5. In the fourth century we find the Church still more hopelessly

committed to formalism and superstition. The decent respect with which

the remains of the early martyrs had been honored degenerated or grew

into a superstitious reverence amounting to worship. This practice was

allowed in deference to the heathen adoration paid to deified heroes.

Pilgrimages to the tombs of martyrs became common as an outward form

of religious devotion; and the ashes of martyrs as well as dust and

earth brought from places said to have been made holy by some uncommon

occurrence were sold as sovereign remedies against disease and as

means of protection against the assaults of malignant spirits.

6. The form of public worship was so changed during the second and

third centuries as to bear little resemblance to the simplicity and

earnestness of that of the early congregations. Philosophic discourses

took the place of fervent testimony bearing and the arts of the

rhetorician and controversial debater supplanted the true eloquence of

religious conviction. Applause was allowed and expected as evidence of

the preacher's popularity. The burning incense, at first abhorred by

Christian assemblies because of its pagan origin and heathen

significance, had become common in the Church before the end of the

third century.

7. In the fourth century the adoration of images, pictures, and

effigies, had been given a place in the so-called Christian worship;

and the practice became general in the century following. An effort to

check the abuses arising from this idolatrous practice in the eighth

century, actually led to civil war.--(See Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.,"

Cent. VIII, Part II, ch. 3:9, 10.)

8. In considering such evidences of pagan ceremonial and superstitious

rites taking the place of the simple procedure incident to genuine

worship characteristic of the Church in the days of its integrity, who

can question the solemn and awful fact of actual apostasy?--(See Note

2, end of chapter.) But more important yet, more significant still

than mere additions to the ritualistic ceremonial, are the perversions

and changes introduced into the most sacred and essential ordinances

of Christ's Church. As it is common with ecclesiastical authorities to

consider the most essential ordinances of the gospel originally

established by Christ and maintained by His apostles, as comprising

baptism and the sacrament of the Lord's supper, we shall examine into

these alone as examples of the unauthorized alterations now under

consideration. In this restriction of our illustrative examples we do

not admit that baptism and the sacrament named were the only

ordinances characterizing the Church; indeed, there is abundant proof

to the contrary. Thus, the authoritative imposition of hands for the

bestowal of the Holy Ghost in the case of baptized believers was

equally essential with baptism itself,--(See Acts 8:5-8, 12, 14-17;

also 19:1-7; see also 2:38; Matt. 3:11; and Mark 1:8.) and was

assuredly regarded as a vital ordinance from the first.--(See Matt.

3:11.) Furthermore, ordination in the priesthood, whereby men were

commissioned by divine authority was indispensable to the maintenance

of an organized Church. The examples selected, however, will be

sufficient for the purposes of our present inquiry.

**The Ordinance of Baptism Changed**.

9. First, then, as to baptism,--in what did the ordinance originally

consist, as to purpose and mode of administration, and what changes

did it undergo in the course of progressive apostasy through which the

Church passed? That baptism is essential to salvation calls for no

demonstration here; this has been generally held by the Christian

Church in both ancient and modern times.--(For a concise treatment of

this subject, see the author's "Articles of Faith," Lecture 6:8-29.)

The purpose of baptism was and is the obtaining of a remission of

sins; compliance with the requirement has been from the first the sole

means of securing admission to the Church of Christ.--(See Mark 1:4

and Luke 3:3; also Acts 2:38; I Peter 3:21; and Acts 22:16. Compare II

Nephi 31:17.)

10. In the early Church, baptism was administered on profession of

faith and evidence of repentance, and was performed by immersion--(See

Note 3, end of chapter) at the hands of one invested with the

requisite authority of priesthood. There was no delay in administering

the ordinance after the eligibility of the candidate had been shown.

As instances we may cite the promptness with which baptism was

administered to the believers on that eventful day of Pentecost;--

(Acts 2:37-41) the baptism administered by Philip to the Ethiopian

convert immediately following due profession of faith;--(Acts 8:26-39)

the undelayed baptism of devout Cornelius and his family;--(Acts

10:47, 48) and the speedy baptism of the converted jailer by Paul, his

prisoner.--(Acts 16:31-33.)

11. In the second century, however, priestly mandate had restricted

the baptismal ordinance to the times of the two Church festivals,

Easter and Whitsuntide, the first being the anniversary of Christ's

resurrection, and the second the time of Pentecostal celebration. A

long and tedious course of preparation was required of the candidate

before his eligibility was admitted; during this time he was known as

a _catechumen_, or novice in training. According to some authorities a

three years' course of preparation was required in all but exceptional

cases.--(Schlegel, Book VIII, ch. 32.)

12. During the second century the baptismal symbolism of a new birth

was emphasized by many additions to the ordinance; thus the newly

baptized were treated as infants and were fed milk and honey in token

of their immaturity. As baptism was construed to be a ceremony of

liberation from the slavery of Satan, certain formulas used in the

freeing of slaves were added. Anointing with oil was also made a part

of the ceremony. In the third century the simple ordinance of baptism

was further encumbered and perverted by the ministrations of an

exorcist. This official indulged in "menacing and formidable shouts

and declamation" whereby the demons or evil spirits with which the

candidate was supposed to be afflicted were to be driven away. "The

driving out of this demon was now considered as an essential

preparation for baptism, after the administration of which the

candidates returned home, adorned with crowns, and arrayed in white

garments, as sacred emblems,--the former of their victory over sin and

the world; the latter of their inward purity and innocence."--

(Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. III, part II, ch. 4:4.) It is not

difficult to see in this superstitious ceremony the evidence of pagan

adulteration of the Christian religion. In the fourth century it

became the practice to place salt in the mouth of the newly baptized

member, as a symbol of purification, and the actual baptism was both

preceded and followed by an anointing with oil.

13. The form or mode of baptism also underwent a radical change during

the first half of the third century,--a change whereby its essential

symbolism was destroyed. Immersion,--(See Note 3, end of chapter)

typifying death followed by resurrection, was no longer deemed an

essential feature, and sprinkling with water was allowed in place

thereof. No less an authority than Cyprian, the learned bishop of

Carthage, advocated the propriety of sprinkling in lieu of immersion

in cases of physical weakness; and the practice thus started, later

became general. The first instance of record is that of Novatus, a

heretic who requested baptism when he thought death was near.--(As to

the scriptural doctrine of baptism, the mode of its administration and

the symbolism thereof, see the author's "Articles of Faith," Lecture

7.)

14. Not only was the form of the baptismal rite radically changed, but

the application of the ordinance was perverted. The practice of

administering baptism to infants was recognized as orthodox in the

third century, and was doubtless of earlier origin. In a prolonged

disputation as to whether it was safe to postpone the baptism of

infants until the eighth day after birth--in deference to the Jewish

custom of performing circumcision on that day--it was gravely decided

that such delay would be dangerous, as jeopardizing the future

well-being of the child should it die before attaining the age of

eight days, and that baptism ought to be administered as soon after

birth as possible.--(See Milner, "Church History," Cent. III; ch. 13.)

A more infamous doctrine than that of the condemnation of unbaptized

infants can scarcely be imagined, and a stronger proof of the heresies

that had invaded and corrupted the early Church need not be sought.

Such a doctrine is foreign to the gospel and to the Church of Christ,

and its adoption as an essential tenet is proof of apostasy.--(For a

discussion of infant baptism, see the author's "Articles of Faith,"

Lecture 6. See Note 4, end of chapter.)

**Changes in the Ordinance of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper**.

15. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper has been regarded as an

essential ordinance from the time of its establishment in the Church

by Jesus Christ. Yet in spite of its sanctity it has undergone radical

alteration both as to its symbolism and its accepted purpose. The

sacrament, as instituted by the Savior and as administered during the

days of the apostolic ministry, was as simple as it was sacred and

solemn. Accompanied by the true spirit of the gospel, its simplicity

was sanctifying; as interpreted by the spirit of apostasy its

simplicity became a reproach. Hence we find that in the third century,

long sacramental prayers were prescribed, and much pomp was

introduced. Vessels of gold and silver were used by such congregations

as could afford them, and this with ostentatious display. Nonmembers

and members "who were in a penitential state" were excluded from the

sacramental service--in imitation of the exclusiveness accompanying

heathen mysteries. Disputation and dissension arose as to the proper

time of administering the sacrament--morning, noon, or evening; and as

to the frequency with which the ordinance should be celebrated.--(See

Note 5, end of chapter.)

16. At a later date the doctrine of _Transubstantiation_ was

established as an essential tenet of the Roman Church. This briefly

summarized, is to the effect that the species--i. e., the bread and

wine used in the sacrament--lose their character as mere bread and

wine, and become in fact the flesh and blood of the crucified Christ.

The transmutation is assumed to take place in such a mystical way as

to delude the senses; and so, though actual flesh and actual blood,

the elements still appear to be bread and wine. This view, so strongly

defended and earnestly reverenced by orthodox members of the Roman

Church, is vehemently denounced by others as "an absurd tenet,"--

(Milner) and a "monstrous and unnatural doctrine."--(Mosheim.)

17. There has been much discussion as to the origin of this

doctrine,--(See Note 6, end of chapter.) the Roman Catholics claiming

for it a great antiquity, while their opponents insist that it was an

innovation of the eighth or ninth century. According to Milner it was

openly taught in the ninth century;--(Milner, "Church History," Cent.

IX, ch. 1.) was formally established as a dogma of the Church by the

Council of Placentia A. D. 1095,--(The same, Cent. XI, ch. 1) and was

made an essential article of creed, belief in which was required of

all by action of the Roman ecclesiastical court about 1160.--(The

same, Cent. XIII, ch. 1.) An official edict of the pope, Innocent III,

confirmed the dogma as a binding tenet and requirement of the Church

in 1215;--(Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. XIII, Part II, ch. 3:2.) and

it remains practically in force in the Roman Catholic Church today.

The doctrine was adopted by the Greek Church in the seventeenth

century.--(The same. Cent. XVII, Part II, ch. 2:3.)

18. The consecrated emblems, or "host," being regarded as the actual

flesh and blood of Christ, were adored as of themselves divine. Thus,

"a very pernicious practice of idolatry was connected with the

reception of this doctrine. Men fell down before the consecrated host,

and worshipped it as God; and the novelty, absurdity, and impiety of

this abomination very much struck the minds of all men who were not

dead to a sense of true religion."--(Milner, "Church History," Cent.

XIII, ch. 1.) The "elevation of the host,"--i. e., the presentation of

the consecrated emblems before the congregation for adoration, is a

feature of the present day ritual of worship in the Roman Catholic

Church. The celebration of the mass is taught to be an actual though

mystic sacrifice, in which the Son of God is daily offered up anew as

a constantly recurring atonement for the present sins of the assembled

worshippers. A further perversion of the sacrament occurred in the

administration of bread alone, instead of both bread and wine as

originally required.

19. Thus was the plain purpose and assured efficacy of the sacrament

hidden beneath a cloud of mystery and ceremonial display. Contrast

such with the solemn simplicity of the ordinance as instituted by our

Lord,--He took bread and wine, blessed them and gave to His disciples

and said, "This do in remembrance of me."--(Luke 22:19, 20; compare

Matt. 26:27, 28.) Of the bread He said, "This is my body;" of the

wine, "This is my blood;" yet at that time His body was unpierced, His

blood was unshed. The disciples ate bread, not flesh of a living man,

and drank wine, not blood; and this they were commanded to do in

remembrance of Christ.--(For a general treatment of the Sacrament of

the Lord's Supper, see the author's "Articles of Faith," Lecture 9.)

The perversion of the sacrament is evidence of departure from the

spirit of the gospel of Christ, and when made an essential dogma of a

church is proof of the apostate condition of that church.

20. Behold, "_they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance,

broken the everlasting covenant_."--(See Isaiah 24:4-6.)

NOTES.

1. _Ceremonies Added as a Compromise_. "Both Jews and heathens were

accustomed to a vast variety of pompous and magnificent ceremonies in

their religious service. And as they considered these rites as an

essential part of religion, it was but natural that they should behold

with indifference, and even with contempt, the simplicity of the

Christian worship, which was destitute of those idle ceremonies that

rendered their service so specious and striking. To remove then, in

some measure, this prejudice against Christianity, the bishops thought

it necessary to increase the number of rites and ceremonies, and thus

to render the public worship more striking to the outward senses. This

addition of external rites was also designed to remove the opprobrious

calumnies which the Jewish and pagan priests cast upon the Christians

on account of the simplicity of their worship, esteeming them little

better than atheists, because they had no temples, altars, victims,

priests, nor anything of that external pomp in which the vulgar are so

prone to place the essence of religion. The rulers of the Church

adopted, therefore, certain external ceremonies, that thus they might

captivate the senses of the vulgar, and be able to refute the

reproaches of their adversaries." (Mosheim, "Ecclesiastical History,"

Cent. II, Part II, ch. 4:2, 3.)

A note appended to the foregoing excerpt by the translator, Dr.

Archibald Maclaine, reads as follows:

"A remarkable passage in the life of Gregory, surnamed Thaumaturgus,

i. e., the wonder worker, will illustrate this point in the clearest

manner. The passage is as follows: 'When Gregory perceived that the

ignorant multitude persisted in their idolatry, on account of the

pleasures and sensual gratifications which they enjoyed at the pagan

festivals, he granted them a permission to indulge themselves in the

like pleasures, in celebrating the memory of the holy martyrs, hoping

that in process of time, they would return of their own accord to a

more virtuous and regular course of life.' There is no sort of doubt,

but that by this permission, Gregory allowed the Christians to dance,

sport, and feast at the tombs of the martyrs upon their respective

festivals, and to do everything which the pagans were accustomed to do

in their temples during the feasts celebrated in honor of their gods."

The Gregory referred to in the note last quoted flourished about the

middle of the third century. He acquired the title Thaumaturgus from

his fame as a worker of miracles, the genuineness of which

achievements is disputed by many authorities. He was bishop of New

Caesarea, and a man of great influence in the Church. His sanction of

ceremonies, patterned after pagan rites, was doubtless of far-reaching

effect.

2. _Church Ceremonial in the Fifth Century_. "The sublime and simple

theology of the primitive Christians was gradually corrupted, and the

Monarchy of heaven, already clouded by metaphysical subtleties, was

degraded by the introduction of a popular mythology, which tended to

restore the reign of polytheism. As the objects of religion were

gradually reduced to the standard of the imagination, the rites and

ceremonies were introduced that seemed most powerfully to affect the

senses of the vulgar. If, in the beginning of the fifth century,

Tertullian or Lactantius had been suddenly raised from the dead, to

assist at the festival of some popular saint or martyr, they would

have gazed with astonishment and indignation on the profane spectacle,

which had succeeded to the pure and spiritual worship of a Christian

congregation. As soon as the doors of the Church were thrown open they

must have been offended by the smoke of incense, the perfume of

flowers, and the glare of lamps and tapers, which diffused, at

noonday, a gaudy, superfluous, and, in their opinion a sacriligious

light. If they approached the balustrade of the altar, they made their

way through the prostrate crowd, consisting for the most part, of

strangers and pilgrims, who resorted to the city on the vigil of the

feast; and who already felt the strong intoxication of fanaticism, and

perhaps of wine. Their devout kisses were imprinted on the walls and

pavements of the sacred edifice; and their fervent prayers were

directed, whatever might be the language of their church, to the

bones, the blood, or the ashes of the saints, which were usually

concealed by a linen or silken veil from the eyes of the vulgar. The

Christians frequented the tombs of the martyrs, in the hope of

obtaining, from their powerful intercession, every sort of spiritual,

but more especially of temporal blessings. * * * The same uniform

original spirit of superstition might suggest, in the most distant

ages and countries, the same methods of deceiving the credulity, and

of affecting the services, of mankind; but it must ingeniously be

confessed that the ministers of the Catholic Church imitated the

profane model which they were impatient to destroy. The most

respectable bishops had persuaded themselves that the ignorant rustics

would more cheerfully renounce the superstitions of Paganism, if they

found some resemblance, some compensation, in the bosom of

Christianity. The religion of Constantine achieved, in less than a

century, the final conquest of the Roman empire; but the victors

themselves were insensibly subdued by the arts of their vanquished

rivals."--(Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," ch.

XXVIII.)

3. _Early Form of Christian Baptism_. History furnishes ample proof

that in the first century after the death of Christ, baptism was

administered solely by immersion. Tertullian thus refers to the

immersion ceremony common in his day: "There is no difference whether

one is washed in a sea or in a pool, in a river or in a fountain, in a

lake or in a channel; nor is there any difference between those whom

John dipped in Jordan, and those whom Peter dipped in the Tiber. * * *

We are immersed in the water."

Justin Martyr describes the ceremony as practiced by himself. First

describing the preparatory examination of the candidate, he proceeds:

"After that they are led by us to where there is water, and are born

again in that kind of new birth by which we ourselves were born again.

For in the name of God, the Father and Lord of all, and of Jesus

Christ, our Savior, and of the Holy Spirit, the immersion in water is

performed; because the Christ hath also said, 'Except a man be born

again, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.'"

Bishop Bennet says concerning the practices of the early Christians:

"They led them into the water and laid them down in the water as a man

is laid in a grave; and then they said those words, 'I baptize (or

wash) thee in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost;' then they

raised them up again, and clean garments were put on them; from whence

came the phrases of being baptized into Christ's death, of being

buried with Him by baptism into death, of our being risen with Christ,

and of our putting on the Lord Jesus Christ, of putting off the old

man, and putting on the new."

"That the apostles immersed whom they baptized there is no doubt. * *

* And that the ancient church followed their example is very clearly

evinced by innumerable testimonies of the fathers."--(Vossius.)

"Burying as it were the person baptized in the water, and raising him

out again, without question was anciently the more usual

method."--(Archbishop Seeker.)

"_Immersion_ was the usual method in which baptism was administered in

the early Church. * * * Immersion was undoubtedly a common mode of

administering baptism, and was not discontinued when infant baptism

prevailed. * * * Sprinkling gradually took the place of immersion

without any formal renunciation of the latter."--(Canon Farrar.)

4. _Historical Notes on Infant Baptism_. "The baptism of infants, in

the first two centuries after Christ, was altogether unknown. * * *

The custom of baptizing infants did not begin before the third age

after Christ was born. In the former ages no trace of it appears; and

it was introduced without the command of Christ."--(Curcullaeus.)

"It is certain that Christ did not ordain infant baptism. * * * We

cannot prove that the apostles ordained infant baptism. From those

places where baptism of a whole family is mentioned (as in Acts 16:33;

I Cor. 1:16) we can draw no such conclusion, because the inquiry is

still to be made, whether there were any children in the 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. * *

* As baptism was closely united with a conscious entrance on Christian

communion, faith and baptism were always connected with one another;

and thus it is in the highest degree probable that baptism was

performed only in instances where both could meet together, and that

the practice of infant baptism was unknown at this (the apostolic)

period. * * * That not till so late a period as (at least certainly

not earlier than) Irenaeus, a trace of infant baptism appears; and

that it first became recognized as an apostolic tradition in the

course of the third century, is evidence rather against than for the

admission of its apostolic origin."--(Johann Neander, a German

theologian who flourished in the first half of the nineteenth

century.)

"Let them therefore come when they are grown up--when they can

understand--when they are taught whither they are to come. Let them

become Christians when they can know Christ."--(Tertullian, one of the

Latin "Christian Fathers;" he lived from 150 to 220 A. D.)

Tertullian's almost violent opposition to the practice of pedo-baptism

is cited by Neander as "a proof that it was then not usually

considered an apostolic ordinance; for in that case he would hardly

have ventured to speak so strongly against it."

Martin Luther, writing in the early part of the sixteenth century,

declared: "It cannot be proven by the sacred scriptures that infant

baptism was instituted by Christ, or begun by the first Christians

after the apostles."

"By _tekna_ the Apostle understands, not infants, but posterity; in

which significance the word occurs in many places of the New Testament

(see among others John 8:39); whence it appears that the argument

which is very commonly taken from this passage for the baptism of

infants, is of no force, and good for nothing."--(Limborch, a native

of Holland, and a theologian of repute; he lived 1633-1712.)

5. _Summary of Changes in the Sacrament as an Ordinance_. "Errors

concerning the sacrament, and its signification, and the manner of

administering it, grew rapidly in the professed Christian churches

during the early centuries of the Christian era. As soon as the power

of the priesthood had departed, much disputation arose in matters of

ordinance, and the observance of the sacrament became distorted.

Theological teachers strove to foster the idea that there was much

mystery attending this naturally simple and most impressive ordinance;

that all who were not in full communion with the Church should be

excluded, not only from participation in the ordinance, which was

justifiable, but from the privilege of witnessing the service, lest

they profane the mystic rite by their unhallowed presence. Then arose

the heresy of transubstantiation,--which held that the sacramental

emblems by the ceremony of consecration lost their natural character

of simple bread and wine, and became in reality flesh and

blood,--actually parts of the crucified body of Christ. Arguments

against such dogmas is useless. Then followed the veneration of the

emblems by the people, the bread and wine--regarded as part of

Christ's tabernacle, being elevated in the mass for the adoration of

the people; and later, the custom of suppressing half of the sacrament

was introduced. By the innovation last mentioned, only the bread was

administered, the dogmatic assertion being that both the body and the

blood were represented in some mystical way in one of the 'elements.'

Certain it is, that Christ required His disciples to both eat and

drink in remembrance of Him."--(The Author, "Articles of Faith,"

Lecture 9, Note 4.)

6. _As to the Antiquity of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation_. As

stated in the text, the date of origin of the Catholic doctrine of

transubstantiation has been debated. The following summary is

instructive. "Protestants combatting 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.'

(Epistle 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 wine] 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 Antoninus.) 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."--(B. H. Roberts, "Outlines of

Ecclesiastical History," p. 133.)

CHAPTER IX.

**Internal Causes.--Continued**.

1. Among the controlling causes leading to the general apostasy of the

Church, we have specified as third in the series: _Unauthorized

changes in Church organization and government_.

2. A comparison between the plan of organization on which the

Primitive Church was founded and the ecclesiastical system which took

its place will afford valuable evidence as to the true or apostate

condition of the modern Church. The Primitive Church was officered by

apostles, pastors, high priests, seventies, elders, bishops, priests,

teachers, and deacons.--(See Luke 6:13 and Mark 3:14; Eph. 4:11; Heb.

5:1-5; Luke 10:1-11; Acts 14:23; 15:6; I Peter 5:1; I Tim. 3:1; Titus

1:17; Rev. 1:6; Acts 13:1; I Tim. 3:8-12.) We have no evidence that

the presiding council of the Church, comprising the twelve apostles,

was continued beyond the earthly ministry of those who had been

ordained to that holy calling during the life of Christ or soon after

His ascension. Nor is there record of any ordination of individuals to

the apostleship, irrespective of membership in the council of twelve,

beyond those whose calling and ministry are chronicled in the New

Testament, which, as a historical record, ends with the first century.

3. Ecclesiastical history other than the holy scriptures informs us,

however, that wherever a branch, or church, was organized, a bishop or

an elder (presbyter) was placed in charge. There is no doubt that

while the apostles lived, they were recognized and respected as the

presiding authorities of the Church. As they established branches or

churches, they selected the bishops, and submitted their nominations

to the vote of the members. As already stated, the principle of

self-government, or common consent, was respected in apostolic days

with a care amounting to sacred duty. We read that the bishops were

assisted in their local administration by presbyters and deacons.

4. After the apostles had gone, bishops and other officers were

nominated by, or at the instance of, the existing authorities. The

affairs of each church or branch were conducted and regulated by the

local officers, so that a marked equality existed among the several

churches, none exercising or claiming supremacy except as to the

deference voluntarily paid to those churches that had been organized

by the personal ministry of the apostles. Throughout the first and the

greater part of the second century, "the Christian churches were

independent of each other; nor were they joined together by

association, confederacy, or other bonds but those of charity. Each

Christian assembly was a little state, governed by its own laws, which

were either enacted, or, at least, approved by the society."--

(Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. II, Part II, ch. 2:2.)

5. As with the churches, so with their bishops,--there was a

recognized equality among them. Late in the second, and throughout the

third century, however, marked distinctions and recognitions of rank

arose among the bishops, those of large and wealthy cities assuming

authority and dignity above that accorded by them to the bishops of

the country provinces. The bishops of the largest cities or provinces,

took to themselves the distinguishing title of Metropolitans,--(See

Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. II, Part II, ch. 2:3; also Cent. IV,

Part II, ch. 2:3, and compare Cent. I, Part II, ch. 2:14.) and assumed

a power of presidency over the bishops of more limited jurisdiction.

6. The second century was marked by the custom of holding synods or

church councils; the practice originated among the churches in Greece,

and thence became general. These councils grew rapidly in power, so

that in the third century we find them legislating for the churches,

and directing by edict and command in matters which formerly had been

left to the vote of the people. Needless to say that with such

assumptions of authority came arrogance and tyranny in the government

of the Church. As the form of church government changed more and more,

many minor orders of clergy or church officers arose; thus in the

third century we read of sub-deacons, acolytes, ostiars, readers,

exorcists, and copiates. As an instance of the pride of office, it is

worthy of note that a sub-deacon was forbidden to sit in the presence

of a deacon without the latter's express consent.

7. Rome, so long the "mistress of the world" in secular affairs,

arrogated to herself a pre-eminence in church matters, and the bishop

of Rome claimed supremacy. It is doubtless true that the church at

Rome was organized by Peter and Paul. Tradition, founded on error,

said that the apostle Peter was the first bishop of Rome; and those

who successively were acknowledged as bishops of the metropolis

claimed to be, in fact, lineal successors of the presiding apostle.

The high but none the less false claim is made by the Catholic Church

in this day, that the present pope is the last lineal successor--not

alone to the bishopric but to the apostleship.

8. The rightful supremacy of the bishops of Rome, or Roman pontiffs as

they came to be known, was early questioned; and when Constantine made

Byzantium, or Constantinople, the capital of the empire, the bishop of

Constantinople claimed equality. The dispute divided the Church, and

for five hundred years the dissension increased, until in the ninth

century (855 A. D.) it developed into a great disruption, in

consequence of which the bishop of Constantinople, known distinctively

as the patriarch, disavowed all further allegiance to the bishop of

Rome, otherwise known as the Roman pontiff. This disruption is marked

today by the distinction between Roman Catholics.

9. The election of pontiff, or bishop of Rome, was long left to the

vote of the people and clergy; later the electoral function was vested

in the clergy alone; and in the eleventh century the power was lodged

in the college of cardinals, where it remains vested today. The Roman

pontiffs strove with unremitting zeal to acquire temporal as well as

spiritual authority; and their influence had become so great that in

the eleventh century we find them claiming the right to direct

princes, kings, and emperors in the affairs of the several nations. It

was at this, the early period of their greatest temporal power, that

the pontiffs took the title of _pope_, the word meaning literally papa

or father, and applied in the sense of universal parent. The power of

the popes was increased during the twelfth century, and may be said to

have reached its height in the thirteenth century.

10. Not content with assumed supremacy in all church affairs, the

popes "carried their insolent pretensions so far as to give themselves

out for lords of the universe, arbiters of the fate of kingdoms and

empires, and supreme rulers over the kings and princes of the

earth."--(Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. XI, Part II, ch. 2:2.) They

claimed the right to authorize and direct in the internal affairs of

nations, and to make lawful the rebellion of subjects against their

rulers if the latter failed to keep favor with the papal power.

11. Compare this arrogant and tyrannical church of the world with the

Church of Christ. Unto Pilate our Lord declared, "My kingdom is not of

this world."--(John 18:36.) and on an earlier occasion, when the

people would have proclaimed Him king with earthly dominion,--(John

6:15.) He departed from them. Yet the Church that boasts of its divine

origin as founded by the Christ, who would not be a king, lifts itself

above all kings and rulers, and proclaims itself the supreme power in

the affairs of nations.

12. In the fourth century the Church had promulgated what has been

since designated as an infamy, viz.: that "errors in religion, when

maintained and adhered to after proper admonition, were punishable

with civil penalties, and corporal tortures."--(Mosheim, "Eccl.

Hist.," Cent. IV, Part II, ch. 3:16.) The effect of this unjust rule

appeared as more and more atrocious with the passage of the years, so

that in the eleventh century, and later, we find the Church imposing

punishment of fine, imprisonment, bodily torture, and even death, as

penalties for infraction of church regulations, and, more infamous

still, providing for mitigation or annulment of such sentences on

payment of money. This led to the shocking practice of selling

_indulgences_ or pardons, which custom was afterwards carried to the

awful extreme of issuing such before the commission of the specific

offense, thus literally offering for sale licenses to sin, with

assurance of temporal and promise of spiritual immunity.

13. The granting of indulgences as exemptions from temporal penalties

was at first confined to the bishops and their agents, and the

practice dates as an organized traffic from about the middle of the

twelfth century. It remained for the popes, however, to go to the

blasphemous extreme of assuming to remit the penalties of the

hereafter on payment of the sums prescribed. Their pretended

justification of the impious assumption was as horrible as the act

itself, and constitutes the dreadful _doctrine of supererogation_.

14. As formulated in the thirteenth century, this doctrine was thus

set forth: "That there actually existed an immense treasure of

_merit_, composed of the pious deeds and virtuous actions which the

saints had performed _beyond what was necessary for their own

salvation_, and which were therefore applicable to the benefit of

others; that the guardian and dispenser of this precious treasure was

the Roman pontiff, and that of consequence he was empowered to assign

to such as he thought proper a portion of this inexhaustible source of

merit, suitable to their respective guilt, and sufficient to deliver

them from the punishment due to their crimes."--(As cited by Mosheim;

see "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. XII, Part II, ch. 3:4.)

15. The doctrine of supererogation is as unreasonable as it is

unscriptural and untrue. Man's individual responsibility for his acts

is as surely a fact as is his agency to act for himself. He will be

saved through the merits and by the atoning sacrifice of our Redeemer

and Lord; and his claim upon the salvation provided is strictly

dependent on his compliance with the principles and ordinances of the

gospel as established by Jesus Christ. Remission of sins and the

eventual salvation of the human soul are provided for; but these gifts

of God are not to be purchased with money. Compare the awful fallacies

of supererogation and the blasphemous practice of assuming to remit

sins of one man in consideration of the merits of another, with the

declaration of the one and only Savior of mankind: "But I say unto

you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give

account thereof in the day of judgment."--(Matt. 12:36.) His inspired

apostles, seeing in prophetic vision the day of awful certainty,

solemnly testifies, "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before

God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is

the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which

were written in the books, _according to their works_. 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

their works_."--(Rev. 20:12, 13. Italics intro.)

16. The scriptures proclaim the eternal fact of individual

accountability;--(For a concise treatment of the doctrine of man's

responsibility see the author's "Articles of Faith," Lecture 3.) the

Church in the days of its degeneracy declares that the merit of one

may be bought by another and paid for in worldly coin. Can such a

Church be in any measure the Church of Christ?

17. In illustration of the indulgences as sold in Germany in the

sixteenth century, we have the record of the doings of John Tetzel,

agent of the pope, who traveled about selling forgiveness of sins.

Says Milner: "Myconius assures us that he himself heard Tetzel declaim

with incredible effrontery concerning the unlimited power of the pope

and the efficacy of indulgences. The people believed that the moment

any person had paid the money for the indulgence he became certain of

his salvation; and that the souls for whom the indulgences were bought

were instantly released out of purgatory. * * * John Tetzel boasted

that he had saved more souls from hell by his indulgences than St.

Peter had converted to Christianity by his preaching. He assured the

purchasers of them, their crimes, however enormous, would be forgiven;

whence it became almost needless for him to bid them dismiss all fears

concerning their salvation. For, remission of sins being fully

obtained, what doubt could there be of salvation?"--(Milner, "History

of the Church," Cent. XVI, ch. 2.)

18. A copy of an indulgence written by the hand of Tetzel, the vendor

of popish pardons, has been preserved to us as follows: "May our Lord,

Jesus Christ, have mercy upon thee and absolve thee by the merits of

His most holy passion. And I, by His authority, that of His Apostles

Peter and Paul, and of the most holy pope granted and committed to me

in these parts, do absolve thee, first from all ecclesiastical

censures, in whatever manner they have been incurred; and then from

all the sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they

may be, even for such as are reserved for the cognizance of the holy

see; and as far as the keys of the holy church extend, I remit to thee

all the punishment which thou deservest in purgatory on their account;

and I restore thee to the holy sacraments of the church, to the unity

of the faithful, and to that innocence and purity which thou

possessedst at baptism; so that when thou diest, the gates of

punishment shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delight

shall be opened; and if thou shalt not die at present, this grace

shall remain in full force when thou art at the point of death. In the

name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost."--(Milner,

"Church History," Cent. XVI, ch. 2.)

19. By way of excuse or defense, it has been claimed for the Roman

Catholic Church that a profession of contrition or repentance was

required of every applicant for indulgence, and that the pardon was

issued on the basis of such penitence, and not primarily for money or

its equivalent; but that recipients of indulgences, at first

voluntarily, and later in compliance with established custom, made a

material offering or donation to the Church. It is reported, moreover,

that some of the abuses with which the selling of indulgences had been

associated were disapproved by the Council of Trent, about the middle

of the sixteenth century. Nevertheless, the dread fact remains that

for four hundred years the Church had claimed for its pope the power

to remit all sins, and that the promise of remission had been sold and

bought.--(See Note 1, end of chapter.)

20. The awful sin of blasphemy consists in taking to one's self the

divine prerogatives and powers. Here we find the pope of Rome, the

head of the only church recognized at the time, assuming to remit the

punishment due in the hereafter for sins committed in mortality. A

pope assuming to sit in judgment as God Himself! Is this not a

fulfilment of the dread conditions of apostasy foreseen and foretold

as antecedent to the second advent of Christ? Read for yourselves:

"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 worshipped: so that he as God

sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is

God_."--(Thess. 2:3, 4. Italics introduced. See Note 4, end of

chapter.)

21. Another abuse perpetrated by the councils through which assemblies

the supreme pontiffs exercised their autocratic powers, is seen in the

restrictions placed on the reading and interpretation of scripture.

The same Council of Trent, which had disclaimed authority or blame for

the acts of church officials regarding the scandalous traffic in

indulgences, prescribed most rigid regulations forbidding the reading

of the scriptures by the people. Thus: "A severe and intolerable law

was enacted, with respect to all interpreters and expositors of the

scriptures, by which they were forbidden to explain the sense of these

divine books, in matters of faith and practice, in such a manner as to

make them speak a different language from that of the church and the

ancient doctors. The same law further declared that the church alone

(i. e., its ruler, the Roman pontiff) had the right of determining the

true meaning and signification of scripture. To fill up the measure of

these tyrannical and iniquitous proceedings, the church of Rome

persisted obstinately in affirming, though not always with the same

imprudence and plainness of speech, that _the holy scriptures were not

composed for the use of the multitude, but only for that of their

spiritual teachers_; and, of consequence, ordered these divine records

to be taken from the people in all places where it was allowed to

execute its imperious demands."--(Mosheim, "Eccl. Hist.," Cent. XVI,

Part I, ch. 1:25. The italics are introduced by the present writer.)

22. Is it possible that a church teaching such heresies can be the

Church established by Jesus Christ? The Lord Jesus commanded all:

"_Search the scriptures_; for in them ye think ye have eternal life:

and they are they which testify of me."--(John 5:39; compare verse 46;

also Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29; and Acts 17:11.)

23. Surely a pall of darkness had fallen upon the earth. The Church of

Christ had long since ceased to exist. In place of a priesthood

conferred by divine authority, a man-created papacy ruled with the

iron hand of tyranny and without regard to moral restraint. In a

scholarly work Dr. J. W. Draper gives a list of pontiffs who had stood

at the head of the Church from the middle of the eighth to the middle

of the eleventh centuries, with biographical notes of each.--(See Note

3, end of chapter.) And what a picture is there outlined! To win the

papal crown no crime was too great, and for a period of centuries the

immoralities of many of the popes and their subordinates are too

shocking for detailed description. It may be claimed that the author

last cited, and whose words are given below, was an avowed opponent of

the Roman Catholic Church, and that, therefore, his judgment is

prejudiced; in reply let it be said that the attested facts of history

support the dread arraignment. In commenting on the facts set forth,

Dr. Draper says:

24. "More than a thousand years had elapsed since the birth of our

Savior, and such was the condition of Rome. Well may the historian

shut the annals of those times in disgust. Well may the heart of the

Christian sink within him at such a catalogue of hideous crimes. Well

may we ask, Were these the vicegerents of God upon earth--these, who

had truly reached the goal beyond which the last effort of human

wickedness cannot pass? Not until several centuries after these events

did public opinion come to the true and philosophical conclusion--the

total rejection of the divine claims of the papacy. For a time the

evils were attributed to the manner of the pontifical election, as if

they could by any possibility influence the descent of a power which

claimed to be supernatural and under the immediate care of God. * * *

No one can study the development of the Italian ecclesiastical power

without discovering how completely it depended on human agency, too

often on human passion and intrigue; how completely wanting it was of

any mark of the divine construction and care--the offspring of man,

not of God, and therefore bearing upon it the lineaments of human

passions, human virtues, and human sins."--(Draper, "Intellectual

Development of Europe;" Vol. 1, p. 382.)

25. By increasing changes and unauthorized alterations in organization

and government, the earthly establishment known as "the Church," with

popes, cardinals, abbots, friars, monks, exorcists, acolytes, etc.,

lost all semblance to the Church as established by Christ and

maintained by His apostles. The Catholic argument that there has been

an uninterrupted succession of authority in the priesthood from the

Apostle Peter to the present occupant of the papal throne, is

untenable in the light of history, and unreasonable in the light of

fact. Authority to speak and act in the name of God, power to

officiate in the saving ordinances of the gospel of Christ, the high

privilege of serving as a duly commissioned ambassador of the court of

Heaven,--these are not to be had as the gifts of princes, nor are they

to be bought for money, nor can they be won as trophies of the bloody

sword. The history of the papacy is the condemnation of the Church of

Rome.--(See Notes 2 and 3, end of chapter.)

NOTES.

1. _The Roman Church Responsible for the Traffic in "Indulgences_." In

view of the claim asserted by some defenders of the Roman Church, to

the effect that the shameful traffic in indulgences was not sanctioned

by the church, and that the church cannot be held accountable for the

excesses to which its subordinates may go in their alleged official

acts, the following remarks by Milner, the judicious authority on

Church History (Cent. XVI, chap. 2.), may be of interest: "It does not

appear that the rulers of the hierarchy ever found the least fault

with Tetzel as exceeding his commission, till an opposition was openly

made to the practice of indulgences. Whence it is evident, that the

protestants have not unjustly censured the corruption of the court of

Rome in this respect. * * * The indulgences were farmed to the highest

bidders, and the undertakers employed such deputies to carry on the

traffic as they thought most likely to promote their lucrative views.

The inferior officers concerned in this commerce were daily seen in

public houses enjoying themselves in riot and voluptuousness

(Maimbourg, p. 11). In fine, whatever the greatest enemy of popery

could have wished, was at that time exhibited with the most

undisguised impudence and temerity, as if on purpose to render that

wicked ecclesiastical system infamous before all mankind."

The author proceeds to comment on the graded prices by which these

indulgences were placed within the pecuniary reach of all classes, and

finds in the wholesale traffic proof of profound ignorance and dire

superstition, and then points out the need of a new gospel

dispensation as follows: "This, however, was the very situation of

things _which opened the way for the reception of the gospel_. But who

was to proclaim the gospel in its native beauty and simplicity? The

princes, the bishops, and the learned men of the times saw all this

scandalous traffic respecting the pardon of sins; but none was found

who possessed the knowledge, the courage, and the honesty, necessary

to detect the fraud, and to lay open to mankind the true doctrine of

salvation by the remission of sins through Jesus Christ." Milner finds

the inauguration of a new era in the "Reformation" during the

sixteenth century. It is sufficient for our present purpose to know

that he recognized the need of preparation whereby the way would be

opened "for the reception of the gospel."--(Milner, "Ch. Hist.,"

Cent. XVI, ch. 2; italics introduced.)

2. _Three Popes at One Time_. "One of the severest blows given both

the temporal and the spiritual authority of the popes, was the

removal, in 1309, through the influence of the French king, Philip the

Fair, of the papal chair from Rome to Avignon, in Provence, near the

frontier of France. Here it remained for a space of about seventy

years, an era known in church history as the Babylonian Captivity.

While it was established here, all the popes were French, and of

course all their policies were shaped and controlled by the French

kings. * * * The discontent awakened among the Italians by the

situation of the papal court at length led to an open rupture between

them and the French party. In 1378 the opposing factions each elected

a pope, and thus there were two heads of the church, one at Avignon

and the other at Rome. The spectacle of _two rival popes_, each

claiming to be the rightful successor of St. Peter, and the sole

infallible head of the church, very naturally led men to question the

claims and infallibility of both. It gave the reverence which the

world had so generally held for the Roman See a rude shock, and one

from which it never recovered. Finally, in 1409, a general council of

the church assembled at Pisa, for the purpose of composing the

shameful quarrel. The council deposed both popes, and elected

Alexander V as the supreme head of the church. But matters, instead of

being mended hereby, were only made worse; for neither of the deposed

pontiffs would lay down his authority in obedience to the demands of

the council, and consequently _there were now three popes instead of

two_. In 1414 another council was called, at Constance, for the

settlement of the growing dispute. Two of the claimants were deposed

and one resigned. A new pope was then elected--Pope Martin V. In his

person the Catholic world was again united under a single spiritual

head. The schism was outwardly healed, but the wound had been too deep

not to leave permanent marks upon the church."--(P. V. N. Meyers,

"Gen. Hist.," pp. 457, 458. Italics introduced.)

The rupture between the French and Italian factions, referred to by

Meyers in the quotation given above, is known in history as the Great

Schism. It may be regarded as the decisive beginning of decline in the

temporal power of the popes.

3. _The Papacy Condemns Itself._ The line of succession in the papacy

for a limited period as referred to in the text, is given by Draper as

follows:

"To some it might seem, considering the interests of religion alone,

desirable to omit all biographical reference to the popes; but this

cannot be done with justice to the subject. The essential principle of

the papacy, that the Roman pontiff is the vicar of Christ upon earth,

necessarily obtrudes his personal relations upon us. How shall we

understand his faith unless we see it illustrated in his life? Indeed,

the unhappy character of those relations was the inciting cause of the

movements in Germany, France, and England, ending in the extinction of

the papacy as an actual political power, movements to be understood

only through a sufficient knowledge of the private lives and opinions

of the popes. It is well, as far as possible, to abstain from

burdening systems with the imperfections of individuals. In this case

they are inseparably interwoven. The signal peculiarity of the papacy

is that, though its history may be imposing, its biography is

infamous. I shall, however, forbear to speak of it in this latter

respect more than the occasion seems necessarily to require; shall

pass in silence some of those cases which would profoundly shock my

religious reader, and therefore restrict myself to the ages between

the middle of the eighth and the middle of the eleventh centuries,

excusing myself to the impartial critic by the apology that these were

the ages with which I have been chiefly concerned in this chapter.

"On the death of Pope Paul I, who had attained the pontificate A. D.

757, the Duke of Nepi compelled some bishops to consecrate

Constantine, one of his brothers, as pope; but more legitimate

electors subsequently, A. D. 768, choosing Stephen IV, the usurper and

his adherents were severely punished; the eyes of Constantine were put

out; the tongue of the Bishop Theodoras was amputated, and he was left

in a dungeon to expire in the agonies of thirst. The nephews of Pope

Adrian seized his successor, Pope Leo III, A. D. 79, in the street,

and, forcing him into a neighboring church, attempted to put out his

eyes and cut out his tongue; at a later period, this pontiff, trying

to suppress a conspiracy to depose him, Rome became the scene of

rebellion, murder and conflagration. His successor, Stephen V, A. D.

816, was ignominiously driven from the city: his successor, Paschal I,

was accused of blinding and murdering two ecclesiastics in the Lateran

Palace; it was necessary that imperial commissioners should

investigate the matter, but the pope died, after having exculpated

himself by oath before thirty bishops. John VIII, A. D. 872, unable to

resist the Mohammedans, was compelled to pay them tribute; the Bishop

of Naples, maintaining a secret alliance with them, received his share

of the plunder they collected. Him John excommunicated, nor would he

give him absolution unless he would betray the chief Mohammedans and

assassinate others himself. There was an ecclesiastical conspiracy to

murder the pope; some of the treasures of the church were seized; and

the gate of St. Pancrazia was opened with false keys, to admit the

Saracens into the city. Formosus, who had been engaged in these

transactions, and excommunicated as a conspirator for the murder of

John, was subsequently elected pope, A. D. 891; he was succeeded by

Boniface VI, A. D. 896, who had been deposed from the diaconate, and

again from the priesthood, for his immoral and lewd life. By Stephen

VII, who followed, the dead body of Formosus was taken from the grave,

clothed in the papal habilaments, propped in a chair, tried before a

council, and the preposterous and indecent scene completed by cutting

off three of the fingers of the corpse and casting it into the Tiber;

but Stephen himself was destined to exemplify how low the papacy had

fallen: he was thrown into prison and strangled. In the course of five

years, from A. D. 896 to A. D. 900, five popes were consecrated.

Leo V, who succeeded in A. D. 904, was in less than two months

thrown into prison by Christopher, one of his chaplains, who usurped

his place, and who, in his turn, was shortly expelled from Rome by

Sergius III, who, by the aid of a military force, seized the

pontificate, A. D. 905. This man, according to the testimony of the

times, lived in criminal intercourse with the celebrated prostitute

Theodora, who, with her daughters Marozia and Theodora, also

prostitutes, exercised an extraordinary control over him. The love of

Theodora was also shared by John X: she gave him first the

archbishopric of Ravenna, and then translated him to Rome, A. D. 915,

as pope. John was not unsuited to the times; he organized a

confederacy which perhaps prevented Rome from being captured by the

Saracens, and the world was astonished and edified by the appearance

of this warlike pontiff at the head of his troops. By the love of

Theodora, as was said, he had maintained himself in the papacy for

fourteen years; by the intrigues and hatred of her daughter Marozia he

was overthrown. She surprised him in the Lateran Palace; killed his

brother Peter before his face; threw him into prison, where he soon

died, smothered, as was asserted, with a pillow. After a short

interval Marozia made her own son pope as John XI, A. D. 931. Many

affirmed that Pope Sergius was his father, but she herself inclined to

attribute him to her husband, Alberic, whose brother Guido she

subsequently married. Another of her sons, Alberic, so called from his

supposed father, jealous of his brother John, cast him and their

mother Marozia into prison. After a time Alberic's son was elected

pope, A. D. 956; he assumed the title of John XII, the amorous Marozia

thus having given a son and a grandson to the papacy. John was only

nineteen years old when he thus became the head of Christendom. His

reign was characterized by the most shocking immoralities, so that the

Emperor Otho I was compelled by the German clergy to interfere. A

synod was summoned for his trial in the Church of St. Peter, before

which it appeared that John had received bribes for the consecration

of bishops; that he had ordained one who was but ten years old, and

had performed that ceremony over another in a stable; he was charged

with incest with one of his father's concubines, and with so many

adulteries that the Lateran Palace had become a brothel; he put out

the eyes of one ecclesiastic, and castrated another, both dying in

consequence of their injuries; he was given to drunkenness, gambling

and the invocation of Jupiter and Venus. When cited to appear before

the council, he sent word that 'he had gone out hunting;' and to the

fathers who remonstrated with him, he threateningly remarked 'that

Judas, as well as the other disciples, received from his Master the

power of binding and loosing, but that as soon as he proved a traitor

to the common cause, the only power he retained was that of binding

his own neck.' Hereupon he was deposed, and Leo VIII elected in his

stead, A. D. 963; but subsequently getting the upper hand, he seized

his antagonists, cut off the hand of one, the nose, finger, tongue of

others. His life was eventually brought to an end by the vengeance of

a man whose wife he had seduced.

"After such details it is almost needless to allude to the annals of

succeeding popes: to relate that John XIII was strangled in prison;

that Boniface VII imprisoned Benedict VII and killed him by

starvation; that John XIV was secretly put to death in the dungeons of

the Castle of St. Angelo; that the corpse of Boniface was dragged by

the populace through the streets. The sentiment of reverence for the

sovereign pontiff, nay, even of respect, had become extinct in Rome;

throughout Europe the clergy were so shocked at the state of things,

that, in their indignation, they began to look with approbation on the

intention of the Emperor Otho to take from the Italians their

privilege of appointing the successor of St. Peter, and confine it to

his own family. But his kinsman Gregory V, whom he placed on the

pontifical throne, was very soon compelled by the Romans to fly; his

excommunications and religious thunders were turned into derision by

them; they were too well acquainted with the true nature of those

terrors; they were living behind the scenes. A terrible punishment

awaited the Anti-Pope John XVI. Otho returned into Italy, seized him,

put out his eyes, cut off his nose and tongue, and sent him through

the streets mounted on an ass, with his face to the tail, and a

winebladder on his head. It seemed impossible that things could become

worse, yet Rome had still to see Benedict IX, A. D. 1033, a boy of

less than twelve years, raised to the apostolic throne. Of this

pontiff, one of his successors, Victor III, declared that his life was

so shameful, so foul, so execrable, that he shuddered to describe it.

He ruled like a captain of banditti rather than a prelate. The people

at last, unable to bear his adulteries, homicides, and abominations

any longer, rose against him. In despair of maintaining his position,

he put the papacy up at auction. It was bought by a presbyter named

John, who became Gregory VI, A. D. 1045."--(J. W. Draper,

"Intellectual Development of Europe," Vol. 1, ch. XII, pp. 378-381.)

4. _Commentary on the Passage from II Thess. 2:3, 4_. It should be

remembered that the application of Paul's declaration as to the

apostasy made in the text, is the one generally made by theologians of

Protestant denominations. It is in no way peculiar to the Church of

Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Let us read the passage again: "Let

no man deceive you by any means: for that day [the day of Christ's

promised advent] 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

worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing

himself that he is God."

In his Bible Commentary, Dr. Adam Clarke says of this scripture: "The

general run of Protestant writers understand the whole as referring to

the popes and church of Rome, or the whole system of the papacy. * * *

Bishop Newton has examined the whole prophecy with his usual skill and

judgment. * * * The principal part of modern commentators follow his

steps. He applies the whole to the Romish church: the apostasy, its

defection from the pure doctrines of Christianity; and the 'man of

sin,' etc., the general succession of the popes of Rome." An

abridgment of Bishop Newton's interpretation is then added; this, in

part, is as follows:

"_For that day shall not come except, etc._--The day of Christ shall

not come except there come the apostasy first. The apostasy here

described is plainly not of a civil, but of a religious nature; not a

revolt from the government, but a defection from the true religion and

worship. * * *

"_So that he as God sitteth in the temple, etc._--By the temple of God

the apostle could not well mean the temple of Jerusalem, because that,

he knew, would be destroyed within a few years. After the death of

Christ, the temple of Jerusalem is never called the temple of God; and

if, at any time, they make mention of the house or temple of God, they

mean the church in general or every particular believer. Whoever will

consult I Cor. 3:16, 17; II Cor. 6:16; I Tim. 3:15; Rev. 3:12, will

want no examples to prove that under the gospel dispensation, the

temple of God is the Church of Christ; and the man of sin's sitting

implies his ruling and presiding there. * * *

"Upon this survey, there appears little room to doubt of the general

sense and meaning of the passage. The Thessalonians, (as we have seen

from some expressions in the former epistle,) were alarmed as if the

end of the world was at hand. The apostle, to correct their mistake

and dissipate their fears, assures them that a great apostasy or

defection of the Christians from the true faith and worship must

happen before the coming of Christ. This apostasy, all the concurrent

marks and characters will justify us in charging upon the church of

Rome. The true Christian worship is the worship of the only true God,

through the one only Mediator, the man Jesus Christ, and from this

worship the church of Rome has most notoriously departed, by

substituting other mediators, and invoking and adoring saints and

angels; nothing is apostasy if idolatry be not. * * * If the apostasy

be rightly charged upon the church of Rome, it follows, of

consequence, that the 'man of sin' is the pope, not meaning any pope

in particular, but the pope in general, as the chief head and

supporter of this apostasy."

The opinion of Dr. MacKnight is also cited with approval by Clarke. In

his "Commentary and Notes"--(Vol. III, p. 100, etc.) MacKnight says:

"As it is said, the man of sin was _to be revealed in his season_,

there can be little doubt that the dark ages, in which all learning

was overturned by the irruption of the northern barbarians, were the

season allotted to the man of sin for revealing himself. Accordingly

we know, that in these ages, the corruptions of Christianity, and the

usurpations of the clergy, were carried to the greatest height. In

short, the annals of the world cannot produce persons and events to

which the things written in this passage can be applied with so much

fitness as to the bishops of Rome."

CHAPTER X.

**Results of the Apostasy.--Its Sequel**.

1. The thoroughly apostate and utterly corrupt condition of the Church

of Rome as proclaimed by its history down to the end of the fifteenth

century,--(See Note 1, end of chapter.) was necessarily accompanied by

absence of all spiritual sanctity and power, whatever may have been

the arrogant assumptions of the Church as to authority in spiritual

affairs. Revolts against the Church, both as rebellion against her

tyranny and in protest against her heresies, were not lacking. The

most significant of these anti-church agitations arose in connection

with the awakening of intellectual activity which began in the latter

part of the fourteenth century. The period from the tenth century

onward to the time of the awakening has come to be known as the dark

ages--characterized by stagnation in the progress of the useful arts

and sciences as well as of fine arts and letters, and by a general

condition of illiteracy and ignorance among the masses.

2. Ignorance is a fertile soil for evil growths, and the despotic

government and doctrinal fallacies of the Church during this period of

darkness were nourished by the ignorance of the times. With the change

known in history as "the revival of learning" came the struggle for

freedom from churchly tyranny.

3. One of the early revolts against the temporal and spiritual

despotism of the papal church was that of the Albigenses in France

during the thirteenth century. This uprising had been crushed by the

papal autocracy with much cruelty and bloodshed. The next notable

revolt was that of John Wickliffe in the fourteenth century. Wickliffe

was a professor in Oxford university, England. He boldly assailed the

evergrowing and greatly abused power of the monks, and denounced the

corruption of the Church and the prevalence of doctrinal errors. He

was particularly emphatic in his opposition to the papal restrictions

as to the popular study of the scriptures, and gave to the world an

English version of the Holy Bible translated from the Vulgate. In

spite of persecution and sentence, he died a natural death; but years

afterward the Church insisted on revenge, and in consequence, his

bones were exhumed and burned, and the ashes scattered to the winds.

4. On the continent of Europe the agitation against the Church was

carried on by John Huss and by Jerome of Prague, both of whom reaped

martyrdom as the harvest of their righteous zeal. These instances are

cited to show that though the Church had long been apostate to the

core, there were men ready to sacrifice their lives in what they

deemed to be the cause of truth.

5. Conditions existing at the opening of the sixteenth century have

been concisely summarized by a modern historian as follows: "Previous

to the opening of the sixteenth century there had been comparatively

few--though there had been some, like the Albigenses in the south of

France, the Wickliffites, in England, and the Hussites, in

Bohemia--who denied the supreme and infallible authority of the bishop

of Rome in all matters touching religion. Speaking in very general

manner it would be correct to say that at the close of the fifteenth

century all the nations of Western Europe professed the faith of the

Latin or Roman Catholic Church and yielded obedience to the Papal

See."--(Myers, "Gen. Hist.," p. 520.)

**The Reformation**.

6. The next notable revolt against the papal Church occurred in the

sixteenth century, and assumed such proportions as to be designated

the Reformation. The movement began in Germany about 1517, when Martin

Luther, a monk of the Augustinian order and an instructor in the

University of Wittenberg, publicly opposed and strongly denounced

Tetzel, the shameless agent of papal indulgences. Luther was

conscientious in his conviction that the whole system of church

penances and indulgences was contrary to scripture, reason, and right.

In line with the academic custom of the day--to challenge discussion

and debate on disputed questions--Luther wrote his famous ninety-five

theses against the practice of granting indulgences, and a copy of

these he nailed to the door of Wittenberg church, inviting criticism

thereon from all scholars. The news spread, and the theses were

discussed in all the scholastic centers of Europe. Luther then

attacked other practices and doctrines of the Roman Church, and the

pope, Leo X, issued a "Bull" or papal decree against him, demanding an

unconditional recantation on pain of excommunication from the Church.

Luther publicly burned the pope's document, and thus declared his open

revolt. The sentence of excommunication was pronounced.

7. We cannot follow here in detail the doings of this bold reformer.

Suffice it to say, he was not long left to fight singlehanded. Among

his able supporters was Philip Melancthon, a professor in Wittenberg.

Luther was summoned before a council or "Diet" at Worms in 1521. There

he openly declared for individual freedom of conscience. There is

inspiration in his words: "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 cannot 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!_"

8. The religious controversy spread throughout Europe. At the Second

Diet of Spires (1529) an edict was issued against the reformers; to

this the representatives of seven German principalities and other

delegates entered a formal _protest_, in consequence of which action

the reformers were henceforth known as _Protestants_. John, Elector of

Saxony, supported Luther in his opposition to papal authority, and

undertook the establishment of an independent church, the constitution

and plan of which were prepared at his instance by Luther and

Melancthon. Luther died in 1546, but the work of revolution, if not in

truth reformation, continued to grow. The Protestants, however, soon

became divided among themselves, and broke up into many contending

sects.

9. In Switzerland, Ulrich Zwingle led in the movement toward reform.

He was accused of heresy, and when placed on trial, he defended

himself on the authority of the Bible as against papal edict, and was

for the time successful. The contest was bitter, and in 1531 the

Catholics and Protestants of the region engaged in actual battle, in

which Zwingle was slain, and his body brutally mutilated.

10. John Calvin next appeared as the leader of the Swiss reformers,

though he was an opponent of many of Zwingle's doctrines. He exerted

great influence as a teacher, and is known as an extremist in

doctrine. He advocated and vehemently defended the tenet of absolute

predestination, thus denying the free agency of man. In France,

Sweden, Denmark, and Holland, leaders arose and the Protestants became

strong in their opposition to the Roman Church, though the several

divisions were antagonistic to one another on many points of doctrine.

11. One effect of this Protestant uprising was the partial awakening

of the Roman Church to the need of internal reform, and an

authoritative re-statement of Catholic principles was attempted. This

movement was largely accomplished through the famous Council of

Trent--(1545-1563), which body disavowed for the Church the extreme

claims made for "indulgences" and denied responsibility for many of

the abuses with which the Church had been charged. But in connection

with the attempted reform came a demand for more implicit obedience to

the requirements of the Church.

12. Near the end of the fifteenth century, in the reign of Ferdinand

and Isabella, the court of the Inquisition, then known as the Holy

Office, had been established in Spain. The prime purpose of this

secret tribunal was the detection and punishment of heresy. Of this

infamous institution as operative in Spain, Myers says: "The Holy

Office, as the tribunal was styled, thus became the instrument of the

most incredible cruelty. Thousands were burned at the stake, and tens

of thousands more condemned to endure penalties scarcely less

terrible. Queen Isabella, in giving her consent to the establishment

of the tribunal in her dominions, was doubtless actuated by the purest

religious zeal, and sincerely believed that in suppressing heresy she

was discharging a simple duty, and rendering God good service. 'In the

love of Christ and His Maid-Mother,' she says, 'I have caused great

misery. I have depopulated towns and districts, provinces and

kingdoms.'"--(Myers, "Gen. Hist." p. 500.)

13. Now, in the sixteenth century, in connection with the attempted

reform in the doctrines of Catholicism, the terrible Inquisition

"assumed new vigor and activity, and heresy was sternly dealt with."

Consider the following as throwing light on the condition of that

time: "At this point, in connection with the persecutions of the

Inquisition, we should not fail to recall that in the sixteenth

century a refusal to conform to the established worship was regarded

by all, by Protestants as well as Catholics, as a species of treason

against society and was dealt with accordingly. Thus we find Calvin at

Geneva consenting to the burning of Servetus (1553) because he

published views that the Calvinists thought heretical; and in England

we see the Anglican Protestants waging the most cruel, bitter, and

persistent persecutions, not only against the Catholics but also

against all Protestants that refused to conform to the Established

Church."--(Myers, "Gen. Hist.," p. 527.)

14. What shall be said of a Church that seeks to propagate its faith

by such methods? Are fire and sword the weapons with which truth

fights her battles? Are torture and death the arguments of the gospel?

However terrible the persecutions to which the early Church was

subjected at the hands of heathen enemies, the persecutions waged by

the apostate church are far more terrible. Can such a church by any

possibility be the Church of Christ? Heaven forbid!

15. In the revolts we have noted against the Church of Rome, notably

in the Reformation, the zeal of the reformers led to many fallacies in

the doctrines they advocated. Luther, himself, proclaimed the doctrine

of absolute predestination and of justification by faith alone, thus

nullifying belief in the God-given rights of free agency, and

impairing the importance of individual effort.--(See the Author's

"Articles of Faith," Lecture 5.) Calvin and others were no less

extreme. Nevertheless their ministry contributed to the awakening of

individual conscience, and assisted in bringing about a measure of

religious freedom of which the world had long been deprived.--(See

note 2, end of chapter.)

**Rise of the Church of England**.

16. At the time of Martin Luther's revolt against the Church of Rome,

Henry VIII reigned in England. In common with all other countries of

western Europe, Britain was profoundly stirred by the reformation

movement. The king openly defended the Catholic Church and published a

book in opposition to Luther's claims. This so pleased the pope, Leo

X, that he conferred upon King Henry the distinguishing title,

"Defender of the Faith." This took place about 1522, and from that

time to the present, British sovereigns have proudly borne the title.

17. Within a few years after his accession to this title of

distinction, we find King Henry among the bitterest enemies of the

Roman Church, and the change came about in this wise. Henry desired a

divorce from his wife, Queen Catherine, to give him freedom to marry

Anne Boleyn. The pope hesitated in the matter of granting the divorce,

and Henry, becoming impatient, disregarded the pope's authority and

secretly married Anne Boleyn. The pope thereupon excommunicated the

king from the Church. The English parliament, following the king's

directions, passed the celebrated Act of Supremacy in 1534. This

statute declared an absolute termination of all allegiance to papal

authority, and proclaimed the king as supreme head of the Church of

Britain. Thus originated the Church of England, without regard for or

claim of divine authority, and without even a semblance of priestly

succession.

18. At first there was little innovation in doctrine or ritual in the

newly formed church. It originated in revolt. Later a form of creed

and a plan of organization were adopted, giving the Church of England

some distinctive features. During the reigns of Edward VI, Queen Mary,

and Queen Elizabeth, persecutions between Catholics and Protestants

were extensive and violent. Several non-conformist sects arose, among

them the Puritans and the Separatists. These were so persecuted that

many of them fled to Holland as exiles. From among these came the

notable colony of the Pilgrim Fathers, who crossed in the Mayflower to

the shores of the then recently-discovered continent, and established

themselves in America.

19. The thoughtful student cannot fail to see in the progress of the

great apostasy and its results the existence of an overruling power,

operating toward eventual good, however mysterious its methods. The

heart-rending persecutions to which the saints were subjected in the

early centuries of our era, the anguish, the torture, the bloodshed,

incurred in defense of the testimony of Christ, the rise of an

apostate church, blighting the intellect and leading captive the souls

of men--all these dread scenes were foreknown to the Lord. While we

cannot say or believe that such exhibitions of human depravity and

blasphemy of heart were in accordance with the divine will, certainly

God willed to permit full scope to the free agency of man, in the

exercise of which agency some won the martyr's crown, and others

filled the measure of their iniquity to overflowing.

20. Not less marked is the divine permission in the revolts and

rebellions, in the revolutions and reformations, that developed in

opposition to the darkening influence of the apostate church. Wycliffe

and Huss, Luther and Melancthon, Zwingle and Calvin, Henry VIII in his

arrogant assumption of priestly authority, John Knox in Scotland,

Roger Williams in America--these and a host of others builded better

than they knew, in that their efforts laid in part the foundation of

the structure of religious freedom and liberty of conscience,--and

this in preparation for the restoration of the gospel as had been

divinely predicted.

21. From the sixteenth century down to the present time, sects

professedly founded on the tenets of Christianity have multiplied

apace. They are now to be numbered by hundreds. On every side the

claim has been heard, "Lo, here is Christ," or "Lo, there." There are

churches named after their place of origin--as the Church of England;

other sects are designated in honor of their famous promoters--as

Lutherans, Calvinists, Wesleyans; others are known from some

peculiarity of creed or doctrine--as Methodists, Presbyterians, and

Baptists; but down to the beginning of the nineteenth century there

was no church even claiming name or title as the Church of Christ. The

only Church existing at that time venturing to assert authority by

succession was the Catholic Church, which as shown was wholly without

priesthood or divine commission.

22. If the "Mother Church" be without divine authority or spiritual

power, how can her children derive from her the right to officiate in

the things of God? Who dares affirm the absurdity that man can

originate for himself a priesthood which God shall honor and respect.

Granted that men may, can and do, create among themselves societies,

associations, sects, and churches if they choose so to designate their

religious organizations; granted that they may formulate laws,

prescribe rules, and construct elaborate plans of organization and

government, and that all such laws, rules and schemes of

administration are binding upon those who voluntarily assume

membership,--granted all these powers and rights--whence can such

human creations derive the authority of the holy Priesthood, without

which there can be no Church of Christ? If the power and authority be,

by any possibility, of human origin, there never has been a Church of

Christ on earth, and the alleged saving ordinances of the gospel have

never been other than empty forms.

23. Our review of the Great Apostasy as presented in this treatise,

does not call for any detailed or critical study of the Roman Catholic

Church as it exists in modern times, nor of any of the numerous

Protestant denominations that have come into existence as dissenting

children of the so-called "Mother Church." The apostasy was complete,

as far as actual loss of priesthood and cessation of spiritual power

in the Church are concerned, long prior to the sixteenth century

revolt, known in history as the Reformation. It is instructive to

observe, however, that the weakness of the Protestant sects as to any

claim to divine appointment and authority, is recognized by those

churches themselves. The Church of England, which, as shown,

originated in revolt against the Roman Catholic Church and its pope,

is without foundation of claim to divine authority in its priestly

orders, unless, indeed, it dare assert the absurdity that kings and

parliaments can create and take unto themselves heavenly authority by

enactment of earthly statutes.

24. The Roman Catholic Church is at least consistent in its claim that

a line of succession in the priesthood has been maintained from the

apostolic age to the present, though the claim is utterly untenable in

the light of a rational interpretation of history. But the fact

remains that the Catholic Church is the only organization venturing to

assert the present possession of the holy priesthood by unbroken

descent from the apostles of our Lord. The Church of England, chief

among the Protestant sects, and all other dissenting churches, are by

their own admission and by the circumstances of their origin, man-made

institutions, without a semblance of claim to the powers and authority

of the holy priesthood.

25. As late as 1896 the question of the validity of the priestly

orders in the Church of England was officially and openly discussed

and considered, both in England and at Rome. Lord Halifax, chairman of

the English Church Union, conferred with the Vatican authorities to

ascertain the possibility of bringing about closer union between the

Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England. This involved the

question of the recognition of the priestly orders of the Anglican

Church by the pope and Church of Rome. The movement was favored in the

interests of unity and peace by the English premier, Mr. Gladstone.

The pope, Leo XIII, finally issued a decree refusing to recognize in

any degree the authority of the Anglican orders, and expressly

declaring all claims to priestly authority by the Church of England as

absolutely invalid.

26. Assuredly the Church of Rome could take no other action than this

and maintain the consistency of its own claim to exclusive possession

of the priesthood by descent. Assuredly the Church of England would

have sought no official recognition of its priestly status by the

Church of Rome had it any independent claim to the power and authority

of the priesthood. The Roman Catholic Church declares that all

Protestant denominations are either apostate organizations, or

institutions of human creation that have never had even a remote

connection with the church that claims succession in the priesthood.

In short, the apostate "Mother Church" aggressively proclaims the

perfidy of her offspring.

**The Apostasy Admitted**.

27. The fact of the great apostasy is admitted. Many theologians who

profess a belief in Christianity have declared the fact. Thus we read:

"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."--(Smith's "Dictionary of the Bible.")

28. John Wesley, who lived from 1703 to 1791 A. D., and who ranks as

chief among the founders of Methodism, comments as follows on the

apostasy of the Christian Church as evidenced by the early decline of

spiritual power and the cessation of the gifts and graces of the

Spirit of God within the Church: "It does not appear that these

extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit--(See I Cor., ch. 12.) 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 almost totally ceased, very few instances of the

kind being 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 Christians. The real cause of it was that 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 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's Works. Vol.

VII, 89:26-27. See Note 3, end of chapter.)

29. The Church of England makes official declaration of degeneracy and

loss of divine authority in these words: "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."--(Church of England 'Homily on Perils of

Idolatry,' p. 3.) The "Book of Homilies," in which occurs this

declaration by the Church of England, dates from about the middle of

the sixteenth century. According to this official statement,

therefore, the religious world had been utterly apostate for eight

centuries prior to the establishment of the Church of England. The

fact of a universal apostasy was widely proclaimed, for the homilies

from which the foregoing citation is taken were "appointed to be read

in churches" in lieu of sermons under specified condition.

30. _The great apostasy was divinely predicted; its accomplishment is

attested by both sacred and secular writ_.

31. To the faithful Latter-day Saint, a concluding proof of the

universal apostasy and of the absolute need of a restoration of

Priesthood from the heavens will be found in the divine reply to the

inquiry of the boy prophet, Joseph Smith, as to which of all the

contending sects was right: "I was answered that I must join none of

them, for they were all wrong; and the personage who addressed me said

that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight; that those

professors were all corrupt; that 'they draw near to me with their

lips, but their hearts are far from me; they teach for doctrines the

commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the

power thereof.'"--(Pearl of Great Price, p. 85, par. 19.)

**The Sequel**.

32. The sequel of the Great Apostasy is the Restoration of the Gospel,

marking the inauguration of the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times.

This epoch-making event occurred in the early part of the nineteenth

century, when the Father and the Son manifested themselves to man, and

when the Holy Priesthood with all its powers and authority was again

brought to earth.

33. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims to the

world this glorious restoration,--at once the consummation of the work

of God throughout the ages past, and the final preparation for the

second advent of Jesus, the Christ. The Church affirms that after the

long night of spiritual darkness, the light of heaven has again come;

and that the Church of Christ is authoritatively established. The

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stands alone in the

declaration that the Holy Priesthood is operative upon earth, not as

an inheritance through earthly continuation from the apostolic age,

but as the endowment of a new dispensation, brought to earth by

heavenly ministration. In this restoration, divinely predicted and

divinely achieved, has been witnessed a realization of the Revelator's

vision:

"_And I saw another 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_."--(Rev. 14:6, 7. For treatment of the

Restoration of the Gospel see the Author's "Articles of Faith,"

Lecture 11. See Notes 4 and 5, end of chapter.)

NOTES.

1. _Papist Testimony to the Corruption of the Church_. "The judicious

student of ecclesiastical history will observe that I constantly

endeavor to draw my proofs from the most unexceptionable sources. For

example: To prove the corrupt state of the clergy, and the abominable

practices of the Roman See, I would produce the evidence of George of

Saxony, a most bigoted papist, whom the Roman Catholics always reckon

among the most sincere and most active of the holy defenders of their

religion. Now, as with them the assertions of Luther and the other

reformers go for nothing but exaggerations, misrepresentations, or

direct falsehoods, let them listen at least to this duke, their steady

friend and advocate, who generally, in religious concerns, opposed his

relation, the elector of Saxony, and who also entirely approved of

Luther's condemnation at Worms. This George of Saxony exhibited to the

Diet twelve heads of the grievances which called loudly for reform.

Two of these are briefly as follows: 1. Indulgences, which ought to be

obtained by prayers, fastings, benevolence towards our neighbor, and

other good works, 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 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 mulct is inflicted, is it done in a way to

stop the commission of the same fault in 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. 2. Another distinct head of the grievances produced by this

zealous duke was expressed thus: '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, "Church History," Cent.

XVI, ch. 6. Footnote.)

2. _Extremes Incident to 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.

"The Sectarian dogma of Justification by Faith alone has exercised an

influence for evil since the early days of Christianity. The idea upon

which this pernicious doctrine was founded, was at first associated

with that of an absolute predestination, by which man was foredoomed

to destruction, or to an utterly undeserved salvation. Thus, Luther

taught as follows: 'The excellent, infallible, and sole preparation

for grace, is the eternal election and predestination of God.' 'Since

the fall of man, free-will is but an idle word.' 'A man who imagines

to arrive at grace by doing all that he is able to do, adds sins 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.' (For

these and other doctrines of the Reformation see D'Aubigne's 'History

of the Reformation,' Vol. I, pp. 82, 83, 119, 122.) In Milner's

'Church History' (Vol. IV, p. 514) we read: 'The point which the

reformer Luther had most at heart in all his labors, contests and

dangers, was the justification by faith alone.' Melancthon voices the

doctrine of Luther in these words: 'Man's justification before God

proceeds from faith alone. This faith enters man's heart by the grace

of God alone;' and further, 'As all things which happen, happen

necessarily, according to the divine predestination, there is no such

thing as liberty in our wills.'--(D'Aubigne, Vol. III, p. 340.) It is

true that Luther strongly denounced, and vehemently disclaimed

responsibility for, the excesses to which this teaching gave rise, yet

he was not less vigorous in proclaiming the doctrine. Note his words:

'I, Doctor Martin Luther, unworthy herald of the doctrine of our Lord

Jesus Christ, confess this article, that faith alone without works

justifies before God; and I declare that it shall stand and remain

forever in despite of the emperor of the Romans, the emperor of the

Turks, 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 teachings of the Holy Ghost.'"--(See the Author's

"Articles of Faith," Lecture V, Note 2.)

3. _Diverse Views Concerning Continuance or Decline of Spiritual

Gifts_. "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

short of the power and dignity of those spiritual manifestations which

the primitive Church was wont to witness. 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 of devils in the name of Jesus

Christ; to say nothing of the gifts of faith, wisdom, knowledge,

discerning of spirits, etc.--common in the Church in the days of the

apostles--(I Cor. 12:8-10). 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 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."--(B. H. Roberts, "Outlines of Ecclesiastical History," Part

II, Sec. 5:6-8.)

4. _Commentary on the Revelator's Vision of the Restoration_. It is

instructive to inquire into the interpretation given by biblical

students to the prophecy voiced by John the Revelator predicting the

advent of the angel "having the everlasting gospel." Dr. Clarke offers

the following reflections on the passage: "_And I saw another angel

fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel_: Whether

this angel means any more than a particular dispensation of providence

and grace, by which the gospel shall be rapidly sent through the whole

world; or whether it means any especial messenger, order of preachers,

people, or society of Christians, whose professed object it is to send

the gospel of the kingdom throughout the earth, we know not. But the

vision seems truly descriptive of a late institution, entitled 'The

British and Foreign Bible Society,' whose object it is to print and

circulate the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments through all the

habitable world, and in all the languages spoken on the face of the

earth."--(Clarke, "Bible Commentary," Rev. 14:6.)

The learned commentator is to be commended for his frank avowal as to

uncertainty regarding the precise interpretation of this scripture,

and for the provisional and tentative manner in which he indicates a

possible application to the wide distribution of the Holy Bible

through the efforts of a most worthy and influential society. It is to

be noted that Dr. Clarke wrote his famous commentary on the Bible

shortly before the actual restoration of the gospel through angelic

agency which resulted in the establishment of the Church of Jesus

Christ of Latter-day Saints. Of necessity his search for the

fulfillment of the prediction was unsatisfactory, and, indeed,

unsuccessful, inasmuch as the fulfillment had not then occurred. The

commendable work of the Bible Society was a preparation for the

fulfillment of the momentous prophecy, but not the fulfillment itself.

5. _Restoration of the Church_. "In the first ten centuries

immediately following the ministry of Christ, the authority of the

priesthood was lost from among men, and no human power could restore

it. But the Lord in His mercy provided for the re-establishment of His

Church in the last days, and for the last time, and prophets of olden

time foresaw this era of renewed enlightenment, and sang in joyous

tones of its coming."--(See Dan. 2:44, 45; 7:27; Matt. 24:14; Rev.

14:6-8.) "This restoration was effected by the Lord through the

prophet, Joseph Smith, who, together with Oliver Cowdery, in 1829,

received the Aaronic Priesthood under the hands of John the Baptist,

and later the Melchizedek Priesthood under the hands of the former-day

apostles, Peter, James and John. By the authority thus bestowed, the

Church has been again organized with all its former completeness, and

mankind once more rejoices in the priceless privileges of the counsels

of God. The Latter-day Saints declare their high claim to the true

Church organization, similar in all essentials to the organization

effected by Christ among the Jews; these people of the last days

profess to have the Priesthood of the Almighty, the power to act in

the name of God, which power commands respect both on earth and in

heaven."--(The Author, "Articles of Faith," Lecture 11:12.)