OUTLINES
OF
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
BY
ELDER B. H. ROBERTS
AUTHOR OF
"The Life of John Taylor" "The Gospel"
"New Witness for God" "Missouri Persecutions"
"Rise and Fall of Nauvoo," etc.
THIRD EDITION
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH.
1902.
DEDICATION
TO THE SEVENTIES:
THAT BODY OF MEN
UPON WHOM--UNDER THE
DIRECTION OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES--
DEVOLVES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PREACHING
THE GOSPEL, AND DEFENDING THE TRUTH
IN ALL THE WORLD, THIS WORK
IS AFFECTIONATELY
DEDICATED.
A WORD WITH STUDENTS AND TEACHERS.
Before you take up the study of OUTLINES OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, I
beg leave to call your attention to the structure of the work, and the
purpose for which it was written. First, then, as to its structure.
The work is divided into four parts, each with a distinct idea
running through it. Part I deals with THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH
through the ministry of Messiah and his apostles; Part II with THE
APOSTASY, brought about through the severe persecution to which the
early saints were subjected, the rise of false teachers, changing
the ordinances of the gospel, intermingling pagan philosophy with
Christian doctrine, and a transgression of the laws of God; Part III
deals with "THE REFORMATION," treating it, however as a revolution
instead of a reformation since the so-called reformation by no means
re-established primitive Christianity, either in its form or essence,
but it did overthrow the power of the Catholic Church in the greater
part of Western Europe, gave larger liberty to the people, and thus
prepared the way for the great work which followed it--the introduction
of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times; Part IV treats of THE
RESTORATION OF THE GOSPEL, in the aforesaid dispensation, through the
revelations which God gave to the Prophet Joseph Smith.
The parts above enumerated are separated into sections, these
subdivisions being determined by the several subjects into which the
main idea of the respective parts naturally divides. The sections are
again separated into topics, the {iv} titles of which are printed in
bold-face type, and the paragraphs are numbered. These divisions, it
is believed, will better enable the student to discern the relation
of the respective parts to the main subject, and at the same time
afford a convenient division for the assignment of lessons to classes.
Ordinarily it will be found that a section will be sufficient for a
lesson for either a class or quorum; but in some instances two of the
shorter sections may be taken for a lesson; but some of the longer
sections should be divided into two or more.
At the end of each section will be found a collection of notes bearing
upon the important points treated in the text of the work, at which
place reference will be found to the note at the end of the section.
The author cannot, in his opinion, too emphatically urge upon the
student the importance of turning to the notes to which he is directed
in the text and reading them. They will be found to throw additional
light upon the subject treated in the text, either by giving the
statement of a recognized authority, supplying pointed argument--with
which it has been thought best not to burden the body of the work--or
giving illustrations to the statement made in the text. Another purpose
for placing these notes at the end of the sections has been to arouse
an interest in the works of the authors quoted; that the students
of this text book may be induced to delve deeper into the study of
Ecclesiastical History than a perusal of these pages will enable
them to do. And here let the author confess, while he believes he is
presenting a very valuable collection of facts to those who will take
up the study of his work--yet if the study of these pages shall result
in merely awakening in the minds of the elders and the youth of Israel
an interest in the subject, he will account the objects of his efforts
successfully attained.
At the end of each section also will be found Review Questions,
covering the main points treated in the text and in the notes. It
is hoped that they will be found useful in conducting {v} class
exercises, and to the private student who wishes to ascertain if he has
mastered the subject matter of each section. Let him put to himself
the questions found in the review at the end of the section, when
completing it, and if he can give a satisfactory answer to each one,
the author feels assured that the student has mastered the salient
points.
The purpose of the work is two-fold: First, it is to sustain the
position taken by the church of Christ in the last days. What that
position is may be readily discerned by the very first revelation
the Lord gave to Joseph Smith. In answering the young prophet's
question--which of all the sects of religion was acknowledged of him
as his church and kingdom--the Lord said they were all wrong; that all
their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors
were all corrupt; that they drew near to him with their lips, but
their hearts were far from him; that they taught for doctrine the
commandments of men--having a form of godliness, but denying the power
thereof.[1]
It has been to bring together the historical evidences of the truth of
this divine announcement that, in part, this work has been written;
and therefore prominence has been given to those facts of history
which support that announcement. But no fact has been suppressed that
has a tendency to support the opposite view. No such fact either of
history or prophecy exists. The whole stream of evidence proves that
there has been a universal apostasy from the religion taught by Jesus
Christ and his apostles; and the existing differences between the
present teachings of "Christendom" and the doctrines of the scriptures
is a proof so palpable that it admits of no contradiction. As this
position of the church is one which the seventies and elders will have
to maintain against all the world, it is of first importance that they
become familiar with those facts of history and of prophecy that will
enable them to maintain that position intelligently and successfully.
The second purpose of the work is to teach the principles of the
gospel. This, the author is convinced, can best be done in connection
with their history. Relate the historical events which resulted in
the introduction and establishment of the gospel and the church of
Christ; then in all the centuries from the second to the tenth show how
the doctrines of Messiah were departed from, how the ordinances were
changed and the laws of God transgressed; relate the principal events
of the sixteenth century revolution--miscalled the "Reformation"--and
point out how that revolution, however salutary in bringing to pass an
enlargement of popular liberty, failed to re-establish the gospel of
the Lord Jesus Christ, or re-organize the church as at first founded
by Messiah; then relate the events connected with the restoration of
the gospel through the revelations given to the great prophet of the
Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, Joseph Smith--and in so doing
you are not only teaching the interesting facts of Ecclesiastical
History to your students, but at the same time you are making them
acquainted with the principles of the gospel. Under such a presentation
the students, without being conscious of it, perhaps, will examine
those principles under a variety of circumstances. They will see them
stated in connection with the leading events of the Messiah's life;
they will see them corrupted by an apostate church; they will hear
them discussed by men during the attempt at Reformation; and after
witnessing the unavailing efforts of the "Reformers" to re-establish
the gospel and the church of Christ, they will see how the heavens
were opened and every principle, doctrine, ordinance, law, officer
and institution known to the church of Christ, restored. Such a
presentation of the principles of the gospel, we repeat, must lead to
a very comprehensive understanding of them, and such is one of the
purposes of this work, and one which the author hopes will give it
a claim upon the attention of all those desiring information on the
subject of the gospel, as well as to the quorums of seventies and
elders to whom we believe it will be of special service.
Before the work went to press the manuscript was submitted to a
committee of brethren appointed by the First Presidency. Elders John
Nicholson, George Reynolds and James E. Talmage constituted that
committee. The author is very much indebted to them for their patient
consideration of his manuscript, and for the very valuable suggestions
and corrections made by them. They reported favorably to the First
Presidency on the work, and it is now presented to the students of
Ecclesiastical History--in which the church of Christ should abound--in
the hope that it will be of service to them in their researches in this
most interesting department of knowledge.
This, the fifth edition, is uniform with the previous edition, in every
respect.
_The Publishers_
Footnotes
1. Pearl of Price, page 85.
CONTENTS
DEDICATION INTRODUCTION
PART I.
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH
PART II.
THE APOSTASY
PART III.
THE REFORMATION
PART IV.
THE RESTORATION OF THE GOSPEL
INDEX
PART I.
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH.
{11}
SECTION I.
1. Birth of Messiah.--Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Savior
of the world, was born, most probably, in the year of Rome 753; at a
period of the year corresponding to our month of April (see notes 1, 2,
end of section). The place of his birth was Bethlehem [Beth-le-hem],[1]
a small town about four miles south of Jerusalem. The birth-place of
Messiah was foretold by Micah [Mi-kah], the prophet, more than seven
hundred years before the event, in the following prophecy:
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah [Ef-ra-tah], though thou be little
among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth
unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been
from of old, from everlasting.[2]
2. Parentage of Christ.--Messiah was born of the virgin Mary, a
descendant of David, and the espoused wife of Joseph, a carpenter in
the little village of Nazareth [Naz-a-reth], who, notwithstanding his
humble station in life, was also a descendant of the royal house of
David. An angel appeared unto Mary previous to her conception, and thus
addressed her:
Hail thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee: blessed
art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his
saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor
with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring
forth a son, and shall call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and
shalt be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give
unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall {12} reign over
the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a
man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall
come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be
called the Son of God. * * * And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the
Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.[3]
3. These two, the mother of Jesus and her betrothed husband,
had left their home in Nazareth to enroll their names as members of
the house of David, in a census which had been ordered by the Emperor
Augustus, and while at Bethlehem Mary was delivered of her son. The
enrollment ordered by the emperor had called so many strangers into the
little town of Bethlehem that on the arrival of Joseph and Mary there
was no room at the inn for them, and they had to take up quarters in
the stable adjacent. There, among the hay and straw spread for the food
and rest of the cattle, Christ was born. (Note 2, end of section.)
4. The Angelic Announcement.--The birth of Christ was announced
to a few shepherds watching their flock by night--about a mile distant
from the village of Bethlehem--by an angel, surrounded about by the
glory of God, who said:
Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy,
which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the
city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall
be a sign unto you; ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling
clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a
multitude of the heavenly host, praising God, and saying, Glory to
God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.[4]
{13} A visit to the village confirmed the strange proclamation of the
angel--they found the mother and child.
5. The Inquiry of the Magi.--Not alone by voice of angels was
the birth of Messiah announced, but "wise men from the east" who had
seen his star in the firmament came to Jerusalem about the time of his
birth, inquiring--"Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we
have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him." [5]
6. Nor were signs of Messiah's birth seen alone on the eastern
hemisphere; to the people of the western hemisphere signs were also
given; "a new star did appear," according to the words of the Nephite
prophets, at Zarahemla; the Nephites saw it and to them, as well as to
the wise men of the east, a star announced the birth of him who was to
be King of the Jews[6] and the Savior of the world. Another sign was
given to the Nephites, which had also been predicted by their prophets;
the night before[7] Jesus was born remained beautifully light on the
western hemisphere. This event is thus recorded in the Book of Mormon:
And it came to pass that the words which came unto Nephi were
fulfilled, according as they had been spoken; for behold at the
going down of the sun, there was no darkness; and the people began
to be astonished, because there was no darkness when the time of
night came. * * * There was no darkness in all that night, but it
was light as though it was midday. And it came to pass that the sun
did rise in the morning again, according to its proper order; and
they [the Nephites] knew that it was the day that the Lord should
be born, because of the sign which had been given.[8]
7. The Alarm of King Herod.--The inquiry made by the "wise men"
from the east concerning the one who was "born King of the Jews,"
alarmed the jealousy of Herod, and learning from the chief priests and
scribes that Bethlehem was the place {14} where the deliverer of Israel
was to be born, he sent the wise men there, strictly charging them to
search diligently, and when they had found the child to bring him word
that he too might worship him. On the way to Bethlehem the star they
had seen in the east went before them until it stood over where the
child was. They found the babe with Mary his mother and they worshipped
him, giving him presents of gold and frankincense and myrrh. They were
commanded of God in a dream, however, not to return to Herod, so they
departed into their own country another way.
8. Joseph, too, after the departure of the wise men, was warned
in a dream to flee out of the land, for Herod would seek the young
child to destroy him. He was commanded to go into Egypt and remain
there until the Lord should call him to return. In obedience to these
divine commandments, Joseph took the mother and child and fled in the
night into Egypt.
9. Herod's wrath knew no bounds when he found that the wise men
had not obeyed him; and in order that he might not be baffled in his
determination to destroy the one he feared would supplant himself or
his posterity in the throne of Israel, he sent out an edict commanding
that all the children in Bethlehem two years old and under should be
slain. Then was fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah:
In Rama [Ra-ma] was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping
and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not
be comforted because they were not.[9] (See note 3, end of section.)
10. Death of Herod.--(note 4 end of section). After Herod's death,
Joseph was again visited, in a dream, by an angel, who commanded him to
return with the child and his mother into the land of Israel; for they
who had sought the young child's life were dead. Then was fulfilled
that which was {15}spoken by the prophet of the Lord, (Hosea), "Out of
Egypt have I called my son." Joseph obeyed the commandment, but as he
approached Judea and learned that Archelaus [Ar-ke-la-us] the son of
Herod reigned in his father's stead, he was fearful and instead of
remaining in Judea, he went into Galilee [Gal-i-lee] and dwelt in the
little town of Nazareth--his former home--"that it might be fulfilled
which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene" [10]
[Naz-a-reen].
NOTES.
1. The Year of Messiah's Birth.--"The Birth of Christ was
first made an era, from which to reckon dates," says the learned
translator of Dr. Mosheim's _Institutes_,--Murdock--"by Dionysius
Exiguus, [Di-o-nish-i-us Exs-ig-u-us] about A. D. 532. He supposed
Christ to have been born on the 25th of December, in the year of Rome
753, and this computation has been followed in practice to this day;
notwithstanding the learned are well agreed that it must be incorrect."
It will be seen, however, from what follows, from the same author, that
all is uncertainty with the learned in respect to this subject:
"To ascertain the true time of Christ's birth, there are two principal
data afforded by the Evangelists: I. It is clear, from Matt. ii: 1,
etc., that Christ was born before the death of Herod the Great, who
died about Easter, in the year of Rome 749 or 750. Now, if Christ was
born in the December next before Herod's death, it must have been in
the year of Rome 748 or 749; and, of course, four, if not five years
anterior to the Dionysian or Vulgar era: II. It is probable, from
Luke iii: 1, 2, 23, that Jesus was 'about' thirty years of age in the
fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar. Now, the reign of
Tiberius may be considered as commencing at the time he became sole
emperor, in August of the year of Rome 767; or (as there is some reason
to suppose that Augustus made him partner in the government two years
before he died), we may begin his reign in the year of Rome 765. The
fifteenth year of Tiberius will therefore be either the year of Rome
781 or 779. From which deduct 30, and we have the year of Rome 751 or
749 for the year of Christ's birth; the former two and the latter four
years earlier than the Dionysian computation. Comparing these results
with those obtained from the death of Herod, it is generally supposed
the true time of Christ's birth was the year of Rome 749, or four years
before the Vulgar era. {16} _But the conclusion is not certain, because
there is uncertainty in the data_. (1.) It is not certain that we ought
to reckon Tiberius' reign as beginning two years before the death
of Augustus. (2.) Luke says '_about_ thirty years of age.' This is
indefinite and may be understood of twenty-nine, thirty, or thirty-one
years. (3.) It is not certain in which of the two years mentioned Herod
died; nor how long before that event the Savior was born. Respecting
the month and day of Christ's birth, we are left almost wholly to
conjecture."
It will be demanded on what authority I have gone counter to the
conclusions of the learned on this subject by keeping to the Dionysian
date,--so far, at least, as the year is concerned. My answer is that
in the revelation on Church government in the Doctrine and Covenants
(sec. xx), the following in respect to the rise of the Church is given:
"The rise of the Church of Christ in these last days, _being one
thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord
and Savior Jesus Christ in the flesh_, it being regularly organized
and established agreeable to the laws of our country, by the will and
commandments of God, in the fourth month, and on the sixth day of the
month, which is called April."
I believe that this--better than any other authority, fixes the time
of the birth, or the "coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ
in the flesh;" and that, as to the year at least, agrees with the
Dionysian computation. It must be remembered that this revelation in
section twenty of the Doctrine and Covenants was given before the
Church was organized--at sundry times between the first and the sixth
of April--and that the prophet was instructed to organize the Church
on the sixth day of April, 1830, hence it was not mere chance that
determined the day on which that organization took place, (History
Joseph Smith, "Millennial Star Supplement" to vol. xiv, p. 22) a fact
that is significant in view of the above considerations and those which
follow in note 2.--Roberts.
2. The Day of Messiah's Birth.--Strictly speaking, if this Church
was organized "one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since
the coming of our Lord and Savior in the flesh," then the sixth of
April must have been the anniversary of the Savior's birthday. If the
organization of the Church had been before or subsequent to that date,
if only by one or any number of days, the great event would have been
more or less than one thousand eight hundred and thirty years by just
so many days. [This argument also holds good as to the year of Christ's
birth.] Options formed by the study of chronological events may or may
not be accurate. But we would scarcely think the Lord would make any
mistake about dates. Least of all he who was born on that day, and on
that day thirty-three years later was crucified.--Joseph F. Smith.
Let us inquire if the day observed by the Christian world as the {17}
day of His [Christ's] birth--the 25th of December--is or is not the
real Christmas day. A great many authors have found out from their
researches, that it is not. I think that there is scarcely an author
at the present day that believes that the twenty-fifth of December was
the day that Christ was born on * * * It is generally believed and
conceded by the learned who have investigated the matter, that Christ
was born in April. * * * It is stated that according to the best of
their [the learned] judgment from the researches they have made, Christ
was crucified on the sixth of April. That is the day on which this
Church was organized. But when these learned men go back from the day
of his crucifixion to the day of his birth, they are at a loss, having
no certain evidence or testimony by which they can determine it.--Orson
Pratt.
In support of Elder Pratt's contention relative to the uncertainty of
Christian scholars as to the day on which Jesus was born, I quote the
statement of Rev. Charles F. Deem, author of "The Light of the Nation,"
and president of the American Institute of Christian Philosophy. "It is
annoying to see learned men use the same apparatus of calculation and
reach the most diverse results." In a foot note at page 32, in "Light
of the Nation," he refers to fifteen different authors all of whom
are writers of note, who give different years for the birth of Christ
varying from B. C. 1 to B. C. 7
3. Humble Nativity of Messiah.--In the rude limestone grotto
attached to the inn as a stable, among the hay and straw spread for
the food and rest of the cattle, weary with their day's journey, far
from home, in the midst of strangers, in circumstances so devoid of
all earthly comfort or splendor that it is impossible to imagine a
humbler nativity, Christ was born. Distant but a few miles, on the
plateau of the abrupt and singular hill now called _Jebel Fureidis_
or "Little Paradise Mountain," towered the palace--fortress of the
great Herod. The magnificent houses of his friends and courtiers
crowded around its base. The humble wayfarers, as they passed near
it, might have heard the hired and voluptuous minstrelsy with which
its feasts were celebrated, or the shouting of the rough mercenaries
whose arms enforced obedience to its despotic lord. But the true King
of the Jews--the rightful Lord of the universe--was not to be found in
palace or fortress. They who wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.
The cattle stables of the lowly caravan-serai were a more fitting
birthplace for him who came to reveal that the soul of the greatest
monarch was no dearer or greater in God's sight than the soul of his
meanest slave; for him who had not where to lay his head; for him who,
from his cross of shame, was to rule the world!--Canon Farrar.
4. Character of Herod.--Now some there are who stand amazed
at the diversity of Herod's nature and purposes; for when we have
respect {18} to his magnificence, and the benefits which he bestowed
on all mankind, there is no possibility for even those who had the
least respect for him, to deny, or not openly confess, that he had a
nature vastly beneficent; but when anyone looks upon the punishment he
inflicted and the injuries he did, not only to his subjects, but to
his nearest relatives, and takes notice of his severe and unrelenting
disposition there, he will be forced to allow that he was brutish, and
a stranger to all humanity. * * * If anyone was not very obsequious to
him in his language, and would not confess himself to be his slave, or
but seemed to think of any innovation in his government, he was not
able to contain himself, but prosecuted his very kindred and friends
and punished them as if they were enemies; and this wickedness he
undertook out of a desire that he might be himself alone honored. * * *
A man he was of great barbarity towards all men equally, and a slave to
his passion; but above the consideration of what was right.--Josephus.
5. Last Illness of Herod.--But now Herod's distemper greatly
increased upon him after a severe manner, and this by God's judgment
upon him for his sins; for a fire glowed in him slowly, which did
not so much appear to the touch outwardly, as it augmented his pains
inwardly; for it brought upon him a vehement appetite to eating, which
he could not avoid to supply with one sort of food or other. His
entrails were exulcerated, and the chief violence of his pain lay on
his colon; an aqueous and transparent liquor also had settled itself
upon his feet; * * * and when he sat upright, he had a difficulty of
breathing which was very loathsome, on account of the stench of his
breath, and the quickness of his returns. He had also convulsions in
all parts of his body, which increased his strength to an unsufferable
degree. It was said by those who pretended to divine, and who were
endowed with wisdom to foretell such things, that God inflicted this
punishment on the king on account of his great impurity; yet was he
still in hopes of recovering, though his afflictions seemed greater
than anyone could bear.--Josephus.
REVIEW.
1. In what year of Rome was Messiah born?
2. State the reasons for placing the date of Messiah's birth in the
year of Rome 753. (See notes 1 and 2.)
3. Give the name of Messiah's birthplace.
4. For what is Ephratah noted? (Note.)
5. Who was the mother of Jesus?
6. Relate what you can of Mary, and the announcement that she should be
the mother of the Son of God.
7. Relate the circumstances under which Christ was born.
{19} 8. Give an account of the visitation of the angels to the
shepherds.
9. What is Canon Farrar's translation of the title of the angelic song?
10. Give an account of the magi's visit to Jerusalem in search of the
Christ.
11. What signs were given of Messiah's birth to the people on the
Western Hemisphere?
12. By what divine providence was Messiah's life preserved in infancy?
13. What was the character of Herod the Great? (Note 4.)
14. Describe Herod's last illness and death. (Note 5.)
15. Where did Joseph settle on his return from Egypt?
16. What prophecies were fulfilled by Messiah being taken into Egypt
and Nazareth?
{20}
SECTION II.[11]
1. State of the Religious World at Messiah's Birth.--At the time
of the birth of the Son of God, the enfeebled world was tottering
on its foundations. The national religions which had satisfied the
parents, no longer proved sufficient for the children. The new
generations could not repose contented within the ancient forms. The
gods of every nation, when transported to Rome--then the dominant
political power in the world--there lost their oracles, as the nations
themselves had there lost their liberty. Brought face to face in the
capital they had destroyed each other, and their divinity had vanished.
A great void was thus occasioned in the religion of the world.
2. A kind of deism, destitute alike of spirit and of life,
floated for a time above the abyss in which the vigorous superstitions
of antiquity had been engulfed. But like all negative creeds it had
no power to reconstruct. All nations were plunged in the grossest
superstition. Most of them, indeed all except the Jews, supposed that
each country and province was subjected to a set of very powerful
beings whom they called gods, and whom the people, in order to live
happily, must propitiate with various rites and ceremonies. These
deities were supposed to differ materially from each other in sex,
power, nature and offices. Some nations went beyond others in impiety
of worship, but all stood chargeable with absurdity, if not gross
stupidity in matters of religion. (See note 1, end of section.)
{21} 3. Thus every nation had a class of deities peculiar to
itself, among which one was supposed to be pre-eminent over the rest,
and was their king, though subject himself to the laws of fate, or to
an eternal destiny. The oriental nations had not the same gods as the
Gauls, the Germans, and the other northern nations; and the Grecian
deities were essentially different from those of the Egyptians, who
worshipped brute animals, plants, and various productions of nature
and art. Each nation, likewise, had its own method of worshiping its
gods; differing widely from the rites of other nations. But, from their
ignorance or from other causes the Greeks and Romans maintained that
their gods were universally worshipped; and they therefore gave the
names of their own gods to the foreign deities which has caused great
confusion and errors in the history of ancient religions even in the
works of the learned.
4. Heathen Toleration--Its Cause.--The variety of gods and
religions in the pagan nations produced no wars or feuds among them.
Each nation without concern allowed its neighbors to enjoy their own
views of religion, and to worship their own gods in their own way. Nor
need this tolerance greatly surprise us. For they who regard the world
as divided like a great country into numerous provinces each subject to
a distinct order of deities, cannot despise the gods of other nations
nor think of compelling all others to pay worship to their national
gods. The Romans in particular, though they would not allow the public
religions to be changed or multiplied, yet gave the citizens full
liberty to observe foreign religions in private, and to hold meetings
and feasts and to erect temples and groves to these foreign deities, in
whose worship there was nothing inconsistent with the public safety and
existing laws. (See note 2, end of section.)
5. Character of Heathen Gods.--The greater part of the gods of
all nations were ancient heroes, famous for their achievements and
their worthy deeds; such as kings, generals {22} and the founders of
cities; and likewise females who were highly distinguished for their
deeds and discoveries, whom a grateful posterity had deified. To these
some added the more splendid and useful objects in the natural world,
among which the sun, moon, and stars being pre-eminent, received
worship from nearly all, and some were not ashamed to pay divine honors
to mountains, rivers, trees, the earth, the ocean, the winds, and even
to diseases, to virtues and vices, and to almost every conceivable
object, or, at least, to the deities supposed to preside over these
objects.
6. The worship of these deities consisted in numerous ceremonies
with sacrifices, offerings, and prayers. The ceremonies, for the most
part, were absurd and ridiculous; and what was worse yet, debasing,
obscene and cruel. The whole pagan system had not the least efficacy
to excite and cherish virtuous emotions in the soul. For in the first
place, the gods and goddesses to whom the public homage was paid,
instead of being patterns of virtue, were patterns rather of enormous
vices and crimes. They were considered as superior to mortals in power
and as exempt from death, but in all things else as on a level with
man. In the next place, the ministers of this religion, neither by
precept nor by example, exhorted the people to lead honest and virtuous
lives, but gave them to understand that all the homage required of
them by the gods was comprised in the observance of the traditional
rites and ceremonies. And lastly, the doctrines inculcated respecting
the rewards of the righteous and the punishments of the wicked in the
future world were some of them dubious and uncertain, and others more
adapted to promote vice than virtue. Hence the wiser pagans themselves,
about the time of the Savior's birth, contemned and ridiculed the whole
system.
7. Mysteries of Paganism.--It is contended by those who would
dignify paganism, that back of its common worship, among the orientals
and Greeks at least, certain recondite {23} and concealed rites called
mysteries--containing in them the essence of true religion--existed:
and that back of its idolatry stood and was recognized the true God,
of which the images worshiped were but the material representatives.
To these mysteries, however, very few were admitted. Candidates for
initiation had first to give satisfactory proof of their good faith and
patience, by various most troublesome ceremonies. When initiated they
could not divulge anything they had seen without exposing their lives
to imminent danger. Hence the interior of these hidden rites is at this
day but little known, and therefore but an imperfect judgment may be
formed as to their virtue. But what glimpses are obtained of the rites
of these mysteries do not prepossess one in their favor; for in many of
them many things were done which are repugnant to modesty and decency,
and in all of them that are known the discerning may see that the
deities there worshipped were more distinguished for their vices than
for their virtues. (See note 3, end of section.)
8. Paul's Arraignment of the Pagan World.--Paul, the great
apostle of the Gentiles, brings a terrible indictment against the pagan
world of his day, and also against the more ancient pagans, and avers
that there was no excuse for their idolatry or wickedness:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all
ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in
unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest
in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things
of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being
understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and
Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, when they
knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful;
but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was
darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image like
to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts and {24}
creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness
through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies
between themselves; who changed the truth of God into a lie and
worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator. * * * For
this cause God gave them up unto vile affections; * * * and even
as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave
them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not
convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication,
wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder,
debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God,
despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient
to parents, without understanding, covenant-breakers, without
natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: who knowing the judgment
of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not
only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.[12] (See
note 4, end of section.)
9. Political State of the World at Messiah's Birth.--At the birth
of Jesus Christ the greater part of the civilized world on the eastern
hemisphere was subject to the Romans. Their remoter provinces they
either ruled by means of temporary governors and presidents sent from
Rome, or suffered them to live under their own kings and laws, subject
to the control of the Roman emperors.
10. The senate and people of Rome, though they had not lost all
the appearance of liberty, were really under the authority of one
man, Augustus; who was clothed with the titles of emperor, sovereign
pontiff, censor, tribune of the people, pro-consul; in a word, with
every office which conferred general power and pre-eminence in the
commonwealth.
11. The Roman government, if we regard only its form and laws,
was sufficiently mild and equitable. But the injustice and avarice of
the nobles and provincial governors, the Roman lust of conquest and
dominion, and the rapacity of the publicans who farmed the revenues
of the state, brought many and {25} grievous evils upon the people.
The magistrates and publicans fleeced them of their property on the
one hand, while, on the other, the Roman lust of dominion required
armies to be raised in the provinces--a thing which was very oppressive
to them, and the occasion of almost perpetual insurrection. This,
however, is true more especially of the days which preceded the reign
of Augustus [Au-gus-tus]. The principal conquests of the Romans were
achieved under the republic. It was left for Augustus to adopt that
policy which aimed merely to preserve those dominions which had been
acquired by the policy of the senate, the active emulation of the
consuls and the martial enthusiasm of the people. Under his reign the
Roman people themselves seem to have relinquished the ambitious design
of subduing the whole earth. (See note 5, end of section.)
12. This widely extended dominion of one people, or rather, of
one man, was attended with several advantages: (1), it brought into
union a multitude of nations differing in customs and languages;
(2,) it gave freer access to the remotest nations; (3,) it gradually
civilized the barbarous nations, by introducing among them the Roman
laws and customs; (4), it spread literature, the arts and philosophy
in countries where they were not before cultivated, and guaranteed the
protection of its laws to the people even in the remotest provinces.
(See note 6, end of section.)
13. Moreover, at the birth of Messiah, the Roman empire was freer
from commotion that it had been for many years. Though it cannot be
said that the whole world was in profound peace, yet there can be no
doubt that the period when the Savior was born, if compared with the
preceding times, was peculiarly peaceful--a condition quite essential
to the introduction of the gospel and the extensive preaching of it.
Nor is it too much to say that the Lord raised up the great Roman
empire that under its beneficent yet powerful sway, the glad tidings of
great joy, the gospel of Jesus Christ, might be widely preached among
men.
{26} 14. Of the state of those nations which lay beyond the
boundaries of the Roman empire we may not learn so much as of Rome. It
is sufficient to know, however, that the Oriental nations were pressed
down by a stern despotism, which their effeminacy of mind and body, and
even their religion, led them to bear with patience; while the northern
nations enjoyed much greater liberty, which was protected by the rigor
of their climate and the consequent energy of their constitutions,
aided by their mode of life.
15. Political and Religious State of the Jews.--The condition
of the Jewish people among whom the Savior was born was scarcely any
better than that of other nations. Herod, called the Great, then
governed, or rather, oppressed the Jewish nation, though only a
tributary king under the Romans. He drew upon himself universal hatred
by his cruelties, jealousies and wars; and he exhausted the wealth of
the unhappy nation by his mad luxury, his excessive magnificence, and
his immoderate largesses. Under his administration Roman luxury and
licentiousness spread over Palestine. In religion he was professedly a
Jew, but he copied the manners of those who despise all religion.
16. The Romans did not wholly prohibit the Jews from retaining
their national laws, and the religion established by Moses.
They had their high priests, council or senate (Sanhedrim)[13], and
inflicted lesser punishments. They could apprehend men and bring them
before the council; and if a guard of soldiers was needful, could be
assisted by them upon asking the governor for them; they could bind
men and keep them in custody; the council could summon witnesses,
take examinations, and when they had any capital offenders, carry
them before the governor. This governor usually paid a regard to what
they offered, and if they brought evidence of the fact, pronounced
{27} sentence according to their laws. He was the proper judge in all
capital causes.[14]
17. The measure of liberty and comfort allowed to the Jews by
the Romans was well nigh wholly dissipated, first by the cruelty
and avarice of the governors, and by the frauds and rapacity of the
publicans; and second, by the profligacy and crimes of those who
pretended to be patriots and guardians of the nation. Their principal
men, their high priests, were abandoned wretches, who had purchased
their places by bribes or by deeds of iniquity, and who maintained
their ill-acquired authority by every species of dishonest acts. The
other priests and all who held any considerable office, were not much
better. The multitude, excited by such examples, ran headlong into
every sort of iniquity, and by their unceasing robberies and seditions
they excited against themselves both the justice of God and the
vengeance of man.
18. Religious Divisions.--Two religions may be said to have
flourished in Palestine at the times of which we write; viz., the
Jewish and the Samaritan; between the followers of which there was
a deadly hatred. The nature of the former is set forth in the Old
Testament. But in the age of the Savior it had been corrupted by
the traditions of the people, who were divided into sects filled
with bitterness against each other. Chief among these sects were the
Pharisees [Fa-ri-sees,] and Sadducees [Sad-du-seez.]
19. Pharisees and Sadducees.--While these two sects agreed as
to a number of fundamental principles of the Jewish religion, they
differed on questions of the highest importance, and such as related
to the salvation of the soul. First, they disagreed respecting the
law which God had given them. The Pharisees superadded to the written
law an oral or unwritten law, handed down by tradition, which the
Sadducees rejected, adhering alone to the written law. They differed,
too, as to {28} the import of the law. The Pharisees held to a double
sense of the scripture, the one literal, the other figurative; while
the Sadducees held only to the literal sense of the Bible. To these
contests concerning the laws were added others on subjects of the
highest moment; particularly in respect to the rewards and punishments
announced in the sacred writings. The Pharisees supposed them to affect
both body and spirit--in whose pre-existence and eternal existence
they believed--and that punishments and rewards extended beyond the
present life. The Sadducees believed in no future retributions. They
were sceptical of the miraculous; and denied the existence of spiritual
beings, the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body.
They were deists, in fact; viewing the Supreme Being as a quiescent
Providence calmly surveying and ruling the regular working of natural
laws. They gave themselves up to ease, luxury, self-indulgence, and
were not indisposed to view with indifferent liberality the laxity of
heathen morals and the profanity of idol worship. They included in
their numbers the leading men of the nation, were the aristocracy in
fact, while the Pharisees, on the other hand, were the common people;
proud of their unblemished descent from Abraham, exclusive, formal,
self-righteous, strict observers of external rites and ceremonies, even
beyond the requirements of the law.
20. Such were the chief sects among the Jews. There were others
but they were of minor importance. Both Sadducees and Pharisees looked
for a deliverer; not, however, such a one as God had promised; but a
powerful warrior and a vindicator of their national liberties, a king,
a ruler. All placed the sum of religion in an observance of the Mosaic
ritual, and in certain duties toward their countrymen. All excluded the
rest of mankind from the hope of salvation, and, of course whenever
they dared, treated them with hatred and inhumanity. To these fruitful
sources of vice, must be added the various absurd and superstitious
opinions concerning the Divine Nature, {29} genii, magic, etc., which
they had imbibed from surrounding nations.
21. Samaritans.--The Samaritans [Sa-mar-i-tans] were colonists
sent by the king of Assyria [As-syr-rya], Shalmaneser [Shal-ma-ne-zer,]
to people the land after he had carried captive the Israelites, in
the latter part of the eighth century, B. C. They were a mixed people
from various eastern nations, conquered by this same king--and they
brought with them their various forms of national idolatry. A plague
breaking out among them, however, led them to petition for a priest of
the god of the country, to teach them the old form of worship. He was
stationed at Bethel [Beth-el,] and the Samaritans endeavored to combine
a formal reverence of God with the practice of their own idolatrous
rites. After the captivity of Judah, they sought an alliance with
the returned Jews (536 B. C.,) with whom they intermarried. On Ezra
enforcing the Mosaic law against mixed marriages--three-quarters of a
century later--Manasses [Ma-nas-ses,] a Jewish priest, who had married
the daughter of Sanballat [San-bal-lat,] chief of the Samaritans,
headed a secession at Shechem [Shek-em.] The Samaritans taught the
Mosaic ritual and erected a rival temple to that at Jerusalem, on Mount
Gerizim [Ger-i-zim]. This mixed community before the time of the Savior
began to claim descent from the patriarchs and a share in the promises.
Their religion was less pure than that of the Jews, as they adulterated
the doctrines of the Old Testament with the profane rites of the pagan
religion.
22. Such was the state of the world--such the condition of
the Jews at the time of Messiah's birth; and surely that condition
justified the pity and also the stern reproofs--nay, the severe rebukes
administered, as we shall see, by the Son of God in the course of his
ministry.
NOTES.
1. State of the World at Messiah's Birth.--The world had grown
{30} old, and the dotage of its paganism was marked by hideous
excesses. Atheism in belief was followed, as among all nations it has
always been, by degradation of morals, iniquity seemed to have run its
course to the very farthest goal. Philosophy had abrogated its boasted
functions except for the favored few. Crime was universal, and there
was no known remedy for the horror and ruin which it was causing in a
thousand hearts. Remorse itself seemed to be exhausted, so that men
were past feeling. There was a callosity of heart, a petrifying of the
moral sense, which even those who suffered from it felt to be abnormal
and portentous. Even the heathen world felt that "the fullness of the
time" had come.--Canon Farrar.
2. Policy of Rome in Respect to Religion.--The policy of the
emperors and the senate, so far as it concerned religion, was happily
seconded by the reflections of the enlightened, and by the habits
of the superstitious part of their subjects. The various modes of
worship, which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by
the people as equally true; by the philosopher as equally false; and
by the magistrate as equally useful. And this toleration produced not
only mutual indulgence, but even religious concord. * * * Avarice and
taste very frequently despoiled the vanquished nations of the elegant
statues of their gods and the rich ornaments of their temples; but in
the exercise of the religion which they derived from their ancestors,
they uniformly experienced the indulgence, and even protection of
the Roman conquerors. The province of Gaul seems, and indeed only
seems, an exception to this universal toleration. Under the specious
pretext of abolishing human sacrifices, the emperors Tiberius and
Claudius suppressed the dangerous power of the Druids; but the priests
themselves, their gods and their altars, subsisted in peaceful
obscurity till the final fall of paganism. * * * Rome gradually became
the common temple of her subjects; and the freedom of the city was
bestowed on all the gods of mankind.--Gibbon.
3. Mysteries of the Pagan Religion.--It has been maintained that
the design of at least some of these mysteries was to inculcate the
grand principles of natural religion, such as the unity of God, the
immortality of the soul, the importance of virtue, etc., and to explain
the vulgar polytheism as symbolical of these great truths. But this
certainly needs better proof. It is more probable that the later pagan
philosophers, who lived after the light of Christianity had exposed the
abominations of polytheism, were the principal authors of this moral
interpretation of the vulgar religion, which they falsely pretended
was taught in the mysteries, while in reality, those mysteries were
probably mere supplements to the vulgar mythology and worship, and of
the same general character and spirit.--Murdock.
{31} 4. State of Religion in Rome.--A modern writer describing
the religious state of Rome at the time of Julius Caesar--it could
not have been much changed at the birth of Messiah, sixty years
later--says: "Religion, once the foundation of the laws and rule of
personal conduct, had subsided into opinion. The educated in their
hearts disbelieved it. Temples were still built with increasing
splendor; the established forms were scrupulously observed. Public men
spoke conventionally of Providence, that they might throw on their
opponents the odium of impiety; but of genuine belief that life had
any serious meaning, there was none remaining beyond the circle of the
silent, patient, ignorant multitude. The whole spiritual atmosphere was
saturated with cant--cant moral, cant political, cant religious; an
affectation of high principle which had ceased to touch the conduct,
and flowed on in an increasing volume of insincere and unreal speech.
The truest thinkers were those who, like Lucretius, spoke frankly out
their real convictions, declared Providence was a dream, and that
man and the world he lived in were material phenomena, generated
by natural forces out of cosmic atoms, and into atoms to be again
resolved."--Froude.
5. Policy of Augustus as to Conquests.--Inclined to peace by
his temper and situation, it was easy for him to discover that Rome,
in her present exalted situation, had much less to hope than to fear
from the chance of arms; and that, in the prosecution of remote wars,
the undertaking every day became more difficult, the event more
doubtful and the possession more precarious and less beneficial. The
experience of Augustus added weight to these salutary reflections,
and eventually convinced him that by prudent vigor of his counsels,
it would be easy to secure every concession which the safety or the
dignity of Rome might require from the most formidable barbarians * *
* On the death of the emperor, his testament was publicly read in the
senate. He bequeathed, as a valuable legacy to his successors, the
advice of confining the empire within those limits which nature seemed
to have placed as its permanent bulwarks and foundations; on the west
the Atlantic ocean; the Rhine and Danube on the north; the Euphrates
on the east; and towards the south the sandy deserts of Arabia and
Africa.--Gibbon, "Decline and Fall", vol. i, chap. 1.
6. Mission and Character of the Roman Empire.--As the soil must
be prepared before the wheat can be sown, so before the kingdom of
heaven could throw up its shoots there was needed a kingdom of this
world, where the nations were neither torn to pieces by violence nor
were rushing after false ideals [as to governments] and spurious
ambitions. Such a kingdom was the empire of the Caesars--a kingdom
where peaceful men could work, think and speak as they pleased, and
travel freely among provinces ruled for the most part by Gallios who
{32} protected life and property, and forbade fanatics to tear each
other to pieces for their religious opinions. "It is not lawful for
us to put a man to death," was the complaint of the Jewish priests to
the Roman governor. Had Europe and Asia been covered with independent
nations, each with a local religion represented in its ruling powers,
Christianity must have been stifled in its cradle. If St. Paul had
escaped the Sanhedrim of Jerusalem, he would have been torn to pieces
by the silversmiths at Ephesus. The appeal to Caesar's judgment
seat was the shield of his mission, and alone made possible his
success.--Froude.
7. The Sanhedrin of the Jews.--"The council" of the Jewish
church and people was a theocratic oligarchy, which after the return
from the captivity (536 B. C.,) ruled the new settlement, being in
all causes and over all persons, ecclesiastical and civil, supreme.
It is supposed to be suggested by the old institution of seventy-two
Elders (six from each tribe,) appointed by Moses, at Jethro's [Jeth-ro]
suggestion, to relieve him in the administration of justice (Ex.
xviii:14; Num. xi:16.) Having died out in the age succeeding Joshua, and
being superceded under the monarchy, it was revived either by Ezra,
or after the Macedonian ascendancy. It consisted of an equal number
of priests, scribes and elders all of whom must be married, above
thirty years of age, well instructed in the law, and of good report
among the people. This constituted the Supreme Court of judicature
and administrative council, taking cognizance of false doctrine and
teaching, as well as breaches of the Mosaic Law, and regulating both
civil and religious observances peculiar to the Jewish nation. The
power of life and death had been taken from it by the Roman government
which otherwise covenanted to respect its decrees. The council usually
met in the hall Gazith, within the Temple precincts, though special
meetings were sometimes held in the house of the high priest, who was
generally (though not necessarily) the president. There were also two
vice-presidents, and two scribes--clerks--or "heralds," one registering
the votes of acquittal (or nos), and the other those of convictions
(or ayes), and a body of lictors or attendants. The assembly set in
the form of a semi-circle, the president occupying the center of the
arc, the prisoner that of the center of the chord, while the two
"heralds" sat a little in advance of the president, on his right and
his left.--"Oxford Teacher's Bible"--Addenda.
REVIEW.
1. State the religious condition of the world at Messiah's birth.
2. What was the cause of heathen religious toleration?
3. What was the policy of Rome in respect to religion? (Note 2.)
{33} 4. What was the nature of the heathen gods?
5. Describe the character of heathen worship.
6. What can you say of pagan mysteries? (Note 3.)
7. Give the substance of Paul's arraignment of the pagan world.
8. What was the political state of the world at Messiah's birth?
9. Describe the general character of the Roman government.
10. Enumerate the advantages the Roman government gave to the world.
11. How did these advantages affect the work of the Christ?
12. What was the state of the nations outside of the Roman empire?
13. Who was the king of the Jews at Messiah's birth?
14. What was the political state of the Jews at that time?
15. What can you say of religion among the Jews at this period?
16. What were the religious divisions in Palestine?
17. State the doctrines of the Pharisees. The Sadducees.
18. What was the character of the Deliverer expected by both Pharisees
and Sadducees?
19. Did Jesus Christ answer their expectations?
20. Tell what you can of the Samaritans.
21. Describe the Sanhedrim of the Jews. (Note 7.)
{34}
SECTION III.
1. Childhood and Youth of Messiah.--Returning from Egypt in
obedience to the commandment of God, Joseph, the husband of Mary, with
the infant Savior, went into Galilee, and lived at Nazareth--the most
despised village of the most despised province in all Palestine. (Note
1, end of section.) Of his childhood but little information can be
obtained from any authentic source. All that may be learned from the
biographies in the Gospels is that after the settlement in Nazareth,
the child grew and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom; and the
grace of God was upon him.
2. Luke tells us that when twelve years of age, Jesus accompanied
his mother and Joseph to Jerusalem, to attend the feast of the
Passover. (See note 2, end of section.) When they started on the
return to Nazareth, Jesus remained behind at Jerusalem without their
knowledge. They supposed him to be in the company, but when after a
whole day's journey he did not appear, they made inquiry for him among
their kindred, and not finding him, returned to Jerusalem in search of
him. After three days' anxious inquiry they found him in the temple,
sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them and asking
questions. Answering his mother's gentle reproof for remaining behind,
he said:
How is it that ye sought me? Wist ye not that I must be about my
Father's business?
Thus early in life, just emerging from childhood, it seems that the
Son of God had the inspiration of his mission resting upon him. Yet in
loving obedience he went with them down into Nazareth, "and was subject
unto them." With the {35} return to Nazareth the authentic history of
the childhood and youth of the Son of God ends; further than we learn
from the remark of Luke that "Jesus increased in wisdom and stature,
and in favor with God and man." But what the details of his life and
development were for the next eighteen years, we do not know. (See note
3, end of section.)
3. In the New Testament apocrypha there are wonderful and
miraculous stories of his carrying spilt water in his robe; of his
pulling a short board to its requisite length; of moulding sparrows
out of clay and then clapping his hands at which they are made alive
and fly away; how he vexes and shames and silences those who wish to
teach him; how he rebukes Joseph or turns his playmates into kids; how
he strikes dead with a curse the boys who offend or run against him,
until at last there is a storm of popular indignation, and his mother
fears to have him leave the house[15]--and a hundred other things
equally absurd which mar rather than embellish the childhood and youth
of Jesus, which the silence of his reliable biographers dignifies and
exalts.
4. John the Baptist.--In the fifteenth year of the reign of
Tiberius Caesar, there came preaching throughout the wilderness of
Judea [Ju-de-a] a strange character, called John the Baptist. He was
the son of Elizabeth, who was a descendant of Aaron, and a cousin to
Mary, the mother to Jesus. His father was a priest of the temple, named
Zacharias. Zacharias and Elizabeth were both well stricken in years,
when there appeared unto the former, in the temple, as he was burning
incense upon the altar, the angel Gabriel [Ga-bri-el], who announced
to him that his wife should bear him a son, and that he must call his
name John. The angel also said that John should be great in the eyes of
the Lord; that he should be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his
mother's womb. He was {36} to have power also to turn unto their God
many of the children of Israel, and to go before the Lord in the spirit
and power of Elias to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,
and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people
prepared for the Lord.[16]
5. In due time all that the angel promised came to pass. The
child was born, and when eight days old he was circumcised and named
John. On that occasion his father who had been dumb from the time of
the visitation of the angel prophesied that the child should be called
the prophet of the Highest; that he should go before the face of the
Lord to prepare his ways; give knowledge of salvation unto his people
by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of God; and
give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death.[17]
6. That the child grew and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the
deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel;[18] that he had his
raiment of camel's hair; a leathern girdle about his loins; that his
food was locusts and wild honey[19] is all we know of him until the
word of the Lord came to him in the wilderness[20] commanding him to
cry repentance, and proclaim the coming of the kingdom of heaven.
7. The Voice from the Wilderness.--The burden of John's message
consisted of three great declarations: Repent, for the kingdom of
heaven is at hand; prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths
straight; there cometh one after me mightier than I am, whose shoe
latchet I am unworthy to loose, he will baptize you with fire and with
the Holy Ghost.
8. When the multitude flocked to hear the teaching of John the
Pharisees and Sadducees came also--with guile in their hearts and
deceit on their lips, he rebuked them, called them a generation of
vipers and told them to bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and not
to pride themselves on being the children of Abraham, for God was able
of the very stones about {37} them to raise up children unto Abraham.
He warned them that the ax was laid at the root of every tree, and that
tree which brought not forth good fruit was to be destroyed.
9. That was a strange voice to the people of that generation,
accustomed as they were to hear only the accents of flattery or
subserviency. Without a tremor of hesitation he rebuked the tax
gatherers for their extortion; the soldiers for their violence; the
Sadducees and Pharisees for their pride and formalism; and warned the
whole people that their cherished privileges were worse than valueless
if without repentance they regarded them as a protection against the
wrath to come.
10. So unusual a teacher as John the Baptist could not fail
to attract attention in Judea where all men were anticipating the
coming of a deliverer. Hence, as the Jews listened to his teachings
so inspired with the power of God, they wondered if he were not the
Messiah. This he denied. They asked him then if he were not Elias. This
too he denied (see note 5, end of section); and claimed only to be the
voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Make straight the way of the
Lord." [21]
11. The Baptism of Jesus.--When John came into the region about
Bethabara [Beth-ab-a-rah], on the Jordan,[22] among others who came to
be baptized was Jesus. When John saw him he hesitated, and knowing by
the inspiration within him what he was soon to know by a more splendid
manifestation of God's power, _viz._, that this was the Son of God,
he said: "I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?"
"Suffer it to be so now," replied Jesus, "for thus it becometh us to
fulfill all righteousness." [23]
12. Then John baptized him, and as Jesus came up out of the water
the heavens were opened unto him (that is, unto John; see note 6, end
of section), and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and
lighting upon him; and he heard a voice from heaven saying: "This is
my beloved Son, in whom I {38} am well pleased." [24] This splendid
spiritual manifestation was a sign to John that this was the Son of
God, the One who was to baptize with fire and the Holy Ghost, the
Messiah, who was to take away the sins of the world. For he who had
sent him to baptize with water, had said to him: "Upon whom thou shalt
see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which
baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." [25]
13. The Martyrdom of John.--Having borne witness that Jesus was
the Son of God, John seems to have completed the mission given to him
at that time, and soon after fell a victim to the malice of a wicked
woman and a weak prince. Herod Antipas [Anti-pas], the son of Herod the
Great, who was made Tetrarch of Galilee on the death of his father,
married the daughter of Aretas [Ar'-e-ta], king of Arabia. But forming
also an unholy attachment for Herodias [He-ro'-di-as], his brother
Philip's wife, he soon became involved in a course of guilt with her.
For this he was reproved by John, who told him it was not lawful for
him to have her. Herod at the instance of Herodias cast John into
prison for his temerity in reproving their wicked course, and would
have put him to death, but he feared the multitude, who esteemed John a
prophet.
14. The revengeful spirit of Herodias, however, was not satisfied
with the bonds and imprisonment of John; she determined to have his
life. On Herod's birthday, in the midst of the feast, she sent her
daughter to dance for the amusement of the company, which greatly
pleased Herod, and he promised her with an oath that he would give
her whatsoever she should ask; and the damsel being instructed of her
mother demanded the head of John the Baptist. It was with sorrow that
Herod, bad as he was, heard this demand, yet for his oath's sake, and
ashamed to manifest weakness in the presence of those who sat at meat
with him, he sent and beheaded John in the prison, and had the head
brought in and given to the damsel in a charger. {39} Thus fell the
first martyr in that dispensation. (See note 7, end of section.)
NOTES.
1. Nazareth.--Nazareth was in Galilee, a part of Palestine, which
was held in disesteem for several reasons: it had a provincial dialect;
lying remote from the capital, its inhabitants spoke a strange tongue,
which was rough, harsh, and uncouth, having a peculiar combination
of words, and words also peculiar to themselves. Its population was
impure, being made up not only of provincial Jews but also of heathens
of several sorts, Egyptians, Arabians, Phoenicians. As Galilee was a
despised part of Palestine, so was Nazareth a despised part of Galilee,
being a small, obscure, if not mean place. Accordingly its inhabitants
were held in little consideration by other Galileans, and, of course,
by those Jews who dwelt in Judea. Hence the name of Nazarene came to
bear with it a bad odor and was nearly synonymous with a low, ignorant
and uncultivated, if not un-Jewish person.--"Biblical Literature",
Kitto.
2. The Passover.--The Passover, like the Sabbath and other
institutions had a two-fold reference--historical and typical. As a
commemorative institution, it was designed to preserve among the Jews
a grateful sense of their redemption from Egyptian bondage, and with
the protection granted to their first born, on the night when all
the first born of the Egyptians were destroyed (Exodus xii: 27,) as
a typical institute its object was to shadow forth the great facts
and consequences of the Christian sacrifices (I. Cor. v: 7). That the
ancient Jews understood this institution to prefigure the sufferings
of the Christ is evident, not only from the New Testament, but from
the Mishna, where, among the five things said to be contained in the
_Great Hallel_ (a hymn composed of several songs and sung after the
Paschal supper,) one is, the suffering of Messiah, for which they refer
to Psalm cxvi. * * * * * The Passover also denotes the whole solemnity,
commencing on the fourteenth and ending on the twenty-first day of
Nisan.--Kitto.
3. The Youth of Christ.--It is written that there was once a
pious, godly bishop who had often earnestly prayed that God would
manifest unto him what Jesus had done in his youth. Once the bishop
had a dream to this effect. He seemed in his sleep to see a carpenter
working at his trade, and beside him a little boy who was gathering up
chips. Then came in a maiden clothed in green, who called them both
to come to the meal, and set porridge before them. All {40} this the
bishop seemed to see in his dream, himself standing behind the door
that he might not be perceived. Then the little boy began and said:
Why does that man stand there? Shall he not also eat with us? And this
so frightened the bishop that he awoke. Let this be what it may, a
true history or a fable, I none the less believe that Christ in his
childhood and youth looked and acted like other children, yet without
sin; in fashion like a man.--Martin Luther.
4. Messiah's Life for Thirty Years.--What was his manner of
life during those thirty years? It is a question which the Christians
cannot help asking in deep reverence, and with yearning love; but the
words in which the Gospels answer it are very calm and very few. * * *
* * His development was a strictly human development. He did not come
to the world endowed with infinite knowledge, but, as St. Luke tells
us, he gradually advanced in wisdom. He was not clothed with infinite
power, but experienced the weakness and imperfections of human infancy.
He grew as other children grow, only in a childhood of stainless and
sinless beauty--as the "flower of roses in the spring of the year and
as lilies by the waters." * * * * * It was in utter stillness, in
prayerfulness, in the quiet round of daily duties--like Moses in the
wilderness, like David among the sheep folds, like Elijah among the
tents of the Bedouin, like Jeremiah in his quiet home at Anathoth,
like Amos in the sycamore groves of Tekoa--that the boy Jesus prepared
himself, amid a hallowed obscurity, for his mighty work on earth. His
outward life was the life of all those of his age, and station and
place of birth. He lived as lived other children of peasant parents in
that quiet town, and in great measure as they live now.--Canon Farrar.
5. Was John the Elias?--"Art thou Elias?" said the messengers
from Jesus to John. "And he saith, I am not" (John i). Afterwards,
as Jesus, Peter, James and John were descending the mountain on
whose summit they had seen in vision Moses and Elias, the following
conversation occurred:
JESUS: Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again
from the dead.
DISCIPLES: Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
JESUS: Elias truly shall first come, _and restore all things_; but I
say unto you that Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but
have done unto him whatsoever they listed. * * * * Then the disciples
knew that he spake unto them of John the Baptist. (Matt. xvii.) From
this it appears that John denied being Elias, while Jesus declared
that he was, and in consequence much controversy has arisen on this
subject. The matter may be easily understood, however, when it is known
that Elias is the name of a person, the name of a prophet who lived,
doubtless, in the days of Abraham {41} (Doc. and Cov. sec cx: 12), and
who also appeared to Jesus on the occasion above named; Elias is also
the name of an office--the office of Restorer. "The spirit of Elias,"
said the Prophet Joseph (March 10, 1844) "is to prepare the way for a
greater revelation of God, which is the priesthood of Elias. * * * *
And when God sends a man into the world to prepare for a greater work
holding the keys of the power of Elias, it was called the doctrine of
Elias, even from the early ages of the world." Hence any man who came
to prepare the way for a greater revelation was an Elias, and in this
sense John the Baptist was pre-eminently Elias; but it is equally true
that he was _not_ Elias, the prophet who lived in the days of Abraham,
who appeared unto Jesus in the mountain and who also appeared to the
Prophet Joseph and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple.
In the revision of the New Testament, by the Prophet Joseph Smith,
often improperly called the new translation, the difficulty in respect
to the denial of John that he was Elias is easily understood. We
quote the passage: "This is the record of John, when the Jews sent
priests and seventies from Jerusalem, to ask him: Who art thou? And he
confessed and denied not that he was Elias; but he confessed, saying, I
am not the Christ. And they asked him, saying: How art thou then Elias?
And he said, _I am not that Elias who was to restore all things_. And
they asked him, saying, Art thou that Prophet? And he answered, No."
(St. John i: 20-22.) From the above it may be plainly seen that while
John was not the particular Elias who is to restore _all_ things, yet
he is an Elias because he restored some things in respect to the
gospel.--Roberts.
6. John the Only Witness of the Descent of the Holy Ghost.--I
suppose that John the Baptist was the only one who was a witness
of the Holy Ghost resting upon Jesus in the form of a dove. In all
the accounts given of this event, except by Luke, the pronoun "he,"
referring to John, is used. While in Luke it is not said that anyone
else saw it, but it is merely stated that "the Holy Ghost descended
in a bodily shape like a dove upon him." John's own testimony is as
follows: "I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it
abode upon him. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize
with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit
descending and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with
the Holy Ghost."--"The Gospel" (note), Roberts.
7. The Fate of Herod Antipas.--He was not allowed to enjoy his
prosperity long. His nephew Agrippa having obtained the title of king,
Herodias urged him to make a journey to Italy and demand the same
honor. He weakly assented to his wife's ambitious representations;
but the project proved fatal to them both. Agrippa anticipated their
design; and when they appeared before Caligula, they {42} were met
by accusations of hostility to Rome, the truth of which they in
vain attempted to disprove. Sentence of deposition was accordingly
passed upon Herod, and both he and his wife [Herodias] were sent into
banishment and died at Lyons in Gaul.--Kitto.
8. The Sign of the Dove.--The Holy Ghost descended in the
form of a dove, or rather in the sign of a dove, in witness of that
administration [Messiah's baptism]. The sign of the dove was instituted
before the creation of the world, a witness for the Holy Ghost, and the
devil cannot come in the sign of a dove. The Holy Ghost is a personage,
and is in the form of a personage. It (he) does not confine itself to
the form of a dove, but in the sign of a dove. The Holy Ghost cannot
be transformed into a dove; but the sign of a dove was given to John
to signify the truth of the deed, as the dove is an emblem or token of
truth and innocence.--Joseph Smith.
REVIEW.
1. State what you can of the childhood of Christ.
2. What can you say of Nazareth?
3. What happened when Jesus was twelve years old?
4. Describe the Passover. (Note 2.)
5. What can you say of the fabulous stories related of the childhood
and youth of Christ?
6. At what time did John the Baptist appear as a preacher?
7. Who were the parents of John? What their descent?
8. Relate all you can concerning John's birth and childhood.
9. What was the burden of John's message?
10. How did he treat the deceitful Pharisees and Sadducees?
11. As whom did some of the Jews regard John?
12. What was the extent of his pretensions?
13. What can you say of Elias? (Note 5.)
14. Relate the baptism of Jesus.
15. Tell the story of John's martyrdom.
16. What was the fate of Herod Antipas? (Note 7.)
{43}
SECTION IV.
1. The Temptations of Jesus.--After his baptism Jesus was led
by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he fasted for forty days
and forty nights. Then at the moment of his great physical weakness
Lucifer came tempting him, but all the allurements of the wily foe were
thwarted, from the challenge to turn the stones into bread to the offer
of the kingdoms of this world and the glory of them. After his failure
to seduce Jesus to sin, Lucifer left him--"for a season," and angels
came and administered unto him. (See notes 1 and 2, end of section.)
2. Commencement of Christ's Ministry.--Having in all things
resisted the temptations of Lucifer, Jesus returned from the wilderness
into Galilee, the Spirit of God resting upon him in mighty power. It
was then that he began his great ministry among the people, teaching
in their synagogues, astonishing all with the graciousness of his
doctrines, and his power in healing the sick, until his fame extended
throughout the land and great multitudes of people from Galilee, and
also from Decapolis (De-kap-o-lis), Jerusalem and other parts of Judea
followed him.
3. The Doctrines Christ Taught.--The burden of his teaching
at this period of his ministry seems to have been: "Repent for the
kingdom of heaven is at hand." [26] In addition to this, he also taught
beautiful truths and moral precepts in brief, emphatic sentences (see
note 3, end of section), that were especially comforting to the poor;
such as, "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom
of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted:
Blessed are {44} the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed
are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall
be filled. * * * Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God."
4. In some things His teachings seemed to come in conflict with
the traditions of the people; and, indeed with the law of Moses itself,
as witness the following: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of
old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in
danger of the judgment: but I say unto you, That whosoever is angry
with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment;
and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca,[27] shall be in danger
of the council; but whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger
of hell fire." Again: "Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of
old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shall perform unto the
Lord thine oaths: but I say unto you, Swear not at all; * * * but let
your communications be Yea, yea; Nay, nay. * * * Ye have heard that it
hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say
unto you, That ye resist not evil. * * * Ye have heard that it hath
been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I
say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to
them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you, and
persecute you."
5. Yet Jesus claimed that He came not to destroy the law nor the
prophets, but to fulfill them, and declared that though heaven and
earth should pass away not one jot nor tittle of the law should pass
away but all should be fulfilled. Still it cannot be denied that some
of his teachings set aside many parts of the law of Moses, and seemed
to be in conflict with its spirit.
6. The Gospel Supplants the Law.--The seeming conflict, referred
to in the last paragraph, between the law of Moses and the teachings
of Messiah disappears when it is understood {45} that the gospel of
Jesus Christ was about to supplant the law. The gospel, under Moses
was offered to ancient Israel before they received the law of carnal
commandments; but they would not live in accordance with its divine
precepts, but hardened their hearts against it until the gospel, as
also the higher priesthood, was taken from among them. The lesser
priesthood, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels and the
preparatory gospel, repentance and baptism, and the law of carnal
commandments (the spirit of which is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth) remained with them,[28] to educate and instruct them, that they
might be prepared eventually for the fullness of the gospel. When Jesus
began his ministry by proclaiming his gospel, the law of Moses was
about fulfilled, and many of the carnal commandments and precepts were
being pushed aside by the more excellent precepts of the gospel, even
as many of the sacrifices and burnt offerings were to be discontinued
after Messiah should be offered up as a sacrifice, of which the
sacrifices before mentioned were but types and symbols. (See note 4,
end of section.)
7. Twelve Apostles Called.--From among the disciples which
followed him Jesus selected twelve men whom he called apostles. Their
names were: Simon, commonly called Peter; Andrew, brother to Peter;
James, the son of Zebedee, sometimes called James the Elder; John,
brother to James above named; Philip; Bartholomew; Thomas; Matthew, the
publican, author of the book of Matthew in the New Testament; James,
the son of Alphaeus, also called James the less, perhaps to distinguish
him from James the elder, or because of his small stature;[29] Lebbaeus
usually called by his surname Thaddaeus; Simon, the Canaanite; Judas
Iscariot, who betrayed him.
8. These twelve men Jesus sent out on a mission to the cities
of Israel, forbidding them to go into the way of the Gentiles, or
into the cities of the Samaritans. Their mission was to the {46} lost
sheep of the house of Israel.[30] They were sent without purse and
without scrip, nor were they to provide themselves with two coats nor
take thought as to what they should eat, or wherewithal they would be
clothed; but they were to trust to the Lord, being assured that the
laborer is worthy of his hire.
9. The burden of their message was to be: "The kingdom of heaven
is at hand." They also received power from their Master to heal the
sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: and were
admonished, since they had received freely, to give as freely to
others. Jesus told them they were going as sheep among wolves; that
they would be brought before governors and kings for his sake; that
they would be delivered up to councils, and scourged in the synagogues;
that they would be hated of all men for his sake; but they were also
given the comforting assurance that they who would endure to the end
should be saved.[31] These apostles went forth through the towns of
Judea preaching the gospel and healing the sick.
10. Seventies Called.--The harvest being great and the laborers
few, Jesus called seventies into the ministry to aid the twelve
apostles. He sent them two and two before him into every city and
place where he himself expected to go. The commission, powers and
instructions which the seventies received were nearly the same as those
given to the twelve apostles.[32] These seventies went forth as the
apostles had done and returning from their labor bore record that the
power of God was with them in their ministry and that the very devils
were subject to them in the name of Jesus.[33]
11. The Order of Events.--It would be difficult if not impossible
to relate even the chief events in the life of Messiah in the order in
which they occurred, since no little confusion exists in respect to
the succession of events in the narratives of the New Testament. (See
note 5, end of section.) Nor is it necessary to our purpose to dwell in
detail or in sequence {47} upon those matters. It is sufficient for us
to know that after the events we have already noted Messiah's mission
was more boldly declared. He proclaimed himself to be the Son of God;
the Messiah of which the scriptures had borne record;[34] he taught
men that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son to
redeem it, that whosoever would believe in him might have everlasting
life.[35] In addition to this great doctrine we have seen that he
taught repentance; he likewise taught that men must be born (baptized)
of the water and of the Spirit before they could enter into the kingdom
of God;[36] he made and baptized more disciples than John;[37] he also
taught the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, and announced
himself as possessing the keys and powers thereof.[38]
12. The Divinity of Messiah's Mission.--Jesus sustained the
divinity of his mission by pointing to the conformity of the facts
connected with his career with the predictions of the scriptures;[39]
by the testimony which John the Baptist bore;[40] by the works which
he did--his wonderful miracles wherein the power of God was made
manifest;[41] and lastly, and best of all, the testimony of the Father
himself which was promised unto all those who would do his (the
Father's) will.[42]
NOTES.
1. Order of the Temptations.--The order of the temptations is
given differently by St. Matthew and St. Luke. St. Matthew placing
second the scene on the pinnacle of the temple, and St. Luke the vision
of the kingdoms of the world. Both orders cannot be right, and possibly
St. Luke may have been influenced in his arrangement by the thought
that a temptation to spiritual pride and the arbitrary exercise of
miraculous power was a subtler and less transparent, and therefore
more powerful one than the temptation to fall down and recognize the
power of evil. * * * The consideration that St. {48} Matthew, as one of
the Apostles, is more likely to have heard the narrative immediately
from the lips of Christ--gives greater weight to the order which he
adopts.--Canon Farrar.
2. More than Three Temptations.--The positive temptations of
Jesus were not confined to that particular point of time when they
assailed him with concentrated force. [In the wilderness.] * * * But
still more frequently in after life was he called to endure temptation
of another kind--the temptation of suffering, and this culminated on
two occasions, viz., in the conflict of Gethsemane, and in that moment
of agony on the cross when he cried, "_My God, my God! why hast thou
forsaken me?"_--Ullman.
3. Manner of Christ's Teaching.--Next to what our Savior taught,
may be considered the manner of his teaching, which was extremely
peculiar; yet, I think, precisely adapted to the peculiarity of his
character and situation. His lessons did not consist of disquisitions;
of anything like moral essays, or like sermons, or like set treatises
upon several points which he mentioned. When he delivered a precept,
it was seldom that he added any proof or argument, still more seldom
that he accompanied it with, what all precepts require, limitations
and distinctions. His instructions were conceived in short, emphatic,
sententious rules, in occasional reflections or in sound maxims. I do
not think this is a natural, or would it have been a proper method
for a philosopher or a moralist or that it is a method which can be
successfully imitated by us. But I contend that it was suitable to the
character which Christ assumed, and to the situation in which, as a
teacher, he was placed. He produced himself as a messenger from God.
He put the truth of what he taught upon authority. [I say unto you,
swear not at all; I say unto you, resist not evil; I say unto you, love
your enemies.] In the choice, therefore, of his mode of teaching, the
purpose by him to be consulted was _impression_; because conviction,
which forms the principal end of our discourse, was to arise in the
minds of his followers from a different source, from their respect to
his person and authority. Now, for the purpose of impression singly and
exclusively, I know nothing which would have so great force, as strong,
ponderous maxims, frequently urged and frequently brought back to the
thoughts of the hearers. I know nothing that could in this view be said
better than, Do unto others as ye would that others should do unto
you; The first and great commandment is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy
God; and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself.--Christian Evidences--Paley.
4. The Law Added to the Gospel.--The Mosaic Law never was
considered, by those who understood it, "an everlasting covenant." It
was given for a special purpose, and when it had accomplished that
purpose, it was laid aside. We read in Galatians iii:8, that "the
scripture, {49} foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through
faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall
all the nations of the earth be blessed." From this it appears that
the gospel was preached unto Abraham. In Hebrews (iv:2), Paul speaking
of ancient Israel says: "For unto us was the gospel preached, as well
as unto them [ancient Israel]: but the word preached did not profit
them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it." Not only then
was the gospel preached unto Abraham, but also unto the children of
Israel. Now let us go back to the third chapter of Galatians; for Paul
having stated that the gospel was preached unto Abraham, asks this
question (verse 19): "Wherefore then serveth the law?" (if the gospel
was preached unto Abraham). "It was added because of transgression,
till the seed" (Christ) "should come to whom the promise was made."
Added? Added to what? Added to the gospel, which before that time
had been preached unto Abraham, and also to ancient Israel. But the
Israelites under Moses were unable to live the perfect law of the
gospel. They were not strong enough to overcome evil with good, as
the gospel requires, so a law of carnal commandments was "added" to
the gospel--a law which breathed of the spirit of an eye for an eye,
a tooth for a tooth--a law which was suited to their capacity. Paul,
speaking of this subject in the same chapter of Galatians (verses
23-25), says: "Before faith came we were kept under the law, shut up
unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law
[the law of Moses] was our school-master to bring us unto Christ, that
we might be justified by faith. But after that faith has come we are
no longer under a school-master." From these passages of scripture we
learn this: The gospel was preached unto Abraham, and also unto ancient
Israel. The Israelites were unable to live the law of the gospel,
hence a law of carnal commandments, known as the law of Moses was
given as a school-master to bring them up to a higher law; Christ came
and introduced that higher law--the gospel; explained its principles
and pointed out the difference between it and the law of Moses. The
gospel took the place of the law of Moses, which was laid aside, having
fulfilled the object for which it was added to the gospel.--Lecture on
Mission of Joseph Smith--Roberts.
5. Neglect of Chronological Order in New Testament
Narratives.--The four gospels narrate the principal events connected
with our Lord's abode on earth, from his birth to his ascension. There
must, therefore, be a general resemblance between them, though that
of John contains little in common with the others, being apparently
supplementary to them. Yet there are considerable diversities both in
the order in which facts are narrated, and in the facts themselves.
Hence the difficulty of weaving the accounts of the four into a
continuous and chronological history. It is our decided conviction
that {50} all the evangelists have not adhered to chronological
arrangement. The question then arises, have all neglected the order of
time? Newcome and many others espouse this view. "Chronological order,"
says the writer, "is not precisely observed by any of the evangelists;
St. John and St. Mark observe it most; and St. Matthew neglects it
most."--Davidson--Biblical Literature.
REVIEW.
1. What followed the baptism of Jesus?
2. What can you say of the order of the temptations? (Note 1).
3. What was the commencement of Christ's ministry?
4. What was the character of Christ's doctrine at this period?
5. State how the gospel supplanted the law of Moses.
6. Name the Apostles whom Jesus called.
7. What was the first mission of the Twelve?
8. What was the nature of the commission given to the Apostles?
9. State the calling and commission of the Seventies.
10. What can you say of the order of chronological events in the New
Testament? (Note 5.)
11. To what several circumstances did Messiah point as giving evidence
of the divinity of his mission?
12. Quote the passages of scripture cited in the text.
{51}
SECTION V.
1. The Common People Hear Jesus Gladly.--The mission of Jesus
was full of comfort to the poor. As one of the signs that he was the
promised Messiah, he said to a delegation of John's disciples--"The
poor have the gospel preached to them." [43] He claimed to be anointed
of the Lord to that work; and in doing it was fulfilling that which
had been predicted by the prophets.[44] He often reproved the rich,
not merely because they were rich, however, but because of their pride
and hypocrisy which led them to oppress the poor. In like manner he
reproved the chief elders and scribes and Pharisees who loved fine
clothing, and loved to receive salutations in the market places; who
coveted the chief seats in the synagogues and the uppermost rooms at
the feasts; who devoured widows' houses, and for a pretense made long
prayers.[45] This with a free reproof of their other vices and crimes
brought upon him the enmity of the wealthy, and of the rulers of the
people; but the common people heard him gladly.[46] (See note 1, end of
section.)
2. Religious Jealousy--Political Fear.--Another thing which
embittered the minds of the chief priests and elders against Jesus was
religious jealousy. The numerous evidences of his divine authority,
to be seen in his character and works, led many of the Jews to revere
him as the Son of God. Especially was this the case after he raised
Lazarus from the dead.[47] They said: "If we let this man alone all
men will believe in him; and the Romans will come and take away both
our place and nation." It was religious jealousy that dictated the
first half of the sentence; and political fear the rest. The Jews had
but a precarious hold upon their political rights; already it had {52}
been intimated that Jesus was king of the Jews; [48] and if the people
should under a sudden impulse accept him as king, the result in their
judgment, must be a loss of those political rights which the Romans
permitted them to exercise. To allow Jesus, therefore, to continue
preaching was dangerous to their supposed honors and privileges; and
this consideration was sufficient to induce the leading men among all
parties to plot against his life.
3. The Charges Against Jesus.--The principal charges which the
Jews brought against Jesus were: (1) violation of the Sabbath; he had
healed a man on the Sabbath day, and had commanded him to take up
his bed and walk:[49] (2) blasphemy; he had said God was his Father,
"making himself equal with God" (see note 2, end of section):[50] (3)
It was said that he was king of the Jews; and, on one occasion, the
people hearing of his coming to Jerusalem took palm branches and went
out to meet him, shouting Hosannah: blessed is the king of Israel that
cometh in the name of the Lord.[51] For this he was said to be an enemy
to Caesar's government and a seditious person.
4. Treason of Judas.--For some time the efforts of the chief
priests to arrest Jesus were baffled. They feared to proceed openly
against him lest the people should stand in his favor and overthrow
them. At last, however, Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, met with
some of the chief rulers and promised to betray him to them in the
absence of the multitude. This offer they gladly accepted and agreed to
pay him thirty pieces of silver for his treachery.
5. Institution of the Sacrament.--The time chosen by Judas for
the betrayal of his Master was the night of the passover feast. Jesus
with the twelve ate the feast in an upper room in Jerusalem. It was on
this occasion that he instituted the Sacrament of the Lord's supper.
He took bread and gave thanks, broke it and gave it to his disciples,
saying: This is my {53} body which is given for you; this do in
remembrance of me. He also took wine, gave thanks, saying as he gave it
to them: This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is shed for
many for the remission of sins.[52]
6. After the supper was over, having sung a hymn, Jesus with the
twelve, excepting Judas Iscariot, went out to the garden of Gethsemane
[Geth-sem-e-na] where Jesus prayed in great agony of spirit so that he
sweat great drops of blood. He prayed that the bitter cup of suffering
now about to be held to his lips might be removed from him. Thrice he
so prayed, but closed each petition to his Father with--"not my will,
but thine, will be done."
7. The Betrayal.--Meantime, Judas Iscariot having stolen out
in the midst of the feast, went to the chief priests and directed a
multitude with a company of Roman soldiers to the garden, and running
to Jesus cried, "Hail, Master!" and kissed him. That was the sign
agreed upon by the traitor and those who came to make the arrest, that
they might know which one to take. And when they had secured him, they
took him first to the house of Annas [An-nas], who, after questioning
him, sent him bound to Caiaphas [Kai-ya-fas], the high priest, where he
was arraigned before the Sanhedrim [San-he-drim].
8. The Trial.--The court before which Jesus was arraigned was
not one before which his case was to be investigated, they had come
together with the fixed determination to adjudge him guilty; hence
they sought for witnesses who would testify something against him
that would furnish a pretext for putting him to death. Many false
witnesses testified against him; but their testimony was unsatisfactory
and failed of its purpose. At last the high priest, evidently losing
patience at the silence of the prisoner--for he made no defense against
the charges of the false witnesses--adjured him by the living God to
say if he were the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus acknowledged that he
was, {54} and told them that hereafter they should see him at the right
hand of Power, coming in the clouds of heaven. At this the high priest
rent his clothes, saying, "he hath spoken blasphemy," and claimed that
they had no need of further witnesses, since they themselves had heard
his "blasphemy" (see note 3, end of section). The council at once
decided him worthy of death.
9. Christ Before Pilate and Herod.--The Romans had taken from the
Sanhedrim of the Jews the power of executing those whom it adjudged
guilty of death, unless the sentence was confirmed by the Roman
governor; hence after sentence of death was passed upon Jesus by the
Sanhedrim they took him to Pilate's judgment hall to have that sentence
confirmed.
10. Learning incidentally that Jesus was a Galilean, and belonged
to Herod's jurisdiction, Pilate sent him to Herod who, at the time, was
in Jerusalem. Before Herod Jesus was silent; neither the contempt of
the murderer of his forerunner, nor the mockery of the common soldiers
could provoke him into breaking his dignified silence. So in ridicule
of his claims to kingship--although, as Jesus himself said, his kingdom
was not of this world[53]--Herod clothed him in gorgeous apparel and
sent him back to Pilate.
11. Satisfied that there was nothing in Messiah's conduct worthy
of death, Pilate sought to let him go; but the Jews insisted upon his
execution. It was the custom among the Jews to have released to them a
prisoner at the feast of the Passover, and on that ground Pilate sought
to release Jesus; but the Jews would not listen to it, and preferred
that the robber, Barabbas, a murderer, should be released. They told
Pilate that whosoever made himself a king was an enemy to Caesar; and
if he let Jesus go he was not Caesar's friend. By such arguments on
the part of the chief priests, and the persistent cry of the people to
crucify him, Pilate was over-awed, and at last confirmed the sentence
of death. (See note 4, end of section.)
{55} 12. The Crucifixion.--From the hall of judgment Jesus was
led into the common hall, where the soldiers stripped him of his own
raiment, and put upon him a scarlet robe in mockery of his claims to
kingship. They also platted a crown of thorns and placed it on his
brow, and for a scepter gave him a reed in his right hand. They bowed
the knee before him, and mockingly cried: "Hail, king of the Jews!"
They spit upon him, beat him with their hands and with the reed they
had given him for a scepter.
13. From the common hall he was led away under a guard of
soldiers to a place called Golgotha [Gol-go-tha], which, as well as
its Latin equivalent--_Calvaria_-_Calvary_[54]--means, the place of
a skull. Here Jesus was stripped, and nailed to the cross, which was
erected between two other crosses, on each of which was a thief. Above
the his head in Latin, Greek and Hebrew was fixed the superscription
written by Pilate--"_This is the King of the Jews."_ As he hung there
between the two thieves, the soldiers mocked him as did also the chief
scribes and the Pharisees, saying: He saved others, let him save
himself; if he is Christ, the chosen of God; let him come down from
the cross and we will believe him; he trusted in God, let him deliver
him now, if he will have him; for he said, I am the Son of God. In the
midst of his great suffering, in which his mental agony was greater
than his physical pain; the Son of God cried, "Father, forgive them,
they know not what they do."
14. At the sixth hour--mid-day--there was a darkness that spread
over the whole land, and continued until the ninth hour (see note 5,
end of section). About the ninth hour Jesus said: "Father, into thy
hands I commend my spirit," then he bowed his head and expired. At
the same moment the veil of the Temple was rent from top to bottom,
an earthquake shook {56} the solid earth and rent the rocks, all the
elements of nature seemed agitated as if anxious to bear witness that a
God had died!
15. The Convulsions of Nature on the Western Hemisphere.--On the
western hemisphere during the crucifixion of our Lord, the elements
of nature were more disturbed than on the eastern hemisphere. During
the time that Jesus was upon the cross, great and terrible tempests
accompanied with terrific lightning raged throughout the land.
Earthquakes shattered cities into confused piles of ruins; level
plains were broken up and left in confused mountainous heaps; solid
rocks were rent in twain; many cities were swept out of existence
by fierce whirl-winds; others were sunk into the depths of the sea,
others covered with mountain chains thrown up by the convulsions of the
trembling earth; and others still were burned with fire. For the space
of about three hours this awful disturbance of the elements continued,
during which the whole face of the land both in North and South America
was greatly changed, and most of the inhabitants destroyed. After the
storm and tempest and the quakings of the earth had ceased, there
followed intense darkness which lasted for three days, the time that
Jesus was lying in the tomb.[55]
16. The Burial.--Towards evening of the day of the crucifixion,
Joseph of Arimathaea [Ar-ra-ma-thee-ya], a rich man and a disciple of
Jesus, went to Pilate, and begged that the body of the Lord be given
him that he might bury it. Pilate granted the request; and Joseph took
the body, wrapt in clean linen and put it in his own new tomb. The
Pharisees also went to Pilate and reminded him how Jesus had said when
living that after three days in the tomb he would rise again, and asked
that the sepulchre wherein he was buried should be placed under guard
until the third day should pass, lest his disciples should come and
steal his body by night, and then spread abroad the rumor {57} that he
had arisen from the dead. Pilate granted them permission to seal up the
sepulchre and set a watch to guard it. (See note 6, end of section.)
NOTES.
1. The Common People Begin Reforms.--The case of the common
people hearing Jesus gladly is not singular; it may be said to be true
in nearly all great movements. It is a truth so generally accepted that
a modern writer (Lew Wallace) has said: "To begin a reform, go not into
the palaces of the great and rich; go rather to those whose cups of
happiness are empty--to the poor and humble."
2. Jesus' Defense Against the Charge of Blasphemy.--The following
scene occurred in Solomon's porch, at the temple, where Jesus was
walking. A number of Jews gathered about him and said: How long dost
thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ tell us so plainly.
JESUS.--I told you and ye believed not; the works that I do in my
Father's name, they bear witness of me * * * I and my Father are one.
[Then the Jews took up stones to stone him.]
JESUS.--Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of
those works do you stone me?
JEWS.--For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and
because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
JESUS.--Is it not written in your law; I said ye are Gods? If he called
them Gods unto whom the word of God come, and the scripture cannot be
broken, say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent unto
the world, thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I
do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
Then they sought again to take him, but he escaped out of their hands.
(John x.)
3. The Law Against Blasphemy.--The law against blasphemy is to be
found in Leviticus (xxiv:15, 16) and is as follows: "Whosoever curseth
his God shall bear his sin; and he that blasphemeth the name of the
Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall
certainly stone him; as well the stranger as he that is born in the
land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death."
The Jews claimed that Jesus was guilty of blasphemy, because he claimed
to be the Son of God, thus making himself equal with God; when to their
eyes he was merely a man. Therein consisted his alleged blasphemy.
Christ's own defense against the charge (see note above) is the best
answer to the sophistry of the Jews by {58} which they tried to make it
appear that he had broken this law.--Roberts.
4. Character of Pilate.--If we now wish to form a judgment of
Pilate's character, we easily see that he was one of that large class
of men who aspire to public offices, not from a pure and lofty desire
of benefitting the public and advancing the good of the world, but from
selfish and personal considerations, from a love of distinction, from a
love of power, from a love of self indulgence; being destitute of any
fixed principles, and having no aim but office and influence, they act
right only by chance and when convenient, and are wholly incapable of
pursuing a consistent course, or of acting with firmness or self-denial
in cases in which the preservation of integrity require the exercise
of these qualities. Pilate was obviously a man of weak, and therefore,
with his temptations, of corrupt character.--J. R. Beard, D. D., Member
of the Historical Theological Society, Leipzig.
5. The Three Hours' Darkness.--In the gospel of Matthew and Luke,
we read that while Jesus hung upon the cross, "from the sixth hour
there was darkness over all the land to the ninth hour." Most of the
ancient commentators believed that this darkness extended to the whole
world. But their arguments are now seldom regarded as satisfactory, and
their proofs even less so. Of the latter the strongest is the mention
of an eclipse of the sun, which is referred to this time by Phlegon
Trallianus, and, after him by Thallus. But even an eclipse of the sun
could not be visible to the whole world; and neither of these writers
names the places of the eclipse. Some think it was Rome; but it is
impossible that an eclipse could have happened from the sixth to the
ninth hour both at Rome and Jerusalem. * * * That the darkness could
not have proceeded from an eclipse of the sun is further placed beyond
all doubt by the fact that, it being then the time of the Passover, the
moon was at the full. This darkness may, therefore, be ascribed to an
extraordinary and preternatural obscuration of the solar light, which
might precede and accompany the earthquake which took place on the same
occasion. For it has been noticed that often before an earthquake such
a mist arises from sulphurous vapors as to occasion a darkness almost
nocturnal.--Biblical Literature--Kitto.
6. Fate of the Chief Actors in Christ's Crucifixion.--Before
the dread sacrifice was consummated, Judas died in the horrors of a
loathsome suicide. Caiaphas (the high priest and president of the
Sanhedrim) was deposed the year following. Herod died in infamy and
exile. Stripped of his procuratorship very shortly afterwards, on the
very charges he had tried by a wicked concession to avoid. Pilate,
wearied out with misfortunes, died in suicide and banishment, leaving
behind him an execrated name. The house of Annas was destroyed a
generation later by an infuriated mob, and his son was dragged through
{59} the streets and scourged and beaten to his place of murder. Some
of those who shared in and witnessed the scenes of that day--and
thousands of their children--also shared in and witnessed the long
horrors of that siege of Jerusalem, which stands unparalleled in
history for its unutterable fearfulness.--Canon Farrar.
REVIEW.
1. What class of people heard Jesus gladly?
2. What classes of people did Jesus reprove? Why?
3. What was it that embittered the minds of the chief priests and
rulers against Jesus?
4. Enumerate the charges against Jesus.
5. In what manner did Jesus defend himself against the charge of
blasphemy? (Note 2.)
6. Who betrayed Jesus?
7. What time was chosen by Judas to betray Jesus?
8. Give an account of the institution of the sacrament.
9. Tell the story of the betrayal.
10. State the circumstances of the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrim.
11. Why did the Jews take Jesus before Pilate?
12. Why did Pilate send him to Herod?
13. What was Messiah's treatment at the hands of Herod?
14. What the deportment of Jesus?
15. How did Pilate look upon Jesus?
16. In what manner did the Roman governor try to save Jesus?
17. What was the character of Pilate? (Note 4).
18. Tell the story of the crucifixion.
19. What occurred on the Western hemisphere at the crucifixion, and
during the time Jesus was in the tomb?
20. Tell about the burial of Jesus.
21. What was the fate of those who judged and condemned Jesus? (Note 6).
{60}
SECTION VI.
1. The Resurrection.--Notwithstanding the sealed sepulchre, the
armed watch, on the third day after his burial, the Son of God arose
from the dead, as he himself predicted he would.[56] A number of women
coming to the sepulchre early in the morning, for the purpose of
finishing the work of embalming his body, found the grave untenanted
and the angel present who announced the resurrection of the Lord; and
commanded them to go and inform his disciples that he was risen from
the dead and would go before them into Galilee, where he would appear
unto them.
2. According to Matthew's account of the resurrection an angel
from heaven came to the sepulchre wherein Jesus was laid, and rolled
back the stone from its mouth; at his presence the soldiers who had
been stationed as a guard to prevent the disciples from coming and
stealing the body, became as dead men. Recovering from their stupor,
some of the watch made their way to the chief priests and related what
had happened. The chief priests and elders immediately assembled in
council, and bribed the soldiers to say that they had fallen asleep,
and during that time the followers of Christ had come and stolen his
body. They agreed also that if the rumor of their falling asleep while
on watch--a capital offense for a Roman soldier--should come to the
ears of the governor, they would persuade him and secure them from
punishment. It was in this way that the disappearance of the body of
Jesus was commonly explained by the Jews who crucified him.[57]
{61} 3. The Appearances of Jesus After His Resurrection.--There
are some slight discrepancies in the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke
and John in respect to the order of the appearances of Messiah after
his resurrection, as indeed there is in respect to the order of the
events connected with his trial, condemnation and death; but the
following because of the fragmentary character of the four gospels may
be regarded as being as nearly correct as may be ascertained. (See
notes 1, 2, and 3, end of section.)
4. First, he appeared to Mary Magdalene, in the garden where
the tomb in which he was laid was located;[58] second, to the women
returning from the sepulchre on their way to deliver the angel's
message to the disciples;[59] third, to two disciples going to
Emmaus;[60] fourth, to Peter;[61] fifth, to ten apostles in an upper
room;[62] sixth, to the eleven apostles, also in the upper room;[63]
seventh, to seven apostles at the sea of Tiberias;[64] eighth, to
eleven apostles in a mountain in Galilee;[65] ninth, to above five
hundred brethren at once;[66] tenth, to James;[67] and finally to Paul
while on his way to Damascus[68]
5. In all, Jesus was with his disciples on the eastern hemisphere
for forty days after his resurrection,[69] during which time he taught
them all things pertaining to the kingdom of heaven, and authorized
them to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever he had commanded
them; and promised that he would be with them even unto the end of the
world.[70]
6. Moreover, he told them that these signs should follow them
that believed: In his name they should cast out devils; they should
speak with new tongues, take up serpents, and {62} even if they drank
any deadly thing he promised that it should not harm them; they should
lay hands on the sick, and they should recover.[71]
7. The Ascension.--Having thus taught the gospel to the people
of the eastern hemisphere, organized his church and commissioned his
apostles to teach the gospel to all nations, he prepared to depart from
them. It was most probably at Bethany [Beth-a-ny] that this solemn
parting occurred. His forerunner, John the Baptist, had promised that
he who should come after him, Jesus Christ, would baptize them with
the Holy Ghost, and just previous to leaving the apostles he told them
that the promise was about to be fulfilled. He therefore commanded them
to tarry in Jerusalem until they were endowed with that power from on
high. Then he lifted up his hands and blessed them, after which he was
parted from them, and a cloud received him out of their sight.[72]
8. As they were still looking steadfastly toward heaven, two
men--angels--in white apparel stood by them, and declared that this
same Jesus whom they had seen go into heaven, should come in like
manner, that is, in the clouds of heaven and in great glory.[73]
9. The Appearing of Messiah to the Nephites.--Jesus, before his
crucifixion, told his disciples at Jerusalem that he was the good
shepherd that would lay down his life for the sheep. He told them
plainly, also, that he had other sheep which were not of that fold.
"Them also I must bring," said he, "and they must hear my voice; and
there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." [74]
10. This saying, like many others which he delivered to them, the
apostles did not understand, because of their unbelief. And because
of their unbelief and their stiffneckedness Jesus was commanded by
his Father to say no more to them {63} about it.[75] But it was the
Nephites on the continent of America whom Jesus had in mind when he
uttered the saying recorded in John's gospel,[76] "Other sheep I have,
which are not of this fold," etc.
11. What length of time intervened between Messiah's departure
from his disciples at Jerusalem and his appearance among the Nephites
is not known. It was not, however, until after he had ascended into
heaven.[77] His appearing to them was in this manner:
12. The few people upon the western hemisphere--and they were
the more righteous part both of the Nephites and the Lamanites--who
survived that terrible period of destruction which lasted during the
time that Jesus hung upon the cross,[78] and the three succeeding
days of darkness, were gathered together about the temple in the land
Bountiful.[79] And as they were pointing out to each other the changes
that had occurred because of the earthquakes and other convulsions of
the elements, while the Messiah suffered upon the cross, they heard
a voice speaking unto them as if from heaven. They at first did not
understand the voice they heard; but the third time it spoke they
understood it, and it made their hearts burn within them and their
whole frame to quake, and these are the words which the voice spake:
"Behold my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have
glorified my name; hear ye him." And looking up into heaven from whence
the voice came, they saw a man descending clothed in a white robe.
The multitude were breathlessly silent, for they supposed an angel
had appeared unto them; but as soon as Jesus was in their midst he
stretched out his arm and said: "Behold I am Jesus Christ, whom the
prophets testified should come into the world. * * * I am the light and
life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the
Father hath {64} given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon
me the sins of the world."
13. At this announcement the people fell prostrate and worshiped
him. But he commanded them to arise and come unto him that they might
thrust their hands into his side, and feel the prints of the nails in
his hands and in his feet, that they might know that he was the God
of Israel, and the God of the whole earth who had been slain for the
sins of the world.[80] (See notes 5, 6, and 7, end of section). This
the people did, and then again they worshiped him, and shouted aloud:
"Hosanna! blessed be the name of the Most High God!"
14. The Church Established in America.--After these things, Jesus
proceeded to teach them his gospel and establish his church among them.
It will be sufficient to say here that the Messiah taught the people
on the western continent the same great moral truths that he taught
the Jews; that he established the same ordinances for the salvation of
the people; that he chose Twelve Apostles to whom he committed power
to preach his gospel, and administer in its ordinances; that a church
was organized which was called the Church of Christ; that Jesus bore
record of the great truth of the resurrection of the dead; that the
Saints enjoyed the same spiritual graces and powers that the church in
Palestine did, only more abundantly because of their greater faith;
that two years after the appearance of Messiah all the people on the
continent accepted the gospel and were baptized; that they had all
things common and were a blessed and prosperous people among whom were
no strifes or jealousies or contentions, and every man did deal justly
one with another.
15. They increased rapidly in numbers and went forth and built
up the waste places, and rebuilded many of the cities which had been
ruined by the earthquakes and by fires. They walked no more after the
ordinances of the law of Moses, but {65} they practiced the principles
of the doctrines of the gospel of Christ, and thus the first century of
the Christian era passed away.
16. All the members of the first quorum of the twelve whom Jesus
called on the western hemisphere died within the first century of the
Christian era, except the three to whom he had granted the privilege,
as he did unto John the beloved disciple,[81] of remaining on the
earth until he should come in his glory. The places of those who died
were filled by ordaining others, and thus the quorum of apostles was
perpetuated.[82]
NOTES.
1. The Gospels but Fragmentary Histories.--Although skeptics
have dwelt with disproportioned persistency upon a multitude
of discrepancies in the four-fold narrative of Christ's trial,
condemnation, death, and resurrection, yet these are not of a nature
to cause the slightest anxiety to a Christian scholar; nor need they
awaken the most momentary distrust in anyone who--even if he have
no deeper feelings in the matter--approaches the gospels with no
preconceived theory, whether of infallibility or of dishonesty, to
support and merely accept them for that which, at the lowest, they
claim to be--histories, honest and faithful, up to the full knowledge
of the writers, _but each, if taken alone, confessedly fragmentary
and obviously incomplete._ After repeated study, I declare, quite
fearlessly, that though the slight variations are numerous--though the
lesser particulars cannot in every instance be rigidly and minutely
accurate--though no one of the narratives taken singly would give us
an adequate impression--yet, so far from there being, in this part of
the gospel story, any irreconcilable contradiction, it is perfectly
possible to discover how one evangelist supplements the details
furnished by another, and perfectly possible to understand the true
sequence of the incidents by combining into one whole the separate
indications which they furnish.--_Canon Farrar_.
2. The Bible Corrupted by the Gentiles.--And it came to pass that
I, Nephi, beheld that they [the Gentiles] did prosper in the land {66}
[America] and I beheld a book [the Bible], and it was carried forth
among them. And the angel said unto me, Knowest thou the meaning of
the book? And I said unto him, I know not. * * * And he said unto me,
The book which thou beholdest, is a record of the Jews, which contains
the covenants of the Lord which he hath made unto the house of Israel.
* * * Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth
of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of the Jew, it
contained the plainness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve
apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth
which is in the Lamb of God; wherefore these things go forth from the
Jews in purity, unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in
God; and after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the
Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the foundation of a
great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other
churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb,
many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants
of the Lord have they taken away; and all this have they done, that
they might pervert the right ways of the Lord; that they might blind
the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men. * * * Because
of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an
exceeding great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great
power over them.--Vision of Nephi--I Nephi xiii.
3. Missing Parts of the Scripture.--No better evidence can be
given that the Jewish scriptures are fragmentary and corrupted than
the fact that reference is made in them to books and scriptures which
are not now extant--that have been destroyed. The following are a such
references taken from the New Testament:
_Scriptures of Abraham's Time_.--"And the scripture, foreseeing that
God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel
unto Abraham" (Gal. iii:8). The Christian world says, "Moses was God's
first pen," but it appears from the above quotation that some one wrote
scriptures even before Abraham's days, and he read them, learned the
gospel from them and also learned that God would justify the heathen
through faith.
_Prophecy of Enoch_.--Speaking of characters who were like "raging
waves of the sea foaming out their own shame," Jude says: "And Enoch
also, the seventh from Adam prophesied of these, saying, Behold the
Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment
upon all," etc. (Jude 14, 15). From this it appears that Enoch had
a revelation concerning the glorious coming of the Son of God to
judgment. May not the prophecy of Enoch have been among the scripture
with which Abraham was acquainted?
_Another Epistle of Jude_.--"When I gave all diligence to write unto
you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto {67}
you, and exhort you that ye should contend earnestly for the faith
which was once delivered unto the Saints." (Jude 3). We have but one
epistle of Jude. Would not the epistle on the "common salvation" be as
important as the one and the only one we have from Jude's pen?
_Another Epistle to the Ephesians_.--In Ephesians iii and 3rd, Paul
alludes to another epistle which he had written to that people, but of
which the world has no knowledge except this reference which is made by
its author. This epistle contained a revelation from God.
_An Epistle to the Laodiceans_.--"When this epistle [Colossians]
is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the
Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea." (Col.
iv: 16.) The epistle to the Laodiceans is among the scripture that is
lost.
_Another Epistle to the Corinthians_.--In the first letter to the
Corinthians is this statement: "I wrote unto you in an epistle not
to company with fornicators" (I Cor. v:9). From this it would appear
that our so-called first epistle to the Corinthians, is really not
the first, since Paul in it speaks of a former letter he had written,
and which was doubtless as good scripture as the two which have been
preserved.
The books mentioned in the Old Testament, but which are missing,
are more numerous than those in the New Testament. In the following
passages some few of the many lost books are referred to: I Chronicles
xxix:29; II Chronicles ix:29; II Chronicles xii:15; I Samuel x:25; I
Kings iv:32, 33.--Roberts.
4. Traditions of Aborigines Respecting Messiah.--It is beyond
all question that the descendants of the Nephites and Lamanites--the
American Indians--have kept in their traditions a recollection--though
perhaps a distorted one--of the memorable visit of Messiah to their
forefathers. "The chief divinity of the Nahua nations," says Bancroft
in his "Native Races," "was Quetzalcoatl, the gentle God, ruler of the
air, controller of the sun and rain, and source of all prosperity. * *
* From toward the rising sun Quetzalcoatl, had come; and he was white,
with large eyes and long, black hair and copious beard. He finally set
out for some other country [83] and as he departed from them his last
words were that "one day bearded white men, brethren of his, perhaps
he himself, would come by way of the sea in which the sun rises, and
would enter in and rule the land;" and from that day, with a fidelity
befitting Hebrews waiting for the coming of Messiah, the Mexican people
watched for the fulfillment of this prophecy, which promised them a
gentle rule, free from bloody sacrifices and oppression."--Roberts.
{68} 5. The Incarnation Believed by the Mexicans.--How truly
surprisingg is it to find that the Mexicans who seemed to have been
unacquainted with the doctrine of the migration of the soul, should
have believed in the incarnation of the only Son of the supreme
God!--Humboldt.
6. Crucifixion and Atonement Believed in by
Mexicans.--Quetzalcoatl is there (in a certain plate where that God
is represented) painted in the attitude of a person crucified, with the
impression of nails in his hands and feet, but not actually upon the
cross. * * * The seventy-third plate of the Borgian Ms. is the most
remarkable of all, for there Quetzalcoatl is not only represented as
crucified upon a cross of Greek form, but his burial and descent into
hell are also depicted in a very curious manner. * * * The Mexicans
believe that Quetzalcoatl took human nature upon him, partaking of
all the infirmities of man, and was not exempt from sorrow, pain
or death, which he suffered voluntarily to atone for the sins of
man.--"Antiquities of Mexico"--Kingsborough.
7. Christ and Quetzalcoatl.--The story of the life of the
Mexican divinity, Quetzalcoatl, closely resembles that of the Savior;
so closely indeed that we can come to no other conclusion than that
Quetzalcoatl and Christ are the same being. But the history of the
former has been handed down to us through an impure Lamanitish source,
which has sadly disfigured and perverted the original incidents
and teachings of the Savior's life and ministry.--"Mediation and
Atonement"--President John Taylor.
REVIEW.
1. What occurred on the third day of Christ's burial?
2. State the several prophecies made by Jesus which were fulfilled in
his resurrection? (note).
3. Relate the account of the resurrection as given by Matthew.
4. In respect to what are there slight discrepancies in the writings of
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?
5. What can you say of the fragmentary character of the New Testament
"Gospels?" (Notes 1 and 2).
6. State the most probable order in which Jesus made his several
appearances after the resurrection.
7. How long was Jesus with his disciples on the eastern hemisphere
after his resurrection?
8. What notable commission did Jesus give to the apostles before
leaving them?
9. What signs did Messiah say should follow believers?
10. Describe the last parting of Jesus from his disciples.
{69} 11. What prophecy did Jesus make to his disciples at Jerusalem
that they did not understand?
12. Give an account of Messiah's visit to the Nephites.
13. What did Jesus do among the Nephites?
14. What was the effect that followed the preaching of the gospel and
the organization of the church?
15. What course was pursued as to the quorum of the apostles?
16. Relate the several traditions of the Mexicans respecting the visit
of Messiah to this land.
{70}
SECTION VII.
1. Vacancy in the Quorum of the Twelve Filled.--The first
official business which occupied the attention of the authorities of
the church after the ascension of the Lord--according to our Christian
annals--was filling up the quorum of the twelve. Judas by his treason
had forfeited his apostleship and was dead, and hence it became
necessary to ordain another to fill his place. Peter when presenting
this matter before the church, appeared to lay some stress upon the
necessity of choosing some one of the brethren who had been with them
from the beginning--"from the baptism of John unto that same day that
he (Christ) was taken up," that he might be a witness with the rest of
the apostles of the things which Jesus did and also a witness of his
resurrection.
2. "And they appointed [nominated] two. Joseph called Barsabas,
who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed. * * * Thou,
Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two
thou hast chosen. * * * And they gave forth their lots [or, gave their
votes];[84] and the lot fell upon Matthias." From that time he was
numbered with the apostles. (See note 1, end of section).
3. The filling of this vacancy in the quorum of the twelve--the
only instance of the kind mentioned in the New Testament--may {71}
be taken as a proof that it was clearly the understanding of the
apostles that the quorum of the twelve was to be perpetuated. It was
so understood in the church on the western hemisphere, for the fourth
Nephi informs us that as the apostles whom Jesus had chosen passed
away, others were ordained in their stead;[85] and thus the quorum was
kept full, but for how long cannot be ascertained.
4. The Holy Ghost Given.--The first time the gospel was preached
publicly after the ascension of Messiah was on the day of Pentecost,
most probably seven days after the ascension.[86] The church had
assembled and suddenly the promised baptism of the Holy Ghost--promised
both by John the Baptist and Messiah[87]--took place, for the Spirit
came like the rushing of a mighty wind and filled the house where the
saints were assembled; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost. It
rested upon them visibly like cloven tongues of fire; and they began
speaking in other tongues, that is, in languages before unknown to
them, as the spirit gave them utterance.
5. The occurrence was soon noised about the city and the
multitude came together, to witness this strange event. In that great
concourse of people thus hastily assembled were devout men out of
every nation under heaven (see note 2, end of section), and they were
confounded with astonishment since every man heard the gospel in his
own language.[88] "Are not all these which speak Galileans," said they,
"and how hear we every man in his own tongue, wherein we were born?"
All were amazed, and some inquired one of another, "What meaneth this?"
Others mockingly said, "These men are full of new wine."
{72} 6. To this latter remark the apostle Peter replied that
the brethren were not drunken as had been supposed, and reminded the
accusers that it was but the third hour of the day. Men were not likely
to be drunk so early. The apostle further informed them that his power
which they witnessed was the same as that of which Joel[89] spoke when
he said that in the last days the Spirit of God should be poured out
upon all flesh, and make the sons and daughters of men to prophesy,
young men to see visions and old men to dream dreams, etc. (See notes 3
and 4, end of section).
7. Having corrected the slander uttered by those inclined to mock
at the power of God, Peter continued his discourse, and proved from the
scriptures and from the marvelous works of the Lord Jesus while among
them, that he was both Lord and Christ. Then a great multitude was
converted, and cried as with one voice, "Men and brethren, what shall
we do?" To which Peter answered, "Repent and be baptized every one of
you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." [90] He informed them that this
promise of the Holy Ghost--and, of course, of salvation--was both to
them and to their children, in fact to all whom God should call.[91]
There were added to the church that day, three thousand souls.
8. The Rise of Opposition.--Being now endowed with power from on
high, the apostles continued to preach in and {73} about Jerusalem with
great success, the Lord working with them and confirming their ministry
by signs and wonders following the believers.
9. The chief priests and rulers among the Jews became alarmed
at the boldness of the disciples of Jesus and the rapidity with which
faith in the gospel spread among the people. They were in imminent
danger of being adjudged by the people, guilty of executing an innocent
man; nay, more, of putting to death Messiah!
10. They therefore had some of the apostles brought before them
and sought to intimidate them with threats not to preach any more in
the name of Jesus. To these threats the apostles made answer: "Whether
it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto
God, judge ye." [92] Leaving the presence of the council the apostles
preached even more boldly in the name of Jesus. A second time they
were brought before the chief rulers, to answer for a disregard of the
orders of the council which charged them with threats not to teach in
the name of Jesus; "and behold," said they, "ye have filled Jerusalem
with your doctrine, and mean to bring this man's blood upon us."
11. The answer of Peter, who spoke also for the rest of the
apostles, was even bolder than before. "We ought to obey God rather
than men," said he. "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye
slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand
to be a Prince and a Savior, for to give repentance to Israel and
forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these things; and so is
also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him." [93]
12. The boldness of his answer gave deep offense and led the
chief rulers to take counsel how they might slay them. But Gamaliel
[Ga-ma-li-el], a learned doctor of the law, advised them against such
proceedings. His advice was to let the men alone, {74} for if the work
they had in hand was of men it would come to naught. If it was of God,
nothing which they could do would overthrow it; and they might be found
fighting against God.[94]
13. The counsel of Gamaliel prevailed in part at least. The
apostles were not killed at that time; but they were once more
forbidden to speak in the name of Jesus, beaten and then set free. The
apostles rejoiced at being found worthy to suffer shame for the name of
Jesus, and not heeding the orders of the council continued preaching in
the temple and in private houses.
14. Temporal Concerns.--So completely did the apostles and the
other disciples give themselves to the work of the ministry, that
complaint was made by the Grecians because the widows and poor were
neglected. Whereupon the twelve called the church together and proposed
that seven men of good report be chosen and set apart to see to these
affairs, that they themselves might give their attention wholly to the
ministry, as it was not profitable for them to neglect that in order to
"wait on tables." The plan pleased the church and the seven men were
appointed.[95]
{75} 15. All Things in Common.--The effect of the gospel upon
the saints of Jerusalem was very marked. They were of one heart and
of one mind; they had all things in common, and those who possessed
houses or lands sold them and brought the price of the things and laid
it at the apostles' feet. Distribution was made unto every man as he
had need; and there was none among them that lacked for that which was
necessary.[96]
16. Persecution.--A great persecution arose against the church
at Jerusalem, within the first year after Messiah's ascension, so
that most of the brethren, except the apostles, were scattered abroad
throughout Judea and Samaria. Everywhere they went they preached the
gospel, so that great good came out of what was intended to be an evil,
as the gospel was more widely preached. Philip, one of the seven who
had been appointed to look after the temporal affairs of the church,
was among the number driven from Jerusalem by the persecution. He went
to the city of Samaria, where the people listened to his teachings,
accepted his testimony and were baptized both men and women. The
apostles hearing of his success, sent to Samaria Peter and John; and
when they came they laid their hands upon those who had been baptized
and they received the Holy Ghost;[97] and thus the work was established
there.
17. Paul.--It was during this persecution that Saul, of Tarsus,
afterwards better known as Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles,
manifested his bitterness toward the saints. He witnessed the stoning
to death of Stephen, one of the seven men appointed to look after
the temporal affairs of the church at Jerusalem. He held the clothes
of those who killed him; and {76} being exceedingly vexed at what he
regarded as a superstition, he followed the saints into distant cities,
breathing out threatenings and slaughter against them. He went to the
high priest and obtained letters of authority from him to the rulers of
the synagogue at Damascus, that if he found any of the saints there he
might bring them bound to Jerusalem. On his way to Damascus, however,
the Lord Jesus appeared to him, and Paul, blinded by the glory of the
vision, and humbled because he found he had been fighting against God,
was led by his companions into the city where a disciple of the name of
Ananias was sent by the Lord to restore to Paul his sight and baptize
him. He was afterwards made an apostle and became zealous for the
truth.[98] (See note 4, end of section).
18. The Gospel Taken to the Gentiles.--The apostles, being Jews
themselves, appear to have shared the common prejudices of their race
against the Gentiles; and treated them as if they had no lot nor part
in the gospel of Christ. It was not the design of the Lord, however,
to thus restrict the application of the gospel. Jesus, himself, while
he had said that he was sent but to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel,[99] had also said: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth,
_will draw all men unto me_." [100] Hence when Cornelius, of Caesarea,
a devout man, one that feared God, though a Gentile, sought the Lord
by prayer and good works, he found him; for an angel was sent to him
who told him his prayers and alms were accepted of God, and that he had
come to direct him to send men to Joppa for Simon Peter, who would be
able to tell him what he ought to do. The devout Gentile immediately
started the messengers to find the apostle.
19. Meantime Peter himself was prepared by a vision to go with
the gospel unto one whom both he and all his race regarded as unclean.
In vision he thought he beheld a great net let down from heaven, filled
with all manner of four-footed {77} beasts, fowls of the air and
creeping things. And a voice said to him, "Rise, Peter, kill, and eat."
"Not so, Lord," was his reply: "for I have never eaten anything that is
common or unclean." "What God hath cleansed," said the voice that spoke
to him, "that call not thou common or unclean." This was done thrice,
and as he was yet pondering what the vision could mean, the messengers
of Cornelius were at the gates enquiring for him; and he was commanded
by the Spirit to go with them, doubting nothing, for God had sent them.
20. Peter was obedient to the inspired commandment, and went to
the house of Cornelius, where he found many of the devout Gentile's
friends and kinsmen gathered together in anticipation of his coming.
Cornelius having informed the apostle how he came to send for him,
Peter exclaimed: "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter
of persons: but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh
righteousness, is accepted with him." He then proceeded to preach the
gospel to Cornelius and all present. As he did so the Holy Ghost fell
upon them to the astonishment of all the Jews who had accompanied
Peter; for they heard them speak in new tongues and magnify God.
Cornelius and his friends were baptized and thus the door of the gospel
was opened to the Gentiles. [101]
21. Rapid Growth of the Work.--The knowledge once established in
the minds of the apostles that God granted to the Gentiles repentance
unto life, seemed to unshackle those who were to preach the gospel,
and gave a broader meaning in their {78} minds to their commission to
go unto "all the world, and preach the gospel unto every creature."
Evidently before this they did not comprehend it in its fullest sense.
22. The apostles appear to have remained in Jerusalem a number
of years--twelve years, tradition says--presiding over the church and
directing the labors of those preaching the gospel. Churches, or, more
correctly speaking, branches of the church were built up in Antioch
[An-ti-ok], Damascus [Da-mas-kus] and other cities of Syria [Sir-ia].
The work also spread into Asia Minor, Greece and Rome; and everywhere
great success attended the preaching of the elders, until the gospel
was firmly established in various parts of the Gentile world. So
extensive was the preaching of the ambassadors of Christ in those early
days of the church, that we have Paul saying (about thirty years after
the ascension of Messiah) that it had been preached to every creature
under heaven.[102] (See note 5, end of section).
NOTES.
1. Was Matthias Called of God?--In consequence of Matthias having
been chosen by "lot," it may be a question in the minds of some as to
his being called of God. A careful consideration of all that was done
in connection with that circumstance will dispel all doubt in relation
to it. It must be observed that after Joseph Barsabas and Matthias
were nominated for the place in the quorum of the Twelve, the Apostles
prayed, saying: "Thou Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show
whether of these two thou hast chosen." Before his ascension Jesus had
said to these men, "If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye
shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. * * * Ye have
not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you; * * * that
whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."
Therefore when these Apostles asked which of the two men nominated
God had chosen, and they gave their votes and Matthias was the one
selected, God in that way answered their prayer, and Matthias was
thus called of God. Again, to be {79} called by a divinely appointed
authority is to be called of God. No one can deny that the Apostles
were a divinely appointed authority, hence to be called by them was to
be called of God.--Roberts.
2. Pentecost.--Pentecost is the name given in the New Testament
to the Feast of Weeks, or of Ingathering, celebrated on the fiftieth
day from the Passover. It was a festival of thanks for the harvest.
It was also one of the three great yearly festivals, in which all the
males were required to appear before the Lord at the place of his
sanctuary. Josephus in three places in his writings, viz., in the
fourteenth book of "Antiquities," ch. xiii,4; Ibid. xvii, ch. x,2; and
in his second book of the "Wars of the Jews," ch. iii,2,--speaks of
this festival as bringing together great numbers of the Jews from all
parts of the world, and sustains the statement in Acts ii, that there
were in Jerusalem at Pentecost "Jews, devout men, out of every nation
under heaven," who came running together on hearing that the disciples
of Jesus were speaking in unknown tongues. We cannot refrain from
remarking that it was a most opportune time for such a demonstration,
since these men would carry the rumor of these things and the substance
of the remarkable sermon they heard to the distant lands from which
they had come, and thus the news of the gospel would be spread
abroad.--Roberts.
3. Joel's Prophecy.--It is very generally supposed among
Christians, that this outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of
Pentecost was the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, that is, its complete
fulfillment. A careful examination of the prophecy, however, will
clearly demonstrate that this is not the case. The prophecy will be
found in Joel ii,28-32, and the particulars enumerated in it are as
follows: The spirit of the Lord is to be poured out upon all flesh.
At Pentecost it was poured out upon a few of the disciples of Jesus
only; the sons and daughters of the people were to prophesy; we have no
account of their doing so at Pentecost; old men were to dream dreams
and young men see visions; there is no account of this taking place
on the occasion in question; wonders were to be shown in the heavens
and in the earth, blood and fire and pillars of smoke, the sun is to
be turned into darkness, the moon into blood, before the great and
terrible day of the Lord come, yet on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem
deliverance was to be found. These things unquestionably point to
the glorious coming of the Son of God to judgment (see Matt. xxiv);
and certainly they were not fulfilled on the day of Pentecost by the
outpouring of the Holy Ghost on a few of the disciples of Jesus. Still
Peter said, referring to the Spirit poured out upon the disciples:
"This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel," and then quoted
the passage. He doubtless meant: This Spirit which you now see poured
out upon these few men, is that Spirit which Joel spoke of, and which
will eventually be poured out upon all flesh, not only upon {80} men
and women, but upon the brute creation as well, so that the lion and
lamb shall lie down together and a little child shall lead them, and
they shall not hurt nor destroy in all God's holy mountain. I have
deemed it necessary to make this note, first, because of the very
general belief among Christians that the prophecy of Joel was fulfilled
on the day of Pentecost; and second, because the prophecy is one that
was quoted by the angel Moroni on the occasion of his first visit
to Joseph Smith, concerning which he said, it was not yet fulfilled
but soon would be (Pearl of Great Price, page 90), hence, since this
heavenly messenger puts its fulfillment in the future, it could
not have been fulfilled on the day of Pentecost two thousand years
ago.--Roberts.
4. Description of Paul.--He is about five feet high; very dark
hair, dark complexion; dark skin; large Roman nose; sharp face; small,
black eyes, penetrating as eternity; round shoulders; a whining voice;
except when elevated, and then it almost resembled the roaring of a
lion. He was a good orator, active and diligent, always employing
himself in doing good to his fellow-man.--Joseph Smith, at the
organization of a school for instruction, Jan. 5th, 1841.
Paul was small in size, and his personal appearance did not correspond
with the greatness of his soul. He was ugly, stout, short, and
stooping, and his broad shoulders awkwardly sustained a little bald
head. His sallow countenance was half hidden in a thick beard; his nose
was aquiline, his eyes piercing, and his eye-brows heavy and joined
across his forehead. Nor was there anything imposing in his speech, for
his timid and embarrassed air gave but a poor idea of his eloquence.
He shrewdly, however, admitted his exterior defects, and even drew
advantage therefrom. The Jewish race possesses the peculiarity of at
the same time presenting types of the greatest beauty, and the most
thorough ugliness; but this Jewish ugliness is something quite apart
by itself. Some of the strange visages which at first excite a smile,
assume, when lighted up by emotion, a sort of deep brilliancy and
grandeur.--Renan--"Life of the Apostles," p. 165.
5. Travels of the Apostles Uncertain.--The ambassadors of Christ
on leaving Jerusalem traveled over a great part of the world, and in a
short time collected numerous religious societies in various countries.
Of the churches they founded, not a small number is mentioned in the
sacred books, especially in the Acts of the Apostles. Besides these,
there can be no doubt they collected many others, both by their own
efforts and by the efforts of their followers. But how far they
traveled, what nations they visited, or when and where they died, is
exceedingly dubious and uncertain.--Mosheim.
6. Divine Aid in Propagation of the Gospel.--The causes must
have been divine which could enable men destitute of all human aid,
poor {81} and friendless, neither eloquent nor learned, fishermen and
publicans, and they too Jews, that is, persons odious to all other
nations, in so short a time to persuade a great part of mankind to
abandon the religion of their fathers, and to embrace a new religion
which is opposed to the natural dispositions of men. In the words they
uttered there must have been an amazing and a divine power controlling
the minds of men. To which may be added miracles, prophecies, the
detection of men's secret designs, magnanimity in the midst of perils,
contempt for all the objects of ordinary ambition, a patient and
cheerful endurance of sufferings worse than death, as well as of
death itself, and finally, lives of the purest and most unblemished
character. That the ambassadors of Jesus Christ were in fact thus
furnished for their work, is a truth perfectly clear and obvious. And
if we suppose them not to have been so furnished, no probable reason
can be assigned for so rapid a propagation of Christianity by this
small and feeble band.--Mosheim.
7. The Rapid Spread of the Gospel.--Thus, then, under a celestial
influence and co-operation, the doctrine of the Savior, like the
rays of the sun, quickly irradiated the whole world. Presently, in
accordance with divine prophecy, the sound of his inspired evangelists
and apostles had gone throughout all the earth, and their words to
the ends of the world. Throughout every city and village, like a
replenished barn floor, churches were rapidly abounding and filled with
members from every people. Those who, in consequence of the delusions
that had descended to them from their ancestors, had been fettered by
the ancient disease of idolatrous superstition, were now liberated
by the power of Christ, through the teachings and miracles of his
messengers.--Eusebius, writing of the period between 37-41 A. D.
REVIEW.
1. What was the first official business of the authorities of the
church after the resurrection?
2. State the manner of filling the vacancy in the quorum of the twelve.
3. What of Mosheim's translation of the phrase: "They gave forth their
lots?" (Note).
4. Was Matthias called of God? (Note 1).
5. What evidence can you refer to in proof that the quorum of Twelve
Apostles was to be perpetuated?
6. When was the gospel first publicly preached after the resurrection?
7. How long between the ascension and Pentecost? (Note 2).
8. Describe the events in the church on the day of Pentecost.
{82} 9. What circumstance is an evidence that the statement of
scripture is true that there were devout men from many nations in
Jerusalem at that time? (Note 2).
10. Was the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost a
complete fulfillment of Joel's prophecy quoted by Peter? (Note 3).
11. How does the order of principles taught by Peter on the day of
Pentecost compare with the order of principles taught by John the
Baptist and Messiah? (Note).
12. Describe the rise of opposition to the church.
13. What answer did Peter make to the mandates of the rulers not to
teach in the name of Jesus?
14. What was the counsel of Gamaliel to the Jews?
15. To what extent did his counsel prevail?
16. What arrangements were made in the church in respect to looking
after the poor?
17. What priesthood did the seven most likely hold? (Note).
18. Give an account of the introduction of the gospel among the
Samaritans.
19. What was Paul's course at the first towards the church?
20. Relate the circumstances of his conversion.
21. Give a description of Paul. (Note 4).
22. What were the views entertained by the Jews toward the Gentiles?
23. Relate how the gospel was introduced to the Gentiles.
24. State the exception to the order of the gospel in the case of
Cornelius.
25. What was the object of the exception?
26. What effect on the church did carrying the gospel to the Gentiles
have?
27. How long is it supposed that the Twelve remained at Jerusalem?
28. What can you say of the spread of the work during the first
century? (Notes 5, 6, 7).
{83}
SECTION VIII.
1. Review.--We have now related the chief events connected with
the introduction of the gospel and the establishment of the Church by
the personal labors of Messiah and those immediately connected with
him. We may now review the doctrines that he taught, which, taken in
the aggregate, constitute the gospel; and examine the character of the
organization he founded--the Church.
2. The Mission of Messiah.--Jesus Christ came into the earth
to accomplish three great purposes; first, to redeem mankind from
the consequences of Adam's transgression; second, to save them from
the consequences of their own sins. The first is a general salvation,
which, without any conditions whatever, will be applied to all
mankind, irrespective of their obedience or disobedience to God, their
righteousness or wickedness, their belief or unbelief. The redemption
will be as universal as the fall. The second may be regarded as a
particular salvation, dependent upon faith in, and obedience to the
gospel of Christ by the individual.
3. The Fall.--When Adam and Eve were placed in the garden of
Eden, there were certain laws given them by their Creator, the penalty
of violating which was death and banishment from the presence of God.
They transgressed the laws and became subject to the penalty. Nor
was that all; but by their transgression, having become mortal, they
bequeathed that mortality to their offspring; and thus death passed
upon all mankind, and that too, through no act or fault of theirs.
Their agency was not exercised in the matter, and therefore justice
would require that they should receive a full and complete {84}
redemption from the evil which overtakes them through the actions of
others over which they had no control.
4. General Salvation.--Such a redemption was wrought out through
the atonement of Jesus Christ, and that its benefits are to be
universal, so far as redeeming mankind for the consequences of Adam's
transgression is concerned, is evident from the fact,
_First_, That the resurrection from the dead is universal, as the
scriptures witness:
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,
some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting
contempt.[103]
For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the
Son to have life in himself. * * * Marvel not at this: for the
hour is coming, in which all that are in their graves shall hear
his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good unto
the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil, unto the
resurrection of damnation.[104]
Or, as the last two clauses were given to the Prophet Joseph Smith by
inspiration:
They who have done good in the resurrection of the just, and they
who have done evil in the resurrection of the unjust.[105]
After giving a full account of the resurrection of the righteous and
their reign upon the earth for a thousand years, the writer of the
Apocalypse [A-poc-a-lypse] says:
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God. * * * And
the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell
delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged
every man according to his works.[106]
_Second_, The scriptures plainly declare that the redemption {85} of
men from the consequences of Adam's transgression shall be universal:
Therefore as by the offense of one [Adam] judgment came upon _all
men_ to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free
gift came _upon all men_ to the justification of life.[107]
Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of
the dead. For as in Adam _all die_, even so in Christ shall _all
be made alive_. But every man in his own order: Christ the first
fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh
the end, when he shall have delivered the kingdom to God, even the
Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and
power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his
feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.[108]
Behold, he created Adam, and by Adam came the fall of man. And
because of the fall of man, came Jesus Christ even the Father and
the Son; and because of Jesus Christ came the redemption of man.
And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ,
they are brought back into the presence of the Lord; yea, this is
wherein all men are redeemed, because the death of Christ bringeth
to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass a redemption from
an endless sleep, from which sleep all men shall be awakened by the
power of God when the trump shall sound; and they shall come forth,
both small and great, and all shall stand before his bar, being
redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death, which death is
a temporal death.[109]
5. Through the atonement made by Messiah, therefore, a full and
complete redemption from the consequences of Adam's transgression is
brought about; that is, a victory over the grave is secured, and that,
too, through the merits of Jesus Christ. And while the law transgressed
by Adam has been vindicated, the posterity of Adam who became subject
to death through his disobedience, are redeemed from the grave without
anything {86} being required of them. For as their agency was not
concerned in bringing about the mischief, nothing is required of them
in order to obtain redemption from it. So far salvation is free and
universal. (See notes 1, 2 and 3, end of section.)
6. The Atonement a Fact Proven by Evidence.--It is often asked:
"How is it that through the sacrifice of one who is innocent salvation
may be purchased for those under the dominion of death?" We observe,
in passing, that what should most concern man is, not so much _how_ it
is that such is the case; but is it a _fact_? Is it true that God has
established such a scheme of redemption? is what should concern him.
To that question the blood sprinkled upon a thousand Jewish altars,
and the smoke that darkened the heavens for ages from burnt offerings,
answer yes. For those sacrifices, and that sprinkled blood were but
typical of the great sacrifice to be made by the Messiah.
Even the mythology of heathen nations retains the idea of an atonement
that either has been, or is to be made for mankind. Fantastic,
distorted, confused, buried under the rubbish of savage superstition
it may be, but it nevertheless exists. So easily traced, so distinct
is this feature of heathen mythology, that some writers[110] have
endeavored to prove that the gospel plan of redemption was derived from
heathen mythology. Whereas the fact is that the gospel was understood
and extensively preached in the earliest ages; men retained in their
tradition a knowledge of those principles, or parts of them, and
however much they may have been distorted, traces of them may still be
found in nearly all the mythologies of the world.
The prophets of the Jewish scriptures answer the question in the
affirmative. The writers of the New Testament make Christ's atonement
the principal theme of their discourses and {87} epistles. The Book
of Mormon, speaking as the voice of entire nations of people whose
prophets and righteous men sought and found God, testify to the same
great fact. The revelations of God as given through the Prophet Joseph
Smith are replete with passages confirming this doctrine. The evidence
is more than sufficient, to establish the _fact_ of the atonement
beyond the possibility of a doubt; and if there are some things in it
not within the scope of our comprehension, still there is sufficient
foundation for the glorious hope of eternal life through its power.
7. Claims of Mercy and Justice Balance.--In the atonement there
is a nice balancing of the relative claims of justice and mercy. The
law given to man having been transgressed, justice demanded the payment
of the penalty, which was death. And as Adam had no power to liberate
himself from the captivity thereof, his sleep in the grave must have
been eternal; so also with all his posterity to whom his mortality
was bequeathed as an evil legacy, had not Mercy put in her claims and
prevented Justice from being cruel. The Son of God having it given
to him to have life in himself,[111] and being capable of making an
infinite atonement, he stood forth as the great friend of man and
offered himself as a sacrifice to satisfy the claims of Justice. That
offering was accepted by the great Law Giver, and upon the demands of
Justice being satisfied--the law having no further claim upon him--the
captive is set free from the dominion of death. Mercy is not permitted
to rob Justice, but she claims her own. Justice is not permitted to be
cruel, but he retains his dignity--his demands are satisfied. As the
late President Taylor very beautifully says:
Is justice dishonored? No; it is satisfied; the debt is paid. Is
righteousness departed from? No; there is a righteous act. All
requirements are met. Is judgment violated? No; its demands are
{88} fulfilled. Is mercy triumphant? No; she simply claims her own.
Justice, judgment, mercy and truth all harmonize as the attributes
of Deity. "Justice and truth have met together, righteousness and
peace have kissed each other." Justice and judgment triumph as well
as mercy and peace; all the attributes of Deity harmonize in this
great momentous, just, equitable, merciful and meritorious act.[112]
8. The Sacrifice of Messiah Voluntary.--Unbelievers delight to
represent God, the great Law Giver, as unspeakably cruel in demanding
such an atonement as Christ made for the salvation of the children of
men. But let it be borne in mind that he who made the atonement did so
voluntarily. Testifying to his disciples respecting the matter, he says:
Therefore doth my father love me, be cause I lay down my life that
I may take it up again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down
of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it
again. This commandment have I received of my Father.[113]
When his enemies gathered about him--a former friend betraying him with
a kiss,--and Peter prepared to defend him with the sword, he chided him
for his rashness, commanding him to put up his sword, and added:
Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall
presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then
shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?[114]
Thus down to the very last moment, it appears that Jesus could have
been delivered from the sacrifice had he so willed it. But the
principle which was the guiding star of his life--"Father, not my will,
but thy will be done"--influenced him in this instance, and he drank of
the cup given him of his Father, and wrung out the dregs in agony; but
he did it voluntarily, and that, too, out of his great love for mankind.
{89} 9. The Love of God Made Manifest in the Atonement.--By this
atonement of Messiah's there is especially one fact thrown out in bold
relief, that is, the great love of God and Christ for mankind. When one
thinks of the unspeakable agony, of the anguish of heart, of the pains
that racked the body and distressed the mind of the Savior at the time
of his betrayal, and during his trial and crucifixion, he may see how
great the love of the Father for mankind must be, when he would consent
for his only begotten Son to pass through this great humiliation and
affliction, in order to redeem mankind from the bonds of death. On such
contemplation increased emphasis will be given to the passage--
In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because that
God sent his only begotten Son into the world that we might live
through him.[115]
And also to this:
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but
have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world
to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be
saved.[116]
Equally great appears the love of the Son of God, who of his own free
will volunteered to take upon himself the task of man's redemption.
10. Individual Salvation.--As before stated, Messiah came
not only to redeem man from the consequences of the fall, but to
save him also from the consequences of his own personal sins. The
redemption from the fall is universal and unconditional, because the
penalties following it were entailed upon the race through no action
of theirs, but through the transgressions of Adam. The redemption from
the consequences of man's personal sins, however, is bottomed upon
conditions, because his agency is more completely a factor in the
violations of the law. He {90} sins knowingly, willfully, and sometimes
wantonly. He transgresses the laws of God and of nature in spite of
the protests of his conscience, the convictions of his reason, and
the promptings of his judgment. He becomes desperately wicked and so
depraved that in some cases he actually seeks evil and loves it. He
hugs it to his bosom and cries: Evil, be thou my good; sin, be thou my
refuge!
11. In cases of such violation of the laws of God, justice
demands that the outraged laws should be vindicated by the punishment
of the transgressor. But here again the principle of mercy is active.
By the sacrifice which he made, Messiah purchased mankind as an
inheritance for himself, and they came of right under his dominion;
for he not only ransomed them from an endless sleep in the grave, but
"he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. * * * * He was
wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities,
the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and by his stripes we are
healed. The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." [117] (See
note 4, end of section.) It was these considerations, doubtless, which
led the Apostle to say to the saints--"Ye are not your own; for ye are
bought with a price." [118]
Still more plain in relation to the effect that Messiah's atonement
has upon the personal sins of men, is the word of the Lord through the
Prophet Joseph Smith to Martin Harris, warning him to repent lest his
sufferings be sore--how sore, how exquisite, how hard to bear, he knew
not:
For behold, I God, have suffered these things for all, that they
might not suffer if they would repent, but if they would not
repent, they must suffer even as I, which suffering caused myself,
even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to
bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit; and would
that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink--nevertheless,
glory be to the {91} Father, I partook and finished my preparations
unto the children of men. [119]
12. Conditions of Salvation.--Messiah having thus ransomed
mankind by his own suffering and death, he becomes the law-giver to
our race and of right prescribes the conditions upon which the full
benefits of his great atonement shall be applied to individuals. Those
conditions he has prescribed, and they constitute the gospel. It was
these conditions which he authorized his Apostles to proclaim to the
world, saying:
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore,
and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe
_all things_ whatsoever I have commanded you. [120]
13. Following the apostles in their fulfillment of this
commission, we have them persuading people to believe on the Lord
Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world, as the only one to whom
they may look for salvation[121]--the resurrection and the life. Men
in whose minds this faith was created they commanded to repent and
be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins;
and promised them on the condition of their obedience the gift of
the Holy Ghost.[122] By repentance they meant a deep and heart-felt
sorrow for sin, accompanied by a reformation of life; [123] by baptism
they meant immersion in water in the likeness of Christ's burial and
resurrection;[124] and the Holy Ghost was imparted by the laying on of
hands and prayer.[125]
14. These things connected with a Godly walk and conversation
after obeying them[126]--constitute the laws of adoption {92} into the
Church of Christ. These are the conditions on which man receives the
full benefit of the atonement of Jesus Christ--a forgiveness of sins
and power through the Holy Ghost to overcome all evil propensities
within himself, until he becomes pure in heart and every way made
ready and worthy of the kingdom of heaven. This is the gospel of Jesus
Christ, as taught by Jesus and his apostles. (See note 6, end of
section.)
15. The Church.--In order to propagate the gospel, and teach,
encourage, instruct, preserve and finally perfect those who accepted
it, Messiah organized his church. He bestowed upon its members certain
great and precious spiritual gifts and graces, such as the power to
speak in new tongues and interpret them; to receive revelation, to
prophesy, to see visions, receive the visitation of angels, to possess
the gift of wisdom, knowledge, faith, discernment of spirits, and
healing the sick.[127]
16. The description of the Church organization in the New
Testament is extremely imperfect, owing, no doubt, to the fragmentary
character of the Christian annals. While the distinctions between the
respective offices in the Priesthood, and the definition of the duties
of each officer are even less satisfactory; still there is enough
written to enable us to get an outline of the organization.
17. Messiah, during his personal ministry, organized a quorum of
twelve apostles, to whom he gave very great powers and authority, even
to be witnesses of him among the people, to build up his church by the
proclamation of the gospel, to heal the sick, open the eyes of the
blind, raise the dead and cast out devils.[128] He likewise organized
quorums of seventies, unto whom he gave similar powers to those
bestowed upon the apostles.[129]
{93} 18. After his resurrection Messiah was with his apostles and
disciples forty days, during which time he was teaching them all things
concerning the kingdom of God. [130] Hence we have these men after his
ascension organizing branches of the church wherever they found people
who received their testimony. In some instances they ordained elders to
preside over these branches;[131] and in other instances bishops were
appointed.[132]
19. Paul, in giving a description of the organization of the
church says:
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily
prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of
healing, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all
apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of
miracles? have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues?
do all interpret?[133]
The implied answer is that all are not apostles, nor prophets, nor
teachers, etc., in the church of Christ, but that the whole body, is
fitly joined together and compacted by that which every part and every
joint supplieth.[134]
20. Preceding the first quotation we made from Paul,[135] he
compares the church of Christ to the body of a man, which, though it be
composed of many members, yet it is but one body, and all the members
thereof are needful to it. "The eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no
need of thee; nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of thee.
Nay, much more, those members of the body which seem to be more feeble
are necessary." This is equivalent to saying that the apostle cannot
say to the elder, I have no need of thee; nor the deacon to the bishop,
I have no need of thee; nor the seventy to the priest, I have no need
of thee. The argument is that all the offices, even those which seem
the least necessary, are all needful to the existence of the church of
Christ, and everyone is forbidden to hold as unnecessary his brother
officer.
{94} 21. Moreover, the apostle insists that there should be the
same bond of sympathy between the members of the church of Christ that
there is in the members of the human body; that there should be no
schism in it, and that the members should have a care one for another;
that when one member suffers all the members suffer with it; or if one
member be honored all rejoice with it.
22. In another description of the church the same writer after
saying again that God had given to men "some apostles, and some
prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers"--he also
enumerates the objects for which this peculiar organization was given:
1. For the perfecting of the Saints. 2. The work of the ministry. 3.
Edifying the body of Christ. 4. To prevent the saints being carried
about by every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning
craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive.
23. He very plainly intimates, too, that this organization was
designed to be perpetuated until the saints all come to the "unity of
the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God--unto a perfect man,
unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ." [136]
Furthermore, we suggest that it must be obvious, since the church
organization was given to perfect the saints, to the work of the
ministry, to edify the body of Christ, to prevent the saints being
carried about by every wind of doctrine or being deceived by cunning
men--that so long as there are saints who need perfecting, so long
as there is a necessity for work in the ministry, so long as the
church of Christ needs edifying, or the saints need to be guarded from
heresy, or the deceitfulness of false teachers--just so long will this
organization of the church with apostles and prophets, seventies, and
elders, bishops and teachers and deacons be needed; and since the kinds
of work enumerated in the foregoing will always be necessary, we reach
the conclusion that the Church organization as established {95} by the
apostles was designed to be perpetual. (See note 5, end of section).
24. Officers of the Church to be Divinely Appointed.--Moreover
it is apparent that these officers of the church were called of God.
Concerning the apostles Jesus said: "Ye have not chosen me but I have
chosen you, and ordained you that ye may bring forth fruit." [137] When
seven men were chosen to look after the poor and minister to them they
set them before the apostles, who, when they had prayed, laid their
hands upon them and ordained them to their calling.[138]
25. So in the case of Paul. It was not enough that he saw and
spoke with Messiah, for afterwards when the Lord would have him engage
in the work of preaching the gospel and administering in the ordinances
thereof, the Holy Ghost said unto certain prophets at Antioch,
Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called
them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on
them, they sent them away. [139]
26. Furthermore, as Paul went about confirming the souls of
saints, he ordained elders in every church.[140] He did not suffer
men to take the authority on themselves to minister in the things of
God; but warned the saints against such characters. "Take heed unto
yourselves," said he to the elders of Ephesus, "and to all the flock
over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the flock
of God * * * For I know this, that after my departing, shall grievous
wolves enter in, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall
men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after
them." [141]
27. The general law of the church is expressed in the following:
Every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in
{96} things pertaining to God that he may offer both gifts and
sacrifices for sins. * * * And no man taketh this honor unto
himself, but he that is called of God as was Aaron. [142]
The manner in which Aaron was called to the priest's office is recorded
in the writings of Moses as follows: The word of the Lord came to that
prophet saying:
Take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him from
among the children of Israel that he may minister unto me in the
priest's office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazer and Ithamar,
Aaron's sons. [143]
28. It may be objected that this was the law relating to the
calling of high priests alone, but if high priests were to be called in
this manner, is it not reasonable to conclude that all who administer
in things "pertaining to God" must be called in the same manner--that
is, of God? So far as the scriptures are concerned, and on subjects
of this character their authority is conclusive, wherever we have an
account of men administering in the things pertaining to God, and their
administrations are accepted of him, they have either been called
directly by revelation from him, or through inspiration in those who
already had authority from God to act in his name; and to be called by
a legitimate, divinely established authority is to be called of God.
(See note 6, end of section).
29. The Church on the Western Hemisphere.--The Book of Mormon is
no more explicit in its description of the church organization than the
New Testament. This is owing to the fact that the Book of Mormon is but
an abridgement of the Nephite annals, and we are informed by Mormon,
who made the abridgement, that not an hundredth part of the things
which Jesus taught to the Nephites could be recorded in his abridged
record--hence the meagre description of the church organization.[144]
From Mormon's abridged account of Messiah's visit and {97} labors among
the Nephites, however, it appears that Jesus chose from among the
faithful men who believed on him, twelve apostles,[145] unto whom he
gave power to preach repentance, baptize for remission of sins,[146]
lay on hands for the Holy Ghost,[147] and organize the Church.[148]
But the details of this work are not given. It is evident, however,
that the twelve disciples ordained subordinate officers, since Moroni
informs us of the manner in which they ordained priests and teachers;
[149] and he also refers to the office of elders.[150]
30. Thus in the Book of Mormon, as in the New Testament, may be
seen only the faint outlines of the organization, the church of Christ.
A full description of it, together with the callings and authority of
the respective officers and persons of which it is composed, will be
reserved for Part IV of this work.
31. The acceptance of the gospel by the Nephites was followed
by the same results as when accepted by the Jews and Gentiles of the
eastern hemisphere. The sick were healed, the dead were raised, the
lame walked, the deaf heard, and the blind received their sight. Peace,
love, sobriety, justice and an absence of greed and pride characterized
the conduct of the saints of the western hemisphere; and here, too,
they had "all things common among them, therefore they were not rich
and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of
the heavenly gifts." [151]
NOTES.
1. The Redemption Unconditional.--We believe that through the
sufferings, death and atonement of Jesus Christ, all mankind without
one exception, are to be completely and fully redeemed, both body
and spirit, from the endless banishment and curse to which they were
consigned by Adam's transgression; and that this universal salvation
and redemption of the whole human family from the {98} endless penalty
of the original sin, is effected without any conditions whatsoever on
their part; that is, that they are not required to believe or repent,
or be baptized, or do anything else, in order to be redeemed from
that penalty; for whether they believe or disbelieve, whether they
repent or remain impenitent, whether they are baptized or unbaptized,
whether they keep the commandments or break them, whether they are
righteous or unrighteous, it will make no difference in relation to
their redemption, both soul and body, from the penalty of Adam's
transgression. The most righteous man that ever lived on the earth,
and the most wicked wretch of the whole human family, were both placed
under the same curse without any transgression or agency of their
own, and they both alike will be redeemed from that curse, without any
agency or conditions on their part.--"Remarkable Visions"--Orson Pratt.
2. The Atonement Universal in its Application.--Transgression of
the law brought death upon all the posterity of Adam, the restoration
through the atonement restored all the human family to life. "For since
by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For
as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." So that
whatever was lost by Adam was restored by Jesus Christ. The penalty of
the transgression of the law was the death of the body. The atonement
made by Jesus Christ resulted in the resurrection of the human body.
Its scope embraced all peoples, nations and tongues.
For all my Lord was crucified,
For all, for all my Savior died.
--"Mediation and Atonement"--John Taylor.
3. The Atonement a Mystery.--As stated elsewhere, in some
mysterious, incomprehensible way, Jesus assumed the responsibility
which naturally would have devolved upon Adam; but which could only
be accomplished through the mediation of himself, and by taking upon
himself their sorrows, assuming their responsibilities and bearing
their transgressions or sins. In a manner incomprehensible and
inexplicable, he bore the weight of the sins of the whole world; not
only of Adam, but of his posterity; and in doing that, opened the
kingdom of heaven, not only to all believers and all who obeyed the
law of God, but to more than one-half of the human family who died
before they came to years of maturity, as well as to the heathen, who
having died without law, will through his mediation be resurrected
without law, and be judged without law, and thus participate
according to their capacity, works and worth, in the blessings of his
atonement.--"Mediation and Atonement"--John Taylor.
{99} 4. The Means of Escape from Penalties of Personal
Sins.--After this full, complete and universal redemption,
restoration, and salvation of the whole of Adam's race through the
atonement of Jesus Christ, * * * all and every one of them will enjoy
eternal life and happiness, never more to be banished from the presence
of God if they themselves have committed no sin. * * * We believe that
all mankind, in consequence of the fall, after they grow up from their
infant state and come to the years of understanding, know good and evil
and are capable of obeying or disobeying law, and that a law is given
against doing evil and that the penalty affixed is a second banishment
from the presence of God, both body and spirit, after they have been
redeemed from the first banishment and restored into his presence. *
* * We believe that all who have done evil, having a knowledge of the
law, or afterwards in this life coming to the knowledge thereof, are
under its penalty, which is not inflicted in this world but in the
world to come. * * * "But," inquires the sinner, "is there no way of
escape? Is my case hopeless?" * * * The answer is, if thou canst hide
thyself from the all-searching eye of an omnipresent God, that he shall
not find thee, or if thou canst prevail with him to deny justice its
claim, or if thou canst clothe thyself with power, and contend with the
Almighty and prevent him from executing the sentence of the law, then
thou canst escape. * * * But be assured, O sinner, that thou canst not
devise any way of thine own to escape, nor do anything which will atone
for thy sins. Therefore thy case is hopeless, unless God hath devised
some way for thy deliverance; but do not let despair seize upon thee;
* * * for he who gave the law has devised a way for thy deliverance.
That same Jesus, who hath atoned for the original sin (Adam's
transgression), and will redeem all mankind from the penalty thereof,
hath also atoned for thy sins, and offereth salvation and deliverance
to thee, on certain conditions to be complied with on thy part. * *
* The first condition to be complied with on the part of sinners is
to believe in God, and in the sufferings and death of his son Jesus
Christ * * * and in the Holy Ghost. * * * That the second condition is
to repent. * * * That the third condition is to be baptized for the
remission of sins. * * * And that the fourth condition is to receive
the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. * * * They are
then required to be humble, to be meek and lowly in heart, to watch
and pray and deal justly. * * * And, in short, to continue faithful to
the end in all the duties enjoined upon them by the word and Spirit of
Christ.--"Remarkable Visions"--Orson Pratt.
5. Four Opinions on Church Government.--How far even wise men and
Christian scholars have gone astray in relation to church government
may be judged from the following opinions on the subject:
{100} Those who imagine that Christ himself or the apostles by his
direction or authority appointed a certain fixed form of church
government are not agreed what that form was. The principal opinions
that have been adopted upon this head may be reduced to the four
following:
_First_, is that of the Roman Catholics maintain that Christ's
intention and appointment was that his followers should be collected
into one sacred empire, subject to the government of St. Peter and
his successors, and divided like the kingdoms of this world into
several provinces; that in consequence thereof Peter fixed the seat of
ecclesiastical dominion at Rome, but afterwards to alleviate the burden
of his office divided the church into three greater provinces according
to the division of the world at that time, and appointed a person to
preside in each who was dignified with the title of Patriarch; that the
European Patriarch resided at Rome, the Asiatic at Antioch, and the
African at Alexandria; that the bishops of each province among whom
there were various ranks, were to reverence the authority of their
respective patriarchs, and that both bishops and patriarchs were to be
passively subject to the supreme dominion of the Roman Pontiff. This
romantic account scarcely deserves a serious refutation.
The _second_ opinion concerning the government of the church makes no
mention of a supreme head or of patriarchs constituted by a divine
authority; but it supposes that the apostles divided the Roman empire
into as many ecclesiastical provinces as there were secular or civil
ones; that the metropolitan bishops, that is, the prelate who resides
in the capital city of each province, presides over the clergy of that
province, and that the other bishops were subject to his authority.
This opinion has been adopted by some of the most learned of the Romish
church; and has also been favored by some of the most eminent British
divines. Some Protestant writers of note have endeavored to prove that
it is not supported by sufficient evidence.
The _third_ opinion is that of those who acknowledge that when the
Christians began to multiply exceedingly, metropolitans, patriarchs
and archbishops were indeed created but only by human appointment and
authority; though they confess at the same time that it is consonant to
the orders and intentions of Christ and his apostles that there should
be in every Christian church one person invested with the highest
authority and clothed with certain rights and privileges above the
other doctors of that assembly. This opinion has been embraced by many
English divines of the first rank in the learned world; and also by
many in other countries and communions.
The _fourth_, and last opinion is that of the Presbyterians who affirm
that Christ's intention was that the Christian doctors and {101}
ministers should all enjoy the same rank and authority without any
sort of pre-eminence or subordination or distinction of rights and
privileges.--Mosheim, vol. 1, pages 67, 68. Note--Murdock.
"The truth of the matter is," remarks Dr. Maclaine, "that Christ by
leaving this matter undetermined, has of consequence, left Christian
societies a discretionary power of modeling the government of the
church in such a manner as the circumstantial reasons of times, places,
etc., may require; and therefore the wisest government of the church is
the best and the most divine; and every Christian society has a right
to make laws for itself; provided that these laws are consistent with
charity and peace and with the fundamental doctrines and principles of
Christianity." Of this it is only necessary to say that Christ did not
leave this matter undetermined but established his church government
as explained in the text of this work. The wisest form of church
government is that which God gave; it is at the same time the best and
not only the most divine but the only one that can lay any claim to
being so; and for the church or any branch thereof to establish any
other government for itself is an unjustifiable departure from the
order of God.--Roberts.
6. Authority from God Needful.--We are informed in the
scriptures, that the Lord wrought special miracles by the hands of
Paul, whom he had called to be his servant. The sick were healed, and
evil spirits were cast out of those who were possessed. "Then certain
of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which
had evil spirits, the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you,
by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. And there were seven sons, of one Sceva,
a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. And the evil spirit
answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know, but who are ye? And
the man in whom the evil spirit was, leaped on them, and overcame them,
and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of the house, naked
and wounded."--(Acts xix: 13-16). These men presumptuously took it upon
themselves to act as those who had authority, and the result was that
not even the devils would respect their administrations, much less
the Lord. There is a principle of great moment associated with this
incident. The question is, if these men, when acting without authority
from God could not drive out an evil spirit, would their administration
be of force, or have any virtue in it, had they administered in some
other ordinance of the gospel, say baptism for the remission of
sins, or the laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Ghost?
Manifestly it would not. Hence we come to the conclusion, so well
expressed in one of our articles of faith: "A man must be called of God
by prophecy and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority
to preach the gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof."--"The
Gospel"--Roberts.
{102} REVIEW.
1. What two great purposes were contemplated in Messiah's mission?
2. Relate the fall of man and its consequences.
3. What is general salvation?
4. How do you prove that there will be a general salvation?
5. Why is redemption from Adam's transgression unconditional? (Notes 1
to 4).
6. How are the claims of justice and mercy balanced in the atonement?
7. Was Messiah's atonement voluntary?
8. What can you say of the love of God as it appears in the atonement?
9. What is meant by individual salvation?
10. In what does it differ from general salvation?
11. By what consideration does mercy mitigate the claims of justice in
the plan of redemption?
12. What are the conditions of salvation? (Note 6).
13. For what several purposes did Messiah institute his church?
14. Why is it that the description of the Church of Christ is so
imperfect in the New Testament?
15. Enumerate the powers granted to the Twelve.
16. What other officers did Jesus call to the ministry upon whom he
bestowed similar powers?
17. What other officers were appointed in the church?
18. Give Paul's description of the church.
19. State the particular objects to be accomplished by the church
organization.
20. What reasons can you give for believing that the church as
organized by Messiah is to be perpetuated?
21. What are the four leading opinions in respect to church government?
(Note 5).
22. What is the truth in respect of church government? (Note 5).
23. Is the Book of Mormon description of church organization more
complete than that of the New Testament? Why?
24. Give an account of the organization of the church on the western
hemisphere.
25. What followed the preaching of the gospel and the organization of
the church on the western hemisphere?
Footnotes
1. It is also called Ephrath [Ef-rath] and Ephratah [Ef-ra-tah.] It was
the scene of Rachel's death and burial, the native place of Samuel's
father, the residence of Boaz and Ruth, and the birthplace of David;
it was also the last rallying point of the remnant of Judah after the
invasion of Nebuchadnezzar.
2. Micah v: 2.
3. Luke 1:28-38.
4. Canon Farrar translates this splendid passage: "Glory to God in the
highest, and on earth peace among men of good will," maintaining that
such is the reading of the best Mss. Dear to us as the reading in King
James' translation of the Bible is, if looked upon as announcing the
effect of Christianity in this world--"On earth peace among men of good
will," comes more nearly to the truth than "on earth peace, good will
toward men."
5. Matt. ii: 2.
6. III Nephi i: 21.
7. III Nephi i: 13.
8. III Nephi i: 15-19.
9. Matt. ii: 18.
10. Matt. ii: 23.
11. I have condensed much of the matter in the first part of this
section from the learned works of D'Aubigne, Dr. Mosheim, Gibbon and
Josephus, sometimes using even their phraseology without further
acknowledgement than this note.--The Author.
12. Epistle to Romans i: 18-32.
13. See note 7, end of section.
14. Dr. Lardner.
15. See "The First Gospel of the Infancy," Apocryphal New Testament
(Colley & Rich, publishers, Boston, 1891.)
16. Luke i.
17. Matt. iii.
18. Luke iii.
19. Matt. iii.
20. Luke iii.
21. John i:19-23.
22. The location of Bethabara is uncertain.
23. Matt. iii.
24. Matt. iii.
25. John i:33.
26. Matt. iv.
27. That is, vain fellow.
28. Doc. and Cov. lxxxiv:17-27.
29. Biblical Literature.--Kitto.
30. Matt. x.
31. Matt. x.
32. Compare Luke x with Matt. x.
33. Luke x.
34. John v.
35. John iii.
36. John iii.
37. John iv.
38. John v:24-30.
39. John v:39-47, vii:14-18.
40. John v:32-35.
41. John v:36; x:25.
42. John v:37, 39.
43. Mark xi:5.
44. Matt. iv:16-24.
45. Matt. iv:16-24.
46. Mark xii.
47. John xi.
48. Matt. ii.
49. John v:1-18.
50. John v:17, 18.
51. John xii.
52. Luke xxii. Matt. xxvi.
53. John xviii:36.
54. Luke alone calls it _Calvary_; Matthew, Mark and John call it
Golgotha. They each have reference to the same place, which was known
by the two different names.
55. III Nephi viii.
56. Those predictions are found in the following passages: John
ii:18-22; x:17, 18; xiii:31-33. Matt. xii:38=42; xvi:21-23; xvii:1-9;
Mark ix:30-32; x:32-34.
57. Matt. xxviii.
58. John xx:14-17.
59. Matt. xxviii:9.
60. Luke xxiv:13-31.
61. Luke xxiv:34 and I Cor. xv:5.
62. John xx:19.
63. John xx:26; Mark xvi:14.
64. John xxi:1-24.
65. Matt. xxviii:16.
66. I Cor. xv:6.
67. I Cor. xv:7.
68. I Cor. xv:8.
69. Acts i.
70. Matt. xviii.
71. Mark xvi:16.
72. Luke xxiv:49, 53; Acts i.
73. Acts i; Matt. xvi.
74. John x:16.
75. III Nephi xv:18.
76. III Nephi xv:21.
77. III Nephi xi:12.
78. Section V, paragraph 14.
79. The land Bountiful was in the northern part of South America.
80. III Nephi xi:14.
81. See John xxi:21-25; III Nephi xxviii.
82. Let those who would be more minutely informed upon the ministry
of Messiah on the western hemisphere, study carefully the book of III
Nephi, where the history of that important event is recorded, and which
book has been called--a "Fifth Gospel."
83. It must be remembered, that Jesus told the Nephites that he was
going to visit the lost tribes whom the Father had led away. They, too,
were to have the gospel preached to them (III Nephi xv and xvi.)
84. In his "Comment de Rebus Christ," p. 78-80, the learned Dr.
Mosheim has a note on this passage in which his aim is to prove that
the correct translation from the Greek of the phrase usually rendered
"they gave forth their lots," should be "they gave their votes."
While it is but proper to say that the Doctor's translation is very
generally rejected by the learned, still there will be no question with
those who understand the order of the priesthood and the manner of
filling vacancies in its quorums, that Dr. Mosheim is correct in his
interpretation as to the meaning of the passage.
85. IV Nephi i:14.
86. Pentecost came fifty days after the Passover, on which day the
Lord Jesus was crucified. Allowing that he lay three days in the tomb
and was with his disciples forty days after his resurrection (Acts
i:3), forty-three days of the fifty between Passover and Pentecost
are accounted for, leaving but seven days between ascension and the
day of Pentecost, when the promise of the baptism of the spirit was
fulfilled.--"The Gospel," note p. 177.
87. Luke iii:16. Matt. iii:2. Acts i:4, 5.
88. The languages spoken are enumerated by the writer of The Acts
ii:9-11.
89. Joel ii:28.
90. I think it proper here to call the attention of the student to the
fact that the principles of the gospel in this discourse of Peter's
are stated in the same order that they were unfolded in the ministry
of John the Baptist and Messiah. First, John came bearing witness of
one who should come after him--Christ, the Lord. Hence, he taught faith
in God (John i:15, 16, also verses 19-36). After that, the burden of
his message was, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand;" then
followed his baptism in water with a promise that they should receive
the Holy Ghost. So Peter first taught the people faith in the Lord,
proving from the scripture that Jesus was both Lord and Christ; and
when they believed that, then he taught them repentance and baptism for
the remission of sins, and promised them the Holy Ghost.
91. Acts ii:38, 39.
92. Acts iv:9.
93. Acts v:26-32.
94. Acts v:34-42.
95. It is generally supposed by Biblical scholars, Mosheim, Neander,
Kitto, Murdock and many others, that these men were deacons only.
There is nothing, however, in the Acts of the Apostles or other parts
of the New Testament which would lead one to believe that such was
the case. We have evidence on the other hand that one of them at
least held a higher priesthood than the office of deacon. In modern
revelation we have it stated that neither teachers nor deacons have
authority to baptize, administer the sacrament or lay on hands for the
Holy Ghost (Doc. and Cov., sec. xx:58); yet we have Philip, one of the
seven, going down into Samaria, teaching the gospel "and baptizing the
people" (Acts viii), hence we may know that he held a higher priesthood
than that of deacon. Yet when it became necessary to confer the Holy
Ghost upon these same converts by the laying on of hands, Philip, it
would seem, had not the authority to do it; but the Apostles hearing
that Samaria had received the word, sent Peter and John down and
they conferred upon the Samaritans the Holy Ghost. And though Philip
was present he appears to have taken no part in it. It is therefore
reasonable to conclude that since Philip had authority to baptize, he
therefore must have held an office higher than that of deacon, or even
of teacher; but since he evidently had not authority to lay on hands
for the gift of the Holy Ghost, his office was something less than that
of an Elder. Hence it is most likely that he was a priest--priests
have the right to baptize but not to lay on hands for the reception
of the Holy Ghost (Doc. and Cov. sec. xx)--as perhaps also were his
six associates, appointed to preside over the temporal affairs of the
Church, especially to see after the poor.
96. Acts iv:32-37.
97. Acts viii. The student will observe that the same order of
presenting and accepting the gospel is observed in the account given of
its introduction into Samaria as was observed in the teaching of John
the Baptist and Jesus, and also of Peter, on the day of Pentecost.
98. Acts ix.
99. Matt. xv:24.
100. John xii:32.
101. This case of Cornelius marks an exception--the only one recorded
in the New Testament--to that order in the gospel to which attention
has been drawn several times in this section; that is, these Gentiles
received the Holy Ghost before baptism in water. The object of the
deviation from the rule is obvious. It was that the Jews might have a
witness from God that the gospel was for the Gentiles as well as for
the house of Israel. But according to the Scriptures, and I may say
according to the nature and relationship of these several principles
and ordinances of the gospel to each other, the reception of the Holy
Ghost comes after repentance and baptism, the one leading up logically
to the other, which follows in beautiful and harmonious sequence.
102. Col. i:23.
103. Dan. xii:2.
104. John v:26, 28, 29.
105. Doc. and Cov. lxxvi:17.
106. Rev. xx:12, 13.
107. Rom. v:18. See whole chapter.
108. Cor. xv:21-26.
109. Mormon ix:12, 13. Other evidences from the Nephite scriptures will
be found in Alma xi:40-44. III Nephi xxvii:13-15. II Nephi ii. Mosiah
xv:18-27. Alma xxxiv:7-17. Alma xiii:1-26.
110. See "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors," by Kersey Graves.
111. John v:26.
112. Mediation and Atonement, xxiv.
113. John x:17, 18.
114. Matt. xxvi:53, 54.
115. I John iv:9.
116. John iii:16, 17.
117. Isaiah liii:5, 6.
118. I Cor. vi:19, 20.
119. Doc. and Cov., sec. xix:16-18. See also Mosiah iii:20, 21. "The
Gospel," Roberts, page 29.
120. Matt. xxviii:18-20.
121. Acts iv:12.
122. Acts ii:22-47. Acts viii:5-25.
123. II Cor. vii:8-10.
124. Rom. vi:3-5.
125. Acts viii:14-18.
126. The injunction placed upon those who accept the faith of the
gospel is that they add to their faith virtue; and to virtue,
knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to temperance, patience;
and to patience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and
to brotherly kindness, charity. For if these things be in you, and
abound they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful
in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (II Peter i:5-8.)--"The
Gospel," page 37.
127. Mark xvi. I Cor. xii.
128. Matt. x. Acts i:4-8.
129. Compare Luke x with Matt. x.
130. Acts i:3.
131. Acts xiv:23. Acts xx:17, 28.
132. Phil. i:1. Titus i:5-7.
133. I Cor. xii:28-30.
134. Eph. iv:10.
135. I Cor. xii.
136. Eph. iv.
137. John xv:16.
138. Acts v:1-6.
139. Acts xiii:1-3.
140. Acts xiv:2, 3.
141. Acts xx:28, 29.
142. Heb. v:1, 5.
143. Ex. xxviii:1.
144. III Nephi xxvi:6, 7.
145. III Nephi xii.
146. III Nephi xi.
147. III Nephi xxvii:37; also Moroni ii.
148. III Nephi xxvii and IV Nephi i:1.
149. Moroni iii.
150. Moroni vi.
151. IV Nephi i:1-7.
{103}
PART II.
THE APOSTASY.
{105}
SECTION I.
In Part I, our narrative was confined mainly to those propitious
circumstances which made for the successful introduction of the gospel
and the founding of the church of Christ. In Part II, we are to deal
with those adverse events which led finally to the subversion of the
Christian religion. We commence with the
1. Persecution of the Christians by the Jews.--The Messiah
forewarned his disciples that they would be persecuted by the world,
pointed out the reasons for it, and comforted them by reminding them
that the world had hated him before it hated them; that the servant
was not greater than his lord; and for that matter all the prophets
which were before them had been persecuted by the generations in which
they lived, and that, for the reason that they were not of the world,
therefore the world hated and destroyed them.[1]
2. Two special reasons may be assigned for the persecution
of the saints by the Jews. 1. They looked upon Christianity as a
rival religion to Judaism, a thing of itself sufficient to engender
bitterness, jealousy, persecution. 2. If Christianity should live and
obtain a respectable standing, the Jews of that generation must ever
be looked upon as not only putting an innocent man to death, but as
rejecting and slaying the Son of God. To crush this rival religion
and escape the odium which the successful establishment of it would
inevitably fix upon them, were the incentives which prompted that first
general persecution which arose against the church in Jerusalem, and
that commenced in the very first year after Messiah's ascension.
{106} 3. The extent of the persecution or the time of its
continuance may not be determined; but that it was murderous may be
learned from the fact that Stephen was slain,[2] as was also James, the
son of Zebedee,[3] and James, the Just, brother of the Lord.[4] The
Apostle Peter was imprisoned and would doubtless have shared the fate
of the other martyrs, but that he was delivered by an angel.[5]
4. Nor was this persecution confined alone to Jerusalem; on
the contrary the hate-blinded high priests and elders of the Jews in
Palestine conferred with the Jews throughout the Roman provinces,
and everywhere incited them to hatred of the Christians, exhorting
them to have no connection with, and to do all in their power to
destroy the "superstition," as the Christian religion was then
called. Nor were they content with what they themselves could do,
but they exhausted their ingenuity in efforts to incite the Romans
against them. To accomplish this they charged that the Christians had
treasonable designs against the Roman government, as "appeared by their
acknowledging as their king one Jesus, a malefactor whom Pilate had
most justly put to death." [6]
5. The Jews themselves, however, were in no great favor with
the Romans since their impatience of Roman restraint led them to be
constantly on the eve of rebellion and sedition, and frequently to
break out into deeds of violence against the Roman authority. This lack
of favor rendered the power of the Jews unequal to their malice against
the church of Christ.
6. The imperious nation, too, whose forefathers had rejected
the prophets and at the last had crucified the Son of God with every
circumstance of cruelty, crying out in the streets of their holy city,
"crucify him, and let his blood be upon us and on our children," [7]
were about to meet the calamities which their wickedness called down
upon them. The Roman emperor Vespasian {107} [Ves-pa-zhe-an], tired
of their repeated seditions, at last sent an army under Titus to
subjugate them. The Jews made a stubborn resistance and a terrible
war followed. Jerusalem, crowded with people who had come into the
city from the surrounding country to attend the Passover, was besieged
for six months, during which time more than a million of her wretched
inhabitants perished of famine. The city was finally taken, the walls
thereof thrown down and the temple so completely destroyed that not
one stone was left upon another. Thousands of Jews were cut to pieces
and nearly a hundred thousand of those taken captive were sent into
slavery.[8] All the calamities predicted by the Messiah[9] befell the
city and people. Jerusalem from that time until now has been trodden
down of the Gentiles; and will be until the times of the Gentiles are
fulfilled.
7. According to Eusebius, the Christians escaped these calamities
which befell the Jews; for the whole body of the church at Jerusalem,
having been commanded by divine revelation, given to men of approved
piety, removed from Jerusalem before the war and dwelt at Pella, beyond
Jordan, where they were secure from the calamities of those times.[10]
8. Persecution by the Romans.--It is more difficult to
understand why the Romans should persecute the Christians than it is
to see why the Jews did it. The Romans were polytheists, and affected
the fullest religious liberty. The author of the "Decline and Fall of
the Roman Empire" claims that this period of Roman history was the
golden age of religious liberty. And such was the multitude of deities
collected in Rome from various nations, and such the variety of worship
to be seen in the great capital of the empire, that Gibbon has said:
Rome gradually became the common temple of her subjects; and {108}
the freedom of the city was bestowed on all the gods of mankind.[11]
Furthermore, the same high authority says:
The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world,
were all considered by the people as being equally true; by the
philosophers as all equally false; and by the magistrates as
equally useful. And thus toleration produced not only mutual
indulgences, but even religious concord.
9. The student who would learn why the mild and beautiful
Christian religion was alone selected to bear the wrath and feel the
vengeful power of Rome, must look deeper than the reasons usually
assigned for the strange circumstance. It is superficial to say that
the persecution was caused by the charges of immorality. The Roman
authorities had the best of evidence that the charges were false. (See
note 1, end of section). Equally absurd is it to assign as a cause
the supposed atheism of the Christians, for that was the condition
of nearly all Rome; while the charge that they were traitors to the
emperor, and expected to see the empire supplanted by the kingdom of
Christ--which some assign as the chief cause of Roman persecution--was
treated with contempt by the emperors. (See note 2, end of section).
10. The true cause of the persecution was this: Satan knew there
was no power of salvation in the idolatrous worship of the heathen,
and hence let them live on in peace, but when Jesus of Nazareth and
his followers came, in the authority of God, preaching the gospel,
he recognized in that the principles and power against which he had
rebelled in heaven, and stirred up the hearts of men to rebellion
against the truth to overthrow it. This was the real cause of
persecution, though it lurked under a variety of pretexts, the most of
which are named in the above supposed causes.
11. The First Roman Persecution.--The first emperor {109} to
enact laws for the extermination of Christians was Nero. (See note
3, end of section). His decrees against them originated rather in an
effort to shield himself from popular fury than any desire that he
had to protect the religion of the State against the advancement of
Christianity. Nero, wishing to witness a great conflagration, had
set fire to the city of Rome. The flames utterly consumed three of
the fourteen wards into which the city was divided, and spread ruin
in seven others. It was in vain that the emperor tried to soothe the
indignant and miserable citizens whose all had been consumed by the
flames, and neither the magnificence of the prince, nor his attempted
expiation of the gods could remove from him the infamy of having
ordered the conflagration.
12. Therefore, [writes Tacitus, one of the most trustworthy of
all historians], to stop the clamor Nero falsely accused and subjugated
to the most exquisite punishments a people hated for their crimes,
called Christians. The founder of the sect, Christ, was executed in the
reign of Tiberius, by the Procurator Pontius Pilate. The pernicious
superstition, repressed for a time, burst forth again; not only
through Judea, the birth-place of the evil, but at Rome also, where
everything atrocious and base centers and is in repute. Those first
seized, confessed; then a vast multitude, detected by their means, were
convicted, not so much of the crime of burning the city as of hatred
of mankind. And insult was added to their torments; for being clad in
skins of wild beasts they were torn to pieces by dogs; or affixed to
crosses to be burned, were used as lights to dispel the darkness of
night, when the day was gone. Nero devoted his garden to the show,
and held circensian [sir-sen-shan] games, mixing with the rabble, or
mounting a chariot, clad like a coachman. Hence, though the guilty and
those meriting the severest punishment, suffered, yet compassion was
excited, because they were destroyed, not for the public good, but to
satisfy the cruelty of an individual.[12]
13. Time of the Persecution.--The time of this persecution {110}
is fixed by the date of the great conflagration, which Tacitus set down
as commencing on the 18th of July, A. D. 65. It lasted six days; and
soon after that the persecution broke out.
14. Continuance and Extent of the Persecution.--How long this
persecution lasted, and whether it was confined to the city of Rome
or extended throughout the empire is difficult to determine. From
some remarks made by Tertullian [Ter-tul-li-an], writing in the next
century, it would seem that the decrees of Nero against the Christians
of Rome were general laws, such as those afterwards passed by Domitian.
But the inferences of his language are generally discredited or
accounted the result of Tertullian's fervid rhetoric; and Gibbon's
conclusion that the persecution was confined within the walls of Rome
generally accepted. [13] It was in this persecution, according to the
tradition of the early Christian fathers, that Peter and Paul suffered
martyrdom.
15. The Second Persecution.--The second persecution against the
Christian church broke out in the year A. D. 93 or 94, under the reign
of Domitian. It was during this persecution that the Apostle John
was banished to Patmos. Eusebius states that at the same time, for
professing Christ, Flavi Domitilla, the niece of Flavius Clemens, one
of the consuls of Rome at the time, "was transported with many others,
by way of punishment, to the island of Pontia." The pretext for this
persecution is ascribed to the fears of Domitian that he would lose
his empire. A rumor reached him that a person would arise from the
relatives of Messiah who would attempt a revolution; whereupon the
jealous nature of the emperor prompted him to begin this persecution.
In it both Jews and Christians suffered, the emperor ordering that
the descendants of David, especially, should be put to death. An
investigation of the prospects of a revolution arising from such a
quarter caused Domitian to dismiss {111} the matter with contempt and
order the persecution to cease.[14] (See note 2, end of section).
NOTES.
1. Pliny's Testimony to the Morality of the Christians.--The
character which this writer gives of the Christians of that age (his
celebrated letter was written to Trajan early in the second century),
and which was drawn from a pretty accurate inquiry, because he
considered their moral principles as the point in which the magistrate
was interested, is as follows: He tells the emperor that some of
those who had relinquished the society, or who, to save themselves
pretended that they had relinquished it, affirmed "that they were
wont to meet together on a stated day, before it was light, and sang
among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as a God; and to bind
themselves by an oath, not to the commission of any wickedness, but
that they would not be guilty of theft, or robbery, or adultery; that
they would never falsify their word, or deny a pledge committed to
them when called upon to return it." This proves that a morality more
pure and strict than was ordinary, prevailed at that time in Christian
societies.--Paley's "Evidences."
2. Interview of Domitian and the Relatives of the Lord.--There
were yet living of the family of our Lord the grandchildren of
Judas, called the brother of our Lord according to the flesh. These
were reported as being of the family of David, and were brought to
Domitian by the evocaties. For this emperor was as much alarmed at
the appearance of Christ as Herod. He put the question whether they
were of David's race and they confessed that they were. He then asked
them what property they had, or how much money they owned. And both of
them answered, that they had between them only nine thousand denarii,
and this they had not in silver, but in the value of a piece of land,
containing only thirty-nine acres; from which they raised their taxes
and supported themselves by their own labor. Then they also began to
show their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies, and the
callosity formed by incessant labor on their hands, as evidence of
their own labor. When asked also, respecting Christ and his kingdom,
what was its nature, and when and where it was to appear, they replied
that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but celestial
and angelic; that it would appear at the end of the world, {112}
when coming in glory he would judge the quick and the dead, and give
to every one according to his works. Upon which Domitian despising
them, made no reply; but treating them with contempt, as simpletons,
commanded them to be dismissed, and by a decree ordered the persecution
to cease.--Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius.
3. Character of Nero.--Nero was the incarnation of depravity--the
very name by which men are accustomed to express the fury of
unrestrained malignity. Bad as he was, he was not worse than Rome. She
had but her due. Nay, when he died the rabble and the slaves crowned
his statue with garlands and scattered flowers over his grave. And
why not? Nero never injured the rabble, never oppressed the slave. He
murdered his mother, his brother, his wife, and was the tyrant of the
wealthy, the terror of the successful. He rendered poverty sweet, for
poverty alone was secure; he rendered slavery tolerable, for slaves
alone or slavish men were promoted to power. The reign of Nero was the
golden reign of the populace, and the holiday of the bondman.--Bancroft.
REVIEW.
1. Of what did Messiah warn his followers?
2. What reason may be assigned for the hatred of the world towards the
people of God?
3. What special reason can you assign for the persecution of the
Christians by the Jews?
4. What can you say of the bitterness and extent of the first great
persecution?
5. What circumstance rendered the Jewish power to injure the Christians
unequal to the malice?
6. Describe the great conflict between the Jews and the Romans.
7. By what means did the Christians living at Jerusalem escape the
calamities of those times?
8. What makes it difficult to understand why the Romans persecuted the
Christians?
9. What can you say of the charges of immorality as justifying Roman
persecution? (Note 1).
10. What of the charge of treason? (Note 2).
11. What was the true cause of the persecution?
12. Who was the first emperor to enact laws against the Christians?
13. What was the character of Nero? (Note 3).
14. What was the incentive which prompted Nero to persecute the
Christians?
{113} 15. What was the duration and extent of the first Roman
persecution?
16. Under whose reign did the second Roman persecution begin?
17. On what was the persecution based?
{114}
SECTION II.
1. Condition of the Church in the Second Century.--During
the second century the church had many seasons of immunity from
persecution. The Roman emperors for the most part were of a mild and
equitable character, and at the beginning of the century there were
no laws against the Christians, as those enacted both by Nero and
Domitian had been repealed. The first by the senate, the second by his
successor, Nerva.[15] Still it must not be supposed that the saints
were free from persecution. Their troubles arose, however, rather from
the tumults of the rabble at the instigation of the pagan priests than
from any desire of the emperors to oppress them.
2. As the Christians had no temples, no altars, no clouds of
incense, no smoking victims--in short, as they had none of the pomp and
circumstance in their simple religion which attended pagan worship,
they were open to the charge of atheism by the great body of the people
of the Roman empire; and, in their judgment, deserved the severest
tortures and death.
If the empire had been afflicted by any recent calamity, [remarks
Gibbon], by a plague, a famine, or an unsuccessful war; if the
Tiber had, or if the Nile had not, risen above its banks; if the
earth had shaken, or if the temperate order of the seasons had
been interrupted, the superstitious pagans were convinced that the
crimes and impurities of the Christians, who were spared by the
excessive lenity of the government, had at length, provoked the
divine justice.[16]
And however virtuous the emperors were, however mild or equitable in
character the governors of the provinces, it is certain {115} they did
not hesitate to appease the rage of the people by sacrificing a few
obnoxious victims.
3. The Persecution Under Marcus Aurelius.--The strangest fact
of all connected with the persecutions of this century is that the
saints suffered most under the most virtuous of the emperors--Marcus
Aurelius [Mar-cus Au-re-li-us], who allowed the judges to put many of
the saints accused of crime to torture. Among those of note who fell in
this persecution were Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna (see note 1, end
of section.) and Justin Martyr, the philosopher. The persecution was
most severe in Gaul (France), the churches of Lyons and Vienne being
well nigh utterly destroyed. The unparalleled cruelties practiced upon
the saints in those cities are related at length by Eusebius[17] in
letters written by those who survived the persecution. (See note 2, end
of section.)
4. Edicts of Severus.--Early in the third century a law was
enacted by the Emperor, Severus [Se-ver-us,] making it criminal
for any reason to abandon the religion of his fathers for that of
the Christians or the Jews. The object of the law was to stay the
propagation of Christianity which was spreading abroad on every hand;
and while it was not intended to increase the hardships of those
already Christians, it nevertheless encouraged the governors and judges
of some of the provinces--especially those of Egypt and other parts of
Africa and Asia--to sorely afflict the saints. Many of the poor were
put to death--thousands of them if we may credit Eusebius--and many
of the rich intimidated into paying large sums of money to the judges
to secure them from torture and death. Still this persecution was not
long continued, nor was it general throughout the empire, and after
it subsided there was a long period of peace--pity it is that we have
to say that it was more hurtful to the church than the periods of the
cruelest persecution.
{116} 5. Persecution Under Decius Trajan.--In the middle of
this century under Decius Trajan [De-ci-us Tra-jan] the severest and
most disastrous persecution of all befell the Christians. The emperor
must have been impelled both by his fear of the Christians and his
attachment to the ancient religion of the Romans to publish his
terrible edicts by which he hoped to destroy the Christian church. The
governors of the provinces were ordered, on pain of forfeiting their
own lives, either to exterminate all Christians utterly, or bring them
back by pains and tortures to the religion of their fathers. Even
Gibbon, whose constant effort is to belittle the sufferings of the
early Christians, says of this persecution:
The bishops of the most considerable cities were removed by exile
or death; the vigilance of the magistrates prevented the clergy of
Rome during sixteen months from proceeding to a new election and
it was the opinion of the Christians that the emperor would more
patiently endure a competitor for the purple than a bishop in the
capital.[18]
6. For more than two years the persecution raged with unmitigated
fury; and great multitudes of Christians, in all the Roman provinces,
were butchered in the most inhuman manner.
This persecution, [writes Dr. Mosheim], was more cruel and
terrific than any which preceded it; and immense numbers,
dismayed, not so much by the fear of death as by the dread of
the long continued tortures by which the magistrates endeavored
to overcome the constancy of the Christians, professed to
renounce Christ, and procured for themselves safety, either by
sacrificing--i. e., offering incense before the idols--or by
certificates purchased with money.[19] (See note 3, end of section.)
7. The immediate successors of Decius continued this persecution,
which with a pestilential disease which prevailed in many of the Roman
provinces, greatly increased the hardships {117} of the saints; but the
latter part of the century passed away in peace.
8. The Diocletian Persecution.--In the commencement of the fourth
century a peculiar state of affairs existed in the Roman empire. In 284
A. D., Diocletian [Di-o-kle-shan], a native of Dalmatia [Dal-ma-shi-a],
whose parents were slaves, was proclaimed emperor. The year following,
feeling that the extent of the empire was too vast to be managed by
a single mind, he chose a colleague, one Maximian [Max-im-i-an], an
unlettered soldier, with whom he shared the authority of emperor and
the title of "Augustus." Soon afterwards they each chose a colleague
with whom they shared their authority. These were Constantinus
[Con-stan-ti-nus] Chlorus [Klo-rus] and Galerius [Ga-le-ri-us]. On
their ascension to this honor they each took the title of "Caesar," and
so matters stood at the opening of the fourth century.
9. The church had peace at the opening of this century, and
at first there were no indications that it would be broken. But
early within that period Diocletian was persuaded to undertake the
suppression of the Christian religion. This he attempted by demanding
that the Christians give up their sacred books; if they refused they
were put to death. The constancy of all the Christians, no, not even
that of all their bishops and clergy, was equal to this trial, and many
voluntarily surrendered the sacred writings in their possession, to
save themselves from punishment and death.
10. The royal palace at Nicomedia being twice set on fire,
soon after the first edict of Diocletian was published, the crime
was charged to the Christians, and led to the issuance of a second
edict which caused many Christians to suffer the penalties inflicted
on incendiaries--torture and death. Following this came rebellion
against Roman authority in Nicomedia and Syria. This too was charged
to the intrigue of Christians (see notes 4 and 5, end of section), and
was made a pretext for {118} throwing all bishops and ministers into
prison. A third edict authorized the employment of torture to compel
them to offer sacrifices to the gods of the heathen. It was hoped by
Diocletian that if these leaders of the church could be forced into
acts of apostasy the people would follow. A great multitude, therefore,
of excellent men in all parts of Christendom--excepting Gaul--were put
to death, and others condemned to labor in the mines.
11. But Diocletian was disappointed in the effects of these
assaults on the leaders of the church. The members thereof remained
obdurate in their adherence to the Christian faith; whereupon he issued
a fourth edict, directing the magistrates to compel all Christians to
offer sacrifice to the gods and to use tortures for that purpose. As
the governors yielded strict obedience to these orders, the Christian
church was reduced to the last extremity.[20]
12. With the exception of Gaul, [says Schlegel], streams
of Christian blood flowed in the provinces of the Roman empire.
Everywhere the Christian temples lay in ruins, and assemblies
for worship were all suspended. The major part had forsaken the
provinces and taken refuge among the barbarians. Such as were
unable or unwilling to do this, kept themselves concealed, and were
afraid for their lives if they appeared in public. The ministers
of Christ were either slain, or mutilated and sent to the mines,
or banished from the country. The avaricious magistrates had
seized upon nearly all their church property and their private
possessions. Many, through dread of undergoing torture, had made
away with their own lives and many apostatized from the faith; and
what remained of the Christian community consisted of weak, poor,
and timorous persons. [21]
Truly it would appear from this that the beast unto whom was given
power "to make war with the saints and overcome them" [22] had at last
triumphed.
{119} 13. End of Pagan Persecution.--This, however, was to be
the last great persecution of the Christians by the heathens. In
305 Diocletian, to the surprise of his own and all succeeding ages,
resigned the empire and compelled his associate, Maximian, to do the
same. This left the empire in the hands of the two Caesars, who became
the emperors. Like their predecessors they chose colleagues; but
Constantius Chlorus, dying at York, in Britain, his son, Constantine
[Kon-stan-tin], afterwards called the Great, was proclaimed emperor by
the army. The associate of his father, Galerius, and the two Caesars
refused to ratify the election, and civil war ensued which lasted for
eighteen years. Finally, however, Constantine prevailed over all his
rivals and became sole emperor, A. D., 323. Being, like his father,
favorably disposed towards Christianity, his accession to the throne
brought universal peace to the church.
14. The Luminous Cross Seen by Constantine.--It was during
the above-mentioned civil war, while marching against the forces
of Maxentius [Max-en-ti-us], one of the rebellious Caesars, that
Constantine and his army are said to have seen near midday, in the
heavens, a luminous cross bearing this inscription in Greek: "By This
Conquer." The same night Christ appeared to him in a dream accompanied
with the same sign and instructed him to make a standard bearing the
cross as a protection against his enemies. The circumstance is related
at great length in the life of Constantine by Eusebius, on whose
sole authority the story rests. It is regarded as suspicious that he
makes no reference to the matter in Ecclesiastical History, written
only twelve years after the event. (See note 7, end of section.)
The story is altogether rejected by some writers as the cunning
invention of interested priests seeking to make the cross an object of
veneration; and even Christian writers of high standing--among them
Mosheim--consider the story to be doubtful.
15. Constantine and his Friendliness to Christianity.--With
{120} the accession of Constantine to the imperial throne, as before
remarked, the peace of the church was assured. His father had favored
the Christians, and in the cruel persecution under Diocletian, he kept
the provinces of Gaul free from the effusion of Christian blood; and
his son seems to have fallen heir to his father's friendliness for the
Christian faith.
16. It is difficult to determine the motives of Constantine for
favoring the Christian cause and resolving upon the destruction of the
pagan religion. Whether it was the appearance of the miraculous cross
in the heavens, as some aver, the influence of Helena, his mother,[23]
as Theodoret claims, or through the arguments of an Egyptian priest
who promised him absolution for the crime of murder if he would accept
Christianity.[24] But let the motive be what it may, benevolence,
policy, conviction or remorse, coupled with a hope of forgiveness,
Constantine from the time of his accession to the throne became
the avowed protector of the Christian church; and at length by his
powerful influence made Christianity the reigning religion of the Roman
empire.[25] The exiles were recalled; those condemned to labor in the
mines were released; those who had been robbed of their property were
reinstated in their possessions, and the demolished Christian temples
were ordered to be rebuilt and enlarged. The church militant after
the emperor's edicts of toleration became the church tranquil, so far
as external opposition was concerned. Her ministers were welcomed to
the court of the emperor, admitted to the imperial table, and even
accompanied the monarch in his expeditions. Wealth, honor and imperial
patronage were bestowed almost without measure on the Christian church.
From the position of a despised, persecuted religion, Christianity
was suddenly exalted to {121} the very throne of the Roman world. Yet
these things which are usually accounted among the good fortunes of
the church, were, as we shall yet see, disastrous to the purity of the
Christian religion.
17. Progress of the Church Under the Patronage of
Constantine.--The court of Constantine was converted, of course;
but it is to be feared that it was the hope of wealth and honor, the
example of the emperor, his exhortations, his irresistible smile,
rather than the truths of Christianity which wrought a change in the
hearts of the obsequious crowd that filled the palace. A number of
cities manifested a forward zeal in a voluntary destruction of their
temples and idols, but it is more than likely that the municipal
distinctions and popular donations which were held out as a reward
for such conduct, rather than belief in the Christian faith are what
inspired the iconoclasts. Twelve thousand men and a proportionate
number of women and children were baptized in a single year in Rome;
but how far did the twenty pieces of gold and a white garment promised
to each convert by the emperor influence the conversion of this
great number? Nor was the influence of Constantine in respect to the
Christian religion confined within the provinces of the empire. It
extended to the barbarous peoples outside; who, while they had held
in disdain a despised and proscribed sect, soon learned to esteem a
religion which had been so lately embraced by the greatest monarch, and
the most civilized nation of the globe.[26]
18. The Character of Constantine.--It is as difficult to come to
a right conclusion as to the real character of Constantine as it is to
decide the motives which led him to accept the Christian religion; for
in the former as in the latter case the authorities are conflicting.
The Christians who were favored by his actions extol him for his
virtues; while the pagans who were despoiled by him, execrate him for
his crimes. It is {122} certain, however, that he put to death his own
son Crispus, and his wife Fausta, on a suspicion that was at least
precarious. He cut off his brother-in-law Licinius, and his offending
son, contrary to his plighted word; and, according to Schlegel and
Gibbon, he was much addicted to pride and voluptuousness:
He pursued the great objects of his ambition through the dark and
bloody paths of war and policy, and after the victory, abandoned
himself without moderation to the abuse of his good fortune. As
he advanced in years he seems to have declined in the practice of
virtue, blighting in his old age, when a convert to the Christian
faith, and famed as the protector of the Christian church, the fair
promises he gave in his youth, and while a pagan, of being a truly
virtuous prince. It is not likely that the patronage of such an
emperor would contribute to the real progress of religion or assist
in the establishment of the church of Christ.
NOTES.
1. The Martyrdom of Polycarp.--Presently the instruments prepared
for the funeral pile were applied to him. As they were on the point of
securing him with spikes, he said: "Let me be thus, for he that gives
me strength to bear the fire, will also give me power, without being
secured by you with these spikes, to remain unmoved on the pile." They
therefore did not nail him, but merely bound him to the stake. But he,
closing his hands behind him, and bound to the stake as a noble victim
selected from the great flock an acceptable sacrifice to Almighty
God, said: "Father of thy well-beloved and blessed Son, Jesus Christ,
through whom we have received the knowledge of thee, the God of angels
and power and all creation, and of all the family of the righteous,
that live before thee, I bless thee that thou hast thought me worthy of
the present day and hour to have a share in the number of the martyrs
and in the cup of Christ, unto the resurrection of eternal life, both
of the soul and body, in the incorruptible felicity of the Holy Spirit.
Among whom may I be received in thy sight this day as a rich and
acceptable sacrifice, as thou the faithful and true God hast prepared,
hast revealed and fulfilled. Wherefore on this account, and for all
things I praise thee, I bless thee; I glorify thee through the eternal
High Priest, Jesus Christ, thy well beloved Son. {123} Through whom
be glory to thee with Him in the Holy Ghost, both now and forever.
Amen." After he had repeated Amen, and had finished his prayer, the
executioners kindled the fire.--Eusebius.
2. A Second Century Persecution.--Would the reader know what a
persecution in those days was, I would refer him to a circular letter
written by the church at Smyrna soon after the death of Polycarp, who
it will be remembered had lived with St. John; and which letter is
entitled a relation of that Bishop's martyrdom. "The sufferings," say
they, "of all the other martyrs were blessed and generous which they
underwent according to the will of God. For so it becomes us, who are
more religious than others, to ascribe the power and ordering of all
things unto him. And indeed who can choose but admire the greatness
of their minds, and that admirable patience and love of their Master,
which then appeared in them? Who when they were so flayed with
whipping, that the frame and structure of their bodies were laid open
to their very inward veins and arteries, nevertheless endured it. In
like manner, those who were condemned to the beasts and kept a long
time in prison, underwent many cruel torments, being forced to lie
upon sharp spikes laid under their bodies, and tormented with divers
other sorts of punishments; that so, if it were possible, the tyrants
by the length of their sufferings might have brought them to deny
Christ."--Paley.
3. The Persecution Under Decius Trajan.--This persecution was
more terrible than any preceding one, because it extended over the
whole empire, and because its object was to worry the Christians into
apostasy by extreme and persevering torture.--The certificated or
libellatici, are supposed to be such as purchased certificates from the
corrupt magistrates, in which it was declared that they were pagans and
had complied with the demands of the law, when neither of these was
fact. To purchase such a certificate was not only to be partaker in the
fraudulent transaction, but it was to prevaricate before the public in
regard to Christianity, and was inconsistent with that open confession
of Christ before men, which He Himself requires.--Murdock. (Note in
Mosheim, vol. I., cent. iii., p. 1, ch. ii.)
4. The Insurrection of Syria and Nicomedia.--Some degree of
probability could be attached to the charge against the Christians of
causing the insurrection from the fact that their inconsiderate zeal
sometimes led them to deeds which had an aspect of rebellion. At the
commencement of this persecution, for example, a very respectable
Christian tore down the imperial edict against the Christians which was
set up in a public place.--Schlegel.
5. Unwise Zeal of the Christians.--Several examples have been
preserved of a zeal impatient of those restraints which the emperors
had provided for the security of the church. The Christians sometimes
supplied by their voluntary declaration the want of an accuser, rudely
{124} disturbed the public service of paganism, and rushing in crowds
round the tribunal of the magistrates, called upon them to pronounce
and to inflict the sentence of the law. The behavior of the Christians
was too remarkable to escape the notice of the ancient philosophers;
but they seemed to have considered it with much less admiration than
astonishment. Incapable of conceiving the motives which sometimes
transported the fortitude of believers beyond the bounds of prudence
or reason, they treated such an eagerness to die as the strange
result of obstinate despair, of stupid insensibility or of suspicious
frenzy.--Gibbon.
6. Spirit of the Christian Martyrs.--The spirit of the Christian
martyrs, at least of the first three centuries, may be learned from
the epistle of Ignatius of Antioch, who, early in the second century
was taken from Syria to Rome, where he suffered martyrdom by being
thrown to the wild beasts. On his journey to Rome, under sentence of
death, he wrote an epistle to the Roman saints from which the following
passage is taken: "I write to the churches and I declare to all, that
willingly I die for God, if it be that you hinder me not. I beg of you,
do not become to me an unseasonable love. Let me be of the beasts, by
whose means I am enabled to obtain God. I am God's wheat, and by the
teeth of the beasts am I ground, that I may be found God's pure bread.
Rather entreat kindly the beasts that they may be a grave for me and
may leave nothing of my body; that not even when I am fallen asleep, I
may be a burden upon any man. Then I shall be in truth a disciple of
Jesus Christ, when the world seeth not even my body. Supplicate our
Lord for me, that by these instruments I may be found a sacrifice to
God. I am not commanding you like Peter and Paul; they were apostles,
I am a condemned convict; they were free, I am hitherto a slave. But
if I suffer I am a free man of Jesus Christ, and I shall rise from
the dead, in him a free man. And now since I am in bonds, I learn to
desire nothing. From Syria to Rome I am cast among beasts by sea and
by land, by night and by day; since I am bound between ten leopards,
who get worse when I do good to them. But by their ill-treatment I am
furthered in my apprenticeship; still by that I am not justified. May
I have to rejoice of the beasts prepared for me! and I pray that they
may be found ready for me, and I will kindly entreat them quickly to
devour me, and not as they have done to some, being afraid of them, to
keep from touching me. And should they not be willing, I will force
them."--Ignatius' Epistle to the Romans.
7. Constantine's Luminous Cross.--Now if this narrative [by
Eusebius] is all true, and if two connected miracles were actually
wrought as here stated, how happens it that no writer of that age,
except Eusebius, says one word about the luminous cross in the
heavens? How came it that Eusebius himself said nothing about it in
his Ecclesiastical {125} History, which was written twelve years
after the event, and about the same length of time before his life of
Constantine? Why does he rely solely on the testimony of the emperor
and not even intimate that he even heard of it from others; whereas,
if true, many thousands must have been eye-witnesses of the fact. What
mean his suggestions, that some may question the truth of the story;
and his caution not to state anything as a matter of public notoriety,
but to confine himself simply to the emperor's private representation
to himself. * * * But how came the whole story of the luminous cross to
be unknown to the Christian world, for more than twenty-five years, and
then to transpire only through a private conversation between Eusebius
and Constantine?--Murdock.
REVIEW.
1. From what source did the persecution of the church come during the
2nd century?
2. What charge did pagan priests bring against the Christians?
3. What in the estimation of the ignorant pagans gave the color of
truth to their charge?
4. To what circumstance were the calamities which befell the empire
usually attributed?
5. What strange fact meets us in connection with the persecution of the
2nd century?
6. What two noted martyrs were put to death in the reign of Marcus
Aurelius?
7. Describe the martyrdom of Polycarp.
8. What was the nature of some of the tortures inflicted on the
Christians? (Note 2).
9. What was the nature and purpose of the edicts of Severus?
10. What was the effect of this persecution and the period of peace
which followed it?
11. What can you say of the persecution under Trajan?
12. What does Gibbon say of it?
13. How long did it continue?
14. What means of avoiding the severe tortures were offered the
Christians?
15. What was the effect of this persecution?
16. What other circumstance added to the afflictions of the Christians?
17. What changes in respect to the Roman government took place early in
the 4th century?
18. What method did Diocletian adopt for the suppression of the
Christian religion?
{126} 19. What special crimes were charged to the Christians in the
reign of Diocletian?
20. What can you say of the zeal of the Christians? (Note 4 and 5).
21. What effect did these persecutions have on the church?
22. What event put a stop to the pagan persecutions?
23. Relate the circumstances which led to Constantine becoming emperor
of Rome.
24. What effect did his accession to the throne have upon the Christian
church?
25. By what circumstance is Constantine said to have been converted to
the Christian religion?
26. What evidences exist against the probability of this story?
27. What good service did the father of Constantine do the Christians
in the Diocletian persecution?
28. What are the several motives assigned for Constantine's
friendliness to the Christian church?
29. What can you say of the emperor's treatment of the Christians?
30. What considerations very likely influenced converts when
Constantine extended his patronage to the church?
31. What was the character of Constantine?
{127}
SECTION III.
1. The Accusations of the Pagans.--The simplicity of the
Christian religion was made a reproach to the church of Christ by
the pagan priests. The saints were accused of atheism, an accusation
which found support in the fact that the primitive church had no
temples, no incense, no sacrifice, no incantations, pomp or ceremony
in its worship. "The Christians have no temples, therefore they have
no gods," was an argument sufficiently convincing to the heathen. It
was but natural, perhaps, that the Christians should seek to cast off
this reproach; but the desire to do so led to the introduction of many
ceremonies quite at variance with the religion of Jesus Christ, and
eventually subverted it altogether.
2. Outward Ordinances of the Christian Religion.--The outward
ordinances of the gospel consisted of baptism, the laying on of hands
for the imparting of the Holy Ghost, and the Lord's Supper. The laying
on of hands was also employed in ordaining men to the Priesthood and
in administering to the sick. In the latter case it was accompanied by
anointing with oil.
3. While it does not appear that there was any specific law
commanding or regulating fasts, the ancient saints occasionally joined
abstinence from their food with their prayers, and especially when
engaged in great undertakings. But the frequency of his fasts and the
time of their continuance were left to each man's judgment.
4. They met on the first day of the week--Sunday--for worship
(see note 1, end of section) the meetings, during the first century,
being held in most instances in private houses. The {128} ceremonies
were of the simplest character. They consisted of reading the
scriptures, the exhortation of the president of the assembly--"neither
eloquent nor long, but full of warmth and love;" the testimony of such
as felt moved upon by the Holy Ghost to bear testimony, exhort or
prophesy; the singing of hymns; the administration of the Sacrament and
prayers.[27] (See note 2, end of section.)
5. Baptism.--Baptism was administered by immersing the candidate
in water. The only pre-requisites were faith in Jesus Christ and
repentance. As soon as the candidate professed these he was admitted
into the church by baptism.[28] In a short time, however, the
simplicity of this ordinance was corrupted and burdened with useless
ceremonies. In the second century the newly baptized converts, since
by baptism they had been born again, were taught to exhibit in their
conduct the innocence of little infants. Milk and honey, the common
food of infants, were administered to them, after their baptism, to
remind them of their infancy in the church. Moreover, since by baptism
they were released from being servants of the devil, and became God's
free men, certain forms borrowed from the Roman ceremony of manumission
of slaves were employed in baptism. As by baptism also they were
supposed to be made God's soldiers, like newly enlisted soldiers in the
Roman army, they were sworn to obey their commander, etc.
6. Further Additions of Ceremonies to Baptism.--A century later
(the third) further ceremonies were added. It was supposed that some
evil spirit was resident in all vicious persons and impelled them
to sin. Therefore, before entering the sacred font for baptism, an
exorcist by a solemn, menacing formula declared them free from the
bondage of Satan, and hailed them servants of Christ.[29] After baptism
the new converts {129} returned home, "decorated with a crown and a
white robe, the first being indicative of their victory over the world
and their lusts, the latter of their acquired innocence." [30]
7. We have already noted the fact that baptism was administered
in the days of the apostles as soon as profession of faith and
repentance were declared, but in the second and third century baptism
was only administered twice a year, and then only to such candidates as
had gone through a long preparation and trial.[31] The times chosen for
the administration of the ordinance were on the vigils of Easter and
Whitsuntide;[32] and in the fourth century it had become the custom to
accompany the ceremony with lighted wax candles, to put salt--an emblem
of purity and wisdom--in the mouth of the baptized, and everywhere a
double anointing was administered to the candidates, the one before,
the other after, baptism.[33]
8. The Form of Baptism Changed.--It must have been early in the
third century that the form of baptism began to be changed. Up to this
time it had been performed only by immersion of the whole body. But
in the first half of the third century, Cyprian, bishop of Carthage,
during a controversy respecting the re-baptism of those who in times
of persecution had denied the faith, decided that those whose weak
state of health did not permit them to be immersed, were sufficiently
baptized by being sprinkled.[34] The first case of this kind of
{130} baptism is related by Eusebius. The person to whom it was so
administered was Novatus [No-va-tus], a desperate heretic, who created
a schism in the church and became the founder of a sect. He was among
the number of so-called Christians who put off baptism as long as he
dared; in order to enjoy a life of sin and then through baptism, just
before death, obtain forgiveness for them--a custom very prevalent in
those times. Novatus being attacked with an obstinate disease, and
supposed to be at the point of death, was baptized by having water
sprinkled upon him as he lay in bed; "if indeed," says Eusebius, "it be
proper to say one like him did receive baptism." [35]
9. This innovation continued to spread until now the general rule
among so-called Christian sects is to baptize by sprinkling or pouring.
For this change there is no warrant of revelation. It destroys the
symbol there is in baptism as taught by Messiah and his apostles--that
of a burial and resurrection--of a death and a birth--a death unto sin,
a birth unto sin, a birth unto righteousness. (See notes 3 and 4, end
of section.) It is one of those innovations which changed an ordinance
of the everlasting covenant.
10. Baptism Misapplied.--About the time that the form of
administering baptism was changed it began to be misapplied, that
is, it was administered to infants. Just when this custom came into
vogue may not be determined, but clearly it has no warrant for its
existence either in the doctrines or practice of the apostles or any
New Testament writer. (See note 5, end of section.) No truth is more
plainly taught by the apostles than that baptism is for the remission
of sins, and must be preceded by faith and repentance; and as infants
are incapable of sin, or of exercising faith, or of repenting,
evidently they are not fit subjects for baptism.
11. Still it became the custom in the latter part of the second
century or early in the third to baptize infants. In the year 253 A.
D., a council of sixty bishops, in Africa--at which {131} Cyprian,
bishop of Carthage, presided, took under consideration the question
whether infants should be baptized within two or three days after
birth, or whether it should be deferred until the eighth day, as was
the custom of the Jews in respect to circumcision. The council decided
that they should be baptized at once, that is within a day or two after
birth.[36] It will be observed that the question was not as to whether
infants should be baptized or not, but when they should be baptized,
within a day or two after birth or not until they were eight days old.
The matter was treated in the council as if infant baptism was a custom
of long standing. This proves, not that infant baptism is a correct
doctrine, or that it was derived from the teachings and examples of
the apostles--as some aver[37]--but that in a century or so after the
introduction of the gospel, men began to pervert it by changing and
misapplying its ordinances. The false doctrine of infant baptism is
now practiced by nearly all so-called Christian churches, Catholic and
Protestant.
12. The Sacrament.--Much as the simple rite of baptism was
burdened with useless ceremonies, changed in its form and misapplied,
it was not more distorted than was the sacrament of the Lord's supper.
The nature of the sacrament--usually called the eucharist--and the
purposes for which it was instituted are so plain that he who runs may
read.
13. From Paul's description of the ordinance, it is clear that
the broken bread was an emblem of Messiah's broken body; the wine an
emblem of his blood, shed for sinful man; and his disciples were to
eat the one and drink the other in remembrance of him until he should
return; and by this ceremony show forth the Lord's death.[38]
{132} 14. It was designed as a memorial of Messiah's great
atonement for mankind, a token and witness unto the Father that the Son
was always remembered. It was to be a sign that those partaking of it
were willing to take upon them the name of Christ, to always remember
him, and keep his commandments. In consideration of these things being
observed, the saints were always to have the Spirit of the Lord to be
with them.[39] In this spirit and without great ceremony (see note 7,
end of section) the sacrament was administered for some time.
15. Administration of the Sacrament Corrupted.--In the third
century there were longer prayers and more ceremony connected with
the administration of the sacrament than in the century preceding.
Disputations arose as to the proper time to administer it. Some
considered the morning, others the afternoon, and some the evening
the most suitable time. All were not agreed either as to how often
the ordinance should be celebrated. Gold and silver vessels were
used, and neither those doing penance, nor those unbaptized, though
believers, were {133} permitted to be present at the celebration of
the ordinance; "which practice, it is well known, was derived from the
pagan mysteries." [40] Very much of mystery began to be associated with
it even at an early date. The bread and the wine through the prayer
of consecration were considered to undergo a mystic change by which
they were converted into and became the very body and the very blood
of Jesus Christ; so that they were no longer regarded as emblems of
Messiah's body and blood, but the body and blood itself.[41] This is
the doctrine of transubstantiation.
16. The dogma established, it was but a short step to the
"elevation of the host;" that is, the elevation of the bread and
wine before they were distributed, so that they might be viewed with
reverence by the people. Thus came the adoration of the symbols.
17. Institution of the Mass.--Hence came also the mass, or the
idea of a sacrifice being connected with the celebration {134} of the
eucharist. It was held that as Jesus was truly present in the bread and
wine he could be offered up, and was truly offered up as an oblation to
his Eternal Father. The death of the victim was not supposed to occur
in reality but mystically, in such a way, however, as to constitute a
true sacrifice, commemorative of that of the cross, and not different
from it in essence. The same victim was present, and offered up by
Christ through his minister, the priest. The sacrifice at the cross was
offered with real suffering; true shedding of blood, and real death of
the victim; in the mass it was taught there was a mystical shedding of
blood and a mystical death of the same victim.
18. Into such absurdities was the simple sacrament of the Lord's
supper distorted! When attended with all the pomp and ceremony of
splendid altars, lighted tapers, processions, elevations and chantings:
offered up by priests and bishops clad in splendid vestments and in
the midst of clouds of incense, accompanied by mystic movements and
genuflections of bishops and priests, the church could congratulate
itself on having removed the reproach at the first fastened upon the
Christians for not having altars and sacrifice. The mass took away the
reproach; and the new converts to Christianity were accustomed to see
the same rites and ceremonies employed in this mystical sacrifice of
the Son of God as they had seen employed in offering up of sacrifice to
their pagan deities. (See notes 8 and 9, end of section.)
19. Suppression of Half the Sacrament.--In time the idea became
prevalent that as the body and blood of Messiah were equally and
entirely present under each "species"--that is, equally and entirely
present in the bread and in the wine--it was equally and entirely
given to the faithful whichever they received. This idea, of course,
rendered it unnecessary to partake of both bread and wine--hence
the practice of communion in one kind. That is, the sacrament was
administered by giving {135} bread alone to the communicant. To remark
that this was changing the ordinance of the sacrament as instituted
by Messiah--suppressing half of it in fact--can scarcely be necessary
since it is so well known that Jesus administered both bread and wine
when instituting the sacred ordinance.[42]
NOTES.
1. Reasons Why the Ancient Saints Worshiped on Sunday.--But
Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it
is the first day on which God, when he changed the darkness and matter,
made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from
the dead; for the day before that of Saturn he was crucified, and on
the day after it, which is Sunday, he appeared to his apostles and
disciples and taught them these things which we have given to you also
for your consideration.--Justin Martyr.
2. Description of Christian Public Worship in the Second
Century.--On the day which is called Sunday there is an assembly in
the same of all who live in cities or in country districts; and the
records of the apostles, or the writings of the prophets, are read as
long as we have time. Then the reader concludes, and the president
verbally instructs and exhorts us to the imitation of these excellent
things. Then we all rise together and offer up our prayers. And, as I
said before, when we have concluded our prayer, bread is brought, and
wine and water, and the president in like manner offers up prayers and
thanksgivings with all his strength, and the people give their assent
by saying Amen; and there is a distribution and a partaking by every
one of the eucharistic elements [the sacrament,] and to those who are
not present they are sent by the hands of the deacons. And such as are
in prosperous circumstances, and wish to do so, give what they will,
each according to his choice; and what is collected is placed in the
hands of the president, who assists the orphans and widows, and such as
through sickness or any other cause are in want; and to those who are
in bonds, and to strangers from afar, and, in a word, to all who are in
need, he is a protector.--Justin Martyr.
3. Baptism a Symbol of Burial and Resurrection.--In writing
to the saints of Rome, Paul says: "Know ye not, that so many of us
as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore {136} we are _buried_ with him by baptism into death; that
like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father,
even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been
_planted_ together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in
the likeness of his resurrection." (Rom. vi:3-5.) In writing to the
saints of Colosse, the same apostle reminds them that they had been
"_Buried_ with him [Christ] in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with
him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from
the dead." (Col. ii: 12.)
In these passages the terms "buried" and "planted" are in plain
allusion to the manner in which the saints had received the ordinance
of baptism, which could not have been by sprinkling or pouring, as
there is no burial or planting in the likeness of Christ's death, or
being raised in likeness of his resurrection in that; but in immersion
there is.--"The Gospel--Roberts," page 173.
4. The Manner of Baptism Instituted Among the Nephites.--"Verily
I say unto you, that whoso repenteth of his sins through your words,
and desireth to be baptized in my name, on this wise shall ye baptize
them: Behold, ye shall go down and stand in the water, and in my name
shall ye baptize them. And now behold, these are the words which ye
shall say, calling them by name, saying, Having authority given me
of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. And then shall ye immerse them in
the water and come forth again out of the water. And after this manner
shall ye baptize in my name."--Jesus to the Nephites.
5. Infant Baptism not Ordained of Christ or the Apostles.--As
faith and baptism are constantly so closely connected together in the
New Testament, an opinion was likely to arise that where there could
be no faith there could be no baptism. It is certain that Christ did
not ordain infant baptism. * * We cannot prove that the apostles
ordained infant baptism; from those places where the baptism of a whole
family is mentioned (Acts xvi:33; I Cor. i: 16), we can draw no such
conclusions, because the inquiry is still to be made whether there
were any children in those families of such an age that they were not
capable of any intelligent reception of Christianity; for this is the
only point on which the case turns.--Neander "Church History," vol. I.,
page 360.
6. Infant Baptism Forbidden Among the Nephites.--The word of
the Lord came to me by the power of the Holy Ghost, saying: * * *
Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous, but sinners
unto repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are
sick; wherefore little children are whole for they are incapable of
committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me,
that {137} it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is
done away in me. * * * Wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is
solemn mockery before God that ye should baptize little children. * *
* Awful is the wickedness to suppose that God saveth one child because
of baptism, and the other must perish because he hath no baptism. Wo
be unto him that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner,
for they shall perish, except they repent.--Mormon to Moroni (Book of
Moroni, chapter viii.)
7. Manner of Administering the Sacrament--Second Century.--When
the Christians celebrated the Lord's supper which they were accustomed
to do chiefly on Sundays, they consecrated a part of the bread and
wine of the oblations, by certain prayers pronounced by the president,
the bishop of the congregation. The wine was mixed with water, and the
bread was divided into small pieces. Portions of the consecrated bread
and wine were commonly sent to the absent and the sick, in testimony
of fraternal affection towards them. There is much evidence that this
most holy rite was regarded as very necessary to the attainment of
salvation.--Mosheim.
8. Pagan Rites Introduced into the Christian Worship--Fourth
Century.--The Christian bishops introduced, with but slight
alterations, into the Christian worship, those rites and institutions
by which formerly the Greeks and Romans, and other nations had
manifested their piety and reverence towards their imaginary deities;
supposing that the people would more readily embrace Christianity, if
they saw that the rites handed down to them from their fathers still
existed unchanged among the Christians, and perceived that Christ and
the martyrs were worshiped in the same manner as formerly their gods
were. There was, of course, little difference in these times, between
the public worship of the Christians and that of the Greeks and Romans.
In both alike there were splendid robes, mitres, tiaras, wax tapers,
crosiers, processions, illustrations, images, golden and silver vases,
and numberless other things.--Mosheim.
9. Superstitious Observances Connected with the Eucharist--Eighth
Century.--As evidence of the superstition which was associated with
the eucharist, note the following: "If any one through negligence,
shall destroy the eucharist, i. e. the sacrifice, let him do penance
one year. * * * If he lets it fall on the ground, carelessly, he must
sing fifty Psalms. Whoever neglects to take care of the sacrifice, so
that worms get into it, or it lose its color or taste, must do penance
thirty or twenty days; and the sacrifice must be burned in the fire.
Whoever turns up the cup at the close of the solemnity of the mass must
do penance forty days. If a drop from the cup should fall on the altar,
the minister must suck up the drop and do penance three days; and the
linen cloth which the drop touched, must be washed three times, {138}
over the cup, and the water in which it was washed be cast into the
fire."--Decisions of Pope Gregory III. (Harduin's Concilia.)
REVIEW.
1. What reproach did the simplicity of the Christian religion lead to?
2. What effect did the endeavor to get rid of that reproach have on the
Christian religion?
3. Enumerate the outward ordinances of the gospel.
4. What can you say of Christian fasts?
5. On what day did the Christians meet for worship?
6. What reasons do the early church fathers give for holding public
worship on that day? (Note 1).
7. Describe the meetings of the early Christians. (Note 2.)
8. How was baptism administered in the early church?
9. What does baptism represent? (Note 3).
10. Tell how the simplicity of this ordinance was changed.
11. What additions were made to the ceremony of baptism in the third
century?
12. When was the form of baptism changed?
13. Relate the first known case of baptism by sprinkling.
14. In what way was the ordinance of baptism misapplied?
15. Was infant baptism ordained of the apostles? (Note 5).
16. About when was infant baptism introduced into the church?
17. Does the antiquity of infant baptism prove it to be a correct
doctrine?
18. What does it prove?
19. What was said to the Nephites about infant baptism? (Note 6).
20. For what was the sacrament of the Lord's supper instituted?
21. Give Paul's description of the introduction of the sacrament.
(Note).
22. About what time was the manner of administering the sacrament
changed?
23. What was the nature of those changes?
24. What custom crept into the practice of the Christian church that
was forbidden by Jesus among the Nephites? (Note).
25. What can you say of the antiquity of the doctrine of
transubstantiation?
26. What is the mass?
27. What reproach did the institution of the mass remove from the
Christians?
28. At what cost was the reproach removed?
29. Who introduced pagan rites into Christian worship?
30. Why was it done? (Note 8.)
31. What reason is given for suppressing half the sacrament?
{139}
SECTION IV.
1. Early Church Organization Not Perpetuated.--We have
already stated in Part I of this work that the church organization
established by Messiah--consisting of apostles, prophets, seventies,
bishops, etc.--was designed to be perpetual. It is a singular fact,
however, that aside from filling up the vacancy in the quorum of
the twelve--occasioned by the fall of Judas Iscariot--there is no
account in any of the writings of the apostles or fathers of the first
centuries--on the eastern hemisphere[43]--of any attempt to perpetuate
the quorum of the twelve by filling up the vacancies occasioned by the
death of the original apostles. The same may also be said of the quorum
of the seventies.
2. The reason for this will doubtless be found in the fact that
in the very days of the apostles the great apostasy which was to end
eventually in the subversion of the Christian religion, had begun.
(See note 2, end of section.) And since "the mystery of iniquity"
had already begun its work in the days of the apostles, and men were
rapidly proving themselves unworthy of the church of Christ, the Lord
did not permit his servants to perpetuate these quorums of the higher
Priesthood.
3. Establishment of the Church by the Apostles.--Whenever in
their travels the apostles converted any considerable number of
persons, in a city or district, they organized them into a church, or,
speaking more precisely, into a branch of {140} the great universal
church of Christ, and appointed either a bishop or an elder to preside
over them. As long as the apostles lived they were regarded as the
presiding authority of the universal church, and were looked to for
counsel and instruction in all difficult matters that arose concerning
doctrine or discipline. Their decisions were accepted as final, and
well might it be so, since these men were guided in their counsels by
revelation[44] as well as by the wisdom which their large experience in
company with Jesus Christ had given them.
4. But when the apostles died, and no one succeeded to their
authority, the branches of the church were left separate and
independent organizations, united, it is true, in faith and charity,
but the visible, general presidency recognized in the apostles and
cheerfully submitted to by all sections of the church, ceased when
the apostles passed away, and each branch was left an independent
organization of itself.[45] There is no evidence that there was such a
thing as subordination among the churches when so left, or rank among
the bishops. Each church was a sort of independent commonwealth, of
which the bishop was president and a vassal to no other bishop.[46]
5. Manner of Electing Bishops.--The manner in which bishops
were first elected was for the apostles to nominate them, and then
for the whole church over which they were to preside to sustain them
by their vote. After the apostles had passed away then "other men of
repute" made the nominations {141} and the people sustained them as at
first.[47] The duties and powers of the bishops in the first and in
the greater part of the second century were limited to conducting the
public worship, administering the ordinances of the gospel, settling
difficulties which arose between brethren, attending in person the
sick and the poor. They also were made the custodians and managers of
the public fund. In all these duties they were assisted by the elders
[presbyters] and the deacons of the church. Yet neither the bishops
nor the elders, nor both of them together, seem to have had power to
ordain or determine anything without the approbation and consent of
the members of the church. The principle of common consent was closely
adhered to in the primitive church. (See note 3, end of section.)
6. Equality Among Bishops Changed.--This equality of rank among
the bishops, together with the simple form of church government,
described above, was soon changed. The bishops who lived in cities
either by their own labors or those of the elders associated with
them, raised up new churches in the adjacent villages and hamlets. The
bishops of these rural districts being nominated and ordained by the
bishops presiding in the city, very naturally, perhaps, felt themselves
under the protection and dependent upon the city bishops. This idea
continued to grow until these "bishops of the suburbs and the fields,"
were looked upon as a distinct order of officers, possessing a dignity
and authority above the elders, and yet subordinate {142} to the
bishops of the cities, who soon came to be designated as archbishops.
7. The Origin of Metropolitans.--Gradually and almost
imperceptibly the church in its government began to follow the civil
divisions of the Roman empire. The bishops of the metropolis of a civil
province, in time, came to be regarded as having a general supervision
of all the churches in that province, over the archbishops and
indirectly over the suburban bishops or suffragans, as they began to
be called, and finally, bishops merely. The bishops of these provinces
were soon designated as metropolitans.
8. The Rise and Influence of Councils.--Concurrent with these
changes arose the custom, first derived from the Greeks, of holding
provincial councils. The bishops living in a single province met in
council to confer upon matters of common interest to the churches of
the province. These provincial councils met at stated times of the
year, usually in the spring and autumn. At the first the attending
bishops looked upon themselves as merely the representatives of their
respective churches, without jurisdiction further than to discuss
and come to agreement on matters of common concern. But gradually
they usurped the power to order by decree where at first they were
accustomed to advise or entreat--so easy is it to change the language
of exhortation to that of command! Nor was it long ere the decrees of
these provincial councils were forced upon the respective churches as
laws to be implicitly obeyed. There was some resistance to this at
first from the lower orders of the clergy; but that resistance was
quickly overcome by the activity and ambition of the bishops, who were
only too glad to escape from the restraints which the doctrine of
"common consent"--a doctrine which made it necessary for the bishops
to submit any matter of importance to their respective churches for
the approbation of the people--imposed upon them. (See note 4, end of
section.)
{143} 9. Conduct of Lower Clergy.--As many changes occurred
among the lower orders of the clergy as among the bishops. The elders
and deacons became too proud to attend to the humble duties of their
offices and hence a number of other officers were added to the church,
while the elders and deacons spent much of their time in indolence and
pleasure.
10. Corruption of Church Officials.--To the evils of
contention for power and place, which had its origin in arrogance
and ambition--unbecoming those who profess to be followers and
servants of Jesus Christ--must be added the vices of dissipation and
voluptuousness. Many bishops, in the third century, affected the state
of princes, especially those who had charge of the more populous and
wealthy congregations; for they sat on thrones, surrounded by their
ministers and other signs of their power, and dazzled the eyes and the
minds of the populace with their splendid attire.[48]
11. Church Government Modeled on the Plan of the Civil
Government.--It was reserved for the fourth century to see the
church government more completely modeled on the plan of the civil
government of the Roman empire, to witness more pride and arrogance
in its rulers, and an increase of vices both in clergy and people.
Early in this century, it will be remembered, Constantine, the emperor
of Rome, avowed his conversion to Christianity, and as might have
been expected that fact produced great changes in the fortunes of the
church. It not only put an end to its persecutions but loaded its
bishops with new honors and enlarged powers.
12. In saying that the church government was modeled upon the
plan of the civil government we would not be understood as saying that
the first was a _fac simile_ of the second; there were some differences
between them, but the civil divisions of the empire suggested the
ecclesiastical divisions.
{144} 13. Under Constantine the Roman empire was divided into
four prefectures, containing thirteen dioceses, embracing one hundred
and sixteen provinces. Officers called praetorian prefects presided
over the four prefectures--exarchs over the dioceses and governors
over the provinces. The Bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch and
Alexandria having gained a pre-eminence over all other metropolitans
were made to correspond with the four prefectures by Constantine, and
assumed, before the close of the century, the title of patriarchs.
Next to the patriarchs stood the bishops, whose jurisdiction extended
over several provinces, corresponding to the civil exarchs,[49] though
the bishops of this dignity did not equal in number the civil exarchs.
Next came the metropolitan bishops, whose jurisdiction was limited
to a single province. They corresponded to the civil governors of
the provinces, whose authority was limited in like manner. After the
metropolitans came the arch-bishops,[50] and then the bishops. Some of
the latter were exempt from the jurisdiction of both metropolitans and
arch-bishops, and hence were called independent bishops.
14. Pre-Eminence of the Bishops of Rome.--The distinctions of
rank among the bishops of the Christian church first arose largely
through the opulence and civil importance of the respective cities
and provinces over which they presided--the membership of the church
and its wealth usually bearing a just proportion to the size and
civil importance of the city in {145} which it was located. It is not
surprisingg, therefore, that the metropolitans and patriarchs also
struggled for pre-eminence upon the same basis. That basis gave the
bishop of Rome great advantage; for, as stated by Gibbon, "the Roman
church was the greatest, the most numerous, and, in regard to the west,
the most ancient of all the Christian establishments, many of which had
received their religion from the pious labors of here missionaries."
The fact, too, that for so many ages Rome had been the capital of the
great empire led men naturally to give pre-eminence to the church
established there.
15. Another thing which went far to establish the supremacy of
the bishop of Rome was the tradition that Peter, the chief or "prince"
of the apostles, had founded that church; that he became its first
bishop; that the bishops succeeding him succeeded to his apostleship
and to whatever of pre-eminence he held over his fellow apostles; and
that pre-eminence, it is claimed, amounted to the right of presidency
over the universal church.
16. Objections to the Claims of the Bishop of Rome.--That Peter,
aided by Paul, did found the church at Rome there is little cause
to doubt. It is also true that Peter was the chief or president of
the apostles; that to him had been given the keys of the kingdom of
heaven.[51] But that he became the bishop of Rome, or that the bishops
of Rome succeeded to the apostleship and to that power which made him
the president of the universal church of Christ, we cannot allow.
17. Our first reason for saying that Peter was not bishop of
Rome is that the office of apostle and bishop are not identical. If
Peter presided at all over the church at Rome he did so by virtue of
his apostleship, not by becoming its bishop; but as his apostleship
would give him the right to act in minor offices of the church--on the
principle that the greater authority includes {146} the lesser--he may
have presided for a time over the church at Rome.
18. Our second reason is that according to the very best
authority on the subject, one Linus and not Peter was the first bishop
of Rome. Irenaeus writing in the second century, says:
The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul] then, upon founding
and erecting the church [at Rome], committed the office of
administering the church to Linus. Of this Linus, Paul speaks in
the epistle to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus [An-a-cle-tus],
and after him in the third place from the apostles, Clement
received the bishopric. [52]
From this it plainly appears that Peter and Paul organized a church at
Rome, and as in other cities they appointed a bishop to preside over
it. Peter no more became the bishop of Rome than he did of the church
at Jerusalem, or Paul of Antioch, Ephesus, or Corinth.
19. The bishop of Rome did not succeed to the apostleship of
Peter, much less to the pre-eminence which he held among the apostles;
and that for the very good reason that the office of bishop and that
of apostle, as remarked above, are not identical. It would require an
apostle to succeed an apostle, and as there is no account of an apostle
being ordained to succeed to Peter's office, we conclude he had no
successor. Here we might let the matter rest, but it will be proper
to notice the arguments which are made by those who contend that the
bishops of Rome are the true successors to the office and mission of
the Apostle Peter.
20. Scripture Basis of the Claims of the Bishop of Rome to
Pre-Eminence.--On one occasion Jesus said to his disciples, "Whom
say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered, * * * Thou art the Christ,
the Son of the living God." To this Jesus said: "Blessed art thou,
Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but
my Father which {147} is in heaven. And I say unto thee, That thou art
Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it." [53] He then gave to Peter the keys of
the kingdom of heaven--power to bind and loose on earth and in heaven.
The argument is that since Peter, some time before this, had been given
the name Cephas, which means a stone,[54] therefore when Jesus said,
"Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church," it is
claimed that he meant than on Peter he would build his church.[55]
21. That this is a clear misconception of the scripture is apparent. If
Messiah had meant to found the church on Peter, how unfortunate that he
did not say, Thou art Cephas, a stone, and upon _thee_ will I build my
church! etc. But he did not. He first assured Peter that the knowledge
he had received that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God,
was received by revelation from God--"And I say unto thee, That thou
art Peter, and upon this rock [principle] will I build my church,"
etc.; i.e., upon the principle of God revealing to men that Jesus was
the Christ[56]--on the principle of revelation.
22. Another passage quoted in support of the theory that the
apostles had successors in the bishops of Rome is found in the
following: Jesus after his resurrection said to his apostles:
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore
and teach all nations; * * * and lo I am with you always even unto
the end of the world. [57]
This is the argument--
The apostles themselves were only to live the ordinary term of
{148} man's life: therefore the commission of preaching and
ministering, together with the promise of divine assistance,
regards the successors of the apostles, no less than the apostles
themselves. This proves that there must have been an uninterrupted
series of successors of the apostles, in every age since their
time; that is to say, successors to their doctrine, to their
jurisdiction, to their orders, and to their mission. [58]
Against this argument we put that of the late Apostle Orson Pratt:
We do not admit that the promise--"Lo, I am with you always, even
unto the end of the world," had any reference to any persons
whatever only the eleven disciples mentioned. * * * * They were the
only persons whom he [Jesus] addressed and to whom he made this
great promise. "But," says Dr. Milner, "they were only to live
the ordinary term of man's life," and consequently he draws the
conclusion that the promise could not be fulfilled to them without
successors. According to this curious inference of the learned
bishop, the Lord must have forsaken the eleven disciples as soon
as they died; for if he admit that Jesus continued with them after
the period of the death of their mortal bodies, and that he will
continue with them even unto the end of the world, then what need
would there be for successors in order that the promise might be
fulfilled? Prove that Jesus has not been with the eleven apostles
from the time of their death until the present time, and that he
will not be with them even unto the end of the world, and after you
have proved this, you will prove that Jesus has falsified his word;
for to be with the successors of the apostles is not to be with
them. But whether the apostles have successors or not, Jesus will
always be with them, and will bring them with him when he shall
appear in his glory, and they shall sit upon thrones and judge the
house of Israel during the great Millennium, while Jesus will not
only be with them, but will reign with them even unto the end of
the world.[59]
23. Those who believe that the church was founded on Peter;
{149}that he became the bishop of Rome; that those who succeeded
to that bishopric became the heir to his apostleship and right of
presidency over the universal church, are as weak in their arguments as
they are wrong in their conceptions of the foundation of the church and
the right of succession in the priesthood.
24. Primacy of the Bishops of Rome Allowed by the Fathers.--It
cannot be denied that the early fathers of the Christian church
conceded to the bishops of Rome a certain "primacy of order and
association;" but they did not concede to them any such authority
as the popes wielded from the fifth and sixth centuries onward. The
assumption of autocratic powers was resisted in the third century
by Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, who contended for the equality and
independence of all bishops. (See note 5, end of section.)
25. Opposition of the Bishops of Constantinople.--After Cyprian
the Roman pontiffs found their chief opponents in the bishops of
Constantinople. That city was made the capital of the empire early in
the fourth century; and became a "New Rome." The importance given to
the city by this act, and the lavish embellishments and increase of
population which followed it, conferred great dignity on the patriarch
appointed to preside there; and the council of Constantinople held A.
D. 381, conferred upon him the second place among the great bishops of
the world--the bishop of Rome being first. The council of Chalcedon,
held in the next century [A. D. 451], decreed that the bishop of "New
Rome" ought to be equal in power and authority with the bishop of Rome,
assigning as a reason that the cities where they resided were equal in
rank and dignity.
26. It would appear that second place ill-suited the ambitious
prelates of "New Rome," and in this century began that struggle for
supremacy between the bishops of the ancient and the new capital of the
empire which ended finally in the division of the church. The strife
raged with varying fortunes; but in the main {150} the Roman pontiffs
were most successful. Still in the last half of the sixth century
the bishop of Constantinople, John, called the Faster--on account of
the austerity of his life--assumed the title of universal bishop and
continued to hold it in spite of all the efforts and threats of the
Roman prelates. Early in the seventh century the emperor, Phocas, being
displeased with Cyriacus, the bishop of Constantinople, he divested
him of the title of universal bishop and conferred it upon the Roman
pontiff, Boniface III. "After Phocas' death the prelate of the east
re-assumed the title. The two bishops each preserved it, and with
equal ambition strove for the pre-eminence." [60] Instead of dwelling
together as brethren and working for the spread of truth, they spent
their time in vain disputes about the extent of their respective
jurisdictions and wasted their revenues and strength in conquests and
reprisals of each other's ecclesiastical provinces.
27. The Ascendency of the Roman Pontiffs.--Gradually, however,
the Roman pontiffs surpassed their eastern competitors in the struggle
for power. The first reason for this will be found in the superior
activity and that restless energy of the western people. While the east
was at a standstill in its missionary enterprises, at this period,
the west was using its best endeavors to extend the faith among the
barbarous peoples of Germany and Briton; and everywhere they went they
taught submission to the decrees of the Roman pontiff. Not only did
Rome send missionaries to the barbarians, but the barbarians came to
Rome. They came with arms in their hands, and as conquerors, it is
true, and in the closing years of the fifth century obtained an easy
victory over the western division of imperial Rome. But if imperial
Rome was vanquished, there rose above its ruins and above the kingdoms
founded upon them by the all-conquering barbarians, papal Rome, in
majesty no {151} less splendid than imperial Rome in her palmiest days;
and in the course of time, the victorious barbarians bowed in as humble
submission to the wand of the popes as their ancestors had to the
eagle-mounted standards of the emperors.
28. Another reason why the Roman pontiff outstripped his
eastern rival in the struggle for supremacy will be found in the
superstitious reverence in which the barbarous nations that fell
under the influence of Roman missionaries were accustomed to hold
their priests. In the days of paganism in Gaul (France) and Germany
the priests reigned over both people and magistrates, controlling
absolutely the jurisdiction of the latter. The proselytes to the
Christian faith among them, readily transferred that devout obedience
which they had given to pagan priests, to the Christian bishops. The
latter were not slow in appropriating to themselves all the honors
the rude barbarians had before paid to their pagan priests, while
the extraordinary reverence--which amounted to worship, according to
some authorities--they bestowed upon their chief priest, was readily
transferred to the pope. (See note 6, end of section.)
29. The Great Division of the Church in the Ninth Century.--The
jealousy of the bishops of Rome and Constantinople finally ended in
a division of the church, which remains to this day. It occurred
in this manner: About the middle of the ninth century the emperor
of the east--Michael--removed Ignatius [Ig-na-shi-us], bishop of
Constantinople--whom he accused of treason--and set up one Photius
[Fo-shi-us] in his place. Ignatius appealed to the bishop of Rome,
Nicolaus I. Nicolaus [Nik-o-lus] called a council, which decided that
the election of Photius was irregular and unlawful, and pronounced
that he, with all his adherents, was unworthy of Christian communion.
Instead of being humbled by this decree, and much less frightened at
it, Photius convened a council, and in turn excommunicated the bishop
of Rome.
30. To follow the controversies in respect to religion which
{152} followed this action, and the contests which arose about the
jurisdiction over certain ecclesiastical provinces, to note the
criminations and recriminations, the excommunications and counter
excommunications would be not only a dreary task but one which the
limits of this work preclude. Let it be sufficient to say that the
breach made in the church in the middle of the ninth century, and which
had its origin in the mutual jealousies of the bishops of Rome and
Constantinople, rather than in the wrong done to the deposed Ignatius,
or doctrinal difference which afterwards arose--continued to widen and
has proven to be a chasm which up to the present it has been impossible
to bridge.
31. Means by Which Roman Pontiffs Gained Ascendency.--The popes
of Rome, however, easily outstripped the prelates of Constantinople in
wealth, in pride, in power, in the magnificence of their courts, in
the veneration paid them by their subjects, in the extent of territory
they brought under their jurisdiction, in the influence wielded in the
affairs of the world. For by encouraging appeals to themselves; by
assuming the care of all the churches, as if it were a part of their
official duty; by appointing vicars in churches, over which they had no
claims to jurisdiction; by assuming to be judges where they should have
only been mediators; by requiring accounts to be sent to them of the
affairs of foreign churches; by imposing the rites and usages of their
own church upon all others, as being of apostolic origin; by insisting
that their elevation was due to the pre-eminence of the Apostle
Peter--whose successor they claimed to be; by maintaining that their
fancied prerogatives belonged to them by divine right; by threatening
with excommunication all who would not submit to their decrees; [61] by
accepting the homage which the barbarians anciently bestowed upon their
pagan priests; [62] by assuming {153} the temporal power of princes,
and obtaining large grants of lands from kings and emperors [63] (see
note 7, end of section)--by these means was that splendid though
corrupt power established, before which monarchs trembled, and which
for ages ruled the destinies of Europe.
32. Rise of the Temporal Power of the Pope.--The Roman pontiffs,
not satisfied with claiming to hold the keys of heaven, determined
through the prestige which this claim gave them to rule the earth.
33. The popes were at first dependent for their election upon the
suffrages of the clergy and people of Rome. The election after the
days of Constantine had also to receive the approval of the emperor.
But in course of time all this was changed. The popes succeeded at
last in conferring the privilege of electing a successor to the chair
of St. Peter upon the clergy alone; and finally lodged that power in
the college of cardinals.[64] The next step was to render the election
independent of the sanction of the emperors. This, too, was finally
accomplished. But no sooner was the church thus made independent of
kings and emperors than the former began to dominate the latter, whose
power was weakness in comparison with that of the popes.
34. They assumed the right not only to excommunicate and
anathematize kings, but to free their subjects from their allegiance,
and thus encourage rebellions and regicides. They assumed the power to
inflict temporal punishments for violations of God's laws; and then
claimed the power to remit those punishments {154} for a consideration
paid into the sacred treasury.[65] Claiming to be the true successors
of the humble fisherman of Galilee--St. Peter--and the vicars of the
still more humble Nazarene, their crowns, and thrones and courts as
far outshone in splendid worldly grandeur those of kings and emperors,
as their pride and arrogance surpassed the pomp and vain glory of the
princes of this world; until, at last, the pope exalted himself "above
all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth
in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." [66] (See notes
9 and 10, end of section.)
NOTES.
1. Apostasy in the Days of the Apostles.--The great apostasy of
the Christian church commenced in the first century, while there were
yet inspired apostles and prophets in their midst; hence Paul, just
previous to his martyrdom, enumerates a great number who had "made
shipwreck of their faith," and "turned aside unto vain jangling;"
teaching "that the resurrection was already past;" giving "heed to
fables and endless genealogies," "doubting about questions and strifes
of words whereof came envyings, railings, evil surmisings, perverse
disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth,
supposing the gain is godliness." This apostasy had become so general
that Paul declares to Timothy, "that all they which are in Asia be
turned away from me;" and again he says "at my first answer, no man
stood with me, but all men forsook me;" he further says {155} that
"there are many unruly, and vain talkers, deceivers, teaching things
which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake." These apostates,
no doubt, pretended to be very righteous; "for," says the apostle,
"they profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being
abominable and disobedient and unto every good work reprobate."--Orson
Pratt.
2. Early Decline of the Church.--About the year of our Lord
sixty, he [James] wrote his Catholic epistle. * * * By the practical
turn of his doctrine, by his discanting on the vices of the tongue,
of partiality to the rich, and of contemptuous treatment of the poor
in Christian assemblies, and by his direction against vain swearing,
it is but too evident that the church had considerably declined from
its original purity and simplicity; and that the craft of Satan, aided
ever by human depravity, was wearing out apace the precious fruits of
that effusion of the Spirit, which has been described [alluding to the
effusion on the day of Pentecost.]--Milner, Vol. I, page 34.
3. Powers and Duties of Bishops--First and Second Century.--We
may define in a few words the narrow limits of their [the bishops]
original jurisdiction, which was chiefly of a spiritual, though in some
instances of a temporal nature. It consisted in the administration
of the sacraments and discipline of the church, the superintendency
of religious ceremonies which imperceptibly increase in number and
variety, the consecration of ecclesiastical ministers to whom the
bishops assigned their respective functions, the management of the
public fund, and the determination of all such differences as the
faithful were unwilling to expose before the tribunal of an idolatrous
judge. These powers, during a short period, were exercised according
to the advice of the presbyteral college [the Elders of the church],
and with the consent and approbation of the assembly of Christians. The
primitive bishops were considered only as the first of their equals,
and the honorable servants of a free people. Whenever the Episcopal
chair became vacant by death, a new president was chosen among the
presbyters [elders] by the suffrage of the whole congregation, every
member of which supposed himself invested with a sacred and sacerdotal
character.--Gibbon (Decline and Fall, ch. xv).
4. Usurpation of Provincial Councils.--As the legislative
authority of the particular churches was insensibly superseded by the
use of councils, the bishops obtained by their alliance a much larger
share of executive and arbitrary power; and as soon as they were
connected by a sense of their common interest, they were enabled to
attack, with united vigor, the original rights of their clergy [the
elders and deacons] and people. The prelates of the third century
imperceptibly changed the language of exhortation into that of command,
scattered the seeds of future usurpations, and supplied, by scripture
allegories {156} and declamatory rhetoric, their deficiency of force
and reason. They exalted the unity and power of the church as it was
represented in the episcopal office, of which every bishop enjoyed an
equal and undivided portion.--Gibbon (Decline and Fall, ch. xv).
5. Cyprian's Opposition to the Bishop of Rome.--Rome experienced
from the nations of Asia and Africa a more vigorous resistance to her
spiritual than she had formerly done to her temporal dominion. The
patriotic Cyprian, who ruled with the most absolute sway the church of
Carthage and the provincial synods, opposed with resolution and success
the ambition of the Roman pontiff, artfully connected his own cause
with that of the eastern bishops, and, like Hannibal, sought out new
allies in the heart of Asia. If this punic war was carried on without
any effusion of blood, it was owing much less to the moderation than to
the weakness of the contending prelates. Invectives and excommunication
were then the only weapons; and these, during the progress of the
whole controversy, they hurled against each other with equal fury and
devotion.--Gibbon (Decline and Fall, Vol. I, ch. xv).
6. Reverence of the Barbarians for the Popes.--That these
pagan nations had been accustomed to treat their idolatrous priests
with extraordinary reverence is a fact well known. When they became
Christians they supposed they must show the same reverence to the
Christian priests. Of course they honored their bishops and clergy,
as they had before honored their druids; and this reverence disposed
them to bear patiently their vices. Every druid was accounted a very
great character, and was feared by every one; but the chief druid
was actually worshiped. When these people became Christians, they
supposed that the bishop of Rome was such a chief druid; and that the
must be honored accordingly. And this was one cause why the Roman
pontiff obtained in process of time such an ascendency in the western
countries. The patriarch of Constantinople rose indeed to a great
elevation; but he never attained the high rank and authority of the
Roman patriarch. The reason was that the people of the east had not the
same ideas of the dignity of a chief priest as the people of the west
had.--Schlegel.
7. Grant of the Roman Dukedom to the Popes.--Charles
[Charlemagne], being made emperor and sovereign of Rome and its
territory, reserved indeed to himself, the supreme power, and the
prerogatives of sovereignty; but the beneficial dominion, as it is
called, and subordinate authority over the city and its territory, he
seems to have conferred on the Romish church. This plan was undoubtedly
suggested to him by the Roman pontiff; who persuaded the emperor,
perhaps by showing him some ancient though forged papers and documents,
that Constantine the Great (to whose place and authority {157} Charles
now succeeded) when he removed the seat of empire to Constantinople,
committed the old seat of empire, Rome and the adjacent territories
or Roman dukedom, to the possession and government of the church,
reserving, however, his imperial prerogatives over it; and that, from
this arrangement and ordinance of Constantine, Charles could not
depart, without incurring the wrath of God and St. Peter.--Mosheim.
8. Copy of an Indulgence.--May our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy
on thee, N. N., and absolve thee by the merits of his passion! And I
in virtue of the apostolic power that has been confided in me, absolve
thee from all ecclesiastical censures, judgments, and penalties which
thou mayst have incurred; moreover, from all excesses, sins and crimes
that thou mayst have committed, however great and enormous they may be,
and from whatsoever cause, were they even reserved for our most holy
father the pope and for the apostolic see. I blot out all the stains
of inability and all marks of infamy that thou mayst have drawn upon
thyself on this occasion. I remit the penalties that thou shouldst
have endured in purgatory. I restore thee anew to participation in the
sacraments of the church. I incorporate thee afresh in the communion of
saints, and re-establish thee in the purity and innocence which thou
hadst at thy baptism. So that in the hour of death, the gate by which
sinners enter the place of torments and punishments will be closed
against thee, and, on the contrary, the gate leading to the paradise of
joy shall be open. And if thou shouldst not die for long years, this
grace shall remain unalterable until thy last hour shall arrive. In
the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen. (Friar John Tetzel,
Commissary, has signed this with his own hand)--D'Aubugne's Hist.
Ref., book III, ch. i.
9. The Absolute Power of the Popes (13th century).--All who had
any share in the government of the church, were alike sovereign lords;
at least in their feelings and dispositions they stiffly maintained
with violence and threats, with both wiles and weapons, those
fundamental principles of the popish canon law, that the Roman pontiff
is the sovereign lord of the whole world, and that all other rulers in
church and state have so much power and authority as he sees fit to
allow them to have. Resting on this eternal principle as they conceive
it to be, the pontiffs arrogate to themselves the absolute power, not
only of conferring sacred offices or benefices as they are called, but
also of giving away empires, and of divesting kings and princes of
their crowns and authority. The more intelligent indeed, for the most
part considered [general] councils as superior to the pontiffs; and
such of the kings as were not blinded by superstition, restrained the
pontiffs from intermeddling with worldly or civil affairs, bid them be
contented with the regulation of things sacred, maintained {158} their
power to the utmost of their ability and even claimed for themselves
supremacy over the church in their respective territories. But they had
to do these things cautiously, if they would not learn by experience
that the pontiffs had very long arms.--Mosheim.
10. Character of Language Employed by the Popes Against Kings
(8th century).--[As a sample of the arrogant language employed by the
popes toward kings and emperors, we present the following taken from
an epistle of Pope Gregory III, addressed to the eastern emperor Leo
III. Leo at the time was opposing with commendable zeal the use of
images in divine worship]: "Because you are unlearned and ignorant,
we are obliged to write to you rude discourses, but full of sense and
the word of God. We conjure you to quit your pride, and hear us with
humility. You say that we adore stones, walls and boards. It is not so,
my lord; but those symbols make us recollect the persons whose names
they bear, and exalt our grovelling minds. We do not look upon them as
gods; but if it be the image of Jesus, we say, 'Lord help us.' If it be
his mother, we say, 'pray to your Son to save us.' If it be a martyr,
we say, 'St. Stephen, pray for us.' We might as having the power of St.
Peter, pronounce punishments against you, but as you have pronounced
the curse upon yourself, let it stick to you. You write to us to
assemble a general council; of which there is no need. Do you cease to
persecute images, and all will be quiet. We fear not your threats; for
if we go a league from Rome toward Campania, we are secure."--Certainly
this is the language of anti-Christ supporting idolatry by pretenses to
infallibility, and despising both civil magistrates and ecclesiastical
councils.--Milner (Church History, Vol. III, Page 159).
REVIEW.
1. Was the early church organization perpetuated?
2. What reasons can you assign for the failure to do so?
3. What can you say of the early apostasy in the church? (Notes 1, 2).
4. What course was pursued by the apostles in respect to organizing
churches?
5. In what light were the apostles regarded by the saints?
6. In what condition were the churches left at the death of the
apostles?
7. Was there such a thing as subordination among the churches, or rank
among the bishops?
8. What was the manner of electing bishops?
{159} 9. What was the nature of the bishop's duties in the early
churches? (Note 3).
10. Describe the growth of iniquity among the bishops.
11. Give an account of the origin of metropolitan bishops.
12. Describe the rise and influence of councils. (Note 4).
13. What was the conduct of the lower officials in the church?
14. What was the moral status of the church officials in the 2nd and
3rd centuries?
15. Tell what important change was made in the form of church
government in the 4th century?
16. Describe the outlines of Roman government under Constantine.
17. Tell how the church government was made somewhat to correspond with
it.
18. What circumstances led to the pre-eminence of the bishop of Rome?
19. What reasons can be urged against the idea that the bishop of
Rome succeeded to the apostleship of Peter and the presidency of the
universal church?
20. What is the scriptural basis of the claims of the bishops of Rome
to pre-eminence?
21. Refute the idea that Jesus built his church upon Peter.
22. Refute the argument that the bishops of Rome must have succeeded
to the apostleship of Peter, because Jesus promised to be with the
apostles unto the end of the world.
23. To what extent did the early Christian fathers admit a primacy to
the bishops of Rome?
24. State the controversy which arose between the bishop of Rome and
the bishop of Constantinople.
25. Through what cause did the Roman pontiffs finally force an
acknowledgment of their independency? (Note 6).
26. What led to the great division of the church in the 9th century?
27. By what means did the Roman pontiffs outstrip their eastern rivals?
(Note 7).
28. What of the sale of indulgences? (Note).
29. What was the climax of papal power?
{160}
SECTION V.
1. Simplicity of Public Worship Changed.--The public worship of
the primitive Christians, as we have seen,[67] was very simple, but its
simplicity was soon corrupted. The bishops and other public teachers in
the third century, framed their discourses and exhortations according
to the rules of Grecian eloquence; "and were better adapted," says a
learned writer,[68] "to call forth the admiration of the rude multitude
who love display, than to amend the heart. And that no folly and no
senseless custom might be omitted in their public assemblies, the
people were allowed to applaud their orators, as had been practiced
in the forums and theaters; nay, they were instructed to applaud the
preachers."
2. This was a wide departure from that spirit of meekness
and humility enjoined by Messiah upon his ministers. And when to
these customs was added the splendid vestments of the clergy, the
magnificence of the temples, with all the pageantry of altars,
surrounded with burning tapers, clouds of incense, beautiful images,
the chanting of choirs, processions and other mummeries without
number--one sees but little left of that simple worship instituted by
the Messiah and his apostles. (See note 1, end of section).
3. About the third century incense began to be used. The
Christians of the first and second centuries abhorred the use
of incense in public worship, as being a part of the worship of
idols.[69] It first became a custom to use it at funerals, against
offensive smells; then in public worship, to disguise the bad air
{161} of crowded assemblies; then at the consecration of bishops
and magistrates, and by these steps at last degenerated into a
superstitious rite.
4. In the fourth century matters became still worse. "The public
supplications by which the pagans were accustomed to appease their
gods, were borrowed from them, and were celebrated in many places with
great pomp. To the temples, to water consecrated in due form, and
the images of holy men, the same efficacy was ascribed to the pagan
temples, statues and lustrations before the advent of Christ." [70]
5. The Worship of Martyrs.--In the third century also arose the
worship of martyrs. It is true that worship or adoration was relative,
and a distinction was made between the worship of martyrs and the
worship paid to God; but by degrees the worship of the martyrs was
made to conform with that which the pagans had in former times paid to
their gods.[71] This was done out of indiscreet eagerness to allure the
pagans to embrace Christianity.[72] (See note 2, end of section).
6. Decline of Spiritual Gifts.--While pagan ceremonies and rites
were increasing in the church, the gifts and graces characteristic of
apostolic times, seemed to have gradually departed from it. Protestant
writers insist that the age of miracles closed with the fourth or fifth
century, and that after that the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost
must not be looked for. Catholic writers, on the other hand, insist
that the power to perform miracles has always continued in the church;
yet those spiritual manifestations which they describe after the fourth
and fifth centuries savor of invention on the part of the priests and
childish credulity on the part of the people; or else what is claimed
to be miraculous falls far short of the power and dignity of those
spiritual manifestations which the primitive church was wont to witness.
{162} 7. The virtues and prodigies ascribed to the bones and
other relics of the martyrs and saints are puerile in comparison with
the healings, by the anointing with oil and the laying on of hands,
speaking in tongues, interpretations, prophecies, revelations, casting
out devils in the name of Jesus Christ; to say nothing of the gifts of
faith, wisdom, knowledge, discernment of spirits, etc.,--common in the
church in the days of the days of the apostles.[73]
8. Nor is there anything in the scriptures or in reason that
would lead one to believe that they were to be discontinued. Still this
plea is made by modern Christians--explaining the absence of these
spiritual powers among them--that the extraordinary gifts of the Holy
Ghost were only intended to accompany the proclamation of the gospel
during the first few centuries until the church was able to make its
way without them, and then they were to be done away. It is sufficient
to remark upon this that it is assumption pure and simple, and stands
without warrant either of scripture or right reason; and proves that
men had so far changed the religion of Jesus Christ that it became a
form of godliness without the power thereof. (See notes 3 and 4, end of
section).
9. Causes and Manner of Excommunications.--It appears to have
been the custom of the apostles in the case of members of the church
grievously transgressing the moral law of the gospel to require
repentance and confession before the church; and in the event of a
stubborn adherence to sin the offender was excommunicated, that is, he
was excluded from the communion of the church and the fellowship of the
saints. For the crimes of murder, idolatry and adultery, some of the
churches excommunicated those guilty of them forever; in other churches
they were received back, but only after long and painful probation.
10. The manner in which excommunication was performed {163} in
apostolic times is not clear, but there is every reason to believe the
process was very simple. In the course of time, however, this simple
order of excommunication was changed, by being burdened with many rites
and ceremonies borrowed from pagan sources.[74] It was not enough
that the fellowship of the saints be withdrawn from the offender and
he left to the mercy of God, or the buffetings of Satan, according
as he was worthy of the one or the other; but the church must load
him down with anathemas too terrible to contemplate. The power of
excommunication, too, eventually, passed from the body of the church
into the hands of the bishops, and finally into those of the pope. At
first excommunication meant the loss of the fellowship of the saints,
and such other punishments as God himself might see fit to inflict; the
church leaving the Lord to be the minister of his own vengeance. But
gradually it came to mean in some instances banishment from home and
country, the confiscation of property, the loss not only of religious
fellowship with the saints, but the loss of civil rights; and the
rights of Christian burial. In the case of a monarch excommunication
absolved his subjects from their allegiance; and in the case of a
subject, it robbed him of the protection of his sovereign. No anathema
was so terrible but it was pronounced against the excommunicated, until
the sweet mercies of God were overshadowed by the black pall of man's
inhumanity.
11. Admixture of Pagan Philosophy with the Christian
Religion.--The thing which contributed most to the subversion of
the Christian religion was the employment of pagan philosophy to
explain Christian doctrine. This brought about an admixture of these
two discordant elements that {164} while it failed to purge pagan
philosophy of its errors, corrupted the doctrines of Christ and laid
the foundations for those false notions in respect of God which obtain
in the so-called Christian world unto this day.
12. Christian Doctrine Respecting God.--The scriptural
doctrine in regard to God--and of course, that is the true Christian
doctrine--is this: There is a being of infinite goodness and power, in
form like man--for man was created in his image[75]--who, with his Son,
Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, constitute the great creative, and
governing power or grand Presidency of the heavens and the earth. As
persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are separate and distinct, yet
one in attributes, one in purpose; the mind of one being the mind of
the others.
13. That they are distinct and separate as persons was plainly
manifested at the baptism of Jesus. On that occasion, as Jesus came
up out of the water, John saw the Holy Ghost descend upon him, and at
the same time the voice of the Father was heard speaking from heaven,
saying: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." [76]
Here we have the persons of the Godhead present but distinct from
each other. Stephen, the martyr, in the presence of the angry crowd
which took his life, saw the heavens open and "Jesus standing on
the right hand of God." [77] Here, too, the Father and Son are seen
and, according to the testimony of the holy man, they are distinct
personalities.
14. Yet Jesus said to the Jews: "I and my Father are one. * * *
Believe that the Father is in me and I in him." [78] But this oneness
cannot have reference to the persons of the Father and of the Son,
which we have seen are distinct. Their oneness, therefore, must consist
in a unity of attributes, {165} purposes, glory, power. Jesus in his
great prayer just previous to his betrayal, said, in praying for his
disciples: "Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou
hast given me, that they may be one. * * * That they all may be one; as
thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in
us." [79] Clearly it is not the uniting of the persons of his disciples
into one person or body that Jesus prayed for; but he would have them
of one mind and one spirit, as he and the Father are one. So also he
had no wish that the person of one of his disciples should be crowded
into that of another, and so on until they all became one person or
body--but "as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee." That is, while
remaining distinct as persons, Messiah would have the mind or Spirit of
God in his disciples as it was in him, and as his was in the Father,
that God might be all in all--the Father to be honored as the head and
worshiped in the name of the Son; and the Holy Ghost to be revered as
the witness and messenger of both the Father and the Son[80]--the bond
of union between God and men, as it is between the Father and the Son;
in one word to be God in man.
15. Each of these persons in scripture is called God; and taken
together they are God, or constitute the grand Presidency of heaven and
earth, and as such are one, as well as in attributes. (See note 5, end
of section).
16. The spirit of the Son had an existence with the Father before
he was born in the flesh; [81] and indeed it was by him, and through
him--under the direction of the Father--that the worlds were made; [82]
"and without him was not anything made that was made." [83]
17. Such is the simple doctrine of the Godhead taught to the
primitive Saints by the apostles. It was implicitly believed as God's
revelation to them upon the subject, and they were {166} content to
allow the revelation to excite their reverence without arousing their
curiosity to the point where men of finite minds attempt to grasp the
infinite, or circumscribe God in their understandings. In a short time,
however, a change came, and men sought to explain the revelation that
God had given of himself by the vain babblings of pagan science; and
that led not only to much contention within the church, but to the
adoption in the Christian creed of erroneous ideas in respect of Deity.
18. Gnostic and "New Platonic" Philosophy.--In order to give
a clear explanation of this matter, it will be necessary to invite
the attention of the student to Gnosticism and the Eclectic or "New
Platonic" philosophy which arose in the early Christian centuries.
First, then, as to Gnosticism. The Gnostics taught there existed from
eternity a Being that embodied within himself all the virtues; a Being
who is the purest light and is diffused throughout boundless space,
which they called Pleroma. This Being, after dwelling alone and in
absolute repose for an infinite period, by an operation purely mental,
or by acting upon himself, produced two spirits[84] of different
sexes. By the marriage of these two spirits others of similar nature
were produced, who, in their turn, produced others. Thus a celestial
family was formed in the pleroma. These emanations from Deity, whether
directly or from those spirits first begotten by Deity acting upon
himself, were called Aeons, a term which was doubtless employed
to signify their eternal duration, and perhaps the mode of their
production.
19. Beyond this pleroma where God and his family dwelt, existed
a rude and unformed mass of matter, heaving itself continually in wild
commotion.[85] This mass of the Aeons, wandering beyond the pleroma,
discovered and reduced to order {167} and beauty and then peopled it
with human beings and with animals of different species. This builder
of the world the Gnostics called the Demiurge [Dem-i-urge].[86] Though
possessed of many shining qualities, the Demiurge was by nature
arrogant and domineering, hence he claims absolute authority over the
new world to the exclusion altogether of the authority of the supreme
God, and requires mankind to pay divine honors exclusively to him.
20. Man, according to the Gnostic philosophy, is composed of a
terrestial, and therefore a vicious body; and of a celestial spirit,
which in some sense is a particle of the Deity himself. The spirit is
oppressed by the body, which is supposed to be the seat of all the
lusts and other evils that flesh is heir to, and by the spirit of man
is drawn away from the knowledge and worship of the true God, and led
to pay reverence to the Demiurge and his associates. From this wretched
bondage of evil God labors to rescue his offspring. But the Demiurge
and his associates, eager to retain their power, resist the divine
purpose and labor to efface all knowledge of the supreme Deity. The
philosophy maintained, however, that God would ultimately prevail;
and having restored to liberty most of the spirits now imprisoned in
bodies, he will dissolve the fabric of the world. Then the primitive
tranquility will return, and God will reign with the redeemed spirits
in perfect happiness to all eternity.[87]
21. When the followers of this philosophy became converted to
Christianity, they looked upon Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost as the
latest Aeons or emanations from the Deity, sent forth to emancipate men
from the tyranny of matter by {168} revealing to them the true God;
to fit them, though perfect knowledge to enter the sacred pleroma. In
connection with this, however, some of these Christian Gnostics held
that Jesus had no body at all, but was an unsubstantial phantom that
constantly deceived the senses of those who thought they associated
with him. Others of them said there doubtless was a man called Jesus
born of human parents, upon whom one of the Aeons, called Christ,
descended at his baptism, having quitted the pleroma for that purpose;
but who, previous to the crucifixion of the man Jesus, withdrew from
him and returned to the Deity. [See note 7, end of section.]
22. The Two Modes of Life to which Gnosticism led.--The Gnostic
philosophy led to two widely different methods of life; one extremely
ascetic and the other as extremely profligate. Gnostics believed matter
to be utterly malignant, the source of all evil, therefore it was
recommended by one party that the body should be weakened by fastings
and the practice of other austerities, that the spirit might enjoy the
greater liberty and be better able to contemplate heavenly things. The
other party, on the contrary, maintained that men could safely indulge
all their appetites and lustful desires, and that there was no moral
difference in human actions. One leader of this persuasion--Carpocrates
of Alexandria, who flourished in the second century--not only gave his
disciples license to sin, but imposed on them the necessity of sinning,
by teaching them the way to eternal salvation was open to those souls
only which committed all kinds of enormity and wickedness. Such were
the errors that grew out of Gnosticism, and which contributed to the
corruption of the gospel soon after it was founded by the preaching of
the apostles.
23. The New Platonic Philosophy.--The Eclectic or "New Platonic"
philosophy which came into existence in the early Christian centuries,
was compounded from all the systems which had preceded it, though
following Plato more closely than {169} any other teacher, for which
reason its disciples assumed the name of New Platonics. The founders
of this philosophy professed simply to follow truth, gathering up
whatever was accordant with it, regardless of its source, or in what
school it was taught--hence the name eclectic. Still the teachings
of Plato formed the basis of their doctrines, and they embraced most
of his dogmas concerning God, the human soul and the universe. We
shall therefore learn the fundamental principles of the Eclectics by
considering what the Athenian sage taught on these subjects.
24. Plato held that God and matter existed from all
eternity--that they were co-eternal. Before the creation of the
world matter had in itself a principle of motion, but without end
or laws. This principle of motion Plato called the immortal soul
of the universe. God wished to give form to this mass of eternal
matter, regulate its motion, subject it to some end and to certain
laws. Everything which exists in heaven or in earth, except Deity
and unorganized matter, according to Plato's philosophy, had a
beginning--there was a time when it did not exist; but there never
was a time when the idea, that is, the form or plan of the thing, did
not exist in the mind of Deity. This idea or intelligence existing
with God from all eternity, is what Plato called the Logos--the word
or intelligence of Deity. Many in the age of which we write saw in
these doctrines a threefold expression of the divine nature--viz.,
the First Cause, the Reason or Logos, and the Spirit of the Universe;
while others saw in these three principles three Gods, united with each
other by a mysterious and ineffable generation; in which the Logos is
regarded in the character of the Son of an Eternal Father, and the
creator and governor of the work.[88]
25. Plato's Logos, John's Word Considered Identical.--In the
introduction of St. John's gospel, commencing--"In {170} the beginning
was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"--in
this Word, which the Apostle in another verse of his opening chapter
declares was "made flesh and dwelt among men,"--plainly alluding to
the pre-existence and birth of Messiah--the New Platonics saw the
incarnation of the Logos of Plato, and according to the fashion of the
times attempted to harmonize the revelations of God with the philosophy
of men. (See note 8, end of section).
26. The Rank of the Logos in the Trinity.--It was trying to
harmonize the revelations of God with these systems of philosophy which
created the agitation in respect to the rank of the Logos, or Son of
God, in the divine trinity; and the nature of the Trinity itself--that
is, whether the three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are
distinct and separate though of the same substance, or merely the same
substance under different aspects.
27. The Orthodox View.--The view held to be orthodox was that in
God there are three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit; each really
distinct yet so united as to constitute but one personal God--of the
same substance, and equal as to their eternity, power, and glory and
all other perfections.
28. Sabellian Theory.--On one side of this orthodox theory stood
the doctrine of Sabellius [Sa-bel-i-us], who held that there was but
one divine person in the Godhead, and that the Father, Son and Holy
Spirit were but different aspects of the same God, and that the Trinity
was one of names, merely, not of distinct persons.[89] The Logos, in hi
theory, is an attribute {171} of Deity rather than a person; and its
incarnation is reduced to an energy or inspiration of the Divine wisdom
which filled the soul and directed all the actions of the man Jesus.
29. The Arian Theory.--On the other side of the orthodox line
stood the theory of Arius [A-ri-us], who while he maintained a real
distinction in the persons of the Divine Trinity, taught that the
Son was created out of nothing by the will of the Father; and though
the longest astronomical periods would not measure the time of his
duration, yet there had been a time when he was not. Upon the Son
thus created the Father bestowed great glory, yet he shone only by a
reflected light, and governed the universe only in obedience to the
will of the Father; in other words, the Son was subordinate to the
Father, unequal as to eternity, power and glory.
30. The Nicene Council.--It was to still the rising commotion
which arose in the church through the violent discussion of these
several theories that the Emperor Constantine assembled the Council
of Nice [Nes]. A. D. 325. In that council the theories of Arius were
condemned and the orthodox creed stated thus:
We believe in one God, the Father, Almighty, the maker of all
things visible and invisible; and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the
Son of God, begotten of the Father, only begotten, (that is) of
the substance of the Father; God of God, Light of Light; Very God
of Very God; begotten not made; of the same substance with the
Father, by whom all things were made, that are in heaven and that
are in earth: who for us men, and for our salvation, descended and
was incarnate, and became man; suffered and rose again the third
day, ascended into the heavens and will come to judge the living
and the dead, and in the Holy Spirit. But those who say there was a
time when he [the {172} Son] was not, and that he was not before he
was begotten, and that he was made out of nothing, or affirm that
he is of any other substance or essence, of that the Son of God
was created, and mutable, or changeable, the Catholic Church doth
pronounce accursed.[90]
31. Athanasius [Ath-a-na-shi-us], who was the most active
opponent of Arius, thus explains the Nicene doctrine, in what is
commonly known as the creed of Athanasius.[91]
We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity and Unity, neither
confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there
is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of
the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost
is all one: the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the
Father is, such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father
uncreate, the Son uncreate; and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father
incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost
incomprehensible. The Father eternal the Son eternal, and the
Holy Ghost eternal. And yet these are not three eternals; but one
eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three
uncreated; but one uncreated and one incomprehensible. So likewise
the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost
Almighty; and yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.
So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God,
and yet they are not three Gods but one God. [92] (See note 7, end
of section.)
{173} 32. Immateriality of God.--The evil which grew out of these
contentions in respect to Deity is found in the conclusion arrived
at that God is an incorporeal, that is to say, an immaterial being;
without body, without parts, without passions. The following is the
Roman Catholic belief in respect to God:
There is but one God, the creator of heaven and earth, the supreme,
incorporeal, uncreated being, who exists of himself, and is
infinite in all his attributes, etc.[93]
The Church of England teaches in her articles of faith:
There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body,
parts or passions; of infinite power, wisdom and goodness,[94] etc.
This plainly teaches the great error of the immateriality of God;
and, indeed, that is the orthodox notion in respect to Deity,
notwithstanding it finds so many express contradictions in the
scriptures.
33. In the work of creation, God proposed to make man in his own
image and likeness, and the proposition was executed.[95] Moreover,
Jesus is said to be the brightness of God's glory, "and the express
image of his person." [96] Again it is said, that Jesus "being in the
form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." [97] All
this teaches that God has a form similar to that of man's; that he
has organs, dimensions, proportions; that he occupies space and has
relation to other objects in space; that he moves from place to place;
and that so far as his actual person is concerned he cannot be in two
places at one and the same instant. The question here arises as to
those passages of scripture which declare the omnipresence of God, a
thing which is impossible--speaking of his person--if what is {174}
here contended for be true. But God may be and is omnipresent by his
influence, by his power, if not in his person. While his person is
confined to one place at a time, as other substances are, his influence
extends throughout the universe, as does also his power, and through
this means he is omnipotent and omnipresent.
34. To assert the immateriality of God is not only to deny his
personality, but his very existence; for an immaterial substance cannot
exist. It can have no relation to time or space, no form, no extension,
no parts. An immaterial substance is simply no substance at all; it
is a contradiction of terms to say a substance is immaterial--it is
the description of an infinite vacuum; and the difference between the
atheist and the orthodox Christian is one of terms, not of fact; the
former says, "There is no God;" the latter in his creed says, "God is
nothing." [98] (See note 10, end of section.)
35. Such were the absurdities into which the vain philosophies
of the pagan led the Christian even in the early centuries of the
Christian era; so that through these errors they even denied the Lord
who bought them.[99]
{175}
NOTES.
1. Christian Worship in the Fifth Century.--Public worship
everywhere assumed a form more calculated for show and for the
gratification of the eye. Various ornaments were added to the
sacerdotal garments in order to increase the veneration of the
people for the clerical order. The new forms of hymns, prayers and
public fasts, are not easily enumerated. * * * In some places it was
appointed, that the praises of God should be sung perpetually, day
and night, the singers succeeding each other without interruption; as
if the Supreme Being took pleasure in clamor and noise, and in the
flatteries of men. The magnificence of the temples had no bounds.
Splendid images were placed in them; and among these * * * the image
of the Virgin Mary, holding her infant in her arms, occupied the most
conspicuous place. Altars and repositories for relics, made of solid
silver if possible, were procured in various places; from which may
easily be conjectured, what must have been the splendor and the expense
of the other sacred utensils.--_Mosheim_.
2. Martyr Worship (3rd century).--When Gregory [surnamed
Thaumaturgus on account of the numerous miracles he is said to have
wrought--born in Pontus, in the second decade of the third century]
perceived that the ignorant and simple multitude persisted in their
idolatry, on account of the sensitive pleasures and delights it
afforded, he allowed them in celebrating the memory of the holy
martyrs, to indulge themselves, and give a loose to pleasure, (i.e., as
the thing itself, and both what precedes and what follows, place beyond
all controversy, he allowed them at the sepulchres of the martyrs on
their fast days, to dance, to use sports, to indulge in conviviality,
and do all things that the worshipers of idols were accustomed to do in
their temples, on their festival days), hoping that in process of time,
they would spontaneously come over to a more becoming and more correct
manner of life.--Nyssen's Life of Gregory Thaumaturgus.
3. On the Continuance of Spiritual Gifts.--The affliction of
devils, the confusion of tongues, deadly poisons and sickness [all of
which were to be overcome by the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit] are
all curses which have been introduced into the world by the wickedness
of man. The blessings of the gospel are bestowed to counteract these
curses. Therefore, as long as these curses exist, the promised signs
[Mark xvi: 17, 18] are needed to counteract their evil consequences.
If Jesus had not intended that the blessings should be as extensive
and unlimited in point of time as the curses, he would have intimated
something to that effect in his word. But when he makes a universal
promise of certain powers, to enable every believer in the gospel
throughout the world to overcome certain curses, entailed {176} upon
man, because of wickedness, it would be the rankest kind of infidelity
not to believe the promised blessing necessary, as long as the curses
abound among men.--Orson Pratt.
4. When and Why the Spiritual Gifts Ceased in the Church.--It
does not appear that these extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit
[speaking of I Cor. xii] were common in the church for more than two or
three centuries. We seldom hear of them after that fatal period when
the Emperor Constantine called himself a Christian; and from a vain
imagination of promoting the Christian cause thereby heaped riches,
and power, and honor upon Christians in general, but in particular
upon the Christian clergy. From this time they [the spiritual gifts]
almost totally ceased; very few instances of the kind were found. The
cause of this was not (as has been supposed) because there was no more
occasion for them, because all the world was become Christians. This
is a miserable mistake; not a twentieth part of it was then nominally
Christian. The real cause of it was the love of many, almost all
Christians, so-called, was waxed cold. The Christians had no more of
the Spirit of Christ than the other heathens. The Son of Man when he
came to examine his church, could hardly find faith upon the earth.
This was the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy
Ghost were no longer to be found in the Christian Church--because
the Christians were turned heathens again and only had a dead form
left.--John Wesley (Wesley's Works, Vol. vii. Sermon 89, Pages 26, 27.)
5. Illustration of the Oneness of the Godhead.--The Godhead
may be further illustrated by a council, composed of three men--all
possessing equal wisdom, knowledge and truth, together with equal
qualifications in every respect. Each person would be a separate,
distinct person or substance from the other two, and yet the three
would form but one council. Each alone possesses, by supposition,
the same wisdom and truth that the three united or the one council
possesses. The union of the three men in one council would not increase
the knowledge of wisdom of either. Each man would be one part of the
council when reference is made to his person; but the wisdom and truth
of each man would be the whole wisdom and truth of the council, and not
a part. If it were possible to divide truth, and other qualities of a
similar nature into fractions, so that the Father should have the third
part of truth, the third part of wisdom, the third part of knowledge,
the third part of love, while the Son and the Holy Spirit possessed
the other two-thirds of these qualities or affections, then neither of
these persons could make "one God," "but only a part of a God." But
because the divisibility of wisdom, truth or love is impossible, the
whole of these qualities dwell in the Father--the whole dwells in the
Son--the whole is possessed by the {177} Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit
is one part of the Godhead in essence; but the whole of God in wisdom,
truth, and other similar qualities. If a truth could become three
truths, distinct from each other, by dwelling in three substances, then
there would be three Gods instead of one. But as it is, the trinity
is three in essence, but one in truth and other similar principles.
The oneness of the Godhead, as described in the scriptures, never was
intended to apply to the essence, but only to the perfections and other
attributes.--Orson Pratt.
6. Messiah the Author of the Gospel and Creator of the
World.--Christ is the author of this gospel, of this earth, of men
and women, of all the posterity of Adam and Eve, and of every living
creature that lives upon the face of the earth, that flies in the
heavens, that swims in the waters, or dwells in the field. Christ is
the author of salvation to all this creation, to all things pertaining
to this terrestial globe we occupy.--Brigham Young (Discourse, August
8, 1852).
7. The Phantom Theory of the Gnostics.--While the blood of Christ
yet smoked on Mount Calvary, the Docetus [the name given to the Gnostic
Christians] invented the impious and extravagant hypothesis, that,
instead of issuing from the womb of the virgin, he had descended on the
banks of the Jordan in the form of perfect manhood; that he had imposed
on the senses of his enemies, and of his disciples; and that the
ministers of Pilate had wasted their impotent rage on an airy phantom,
who seemed to expire on the cross, and, after three days, to rise from
the dead.--Gibbon.
8. The Fashion of Uniting Discordant Elements in Philosophy and
Religion.--When we come to consider the state of philosophy at that
time [the early Christian centuries], and the fashion which prevailed
of catching at anything new, and of uniting discordant elements into
fanciful systems, we shall not be surprised to find the doctrines of
the gospel disguised and altered, and that, according to the language
of that age, many new heresies were formed.--Burton's Brampton Lectures.
9. The Mysteries of Religion Deepened Through Attempted
Explanation.--That devout and reverential simplicity of the first
ages of the church, which taught men to believe when God speaks, and
obey when God commands, appeared to most of the doctors of this age
[the fifth century] to be unphilosophical and becoming only in the
vulgar. Many of those, however, who attempted to explain and illustrate
these doctrines, opened the way rather to disputation than for a
rational faith and a holy life; for they did not so much explain, as
involve in greater obscurity, and darken with ambiguous terms and
incomprehensible distinctions the deep mysteries of revealed religion.
And hence arose abundant matter for difficulties, contentions and
animosities which flowed down to succeeding ages, and which {178} can
scarcely be removed by the efforts of human power. It hardly need be
remarked, that some, while pressing their adversaries, incautiously
fell into errors of an opposite character which were no less
dangerous.--Mosheim.
10. Immaterialists are Atheists.--There are two classes of
atheists in the world. One class denies the existence of God in the
most positive language; the other denies his existence in duration or
space. One says, "There is no God;" the other says "God is not here or
there, any more than he exists now and then." The infidel says, "There
is no such a substance as God." The immaterialist says, "There is
such a substance as God, but it is 'without parts.'" The atheist says,
"There is no such substance as spirit." The immaterialist says, "A
spirit, though he lives and acts, occupies no room and fills no space,
in the same way and after the same manner as matter not even so much
as does the minutest grain of sand." The atheist does not seek to hide
his infidelity; but the immaterialist, whose declared belief amounts
to the same thing as the atheist's endeavors to hide his infidelity
under the shallow covering of a few words.--Orson Pratt (Absurdities of
Immaterialism, page 11).
REVIEW.
1. Describe the simplicity of public worship in early Christian times.
(Note 2, end of section III.)
2. What changes in the public worship were gradually introduced? (Note
1).
3. What was the object in introducing these changes?
4. In what manner was incense introduced into public worship?
5. What especially obnoxious practice became prevalent in the 4th
century?
6. What can you say of the worship of martyrs? (Note 2).
7. Give an account of the decline of spiritual gifts in the church.
8. On this point what difference exists between Catholics and
Protestants?
9. What can you say of Protestant excuses for the absence of the
spiritual gifts of the gospel? (Notes 3 and 4).
10. What does the absence of spiritual gifts prove?
11. In what way were grievous offenses punished by the church?
12. What ceremonies finally became associated with excommunication?
13. What temporal punishments were sometimes associated with
excommunication?
{179} 14. What can you say of the mingling of pagan philosophy with the
Christian religion?
15. Give the scriptural doctrine respecting God.
16. Give an instance from scripture where the personages of the Godhead
are seen to be distinct.
17. In what does the oneness of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost consist?
(Note 5.)
18. How did the early Christians regard the scriptural doctrine of the
Godhead?
19. By what means did men at last try to explain the revelation?
20. Give the Gnostic idea respecting God.
21. How did the Gnostics account for the creation of the world?
22. In what way did the Gnostics avoid making God the author of evil?
23. What is the nature of man according to the Gnostic philosophy?
24. What did the Gnostic philosophy look to as the culmination between
the struggle of man with evil?
25. In what light did the Gnostics look upon Jesus Christ?
26. What fanciful theory did some of them hold respecting him? (Note 7).
27. To what two modes of life did the Gnostic philosophy lead?
28. What was the new Platonic philosophy?
29. What was Plato's idea of God?
30. In what way was there an attempt to harmonize the philosophy of
Plato with the writings of St John?
31. State the "orthodox" doctrine respecting Deity in those times.
32. State the Sabellian theory.
33. Give an illustration of it.
34. State the Arian theory.
35. In what way did the Nicene Council decide the trinity controversy?
36. What confession did Athanasius make as to his inability to
comprehend the Nicene creed?
37. What great error resulted from the controversy on the nature of
Deity?
38. What passages of scripture refute the "orthodox" Christian notion
that God is immaterial?
39. How from reason would you refute the notion that God is an
immaterial Being?
{180}
SECTION VI.
1. Departure from Moral Precepts of the Gospel.--There was as
wide a departure from the moral precepts of the gospel among the
Christians as there was from the doctrines, ordinances and government
of the church. From the nature of the reproofs, the admonitions and
warnings to be found in the epistles of the apostles to the churches,
one may see that while they yet lived the saints were prone to
wickedness, and great errors in regard to moral conduct crept into the
churches. The writings of the early fathers of the church who succeeded
the apostles also bear witness to the continuance and increase of these
errors.
2. Double Rule of Life.--As early as the second century the idea
became prevalent that messiah had prescribed a twofold rule of moral
conduct; the one ordinary, the other extraordinary; one for those
engaged in ordinary affairs of life, the other for persons of leisure
and such as desired a higher glory in the future life. This led the
early Christian doctors to divide whatsoever had been taught by the
apostles in respect to Christian life and morals, into precepts and
counsels. The precepts were those laws which were equally binding on
all men the counsels were binding only on those who aspired to a closer
union with God.
3. Of course there soon appeared a class of persons who sought
to attain to this closer union; and they adopted the method of life
practiced among the pagan philosophers who wished to excel in virtue.
They considered many things forbidden to them which were proper for
ordinary Christians to {181} indulge in; such as wine, flesh, matrimony,
and secular business. They thought the holiness of life they aspired to
could sooner be attained by emaciating the body by fastings, watchings,
excessive toil, hunger, insufficient and coarse raiment. In short, they
"thought to merit heaven by making earth a hell." Those who engaged
in this kind of life soom came to distinguish themselves by their
dress as well as by the austerity of their lives. They soon began to
withdraw themselves from association with their fellow Christians and
the world and retire to the deserts and the wilderness, where by severe
meditation they sought to abstract their minds from external objects
and those things which minister to sensual delights. They sometimes
lived alone but oftener in association with those devoted to the same
manner of life.
4. When peace was assured to the Christian church, early in the
fourth century, the number of those who became ambitious for this
austere righteousness greatly increased, until vast multitudes of
monk and sacred virgins spread with remarkable rapidity throughout
Christendom. About the year 305, A. D., the practice of collecting
these people into associated communities and regulating their mode of
living by fixed rules was introduced. St Anthony of Egypt was the prime
mover in this work. Thus monasteries and nunneries were established;
and in a short time the east, especially, swarmed with persons who
abandoned the conveniences, associations and business of ordinary
life, to pine away in these institutions and hardships and sufferings,
in order to attain a closer communion with God and a more excellent
salvation.
5. Origin of the False Idea of Moral Life.--"The Christian church
would have remained free from these numerous tortures of the mond
and body," remarks Dr. Mosheim, "had not that great and fascinating
doctrine of the ancient philosophy gained credence among Christians
that to attain to happiness and communion with God, the soul must be
freed from the influence {182} of the body, and for this purpose the
body must be subdued." [100]
6. As a further evidence that these false notions of life and
virtue came from the pagan philosophy rather than from the Christian
religion, we quote again from Mosheim:
The causes of this institution [austere method of life] are at
hand. First, the Christians did not like to appear inferior to the
Greeks, the Romans, and the other people; among whom were many
philosophers and sages, who were distinguished from the vulgar by
their dress and their whole mode of life, and who were held in
high honor. Now among these philosopher (as is well known), none
better pleased the Christians than the Platonists and Pythagoreans
[Pyth-a-go-re-ans]; who are known to have recommended two modes of
living, the one for philosophers who wished to excel in virtue, and
the other for the people engaged in the common affairs of life.[101]
The Platonists prescribed the following rules for philosophers:
The mind of a wise man must be withdrawn, as far as possible, from
the contagious influence of the body, and as the oppressive load of
the body and social intercourse are most adverse to this design,
therefore all sensual gratifications are to be avoided; the body is
to be sustained or rather mortified, with coarse and slender fare;
solitude is to be sought for; and the mind is to be self-collected,
and absorbed in contemplation, so as to be detached as much as
possible from the body. Whoever lives in this manner, shall in the
present life have converse with God; and when freed from the load
of the body, shall ascend without delay to the celestial mansions
and shall not need, like the souls of other men, to undergo
purgation.[102]
7. It will be remembered that the Christians adopted the pagan
philosophy--of which the teachings of Plato were the basis--and
employed it to explain the Christian religion. It is {183} not
surprising, therefore, that they adopted its moral precepts, and by so
doing corrupted that reasonable and healthy moral life enjoined upon
all alike in the gospel of Jesus Christ.
8. Celibacy of the Clergy.--From the same source came the
celibacy of the clergy. It was considered that those who lived in
wedlock were more subject to the assaults of evil spirits than those
who lived in celibacy; hence those who were appointed to teach and
govern others were supposed to be all the better qualified for their
work if they had nothing to do with conjugal life. It was a matter,
however, which during the first centuries was not strictly enjoined
by any formal regulations of the church; it was left for Pope Gregory
VII in the eleventh century to bind such a wicked regulation upon the
clergy by express law. In the third century the most shameful abuses
arose out of this doctrine; for men sought to fulfill its requirements
with the least violence to their inclinations, and many of those who
had taken upon themselves vows of chastity, took to their houses and
even to their beds some one of those holy females under like vows of
chastity, yet maintained that there was no improper relations between
them. It is but just to say that many bishops condemned this shameful
practice but it was some time before the church was rid of it, and the
scandal it created, and even when such practices did cease openly it
may well be doubted if it really ceased among those forced into such
unnatural conditions.
9. Deceiving and Lying Accounted Virtues.--Another evil which
went far toward corrupting the church was the idea that to deceive and
lie are virtues when religion can be promoted by them. This pernicious
doctrine was accepted early in the first centuries and it accounts
for the existence and circulation of that great mass of childish
fable and falsehood respecting the infancy and youth of Messiah and
the miraculous, wonder-working power of the relics of the saints and
martyrs, from which the cause of the Christian religion has suffered so
{184} much. "If some inquisitive person were to examine the conduct and
the writings of the greatest and most pious teachers of this century"
[the fourth], writes Dr. Mosheim, "I fear he would find about all of
them infected with this leprosy. I cannot except Ambrose, nor Hilary,
nor Augustine, nor Gregory Nazianzen nor Jerome." [103]
10. Immoral Condition of the Church in General.--The wickedness
of the clergy in the last centuries, the ambition of the bishops and
their imitating in their lives the voluptuousness of princes, we have
already noted in section four of part II, and therefore little need
be said here further than to remark that those vices very rapidly
increased. As time rolled on worldly prosperity seemed to relax the
nerves of discipline. "Fraud, envy and malice prevailed in every
congregation. The presbyters aspired to the episcopal office, which
every day became an object more worthy their ambition. The bishops who
contended with each other for ecclesiastical pre-eminence, appeared by
their conduct to claim a secular and tyrannical power in the church;
and the lively faith which still distinguished the Christians from the
Gentiles was shown much less in their lives than in their controversial
writings." [104]
11. Sometimes these struggles for place and power resulted in
war and bloodshed. Such was the case in the fourth century when a new
pope was to be elected to succeed Liberius [Li-be-ri-us]. One party in
Rome was for one Damasus [Dam-a-sus], and another party for Ursicinus
[Ur-si-ci-nus]. The contest resulted in a bloody conflict, houses were
burned and many lost their lives. In one church alone one morning after
the conflict there were found one hundred and thirty-seven corpses to
bear witness to the violence of the struggle for what was claimed to be
the office of viceregent of God on earth.
12. Moral Condition of the Church in the Fourth {185}
Century.--In the fourth century--"If we look at the lives and
morals of the Christians--we shal find, as heretofore, that good men
were commingled with bad, yet the number of the bad began gradually
to increase, so that the truly pious and godly appeared more rare.
when there was no more to fear from enemies from without; when the
character of most bishops was tarnished with arrogance, luxury,
effeminacy, animosity, resentments, and other defects; when the lower
clergy neglected their proper duties, and were more attentive to
controversies, than to the promotion of piety and the instruction
of the people; when vast numbers were induced not by a rational
conviction, but by the fear of punishment and the hope of worldly
advantage to enroll themselves as Christians, how can it surprise us,
that on all sides the vicious appeared a host, and the pious a little
band almost overpowered by them. Against the flagitious and those
guilty of heinous offenses, the same rules for penance were prescribed,
as before the reign of Constantine. But as the times continually
waxed worse and worse, the more honorable and powerful could sin with
impunity, and only the poor and the unfortunate felt the severity of
the laws." [105]
13. Moral Condition of the Church in the Fifth Century.--About
the middle of the fifth century we have Salvian [Sal-vi-an] saying:
The very church which should be the body to appease the anger of
God, alas! what reigns there but disorders calculated to incense
the Most High? It is more common to meet with Christians who are
guilty of the greatest abominations than with those who are wholly
exempt from crime. So that today it is a sort of sanctity among us
to be less vicious than the generality of Christians. We insult the
majesty of the Most High at the foot of his altars. Men, the most
steeped in crime enter the holy places without respect for them.
True all men ought to pay their vows to God, but why should they
seek his temples to propitiate him, only to go forth to provoke
him? {186} Why enter the church to deplore their former sins,
and upon going forth--what do I say?--in those very courts the
commit fresh sins, their mouths and their hearts contradict one
another. Their prayers are criminal meditations rather than vows of
expiation. Scarcely is the service ended before each returns to his
old practices. Some go to their wine, others to their impurities,
still others to robbing and brigandage, so that we cannot doubt
that these things had been occupying them while they were in the
church. Nor is it the lowest of the people who are thus guilty.
There is no rank whatever in the church which does not commit all
sorts of crimes.
14. It may be urged that we are at heart better than the
barbarians who oppose us. Suppose this to be granted; we ought
to be better than they. But as a matter of fact, they are more
virtuous than we. The mass of Christians are below the barbarians
in probity. True, all kinds of sins are found among them but what
one is not found among us? The several nations have their peculiar
sin; the Saxons are cruel; the Franks perfidious; the Gepidae
inhuman; the Huns lewd. But we, having the law of God to restrain
us, are given over to all these offenses. Then to confine ourselves
to the single sin of swearing, can many be found among the faithful
who have not the name of Jesus Christ constantly upon their lips
in support of their perjuries? This practice coming down from the
higher to the lower classes, has so prevailed that Christians might
be deemed pagans. This, although the law of God expressly forbids
to take his name in vain. We read this law but we do not practice
it; as a consequence the pagans taunt us that we boast ourselves
the sole possessors of God's law, and of the rules of truth and of
what that law enjoins. Christians, indeed, to the shame of Jesus
Christ! say they.[106]
15. In book VI on _The Providence of God_, Salvian continues his
arraignment:
We rush from the churches to the theatres, even in the midst of
our perils. In Carthage the theatres were thronged while the enemy
{187} were before the walls, and the cries of those perishing
outside under the sword mingled with the shouts of the spectators
in the circus. Nor are we better here in Gaul (France). Treves
[Trevz] has been taken four times, and has only increased in
wickedness under her misfortunes. The same state of things exists
in Cologne [Ko-lon]--deplorable wickedness among young and old, low
and high. The smaller cities have been blind and insensible to the
dangers threatening, until they have overwhelmed them. It seems to
be the destiny of the Roman empire to perish rather than reform;
they must cease to be, in order to cease to be vicious. A part of
the inhabitants of Treves, having escaped from the ruins, petitions
the emperor for--what? A theatre, spectacles, public shows! A city
which thrice overthrown could not correct itself, well deserved
to suffer a fourth destruction. * * * Would that my voice might
be heard by all Romans! I would cry: Let us all blush that today
the only cities where impurity does not reign are those which have
submitted to the barbarians. Think not, then, that they conquer and
we yield by the simple force of nature. Rather let us admit that
we succumb through the dissoluteness of our morals of which our
calamities are the just punishment.[107]
16. State of Morals in Centuries Subsequent to the Fifth.--Such
was the condition of the Christian church as to morals in the fifth
century. It was no better in the sixth or the seventh or the eighth.
Indeed the concurrent testimony of all authorities is to the effect
that matters moral and spiritual grew gradually worse in these
centuries until darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the
people. Of the ninth century Mosheim says:
The ungodly lives of most of those intrusted with the care and
government of the church are a subject of complaint with all
the ingenuous and honest writers of this age. In the east,
sinister designs, rancor, contentions and strife were everywhere
predominant. * * *
In the west, the bishops hung round the courts of princes and
indulged {188} themselves in every species of voluptuousness; while
the inferior clergy and the monks were sensual, and by the grossest
vices corrupted the people whom they were set to reform.[108]
17. State of Morals in Tenth Century.--Of the tenth century Dr.
Milner, who wrote his great history for the purpose of maintaining that
there had been a succession of pious men since the founding of the
church by Messiah, and to "trace the goodness of God taking care of his
church in every age by his providence," [109] says:
The famous annalist of the Roman Church,[110] whose partiality
to the see of Rome is notorious, has, however, the candor to own
that this [the tenth century] was an iron age, barren of all
goodness; a leaden age, abounding in all wickedness; and a dark
age, remarkable above all other things for the scarcity of writers
and men of learning. Christ was then, as it appears, in a very
deep sleep, when the ship was covered with waves; and what seemed
worse, when the Lord was thus asleep there were no disciples,
who by their cries, might wake him, being themselves all fast
asleep. * * * Under an allusion by no means incongruous with the
oriental abd scriptural taste, this writer [Baronius] represents
the divine head of the church as having given up the church for its
wickedness, to a judicial impenitency, which continued the longer,
because there was scarcely any zealous spirits who had the charity
to pray for the cause of God upon earth. * * * Infidel Malice has
with pleasure recorded the vices and the crimes of the popes of
this century. Nor is it my intention to attempt to palliate the
account of their wickedness. It was as deep {189} and atrocious as
language can paint; nor can a reasonable man desire more authentic
evidence of history than that which the records both of civil and
ecclesiastical history afford concerning the corruption of the
whole church.[111]
18. The Church Destroyed.--Beyond this century it is not
necessary to go. The church of Christ no longer existed in the earth.
The persecution of the Jews and the Romans, coupled with the internal
dissensions in the church; the rise of false teachers, who brought
in damnable heresies; the changing of the character and spirit of
the church government; the addition of pagan rites and ceremonies to
the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel; the admixture of pagan
philosophy with Christian theology; and, finally, the universal
departure of the church from that moral life enjoined upon mankind by
the precepts of the Christian religion--utterly subverted the religion
of Jesus Christ, and destroyed the church which he founded. The
apostasy of men from that religion and church was complete; and since
they did not like to retain God in their hearts, God also gave them up
to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts. [See notes 1 to
6, end of section].
NOTES.
1. Admission of the Great Apostasy by Christian Writers.--The
church of England in its Homily on the Perils of Idolatry, says: "Laity
and clergy, learned and unlearned, all ages, sects and degrees have
been drowned in abominable idolatry most detested by God and damnable
to man for eight hundred years and more."
2. In Smith's Dictionary of the Bible (page 163)--the work
is endorsed by sixty-three learned divines and Bible scholars--the
following {190} occurs: "We must not expect to see the church of Christ
existing in its perfection on the earth. It is not to be found thus
perfect, either in the collected fragments of Christendom, or still
less in any one of those fragments."
3. John Wesley said that the reason why the extraordinary gifts
of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in the church [in the dark
ages] was "because the love of many waxed cold, the Christians had
turned heathens again and only had a dead form left."--(Wesley's Works,
Vol. vii, sermon 89, pages 26, 27).
4. Dr. Adam Clark commenting on the fourth chapter of
Ephsians--treating church officers and the gifts bestowed upon
them--says: "All these officers and the and graces conferred upon
them were adjudged necessary by the great head of the church for its
full instruction in the important doctrines of Christianity. The same
officers and gifts are still necessary, and God gives them, but they do
not know their places."
5. Roger Williams (Picturesque America, page 502) refused to
continue as pastor over the oldest Baptist church in America on the
ground that there was "no regularly constituted church on earth, nor
any person qualified to administer any church ordinance; nor can there
be until new apostles are sent by the great head of the church, for
whose coming I am seeking."
5. Alexander Campbell, founder of the sect of the "Disciples,"
says: "The meaning of this institution [the kingdom of heaven] has been
buried under the rubbish of human tradition for hundreds of years.
It was lost in the dark ages and has never, until recently, been
disinterred."--(Christianity Restored, page 184).
REVIEW.
1. What may be learned from the reproofs and admonitions in the
writings of the apostles and early Christian fathers?
2. About what time did the notion arise in respect to a double rule of
life?
3. What great evil grew out of this erroneous idea?
4. From whence did Christians derive their ideas which demanded the
austerities they practiced?
5. Give an account of the origin of monasteries and nunneries.
6. How did the celibacy of the clergy originate?
7. When did it become an express law of the church?
8. What shameful scandal arose from this doctrine in the 3rd century?
9. Under what circumstances were lying and deceiving accounted virtues?
{191} 10. What evil grew out of this wicked notion?
11. What can you say of the general moral condition of the church in
the early Christian centuries?
12. State the moral condition of the church in the 4th century. In the
5th.
13. What of the moral state of the church subsequent to the 5th?
14. Give the substance of Dr. Milner's admission concerning the moral
state of the church in the 10th century.
15. State what several circumstances led to the destruction of the
church of Christ.
16. Recount the admissions which noted Christian writers make
concerning the apostasy from the Christian religion. (Notes end of
section).
{192}
SECTION VII.
We have considered those events that occurred in the church by
which its form and spirit of government were altered, its doctrines
corrupted, its ordinances changed, and its truths and powers subverted.
We now turn to the scriptures to show that all these things were
predicted by the apostles and prophets of God, being foreseen by the
spirit of revelation.
1. False Teachers to Arise in the Church.--On the occasion of
Paul's last visit to Ephesus, he had the elders assembled, and in the
course of his address to them said:
I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
Taken heed, therefore, unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over
which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of
God which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this,
that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you,
not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise,
speaking perverse things to lead away disciples after them.[112]
2. In his second letter to Timothy the same apostle again
prophesies of the coming of these false teachers:
I charge thee, therfore, [said he], before God, and the Lord Jesus
Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and
his kingdom; preach the word; be instant in season, out of season;
reprove, rebuke with all long suffering and doctrine. For the time
will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their
own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching
ears; and they [the false teachers] shall turn their ears from the
truth, and shall be turned unto fables.[113]
3. Peter also prophesied the rise of false teachers in the {193}
church. In his second epistle, addressed, "to them that have obtained
like precious faith," with himself--that is, to the saints; after
saying that prophecy in olden time came by men speaking as they were
moved upon by the Holy Ghost;[114] he then remarks:
But there were false prophets also among the people [that is, among
the ancient saints], even as there shall be false teachers among
you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the
Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the
way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness with
feigned words make merchandise of you; whose judgment now of a long
time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.[115]
4. Hypocrisy and Austerity Predicted.--Paul also appears to have
foreseen the hypocrisy that would creep into the church, together with
that useless austerity of life with which men and women would become
infatuated, and which, became the fountain of so much corruption. He
thus speaks of it:
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some
shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and
doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their
conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and
commanding to abstain from meats.[116]
5. The Rise of Anti-Christ Foretold.--Moreover, the Prophet Paul
foretold the rise of anti-Christ before the glorious coming of Messiah
to judgment. He plainly foresaw the "falling away"--the long night of
spiritual darkness and apostasy that would brood over the world before
the coming of the Son of God in the glory of his Father, to reward the
righteous, to condemn the wicked. He said of this apostasy:
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus {194}
Christ and by our gathering together unto him; that ye be not soon
shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit nor by word, nor
by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.[117]
Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day shall not come
except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be
revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself
above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he
as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is
God. Remember ye not that when I was yet with you I told you these
things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed
in his own time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work:
only he who now letteth [hindereth] will let [will hinder][118]
until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be
revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth,
and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming; even him whose
coming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and
lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in
them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth,
that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them
strong delusions, that they should believe a lie; that they all
might be damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in
unrighteousness. [119]
6. Isaiah's Great Prophecy of the Apostasy.--Isaiah also
prophesied of the universal apostasy from the gospel of Christ. After
describing the earth as mourning and fading away, together with its
haughty people, he said:
The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because
they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the
everlasting covenant. Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth,
and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants
of the earth are burned, and few men left. [120]
7. It is sometimes claimed that this prophecy refers to the
Mosaic law, and the Mosaic covenant, instead of the gospel of Christ.
The answer to such claim is that the prophecy has reference to an
everlasting covenant that is to be broken; and the Mosaic law or
covenant, never was intended to be an everlasting covenant, while the
gospel of Christ is such a covenant. Paul said:
The scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen
through faith, preached before the gospel to Abraham. * * *
Wherefore then serveth the law [that is, if the gospel was
preached unto Abraham, of what use is the law of Moses--the law
of carnal commandments--how came it into existence]? It was added
because of transgression, till the seed [Christ] should come,
to whom the promise was made. * * * Wherefore the law was our
schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified
by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a
schoolmaster. [121]
8. From this it appears that the gospel was preached in very
ancient times; that afterwards, because of transgression--doubtless
apostasy--the law of Moses was added, or given in the place of the
gospel, that it might act as a schoolmaster to bring the people to
Christ, that is, prepare them for the gospel. Therefore, when the
gospel was introduced by the personal ministry of Messiah, the law of
Moses--the carnal law--having served its purpose, was set aside, and
the gospel was reinstated. It will be seen, therefore, that the Mosaic
law was not an everlasting covenant, but a temporary law, given for a
specific purpose, having accomplished which it is supplanted by a more
excellent law and covenant. It is clear that Isaiah's great prophecy
had no reference to the law of Moses, but to an everlasting covenant
which was to be broken, its ordinance changed, its laws transgressed.
That covenant is the gospel of {196} Jesus Christ, whose blood is
spoken of as the "blood of the everlasting covenant." [122]
9. Moreover the prophecy ends by saying that in consequence
of the transgression of the law, the changing of the ordinance, the
breaking of the covenant, "the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and
few men left." This predicted calamity did not overtake the people for
breaking the Mosaic law. It has not yet taken place. It is a judgment
still hanging over mankind for their great apostasy from the gospel of
Jesus Christ.
10. John's Vision Foreshadowing the Apostasy.--Among the many
revelations given to the Apostle John while a prisoner on the Isle of
Patmos was one in which he saw an angel "fly in the midst of heaven,
having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the
earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying
with a loud voice, "Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of
his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and
the sea, and the fountains of waters." [123] From this it is learned
that in the hour of God's judgment the gospel will be brought to the
earth by an angel, and thence proclaimed to every nation, and kindred,
and tongue, and people, a very good evidence that in the "hour of
God's judgment" all the world would be without the gospel, or why this
restoration at that time and its universal proclamation if the nations
at the time indicated already possessed it?
11. Thus through revelation the ancient prophets foresaw the
great apostasy from the gospel of Jesus Christ. We who live now after
the great event has occurred, in the light of historical facts, see it
no more plainly than did these ancient servants of God through the gift
of prophecy. They read the history of it by the light of revelation, we
by the light of history, and the former is a light no less certain than
the latter.
{197}
REVIEW.
1. By what means were the apostles and still more ancient prophets made
acquainted with the great apostasy from the Christian religion?
2. Repeat the several prophecies concerning the rise of false teachers
in the church.
3. Give the passage which predicts the rise of hypocrisy and austerity
of life.
4. In what passage of Paul's writings is the rise of anti-Christ
predicted?
5. What does letteth and let in this passage mean? Give proof.
6. State in what way Paul's great prophecy has been fulfilled.
7. State Isaiah's great prophecy respecting the apostasy.
8. What objection may be urged to our application of this prophecy?
9. How would you meet the objection?
10. What great judgment is still pending over the world because of
their wicked apostasy?
11. What vision given to St. John on Patmos foreshadowed a universal
apostasy?
12. If the gospel from the time it was established on the earth by
Messiah's personal ministry had continued with men until now, would
there be any necessity for restoring it to the earth in the hour of
God's judgment?
13. Was the fact of the apostasy read by the light of the spirit of
prophecy less clear than when by the light of historical facts?
{198}
SECTION VIII.
1. The Nephite Christian Church.--For nearly two centuries the
Nephite Christian church flourished in great prosperity. For that
length of time the truth seems to have been preserved in its fullness,
and the church in its unity. With the third century, however, began
that apostasy which eventually terminated by a complete subversion of
the church of Christ on the Western hemisphere.
2. Pride of Wealth and Class Distinctions.--The peace and
righteousness of two centuries brought great prosperity and wealth
to the Nephite Christians--to the entire western hemisphere; but the
commencement of the third century began to develop the fact that
pride was pressing fast upon the heels of that prosperity. Up to the
commencement of the third century the Nephite Christians had all
things common; but early in the third century that order of things was
broken up. Class distinctions arose, men began to pride themselves on
their fine apparel and jewels. They began to build churches to get
gain, and to deny the true church of Christ. Others, professing to be
Christians, denied much of that which Messiah taught, and administered
that which was sacred to those to whom it had been forbidden, because
of unworthiness.
3. The Anti-Christian Church Persecutions.--There also arose an
anti-Christian church, which persecuted the true church, despising the
members thereof because of their humility, and hating them because
of the power of God which was with them. Among the twelve apostles
whom Jesus selected from the Nephites three desired that they might
remain upon the earth until Messiah should come in his glory. {199}
This request was granted them, and their bodies were changed that they
were not subject to death. They had remained with the church up to the
time of which we write, and against them the anti-Christian church was
especially embittered. The apostates sought to kill them as the Jews
at Jerusalem tried to kill Jesus; they cast them into prison and into
dens of wild beasts; but the Lord delivered them from prisons, murders
and the wild beasts, and that by the manifestations of his power. Yet
the miracles did not convert their ungodly persecutors, and the wicked
increased rapidly in numbers.
4. Revival of Old Distinctions.--Soon the ancient distinctions
between Nephites and Lamanites which for two centuries had been buried
in oblivion, began to be employed to designate the two peoples which
gradually began to be formed. The true Christians were called Nephites,
and their enemies Lamanite. All the old bitterness which attached to
the names in former times was revived.
5. It was but a few years after the apostasy began before the
wicked outnumbered the righteous. For a while the name "Nephites"
designated the true followers of Messiah, but soon they became as proud
and as wicked as the Lamanites, and righteousness was subverted.
6. Revival of Secret Organizations.--The old secret societies
were revived for robbery and plunder. Early in the fourth century (320
A. D.) Ammoran, who had charge of the Nephite records, hid them up,
revealing the place of their concealment only to Mormon, a lad then ten
years of age, giving him a charge to go, when he was twenty-four years
old, and take the plates of Nephi and record on them the things he
had witnessed among the people. About the same time the three Nephite
apostles disappeared from among the people; the church no longer
being worthy of their administrations, the Lord took them away. All
miracles, healings, and other spiritual manifestations ceased. Mormon,
a historian and a {200} righteous man, remained with them, but he was
forbidden to preach to them. A black pall of spiritual darkness settled
over the land and the minds of the people.
7. An Attempt to Reorganize the Church.--Forty years later, after
a series of disastrous wars, by which one might reasonably expect the
Nephites would be humbled and brought to seek the Lord, an attempt to
re-establish the church was made. Mormon received a commandment to
preach repentance and baptism to the people, a commandment which he
willingly obeyed; but all to no purpose. The people would not repent.
They hardened their hearts against God and made themselves fit only for
destruction.
8. Utter Destruction of the Nephites.--That destruction was not
very remote. Towards the close of that century which witnessed the
climax of their wickedness saw their destruction. By permission of the
Lamanites the Nephites assembled about the hill called by them Cumorah
and prepared for the last great struggle. It took place in the year 385
A. D., and resulted in the entire destruction of the Nephite people,
except, perhaps, a few who fled southward. Mormon was slain, and his
son, the last of the Nephites, was preserved to record the destruction
and the desolation which followed it, and hid up the records of the
great race which had founded kingdoms and republics upon the western
hemisphere that would vie with those of Persia, Macedonia or Greece;
and cities that in extent and grandeur must have equalled those of
Antioch, Alexandria, Tyre or Sidon.
9. The Reign of Anarchy.--That civilization was destroyed, the
empires and republics were overthrown, government was destroyed,
anarchy reigned. The people, chiefly Lamanites, who survived the
terrible conflict about Cumorah, broke up into tribes, each fiercely
contending with the other. Cities were laid waste to crumble into
shapeless heaps of ruin, with here and there a monument that defied
the ravages of time and {201} proudly stood a silent witness of the
greatness of the departed race which reared it. Such was the apostasy
on the western hemisphere, and such the result which followed it.
REVIEW.
1. For how long did the Nephite Christian church keep the faith?
2. In the third century what occurred?
3. On what were their class distinctions based?
4. State what you can of the rise and course of the anti-Christian
church.
5. What of the rise of old distinctions?
6. What old organizations were revived in the fourth century?
7. What attempt was made to reorganize the church?
8. Where were the Nephites destroyed?
9. What followed the destruction of the Nephites?
Footnotes
1. These statements are sustained in the following scriptures. Matt.
x:16-40; Luke vi:22-26; John xv:18-22.
2. Acts vii: 55-60.
3. Acts xii: 1, 2.
4. Eusebius Bk. II, ch. xxiii.
5. Acts xii.
6. Mosheim Part I, ch. v.
7. Matt. xxvii: 22-25.
8. Josephus' Wars of the Jews, Bk. vi, ch. ix.
9. Luke xxi: 5-9, 20-24.
10. Eusebius Bk. III, ch. v. The Saints were also warned to flee from
Jerusalem by Messiah himself when they should see armies begin to
encompass it.--See Luke xxi: 20-24.
11. Decline and Fall Vol. I, ch. 1.
12. Annals lib. xv, ch. 44.
13. Decline and Fall I, ch. xvi. See also Guizot's note on same page.
14. This is according to the testimony of Eusebius, quoting Hagesippus
and Tertullian. (Eusebius Book III, ch. xx). But other authorities
claim that Domitian's edicts against the Christians were not revoked
until after his death.
15. Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. I. Second Cent. ch. ii.
16. Decline and Fall, vol. I, ch. xvi.
17. Eusebius Eccle. Hist. Bk. v, ch. i and ii.
18. Decline and Fall, vol. I, ch. xvi.
19. Mosheim's Eccl. His. vol. I, cent. iii, ch. ii.
20. Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. vol. I, cent. iv, ch. i.
21. Quoted by Murdock in Mosheim.--See note--Mosheim Eccl. Hist. vol.
I, p. 210.
22. Revelation ch. xiii: 1-7.
23. According to Eusebius, however, Helena was converted to
Christianity by her son.--De Veta Constantine I, iii, ch: 47.
24. Constantine had caused to be put to death, through jealousy and on
what, to say the least, was very slight and very suspicious testimony,
his son Crispus, his wife Fausta, and his brother-in-law Licinius.
25. Decline and Fall, vol. I, ch. xvi.
26. Decline and Fall vol. I, ch. xvi.
27. Mosheim vol. I, Book i, part ii, ch. iv.
28. Acts ii: 41. Acts viii: 12, 35-40.
29. That exorcism was not annexed to baptism till some time in the
third century, and after the admission of the Platonic philosophy into
the church, may almost be demonstrated. The ceremonies used at baptism
in the second century are described by Justin Martyr in his second
apology, and by Tertullian in his book de Corono Militas. But neither
makes mention of exorcism. This is a cogent argument to prove that it
was admitted by Christians after the times of these fathers, and of
course in the third century. Egypt perhaps first received it. Murdock's
Mosheim vol. I, p. 190.--(Note.)
30. Mosheim vol. I, book i, part ii, ch. iv.
31. According to Schlegel, the so-called apostolic constitution (b.
viii, ch. 32) enjoined a three years' course of preparation; yet with
allowance of some exceptions.
32. That is, the evening preceding the day on which Messiah is supposed
to have arisen from the dead, and the evening preceding the seventh
Sunday after Easter, the anniversary of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost
was poured out upon the Apostles in a remarkable manner (Acts ii.)
33. Mosheim vol. I, book ii, part ii. ch. iv.
34. Cyprian's Epistles, letter 76.
35. Eusebius Eccl. Hist. b. vi, ch. 43.
36. Milner's Church Hist. vol. I pp. 429, 430.
37. Such is the opinion of Milner--Church Hist. vol. I. p. 430.
38. The Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat; this is
my body which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me. After
the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying:
This cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye
drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and
drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come.--Paul to the
Corinthians. (I Cor. xi: 23-26.)
39. These facts are clearly taught by Messiah when he established the
sacrament among the Nephites; and of course it was established among
the Jews for the same purpose that it was among the Nephites. After
having broken the bread and blessed it, and passed it to the multitude,
Messiah said: "This shall ye do in remembrance of my body, which I have
shown unto you. And it shall be a testimony unto the Father that ye do
always remember me. And if you do always remember me, ye shall have my
Spirit to be with you." So when he had administered the wine: "Blessed
are ye for this thing which ye have done; * * * this doth witness unto
the Father that ye are willing to do that which I have commanded you;
and this shall ye always do to those who repent and are baptized in my
name; and ye shall do it in remembrance of my blood which I have shed
for you, that ye may witness unto the Father that ye do always remember
me. And if ye do always remember me, ye shall have my Spirit to be with
you."--III Nephi, xviii. See also Moroni, iv and v, where the prayer of
consecration is given.
40. Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, vol. I, book i, cent. iii, part
2, chapter iv. The banishment of unbaptized people from sacrament
meetings was forbidden among the Nephites by Messiah. III Nephi xviii:
22-23.
41. Protestants combating the Catholic idea of the real presence of the
flesh and blood in the eucharist--transubstantiation--have endeavored
to prove that this doctrine was not of earlier origin than the eighth
century. In this, however, the evidence is against them. Ignatius,
bishop of Antioch, writing early in the second century says of certain
supposed heretics: "They do not admit of eucharists and oblations,
because they do not believe the eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior
Jesus Christ, who suffered for our sins." (Epistles of Ignatius to
the Smyrneans.) So Justin Martyr, also writing in the first half of
the second century:--"We do not receive them [the bread and the win]
as ordinary food or ordinary drink; but as by the word of God Jesus
Christ, our Savior, was made flesh and took upon him both flesh and
blood for our salvation, so also the food which was blessed by the
prayer of the word which proceeded from him, and from which our flesh
and blood, by transmutation, receive nourishment, is, we are taught,
both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." (Justin's
Apology to Emperor Antonius.) After Justin's time the testimony of
the fathers is abundant. There can be no doubt as to the antiquity of
the idea of the real presence of the body and blood of Jesus in the
eucharist; but that proves--as we said of infant baptism--not that the
doctrine is true, but that soon after the apostles had passed away, the
simplicity of the gospel was corrupted or else entirely departed from.
42. Luke xxii. Matt. xxvi. III Nephi xviii.
43. It will be remembered that the quorum of the twelve was perpetuated
on the western hemisphere by filling up vacancies as fast as they
occurred (IV Nephi: 14), but for how long a period is uncertain.
44. Acts xv: 1-30. Rev. i-iv.
45. During a greater part of this century (the second) all the churches
continued to be, as at the first, independent of each other. * * * Each
church was a kind of small republic, governing itself by its own laws,
enacted or at least sanctioned by the people.--Ecclesiastical History,
Mosheim Vol. I, book ii, cent. ii, part ii, ch. ii.
46. As might be expected, however, there was a peculiar respect paid
to the churches founded by the apostles--the church at Jerusalem,
Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Rome. Those churches were appealed to in
controversies on points of doctrine, "as most likely to know what the
apostles taught," but the appeal had no other significance than that.
47. Clement, the third bishop of Rome, is my authority for the above
statement. It appears that the Corinthians had deposed some of their
bishops, and Clement in an epistle which he wrote to them said: "Our
apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife
over the name of the bishop's office. For this cause therefore, having
received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons
[the bishops], and afterward they provided a continuance [i.e.,
gave instructions] that if these should fall asleep, other approved
men should succeed to their ministration. Those therefore who were
appointed by other men of repute with the consent of the whole church,
and have ministered unblamably * * * these men we consider to be
unjustly thrust out of their ministration."--See also Gibbon's "Decline
and Fall," vol. I, ch. xv.
48. Eccl. Hist. (Mosheim) vol. I, bk. i, cent. iii, part ii, ch. ii.
49. Dr. Mosheim in his Institutes of Ecclesiastical History states
that next to the patriarchs were bishops called exarchs; but this his
translator (Murdock) denies. Certain it is, however, that there were
bishops who presided over several provinces, just as the civil exarchs
did. These Mosheim may have considered as corresponding to the civil
exarchs; while his translator insists that they were merely the "first
metropolitans of the civil dioceses." The difference seems to be one
of terms rather than of facts; but there is this to say in favor of
the translator, that the bishops exercising jurisdiction over several
provinces did not correspond to the number of civil exarchs. There was
not an exarch bishop over each civil diocese, and perhaps this is the
reason the learned translator objects to the term of ecclesiastical
exarch.
50. In course of time the terms arch-bishop and metropolitan came to be
used interchangeably.
51. Matt. xvi:19.
52. Irenaeus against Heresy, bk. III, ch. iii: 2, 3.
53. Matt. xvi:15-18.
54. St. John i:42.
55. The words of Christ to Peter, spoken in the vulgar language of the
Jews, which our Lord made use of, were the same as if he had said in
English: Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build my church. So
that by the plain course of the words Peter is here declared to be the
rock upon which the church was to be built.--Footnote in Douay Bible on
these passages.
56. As if it read: "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but
my Father which is in heaven; and I say unto thee, Peter, upon this
principle I will build my church."
57. Matt. xxviii:18-20.
58. Milner's End of Religious Controversy--Letter xxviii.
59. Orson Pratt's Works, Divine Authenticity, No.3.
60. Milner's Church Hist. Vol. III, pp. 53, 69--note.
61. See Bossuet's Universal History, Vol. I, p. 558. J. Andrew Cramer,
German translation.
62. See Eccl. Hist. (Mosheim) bk. III, part ii, ch. ii:6.
63. Eccl. Hist. (Mosheim) bk. III, part ii, ch. ii:11.
64. The cardinals are senators of the church and counselors of the
successors of St. Peter. There are now three orders of cardinals,
viz., bishops, priests and deacons; six of these are bishops, fifty
are priests and fourteen deacons. Sixtus V. [between A. D. 1585 and
1590] fixed the number of cardinals at seventy in order to imitate the
ancient Sanhedrin of the Jews which was composed of seventy elders, and
it is this assembly which is now called the Sacred College.--History of
all religions (Burder) p. 336.
65. Apologists of the popes may say what they will about purchased
indulgences not being intended to remit sins, or a grant of permission
to commit sin; and claim that they are only a remission of the whole or
part of the temporal punishment due to sin. But if indulgences remit
the temporal penalties of sins, what is that but the remission of sin
or at least of its effects, which, for all practical purposes, would
be the same as remission of sin? And if penalties attached to sins are
set aside in advance of the commission of the sins, what is that but a
license to commit sin? "Come," said Tetzel, in selling indulgences in
Germany early in the 16th century, "come and I will give you letters
all properly sealed, by which even the sins that you intend to commit
may be pardoned. * * * There is no sin so great but that an indulgence
cannot remit."--Hist. Reformation, D'Aubigne's, bk. III, ch. i. Tetzel
defends this doctrine in his Antithesis 99, 100, 101. [See note 8, end
of section.]
66. II Thess. ii:4.
67. Page 127.
68. Mosheim.
69. Tertullian's Apology, ch. xlii.
70. Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. vol. I, bk, ii, part ii, ch. 4.
71. Historie de Manicheism, tom ii, page 642.
72. Eccl. Hist. (Mosheim) vol. I, bk. ii, part ii.
73. I Cor. xii: 8-10.
74. That it was proper for the Christian bishops to increase the
restraints upon the licentiousness of transgression, will be readily
granted by all who consider the circumstances of those times. But
whether it was for the advantage of Christianity, to borrow rules
for this salutary ordinance from the enemies of truth, and thus to
consecrate, as it were, a part of the pagan superstition, many persons
very justly call in question.--Eccl. Hist. (Mosheim) book I, cent. 2,
part ii, ch. iii.
75. Gen. i:26, 27. Jesus Christ was in the form of man, yet he is said
to be the express image of God's person--Heb. i: 1-2.
76. Matt. iii: 16, 17.
77. Acts vii: 55, 56.
78. John x: 30, and John xiv: 8-11.
79. John xvii: 11, 21.
80. John xiv: 26. John xv: 26. John xvi: 13-15.
81. John xvii: 4, 5.
82. Heb. iv: 2.
83. John i:3. [See note 6, end of section].
84. Some authorities say seven pairs were introduced in this manner.
85. The statement is condensed from Mosheim; Dr. Benton, for years
professor of divinity at Oxford, in his Brampton lectures states that
the matter was "inert and powerless though co-eternal with the supreme
God, and, like Him, without beginning."
86. The Gnostics desired to avoid making God the author of evil, hence
it is a leading principle in their philosophy that all evil has its
origin in matter, and as matter was created by one of the Aeons, not by
God, the Lord in the Gnostic system is relieved from the responsibility
of being the author of evil.
87. The statement of the Gnostic philosophy I have condensed from
Mosheim and Dr. Benton, than whom there can be no higher authority on
this subject.
88. Gibbon's Decline and Fall, vol. ii, ch. xxii.
89. The subject is difficult of illustration; but the following will
perhaps aid the student to grasp the Sabellian doctrine. We see the
ocean is a liquid; let us next imagine it frozen into solid ice; next
as entirely dissolved into vapor. Here we have the same substance in
three different aspects, but whether we speak of it as the liquid
ocean, the frozen ocean or the ocean dissolved into vapor, it is always
the same ocean, the same substance, but under different aspects.
Whether he appeared as the Father, the Son or the Holy Ghost, he was
always the same God. Such was the Sabellian theory in respect to Deity.
Mosheim represents Sabellius as teaching that the divine nature was
divided into portions, that one portion became separate, was called
the Son, and was joined to the man Jesus. The Holy Ghost was a similar
portion or part of the Eternal Father. The weight of authority is
against the learned Doctor in this matter, however, and in favor of the
statement of Sabellius' views in the text of this work.
90. This is the Nicene Creed as it was formulated by that celebrated
council. The so-called Nicene Creed used in the Catholic, Lutheran
and English Churches is this creed as modified by the Council of
Constantinople, A. D., 381. There is no material difference in them.
91. Mosheim, Gibbon, Montfaucon and others insist that Athanasius is
not the author of this creed, and this may be true, but I have not yet
heard of its being rejected as an explanation of the Nicene Creed.
Indeed, notwithstanding its authenticity has long been suspected, it
still stands in the English prayer book and is recited in the church of
England service upon the most notable feasts, Christmas, Epiphany etc.
92. Church of England Book of Common Prayer, p. 49 Athanasius
is credited with having confessed that whenever he forced his
understanding to meditate on the divinity of the Logos, his toilsome
and unavailing efforts recoiled on themselves; that the more he
thought, the less he comprehended; and the more he wrote, the less
capable was he of expressing his thoughts. (Decline and Fall, vol.
II, ch. xxi.) We would naturally think that whoever the author of the
Athanasian Creed may be, that such would be his mental condition.
Nor are we very much surprised when we hear Gennadius, patriarch of
Constantinople, frankly pronouncing it the work of a drunken man.
93. Catholic Belief (Bruno) p. 1. This work is endorsed by His eminence
Cardinal Manning.
94. Church of England Book of Common Prayer, p. 311.
95. Gen. i: 26, 27.
96. Heb. i: 3.
97. Phil. ii: 5, 6.
98. It is remarkable how clearly men will reason upon the absurdity of
immaterialism in everything except in respect to God. As an example,
take the reasoning of Rev. John Wesley in regard to the supposed
immateriality of the fire in hell: "But it has been questioned by some
whether there be any fire in hell; that is, any material fire. Nay, if
there be any fire it is unquestionably material. For what is immaterial
fire? The same as immaterial water or earth! Both the one and the other
is absolute nonsense, a contradiction in terms. Either, therefore, we
must affirm it to be material, or we deny its existence." Now apply
that correct reasoning to the immaterial God of the orthodox Christian
and what is the result? Let us try the experiment by substituting the
word God, for the word fire in the quotation:--But it is questioned by
some whether there be any God, that is, any material God. Nay, if there
be any God, he is unquestionably material. For what is an immaterial
God? The same as immaterial water or earth! both the one and the
other [that is, both immaterial God and immaterial earth] is absolute
nonsense, a contradiction in terms. Either, therefore, we must affirm
him to be material, or we deny his existence.
99. II Peter ii: I.
100. Mosheim, book II, cent. iv, part ii, ch. iii.
101. The phraseology of the philosophers was, "living according to
nature, and living above nature." The former was the rule for all men,
the latter for the philosophers who aimed at perfect virtue.
102. Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., book I, cent. i, part ii, ch. iii.
103. Mosheim, book II, cent. iv, part ii, ch. ii.
104. Decline and Fall (Gibbon) vol. 1, ch. xvi.
105. Mosheim, book II, cent. iv, part ii, ch. iii.
106. The above quotation is taken from the third and fourth books on
"The Providence of God" by Salvian, who flourished in the 5th century,
a priest of Marseilles, and one who knew whereof he wrote, as he was
dealing with affairs of which he was a witness.
107. Book VI and VII of The Providence of God.--Salvian.
108. Mosheim, book III, cent. ix, part ii, chap. ii.
109. See Milner's introduction to the first volume of his Church
History. It will also be seen in that introduction that Milner wrote
his history to counteract the influence that he feared the great work
of the too candid Mosheim might exert, viz., to create the impression
"That real religion appears scarcely to have had any existence." Hence
the admissions of Dr. Milner to the sad condition of the church in the
tenth century have a peculiar significance since he would not admit its
corruption unless compelled to by the facts.
110. This is Caesar Baronius, a Catholic historian of the 16th century.
His "Annales Ecclesiastical" comprise twelve volumes and were published
in Rome, 1588-1607. He was a candidate for the papacy in 1605, but
failed to secure the election.
111. Milner's Ch. Hist., vol. iii, cent. x, ch. i. The only thing
which seems to console the learned doctor in respect to this terrible
condition of the church is that the scripture predicted this awful
state, and the truth of scripture was "vindicated by events of all
others the most disagreeable to a pious mind."--Ibid.
112. Acts xx: 27-30.
113. II Tim. iv: 1-4.
114. II Peter i: 21.
115. II Peter ii: 1-3.
116. Tim. iv: 1, 2.
117. That is, that the day of Messiah's glorious coming is at hand.
118. Letteth and let are the old English equivalents of hindereth and
hinder. The student will remember that Shakespeare makes Hamlet say
to those who seek to prevent him following the ghost of his father
when beckoned to private interview--"Still am I called. Unhand me,
gentlemen. By heaven I'll make a ghost of him that lets me"--i.e. that
hinders me.
119. II Thes. ii: 1-12.
120. Isaiah xxiv: 4-6.
121. Gal. iii. 8, 19, 24, 25.
122. Heb. xiii: 20.
123. Rev. xiv: 6, 7.
{203}
PART III.
THE REFORMATION
{205}
SECTION 1.
The Age of Darkness.--We have not found it necessary to our
purpose to dwell upon the particular events of ecclesiastical history
from the tenth to the sixteenth centuries. Those were the days of
spiritual darkness of this earth. The papal power was supreme, and with
an iron hand it ruled the nations. Some idea of its arrogance and power
may be conjectured from the fact that in the eleventh century[1] Henry
IV, of Germany, the greatest temporal monarch in the world, in that
age, stood for three days together in mid-winter, bare headed, and bare
footed, and meanly clad, at Canossa (a town in Italy where the pope
was temporarily residing), professing himself a penitent in order to
obtain absolution from the Roman pontiff, Gregory VII. His offense was
persisting to sell ecclesiastical offices in his empire contrary to the
edicts of the pope. [See note 1, end of section.] [2]
2. The Revival of Learning.--In the latter part of the fifteenth
century occurred that event called by historians the "Revival of
Learning." The intellectual stupor of Europe had been as profound as
spiritual darkness had been dense. But with the close of the fifteenth
century, literature, science and art seemed to spring into active
life. The invention of gun-powder[3] had completely revolutionized the
modes of warfare; the employment of the mariner's compass made ocean
navigation {206} less dangerous; the discovery of a new passage to
India by the Cape of Good Hope, by Vasco de Gama [Vas-ko-da-ga-ma], and
the discovery of America by Columbus, greatly enlarged the commerce
of Europe and increased the comforts of life. Painting in oil came
into vogue about this time and filled Europe with masterpieces of art;
engraving on copper, invented early in the century, multiplied and
diffused them. Paper made of linen also came into common use; and,
finally, between 1436 and 1452 A. D. printing was invented, which gave
to the modern world the intellectual riches of the ancients.
3. In the middle of this century--the fifteenth--Constantinople
was taken by the Turks, and with that event the eastern division of
the Roman empire fell. The fall of the great capital drove many of
the Greeks into Italy. They took with them a greater knowledge of
antiquity than that possessed by the western nations, together with
numerous manuscripts; and literature from that time may be said to
have commenced its splendid career. [See note 2, end of section.]
Intellectual pursuits became not only a pleasure, but a passion;
"and it may be regarded as a maxim, that wherever the progress of
intelligence is a true pleasure, a desire for liberty is soon felt, nor
is it long in passing from the public mind to the state." [4] It was so
in Europe; for the "Revival of Learning" preceded, and there can be no
doubt that it did much to produce, that struggle for enlarged liberty
which convulsed Europe in the following century.
4. Release of the Masses from Serfdom.--The masses, moreover,
began to be released, to some extent, from the serfdom of former
times, and to be given some share of civil and political freedom. This
change was largely due to the breaking up of the old feudal system of
land tenure and service. {207} According to feudal principles, all
the land of a country belonged to the king, not as representing the
community, but as sovereign feudal lord. Out of this land the king
granted portions to his subjects, on condition of their paying him
homage and fealty, and rendering him active military service a certain
number of days in every year. The estates the king granted to his more
immediate and distinguished followers, whom he called his barons, were
styled baronies, and were of large extent; the barons in their turn
made undergrants to their own retainers, on similar conditions to those
imposed upon themselves by the king. The relation between landlord and
tenant, though at first merely lifelong, soon came to be regarded as
hereditary, the heir becoming entitled on the death of the tenant to
occupy his land upon the same terms. [5]
5. This order of things established a powerful landed aristocracy
on the one hand, and a peasant tenantry on the other, whose vassalage
was but little removed from absolute slavery. The crusades and the
development of a commercial class, living chiefly in the cities, in
time wrought the destruction of feudalism.
6. The Crusades, their Influence on Feudalism and Liberty--The
crusades were religious wars carried on in the eleventh, twelfth and
thirteenth centuries, between the Christian nations of the West and
the Mohammedans of the East. It had for ages been looked upon as an
act of piety to make a pilgrimage to Palestine and visit the various
places hallowed by the presence of Messiah during his earthly career,
especially his sepulchre at Jerusalem. These Christian pilgrims had
been respected by the Saracens for centuries; but when the Seljuk
Turks captured Jerusalem, towards the close of the eleventh century,
the Christians met with insult and cruelty. The western nations, under
the fervent preaching of Peter the {208} Hermit, a native of France,
who had witnessed the atrocities practiced upon Christians in the Holy
Land, were lashed into a fury of resentment against the Turks. Pope
Urban II took up the cause, and advocated wresting the Holy Land from
the dominion of the infidels. Europe responded, "God wills it," and
preparations were made for the holy war.
7. To raise the money necessary to equip and transport their
soldiers to the distant East, the barons had to sell their lands, which
had the effect of breaking down to a very great extent the feudal
system of land tenure, and with it the obligations that it imposed. The
direct result of this was to enlarge the liberties of the people. For
the same purpose--to raise money for carrying on the holy wars in the
East--kings granted to the towns political privileges, a circumstance
which also contributed vastly to the progress of popular liberty. Thus
the way was prepared for that religious revolution of the sixteenth
century known in history as the Reformation.
8. Martin Luther.--The Reformation is usually considered to have
begun with the fearless preaching of Martin Luther against the sale
of indulgences, A. D., 1517. Luther was born at Eisleben [Is-la-ben],
Germany, A. D., 1483. His father was a miner of Mansfield in the same
country. After attending the school of Magdeburg [Mag-de-boorg] and
Eisenach [Is-sen-ak] he was sent to study philosophy and jurisprudence
at Erfurt [Er-foort]. Much against the will of his father, he abandoned
the pursuit of these studies, and joined himself to the Augustine
Eremites, a rigid order of mendicant monks. His good temper, industry
and abilities won for him the good opinions of his superiors. In 1508
he was sent by his vicar-general to be professor of philosophy at
Wittemburg. While here he applied himself to Biblical theology and soon
discovered a wide discrepancy between the religion of the scriptures
and that of the church. Two years after becoming a professor at
Wittemburg, he made a journey to Rome on some business connected {209}
with the Augustine order of monks; and was not a little shocked at the
corruption and depravity of the Italian clergy. That visit to Rome did
much to dispel the veneration in which he had held the "Holy See," and
armed him for his subsequent conflict with it.
9. Indulgences and their Origin.--The thing which provoked
Luther's opposition to the church of Rome was the reckless sale of
indulgences by the agents of the pope in Germany. The origin of
indulgences, according to the learned Schlegel, must be sought in
the earliest history of the church. In the first centuries of the
Christian era, such Christians as were excluded from the communion of
the church on account of their apostasy in the times of persecutions,
or on account of other heinous sins, had to seek a restoration to
fellowship by a public penance, in which they entreated the brethren
to forgive them, frequently standing before the door of the church
clothed in the garb of mourning. This punishment was regarded as a sort
of "satisfaction" made to the community of saints, and was called by
that name. In the case of aged or infirm Christians this "satisfaction"
was sometimes omitted, and this omission was called "indulgence."
Originally, therefore, indulgences were merely the remission of
ecclesiastical punishments imposed on grave offenders against church
laws.[6]
10. It is maintained, however, in the decretal of Pope Clement
VI, that "one drop of Christ's blood being sufficient to redeem the
whole human race, the remaining quantity that was shed in the garden
and upon the cross, was left as a legacy to the church, to be a
treasure from whence indulgences were to be drawn and administered
by the Roman pontiffs." [7] The doctrine was held that Messiah had
atoned for the eternal punishment of sins, but not for its temporary
punishment. The temporary {210} punishment the Catholic Church divided
into that of the present life and that of the future life, or of
purgatory. It was held that every man who attained salvation, must
suffer the temporary punishment of his sins, either in the present
world or in the flames of purgatory. It was also held that the priest
to whom a man confessed his sins, had the power to adjudge and impose
the necessary punishment.
11. The punishment usually consisted of fastings, pilgrimages,
whippings, etc.; but people of distinction and wealth were permitted
to employ substitutes to receive this punishment; and there were
monks ever ready to endure the punishment of the transgressor for
a consideration paid in money. This penance was finally changed to
paying to the church the money instead of employing monks to endure
the punishment. Whoever, for instance, was bound to whip himself with
so many stripes each day for several weeks might pay to the church or
to the monastery a certain sum of money, or give it a piece of land
and then be released from the penance. As the popes perceived that
something might be gained in this way, they assumed to themselves the
right of commuting penances for pecuniary satisfactions, which every
bishop had before exercised in his own diocese. At first they released
only from the punishments of sin in the present world; but in the
fourteenth century they extended this release also to the punishment in
purgatory.
12. The Traffic in Indulgences.--When such indulgences were to
be published, the disposal of them was commonly farmed out. The papal
court could not always wait to have the money conveyed from every
country of Europe; and there were rich merchants at Genoa, Milan,
Venice, and Augsburg, who purchased the indulgences for a particular
province and paid to the papal treasury handsome sums for them. Thus
both parties were benefited. The pope came at once into possession
of large sums of money; and the farmers did not fail of {211} a
good bargain. They were careful to employ skillful hawkers of the
indulgences, persons whose boldness and impudence bore due proportion
to the eloquence with which they imposed upon the simple people. Yet
that this traffic might have a religious aspect, the pope appointed
the archbishops of the several provinces to be his commissioners, who
in his name published that indulgences were to be sold, and usually
selected the persons to hawk them, and for this service shared the
profits with the merchants who farmed them.[8] [See notes 3 and 4, end
of section.]
13. In the beginning of the sixteenth century the sale of
indulgences was pushed vigorously and became most offensive. The reason
for resorting to this mode of raising revenue was justified by the pope
on the plea of completing the church of St. Peter, at Rome, which had
been commenced by Julius II.
14. John Tetzel.--The hawker of indulgences who traveled through
Germany, where Luther was living, was John Tetzel, a Dominical monk, at
once one of the boldest, most eloquent and the most profligate of men.
[See note 6, end of section.] His reckless preaching of these papal
wares aroused the indignation of Luther, who published ninety-five
propositions against the sale of indulgences, in which he even gently
censured the pope for permitting the people to be diverted from Christ.
15. The Indifference of Leo X to the Agitation in Germany.--The
dispute which arose between Luther and Tetzel was looked upon at Rome
as the wrangle between two monks--Luther was an Augustine monk, Tetzel
a Dominican; and it was supposed that the former was jealous because
the Dominicans had been preferred for this work of selling indulgences.
In addition to assailing Tetzel, Luther wrote a protest to {212}
Albert, Archbishop of Mentz and Magdeburg, and was as surprised as he
was indignant to learn that the archbishop received of the profits
arising from this wretched traffic. His assault upon Tetzel provoked
a protracted controversy, a war of pamphlets between himself and
Tetzel and his friends, among whom was John Eckius, a theologian of
Ingolstadt. The dispute on both sides was more noted for its warmth
than for its Christian character.
16. At last Leo X was aroused from his indifference to the
controversy that had arisen in Germany, by the emperor, Maximilian
I informing him that the agitation was serious, and that Germany
was taking sides in respect to it. He therefore appointed Cardinal
Thomas Cajetan, then at the diet of Augsburg, to hear the cause of
Luther. The cardinal summoned the monk before him at Augsburg, in
October, 1518. They had three interviews, but nothing was accomplished
towards reconciliation, as the cardinal treated Luther imperiously,
and peremptorily ordered him to submit his judgment to the authority
of the pope. This the reformer refused to do until he was convinced
of his error, and appealed from the pope ill-informed to the pope
better-informed. This took the matter out of the hands of the cardinal.
17. An Appeal to a General Council.--There was a difference
between the Reformer and the cardinal in their views in respect to
authorities appealed to. The latter sought to convince the former of
his errors by appealing to the canon law,[9] and the authority of
Lombard; [10] but Luther refused to admit of any proof except that of
the holy scripture, and as the cardinal seems not to have been able
to make good his censure of the Reformer's doctrines by proofs from
the scriptures, {213} Luther appealed to the pope better informed.
But Leo X, the month following (Nov. 9th), issued an edict requiring
the church to believe in his power to forgive sins. Learning of this,
Luther promptly appealed from the pope to a future council of the whole
church.[11]
18. Discussion on Free Will.--Meantime the points of disagreement
between the Reformer and the church of Rome increased. In 1519 John
Eckius [Eck-ius] challenged Andrew Carlstadt [Karl-stat], a friend and
colleague of Luther's, to a discussion on the subject of Free Will,
about which there was a disagreement between the Reformer and those who
thought with him--among whom was Carlstadt--and the adherents of the
church of Rome. In this dispute Carlstadt maintained--and of course his
were Luther's views--that since the fall, the natural freedom of man is
not strong enough to move him to that which is morally good, or to do
the will of God. Eckius on the contrary insisted that the free will of
man produces good works, and not merely the grace of God; that our free
will co-operates with divine grace in the production of good works, and
that it depends on man's free power, whether he will give place to the
operations of grace or will resist them.
19. Luther and Eckius.--After this dispute with Carlstadt, Eckius
drew Luther--who had been present at the discussion on Free Will--into
a public debate on the foundation of the authority of the pope. Eckius
maintained the orthodox {214} view that the supremacy of the pope was
founded on divine right, that he was the successor of St. Peter and the
vicar of Christ. Luther allowed the superiority of the pope over other
bishops, but based that superiority on other grounds. He could not deny
that the pontiffs had possessed a decided pre-eminence from age to age,
and therefore he conceived it as his duty not to resist the powers that
be. "Unless it had been the will of God," he went on to say, "the pope
could never have attained so great and durable a dominion. The whole
body of the Christians own themselves to be under the Roman pontiff.
This universal consent is a consideration of the greatest weight; the
unity of the church should be preserved in everything that is not
directly contrary to the word of God." [12]
20. In all these admissions, however, it will be observed that
the Reformer placed the supremacy of the pontiffs on human, not divine
right. It was based upon tradition, upon human arrangement. To the
contention of Eckius that the expressions--"Thou art Peter, and upon
this rock I will build my church," "And I will give unto thee the keys
of the kingdom"--evinced the supremacy of Peter and his successors;
that this was the explanation given by the holy fathers, etc.,
Luther replied: That even if all the fathers, without exception, had
understood the passages in that sense, he would confute them by the
authority of St. Paul, and by St. Peter himself, who said that Jesus
Christ is the only foundation and corner-stone of the church. And
further, if the words "Thou art Peter," etc., be construed strictly
then they must be confined to the person of Peter and therefore the
authority conveyed by them ceased when that apostle died.[13]
21. The dispute amounted to nothing except that it widened the
breach between the See of Rome and the Reformer. The latter, while
preparing for his discussion with Eckius, had his {215} suspicions
aroused that the pope was the very anti-Christ of the New Testament.
At the conclusion of the debate, George, Duke of Saxony, said to the
disputants, privately, "Whether the pope exists by divine or by human
right, he is, however, the pope;" and that remark doubtless expressed
the sentiments of the papist party.
22. Luther Condemned and Excommunicated.--Eckius hastened to Rome
after the discussion at Leipsic [Lip-sik], where, with the assistance
of other enemies of Luther, among them Cardinal Cajetan, he urged Leo
X to condemn him and his works. This Leo did by issuing a bull, in
which forty-one of his tenets were pronounced heretical; his writings
condemned to the flames, and he himself commanded to confess his faults
within sixty days, beg the forgiveness of the pope or be excommunicated
from the church.
23. This bull of condemnation Luther burned; together with a copy
of the pontifical canon law, in the presence of a vast multitude. (See
note 6, end of section.) By this act he meant to withdraw from the
church of Rome, that the excommunication which was expected to follow
might be robbed of its force. About a month later--4th of January,
1521--the second bull of Leo was issued in which the Reformer was
expelled from the Catholic church for his heresies and for violating
the majesty of the pontiff. (See note 7, end of section.)
24. Luther Before the Diet at Worms.--After issuing his bull of
excommunication, Leo X called upon the emperor of Germany, Charles V,
to vindicate his title to "Advocate and Defender of the Church," by
inflicting due punishment on that "rebellious member, Martin Luther."
Charles, however, was under deep obligations to Frederic, the Wise,
Elector of Saxony, for his election by the states of Germany to the
imperial dignity; and Frederic, being a warm friend of Luther's and
favorable in the main to his doctrines, advised the emperor {216} to take
no action against the Reformer until he had given him a hearing. This
course Charles resolved to follow, and therefore summoned Luther to
appear before the diet which assembled at Worms in 1521.[14]
25. Before this august body the Reformer appeared to make answer
to the two questions: First, if the books which he had written, the
titles of which were read to him, were his; second, if he was prepared
to retract those books and their contents, or if he persisted in the
opinions he had advanced in them. He acknowledged the books to be his,
and in a speech of some length he explained his motives in writing his
books, and refused to retract them. He thus concluded his speech:
26. I cannot submit my faith either to the pope or to
the council, because it is as clear as the day that they have
frequently erred and contradicted each other. Unless, therefore,
I am convinced by the testimony of scripture, or by the clearest
reasoning--unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have
quoted,--and unless they thus render my conscience bound, by the
word of God, I can not and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a
Christian to speak against his conscience. HERE I STAND, I CAN DO
NO OTHER, MAY GOD HELP ME! AMEN!
27. Luther was protected by a safe conduct from the emperor--a
written guarantee pledging the faith and honor of the empire for his
safety for a limited length of time--or doubtless he would have been
burned at the stake for his adherence to his doctrines and his defiance
of the pope. Indeed, some members of the diet advised the violation of
the safe conduct, as the word of honor given to an heretic, according
to the morals of the age, was not binding. Charles V, however, {217}
would not listen to such perfidy. He dismissed Luther to return to
Wittenberg in accordance with the terms of his safe conduct; at the
same time condemning him as an heretic misled by his own folly. He
forbade him on his return to Wittenberg to cause the least disorder
among the people, and then promised the representatives of the pope
that he would proceed against him and his adherents as contumacious
heretics, by excommunication, by interdict and by every means
calculated to destroy them.
28. Luther's Confinement at Wartburg.--Prince Frederic, the
Wise, fearing that Luther would fall a prey to his enemies, in the
storm which he saw gathering about him, had him intercepted on his way
back to Wittenberg, by persons in disguise, who carried him to the
castle of Wartburg [Wart-berg], where he was concealed ten months. The
extremes into which some of his followers went, both in doctrine and
in opposition to the Catholics, at last called him from his place of
retirement, in order to restrain them and correct the abuses to which
some of his doctrines gave birth.
29. Death of Leo X--Demands for a General Council.--The year
following the diet at Worms, Leo X died and was succeeded by Hadrian
VI. This pontiff, while renewing the demand that the edict of the
diet of Worms against Luther and his adherents should be executed,
acknowledged the church to be in a lamentable condition, and promised
a general reformation. The assembled princes at the diet of Nuremberg,
before which the demands of Hadrian were presented, thought the time
propitious--the emperor Charles was absent in Spain--to insist upon a
free council to be held in Germany, to deliberate in the ancient manner
on a general reformation of the church. This Hadrian promised to grant,
but before it could be assembled he died, having occupied the papal
chair but two years and eight months. He was succeeded by Clement VII,
who reproved the German princes for {218} neglecting to proceed against
Luther and his adherents. The emperor seconded the demands of the pope,
and a number of the princes, awed by the united demands of the pope and
the emperor, promised to enforce the edict to the extent of their power.
30. Death of Frederic--Distinct Church Founded.--In 1525, Prince
Frederic, the Wise, Elector of Saxony, and friend of Luther, died. He
was succeeded by his brother John. Frederic had ever been an ardent
admirer of Luther, but was extremely cautions in giving him any
direct assistance. John was of a different temperament. He believed
the principles which the Reformer taught, but saw quite clearly that
they must either be abandoned or the authority of the pope discarded.
He resolved upon the latter; and taking matters in his own hands,
determined to organize a church altogether distinct from that of
Rome. To accomplish this he called upon Luther and Philip Melancthon
[Me-lanc-thon] to draw up a formula for public worship, and draft a
form of church government in harmony with their principles, fixing the
salaries of the clergy, defining their official duties, etc. This the
Reformers gladly undertook, and shortly afterwards had the pleasure of
seeing other German princes pursue the same course that John had taken,
and adopt the system of worship they had formulated.
31. The Rupture Between the Pope and the Emperor.--This bold step
threatened for a time to disrupt the German empire; for the princes who
remained true to the old religion openly consulted together upon the
advisability of taking up arms against the Lutherans; and the princes
favoring the Reformers met to consider the necessity of forming an
alliance to resist their enemies. In the midst of these threatening
prospects an event happened which was of great advantage to the
Lutheran cause, and prevented for the moment any action against them.
The Emperor Charles V and Pope {219} Clement VII became open enemies.
The pontiff, fearing the increasing power of Charles, had formed an
alliance with Francis I, king of France, against him. This so incensed
Charles that he abolished the authority of the pope in Spain, made war
upon him in Italy, captured the cities of Rome, besieged the pontiff in
his castle of St. Angelo, and subjected him to great indignities.
32. The Diet at Spire--1529.--The difficulties between Charles
and the pope were finally settled, however, and a diet was called
at Spire in 1529, in which a majority voted to deprive the princes
of Germany of the right to regulate religious matters within their
respective territories--a right which a diet held three years before
at Spire had granted. That is, such power was granted pending the
settlement of religious difficulties by a free general council.[15] The
diet also declared all changes made in the public religion unlawful.
This action was considered a hardship by those princes who had made
such changes, and they protested against the action of the diet and
appealed to the emperor.[16] It was this protest which gave to the
dissenting princes, and the followers of Luther generally, the name
Protestants.
33. The envoys of the dissenting princes sent to inform Charles
of the stand they had taken in relation to the religious controversy
in Germany were imprisoned by him, a circumstance which threatened
hostility, and the Protestant princes at once took counsel for their
safety and sought to form closer alliances with each other for mutual
defense. Unfortunately, however, the would-be reformers of religion
were not united in {220} doctrine, and the efforts of the princes at
union were rendered vain by the disputes of the theologians.
34. Diet at Augsburg--Protestant Confession of Faith.--The
emperor finally determined to settle this religious controversy within
his empire, and appointed a diet to be assembled at Augsburg for that
purpose. In order that the faith of the Protestants might be clearly
set forth, together with their reasons for separation from the Roman
church, Luther and Melancthon, at the instance of the princes who
favored their doctrines, drew up a confession of faith, known as the
Augsburg Confession. It consisted of twenty-eight articles, twenty-one
of which stated the doctrines of the Reformers, and the other seven
stated their reason for withdrawing from the Roman church. These in
brief were--communion in one kind; by which the sacramental cup was
denied the laity; imposing celibacy on the clergy; private masses;
auricular confession; legendary traditions; monastic vows; and lastly,
the excessive power of the church. In respect to this last "abuse," as
these several above things are called, they discriminate between civil
and ecclesiastical power, and insist that neither should infringe upon
the domain of the other.
35. The diet of Augsburg assembled on the 20th of June, 1530;
and after the Confession of Faith was read to the emperor, it was
signed by John, Elector of Saxony, four princes of the empire, and the
representatives of two imperial cities, Nuremberg [Nu-rem-berg] and
Reutlingen [Roit-ling-en].[17]
36. The friends of the pope at the diet presented a confutation
of the Protestant confession, and thereupon the emperor commanded the
Protestants to abandon their whole cause of controversy. In reply they
protested they were not satisfied {221} with the "confutation," and
asked that a copy of it might be given them that they might make answer
to it. This the emperor would not grant, nor would he permit an answer
to be read before the diet which Philip Melanchthon had written out
from memory. A number of conferences were held between the leaders of
the contending parties with a view to reach an honorable compromise,
but they had drifted too far apart, and all hope of reconciliation
was lost. At last the emperor issued a decree commanding back to
their allegiance to the pontiff the princes and cities that had
become alienated from the holy See of Rome, on pain of incurring the
vengeance of the emperor. The religious changes made in some of the
principalities were censured and the edict of Worms against Luther and
his adherents received new force.
37. The League of Smalcald.--Nothing daunted by the unfavorable
decree of the emperor, the Protestant princes assembled at Smalcald,
and entered into a league among themselves, and made every effort to
induce the kings of England, France, Denmark and other princes to join
their confederacy. This movement seriously embarrassed Charles, for
he was just on the eve of a war with the Turks, and needed the entire
strength of his empire. He therefore entered into negotiations with the
Protestant princes, and finally agreed to annual the edict of Worms and
of Augsburg, allow the Protestants to regulate religious matters to
please themselves until either a council of the church or a diet of the
empire should determine what religious principles should be approved
and obeyed--the council to be called within six months. Such were the
concessions of the emperor. On their part, the Protestant princes were
to contribute money for the Turkish war, and acknowledge Ferdinand,
brother of the emperor, king of the Romans.[18]
38. The Truce of Nuremberg.--This treaty of peace {222} being
drawn up and accepted in the city of Nuremberg [Nu-rem-berg], was
known as the Truce of Nuremberg, and under it the Protestant cause was
materially strengthened; for every day men and cities threw off their
allegiance to the pope and rejoiced in their new-found freedom.
39. Difficulty in Locating the Council.--The emperor urged the
pontiff to call the long-talked-of council which was to settle these
unhappy difficulties. But this Clement VII seemed not anxious to do.
When he did propose a council it was at places in Italy, and to this
the Germans would not consent, as a council held there would be under
the influence of the pope; besides, the controversy had arisen in
Germany, and there it should be settled. The Protestants also insisted
that the decision should be founded solely on the scriptures, a point
which required the church of Rome to set aside all the former decisions
of her great councils--a thing her pontiffs were in no temper to do, as
they considered themselves in the position of a parent having absolute
jurisdiction, dealing with a refractory child. Finally, the successor
of Clement VII--Paul III--with the approval of the emperor, called a
council to meet at Trent, in Austria (in the Austrian Tyrol). But this
was not satisfactory to the Protestants, and Charles X despairing of
settling the difficulties by peaceful methods and being urged to it
by Pope Paul III prepared to settle them by resorting to force. While
the Catholics and Protestants were preparing for this conflict Luther,
whose preaching had begun this agitation, died at Eisleben, his native
town. [See note 8, end of section.]
40. Reverses of the Protestants.--In the war which followed the
Protestants met with severe reverses and were forced by the emperor to
consent to refer the religious controversy to the council of Trent,
but it being reported that the plague had broken out in that city,
the council was broken up, nor could Charles induce the pope to call
another immediately {223} (see note 9, end of section); hence it
became necessary to formulate a treaty which should bind both parties
in respect to religion, pending the convening of a council. This
treaty was called The Interim, and was of course most favorable to the
victorious party--the Catholics--and went far towards establishing the
old methods of worship.
41. Victory of Protestants--Religious Liberty Secured.--At last
the emperor persuaded the pope to re-assemble the Council of Trent, and
gave notice to the Protestants to attend, promising to use his best
endeavor to have everything done in a Christian manner and without
passion. But before this council could assemble the Protestant princes
revolted, took the emperor by surprise, and forced him into signing a
treaty at Paussau, in 1552, which guaranteed religious liberty to the
Protestants. This treaty was re-confirmed by the emperor in the diet at
Augsburg, 1555. By that treaty all who had accepted the Confession of
Augsburg were declared free from all jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff,
and his bishops. They were to be permitted to live in peace and the
quiet enjoyment of religious liberty. Men were to be left free to join
either the Reformed or the Catholic Church, and any person making war
upon others, or molesting them because of their religion was to be
accounted the public enemy of Germany.
42. Such was the fruit of the great revolution of the sixteenth
century in Germany--religious liberty. To that end all the struggles
tended, and its result was indeed glorious, worth all the tears and
blood it had cost to gain it. But it was not a reformation, if by
that is meant the bringing back of primitive Christianity. That the
Reformers did not do. Indeed they left more truth in the Catholic
church than they brought out with them, or found in their speculations
after leaving that church, as will be seen by a careful consideration
of Protestant doctrines treated in subsequent sections.
{224}
NOTES.
1. The Humiliation of Henry IV.--It was the fourth day on which
he had borne the humiliating garb of an affected penitent, and in
that sordid raiment he drew near on his bare feet to the more than
imperial majesty of the church, and prostrated himself in more than
servile deference before the diminutive and emaciated old man, from
the terrible glance of whose countenance, we are told, "the eyes of
every beholder recoiled as from the lightning." Hunger, cold and
nakedness, and shame, had for the moment crushed the gallant spirit of
the sufferer. He wept and cried for mercy, again and again renewing his
entreaties until he had reached the lowest level of abasement to which
his own enfeebled heart or the haughtiness of his great antagonist
could depress him. Then, and not till then did the pope condescend
to revoke the anathema of the vatican.--Sir J. Stephen's Essays On
Ecclesiastical Biography.
2. Influence of Greek Literature on the Fifteenth Century.--The
classical school of that period (15th century) inspired its disciples
with admiration, not only for the writings of Virgil and Homer, but
for the entire frame of ancient society; for its institutions, its
opinions, its philosophy, as well as its literature. Antiquity, it must
be allowed, whether as regards politics, philosophy, or literature,
was greatly superior to the Europe of the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries. It is not surprisingg, therefore, that it should have
exercised so great an influence; that lofty, vigorous, elegant and
fastidious minds should have been disgusted with the coarse manners,
the confused ideas, the barbarous modes of their own time, and should
have devoted themselves with enthusiasm, and almost with veneration, to
the study of a state of society at once more regular and more perfect
than their own. Thus was formed that school of bold thinkers, which
appeared at the commencement of the fifteenth century, and in which
prelates, priests and men of learning were united by common sentiment
and common pursuits.--Guizot's Hist. Civilization.
3. Luther on Indulgences.--I was compelled in my conscience to
expose the scandalous sale of indulgences. I saw some seduced by them
into mischievous errors, others tempted into an audacious profaneness.
In a word, the proclaiming and selling of pardons proceeded to such
an unbounded licentiousness that the holy church and its authorities
became subjects of open derision in the public taverns. There was no
occasion to excite the hatred of mankind against priests to a greater
degree. The avarice and profligacy of the clergy had for many years
past kindled the indignation of the laity. Alas! they have not a
particle of respect or honor for the priesthood, except what solely
arises from fear of punishment.--Luther.
{225} 4. Duke George of Saxony on the Corruption in the
Church.--[Duke George is regarded as a bigoted papist, esteemed
by the Roman Catholics as a most sincere and active defender of the
faith of his day. His testimony, therefore, to the sale and evils of
indulgences, and the corruption of the clergy, is the more valuable.
He entirely approved of Luther's condemnation.] "Indulgences which
ought to be obtained by prayer, fastings, benevolence towards our
neighbor, and other good works," said the duke, "are sold for money.
Their value is extolled beyond all decency. The sole object is to gain
a deal of money. Hence the preachers who are bound to set forth truth,
teach men nothing but lies and frauds. They are not only suffered to
go on thus, but they are well paid for their fraudulent harangues. The
reason is the more conviction they can produce among their hearers,
the more money flows into the chest. Rivers of scandalous proceedings
arise from this corrupt fountain. The officials of the bishops are
equally attentive to scrape money together. They vex the poor with
their censures for great crimes, as whoredom, adultery, blasphemy;
but they spare the rich. The clergy commit the very same crimes, and
nobody censures them. Faults which ought to be expiated by prayers and
fastings are atoned for by money, in order that the officials may pay
large sums to their respective bishops, and retain a portion of the
gain for themselves. Neither when a fine is inflicted is it done in a
way to stop the commission of the same fault in the future, but rather
so that the delinquent understands he may soon do that very thing
again, provided he be but ready to pay. Hence all the sacraments are
sold for money; and where that is not to be had, they are absolutely
neglected."--Duke George, quoted by Milner, Church Hist. vol. iv, p.
568.
5. Character of Tetzel.--He was a profligate wretch, who had
once fallen into the hands of the Inquisition in consequence of his
adulteries, and whom the elector of Saxony rescued by his intercession.
He now cried up his merchandise in a manner so offensive, so contrary
to all Christian principles, and so acceptably to the inconsiderate,
that all upright men were disgusted with him. * * * He claimed to have
power to absolve, not only from all church censure, but likewise from
all sins, transgressions, and enormities, however horrid they might
be, and even from those of which only the pope can take cognizance.
He released from all the punishments of purgatory, gave permission
to come to the sacraments, and promised to those who purchased their
indulgences, that the gates of hell should be closed, and the gates of
paradise and of bliss open to them.--Schlegel.
6. Luther Burning the Pope's Bull.--On the 10th of December, a
{226} placard was posted on the walls of the university of Wittemberg,
inviting the professors and students to be present at nine o'clock in
the morning, at the eastern gate near the Holy Cross. A great number
of doctors and students assembled, and Luther walking at their head,
conducted the procession to the appointed place. How many burning
piles has Rome erected during the course of ages! Luther resolves to
make a better application of the great Roman principle. It is only
a few old papers that are to be destroyed; and fire, thinks he, is
intended for that purpose. A scaffold had been prepared. One of the
oldest masters of arts set fire to it. As the flames rose high into
the air, the formidable Augustine, wearing his frock, approached the
pile, carrying the Canon Law, the Decretals, the Clementines, the papal
Extravagants, some writings by Eckius and Emser, and the pope's bull.
Luther held up the bull and said: "Since thou hast vexed the Holy One
of the Lord, may everlasting fire vex and consume thee." He then flung
it into the flames. Never had war been declared with greater energy
and resolution. After this Luther calmly returned to the city, and the
crowd of doctors, professors and students testifying their approval by
loud cheers, re-entered Wittemberg with him.--D'Aubigne's Hist. of the
Reformation.
7. Excommunication of Luther.--The excommunication bull was an
attack upon the rights of the German churches. For Luther had appealed
to an ecclesiastical council; and in consequence of this appeal the
pope could no longer have jurisdiction of the case. Hence the number
of Luther's friends increased the more after the publication of this
bull.--Schlegel.
8. The Character of Luther.--Seckendorf * * * defies all the
adversaries of Luther to fix any just censure on his character except
what may be ranked under two heads, viz., a disposition to anger, and
an indulgence in jesting. Beyond all doubt the Saxon reformer was of a
choleric temper, and he too often gave way to this constitutional evil,
as he himself laments. Neither is it to be denied that he also too much
encouraged his natural propensity to facetiousness. The monks of his
time were in general guilty of the like fault, and often to so great
a degree as very improperly to mix scurrilities with sacred subjects.
Moreover, the vices and follies of those whom Luther opposed, afforded
a strong temptation both to the spirit of anger and of ridicule. For
however severe he may be thought in many of his invectives, we are
compelled by unquestionable evidence to confess that his keenest
satirical pieces never reached the demerits of those who ruled the
church in that age. But after all that can be said in mitigation, it
must be owned that a reformer ought to have considered not so much what
they deserved {227} as what became the character he had to support;
viz., that of a serious Christian, zealous for the honor of his God,
displeased with the vices of his clerical brethren, and grieved on
account of the pitiable ignorance of the people, yet more desirous of
curing the prevailing evils than of exposing them.--Milner.
9. The Pestilence and the Council of Trent.--The report of a
pestilence was a mere pretense. The Pope Paul III was equally zealous
of the council which had not been disposed in all respects to govern
itself by his prescription, and of the governing power of the emperor,
which he did not wish to see farther increased by the council. He
indeed hated the Protestants, but he did not wish to see the emperor,
under color of enforcing the decrees of the council, acquire a
more absolute authority over Germany. He had already withdrawn his
troops from the imperial army; and he now wished to see the council
dispersed. The Spanish members opposed him; but he found means to
prevail.--Schlegel.
REVIEW.
1. What centuries may be considered as the age of moral and spiritual
darkness?
2. What power was supreme in those ages?
3. Give an instance illustrating the pride and insolence of the popes.
(Note 1.)
4. What was Henry IV's offense?
5. From what period do historians date the "revival of learning?"
6. What several inventions and circumstances contributed to the
intellectual awakening of Europe?
7. What effect did the fall of the eastern division of the Roman empire
have on the west?
8. What was the influence of ancient literature on the west? (Note 2.)
9. What circumstances led to the enlargement of the liberty of the
masses?
10. Describe land tenure under the feudal system.
11. What were the Crusades?
12. Who aroused the nations of western Europe to undertake the Crusades?
13. What effect did the Crusades have on the feudal system of land
tenure and liberty?
{228} 14. What did this enlarged liberty prepare the people for?
15. What event is usually considered the beginning of the Reformation?
16. Give an account of the birth and parentage of Martin Luther.
17. What schools did he attend and with what result?
18. What effect was produced by his visit to Rome?
19. State the origin of indulgences.
20. What doctrine respecting the efficacy of Christ's blood was
advanced by Pope Clement VI?
21. What doctrine is held by the Roman Catholic church about the
atonement of Christ for sin?
22. Of what did the temporary punishments for sin usually consist--that
is, in early times?
23. What changes were made later?
24. Describe the traffic in indulgences.
25. What excuse was made by the pope for the vigorous sale of
indulgences in the 16th century?
26. Who hawked indulgences in the part of Germany where Luther lived?
27. What was the character of Tetzel? (Note 5.)
28. In what spirit was Luther's controversy with Tetzel regarded at
Rome?
29. What aroused the pope from his indifference?
30. In what way did meet the difficulty?
31. What course was pursued by Cardinal Cajetan and what was the result?
32. What difference in respect to authority to be appealed to in the
settlement of controversy existed between Luther and the cardinal?
33. What act of Leo X led Luther to appeal to a general council?
34. State what two parties existed in the Roman Catholic church and
what their difference.
35. Describe how the controversy on free will arose.
36. State the respective positions of Eckius and Carolstadt in the
controversy.
37. What discussion arose between Luther and Eckius after the debate on
free will?
38. What position did Eckius take in relation to the supremacy of the
pope?
39. What was Luther's position?
40. What was the effect of the discussion?
41. Relate the circumstance of Luther's excommunication.
42. How did Luther treat the bull of excommunication? (Notes 6 and 7.)
43. State how Luther came to be summoned before the diet at Worms.
{229} 44. What two questions confronted Luther at the diet?
45. How did he answer them?
46. By what means was Luther protected from the vengeance of the pope?
47. What at last called him from his retirement?
48. Who succeeded Leo X?
49. What demand was made upon Pope Hadrian by the German princes?
50. What event prevented the assembling of the council?
51. What course did Pope Clement VII follow?
52. How did the death of Frederic, the Wise, and the succession of
John, his brother, affect the Reformation?
53. What did John's course threaten to produce?
54. What circumstance prevented it?
55. Relate what transpired at the diet at Spire.
56. By what means did the German emperor decide to settle the religious
controversy in his realm?
57. State what you can of the Augsburg confession of faith.
58. What unreasonable demand did the emperor make of the Protestants?
59. What compromise was effected?
60. What difficulty arose concerning convening the council?
61. What reverses did the Protestants sustain in the conflict of arms?
62. What finally resulted from all this agitation?
63. Give the character of Luther? (Note 8.)
{230}
SECTION II.
1. Controversy on the Question of Grace.--It is now for us to
consider the principles at issue in the Reformation. Luther at the
first began his opposition to the pope by denouncing indulgences, and
there can be no question but he and every other honest Christian had
just cause of complaint and indignation against this infamous traffic,
and against the church for permitting it. Yet it cannot be denied that
there was a wide difference between the doctrine of the Catholic church
respecting indulgences [see note 1, end of section] and the things
taught by the infamous John Tetzel. This is evident from the fact that
Tetzel with other agents of the pope were censured for their over zeal
and excesses in dealing in indulgences.[19] Miltitz, whom the pope had
appointed to treat with Luther to bring about his reconciliation with
the church, meeting with Tetzel at Leipsic, twice rebuked him with the
greatest severity before the bishops of his province, on account of his
iniquitous proceedings in the sale of indulgences, and he finally died
neglected and alone--"deserted by all the world." [See note 2, end of
section.]
2. These abuses in the sale of indulgences and the other
corruptions which had crept into the church formed a just cause
of complaint; but they were not the true point at issue in the
controversy. Some time before he opposed indulgences, Luther--if we
may believe D'Aubigne [Do-benya]--had imbibed {231} ideas in respect
to the part which the grace of God takes in the salvation of man that
would have led him to oppose the church of Rome, if the abuses in the
matter of indulgences had never existed. In order that the student may
grasp this subject in its fullness, and the better understand this
controversy between Luther and the Catholic church, we shall make a
careful statement of the facts which enter into the question of God's
grace and the free will of man.
1. _Power of Deliberation_--The mind is conscious of a power of
deliberation, before the intellect passes the different motives of
action, interests, passions, opinions, etc. The intellect considers,
compares, estimates, and finally judges them. This is a preparatory
work which precedes the act of will.
2. _Liberty, Free Agency or Will_.--When deliberation has taken
place--when man has taken full cognizance of the motives which present
themselves to him, he takes a resolution, of which he looks upon
himself as the author, which arises because he wishes it, and which
would not arise unless he did wish it--here the fact of agency is
shown; it resides complete in the resolution which man makes after
deliberation; it is the resolution which is the proper act of man,
which subsists by him alone; a simple fact independent of all the facts
which precede it or surround it.
3. _Free Will, or Agency Modified_--At the same time that man feels
himself free, he recognizes the fact that his freedom is not arbitrary,
that it is placed under the dominion of a law which will preside over
it and influence it. What that law is will depend upon the education
of each individual, upon his surroundings, etc. To act in harmony with
that law is what man recognizes as his duty; it will be the task of
his liberty. He will soon see, however, that he never fully acquits
himself of his task, never acts in full harmony with his moral law.
Morally capable of conforming himself to his law, he falls short of
doing it. He does not accomplish all that he ought, nor all {232} that
he can. This fact is evident, one of which all may give witness; and it
often happens that the best men, that is, those who have best conformed
their will to reason, have often been the most struck with their
insufficience.
4. _Necessity of External Assistance_--This weakness in man leads him
to feel the necessity of an external support to operate as a fulcrum
for the human will, a power that may be added to its present power and
sustain it at need. Man seeks this fulcrum on all sides; he demands
it in the encouragement of friends, in the councils of the wise; but
as the visible world, the human society, do not always answer to his
desires, the soul goes beyond the visible world, above human relations,
to seek this fulcrum of which it has need. Hence the religious
sentiment develops itself: man addresses himself to God, and invokes
his aid through prayer.
5. _Man Finds the Help he Seeks_--Such is the nature of man that when
he sincerely asks this support he obtains it; that is, seeking it is
almost sufficient to secure it. Whosoever feeling his will weak invokes
the encouragement of a friend, the influence of wise councils, the
support of public opinion, or who addresses himself to God by prayer,
soon feels his will fortified in a certain measure and for a certain
time.
6. _Influence of Spiritual World on Liberty_--There are spiritual
influences at work on man--the empire of the spiritual world upon
liberty. There are certain changes, certain moral events which manifest
themselves in man without his being able to refer their origin to
an act of his will, or being able to recognize the author. Certain
facts occur in the interior of the human soul which it does not refer
to itself, which it does not recognize as the work of its own will.
There are certain days, certain moments in which it finds itself in a
different moral state from that which it was last conscious of under
the operations of its own will. In other words, the moral man does not
wholly create himself; he is conscious that causes, that powers {233}
external to himself act upon and modify him imperceptibly[20]--this
fact has been called the grace of God which helps the will of man,
while others see in it the evidences of predestination.
3. The Pelagian View.--From these facts men arrive at different
conclusions. Some regarding only the power of man to deliberate on any
proposed course of conduct, and his ability to decide for himself what
course he will pursue, ignoring the spiritual influences which operate
on him, and taking no account of the aid which comes to man through
prayer--believe that man's conduct depends entirely upon his will.
"Tis in ourselves that we are thus or thus," say they; and hence reject
the fact of the grace of God and the influence it exerts on human
conduct.
Such was the conclusion arrived at by Pelagius who flourished early in
the fifth century. He asserted that human nature is not fallen--that
there is no hereditary corruption, and that man having the power to
do good has only to will in order to perform. His doctrine has been
revised several times, and has drawn to it not a few believers.
4. Catholic View.--Others regarding all the facts elsewhere
enumerated--man's power to deliberate, his ability to decide upon his
course, his failure to do all that his reason teaches him it is his
duty to do, his need of help from a source external to himself, the
assistance he can and does obtain through prayer and, lastly, the
influence of spiritual forces upon man--leads them to the conclusion
that it is through a union of the grace of God and the free will of man
that men arrive at last at righteousness. Such was the teaching of the
Roman Catholic church.
5. Protestant View.--Others still, looking only upon the
influence of the spiritual world on man, and noting how very far short
he comes of doing all his reason teaches him it is his {234} duty to
do, conclude that man has no power whatsoever to do good of himself,
that he can exercise no will to work righteousness until after the
grace of God makes him righteous, and that it is that grace altogether
which causes him both to will and to do good works.
6. Luther's Fundamental Doctrine.--Luther belonged to this
last-named class. Long before he came to an open rupture with the pope,
he taught the doctrine of predestination, and of salvation through
faith alone:--"The excellent, infallible, and sole preparation for
grace is the eternal election and predestination of God." "On the side
of man there is nothing that goes before grace, unless it be impotency
and even rebellion." "We do not become righteous by doing what is
righteous; but having become righteous we do what is righteous." [21]
"Since the fall of man, free will is but an idle word; and if man does
all he can he still sins mortally." "A man who imagines to arrive at
grace by doing all that he is able to do adds sin to sin and is doubly
guilty." "That man is not justified who performs many works; but he
who, without works, has much faith in Christ." [22] "What gives peace
to our consciences is this--by faith our sins are no longer ours, but
Christ's on whom God has laid them all; and, on the other hand, all
Christ's righteousness belongs to us, to whom God has given it." [23]
Thus taught Luther, and this became the first, the main theological
question of the reformation. "The point which the Reformer had most
at heart in all his labors, contests and dangers," says a respectable
authority, "was the doctrine of justification by faith alone." [24]
[Note 3, end of section.]
7. It is but just to the Reformer however, that it should be
known that he did not himself reject good works, but on the contrary
exhorted men to practice them; but he condemns {235} those who did them
with an idea that by them they would be justified, or that they were
necessary to salvation. He held also that in order to do good works men
must first be justified, and that good works done before justification
were even sinful.[25]
8. The Mischief of Luther's Doctrine.--Though Luther did not
reject good works, and though he held that justifying faith would
produce them, yet his doctrine has been the source of much mischief in
the world. When it was charged by his vicar general, Staupitius, that
his doctrines were the delight of debauches, and that many scandalous
practices were the consequences of some of his publications, he could
not deny the charge, but contented himself by saying, "I am neither
afraid of such censorious representations, nor surprised to hear
them." [26] Luther's doctrine of salvation by faith alone, as stated
by Melanchthon, with his approval, stands thus: "Man's justification
before God proceeds from faith alone. This faith enters man's heart
by the grace of God alone." [27] This leaves man a passive creature in
relation to his salvation. He is helpless to procure it; he can do
nothing to hasten it; he is helpless; he must wait the divine workings
of the grace of God. "As all things which happen," says Melanchthon,
"happen necessarily, according to the divine predestination, there is
no such thing as liberty in our wills." [28] [Note 4, end of section.]
Other followers of Luther, among them one Nicholas Amsdorf, went so far
as to maintain that good works were a hindrance to salvation.[29]
9. By denying the existence of human liberty, and maintaining
{236} that all things happen necessarily, the reformers, with Luther at
their head, laid themselves open to the charges made by the partisans
of the church of Rome, viz.: Their doctrine threw open a door to the
most unbounded licentiousness since it furnished men with this defense
for the crimes they committed--"We could do no other, our fate did
not permit us to do otherwise." By saying that good works were not
necessary to salvation, and assisted in no way to procure it, the
Reformers took away the chief incentive to good works, and removed the
principal restraint to the doing of evil.
10. Moreover, their doctrine rendered void the ordinances and
works required by the gospel; neither repentance nor baptism, nor any
other act of obedience to God is essential if salvation is by faith
alone. To say that it is a doctrine adverse to the whole tenor of
scripture, notwithstanding a few isolated passages depended upon by the
Reformers and their successors to support it, is not necessary here.
It is sufficient to remark that it is a doctrine which would render
the commandments of God incompatible with the powers and capacity of
his creatures; a doctrine which destroys at once the consistency of
God and the moral responsibility of man; and therefore a doctrine most
pernicious and dangerous to entertain. [See note 5, end of section.]
11. Luther on the Danger of his Doctrine.--It proved to be so
even during the lifetime of Luther; for it led some of his followers to
believe that Christ had abolished the moral law; and that Christians,
therefore, were not obliged to observe it.[30] Luther himself saw the
danger of his doctrine and thus spoke of it:
If faith be preached, as of necessity it must be, the greater
part of mankind will interpret the doctrine in a carnal way, and
so understand spiritual liberty as to allow indulgences of the
flesh. This we {237} may see in all the ranks of life. All profess
themselves to be evangelical; all boast of their Christian liberty;
and yet give way to their lusts and passions, for example to
covetousness, pride, envy, pleasures, and such like. Who discharges
his duty faithfully? Who serves his brother in a true spirit of
charity? The disgrace which such conduct brings on the profession
of the gospel puts me sometimes so out of temper that I could wish
these swine, that tread precious pearls under their feet were
still under the tyranny of the pope; for it is impossible that a
people so much resembling those of Gomorrah, should be kept in due
subjection by the mild maxims of the gospel of peace.[31]
12. It counts for nothing that Luther denounced this corrupt
state of morals among his followers; it was the legitimate outgrowth of
his fundamental doctrine--the doctrine of nearly all Protestants--of
justification by faith alone, a faith which man had no part in
generating, but which came through the grace of God alone. The tree of
his planting produced bitter fruit; it was vain for him to proclaim
against the fruit so long as he insisted that it was a good tree on
which it grew.
13. Teaching of the Church of Rome on Justification.--The
Catholic Church at the time, whatever errors in respect to other
doctrines it entertained, held that salvation, justification before
God, resulted through the exertion of man's free will, aided by the
grace of God. It came through a union of faith and works on the part of
man, and the rich outpouring of grace on the part of Deity; a doctrine
which man is conscious of as operating upon and influencing human
conduct, and at once in harmony with the whole tenor of revelation, and
consonant with the great facts underlying the free will of man which
have been already stated in this section.
14. Unfortunately for the Catholic Church, she did not stop
here, but attached too great importance to external marks of {238}
repentance, to works of penance--to tears, fastings, mortifications
of the flesh, and pilgrimages. Men were required to go barefooted, to
wear coarse raiment next their bodies, to become exiles from their
homes or to renounce the world and embrace a monastic life. Finally
in the eleventh century voluntary whippings were added to these other
punishments [see note 6, end of section]; and men learned to look
upon these works of penance as purchasing a forgiveness of sins, and
paid little attention to the inward regeneration of the heart. "As
confession and penance are easier than the extirpation of sin and
the abandonment of vice, many ceased contending against the lusts
of the flesh, and preferred gratifying them at the expense of a few
mortifications." [32] Especially did this become the case when the
doctrine was promulgated that substitutes could be hired to receive
the punishment originally inflicted upon the offender, and monks and
priests could be found willing to undergo it for a consideration.
15. The church trusted too much in the works of penance, and
did not insist stoutly enough upon repentance--a godly sorrow which
worketh a reformation of life. If the reformers went to one extreme
in attributing man's justification wholly to the act of faith and the
grace of God, the Catholic church went to the other in assigning too
much value to works of penance and performances of human invention for
the forgiveness of sins.
NOTES.
1. Indulgences to be Accompanied by Amendment of Life.--The
doctrine and the sale of indulgences were powerful incentives to evil
among an ignorant people. True, according to the church, indulgences
{239} could benefit those only who promised to amend their lives,
and who kept their word. But what could be expected from a tenet
invented solely with a view to the profit that might be derived from
it? The vendors of indulgences were naturally tempted for the better
sale of their merchandise to present their wares to the people in the
most attractive and seducing aspect. The learned themselves did not
fully understand the doctrine. All the multitude saw in them was that
they permitted men to sin; and the merchants were not over eager to
dissipate an error so favorable to their sale.--D'Aubigne.
2. Death of Tetzel.--While the proper nuncio (Miltitz) was
negotiating a reconciliation in Germany, Tetzel, the wretched
subaltern, whose scandalous conduct had so disgraced his employers,
met with the reward which frequently awaits the ministers of iniquity.
He found himself deserted by all the world. Miltitz in particular had
treated him so roughly that this daring and boisterous instrument of
papal avarice and extortion actually fell sick, wasted away, and at
last died of a broken heart. A dreadful lesson! This unhappy man left
the world, as far as appears, destitute of comfort in his own soul,
after he had ministered a false peace to thousands.--Milner.
3. Luther on Justification by Faith.--I observe that the devil is
continually attacking this fundamental article by means of his doctors,
and that in this respect he can never cease or take any repose. Well,
then, I, Doctor Martin Luther, unworthy herald of the gospel of our
Lord Jesus Christ, confess this article, that faith alone without
works justifies before Gods; and I declare that it shall stand and
remain forever in spite of the emperor of the Romans, the emperor of
the Turks, the emperor of the Tartars, the emperor of the Persians--in
spite of the pope and all the cardinals, with the bishops, priests,
monks and nuns--in spite of kings, princes and nobles, and in spite of
all the world and of the devils themselves; and that if they endeavor
to fight against this truth they will draw the fires of hell upon their
heads. This is the true and holy gospel, and the declaration of me,
Doctor Luther, according to the teaching of the Holy Ghost.--D'Aubigne
(Hist. Ref., vol I, p. 70.)
4. Effects of Predestination on the Mind.--To what purpose shall
I labor in the service of God? If I am predestinated to death [that is,
spiritual death] I shall never escape from it; and if I am predestined
to life [that is, to salvation] even though I do wickedly, I shall, no
doubt, arrive at eternal rest.--Raban, Quoted by Guizot.
5. Evil Results of the Doctrine of Justification by Faith
Alone.--The serious evil involved in Luther's doctrine of
justification by faith without works is perhaps best seen in a
quotation from Fletcher, of Madeley, the most able disciple of John
Wesley and his successor {240} Fletcher accuses one Richard Hill,
Esq.--who accepted in its widest sense the doctrine of justification
by faith alone--with saying: "Even adultery and murder do not hurt the
pleasant children, but rather work for their good. God sees no sin in
believers, whatever sin they may commit. My sins might displease God:
my person is always acceptable to him * * * It is a most pernicious
error of the schoolmen to distinguish sins according to the fact, and
not according to the persons. Though I blame those who say, let us sin
that grace may abound, yet adultery, incest and murder shall, upon
the whole, make me holier on earth and merrier in heaven."--End of
Religious Controversy, p. 90.
6. The Works in which Catholics Trusted.--In the eleventh century
voluntary flagellations were superadded to these practices [fastings,
pilgrimages, etc.]; somewhat later they became quite a mania in Italy,
which was then in a very disturbed state. Nobles and peasants, old and
young, even children of five years of age, whose only covering was
a cloth tied round the middle, went in pairs by hundreds, thousands
and tens of thousands, through the towns and villages, visiting the
churches in the depth of winter. Armed with scourges, they flogged each
other without pity, and the streets resounded with cries and groans
that drew tears from all who heard them.--D'Aubigne.
REVIEW.
1. What difference existed between the teachings of the Catholic church
and the conduct of its agents in the matter of indulgences? (Note 1.)
2. Was the sale of indulgences the chief cause of Luther's revolt from
Rome?
3. What doctrines did Luther entertain which would at last have led him
to oppose the Catholic church?
4. What is the power of deliberation?
5. Explain what liberty or free agency is.
6. In what way is man's will or free agency modified?
7. What is it that convinces man of the necessity of external help to
aid his will?
8. What does man's experience teach him when he seeks external help?
9. What influence is man conscious of as operating upon him in moral
and spiritual affairs?
{241} 10. State the Pelagian view on the subject of grace and free will.
11. State the Roman Catholic view.
12. State the Protestant view.
13. What was Luther's fundamental doctrine?
14. In what light did Luther hold good works?
15. What mischief arose out of Luther's doctrine?
16. What did Luther himself say respecting the danger of his doctrine?
17. What were the teachings of the Roman church on justification?
18. To what extreme did the church of Rome go in the matter of good
works?
19. What was the nature of the works in which Roman Catholics trusted
too much? (Note 6.)
20. What influence on morals did the doctrine have that substitutes
could be employed to receive punishment for sins?
{242}
SECTION III.
1. The Growth of Luther's Rebellion.--The thing most important,
the one which drew with it the gravest consequences, and which led
to the greatest good produced by the Reformation, was the rebellion
of Luther against the authority of the pope. He did not come out in
open rebellion at the first, but arrived at that state by gradual and
imperceptible steps. When his opposition to the sale of indulgences met
with reproof from the pontiff, he appealed from the pope ill-informed
to the pope better-informed. When that pope better-informed still
held him to be in error and refractory, he appealed to a general,
free council of the whole church; but when no heed was taken of this
appeal, and Leo, pressed by Eckius, Cajetan and others, excommunicated
him, he then answered by burning the pope's bull of excommunication,
and stood in open rebellion to the authority of the pontiff. When the
pope appealed to Emperor Charles to make the excommunication of some
force by the power of the secular authority vested in him, the emperor,
contrary to the protests of the pope's legates, resolved to give the
Reformer a hearing before proceeding against him. Accordingly Luther
was summoned before the diet at Worms, where he not only insisted upon
having a hearing before a free, general council of the church, but a
council that would accept the Bible as the final authority upon the
questions at issue between himself and the pontiff.
2. The Catholic Rule of Faith.--This was demanding more than
the pope could grant; for the Catholics have never exalted the Bible
above the church, but have always held that {243} the scriptures must
be accepted as construed by the church, and in the days of Luther the
pope was the church. The Catholic rule of faith in respect to the
laws by which the church is to be governed is: "The word of God, at
large, whether written in the Bible or handed down from the apostles
by tradition, and as it is understood and explained by the Catholic
church." [33] Besides their rule of faith, which is scripture and
tradition, "Catholics acknowledge an unerring judge of controversy, or
sure guide in all matters relating to salvation--viz., the church." [34]
3. This rule employed to interpret the Bible and to settle
controversies that might arise, Luther rejected. Writing in defense
of his conduct in burning the papal bull of excommunication and the
decretals of the popes, he said:
Let no man's good sense be so far seduced as to reverence the
volumes I have burnt, on account of their great antiquity or their
high titles. Let every one first hear and see what the pope teaches
in his own books, and what abominable, poisonous doctrines are to
be found among the sacred, spiritual laws; and then let him freely
judge, whether I have done right or not in burning such writings.
4. Among the teachings in the decretals which Luther held up for
special condemnation were the following:
(1) The pope has the power to interpret scripture, and to teach as
he pleases; and no person is allowed to interpret in a different
way. (2) The pope does not derive from the scripture but the
scripture derives from the pope, authority, power and dignity.
He then affirms that comparing together the different parts of the
canon law, its language amounts to this:
That the pope is God on earth; above all that is earthly or
heavenly, temporal or spiritual; that all things belong to the
pope; and that no one must venture to say, what doest thou?[35]
{244}It was against this arbitrary authority that Luther rebelled.
5. Attempted Settlement by a General Council.--At last when
through the influence of the emperor the pope consented to appoint a
council, a difficulty arose as to where it should be held. The pope on
his part seemed determined to have it assemble in Italy, or in some
country where his influence would predominate; the Reformers were
equally determined to submit their cause to no council outside of
Germany. The difficulty had arisen in Germany; they insisted it should
be settled by a council in Germany, or by a diet of the empire. The
cause was never fairly tried by a council of the whole church; the
revolt against the authority of the pope was sustained by an appeal to
arms, as related in section I, Part III, of this work.
6. Revolution, not Rebellion.--Had that revolt against the
Catholic church been a revolt against legitimate authority it would
have been rebellion: but as it was against a usurped and hence an
illegitimate authority, it was a justifiable revolution. For in
ecclesiastical government, no less than in civil government, if a
long train of abuses renders it odious, and those who execute it are
tyrannical and usurp authority which the law of God does not sanction,
by which unrighteous dominion is exercised over the minds of men, it is
the right of the people to resist such authority: and refuse to sustain
those who exercise that unrighteous dominion to please their vanity or
gratify their ambition.
7. True Position, but a Corrupt Church.--The position that
the church, officered by inspired prophets and apostles--men having
by virtue of their priesthood and official position a right to the
inspiration and revelations of God--the position that the church of
Christ so officered, has the right to decide upon all controversies and
to determine the meaning of scripture, is, beyond all questioning, a
true position. But the difficulty with the Roman Catholic church was
that it was no {245} longer the church of Christ, as already proven in
Part II of this work. It had no prophets or apostles, no men who had a
right to the revelations of God. The popes and bishops of the church
taught that revelation had ceased, and they depended on scripture and
tradition alone, interpreted by themselves, for their guide. The power
the church possessed was usurped power merely, the growth of ages. It
had become both arrogant and insolent, and at last intolerable, and
when a man was found possessing the courage to resent its presumption
and defy it, he found plenty to applaud and sanction his act.
8. True Cause of the Reformation.--We cannot ascribe the
Reformation to accidents and mischances, such for instance as the
jealousy of Luther because the sale of indulgences was entrusted to
the Dominican monks instead of to the order of Augustine monks, to
which he belonged[36]--we cannot assign the cause of the Reformation
to this, neither can we go to the other extreme and say that the great
revolution of the sixteenth century resulted solely from a pure desire
to reform the abuses that had arisen in the church or bring back
Christianity to its primitive purity. Not a few of the princes that
favored Luther in his revolt against the pope did so from other motives
than those prompted by a desire to reform the church.
9. Many of the temporal monarchs and princes were jealous of the
power exercised within their dominions by the Roman pontiffs, as it
lowered the dignity of their own position. They were tired, moreover,
of the assumed right of the pope to enter their dominions, and, under
one pretext or another, tax their subjects and thus not only impoverish
the people, but reduce the revenue of the temporal ruler. It will be
found, {246} therefore, that the jealousy, ambition and interest of
these princes, and not a desire to establish pure religion, made them
factors in the great revolution. (See note 1, end of section.)
10. The people also were tired of the dominion asserted over
their minds by the papal authority, and were only too glad to escape
from that thraldom under any pretext whatsoever. The preceding century
had brought a great intellectual awakening to Europe, and men were no
longer content to have questions of fact and belief decided by the
authority of the church. (See note 2, end of section.) They insisted
that human reason and individual judgment had a right to investigate
and to be satisfied on these questions; and the securing of that
freedom was not only the leading principle of the sixteenth century
revolution, but its greatest achievement. (See note 3, end of section.)
11. Revolution, not Reformation.--It is absurd to say that
the revolution of the sixteenth century was a reformation, if by
that it is meant that it re-established the primitive doctrines of
Christianity, purified the morals of the people, or gave birth to a
better ecclesiastical government. It did no such thing. The Reformers
declaimed against some of the abuses of the Catholic church, such
as denying the sacramental cup to the laity, the celibacy of the
clergy, the absurdities of the mass, fasts and ceremonies of human
invention, the whole system of monkery, and the great usurpation of
authority by the church; and consequently did not include any of
these abuses--except perhaps the last--in the system of religion they
founded. Still their doctrines led them into serious errors and great
disorders.
12. Private Interpretation of the Bible and its Effects.--The
evils that arose from the doctrine of justification by faith alone, we
have already noticed.[37] The disorders that grew out of the doctrine
of private interpretation of scripture is yet to be considered. When
Luther refused to longer recognize the authority of the church in
matters of doctrine, he still was aware that men would need some
authority to decide controversies that would arise, consequently he
held up the Bible as the final arbiter of all questions touching
faith and morals. But the Bible had to be construed, its meaning made
plain, and as each one was left to explain it in his own way, the
utmost confusion prevailed. On the great fundamental principle of the
Protestants--justification by faith alone--Osiander, a Lutheran, says:
There are twenty several opinions, all drawn from scriptures,
and held by different members of the Augsburg, or Lutheran
Confession.[38]
When the Reformers from the several parts of Germany consulted
together, and with them the Reformers from other states met with a
view to come to some understanding in respect to religion and modes of
worship, it was soon apparent that they were hopelessly divided, not
only upon matters unimportant, but also upon fundamental principles.
Luther had rejected the authority of the church and set up the tribunal
of private interpretation of scripture in its stead. A number of his
disciples proceeding on the same principle, rejected some of his
doctrines and undertook to prove from the scripture that he was in
error and that the Reformation needed reforming.
13. Carolstadt, [says the author of the "End of Religious
Controversy] Zuinglius, Okolampadius, Muncer and a hundred more
of his followers, wrote and preached against him and against
each other with the utmost virulence, whilst each of them still
professed to ground his doctrine and conduct on the written word
of God alone. In vain did Luther denounce hell fire against them;
in vain did he threaten to return back to the Catholic religion;
he had put the {248} Bible into each man's hand to explain it for
himself, and this his followers continued to do in open defiance
of him, till their mutual contradictions and discords became so
numerous and scandalous as to overwhelm the thinking part of them
with grief and confusion." [39] (See note 4, end of section.)
14. The Multiplication of Sects.--The division of the Reformers
into numerous sects has ever been a reproach to Protestants and
likewise an evidence of the weakness of their position. Men of
different capacities and dispositions examined the Bible; they found it
no systematic treatise upon religion and morals, but a miscellaneous
collection of inspired writings, dealing with historical events,
connected, in the main, with the people of God; prophecies, dreams,
revelations, doctrines, and morals; written at different times, to
different peoples, and under a great variety of circumstances. In
addition to all this, many plain and precious parts have been taken
away from it;[40] other parts have doubtless been purposely changed
by designing men;[41] which, with the imperfections arising from its
translation from the original languages in which it was written,
has made it an uncertain guide, taken alone, for the church or for
individuals; and as Protestants insisted upon the right of private
judgment in the interpretation of the Bible, it is not surprisingg
that a great variety of opinions were entertained, or that numerous
sects were founded upon them. It was a great evil; much confusion and
disorder arose out of it; but it was an evil that could not be avoided.
It was one of those periods of time when liberty was a cause of
disorder, but the attainment of liberty through that disorder more than
outweighed the evils that arose from it.
15. The Error of the Reformers.--The great error which the
Reformers made was in not giving full application to their principle
of the right of private judgment in matters of {249} religion. They
claimed the right to revolt from the Catholic church, to interpret the
Bible for themselves, and to found their mode of worship upon their own
conceptions of what was required by the revelations of God; but when
others differed from them, and desired to exercise the same liberty,
the Reformers were themselves intolerant, and attempted to compel men
by force to accept their religious faith and modes of worship. It is
this intolerance which is the chief reproach applied to the Reformation
by its enemies, and it must be admitted that it somewhat sullies the
glory of its achievements. (See note 5, end of section.)
NOTES.
1. Motives Back of the Reformation.--The Protestant historian,
Mosheim, with whom Hume agrees, admits that several of the principal
agents in this revolution were actuated more by the impulse of passion
and views of interest than by a zeal for true religion. (Maclaine's
Mosheim, vol. iv. p. 135.) He had before acknowledged that King
Gustavus introduced Lutheranism into Sweden in opposition to the
clergy and bishops, not only as agreeable to the genius and spirit of
the gospel, but also as favorable to the temporal state and political
constitution of the Swedish dominions. He adds that Christiern,
who introduced the Reformation into Denmark, was animated by no
other motives than those of ambition and avarice. Grotius, another
Protestant, testifies that it was sedition and violence which gave
birth to the Reformation in his own country--Holland. The same was the
case in France, Geneva and Scotland. It is to be observed, that in all
these countries the Reformers, as soon as they got the upper hand,
became violent persecutors of the Catholics. Bergier defies Protestants
to name so much as a town or village in which, when they became masters
of it, they tolerated a single Catholic.--End of Religious Controversy,
note, p. 105.
2. Desire for Freedom the Moving Cause in Reformation.--The
strength of the Protestant party had been derived, both in Germany and
England, far less from their superiority in argument, however decisive
{250} this might be, than from that desire which all classes, and
especially the higher, had long experienced to emancipate themselves
from the thraldom of ecclesiastical jurisdiction.--Hallam's Const.
Hist. of Eng.
3. The Cause and Leading Principle of the Reformation.--In
my opinion the Reformation neither was an accident, the result of
some casual circumstance, or some personal interests, nor arose from
unmingled views of religious improvement, the fruit of Utopian humanity
and truth. It had a more powerful cause than all these; a general cause
to which all the others are subordinate. It was a vast effort made by
the human mind to achieve its freedom; it was a new-born desire which
it felt to think and judge, freely and independently, of facts and
opinions which, till then, Europe received or was considered bound
to receive from the hands of authority. It was a great endeavor to
emancipate human reason, and to call things by their right names;
it was an insurrection of the human mind against the absolute power
of spiritual order. Such, in my opinion, was the true character and
leading principle of the Reformation. * * * Not only was this the
result of the Reformation, but it was content with this result.
Whenever this was obtained no other was sought for; so entirely was
it the very foundation of the event, its primitive and fundamental
character! * * * I repeat it; whenever the Reformation attained this
object, it accommodated itself to every form of government and to every
situation.--Guizot.
4. Unhappy Divisions Among Reformers.--Capito, minister of
Strasburg, writing to Forel, pastor of Geneva, thus complains to him:
"God has given me to understand the mischief we have done by our
precipitancy in breaking with the pope. The people say I know enough of
the gospel. I can read it for myself. I have no need of you." In the
same tone Dudith writes to his friend Beza: "Our people are carried
away with every wind of doctrine. If you know what their religion is
today, you cannot tell what it will be tomorrow. In what single point
are those churches which have declared war against the pope agreed
amongst themselves? There is not one point which is not held by some
of them as an article of faith, and by others as an impiety!" In the
same sentiment, Calvin, writing to Melanchthon, says: "It is of great
importance that the divisions which subsist among us should not be
known to future ages: for nothing can be more ridiculous than that we
who have broken off from the whole world, should have agreed so ill
among ourselves from the very beginning of the Reformation."--End of
Religious Controversy, Page 101.
5. The Reproach of the Reformation.--What were the reproaches
constantly applied to the Reformation by its enemies? Which of its
results are thrown in its face, as it were, unanswerable? The two
principal reproaches are, first, the multiplicity of sects, the
excessive license of thought, the destruction of all spiritual
authority, and the entire dissolution of religious society; secondly,
tyranny and persecution. "You provoke licentiousness," it has been said
to the Reformers: "you produce it; and, after being the cause of it,
you wish to restrain and repress it. And how do you repress it? By the
most harsh and violent means. You take upon yourselves, too, to punish
heresy, and that by virtue of an illegitimate authority."--Guizot.
REVIEW.
1. What was the matter of chief importance in the Reformation?
2. Describe the growth of Luther's conflict with the pope.
3. Describe the Catholic rule of faith.
4. What demands contrary to that rule did Luther make?
5. What difficulty arose in respect to settling the controversy by an
appeal to a general council?
6. What can you say of the revolt of Luther to the Catholic church
authority?
7. What can you say of the right of the true Church of Christ to settle
controversies and determine the meaning of scripture?
8. Why was the Catholic church unqualified to render decisions on such
matters?
9. What several causes are assigned for the Reformation by Catholics
and Protestants respectively? (Note.)
10. What was the true cause?
11. What several considerations aided the Reformation?
12. Was the religious movement of the 16th century a reformation or a
revolution?
13. What can you say of the evils which arose from the private
interpretation of the Bible?
14. What caused the multiplication of sects among the Protestants?
15. What makes the Bible an insufficient guide in matters of faith and
worship?
16. What was the great error of the Reformers?
{252}
SECTION IV.
1. The Reformation in Switzerland.--So far we have considered
this sixteenth century revolution as it affected the German empire
alone. It was not confined, however, to that country. As a matter of
fact, the so-called Reformation began in Switzerland before it did
in Germany. Ulrich Zwingle, born in Wildhausen, Canton of St. Gall,
Switzerland 1484, attacked many of the errors of the Catholic Church,
before Luther began his opposition.
2. In 1516, Zwingle openly declaimed against many Catholic
abuses, such as monastic vows, pilgrimages, worship of relics, and
indulgences. He also taught that the Bible was the only standard of
religious truth. In 1518, one Samson came into Switzerland to sell
indulgences. The year following Zwingle opposed him and drove him from
Zurich. Four years later the Swiss Reformer was accused of heresy
by adherents of the Roman pontiff, and brought before the council
of Zurich. He presented sixty-seven doctrinal propositions before
the council which he agreed to defend by the scriptures against all
opposers. The council before which his cause was tried decided that
the controversy must be settled by an appeal to the Bible, and Zwingle
triumphed. At the conclusion of the hearing the council decreed that
the Reformer should be allowed to teach as he had formerly done
unmolested; and that no preacher in the canton should teach any
doctrine he could not prove by the Bible. The year following--1524--the
council reformed the public worship, that is, they adopted the
principles and methods of worship proposed by Zwingle.
{253} 3. In 1531, the Catholics in the surrounding cantons
attacked Zurich, and early in the battle, Zwingle, while leading the
Protestant forces, was slain, his body hacked to pieces and afterwards
burned. [See note 1, end of section.]
4. John Calvin.--Zwingle was succeeded in the leadership of the
Swiss Reformers by John Calvin, a talented but austere man, a native
of Noyon, France. [See note 2, end of section.] He more than any other
man--Luther excepted--influenced the character of the Protestant
churches. He held many views that were at variance with those of
Zwingle. The latter taught that civil rulers possessed absolute power
in religious matters, and subjected the ministers altogether to their
authority. Calvin held that the church should be free and independent
of the state; that it should govern itself by its own officers whom
the church and not the state should appoint; he limited the power of
the state over the church to giving it external protection. Zwingle
recognized a gradation of officers in the Christian church; Calvin
held that all were equal. Suitable persons appointed and ordained with
the consent of the members of the church, constituted, in his theory
of church government, a legitimate ministry to preach the gospel and
administer the sacraments. But for the government of the church a
number of men were chosen by the people from among the most venerable
and respectable of the congregation. These men were called presbyters
or elders. They were all equal in authority, and even the preaching
minister was in no sense superior to them in office.
5. The elders of a single church or congregation convened
in council constituted the church session; councils composed of
representatives from the several churches in a province, constituted
synods or consistories; while a general council composed of elders from
all the churches was known as the general assembly. The elders in these
several councils were all regarded {254} as equal in authority and had
full power to enact laws relating to religious matters and to establish
the discipline of the church. Such is the order of church government
founded by Calvin, and known as Presbyterianism.
6. Difference of Opinion on the Eucharist.--As already stated
in a previous section, the Catholics maintained that in the eucharist
the bread and the wine, were converted by consecration into the very
body and blood of Messiah. Zwingle maintained that the bread and wine
were symbols merely of Christ's flesh and blood, employed to call to
mind his death, and the blessings procured to man by that death. Calvin
stood between these two extremes, as also did Luther, and while they
disagreed with Catholics, and would not concede that the bread and wine
were changed to the _very_ body and blood of Christ, neither would they
concede that the bread and wine were merely symbols, but insisted upon
a sort of spiritual presence. That is, they held that the saints in
the exercise of faith in partaking of the sacrament, do become united
in a certain mystic way with Christ, and from this union received an
increase of spiritual life.
7. Predestination.--Another thing in which Calvin differed from
Zwingle was in relation to the celebrated doctrine of an absolute
decree of God respecting the salvation of men. Calvin emphasized the
doctrines of Luther and Melanchthon in regard to the part which the
grace of God takes in the salvation of men; and perhaps carried it
further than they would have done, certainly further than Zwingle did.
On this point Calvin taught that God had elected some persons from all
eternity to everlasting life; and had appointed others to everlasting
punishments; and that for this he had no other ground except his own
pleasure, or his most free and sovereign will. This is the doctrine of
predestination.
8. The Spread of Calvin's Doctrines.--It was some time before the
Swiss could be brought to accept these doctrines {255} so at variance
with or not found in the teachings of Zwingle. Yet by the perseverance
and the high reputation for learning and piety of Calvin they were
very generally accepted in Switzerland; and after him, such was the
success of his pupils, that large bodies of Protestants in other
nations accepted his doctrines. Especially was this the case in France,
England, Scotland, and even in Germany.
9. The Reformation in France.--In France, though in the main
her people adhered to the Catholic church, the Reformation found its
most faithful adherents, and there they suffered the most violent
persecutions. The Protestants were opprobriously called Huguenots
[Hu-ge-nots] the origin of the appellation is uncertain. Among these
French Protestants were men of high character, and not a few bishops
of the church. The king and the magistrates, however, protected the
ancient religion by the sword, by penal inflictions; and a large number
of pious and good people were put to death, among them not a few of the
nobility. [See notes 3 and 4, end of section.]
10. The Reformation in Sweden.--In Sweden the Reformation made
rapid headway. Its doctrines were introduced into that country by
Olaus Peri, whose zeal for the cause was warmly seconded by the king,
Gustavus Vasa, who while an exile in Lubec, during the revolution of
1523, learned something of the "reformed" religion. For some time
before 1523 Sweden had been ruled by Danish kings; but in that year,
in consequence of the tyranny practiced by Christiern II of Denmark, a
revolution was inaugurated by Gustavus Vasa, which ended in Christiern
being driven from Sweden. Gustavus was chosen king in his stead.
While prejudiced in favor of the "reformed" religion, he acted with
great moderation. He invited learned Protestants from Germany whom he
directed to instruct his people in the Bible and the Protestant faith.
The Bible translated by Olaus Petri he caused to be published and
disseminated. In 1526, a great discussion on religion was {256} held
at Upsal at the instance of the king, between Olaus Petri and Peter
Gallius, a Roman Catholic. Gallius seems to have been so far defeated,
even in his own estimation, that in the year following, in the assembly
of the states at Westeras, he recommended the "reformed" religion of
Luther to the representatives of the nation. After a long discussion,
and much opposition from the bishops, it was finally harmoniously
decreed that the "reformed" religion should be introduced. From that
time until now the power of the pope in Sweden has been prostrated.
[See note 5, end of section.]
11. Denmark.--In Denmark the reformation was not accomplished so
happily. Christiern, whose authority, as we have seen, was overthrown
in Sweden, sought to establish the reformed religion in Denmark,
but more from a desire to deprive the bishops of their power, and
confiscate their property, than from a right zeal for true religion. In
1520 he invited Martin Reynhard, a disciple of Carlstadt, to Denmark,
and made him professor of theology at Copenhagen. Reynhard stayed about
a year. When he left, the king sent for Carlstadt. He remained but a
short time; and then the king invited Luther himself to come, but the
reformer would not accept the invitation. All these failing him, the
king set about the work of reformation himself, but as he was a tyrant,
his people conspired against him, and banished him from the kingdom,
in 1523. He was succeeded by his uncle, Frederic, Duke of Holstein and
Sleswick.
12. Frederic was as anxious as Christiern had been to see the
reformed religion established in Denmark, but he was more prudent
than his nephew. He permitted the leaders among the Protestants to
teach publicly the doctrines of Luther, and in time these raised up a
strong following. In 1527 the king procured a decree from the senate,
at the diet of Odensee, giving religious liberty to the people. By
this decree the Danes were left free to embrace the new religion, or
continue {257} members of the Catholic Church, as they saw proper. The
successor of Frederic--Christian III--went further than this, however,
in the interest of the Reformation. He stripped the bishops of their
odious power, confiscated the church property, much of which, however,
he restored to the original owners, from whom it had been obtained, it
is alleged, by base arts. He called John Bugenhagius from Wittemburg,
and with his assistance regulated the religious affairs of his realm by
making the reformed the established religion of his kingdom. The action
of Christian III seems harsh, but a circumstance which mitigates if it
does not destroy the harshness of his measures, was the insufferable
arrogance, pride and power of the bishops, which was a constant menace
to the power of the monarch, and did much to eclipse his glory. [See
note 6, end of section.]
13. Holland.--Perhaps from being contiguous to Germany, the
Netherlands--Belgium and Holland--soon partook of the spirit of the
Reformation--the desire to be free. The writings of Luther were
early received and widely read by the Netherlanders. This alarmed
the Catholics who, in 1552, established the Inquisition there and
persecuted with great vigor all who accepted the doctrines of the
reformers. It is estimated that in those provinces which, taken
together, constitute the Netherlands, in the reign of Charles V
alone--from 1519 to 1552--not less than 50,000 persons lost their
lives in consequence of their defection from the church of Rome. But
notwithstanding this severe persecution, adherents to the Protestant
faith increased. The tyranny of their oppressors seemed to increase
the boldness of the people in clamoring for the rights of conscience;
and towards the close of the sixteenth century seven of the provinces
successfully revolted against the Duke of Alva, Viceroy of the Catholic
monarch, Phillip II of Spain. These revolting provinces formed the
Dutch Republic, and in a short time became the most formidable maritime
{258} power in the world. They suffered the most and wrought the most
in behalf of the liberty of conscience, the freedom of commerce, and
the liberty of the state. It is said by one historian that "In freedom
of conscience they were the light of the world." [42] It is well known
that for many years their land was the asylum for the oppressed,
especially for those persecuted for their religion.
14. England.--The Reformation in England took on a different
aspect to what it did in the other countries. When Luther began his
assault upon the church of Rome, the English monarch, Henry VIII,
appeared as a champion on the side of the Roman pontiffs. He wrote a
book against Luther in defense of the seven sacraments of the Catholic
Church, which met with such favor in the eyes of the pope that he
conferred upon Henry the title of "Defender of the Faith." Henry's
book appeared in 1522. Soon after this the king began to question the
legality of his marriage with Catherine of Aragon.
15. Catherine had been the wife of the king's deceased brother,
Arthur; and a marriage with a deceased brother's widow was regarded as
contrary to the law of God.[43] Henry therefore applied to the pope for
the annulment of his marriage, since his conscience would not permit
him to cohabit longer with his deceased brother's wife. The conduct
of the king, however, was such as to give strong ground to the belief
that it was his love for Ann Boleyn, an English lady of high birth, and
not conscientious scruples as to the lawfulness of his marriage with
Catherine. The queen's beauty had faded and some disease, it is said,
had rendered her person less agreeable. Still, to do Henry justice,
it must not be concealed that his father had scrupled the legitimacy
of the marriage; a foreign {259} court had made it an objection
to intermarriage with his children by his wife; and the people of
England very generally entertained fears respecting the succession
to his crown, and these political considerations doubtless had their
influence.[44] Still it will not be denied that after the king had
fallen in love with Ann Boleyn, his love for her and not political
considerations, or religious scruples, was the incentive that prompted
him to seek a divorce.
16. The Rupture with the Pope.--The pope, Clement VII, evaded
a direct answer to Henry's appeal. Catherine was the aunt of Charles
V, and perhaps Clement feared that he would offend that monarch--to
whom he looked to suppress the Reformation in Germany--if he granted
the divorce. Henry, impatient of these enforced delays, consulted the
universities of Europe, and as most of them pronounced marriage with
a deceased brother's wife unlawful, he divorced Catherine without the
consent of the pope. A quarrel ensued between the king and the pontiff,
which resulted in the former casting off the authority of the latter,
and the pope excommunicated the king. In 1533 Henry was declared
head of the British church and Defender of the Faith, by the English
parliament. He thereupon ejected the monks from their possessions,
disposed of their property at his own good pleasure, and abolished in
toto the authority of the pope in England.
17. No other country in all Europe was so well prepared for the
Sixteenth Century revolution as England. A century and a half before
either Luther or Zwingle were heard of, John Wycliffe proclaimed
against the corruption and abuses of the Catholic church, denounced
the pope as anti-Christ,[45] and preached against the doctrine
of transubstantiation. He also {260} translated the Scriptures
and circulated them among the common people. Two years before his
death, however, he was summoned before a church council by which,
notwithstanding he defended himself with great ability, many of his
doctrines were condemned, and he himself was restricted in his ministry
to the parish of Lutterworth, in Leicestershire, where he died. [See
note 7, end of section.] His teachings, however, had made a deep
impression upon his countrymen, and he left many followers, who were
called by their opponents Lollards. The Lollards were a proscribed
sect in England, and as they avoided persecution, but little was heard
of them. Still they cherished the doctrines of their leader, and
transmitted them to their children, so that when Luther and the other
continental reformers began their work, there were many in England
who sympathized with them; and when Henry VIII considered it to his
interests to revolt against the authority of the pope, he found large
numbers of his people not only ready to support him in casting off
that authority, but anxious to go much farther in that revolt than
the king desired. [See note 6, end of section.] They had viewed the
rupture between the king and the pope with deep satisfaction; but
they were soon to learn that the defection of the monarch was not to
bring religious liberty to England, or establish there the doctrines
of Wycliffe or Luther. It was but a change of masters that had taken
place, and the king was as despotic as the pope. [See note 9, end of
section.] Although Henry had thrown off the authority of the pontiff,
he would tolerate but few changes in the forms and ceremonies of
religion. More changes were introduced in the reign of Edward VI, the
son of Henry VIII by Jane Seymore; and still more in the reign of
Elizabeth, his daughter by Anne Boleyn.
18. The Puritans.--But these changes came far short of satisfying
the English Protestants, who were called Puritans. They demanded
almost a complete abolition of the rites and {261} ceremonies of the
Roman Church, which they denounced as idolatrous. The most of them
favored the Presbyterian form of church government, or a still simpler
method which would recognize each congregation as a complete church
within itself. Those who contended for this more simple form of church
government were called Independents. The puritans were frequently rude
and clamorous in their demands for further reformation; and on their
part the adherents of the established religion were intolerant, and
persecuted to imprisonment, exile or death the Puritans. [See note 10,
end of section.]
19. The Reformation in Scotland.--All things considered, the
Reformation in Scotland--that is the overthrow of the authority of the
pope--was accomplished with as little trouble as it was in England; and
accompanied by less injustice to Catholics. In Scotland, as in England,
the doctrines of Wycliffe had many silent adherents, and such was the
frame of the popular mind that only the leadership of bold men was
needed to make a successful revolt against the authority of the pope.
That leadership was found in John Knox.[46] Knox was thirty-eight years
of age when he openly declared himself a Protestant, and began his work
of reform. About three years later Cardinal Beaton, a proud, arrogant
man, and of course the head of the Catholic church in Scotland, was
assassinated. His castle--St. Andrews--was taken possession of by the
band of nobles and others who had murdered him, and it became for a
time the stronghold of Protestantism. To this place Knox repaired, and
there in the parish church of St. Andrews, first became famous as a
preacher. In a short time, however, the fortress was surrendered, and
Knox was sent to the French galleys a prisoner. After two years he was
set at liberty, and allowed to depart for England, where he lived for
years, on terms of intimacy with Cranmer and other English reformers.
{262} On the accession of Queen Mary,[47] Knox retired to Germany and
Switzerland, residing chiefly in the latter place, where he learned and
became attached to both the doctrines and form of church government
taught by Calvin.
20. In 155, political necessity compelled the government in
Scotland to become more lenient towards the nobles favoring the
Reformation, and Knox returned to Scotland, where his impassioned
denunciations of the idolatry of the mass and of image-worship aroused
the pent-up enthusiasm of the people. Indeed the people went far
beyond what Knox intended; riots ensued, churches and monasteries
were destroyed, and the whole country, already suffering the evils of
civil war, was plunged into greater disorder. At last, through the
assistance of Queen Elizabeth, of England, a truce was proclaimed,
and a parliament chosen to settle the troubles. The parliament met
in 1560, and its deliberations resulted in the overthrow of the old
religion, and the establishment of the "Reformed church," based on the
doctrines and church polity of Calvin. In the midst of the harshness
which attended the overthrow of the old religion there was a singular
instance of moderation which will be looked for in vain in other
countries where the reformation succeeded. According to Hallam, it
was agreed in the settlement made by the parliament of 1560, "that
the Roman Catholic prelates, including the regulars, should enjoy
two-thirds of their revenues as well as their rank and seats in
parliament; the remaining third being given to the crown, out of which
stipends should be allotted to the protestant clergy." [48] "Whatever
violence may be imputed to the authors of the Scots reformation,"
continues Mr. Hallam, "this arrangement seems to display a moderation
which we would vainly seek in our own" [49]--the English reformation.
21. Unfortunately, as in England, after the authority and {263}
religion of the pope were overthrown in Scotland, the religious
difficulties were far from settled. A controversy arose between
the church and the crown on the subject of authority. It will be
remembered that Calvin insisted that the church should be independent
of the state,[50] and nowhere was it so strenuously insisted upon as
in Scotland; not only did it demand of the secular authority freedom
from interference, but assumed the right to reprove the king and his
court, and that, too, in no guarded language. In 1854, Andrew Melville
was summoned before the king's council, to give an account of some
seditious language employed by him in the pulpit against the court.
He declined the jurisdiction of the council on the ground that he
was responsible only to the church for such language; and the king
could not judge of the matter without violating the immunities of the
church.[51]
22. The king and council, however, did not hesitate to declare
the supremacy of the secular power, and thus was begun a controversy
which, united with the attempts on the part of the sovereigns and
parliament to restore the Episcopal form of church government, led
to violent persecutions on the part of the secular authority, and
to heroic resistance on the part of the people of Scotland. In that
protracted struggle, persecuted by both parties with varying fortunes,
the people were at last successful; though their victory was not
secured for them until the Stuart line of monarchs were driven out
of Scotland and England by the revolution of 1688, which dethroned
James II of England and VII of Scotland, and placed William, Prince of
Orange, and Mary, his wife, on the British throne.
23. The Discovery of America--Its Influence on Liberty.--It is
significant that about the time of the "Revival of Learning" in Europe,
America was discovered by Columbus, {264} led hither by the inspiration
of God. [Note 11, end of section.] Between this struggle for liberty
in the Old World and the discovery of the New there was doubtless a
providential connection. God knew there could be but a stunted growth
of the tree of liberty in the Old World, hence he opened the way for
it to be planted in a land more congenial to its growth. The whole
continent of America is a land consecrated by the decrees of Almighty
God to liberty, and the people who inhabit it are assured by that same
decree of their freedom.[52] Hence when a fullness of liberty was
denied the Puritans in England, they fled to America, and here found
room for the planting of colonies where they could enjoy the liberty
denied them in the Old World, and the founding of the New England
colonies (now the New England States) was the result.
24. Catholics Seek Liberty in America--Nor were the Puritans the
only ones who sought liberty in the New World. Even the Catholics
came; for they, no less than the Puritans, were persecuted in England.
Sir George Calvert, whose title was Lord Baltimore, a Roman Catholic,
desiring to establish a colony in America that would be a place of
refuge for persecuted Catholics, obtained a charter for that territory
comprised within the boundary lines of the state of Maryland. Before
the charter was signed, Sir George died; but it was made out to his son
Cecil, who carried out his father's designs. The charter granted to
Lord Baltimore was unlike any which had hitherto passed the royal seal,
in that it secured to all who should settle in the colony, religious
liberty. That is, Christianity was the recognized religion, made so by
the law of the land, but no preference was given to any sect or party.
25. Puritan Intolerance.--Unfortunately all the colonies were not
founded in the same liberal spirit as Maryland. The Puritans themselves
seemed not to have learned toleration by the persecutions they had
suffered; but, on the contrary, {265} when they found themselves
possessed of power, they forgot right and persecuted all those not of
their own way of thinking. This led to the founding of other colonies
where greater religious liberty was granted; such as Pennsylvania,
settled by the Quakers; Rhode Island, by Roger Williams, a Baptist,
driven by Puritan intolerance from Massachusetts.
26. Common dangers, however, taught these colonists toleration.
They were surrounded by hordes of savages, against whom they were
compelled frequently to combine. The wars between the French and the
English extended to their respective settlements in America, and
this circumstance drove the English colonists together and taught
them toleration. They were driven into a still closer union by the
oppression of England, and forgot their religious differences in the
presence of the great danger of losing all their freedom, civil as well
as religious. When they had achieved their independence, and necessity
and experience taught them that a national government--an indissoluble
union of the colonies--must be formed, wisdom clearly suggested that
the chief cornerstone of the new temple of liberty must be religious
freedom. Hence in the constitution which they adopted, freedom to
worship God according to the dictates of conscience is guaranteed. [See
note 12, end of section.]
27. The Hand of God Manifested.--If in the rise of the great
Roman Empire we see the hand of God preparing the way for the
introduction of the gospel under the personal administration of the Son
of God, that under the protection of that great government the apostles
of Messiah might visit every land and deliver the glad tidings of great
joy--if in this the hand of God is visible, it is equally clear that
the meaning of this sixteenth century revolution which we have been
considering, together with the subsequent founding of a great republic
in the New World, pledged to the maintenance of religious liberty--it
is clearly the meaning of all this that God {266} was preparing the day
for a restoration of the gospel--the ushering in of the Dispensation of
the Fullness of Times. [See note 13, end of section.] That revolution
of the sixteenth century was the first glimmerings of the dawn which
heralded the approaching day; the light became clearer in America on
the establishment of religious liberty under the Constitution of the
United States; the sun rose when the Lord introduced the DISPENSATION
OF THE FULLNESS OF TIMES by revealing himself and his Son Jesus Christ
to the Prophet Joseph Smith.
NOTES.
1. Zwingle.--Zwingle discovered the corruptions of the church
of Rome, at an earlier period than Luther. Both opened their eyes
gradually, and altogether without any concert; and without aid from
each other. But Zwingle was always in advance of Luther in his
views and opinions; and he finally carried the reformation somewhat
farther than what Luther did. But he proceeded with more gentleness
and caution, not to run before the prejudices of the people; and
the circumstances in which he was placed did not call him so early
to open combat with the powers of the hierarchy; Luther, therefore,
has the honor of being the first to declare open war with the pope,
and to be exposed to persecution. He also acted in a much wider
sphere. All Germany, and even all Europe, was the theatre of his
operations. Zwingle moved only in the narrow circle of a single canton
of Switzerland. He also died young, and when but just commencing his
career of usefulness. And these circumstances have raised Luther's fame
so high that Zwingle has almost been overlooked.--Murdock.
2. Calvin.--John Calvin was born in the year 1509; and in his
studies connected law with theology, studying the former at the command
of his father, and the latter from his own choice; and from Melchoir
Valmar, a German and professor of Greek at Bourges, he acquired a
knowledge of the evangelican [reformed] doctrines. After the death
of his father, he devoted himself wholly to theology, and publicly
professed the reformed doctrine, which he spread in France with all
diligence. His name soon became known in Switzerland as well as in
France; and Farell and Viret [two Swiss reformers] besought him, as he
was traveling through Geneva, to remain {267} there and aid them in
setting up the new church. But in the year 1538, great dissension arose
in Geneva; and Calvin and his assistant, Farell, severely inveighed
from the pulpit against the conduct of the council, which resolved
to introduce the ceremonies agreed on at Bern, in the ordinances
of baptism and the Lord's supper, and to reject those which these
ministers wished to have adopted: and the consequence was, that Calvin
and Farell were banished from the republic. * * * But in the year 1541,
at the pressing and repeated invitation of the Genevans, he returned
to them again, and there officiated with great perseverance, zeal,
prudence and disinterestedness, till his death in 1564. His great
talents and virtues were shaded by the love of control, by a want of
tenderness, and by a passionate vigor against the erring.--Schlegel.
3. The Reformation In France.--France was the first country
where the reformation that commenced in Germany and Switzerland, very
soon and under the severest oppressions, found many adherents. No
country seems to have been so long and so well prepared for it as this;
and yet here it met the most violent opposition; and nowhere was it
later, before it obtained legal toleration. Nowhere did it occasion
such streams of blood to flow; nowhere give birth to such dreadful
and deadly civil wars. And nowhere have state policy, court intrigue,
political parties and the ambition of greatness had so powerful an
influence on the progress and fortunes of the reformation, as in
France.--Schroeckh.
4. Massacre on St. Bartholomew's Eve.--During the civil
wars which desolated France from the year 1560 up to the edict of
Nantes--which secured religious toleration from the Protestants,
1598--occurred the massacre of St. Bartholomew's eve. A peace was
concluded in 1570, by which toleration was granted the Protestants.
The terms of the treaty were enforced with much apparent zeal by the
French court, for the purpose, as Protestant writers claim, of lulling
the Protestants into security preparatory to their assassination by
order of the king. The bloody scene began at midnight of the 22nd of
August, 1572. The signal for the beginning of the massacre was the
tolling of the great bell of the palace. The scene of blood and murder
continued for three days. During which time five hundred noblemen and
about six thousand other Protestants were butchered in Paris alone.
Orders were dispatched to all parts of the empire for a similar
massacre everywhere. More than thirty thousand--some say seventy
thousand--perished by the hands of the royal assassins; and the pope
ordered a jubilee throughout Christendom.--Murdock.
5. The Decision to Introduce the "Reformed" Religion into
Sweden.--This decision was the effect specially of the firmness and
resolution {268} of the king [Gustavus Vasa], who declared publicly
that he would rather resign his crown and retire from the kingdom,
than rule over a people subjected to the laws and authority of the
Roman pontiff, and more obedient to their bishops than to their
king.--Mosheim.
6. The Danish and Swedish Bishops Stripped of Power.--Violent
measures were adopted, and the bishops, against their wills and
their efforts to the contrary, were deprived of their honors, their
prerogatives and their possessions. Yet this reformation (?) of the
clergy in both those northern kingdoms, was not a religious, but a mere
civil and secular transaction; and it was so necessary that it must
have been undertaken if no Luther had arisen. For the bishops had by
corrupt artifices got possession of so much wealth, so many cattle,
such revenues and so great authority, that they were far more powerful
than the kings, and were able to govern the whole realm at their
pleasure; indeed they had appropriated to themselves a large portion of
the patrimony of the kings and of the public revenues. Such therefore
was the state both of the Danish and the Swedish commonwealths in the
time of Luther, that either the bishops who shamefully abused their
riches, their prerogatives and their honors must be divested of the
high rank they held in the state, and be deprived of their ill-gotten
wealth, or the ruin of those kingdoms, the irreparable detriment of
the public safety and tranquility, and the sinking of their kings
into contempt, with an utter inability to protect the people, must be
anticipated.--Mosheim.
7. Wycliffe.--John Wycliffe, the greatest of all the "Reformers
before the Reformation," was born in 1324, and is supposed to have
been a native of the parish of Wycliffe, near the town of Richmond,
Yorkshire. He studied at Oxford, but little is known of his university
career. Wycliffe appears to have been a man of simple faith and of
earnest and manly courage. He made a strong impression upon his age;
an impression that was not effaced at the time of the Reformation. The
Lollards, as his disciples were called, were to be found, not only
among the poor, but in the church, the castle and even the throne.
Wycliffe died in the year 1384.
8. England Prepared for the Reformation.--No revolution has been
more gradually prepared than that which separated one half of Europe
from the communion of the Roman see; nor were Luther and Zwingle any
more than occasional instruments of that change which, had they never
existed, would at no great distance of time been effected under the
names of some other reformers. At the beginning of the sixteenth
century, the learned, doubtfully and with caution, the ignorant with
zeal and eagerness, were tending to depart from the faith and rites
which authority prescribed. But probably not even Germany was so far
advanced on this course as England. {269} Almost a hundred and fifty
years before Luther, nearly the same doctrines as he taught had been
maintained by Wycliffe, whose disciples usually called Lollards, lasted
as a numerous though obscure and proscribed sect, till aided by the
confluence of foreign streams, they swelled into the Protestant church
of England. We hear, indeed, little of them during some parts of the
fifteenth century, for they generally shunned persecution; and it is
chiefly through records of persecution that we learn of the existence
of heretics. But immediately before the name of Luther was known, they
seem to have become more numerous, or to have attracted more attention;
since several persons were burned for heresy, and others abjured
their errors in the first years of Henry VIII's reign. Some of these,
as usual among ignorant men, engaging in religious speculation, are
charged with very absurd notions; but it is not so material to observe
their peculiar tenets as the general fact that an inquisitive and
sectarian spirit had begun to prevail.--Hallam's Const. Hist. England.
9. Henry VIII and his Revolt Against Rome.--Soon after Henry was
declared by Parliament the only supreme head on earth of the church
of England, the authority of the pope was finally abolished, and all
tributes paid to him were declared illegal. But although the king
thus separated from the church of Rome, he professed to maintain the
Catholic doctrine in its purity, and persecuted the reformers most
violently; so that while many were burned as heretics for denying the
doctrines of Catholicism, others were executed for maintaining the
supremacy of the pope. As therefore the earnest adherents of both
religions were equally persecuted and equally encouraged, both parties
were induced to court the favor of the king, who was thus enabled to
assume an absolute authority over the nation, and to impose upon it
his own doctrines as those of the only true church. * * * When news
of these proceedings reached Rome, the most terrible fulminations
were hurled by the pope against the king of England, whose soul was
delivered over to the devil, and his dominions to the first invader;
all leagues with Catholic princes were declared to be dissolved--his
subjects were freed from their oaths of allegiance, and the nobility
were commanded to take up arms against him. But these missives, which
half a century before would have hurled the monarch from his throne
and made him a despised outcast among his people, were now utterly
harmless. The papal supremacy was forever lost in England.--Wilson,
Hist. U. S., Appendix to Voyage and Discoveries, p. 153.
10. The Puritans.--The Puritan party professing to derive their
doctrines directly from the scriptures, were wholly dissatisfied with
the old church system, which they denounced as rotten, depraved and
defiled by human inventions, and they wished it to undergo a thorough
{270} reform, to abandon everything of man's device, and adopt nothing,
either in doctrine or discipline, which was not directly authorized by
the word of God. Exceedingly ardent in their feelings, zealous in their
principles, abhorring all formalism as destructive of the very elements
of piety, and rejecting the regal as well as papal supremacy, they
demanded in place of the liturgical service, an effective preaching of
the gospel, more of the substance of religion, instead of what they
denominated its shadows; and so convinced were they of the justness
of their views and the reasonableness of their demands, that they
would listen to no considerations which pleaded for compromise or
delay.--Wilson, Hist. U. S. Appendix Voyage and Discoveries, p. 157.
11. Columbus Inspired of God.--And it came to pass that I looked
and beheld many waters; and they divided the Gentiles from the seed of
my brethren. And it came to pass that the angel said unto me, Behold
the wrath of God is upon the seed of thy brethren. And I looked and
beheld a man among the Gentiles who was separated from the seed of my
brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it
came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many
waters, even unto the seed of my brethren who were in the promised
land. And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it
wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity
upon the many waters: * * * [and] I beheld many multitudes of the
Gentiles upon the land of promise.--Nephi's Vision, Book of Mormon, ch.
xiii:10-14.
12. Religious Liberty in the Constitution.--The parts of the
United States Constitution which secure religious freedom are the
clause in article vi, which says: "No religious test shall ever be
required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the
United States;" and the first Amendment which says: "Congress shall
make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit
the free exercise thereof." Respecting these two clauses in the
Constitution, Judge Story remarks: "We are not to attribute this
prohibition of a national religious establishment to an indifference
to religion in general, and especially to Christianity, (which none
could hold in more reverence than the framers of the Constitution),
but to a dread by the people of the influence of ecclesiastical power
in matters of government; a dread which their ancestors brought with
them from the parent country, and which unhappily for human infirmity,
their own conduct, after the emigration, had not, in any just degree,
tended to diminish. It was also obvious, from the numerous and powerful
sects existing in the United States, that there would be perpetual
temptations to struggles for ascendency in the national councils, if
any one might thereby hope to found a permanent and exclusive national
establishment of its own; and religious persecutions {271} might thus
be introduced, to an extent utterly subversive of the true interests
and good order of the Republic. The most effectual mode of suppressing
the evil, in the view of the people, was to strike down the temptations
to its introduction."
13. Hand of the Lord in the Establishment of the United States
Government.--That the hand of Almighty God was in the work of
founding the Government of the United States is plainly declared in
one of the revelations to Joseph Smith: "It is not right that any
man should be in bondage one to another. And for this purpose have I
established the constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men
whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the
shedding of blood." (Doc. and Cov. sec. ci: 79, 80.) Nor are thoughtful
historians blind to the fact that the hand of God has had much to do
with those revolutions which finally produced the great republic of the
New World. Commenting on the war of the American Revolution, Marcus
Wilson says: "The expense of blood and treasure which this war cost
England was enormous; nor, indeed, did her European antagonists suffer
much less severely. The United States was the only country that could
look to any beneficial results from the war, and these were obtained by
a strong union of opposing motives and principles, unequalled in the
annals of history. France and Spain, the arbitrary despots of the Old
World, had stood forth as the protectors of an infant republic, and
had combined, contrary to all the principles of their political faith,
to establish the rising liberties of America. They seemed but as blind
instruments in the hands of Providence, employed to aid in the founding
of a nation which should cultivate those Republican virtues that were
destined yet to regenerate the world upon the principles of universal
intelligence, and eventually to overthrow the time-worn system of
tyrannical usurpation of the few over the many."
REVIEW.
1. Was the Reformation confined to Germany?
2. When did the Reformation first begin?
3. Who was the leader of the movement in Switzerland?
4. State what you can of the Reformation in Switzerland under Zwingle.
5. What fate befell the young Reformer?
6. State the chief difference in methods of work between Luther and
Zwingle. (Note I.)
7. Who succeeded in the leadership of the Reformation in Switzerland?
8. Where and when was Calvin born?
9. State the points of difference in the views of Calvin and Zwingle.
{272} 10. Describe the Presbyterian system of church government.
11. Give a sketch of the life and character of Calvin. (note 2.)
12. State the several views of the Reformers in respect to the
eucharist.
13. What difference existed between Calvin and Zwingle on the subject
of predestination?
14. What can you say of the spread of Calvin's doctrine?
15. Describe the Reformation in France.
16. What can you say of the persecution of the Protestants in France?
(Note 3.)
17. Give a description of the massacre of St. Bartholomew's eve.
18. State what you can of the Reformation in Sweden.
19. Tell how the Reformation in Sweden was accomplished.
20. On what ground can the king of Sweden and Denmark be justified in
stripping the Catholic bishops of their power and wealth? (Note 5.)
21. Give an account of the Reformation in Holland.
22. What was the attitude of Henry VIII of England at the beginning of
the Reformation in Germany?
23. What title did his defense of the Roman Catholic sacraments secure
for him?
24. What circumstance was it that afterwards estranged Henry from the
pope?
25. What was the conduct of Pope Clement VII in this controversy?
26. What course did Henry adopt?
27. What resulted from the king's conduct?
28. How did the friends of the Reformation in England receive the
rupture of the king and pope?
29. Did the rupture between king and pope help the Reformation in
England?
30. What were the Reformers in England called?
31. What were the demands of the Puritans in respect to religion? (Note
8.)
32. When denied religious liberty in England to what country did the
Puritans go?
33. What influence on liberty did the discovery of America have?
34. What can you say of the inspiration of Christopher Columbus? (Note
9.)
35. What people besides Puritans sought religious liberty in the new
world?
36. Give an account of the settlement of Maryland.
37. What can you say of Puritan intolerance?
38. What circumstances taught them, at least, partial toleration?
39. What power was working in all those changes which brought freedom
to man? (Note 11.)
40. What was the object of enlarging the liberties of mankind?
Footnotes
1. February, 1070, A. D.
2. Subsequently Henry IV made war upon Gregory, drove him from the
papal chair into exile, and placed Guibert, archbishop of Ravenna,
upon the papal throne. Guibert took the name of Innocent III, at his
consecration, 1084, A. D.
3. It was invented by Schwartz in 1320.
4. Guizot Hist. Civilization.
5. Smith's Eng. Inst., pages 8,9.
6. It is only fair to Catholics to say that such is their explanation
of indulgences now.
7. Maclain's note in Mosheim, vol. II, Ch. ii.
8. The account here given of the rise and character of indulgences is
condensed chiefly from Schlegel, quoted by Murdock in the latter's
translation of Mosheim, vol. III, book iv, cent. xvi, ch. i.
9. The canon law consists of the enactments of the councils and decrees
of the popes.
10. Peter Lombard, who in the 12th century collected and arranged
systematically the theological opinions and decisions of the Latin
fathers.
11. In the church of Rome it may be said there were two parties, one
of which held that the pope's power was supreme--superior to all
other authority in the church; the other maintained that the pope's
authority was subordinate to that of a general council of the whole
church. The latter party was quite strong in Germany, so that a great
many sustained Luther in his appeal to a general council. Even Duke
George of Saxony favored the calling of such a council. Said he:--"The
scandalous conduct of the clergy is a very fruitful source of the
destruction of poor souls. There must be a universal reformation;
and this cannot be better effected than by a general council. It is
therefore the most earnest wish of us all, that such a measure be
adopted."--Milner's Church Hist. vol. iv, ch. v, (Note.)
12. Milner's Church Hist., vol. IV, p. 405.
13. Milner's Church Hist., vol. IV, ch. iv.
14. The diet was a great council of the German empire, consisting of
the princes, provincial rulers and the chief dignitaries of the church.
The diet from the 10th century had assumed the right of electing the
emperor of Germany, subject to confirmation by the pope, by whom alone
he could be crowned. The diet was also usually assembled for the
consideration of very important matters pertaining to the empire.
15. Mosheim (Murdock) vol. iii, bk. iv, cent. xvi, sec. i, ch. ii.
16. The Emperor was not present at this second diet at Spire. He was
absent in Spain. "They appealed to the emperor, to a future council
of the German nation, and lastly to every impartial judge. For they
believed that a majority of votes in a diet could decide a secular
question, but not a spiritual or religious question; they appealed
to the emperor, not as recognizing him as their judge in a matter of
religion, but merely that he might allow their appeal to a council to
be valid."--Schlegel.
17. Before the diet rose the cities Kempten, Heilbronn Windsheim,
and Weisenburg also subscribed; and afterwards many more. It was
immediately printed and soon spread all over Europe, and was translated
into various languages. It thus became of great service to the
Protestant cause; for it was a very able document and was drawn up in a
most judicious manner.--Murdock.
18. The Protestant princes had held that the election of Ferdinand to
be king of the Romans was contrary to the laws of the empire.
19. Luther himself testifies to this. In the Latin preface to the first
volume of his works, the Reformer says: "In the year 1517, when I was a
young preacher, and dissuaded the people from purchasing indulgences. *
* * I felt assured I should have the pope on my side: for he himself,
in his public decrees had condemned the excesses of his agents in this
business."
20. The foregoing six statements of fact I have summarized from M.
Guizot's excellent work on the Civilization of Europe.
21. D'Aubigne's Hist. Ref., vol. I, pages 82, 83.
22. D'Aubigne's Hist. Ref., vol. I; book III, page 119.
23. Ibid, page 122.
24. Milner's Ch. Hist., vol. IV; page 514.
25. Men desire to do good works before their sins are forgiven, whilst
it is necessary for sin to be forgiven before men can perform good
works. It is not the works that expel sin; but the sin being expelled
good works follow. For good works must be performed with a joyful
heart, with a good conscience towards God, that is, with remission of
sins.--D'Aubigne's Hist. Ref., vol. 1, page 117. "The works of the
righteous themselves would be mortal sins, unless being filled with
holy reverence for the Lord, they feared that their works might in
truth be mortal sins."--Ibid, page 119.
26. Milner's Ch. Hist., vol. IV., page 379.
27. D'Aubigne's Hist. Ref., vol. III, page 340.
28. Ibid.
29. Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. (Murdock,) vol. III., page 147 (second
edition.)
30. This doctrine was called Antinomianism; many believed it and
followed it to its very extremes.
31. From Luther's Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, quoted by
Milner, vol. IV., page 520.
32. D'Aubigne's Hist. Ref., vol. I., page 15.
33. End of Religious Controversy, p. 80.
34. Ibid.
35. Milner's Church Hist., vol. iv, page 500.
36. Such is the cause assigned for the Reformation by Catholics: John
Milner, the noted Catholic divine, author of The End of Religious
Controversy, p. 105, says: "As to Martin Luther, he testifies, and
calls God to witness the truth of his testimony that it was not
willingly (that is, not from a previous discovery of the falsehood of
his religion,) but from accident, (namely, a quarrel with the Dominican
friars, and afterwards with the pope) that he fell into his broils
about religion."
37. See preceding section.
38. Archdeacon Blackburn's Confessional, p. 16.
39. End of Religious Controversy, p. 100.
40. I Nephi xiii: 26, 28, 32. See also Part I, Section VI, note 3.
41. Ibid.
42. Bancroft.
43. It must appear remarkable that such an idea could become prevalent
since it is provided in the law of God to ancient Israel that the
brother should marry the deceased brother's widow.--Deut. xxv:5, 6, 9,
10.
44. Hume's Hist. of England vol. iii, ch. xxx.
45. On one occasion he declared the pope to be "The proud, worldly
priest, Rome, the most cursed of clippers and purse-kervers
(cut-purses)."
46. Knox was born in the year 1505, near Haddington, Scotland. Died at
Edinburgh, 1572.
47. Daughter of Henry VIII, and Catherine of Aragon. She was a bigoted
Catholic; married Philip of Spain, also a Catholic.
48. Hallam's Const. Hist. England, p. 812.
49. Ibid.
50. Page 253.
51. Precedents for such an immunity it would not have been difficult to
find; but they must have been sought in the archives of the enemy. It
was rather early for the new republic to emulate the despotism she had
overthrown.--Hallam, Hist. of England.
52. Book of Mormon, Ether, ch. 11:7-13.
{273}
PART IV.
THE RESTORATION OF THE GOSPEL.
{275}
SECTION I.
1. The Dispensation of the Fullness of Times.--By a dispensation,
in connection with the work of God, we mean "the opening of the heavens
to men, the bestowing of the Holy Priesthood with all its powers upon
them, and the organization and building up of the church of Christ
upon the earth, for the salvation of all who will obey the gospel." [1]
By the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times we mean the last
dispensation, the one in which all things, in Christ, whether in heaven
or in earth, shall be gathered together in one; [2] a dispensation
which will include all other dispensations--one which will encompass
all truth. As the rivers of the earth all eventually find their way to
the ocean and empty into it, so all former dispensations will run into
and become part of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, in which
the work of God, in respect to the salvation of man and the redemption
of the earth, will be consummated. [See note 1, end of section]
2. Birth and Parentage of Joseph Smith.--Joseph Smith, the man
whom God appointed to stand at the head of the Dispensation of the
Fullness of Times, and be the great Prophet, Seer, Revelator and
President thereof was born in the year of our Lord 1805, on the 23rd
of December, in Sharon, Windsor [Winsor] County, State of Vermont.
His father's name was Joseph[3] Smith, and his mother's maiden name
Lucy Mack. Joseph and Lucy Smith had nine children, six sons and {276}
three daughters. The sons in the order of their age were Alvin, Hyrum,
Joseph, Samuel Harrison, William, Don Carlos; the daughters, Sophronia,
Catherine, Lucy.
3. The parents of the prophet were of humble origin, and poor,
having to labor with their hands, hiring out by day's work, and
otherwise to obtain a livelihood for their large family. In consequence
of their poverty, they could give their children but very limited
opportunities for attending school; yet Joseph learned to read,
to write, and had some knowledge of the rudimentary principles of
arithmetic.
4. When Joseph was ten years of age, his father moved from
the State of Vermont to that of New York, settling in Palmyra,
Ontario County.[4] Four years later the family moved from Palmyra to
Manchester, in the same county.
5. Religious Agitations.--While the Smith family lived in
Manchester, when Joseph was in his fifteenth year, there was an
unusual excitement on the subject of religion. It began with the
Methodists, but soon became general among all the sects, and union
revival meetings, in which all sects, took part were held in the
vicinity of Manchester. The Smith family, being by nature religiously
inclined became interested in these meetings, and several of them,
viz., Joseph's mother, his brothers Hyrum and Samuel Harrison, and his
sisters Lucy and Sophronia, were converted to the Presbyterian faith.
Joseph's own mind was much wrought up by this religious agitation, and
at one time he became somewhat partial to the Methodist persuasion.
6. He was greatly perplexed, however, by the strife among the sects,
and the divisions which existed. The Presbyterians were opposed to
the Methodists and Baptists; and these last named sects, though not
agreeing with each other, were equally opposed to the Presbyterians.
Why should the church of {277} Christ be split up into fractions? Is
God the author of confusion? Would he teach one society to worship
one way, and administer one set of ordinances; and then teach another
society quite a different system of worship, and another set of
principles and ordinances different from those taught the first? Such
were the questions Joseph Smith frequently asked himself when he
reflected upon the confusion he witnessed.
7. In the midst of the war of words and tumult of opinion that
accompanied this agitation, Joseph would often say to himself, What is
to be done? Who of all these parties are right?
8. Joseph Smith's First Prayer and Vision.--While floundering in
the midst of these difficulties he came to the following passage in the
first chapter of the Epistle of James:
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all
men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
This passage impressed him with great force. It was the voice of God
to him. If any man lacked wisdom he did; and here was counsel given
directly how to obtain it, with a promise that he should receive it and
not be unbraided for asking. He at last decided to follow the divine
injunction.
9. It was in the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring
of eighteen hundred and twenty, that Joseph put his resolution into
effect. He selected a place in a grove near his father's house for
that purpose. It was his first attempt to pray vocally, and he was
somewhat timid; but finding himself alone he knelt down and began to
offer up the desires of his heart to the Lord. He had scarcely began
to pray when he was seized by some power which threw him violently to
the ground, and it seemed for a time that he was doomed to a sudden
destruction. It was no imaginary power but some actual being from the
unseen world. His tongue for a time was bound that he could not speak;
darkness gathered about him; but exerting all his powers he called
upon God to deliver {278} him out of the hands of his enemy, and at
the very moment he was ready to give up in despair and abandon himself
to destruction, he beheld a pillar of light immediately over his head
descending towards him. Its brightness was above that of the sun at
noon-day, and no sooner did it appear than he was freed from the enemy
which had held him bound.
10. When the light rested upon him he beheld within it two personages
standing above him in the air, whose brightness and glory defy all
description, but they exactly resembled each other in form and
features. One of them, pointing to the other said: "JOSEPH, THIS IS MY
BELOVED SON, HEAR HIM."
11. Joseph's purpose in calling upon the Lord was to learn which of the
sects was right, that he might know which to join. As soon, therefore,
as he gained his self-possession, he addressed these questions to the
personage to whom he was directed. To his astonishment he was told
that none of the sects were right, and that he must join none of them.
He was further told by the person who addressed him, that all their
creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all
corrupt; that they drew near to him with their lips, but their hearts
were far from him; that they taught for doctrine the commandments of
men; that they had a form of godliness, but denied the power of God.
And he was commanded the second time to join none of them.
12. There were many other things which Jesus said to Joseph on this
occasion, but the prophet never recorded them further than to say that
he received a promise that the fullness of the gospel would at some
future time be made known to him.
13. The Importance of the Vision.--This splendid revelation is of vast
importance: First, it dispels the vagaries that men had conjured up in
respect to the person of Deity. Instead of being a personage without
body, parts or passions, it revealed the fact that he had both body and
parts, that he was in the form of man, or rather, that man had been
made in his {279} image.[5] Second: It clearly proves that the Father
and Son are distinct persons, and not one person as the Christian
world believes. The oneness of the Godhead, so frequently spoken
of in scripture, must therefore relate to oneness of sentiment and
agreement in purpose. Third: It swept away the rubbish of human dogma
and tradition that had accumulated in all the ages since Messiah's
personal ministry on earth, by announcing that God did not acknowledge
any of the sects of Christendom as his church, nor their creeds as his
gospel. Thus the ground was cleared for the planting of the truth.
Fourth: it showed how mistaken the Christian world was in claiming
that all revelation had ceased--that God would no more reveal himself
to man. Fifth: the vision created a witness for God on the earth: a
man lived who could say to some purpose that God lived and that Jesus
was the Christ, for he had seen and talked with them. Thus was laid
the foundation for faith. We shall see anon, how the foundation was
broadened.
14. The Interval of Three Years.--For three years after this first
vision, Joseph received no other visitation or revelation; and as he
had been forbidden to join any of the religious sects then existing
he stood alone. It was a period of severe trial. A few days after his
first vision, he related the circumstance to a Methodist minister who
had been active in the religious agitation before mentioned. To the
lad's surprise he {280} treated his story with the utmost contempt;
and declared it to be from the devil, as the Lord gave no revelations
in these days, those things having ceased with the apostles. Making
his vision public brought upon him the ridicule and indignation of the
whole neighborhood, especially of the ministers. In this trying period
of three years, according to his own statement, he was guilty of some
youthful follies; but he was true to God, and continued in the face of
all opposition to maintain that he had received a revelation from him.
15. The First Visit of Moroni.--On the 21st of September, 1823, having
retired for the night, he betook himself to prayer to obtain the
forgiveness of his sins, and a manifestation that would enable him to
know his standing before the Lord. While thus engaged, the room began
to be filled with light, and presently a personage appeared by his
bedside, standing in the air. [See note 3, end of section.] He said
that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God, and that his
name was Moroni. He announced to Joseph Smith that the Lord had a work
for him to do; and that his name would be had for good and evil among
all nations.
16. The Book of Mormon.--The angel informed Joseph of the existence
of the Book of Mormon, a record engraven upon golden plates, giving
an account of the ancient inhabitants of the American continent
and their origin. He said, also, that it contained the everlasting
gospel as taught by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants of this
Western hemisphere. Deposited with the record was a Urim and Thummim,
consisting of two stones fastened in silver bows, attached to a
breast-plate. The Lord had prepared this instrument for the purpose of
translating the record. A vision of the hill where the sacred plates
were hidden was given to the prophet.
17. Ancient Prophecies Quoted by Moroni.--After relating these things,
the angel began quoting from the prophecies of the Old Testament. He
first quoted part of the third {281} chapter of Malachi; [6] and then
the fourth chapter. The first verse of the fourth chapter he quoted as
follows:
For, behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the
proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall _burn as stubble; for
they that come shall burn them_, saith the Lord of hosts; that it
shall leave them neither root nor branch.
The fifth and sixth verses he quoted:
Behold, I will _reveal unto you the priesthood by the hand of_
Elijah, the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful
day of the Lord. And he shall _plant in the hearts of the children
the promise made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children
shall turn to their fathers; if it were not so, the whole earth
would be utterly wasted at his coming_.[7]
18. Moroni also quoted the eleventh chapter of Isaiah, and
said the predictions in it were about to be fulfilled. They relate
to the glorious restoration of the house of Israel from their long
dispersion, and the reign of peace and righteousness on the earth.
He quoted also the twenty-second and twenty-third verses of the
third chapter of Acts:
For Moses truly said unto the fathers, a prophet shall the Lord
your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him
shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And
it shall come to pass, that every soul which will not hear that
prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
Moroni explained that the prophet here spoken of was Jesus Christ; but
the day when they who would not hear his voice should be cut off from
among the people had not yet come, but it would soon come.
19.>b> The angel quoted from the twenty-eighth verse to the end of
the second chapter of Joel; and said that it was soon to be fulfilled.
It predicts the outpouring of God's Spirit upon all {282} flesh; the
signs in the heavens and the earth which are to precede the glorious
coming of Messiah; and foretells the safety which shall be found in
Mount Zion and Jerusalem in those troublous times.
20. The Warnings of Moroni.--After making these and other
explanations the light within the room seemed to condense about the
person of the angel and he departed. Shortly, however, he returned and
repeated what he had said on his first appearance, and again withdrew.
To Joseph's astonishment he appeared the third time and again repeated
his message.
21. In his first appearance that eventful night the angel told
Joseph that when he obtained the plates containing the record of the
ancient inhabitants of America, together with the breast-plate and the
Urim and Thummim--the full time for them to be given to him had not
then arrived--he was to show them to no person except those to whom he
would be commanded to show them. He was told that if he violated his
commandment he would be destroyed. At his third appearing that same
night the angel cautioned Joseph, saying that Satan would try to tempt
him, in consequence of the poverty of his father's family, to obtain
the plates for the purpose of getting rich. This he forbade him, saying
that he must have no other object in view in getting the plates but to
glorify God, and must be influenced by no other motive than that of
building up his kingdom.
22. The Fourth Appearance of Moroni.--The whole night was
consumed in these interviews with the angel. In the morning of the day
following, Joseph went to his usual labors, but was so exhausted and
faint that he found himself unable to pursue them. His father, who was
laboring with him, observing that he was ailing, directed him to go
home. In attempting to climb the fence out of the field where he was
working, his strength entirely failed him and he fell unconscious to
the ground. When he became conscious, the angel who had visited him the
night before was standing by him calling his name. He {283} repeated
again the things of the night before, and commanded Joseph to go and
tell his father of them. This he did, and his father testified that
they were of God, and counseled his son to be obedient to the heavenly
vision.
23. Cumorah and its Treasures.--Joseph went immediately to the
hill Cumorah[8] where the ancient record was hidden. So vivid had been
his vision of the place the night before that he had no difficulty in
recognizing it. [See note 4, end of section.]
24. On the west side of the hill Cumorah, not far from the top,
under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates, deposited in a
stone box. Removing the soil from around the edges of the stone box,
with the aid of a lever, he raised it up and to his joy beheld the
plates, the Urim and Thummim and breast-plate, just as described by
the angel. He was about to take these treasures from the box when the
messenger of the previous night again stood before him, and told him
again that the time for bringing them forth had not yet arrived, and
would not until four years from that date. The angel instructed him
to come to that place in just one year from that time and he would
meet with him, and that he would continue to do so until the time for
obtaining the plates for translation had come. Accordingly at the end
of each year Joseph went to the place appointed, and every time met the
same heavenly messenger, who gave him instruction and intelligence in
respect to the work of the Lord, and how the Christ's kingdom was to be
conducted in these last days.
25. Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon.--On
the 22nd of September, 1827, the plates, together with the Urim and
Thummim and breast-plate, were given into the hands of Joseph Smith
by the angel Moroni, with a strict charge to keep them safe, saying
that he [Joseph] would be held responsible for them; that if he should
carelessly, {284} or through any neglect of his, let them go, he would
be cut off; but if he would use his best endeavors to preserve them,
they should be protected. He soon learned the necessity of the strict
charge given to him by Moroni, for no sooner was it learned that he
had the plates than every kind of device, not even omitting that of
violence, was employed to wrest them from him. He guarded them safely
however, and in the midst of much persecution and many difficulties,
succeeded by the help of the Lord and the assistance of Martin Harris,
a well-to-to farmer, Oliver Cowdery, a young school teacher, who acted
as his scribe in much of the work of translation, and the Whitmer
family--with this assistance he succeeded in completing the translation
and publishing the work in the year 1830.
26. The Witness.--In the course of the work of translation,
Joseph and those assisting him, learned from the record itself that it
would be hidden from the eyes of the world, that the eyes of none might
behold it except three witnesses that should see it by the power of
God--besides him to whom the record would be given to translate--and a
few others who should view it that they might bear witness of the work
of God to the children of men.[9]
27. Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris desired to
become the three witness named, and obtained that privilege from the
Lord. Some time in June, 1829, the promise that they should have a view
of the plates, the Urim and Thummim and breast-plate was fulfilled. The
angel Moroni appeared unto them, exhibited to them those sacred things,
and commanded them to bear witness of their existence to the world.
This they did, and their testimony is published in all copies of the
Book of Mormon.
28. The plates were exhibited by Joseph Smith to eight other
witnesses whose testimony and names are also published in all copies of
the Book of Mormon.
{285}
NOTES.
1. The Fullness of Times.--Now the thing to be known is, what
the fullness of times means, or the extent and authority thereof. It
means this, that the dispensation of the fullness of times is made up
of all the dispensations that have ever been given since the world
began, until this time. Unto Adam first was given a dispensation.
It is well to know that God spoke to him with his own voice in the
garden, and gave him the promise of the Messiah. And unto Noah also
was a dispensation given. * * * And from Noah to Abraham, and from
Abraham to Moses, and from Moses to Elias, and from Elias to John the
Baptist, and from them to Jesus Christ, and from Jesus Christ to Peter,
James and John, the apostles all having received their dispensation
by revelation from God to accomplish the great scheme of restitution,
spoken by all the holy prophets since the world began, the end of which
is, the dispensation of the fullness of times in which all things shall
be fulfilled that have been spoken of since the earth was made.--Joseph
Smith, Mill. Star, vol. XVI, p. 220.
2. The Name of Joseph Foretold.--The Book of Mormon contains a
remarkable prophecy by Joseph, the favorite son of Jacob, by which the
name of the Prophet Joseph Smith, and of his father were foretold. The
Prophet Lehi, who, it will be remembered, left Jerusalem six hundred
years B. C., and who was acquainted with the Jewish scriptures, says,
in blessing his son Joseph: "For Joseph (the one sold into Egypt by his
brother) truly testified saying: A seer shall the Lord my God raise up,
who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins. * * * Behold
that seer will the Lord bless; and they that seek to destroy him shall
be confounded. * * * And his name shall be called after me [Joseph];
and it shall be after the name of his father. And he shall be like unto
me; for the thing which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand by the
power of the Lord shall bring my people unto salvation."--II Nephi, ch.
iii.
3. Description of Moroni.--He had on a loose robe of most
exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had
ever seen; nor do I believe any earthly thing could be made to appear
so exceedingly white and brilliant; his hands were naked, and his
arms also, a little above the wrist; so also, were his feet naked,
as were his legs a little above the ankles. His head and neck were
also bare. I could discover that he had no other clothing on but this
robe, as it was open, so that I could see into his bosom. Not only was
his robe exceedingly white, but his whole person was glorious beyond
description, {286} and his countenance truly like lightning.--Joseph
Smith, Pearl of Great Price, p. 89,
4. Description of Cumorah.--As you pass on the mailroad from
Palmyra, Wayne County, to Canandaigua, Ontario County, New York, before
arriving at the little village of Palmyra, you pass a large hill on
the east side of the road. Why I say large, is because it is as large,
perhaps, as any in that country. The north end rises quite suddenly
until it assumes a level with the more southerly extremity, and I think
I may say, an elevation higher than at the south, a short distance,
say half or three-fourth of a mile. As you pass towards Canandaigua it
lessens gradually, until the surface assumes its common level, or is
broken by other smaller hills or ridges, water-courses and ravines.
I think I am justified in saying that this is the highest hill for
some distance round, and I am certain that its appearance, as it rises
suddenly from a plain on the north, must attract the notice of the
traveler as he passes by. The north end, (which has been described as
rising suddenly from the plain) forms a promontory without timber,
but covered with grass. As you pass to the south you soon come to
scattering timber, the surface having been cleared by art or wind;
and a short distance further left, you are surrounded with the common
forest of the country. It is necessary to observe that even the part
cleared, was only occupied for pasturage; its steep ascent and narrow
summit not admitting the plough of the husbandman with any degree of
ease or profit. It was at the second mentioned place, where the record
was found to be deposited, on the west side of the hill, not far from
the top down its side; and when myself visited the place in the year
1830, there were several trees standing--enough to cause a shade in
summer, but not so much as to prevent the surface being covered with
grass, which was also the case when the record was found.--Oliver
Cowdery.
5. Analysis of the Book of Mormon.--
1. _The Construction of the Record_.--The Book of Mormon is an
abridgment made from more extensive records kept by the ancient
civilized people of America--chiefly by the people known in the Book
of Mormon as Nephites. The abridgment, for the most part, is made
by one Mormon, a Nephite prophet, who was born 311 A. D., and slain
by his enemies in the year 400 A. D. The parts which are not his
abridgment are the first 157 pages (N. E.), which bring us to the
"Words of Mormon," page 158; and from page 563 {N. E.} to the end of
the volume--sixty pages. This latter part of the record was made by
Moroni, the son of Mormon, who was also the one who hid up the plates
containing his father's and his own abridgment, in the year 421 A. D.;
and who, having been raised from the dead, revealed the existence of
these plates to Joseph Smith.
{287} The first 157 pages are a verbatim translation from what are
known as the "smaller plates of Nephi"--we will explain: The first
Nephi, who left Jerusalem with a small company of colonists led out
from that city by his father, Lehi, 600 B. C., and who afterwards
became their leader, prophet, and their first king--made two sets of
plates, on which he proposed engraving the history of his people. On
the larger of these two sets he engraved an account of his father's
life, travels, prophecies, etc., together with his genealogy; and
upon them also he recorded a full history of the wars and contentions
of his people, as also their travels, and an account of the cities
they founded and colonies they established. These larger plates were
preserved in the care of succeeding kings, or judges of the republic
when the kingdom was transformed into one; and, in a word, upon them
was written a full history of the rise and fall of the nations which
existed in America, from the landing of this colony from Jerusalem to
400 A. D., a period of nearly one thousand years.
It is quite evident that as these plates were transmitted from king to
king, or from one ruling judge of the republic to another, or given
into the possession of a prophet, that each recorded the historical
events of his own day, and gave to such account his own name--hence
Mormon found in these "larger plates" of Nephi, The Book of Mosiah, the
Book of Alma, the Book of Helaman, etc.
Furthermore, it happened that there were colonies from time to time
that drifted off into distant parts of the land and became lost for
a season to the main body of the people; and there were missionary
expeditions formed for the conversion of the Lamanites; and these
parties, whether missionary or colonial, generally kept records; and
when these colonists or missionary parties were found, or returned to
the main body of the people, their records were incorporated within the
main record, being kept by the historian--hence there was, sometimes, a
book within a book, and the current of events was interrupted to record
the history of these detached portions of the people, or some important
missionary expedition.
Mormon, when abridging these plates of Nephi, gave to each particular
division of his abridgment the name of the book from which he had
taken his account of the events recorded--hence the Books of Mosiah,
Alma, Helaman and III and IV Nephi in his abridgment. He also, in some
instances, at least, followed the sub-divisions we have alluded to,
hence we have the Record of Zeniff within the Book of Mosiah (page 181,
N. E.); the account of the church founded by the first Alma (page 213);
and the account of the missionary expeditions of the sons of Mosiah to
the Lamanites within the Book of Alma (page 283.)
2. _Complexity of the Literary Structure of the Book_.--Again we
caution the student to remember that the Book of Mormon is, for the
most {288} part, an abridgment from the "larger plates" of Nephi; but
it is quite evident that Mormon frequently came to passages upon the
plates of Nephi which pleased him so well that he transcribed them
verbatim upon the plates containing his abridgment. An example of this
will be found beginning on page 163, in the second line of the ninth
paragraph, and ending with page 169--the words of King Benjamin to his
people. The words of King Benjamin are also renewed on page 170, in the
second line of the fourth paragraph, and continue to the close of the
chapter. There are many such passages throughout Mormon's abridgment.
In addition to this, Mormon frequently introduces remarks of his own
by way of comment, warning, prophecy or admonition, and since there is
nothing in the text, neither quotation marks nor a change of type, to
indicate where these comments, or what we might call annotations, begin
or end, they are liable to confuse the reader--a difficulty that we
hope will be obviated by this caution. So much for Mormon's abridgment.
Now to consider the part of the work done by his son, Moroni. This is
from page 563 to the end of the volume. He closes up the record of his
father, Mormon, and then gives us an abridgment of the twenty-four
plates of Ether, which were found in North America by the people of
Limhi, in the second century B. C., and then concludes his work with
notes on the manner of ordaining priests and teachers, administering
the sacrament of the Lord's supper, baptism, spiritual gifts, together
with a sermon and some of his father's letters. In his abridgment of
the record of the Jaredites, the peculiarity of mixing up his comments,
admonitions and prophecies with his narrative, is even more marked
than in the abridgment of Mormon, therefore the reader will need to be
doubly on his guard.
3. _How the "Smaller Plates" of Nephi came to be attached to Mormon's
Abridgment_.--We have already said that the first 157 pages of the
Book of Mormon were not a part of Mormon's abridgment. Those pages are
a verbatim translation of the "smaller plates" of Nephi, and became
connected with Mormon's abridgment in this manner: Mormon had abridged
the "larger plates" of Nephi as far as the reign of King Benjamin, and
in searching through the records which had been delivered to him, he
found the "smaller plates" of Nephi. They contained a brief history
of events connected with the departure of Lehi and his colony from
Jerusalem to their landing in America, and thence down to the reign
of this King Benjamin--covering a period of about 400 years. These
plates were made by Nephi, that upon them might be engraven an account
of the ministry of the servants of God, among his people, together
with their prophecies and teachings. They contain, in other words, an
ecclesiastical history of the {289} Nephites, while the "larger plates"
of Nephi contained a political or secular history of the same people.
(I Nephi ix; xix: 1-5.)
Mormon was particularly well pleased with the contents of these
"smaller plates" of Nephi, because upon them had been engraven so
many prophecies concerning the coming and mission of the Messiah; and
instead of condensing the history recorded on them into an abridgment,
he took the plates themselves and attached them to the abridgment of
Nephi's "larger plates." "And I do this for a wise purpose," says
Mormon; "for thus it whispereth me according to the workings of the
Spirit of the Lord which is in me." (Words of Mormon, page 159 N. E.)
Nephi also, in speaking of these "smaller plates," says, "the Lord hath
commanded me to make these plates for a wise purpose in him; which
purpose I know not." (I Nephi ix:5.)
4. _The Wise Purpose_.--By Mormon attaching these "smaller plates"
of Nephi to his own abridgment of Nephi's "larger plates," it will
be observed there was a double line of history of the Nephites for
about 400 years, and the wisdom of this arrangement is seen in the
following: When Joseph Smith had translated the first part of Mormon's
abridgment--amounting to 116 pages of manuscript, he listened to the
importunities of Martin Harris, who was giving him some assistance in
the work of translating, and who desired to show that portion of the
work to his friends. The result was the manuscript was stolen from
Harris; the records were taken from Joseph by the angel, and for a
season he lost his power to translate. After a time, however, he was
permitted to go on with the work, but the Lord made it known to him
that it was the design of those into whose hands the manuscript had
fallen to wait until he had translated that part again, and then by
changing the manuscript in their possession, would bring it forth and
claim that he could not translate the same record twice alike; and thus
they would seek to overthrow the work of God.
But the heavenly messenger commanded Joseph Smith not to translate
again the part he had already translated, but instead thereof he
should translate the "smaller plates" of Nephi, and that account was
to take the place of Mormon's abridgment up to the latter days of the
reign of King Benjamin. (Doc. and Cov., Sec. 10.) Thus it is that we
have the "Words of Mormon," beginning on page 158, explaining how the
"smaller plates" of Nephi came into his possession and attached to the
plates containing the record he himself was making, and connecting
the historical narrative of the "smaller plates" of Nephi with his
own abridgment of Nephi's "larger plates." The "Words of Mormon,"
interrupting as they do the history of the Nephites, have caused no
little confusion in the minds of unthoughtful readers; but after it is
understood that they are merely the link connecting the ecclesiastical
history engraven on the "smaller {290} plates" of Nephi to Mormon's
abridgment, and that they take the place of the first part of Mormon's
record, the difficulty will disappear.
5. _Difference in the Literary Style of the "Smaller Plates" and
Mormon's Abridgment_.--One thing we cannot forbear to mention, and that
is, in the parts of the Book of Mormon translated from the "smaller
plates" of Nephi, we find none of those comments or annotations mixed
up with the record that we have already spoken of as being peculiar
to the abridgment made by Mormon--a circumstance, we take it, which
proves the Book of Mormon to be consistent with the account given of
the original records from which it was translated. The value of this
fact appears if we stop to consider how destructive to the claims
of the book it would be if the peculiarity of Mormon's abridgment
were found in that part of the book which claims to be a verbatim
translation of the "smaller plates" of Nephi. There will be found,
however, in this translation direct from the "smaller plates" of
Nephi, as also in Mormon's abridgment, extracts from the old Jewish
Scriptures--especially from the writings of Isaiah--this is accounted
for by the fact that when Lehi's colony left Jerusalem, they took with
them copies of the books of Moses and the writings of the prophets,
and the record of the Jews down to the commencement of the reign of
Zedekiah, all of which were engraven on plates of brass (see I Nephi
v: 10-13), and the Nephite historians transcribed passages from these
sacred records into their own writings.
6. _The Transcribed Passages_.--There are a few suggestions about these
transcribed passages which may be valuable to the student, as they
furnish an indirect evidence of the truth of the Book of Mormon. The
Nephites having transcribed passages from the brass plates they carried
with them from Jerusalem into their records, wherever such passages
occur in the Book of Mormon, and corresponding passages are found in
our English Bible, it will be seen by the reader that so far we have
two translations of the writings of the old Hebrew prophets; and it
will be found on comparison that the passages in the Book of Mormon are
stronger and more in keeping with the sense sought to be expressed by
the prophet than the corresponding passages and chapters in the Bible.
As a proof of this I ask the student to compare I Nephi xx and xxi with
Isaiah xlvii and xlix.
In some instances there are sentences, in the Book of Mormon version
of passages from Isaiah, not to be found in our English version, as
witness the following:
{291} BOOK OF MORMON.
O house of Jacob, come ye and let us walk in the light of the Lord;
_yea, come, for ye have all gone astray, every one to his wicked
ways_.--II Nephi xii.
BIBLE.
O house of Jacob, come ye, and let us walk in the light of the
Lord.--Isa. ii: 5.
In other instances it will be found that the sense of the passages is
different, and that the passages in the Book of Mormon best accord with
the sense of the whole:
BOOK OF MORMON.
Therefore, O Lord, thou hast forsaken thy people, the house of Jacob,
because they be replenished from the east, and hearken unto soothsayers
like the Philistines, and they please themselves in the children of
strangers.--II Nephi xii: 6.
Their land is also full of idols--they worship the work of their own
hands, that which their own fingers have made: and the mean man boweth
not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive
him not.--II Nephi xii: 8, 9.
Thou hast multiplied the nation, and increased the joy: they joy before
thee according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they
divide the spoil.--II Nephi xix: 3.
BIBLE.
Therefore Thou hast forsaken Thy people the house of Jacob, because
they be replenished from the east, and _are_ soothsayers like
the Philistines, and they please themselves in the children of
strangers.--Isa. ii: 6
Their land also is full of idols; they worship the work which their
own fingers have made: and the mean man boweth down, and the great man
humbleth himself: therefore, forgive them not.--Isa. ii: 8, 9.
Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the joy: they joy
before thee according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when
they divide the spoil.--Isa. ix: 3.
Observe, too, the difference in the clearness of the following passages:
BOOK OF MORMON.
And when they shall say unto you, seek unto them that have familiar
spirits, and unto wizards that peep and mutter; should not a people
seek unto their God? for the living to hear from the dead?--II Nephi
xix: 3.
BIBLE.
And when they shall say unto you, seek unto them that have familiar
spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter; should not a
people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?--Isa. viii: 19.
{292} Again, the English translators of the Bible, in order to make the
sense of various passages more clear, inserted here and there, words of
their own; which are always written in _Italics_, that the reader might
know what words have been inserted by the translator, and for which
he will find no equivalent in the original text. It is worthy of note
that in those transcribed passages from the brass plates into the Book
of Mormon, in almost every instance, the words in the Book of Mormon
version are different to those substituted by the translators of the
common English Version; or are left out, as follows:
BOOK OF MORMON.
What mean ye? Ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the
poor.--II Nephi xiii: 15.
BIBLE.
What mean ye _that_ ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of
the poor?--Isa. iii: 15.
The above is a case where the inserted word of the translator, which I
have written in _Italics_, is omitted, and to my mind the passage as it
stands in the Book of Mormon is the stronger and more beautiful. Here
is a passage where different words are used than those inserted by the
translators:
BOOK OF MORMON.
Say unto the righteous, that it is well with them; for they shall eat
the fruit of their doings.
Woe unto the wicked for they shall perish; for the reward of their
hands shall be upon them.--II Nephi xiii: 10, 11.
BIBLE.
Say ye to the righteous, that _it shall be_ well _with him_: for they
shall eat the fruit of their doings.
Woe unto the wicked; _it shall be ill with him_; for the reward of his
hands shall be given him.--Isa. iii: 10, 11.
I think it will be readily conceived that the above passage as it
stands in the Book of Mormon is much superior to the version given in
our common Bible. And when it is remembered that Joseph Smith and those
who assisted in translating that work were most likely uninformed as to
the supplied words of the translators being written in _Italics_, it
is an incidental evidence that those passages in the Book of Mormon to
which are found corresponding passages in the Bible, were not merely
copied from the Bible, but in the Book of Mormon we have really another
translation of those passages taken from original records of the
Hebrews, uncorrupted by the hand of man, and hence more perfect.
7. _A Means of Testing the Truth of the Book of Mormon_.--One
suggestion more I would make to the readers of the Book of Mormon:
{293} that is, that they read it prayerfully with a real desire to
know if it is of God. If they will peruse it with that desire in their
hearts, I am sanguine that the Spirit of God which searches all things,
yea, the deep things of God, will bear witness to their understanding
that the book is of divine origin, and they will have a witness from
God of its truth. Such a promise in fact, is contained within the book
itself. When Moroni was closing up the sacred record previous to hiding
it up unto the Lord until the time should come for it to be revealed as
a witness for God, he engraved the following passage on the plates as
words of counsel to those into whose hands the record should fall:
"And when ye shall receive these things" (i. e., the things written
in the Book of Mormon) "I would exhort you that ye would ask God the
Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true;
and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having
faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you by the power
of the Holy Ghost; and by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the
truth of all things." (Moroni x: 4,5.)
Here, then, is a means by which every person into whose hands the Book
of Mormon falls may find out for himself, not from human testimony, not
from the deductions of logic, but through the power of the Holy Ghost,
whether the Book of Mormon is of divine origin or not. This test must
be final, either for or against it, to every individual who complies
with the conditions enjoined by Moroni. Those conditions are, that they
into whose hands the record falls shall inquire of God with a sincere
heart, with real intent, and having faith in Christ and to those who
so proceed he promises without equivocation that they shall receive a
manifestation of its truth by the power of the Holy Ghost. Therefore,
if these directions are complied with faithfully and honestly, and the
manifestation follows not, then they may know it is not of God. If
the manifestation comes, of course the divine origin of the book is
confirmed, for the Holy Ghost would not confirm by any manifestation of
its power an imposition.
REVIEW.
1. What is a dispensation in connection with the work of God?
2. In what does the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times differ from
other dispensations?
3. State when and where the Prophet Joseph was born.
4. What was the condition and standing of the Prophet's parents?
{294} 5. State what you can about the movements of the Smith family
until its settlement in Manchester.
6. What occurred in Manchester when the prophet was in his fifteenth
year?
7. What influence did this religious revival have on the Smith family?
8. What reflections did it give birth to in the boy Joseph?
9. What circumstance was it that decided the course of Joseph?
10. Describe the first great vision Joseph received.
11. What sectarian vagary is dispelled by this vision?
12. What were the prophet's subsequent teachings relative to the
personage of God? (Note.)
13. What does the vision teach in respect to the Father and Son being
distinct persons?
14. What great truth respecting the character of the creeds and sects
of Christendom is learned from the vision?
15. What did it prove in regard to the false idea that God would give
no more revelation to man?
16. What other important thing did this first vision accomplish?
17. How long was it after the prophet received his first vision before
any other revelation was given him?
18. How was Joseph's announcement that he had received a revelation
from God treated by the ministers?
19. What can you say of the prophet's conduct during the above
mentioned interval of three years?
20. Give an account of Moroni's first visit to the Prophet Joseph.
21. Give a description of Moroni. (Note 3),
22. What ancient record did Moroni reveal the existence of?
23. Enumerate the several ancient prophecies of the Bible quoted by
Moroni.
24. What cautions did Moroni give Joseph before finally leaving him?
25. Relate Moroni's fourth appearance to Joseph.
26. Give an account of Joseph's first visit to Cumorah.
27. By what name was this same hill known among the Jaredites?
28. Give a description of Cumorah.
29. What arrangements for future visitations did Moroni make with
Joseph?
30. When were the plates of the Book of Mormon together with the Urim
and Thummim given into the possession of Joseph?
31. What individuals and family rendered Joseph valuable assistance
while translating the Book of Mormon?
32. How many especial witnesses were raised up to the Book of Mormon?
33. State how the Book of Mormon was constructed.
34. Describe the complexity of the structure of the Book of Mormon.
{295} 35. How did the "smaller plates" of Nephi come to be attached to
Mormon's abridgment?
36. For what wise purpose were they attached to Mormon's abridgment?
37. What difference in style of composition is noticeable between these
"smaller plates" and Mormon's abridgment?
38. What can you say of the transcribed passages from the brass plates?
39. What direct means exists for testing the truth of the Book of
Mormon?
{296}