Is the Extreme Weather in America Purposely Created by Technology to Blame it on Climate Change And Tax The Public for CO2 Emissions?

Is the Extreme Weather in America Purposely Created by Technology to Blame it on Climate Change And Tax The Public for CO2 Emissions?

My wife sent me above meme. I fact-checked these patent numbers to see if they actually exist. They all do!

US patent #3056556: Method of artificially influencing the weather
Description
“United States Patent Oil” Patented Oct. 2, 1962 ICC The invention relates to a method of artificially influencing the weather by turning undercooled clouds into ice particles for the purpose of generating a rainfall and of preventing the formation of hail by seeding the said clouds with ice-forming nuclei, i.e. with freezing or sublimation nuclei in finely atomized form.” (Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US3056556A/en) Read More

US patent #20030085296: Hurricane and tornado control device
Abstract
A method is disclosed for affecting the formation and/or direction of a low atmospheric weather system. Audio generators are positioned to project sound waves toward a peripheral area of a weather system. The sound waves are generated at a frequency to affect the formation of the weather system in a manner to disrupt, enhance or direct the formation. The sound waves can also be projected in a manner to cause the system to produce rain. (Source https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030085296A1/en) Read More

US patent #8262314: Method for decreasing the intensity and frequency of tropical storms or hurricanes
Abstract
Modification of tropical storms or hurricanes by mixing the upper layer of a section of a body of water with water from a lower section of the body of water. Rapidly mixing the warmer upper layer with the cooler lower layer cools the surface of the water, thereby reducing the amount of heat energy available to fuel the intensity and movement of storms. By cooling selected sections of water, the frequency, intensity or direction of storms may be altered. In one embodiment of the invention, a bluff shaped object is attached to a submarine to facilitate rapid mixing of the upper and lower layers of the body of water. (Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8262314B2/en) Read More

US patent #20130038063: Apparatus and method for inhibiting the formation of tropical cyclones
Abstract
An apparatus for inhibiting the formation of tropical cyclones, comprising an elongated rigid tube through which cooler water is pumped from below to the near-ocean surface, thereby depriving incipient tropical cyclones of the heat energy they require for further development. The tube contains a pump comprising a fixed flap valve and a movable flap valve. The movable flap valve is attached to a drive disk encircling the tube at a depth where ambient waters have little vertical motion. The wave-driven vertical motion of the elongated tube causes the movable flap valve to oscillate with respect to the fixed flap valve, thereby pumping seawater upward onto the near-ocean surface. The apparatus also can navigate to alternative locations by means of a propulsion/steering system, and it can submerge to a safe depth to avoid oncoming vessels and potentially damaging seas. A fleet of apparatuses is required to provide the necessary cooling effect. (Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20130038063A1/en) Read More

US patent #20130175352: Method to influence the direction of travel of hurricanes
Abstract
In like manner that winds intersect and deflect each other in space we can intersect and deflect the hurricanes and storms at the area of thrusting between their steering winds and their outer edge, with blasting explosion waves of non-nuclear high-power propellant fuel missiles thrown in vertical perpendicular alignment, against the routing of the steering wind current at N equal number of levels, first for testing a 300 pounds missile thrown, by adequately equipped air-vehicles for missiles launching, to observe the effect on the hurricane configuration, then decide to adjust the explosive quantity to thrust successfully, all blasts of each round of missiles should be detonated in a timely manner, then continue the rounds of explosives at intervals approximately similar to the time required by the prior blast to travel twice the diameter of its explosion, repeating as necessary, hitting always at the thrusting area until achieving success. (Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20130175352A1/en) Read More

US patent #20200187430: Helical artificial generator of tornado, hurricane, yellow dust, and typhoon
Abstract

The present invention provides a spiral artificial generator for the artificial generation of a tornado, a hurricane, yellowdust, or a typhoon, wherein the diameter D of the spiral artificial generator is selected by a basic module formula D=0.382H, a module formula H=2.618D is used when the diameter D of the spiral artificial generator is selected first, funnel-shaped arresters made of silver (Ag) are basically installed at a top of the spiral artificial generator, a solar cell heat collecting plate is installed on the outer wall of the top, and a door configured to be selectively opened and closed by solar cells and wind power generation, a blower configured to blow air to the artificial generator, and a stainless steel plate and heating coil configured to heat the inner walls of the paths are installed on the bottom of the spiral artificial generator. (Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200187430A1/en) Read More

US patent #20200315104: Propagating sound through bodies of water, to generate and direct wind, for the purpose of moderating and affecting weather patterns
Abstract

This invention claims a patent on the process of propagating soundwaves through bodies of water, such as oceans, to produce and direct winds, for the purpose of managing aerial weather systems. Propagating soundwaves within water can generate and direct wind for many purposes. One purpose is to effectively weaken storms, by directing wind-shear against a storm’s momentum, and stripping it of precipitation. Another purpose is to guide atmospheric rivers, and manually re-direct clouds in the precipitation cycle. This inventive process grants methods to mitigate dangerous weather patterns, such as droughts and hurricanes. The invention introduces a new subject matter that distinguishes it from other inventions relevant to underwater acoustics: manual processes to moderate weather. (Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200315104A1/en) Read More

Do any of these inventions relate to weather occurrences you’ve heard about? May the reader arrive at his or her own conclusions.

As you can see, some of the inventions where designed to weaken storms, and others to enhance storms! US patent #20030085296: Hurricane and tornado control device.
A method is disclosed for affecting the formation and/or direction of a low atmospheric weather system. Audio generators are positioned to project sound waves toward a peripheral area of a weather system. The sound waves are generated at a frequency to affect the formation of the weather system in a manner to disrupt, enhance or direct the formation.

For more information about weather manipulation which is also known as geoengineering, please see the videos on Dane Wigington’s YouTube channel, and also see his website on www.geoengineeringwatch.org.

I’m glad to have substantial and credible documentation which I hope will cause the public to think and not accept what the mainstream media is saying at face value. As Denzel Washington says, “If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed, If you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.” And Thomas Jefferson said: “The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.” Who controls the Press in America? My scientist friend thinks it’s the Jews. I believe it’s the Vatican, the Jesuits and their connection with secret societies in America. The Pope and Jesuit Superior General are clearly promoting the Climate Change Scam.




The King James Version: Precise Translation versus Fraudulent Texts and Heretical Translations – By Gregory L. Jackson

The King James Version: Precise Translation versus Fraudulent Texts and Heretical Translations – By Gregory L. Jackson

Introduction from the Webmaster

A regular visitor of this website shared a PDF file with me on https://www.lutheranlibrary.org/386-jackson-kjv-apostolic-texts/. I knew it would be good to post on James Japan because it’s in the public domain, because I promote the KJV, and because I can’t find this article elsewhere on the WWW in HTML web format.

The author, Dr. Gregory L. Jackson, uses unknown (at least to me) abbreviations that he doesn’t define. The abbreviations of Bible versions I knew, but I had to look up the abbreviations for the Lutheran synods:

WELS = Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. A synod in this case is a regional or national organization of Lutheran congregations.
ELCA = Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
LCMS = Lutheran Church Missouri Synod
ELS = Evangelical Lutheran Synod
CLC = Church of the Lutheran Confession
ELDONA = Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America

It’s shocking that a number of these synods, perhaps all of them, are apostate. They do not follow Martin Luther’s doctrines, they do not believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and they do not believe in the Virgin Birth or believe that Jesus rose from the dead! How can they call themselves Christians?! How can they even call themselves Lutherans when they do not follow Martin Luther?

Abbreviations of Bible translations:
KJV = King James Version, also known as the Authorised Version (AV)
NKJV = New King James Version
RSV = Revised Standard Version
NIV = New International Version
ESV = English Standard Version


The King James Version:
Apostolic Texts, Precise Translation versus
Fraudulent Texts and Heretical Translations
by

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson,

STM, Yale University; PhD, Notre Dame

Illustrated by Norma A. Boeckler

ISBN: 9798429093451
Imprint: Independently published

Public Domain

Dedication – Christina Ellenberger Jackson

Figure 1 Christina Elizabeth Ellenberger, engagement portrait.

Figure 1 Christina Elizabeth Ellenberger, engagement portrait.

Christina was born in Germany, shortly after WWII, and delivered by a midwife. She soon traveled to America with her younger sister Maria and her parents. She excelled in academics, and was inducted into the National Honor Society in her junior year in high school.

She chose Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois, where we met on the first day of school. As Conrad Bergendoff said to us, “It was fore-ordained.” We married a few days after graduation and moved to Waterloo, Ontario, seminary for me, and an MA for her in German literature. She did research for the German department and encouraged my work in German. Later, WELS pastors were surprised that I read German. I was shocked that they did not.

We continued the teamwork at Yale University. I worked at the medical school library, and Christina worked for Dr. Joan Fassler, on the faculty at the Yale Child Study Center, next door to the medical library. Fassler begged her to stay on after my degree was finished, but we moved on, to Cleveland and then Notre Dame. Christina also attended two Elisabeth Kuebler-Ross workshops. She contributed to Kuebler-Ross’ book On Children and Death, Scribner, 2011.

Christina also showed off her research skills in Columbus, where she studied man-made disasters and pursued engineering studies for DNV Technica. My article writing turned to books, and she always helped with that research. She did so much in our 51 years of marriage that I wrote a book about it – Lutheran Christina.

The synods were equally allergic to Luther and the Scriptures, but Christina endured the nastiness of the apostates and learned to laugh at their vile, anonymous emails. My books were printed – hated or loved – in one synod after another. The constant in publishing was her unfailing encouragement and help with each effort. Christina enjoyed hearing about the progress of this book, which would be muted without a German language and translating adviser. The books, large and small, may seem numerous. That is due to her constant help and the never-ending opposition of the “conservative, orthodox, confessional” Lutherans who not only reject the Chief Article of the Christianity – Justification by Faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but also the work of Luther himself.

Special Thanks

I would like to thank Norma A. Boeckler for her artistic contributions to this book, covers and interior, to Facebook, and my Old Testament classes. We all love her cheerful, beautiful, and inspiring works.

Janie Sullivan has worked on virtually all my books and Kindle versions. She is exactly what I need in getting a book to the public.

Virginia Roberts has been a volunteer editor ever since the Luther sermons, always proving how easy it is to find my typos and opaque passages.

Alec Satin shocked me when he joined our little congregation and showed a great deal of knowledge about the King James Version. He then created the Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry www.lutheranlibrary.org – a remarkable online collection of over 300 books I would recommend for reading and enjoyment and then some. He has also produced many inexpensive print books from the online collection.

“Today there is an artificially produced conviction resulting from marketing techniques and imposed on the churches from without. This whole modern consensus maintains the Bible publishing industry must now determine the texts of Scripture.

The Church, as Professor van Bruggen has demonstrated (The Future of the Bible, 1978), has abdicated her role as guardian of the Bible and has turned such responsibility over to hirelings who market various, conflicting translations to the confusion and disarray of the Church.”

The Authorised Version, 2012, Trinitarian Bible Society.

Figure 2 WELS Synod President Mark Schroeder agreed with the convention approving ALL translations, an echo of the extra ALL in Romans 3, 2012 NIV.

Figure 2 WELS Synod President Mark Schroeder agreed with the convention approving ALL translations, an echo of the extra ALL in Romans 3, 2012 NIV.

Questions To Be Asked While Reading This Book

  1. Since manuscripts do not have a date, how can scholars like Tischendorf promote a very early date, or any date – without proof-enhancing their careers?
  2. Why did Tischendorf, a German Lutheran, have an audience with the Pope, an arrangement with a Roman Catholic king, and a deal with a Russian Orthodox Tzar?
  3. How can anyone claim, as Tischendorf did, that monks devoted to ancient manuscripts were burning up pages from Sinaiticus, a 1500-year-old bound volume (codex) with supple leather pages that could not burn – but would stink?
  4. How does anyone explain Sinaiticus having white, supple pages after resting unknown for 15 centuries? Two witnesses attest to the whiteness, and yet the codex later looked very much darkened, not so much by age but by special treatments. (Daniels, David W. (2021). Who Faked the “World’s Oldest Bible?)
  5. Since Tischendorf lied so many times about Codex Sinaiticus, what does that suggest about his earlier work with Codex Ephraim Rescriptus (Tischendorf claimed to have superb eyesight, enabling him to detect what others could not, since the pages were erased and overwritten. Looking at his complete record, this looks like another self-serving fable.) – and his later work embracing Codex Vaticanus – “so much like Sinaiticus?” Sinaticus and Vatincanus disagree at a 40% level, not exactly a match, except for having the doubtful origins.
  6. Why did the mysterious Codex Sinaiticus suddenly appear at St. Catherine’s Monastery, having no previous history, and was later stolen by Tischendorf – but never returned – so the Russians “could set Sinaiticus in print for the whole world.”
  7. How did Tischendorf happen upon a codex with no history and get away with his garbage-to-be- burned-excuse for spiriting pages away for the Catholic king?
  8. Biblical apostates in England and America were burning to have the earliest and best possible New Testament Greek text, so why did they accept the least trustworthy and most heretical sources – Sinaiticus and Vaticanus? Were they longing for the heresies Tischendorf promoted with his fantasies?
  9. Indeed, why did the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod use Vaticanus as the main source for the Gospel of Mark commentary, 1350 pages long?
  10. Since Westcott and Hort were honored clergy and scholars in England, why were they allowed to push their Greek New Testament secretly on the KJV Revision Committee? Their Greek New Testament was printed but kept hidden for 10 years while they influenced the Revision committee against the Majority Text?
  11. Why did the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament stay hidden until the horrible KJV Revision came out – revealing no references (critical apparatus) to back up their wild claims, which have been refuted by their peers?
  12. The wild boasting of Tischendorf and the absurd theories of Westcott-Hort are an embarrassment to text scholars, so why are they still locked into loyalty to these Til Eulenspiegels (pranksters) but opposed to the clear, well-documented, apostolic sources of the Byzantine Majority Text?
  13. Which is more likely to be the true apostolic heritage? – 5,000 or more individual examples of the Byzantine Text from a Christian empire 1100 years old – or a handful of dubious and heretical exceptions with no history and no descendants? That alone proves Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were never used for anything other than supporting papal supremacy over the Word of God.
  14. When will the New King James Version and any other KJV copycats stop referring to the Nestle- Aland-Nida texts as genuine alternatives? Do we join the apostates in saying a Virgin – or young woman – will bear a son?* Are we so frightened by these hucksters that we speak the Biblical truths softly lest God’s Word be heard clearly on the streets of Gath?

Figure 3 Schmauk is greatly admired today, but not read or quoted very often.

*The RSV first used young woman instead of virgin in Isaiah 7:10. After the firestorm, they used virgin in the text and footnoted young woman. Now the RSV has young woman in the text and footnotes virgin. A con artist always rigs the game against suckers.

Preface – Appreciating the King James Version

The most read English Bible is the King James Version, with 55% of the readers, compared to 19% for the latest New International Version, the English Standard Version, and the New Revised Standard Version.*

* Christianity Today, March, 2014, quoted a survey giving 55% to the KJV, only 19% to the NIV, single digits for the New RSV, etc. Single digits still add up to a lot of Bibles in the wrong hands. The Most Popular and Fastest Growing Bible Translation Isn’t What You Think It Is.

The numbers are surprising, given the strong sales of NIV translations in bookstores. The NIV has topped the CBA’s bestselling Bible translation list for decades, and continued to sell robustly in 2013.

The high numbers of KJV readers confirm the findings of last year’s American Bible Society (ABS) State of the Bible report. On behalf of ABS, Barna Group found that 52 percent of Americans read the King James or the New King James Version, compared with 11 percent who read the NIV.

The KJV also received almost 45 percent of the Bible translation-related searches on Google, compared with almost 24 percent for the NIV, according to Bible Gateway’s Stephen Smith.

In fact, searches for the KJV seem to be rising distinctly since 2005, while most other English translations are staying flat or are declining, according to Smith’s Google research.

The percentages dwindle after the first three modern wannabees, and there are so many more versions, scaled down to insipid and verbose. The KJV has much to commend it, not only for its use of the Majority Text but also for its deliberately grand, formal, and eloquent style. If some complain that the KJV reads too much like Shakespeare, others respond that the modern versions sound too much like television cartoons. Even worse, all the modern “scientific” texts are at war against the Majority Text and against each other too, because they remove and corrupt so many passages, diluting and changing the actual message of God’s Word. Nevertheless, the Lutheran synods (ELCA, LCMS, WELS, ELS, CLC, ELDONA) and all other mainline denominations reject the KJV for their worship, colleges and seminaries, printed readings, and official proclamations. Beyond that opposition, agreement is absent about which bad translation or paraphrase they think is best.

Details about the development of the KJV and the crimes of the modern text and translation experts will follow. First, let us cite the reasons why the KJV is favored above the rest and destined to outlast the newest, ever-changing, increasingly vapid Bibles. The greatest statement is simple and profound –

Gustavus Swift Paine

“May your Majesty be pleased,” said Dr. John Rainolds in his address to the king, “to direct that the Bible be now translated, such versions as are extant not answering to the original.”

Rainolds was a Puritan, and the Bishop of London felt it his duty to disagree. “If every man’s humor might be followed,” snorted His Grace, “there would be no end to translating.”

King James was quick to put both factions down. “I profess,” he said, “I could never yet see a Bible well translated in English, but I think that of Geneva is the worst.” The Learned Men, p. 1, 1834. Forgotten Books.

+++

Alister McGrath

“Aiming at truth, they achieved what later generations recognized as beauty and elegance.” Alister McGrath, In the Beginning, p. 254.

+++

Harvard University Press

“We have as a rule used the King James Version in translations, and our reasons for doing so must be obvious: it is the version most English readers associated with the literary qualities of the Bible, and it is till arguably the version that best preserves the literary effects of the original languages.”

The Literary Guide to the Bible, edited by Robert Alter and Frank Kermod, Harvard University Press, 1987, p. 7.

+++

Victor Hugo, from Christian History Institute *

* https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/they-said-it-best-kjv

“ENGLAND HAS TWO BOOKS: the Bible and Shakespeare. England made Shakespeare, but the Bible made England.” — Victor Hugo (1802–1885)

+++

George Bernard Shaw

“The translation was extraordinarily well done because to the translators what they were translating was not merely a curious collection of ancient books written by different authors indifferent stages of culture, but the word of God divinely revealed through His chosen and expressly inspired scribes. In this conviction they carried out their work with boundless reverence and care and achieved a beautifully artistic result . . . they made a translation so magnificent that to this day the common human Britisher or citizen of the United States of North America accepts and worships it as a single book by a single author, the book being the Book of Books and the author being God.” — George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950) Quoted in G. S. Paine, The Men Behind the King James Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1959, 1977), pp. 182–183

+++

H. L. Menken, Famous Journalist and Agnostic

“It is the most beautiful of all the translations of the Bible; indeed, it is probably the most beautiful piece of writing in all the literature of the world. Many attempts have been made to purge it of its errors and obscurities. An English Revised Version was published in 1885 and an American Revised Version in 1901, and since then many learned but misguided men have sought to produce translations that should be mathematically accurate, and in the plain speech of everyday. But the Authorised Version has never yielded to any of them, for it is palpably and overwhelmingly better than they are, just as it is better than the Greek New Testament, or the Vulgate, or the Septuagint. Its English is extraordinarily simple, pure, eloquent, lovely. It is a mine of lordly and incomparable poetry, at once the most stirring and the most touching ever heard of.” — H. L. Mencken (1880-1956).

+++

Winston Churchill

“The scholars who produced this masterpiece are mostly unknown and unremembered. But they forged an enduring link, literary and religious, between the English-speaking people of the world.” The King James Bible Translators; Olga S. Opfell; Jefferson and London: McFarland, 1982. From HolyBible.org

+++

Compton’s Encyclopedia, Online Edition

“One of the supreme achievements of the English Renaissance came at its close, in the King James Bible…It is rightly regarded as the most influential book in the history of English civilization…the King James Version combined homely, dignified phrases into a style of great richness and loveliness. It has been a model of writing for generations of English-speaking people.”

+++

From America Online, May 26, 1995

“The greatest English Bible is the Authorised, or King James, Version. Based on Tyndale’s translation and original texts, it was produced in 1611 by six groups of churchmen at the command of King James I. The King James Bible became the traditional Bible of English- speaking Protestants. Its dignified and beautiful style strongly influenced the development of literature in the English language. The influence can be seen in the works of John Bunyan, John Milton, Herman Melville, and many other writers.”

Volume 3; Crowell-Collier Educational Corporation; 1967, 1972 ed. p.p. 137, 138 Rev. Holt H. Graham; Rev. Joseph M. Petulla; Mr. Cecil Roth.

+++

Charlton Heston, In the Arena: An Autobiography, pp. 554-555

“…the King James translation has been described as ‘the monument of English prose’ as well as ‘the only great work of art ever created by a committee’. Both statements are true. Fifty-four scholars worked seven years to produce the work from its extant texts in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English. Such an undertaking can be expected to produce great scholarship, but hardly writing as spare and sublime as the King James….

“The authors of several boring translations that have followed over the last fifty years mumble that the KJV is “difficult” filled with long words. Have a look at the difficult long words that begin the Old Testament, and end the Gospels: ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; darkness was upon the face of the deep.’ and ‘Now, of the other things which Jesus did, if they should be written everyone, I suppose the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.’ Shakespeare aside, there’s no comparable writing in the language, as has been observed by wiser men than I.

Over the past several centuries it’s been the single book in most households, an enormous force in shaping the development of the English language. Carried around the world by missionaries, it provided the base by which English is about to become the lingua franca of the world in the next century. Exploring it during this shoot [Ten Commandments] was one of the most rewarding creative experiences of my life.”

+++

Theodore P. Letis

“Moreover, those clergy who have obediently fallen in line with the New Tradition have sent a clear signal to their parishioners and colleagues that, unlike William Tyndale, they no longer find the verbal view of inspiration compelling.”

The Ecclesiastical Text: Text Criticism, Biblical Authority, and the Popular Mind, 1997.

+++

Trinitarian Bible Society

The Authorised Version translators continued in the textual tradition which the church had used and accepted for hundreds of years. In doing so, they continued the solidarity of both original language texts and also of Earlier English translations upon which they based their work.”

The Authorised Version: What Today’s Christian Needs to Know about the Authorised (King James) Version, 2012, p. 2.

+++

TBS – The Excellence of the Authorised Version

The conspicuous merits of the ‘new version’ of 1611 gradually gained recognition. It was not only pronounced more scholarly, but it was found to be more readable than any other English translation of the Scriptures. Many of the changes incorporated in the Authorised Version were not designed to give a new meaning to the Scriptures, but to express the old meaning in another way, for the sake of literary improvement.

Changes were made to make the English agree better with the truth of the original, but far more were made for the sake of good, plain English and pleasant cadence in reading. The translators introduced a sweeter, smoother and more stately diction into our English Bible, and this was a great gain.

+++

Public Reading- Trinitarian Bible Society

The English Bible is designed for public reading, and whatever makes it read more smoothly, and in a style of pathos or majesty more accordant with its subject matter, is a help to the reader and a benefit to the hearer. The statements of the Bible that bear on our conduct and comfort, on our salvation and sanctification, are meant to be remembered, so as to be present in our minds whenever temptations or afflictions come our way. Whatever choice or arrangement of words makes these statements of the Bible more striking or more impressive, more pleasant to the ear, or more fascinating to the imagination, makes them also more easily remembered, and more potent for good.

It is not enough that our English Bible be a mathematically correct translation from the original Scriptures, word for word, point for point. It should, both in its literary grace and in its Divine revelations, be a well-spring of spiritual life in the broadest and highest sense of the terms. We cannot be too grateful, therefore, that the framers of our Authorised Version were not only skilled in ‘the discernment of tongues’, but were gifted with an ear for melody. This particular excellence of the AV was recognized even by Roman Catholic scholars who feared that it would make a deep impression upon the minds of many readers. Archbishop Faber declared,

Who will not say that the uncommon beauty and marvelous English of the Protestant Bible is not one of the great strongholds of heresy in this country? It lives on the ear, like a music that can never be forgotten, like the sound of church bells, which the convert hardly knows how he can forgo. Its felicities often seem to be almost things rather than mere words. It is part of the national mind, and the anchor of national seriousness.
At the present time one might well inquire whether any such testimony could be borne in praise of any of the numerous modern versions that are offered in its place.”

Trinitarian Bible Society Booklet*

* https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tbsbibles.org/resource/collection/D1B0BDBE- CD9E-4D12-BBDD-138677F98835/The-Excellence-of-the-Authorised-Version.pdf

+++

Preface to the Original King James Version

  • 22 It is not only an armour, but also a whole armoury of weapons, both offensive and defensive; whereby we may save ourselves and put the enemy to flight.
  • 23 It is not an herb, but a tree, or rather a whole paradise of trees of life, which bring forth fruit every month, and the fruit thereof is for meat, and the leaves for medicine.
  • 24 It is not a pot of Manna, or a cruse of oil, which were for memory only, or for a meal’s meat or two, but as it were a shower of heavenly bread sufficient for a whole host, be it never so great; and as it were a whole cellar full of oil vessels; whereby all our necessities may be provided for and our debts discharged.
  • 25 In a word, it is a panary ((bread Pantry)) of wholesome food, against fenowed [mouldy.] traditions; a physician’s shop [κοινον ιατρειον. S.Basil. in Psal.primum.] (Saint Basil calleth it) of preservatives against poisoned heresies; a pandect ((a complete body)) of profitable laws against rebellious spirits; a treasury of most costly jewels against beggarly rudiments; finally, a fountain of most pure water springing up unto everlasting life.
  • 26 And what marvel? the original thereof being from heaven, not from earth; the author being God, not man; the inditer, the Holy Spirit, not the wit of the Apostles or Prophets; the penmen, such as were sanctified from the womb, and endued with a principal portion of God’s Spirit; the matter, verity, piety, purity, uprightness; the form, God’s word, God’s testimony, God’s oracles, the word of truth, the word of salvation, etc.; the effects, light of understanding, stableness of persuasion, repentance from dead works, newness of life, holiness, peace, joy in the Holy Ghost; lastly, the end and reward of the study thereof, fellowship with the Saints, participation of the heavenly nature, fruition of an inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that never shall fade away.
  • 27 Happy is the man that delighteth in the Scripture, and thrice happy that meditateth in it day and night.

+++

Alexander McClure

“The first decided steps, however, toward giving to the English nation a Bible printed in their own tongue, were the translations of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, made by William Tyndale, and by him printed at Hamburg, in the year 1524; — and a translation of the whole of the New Testament, printed by him partly at Cologne, and partly at Worms, in 1525.”

Alexander McClure, The Translators Revived, Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry, p. 6.

+++

Robert Martin

“Why is accuracy of translation so important? Because the Bible is the Word of the living God. It is an utterly unique book. It is the inscripturated revelation to mankind of God’s mind and will and the inspired record of His redemptive work. And this being so, there is no more important piece of literature in the world. Thus, the accuracy of the Bible’s translation is of the utmost importance.”

Robert Martin, Accuracy of Translation, The Banner of Truth Trust, 1989, p. 2.

+++

David Blunt

“Omission of material found in the Authorised Version (AV) is the main type of alteration found in the modern versions. The New Testament of one popular modern version, the New International Version (NIV), first published in 1973, omits seventeen complete verses found in the AV—a figure found applicable to most modern versions.”

David Blunt, Which Bible Version: Does It Really Matter? Trinitarian Bible Society, 2007, p. 3.

+++

Dr. Aland’s Influence on the New International Version

“Dr. Aland’s pernicious views of the unreliability of our Bibles in the original manuscripts is profoundly seen in the NIV Bible. The same hand that would excise whole books of the Bible from our Canon would also excise many, many texts.”

Hembd, What Today’s Christian Needs to Know about Dr. Kurt Aland, Trinitarian Bible Society, 2007, p. 11f.

+++

Jim Mitchell

“Dear Pastor Greg,

I just wanted to take the time to congratulate you on informing the world of the outstanding accuracy/dependability of the KJV translation. You have done what this journalist used to dream of. I know I’m not telling you anything, but you really have the story of all time since it is important to the salvation journey of all. What a wondrous work the Lord has done through you. You’ve investigated and specified credible reasons for the total lack of credibility of certain “biblical experts” and the obvious harm they have done. I would be glad for any recommendations you may have on studying Greek and Hebrew.”

Figure 4 Richard C. H. Lenski is highly regarded in many denominations for his New Testament commentaries.

Figure 4 Richard C. H. Lenski is highly regarded in many denominations for his New Testament commentaries.

Required Reading: The Gospels of Mark and John and the Text

Crucial for Understanding the Radical Academic Shift to Apostasy

Many believers are not aware of the famous, academic, radical Biblical scholars using the Gospels of Mark and John to advance their theories and deny the Scriptural truth. Pietism, with its emphasis on cooperation rather than doctrine, helped rationalism begin to flourish, at Halle University and other places. The famous Reimarus Fragments were printed anonymously to deny the miracles of the Bible, among other things. The Gospel of John was dismissed by the Tuebingen School as belonging to an era three centuries after Christ. That claim allowed the academics to disregard any support in the Fourth Gospel regarding historical and doctrinal revelation. In fact, they hated the open Trinitarian nature of John’s Gospel, the clear identification of Jesus as the only begotten Son of God, His Virgin Birth, Resurrection, and Ascension. These wiser-than-the- Holy Spirit professors considered Jesus to be a wandering teacher who inspired love, caused emotional healings, and never considered Himself the Messiah, Savior, or Son of God.

With the Fourth Gospel out of the way in the quest for the historical Jesus, the academics could turn Mark’s Gospel into that kernel of truth they were seeking, the story of Jesus without the divine or miraculous. The Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament removed “the Son of God” from Mark 1:1.

W-H Mark 1:1 αρχη του ευαγγελιου ιησου χριστου – The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

KJV – Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

The Westcott-Hort edition also stopped the Gospel at Mark 16:8, with the rest of the chapter closed off in square brackets to show that the traditional ending did not really belong. This editing of the Greek text, with no support for these actions, reduced the divinity of Christ in Mark 1:1 and erased His resurrection in Mark 16. A century after Wescott-Hort, the first RSV edition dropped the ending of Mark into a footnote and later raised it up with a space between verse 8 and 9 to show that the ending was foreign. Thanks to Tischendorf, Westcott, Hort, Aland, and Metzger, the New Testament has become a model airplane kit to be assembled with cheap glue, even with parts missing and the wrong parts glued in recklessly.

The changes in Mark’s Gospel made it easier to write fantasies about the undiscovered primitive version, the kernel, the story of a popular teacher. Humorously, because Biblical experts often paint strange mirages, the academics postulated Q, the imaginary source shared between Matthew and Luke, because those two Gospels had so much in common with each other. However, nothing like Q has ever been found. Theories build slowly and often fade slowly. The least likely view for them – the traditional perspective – has the Gospels written by the Apostles Matthew and John and by associates of Apostles Peter and Paul for Mark and Luke, all inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The Gospel of John is still dated by academics – far from the time of Jesus. In 1975, at Notre Dame, Elisabeth Schuessler-Fiorenza stated, “The Gospel of John was written in the first century by the Apostle, according to conservatives, 300 years later – according to liberals.” She is still teaching, at Harvard Divinity School. For most Biblical scholars with an academic position, the Bible is just a book to be treated like other books, with lengthy analysis and competing arguments. Their values are strictly rationalistic, and their tolerance for traditional Christian professors is zero, including the issue of the text itself, which is where it began. Those who want the Gospel of John 300 years later also want to remove all the historical data and quotations, and call it a Gnostic, semi-pagan text.

The Christian Church once handled the teaching of Biblical doctrine and the printing of the KJV. Now the Scriptures are dominated by the extreme Left, literally the National Council of Churches owning the RSV, New RSV, and ESV. Bibles are printed and promoted by a variety of profitable businesses. College and seminary professors are both the products and the promoters of rationalistic views. They are opponents of the King James Version. Faculty are happy to be named as consultants for the latest, most dumbed-down, least demanding Bible. The denomination will not give them free trips to Israel, but the Bible factories will.*

* The Southern Baptists voted to forbid their chain of stores from displaying the newest NIV, only allowing individual orders sub rosa. The stores said, No, they will sell the 2011 NIV anyway – https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2012/february/lifeway-declines-sbc-request-to-bar-niv-from-stores.html

I remember, as a lad, hearing the excitement about the RSV being a new, modern version of the Bible, then learning the Virgin Birth was denied in Isaiah 7:10. Much later I studied in the RSV Room, the reading room of Yale Divinity School Library, where the RSV was developed. No one wants to mention that their favorite translations are sired by the radical National Council of Churches. The alleged new, improved ESV is printed under license from the NCC, a fact not promoted by the sellers or readers of the Bible.

The engine behind the repudiation of the KJV is really the monopoly established by Bible text critics. Westcott- Hort began the consolidation with their own Greek New Testament, which seemed to fail, but the modernists ascended in the 1930s, accepted it, and never let go.*

My first Greek New Testament was a Westcott-Hort. I now have a Byzantine (Majority or KJV text), a United Bible Society GNT, and a Westcott-Hort, all in perfect condition. Westcott-Hort and the Byzantine (Stephanus), are also part of the Bible Gateway website, which I use daily. The rationalistic Society of Biblical Literature – “In circumstances such as these, the existence of an alternative critically edited text—the SBLGNT differs from the standard text in more than 540 variation units—will help to remind readers of the Greek New Testament that the text-critical task is not finished.” Introduction to the SBL Greek New Testament.

The Biblical text, especially the New Testament Greek, has been a playground for apostates ever since, and a fallback position for anyone accused of teaching liberal notions. They cry out, in unison, “The Bible did not float down from heaven. It was made and transmitted by man.” *

* No one has ever claimed that the Bible floated down from heaven. However, God has miraculously preserved His Word, as proven by the dominance of the KJV today, 70 years after the National Council of Churches birthed the RSV and later the ESV and New RSV. KJV Proverbs 30:5 5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Proverbs 12:1

PART ONE – Introduction, The King James Version

The Apostles Creed

Preface

Comparisons show there is a four-fold swindle being worked on the church and academic populations.

  1. The preferred New Testament text has been switched from the witness of 98% of the evidence – the Majority Text – to the dubious manuscripts’ witness of 2% – the Westcott-Hort morphing into the Nestle-Aland-UBS, a process which began in 1881. Wake up!
  2. Based on this New Testament text fraud, the translations no longer aim at precision but use the imaginations of fiction writers.
  3. The Roman Catholic Church has assumed a vast amount of authority in this ecumenical, apostate enterprise, both in the slant of the text and the paraphrases. They are a part of the American Bible Society, the United Bible Societies, and efforts to present one “Standard Text” with all the Protestants.
  4. The “conservative” Lutheran church bodies are eager members of this enterprise, promoting the Seminex rationalistic view of the Bible without a whimper from Christian News, the LCMS, the ELS, ELDONA, or the rock-ribbed Wisconsin Synod. Instead of guarding the Word of God, they protect their own cash registers.

Only two alternatives are possible. One is the historic view of the Christian Church – the Bible is the revelation of God, inerrant and infallible, the inspired Book of the Holy Spirit, given by God and written down by man. God protects His Scriptures, which like Jesus, have two natures, divine and human, and yet without sin.

The alternative is to view the Scriptures as an important but fallible work of mankind, full of errors and contradictions, valued for the myths and symbols established, explained and elaborated by enlightened and reasonable people.

The denominational establishment cherishes the alternative view, with predictable results. Few clergy today have any serious training in the Biblical languages. Everyone is supposedly smarter today and capable of using entire libraries on their computers, but their brains cannot bear the struggle of learning Greek for the New Testament and Hebrew for the Old Testament. The word seminary was originally used to mean a seedbed for learning. Now the students are assumed to be too weak to dig in the soil, to labor in the vineyard, so they are condemned to watch from the outside, and buy their Bibles from profitable presses minting money for the fortunate.

A modern sermon starts with a text from the Bible and abandons the message in order to pursue a sales pitch for the denomination, a plea for local funds, or a rousing speech in favor of current political issues. If done correctly, or copied from a good source, the sermon – a bad word – no, the message will leave people burdened with guilt for the hardness of their flinty hearts. The Church of Rome learned long ago that perpetual guilt is an energy to be encouraged and promoted. The issue is not whether the original text is used, because the customers have no idea that they have been herded into the modern, “scientific” text corral. Almost every translation – or rather, paraphrase – of the Bible is based upon the supposed latest and best, ever-changing text.

This alternative view of the Bible provides everyone with unparalleled freedom, because the Scriptures are God’s unified, harmonious revelation, His declaration in plain language for everyone.

The exception is the King James Version. Everyone is warned against precise translation from faithful texts. “This new one is much simpler to read than the King James – it was tested for the widest possible appeal.” Frowning, the experts say, “The King James is too literal, too old-fashioned.” Even the KJV friends will say it is a “word for word” translation. No, the word-for- word approach only happens in interlinear translations, which are awkward, used mostly for beginners in seminary trying to show they are translating. Biblical help hidden under the desk is called a Jimmie from using the King James or a pony, for getting a free ride. Lenski created a literal Greek New Testament for emphasis on the grammar, but the results are for Greek class, not public reading.

This precise translation view was challenged by what seemed to be a new chapter of Animal Farm. “All translations are equal, but some translations are more equal than others.” The vast majority of readers use the King James Version, but publishing houses found a brilliant way to change loyalties. The New International Version (NIV) asked for leading members of each denomination to be advisors for the upcoming project. Prestige, awards, and trips were funded. Even a tiny church body like the Wisconsin Synod had two names listed – John Jeske and David Kuske – alongside of Pentecostals, Methodists, Northern Baptists, Southern Baptists*, the Reformed, the ELCA bodies about to merge, and many more. As every pastor knows, it is easier to speak against an old traditional translation, the KJV, than to question the version endorsed and embraced by their seminary faculty members, a new translation with many influential and prickly friends and relatives.

* At Wheaton College, the Billy Graham Center, the leader of the program distinguished between Baptists from the North and Baptists from the South. The air immediately became rather frosty after that observation.

As the paraphrases branched out into newer and more creative works of translation marketing, Christian doctrine became untethered by the original, even their butchered new text. The rationalism that inspired these changes in text and translation were expressed with great freedom. The best example is Justification by Faith, the hallmark of the Reformation and the bane of Rationalists of every type. The Universalists established their dogma thus – every single person in the world is already forgiven and saved. That is their perfected expression of grace, derived from the goodness of God and avoiding the Gospel of New Testament. The New NIV of 2011 broke free of the earlier versions – and all Greek texts – by declaring:

2011 NIV Romans 3:22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all [not in any Greek text] are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.*

“The 2011 update to the NIV is the latest fruit of this process. By working with input from pastors and Bible scholars, by grappling with the latest discoveries about biblical languages and the biblical world, and by using cutting-edge research on English usage, the Committee on Bible Translation has updated the text to ensure that the New International Version of the Bible remains faithful to Howard Long’s original inspiration.” Biblegateway.com – https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-International-Version-NIV-Bible/

KJV Romans 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

Not the original NIV, but the New NIV of 2011 has handed Universalism to the reading public through their paraphrase, by claiming “all are justified.” The earlier NIV is no longer printed and cannot be used in new Christian education materials, thus requiring new purchases where denominations are printing their own materials and quoting the NIV. And yet the clergy, especially the Lutherans, are silent and afraid of questioning this corruption and deceit.

Figure 5

Figure 5 The text scholars already had one codex named A, so Tischendorf used Aleph to place his Sinaiticus first as the “world’s oldest Bible” in the lists, even though it was forged in the 19th century.

Isaiah 55:10,11

I. Autobiographical Academic Introduction

I grew up in the 1950s, in the center of the Corn and Bible Belt, when the King James Version of the Bible was gradually being replaced by the Revised Standard Version. Early on I heard that the RSV denied the Virgin Birth of Christ, but they backpedaled after the blowback from most denominations was too heated. Little did we know that the RSV was a product of the Marxist National Council of Churches, whose maiden name was the Federal Council of Churches. The Federal Council was so obviously Marxist that they did what any good mainline ecumenical group would do, they changed the name but kept the same address, the funding, and the radical ideology.

Carrying a Greek textbook might have been garlic to some at Augustana College in the 1960s, but it attracted the notice of my future wife, Christina. Little did I know that only pre-theology students studied Greek. I got into the course as a freshman by mistake and carried the classic Paine Beginning Greek textbook. I was fascinated with ancient history, especially Greece, even though two years of Latin did everything possible to exterminate my interest. Christina also took Greek, a year behind me, and I took German for two years. In seminary I took Hebrew for no credit and increased my Greek knowledge by writing out translations of John, Mark, Revelation, and Galatians. I learned how difficult translating was, but I also began to understand the meaning of words in their Biblical context rather than memorized from a vocabulary list in a textbook.

In 1972-73, I had the chance to earn an STM at Yale, studying the Bible in Hebrew and Greek, under

  1. Nils A. Dahl,
  2. Robert Wilson, and
  3. Abraham Malherbe.

Those were the best years of Biblical studies at Yale Divinity, because those professors emphasized the text of the Scriptures rather than the rationalistic theories about them. That was a Brigadoon* experience, as a later graduate told me – the greats were soon retired and promoted to eternal life.

* Brigadoon is a Lerner and Lowe musical where two hikers stumble into a city that only becomes visible every 100 years. Dahl, Holmer, Ahlstrom, Lindbeck, and Pelikan were Lutherans. Bainton was dubbed an honorary Lutheran.

  • Paul L. Holmer taught philosophical theology.
  • Roland Bainton lectured in retirement and later helped me with my dissertation. He wrote Here I Stand, A Life of Martin Luther and many other best- selling church history books.
  • Sydney Ahlstrom finished his Religious History of the American People in 1972 and talked at member forums at Bethesda Lutheran Church, down the hill from the divinity school.
  • George Lindbeck, the official observer from the Lutheran Church at Vatican II, came to the early morning service at Bethesda, where I was the regular liturgist.
  • Krister Stendahl, Harvard Divinity School’s Dean, visited YDS and lectured because his son’s family was there. Mahlherbe, a Harvard PhD, refuted Stendahl’s lecture in a few minutes after it was over.
  • Church historian Jaroslav Pelikan came to the second service at Bethesda Lutheran Church and spent time visiting with us at the coffee hour. Soon after, I met his brother and visited his father in the hospital in Cleveland.

I was accepted at Notre Dame for their PhD program in 1975, getting a full tuition scholarship. We moved as close as possible to the campus, 50 miles away, and began regular commuting. I took apocalyptic literature in the Bible with Elisabeth Schuessler-Fiorenza and a theology seminar with her husband Frank Schuessler- Fiorenza. Notre Dame wanted the couple gone, which ended up with both enjoying endowed professorships at Harvard. Likewise, Augustana College, where I met Christina on the first day, did not renew the initial contract of Stanley Hauerwas, who then moved to Notre Dame, served as one of my dissertation advisors, and became world famous. Notre Dame was far more liberal than Yale Divinity, so I had the opportunity to share my perspectives and provoke outraged responses. One Christian Brother said to his priest friend, holding him back during class, “Remember, we promised we would not argue with him again.” They were disgusted when grilling me about two topics from the book, A Study of Generations*, which they had open in their hands:

* Ralph Underwager wrote a study of Lutherans and their beliefs, which was funded by an insurance company. That book has disappeared from the Net.

  1. “Greg, Lutherans are supposed to be very conservative. Do you believe Jesus actually rose from the dead?” I said, “Yes, I do.”
  2. “What! Do you believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus as a real, historical fact?” I said,” Of course I do.”

One of them slammed the book shut and said, “There is no use talking to you, Jackson.” Later, they were openly dismayed that a famous visiting Roman Catholic theologian considered the New Testament to be historical rather than mythical.

Just as the Revised Standard Version tried to displace the KJV gradually, the New International Version took over later. The Lutheran Church in America loved every translation except the KJV, a reminder of the Roman Empire allowing the worship of every god except the One, True God – Jesus, the Son of God. WELS pivoted from boasting about their love of the KJV to excommunicating pastors who dared to critique the NIV.

One member of Trinity in Bridgeton, Missouri, asked me, “Why do you quote the NIV in your articles?” I said, “That is my only Biblical program, so it saves time.” He said, “Would you use the KJV if I gave the program for you?” I was happy to make the change, because the predatory attitude of modern translations meant a lot of dubious quotations. I also had restrictions or costs involved in quoting their precious wording. Various people pointed out the value of the precise language of the KJV as new paraphrases began diluting and harming the text with a combination of text corruption, dogmatic insertions, and leaden prose.

Some of the tiny Lutheran sects use the New KJV, which is far better than the NIV and ESV. But – I noticed something when reading from two different NKJV Bibles the same Sunday – that this relatively new version was already constantly changing, just like the NIV, whose betrayal of accurate translation was fully revealed in the latest major revision, the 2011. WELS danced around the issue but made the 2011 NIV its official Bible for publishing church materials and its latest hymnal.

Isaiah 40:31

The Bible has been improved in so many ways in the last 70 years that many of the readers can hardly find their way back to the source. One revision was not enough, so the new versions have multiplied faster than diet books and Church Growth manuals, with similar failing results. I remember getting a four version New Testament in the 1960s, in parallel columns, which provided as much clarity as a family argument.

The Bible is one unified Truth, the Book of the Holy Spirit. The spirit of rationalism, under the banner of improvement, is bound to move from one imagined contradiction to another. However, faith in Jesus, the Son of God, leads us from one priceless passage to another.

The Bible is inerrant and infallible. The established denominations claim that inerrant is a new description for the Bible. But Luther used the Latin words for inerrant and infallible in his Large Catechism, On Baptism. Infallible has been the prevailing definition but the term was watered down so much that the word suggested fallible. The tepid, tentative, liberal theologians began saying, “Infallible in doctrine, but not in history or geography.” That was like saying, “Your essay is perfect, except in spelling and grammar.” Likewise, the inspiration of the Scriptures was watered down by many similar qualifications and amendments, so plenary (complete in all respects) was added by some to the inspiration of the Word of God.*

* The transition apostates said the Bible was infallible in doctrine, but not in history or geography. That commendation was no better than Billy Graham saying the original texts were inerrant, which actually meant all Biblical texts had errors, even the Majority Text. Inerrant is used now, but the history of terms should be explained and watered-down milk-toast teaching refuted.

Denominational mergers of the 20th century hid their internal conflicts, so they supposedly removed the friction with this solemn and rather angry declaration – “The Bible did not float down from heaven. It was written by men.” Some added, to ease the pain of serious study, “We could have 30 books in the Bible or 100. Various people decided the number.” I have never discovered a believer who thought the Bible floated down, whether as a first draft or in finished form, from heaven. Nor did I find an expert naming another 34 books for the canon. The Apocrypha, heavily promoted by the Church of Rome and liberal Lutherans, never qualified for the canon. The marketing of the Apocrypha did little more than make people wonder what those books were.

The greatest detour in understanding the Bible began with Medieval philosophy and theology – they were really the same at that time. Augustine began by spoiling the Egyptians, combining his universal grasp of secular knowledge with the Scriptures. Toward the end of the Middle Ages, Aquinas embalmed this method, which was embraced by Rome. Reading Augustine and Aquinas in Latin means moving from the peak of erudition to the denominational script.

Unfortunately for today’s dream-weaving theologians, Luther was urged to earn a doctorate in the Scriptures, which brought him into constant and daily contact with the Bible. The Erasmus edition of the Greek New Testament gave the Reformer the original text of the New Testament versus the accepted, corrupt, and misleading Latin version. There is a reason the Holy Spirit chose to speak to us in Greek. This language was made universal by Alexander the Great’s conquests, his promotion of Greek culture, and the Greek merchants and managers set up by Alexander to do business with the world markets. Centuries before the Nativity, Greek was established as the natural route for the Gospel to move about in the Eastern and Western Roman Empires, centered in Constantinople (East) and Rome (West). The mighty Roman Empire, which grew after Alexander’s, saw Greek as the language of culture, and proved its admiration for everything Greek by borrowing its architecture, law, literature, drama, comedy, sculpture, government, and pagan theology. “Rome had the drains, but the Greeks had the brains.”

Besides Greek, Luther also learned Hebrew and used his verbal skills, with a team of scholars, to translate the Old Testament into German. The Old Testament completed the Bible he began when he translated the New Testament from Greek into German at the Wartburg Castle. Luther’s Bible established the German language, just as Shakespeare and the King James Version established the English language.*

* The German Shakespeare is as foundational in Germany as Shakespeare is in English-speaking countries.

We now have endless methods and resources for learning the Biblical languages of Hebrew and Greek, which caused so much interest during the Reformation and after. But few seminary students currently learn more than the ancient alphabets, bypassing Latin as well, due to its expulsion from public education. The put down of Shakespeare, the actor, having “little Latin and less Greek,” is now true of the ministry, having little Greek, less Hebrew, and no Latin at all.

Walter A. Maier

Christian News has been instrumental in the LCMS- WELS quashing of Justification by Faith and the promotion of anything-goes translation.* But Otten chose this Maier statement for the back cover of his book about Maier, Walter Maier Still Speaks.

* “Good authors, too, who once knew better words now only use four-letter words writing prose… anything goes.”Cole Porter, Anything Goes.

Walter Maier Still Speaks

The Cornerstone Is the Beginning

The great Dr. Walter Maier, who earned a PhD in Semitics at Harvard University, identified Biblical inerrancy and Justification by Faith as the cornerstone and the keystone of the Scriptures.

Justification by faith in Christ together with its twin truth, the inerrancy of Holy Scripture, are the keystone and cornerstone of Protestantism. Neglect one or both and the whole structure will fall into ruin.*

* Thus Maier is quoted on the back cover of Herman Otten’s book about him – Walter A. Maier Still Speaks: Missouri and the World Should Listen. Missouri, the world. And Christian News does not listen.

The beginning of the universe – and the Bible – is an excellent litmus test to see whether an individual is using ministerial reason or magisterial reason in interpreting the Bible. Ministerial reason means subordinating our own understanding to the clear, plain language of the Bible. An example is Luther stating that the Bible judges all books and is not judged by any book. Magisterial reason places human reason above the teaching of the Bible. This magisterial reason is on constant display in the modern commentaries, most denominations, and the Church of Rome.

John 1:1

Genesis 1 teaches us inerrancy, the cornerstone of the Bible, not simply inerrancy but the power, majesty, clarity, and efficacy of the Word of God. Without this knowledge, taught by the Holy Spirit in the Word, we can make little progress in Scriptural knowledge. We may know about the Bible, as with many other subjects, whether nuclear fission or calculus, but we do not know the Bible – and become confused, indifferent, or hostile to its message.

KJV Genesis 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

God’s creation of the universe is taught or mocked many different ways, but this is the only true account. These two verses take chance and evolution out of the picture, and place God’s will, wisdom, intent, and purpose at the center of our lives. In the first two verses we find God the Father creating and God the Holy Spirit witnessing. The third member of the Trinity is revealed in the next verses.

KJV Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

The skeptic wonders, “Where is the Son of God in Creation?” – which is answered in John, the Fourth Gospel and God’s own commentary on the Five Books of Moses.*

* The Gospel of John is perhaps the least-read commentary about the Five Books of Moses. A careful study of John will put to shame a century of rationalistic Biblical works.

KJV John 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

The Son of God existed in the beginning. He is the Logos, and through this Logos, God’s Word, all creatures and elements, stars and planets, were fashioned. To make this very certain, the double negative is used – not one single thing was made apart from Him. Moreover, He is the life and the light of men.

The opening of the Fourth Gospel begins with the three- fold use of the Word, which indicates the Trinity, as taught throughout John and throughout the entire Bible. The link to Genesis is difficult to miss, since only Genesis and John start with the same phrase – in the beginning. Another lesson hidden in plain view – is light being created in Genesis – before the sun and planets. The true Light of man is the Son of God, not the sun, planets, and moon, so often worshiped by pagans.

These comparisons are not slight or accidental, but essential to the entire Bible and our understanding of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our Savior. They show how much of the Old Testament is essential to the New Testament, so knowledge of one without the other is slighted.

The link between Genesis and John is attacked from two positions. One is to dismiss the Creation in Genesis because every religion has some kind of Creation story, from the absurd to the disgusting. The other is to remove the apostolic authority of John by saying it is a philosophical or Gnostic work written centuries after Christ. Thus, with so much time spent outside of Christian sources, they find no DNA match between John and Genesis, but an astounding array of invented matches between paganism and the Biblical books. “The Bible is dependent upon pagan religion” will place a clever lad or lass in the best world religion faculties, at elite divinity schools, and at tenure-protected denominational seminaries.

One Truth, One Harmonious Doctrine

The fatal trigger for many is the promiscuous use of brief portions of Scripture to prove a point, apart from obvious dissonance with the Bible as a whole. The trigger word is spelled skandalon in Greek, and it means the part which sets off the trap and captures the prey. The Word of God is not so confused that it reveals one truth here and a conflicting truth somewhere else. The only way to read the Bible is seeing it as the Book of the Holy Spirit, Luther’s term, and not as a series of possible debating points.

Teaching the Bible as a unified Truth is a powerful weapon against false doctrine because the contradictions are so easily identified. Laity and ministers should arm themselves in advance, but that is often not sufficient. Fortunately, attacks against the truth force us into returning to the sources, the Scriptures, and faithful books, to support the strength of the Gospel and the weakness of error.

One Teacher – The Holy Spirit

The final sermons of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel are beautiful lessons on the work of the Holy Spirit. If people studied them, they would not be gaping with wonder at the gaseous marketing lectures of Fuller Seminary graduates. If the Bible were simply a work of man, it would then be just as full of contradictions as any novel. Even the classic work of Homer has errors that made the ancients say about the Iliad – “Even good Homer snores.” But the power of the Holy Spirit throughout the Bible reveals a miraculous unity on one hand and an ability to teach us on the other. The youngest child, even a baby, can comprehend the Bible’s message. However, one must believe as a child, or the Kingdom of God remains a mystery and even an enemy for those too refined to subordinate themselves to the truth.

Figure 6 This warning from Krauth should be heeded by everyone.

Figure 6 This warning from Krauth should be heeded by everyone.

Continued in Part II The Efficacy of the Word

All sections of The King James Version: Precise Translation versus Fraudulent Texts and Heretical Translations




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part Second. Words For The Day’s March. II. Special Graces

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part Second. Words For The Day’s March. II. Special Graces

Continued from Part Second. Words For The Day’s March. I. The Leader

Love, Humility, Forbearance, Gentleness, Goodness.

Love.

IT had been enough (in enumerating the fruits of the Spirit) to have said love, and no more; for love expandeth itself into all the fruits of the Spirit, when he saith, “Love is patient, courteous,” &c.

Our love to our neighbors should be like a pure, chaste love between bride and bridegroom, by which all infirmities are veiled, covered, and made the best of, and only virtues looked at.

The law of Christ is the law of love. And to love is not merely to wish well one to another, but to bear one another’s burdens, that is, to bear those things which are grievous unto thee, and which thou wouldst not willingly bear. Therefore Christians must have strong shoulders and powerful bones, that they may bear flesh, that is to say, the weakness of their brethren; for Paul says that they have burdens and troubles. Love is mild, patient, courteous.

How Luther bore the Burdens of others.

WHEN Doctor Sebald and his wife both died of the plague, and Dr. Martin Luther took their children home to his own house, many blamed him and said he was tempting God. “Ah!” he said, “I had fine masters who would have taught me what it is to tempt God.”

Joy.

THIS is the Voice of the Bridegroom and the Bride; that is to say, sweet cogitations of Christ, wholesome exhortation, pleasant songs and psalms, praises and thanksgivings.

God loveth not heaviness and doubtfulness of spirit; He hateth discomforting doctrine, heavy and sorrowful cogitations, and loveth cheerful hearts.

Joy and Fear.

DAVID says, “Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice before Him with trembling.” Let someone make this rhyme for me: “to rejoice” and “to fear.”

My little son Hans can do this with me, but I cannot do it with God. For when I sit and write, or do anything, he sings a little song to me the while; and if he makes it too loud, and I tell him so, then he still sings on, but makes it softer, crowing on with a sweet little subdued voice, slyly watching me all the time. So would God have it with us, that we should be always rejoicing, yet with fear and reverence before Him.

Grace and Peace.

THESE two words, grace and peace, do contain in them the whole sum of Christianity. Grace containeth the remission of sins; peace, a quiet and joyful conscience.

When the grace and peace of God are in the heart, then is man strong, so that he can neither be cast down by adversity, nor puffed up by prosperity; but walketh on evenly, and keepeth the highway, and is able to bear and overcome all troubles, yea, even death itself; for in spirit he walketh in the paradise of grace and peace.

Humility.

LEARN OF ME.

NO one ever made himself so low and little as Christ, so that He alone has the right to say, “Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart;” words which no Saint can venture to utter, nor ever more claim to himself the mastership in meekness and lowliness, All together they abide forever scholars under this Master.

The whole Gospel is nothing more than the history of this lowliest “Son of God,” and of His humiliation.

BY His washing of the disciples’ feet, the Lord Christ would show us that the kingdom which He was establishing should not be an outward, worldly kingdom, wherein there is respect of persons, one greater and higher than another, as in Moses’ kingdom; but a kingdom wherein one should serve another by humility. “The greatest among you shall be as the youngest; and he that is chief among you as he that doth serve.”

No man, if he were the gentlest and kindest in the world, could have such a gentle bearing as Christ had; for Christ is the Lamb of God, who beareth the sin of the world.

The Gentleness of Christ.

THERE is a legend of St. Peter, that he had always by him a cloth wherewith he wiped his eyes, which were often red with weeping. (And I can well believe it!) When he was asked why he wept, he said, “When he recalled that most sweet gentleness of Christ with His apostles, he could not restrain his tears.” Christ must indeed have been perfect in kindness and tenderness. And even so and even such is he now daily with us, but we perceive it not.

The Silence of Christ.

CHRIST refrained from preaching and teaching until His thirtieth year, ever keeping silence, and suffering Himself not to be seen or heard in public. Throughout those years, what great and manifold impieties, idolatries, false religions, blasphemies, heresies, and schisms must He have seen. Yet He could refrain Himself until He was called to the office of the Prophet. This is much to be wondered at.

Luther Nothing in Himself.

MANY believe for my sake. But those only believe rightly who would remain steadfast in their faith, if they heard (which God forbid) that I had denied and apostatized. These believe not in Luther, but in Christ. The Word possesses them, and they possess the Word. Luther they can let go, be he a saint or a villain. God can speak as well through Balaam as through Isaiah, through Caiaphas as through Peter. Yea, He can speak by an ass.

I myself know nothing of Luther; will know nothing of him. I preach nothing of him; only of Christ. The devil may take Luther (if he can). If he leave Christ in peace, it will be well with us too.

So let us pray, before all things, that God may make His dear Child Jesus great in our hearts, from day to day, that with all eagerness and joy we may praise, bless, and confess Him before all.

Our God is the God of the low and the lowly. Power becomes strong in weakness; if we were not weak, we should be proud. It is only in weakness He can show His strength.

Humility the Secret of Unity.

TO MICHAEL DRESSEL AND THE AUGUSTINIAN CHAPTER AT NEUSTADT, 1516, 25 SEPTEMBER.

I HEAR with grief that though living in one house, you are living without peace and unity, neither are you of one heart and mind in the Lord. This miserable and useless way of living comes either from the weakness of your humility (emphasis mine) —for where humility is, there is peace—or from your and my fault, in that we do not entreat before the Lord who made us, that He will direct our way in His sight, and lead us in His righteousness. He errs, errs, errs, who by his own counsel presumes to direct himself, much more others. With humble prayer and devoted affection must we seek this from God.

There is peril in a life without peace, for it is without Christ, and is rather death than life.

ALL the works of God are embraced in the Magnificat (what Mary said to Elizabeth in Luke 1:46–55). If a thing exalts itself, it is nothing; and again, when it is at the lowest and lowliest, it is once more exalted. If the weak in faith did not belong to Christ, what would have become of the Apostles, whom the Lord, even after His resurrection, often had to rebuke for their unbelief. <\

Bearing one Another’s Burdens.

Forgive because forgiven.
TO GEORGE SPENLEIN—I516.

FOR the rest, about which thy soul is concerned, I desire to know whether, wearied out with her own righteousness, she is learning to breathe and trust in the righteousness of Christ. For in this our age, this temptation to presumption waxes hot in many, and chiefly in those who are struggling with their whole might to be just and good.

Ignorant of the righteousness of God, which in Christ is freely and most generously bestowed upon us, they seek in themselves to do such good works that at last they may have confidence in standing before God, as if adorned with virtues and merits; which is impossible to be done.

When thou wert with us thou wert of this opinion, and in this error, and I also. But now contend against this error; not yet, however, have I overcome.

Therefore, my good brother, learn Christ, and Him crucified; learn to sing to Him, and despairing of thyself, to say to Him “ Thou, Lord Jesus, art my righteousness, but I am Thy son. Thou hast taken on Thee what is mine, and Thou hast given to me what is Thine. Thou hast taken what Thou wast not, and given to me what I was not.”

Take heed lest thou aspire to such a purity as not to seem to thyself a sinner. For Christ dwells only in sinners. For this cause did He descend from heaven, where He dwells in the just, that He might also dwell in sinners,

Ruminate on that love of His, and thou shalt be conscious of most sweet consolation in thy soul.

For if by our labors and afflictions it is possible for us to reach quiet of conscience, for what did He die? Therefore, nowhere save in Him, by a confiding self-despair, wilt thou find peace; whilst thou learnest of Him, that as He has taken thee on Himself, and made thy sins His, so also has He made His righteousness thine.

If thou firmly believest this, as thou shouldst (and he who believes not is accursed), then do thou also take on thee thy undisciplined and erring brethren, and patiently bear with them, making their sins thine own. And if thou hast anything good, let it be theirs. So teaches the apostle: “Receive ye one another, as Christ also received us, to the glory of God.” And again, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, emptied Himself.” So also thou, if thou seemest to thyself better than they, think it not robbery, or something meant for thyself alone, but “empty thyself,” and forget what thou art, and be as one of them, that thou mayest sustain them.

For miserable is that righteousness, which by comparison deeming others worse, will not bear with them, but meditates to fly and desert them, when by patience and prayer while present with them it might be profitable to them. This is to hide the Master’s talent, and not give it, as due, to the usurers.

Therefore, if thou art a lily and a rose of Christ, since thine abode must be among thorns, seek and strive with a single heart for the welfare of others, lest by impatience and rash judgment, or by hidden pride, thou thyself become a thorn.

The kingdom of Christ is in the midst of His enemies, as saith the Psalm. Dost thou, then, imagine to thyself that thine shall be in the midst of friends?

Thus, whatever thou lackest, prostrate before the Lord Jesus, ask for it. He Himself will teach thee all things. Consider only what He has done for thee, and for all, that thou also mayest learn what is due from thee to others.

If He had willed to live only amongst the good, and to die for friends, for whom, I ask, would He have died, or with whom would He have lived?

Thus do, my brother, and pray for me, and the Lord be with thee.
WITTENBERG, 1516.
Thy Brother, MARTIN LUTHER, AUGUSTINIAN.

To the People of Wittenberg.

ON BEARING WITH THE WEAK.

CHRIST has borne our impotence in life and death. As Christ has done for us, we should do for our neighbor. He has borne our infirmities; so should we bear our neighbor’s infirmities.

They have brought in these innovations in trivial things, and let faith and love go.

We have many weak brothers and sisters who dwell around us. These also must we take with us to heaven.

If Duke George and many others are angry and enraged with us, let us bear with them. It is possible that they may become better men than we are.

In these free things, we must nowhere insist; only, if our enemies insist on them as necessary things, we must resist.

Mark this emblem. The sun has light and heat. This light no kaiser nor king can quench. So also no one can quench the Word. But the heat we can flee, and go into the shade. Thus does Love, yielding to her neighbor, whenever needful.

The Incarnation the Bond between Men. 1521.

GOD has become man; nevermore, therefore, should we be enemies to any man. We should be ready to lay down life for each other. Who would hate or injure the image in body and soul of Him who is thy God?

Those who wrong us still our Neighbors.

EVERY man is my neighbor, who although he hath done me some wrong, or hurt me by any manner of way; yet notwithstanding, he hath not put off the nature of man, or ceased to be flesh and blood, and the creature of God most like unto myself. Briefly, he ceaseth not to be my neighbor. As long, then, as the nature of man remaineth, so long remaineth the commandment of love, which requireth at my hand that I should not despise mine own flesh, nor render evil for evil; but overcome evil with good, else shall love never be as Paul describeth it.

GOD forgives sins of pure grace for Christ’s sake; but we must not abuse His grace and forgiveness. Our Lord God has given us many signs that sins shall be forgiven us, namely, the preaching of the Gospel, Baptism, the Sacrament, and the Holy Spirit in our heart.

Now, it is also needful that we give a sign to show that we have received forgiveness of sins. This sign is, that each of us forgive his brother his trespasses. Although, indeed, between God’s forgiveness and ours there is no comparison. What are the hundred pence to the ten thousand talents?

But to this brotherly forgiveness it is essential that the brother whom I am to forgive should confess his sins; for sin which is not confessed, I cannot forgive. If my brother continues to wrong me, I must indeed suffer it, but I cannot forgive it, because he will not confess it.

Care for the Fallen.

TAKE care of this fallen brother of thine, yea, of ours. Nor do thou, averted from pity, abandon him who, subverted by impiety, abandoned thee. Let it not distress thee that ye suffer offense. To bear one another’s burdens is that to which we are all called, baptized, ordained. For such has Christ been to us, such He is, such He will be forever; as it is written, “Thou art a Priest forever.”

Hope for the Fallen.—1516.

NO man hath so grievously fallen at any time, but he may rise again. And on the other hand, no man taketh so fast footing but he may fall. If Peter fell, I may likewise fall. If he rose again, I may also rise again.

A Child helping a Veteran.

GO to thy brother in hours of temptation. One alone is too weak to encounter the tempter. I am often glad of having even a child to speak to. This is so, in order that we may not glorify ourselves. Therefore at times I need and find help from one who has not as much theology in his whole person as I have in one finger, that I may learn what that meaneth, “My strength ts made perfect in weakness.”

OFTEN when I have lain under temptation, and have been in anguish, Philip Melanchthon, or Dr. Pommer, or my own wife has comforted me with the Word of God, so that I came thereby into peace, and felt “God says this,” be- cause my brother said it.

I UNDERSTAND now that St. Paul was at times weak in faith, and when he went to Rome he was comforted when he saw that the brethren came to meet him.

Yielding for Peace sake.

IF two goats meet each other on a narrow path above a river, what will they do? They cannot turn back; they cannot pass each other; if they were to butt at each other, both would fall into the water and be drowned. What then will they do? Nature has taught them, one to lie-down, and let the other pass over it. Thus both are unhurt.

So should one man do to another; let himself be trodden under foot rather than quarrel and contend.

Toleration of Differences.

BY the Word alone I condemn. Let him who believes, believe and follow. Let him who believes not, not believe, and be dismissed. No man is to be constrained to faith and the things of faith, but to be drawn by the Word, that believing willingly, he may come spontaneously.

Cease to contend by violence for the Gospel. By the Word the world is overcome. By the Word the Church is preserved, and by the Word she is restored.

CHRISTIAN freedom is no trifle, although it may concern a trifle.

I KNOW, I know it must be that offenses come; neither is it a miracle for man to fall. The miracle is for man to rise again and stand upright. Peter fell that he might know himself to be a man. To-day also the cedars of Lebanon fall, whose tops touch the heavens. Nay (which surpasses all wonders), an angel fell in heaven, and Adam in Paradise.

What wonder then if a reed is shaken with the wind, and the smoking flax is quenched? The Lord Jesus teach thee, and work with thee, and finish the good work.

Thankfulness.

How God gives.

IF God refused us for a time the use of His creatures; if He once withheld the sun from shining, at another time imprisoned the air, or again dried up the waters, or quenched the fire, then we would indeed eagerly give all our money, and everything we possessed, to have once more the use of these creatures.

But because He lavishes His gifts and riches on us so freely and so abundantly, we claim them as a right. Thus the unspeakably great abundance of His countless benefits hinders and darkens our faith.

Constancy of God’s Gifts leading to Ingratitude.

GOD gives sun and moon and stars and elements, fire and water, air and earth, and all creatures, body and soul, and all kinds of nourishment, in fruits, grain, corn, wine, and all that is needful and useful to preserve his temporal life.

And, besides, He gives us His good Word; yes, Himself.

What return is rendered to Him? Nothing else, but that He is blasphemed, and set at naught; yea, His dear Son grievously scorned, mocked, and hung on the cross; and His servants plagued, hunted down, and slain. This is our gratitude to Him for having created, redeemed, nourished, and preserved us.

IF God were to say to the Pope, the Emperor, kings, princes, bishops, doctors, rich merchants, burghers, and farmers, “Thou shalt die this very day, unless thou give Me a hundred thousand florins,” every one would say, “Yes, with all my heart, if I may only live.”

But now we are such thankless creatures, that we scarce sing Him a Deo gratias (thank God) for the many and great benefits which we daily receive abundantly from His pure goodness and mercy.

Nevertheless, the gracious Father is not estranged by this, but is ever doing us good. If He stinted his gifts, instead of lavishing and showering them on us, we should thank Him more. For instance: if we were all born with one leg or foot, and only in our seventh year received the second leg; at fourteen one hand, at twenty a second, we might recognize more the worth of the gifts for a time withheld, and be more thankful.

WE are so shamefully perverse that we are unthankful for our present gifts and goods, and only think of little deficiencies. Let every one go home and count the gifts which he has; he will find far more gifts than deficiencies; and let him thank God for them.

To be used with Thanksgiving.

WHEN grapes, nuts, peaches, etc., were set on the table after the meal, and all were enjoying them, he said: “What does our Lord God on high, in heaven, say to our sitting here consuming His gifts? Verily for this purpose He created them, that we should use them; and He asks nothing from us but that we should acknowledge they are His gifts, and enjoy them with thanksgiving.”

Two Sacrifices.

THE Scriptures point out two sacrifices which are well-pleasing to God. The first they call the sacrifice of praise, when we teach or hear God’s Word with faith, and confess and spread it, and thank Him from our hearts for all the unspeakable gifts so richly given us in Christ. “He who offereth praise, he honoreth Me.”

The other sacrifice is when an agonized, troubled heart takes refuge with God, seeks help from Him, and patiently waits for it. “The sacrifices of God are a troubled spirit. A broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise.”

The Church a Choir of Praise.

GOD has created all creatures, and nourishes and preserves them freely, out of pure goodness. But the little flock, dear Christendom, says Him a Deo Gratias for it.


On Giving and Communicating.

EVERY Christian has the priest’s office, and does priestly work.

LET us be liberal and bountiful towards all men, and that without weariness. For it is an easy thing for a man to do good once or twice, but to continue, and not to be discouraged through the ingratitude and perverseness of those to whom he hath done good, that is very hard. Therefore he doth not only exhort us to do good, but also not to be weary in doing good.

And to persuade us he addeth: “For in due season we shall reap if we faint not.” As if he said, “Wait and look for the eternal harvest that is to come, and then no ingratitude or perverse dealing of men shall be able to pluck you away from well-doing; for in the harvest-time ye shall receive most plentiful increase and fruit of your seed.” Thus, with most sweet words, he exhorteth the faithful to the doing of good works.

Date and Dabitur.

THERE was once a convent, which while it gave freely was rich, but when it became weary of giving it grew poor. Now, once upon a time one came to this convent and asked an alms, but they refused him. Then the beggar inquired why they would not give anything to him for God’s sake? The porter replied, “We are poor.” Thereupon the beggar said, “The cause of your poverty is, that once you had two brothers in the convent, but one of these ye have cast out, and the other has secretly crept after him, and is gone too. For when Brother Date is set at naught, then Brother Dabitur also departs.<

Hoping for Nothing again.

A PERSON was once excusing himself by saying “he would gladly help and serve people, and do them good, but their ingratitude repelled him.”

Then Dr. Martin Luther said, “Benefits and kindnesses should be conferred secretly, not with a view to fame; quietly and without seeking our own enjoyment, for God’s sake, and for our neighbor’s good.”

THERE are three kinds of alms: first, that we give something towards the maintenance of the office of the preacher. Secondly, to relieve our poor friends and kindred. Thirdly, to help strangers, and those who live near us, or any who need our aid, and cannot live without the help of others.

THE noble Word brings naturally with it a burning hunger and an insatiable thirst, so that we cannot be satisfied even if thousands believe in it, but still long that no human creature may lack it.

Such a thirst suffers us not to rest, but impels us to speak (as David says, “I believed, therefore have I spoken.” And St. Paul, “We having received the same spirit of faith, therefore we also speak”), until we would press the whole world to our hearts, and incorporate every one with us, and make, if possible, one Bread and one Body of all.

But not only does this thirst fall short of its longings; men still it with gall and vinegar, as with Christ on the cross.

Such a thirst had St. Paul when he wished that “every one were even as he, except these bonds;” when he wished to be “banished from Christ for his brethren’s sake.”

Such a thirst for the salvation of your brethren have ye now received, sure token of a faith sound at the root. What remains then but that ye also must await the vinegar and the gall? That is, calumny, shame, persecution, as the reward of this your Christian speaking.

How Luther gave.

TO HIS WIFE, ON A SERVANT LEAVING THEIR SERVICE.

SINCE Johannes is going away, I will do all I can that he may leave me well cared for. For thou knowest how faithfully and diligently he has served, and truly demeaned himself humbly, according to the Gospel, and has done and suffered all things.

Therefore think how often we have given gifts to good-for-nothing people, and to ungrateful students, on whom all was wasted; so look around thee now, and see that such a good fellow lacks nothing; for thou knowest it will be well spent and pleasing to God.

I know well there is but little to spare; but I would gladly give him ten florins if I had them. Less than five florins thou must not give him, for he has no stock of clothes. What thou canst give more, give, I pray thee. The common fund might present something for my sake to such a servant of mine, seeing that I have to keep my servants at my own cost, for the service and use of their church. But as they will. At all events be thou sure not to fail, as long as there is a silver tankard left. Think how thou canst provide it. God will surely give us more; that I know.

AGAIN, “To him who gives willingly it shall be given.” Therefore, dear Kathe, when we have no more money, we must give the silver tankards (a form of drinkware consisting of a large, roughly cylindrical, drinking cup with a single handle).

DOCTOR MARTIN LUTHER went once, with Dr. Jonas, Master Veit Dietrich, and others of his guests, to walk in the little town of Tessen, There Doctor Martin Luther gave alms to the poor. Then Dr. Jonas also gave something, and said, “ Who knows when God will repay me?” Thereupon Dr. Martin Luther said, laughing, “Just as if God had not first given it to you. Freely and simply should we give, from mere love, willingly.”

Luther’s Theology in his Seal.

TO LAZARUS SPENGLER.

SINCE you wish to know about the device for my seal, I will send you my first thoughts, which I would have my seal express, as a sign and token of my theology.

First, there shall be a cross, black, in a heart which shall have its natural color, that thereby I may remind myself that faith in the Crucified saves us. For if a man believes from the heart he is justified.

But although it is a black cross, because it mortifies, and must also cause pain, yet it leaves the heart its own color; that is, destroying not its nature; not killing, but preserving alive. For the just shall live by faith, but by the faith of the Crucified.

Moreover, this heart shall be set in the midst of a white rose, to show that faith gives joy, consolation, and peace, and sets the heart as in a white festive rose. Yet not as the world gives peace and joy; therefore shall the rose be white, and not red. For white is the color of angels and of spirits.

The rose is set in a sky-blue field; because such joy in the spirit and in faith is a beginning of the heavenly future joy—is indeed enfolded therein, and embraced by hope, but not yet manifest.

And in this field shall be a golden ring, because this blessedness endures eternally in heaven, and has no end, and is precious above all joy and all riches, as gold is the highest and most precious of metals.

Christ, our dear Lord, be with your spirit until that life. Amen.

Flowers

Continued in Part Third. Words For The Halting-Places. I. The Visible Creation

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part Second. Words For The Day’s March. I. The Leader

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part Second. Words For The Day’s March. I. The Leader

Continued from Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, V. The Enemy

I. The Leader

FOR the rest, I am expecting daily the maledictions of Rome. I am disposing and arranging all things, so that when these arrive I may go forth prepared and girded; like Abraham not knowing whither, or rather knowing most certainly whither, since God is everywhere.—1518.

WHAT a beautiful, comforting Gospel that is in which the Lord Christ depicts Himself as the Good Shepherd; showing what a heart He has toward us poor sinners, and how we can do nothing to save ourselves,

The sheep cannot defend nor provide for itself, nor keep itself from going astray if the shepherd did not continually guide it; and when it has gone astray and is lost, it cannot find its way back again nor come to its shepherd; but the shepherd himself must go after it, and seek it until he find it; otherwise it would wander and be lost forever. And when he has found it he must lay it on his shoulder and carry it, lest it should again be frightened away from himself, and stray, or be devoured by the wolf.

So also is it with us. We can neither help nor counsel ourselves, nor come to rest and peace of conscience, nor escape the devil, death, and hell, if Christ Himself, by His word, did not fetch us, and call us to Himself. And even when we have come to Him, and are in the faith, we can- not keep ourselves in it, unless He lifts and carries us by His Word and power, since the devil is everywhere and at all times on the watch to do us harm. But Christ is a thousand times more willing and earnest to do all for His sheep than the best shepherd.

Not at our own Will.

I CANNOT guide myself, and yet would fain guide the world! Many a time I have made fine articles and rules, and brought them to our Lord God to guide Him. But the good God has let me see in the end how all my mastering has come to nothing.

Not at our own Pace.

THIS temptation oftentimes excuseth the godly, that their life seemeth unto them to be rather a certain slow creeping than a running. But if they abide in sound doctrine and walk in the spirit, let this nothing trouble them. God judgeth far otherwise.

For that which seemeth unto us to be very slow, and scarcely to be creeping, is running swiftly in God’s sight. Again, that which is to us nothing else but sorrow, mourning, and death, is before God joy, goodness, and true felicity.

The Word of God as Daily Bread.

ALTHOUGH the works of God are not dumb, but picture Him to our eyes that we may see Him, yet He comforts us far more powerfully when He adds to His works a living Word, which the eyes do not see, but the ears hear, and the heart, through the in working of the Holy Spirit, understands.

“The Divine Art of Learning.”

I ALTHOUGH I am an old Doctor of the Holy Scriptures, have not yet come out of the children’s lessons; and do not yet rightly understand the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer. I cannot study or learn them through and through, but I am learning daily therein; and I pray the Catechism with my son Hans, and with my little daughter Magdalene.

When, indeed, do we understand in its breadth and depth the first words of the Lord’s Prayer, “Who art in heaven”? For if I understood and believed these few words, that God, who has created heaven and earth, and all creatures, and has them in His hand and power, is my Father, then would follow this sure conclusion, that I should also be a lord of heaven and earth; that Christ should be my brother, and all things be mine. Gabriel must be my servant, and Raphael my guide, and all angels must minister to me in my needs.

But now, that my faith may be exercised and preserved, my Father in heaven lets me be thrown into a dungeon, or fall into the water. In such trials we see and experience how far we understand these words, how our faith totters, and how great our weakness is.

Therefore, the one little word, “Thine” or “Our,” is the hardest word in the Holy Scriptures, as is to be seen in the first Commandment, “I am the Lord thy God.”

TO fathom and truly to exhaust one single word in the Holy Scriptures is impossible. I defy all learned men and theologians to do it.

For they are the words of the Holy Spirit; therefore they are too high for all men; and we new-born Christians have only the first-fruits, not the tithe.

I have many times thought of commenting on the Ten Commandments, but when I have only begun with the first word, which sounds thus, “I am the Lord thy God,” I have stopped short at the little word “I.” And not yet can I under- stand that “I.”

OH, my Lord God, the Holy Scriptures are not so easily understood, even when one reads them diligently. Let us learn well these three words, and ever remain learners before them: to love, fear, and trust God.

BEFORE a man can truly understand the first word in Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” he dies. If he lived a thousand years he would not learn those words through and through.

MY best and Christian counsel is, that all should draw from this spring or wellhead; that is, should read the Bible diligently. For he who is well grounded and exercised in the text will be a good and perfect theologian; since one saying or text from the Bible is better than many glosses and commentaries, which are not strong and sound, and do not stand the enemy’s thrust.

THE Bible is a very large, wide forest, wherein stand many trees, of all kinds, from which we can gather many kinds of fruits. For in the Bible we have rich consolation, doctrine, instruction, exhortation, warning, promises, and threatenings. But in all this forest there is not a tree which I have not shaken, and broken off at least a pair of apples or pears from it.

CABALA was good until Christ; but now that Christ has come, and His grave stands open, all that is over. Our fanatics say that much is still dark in the Holy Scriptures, and not yet manifest. That is false, and not true; for the sepulcher is open, and Christ has come forth into the light. Therefore, whosoever knows Christ, truly is a master in the Holy Scriptures, and remains a master.

IN this Book thou findest the swaddling-clothes, and the manger wherein Christ is laid. Thither the angels directed the shepherds. These swaddling-clothes may indeed be poor and little; but precious is Christ, the treasure laid therein.

ONCE when Jeit Dietrich said to the Doctor, in reference to heresies, “It would be better to pray not to be learned in the Holy Scriptures than to be learned in them,” Doctor Luther answered, “No, no! we might as well pray that there should be no gold in the world, or no sun in the world; because without the sun many crimes could not be committed.

It is an abominable slander against the Holy Scriptures, and against all Christendom, to say that the Holy Scriptures are obscure. There never was written on earth a clearer book than the Holy Scriptures; compared with all other books, it is as the sun to all other light.

Let none tempt you away from the Scriptures. For if you step out of these you are lost; your enemies lead you whither they will. But if you keep to them you have overcome, and will heed their raging no more than the rock heeds the waves and billows of the sea.

Only be certain and doubt not that nothing is clearer than the sun, that is, the Scriptures. If a cloud glides before them, behind them is nothing but the same clear sun. So, if there is a dark saying in the Scriptures, doubt not; behind it, most surely, is shining the same truth which in other places is clear; and let him who cannot pierce the dark, keep to what is clear.

THE Word of God is a light which shines in darkness, brighter than the sun at mid-day. For in death not only is the light of this material sun extinguished, but even of reason with all her wisdom. But there, with all faithfulness, the Word of God still shines, an eternal sun, which faith only sees, and follows on into the clear Eternal Life.

I HAVE often said that from the beginning I have prayed the Lord that He would send me neither dream, nor vision, nor angel. But I have entreated also, with earnest prayer, that He would give me the true and sure understanding of the Holy Scriptures.

“AH, if I were only a good poet,” he sighed, “I would fain write a costly Carmen (Latin for “poem” or “song,” symbolizing beauty, creativity, and expression.), Song, or Poem, concerning the use, power, and fruitfulness of the Divine Word.”

HE said, “You have now the Bible in German. Now I will cease from my labors. You have what you want. Only see to it, and use it after my death. It has cost me labor enough. What an unspeakable gift it is that God speaks to us.”

IN the evening, bear something of sacred words with thee in thy heart to bed; chewing the cud of which, like a clean ruminant animal, thou mayst sweetly fall asleep.

But let it not be much in quantity; rather little, well pondered and understood; so that rising in the morning thou mayst find ready for thee the relics of last night’s feast.

For in all study of the Sacred Scriptures we should despair of our own wit and labor, and seek understanding with fear and humility from God. At the close, and often during the reading, lift up the eyes of thy heart, and of thy body, to Christ, with a brief sigh imploring His grace, saying and thinking, “ Grant, Lord, that I may rightly understand these things; yet more, that I may do them. Behold, Lord Jesus, if this study be not to Thy glory, let me not understand a syllable. But give to me whatever shall seem to Thee for Thy glory in me a sinner.”

SAINT JOHN the Evangelist speaks majestically, with very simple words; as when he says, “In the beginning was the Word.”

See with what simple words he describes God the Creator, and all the creatures; as with a flash of lightning.

If a philosopher and man of learning had undertaken to write of such things, how would he have gone round about with wondrous, swelling, high-sounding words, magnificent but obscure, de ente et essentia (Latin meaning of being and essence), of self-existence, and divine and heavenly powers, so that one could have understood nothing. Never were simpler words; yet under such simplicity he says all.

Every word in him is worth an hundredweight; as when he writes, “He came into a city of Samaria called Sychar, and spoke with a woman;” and, “the Father honoreth the Son.”

They are indeed, in appearance, slumbering words; but when one wakes them up, and unveils them, and earnestly meditates on them, they are found indeed worthy.

UNDER the papacy they were constantly making pilgrimages to the shrines of the Saints; to Rome, Jerusalem, St. Iago de Compostella, in order to make satisfaction for sins; but now we may make true Christian pilgrimages, in faith, which will please God; that is, if we diligently read the Prophets, Psalms, Evangelists. Thus shall we make journeys, not through the earthly cities of the saints, but in our thoughts and hearts to God Himself; thus shall we make pilgrimages to the true Promised Land, and Paradise of Eternal Life.

Flowers

Continued in Words For The Day’s March. II. Special Graces

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




The Inventors of the Climate Change Scam: The Club of Rome

The Inventors of the Climate Change Scam: The Club of Rome

What is the Club of Rome?

“The Club of Rome is a platform of diverse thought leaders who identify holistic solutions to complex global issues and promote policy initiatives and action to enable humanity to emerge from multiple planetary emergencies.” (Source: https://www.clubofrome.org/about-us/ — on the official website of the Club of Rome
“The Club of Rome is a Masonic lodge founded in 1968 on David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy. The Member Squadron is a traditional collection of grandiose reformers with heads of state, UN bureaucrats, leading politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists and big business leaders. A collection from all over the world with a strong side of rich Western “elite”. This political lodge also brings together multi-billionaires in the Rockefeller, Rothschild and Soros families along with political chameleons such as Anders Wijkman and industrial magnates such as the now deceased oil businessman Maurice Strong.” (Source: Club Of Rome: The Origin Of Climate And Population Alarmism )

The second definition is from Technocracy News which mediabiasfactcheck.com calls “Conspiracy-Pseudoscience.” LOL!

I fact-checked mediabiasfactcheck.com and this is what I came up with:

“Mediabiasfactcheck has been repeatedly caught in lies and distortion of truth. Repeated claims that have proven false about Covid alone are enough to quit using them. Takes going to court to get them to correct lies they publish. It is a totally discredited, self-styled ‘fact-checker’ site that has been served with a ‘cease and desist’ legal notice for publishing unsubstantiated and defamatory claims against Principia Scientific International (PSI).” (Source: https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/mediabiasfactcheck.com

David Icke and Dr. John Coleman talk a lot about the Club of Rome, but because I don’t trust information from either of those guys, I won’t use any of their materials. Coleman talked about the Club of Rome as a governing body giving orders, but I see it more as a think tank.

I consider the most reliable source of information about globalists’ plans that do not have the good of the general public in mind to be right out of publications of the globalists themselves. The following quotes are from a PDF file of a Club of Rome publication entitled: “The First Global Revolution – A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome written in 1991 by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider. You can click the link to download the PDF file.

Quotes from the publication of the Council of the Club of Rome

From page 108 of the PDF file:

The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. States have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by designating external enemies. The scapegoat practice is as old as mankind itself. When things become too difficult at home, divert attention by adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.

From page 115 of the PDF file:

The Common Enemy of Humanity Is Man

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came ​up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global ​warming (now called climate change), water shortages, famine and the like would ​fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions ​these phenomena do constitute a common threat ​which demands the solidarity of all peoples.

Climate change is controversial even among scientists, but you probably didn’t know that by listening to the mainstream media. One of my friends was surprised when I called Climate Change a scam and offered evidence from a scientist, Dr. John G. Hartnett, from his website. Please see Climate change study on coral reef fish was ‘100 per cent wrong’

Researching controversial organizations and topics such as the Club of Rome and Climate Change requires spiritual discernment, and that comes from knowing the written Word of God in the Bible and a good relationship with God through obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Proverbs 1:7  The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge:..

Also see: Elitists have created the myth of climate change to eliminate national sovereignty




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, V. The Enemy

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, V. The Enemy

Continued from IV. The Armies of Heaven

The Devil.

THE serpent denies the good-will of God to us, and endeavors to persuade that God does not mean us well.

THE devil tempted Eve to all sin when he tempted her to resist the will of God.

The Devil the only Enemy to be hated.

“BLESS THOSE THAT CURSE You.” How can ye do this? In no way better than by turning your eyes from the men who do you wrong, and fixing them on the wicked being who possesses them and urges them; on seeing how you can avenge yourselves, and cool your courage on him. He has not flesh and bones. He is a spirit. Therefore, as saith St. Paul, it is not against flesh and blood that ye have to fight, but against that spiritual villain above in the air, against the ruler of this dark, blind world.

WHEN it was once said to him, “I would fain know what the devil is like in character,” Dr. Martin said, “If you see the true likeness of the devil, and know what his character is, give good heed to all the commandments of God, one after another, and represent to yourself a suspicious, shameful, lying, despairing, abandoned, godless, calumnious man, whose mind and thoughts are all set on opposing God in every possible way, and working woe and harm to others. Thus you may see the character of the devil.”

FIRSTLY, in him is no fear, love, faith, and trust in God, that He is just, faithful, and true; but utter hatred, unbelief, despair, and blasphemy.

This is the devil’s head set against the first commandment of the First Table.

Secondly, a faithful Christian uses the name of God to good uses, spreads His Word, calls on Him from the heart in need, praises Him, confesses Him.

But this wicked man does exactly the contrary; treats God’s Word as a fable, blasphemes Him, curses men. There is the devil’s mouth and speech.

Thirdly, a Christian holds the office of the preacher dear, hears and learns God’s Word with earnestness and diligence, receives the Holy Sacrament according to Christ’s order. The other does the contrary, despises the preacher’s office, hears God’s Word not at all or carelessly. This is the devil’s way of hearing.

Then for the Second Table.

A true Christian honors and obeys, for God’s sake, parents, magistrates, those who have the care of souls, masters and teachers. The other obeys not parents, serves and helps them not, nay, dishonors, despises, and troubles them, forsakes them in their need, is ashamed of them when they are poor, despises them when they are old, infirm, and childish; obeys not authorities. Again, a man of true heart envies not his neighbor, bears no ill-will against him, desires not revenge, has compassion when he is hurt, helps and protects him as much as he can. The other hates, envies, rejoices in his neighbor’s troubles. There is the devil’s grim, angry, and murderous heart.

A God-fearing man lives temperately and chastely; the other the contrary, in thought, word, and act.

A good man maintains himself by labor, trade, etc., lends, helps, and gives to the needy. The other takes every advantage. These are the devil’s sharp claws.

Again, a good man speaks evil of no man— yea, even if he knows that his neighbor is guilty, he covers his sin with love. The other backbites, detracts, misinterprets, betrays. There is the devil’s wicked will.

As our Lord God is thesis decalogi, (the thesis of the decalogue) so is the devil antithesis decalogi.

THE devil can indeed frighten, overwhelm, and kill; God alone can comfort and make alive. And that is His own prerogative and work. Therefore we do not know God at all unless we know Him as a Comforter of the wretched, troubled, and distressed, a Helper in need, who makes living and joyful. The true knowledge of God is to know that God is not a devil, i.e, an accuser, an enemy, but only, entirely, and simply God, that is, only a Saviour.

WE have more cause to rejoice than to mourn; for our hope is in God, who says; “I live, and ye shall live also.” But melancholy is born with us; so the spirit of melancholy, the devil comes and stimulates it; but the Lord our God lifts us up.

WHEN one is on the battle-field with the devil, and is fighting against him, it is not enough to say, “That is God’s Word.” For this is one of the devil’s master-strokes, to snatch the weapon from our hands, especially when he takes us by surprise. This he has often tried on me. He knows that my heart is always praying the Lord’s Prayer, and yet he vexes me with the temptation that I have ceased to pray.

Let no one encounter him unless he prays the Lord’s Prayer first. The devil is skillful, and we do not know the seven-hundredth part of what he knows. He has assailed Adam, Abraham, David, and others, and tormented them in manifold ways, and he knows where to attack us, where we are weak and he may give us a wound.

The Apostle Judas who betrayed Christ was throughout his life little assailed by the devil; but when the hour was come, he went securely forth on the devil’s errand, and knew not whither.

HIS highest art is to make a law out of the Gospel; to represent the Lord Christ as a Judge and Accuser, and not as a Saviour, Mediator, High Priest, and Throne of Grace.

THE devil has a great advantage against us, inasmuch as he has a strong bastion and bulwark against us in our own flesh and blood.

THIS envious, poisonous, cunning spirit seeks to misinterpret and slander the good and godly works which a true Christian does through the grace of God, working and help of the Holy Spirit. Therefore he is called diabolus, that is, accuser and slanderer.

AT night, when I wake, the devil is there, and wants to dispute with me. The evil one would dispute with me de justitia; (of justice) and he is himself a villain, and would cast God out of heaven, and has crucified His Son.

THE devil has not indeed a do¢tor’s degree, but he is highly educated and deeply experienced, and has moreover been practicing, trying, and exercising his art and craft now well nigh six thousand years. No one avails against him but Christ alone.

NO one can understand how to contend with him, unless he first pray with great earnestness. He is skilled in a thousand arts, and is far too strong and mighty for us, for he is the prince and god of this world.

THE devil seeks high things, looks to that which is great and high; scorns what is lowly. But the eternal merciful God reverses this, and looks on what is lowly. “I look on him who is poor and of a broken heart.” But what is lifted up He lets go, for it is an abomination to Him.

THE devil, that lost spirit, cannot endure sacred songs of joy. Our passions and temptations, our complainings and our cryings, our Alas! and our Woe is me! please him well, but our songs and psalms vex him and grieve him sorely.

THE devil is a proud spirit. He cannot endure contempt. There is no better way to be quit of his temptations than by despising them (as Geroon says), just as when a traveller is attacked by a dog who would bite him; if the traveller goes quietly by, lets the dog howl and bark, and takes no heed of him, the dog does not bite him, and soon ceases to bark.

SATAN will not desist; he will contest every article of the faith in our hearts ere we depart this life, so bitterly opposed is he to the faith, which he well knows is the power and victory wherewith we overcome the world.

WE have the great devils who are doctors of theology (enemies of the First Table of the Decalogue), The Turks and Papists have little, insignificant devils to contend with, which are not theological but only juristical devils.

THE devil gives heaven before sin, and after we have sinned drives us to dismay of conscience, and to despair.

Christ does the contrary. He gives heaven after we have sinned, and peace to the troubled conscience.

ONE single devil is stronger and more cunning than all men, for they know us within and without, and compared with him we are only to be reckoned alphabet-scholars, poor and weak sinners, as we learn from experience.

FOR think only, if the devil in the beginning of the world was a bad creature, how cunning and skilful he must have become through such long practice, during which he has been assailing, and with all his power, without ever ceasing, has been tormenting Adam, Methuselah, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, David, Solomon, the prophets, the Apostles, yea, the Lord Christ Himself, and all believers.

THE devil has vowed our death. I hope, however, when he kills me, he will bite a deaf nut (i.e., the kernel will be gone).

I SHOULD be so joyful that joy would bring me perfect health, and I could not be sick for mere joy. But the devil prowls incessantly about, makes me sad and careful, and when he cannot do it directly, does it through means; as for instance, through vexatious men.

THIS white devil, which urges men to commit spiritual sins, to sell them for righteousness, is far more dangerous than the black devil, which only tempts them to commit fleshly sins, which the world acknowledges to be sins.

SATAN’S power is greater than that of twelve Turkish Emperors; his knowledge greater than that of all men; his wickedness than that of the worst men; a powerful, able, subtle spirit.

THE kingdom of this world, or the devil’s kingdom, is the kingdom of iniquity, ignorance, error, sin, death, blasphemy, desperation, and everlasting damnation. On the other side, the kingdom of Christ is the kingdom of equity, grace, light, remission of sins, peace, consolation, saving health, and everlasting life.

IT is strange that it should be commanded us, such weak flesh and blood as we are, to strive and fight with such a powerful spirit as the devil is, and that no other weapons should be placed in our hands, save only God’s Word. This must irritate and vex such a great and mighty foe. But in such combats the hard thing is to recognize the devil as the devil.

God has ordered it thus, that when this mighty spirit is overcome simply by the faith of a good man, he may be all the more vexed and put to shame. That the “strong man armed” should be vanquished by one so weak, vexes him to the heart.

Warfare against all kinds of Evil—Warfare against the Devil.

“I HOLD,” he said, “that Satan sends epidemics and sicknesses amongst men, for he is a prince of death. Therefore St. Peter saith, ‘Christ healed all who were held captive by the devil’” To this end the devil uses natural means, poisonous air, &c., as a murderer uses a sword. So also God uses natural means to preserve man’s health and life, as sleep and food.

A physician mends and repairs for our Lord God; he helps bodily, as we theologians spiritually, to make good what the devil has spoiled.

Once a burgomaster (mayor) asked me if it was contrary to God to use medicine. (Doctor Carlstadt having publicly preached that in sickness we should use no medicine, but pray that God’s will be done.) I asked him if he ate when he was hungry. “Yes,” said he. Then I said to him, “Surely then medicine, which is you may use as much God’s creature as food and drink, and all which we use to preserve this life.”

Luther’s own Experience tn such Conflicts.

“LAST night,” he said, “when I awoke, the devil came and wanted to dispute with me, and cast it up at me that I was a sinner. Then I said: Say something new, devil. That I know well already. I have committed real, actual sins. But God has forgiven me for His dear Son’s sake.”

THE devil often casts up against me that great offenses have sprung from my doctrine. Sometimes he makes me heavy and sad with such thoughts. And when I answer that much good has also sprung thence, by a masterstroke, he can turn that against me. He is a swift, acute, cunning rhetorician.

How Luther met what he believed to be an Assault of the Devil.

ONCE, in the year 1521, when I had journeyed from Worms, and was imprisoned near Eisenach, in the castle of the Wartburg (in Patmos), I was far from any one, in a chamber to which no one was allowed to come save two young boys of the nobility, who twice a day brought me food and drink. Once they had brought me a bag of hazel-nuts, of which from time to time I ate, and had locked it up in a chest. At night when I went to bed, I put out the light. Then the hazel-nuts began to rattle against each other. But I did not heed. However, when I had been a little while asleep, such a clatter was made on the stairs, as if a score of platters had been thrown down from step to step, although I knew the staircase was guarded with chains and bolts, so that no one could come up. I rose and went to the head of the staircase and saw that all was closed. Then I said, “Oh, if it is only you, it does not matter.” And committed myself to the Lord Christ, of whom it is written, “Thou hast put all things under His feet,” and lay quietly down in the bed again.

THANK God, the devil has never been able altogether to vanquish me. He has burnt himself out on the Lord Christ.


Sin.

SIN is essentially a departure from God.

THE first freedom is freedom from sin.

To Melanchthon, from Cobourg, during the Diet of Augsburg.

WHAT can the devil do worse than to kill us? I conjure thee, who art in all other things a good soldier, fight also against thyself, thy greatest enemy, who turnest Satan’s arms against thyself.

WE have against us one-half of ourselves. The flesh striveth against the spirit.

THE recognition of sin is the beginning of salvation.

HELL is primarily forgetfulness, or hatred of God, for there reign a disordered, desolate, chaotic carefulness and self-love, unable to see the goodness and mercy of God; ever seeking escape and refuge from God.

ORIGINAL sin is the perversion of original righteousness.

WHERE sin is not acknowledged, there is no help nor remedy; for he who thinks himself whole when he is sick seeks no physician.

SIN is not forgiven that it may be no more felt, but that it may not be imputed.

UNKNOWN, hidden sins are the most dangerous. Therefore the prophet says, “Cleanse me from my secret faults.”

THE sin against the Holy Ghost must be such a hidden, unacknowledged sin, not a coarse, worldly sin; but a deep spiritual sin. It must be a hardening in evil, or a contending against what is known to be truth, persevered in, without repentance until the end.

Especial Sins.

IT is a godless opinion and a vain dream to say that all sins are alike. St. Paul’s sins were very different from Nero’s.

Injustice.

TO THE ELECTOR FREDERICK, PLEADING FOR A POOR MAN HE DEEMED UNJUSTLY USED.

I KNOW well that no prince is so good but that he may deal too hastily with some, through his officials.

David was the kernel of all princes ever on the earth; yet he did wrong to poor Mephibosheth, at the demand of Ziba; thinking, however, that he had done him no wrong.

A prince may be sure his rule will be marred by injustice; well for him who does the least. Therefore are mercy and beneficence the more necessary.

Give, and it shall be given unto you. Where Date (He gives) is rich, there Dadbitur (It will be given) will be the richer.

Your Electoral Highness may be sure that I will not abandon this poor man thus. I will rather, myself, go begging for him. And if that did not answer, I would rob and steal whatever lay next me, especially from the Elector of Saxony. For your Electoral Grace is bound to maintain him.

To the Count Albert of Mansfeld

(Luther’s native Prince), warning him against oppressing his subjects.

PEACE and grace in the Lord, and my poor Pater Noster.

Your Grace will graciously listen to my poor sighs, if, on account of the speaking and crying which I hear daily concerning my poor countrymen, I cannot begin my letter to your Grace cheerfully; for it is no fault of mine, and the child’s heart in me is wounded. Your Grace must surely feel how cold you have become, and given over to Mammon, thinking only how to grow very rich; also (as the complaints go), bearing altogether too hard and sharply on your subjects, taking them from their fathers’ inheritance, and their goods, and intending to make them mere bondmen.

Which God will not suffer, or if He suffer it, He will also suffer the whole country to be impoverished to utter ruin; for all things are His gifts, which He can easily withdraw again; and He is not bound to give account,as Haggai saith, “Ye have sown much, and bring in little; ye clothe you, but there is none warm; and he that earneth wages, earneth wages to put it into a bag with holes.”

These things I write unto your Grace, as think for the last time; for the grave is nearer me now, perhaps, than people think, and I entreat that your Grace will deal more softly and graciously with your subjects, and let them abide; so shall your Grace also abide, through God’s blessing, here and yonder. Otherwise you will lose both together, and be like him of whom Aesop’s fable speaks, who killed the goose which every day laid him a golden egg, and thereby lost at once the golden egg, with the goose, and all the egg stock;—be like the dog in Aesop, who lost the piece of flesh in the water while he was snapping at the shadow. For certainly it is true, that he who will have too much gains less; whereof Solomon in the Proverbs writes much.

In brief, I have to do with your Grace’s soul, which I cannot bear to have cast out of my care and prayer; for this is to me sure: to be cast out of the Church is to be cast out of heaven. And hereto constrains me not only the command of Christian love, but also the heavy threat wherewith God has laden us preachers (Ezekiel 3d): “If thou warn not the sinner of his sin, and he die, I will require his soul at thine hands; for therefore have I set thee to be a watchman of souls.”

Therefore, may your Grace take this needful warning in good part; for I cannot on your Grace’s account suffer myself to be damned; but seek much rather to save you with myself, if it is by any means possible. But before God, am hereby free from guilt concerning this. Herewith I commend you to Him in all His grace and mercy. Amen.

Falsehood.

A LIE is like a snow-ball. The longer it is rolled, the larger it is.

Covetousness.

MAMMON has two virtues; the first, that he makes us secure when things go well, so that we live without the fear of God.

The second, that in adversity, when things go ill, he teaches us to tempt and fly from God, and to seek a false god.

IT was with good reason that God commanded through Moses that the vineyard and harvest were not to be gleaned to the last grape or grain; but something to be left for the poor. For covetousness is never to be satisfied; the more it has, the more it wants. Such insatiable ones injure themselves, and transform God’s blessings into evil.

RICHES are the pettiest and least worthy gifts which God can give a man. What are they to God’s Word? Yea, to bodily gifts, such as beauty and health; or to the gifts of the mind, such as understanding, skill, wisdom? Yet men toil for them day and night, and take no rest. Therefore our Lord God commonly gives riches to foolish people to whom He gives nothing else.

JEROBOAM’’S calves remain in the world forever until the Last Day; for whatever a man places his confidence and trust in, setting God aside, that is to him like Jeroboam’s calves, which he worships and invokes instead of the only true, living, eternal God, who alone can and will give counsel and help in all need.

All are worshiping these calves who trust to their own skill, wisdom, strength, holiness, riches, honor, power, or to any league, defense, or fortress, or in brief to anything, be it called what it may, on which the world builds and trusts. For such trust in transitory creatures is the real idolatry.

LIES drowned and overwhelmed in the sea of covetousness, deeper than the mountains under the flood; these lay only fifteen ells deep in the water, but she lies fifteen miles deep under the waves of avarice.

THE Jews suffered themselves to dream, and thought that the kingdom of Christ would be a worldly kingdom; as also the Apostles in John 14: “Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest Thyself unto us, and not unto the world?” “We thought the whole world should see Thy glory; that Thou shouldst, be Caesar, and we twelve kings, amongst whom the kingdoms should be divided; that each of us should have had six disciples for princes, counts, and nobles; these would be the seventy-two disciples—for that was the number.” Thus had the dear Apostles already beautifully parceled out the land, according to Platonic dreams and human reason.

But Christ describes His kingdom far otherwise: “He who loveth Me, and keepeth my Word, Shall be loved of my Father; and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

IT is a terrible evil, that we see daily before our eyes, how eager a thirsty man is to drink, and a hungry man to eat, although a drink of water and a piece of bread can only keep off thirst or hunger an hour or two; whilst on the contrary no one, or scarcely any one, is eager for this most precious Physician, although He tenderly allures all to Him, saying, “If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink,” and gives food and drink which are imperishable, and endure to eternal life.

WE know, thank God, that Christ has overcome the world, with her prince the devil; that sin may no more have dominion over us, nor death swallow us up. At which we should, in reason, be far more joyful than the children of the world over temporal prosperity, riches, honor, power. For these, be they as much as they may be compared with the eternal riches which Christ gives, are indeed mere trifling, contemptible fragments and crumbs.

IF we have Him, the dear Lord, we are indeed rich and happy enough, and ask not for their pomp, glory, and wealth. Too often, indeed, we lose Him, and consider not that He is ours, and we are His; especially when, in time of need, He seems to hide His face fora moment. But He says, “I am with you alway to the end of the world.” This is our best treasure.

WHERE the Gospel is, there is poverty. In olden times men could richly endow whole convents; now they will give nothing. Superstition, false doctrine, and hypocrisy give money enough. Truth goes begging.

Carefulness.

“THEY SOW NOT, NEITHER DO THEY REAP, NOR GATHER INTO BARNS.”

Let the Lord build the house, and be the householder. He who filleth heaven and earth can surely fill one house.

If thou dost not look to Him who should fill the house, every corner of it must indeed be empty to thee. But if thou art looking to Him, thou perceivest not if there be an empty corner. To thee all seems full, and indeed all is full. If not, it is the defect of thy vision, as with the blind, who see not the sun.

Not that labor is forbidden, but that God gives success. For if thou wert to plough a hundred years, thou couldst not bring one stalk out of the earth. But God, without work of thine, whilst thou art asleep, creates out of the little grain a stalk, and on the stalk many ears, as many as He wills.

The animals do not work in order to earn their food; yet each has its work. The bird flies and sings, and hatches its eggs; that is its work. Horses carry men on the road, and to the battle; sheep give us wool, milk, and cheese; that is their work; yet that feeds them not. The earth freely brings forth grass and feeds them, through God’s blessing. Thus Christ tells us to behold the fowls of the air; they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns, and yet God feedeth them. That is, they do their appointed work, but not thereby are they fed.

So also must man work. But let him know, it is Another that feeds him, namely, God blessing his work.

This is the signification of it all. God commanded Adam to eat bread in the sweat of his brow, and wills that men shall work, and without work will give them nothing. On the other hand, by our work, in itself, He gives us nothing, but only of His free goodness and blessing; that labor may be our discipline in this life, to overcome the flesh.

You say, Who places the silver and gold in the mountains, that men may find them? Who places in the field those great hidden treasures which spring out of it in corn, wine, and all manner of fruits, whereby all creatures live? Does man’s labor create these? Man’s labor indeed finds them; but God has laid the treasures there, and He bestows them.

Thus the ruler must indeed watch over the city, close the gates, guard tower and wall, put on armor, lay up stores, as if there were no God. And the householder must work as if his work in itself were to nourish the household. But he who believes in God is not careful for the morrow, but labors joyfully and with a great heart.

“For He giveth His beloved, as in sleep.” They must work and watch, yet never be careful or anxious, but commit all to Him, and live in serene tranquility; with a quiet heart, as one who sleeps safely and quietly.

(The last letter to her but one.)

To the holy, care-laden lady, Katharin Lutherin, my gracious, dear Wife.

WE thank you very heartily for the great care for us, which has prevented your sleeping; for since the time that you have taken this care on you, the fire all but consumed us in our inn, breaking out outside our chamber door, and yesterday (no doubt in consequence of these cares of yours), a stone all but fell on our head and crushed us, as in a mouse-trap; for in our room, two days since, the lime and plaster crumbled away. For this also we should have had to thank your saintly cares, if the dear holy angels had not hindered. I am anxious lest, if thou dost not give up thy anxieties, the earth itself may swallow us up, and all the elements turn against us.

Dost thou learn the Catechism, and the Creed? Do thou pray, and leave God to care. It is said, “Cast your care on Him, for He careth for you.”

Temptation, and Depression of Spirit.

For one heavy in Heart.

FIRST of all, let her not look at herself, nor judge herself by her own feelings, but grasp the Word, and hang upon it, and plant herself on it, in defiance of all, and dire¢t all her feelings, and all the thoughts of her heart towards it.

Let her also lift up her voice in praise. A strong medicine lies therein. For the evil spirit of heaviness is not to be chased away by sad words and complainings, but by the praise of God, whereby the heart is made glad.

YOUR distress is, that God Almighty knows from eternity who will be saved. Which is true; for he knows all things, the drops in the sea, the stars in heaven, the roots, branches, twigs, and leaves of every tree. He has numbered the hairs of our heads. From this you conclude that do what you will, good or bad, God knows already whether you will be saved or not. And further, you think more of damnation than of salvation, and therefore you despair, and know not how God is minded toward you.

Wherefore I, as a servant of my dear Lord Jesus Christ, write you this, that you may know how God the Almighty is minded toward you.

God, the Almighty, does know all things; so that all works and thoughts in all creatures must happen according to His will. But His earnest will, and mind, and decree, ordered from eternity, is “that all men shall be saved,” and shall become partakers of eternal joy. “God willeth not the death of a sinner, but that he should be converted and live.”

If, therefore, He wills that sinners, wherever they live and wander under the broad, high heavens, should be saved, will you, by a foolish thought suggested by the devil, sunder yourself from all these, and from the grace of God?

God the Father Himself, with His own finger, points out to you how He is minded toward you, when with loud clear voice He cries, “This is my beloved Son in Whom I am well pleased. Hear Him.

And even if you were ever so hard and deaf, and as a despairing man turned to stone, could not look up to heaven, nor hear God the Father calling to you on those heights, yet can you not fail to hear the Son, who stands in the highway by which every one must pass, and as with a mighty trumpet calls, “Vesete!” “Come, come!”

But who are those who are to come? “ Ye that are weary and heavy-laden.” What kind of a company is that? “Heavy-laden;” as if He knew it all well, and would take our burdens and loads on His shoulder, and not only help us, but altogether rid us of them.

To Hieronymus Weller.

IN AN ATTACK OF DEPRESSION.

THEREFORE, before all things, thou shalt firmly hold, that those and evil thoughts are not from God, but from the devil; because God is not the God of sadness, but the God of consolation and gladness, as Christ Himself says, “He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” But what is to live save to be glad in the Lord?

WHEREFORE use thyself at once to repel such thoughts, saying, “The Lord hath not sent thee.” Hard is the fight at the beginning; but use makes it easier. It is not thou alone who endureth such thoughts, but all the saints; yet they have fought and conquered. So also thou, yield not to evil, but go forth bravely. The highest valor in this fight is not to look at these thoughts nor to investigate them, but to disperse them like a flock of geese, and to pass by. (Emphasis mine.) He who has learnt this has conquered; he who has not learnt it will be conquered. For to gaze at them, and dispute with them until they cease, or freely yield, is but to irritate and to strengthen them.

Let Israel be an example to thee, who overcame the fiery serpents, not by gazing or by struggling, but by averting their gaze, and looking at the brazen serpent. This is the true and certain victory in this combat. Therefore take heed, my Jerome, that thou suffer them not to linger in thy heart. Thus a certain wise man replied to one so tempted, who said “ Such and such sad thoughts have come into my mind,” by saying, “Then let them go again.” And another, as a wise oracle said, “Thou canst not prevent the birds from flying above thy head; but thou canst prevent their building their nests in thy hair.”

To Barbara Lischnerinn.—1530.

VIRTUOUS dear Lady:—Your dear brother, Hieronymus, Weller has told me how you are troubled with temptations about the eternal foreseeing of God. That is truly grievous to me. Christ, our Lord, will redeem you from this. Amen.

For I know this sickness well, and have lain sick to eternal death in that hospital.

First, you must grasp firmly in your own heart that such thoughts come from the devil and are his fiery darts.

Secondly, when such thoughts come, you should ask yourself “In what commandment is it written that I should think of these things; Thou, O devil, wouldst have me care for myself, but I must cast my care on God, for He careth for me.”

Among all the commands of God, this is the highest that we should picture to ourselves His dear Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is to our hearts the daily and most excellent mirror wherein we see how dear God holds us.

Here we learn God’s Providence, by believing in Christ. If you believe, you are called; if you are called, you are also predestined. Let none tear Christ, this mirror and throne of grace, from your heart.

TO the heavy temptations concerning eternal election which so deeply distress many, nowhere is such a solution to be found as in the Wounds of Christ. “This ts My beloved Son; hear Him. In Him you will find Who and what I am, and what I will; and nowhere else in heaven or on earth.”

The Father has fixed a sure and firm foundation on which we can firmly rest—Jesus Christ our Lord, through Whom we must enter the Kingdom of Heaven. For He, and none else, is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

To Valentine Hausmann.—1532.

I HAVE heard of your heaviness through inward terrors; but you must not distress yourself much on this account; for God is wonderful in His way toward us, so that things seem to us often bad and hurtful which are really most useful to us, although we understand not how. Who knows what worse might have come to you, if God had not thus taken you under His discipline, and kept you in His fear? Therefore you must not be impatient although your faith be not strong. For St. Paul says the weak in faith are not to be rejected. God is not a Father who casts out sick and diseased children. If He were, He would keep none. Therefore you should say to Him, “Dear Father, if it pleases Thee thus to chastise me, I will be content to have it so. Thy will be done; only give me patience.”

For the rest, I know not how you are meeting this; for you should be calling on God and praying; especially when you feel the terror is coming, fall on your knees and cry to heaven; and although the prayer seem to you in vain, and too cold, do not for that give over. Strike a firm stroke, and pray so much the more earnestly, the more it seems to you In vain.

For you must learn to fight and not to keep still and gaze, or suffer whatever this temptation inflicts, until it ceases of itself. For that way will only gain strength. You must pray mightily, and call aloud, and with ringing words cry out the Our Father.

And before all things you have to grasp in your heart the conviction that this is from the devil, whom God will have us resist.

But if, indeed, you cannot pray, let something be read to you from the Psalms or the New Testament, with a clear voice; and listen to it. For you must use yourself, at such times, not to wrestle with the anguish in your own thoughts, without God’s Word; you should hear the voice of prayer and God’s Word together.

For without God’s Word the foe is too strong for us. But prayer and the Word of God he cannot endure.

To Jonas von Stockhausen—1532.

IT has been shown me by good friends how the malignant enemy is assailing you sorely with weariness of life, and longing for death.

You know we must be obedient to God, and diligently guard ourselves against disobedience to His will. Now you are sure God has given you life, and has not yet willed you to be dead. Therefore you can have no doubt that such disobedient thoughts come from the devil; and that with all your might you must tear them out.

Life was sour and bitter to our Lord Christ; yet He would not die except by the Father’s will, and fled from death and held to life whilst He could, and said, “My hour is not yet come.”

Elias, indeed, and Jonas, and other prophets, called and cried for death, from great anguish and impatience of life; cursed even the day of their birth. Yet they had to live and bear this weariness with all their strength, until their hour was come.

Such words and examples as the Holy Ghost’s words and warnings you must faithfully follow, and the thoughts which drive you thence you must cast out and spit upon. And although this may be sour and bitter to do, you should but think of yourself as one bound and held captive with chains, out of which you must twist and writhe yourself, with sweat of anguish. For the devil’s darts, when they pierce so deep, are not to be torn out with laughter, or without labor. They must be wrenched out by main force. You must gnash your teeth against these thoughts, and set your face as a flint to do God’s will, harder than iron or anvil.

Yet the best counsel of all is that you should scorn these temptations, and make as if you did not feel them, and think of something else, and say to the devil, “Come, then, devil! let me alone! I cannot listen to thy thoughts. I have to travel, eat, drink, ride, or do this or that.”

Herewith I commend you to our dear Lord, the only Saviour and true Conqueror, Jesus Christ.

To the Lady von Stockhausen.

THE devil is an enemy to both you and your husband, because you hold Christ, his enemy, dear.

See that you do not leave your husband a moment alone. Solitude is pure poison for him. It would do no harm to read to him histories, news, and all kinds of strange things, even if they were gloomy or false tidings and tales, about the Turks, Tartars, and the like, if he could be made to laugh and jest about it. And thereon soon follow with comforting words of the Scriptures.

Whatever you do, do not let him be alone or dull, so that he sink into thought. Never mind if he is angry at this. Pretend that you are suffering, and complain about it.

Christ, who is the cause of the devil’s enmity and your heart-trouble, will help you. Only hold fast to this, that you are the apple of His eye. Who touches you touches Him.

To Johann Schlaginhausen.— 1533.

I HEAR with pain that you are sometimes troubled in mind, although, indeed, Christ is as near to you as yourself, and will surely do you no harm, since He has shed His blood for you. Dear friend, give honor to this good, faithful Man, and believe that He holds you dearer, and has more favor to you than Doctor Luther, and all Christians.

What you trust us to be, trust Him to be far more.

For what we do, we do at His bidding. But He who bids us do it, Himself does all unbidden, from His own spontaneous goodness and kindness.

To Joachim, Prince of Anhalt.—1534.

WE know not what we should pray for as we ought, but He, as a faithful Father, knows and sees well how we should pray, and does according to what He knows, not according to how we pray.

Thus indeed a father must deal with his child, not giving what the child asks, but what he knows the child should ask. Although the child weeps for it, that does not hurt him; nor is the child’s request less dear to the father because he does not give in the way the child desires.

So also, often, the physician must not do what the patient wishes, and yet he holds the sick man none the less dear for his sick longings and for the request he cannot grant.

* * * *

I counsel you also (as a remedy against this depression) to ride, hunt, and occupy yourself as a young man should, in good company, who can be merry with you in a godly and honorable way.

To Johann Mantel.

SERVANT OF THE CHURCH AT WITTENBERG.

AS to what you write about temptation and sadness on account of death, you know how in our faith we express and confess that the Son of God suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified and died to this end, that He might, for all who believe in Him, take away the power from death, yea altogether and utterly abolish it. Dear friend, what great matter is it that we shall die, when we really think that He, the dear Lord has died, and has died for us? His death is the true, only death which should so possess and fill our hearts, senses and thoughts, that it should henceforth be to us no otherwise than as if now nothing was living any more, not even the dear sun, but that all died with the dear Lord; yet died in such a way that all with Him shall rise again at that blessed day.

In this His death and life, our death and life should sink and be swallowed up, as those who shall live with Him forever.

And truly from the beginning of the world He has been before us with His death; and to even the end of the world. He waits for us when we shall depart out of this brief, poor life, and He shall welcome us and receive us into His eternal kingdom.

To a Pastor.

ALAS, we live in the kingdom of the devil, ab extra, therefore we cannot hear or see any good, ab extra. But we live in the blessed Kingdom of Christ ab intra. There we see, though as in a glass darkly, the exceeding unutterable riches of the grace and glory of God.

Therefore, in the name of the Lord, let us break through, press forward, and fight our way through praise and blame, through evil report and good report, through hatred and love, until we come into the blessed kingdom of our dear Father, which Christ the Lord has prepared for us before the beginning of the world. There only shall we find joy. Amen.

GOD forbid that the offense of the Cross should be taken away; which thing would come to pass if we would preach that which the prince of this world and his members would gladly hear. Then we should have a gentle devil, a gracious pope, and merciful princes. But because we set forth the benefits and the glory of Christ, they persecute us and spoil us both of our goods and lives.

I DID not learn my theology all at once; but I have had to search ever deeper and deeper into it. To this many conflicts have brought me, for no one can understand the Holy Scriptures without exercise and conflict. Fanatics and pretenders, each the true adversary, namely the devil, who with his buffetings drove me to study the Holy Scriptures. If we have no such devil, we are only speculative theologians, who rove about in their own thoughts, speculating that thus and thus it must be.

Yet no good art or handicraft is to be learned without exercise. What kind of a physician would he be who perpetually did nothing but roam about the schools? He must bring his art into practice, and the more he has to do with nature, the more he sees and experiences how imperfect his art is.

It is a great grace of God to be able to say of one text in the Bible, “That I know for certain to be true.”

I know, old and learned Doctor that I am (or ought to be), that I have not yet mastered the Lord’s Prayer. Without exercise and experience no one can become truly learned.

THIS will not be thy greatest nor thy last temptation. The wisdom of God is, as it were, playing with thee and training thee, if thou livest, for real war.

IT is a hard thing to say always, I am God’s child; and to be comforted and refreshed by the great grace and mercy of the heavenly Father. To do this from the heart is not what every one can do, Therefore, without exercise and experience, no one can learn the faith in true purity.

THE Holy Spirit cheers us, and teaches us to despise death and all dangers. He says (in us), “If God wills not that I should live, then I will die; if He wills not that I should be rich, I will be poor.” But the evil spirit saddens and terrifies, at the last, after making secure and self-satisfied. Joyfulness comes from God, depression from the devil.

CONFLICT makes us live in the fear of God, walk circumspectly, pray without ceasing, grow in grace and in the knowledge of Christ, and learn to understand the power of the Word.

Therefore be not faint-hearted, nor dismayed; but take such conflicts for a sure sign that thou hast a gracious God, since thou art being fashioned into the likeness of His Son; and doubt not that thou belongest to the great and glorious brotherhood of all the Saints, of whom St. Peter says, “Resist the devil, steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren which are in the world.”

THE essence of temptation is that we forget the present, and covet the future, like Eve in Paradise.

ALL do not suffer the same temptations. Indeed they could not. Some must be knuckles and bones which can sustain and keep together the flesh. Just as in the body of man, if all were flesh it would fall into a shapeless mass. The knuckles and nerves hold the flesh together. So, in the Christian Church, there must be some who can sustain good buffetings from the devil; such as we three, Philip Melanchthon, Doctor Pommer, and I. But all could not bear it. Therefore, in the Church we pray one for another. Prayer does all things.

DOCTOR MARTIN said to Schlainhaeffen, “Fear not, neither be dismayed. All will turn to the best for you; your trial will work for God’s glory, and for the profit and health of us all.

“It is impossible that man’s heart can know God truly and keep Him in mind without the cross and temptation. Believe me, if you had not such a good stone in God the Father’s house, you would not have these conflicts.”

ONLY believe firmly God will make an end of this trial. For He calls that which is not, that it may be. As I have myself experienced in sore temptations, which so exhausted and tortured my body that I could scarcely breathe, went about like a shadow, like a corpse, withered, parched up, and no man could comfort me. All to whom I spoke, said “I know not.” No confessor could understand anything of it, so that I said, “Am I, then, alone? Is it I only who must be thus sorrowful in spirit and thus assailed?”’

Dr. Staupitz said to me at table, seeing me so sad and smitten down, “ Why are you so sad, brother Martin?” Then I said, “Whither shall I flee?” He answered, “Ah! know you not that such temptation is good for you? Otherwise no good could come of you.”

Ten years ago, when I was alone, God comforted me through His dear angels, with my own striving and writing.

Therefore fear not; you are not alone.

BISHOP ALBERT of Mainz used to say that “the human heart is like a mill-stone in a mill. If you place corn on it, it spins round, grinds, and crushes, and makes it into meal. If there is no corn it still spins round, and grinds itself, so that it becomes thinner and smaller. So the human heart must have work to do; if it has not the work of its calling to fulfill, the devil comes with temptation, heaviness, and sadness, till the heart devours itself with sorrow.”

In his own Sickness.

“AH, how gladly would I now die. For I am now weary and worn out, and have a peaceful and joyful conscience and heart. But know, as soon as I recover, care, toil, and temptation will not keep outside. For through much tribulation we must enter into the Kingdom of God.”

IN the year 1538, on the night of the 2nd of August, Doctor Martin Luther had a severe pain in his arm, as if it were being torn. Then he said, “Thank God! That we can say, for it is an easier thing to yield up our money, or our skin. But when spiritual temptations come, that we could say, ‘Cursed be the day wherein I was born!’ that does give pain! In such trial was Christ, in the Garden: ‘Father take this cup from Me!’ There was the will against the will.”

DOCTOR MARTIN once said to a very desponding man, “Oh, friend, what art thou doing? Canst thou do nothing but look at thy sins, thy death, and damnation? Turn thine eyes quite the opposite way, and look at Him who is called Christ. Of Him it is written that He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered, died, and was buried, descended into hell, on the third day rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven. Why, dost thou think, did all this happen? That thou mightest be comforted against death, and sin. Therefore cease to fear and to be dismayed. Verily thou hast no cause. If Christ were not there, and had not done all this for thee, then indeed thou mightest fear.”

SEE what a life the Lord Christ led whilst He went about on earth. He was not much alone; there was ever a noise and stir of much people around Him. He was never alone, save when He was praying. So He has promised, “Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.”

KING DAVID, when he was alone and idle, and went not forth to the war, fell into temptation. God created man for society, and not for solitude.

DR. LUTHER said that often when he was tempted, a word from a good friend had comforted him: “For when, in the year 1535, I was much troubled about something, and cast down, Doctor Pommer said to me, ‘Our Lord God doubtless thinks in heaven, “ What shall I do more with this man? I have given him so many great and noble gifts, and still he will despair of my goodness.”’

“These words were a glorious, great comfort to me, and took fast hold of my heart, as if an angel from heaven had spoken them to me, although Dr. Pommer thought not to comfort me with them.”

IN the year 1541 Doctor Luther was recalling his spiritual temptation in his sickness, when for fourteen days he neither ate, drank, nor slept. “At that time I disputed with our Lord God in wild impatience, and reproached Him with His promises, Then God taught me to understand the Holy Scriptures aright; for when all goes according to our will we do not know much of God’s Word. Now God will not have us be too impatient; therefore in His Holy Scriptures He requires us frequently to hope and wait on Him, as in the Psalm, ‘I wait on the Lord from one morning watch to another. For if God does not help speedily, yet He gives grace to sustain temptation. So Job says, ‘Though He slay me I will trust in Him,’ just as if he said, ‘Though it seems as if Thou hadst turned away Thy face from me, yet I will never believe Thou art my enemy.’”

A NUN, who was sorely tempted, and had no other weapons wherewith to drive away the devil, said, “I am a Christian; that word contains everything in itself.”

GOD has set a firm ground for us to tread on, and thereby to ascend into heaven, even Jesus Christ. He only is the way and door by which we come to the Father. But we want to begin our building with the roof; we despise the foundation, and therefore we must fall.

AH, if that great man, Paul, were living now, how glad I should be to learn from him what his thorn in the flesh was. It was not a beloved Thekla, as the legends say. Oh no! It was not a sin. I know not what it was.

The Book of Job is full of such temptations. His friends and comforters were sensible, prudent, wise, just, and pious people; yet they did not touch the point. For around this turns the whole debate in the book. “I am just and innocent,” says Job. They say, on the contrary, “Ah! that is of the devil, to say that thou art good and just. Then God must be unjust!” Round this question revolves the whole controversy. I hold that the Book of Job is a history, afterward worked into a poem, concerning things which were actually experienced by someone; although not uttered in the words in which it is described.

It is a good book, and therein we have a choice picture and example of an assaulted and troubled Christian. For this book was not written with reference to Job, or any individual, but is a mirror for all suffering Christians. We see in it what kind of a process God is carrying on through the trials of the Saints. For when it is only the devil and the Chaldeans, Job can be patient, and says, “Blessed be the name of the Lord.” But when it is a question of God’s anger, he can no longer bear it, and falls into perplexity and disputing about the happiness of the ungodly.

But he worked his way out of this perplexity again and said, “I know that Thou art good.” Although it is hard to say it. In brief, all men have flesh and blood in them which murmurs and sets itself against God; for it is hard to believe, when we are in trial, that God is gracious to us.

Flowers

Continued in Part Second. Words For The Day’s March. I. The Leader

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, IV. The Armies of Heaven

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, IV. The Armies of Heaven

Continued from III. The Weapons of Our Warfare.

The Church.

“As it stands in the third article of our faith, one holy catholic—that is universal—Church, the communion of saints.”

The Church is an assembly of people that depends on things which do not appear, nor can be apprehended by the senses; namely, on the Word alone. This people believes what the Word says, and gives God the glory of trusting that what He promises us therein is true.

THE Church is never in a more perilous state than when she has quiet and peace.

GOD has set His Church and Christian community in the midst of the world, amid infinite external action, manifold occupations, callings and standings, to the end that Christians should not be monks, nor fly into cloisters or wildernesses, but should live amongst people and be sociable, that their works of faith may be open and manifest.

To live in society and friendship with each other, as Aristotle the heathen says, is not indeed the end of man, whereunto he is created, but only a means to the end.

The most excellent end for which we are created is that one should teach another about God, what He is in His being, what His will is, how He is minded towards us.

Therefore let us in the Church, with the Church, pray for the Church. For there are three things which preserve the Church, and essentially belong to the Church: firstly, to teach faithfully; secondly, to pray diligently; thirdly, to suffer really (mit Ernst).- (German meaning, “with seriousness”)

THE labor and travail of the Church lasts a long time; but one day her day and hour will come, that she shall be redeemed, and joyful indeed will be her aspect then.

THE outward form and aspect of the Church is without form or comeliness, sad and troubled; but in truth she is triumphing and gaining the victory with Christ. “He has set us in the heavenly places together with Christ.” As a bride is Domina (from Latin, Mrs.) and lady of her husband’s possessions, so is a believer lord of all the possessions of the Bridegroom; for he is quickened with Christ, and set in heavenly places with Him.

God looks not on the evil in His Church, but only on Christ, His dear Son, whom He holds so dearly beloved, that for that love’s sake He sees no evil in His Bride, for “He has cleansed her through the washing of water, by the Word.”

Why the Church on Earth is in Tribulation.

FIRSTLY, that we should be reminded and warned that we are exiled servants, cast out of Paradise on account of Adam’s fall in Paradise.

Secondly, that we may think of the sufferings of the Son of God, who for our sake became man, took our flesh and blood on Him, yet without sin, has walked through this valley of sorrows, has suffered and died for us, and has risen again from the dead, and has thus restored us to our Fatherland from which we were exiled.

Thirdly, that such tribulation might teach and remind us that our citizenship is not of this world, but that we here on earth are only pilgrims, and that another life, the life eternal, remains to us.

Amaranth a Type of the Church.

AMARANTH grows in August, and is more a stalk than a flower, is easily broken off, yet grows fair and flourishing after being broken. And when all the flowers are over, if this stalk is sprinkled with water and made moist it becomes fair again and green, so that in winter wreaths and garlands can be twined of it.

For this reason it is called amaranth, because it neither fades nor withers.

I know not that anything can be more like the Church than this amaranth, which we call a thousandfold fair (Tausendschon). For although the church washes her robes in the blood of the Lamb (as it is written in Genesis and in the Apocalypse), and is stained crimson, yet she is fairer than any state or community on earth. And she alone it is whom the Son of God loves as His Bride, in whom He has joy and rest.

Moreover, the Church suffers herself easily to be broken and crushed; that is, she is willing and contented to be obedient to God under the Cross, is patient therein, and springs up again fair and flourishing, and grows and spreads, yea, gains her best fruits and uses thence, for thereby she learns truly to apprehend God, freely to confess His doctrine, and brings forth far more beautiful and heavenly virtues.

Finally, the body and stock of this true Amaranth remain entire, and cannot be uprooted, however great may be the rage and assaults against particular branches, so as to rend them away. For as the amaranth, thousandfold fair, cannot fade nor decay, so nevermore can the Church fade nor decay, be destroyed or rooted up. But what is more wonderful than the amaranth? If it is sprinkled with water and laid therein, it becomes green and fresh again, as if awakened from the dead.

So, we can have no doubt that the Church will be awakened by God from the grave, and will come forth living, eternally to praise, glorify, and bless the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and His son our Redeemer and Lord, with the Holy Ghost.

For although other empires, kingdoms, principalities, and dominions have their changes, and soon fade and fall away like flowers, this Kingdom, on the contrary, has roots so firm and deep, that by no force nor might can it be torn up or laid waste, but abides for ever.

None Suffer Alone.

WE are not alone. Many here and there in the world suffer with us, whom we know not.

THE saints are but as dewdrops on the locks of the Bridegroom.

HIS Christendom is Lady and Empress in heaven and on earth; for she is called the Bride of God.

The Holy Angels.

IT would not be fit that we should know how earnestly the dear, holy angels contend for us with the devil; what a hard and severe strife and warfare it is. For if we saw it, we should be dismayed.

“THEY are ministering spirits,” and herein is set before all good Christians a great and heart-cheering truth, and a mirror of humility, that such pure and glorious creatures minister to us impure, poor, insignificant human beings, in the home, in the state, in religion.

Our faithful servants are they, rendering us service which we poor beggars and human creatures are ashamed to render another.

Thus should it be taught simply, and in choice order, concerning the dear angels.

THE good angels are wiser and can do more than the evil angels. The reason is, they have a mirror wherein they look and learn: “the face of the Father.”

THEY are far nobler than we men; firstly, in nature and essence; also because they are without sin. But they are without pride; they despise not us human creatures for our misery. Our dying, sinning, and suffering are to them a sorrow of heart.

THE nature of the good angels is a humble, loving, and kindly nature. An angel’s is a fine, tender, kind heart. As if we could find a man who had a heart sweet all through, and a gentle will; without subtlety, yet of sound reason; at once wise and simple. He who has seen such a heart, has colors wherewith he may picture to himself what an angel is.

THEY guard us from evil. This they do earnestly and with joy. The angels see nothing more gladly than when people delight in the Word of God. There they delight to dwell. Therefore seek them not yonder in heaven, but here below on earth, with thy neighbor, thy father and mother, thy child and thy friend. If thou dost to these as God commands thee, the angels will not be far from thee.

HE was once asked what an angel was. He said, “An angel is a spiritual creature, created without a body, by God, to minister to Christendom, especially in the offices of the Church. True and godly preachers should preach and teach concerning them in an orderly, Christian way.”

THEIR antitypes are the evil spirits, which were not created evil by God, but fell, from a hatred which they conceived against God.

DOCTOR MARTIN once said of the angels: “This is what I picture to myself, and I stand on it as on sure ground, that the angels are already getting ready for the field, drawing on their armor, girding on their sword and spear; for the Last Day is already beginning to dawn, and the angels are arming themselves for the combat.

IF we praise God that He has created for us the sun, the moon, wine, and bread, we should surely also praise Him that He has created the dear angels. My God, I thank Thee that Thou hast given Thy good angels, and hast set a guard of Thy heavenly princes round about us!

THE nature and character of the good angels is a humble, loving, friendly nature, which does not deem itself too high to serve poor sinful creatures, both men and women. For they are full of light, of the knowledge of God, and of the wisdom of the divine goodness. Therefore, all that God commands they understand to be perfect, and very good, because it pleases God.

LET us follow the virtues of the holy angels, and their works of love, and be very friendly, loving, and helpful to each other. No man is so kind, and so ready, and disposed to all kinds of services and good works as the angels are.

WE must learn that our best and most steadfast friends are invisible, namely, the dear angels, who with faithfulness and love, moreover with all helpfulness and true friendship, far surpass all the friends we have whom we can see. Thus in many ways we enjoy the fellowship of the heavenly spirits.

ANGELS are creatures who shine and burn with thoughts and desires how God can be praised, peace be on earth, and all men be of a good heart and mind.

His Belief about the Guardian Angel.

FROM early childhood I would accustom a child, and say to it: “Dear child, thou hast an angel of thine own. When thou prayest, morning and evening, the same angel will be with thee, and sit beside thy little bed, clothed in a white robe; will take care of thee, lull thee to sleep, and guard over thee that the evil one, the devil, may not come near thee. So, also, when thou gladly sayest the ‘Benedicite’ and ‘Gratias,’ at thy meals, thine angel will be with thee, at table, will serve thee, and guard thee.” If we pictured this to children from their earliest years, that angels are with them, this would not only make the dear children trust to the guardianship of the dear angels, but it would make them gentle and good, for they would think, “If our parents are not here, the angels are here, and the evil one must not tempt us to do wrong.”

AT the last, when we die, we have the dear angels for our escort on the way. They who can grasp the whole world in their hands, can surely also guard our souls, that they make that last journey safely.

Flowers

Continued in V. The Enemy

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




Teaching the 70 Weeks of Daniel Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 to Young People at a Church

Teaching the 70 Weeks of Daniel Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 to Young People at a Church

On Sunday, September 29, I gave a one-hour Bible study about Daniel 9:24-27 to young people at a Church in the city of Allen, Northern Samar, the Philippines, called Cornerstone Baptist Church.

James teaching at Cornerstone Baptist Church

In the photo, it shows only 6 attendees besides me and my wife Tess, but more came a few minutes later totaling about 20 in all.

I covered all the basic points that I wrote in my article, “Who is the “He” of Daniel 9:27 Who Confirms the Covenant with Many for One Week?”

They were all largely ignorant of the false futurist interpretation of the 70th Week of Daniel as the final 7 years of the reign of the Antichrist on Earth. I told them that sooner or later they will probably hear this false interpretation, and hopefully, they will reject it because they now know the true interpretation which all the Protestants believed and taught before John Nelson Darby and C.I. Scofield’s futurist dispensational doctrines became popular in the 20th century.

I told him the false futurist interpretation of the 70th Week of Daniel was cooked up circa 1585 by a Jesuit priest, Francesco Ribera, to stop Protestants from calling the popes of Rome the Antichrist. The Protestants at the time rejected it but by and by it came to be taught by Protestants in the 19th century. When you think about it, the 19th century was the time false cults began to arise in the Church, especially Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the Seventh Day Adventists.

I told them a church is only as good as the pastor of the church. I told them their pastor must be a good one who loves the Word of God because he let us tell his flock the truth about the 70th Week of Daniel!

I told them there is no way an honest true believer in Jesus Christ can come up with the futurist view that the “he” of Daniel 9:27 is the future Antichrist who arises to make a treaty with the nation of Israel for 7 years in the unknown future so that the Jews can rebuild their Temple to resume animal sacrifices so that the Antichrist can sit in it after breaking the covenant with the Jews so that he can reign as God on earth. Such a temple could not be the “holy place” of Matthew 24:15 because a rebuilt temple would represent a further rejection of the Blood of Christ, the Messiah which was shed for our sins!

I was taught the false futurist interpretation by a pastor in 1975. I was still young in Christ and had no reason to doubt what the pastor taught. It was finally in 2014 I came to know the truth about the 70th Week of Daniel.

I also talked about differences in Bible translations and why modern English translations of Daniel 9:27 are not correct. They are based on bad manuscripts. Unfortunately this is also true of the Tagalog language Bible they use. It’s similar to the NIV. I found a better translation in Tagalog called Ang Biblia. It’s similar to the KJV. Next time I see them I’ll recommend it to them.




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, III. The Weapons of Our Warfare.

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, III. The Weapons of Our Warfare.

Continued from II. Rules of the Service

Faith.

FAITH is nothing else but the truth of the heart; that is to say, a true and right opinion of the heart as touching God.

FAITH is the divinity of works, and is so spread throughout the works of the faithful as is the divinity throughout the humanity of Christ.

Through faith we do good works. Through good works faith is made visible and comprehensible. As the Godhead cannot be seen nor comprehended, but when Christ became incarnate He was seen and handled.

In all our doings, spiritual and bodily, faith must rule and reign, and the heart hold it sure and firm, that God is looking on us, holds us dear, will help us, and not forsake us.

CHRISTIAN faith is not an idle quality or empty husk in the heart, until charity come and quicken it, but if it be true faith, it is a sure trust and confidence in the heart, and a firm consent whereby Christ is apprehended, so that Christ is the object of faith, yea, rather, even in faith Christ himself is present.

Faith, therefore, is a certain obscure knowledge, or rather darkness which seeth nothing, and yet Christ apprehended by faith sitteth in the darkness.

The school divines do dream that faith is a quality cleaving in the heart, without Christ. But Christ should be so set forth that thou shouldst see nothing besides him, and shouldst think that nothing can be more unto thee, or more present with thy heart than He is. For he sitteth not idly in Heaven, but is present with us, working and living in us,

Faith, therefore, is a certain steadfast beholding, which looketh upon nothing else but Christ, the conqueror of sin and death, and the giver of righteousness, salvation, and eternal life.

FOR he that is a Christian hath Christ the Lord of the law present and enclosed in his heart, even as a ring hath a jewel or precious stone enclosed in it.

He that hath faith in the heart hath such a treasure, that though it seemeth to be but little, is greater than heaven and earth, because Christ “the unspeakable gift” is greater.

THE believing man hath the Holy Ghost, and where the Holy Ghost dwelleth, He will not suffer a man to be idle, but stirreth him up to all exercises of piety and godliness, and of true religion, to the love of God, to the patient suffering of afflictions to prayer, to thanksgiving, and to the exercise of charity towards all men.

BECAUSE thou hast laid hold on Christ by faith, through whom thou art made righteousness, begin now to work well. Love God and thy neighbor, call upon God, praise Him, and confess Him. These are good works indeed, which flow out of this faith and this cheerfulness conceived in the heart, for that we have remission of sins freely by Christ.

The Reflex Action of Faith.

THE FORCE OF PRONOUNS.

BUT weigh diligently every word of Paul, and especially mark well this pronoun “our;” for the effect altogether consisteth in the well-applying of pronouns, which we find very often in the Scriptures; wherein also there is ever some vehemency and power.

Therefore, generally, it is an easy matter to magnify and amplify the benefit of Christ, namely that Christ was given for sins, but for other men’s sins, which are worthy. But when it cometh to the putting to of this pronoun ‘our,’ there our weak nature and reason starteth back, and dare not come nigh unto God, nor promise to herself that so great a treasure shall be freely given unto her.

WHEREFORE these words, “Which loveth Me,” are full of faith, And he who can utter this word “me,” and apply it unto himself with a true and constant faith as Paul did, shall be a good disputer with Paul against the law.

For He delivered neither sheep, ox, gold nor silver, but even God Himself entirely and wholly “for me,” even “for me,” I say, a miserable and wretched sinner.

HUMAN wit treats these words, “Who gave Himself for our sins,” as if the sins were not real, true sins; as if the words were said lightly, and not, as they are, in true, bitter earnest.

Faith Lifting us to God’s Horizon.

PSALM XXXVII. “For they shall soon be cut down like the grass.” He lifts us from our horizon to God’s. In our sight the wicked flourish and increase and cover the whole earth. But in God’s sight what are they? Hay! The higher the grass is, the nearer the hay-fork.

PSALM XXXVII. “But the Lord shall laugh at him, for He seeth that his day cometh.”

Not that God laughs, like a man; but that in truth it is a laughable thing to see foolish men raging (against the truth), and undertaking great things which they cannot really advance one hair’s breadth.

Just as a fool would be ridiculous, who with a long spear and a short dagger were to seek to smite the Sun out of the heavens, and with this prospect were to shout and glorify himself as if he had accomplished a grand feat.

Faith and Hope.

FAITH is a teacher and a judge, fighting against errors and heresies, judging spirits and doctrines.

But Hope is, as it were, the general and captain of the field, fighting against temptation, the cross, impatience, heaviness of spirit, desperation and blaspheming, and it waiteth for good things, even in the midst of all evils.

FAITH and hope are in many ways distinguished. Faith is in the understanding of man; hope in the will; and yet these two can no more be severed than the cherubim above the mercy seat.

According to their offices; faith dictates, distinguishes, teaches, and is knowledge and science. But hope exhorts, awakens, listens, waits, and patiently endures.

Faith looks to the word and the promise, that is, the truth. But hope looks to that which the Word has promised, to the gifts.

Faith exists at the beginning of life, before all tribulations and adversities. But hope follows afterwards and grows out of adversities.

Faith strives against error and heresy. But hope strives against tribulation and temptation.

As foresight and understanding are useless, and effect nothing without manhood and cheerfulness, so is faith nothing without hope; for hope endures and overcomes misfortune and evil. And as a joyful heart without foresight and understanding is foolhardiness, so is hope without faith.

Faith and hope are thus distinguished. Faith says, I believe in a resurrection of the dead at the Last Day. To this hope adds, “Then, if this is true, let us give up what we have, and suffer what we can, if hereafter we are to be such great princes.”

ALL which happens in the whole world happens through hope. No husbandman would sow a grain of corn, if he did not hope it would spring up and bring forth the ear. How much more are we helped on by hope in the way to eternal life.

Faith and Charity.

CHARITY giveth place, for it “suffereth all things.” But faith giveth no place; yea, it can suffer nothing. As concerning faith, we ought to be invincible and more hard, if it might be, than the adamant stone. But as touching charity we ought to be soft, and more flexible than the reed or leaf that is shaken by the wind, and ready to yield to everything.

SEE the sun! It brings us two things—light and heat. The rays of light beam directly onus. No king is powerful enough to intercept those keen, direct and swift rays. But heat is radiated back to us from every side. Thus, like the light, faith should ever be direct and inflexible; but love, like the heat, should radiate on all sides, and meekly adapt itself to the wants of all.

The Trial of Faith.

THE trial of faith is the greatest and heaviest of all trials. For faith it is which must conquer in all trials. Therefore, if faith gives way, then the smallest and most trifling temptations can overcome a man. But when faith is sound and true, then all other temptations must yield, and be overcome.

“ALAS! that we believe God so little,” he said. “I can trust my wife, and all of you, my friends, more than I can trust Him. Yet none of you would do and suffer for me what He did; would suffer yourselves to be crucified for me.”

SECURE, easy spirits, like all false Christians, when they have glanced over the Bible and heard a few sermons, soon persuade themselves they have the Holy Ghost, and that they understand and know all things.

Ah! true hearts find it far otherwise; these pray every day, yea, every moment: “Lord, strengthen our faith.”

REAL believers are always thinking they believe not, therefore they are fighting, wrestling, striving, and toiling without ceasing, to preserve and increase their faith. Just as good and skillful masters of any art are always seeing and observing that something is lacking in their work, whilst bunglers and pretenders persuade themselves that they lack nothing, but that all they make and do is quite perfect.

OUR faith is weak, and yet it is a rock; for it is the corner-stone of the heart.

Martin Luther’s own Faith in Trial.

Letter from Coburg, during the Diet of Augsburg. To the Elector Frederic, of Saxony.

AS to my affairs, my gracious lord, I answer thus: Your Electoral Grace knows (or if your Electoral Grace does not know, I hereby make it known), I have not received the Gospel from man, but from heaven, only through our Lord Jesus Christ, so that I might well esteem and subscribe myself (as henceforth I will) His servant and evangelist. That I have at any time submitted myself to human hearing and judgment was not because I doubted this, but from humility, to win others.

Now, however, that I see how my too great humility will lead to the degrading of the Gospel, and that if I yield the devil a hand’s breadth, he will take the whole place, by constraint of my conscience I must act otherwise. I have yielded enough this year, in deference to your Electoral Grace; for the devil knows well it was no faint-heartedness that made me yield. He saw my heart well, when I came into Worms; that if I had known that as many devils would set upon me as there are tiles on the roofs, I would have leapt down among them with joy.

After all, Duke George is far from being equal to one single devil. And since the Father of unfathomable mercy has, through the Gospel, made us joyful lords over all the devils, and over death, and has given us such wealth of trust that we can say to Him, “most dear Father,” it would indeed be the most shameful slight to such a Father that we could not trust Him to make us lords over Duke George’s wrath.

This, at least, I know well of myself; if needful I would ride into Leipzig, if it rained Duke Georges nine days, and each Duke George were ninefold more furious than this one.

They hold my Lord Christ to be a man twisted of straw! This may my Lord, and I, for a while, indeed, endure.

It is another than Duke George with whom I have to do, who knows me pretty well, and I know Him not ill.

Your Electoral Grace is only lord over goods and bodies. But Christ is Lord also over souls, to whom He has sent me, and to that end has awakened me. These souls I dare not forsake. I hope my Lord Christ will overcome our foes, and will be well able to shield me from them, if He so will. If so he will not, His dear will be done.

Letter to Melanchthon during the Diet of Augsburg.

THE end and event of the cause troubles thee, that thou canst not order it. But if thou couldst comprehend it, then would I be no partaker in such a cause, much less the author of it.

God has placed this cause in a certain common place, which thou hast not in thy rhetoric, nor in thy philosophy. It is called Faith, in which place are set all things invisible, and that do not appear, which things, if any one seeks to render visible, apparent and comprehensible, as thou art doing, he shall reap cares and tears as the reward of his labor, which in truth thou art reaping, all of us meanwhile warning thee in vain.

God dwelleth in the clouds, and has set this darkness as His curtain. Let him who will, change this.

If Moses had insisted on knowing the end, and how he was to escape the hosts of Pharaoh, Israel would probably have been in Egypt to this day.

To Brentins on Melanchthon’s Fears.

AFTER us, God will be the Creator, as He was before us, and is to-day, with us. He will not die with us, nor cease to be God, ruling even men’s thoughts.

It seemed to Eli, the priest, that the kingdom of Israel was perishing, the ark being taken by the Philistines; but Eli perished first, and the kingdom afterwards began to flourish most.

Philip designs to be head-ruler of the world, that is to crucify himself. But I know that He will be, in the future, who said, “Where is Abel, thy brother?”

If God exists, not here only do we live; but wherever He lives we shall live. If these things are true, what, I ask, are these furious threats of idols, not merely dying, but wholly lifeless? He who created me will be the Father of my son, a Husband to my wife, the Ruler of my country, the Preacher to my parish, and better than all that (when I am gone).

To Shalatin.

PHILIP thinks to accomplish his own counsel. Sic fecissem ego. No! it must not be “Sic ego Philippus.” The “ego” is too small. The word is, “I am that I am.”

Do thou exhort Philip in my name not to make himself God, but to fight against that innate ambition of divinity implanted in us by the Devil in Paradise. This cast Adam out of Paradise, and this only disquiets us, and casts us out of peace.

We are to be men, and not God. This is the sum of the whole matter. Otherwise eternal unrest and heart-sorrow is our portion.

To Fustus Fonas.

CHRIST has come; and He sitteth at the right hand, not of Caesar, but of God. This may be very incredible. I nevertheless delight in this incredible thing; and therein I will dare to die. Why, then, should I not live therein?

I would that Philip would take this my faith, if he has none beside.

“On the right hand,” is indeed a little thing; but the “My,” “My right hand;” where has that an end?

The pronoun does it. The name Adonai, which follows the “I have said,” will take good care of the precious “Sit Thou,” until “Thy foes Thy footstool” shall also come. What recks it, (what difference does it make) if David falls?

Farewell in Christ, and believe us, as thou dost, that Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords. If He lose this title at Augsburg, He will have lost it in heaven and on earth. Amen.

To the Chancellor Bruck, at Augsburg, from “the Wilderness” (Coburg).

TWO MIRACLES.

I HAVE lately seen two miracles. The first, I as I was looking out of the window, and saw the stars in heaven, and the whole fair vault of God, yet saw nowhere any pillars whereon the Master had raised this vault. Nevertheless the heavens fell not, and that fair vault stands firm.

Now, there are some who search for the pillars, and would fain grasp and feel them. And because they cannot do this they totter and tremble as if the heavens must surely fall, from no other cause save that they cannot grasp these pillars, nor see them. If they could grasp these pillars, then (no doubt) the heavens would stand firm!

The second miracle is this. I saw also vast, thick clouds lowering over us, with such a weight that they might be compared to a great ocean. Yet saw I no floor whereon they were based, nor any shore whereby they were bound. Nevertheless they fell not on us, but saluted us with a frowning countenance and fled away.

When they had passed by, then shone forth their floor, whereon they were based, and also our roof, the rainbow. Yet that was indeed a feeble, slight, insignificant floor and roof; so slight that it faded away into the clouds, and was more like a prism, such as is wont to stream through painted glass, than such a mighty floor; so that one might well have despaired on account of the feebleness of the floor, as much as on account of the great weight of the waters.

Nevertheless it was found, in fact, that this feeble prism bore up the weight of waters and shielded us.

Yet there are some who look at the mass and weight of the clouds, and consider these more than this slight, subtle, narrow prism. They would fain feel the power of the prism, and because they cannot do this, they fear that the clouds will pour down an eternal deluge.

The Sea Restrained by a Rope of Sand.

LET the adversaries rage and storm as long as they can. God has set it bound to the sea. He suffers it to rage and swell, and to rush on with its waves in vehement assaults, as if it would cover and overwhelm all things. But nevertheless it does not pass the shore, although God binds it not with bands of iron, but of sand.

THROUGH what inner conflict this faith of Luther’s was maintained, I have and know nothing of Jesus Christ (since I have not seen him with my bodily eyes, nor heard with my bodily ears), save only His name. Yet have I, thank God, learned so much of Him from the Scriptures that I am well contented therewith, and desire not to see or hear Him in the flesh. Moreover, in my deepest weakness, in ter- rors and pressure of the burden of sin, in fear and trembling before death, in persecution from the false, cruel world, often have I experienced and felt the divine power of this name in me, abandoned as I was by all creatures. I have proved its power to snatch me from death, to make me live again, to comfort me in the greatest despair, especially during the Diet of Augsburg in the year 1530.


Prayer.

AS a shoemaker makes shoes, and a tailor coats, so should a Christian pray. Prayer is the Christian’s business, Let us pray and strive; for the word of faith and the prayer of the just are the mightiest weapons.

A COMPLAINT was once made to Doctor Martin Luther, “Dear Herr Doctor, things are issuing and happening nowhere as we would have them.” “Well,” he said, “that is precisely right. Have you not given up your will to our Lord God, praying every day, “Thy will be done on earth as it ts in heaven?”

OH, it is a great and mighty thing, the prayer of the just. But God knows best how and when to grant our prayers, for if He did always as we would, He would be our captive. I prayed once for the life of a suffering woman, with great anguish and wrestling of heart. But God knew best. He did indeed hear our prayer in such a way that in the life to come that good woman will thank me for it.

WE should commit all to God. He will make it all well. “Even to hoar hairs I will carry you; I have made, and I will bear. I will carry and deliver you. Therefore lay it all on me, my beloved; commit it to me.”

So Saint Peter: “Casting all your care upon Him.” That is a choice, consoling saying. And “Cast thy burden on the Lord, and He will sustain thee.”

Ah, these are beautiful, comforting sayings! But we want to do and order all ourselves, although we are not able, yea it is impossible. We want to lift and carry all ourselves, and forget our Lord God, and so we sink, and make the evil worse.

Indeed, sayest thou, I have committed all to Him, but He will not come, He delays too long. Oh, wait on the Lord—we must wait and hold on; for at last he will surely come.

ALL who call on God in true faith, earnestly, from the heart, will certainly be heard, and will receive what they have asked and desired, although not in the hour or in the measure, or the very thing which they ask; yet they will obtain something greater and more glorious than they had dared to ask.

THE cry and sigh of the heart raises a clamor that not only God but all the angels in heaven must hear. Thus, Moses was dismayed when he came to the Red Sea. He cried with trembling, shuddering, and dismay, and nevertheless did not open his mouth. “O Lord God,” he said, “ what shall I do now? How can I find my way out? I am the cause that all this people will be here miserably murdered. There is no help nor counsel. Before us is the sea; behind us are our foes, the Egyptians; on both sides high mountains. It is all over with us.” Then God answered, “Wherefore criest thou unto me.” —Exodus xiv, 13, 14, 15.

But we read their examples as if they were a dead letter.

Moses must have heaved a great sigh, that he filled therewith the ears of God. It is contrary to all which reason could have expected that they went through the Red Sea. For their way through the Red Sea is as broad as from Wittenburg to Coburg, or at least from Wittenburg to Magdeburg. In the night, moreover, they must have rested and eaten. For six hundred thou- sand men, not including women and children, even if they went three hundred and fifty, or even five hundred abreast, must have taken time.

Thus the cry of Moses seemed to Moses indeed little, but to God great.

WE think this groaning which we make in these terrors, and this weakness, scarcely to be a groaning, far less a cry. For our faith, which in temptation thus groaneth unto Christ, is very weak if we consider our own sense and feeling, and therefore we hear not this cry.

But to the searcher of hearts this small and feeble groaning (as it seemeth unto us), is a loud and mighty cry, in comparison whereof the great and horrible roarings of the law, of sin, of death, of the devil, and of hell, are as nothing, neither can they even be heard. It filleth heaven, so that the angels think they hear nothing but this cry.

These feeble cries were our guns and artillery wherewith we have, so many years, scattered the counsels and enterprises of our adversaries.

NO one believes how mighty and strong prayer is, and how much it can do, save he who has learned by experience and tried it. But it is a great thing, when any one feels great need pressing on him, if he can grasp prayer.

FOR I know, as often as I have earnestly prayed, when it has been real earnest with me I have indeed been richly heard, and have obtained more than I have prayed for. God has for a time delayed, but nevertheless the help has come.

Ah, how truly grand a thing is the honest prayer of a true Christian! How mighty it is with God; that a poor human creature can so speak with the High Majesty in Heaven, and not dread him, but know that God is kindly smiling on him, for Jesus Christ’s sake, His dear Son, our Lord and Saviour! To this end, the heart and conscience must not look back, must not doubt or fear on account of unworthiness.

THE ancients have well described prayer as the lifting up of the heart to God. It was well said. But I and many others in olden times did not understand the definition aright. We spoke and boasted of “the lifting up of the heart,” the “ascensus mentis;” but our syntax failed, for we could not add the “Deum,” the word God.

DEAR brethren, pray with the heart, sometimes also with the lips; for prayer sustains the world: without prayer things would be far otherwise.

THE prayer of the Church works great miracles. In our own days it has raised three from the dead; myself, who have often lain sick to death; my wife Kathe, who was also sick to death; and Philip Melanchthon, who, in 1540, lay sick to death at Weimar.

Yet these are poor miracles, to be observed on account of those who are weak in faith.

Far greater miracles to me are these: that our Lord God every day in the Church baptizes, gives the Sacrament of the Altar, absolves, and delivers from sin, from death, and eternal damnation. These are to me the great miracles.

What a strong wall and fortification to the Church, and what a weapon for Christians is prayer!

Ah, what an excellent Master composed the Lord’s Prayer! What an endless rhetoric and eloquence lies hidden in those words, wherein all things, all necessities, are comprehended.

The first three petitions embrace such great, excellent, and heavenly things, that no heart can ever fathom them.

The fourth petition gathers together all policy and economy, national and domestic government, and all which is bodily and temporal, and needful for this life.

The fifth contends against the devil of a bad conscience; against inborn and actual sins, which burden the conscience.

Truly One who is wise made this prayer, whom no man can rival.

AH, we have cried and prayed so long, and Thou wilt not give us rain! Surely, if Thou givest not rain, Thou wilt give something better—a still and quiet life.

THE prayer of the heart, and the complaints of the poor, raise such a cry that all the angels in heaven must hear it. Our Lord God hears, with quick, delicate hearing, the faintest breath.

THOSE deep sighs, in deep necessities, are the true great clamor and fervent cry before which the heavens are rent.

THE causa efficiens (efficient cause) of prayer is simply faith itself. Causa per accidens (cause by accident), which drives us to prayer, is necessity. The forma (form), is to grasp the mercy so freely given. Materia circa quam (the material about which) is the promise, and the command of God to pray, to which prayer holds and cleaves, and on which it is based. Finis (The end) is the hearing and deliverance.

I have not yet prayed the whole Psalter through. The Lord’s Prayer is my prayer.

GOD gives not according to the measure, manner, and time that we would prescribe. He will be unfettered. But He gives good measure, pressed down and running over, as Christ says.

Thus did St. Augustine’s mother. She asked that her son might be converted. But it came not to pass. She went to all the learned men, that they might persuade him. At last she entreated him to marry a Christian maiden, that she might bring him to the faith. But nothing succeeded.

But when at last our Lord God comes, He comes indeed, and makes such an Augustine of him, that to this day he is called a light of the Church.

SOME have vehemently prayed for temptation, that they might not grow careless without the cross. I, however, will never more pray for temptation, but only, “Lead me not into temptation.”

Every sigh of a Christian is a prayer; when he sighs he prays.

THIS saying, “ Ask, and ye shall receive,” means nothing less than ask, call, cry, knock, knock vehemently. And this we must do, on and on, without ceasing.

Intercession for those in Authority.

PRINCES and lords are poor people, especially when they are good and God-fearing; therefore our Lord God has not vainly commanded us to honor and pray for them.

I did not so well understand this command until I learned it with reference to my two Electors and lords, Duke John and Duke John Frederic. Often they cannot help if they would. Therefore they sorely need the prayer of Christians.

Praying and Waiting.

LET us pray and call on God in all tribulations, and wait.

Let us keep to Christ, and cling to Him, and hang on Him, so that no power can sever us. Then soon we shall see Him with joy, at that Day.

Thanksgiving.

THANKSGIVING makes our prayers bold and strong, easy, moreover, pleasant and sweet; feeds and enkindles them as with coals of fire.

Intercession.

CHRIST suffers not that one should pray for himself alone, but for the whole community of all men. For He teaches us not to say “My Father,” but “Our Father.” Prayer is a spiritual, common possession; therefore we must despoil no one of it, not even our enemies. For as He is the Father of us all, He wills that we shall be brothers amongst each other, and pray for one another, as for ourselves.

Prayer of Luther, Overheard during the Diet of Worms.

ALMIGHTY, everlasting God, how terrible this world is! How it would open its jaws to devour me. And how weak is my trust in Thee! The flesh is weak, and the devil is strong! O Thou my God, help me against all the wisdom of this world. Do Thou the work. It is for Thee alone to do it; for the work is Thine, not mine. I have nothing to bring me here. I have no controversy to maintain—not I—with the great ones of the earth, I, too, would fain that my days should glide along, happy and calm. But the cause is Thine. It is righteous; it is eternal. O Lord, help me! Thou that art faithful, Thou that art unchangeable! It is not in any man I trust. That were vain indeed. All that is in man gives way; all that comes from man faileth, O God, my God, dost Thou not hear me? Art Thou dead? No; Thou canst not die. Thou art hiding Thyself.

Thou hast chosen me for this work. I know it. Oh, then, arise and work! Be Thou on my side, for the sake of Thy beloved Son, Jesus Christ, who is my defense, my shield, and my fortress.

O Lord my God, where art Thou? Come; come! I am ready—ready to forsake life for Thy truth; patient as a lamb. For it is a righteous cause, and it is Thine own. I will not depart from Thee now, nor through eternity. And although the world should be full of demons; although my body (which, nevertheless, is the work of Thy hands) should be doomed to bite the dust, to be stretched on the rack, cut into pieces, consumed to ashes, the soul is Thine. Yes; for this I have the assurance of Thy Word. My soul is Thine. It will abide near Thee throughout the endless ages. Amen. O God, help Thou me! Amen.

Amen, amen—that means Yes, yes; that shall be done.

The Word of God.

THE Word of God is a fiery shield, for this reason, that it is more enduring and purer than gold tried in the fire; which gold loses nothing in the fire, but it stands the fire, endures, and overcomes all trial. So, he who believes in the Word of God, overcomes all, and continues eternally secure against all misfortune. This shield shrinks not from the gates of hell, but the gates of hell tremble before it.

THE words of the Lord Christ are the most powerful; they have hands and feet, and overcome all attacks, all subtleties and devices of the wise. Thus we see in the Gospel how Christ, with quite simple, common words, brought to shame the wisdom of the Pharisees, so that they could find no escape from them.

It is a very acute and conclusive syllogism, when the Lord says, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s:” for He neither bids nor forbids to pay the tribute, but answers them with their own arguments; as if He had said, “If, indeed, you have suffered Caesar to make such inroads that you have,and use his coinage, then give him what you owe him.”

THERE is no greater grace or possession than to believe that God speaks to us, If we believed that, we should be already blessed.

Commentaries.

THROUGH so many commentaries and books the dear Bible is buried, so that people do not look at the text itself. It is far better to see with our own eyes than with other people’s eyes. For which reason I could wish that all my own books were buried nine ells deep in the earth, on account of the bad example they may give to others to follow me in writing multitudes of books.

The Second Psalm.

THIS is a right lofty psalm against the enemies of God. It begins softly and simply, but it goes out with magnificence. It is a lofty, noble psalm. It says, Come and see what the Lord doeth. He has been now six thousand years in the Council, ruling and making all laws. Habitator caeli (inhabitant of heaven), He that dwelleth in the heavens takes our cause in hand.

MANY foes, Egyptian; Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman, have raged against the Bible, endeavoring to extirpate it; but they have been able to accomplish nothing. They are all gone, but the book remains for ever perfect. Who then has preserved it, and defended it with such great power? No one surely but God Himself, who is the Master. And it is a great miracle that God has preserved the book so long, for the devil and the world hate it bitterly.

THE resurrection of the Lord Christ through the Word does not take place without an earthquake, as Christ Himself also did not come forth from the grave without an earthquake.

But such an earthquake is pleasanter to true hearts, than that Christ should lie in the grave and rest. When there is peace and rest in Christendom it is a bad sign.

WHEN the devil finds me idle and unarmed, not heeding God’s Word, he works on my conscience that I have taught wrong, and stirred up by my doctrine much offense and division compared with the former state of the Church, which was still and peaceful.

I cannot deny I am often in depression and anguish on this account; but when I grasp the Word of God, I have won the battle.

WE see, and experience teaches us, how powerful and strong Divine Truth is; it presses through all the obstacles by which it is hemmed in; the more we read it, the more it moves us; it takes the heart captive, and creates other good thoughts.


The Sacraments.

Holy Baptism.

DOCTOR MARTIN LUTHER asked Doctor Hieronymus Weller “ How it went with him?” “Sadly and mournfully,” said he; “I know not how it is.”. Whereon Dr, Martin Luther replied, “Have you, then, not been baptized?” What a great gift of God is baptism! What a great gift also is the Word of God; we should thank God from our hearts that we have His Word. For it is God who comforts and strengthens us, and who has given us His Holy Spirit for a pledge and a foretaste.

HEAVEN is given to me freely, and is my (royal) gift, and I have letters and seals for it; that is, I am baptized and go to the sacrament. Therefore I take care of the letter, that the devil may not tear it in pieces; that is, I live and abide in the fear of God, and pray the Lord’s Prayer.

God could not have given me salvation and the gospel save through the death, the suffering, and dying of His dear Son. And when I believe that He has overcome death, and has died for me, and I look at the promise of the Father, then I have the letter complete, and the seal of baptism and of the sacrament of the altar (the true essential body and blood of our Lord Christ) affixed to it; thus I am well provided for.

We should hold it certain that baptism is God’s ordinance, which He has appointed, that we may know where we may surely find Him. He seeks us; He comes to us; we cannot come to Him of ourselves.

The Sacrament of the Altar.

“THE true cause of this sacrament,” said Dr. Martin Luther, “is the word and appointment of Christ, who has instituted and established it. The materia is bread and wine; the form is the true body and blood of Christ; the final cause whereto it is ordained is the use and fruit, that we may strengthen our faith, and not doubt that the body of Christ is given for us, and His blood poured out for us, and that our sins are surely forgiven us through the death of Christ.”

THIS sacrament can only be received and embraced by the heart; for it is not with the hand that we receive such a gift and eternal treasure.

THIS benefit and grace have we now received, that Christ is our Saviour, not our severe Judge; our Redeemer and Deliverer, not our accuser and jailer who takes us captive. For we are all sinners in Adam, guilty of eternal death, and condemned; but we are all now justified, redeemed, and consecrated by the blood of Christ. Let us grasp this with faith.

The Vow of Baptism the True and Highest Vow.

A CARNAL man does not understand why Paul so often boasts that he is an apostle of Jesus Christ according to the will of God. This boasting was as necessary to him in heavy temptation as an article of the faith. Satan had gained far more advantage over me, also, if I had not been a doctor by vocation.

It is not a little thing to change the whole religion and doctrine of the Papacy. How hard it was to me, will be seen in that Day; now no one believes it.

Gladly, at first, would I have subjected myself to the Pope and his clergy; they, however, would not receive such humility and obedience from me, but insisted, as to-day, that I should give the lie to God, deny Christ, call His gospel heresy. Before I do that, I would, if God willed, and if it were possible, rather be burned ten times over.

In my baptism I promised my Lord Christ I would believe on Him, and cleave fast to Him. This, by His grace, working, and help, I will do. To this I keep in all my temptations (namely, to the vow which I made in baptism, which is the true and highest vow, that I would be faithful to Him), whereon He, on His part, promised He would be my God. If I had not had this consolation, I had long before fainted for great anguish in my heavy temptations. The dear Lord help further, Amen!

GOD speaks to me in His word through His ministers (as Christ says, “ He who heareth you heareth Me”), and says to me, “I have baptized thee and received thee for my child, for Christ’s sake, my beloved Son, who counted not His life dear unto Him to redeem thee. In him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, and these I give to thee to be thine own.” This only comforts. If Christ is lost, all is lost in heaven and on earth.

IT is far too long a delay, if we wait to learn to know Christ until the last conflict. He came to us in baptism, and has been with us always, and has already made the bridge for us on which we pass from this life through death into the life beyond.

CHRIST was offered once for all; now He requires nothing but that we should give Him thanks forever.

HE who receives a sacrament does not perform a good work; he receives a benefit. In the mass we give Christ nothing; we only receive from Him.

IT is not the external eating which makes the Christian. It is the internal and spiritual cating which is the work of faith, and without which all external things are mere empty shows and vain grimaces.

This spiritual bread is the consolation of the afflicted, the cure of the sick, the life of the dying, food to the hungry, the treasure of the poor,


Preaching.

Preparation for Preaching.

DOCTOR MARTIN said to a pastor, “When you are about to preach, speak to God, and say, ‘My Lord God, I wish to preach to Thine honor, to speak of Thee, to praise Thee, to glorify thy name.’”

Think not of me, nor of Philip, nor any of the learned, but remember you are then most learned in the pulpit when you speak of God. I have never been troubled because I could not preach well; but often, because I had to speak, before the face of God, of His great Majesty and Divine Being.

ONCE, when Dr. Martin sat under the pear tree in his garden, he asked Magister Anthony Lauterbach how he prospered with his preaching? When he complained of his temptations, difficulties, and weakness, Dr. Martin said, “Ah, my friend, so it has been with me. I have dreaded the pulpit quite as much as you can; yet I had to go on.

“But you want to be a master all at once. Perhaps you are seeking honor, and are therefore tempted. You should preach for our Lord God, and not regard how men think and judge. If any one can do better, let him; do you preach Christ and the Catechism. Such wisdom will lift you above the judgments of all men, their praise or blame; for this wisdom is God’s, wiser than men.

“You need not expect praise from me; if I hear you, I shall be sure to find fault; for you young (journeymen) preachers must be set down, lest you become ambitious and proud. But this thou shouldst ascertain; that thou art called to this, that Christ hath need of thee to help praise Him. On this stand firm; let who will praise or blame, that is not thy concern.”

DR. MARTIN exhorted the clergy that they should not torture and detain their hearers with long sermons, “For,” said he, “the pleasure of listening passes away from them; and the preachers do them hurt and violence with long preaching.” “Some,” said Dr. Martin, “plague the people with too long sermons; for the faculty of listening is a tender thing, and soon becomes weary and satiated.”

HE was asked, “Which was the greater, to controvert adversaries, or to exhort and hold up the weak?” He answered and said: “Both are good and needful, although to comfort the faint-hearted is something greater; and yet the weak themselves are edified and improved by hearing the faith contended for. Each is God’s gift.”

YOU should not attempt to judge or criticize yourself. It often happens to me that I am ashamed of my sermon when I have finished it, and think how cold it has been; yet others have afterwards commended the same sermon much to me.

The Best Teachers always Learners.

IT is a true word in theology, that those who think they know anything know really nothing. For he who truly hears and learns God’s Word, can never wonder at it enough, or learn it to the bottom. Let every one humble himself and remain a learner therein.

Dr. Luther’s Portrait of a good Preacher.

A GOOD preacher should have these virtues and qualities.

First, he should be able to teach plainly and in order.

Secondly, he should have a good head.

Thirdly, he should have good power of speech.

Fourthly, a good voice.

Fifthly, a good memory.

Sixthly, he should know when to stop.

Seventhly, he should be sure what he means to say, and should study diligently.

Eighthly, he should be ready to stake body and life, goods and glory, on its truth.

Ninthly, he must suffer himself to be vexed and criticized by everybody.

Keeping to the Point.

WHOEVER understands a subject thoroughly and intimately, can speak well about it.

“I endeavor in my sermons,” said Dr. Martin, “to take a text and keep to it; and so to show it to the people, and spread it out before them, that they may say, ‘This is what the sermon was about.’ Soldiers should not greet every one they meet. Dr. Pommer is too much given sometimes to take with him everything he meets on his way. See what the main point is, and keep to it.”

Simplicity.

LET all thy sermons be of the simplest. Look not to the princes, but to the simple, unwise, rude, and unlearned people; for the prince is made of the same stuff. If I in my sermons were to regard Philip Melanchthon and the other doctors, I should do no good; but I preach in the simplest way to the unlearned, and that pleases all. (I keep the Hebrew and Greek for the times when we learned men are alone together. Then we can talk such crabbed stuff they may well wonder at us in heaven.)

A PREACHER should have the skill to teach the unlearned, simply, roundly, and plainly; for teaching is of more importance than exhorting.

NO one should preach for me and Philip, however much we might learn from it. Preaching should not be magnificent with great, splendid, labored words, that men may see how learned we are. Ah, that is worth nothing. In the church every one should use the simple mother-tongue, such as every one can understand.

The doctors are present by forty, young people and unlearned by the thousand.

HE who has one word of God and cannot make a sermon out of it can never be a preacher.

TO preach simply is a high art. Christ does it himself. He speaks of husbandry, of sowing seed, and uses simple peasants’ similes.

“ALBRECHT DURER, the famous painter,” said Dr. Luther, “used to say he had no pleasure in pictures that were painted with many colors, but in those which were painted with a choice simplicity.” So it is with me as to sermons.

IF I had to preach only to Dr. Hieronymus, or to Philip, I would not make another sermon my life-long, for they understand well enough already. Children, men-servants, and maid-servants attend our churches; to these we must preach; these need our preaching, not the learned. It is the poor young people and the simple with whom we have to do; to these we must come down.

So did the Lord Christ; He speaks as if for His audience He had none other than my little Martin, Paul and Magdalene. When, indeed, He comes to the Pharisees, He gives them severe strokes.

We should preach to the little children; for the sake of such as these the office of preaching is instituted.

Dr. Martin said the best books of the Bible to preach from, were the Psalter, the Gospel of St. John, and St. Paul; but for the common people, and the young, the other Gospels.

WE must not teach the common people about high, difficult things, and with subtle words, for they cannot comprehend. Into the church come poor little children, maidens, old women and men, to whom such teaching is useless; and even if they say, “Ah, he said precious things; he made a fine discourse!” if one asks them further, “What did he say?” they often reply, “Ah, I do not know.” To poor people we must call white, white, and black, black, all in the simplest way.

Ah, what pains our Lord Christ took to teach simply. From vineyards, sheep, and trees He drew His similes; anything in order that the multitudes might understand, embrace, and retain it.

Earnestness.

THIS is not the time for jest, but for earnest. “Ye are the salt of the earth.” Salt bites and pains, but it cleanses and preserves from corruption.

Feeding and Guarding.

IN a true, good shepherd, feeding and guarding must be combined; for, if the guarding fails, the wolf will devour all the more readily the sheep which are well fed.

A preacher must be both a warrior and a shepherd. To feed is to teach, and that is the most difficult art; but it is needful also to be able to contend and defend.

The Best Kind of Controversy.

I COUNSEL those who preach in papal countries to teach the Gospel simply, without any snapping or biting. If they do this the Pope will fall, for he does not stand on the Gospel.

Religious Vanity, Gloria Religionists.

HE complained much of the vanity and self-sufficiency of the clergy, especially of the younger. “A new Jurist,” he said, “is in his first year a Justinian; that is, he thinks himself superior to all the doctors, and has nothing but law in his head; the second year he is a Doctor; the third, a Licentiate; the fourth, a Bachelor; the fifth, a Student.”

EVERY one should be content with his own gifts which God has given him; for we cannot all be Pauls and John Baptists; there must also be Tituses and Timothys. We need in any building more common stones than corner stones.

Excellence of the Office of the Preacher and Teacher.

HE who thinks lightly of preachers and of women will never come to good; as is commonly said. The office of the preacher, and women, the mothers of our children, must be held in all honor, that these be kept right and pure. The rule of the home and the State depends on them. Whosoever, therefore, despises these, and sets them at naught, despises God and man.

I WOULD wish that no one were suffered to be a preacher until he had first been a schoolmaster. Now, young men go at once from the school to the pulpit. But when any one has kept a school for ten years, he may leave it with a good conscience. The work is too heavy and too little esteemed. Yet a schoolmaster is as necessary in a town as a pastor. We might more easily do without burgomasters (mayors), princes, and nobles, than without schools, for these must govern the world.

No potentate or lord but needs to be guided by a jurist or theologian; and these come from schools.

If I were no preacher, I know no calling on earth that I should prefer to that of a schoolmaster. But we must not look at what the world rewards and esteems; we must consider what God esteems and will honor in that Day.

Trials and Burdens of the Preacher.

TO be a true pastor and preacher is a great thing; and if our Lord God Himself did not give strength, the thing could not be.

It needs a great soul to serve the people with body and soul, goods and honor, and to suffer for it the greatest peril and ingratitude.

Therefore it was that Christ said to Peter, “Peter, lovest thou Me?” and repeats it three times, and then says, “ Feed My sheep.” It is as if He said: “If thou wilt be a true shepherd and friend of souls, thou must be so from love to Me.” Otherwise it is impossible. For who will and can suffer ingratitude, spend his health and substance in study, and, for a reward, stand in the greatest peril? Therefore He says: “It is a necessity that thou shouldst love Me.”

I HAVE begun, and I will persevere. I would not take the whole world to begin again, so exceeding great and heavy are the cares and sorrows of this office. Dear sirs, it is no child’s play. Nevertheless, when I look at Him who has called me, I would not wish not to have undertaken it.

IF I were to write of the burdens which a preacher must bear, as I have experienced them, I should terrify every one from the office. A true God-fearing preacher must be so minded, that nothing is dearer to him than Christ his Lord and Saviour, and the future eternal life; so that when he has lost this life and all things, Christ may say to him, “Come hither to Me; thou hast been my good and faithful servant.”

IT was once asked, when two preachers at Nurnberg had died of the Plague, “if a preacher, whose office is only preaching, may, with a good conscience, refuse his services to the sick, and not visit them in times of pestilence.”

Thereupon Dr. Martin Luther answered and said:

“By all that is most sacred, No! The preachers must not flee too readily, lest they make the people fearful, and they should come to disregard the priests, seeing that at such a time none will come to them. It is not good, on the other hand, that all should stay.

“If the lot fell on me to stay, I would not shrink, nor fear. I have now survived three pestilences, and have been with many who have suffered; but, thank God, I took no harm. I came home and stroked my little Margarethe on the cheek, without washing my hands. But I had forgotten, or I would not have done it. It would have been tempting God.”

ST. JEROME has written about the Book of Job; but he wrote only thoughts, for he had not experienced the deepest temptations (i.e., spiritual, not fleshly). If I could have preached in my sickness, I could have made many a beautiful sermon on temptation; for then I learned to understand the Psalter and its consolations a little.

THE good Paul had to suffer and see many things, as God says of him: “I will show him how great things he must suffer for My name’s sake.” He soon lays on his neck the Pati,— the yoke of suffering; and he experienced it indeed. Such heart-sorrow as is far worse than death. It is called martyrum interpretativum, martyrdom without blood, wherein we are indeed burned and tortured.

Rewards of the Preachers.

IF we are found true to our calling we shall receive honor enough; not, however, in this life, but in the life to come.

There we shall be crowned with the unfading crown of glory, as St. Paul says, which is laid up for us in heaven. But here on earth, saith the Lord Christ, we shall not have glory, for it is written: “Woe unto you when all men speak well of you.” For we do not belong to this life, but are called to another, and a far better.

I will not be crowned on earth by men.

I choose to have my recompense from God, the just Judge, in heaven.


Patience as a Weapon.

Patience ts the best Virtue.

IF thou wilt learn to overcome the greatest, fiercest, and most spiteful enemies, who would fain crush thee, and do thee all possible harm in body and soul, purchase before all things one weapon, and give all thou hast to learn how to exercise it. And know that it is one sweet, lovely little herb, which serves this purpose best, which is called Patientia.

“Ah,” sayest thou, “how can I find this medicine?” The answer is, “ Take faith to thee, which says that no one can hurt thee unless God wills it. If evil comes to thee, it comes to thee from God’s kind and gracious will. So that thy foe does himself a thousandfold greater hurt than thee.”

For from this faith flows love, which says: “I will still render good for evil, heap coals of fire on his head.” This love is the Christian’s armor and coat of mail, wherewith he casts down his foes, though they seem like great mountains, and are not to be cast down by iron and steel. This same love teaches us patiently to suffer all things.

NO one does me hurt, but it will hurt him in the end; for he has to die. I sin not in suffering, but he who makes me suffer, sins.

Patience with the Misled, and Anger against those who Mislead.

ST. PAUL showeth towards the Galatians a fatherly and motherly affection, and speaketh them very fair, and yet in such a sort that he reproveth them.

Contrariwise, he is very hot and full of indignation against those false apostles their seducers; he bursteth into plain thunderings and lightnings against them.

This example must we also follow, that we may show ourselves to bear like affection toward such as are misled.

But as for the devil and his ministers, against them we ought to be impatient, proud, sharp and bitter, detesting and condemning their false jugglings and deceits with as much rigor and severity as may be. So parents, when their child is hurt with the biting of a dog, are wont to pursue the dog only; but the weeping child they bemoan, and speak fair unto it, comforting it with the most sweet words.

Flowers

Continued in IV. The Armies of Heaven

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, II. Rules of the Service

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life, Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, II. Rules of the Service

Continued from Watchwords for the Warfare of Life – By Martin Luther Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, I. The Commander

Obedience a Glorious Apparel.

HER clothing ts all glorious within. What kind of glorious apparel is this? For we know that on earth Christians are poor and little esteemed. It is a spiritual adorning; not gold, silver, pearls, velvet, but obedience to the Lord our God, This apparel is brighter than the sun, for these are God’s jewels. He who goes about doing God’s will, goes about clothed in God’s beauty. To serve Him truly, is simply to abide in our calling, be it lowly as it may.

WHEN one asked what was the best service of God, which pleased Him best? Doctor Martin said, “To hear Christ and be obedient to Him.” This is the highest and greatest service of God. Besides this, all is worth no- thing. For in heaven He has far better and more beautiful worship and service than we can render. As it was said to Saul, “To obey is better than to sacrifice.” As also soldiers say in time of war; obedience and keeping to the articles of war —this is victory.

EVEN in philosophy men are constrained not to look on the bare work, but on the goodwill of the worker. Wherefore we must ascend up higher in divinity with this word “doing” than in natural things and philosophy, so that now it must have a new signification, and be made altogether new.

TRUE obedience to God is the obedience of faith and good works; that is, he is truly obedient to God who trusts Him and does what He commands.

CHRISTIANS have to do with two kinds of business; the Word and the works of God.

IN all works we should look to God’s Word. Such works as are done at God’s command, these are not from our self-will; but we are God’s tools and instruments, through which He works; they are not our own works, but God’s. But all works which are not done at God’s command are godless and condemned, being mere works of our own hands.

THE true doer of the law is he who, receiving the Holy Ghost through faith in Christ, beginneth to love God and to do good to his neighbor. The tree must be first, and then the fruit.

TO worship God in spirit, is the service and homage of the heart, and implies fear of God and trust in Him.

ALL Christians constitute the spiritual estate; and the only difference among them is that of the functions which they discharge.

The Law and the Gospel.

THE law discovers the disease. The gospel gives the remedy.

THE law is what we must do; the gospel what God will give.

THE gospel is like a fresh, soft, cool breeze in the great heat of summer, a comfort in anguish of conscience; not in winter, when there is already cold enough (that is in time of peace, when people are secure); but in the great heat of summer—that is, in those who truly feel terror and anguish of conscience, and God’s anger against them.

THIS heat is caused by the sun. So must this terror of conscience be caused by the preaching of the law. Then must the heavenly breeze again quicken and refresh the conscience.

BUT when the powers are thus again quickened by the sweet wind of the gospel, we must not lie idly basking, we must show our faith by good works.

LIKE as the parched earth coveteth the rain, the law maketh parched and troubled souls . to thirst after Christ.

THE law is a light which enlightens us not to see God’s grace nor righteousness, through which we attain to eternal life, but sin, our infirmities, death, God’s anger, and judgment.

THE gospel is a far different light. It lights up the troubled heart, makes it live again, comforts and helps. For it shows how God forgives unworthy, condemned sinners for Christ’s sake, when they believe that they are redeemed by His death; and that through His victory are given to them all blessings, grace, forgiveness of sins, righteousness, and eternal life.

The Law a Fire.

THE law is that hammer, that fire, that mighty and strong wind, and that terrible earthquake, rending the mountains and shivering the rocks. But it behooved that the tempest, the fire, the wind, the earthquake, should pass, before the Lord should reveal Himself in the still small voice.

The Law a Prison.

THE law is a prison, both civilly and spiritually. For, first, it restraineth and shutteth up the wicked; furthermore, by revealing sin, it shutteth man up in a prison, out of which he cannot escape.

The Law a Schoolmaster.

THE law is not barely a schoolmaster, but a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. For what a schoolmaster were he which should alway torment and beat the child, and teach him nothing at all? And yet such schoolmasters there were in times past, when schools were nothing else but a prison and a very hell; the schoolmasters cruel tyrants and very butchers; the children were always beaten; they learned with continual pain and travail, and yet few of them came to any proof. The law is not such a schoolmaster. For it doth not only terrify and torment. It instructeth, and exerciseth, and with its rods driveth us to Christ.

“IF Moses comes to judge me,” said Doctor Martin, “I will motion him away, in God’s name, and say, ‘Here stands Christ.’ And at the Last Day, Moses will look on me and say, ‘Thou hast understood me aright.’ And he will be gracious to me.”

The Law a Wall of Defense.

BY the Ten Commandments the Lord hath defended and fortified the life of man, his wife and children, and his goods, as it were with a wall, against the force and violence of the wicked.

The Decalogue to be taught Affirmatively.

THE Decalogue (that, is the Ten Commandments of God) is a mirror and brief summary of all virtues, and teaches how we should conduct ourselves towards God and towards man. And no more beautiful, perfect, and shorter book of virtues was ever written.

The virtue of the First Commandment is godliness; that is, to fear, love, and trust God.

Of the Second, to confess and preach the doctrine of God’s word.

Of the Third, public worship of God.

Of the Fourth, obedience to parents, preceptors, and rulers in that which is not contrary to God.

Of the Fifth, gentleness, not to be revengeful.

Of the Sixth, chastity and sobriety.

Of the Seventh, to do good, willingly give and lend, and be generous.

Of the Eighth, truth, to injure no one’s good name, to speak good of each other.

Of the Ninth, justice, to let each enjoy his own.

Of the Tenth, to be without evil desires in the heart, and to be content with our own. The Ten Commandments are to be understood and explained as not only forbidding, but bidding. “The chief commandment is love from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned.”

THAT word, “Thou shalt have none other gods before Me,” once seemed to me useless and superfluous under the gospel. When I read it first, I thought, “Ah, who does not know that?” But now, thank God, I see what the words mean; indeed, they are more wonderful than any man can explain or comprehend.

Short Sayings about the Catechism as Dr. Martin Luther taught wt at Home.

THE COMMANDMENTS

AS faith is, so is God. God does not remain outside, although He delays.

Idolatry is essentially darkness of heart.

God gives through creatures.

Unthankfulness is theft.

No one should be judged in his absence.

Interpret all for the best.

No good work goes beyond the Ten Commandments.

To fear and trust God is fulfilling all the Commandments.

The First Commandment includes all the rest.

THE CREED.

GOD gives Himself to us with all the creatures.

The Holy Spirit brings Christ home to us.

Where the Holy Spirit does not preach, there is no church.

The work of the Holy Spirit is going forward perpetually.

GOOD WORKS.

THE good works of Christians are to benefit and help our neighbors.

In tribulations we should be manly and of a good heart.

Our whole life should be manly, fearing and trusting God.

Faith makes us the inheritance of Christ.

The gospel is pure joy.

The person must be good before his works.

“A Christian life consists in three things—in faith, love, and the cross.” Elsewhere he says, “Faith, confession, and the cross make a true Christian.”

A clergyman is like the director of a hospital. God’s gifts which we possess, we should es- teem highly; ourselves humbly.

THE Decalogue is a doctrine beyond all doctrines. The Apostles’ Creed is virtue beyond all virtues. The Lord’s Prayer is a prayer beyond all prayers and Litanies; moreover, it is a joy above all joys. For as the Ten Commandments teach and exhort all in the freest and fullest way, so the Creed fulfills the same in the most thorough way, and the Lord’s Prayer asks and entreats all in the most Christian and certain way. Therefore this threefold cord makes a man perfect in thought, speech, and work, ordering and educating his heart, mind, tongue, and body to the highest perfection.

The Decalogue based on Redemption.

THUS saith God, “I am the Lord thy God, who led thee out of the land of Egypt.” Because God can only be known through His acts and works. He points us to a glorious act whereby we may know what a God we honor and serve—namely, the God who delivered Israel from the house of bondage; the God who has given us His Word, and His Son Christ, who has suffered and died for us; the God who awakened Him again from the dead.

Fulfilling the Duties of our Calling the best Service of God.

ST. PAUL in his Epistles has written more fully and wisely of virtues and good works than all the philosophers, for he exalts and gloriously commends the works of each man’s calling.

HE said, “Master Joachim Morlein has pleased me well to-day with his sermon, for he spoke of the office and vocation of a wife, and a maid-servant—namely, that a wife should think she lives in a Holy Order, and that a servant also may know that her works are good and holy works. This the people can carry home.”

IF a peasant knew the perils and toils of a prince, he would thank God that he was a peasant, and in the happiest and safest state. But the peasants know not their happiness and welfare. They look only on the outside pomp of princes, their fine clothes, golden chains, great castles, and houses; but see not the care and peril wherein princes live, as in a fire and a deluge.

PEASANTS’ work is among the happiest, for it is full of hope. Ploughing, sowing, planting, propping, pruning, mowing, threshing, wood-cutting, are all labors full of hope.

SO, also, men and maidens in a house are often better off than their masters and mistresses, for they have no household cares—have only to do their work, and when this is done, it is done; and they can eat, and drink, and sing. My Wolf, and Orthe (Dorothea), my man, and my cook, are better off than my Kattie or I, for married life and the ordering of a household bring with them their trials and the holy cross.

HE spoke of the legends of the holy Patriarchs, how far they exceeded the holiness of (reputed) saints, because they simply went on their way, In obedience to God, in the works of their calling, and did what came to their hand to do, according to God’s commandment, without choosing for themselves.

Two Vocations, of Faith and of Love.

NO one can understand any work aright unless he is called to it.

Vocation is of two kinds. Either it is divine, comes from above, or from those who have the right to command; and then it is a Vocation of Faith.

Or it is a Vocation of Love, and comes from our equals.

Two Sacrifices.

THE first was called in the Old Testament the early or morning sacrifice. By this it was shadowed forth that we should first sacrifice to God, not calves and oxen, but ourselves, acknowledging God’s gifts, both bodily and Spiritual, temporal and eternal, and giving Him thanks.

The second the evening sacrifice. By this it was signified that a Christian should offer to God a broken, lowly, contrite heart, which confesses both its sin and danger, bodily and spiritual, and cries to God for help.

What Obedience meant to Luther.

AT THE DIET OF WORMS.

“HERE I stand: I can do no otherwise. God help me. Amen.”

AT AUGSBURG.

“THREE whole days I was at Augsburg, without the Imperial safe-conduct. Meantime they earnestly entreated me to say ‘Revoco.’ (recant)

“After three days the Bishop of Trent came and showed me the safe-conduct. Then I went in all humility to the Cardinal; fell at first on my knee; the second time on the ground; the third time prostrate there so long that three times he bid me rise. Then I arose. That pleased him much. He hoped I would think better of it.

“When I came to the Cardinal the second time, and would not recant, he said:

“’What meanest thou? Dost think the princes will defend thee with arms and armies? Surely, no! Where, then, wilt thou take refuge?’

“I said, ‘Under heaven.’”

DURING THE PLAGUE AT WITTENBURG.

“IF the lot fell on me, I would not shrink from the plague. I have been with many when they had it. I have now remained through three pestilences without fleeing.”

Merit.

MERIT is a work for the sake of which Christ gives rewards. But no such work is to be found, for Christ gives by promise. Just as if a prince were to say to me: “Come to me in my castle, and I will give you a hundred florins.” I do a work, certainly, in going to the castle, but the gift is not given me as the reward of my work in going, but because the prince promised it me.

Continued in Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, III. The Weapons of Our Warfare.

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




Watchwords for the Warfare of Life – By Martin Luther Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, I. The Commander

Watchwords for the Warfare of Life – By Martin Luther Part 1 Words for the Battle-Field, I. The Commander

Introduction from the Webmaster

This is from a PDF file I found on LutheranLibrary.Org

About this series of quotes from Martin Luther, one of my friends, Steve, commented: “Sometimes the reformers like Martin Luther, can be “dated” to those of us several centuries on. Many of them were challenging Roman Catholicism for the first time and might have carried over teachings you and I certainly don’t agree with. But in the main, I’ll take their faith and belief in God’s plain Word compared to many of the newer and very misleading “experts” (so called) of the past 150 years!”

I agree! Though I find much of what Martin Luther had to say inspiring, we must not take his words all as Gospel truth. He had come out of the Catholic Church and was still was somewhat under its influence. That’s no surprise. We can try to cut ourselves off from the world, but past experiences in the world may continue to influence us apart from the grace of God. It’s good to pray the prayer of Psalms 139:23-24:

Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.

“The selections in this volume have all been freshly translated from Luther’s own German or Latin, with the exception of the extracts taken from the sixteenth century translation of the Commentary on the Galatians.” -from the introduction.

WATCHWORDS
FOR THE
WARFARE OF LIFE.
FROM DR. MARTIN LUTHER.

I. THE COMMANDER.

We must strive, for we are under one Lord of armies and Prince of warriors. Therefore, with one hand we must build, and iN the other bear the sword.

It must not be “Sic ego Philippus.” The “ego” is too small. The word is, “I am that I am.”

LOVE is an image of God, and not a lifeless image, nor one painted on paper, but the living essence of the Divine Nature, which beams full of all goodness.

He is not harsh, as we are to those who have injured us. We withdraw our hand and close our purse; but He is kind to the unthankful and the evil.

He sees thee in thy poverty and wretchedness, and knows thou hast nothing to pay; therefore He freely forgives and gives thee all.

“GOD’S love gives in such a way, that it flows from a Father’s heart, the well-spring of all good. The heart of the giver makes the gift dear and precious; as among ourselves we say of even a trifling gift, ‘It comes from a hand we love,’ and look not so much at the gift as at the heart.”

“IF we will only consider Him in His works, we shall learn that God is nothing else but pure, unutterable love, greater and more than any one can think. The shameful thing is, that the world does not regard this, nor thank Him for it, although every day it sees before it such countless benefits from Him; and it deserves for its ingratitude that the sun should not shine another moment longer, nor the grass grow; yet He ceases not, for one moment’s interval, to love us and to do us good. Language must fail me to speak of His spiritual gifts. Here He pours forth for us, not sun and moon, nor heaven and earth, but His own heart, His beloved Son, so that He suffered His blood to be shed, and the most shameful death to be inflicted on Him, for us wretched, wicked, thankless creatures. How, then, can we say anything but that God is an abyss of endless, unfathomable love?”

“THE whole Bible is full of this—that we should not doubt, but be absolutely certain, that God is merciful, gracious, patient, faithful, and true; who not only will keep His promises, but already has kept and done abundantly beyond what He promised, since He has given His own Son for our sins on the cross, that all who believe on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

“WHOEVER believes, and embraces this, that God has given His only Son to die for us poor sinners, to him it is no longer any doubt, but the most certain truth, that God reconciles us to Himself, and is favorable and heartily gracious to us.”

“SINCE the gospel shows us Christ the Son of God, who, according to the will of the Father, has offered Himself for us, and has satisfied for sin, the heart can no more doubt God’s goodness and grace—is no more affrighted, nor flies from God, but sets all its hope in His goodness and mercy.”

THE apostles are always exhorting us to continue in the love of God—that is, that each one should entirely conclude in his heart that he is loved by God; and they set before our eyes a certain proof of it, in that God has not spared His Son, but given Him for the world, that through His death the world might again have life.

It is God’s honor and glory to give liberally. His nature is all pure love, so that if any one would describe or picture God, he must describe One who is pure love, the Divine Nature being nothing else than a furnace and glow of such love that it fills heaven and earth.

IT is not to be borne that Christian people should say, We cannot know whether God is favorable to us or not. On the contrary, we should learn to say, I know that I believe in Christ, and therefore that God is my gracious Father.

WHAT is the reason that God gives? What moves Him to it ? Nothing but unutterable love, because He delights to give and to bless. What does He give? Not empires merely, not a world full of silver and gold, not heaven and earth only; but His Son, who is as great as Himself —that is, eternal and incomprehensible, a Gift as infinite as the Giver, the very spring and fountain of all grace; yea, the possession and property of all the riches and treasures of God.

Omnipresence.

GOD is limited to no place. He is also excluded from none. He is in all places, and in the least of His creatures, in the petal of the flower, in a blade of grass; and yet He is in no place. Nowhere, comprehensively and exclusively; everywhere, because everywhere He is creating and upholding everything.

The Creation not Left to Itself.

GOD has not so created the creatures that after creating He abandons them. He loves them, delights in them, is with them; moves and sustains each creature according to its kind.

We Christians know that with God creating and sustaining are one thing.

The Creator.

TO Magister Holflein, Doctor Martin Luther said, “Dear Master, where were you, sixty years ago? Where was I? Whence came I hither? Whence came you hither? We did not create ourselves, and yet, now, we want to go to our Lord God and bargain with Him, and sell Him our works! He must, forsooth, give us His heaven for them! Is not this a shameful thing, that a creature should lift itself up thus and desire to traffic with its Creator?

“We do not really believe that God is our Creator. If we believed it, we should act far otherwise. But no one believes that God is the Creator. Even when we say it, and our con- science convinces us, it is not genuine earnest with us.

“We virtually go up to God and say, ‘Lord God, look on me for my works’ sake! I come to Thee. Thou hast not created me.’ Shame on us.”

The Living God.

THE chief thing that God requireth of man is that he giveth unto Him the glory of His Divinity—that is to say, that he taketh Him not for an idol, but for God, who looketh on him, listeneth to him, showeth mercy on him, and helpeth.

“True Christian Divinity.”

TRUE Christian Divinity setteth not God forth unto us in His Majesty. It commandeth us not to search out the nature of God, but to know His will set forth to us in Christ.

Therefore begin thou where Christ began— namely, in the womb of the Virgin, in the manger, and at His mother’s breast. It is to this end He came down, was born, was conversant among men; suffered, was crucified and died, that by all means He might set Himself forth plainly before us, and fasten the eyes of our heart upon Himself, that He might thereby keep us from climbing up into heaven, and from the curious searching of the Divine Majesty.

Christ Revealing the Father.

CHRIST, according to His office, calleth us back unto the Father’s will, that in His words and works we should not so much look on Him, but on the Father. For Christ came into this world, and took man’s nature on Him, that He might be a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, and so reconcile us to God the Father; that He alone might declare unto us how this was done through the good pleasure of the Father, that we, by fastening our eyes on Christ, might be drawn and carried straight unto the Father.

Theology Beginning at Bethlehem.

CHRISTIAN religion beginneth not at the highest, as other religions do, but at the lowest. It will have us to climb up by Jacob’s ladder, whereupon God Himself leaneth, whose feet touch the very earth, hard by the head of Jacob.

Run straight to the manger, and embrace this infant, the Virgin’s little babe, in thine arms; and behold Him as He was born, nursed, grew up, was conversant amongst men; teaching; dying; rising again; ascending up above all the heavens, and having power over all things.

This sight and contemplation will keep thee in the right way, that thou mayest follow whither Christ hath gone.

God Stooping to Man.

THE Gospel is the Revelation of the Son of God.

With our reason we can never comprehend what God the Creator is. And for this cause He has taught, “It is in vain; human reason cannot comprehend Me. I am too great and too high. I will make Myself little, that man may understand Me; I will give him My Son, and so give Him, that for man He shall become a sacrifice, sin and a curse, and be obedient to Me the Father, even to the death of the cross.”

This is indeed to become little and comprehensible. But who believes it? Novem ubi sunt? “Where are the nine?”

The Incarnation.

IN deep spiritual temptations nothing has helped me better, with nothing have I heartened myself and driven away the devil better than with this, that Christ, the true Eternal Son of God, is “bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh,” and that he sits on the right hand of God, and pleads for us. When I can grasp this shield of faith, I have already chased away the evil one with his fiery darts.

ANNO Domini 1538, on the 25th of December, on Christmas Day, Doctor Martin Luther was very joyous, and all his sayings, songs, and thoughts were about the Incarnation of Christ our Saviour. And he said, with a deep sigh,—

“Ah, we poor human creatures, how coldly and tamely we greet this great joy which has come to bless us! This is the great act of beneficence which far excels all other works of creation. And shall we so feebly believe it, when it has been announced to us, preached, and sung by the angels? (heavenly theologians and preachers, indeed!) And they have rejoiced on our account, and their song is verily a glorious.song, wherein is briefly enfolded the sum of the whole Christian religion. For the Gloria in excelsis Deo, ‘Glory to God in the highest,’ is the high- est worship, and this they bring to us in this Christ.

“For the world since Adam’s fall knows neither God nor His creatures; lives without regarding God’s glory; praises, honors, glorifies Him not. Oh, what choice, joyous thoughts man would have had; seeing even in the lowliest flowers that our Lord God is an Artist and Master whom none can imitate!

“Wherefore the dear angels call us, fallen creatures, to faith in Christ, and to love; that we, giving glory to God alone, may have peace in this life, both with God and with one another.”

THE Feast of the Annunciation may well be called the Feast of the Incarnation. Then our Redemption began. Thus the French and the English date the beginning of the year from this Feast. For this mystery no one can explain, nor fathom with his reason, that God, the Highest Majesty, has humbled Himself to take on Him our flesh.

On this day we preachers should diligently picture to the people the History of the Festival, as Luke describes it, circumstantially and in order; and we should, all together, have joy and delight in the comforting, blessed story that, as on this day, Christ our Lord and Saviour, conceived by the Holy Ghost, took our human nature upon Him, of the pure chaste Virgin Mary; became our Brother; lifted up our condemned and corrupted humanity to this highest glory, that we should be children of God, and His fellow-heirs, at which, indeed, we should rejoice more than over all the treasures of this earth.

It is true we cannot enough praise Mary, that high, noble creature; but when the Creator Himself comes and gives Himself for us, to redeem us from the power of the devil, for this inexpressible grace, neither we nor the angels can praise and bless Him enough to eternity.

The Childhood and Youth of our Lord.

ALL the wisdom of the world is mere child’s play, yes, folly, compared with the knowledge of Christ. For what is more wonderful than to know and acknowledge the great, unspeakable mystery that the Son of God, the express Image of the Eternal Father, has taken our nature on Him, and become in fashion as a man?

At Nazareth He must have helped His father build houses; for Joseph was a carpenter. Therefore Christ was called “the carpenter’s son;” yes, Himself “the carpenter.”

What will the people of Nazareth think at the Last Day, when they shall see Christ sitting in Divine Majesty, and may say to Him, “Lord, didst Thou not help build my house? How then comest Thou to this high glory?”

Many fables have been imaged, by many, of what Jesus did in His childhood and youth, as can be seen in the book with the title, “De Infanti a Salvatoris,” and “De Vita Fesu.” But because in this book stands many a foolish, ridiculous thing, it has never been esteemed by Christians.

This, however, is the needful thing, that we Christians should with all diligence learn and know that the Son of God did so deeply humble Himself, was born so poor and in such a low estate, all on account of our sins; and that for our sakes He hid His Majesty so long.

When He was born, He wept and wailed like another babe. Mary had to wait on Him and tend Him, and feed Him at her breast (as the Church sings, “A little milk was once His food”), to cherish, clothe, lift, and carry Him, lay Him to rest, as any other mother her babe.

Soon afterwards Joseph, with the mother and the babe, in distress, had to flee into Egypt, from Herod.

When, after Herod’s death, they came back to Nazareth, He was subject to His parents, and no doubt often brought them bread, drink, and other things. Mary may have said to Him, “Jesus, where hast Thou been? Canst Thou not stay at home!” And when He grew up, He must have helped Joseph at the carpentering, &c. Not to stumble nor to be offended at this feeble, lowly form, this despised mode of life, which was seen in Christ, is great, high art and wisdom, yea, God’s gift, and the Holy Ghost’s own work.

Some are offended because we sometimes say in the pulpit that Christ was a carpenter (Zimmergescell), But it is a far greater offense that He was nailed to the cross, as one guilty of blasphemy and insurrection, between two malefactors.

IT is written that there was once a pious godly bishop who had often earnestly prayed that God would manifest to him what Jesus had done in His youth. Once the bishop had a dream to this effect. He seemed, in his sleep, to see a carpenter working at his trade, and beside him a little boy, who was gathering up chips. Then came in a maiden, clothed in green, who called them both to come to the meal, and set porridge (Brei) before them. All this the bishop seemed to see in his dream, himself standing behind the door that he might not be perceived. Then the little boy began and said, “ Why does that man stand there? Shall not he also eat with us?” And this so frightened the bishop that he awoke.

Let this be what it may, a true history or a fable, I none the less believe that Christ in His childhood and youth looked and acted like other children, “yet without sin,” “in fashion like a man.”

Often (so I think, I assert it not for truth), when His parents had need, by His Divine power He may have created and brought them what they needed, without money. For when His mother saw at the marriage-feast at Cana that they wanted wine, from her motherly heart she said to Him with confidence, “They have no wine,” as if often before she had seen how He could help in need.

Whosoever, therefore, will rightly comprehend this child, must think that there is no higher wisdom than to acknowledge Christ, and not to be offended or turned aside, because the world holds all this for the greatest foolishness. For to us who believe it is the “wisdom of God and the power of God” whereby we are saved, and wherein the dear angels have delight and joy.

Therefore it pleases me very well, when in the churches they sing aloud, and with a solemn slowness, Et homo factus est and Verbum caro factum est. To these words the devil cannot listen, but must flee many miles from them, for he feels well what there is in them.

If we rejoiced from our hearts over those words, as the devil trembles at them, it would be well for us.

Christ at the Judgment-Seat.

IS it not a wonderful thing that the Son of God should sit there and suffer himself to be so piteously tormented, scorned, and mocked? —He whom all angels adore, before whom the earth trembles?—Whom all the creatures acknowledge as their Creator, in His face they spit, strike Him on the lips with a reed, say in mockery, “Ah, if He is a king He must have a crown and sceptre!”

Oh, our sufferings are nothing! When I think of them, I am ashamed to death. Yet we are to be conformed to the image of the Son of God; and if our sufferings could be as great as His, it would still be nothing in comparison. For He is the Son of God, and we are poor creatures. If we suffered eternal death, it were nothing in comparison.

The Last Supper.

THE supper which Christ held with His disciples when He gave them His farewell must have been full of friendly heart-intercourse; for Christ spoke just as tenderly and cordially to them as a father to his dear little children when he is obliged to part from them, He made the best of their infirmities, and had patience with them, although all the while they were so slow to understand, and still lisped like babes.

Yet that must indeed have been choice, friendly, and delightful converse when Philip said, “Show us the Father;” and Thomas, “We know not the way;” and Peter, “I will go with Thee to prison and to death.”

It was simple, quiet table-talk; every one opening his heart and showing his thoughts freely and fearlessly, and without restraint.

Never since the world began was there a more delightful meal than that.

The Agony tn the Garden.

DR. LUTHER was once questioned at table concerning the “bloody sweat,” and the other deep spiritual sufferings which Christ endured in the garden. Then he said—”No man can know or conceive what that anguish must have been. If any man began even to experience such suffering, he must die. You know many do die of sickness of heart; for heart- anguish is indeed death. If a man could feel such anguish and distress as Christ felt, it would be impossible for him to endure it and for his soul to remain in his body. Soul and body would part. To Christ alone was this agony possible, and it wrung from Him ‘sweat which was as great drops of blood.’”

The Ascension of Christ.

A WONDERFUL thing it must have been to see, when Christ vanished before the disciples’ eyes, and went up into heaven. The good disciples must have thought, “We have eaten and drunk with Him, and now, whilst looking at us, He is taken from us into heaven.” I know Dr. Justus Jonas very intimately, and if he were now raised up into heaven, and were to vanish before our eyes, it would give us many strange and wonderful thoughts.

NO man hath ascended into heaven save He who came down from heaven, even the Son of Man, who is in heaven.”

In these three sayings are briefly comprehended His almightiness. “To come down from heaven,” means that He appeared on earth, became man (in all things like us, save in sin), let His glory be seen in his words and wondrous works, and at last accomplished the redemption of the human race.

“To ascend to heaven,” means that henceforth He appears no more on earth in bodily form.

“Is in heaven,” means that in His Godhead He has never left the right hand of the Father, and moreover that He has never relinquished, and will never relinquish, the human nature which He has taken on Him.

The Holy Spirit.

ON the Day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit began the New Testament. Then He openly established his office and work, as Christ proclaimed Him, “the Comforter, and the Spirit of Truth.”

For He gave to the apostles and disciples a true, sure consolation in their hearts, and an assured, joyful mind, so that they did not ask if the world and the devil were favorable or unfavorable, raged or laughed, but went through the streets of the city, and thought, “Here neither Annas, Caiaphas, Pilate, or Herod are anything. We Christians are all. All are our subjects and servants, and we their lords and rulers.”

That these poor beggars and fishermen, the apostles, should step forth and preach as they did, enraging the whole government at Jerusalem, bringing on themselves the wrath of the priests also, and of the whole Roman empire, opening their mouths and crying, “Ye are traitors and murderers,” knowing that they would in consequence be smitten on the mouth; all this could not have been but through the Holy Spirit.

THE Holy Ghost is called the Comforter, not one who makes sad; for where melancholy and depression are, there the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, is not at home. The devil is a spirit of terror and sadness. But the Holy Ghost is the Comforter.

THE Holy Ghost, who is called a Witness and a Comforter, preaches and testifies throughout Christendom, to comfort and strengthen all the sorrowful, of none save only of Christ.

THE Holy Scriptures give to the Holy Spirit a very choice name, calling Him an Advocate, Paraclete, who conducts our cause and does the best for us, speaks for us, makes intercession for us, and helps us up again when we are fallen. Thus we obtain the victory through faith, and overcome the devil and the world, not by our own means and powers, but by the power and working of the Holy Spirit and of faith.

The Love of God.

THE slender capacity of man’s heart cannot comprehend, much less utter, that unsearchable depth and burning zeal of God’s love towards us.

God is gracious and merciful, as the Scriptures show. He loves even real sinners (bosen Buben). Yea, to the blind, hard world which lieth in the wicked one, He has sent as a Saviour His own Son. I could not have done that, and yet I am a real sin- ner (bose Bube) myself.

“True Definition of Christ.”

FOR, indeed, Christ is no cruel exactor, but a forgiver of the sins of the whole world. Wherefore, if thou be a sinner (as indeed are we all), set not Christ down upon the rainbow as a judge, but take hold of His true definition—namely, that Christ the Son of God and of the Virgin is a Person not that terrifieth, not that afflicteth, not that condemneth us of sin, not that demandeth an account of us for our life of evil passed, but hath given Himself for our sins, and with one oblation hath put away the sins of the whole world, hath fastened them upon the cross, and put them clean out by Himself.

CHRIST, then, is no Moses, no exactor, no giver of laws, but a giver of grace; a Saviour, and one that is full of mercy. Briefly, He is nothing else but infinite mercy and goodness, freely given, and bountifully giving unto us.

Now, as it is the greatest knowledge and cunning that Christians can have thus to define Christ, so of all things it is the hardest.

I speak not this without cause, for I know what moveth me to be so earnest that we should learn to define Christ out of the words of Paul.

Ye young men, therefore, are in this case much more happy than we that are old. For ye are not infected with these pernicious errors where in I have been so nustled (cherished, nursed) and drowned from my youth, that at the very hearing of the name of Christ my heart hath trembled and quaked for fear.

Christ, when He cometh, is nothing else but joy and sweetness to a trembling, broken heart, as Paul here witnesseth, who setteth Him out with this most sweet and comfortable title when he saith, “Which loved me and gave Himself for me.” Christ, therefore, in very deed is a lover of those which are in trouble and anguish, in sin and death, and such a lover as gave Himself for us, who is also our High Priest.

He saith not, “Which hath received our works at our hands,” nor “Which hath received the sacrifices of Moses’ law, worshippings, religions, masses, vows and pilgrimages;” but hath “given.” What? Not gold nor silver, nor beasts, nor paschal lambs, nor an angel, but Himself. For what? Not for a crown, not for a kingdom, not for our holiness and righteousness, but for our sins. Not for feigned or counterfeit sins, nor yet for small sins, nor for vanquished sins, but for great and huge sins; not for one or two, but for all.

Christ the Center.

IN my heart,” he said, “this article reigns alone, and shall reign—namely, faith in my dear Lord Christ, who is the only Beginning, Middle, and End of all my spiritual and divine thoughts which I have by day or night.”

Yet at the same time I feel that I only attain to a little feeble lifting up before others of the height, depth, and breadth, of this immeasurable and endless wisdom, and have scarcely been able to bring to light more than a few little fragments and broken pieces from this most rich and precious mine.

Christ the Priest.

ONCE, when his servant read in the Psalms the verse, “I have sworn and will not re- pent, Thou art a Priest for ever,” Doctor Martin said, “That is the most beautiful and glorious verse in the whole Psalter; for herein God holds forth this Christ alone as our Bishop and High Priest, who Himself and no other, without ceasing, makes intercession for His own with the Father. Not Caiaphas, nor Annas, nor Peter, nor Paul, nor the Pope; He, He alone shall be the Priest. This I affirm with an oath.”

Thou art a Priest for ever.” In that saying every syllable is greater than the whole Tower of Babel.

To this Priest let us cling and cleave. For He is faithful; He has given Himself for us to God, and holds us dearer than His own life. When we stand firm to Christ, there is no other god in heaven or on earth but One who makes just and blessed. On the other hand, if we lose Him from our heart and eyes, there is no other help, comfort, or rest.

Christ our Sacrifice.

IN His death He is a Sacrifice, satisfying for our sins; in the resurrection, a Conqueror; in the ascension, a King; in the intercession, a High Priest.

Christ made One with Man.

GOD sent His only Son into the world, and laid upon Him the sins of all men, saying, “Be Thou Peter, that denier; Paul, that persecutor, blasphemer, and cruel oppressor; David, that adulterer; that sinner which did eat the apple in Paradise; that thief which hanged upon the cross; and briefly, be Thou the person which hath committed the sins of all men.”

Christ Obedient to the Law.

CHRIST is not a Teacher of the law, like Moses, but a disciple who would be obedient to the law, that through such subjection and obedience He might redeem those who were under the law.

Christ Conquering by Suffering.

CHRIST is made the law of the law, the sin of sin, the death of death, that He might redeem from the curse of the law, justify me and quicken me. While He is the law, He is also liberty; while He is sin, He is righteousness; while He is death, He is life. For in that He suffered the law to accuse Him, sin to condemn Him, and death to devour Him, He abolished the law, He condemned sin, He destroyed death, He justified and saved me.

Christ our Life.

THIS life that I have now in the flesh, in very deed is no true life, but a shadow of life, under which another liveth; that is to say, Christ. Who is my true life, indeed; which life thou seest not, but only hearest, and I feel.

Christ Cleansing Us.

AS if He would say (in washing the disciples’ feet), I am the true Laver and Bath. Therefore, if I wash thee not, thou remainest unclean, and dead in thy sins.

Christ the Conqueror of Sin, Death, and the Curse.

NOT only my sins and thine, but the sins of the whole world, either past, present, or to come, take hold of Him, go about to condemn Him, and do indeed condemn Him.

But because in the self-same Person—which is thus the highest, the greatest, and the only sinner—there is also an everlasting and invincible righteousness, therefore these two do encounter together; the highest, the greatest, and the only sin; and the highest, the greatest, and the only righteousness,

Sin is a mighty and cruel tyrant, ruling and reigning over the whole world, bringing all men into bondage. This tyrant flieth upon Christ, and will needs swallow Him up, as he doth all other, But he seeth not that He is a person of invincible and everlasting righteousness. In this combat what is done? Righteousness is everlasting, immortal, invincible.

In like manner, Death, which is an invincible queen and empress of the whole world, killing kings, princes, and, generally, all men, doth mightily encounter with Life, thinking utterly to overcome it; and that which it undertaketh, it bringeth to pass indeed. But because Life was immortal, therefore, when it was overcome, yet did it truly overcome, and get the victory, vanquishing and killing death. Death, therefore, through Christ is vanquished and abolished throughout the whole world; so that now it is but a painted death, which, losing its sting, can no more hurt those that believe in Christ, who is become the death of death.

So, the curse fighteth against the blessing, and would condemn it and bring it to naught; but it cannot do so. For the blessing is divine, everlasting, and therefore the curse must needs give place. For if the blessing in Christ could be overcome, then should God Himself also be overcome,

The Name of Jesus.

IF God takes me this hour, or to-morrow, out of this life, I will leave it behind me, that I confess Jesus Christ to be my God and Lord. This I have learned, not from the Scriptures only, but in many great and hard experiences. I have resisted well-nigh unto blood, and endured many a sore conflict on this account; but it has been very good and profitable for me.

The Gospel in the Crucifix.

I BELIEVE that many have been saved under the Papacy, although they never heard the gospel as now, thank God, it is preached and taught, to whom, as they were in the agony of death, and about to depart, the crucifix was held up, and it was said, “Fix thy hope on Him who hath redeemed thee.”

Flowers

Continued in II. Rules of the Service

All sections of Watchwords for the Warfare of Life




History of the Papacy Chapter VII. That the Church of Rome Neither has Nor Can Change Her Principles on the Head of the Supremacy

History of the Papacy Chapter VII. That the Church of Rome Neither has Nor Can Change Her Principles on the Head of the Supremacy

Continued from Chapter VI. The Canon Law

We have shown in the foregoing chapter, that nothing in all past history is better authenticated than the fact that the Papacy has claimed supremacy over kings and kingdoms. We have also shown that this claim is a legitimate inference from the fundamental principles of the Papacy,–that these principles are of such a nature as to imply a Divine right, and that the arrogant claim based on these principles Rome has not only asserted, but succeeded in establishing. Her doctors have taught it, her casuists have defended it, her councils have ratified it, the papal bulls have been based upon it, and her popes have reduced it to practice, in the way of deposing monarchs, and transferring their kingdoms to others. “Seeing it hath been current among their divines of greatest vogue and authority,” reasons Barrow, “the great masters of their school,–seeing by so large a consent and concurrence, during so long a time, it may pretend (much better than divers other points of great importance) to be confirmed by tradition or prescription,–why should it not be admitted for a doctrine of the holy Roman Church, the mother and mistress of all churches? How can they who disavow this notion be the true sons of that mother, or faithful scholars of that mistress? How can they acknowledge any authority in that Church to be infallible, or certain, or obliging to assent. No man apprehending it false, seemeth capable, with good conscience, to hold communion with those who profess it; for, upon supposition of its falsehood, the Pope and his chief adherents are the teachers and abettors of the highest violation of Divine commands, and most enormous sins of usurpation, tyranny, imposture, perjury, rebellion, murder, rapine, and all the villanies complicated in the practical influence of this doctrine.”[1]

But does the fact, so clearly established from history, that the Church of Rome not only claimed, but succeeded in making good her claim, to universal supremacy, suggest no fears for the cause of public liberty in time to come? Has the Papacy renounced this claim? Has she confessed that it is a claim which she ought never to have made, and which she would not now make were she in the same circumstances? So far from this, it can be shown, that though Gosselin and other modern writers have attempted to apologise for the past usurpations of the Papacy, and to explain the grounds on which these acts were based, as being not so much definite principles as popular beliefs and concessions; and though they have written with the obvious intention of leading their readers to infer that the Papacy would not so act now were it placed in the same circumstances as before; yet it can be shown that the Papacy has not renounced this claim,–that it never can renounce it,–and that, were opportunity to offer, it would once more take upon itself the high prerogative of disposing of crowns and kingdoms. How does this appear? In the first place, if Rome has renounced this alleged right, let the deed of renunciation be produced. The fact is notorious, that she did depose monarchs. When or where has she confessed that in doing so she stopped out of her sphere, and was betrayed by a guilty ambition into an act of flagrant usurpation? The contrition must be as public as the crime is notorious. But there exists no such deed; and, in lieu of a public and formal renunciation, we cannot accept the explanations and apologies, the feeble and qualified denials, of modern writers. It is the interest of these writers to keep discreetly in the shade claims and pretensions which it would be dangerous meanwhile to avow. And even granting that these disavowals were more explicit than they are, and granting, too, that they were sincerely made, they carry no authority with them. They are merely private opinions, and do not bind the Church; and there is too much reason to believe that they would be repudiated by Rome whenever she found it safe or advantageous to do so. The case stands thus:–the Church of Rome, in violation of the principle of a co-ordinate jurisdiction in spiritual and civil affairs, and in violation of her own proper character and objects as a church, has claimed and exercised supremacy over kings and kingdoms; but she has not to this hour acknowledged that she erred in doing so, nor has she renounced the principles which led to that error; and so long as she maintains an attitude which is a virtual defence and justification of all her past pretensions, both in their theory and their practice, the common sense of mankind must hold that she is ready to repeat the same aggressions whenever the same occasions and opportunities shall occur.

It is also to be borne in mind, that though the Church of Rome is silent on her claims meanwhile, we are not warranted to take that silence for surrender. They are not claims renounced; they are simply claims not asserted. The foundation of these claims, and their desirableness, remain unchanged. Moreover, it is important to observe, that wherever the action of the Romish Church is restrained, it is restrained by a power from without, and not by any principle or power from within. Her prerogatives have sometimes been wrested from her, but never without the Church of Rome putting on record her solemn protest. She has declared that the authority of which she was deprived was rightfully hers, and that to forbid her to use it was an unrighteous interference with her just powers; which means, that she was purposed to reclaim these rights the moment she thought she could make the attempt with success. In those countries where she still bears sway, we find her giving effect to her pretensions to the very utmost which the liberty allowed her will permit; and it is certainly fair to infer, that were her liberty greater, her pretensions would be greater too, not in assumption only, but in practice also.

But, second, the Church of Rome cannot renounce this claim, because she is infallible. We shall afterwards prove that that Church does hold the doctrine of the infallibility, and that it is one of the fundamental principles on which her system is built. Meanwhile we assume it. Being infallible, she can never believe what is false, or practise what is wrong, and is therefore incapable in all time coming of renouncing any one doctrine she ever taught, or departing from any one claim she ever asserted. To say that such an opinion was taught as true ages ago, but is not now recognised as sound, or held to be obligatory, is perfectly allowable to Protestants, for they make no claim to infallibility. They may err, and they may own that their fathers have erred; for though they have an infallible standard,–the Word of God,–in which all the fundamental doctrines appertaining to salvation are so clearly taught, that there is no mistaking them on the part of any one who brings ordinary powers and ordinary candour, with a due reliance on the Spirit’s promised aid, to their investigation, yet there are subordinate matters, especially points of administration, on which a longer study of the Word of God will throw clearer light. Protestants, therefore, may with perfect consistency amend their system, both in its theory and in its practice, and so bring it into nearer conformity with the great standard of truth. They have built up no wall of adamant behind them. Not so Rome. She is infallible; and, as such, must stand eternally on the ground she has taken up. It is a double thraldom which she has perpetrated: she has enslaved the human understanding, and she has enslaved herself. The dogma of infallibility, like a chain which mortal power cannot break, has tied her to the bulls of popes, and the decrees of councils and canonists; and it matters not how gross the error, how glaring the absurdity, or how manifest the contradiction, into which they may have fallen; the error is part of her infallibility, and must be maintained. The Church of Rome can never plead that she believed so and so, and acted agreeably thereto, six hundred years ago, but that she has since come to think differently on the point,–that a deeper knowledge of the Bible has corrected her views. Infallibility was infallibility six hundred years ago, as really as it is so to-day. Infallibility can never be either less or more. To an infallible Church it is all one whether her decisions were delivered yesterday or a thousand years ago. The decision of ten centuries since is as much a piece of infallibility as the decision of ten hours since. With Rome a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years are but as a day.

Nor can the Church of Rome avail herself of the excuse, that such an opinion was held by her in the dark ages, when there was little knowledge of any sort in the world. There was infallibility in it, however, according to the Church of Rome. In those ages, that Church taught as infallible that the earth was stationary, while the sun rolled round it, and that the earth was not a globe, but an extended plain. The apology that this was before the birth of the modern astronomy, however satisfactory in the mouth of another, would in her mouth be a condemnation of her whole system. The ages were dark enough, no doubt; but infallibility then was still infallibility. Why, it is precisely at such times that we need infallibility. An infallibility that cannot see in the dark is not worth much. If it cannot speak till science has first spoken, but at the risk of falling into gross error, why, we think the world might do as well without as with infallibility. A prophet that restricts his vaticinations to what has already come to pass, possesses no great share of the prophetic gift. The beacon whose light cannot be seen but when the sun is above the horizon, will be but a sorry guide to the mariner; and that infallibility which cannot move a step without losing itself in a quagmire, except when science and history pioneer its way, is but ill fitted to govern the world. The infallibility has made three grand discoveries,–the first in the department of astronomy, the second in the department of geography, and the third in the department of theology. The first is, that the sun revolves round our earth; the second is, that the world is an extended plain; and the third and greatest is, that the Pope is God’s vicar. If the Church of Rome be true, these three are all equally infallible truths.

To dwell a little longer on this infallibility, and the unchangeableness with which it endows the Church of Rome,–that Church is not only infallible as a church or society, but every separate article of her creed is infallible. In fact, Popery is just a bundle of infallible axioms, every one of which is as unalterably and everlastingly true as are the theorems of Euclid. How impossible that a creed of this character can be either amended or changed! Amended it cannot be, for it is already infallible; changed still less can it be, for to change infallible truth would be to embrace error. What would be thought of the mathematician who should affirm that geometry might be changed,–that though it was a truth when Euclid flourished, that the three angles of a triangle were together equal to two right angles, it does not follow that it is a truth now? Geometry is what Popery claims to be,–a system of infallible truths, and therefore eternally immutable. Between the trigonometrical survey of Britain in our own times, and those annual measurements of their fields which were wont to be undertaken by the early Egyptians on the reflux of the Nile, there is an intervening period of not less than forty centuries, and yet the two processes were based on the identical geometrical truths. The two angles at the base of an isosceles triangle were then equal to one another, and they are so still, and will be myriads of ages beyond the present moment, and myriads and myriads of miles away from the sphere of our globe. Popery claims for her truths an equally necessary, independent, universal, and eternal existence. When we talk of the one being changed, we talk not a whit more irrationally than when we talk of the other being changed. There is not a dogma in the bullarium which is not just as infallible a truth as any axiom of geometry. It follows that the canon law is as unchangeable as Euclid. The deposing power having been received by the Church as an infallible truth, must be an infallible truth still. Truth cannot be truth in one age and error in the next. The infallibility can never wax old. To this attribute has the Church of Rome linked herself: she must not shirk its conditions. Were she to confess that in any one instance she had ever adopted or practised error,–above all, were she to grant that she had erred in the great acts of her supremacy,–she would virtually surrender her whole cause into the hands of Protestants.

We find Cardinal Perron adopting this precise line of argument on a very memorable occasion. After the assassination of Henry IV. by the Jesuits, it was proposed, for the future security of government, to abjure the papal doctrine of deposing kings for heresy. When the three estates assembled in 1616, Cardinal Perron, as the organ of the rest of the Gallican clergy, addressed them on the subject. He argued, that were they to abjure the pope’s right to depose heretical sovereigns, they would destroy the communion hitherto existing between them and other churches,–nay, even with the church of France before their own time: that seeing the popes had claimed and exercised this right, they could not take the proposed oath without acknowledging that the Pope and the whole Church had erred, both in faith and in things pertaining to salvation, and that for many ages the Catholic Church had perished from the earth: that they behoved to dig up the bones of a multitude of French doctors, even the bones of St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure, and burn them upon the altar, as Josiah burnt the bones of the false prophet. So reasoned the Cardinal; and we should like to see those who now attempt to deny the Pope’s deposing power try to answer his arguments.

The infallibility is the iron hoop around the Church of Rome. In every variety of outward circumstances, and amid the most furious conflicts of discordant opinions, that Church is and must ever be the same. Change or amendment she can never know. She cannot repent, because she cannot err. Repentance and amendment are for the fallible only. Far more marvellous would it be to hear that she had changed than to hear that she had been destroyed. It will one day be told the world, and the nations will clap their hands at the news, that the Papacy has fallen; but it will never be told that the Papacy has repented. She will be destroyed, not amended.

But, in the third place, the Papacy cannot renounce this claim without denying its essential and fundamental principles. Between the dogma that the Pope is Christ’s vicar and the claim of supremacy, there is, as we have shown, the most strict and logical connection. The latter is but the former transmuted into fact; and if the one is renounced, the other must go with it. On the assumption that the Pope is Christ’s vicar is built the whole fabric of Popery. On this point, according to Bellarmine, hangs the whole of Christianity;[2] and one of the latest expounders of the Papacy re-echoes this sentiment:–“Wanting the sovereign pontiff,” says De Maistre, “Christianity wants its sole foundation.”[3] Anything, therefore, that would go to annihilate that assumption, would raze, as Bellarmine admits, the foundations of the whole system. The Papacy, then, has it in its choice to be the superior of kings or nothing. It has no middle path. Aut Caesar aut nullus. The Pope is Christ’s vicar, and so lord of the earth and of all its empires, or his pretensions are unfounded, his religion a cheat, and himself an impostor.

It is necessary here to advert to the popular argument,–a miserable fallacy, no doubt, but one that possesses an influence that better reasons are sometimes found to want. The world is now so greatly changed that it is impossible not to believe that Popery also is changed. It is incredible that it should now think of enforcing its antiquated claims. We find this argument in the mouths of two classes of persons. It is urged by those who see that the only chance which the Papacy has of succeeding in its present criminal designs is to persuade the world that it is changed, and who accordingly report as true what they know to be false. And, second, it is employed by those who are ignorant of the character of Popery, and who conclude, that because all else is changed, this too has undergone a change. But the question is not, Is the world altered?–this all admit; but, Is the Papacy altered? A change in the one gives not the slightest ground to infer a change in the other. The Papacy itself makes no claim of the sort; it repudiates the imputation of change; glories in being the same in all ages; and with this agrees its nature, which shuts out the very idea of change, or rather makes change synonymous with destruction. It is nothing to prove that society is changed, though it is worth remembering that the essential elements of human nature are the same in all ages, and that the changes of which so much account is made lie mainly on the surface. The question is, Is the Papacy changed? It cannot be shown on any good ground that it is. And while the system continues the same, its influence, its mode of action, and its aims, will be identical, let the circumstances around it be what they may. It will mould the world to itself, but cannot be moulded by it. Is not this a universal law, determining the development alike of things, of systems, and of men? Take a seed from the tomb of an Egyptian mummy, carry it into the latitude of Britain, and bury it ill the earth; the climate, and many other things, will all be different, but the seed is the same. Its incarceration of four thousand years has but suspended, not annihilated, its vital powers; and, being the same seed, it will grow up into the same plant; its leaf, and flower, and fruit, will all be the same they would have been on the banks of the Nile under the reign of the Pharaohs. Or let us suppose that the mummy, the companion of its long imprisonment, should start into life. The brown son of Egypt, on looking up, would find the world greatly changed;–the Pharaohs gone, the pyramids old, Memphis in ruins, empires become wrecks, which had not been born till long after his embalmment; but amid all these changes he would feel that he was the same man, and that his sleep of forty centuries had left his dispositions and habits wholly unchanged. Nay, will not the whole human race rise at the last day with the same moral tastes and dispositions with which they went to their graves, so that to the characters with which they died will link on the allotments to which they shall rise? The infallibility has stereotyped the Papacy, just as nature has stereotyped the seed, and death the characters of men; and, let it slumber for one century, or twenty centuries, it will awake with its old instincts. And while as a system it continues unchanged, its action on the world must necessarily be the same. It is not more accordant with the law of their natures that fire should burn and air ascend, than it is accordant with the nature of the Papacy that it should claim the supremacy, and so override the consciences of men and the laws of kingdoms.

Nay, so far is it from being a truth that Popery is growing a better thing, that the truth lies the other way: it is growing rapidly and progressively worse. So egregiously do the class to which we have referred miscalculate, and so little true acquaintance do they show with the system on which they so confidently pronounce, that those very influences on which the rely for rendering the Papacy milder in spirit, and more tolerant in policy, are the very influences which are communicating a more defined stamp to its bigotry and a keener edge to its malignity. By an inevitable consequence, the Papacy must retrograde as the world advances. The diffusion of letters, the growth of free institutions, above all, the prevalence of true religion, are hateful to the Papacy; they threaten its very existence, and necessarily rouse into violent action all its more intolerant qualities. The most cursory survey of its history for the past six centuries abundantly attests the truth of what we now say. It was not till arts and Christianity began to enlighten southern Europe in the twelfth century, that Rome unsheathed the sword. The Reformation came next, and was followed by a new outburst of ferocity and tyranny on the part of Rome. Thus, as the world grows better, the Papacy grows worse. The Papacy of the present day, so far from being set off by a comparison of the Papacy of the middle ages, rather suffers thereby; for of the two, the latter certainly was the more tolerant in its actings. No thanks to Rome for being tolerant, when there is nothing to tolerate. No thanks that her sword rusts in its scabbard, when there is no heretical blood to moisten it. But let a handful of Florentines open a chapel for Protestant worship, and the deadly marshes of the Maremme will soon read them the lesson of the Papacy’s tolerance; or let a poor Roman presume to circulate the Word of God, and he will have time in the papal dungeons to acquaint himself with Rome’s new-sprung liberality; or let the Queen’s government build colleges in Ireland, to introduce a little useful knowledge into that model land of sacerdotal rule, and the anathemas which will instantly be hurled from every Popish altar on the other side of the Channel will furnish unmistakeable evidence as to the progress which the Church of Rome has recently made in the virtue of toleration. Assuredly Rome will not change so long as there are fools in the world to believe that she is changed.

At no former period, and by no former holder of the pontificate, was the primary principle of the Papacy more vigorously or unequivocally asserted, than it has been by the present pontiff. In his encyclical letter against the circulation of the Bible[4] we find Pius IX. thus speaking:–“All who labour with you for the defence of the faith will have especially an eye to this, that they confirm, defend, and deeply fix in the minds of your faithful people that piety, veneration, and respect towards this supreme see of Peter, in which you, venerable brothers, so greatly excel. Let the faithful people remember that there here lives and presides, in the person of his successors, Peter, the prince of the apostles, whose dignity faileth not even in his unworthy heir. Let them remember that Christ the Lord hath placed in this chair of Peter the unshaken foundation of his Church; and that he gives to Peter himself the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and that he prayed, therefore, that his faith might fail not, and commanded him to confirm his brethren therein; so that the successor of St. Peter holds the primacy over the whole world, and is the true vicar of Christ and head of the whole Church, and father and doctor of all Christians.” There is not a false dogma or a persecuting principle which Rome ever taught or practised, which is not contained, avowedly or implicitly, in this declaration. The Pope herein sets no limits to his spiritual sway but those of the world,–of course excommunicating all who do not belong to his Church; and claims a character,–“true vicar of Christ and head of the whole Church,”–which vests in him temporal dominion equally unbounded and supreme.

The popes do not now send their legates a latere to the court of London or of Paris, to summon monarchs to do homage to Peter or transient tribute to Rome. The Papacy is too sagacious needlessly to awaken the fears of princes, or to send its messengers on what, meanwhile, would be a very bootless errand. But has the Pope renounced these claims? We have shown a priori that he cannot, and with this agrees the fact that he has not: therefore he must, in all fairness, be held as still retaining, though not actually asserting, this claim. No conclusion is more certain than this, that the essential principles of the system being the same, they will, in the same circumstances, practice the same evils and mischiefs in future which they have done in the past. What has been may be. In the sixth century, had any one pointed out the bearing of these principles, affirming that they necessarily led to supremacy over kings, one might have been excused for doubting whether practically this result would follow. But the same excuse is signally awanting in the nineteenth century. The world has had dire experience of the fact; it knows what the Papacy is practically as well as theoretically. Moreover are not the modern chiefs of the Papacy as ambitious and as devoted to the aggrandizement of the Papacy as the pontiffs of the past? Is not universal dominion as tempting an object of ambition now as it was in the eleventh century? and, provided the popes can manage, either by craft or force, to persuade the world to submit to their rule, is any man so simple as to believe that they will not exercise it,–that they will modestly put aside the sceptre, and content themselves with the pastoral staff? There is nothing in that dominion, on their own principles, which is inconsistent with their spiritual character; nay the possession of temporal authority is essential to the completeness of that character, and to the vigour of their spiritual administration. Is it not capable of being made to subserve as effectually as ever the authority and influence of the Church? In times like the present, pontiffs may affect to undervalue the temporal supremacy; they may talk piously of throwing off the cares of State, and giving themselves wholly to their spiritual duties; but let such prospects open before them as were presented to the Gregories and the Leos of the past, and we shall see how long this horror of the world’s pomps and riches, and this love of meditation and prayer, will retain possession of their breasts. The present occupant of the pontifical chair talked in this way of his temporal sovereignty; but the moment he came to lose that sovereignty, instead of venting his joy at having got rid of his burden, he filled Europe with the most dolorous complaints and outcries, and fulminated from his retreat at Gaeta the bitterest execrations and the most dreadful anathamas against all who had been concerned in the act of stripping him of his sovereignty. So far was Pius from betaking himself to the spiritual solace for which he had so thirsted, that he plunged headlong into the darkest intrigues and conspiracies against the independence of Italy, and sent his messengers to every Catholic court in Europe, exhorting and supplicating these powers to take up arms and restore him to his capital. The result, as all the world knows, was, that the young liberties of Italy were quenched in blood, and the throne of the triple tyrant was again set up. “The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep,”–so wrote they on the gates of Notre Dame;–“Pius IX. kills his.” Accordingly, the doctrine now maintained by the pontiff and the advocates of the Papacy in every part of Europe is, that the sacerdotal and temporal sovereignties cannot be disjoined, and that the union of the two, in the person of the Pope, is indispensable to the welfare of the Church and the independence of its supreme bishop. But if it be essential to the good of the Church and the independence of its head that the Pope should be sovereign of the Roman States, the conclusion is inevitable, that it is equally essential for these objects that he should possess the temporal supremacy. Will not the same good, but on a far larger scale, flow from the possession of the temporal supremacy that now flows from the temporal sovereignty? and will not the loss of the former expose the Papacy to similar and much greater inconveniences and dangers than those likely to arise from the loss of the latter? When we confound the distinction between things civil and sacred, or rather,–for the error of Rome properly lies here,–when we deny the co-ordinate jurisdiction of the two powers, and subordinate the temporal to the spiritual, there is no limit to the amount of temporal power which may not be possessed and exercised by spiritual functionaries. If to possess any degree of temporal jurisdiction conduce to the authority of ecclesiastical rulers and the good of the Church, then the more of this power the better. The temporal supremacy is a better thing than the temporal sovereignty, in proportion as it is a more powerful thing. Thus, every argument for the sovereignty of the Pope is a fortiori an argument for the supremacy of the Pope. Why does he cling to the temporal sovereignty, but that he may provide for the dignity of his person and office, maintain his court in befitting splendour from the revenue of St. Peter’s patrimony, transact with kings on something like a footing of equality, keep his spies at foreign courts in the shape of legates and nuncios, and by these means check heresy, and advance the interests of the universal Church? But as lord paramount of Europe, he will be able to accomplish all these ends much more completely than merely as sovereign of the Papal States. His spiritual thunder will possess far more terror when launched from a seat which rises in proud supremacy over thrones. The glory of his court, and the numbers of his returns, will be far more effectually provided for when able to subsidize all Europe, than when dependent simply on the limited and now beggared domains of the fisherman. With what vigour will he chastise rebellions nations, and reduce to obedience heretical sovereigns, when able to point against them the combined temporal and spiritual artillery! How completely will he purge out heresy, when at his powerful word every sword in Europe shall again leap from its scabbard! Will not bishops and cardinals be able to take high ground at foreign courts, when they can tell their sovereigns, “The Pope is as much your master as ours?” But this is but a tithe of the power and glory which the supremacy would confer upon the Church, and especially upon its head. To grasp the political power of Europe, and wield it in the dark, is the present object the Jesuits are striving to attain; and can any man doubt that, were the times favourable, they would exercise openly what they are now trying to wield by stealth? Never will the Papacy feel that it is in its proper place, or that it is in a position to carry out fully its peculiar mission, till, seated once more in absolute and unapproachable power upon the Seven Hills, it look down upon the kings of Europe as its vassals, and be worshipped by the nations as a God; and the turn that affairs are taking in the world appears to be forcing this upon the Papacy. A crisis has arrived in which, if the Church of Rome is to maintain herself, she must take higher ground than she has done since the Reformation. She has the alternative of becoming the head of Europe, or of being swept out of existence. A new era, such as neither the Pope nor his fathers have known, has dawned on the world. The French Revolution, after Napoleon had extinguished it in blood, as all men believed, has returned from its tomb, refreshed by its sleep of half a century, to do battle with the dynasties and hierarchies of Europe.

The first idea of the Papacy was to mount on the revolutionary wave, and be floated to the lofty seat it had formerly occupied. “Your Holiness has but one choice,” Cicerovacchio is reported to have said to the Pope: “you may place yourself at the head of reform, or you will be dragged in the rear of revolution.” The pontifical choice was fixed in favour of the former. Accordingly, the world was astonished by the unwonted sight of the mitre surmounted by the cap of liberty; the echoes of the Vatican were awakened by the strange sounds of “liberty and fraternity;” and the Papacy, wrinkled and hoar, was seen to coquette with the young revolution on the sacred soil of the Seven Hills. But nature had forbidden the banns; and no long time elapsed till it was discovered that the projected union was monstrous and impossible. The Church broke with the revolution; the harlot hastened to throw herself once more into the arms of her old Paramour the State; and now commenced the war of the Church with the democracy. It is plain that the issue of that war to the Papacy must be one of two things,–complete annihilation, or unbounded dominion. Rome must be all that she ever was, and more, or she must cease to be. Europe is not wide enough to hold both the old Papacy and the young Democracy; and one or other must go to the wall. Matters have gone too far to permit of the contest being ended by a truce or compromise; the battle must be fought out. If the Democracy shall triumph, a fearful retribution will be exercised on a Church which has proved herself to be essentially sanguinary and despotic; and if the Church shall overcome, the revolution will be cut up root and branch. It is not for victory, then, but for life, that both parties now fight. The gravity of the juncture, and the eminent peril in which the Papacy is placed, will probably spirit it on to some desperate attempt. Half-measures will not save it at such a crisis as this. To retain only the traditions of its power, and to practise the comparatively tolerant policy which it has pursued for the past half-century, will no longer either suit its purpose, or be found compatible with its continued existence. It must become the living, dominant Papacy once more. In order that it may exist, it must reign. We may therefore expect to witness some combined and vigorous attempt on the part of Popery to recover its former dominion. It has studied the genius of every people; it has fathomed the policy of every government; it knows the principles of every sect, and school, and club,–the sentiments and feelings of almost every individual; and with its usual tact and ability, it is attempting to control and harmonize all these various and conflicting elements, so as to work out its own ends. To those frightened by revolutionary excesses the Church of Rome announces herself as the asylum of order. To those scared and shocked by the blasphemies of Socialist infidelity she exhibits herself as the ark of the faith. To monarchs whom the revolution has shaken upon their thrones she promises a new lease of power, provided they will be ruled by her. And as regards those fiery spirits whom her other arts cannot tame, she has in reserve the unanswerable and silencing arguments of the dungeon and the scaffold. Popery is the soul of that re-action that is now in progress on the Continent, though, with her usual cunning, she puts the State in the foreground. it was the Jesuits who instigated and planned the expedition to Rome. It was the Jesuits who plotted the dreadful massacres in Sicily, who have filled the dungeons of Naples with thousands of innocent citizens, who drove into exile every Roman favourable to liberty and opposed to the Pope, who closed the clubs and fettered the press of France, Tuscany, Germany, and Austria; and, in fine, it was the Jesuits of Vienna who crushed the nationalities and counselled the judicial murders of Hungary. History will lay all this blood to the door of the Papacy. It has all been shed in pursuance of a plan concocted by the Church,–now under the government of Jesuitism,–to recover her former ascendancy. The common danger which in the late revolution threatened both Church and State, has made the two cling closely together. “I alone,”–so, in effect, said the Church to the State,–“can save you. In me, and no where else, are to be found the principles of order and the centre of union. The spiritual weapons which it is mine to wield are alone able to combat and subdue the infidel and atheistic principles which have produced the revolution. Lend me your aid now, and promise me your submission in time to come, and I will reduce the masses to your authority.” This reasoning was omnipotent, and the bargain was struck. Accordingly there is not a court of Catholic Europe where the Jesuit influence is not at this moment supreme. And it is happening at present, as it has happened at all former periods of confusion, that in proportion as the State loses the Church acquires strength. Although its companion in trouble, the Church is acting at this moment as the State’s superior. She extends to the civil powers the benefit of her matchless policy and her universal organization. So stands the case, then. It must force itself upon the conviction of all, that this relation of the Church to the State is fraught with tremendous danger to the independence of the secular authority and the liberties of the world. In no fairer train could matters be for realizing all that Rome aspires to. And soon would she realize her aim, were it not that the present era differs from all preceding ones, in that there is an antagonist force in existence in the shape of an infidel Democracy. These two tremendous forces,–Democracy and Catholicism,–poise one another; and neither can reign so long as both exist. But who can tell how soon the equilibrium may be destroyed? Should the balance preponderate in favour of the Catholic element,–should Popery succeed in bringing over from the infidel and democratic camp a sufficient number of converts to enable her to crush her antagonist,–the supremacy is again in her hands. With Democracy collapsed, with the State exhausted and owing its salvation to the Church, and with a priesthood burning to avenge the disasters and humiliations of three centuries, wo to Europe!–the darkest page of its history would be yet to be written.


[1] Barrow’s Works, vol. i. p. 548. [Back]

[2] Bellarm. Prefatio in Libros de Summo Pontifice. [Back]

[3] Du Pape: Discours Preliminaire. [Back]

[4] Letter to the archbishops and bishops of Italy dated Portici, December 8, 1849. [Back]

END OF book ONE

All chapters History of the Papacy




History of the Papacy Chapter VI. The Canon Law

History of the Papacy Chapter VI. The Canon Law

Continued from Chapter V. Foundation and Extent of the Supremacy.

It would be bad enough that a system of the character we have described should exist in the world, and that there should be a numerous class of men all animated by its spirit, and sworn to carry into effect its principles. But this is not the worst of it. The system has been converted into a code. It exists, not as a body of maxims or principles, though in that shape its influence would have been great: it exists as a body of laws, by which every Romish ecclesiastic is bound to act, and which he is appointed to administer. This is termed CANON LAW. The canon law is the slow growth of a multitude of ages. It reminds us of those coral islands in the great Pacific, the terror of the mariner, which myriads and myriads of insects laboured to raise from the bottom to the surface of the ocean. One race of these little builders took up the work where another race had left it; and thus the mass grew unseen in the dark and sullen deep, whether calm or storm prevailed on the surface. In like fashion, monks and popes innumerable, working in the depth of the dark ages, with the ceaseless and noiseless diligence, though not quite so innocently as the little artificers to which we have referred, produced at last the hideous formation known as the canon law. This code, then, is not the product of one large mind, like the Code Justinian or the Code Napoleon, but of innumerable minds, all working intently and laboriously through successive ages on this one object. The canon law is made up of the constitutions or canons of councils, the decrees of popes, and the traditi-ons which have at any time received the pontifical sanction. As questions arose they were adjudicated upon; new emergencies produced new decisions; at last it came to pass that there was scarce a point of possible occurrence on which infallibility had not pronounced. The machinery of the canon law, then, as may be easily imagined, has reached its highest possible perfection and its widest possible application. The statute-book of Rome, combining amazing flexibility with enormous power, like the most wonderful of all modern inventions, can regulate with equal ease the affairs of a kingdom and of a family. Like the elephant’s trunk, it can crush an empire in its folds, or conduct the course of a petty intrigue,–fling a monarch from his throne, or plant the stake for the heretic. Like a net of steel forged by the Vulcan of the Vatican and his cunning artificers, the canon law encloses the whole of Catholic Christendom. A short discussion of this subject may not be without its interest at present, seeing Dr. Wiseman had the candour to tell us, that it is his intention to enclose Great Britain in this net, provided he meets with no obstruction, which he scarce thinks we will be so unreasonable as to offer. Seeing, then, it will not be Dr. Wiseman’s fault if we have not a nearer acquaintance with canon law than we can boast at present, it may be worth while examining its structure, and endeavouring to ascertain our probable condition, once within this enclosure. Not that we intend to hold up to view all its monstrosities; the canon law is the entire Papacy viewed as a system of government: we can refer to but the more prominent points which bear upon the subject we are now discussing,–the supremacy; and these are precisely the points which have the closest connection with our own condition, should the agent of the pontiff in London be able to carry his intent into effect, and introduce the canon law, “the real and complete code of the Church,” as he terms it. Here we shall do little more than quote the leading provisions of the code from the authorized books of Rome, leaving the canon law to commend itself to British notions of toleration and justice.

The false decretals of Isidore, already referred to, offered a worthy foundation for this fabric of unbearable tyranny. We pass, as not meriting particular notice, the earlier and minor compilations of Rheginon of Prum in the tenth century, Buchardus of Worms in the eleventh, and St. Ivo of Chartres in the twelfth. The first great collection of canons and decretals which the world was privileged to see was made by Gratian, a monk of Bologna, who about 1150 published his work entitled Decretum Gratiani. Pope Eugenius III. approved his work, which immediately became the highest authority in the western Church. The rapid growth of the papal tyranny soon superseded the Decretum Gratiani. Succeeding popes flung their decretals upon the world with a prodigality with which the diligence of compilers who gathered them up, and formed them into new codes, toiled to keep pace. Innocent III. and Honorius III. issued numerous rescripts and decrees, which Gregory IX. commissioned Raymond of Pennafort to collect and publish. This the Dominican did in 1234; and Gregory, in order to perfect this collection of infallible decisions, supplemented it with a goodly addition of his own. This is the more essential part of the canon law, and contains a copious system of jurisprudence, as well as rules for the government of the Church. But infallibility had not exhausted itself with these labours. Boniface VIII. in 1298 added a sixth part, which he named the Sext. A fresh batch of decretals was issued by Clement V. in 1313, under the title of Clementines. John XXII. in 1340 added the Extravagantes, so called because they extravagate, or straddle, outside the others. Succeeding pontiffs, down to Sixtus IV., added their extravagating articles, which came under the name of Extravagantes Communes. The government of the world was in some danger of being stopped by the very abundance of infallible law; and since the end of the fifteenth century nothing has been formally added to this already enormous code. We cannot say that this fabric of commingled assumption and fraud is finished even yet: it stands like the great Dom of Cologne, with the crane atop, ready to receive a new tier whenever infallibility shall begin again to build, or rather to arrange the materials it has been producing during the past four centuries. While Rome exists, the canon law must continue to grow. Infallibility will always be speaking; and every new deliverance of the oracle is another statute added to canon law. The growth of all other bodies is regulated by great natural laws. The tower of Babel itself, had its builders been permitted to go on with it, must have stopped at the point where the attractive forces of earth and of the other planets balance each other; but where is the canon law to end?[1] “This general supremacy,” says Hallam, “effected by the Roman Church over mankind in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, derived material support from the promulgation of the canon law. The superiority of ecclesiastical to temporal power, or at least the absolute independence of the former, may be considered as a sort of key-note which regulates every passage in the canon law. It is expressly declared, that subjects owe no allegiance to an excommunicated lord, if after admonition he is not reconciled to the Church. And the rubric prefixed to the declaration of Frederick II.’s deposition in the Council of Lyons asserts that the Pope may dethrone the Emperor for lawful causes.”[2] “Legislation quailed,” says Gavazzi,[3] “before the new-born code of clerical command, which, in the slang of the dark ages, was called canon law. The principle which pollutes every page of this nefarious imposture is, that every human right, claim, property, franchise, or feeling, at variance with the predominance of the popedom, was ipso facto inimical to heaven and the God of eternal justice. In virtue of this preposterous prerogative, universal manhood became a priest’s footstool; this planet a huge game-preserve for the Pope’s individual shooting.” We repeat, it is this law which Dr. Wiseman avows to be one main object of the papal aggression to introduce. Its establishment in Britain implies the utter prostration of all other authority. We have seen how it came into being. The next question is, What is it? Let us first hear the canon law on the subject of the spiritual and civil jurisdictions, and let us take note how it places the world under the dominion of one all-absorbing power,–a power which is not temporal certainly, neither is it purely spiritual, but which, for want of a better phrase, we may term pontifical.

“The constitutions of princes are not superior to ecclesiastical constitutions, but subordinate to them.”[4]

“The law of the emperors cannot dissolve the ecclesiastical law.”[5]

“Constitutions (civil, we presume) cannot contravene good manners and the decrees of the Roman prelates.”[6]

“Whatever belongs to priests cannot be usurped by kings.”[7]

“The tribunals of kings are subjected to the power of priests.”[8]

“All the ordinances of the apostolic seat are to be inviolably observed.”[9]

“The yoke which the holy chair imposes must be borne, although it may seem unbearable.”[10]

“The decretal epistles are to be ranked along with canonical scripture.”[11]

“The temporal power can neither loose nor bind the Pope.”[12]

“It does not belong to the Emperor to judge the actions of the Pope.”[13]

“The Emperor ought to obey, not command, the Pope.”[14]

Such is a specimen of the powers vested in the Pope by the canon law. It makes him the absolute master of kings, and places in his grasp all law and authority, so that he can annul and establish whatever he pleases. It is instructive also to observe, that this power he possesses through the spiritual supremacy; and, as confirmatory of what we have already stated respecting the direct and indirect temporal supremacy, that the two in their issues are identical, we may quote the following remarks of Reiffenstuel, in his textbook on the canon law, published at Rome in 1831:–“The supreme pontiff, or Pope, by virtue of the power immediately granted to him, can, in matters spiritual, and concerning the salvation of souls and the right government of the Church, make ecclesiastical constitutions for the whole Christian world. . . . . It must be confessed, notwithstanding, that the Pope, as vicar of Christ on earth, and universal pastor of his sheep, has indirectly (or in respect of the spiritual power granted to him by God, in order to the good government of the whole Church) a certain supreme power, for the good estate of the Church, if it be necessary, OF JUDGING AND DISPOSING OF ALL THE TEMPORAL GOODS OF ALL CHRISTIANS.”[15] But we pursue our quotations.

“We ordain that kings, and bishops, and nobles, who shall permit the decrees of the Bishop of Rome in anything to be violated, shall be accursed, and be for ever guilty before God as transgressors against the Catholic faith.”[16]

“The Bishop of Rome may excommunicate emperors and princes, depose them from their states, and assoil their subjects from their oath of obedience to them.”[17]

“The Bishop of Rome may be judged of none but of God only.”[18]

“If the Pope should become neglectful of his own salvation, and of that of other men, and so lost to all good that he draw down with himself innumerable people by heaps into hell, and plunge them with himself into eternal torments, yet no mortal man may presume to reprehend him, forasmuch as he is judge of all, and is judged of no one.”[19]

This surely is license enough; and should the pontiff complain that his limits are still too narrow, we should be glad to know how they could possibly be made larger. But let us hear the canon law on the power of the Pope to annul oaths, and release subjects from their allegiance.

“The Bishop of Rome has power to absolve from allegiance, obligation, bond of service, promise, and compact, the provinces, cities, and armies of kings that rebel against him, and also to loose their vassals and feudatories.”[20]

“The pontifical authority absolves some from their oath of allegiance.”[21]

“The bond of allegiance to an excommunicated man does not bind those who have come under it.”[22]

“An oath sworn against the good of the Church does not bind; because that is not an oath, but a perjury rather, which is taken against the Church’s interests.”[23]

We may glance next at the doctrine of the canon law on the subject of clerical immunities.

“It is not lawful for laymen to impose taxes or subsidies upon the clergy. If laics encroach upon cleric immunities, they are, after admonition, to be excommunicated. But in times of great necessity, the clergy may grant assistance to the State, with permission of the Bishop of Rome.”[24]

“It is not lawful for a layman to sit in judgment upon a clergyman. Secular judges who dare, in the exercise of a damnable presumption, to compel priests to pay their debts, are to be restrained by spiritual censures.”[25]

“The man who takes the money of the Church is as guilty as he who commits homicide. He who seizes upon the lands of the Church is excommunicated, and must restore four-fold.”[26]

“The wealth of dioceses and abbacies must in nowise be alienated. It is not lawful for even the Pope himself to alienate the lands of the Church.”[27]

Should the Romish priesthood ever come to be a twentieth of the male population of Britain, as is well nigh the case in Italy and Spain, it is not difficult to imagine the comfortable state of society which must ensue with so numerous a body withdrawn from useful labour, exempt from public burdens, paying their debts only when they please, committing all sorts of wickedness uncontrolled by the ordinary tribunals, and plying vigorously the ghostly machinery of the confessional and purgatory to convey the nation’s property into the treasury of their Church; and once there, there for ever. It is useless henceforth, unless to feed “holy men,”–the term by which Rome designates her consecrated bands of idle, ignorant, sorning monks, and vagabondising friars and priests. No wonder that Dr. Wiseman is so anxious to introduce the canon law, which brings with it so many sweets to the clergy.

There is but one other point on which we shall touch: What says the canon law respecting heresy? In the judgment of Rome we are heretics; and therefore it cannot but be interesting to enquire how we are likely to be dealt with should the canon law ever be established in Britain, and what means the agents of the Vatican would adopt to purge our realm from the taint of our heresy. There is no mistaking the means, whatever may be thought of them. The Church has two swords; and, in the case of heresy, the vigorous use of both, but especially the temporal, is strictly enjoined.

In the decretals of Gregory IX., a heretic is defined to be a man “who, in whatever way, or by whatever vain argument, is led away and dissents from the orthodox faith and Catholic religion which is professed by the Church of Rome.”[28] The circumstance of baptism and initiation into the Christian faith distinguishes the heretic from the infidel and the Jew. The fitting remedies for the cure of this evil are, according to the canon law, the following:–

It is commanded that archbishops and bishops, either personally, or by their archdeacons or other fit persons, go through and visit their dioceses once or twice every year, and inquire for heretics, and persons suspected of heresy. Princes, or other supreme power in the commonwealth, are to be admonished and required to purge their dominions from the filth of heresy.

This goodly work of purgation is to be conducted in the following manner:–

I. Excommunication. This sentence is to be pronounced not only on notorious heretics, and those suspected of heresy, but also on those who harbour, defend, or assist them, or who converse familiarly with them, or trade with them, or hold communion of any sort with them.

II. Proscription from all offices, ecclesiastical or civil,–from all public duties and private rights.

III. Confiscation of all their goods.

IV. The last punishment is DEATH; sometimes by the sword,–more commonly by fire.[29]

Pope Honorius II., in his Decretals, speaks in a precisely similar style. Under the head De Hereticis we find him enumerating a variety of dissentients from Rome, and thus disposing of them:–“And all heretics, of both sexes and of every name, we damn to perpetual infamy; we declare hostility against them; we account them accursed, and their goods confiscated; nor can they ever enjoy their property, or their children succeed to their inheritance; inasmuch as they grievously offend against the Eternal as well as the temporal king.” The decree goes on to declare, that as regards princes who have been required and admonished by the Church, and have neglected to purge their kingdoms from heretical pravity a year after admonition, their lands may be taken possession of by any Catholic power who shall undertake the labour of purging them from heresy.[30]

We shall close these extracts from the code of Rome’s jurisprudence with one tremendous canon.

“Temporal princes shall be reminded and exhorted, and, if need be, compelled by spiritual censures, to discharge every one of their functions; and that, as they would be accounted faithful, so, for the defence of the faith, they publicly make oath that they will endeavour, bona fide, with all their might, to extirpate from their territories all heretics marked by the Church; so that when any one is about to assume any authority, whether of a permanent kind or only temporary, he shall be held bound to confirm his title by this oath. And if a temporal prince, being required and admonished by the Church, shall neglect to purge his kingdom from this heretical pravity, the metropolitan and other provincial bishops shall bind him in the fetters of excommunication; and if he obstinately refuse to make satisfaction within the year, it shall be notified to the supreme pontiff, that then he may declare his subjects absolved from their allegiance, and bestow their lands upon good Catholics, who, the heretics being exterminated, may possess them unchallenged, and preserve them in the purity of the faith.”[31]

“Those are not to be accounted homicides who, fired with zeal for Mother Church, may have killed excommunicated persons.”[32]

We shall add to the above the episcopal oath of allegiance to the Pope. That oath contemplates the pontiff in both his characters of a temporal monarch and a spiritual sovereign; and, of consequence, the fealty to which the swearer binds himself is of the same complex character. It is taken not only by archbishops and bishops, but by all who receive any dignity of the Pope; in short, by the whole ruling hierarchy of the monarchy of Rome. It is “not only,” says the learned annotator Catalani, “a profession of canonical obedience, but an oath of fealty, not unlike that which vassals took to their direct lord.” We quote the oath only down to the famous clause enjoining the persecution of heretics:–

I. N., elect of the church of N., from henceforward will be faithful and obedient to St. Peter the apostle, and to the holy Roman Church, and to our Lord the Lord N. Pope N., and to his successors, canonically coming in. I will neither advise, consent, or do anything that they may lose life or member, or that their persons may be seized, or hands anywise laid upon them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pretence whatsoever. The counsel which they shall intrust me withal, by themselves, their messengers, or letters, I will not knowingly reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to defend and keep the Roman Papacy, and the royalties of St. Peter, saving my order, against all men. The legate of the apostolic see, going and coming, I will honourably treat and help in his necessities. The rights, honours, privileges, and authority of the holy Roman Church, of our lord the Pope, and his foresaid successors, I will endeavour to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. I will not be in any council, action, or treaty, in which shall be plotted against our said lord, and the said Roman Church, anything to the hurt or prejudice of their persons, right, honour, state, or power; and if I shall know any such thing to be treated or agitated by any whatsoever, I will hinder it to my power; and, as soon as I can, will signify it to our said lord, or to some other, by whom it may come to his knowledge. The rules of the holy fathers, the apostolic decrees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, provisions, and mandates, I will observe with all my might, and cause to be observed by others. Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord, or his foresaid successors, I will to my power persecute and oppose.”[33]

Such is a sample of Rome’s infallible code. The canon law cannot cease to be venerated while hypocrisy and tyranny bear any value among men. It is by this law that Rome would govern the world, would the world let her; and it is by this law that she is desirous especially to govern Britain. This explains what Rome understands by a spiritual jurisdiction. She disclaims the temporal supremacy, and professes to reign only by direction; but we can now understand what a direction, acting according to canon law, and working through the machinery of the confessional, would speedily land us in. The moment the canon law is set up, the laws of Britain are overthrown, and the rights and liberties which they confer would henceforth be among the things that were. The government of the realm would become priestly, and the secular jurisdiction would be a mere appanage of the sacerdotal. Red hats and cowls would fill the offices of state and the halls of legislation, and would enact those marvels of political wisdom for which Spain and Italy are so justly renowned. A favoured class, combining the laziness of Turks with the rapacity of Algerines, would speedily spring up; and, to enable them to live in idleness, or in something worse, the “tale of bricks” would be doubled to the people. Malefactors of every class, instead of crossing the Atlantic, as now, would simply tie the Franciscan’s rope round their middle, or throw the friar’s cloak over their consecrated shoulders. The Bible would disappear as the most pestiferous of books, and the good old cause of ignorance would triumph. A purification of our island on a grand scale, from three centuries of heresy, would straightway be undertaken. As Protestants (the worst of all heretics) our lives would be of equal value with those of the wolf or the tiger; and it would be not less a virtue to destroy us, only the mode of despatch might not be so quick and merciful. The wolf would be shot down at once; the Protestant would be permitted to edify the Catholic by the prolongation of his dying agonies. Our Queen would have a twelvemonth’s notice to make her peace with Rome, or abide the consequences. Should she disdain becoming a vassal of the Roman see, a crusade would be preached against her dominions, and every soldier in the army of the Holy League would be recompensed with the promise of paradise, and of as much of the wealth of heretical Albion as he could appropriate. These consequences would follow the introduction of the canon law, as certainly as darkness follows the setting of the sun.

But these effects would not be realized in a day. This tremendous tyranny would overtake the realm as night overtakes the earth. First, the Roman Catholics in Britain would be habituated to the government of this code; and it is to them only that Dr. Wiseman, making a virtue of necessity, proposes meanwhile to extend it. Having formed a colony governed by the code of Rome in the heart of a nation under the code of Britain, the agent of the Vatican would be able thus to inaugurate his system.. His imperium in imperio, once fairly set up, would be daily extending by conversions. A Jesuit’s school here, a nunnery and cathedral there, would enlarge the sphere of the canon law, and fasten silently but tenaciously its manacles upon the community. Give Rome darkness enough, and she can do anything,–govern by canon law, with equal ease, a family or the globe. We must look fairly at the case. Let us suppose that this law is put in operation in Britain, though confined at first to members of the Romish Church. Well, then, we have a colony in the heart of the country actually released from their allegiance to the sovereign. They are the subjects of canon law, and that teaches unmistakeably the supremacy of the pontiff, and holds as null all authority that interferes with his; and especially does it ignore the authority of heretical sovereigns. Should these persons continue to obey the civil laws, they would do so simply because there is an army in the country. Their real rulers would be the priesthood, whom they dared not disobey, under peril of their eternal salvation. All their duties as citizens must be performed according to ghostly direction. Their votes at the poll must be given for the priest’s nominee. They must speak and vote in Parliament for the interests of Rome, not of England. In the witness-box they must swear to or against the fact, as the interests of the Church may require. And as a false oath is no perjury, so killing is no murder, according to canon law, when heresy and heretics are to be purged out. Thus, every duty, from that of conducting a parliamentary opposition down to heading a street brawl, must be done with a view to the account to be rendered in the confessional. Allegiance to the Pope must override all other duties, spiritual and temporal. Popery, a deceiver to others, is a tyrant to its own.

Should we, then, permit the introduction of the canon law, the Greek who opened the gates to the Trojan horse will henceforward pass for a wise and honest man. We must not have our understandings insulted by being told that this law is meliorated. It is the code of an infallible Church, and not one jot or tittle of it can ever be changed. Rome and the canon law must stand or perish together. Besides, it is only twenty years since it was republished in Rome, under the very eye of the Pope, without one single blasphemy or atrocity lopped off. Nor must we listen to the assurance that the laws of Britain will protect us from the canon law. We may have perfect confidence in the strength of our fortress, though we do not permit the enemy to plant a battery beneath its walls. But the trust is false;–the law of Britain will not be a sufficient protection in the long run. Dr. Wiseman demands permission to erect a hierarchy in order that he may govern the members of his Church in England by canon law. We refuse to grant him leave, and the doctor raises the cry of persecution, and prefers a charge of intolerance, because we will not permit him to give full development to the code of his Church,–a code, be it remembered, which teaches that the Pope can annul the constitutions of princes,–that it is damnable presumption in a lay judge to compel an ecclesiastic to pay his debts,–and that it is no crime to swear a false oath against a heretic, or even to kill him, if the massacre of his character or his person can in anywise benefit the Church. The doctor, we say, even now raises the cry of persecution against us, because we will not permit him to put this code into effect by erecting the hierarchy; and many Protestants profess to see not a little force in his reasoning. But suppose we should grant leave to erect the hierarchy, and so help Dr. Wiseman to put the canon law into working gear; what would be his next demand? Why, that we should subject the laws of England to instant revision, so as to conform them to the canon law. “You allowed me,” would the doctor say, “to introduce the canon law, and yet you forbid me to give it full development. Here it is perpetually checked and fettered by your enactments. I demand that these shall be rescinded in all points where they clash with canon law. You virtually pledged yourselves to this when you sanctioned the hierarchy. Why did you allow me to introduce this law, if you will not suffer me to work it? I insist on your implementing your pledge, otherwise I shall brand you as persecutors.” The Protestants who gave way in the former instance will find it hard to make good their resistance here. In this manner point after point will be carried, and a despotism worse than that of Turkey, and growing by moments, will be established in the heart of this free country. All lets and hindrances in its path will crumble into dust before the insidious and persistent attacks of this conspiracy. Its agents will act with the celerity and combination of an army, while the leaders will remain invisible. It will attack in a form in which it cannot be repelled. It will use the Constitution to undermine the Constitution. It will basely take advantage of the privileges which liberty bestows, to overthrow liberty: and it will never rest content till the mighty Dagon of co-mingled blasphemy and tyranny known as canon law is enthroned above the ruins of British liberty and justice, and the neck of prince and peasant is bent in ignominious vassalage.

Were Lucifer to turn legislator, and indite a code of jurisprudence for the government of mankind, he would find the work done already to his hand in the canon canon law. Surveying the labours of his renowned servants with a smile of grim complacency,–sorely puzzled what to alter, where to amend, or how to enlarge with advantage,–unwilling to run the risk of doing worse what his predecessors had done better,–he would wisely forgo all thoughts of legislative and literary fame, and be content to let well alone. Instead of wasting the midnight oil over a new work, he would confine his labours to the more useful, if less ambitious, task of writing a recommendatory preface to the canon law.


[1] This account of the canon law is compiled from the Horae Juridicae Subsecevae of Butler, pp. 145-184; Lond. 1807. “The modern period,” observes Butler, “of the canon law begins with the Council of Pisa, and extends to the present time.” Its principal parts are the canons of modern oecumenical councils, especially Trent, the various transactions and concordats between sovereigns and the see of Rome, the bulls of popes, and the rules of the Roman Chancery. [Back]

[2] Hallam’s History of the Middle Ages, vol. ii. pp. 2-4. [Back]

[3] Gavazzi, Oration vi. [Back]

[4] Corpus Juris Canonici, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. [Back]

[5] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. can. i. [Back]

[6] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. can iv. [Back]

[7] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. can, v. [Back]

[8] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. x. can. vi. [Back]

[9] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xix. can. ii. [Back]

[10] Corpus Juris Canonici, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xix. can. iii. [Back]

[11] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xix. can. vi. [Back]

[12] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xcvi. can. vii. [Back]

[13] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xcvi. can. viii. [Back]

[14] Idem, Decreti, pars i. distinct. xcvi. can. xi. [Back]

[15] Quoted from M’Caul’s “What is the Canon Law?” [Back]

[16] Decreti, pars ii. causa xxv. quest. i. can. xi. [Back]

[17] Decreti, pars i, distinct. xcvi. can. x., and Decreti, pars ii. causa xv. quest. vi. can. iii. iv. v. [Back]

[18] Decreti, pars ii. causa iii. quest. vi. can. ix. [Back]

[19] Decreti, pars i. distinct. xl. can. vi. [Back]

[20] Clementin. lib. ii. tit. i. cap. ii. [Back]

[21] Decreti, pars ii. causa xv. quest. vi. can. iii. [Back]

[22] Decreti, pars ii. causa xv. quest. vi. can. iv. [Back]

[23] Decret. Gregorii, lib. ii. tit. xxiv. cap. xxvii. [Back]

[24] Decret. Gregorii, lib. iii. tit. xlix. cap. iv. and vii. [Back]

[25] Decret. Gregorii, lib. ii. tit. ii. cap. i. ii. vi, and Sexti Decret. lib. ii. tit. ii. cap. ii. [Back]

[26] Decreti, pars ii. causa xii. quest, ii. can. i. iv. vii. [Back]

[27] Decreti, pars ii. causa xii. quest. ii, can. xii. xix. xi. [Back]

[28] Decret. Gregorii IX. lib. v,. tit. vii. De Hereticis. [Back]

[29] The above Decretals respecting heresy are quoted from the JUS CANONICUM; Digestum et Enucleatum juxta Ordinem Librorum et Titulorum qui in Decretalibus Epistolis Gregorii IX. P. M. Georgii Adami Struvi, pp. 359-363: Lipsiae et Jenae, 1688. [Back]

[30] Quinta Compilatio Epistolarum Decretalium Honorii III. P. M. Innocentii Cironii, Juris Utriusque Professoris, Canonici ac Ecclesiae, et Academae Tolosanae Cancellarii, Comp. v. tit. iv. cap. i. p. 200; Tolosae, 1645. [Back]

[31] Decret. Gregorii, lib. v. tit. vii. cap. xiii. [Back]

[32] Decreti, pars ii. causa xxiii. quaest v. can. xlvii. [Back]

[33] “Haereticos, schismaticos, et rebelles eidem domino nostro, vel successoribus praedictis, pro posse persequar et impugnabo.” This form of the oath is quoted from Barrow, who takes it from the Roman Pontifical. The oath, in its more ancient form, as enacted by Gregory VII., is extant in the Gregorian Decretals. Since his time it has been considerably enlarged and made more stringent,–illustrative of the encroaching spirit of the popes. (See Decret. Gregorii, lib. ii. tit. xxiv.)

We subjoin (Ex Bullario Laertii Cherubini; Romae 1638) the more remarkable clauses of the bull in Coenae Domini, annually published at Rome on Maunday Thursday, in order, as we are informed in the preface, “to exercise the spiritual sword of ecclesiastical discipline and wholesome weapons of justice by the ministry of the supreme apostolate, to the glory of God and salvation of souls.”

“1. We excommunicate and anathematize, in the name of God Almighty, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and by the authority of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own, all Hussites, Wicliphists, Lutherans, Zuinglians, Calvinists, Hugonets, Anabaptists, Trinitarians, and apostates from the Christian faith, and all other heretics, by whatsoever name they are called, and of whatsoever sect they be; as also their adherents, receivers, favourers, and generally any defenders of them; together with all who, without our authority, or that of the apostolic see, knowingly read, keep, print, or anywise, for any cause whatsoever, publicly or privately, on any pretext or colour, defend their books containing heresy or treating of religion; as also schismatics, and those who withdraw themselves or recede obstinately from the obedience of us, or the Bishop of Rome for the time being.

“2. Further, we excommunicate and anathematize all and singular, of whatsoever station, degree, or condition they be; and interdict all universities, colleges, and chapters, by whatsoever name they are called; who appeal from the orders or decrees of us, or the pope of Rome for the time being, to a future general council; and those by whose aid and favour the appeal was made.

“15. Also those who, under pretence of their office, or at the instance of any party, or of any others, draw, or cause and procure to be drawn, directly or indirectly, upon any pretext whatsoever, ecclesiastical persons, chapters, convents, colleges of any churches, before them to their tribunal, audience, Chancery, council, or parliament, against the rules of the canon law; as also those who, for any cause, or under any pretext, or by pretence of any custom or privilege, or any other way, shall make, enact, and publish any statutes, orders, constitutions, pragmatics, or any other decrees in general or in particular; or shall use them when made and enacted; whereby the ecclesiastical liberty is violated, or anyways injured or depressed, or by any other means restrained, or whereby the rights of us and of the said see, and of any other churches, are any way, directly or indirectly, tacitly or expressly, prejudged.

“16. Also those who, upon this account, directly or indirectly hinder archbishops, bishops, and other superior and inferior prelates and all other ordinary ecclesiastical judges whatsoever, by any means, either by imprisoning or molesting their agents, proctors, domestics, kindred on both sides, or by any other way, from exerting their ecclesiastical jurisdiction against any persons whatsoever, according as the canons and sacred ecclesiastical constitutions and decrees of general councils, and especially that of Trent, do appoint; as also those who, after the sentence and decrees of the ordinaries themselves, or of those delegated by them, or by any other means, eluding the judgment of the ecclesiastical court, have recourse to chanceries or other secular courts, and procure thence prohibitions, and even penal mandates, to be decreed against the said ordinaries and delegates, and executed against them; also those who make and execute these decrees, or who give aid, counsel, countenance, or favour to them.

“17. Also those who usurp any jurisdictions, fruits, revenues, and emoluments belonging to us and the apostolic see, and any ecclesiastical persons upon account of any churches, monasteries, or other ecclesiastical benefices; or who, upon any occasion or cause, sequester the said revenues without the express leave of the Bishop of Rome, or others having lawful power to do it.”

This curse, annually pronounced at Rome, includes the whole realm of Britain, those few excepted who own the jurisdiction of the Roman see. All we in this land are cursed,–so far as the pontiff can,–trebly cursed, in this bull, published annually in presence of the Pope and the Cardinals. Our great crime is, that we obey not canon law. In violation of that law, we print, publish, and read books which contain heresy or treat of religion and therefore we are cursed. In violation of canon law, we hold amenable to the civil tribunals, all persons, not excepting the clergy of Rome, and therefore we are cursed again. We possess and use, in not a few instances, lands and inheritances which once belonged to the Romish Church in Britain, and which that Church claims as still belonging to her, and therefore we are cursed a third time. We hinder archbishops and other prelates from “exerting their ecclesiastical jurisdiction against any persons whatsoever,” according to the canons, and especially those of Trent, and so we are cursed a fourth time. All classes, from the throne downwards, are included in almost all the curses of this maledictory roll. [Back]

Continued in History of the Papacy Chapter VII. That the Church of Rome Neither has Nor Can Change Her Principles on the Head of the Supremacy

All chapters History of the Papacy




The Other Woman Rome Rides Upon the Beast and Will Fall

The Other Woman Rome Rides Upon the Beast and Will Fall

By William Mencarrow

This is from an article sent to me by email from Berean Beacon.

Rev. 17:13-18
“These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful. And he saith unto me, The waters, which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.”

This is the woman John saw in Rev. 17 and later. To refresh our memory:

[1] And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
[2] With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
[3] So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
[4] And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
[5] And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
[6] And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
[7] And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.
[8] The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
[9] And here is the mind, which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
To anyone who knows history, this passage cannot be other than a description of Roman Catholicism. It is the chief torturer and murderer of the elect, drunken with the blood of the saints, riding the beast, which sets its course, which is the papacy.

“Our Lord God The Pope”

The pope is the undisputed earthly god of the Roman Catholic religion. He rules with an iron fist. He is called, among many other deific names, “God Upon Earth” and “Our Lord God the Pope,” whose ex cathedra pronouncements on doctrine and practice are claimed to be infallible:
“Our Lord God the pope; another God upon earth, king of kings, and lord of lords. The same is the dominion of God and the pope. To believe that our Lord God the pope might not decree, as he decreed, it were a matter of heresy. The power of the pope is greater than all created power, and extends itself to things celestial, terrestrial, and infernal. The pope doeth whatsoever he listeth [wills], even things unlawful, and is more than God” (Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, p. 456).

“…in matters of jurisdiction [the pope] enjoys supreme, universal and immediate jurisdiction over the whole Church and every member of it. This supremacy is not given by the cardinals who elect him, but immediately by God. The Pope is the Church’s supreme and infallible teacher, its supreme legislator, and its supreme judge” (Bertrand Conway, The Question Box, p. 158).

E.B. Elliott writes in Horae Apocalypticae about Rev. 17:5 (“And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.”): “Mystery (a name allusive evidently to St. Paul’s predicted mystery of iniquity [II Thes. 2:7-8]) was once, if we may repose credit on no vulgar authority, written on the Pope’s tiara; and the Apocalyptic title “Mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth” the very parody, if I may so say, of the title Rome arrogates to herself, “Rome, Mother and Mistress”  Tridentine Creed #10 (1564): “I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church as the mother and mistress of all Churches.”

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet.” – Rev. 17:12.
Remember that the 10 administrative regions, in Biblical language “kings” of the one world civil and religious government, were not in existence during the Apostle John’s time. “…but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb…” – Rev. 17:12b-14a. Therefore, this passage is about the future: The nations of the world will turn on the Body of Christ, the elect, and attempt to obliterate it. 

We are seeing that more and more in our time. Satan, after the Roman Catholic faith has been destroyed, will then use the global government to persecute Christ’s Church in unprecedented demonic fury. But this is doomed to fail: “And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues…For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.” – Rev. 17:15,17

Before that happens, the 10 world divisions will be comprised of all peoples, all nations of the earth. They will give their authority to the papacy, the Antichrist. The pope will pull the strings behind the scenes, as he often does now. But this will not last but for “one hour,” a short time. Perhaps because it will fail, the nations will blame the pope, the one who orchestrated the persecution against Christians.

“And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.” – Rev. 17:16

The world government alliance with the papacy will not be able to sustain itself. It will turn against the papacy and destroy it: “For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.” The Bible assures us that all of this is the will of God. Of course it is! It cannot be otherwise: “God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass.” (Westminster Confession of Faith III:I)
“In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.” – Eph. 1:11
“O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” – Rom. 11:33

“Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath.” – Heb. 6:7
“For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion…Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” –
Rom. 9:15,18

When global civil, religious, and economic government comes, it is because the Lord has willed it. He has put it in peoples’ hearts to agree together to serve the beast in order that His will is to be fulfilled until these words in Rev. 17 come to pass. 

Why does He will what is to us such a horrible thing? We are not told, so we are not to inquire into the deep things of God. What we can and do know is that ultimately it is to His glory, because it is His will. Ps. 76:10: “Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee: the remainder of wrath shalt thou restrain.” What this means is that even the wrath of men raging against the Lord is the fulfillment of His will and thus is praise to Him. But He restrains men’s wrath, never letting it go beyond His purposes. The Lord controls history for His glory. He controls the decisions of men and their actions as a horseman controls his mount. He says to the nations as he said to Hezekiah in Isa. 37:28-29: “But I know thy abode, and thy going out, and thy coming in, and thy rage against me. Because thy rage against me, and thy tumult, is come up into mine ears, therefore will I put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back by the way by which thou camest.”

The Church is called in I Tim. 3:15 “the pillar and ground of the truth.” God the Father has put all things under Christ’s feet (Eph. 1:22, emphasis added) – meaning that Christ rules over everything, including world events, including our lives and what happens to us, including the universe, the movements of the stars in the sky, down to the tiniest subatomic particles in our body. Why? For one reason only, and He explains it in Eph. 1:22: God the Father “hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church.” (emphasis added)

No matter what happens in the world, no matter what persecutions may come, never lose hope, never falter, never, never, never give up! Remember, we live in a tiny sliver of time. Despite what it may seem, the Lord is in control. Every person, even the most wicked, does whatever He has commanded. “For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.” – Acts 4:28

Believers are His beloved bride, the Church of Christ, and He will let nothing happen to His bride that is not for our good. Be comforted and encouraged by His promise in Jn. 4:4: “Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.”
“...the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.” – Rev. 17:14




Calvinism’s Surprising Catholic Connection – By Dave Hunt

Calvinism’s Surprising Catholic Connection – By Dave Hunt

Re-posted from an article on The Berean Call.

THERE IS NO QUESTION that Calvin imposed upon the Bible certain erroneous interpretations from his Roman Catholic background. Many leading Calvinists agree that the writings of Augustine were the actual source of most of what is known as Calvinism today. Calvinists David Steele and Curtis Thomas point out that “The basic doctrines of the Calvinistic position had been vigorously defended by Augustine against Pelagius during the fifth century.”1

In his eye-opening book, The Other Side of Calvinism, Laurence M. Vance thoroughly documents that “John Calvin did not originate the doctrines that bear his name….”2 Vance quotes numerous well-known Calvinists to this effect. For example, Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton write, “The system of doctrine which bears the name of John Calvin was in no way originated by him….”3 B. B. Warfield declared, “The system of doctrine taught by Calvin is just the Augustinianism common to the whole body of the Reformers.”4 Thus the debt that the creeds coming out of the Reformation owe to Augustine is also acknowledged. This is not surprising in view of the fact that most of the Reformers had been part of the Roman Catholic Church, of which Augustine was one of the most highly regarded “saints.” John Piper acknowledges that Augustine was the major influence upon both Calvin and Luther, who continued to revere him and his doctrines even after they broke away from Roman Catholicism.5

C. H. Spurgeon admitted that “perhaps Calvin himself derived it [Calvinism] mainly from the writings of Augustine.”6 Alvin L. Baker wrote, “There is hardly a doctrine of Calvin that does not bear the marks of Augustine’s influence.”7 For example, the following from Augustine sounds like an echo reverberating through the writings of Calvin:

Even as he has appointed them to be regenerated…whom he predestinated to everlasting life, as the most merciful bestower of grace, whilst to those whom he has predestinated to eternal death, he is also the most righteous awarder of punishment.8

C. Gregg Singer said, “The main features of Calvin’s theology are found in the writings of St. Augustine to such an extent that many theologians regard Calvinism as a more fully developed form of Augustinianism.”9 Such statements are staggering declarations in view of the undisputed fact that, as Vance points out, the Roman Catholic Church itself has a better claim on Augustine than do the Calvinists.10 Calvin himself said:

Augustine is so wholly with me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fulness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings.11

Augustine and the Use of Force

The fourth century Donatists believed that the church should be a pure communion of true believers who demonstrated the truth of the gospel in their lives. They abhorred the apostasy that had come into the church when Constantine wedded Christianity to paganism in order to unify the empire. Compromising clergy were “evil priests working hand in glove with the kings of the earth, who show that they have no king but Caesar.” To the Donatists, the church was a “small body of saved surrounded by the unregenerate mass.”12 This is, of course, the biblical view.

Augustine, on the other hand, saw the church of his day as a mixture of believers and unbelievers, in which purity and evil should be allowed to exist side by side for the sake of unity. He used the power of the state to compel church attendance (as Calvin also would 1,200 years later): “Whoever was not found within the Church was not asked the reason, but was to be corrected and converted….”13 Calvin followed his mentor Augustine in enforcing church attendance and participation in the sacraments by threats (and worse) against the citizens of Geneva. Augustine “identified the Donatists as heretics…who could be subjected to imperial legislation [and force] in exactly the same way as other criminals and misbelievers, including poisoners and pagans.”14 Frend says of Augustine, “The questing, sensitive youth had become the father of the inquisition.”15

Though he preferred persuasion if possible, Augustine supported military force against those who were rebaptized as believers after conversion to Christ and for other alleged heretics. In his controversy with the Donatists, using a distorted and un-Christian interpretation of Luke:14:23,16 Augustine declared:

Why therefore should not the Church use force in compelling her lost sons to return?… The Lord Himself said, “Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in….” Wherefore is the power which the Church has received…through the religious character and faith of kings…the instrument by which those who are found in the highways and hedges—that is, in heresies and schisms—are compelled to come in, and let them not find fault with being compelled.17

Sadly, Calvin put into effect in Geneva the very principles of punishment, coercion, and death that Augustine advocated and that the Roman Catholic Church followed consistently for centuries. Henry H. Milman writes: “Augustinianism was worked up into a still more rigid and uncompromising system by the severe intellect of Calvin.”18 And he justified himself by Augustine’s erroneous interpretation of Luke:14:23. How could any who today hail Calvin as a great exegete accept such abuse of this passage?

Compel? Isn’t that God’s job through Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace? Compel those for whom Christ didn’t die and whom God has predestined to eternal torment? This verse refutes Calvinism no matter how it is intepreted!

Augustine’s Dominant Influence

There is no question as to the important role Augustine played in molding Calvin’s thinking, theology, and actions. This is particularly true concerning the key foundations of Calvinism. Warfield refers to Calvin and Augustine as “two extraordinarily gifted men [who] tower like pyramids over the scene of history.”19 Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion make repeated favorable references to Augustine, frequently citing his writings as authoritative and using the expression, “Confirmed by the authority of Augustine.”20 Calvin often credits Augustine with having formulated key concepts, which he then expounds in his Institutes. The following are but a very small sampling of such references:

• “We have come into the way of faith,” says Augustine: “Let us constantly adhere to it….”21

• The truth of God is too powerful, both here and everywhere, to dread the slanders of the ungodly, as Augustine powerfully maintains…. Augustine disguises not that…he was often charged with preaching the doctrine of predestination too freely, but…he abundantly refutes the charge…. For it has been shrewdly observed by Augustine (De Genesi ad litteram, Lib V) that we can safely follow Scripture….22

• For Augustine, rightly expounding this passage, says….23

• I say with Augustine, that the Lord has created those who, as he certainly foreknew, were to go to destruction, and he did so because he so willed.24

• If your mind is troubled, decline not to embrace the counsel of Augustine….25

• I will not hesitate, therefore, simply to confess with Augustine that…those things will certainly happen which he [God] has foreseen [and] that the destruction [of the non-elect] consequent upon predestination is also most just.26

• Augustine, in two passages in particular, gives a [favorable] portraiture of the form of ancient monasticism. [Calvin then proceeds to quote Augustine’s commendation of the early monks.]27

• Here the words of Augustine most admirably apply….28

• This is a faithful saying from Augustine; but because his words will perhaps have more authority than mine, let us adduce the following passage from his treatise….29

• Wherefore, Augustine not undeservedly orders such, as senseless teachers or sinister and ill-omened prophets, to retire from the Church.30

We could multiply many times over the above examples of Augustine’s influence upon Calvin from the scores of times Calvin quotes extensively from Augustine’s writings. Leading Calvinists admit that Calvin’s basic beliefs were already formed while he was still a devout Roman Catholic, through the writings of Augustine—an influence that remained with him throughout his life.

Augustinian teachings that Calvin presented in his Institutes included the sovereignty that made God the cause of all (including sin), the predestination of some to salvation and of others to damnation, election and reprobation, faith as an irresistible gift from God—in fact, the key concepts at the heart of Calvinism.

We search in vain for evidence that Calvin ever disapproved of any of Augustine’s heresies. Calvinist Richard A. Muller admits, “John Calvin was part of a long line of thinkers who based their doctrine of predestination on the Augustinian interpretation of St. Paul.”31 In each expanded edition of his Institutes, Calvin quotes and relies upon Augustine more than ever.

Is Calvinism Really a Protestant Belief?

That many prominent evangelicals today are still under the spell of Augustine is evident—and astonishing, considering his numerous heresies. Norm Geisler has said, “St. Augustine was one of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time.”32 Yet Augustine said, “I should not believe the gospel unless I were moved to do so by the authority of the [Catholic ] Church.”33 That statement was quoted with great satisfaction by Pope John Paul II in his 1986 celebration of the 1600th anniversary of Augustine’s conversion. The Pope went on to say:

Augustine’s legacy…is the theological methods to which he remained absolutely faithful…full adherence to the authority of the faith…revealed through Scripture, Tradition and the Church…. Likewise the profound sense of mystery—“for it is better,” he exclaims, “to have a faithful ignorance than a presumptuous knowledge….” I express once again my fervent desire…that the authoritative teaching of such a great doctor and pastor may flourish ever more happily in the Church….34

In my debate with him, James White claims that “Calvin refuted this very passage in Institutes, and any fair reading of Augustine’s own writings disproves this misrepresentation by Hunt.”35 In fact, Calvin acknowledged the authenticity of the statement and attempted to defend it as legitimate reasoning for those who had not the assurance of faith by the Holy Spirit.36

Vance provides numerous astonishing quotations from Calvinists praising Augustine: “One of the greatest theological and philosophical minds that God has ever so seen fit to give to His church.”37 “The greatest Christian since New Testament times…greatest man that ever wrote Latin.”38 “[His] labors and writings, more than those of any other man in the age in which he lived, contributed to the promotion of sound doctrine and the revival of true religion.”39

Warfield adds, “Augustine determined for all time the doctrine of grace.”40 Yet he [Augustine] believed that grace came through the Roman Catholic sacraments. That Calvinists shower such praise upon Augustine makes it easier to comprehend why they heap the same praise on Calvin.

As for the formation of Roman Catholicism’s doctrines and practices, Augustine’s influence was the greatest in history. Vance reminds us that Augustine was “one of Catholicism’s original four ‘Doctors of the Church’ [with] a feast day [dedicated to him] in the Catholic Church on August 28, the day of his death.”41 Pope John Paul II has called Augustine “the common father of our Christian civilization.”42 William P. Grady, on the other hand, writes, “The deluded Augustine (354–430) went so far as to announce (through his book, The City of God?) that Rome had been privileged to usher in the millennial kingdom (otherwise known as the ‘Dark Ages’).”43

Drawing from a Polluted Stream

Sir Robert Anderson reminds us that “the Roman [Catholic] Church was molded by Augustine into the form it has ever since maintained. Of all the errors that later centuries developed in the teachings of the church, scarcely one cannot be found in embryo in his writings.”44 Those errors include infant baptism for regeneration (infants who die unbaptized are damned), the necessity of baptism for the remission of sins (martyrdom, as in Islam, does the same), purgatory, salvation in the Church alone through its sacraments, and persecution of those who reject Catholic dogmas. Augustine also fathered acceptance of the Apocrypha (which he admitted even the Jews rejected), allegorical interpretation of the Bible (thus the creation account, the six days, and other details in Genesis are not necessarily literal), and rejection of the literal personal reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years (we are now supposedly in the millennial reign of Christ with the Church reigning and the devil presently bound).

Augustine insists that Satan is now “bound” on the basis that “even now men are, and doubtless to the end of the world shall be, converted to the faith from the unbelief in which he [Satan] held them.” That he views the promised binding of Satan in the “bottomless pit” (Revelation:20:1–3) allegorically is clear. Amazingly, Satan “is bound in each instance in which he is spoiled of one of his goods [i.e., someone believes in Christ].” And even more amazing, “the abyss in which he is shut up” is somehow construed by Augustine to be “in the depths” of Christ-rejecters’ “blind hearts.” It is thus that Satan is continually shut up as in an abyss.45

Augustine doesn’t attempt to explain how he arrived at such an astonishing idea, much less how one abyss could exist in millions of hearts or how, being “bound” there, Satan would still be free to blind those within whose “hearts” he is supposedly bound (2 Corinthians:4:4). Nor does he explain how or why, in spite of Satan’s being bound,

•    Christ commissioned Paul to turn Jew and Gentile “from the power of Satan unto God” (Acts:26:18)

•    Paul could deliver the Corinthian fornicator to Satan (1 Corinthians:5:5)

•    Satan can transform himself “into an angel of light” (2 Corinthians:11:14)

•    Paul would warn the Ephesian believers not to “give place to the devil” (Ephesians:4:27) and urge them and us today to “stand against the wiles of the devil” (6:11)

•    Satan could still be going about “like a roaring lion…seeking whom he may devour” (1 Peter:5:8)

•    Satan could still be able to continually accuse Christians before God and, with his angels, yet wage war in heaven against “Michael and his angels” and at last be cast out of heaven to earth (Revelation:12:7–10)

Augustine was one of the first to place the authority of tradition on a level with the Bible, and to incorporate much philosophy, especially Platonism, into his theology. Exposing the folly of those who praise Augustine, Vance writes:

He believed in apostolic succession from Peter as one of the marks of the true church, taught that Mary was sinless and promoted her worship. He was the first who defined the so-called sacraments as a visible sign of invisible grace…. The memorial of the Lord’s supper became that of the spiritual presence of Christ’s body and blood. To Augustine the only true church was the Catholic Church. Writing against the Donatists, he asserted: “The Catholic Church alone is the body of Christ…. Outside this body the Holy Spirit giveth life to no one…[and] he is not a partaker of divine love who is the enemy of unity. Therefore they have not the Holy Ghost who are outside the Church.46

And this is the man whom Geisler calls “one of the greatest Christian thinkers of all time.” On the contrary, Calvin drew from a badly polluted stream when he embraced the teachings of Augustine! How could one dip into such contaminating heresy without becoming confused and infected? Yet this bewildering muddle of speculation and formative Roman Catholicism is acknowledged to be the source of Calvinism—and is praised by leading evangelicals. One comes away dumbfounded at the acclaim heaped upon both Calvin and Augustine by otherwise sound Christian leaders.

An Amazing Contradiction

Calvin’s almost complete agreement with and repeated praise of Augustine cannot be denied. Calvin called himself “an Augustinian theologian.”47 Of Augustine he said, “whom we quote frequently, as being the best and most faithful witness of all antiquity.”48

Calvinists themselves insist upon the connection between Calvin and Augustine. McGrath writes, “Above all, Calvin regarded his thought as a faithful exposition of the leading ideas of Augustine of Hippo.”49 Wendel concedes, “Upon points of doctrine he borrows from St. Augustine with both hands.”50 Vance writes:

Howbeit, to prove conclusively that Calvin was a disciple of Augustine, we need look no further than Calvin himself. One can’t read five pages in Calvin’s Institutes without seeing the name of Augustine. Calvin quotes Augustine over four hundred times in the Institutes alone. He called Augustine by such titles as “holy man” and “holy father.”51

As Vance further points out, “Calvinists admit that Calvin was heavily influenced by Augustine in forming his doctrine of predestination.”52 How could one of the leaders of the Reformation embrace so fully the doctrines of one who has been called the “principal theological creator of the Latin-Catholic system as distinct from…Evangelical Protestantism…”?53

Calvin’s admiration of Augustine and his embracing of much of his teaching is only one of several major contradictions in his life, which will be fully documented in this book. The situation is contradictory on the Roman Catholic side as well. Their dogmas reject some of the most important doctrines held by the most famous of their saints—the very Augustinian doctrines that Calvin embraced.

Here we confront a strange anomaly. Warfield declares that “it is Augustine who gave us the Reformation”54—yet at the same time, he also acknowledges that Augustine was “in a true sense the founder of Roman Catholicism55 and “the creator of the Holy Roman Empire.”56

Strangely, Calvin apparently failed to recognize that Augustine never understood salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Philip F. Congdon writes, “Another curious parallel is evident between Classical Calvinist theology and Roman Catholic theology. The two share an inclusion of works in the gospel message, and an impossibility of assurance of salvation…. Both hold to the primacy of God’s grace; both include the necessity of our works.”57 Augustine’s heresies, especially his Romanist view of faith in Christ being supplemented by good works and the sacraments, were not lost on Luther, who wrote: “In the beginning, I devoured Augustine, but when…I knew what justification by faith really was, then it was out with him.”58

Yet leading Calvinists suggest that I side with Roman Catholicism by rejecting Calvinism, even though it comes largely from the ultimate Roman Catholic, Augustine. Here is how one writer expressed it to me:

And given that the position you espouse is, in fact, utterly opposed to the very heart of the message of the Reformers, and is instead in line with Rome’s view of man’s will and the nature of grace, I find it tremendously inconsistent on your part. You speak often of opposing the traditions of men, yet, in this case, you embrace the very traditions that lie at the heart of Rome’s “gospel.”59

On the contrary, the Reformers and their creeds are infected with ideas that came from the greatest Roman Catholic, Augustine himself. Furthermore, a rejection of Election, Predestination, and the Preservation of the Saints as defined by Calvinists is hardly embracing “the heart of Rome’s ‘gospel.’” The real heart of Rome’s gospel is good works and sacraments. Certainly Calvin’s retention of sacramentalism, baptismal regeneration for infants, and honoring the Roman Catholic priesthood as valid is a more serious embrace of Catholicism’s false gospel. The rejection of Calvinism requires no agreement with Rome whatsoever on any part of its heretical doctrines of salvation.

It seems incomprehensible that the predominant influence upon Reformed theology and creeds could be so closely related to the very Roman Catholicism against which the Reformers rebelled. Yet those who fail to bow to these creeds are allegedly “in error.” How the Protestant creeds came to be dominated by Calvinistic doctrine is an interesting story.

The Role of the Latin Vulgate

Along with the writings of Augustine, the Latin Vulgate also molded Calvin’s thoughts as expressed in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. Fluent in Latin, Calvin had long used that corrupted translation of the Bible, which, since its composition by Jerome at the beginning of the fifth century, was the official Bible of Roman Catholics. It was again so declared by the Council of Trent in 1546, when Calvin was 37 years of age. More than that, its influence reached into the Protestant movement: “For one thousand years the Vulgate was practically the only Bible known and read in Western Europe. All commentaries were based upon the Vulgate text…. Preachers based their sermons on it.”60

The Vulgate was permeated with Augustinian views on predestination and the rejection of free will. According to Philip Schaff, “The Vulgate can be charged, indeed, with innumerable faults, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and arbitrary dealing in particulars.”61 Others have expressed the same opinion. Samuel Fisk quotes Samuel Berger, who in the Cambridge History of the English Bible, Vol. 3 (S. L. Greenslade, ed., Cambridge, England: University Press, 1963, 414), called the Vulgate “the most vulgarized and bastardized text imaginable.”62 Grady says, “Damasus commissioned Jerome to revive the archaic Old Latin Bible in A.D. 382…the completed monstrosity became known as the Latin ‘Vulgate’…and was used of the devil to usher in the Dark Ages.”63 Fisk reminds us:

Well-known examples of far-reaching errors include the whole system of Catholic “penance,” drawn from the Vulgate’s “do penance”…when the Latin should have followed the Greek—repent.

Likewise the word “sacrament” was a mis-reading from the Vulgate of the original word for mystery. Even more significant, perhaps, was the rendering of the word presbyter (elder) as “priest.”64

Augustine described the problem that led to the production of the Vulgate: “In the earliest days of the faith, when a Greek manuscript came into anyone’s hands, and he thought he possessed a little facility in both languages, he ventured to make a translation [into Latin].”65 As a consequence of such individual endeavor, Bruce says, “The time came, however, when the multiplicity of [Latin] texts [of Scripture] became too inconvenient to be tolerated any longer, and Pope Damasus…commissioned his secretary, Jerome, to undertake the work” of revision to produce one authorized Latin version.

Bruce continues: “He [Jerome] was told to be cautious for the sake of ‘weaker brethren’ who did not like to see their favorite texts tampered with, even in the interests of greater accuracy. Even so, he went much too far for the taste of many, while he himself knew that he was not going far enough.”66Unger’s Bible Dictionary comments:

For many centuries it [Vulgate] was the only Bible generally used…. In the age of the Reformation the Vulgate [influenced] popular versions. That of Luther (N. T. in 1523) was the most important and in this the Vulgate had great weight. From Luther the influence of the Latin passed to our own Authorized Version [KJV]….67

The Geneva and King James Bibles and Protestant Creeds

Of no small importance to our study is the fact that this corrupt translation had an influence upon the Protestant churches in Europe, England, and America. That influence carried over into the Geneva Bible (which has further problems; see below) as well as into other early versions of the English Bible, and even into the King James Bible of today.

As the Vulgate was filled with Augustinianisms, the Geneva Bible was filled with Calvinism, in the text as well as in voluminous notes. H. S. Miller’s General Biblical Introduction says, “It was a revision of Tyndale’s, with an Introduction by Calvin…the work of English reformers, assisted by Beza, Calvin, and possibly others.” J. R. Dore, in Old Bibles: An Account of the Early Versions of the English Bible, 2nd edition, adds that “almost every chapter [of the Geneva Bible] has voluminous notes full of Calvinistic doctrine.” Andrew Edgar, in The Bibles of England, declares, “At the time the Geneva Bible was first published, Calvin was the ruling spirit in Geneva. All the features of his theological, ecclesiastical, political, and social system are accordingly reflected in the marginal annotations…. The doctrine of predestination is proclaimed to be the head cornerstone of the gospel.”68

W. Hoare says in The Evolution of the English Bible, “Considered as a literary whole it [the Geneva Bible] has about it the character of a Calvinist manifesto…a book with a special purpose.” F. F. Bruce adds,

The notes of the Geneva Bible…are, to be sure, unashamedly Calvinistic in doctrine…. The people of England and Scotland…learned much of their biblical exegesis from these notes…. The Geneva Bible immediately won, and retained, widespread popularity. It became the household Bible of English-speaking Protestants…. This became the authorized Bible in Scotland and was brought to America where it had a strong influence.69

Butterworth points out: “In the lineage of the King James Bible this [Geneva Bible] is by all means the most important single volume…. The Geneva Bible…had a very great influence in the shaping of the King James Bible.”70 Robinson is even more emphatic:

A large part of its [Geneva Bible] innovations are included in the Authorized Version [KJV]…. Sometimes the Geneva text and the Geneva margin are taken over intact, sometimes the text becomes the margin and the margin the text. Sometimes the margin becomes the text and no alternative is offered. Very often the Genevan margin becomes the Authorized Version text with or without verbal change.71

Further documentation could be given, but this should be sufficient to trace briefly the influence from that ultimate Roman Catholic, Augustine, through the Latin Vulgate and his writings, upon Calvin—and through Calvin, into the Geneva Bible and on into the King James Bible. And thus into the pulpits and homes of Protestants throughout Europe, England, and America. It is small wonder, then, that those who, like Arminius, dared to question Calvinism, were overwhelmed with opposition. Of course, various synods and assemblies were held to formulate accepted creeds and to punish the dissenters, but the decks were stacked in favor of Calvinism, and no influence to mitigate this error was allowed. This will be documented in the next chapter. [For additional detail, see T.U.L.I.P. and the Bible: Comparing the Works of Calvin to the Word of God, and What Love Is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God.]

The New Geneva Study Bible and Reformation Truth

Today’s New Geneva Study Bible (recently reprinted as The Reformation Study Bible) is being widely distributed in an effort to indoctrinate the readers into Calvinism. Its New King James translation is appealing. As with the original Geneva Bible, however, the notes are Calvinistic treatises. In his foreword, R. C. Sproul writes,

The New Geneva Study Bible is so called because it stands in the tradition of the original Geneva Bible…. The light of the Reformation was the light of the Bible…. The Geneva Bible was published in 1560…[and] dominated the English-speaking world for a hundred years…. Pilgrims and Puritans carried the Geneva Bible to the shores of the New World. American colonists were reared on the Geneva Bible…. The New Geneva Study Bible contains a modern restatement of Reformation truth in its comments and theological notes. Its purpose is to present the light of the Reformation afresh.

In fact, its purpose is to indoctrinate the reader into Calvinism, which inaccurately is marketed as “Reformation truth”—as though Calvinism and Protestantism are identical. There was, in fact, much more to the Reformation than Calvinism, Calvinists’ claims notwithstanding.

The Necessity to Clarify Confusion

Calvinism is experiencing resurgence today. Yet there is widespread ignorance of what both Augustine and Calvin really taught and practiced. Has the truth been suppressed to further a particular theology? Consider Boettner’s declaration that “Calvin and Augustine easily rank as the two outstanding systematic expounders of the Christian system since Saint Paul.”72 Spurgeon, also declared: “Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Spirit of God, from the diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them of the Holy Ghost, from Jesus Christ”.73

One cannot but view such statements with astonishment. How incredible that Loraine Boettner, one of the foremost apologists opposing the Roman Catholic Church, praised Augustine, who gave the Roman Catholic Church so many of its basic doctrines that he is among the most highly honored of its “saints” to this day.

As for Spurgeon, would he have considered that Augustine’s teaching of salvation by the Roman Catholic Church, through its sacraments alone, beginning with regeneration by infant baptism; the use of force even to the death against “heretics”; acceptance of the Apocrypha; allegorical interpretation of creation and the prophecies concerning Israel; a rejection of the literal reign of Christ on David’s throne; and so much other false doctrine, had also all been received from the Holy Spirit? How could Augustine—and Calvin, who embraced and passed on many of his major errors—be so wrong on so much and yet be biblically sound as regards predestination, election, sovereignty, etc.? Is there not ample cause to examine carefully these foundational teachings of Calvinism?

One can only respond in the affirmative. For that reason, the key Calvinist doctrines will be presented in the following pages and compared carefully with God’s Word.

Endnotes

  1. David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas, The Five Points of Calvinism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1963), 19.
  2. Laurence M. Vance, The Other Side of Calvinism (Pensacola, FL: Vance Publications, rev. ed., 1999), 37.
  3. Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton, Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism (Edmonton, AB: Still Water Revival Books, 1990), 78.
  4. Benjamin B. Warfield, Calvin and Augustine, ed. Samuel G. Craig (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1956), 22.
  5. John Piper, The Legacy of Sovereign Joy: God’s Triumphant Grace in the Lives of Augustine, Luther, and Calvin (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000), 24-25.
  6. Charles Haddon Spurgeon, ed., Exposition of the Doctrine of Grace (Pasadena, CA: Pilgrim Publications, n. d.), 298.
  7. Alvin L. Baker, Berkouwer’s Doctrine of Election: Balance or Imbalance? (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1981), 25.
  8. St. Augustine, A Treatment On the Soul and its Origins, Book IV, 16.
  9. C. Gregg Singer, John Calvin: His Roots and Fruits (Abingdon Press, 1989), vii.
  10. Vance, Other Side, 40.
  11. John Calvin, “A Treatise on the Eternal Predestination of God,” in John Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, trans. Henry Cole (Grandville, MI: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 1987), 38; cited in Vance, Other Side, 38.
  12. Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren (Sarasota, FL: Christian Hymnary Publishers, 1991), 33.
  13. Petilian II.85.189; cited in W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1984), 671.
  14. Frend, Rise, 671.
  15. Ibid., 672.
  16. F.F. Bruce, Light in the West, Bk. III of The Spreading Flame (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1956), 60-61.
  17. E. H. Broadbent, The Pilgrim Church (Port Colborne, ON: Gospel Folio Press, reprint 1999), 49.
  18. Henry H. Milman, History of Christianity (New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1886), 3:176.
  19. Warfield, Calvin, v.
  20. John Calvin, contents page of Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998 ed.), III: xxiii, IV: xvii, etc.
  21. Calvin, Institutes, III: xxi, 2.
  22. Ibid., xxi, 4.
  23. Ibid., xxiii, 1.
  24. Ibid., 5.
  25. Ibid.
  26. Ibid., 8.
  27. Ibid., IV: xiii, 9.
  28. Ibid., III: xxiii, 11.
  29. Ibid., 13.
  30. Ibid., 14.
  31. Richard A. Muller, Christ and the Decree (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 22.
  32. Norman L. Geisler, What Augustine Says (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1982), 9.
  33. Aug. Cont. Epist. Fundament c.v.
  34. John Paul II, Sovereign Pontiff, Augustineum Hyponensem (Apostolic Letter, August 28, 1986. Available at: www. cin.org/jp2.ency/augustin.html).
  35. Dave Hunt and James White, Debating Calvinism, (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2004), 244.
  36. Calvin, Institutes, I: vii, 3.
  37. Talbot and Crampton, Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism, 78; cited in Vance, Other Side, 39.
  38. Alexander Souter, The Earliest Latin Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul (n. p., 1927), 139.
  39. N. L. Rice, God Sovereign and Man Free (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1985), 13.
  40. Benjamin B. Warfield, “The Idea of Systematic Theology,” in The Princeton Theology, ed. Mark A. Noll (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1983), 258.
  41. Vance, Other Side, 41.
  42. Richard N. Ostling, “The Second Founder of the Faith” (Time, September 29, 1986).
  43. William P. Grady, Final Authority: A Christian’s Guide to the King James Bible (Knoxville, TN: Grady Publications, 1993), 54.
  44. Sir Robert Anderson, The Bible or the Church? (London: Pickering and Inglis, 2nd ed., n. d.), 53.
  45. Augustine, The City of God, trans. Marcus Dods. In Great Books of the Western World, ed. Robert Maynard Hutchins and Mortimer J. Adler (Encyclopaedia Brittanica, Inc., 1952), XX:7, 8.
  46. Vance, Other Side, 55.
  47. Talbot and Crampton, Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism, 79.
  48. Calvin, Institutes, IV:xiv, 26.
  49. Alister E. McGrath, The Life of John Calvin (Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1990), 151.
  50. Francois Wendel, Calvin: Origins and Development of His Religious Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1997), 124.
  51. Vance, Other Side; citing Calvin, Institutes, 139, 146, 148–49.
  52. Vance, Other Side, 113; citing Wendel, Origins, 264, and Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1988), 232.
  53. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., reprint 1959), III: 1018.
  54. Warfield, Calvin, 322.
  55. Ibid., 313.
  56. Ibid., 318.
  57. Philip F. Congdon, “Soteriological Implications of Five-point Calvinism,” Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 1995, 8:15, 55–68.
  58. George, Theology, 68.
  59. James R. White to Dave Hunt, August 4, 2000. On file.
  60. David Schaff, Our Father’s Faith and Ours, 172; cited in Samuel Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced (Raleigh, NC: Biblical Evangelism Press, 1985), 68.
  61. Philip Schaff, History, II:975–76.
  62. Samuel Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced (Raleigh, NC: Biblical Evangelism Press, 1985), 68.
  63. Grady, Final Authority, 35.
  64. Fisk, Calvinistic, 67.
  65. F. F. Bruce, The Books and the Parchments (London: Pickering and Inglis, Ltd., 1950), 191.
  66. Bruce, Books, 194–95.
  67. Merrill F. Unger, Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1969), 1151–54.
  68. Fisk, Calvinistic, 70–75.
  69. F.F. Bruce, The English Bible: A History of Translations (New York: Oxford University Press, 1961), 90-91.
  70. Charles C. Butterworth, The Literary Lineage of the King James Bible (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1941), 163.
  71. H. Wheeler Robinson, The Bible In Its Ancient and English Versions (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940), 186, 206–207.
  72. Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Phillipsburg, NJ : Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1932), 405.
  73. Spurgeon, Exposition, 298; cited in Vance, Other Side, 38.



History of the Papacy Chapter V. Foundation and Extent of the Supremacy.

History of the Papacy Chapter V. Foundation and Extent of the Supremacy.

This is the next chapter after Chapter IV. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Supremacy.

This is the favourable point for taking a view of the character of the Papacy,–its lofty pretensions and claims, and the foundation on which all these are based. The conflict waged by the seventh Gregory, and which ended in disaster to himself, but in triumph to his system, brings out in striking relief the essential principles, the guiding spirit, and the unvarying aims, of the popedom. When intelligently contemplated, the Papacy is seen to be a monarchy of a mixed kind, partly ecclesiastical and partly civil, founded professedly upon divine right, and claiming universal jurisdiction and dominion. The empire which Gregory VII. strove to erect was of this mixed kind; the dominion he arrogated and exercised extended directly or indirectly to all things temporal and spiritual; and this vast power he claimed jure divino. This it now becomes our business to show.

The Pope had now made himself absolute master in the Church. There was, in fact, but one bishop, and Christendom was his diocese. From this one man flowed all ecclesiastical honours, offices, acts, and jurisdiction. The pontiffs presided in all councils by their legates; they were the supreme arbiters in all controversies that arose respecting religion or church discipline. “Gregory VII.,” remarks D’Aubigné, “claimed the same power over all the bishops and priests of Christendom that an abbot of Cluny exercises in the order in which he presides.”[1] And all this they claimed as the successor of St. Peter. But it is unnecessary to spend time on a point so universally admitted as that the popes now possessed ecclesiastical supremacy, and professed to hold it by divine right, that is, as the successors of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles. But the point to be demonstrated here is, that the popes, not content with being supreme rulers in the Church, and having all ecclesiastical persons and things subject to their absolute authority, claimed to be supreme in the State also; and, in the character of God’s vicegerents presumed to dispose of crowns and kingdoms, and to interfere in all temporal affairs. The foundation of this power was laid when the popes claimed to be the successors of St. Peter and the vicars of Christ, which they did, as we have already shown, as early as the middle of the fifth century; but the universal and uncontrolled dominion implied in this claim they did not seek to wield till towards the times of Gregory VII., in the eleventh century. But that they did then arrogate this power in the most open and unblushing manner, does not admit of doubt or denial. There exists a vast body of proof to the effect that the popes of the eleventh and succeeding centuries attempted to prostrate beneath their feet the temporal as well as the spiritual power, and that they succeeded in their attempt. The history of Europe from the era of Hildebrand to that of Luther must be blotted out before the condemnatory evidence–for condemnatory of the Papacy it certainly is, as irreconcileably hostile to the liberties of nations and the rights of princes–can be annihilated or got rid of. It has put this claim into a great variety of forms, and attempted in every possible way to make it good. It taught this claim in its essential principles; and, when the character of the times permitted, it advanced it in plain and unmistakeable statements. It spent five centuries of intrigue in the effort to realize this claim, and five centuries more of wars and bloodshed in the effort to retain and consolidate it. It was promulgated from the doctor’s chair, ratified by synodical acts, embodied in the instructions of nuncios, and thundered from the pontifical throne in the dreadful sentence of interdict by which monarchs were deposed, their crowns transferred to others, their subjects loosed from their allegiance, and their kingdoms not unfrequently ravaged with fire and sword.

Acts so monstrous may appear to be the mere wantonness of ambition, or the irresponsible doings of men in whom the lust of power had overborne every other consideration. The man who reasons in this way either does not understand the Papacy, or wilfully perverts the question. This was but the sober and logical action of the popedom; it was the fair working of the evil principles of the system, and no chance ebullition of the destructive passions of the man who had been placed at its head; and nothing is capable of a more complete and convincing demonstration. The foundation of our proof must of course be the constitution of the Papacy. As is the nature of the thing,–as are the elements and principles of which it is made up,–so inevitably must be the character and extent of its claims, and the nature of its action and influence. What, then, is the Papacy? Is it a purely spiritual society, or a purely secular society? It is neither. The Papacy is a mixed society: the secular element enters quite as largely into its constitution as does the spiritual. It is a compound of both elements in equal proportions; and, being so, must necessarily possess secular as well as spiritual jurisdiction, and be necessitated to adopt civil as well as ecclesiastical action. But how does it appear that the Church of Rome combines in one essence the secular and spiritual elements? for the point lies here. It appears from the fundamental axiom on which she rests. There are but a few links in the chain of her infernal logic; but these few links are of adamant; and they so bind up together, in one composite body, the two principles, the spiritual and the temporal, and, by consequence, the two jurisdictions, that the moment Rome attempts to cut in twain what her logic joins in one, she ceases to be the popedom. Her syllogism is indestructible if the minor proposition be but granted; and the minor proposition, be it remembered, is her fundamental axiom:–CHRIST IS THE VICAR OF GOD, AND, AS SUCH, POSSESSES HIS POWER; BUT THE POPE IS THE VICAR OF CHRIST; THEREFORE THE POPE IS GOD’S VICAR, AND POSSESSES HIS POWER. To Christ, as the Vicar of God, all power, spiritual and temporal, has been delegated. All spiritual power has been delegated to Him as Head of the Church; and all temporal power has been delegated to Him for the good of the Church. This power has been delegated a second time from Christ to the Pope. To the Pope all spiritual power has been delegated, as head of the Church, and God’s vicegerent on earth; and all temporal power also, for the good of the Church. Such is the theory of the popedom. This conclusively establishes that the Papacy is of a mixed character. We but perplex ourselves when we think or speak of it simply as a religion. It contains the religious element, no doubt; but it is not a religion;–it is a scheme of domination of a mixed character, partly spiritual and partly temporal; and its jurisdiction must be of the same mixed kind with its constitution. To talk of the popedom wielding a purely spiritual authority only, is to assert what her fundamental principles repudiate. These principles compel her to claim the temporal also. The two authorities grow out of the same fundamental axiom, and are so woven together in the system, and so indissolubly knit the one to the other, that the Papacy must part with both or none. The popedom, then, stands alone. In genius, in constitution, and in prerogative, it is diverse from all other societies. The Church of Rome is a temporal monarchy as really as she is an ecclesiastic body; and in token of her hybrid character, her head, the Pope, displays the emblems of both jurisdictions,–the keys in the one hand, the sword in the other.

Pope Boniface VIII. was a much more logical expounder of the Papacy than those who now-a-days would persuade us that it is purely spiritual. In a bull “given at the palace of the Lateran, in the eighth year of his pontificate,” and inserted in the body of the canon law, we find him claiming both jurisdictions in the broadest manner. “There is,” says he, “one fold and one shepherd. The authority of that shepherd includes the two swords,–the spiritual and the temporal. So much are we taught by the words of the evangelist, ‘Behold, here are two swords,’ namely, in the Church. The Lord did not reply, It is too much, but, It is enough. Certainly he did not deny to Peter the temporal sword: he only commanded him to return it into its scabbard. Both, therefore, belong to the jurisdiction of the Church,–the spiritual sword and the secular. The one is to be wielded for the Church,–the other by the Church; the one is the sword of the priest,–the other is in the hand of the monarch, but at the command and sufferance of the priest. It behoves the one sword to be under the other,–the temporal authority to be subject to the spiritual power.”[2] Whatever may be thought of this pontifical gloss, there can be no question as to the comprehensive jurisdiction which Boniface founds upon the passage.

It cannot be argued, then, with the least amount of truth, or of plausibility even, that this claim was the result of a kind of accident,–that it originated solely in the ambition of an individual pope, and was foreign to the genius, or disallowed by the principles, of the Papacy. On the contrary, nothing is easier than to show that it is a most logical deduction from the fundamental elements of the system. It partakes not in the slightest degree of the accidental; nor was it a crotchet of Hildebrand, or a delusion of the age in which he lived; as is manifest from the fact, that its development was the work of five centuries, and the joint operation of many hundreds of minds who were successively employed upon it. It was the logical consequence of principles which had been engrafted in the Papacy, or rather, as we have just shown, which lie at the foundation of the whole system; and accordingly, it was steadily and systematically pursued through a succession of centuries, and engaged the genius and ambition of innumerable minds. As the seed bursts the clod and struggles into light, so we behold the principle of papal supremacy struggling for development through the slow centuries, and in its efforts overturning thrones and convulsing society. We can discover the supremacy in embryo as early as the fifth century, and can trace its logical development till the times of Hildebrand. We see it passing through the consecutive stages of the dogma, the synodical decree, the papal missive, and the interdict, which shook the thrones of monarchs, and laid their occupants prostrate in the dust. The gnarled oak, whose lofty stature and thick foliage darken the earth for roods around, is not more really a development of the acorn deposited in the soil centuries before, than were the arrogant pretensions and domineering acts of the Papacy in the age of Innocent the result of the principle deposited in the Papacy in the fifth century, that the Pope is Christ’s vicar.

The Pope’s absolute dominion over priests is not a more legitimate inference from this doctrine than is his dominion over kings. If the pontiffs have renounced the temporal supremacy, it is on one of two grounds,–either they are not Christ’s vicars, or Christ is not a King of kings. But they have claimed all along, and do still claim, to be the vicars of Christ; and they have likewise held all along, and do still hold, that Christ is Head of the world as well as Head of the Church. The conclusion is inevitable, that it is not only over the Church that they bear rule, but over the world also; and that they have as good a right to dispose of crowns, and to meddle in the temporal affairs of kingdoms, as they have to bestow mitres, and to make laws in the Church. The one authority is as essential to the completeness of their assumed character as is the other.

The popes have understood the matter in this light from the beginning. Some writers of name are at present endeavouring to persuade the world that the pontiffs (some few excepted, who, they say, transgressed in this matter the bounds of Catholicism as well as of moderation) never claimed or exercised supremacy over princes; that this is not, and never was, a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church; and that she repudiates and condemns the opinion that the Pope has been invested with jurisdiction over temporal princes. But we cannot grant to Rome the sole right to interpret history, as her members grant to her the right to interpret the Bible. We can examine and judge for ourselves; and when we do so, we certainly find far more reason to admire the boldness than to confess the prudence of those who disclaim, on the part of Rome, this doctrine. The proofs to the contrary are far too plain and too numerous to permit of this disclaimer obtaining the least credit from any one, save those who are prepared to receive without scruple or inquiry all that popish writers may be pleased to assert in behalf of their Church. Popes, canonists, and councils have promulgated this tenet; and not only have they asserted that the power it implies rests on Divine right, but they have inculcated it as an article of belief on all who would preserve the faith and unity of the Church. “We,” says Pope Boniface VIII., “declare, say, define, and pronounce it to be necessary to salvation, that every human creature be subject to the Roman pontiff.[3] The one sword must be under the other; and the temporal authority must be subject to the spiritual power: hence, if the earthly power go astray, the spiritual shall judge it.”[4] These sentiments are re-echoed by Leo X. and his Council of Lateran. “We,” says that pope, “with the approbation of the present holy council, do renew and approve that holy constitution.”[5] To that doctrine Baronius heartily subscribes: “There can be no doubt of it,” says he, “but that the civil principality is subject to the sacerdotal, and that God hath made the political government subject to the dominion of the spiritual Church.”[6]

“He who reigneth on high,” says Pius V., in his introduction to his bull against Queen Elizabeth, “to whom is given all power in heaven and in earth, hath committed the one holy Catholic Church, out of which there is no salvation, to one alone upon earth, that is, to Peter, the prince of apostles, and to the Roman pontiff, the successor of Peter, to be governed with a plenitude of power. This one he hath constituted prince over all nations, that he may pluck up, overthrow, disperse, destroy, plant, and rear.” The Italian priest, therefore, thunders against the English monarch in the following style:–“We deprive the Queen of her pretended right to the kingdom, and of all dominion, dignity, and privilege whatsoever; and absolve all the nobles, subjects, and people of the kingdom, and whoever else have sworn to her, from their oath, and all duty whatsoever in regard of dominion, fidelity, and obedience.”[7]

“Snatch up, therefore, the two-edged sword of Divine power committed to thee,” was the address of the Council of Lateran to Leo X., “andenjoin, command, and charge, that a universal peace and alliance, for at least ten years, be made among Christians; and to that bind kings in the fetters of the great King, and firmly fasten nobles with the iron manacles of censures; for to thee is given all power in heaven and in earth.”[8]

So speak the popes and councils of Rome. Here is not only the principle out of which the supremacy springs enunciated, but the claim itself advanced. Not in words only have they held this high tone; their deeds have been equally lofty. The supremacy was not permitted to remain a theory; it became a fact. For several centuries together we see the popes reigning over Europe, and demeaning themselves in every way as not only its spiritual, but also its temporal lords. We see them freely distributing immunities, titles, revenues, territories, as if all belonged to them; we see them sustaining themselves arbiters in all disputes, umpires in all quarrels, and judges in all causes; we see them giving provinces and crowns to their favourites, and constituting emperors; we see them imposing oaths of fidelity and vassalage on monarchs; and, in token, of the dependence of the one and the supremacy of the other, we see them exacting tribute for their kingdoms in the shape of Peter’s pence; we see them raising wars and crusades, summoning princes and kings into the field, attiring them in their livery, the cross, and holding them but as lieutenants under them. In fine, how often have they deposed monarchs, and laid their kingdoms under interdict? History presents us with a list of not less than sixty-four emperors and kings deposed by the popes.[9] But it is improper to despatch in a single sentence what occupies so large a space in history, and has been the cause of so much suffering, bloodshed, and war to Europe. Nothing can convey a better or truer picture of the insufferable arrogance and pride of the pontiffs than their own language on these occasions.

“For the dignity and defence of God’s holy Church” says Gregory VII. (Hildebrand), “in the name of the omnipotent God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I depose from imperial and royal administration, Henry the king, the son of Henry, formerly emperor, who, too boldly and rashly, has laid hands on thy Church; and I absolve all Christians subject to the empire from that oath by which they were wont to plight their faith unto true kings; for it is right that he should be deprived of dignity who doth endeavour to diminish the majesty of the Church.

“Go to, therefore, most holy princes of the apostles, and what I said, by interposing your authority, confirm; that all men may now at length understand, if ye can bind and loose in heaven, that ye also can upon earth take away and give empires, kingdoms, and whatsoever mortals can have; for if ye can judge things belonging unto God, what is to be deemed concerning these inferior and profane things? And if it is your part to judge angels who govern proud princes, what becometh it you to do towards their servants? Let kings now, and all secular princes, learn by this man’s example what ye can do in heaven, and in what esteem ye are with God; and let them henceforth fear to slight the commands of holy Church, but put forth suddenly this judgment, that all men may understand, that not casually, but by your means, this son of iniquity doth fall from his kingdom.”[10]

“We therefore,” says Innocent IV. in the Council of Lyons (1245), when pronouncing sentence of excommunication upon the Emperor Frederick II.,[11] “having had previous and careful deliberation with our brethren and the holy council respecting the preceding and many other of his wicked miscarriages, do show, denounce, and accordingly deprive of all honour and dignity, the said prince, who hath rendered himself unworthy of empire and kingdoms, and of all honour and dignity; and who, for his sins, is cast away by God, that he should not reign nor command; and all who are bound by oath of allegiance we absolve from such oath for ever, firmly enjoining that none in future regard or obey him as emperor or king; and decreeing, that whoever yields him in these characters advice, assistance, or favours, shall immediately lie under the bond of excommunication.”

The following bull of Sixtus V. (1585) against the King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde,–the two sons of wrath,–is conceived in the loftiest pontifical style. “The authority given to St. Peter and his successors by the immense power of the Eternal King, excels all the power of earthly princes; it passes uncontrollable sentence upon them all; and if it find any of them resisting the ordinance of God, it takes a more severe vengeance upon them, casting them down from their throne, however powerful they may be, and tumbling them to the lowest parts of the earth, as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer. We deprive them and their posterity of their dominions for ever. By the authority of these presents, we absolve and free all persons from their oath [of allegiance], and from all duty whatever relating to dominion, fealty, and obedience; and we charge and forbid all from presuming to obey them, or any of their admonitions, laws, or commands.”[12]

But it were endless to bring forward all that might be adduced on the point. The history of the middle ages abounds with instances of the exercise of this tremendous power, of the disgrace and disaster it entailed on monarchs, and the confusion and calamity it occasioned to nations. But instead of citing instances of these,–of which the history of Europe, not excepting that of our own country, is filled,–we think it of more consequence here to observe, that the most high-handed of these acts grew directly out of the fundamental principle of the Papacy,–that the Pope is Christ’s vicar. If this be granted, the pontiff is as really the temporal as the spiritual chief of Europe; and in dethroning heretical kings, and laying rebellious kingdoms under interdict, he is simply exercising a power which Christ has lodged in his hands; he is doing what he is not only entitled, but bound to do. Nothing could display greater ignorance of the essential principles of the Papacy, or greater incompetence to deduce legitimate inferences from these principles, than to hold, as some do, that the supremacy was an accident, or had its origin in the ambition of Gregory, or in the superstitious and slavish character of the times. True, it was only at times that the Papacy dared to assert or to act upon this arrogant claim. In itself the claim is so monstrous, and so destructive of both the natural rights of men and the just prerogatives of princes, that the instinct of self-preservation overcame at times the slavish dictates of superstition, and princes and people united to oppose a despotism that threatened to crush both. When the state was strong the Papacy held its claims in abeyance; but when the sceptre came into feeble hands, that moment Rome advanced her lordly pretensions, and summoned both her ghostly terrors and her material resources to enforce them. She trampled with inexorable pride upon the dignity of princes; she violated without scruple the sanctity of oaths; she repaid former favours with insult; and treated with equal disdain the rights and the supplications of nations. Nothing, however exalted, nothing, however venerable, nothing, however sacred, was permitted to stand in her way to universal and supreme dominion. She became the lady of kingdoms. She was God’s vicegerent, and could bind or loose, build up or pull down, as seemed good unto her. In disposing of the crowns of monarchs, she was disposing of but her own; and in assuming the supreme authority in their kingdoms, she was exercising a right inherent in her, and with which she could no more part than she could cease to be Rome.

Such is the principle viewed logically. The most arrogant acts of Gregory and Innocent did not exceed by a single hairbreadth the just limits of their power, judged according to the fundamental axiom out of which that power springs. But we are not to suppose that Romanists have all been of one mind respecting the nature and extent of the supremacy. On this, as on every other point, they have differed widely. By a curious but easily explained coincidence, the Romanist theory of the supremacy has been enlarged or contracted, according to the mutations which the supremacy itself, in its exercise upon the world, has undergone. The papal sceptre has been a sort of index-hand. Its motions, whether through a larger or a narrower space, have ever furnished an exact measure of the existing state of opinion in the schools on the subject in question. In fact, the risings and fallings of theory and practice on the head of the supremacy have been as coincident, both in time and space, as the turnings of the vane and the wind, or as the changes of the mercury and the atmosphere; furnishing an instructive specimen of that very peculiar infallibility which Rome possesses. We distinctly recognise three well-defined and different opinions, not to mention minute shades and variations, among Romish doctors on this important question. The first attributes temporal power to the Pope on the ground of express and formal delegation from God. We are, say they, Peter’s representative, God’s vicegerent, possessors of the two keys, and therefore the rulers of the world in both its spiritual and temporal affairs. This may be held, speaking generally, as the claim of the popes who lived from Gregory VII. to Pius V., as expressed in their bulls, and interpreted (little to the comfort of sovereigns) in their acts. They were the world’s priest and monarch in one person. And, we repeat, this, which is the high ultra-montane theory, appears to us to be the most consistent opinion, strictly logical on Romanist principles, and, indeed, wholly impregnable if we but grant their postulate, that the Pope is Christ’s vicar. Prior to the Reformation there was scarce a single dissentient from this view of the supremacy in the Romish Church, if we except the illustrious defenders of the “Gallican liberties.” Theologians, canonists, and popes, with one voice claimed this prerogative. “The first opinion,” says Bellarmine, when enumerating the views held respecting the Pope’s temporal supremacy, “is, that the Pope has a most full power, jure divino, over the whole world, in both ecclesiastical and civil affairs.”[13] “This,” he adds, “is the doctrine of Augustine Triumphus, Alvarus Pelagius, Hostiensis, Panormitanus, Sylvester, and others not a few.” The same doctrine was taught by the “Angelical Doctor,” as he is termed. Aquinas held, that “in the Pope is the top of both powers,” and “by plain consequence asserting,” says Barrow, “when any one is denounced excommunicate for apostacy, his subjects are immediately freed his dominion, and from their oaths of allegiance to him.”[14]

The second opinion is, that the Pope’s immediate and direct jurisdiction extends to ecclesiastical matters only, but that he possesses a mediate and indirect authority over temporal affairs also. This opinion found its best expositor and its ablest champion in the redoubtable Cardinal Bellarmine. The Cardinal had sense to see, that the monstrous and colossal Janus, which turned a cleric or laic visage to the gazer, according to the side from which he viewed it,–which sat upon the seven hills, and was worshipped in the dark ages,–could no longer be borne by the world; and accordingly he set himself, with an adroitness and skill for which he had but little thanks from the reigning pontiff,–for the Cardinal narrowly escaped the Expurgatorius,–to show that the Pope had but one jurisdiction, the spiritual; and could exercise temporal authority only indirectly, that is, for the good of religion or the Church. The Pope, however, lost nothing, in point of fact, by the Cardinal’s logic; for Bellarmine took care to teach, that that indirect temporal power would carry the pontiff as far, and enable him to do as much, as the direct temporal authority. This indirect temporal power, the Cardinal taught, was supreme, and could enable the Pope, for the welfare of the Church, to annul laws and depose sovereigns.[15] This was dexterous management on the part of the Jesuit. He professed to part the enormous power which had before centred in Peter’s chair, between the kings and the pope, giving the temporal to the former and the spiritual to the latter; but he took care that the lion’s share should fall to the pontiff. It was a grand feat of legerdemain; for this division, made with such show of fairness, left the one party with not a particle more power, and the other with not a particle less, than before. Bellarmine had not broken or blunted the temporal sword; he had simply muffled it. He had left the pope brandishing in his hand the spiritual mace, with the temporal stiletto slung conveniently by his side, concealed by the folds of his pontificals. He could knock monarchs on the head with the spiritual bludgeon; and, having got them down, could despatch them with the secular poignard. What was there then in Bellarmine’s theory to prevent the great spiritual freebooter of Rome doing as much business in his own peculiar line as before? Nothing.

But Bellarmine’s opinion has become antiquated in its turn. The papal sceptre now describes a narrower political circle, and the opinions of the Romish doctors on the subject of the supremacy have undergone a corresponding limitation. A third opinion is that of those who hold the pope’s indirect temporal power in its most mitigated and attenuated form,–in so very attenuated a form, indeed, that it is all but invisible; and accordingly the authors of this opinion take leave to deny that they grant to the pope any temporal power at all. There are the views propounded by Count de Maistre and Abbe Gosselin on the Continent, and by Dr. Wiseman in this country, and now generally received by all Roman Catholics. De Maistre strongly condemns the use of the term temporal supremacy to indicate the power which the popes claim over sovereigns; and maintains that it is in virtue of a power entirely and eminently spiritual that they believe themselves to be possessed of the right to excommunicate sovereigns guilty of certain crimes, without, however, any temporal encroachment, or any interference with their sovereignty. He instances the case of the present Pope, who is possessed of so little temporal power, that he is compelled to submit to the ridicule of the Roman citizens.[16] De Maistre conveniently forgets that the question is not what the popes possess, but what they claim, either directly or by implication. The matter is stated in almost precisely similar terms by Dr. Wiseman, in his “Lectures on the Doctrines and Practices of the Catholic Church.” “The supremacy which I have described,” says he, “is of a character purely spiritual, and has no connexion with the possession of any temporal jurisdiction. . . . Nor has this spiritual supremacy any relation to the wider sway once held by the pontiffs over the destinies of Europe. That the headship of the Church won naturally the highest weight and authority, in a social and political state, grounded on catholic principles, we cannot wonder. That power arose and disappeared with the institutions which produced or supported it, and forms no part of the doctrine hold by the Church regarding the papal supremacy.”[17] What sort of power, then, is it which these writers attribute to the Pope? A purely spiritual power, which, however, may, as they themselves admit, and must, as we shall show, carry very formidable temporal consequences in its train. A single term expresses the modern view of the supremacy, direction. It is not, according to this view, jurisdiction, but direction, which rightfully belongs to the pontiff. He sits upon the Seven Hills, not as the world’s magistrate, but as the world’s casuist. He is there to solve doubts and guide the consciences, not to coerce the bodies, of men. It is not as the dictator, but as the doctor of Europe that he occupies Peter’s chair. But this is just Bellarmine’s theory in a subtler form. The mode of action is changed, but that action in its result is the very same: we are led, in no long time, and by no very indirect path, to the full temporal supremacy. If the Pope be the director and judge of all consciences; if he be, as Romanists maintain, an infallible director and judge; must he not require submission to his judgment,–implicit submission,–seeing it is an infallible and supreme judgment? Suppose this infallible resolver had such a case of conscience as the following submitted to him,–it is no hypothetical case:–The Grand Duke of Tuscany solicits the papal see to direct his conscience as to whether it is lawful to permit his subjects to read the Word of God in the vernacular tongue, or to permit Protestant worship in the Italian language in his dominions; and he is told it is not. The Pope does not send a single sbirri to Florence; he simply directs the ducal conscience. But the Grand Duke, as an obedient son of the church, feels himself bound to act on the advice of infallibility. Immediately the gens d’armes appear in the Protestant chapel, the Waldensian ministers are banished, and a count[18] of the realm, along with others, whose only crime is attendance at Protestant worship, and reading the Word of God in Italian, are thrown into the Bargello or common prison. The sentence of excommunication thundered from Gaeta against the Romans was the precursor of the French cannon which the Jesuits of the cabinet of the Elysee sent to Rome. The excommunication was a purely spiritual act; but the gaps in the Roman wall, filled with gory masses of Roman and French corpses, had not much of a spiritual character. Laws favourable to toleration and Protestantism, the succession of Protestant sovereigns, and all other acts of the same kind, must be condemned by this supreme spiritual judge, as hostile to the interests of religion. Of course, every Catholic conscience throughout the world is directed by the judgment of the pontiff, and must feel bound to carry that judgment out to the best of his power. Were the Catholics of Ireland to propound such a case of casuistry as this to the papal see,–whether it is for the good of the Church in Ireland that a heretic like Queen Victoria should bear sway over that island,–who can doubt what the reply would be? Nor can it be doubted that Irish Catholic consciences would take the direction which infallibility indicated, if they thought they could do so to good purpose. This autocrat of all consciences in and out of Christendom may disclaim all temporal power, and affect to be head of but a spiritual organization; but well he knows that, on the right and left of Peter’s chair, as turnkey and hangman to the holy apostolic see, stand Naples and Austria. The knife of De Maistre, fine as its edge is, has but lopped off the branches of the tree of supremacy; the root is in the earth, fastened with a band of iron and brass. The artillery of Romanist logic plays harmlessly upon the fabric of the papal power. It veils it in clouds of smoke, but it does not throw down a single stone of the building. The spectator, because it is blotted from his sight, thinks it is demolished. Anon the smoke clears away, and it is seen standing unscathed, and strong as ever.

History is a great bar in the way of the reception of this theory, or rather of the general conclusion to which its authors seek to lead the public mind, namely, that the pontifical direction is not connected, either directly or consequentially, with temporal power; and that the popes simply pronounce judgment in abstract questions of right and wrong, leaving their award, as any other moral and religious body would do, to exercise its legitimate influence upon the opinion and action of the age. The reception of such a view of the supremacy as this is much impeded, we say, by the monuments of history. But what can be neither blotted out nor forgotten, it may be possible to explain away; and this is the task which De Maistre, and especially Gosselin and other modern Romanist writers, have imposed upon themselves. De Maistre admits, as it would be madness to deny, that the popes of a former age did depose sovereigns and loose subjects from their oath of allegiance;[19] but to the amount to which these acts embodied temporal jurisdiction, or differed in their mode from direction, the adherents of the modern theory maintain that they grew out of the spirit and views of the middle ages, and that they were founded, not on divine right, but on public right, that is, on the general consent of the sovereigns and people of those days.[20] Now, to this view of the subject there are many and insuperable objections. The popes themselves give quite a different account of the matter. When they pronounced sentence of excommunication on monarchs, in the middle ages, on what ground did they rest their acts? On the constitutional law of Europe? On rights made over to them by a convention, express or tacit, of sovereigns and people? No; but on the highest style of divine right. They gave and took away crowns, as the vicars of Christ and the holders of the keys. These popes did not act as casuists, but as rulers. They did not decide a point of morality, but a point of policy. One can easily imagine the measureless indignation of Gregory or Innocent, had any one then dared to propound such a theory,–how quickly they would have smelt heresy in it, and summoned the pontifical thunders to purge out that heresy. Jurisdiction they did claim then, and on the theory of infallibility they claim it still; nor does it mend the matter though one should grant that that jurisdiction is of a spiritual nature, with the indirect temporal power attached; for, as we have already shown, this is but adding one step more to the logic, without adding even a step more to the process by which the act becomes thoroughly temporal. Nay, it does not mend the matter though we should drop the attached indirect temporal power, and retain only the spiritual jurisdiction. That jurisdiction is infallible and supreme, and extends to all things affecting religion, that is, the Church, the popes being the judges. We have had a modern proof how little this would avail to curb the excesses of pontifical ambition. We have seen the Pope, solely by the force of the spiritual jurisdiction, endeavouring to compel Piedmont to alter its laws, and to restore the lands to monasteries, and again extend to the clergy immunity from the secular tribuinals. Even De Maistre grants the right of excommunicating sovereigns guilty of great crimes. But the Pope is to be the judge of what crimes do and do not merit this dreadful punishment; and the notions of pontiffs on this grave point are apt to differ from those of ordinary men. Innocent III. threatened to interrupt the succession to the throne of Hungary because his legate had been stopped in passing through that kingdom. Wherever duty is involved, there the Pope has the right to interfere. But what action is it that does not involve duty? There is nothing a man can do,–scarce anything he can leave undone,–in which the interests of religion are not more or less directly concerned, and in which the Pope has not a pretext for thrusting in his direction. He can prescribe the food a man is to eat, the person with whom he is to trade, the master whom he is to serve, or the menial whom he is to hire. One can marry only whom the priest pleases; and can send one’s children to no school which the Pope has disallowed; he must be told how often to come to confession, and what proportion of his goods to give to the Church; above all, his conscience must be directed in the important matter of his last will and testament. He cannot bury his dead unless he is on good terms with the Church. Whether as a holder of the franchise, a municipal councillor, a judge, or a member of parliament, he must give an account of his stewardship to Rome. From his cradle to his grave he is under priestly direction. That direction is not tendered in the shape of advice, and so left to guide the man by its moral force: it is delivered as an infallible decision, the justice of which he dare not question, and to hesitate to obey which would be to peril his salvation. Thus, in every matter of life and business the Church comes in. But the Church can as thoroughly direct a whole kingdom as she can direct the individual man. The whole affairs of a nation, from the state secret down to the peasant’s gossip, lie open before her eye. Her agents ramify everywhere, and can at a given signal commence simultaneously a system of opposition and agitation over the whole kingdom. Any decision in the cabinet, any law in the senate, unfriendly to the Church, is sure in this way to be met and crushed. In directing national affairs, Rome has dropt the bold, blustering tone of Hildebrand: she now intimates her will in blander accents and politer phrase, but in a manner not less firm and irresistible than before. She has only to hint at withholding the sacraments, as the Archbishop Franzoni lately did to the minister Rosa, and the threat generally is successful. Governments cannot move a step but they are met by this tremendous spiritual check. They cannot make laws about education or about church lands,–they cannot regulate monasteries or take cognizance of the clergy,–they cannot extend civil privileges to their subjects, or conclude a treaty with foreign states,–without coming into collision with the Church. Every matter which they touch is Church, and before they can avoid her they must step out of the world. Under the plea of directing their consciences, their power, they find, is a nullity, and the real master of both themselves and their kingdom is the Bishop of Rome, or his cowled or scarlet-hatted representative at their court. Thus there is nothing of a temporal kind which is not drawn within the jurisdiction of the Pope’s constructive empire; and the “purely spiritual power” is felt in practice to be an intolerable secular thraldom. Under Rome’s scheme of infallible spiritual direction things sacred and civil are inseparably and hopelessly blended; and the attempt to separate the two would be as vain as the attempt to separate time from the beings that live in it, or space from the bodies it contains, or, as it is well expressed by a writer in the Edinburgh Review,[21] to cut out Shylock’s pound of flesh without spilling a drop of blood. The recent concordat between the Pope and the Spanish government[22] shows what a powerful engine the “spiritual jurisdiction” is for the government of a nation in all its affairs, temporal and spiritual. That concordat puts both swords into the hands of Pius IX. as truly as ever Gregory VII. or Innocent III. held them. Let the reader mark its leading provisions, and see how it subjects the temporal to the spiritual power:–

“Art. 1 declares that the Roman Catholic religion, being the sole worship of the Spanish nation, to the exclusion of all others, shall be maintained for ever, with all the rights and prerogatives which it ought to enjoy, according to the law of God and the dispositions of the sacred canons.

“Art. 2 deposes that all instruction in universities, colleges, seminaries, and public or private schools, shall be conformable to Catholic doctrine; and that no impediment shall be put in the way of the bishops, &c. whose duty is to watch over the purity of doctrine and of manners, and over the religious education of youth, even in the public schools.

“Art. 3. The authorities to give every support to the bishops and other ministers in the exercise of their duties; and the government to support the bishops when called on, whether in opposing themselves to the malignity of men who seek to pervert the minds of the faithful and corrupt their morals, or in impeding the publication, introduction, and circulation of bad and dangerous books.'”

The 29th article provides for the establishment by the government of certain religious houses and congregations, specifying those of San Vicente Paul, San Felipe Neri, and “some other one of those approved by the Holy See;” the object being stated to be, that there may be always a sufficient number of ministers and evangelical labourers for home and foreign missions, &c., and also that they may serve as places of retirement for ecclesiastics, in order to perform spiritual exercises and other pious works.

Art. 30 refers to religious houses for women, in which those who are called to a contemplative life may follow their vocation, and others may follow that of assistance to the sick, education, and other pious and useful works; and directs the preservation of the institution of Daughters of Charity, under the direction of the clergy of San Vicente Paul, the government to endeavour to promote the same; religious houses in which education of children and other works of charity are added to a contemplative life also to be maintained; and, with respect to other orders, the bishops of the respective dioceses to propose the cases in which the admission and profession of noviciates should take place, and the exercises of education or of charity which should be established in them.

The 35th article declares that the government shall provide, by all suitable means, for the support of the religious houses, &c. for men; and that, with respect to those for women, all the unsold convent property is at once to be returned to the bishops in whose dioceses it is, as their representatives.[23]

Here, then, is the supremacy, not as portrayed in the ingenious theories of De Maistre and Gosselin, but as it exists at this moment in fact. Stript of the sanctimonious phraseology with which it has always been the policy of Rome to veil her worst atrocities and her vilest tyrannies, the document just means that the Pope is the real sovereign of Spain, that his priests are to rule it as they list, and that the court at Madrid, and the other civil functionaries, are there merely to assist them. The first article of this concordat declares freedom of conscience eternally proscribed in the realm of Spain; the second decrees the extinction of knowledge and the perpetual reign of ignorance; the third takes the civil authorities bound and astricted to aid the clergy in searching for Bibles, hunting out missionaries, and burning converts; and the following articles grant license for the erection of sacerdotal stews, and the institution of clubs all over the country, the better to enable the clergy to coerce the citizens and beard the government. The concordat means this, and nothing else. It is as detestable and villanous an instrument as ever emanated from the gang of conspirators which has so long had its head-quarters on the Roman hill. It is meant to bind down the conscience and the manhood of Spain in everlasting slavery; and it shows that, despite all the recent exposures of these men,–despite all the disasters which have befallen them, and the yet more terrible disasters that lower over them,–their hearts are fully set upon their wickedness, and that they are resolved to present to the last a forehead of brass to the wrath of man and the bolts of heaven. This concordat has been shelved, meanwhile,–no thanks to the imbeciles who exchanged ratifications with Rome, but to the revolution which broke out at that moment in Portugal, and to the mutterings, not loud, but deep, which began to be heard in Spain itself, and which convinced its rulers that even a concordat with the Pope might be bought at too great a price.

Not in the high despotic countries of Italy and Spain only do we meet these lofty notions of the sacerdotal power: in constitutional and semi-Protestant Germany we find the bishops of the Church of Rome advancing the same exclusive and intolerant claims. The triumph of Austrian arms and of Austrian politics in the south of Germany has already made the Romish priesthood of that region predominant, and led them to aspire to the supremacy. Accordingly, demands utterly incompatible with any government, and especially constitutional and Protestant government, have been put forth by the bishops of the two Hesses, Wurtemberg, Nassau, Hamburg, Frankfort,–all Protestant States; and of Baden, a semi-Protestant State. The document in which these demands are contained is entitled, “The Assembled Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of the Haut-Rhin, to the several Governments.” A copy has been sent over by our ambassador, Lord Cowley, and published by order of Parliament.[24] Its leading claims are as follows:

“The repeal of all religious concessions made since March 1848.

“The free nomination to all ecclesiastical employments and benefices by the several bishops in their respective dioceses.

“The right of the bishops to subject their subordinates to a special examination, and to punish them according to the canon law.

“The abolition, in the exercise of the ecclesiastical penal jurisdiction, of the right of appeal to the secular tribunals. This shall extend from the simple remonstrance to the removal from office and the loss of emolument. Every attempt to appeal in these matters to the secular authority shall be looked upon as an act of disobedience to the legal authority of the Church, and shall be punished by excommunicatio latae sententiae.

“The establishment of seminaries for young boys.

“Episcopal sanction for the nomination of masters for religious education in the colleges and universities.

“Abolition of the right of placet of the secular authority as regards the publication of papal bulls, of briefs, and pastoral letters of the bishops to the members of the clergy.

Permission for the bishops to preach to the people in public, and to hold exercises for the instruction of priests.

“Permission to collect men and women for prayer, for contemplation, and for self-denial.

“The re-instatement of the bishops in the entire enjoyment of their ancient penal jurisdiction as against such of the members of the Church as shall manifest contempt for ecclesiastical ordinances.

“Free communication between the bishops and Rome.

“No interference of the secular power in questions of filling up the appointment to the chapter of canons.

“Independent administration of the property of the Church and of foundations.”

Can any man peruse these two documents, appearing as they do at the same moment in widely-separated quarters of Europe, yet identical in their spirit and in the claims they put forth, and fail to see that the Papacy has plotted once more to seize upon the government of the world; and that its priests in all countries are working with dauntless audacity and amazing craft, on a given plan, to accomplish this grand object? In every country they insolently claim independence of the government and of the courts of law, with unlimited control of the schools. They would override all things, and be themselves controlled by no one. Rome, through her organs, bids Europe again crouch down beneath the infallibility. How strikingly also do these documents teach that Popery is as unchangeable in her character as in her creed. Amid the liberal ideas and constitutional governments of Germany she retains her exclusive and intolerant spirit, not less than amid the medieval opinions and barbaric despotism of Spain. The glacier in the heart of the Swiss valley lies eternally congealed in the midst of fruit, and flowers, and sunshine. In like manner, an eternal congelation holds fast the Papacy, let the world advance as it may. In the middle of the nineteenth century it starts up grizzly, ferocious, and bloodthirsty, as in the fifteenth. As a murderer from his grave, or a wild beast from his lair, so has it come back upon the world. The compilers of these documents breathe the very spirit of the men who, in former ages, covered Spain with inquisitions and Germany with stakes. They lack simply opportunity to revive, and even outdo, the worst tragedies of their predecessors. In Germany they attempt by a single stroke of the pen to sweep away all the guarantees which flowed from the treaty of Westphalia; and in southern Europe they strike down with the sabre the rights of conscience and the liberties of states. How long will princes and statesmen permit themselves to be misled by the wretched pretext that these men have a divine right to commit all these enormities and crimes,–that heaven has committed the human race into their hands,–and that neither the rights of man nor the prerogatives of God must come into competition with their sacerdotal will? How long is the world to be oppressed by a confederacy of fanatics and ruffians, who are only the abler to play the knave, that they rob under the mask of devotion, and tyrannize in the awful name of God?

But we have no need to go so far from home as to Spain and Germany, for an instance of “a purely spiritual jurisdiction” transmuting itself immediately and directly into temporal supremacy. Let us look across St. George’s Channel. The British government, pitying the deep ignorance of the natives of Ireland, wisely resolve to erect a number of colleges in that dark land, in the hope of mitigating the wretchedness of its people. The priesthood discover that this scheme interferes with the Church, whose vested right in the ignorance of the natives it threatens to sweep away. The Pope does not throw down a single stone of any of these colleges. His interference takes a purely spiritual direction, but a direction that accomplishes his object quite as effectually as could be done by a physical intervention. He issues a bull, denouncing the Irish colleges as godless, and forbidding every good Catholic, as he values his salvation, to allow his child to enter them. This bull, given at the Quirinal, makes frustrate the intention of the Queen, and renders the colleges as completely useless to the Irish nation,–at least to that large portion of it for whose benefit they were specially intended,–as if an army had been sent to raze the obnoxious buildings, and not leave so much as one stone upon another. It matters wonderfully little whether we term the Pope the director of Ireland or the dictator of Ireland: while Ireland is Catholic, the pontiff is, and must be, its virtual sovereign. The British power is limited in that unhappy island to the work of imposing taxes,–imposing, not gathering, for the taxes are taken up by the priests and sent to Rome; while to us is left the duty of feeding a country which clerical rapacity and tyranny has made a country of beggars. Thus the Pope’s yoke is not whit lighter that, instead of calling it temporal supremacy, we call it “spiritual jurisdiction,” or even “spiritual direction.” It would yield, we are disposed to think, wonderfully little consolation to the unhappy sovereign whose throne is struck from under him, and whose kingdom is plunged into contention and civil war, to be told that the Pope in this has acted, not by jurisdiction, but by direction; that he exercises this power, not as lord paramount of his realm, but as lord paramount of his conscience; that, in fact, it is his conscience, and not his territory, that he holds as a fief of the papal see; and that he is enduring this castigation from the pontifical ferula, not in his capacity of king, but in his capacity of Christian. The unhappy monarch, we say, would find but little solace in this nice distinction; and, even at the risk of adding to both his offence and his punishment, might denounce it as a wretched quibble.[25]

These, then, are the two points between which the supremacy oscillates–direction and divine right. It never sinks lower than the former; it cannot rise higher than the latter. But it is important to bear in mind that, whether it stands at the one or at the other of these points, it is supremacy still. We have already indicated[26] that the temporal and spiritual jurisdictions are co-ordinate. This, we believe, is the only rational, as it is undoubtedly the scriptural view of the subject. The liberties of society can be maintained only by maintaining the divinely-appointed equilibrium between the two. If we make the temporal preponderate, we have Erastianism, or the slavery of the Church. If we make the spiritual preponderate, we have Popery, or the slavery of the State. The popish element entered into the jurisdiction of the Church when spiritual independence was transmuted into spiritual supremacy. This happened about the sixth century, when the Bishop of Rome claimed to be Christ’s vicar. From that time the popes began to interfere in temporal matters by direction; for it is curious to note, that the supremacy, as defined in the modern theory, has come back to its beginnings, to run, of course, the same career, should the state of the world permit. At the period of Gregory VII. it ceased to be direction, and became a jurisdiction, and so continued down till the Reformation. Since that time it has been slowly returning through the intermediate stages of indirect temporal power,–of purely spiritual jurisdiction,–to its original form of direction, at which it now stands. But the root of the matter is the claim to be Christ’s vicar; and till that is torn up, the evil and malignant principle cannot be eradicated. The supremacy may change shapes; it may go into a nutshell, as some philosophers have held the whole universe may do; but it can develope itself as suddenly; and, let the world become favourable, it will speedily shoot up into its former colossal dimensions, overshadowing all earthly jurisdiction, and claiming equality with, if not supremacy above, divine authority. We repeat, according to the modern theory, to go no higher, all Christendom holds its conscience as a fief of the Roman see; and we trust pontifical dignities will forgive the homely metaphor by which we seek to show them the extent of their own power. The governing power in the world is conscience, or whatever else may occupy its place; and he who governs it governs the world. But the pontiff is the infallible and supreme director of conscience. He sits above it, like the driver of a railway train behind his engine. An ingenious apologist might make out a case of limited powers in behalf of the latter, showing how little he has to do with either the course or velocity of the train. “He does not drag the train,” might such say; “he has not power enough to move a single carriage; he but regulates the steam.”Here is the Pope astride his famous ecclesiastical engine, with all the Catholic states of Europe dragging at his heels, and careering along at a great rate. Here is the Bourbon family-coach, which upset so recently, pitching its occupant in the mud, looking as new as it is possible for an old battered vehicle to do by the help of fresh tri-colour paint and varnish; here is the old imperial car which Austria picked up for a trifle when the Caesars had no longer any need for it,–here it is, blazoned with the bloody beak and iron talons of the double-headed eagle; here is the Spanish state-coach, hurtling along in the tawdry and tattered finery of its better days, its wheels worn to their spokes, and its motion made up of but a succession of jerks and bounds; here is the Neapolitan vehicle and the Tuscan vehicle, and others lumbering and crazy; and here, in front, is the famous engine St. Peter, snorting and puffing away; and here is Peter himself as engineer, with superstition for a propelling power, and excommunication for a steam-whistle, and tradition for spectacles, to enable him to keep on the rails of apostolic succession, and prevent his being bogged in heresy. It would be very wrong to say that he drags along this great train. No; he only turns the handle, to let on or shut off the steam; shovels in coals, manages the valves, blows his whistle at times with eldrich screech, and catches at his three-storied cap, which the wind blows off now and then. It is not jurisdiction, but direction, with which he favours the members of his tail: nevertheless, it moves where, when, and as fast as he pleases.

But something in a somewhat more classic vein would doubtless be deemed more befitting the pure and lofty function of the pontiff. The Romanists have exalted their Father, as the Pagans did their Jove, into an empyrean, far above sublunary affairs. In that eternal calm he issues his infallible decisions, thinking, the while, no more of this little ball of earth, or of the angry passions that contend upon it, than if it had yet to be created. Or if at times the thought does cross the pontifical mind that there are such things in the world beneath him as cannon and sabres, and that these are often had recourse to to execute the determinations of infallibility, how can he help it? He must needs discharge his office as the world’s spiritual director; he dare not refrain from pronouncing infallibly on those high questions of duty which are brought before him; and if others will have recourse to material weapons in carrying out his advice, he begs the world to understand that this is not his doing, and that he cannot be justly blamed for it. One cannot but wonder at the admirable distribution of parts among the innumerable actors by whom the play of the Papacy is carried on. From the stage-manager at Rome, to the lowest scene-shifter in Clonmel or Tipperary, each has his place, and keeps it too. When an unhappy monarch is so unfortunate as to incur the displeasure of mother church, the pontiff does not lay a finger upon him; he does not touch a hair of his head; no, not he; he only gives a wink to the bullies who, he knows, are not far off, and whose office it is to do the business; and thus the wretched farce goes.


[1] D’Aubigné’s History of the Reformation, vol. i. p. 48. [Back]

[2] Corpus Juris Canonici (Coloniae. 1631), Extravag. Commun. lib. i. tit. viii. cap. i. “Uterque ergo est in potestate ecclesiae, spiritalis, scilicet, gladius, et materialis. Sed is quidem pro ecclesia, ille vero ab ecclesia, exercendus.” [Back]

[3] First taught as an axiom by Thomas Aquinas, in his work against the Greeks; converted into law by Pope Boniface; and attempted to be applied by the same pope in the way of deposing King Philip of France.[Back]

[4] Extravag. Commun. lib. i. tit. viii. cap. i. “Porro subesse Romano pontifici omni humanae creaturae, declaramus, dicimus, finimus, et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis .” [Back]

[5] Concil. Lateran. sess. xi. p. 153. [Back]

[6] Baron. anno 57, sec. 23-53. [Back]

[7] Pope Pius V. in bull contra Reg. Eliz., quoted from Barrow. [Back]

[8] Concil. Lateran. sess. x. p. 132. [Back]

[9] See a list of these sovereigns in Free Thoughts on the Toleration of Popery, pp. 50, 51; Edin. 1780. This work is from the pen of the late Professor Bruce of Whitburn. It displays immense research, sound learning, and great eloquence. [Back]

[10] Concil. Rom. vii. apud Bin. tom. vii. p. 491. (Barrow). [Back]

[11] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 400. [Back]

[12] Bulla Sexti V, contra Hen. Navarr. Rex. (Barrow). [Back]

[13] Bellarm. De Romano Pontifice, lib. v. cap. i.; Cologne edit. 1620. [Back]

[14] Barrow on the Supremacy, Barrow’s Works, vol. i. p. 539; Lond. 1716. [Back]

[15] “Pontificem, ut pontificem, non habere directe et immediate ullam temporalem potestatem, sed solum spiritualem, tamen ratione spiritualis habere saltem indirecte potestatem quamdam, eamque summam, in temporalibus.” (De Rom. Pont. lib. v. cap. i.) “Quantum ad personas, non potest papa, ut papa, ordinarie temporales principes deponere, etiam justa de causa, eo modo, quo deponit episcopos, id est, tamquam ordinarius judex: tamen potest mutare regna, et uni auferre, atque alteri conferre, tamquam summus princeps spiritualis, si id necessarium sit ad animorum salutem.” (Idem, lib. v. cap. vi.) [Back]

[16] “L’exercise d’un pouvoir purement et eminemment spirituel, en vertu duquel ils se croyaient en droit de frapper d’excommunication des princes coupables des certains crimes, sans aucune usurpation materielle, sans aucune suspension de la souverainete, et sans aucune derogation au dogme de son origine divine. . . . Je crois que la verité no se trouve que dans la proposition contraire, savoir, que la puissance dont il s’agit est purement spirituelle.” (Du Pape, liv. ii. chap. viii. pp. 225, 226.) [Back]

[17] Wiseman’s Lectures, lect. viii. pp. 264, 265. [Back]

[18] Guicciardini (May 1851). His story is well known. He is the descendant of the great historian of that name. His ancestors had rendered important services to the Roman see. The present Count Guicciardini has been a Protestant for years; he is of unblemished reputation, has never meddled with politics; and simply for reading Diodati’s Bible with a few fellow-citizens, he was sentenced to die in the poisonous air of the Maremme. He was permitted, however, with six others, to make his escape. [Back]

[19] Du Pape, liv. ii. chap. ix. p. 230. [Back]

[20] Idem, pp. 231, 232. [Back]

[21] Number for April 1851. [Back]

[22] Ratifications were exchanged April 23, 1851. [Back]

[23] Gaceta de Madrid of May 12, 1851. [Back]

[24] June, 1851. [Back]

[25] In December last (1850), Lord Palmerston addressed from the Foreign Office to her Majesty’s representatives abroad, a circular, instructing them to transmit copies of any concordat or equivalent arrangement between the court of Rome and the particular government to which each representative was accredited. The replies form the substance of a Blue Book of about 350 pages, which has recently been published. We extract from the enclosures received by government in January last, from the Hon. Ralph Abercromby, our representative at Turin, the copy of the oath required to be taken by new cardinals in Sardinia. It entirely, and for all governments, settles the question of what a cardinal really is,-proving him to be the sworn emissary, spy, and creature of the court of Rome. He so pledges his allegiance to a foreign prince as palpably to rescind the allegiance due to his own sovereign.

THE CARDINAL’S OATH.

“I,—-, cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, do promise and swear that, from this hour until my life’s end, I will be faithful and obedient unto St. Peter, the Holy Apostolic Roman Church, and our Most Holy Lord the Pope and his successors, canonically and lawfully elected; that I will give no advice, consent, or assistance against the Pontifical Majesty and person; that I will never knowingly and advisedly, to their injury or disgrace, make public the counsels entrusted to me by themselves, or by messengers or letters (from them); also that I will give them any assistance in retaining, defending, and recovering the Roman Papacy and the Regalia of Peter, all my might and endeavour, so far as the rights and privileges of my order will allow it, and will defend against all, their Honour and state; that I will direct and defend, with due favour and honour, the legates and nuncios of the apostolic see, in the territories, churches, monasteries, and other benefices committed to my keeping; that I will cordially co-operate with them, and treat them with Honour in their coming, abiding, and returning; and that I will resist unto blood all persons whatsoever who shall attempt anything against them; that I will by every way, and by every means, strive to preserve, augment, and advance the rights, honours, privileges, the authority of the Holy Roman Bishop our Lord the Pope, and his before-mentioned successors; and that at whatever time anything shall be devised to their prejudice, which it is out of my power to hinder, as soon as I shall know that any steps or measures have been taken (in the matter), I will make it known to the same our Lord, or his before-mentioned successors, or to some other person by whose means it may be brought to their knowledge. “That I will keep and carry out, and cause others to keep and carry out, the rules of the Holy Fathers, the decrees, ordinances, dispensations, reservations, provisions, apostolical mandates, and constitutions, of the Holy Pontiff Sixtus, of happy memory, as to visiting the thresholds of the apostles, at certain prescribed times according to the tenor of that which I have just read through.

“That I will seek out and oppose (persecute and fight against?)* heretics, schismatics, against the same our Lord the Pope and his before-mentioned successors, with every possible effort. When sent for, from whatever cause, by the same our Most Holy Lord, and his before-mentioned successors, that I will set out to present myself before them, or, being hindered by a legitimate impediment, will send some one to make my excuses; and that I will pay them due reverence and obedience. That I will by no means sell, bestow away, or pledge, or give away in fee, or otherwise alienate, without the advice and knowledge of the Bishop of Rome, even with the consent of the said chapters, convents, churches, monasteries, and benefices, the possessions set apart for the maintenance of the churches, monasteries, and other benefices committed to my keeping, or in any way belonging to them. That I will for ever maintain the constitution of the blessed Pius V., which begins ‘Admonet,’ and is dated from Rome on the 4th of the calends of April, of the year of our Lord’s incarnation 1567, and the second of his pontificate; together with the declarations of the holy pontiffs his successors, particularly of Pope Innocent IX., dated at Rome the day before the nones of November, of the year of our Lord’s incarnation 1591, of the first of his pontificate, and of Clement VIII. of happy memory, dated at Rome on the 16th of the calends of March, in the year 1592, and the tenth of his pontificate, on the subject (in the matter) of not giving away in fee or alienating the cities and places of the Holy Roman Church. Also, I promise and swear to keep for ever inviolate the decrees and incorporations made by the same Clement VIII. on the 26th day of June of the before-mentioned year 1592, on the 2d day of November 1592, and on the 19th of January and the 11th day of February 1698, in the matter of the city of Ferrara and the whole duchy thereof, as well as respecting all other cities whatsoever, and places recovered by him, and which fell in by the death of Alphonso, of happy memory, the last Duke of Ferrara, or otherwise to the Holy Roman Church and apostolic see. Also the decrees and incorporations made by Urban VIII. of happy memory, on the 12th day of May 1631, respecting the cities of Urbino, Eugubio, Carlii, Jorisempronium, of the whole duchy of Urbino, as well as in the matters of the cities of Pisauri, Sinogallia, S. Leo, the state of Monte Feltro, the vicariate of Mondovi, and of the other cities and places whatsoever recovered by and having devolved to the Holy Roman Apostolic Church by the death of Francis Maria, the last duke, or otherwise. Also the decree of incorporation made in Consistory on the 20th day of December 1660, by Alexander VII. of happy memory, in the matter of the duchy of Castri and the state of Roncilioni, and other places, lands, and properties sold to the Apostolic Chamber by Raimuntius, duke of Parma; and the constitution of the same Alexander VII. of happy memory, with the reason of, and allocation upon, the decree for incorporations of this kind, published on the 24th of January 1660, together with the confirmation, innovation, extension, and declaration of the other decrees and constitutions of the holy pontiffs, issued in prohibition of parting with them in fee; and in no way and at no time, either directly or indirectly, whatever cause, colour, or occasion, even of evident necessity or utility may present itself, to act against them or to give advice, counsel, or consent against them in any way; but, on the contrary, always and constantly to dissent from, oppose, and reveal every device and practice against them, whatever may come to my knowledge by myself or by any messenger, immediately to his Holiness, or his successors, lawfully entering, under the penalties (in case of neglect or disobedience) contained in the said constitutions, or any other heavier ones that it may seem fit to his Holiness and his before-mentioned successors (to inflict). . . . . I will not seek absolution from any of the foregoing articles, but reject it if it should be offered me (or in no way accept it when offered). So help me God and these most holy gospels.”

*This double translation stands so in the Parliamentary Book: the original is omni conatu persecuturum et impugnaturum. [Back]

[26] See chap. ii. [Back]

Continued in Chapter VI. The Canon Law

All chapters History of the Papacy




History of the Papacy Chapter IV. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Supremacy.

History of the Papacy Chapter IV. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Supremacy.

This is the next chapter after Chapter III. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Sovereignty.

We left the Papacy, at the opening of the ninth century, reposing beneath the shadow of the Carlovingian monarchy. One grand stage in its progress had been accomplished. The battle for the temporal sovereignty had been fought and won. A crowned priest now sat upon the Seven Hills. From this time another and far mightier object began to occupy the ambition and exercise the genius of Rome. To occupy a seat overshadowed by the loftier throne of the emperors would not satisfy the vast ambition of the pontiffs, and accordingly there was now commenced the struggle for the temporal supremacy.

There was an obvious incompatibility between the lofty spiritual powers claimed by the pontiffs, and their subordination to secular authority; nevertheless, at this time, and for some ages afterwards, the popes were subject to the emperors. Charlemagne was lord paramount of Rome, and the territories of the Church were a fief of the Emperor. The son of Pepin wore the imperial diadem, and, in the words of Ranke, “performed unequivocal acts of sovereign authority in the dominions conferred on St. Peter.”[1] Nevertheless, he had received the empire in a way which left it undecided whether he owed it more to his own merit or to the pontiff’s favour, and whether he held it solely in virtue of his own right, and not also, in good degree, as the gift of Leo. The Pope was nominally subject to the Emperor, but in many vital points the first was last; and he who now wrote himself “a servant of servants,” was fulfilling in a bad sense what our Lord intended in a good,–“Whosoever will be the greatest among you, let him be the servant of all.” The popes had not yet advanced a direct and formal claim to dispose of crowns and kingdoms, but the germ of such a claim was contained, first, in the acts which they now performed. They had already taken it upon them to sanction the transference of the crown of France from the Merovingian to the Carlovingian family. And on what principle had they done so? Why did the Pope, rather than any other prince, profess to give validity to Pepin’s right to the throne of France? Why, seeing, as a temporal ruler, he was the least powerful and independent sovereign in Europe, did he, of all men, interpose his prerogative in the matter? The principle on which he proceeded was plainly this,–that in virtue of his spiritual character he was superior to earthly dignities, and had been vested in the power of controlling and disposing of such dignities.[2] The same principle is yet more clearly involved in the bestowal of the imperial dignity on Charlemagne. That the popes themselves held this principle to be implied in these proceedings, though as yet they kept the claim in the background, is plain from the fact that, at an after period, and in more favourable circumstances, they founded on these acts in proof of the dependence of the emperors, and their own right to confer the empire. It was the usual manner of the Papacy to perform acts which, as they appeared to contain no principles hostile to the rights of society or the prerogatives of princes, were permitted to pass unchallenged at the time; but the Popes took care afterwards to improve them, by founding upon them the most extravagant and ambitious claims. In nothing have the plausibility and artifice of the system and its patrons been more plainly shown.

But, second, the principle on which the whole system of the popes was founded, virtually implied their supremacy over kings as well as over priests. They claimed to be the successors of Peter and the vicars of Christ. But Christ is Lord of the world as well as Head of the Church. He is a King of kings; and the popes aimed at exhibiting on earth an exact model or representation of Christ’s government in heaven; and accordingly they strove to reduce monarchs to the rank of their vassals, and assume into their own hands the management of all the affairs of earth. If their claim was a just one,–if they were indeed the vicars of Christ and the vicegerents of God, as they affirmed,–there were plainly no bounds to their authority, either in temporal or spiritual matters. The symbol which to pontifical rhetoric has alone seemed worthy to shadow forth the more than mortal magnificence of the popes is the sun, which, they tell us, the Creator has set in the heavens as the representative of the pontifical authority; while the moon, shining with borrowed splendour, has formed the humble symbolization of the secular power. According to their theory, there was strictly but one ruler on earth,–the Pope. In him all authority was centred. From him all rule and jurisdiction emanated. From him kings received their crowns, and priests their mitres. To him all were accountable, while he was accountable to no one save God alone. The pontiffs, we say, judged it premature to startle the world as yet by an undisguised and open avowal of this claim: they accounted it sufficient, meanwhile, to embody its fundamental principles in the decrees of councils and in the pontifical acts, and allow them to lie dormant there, in the hope that a better age would arrive, when it would be possible to avow in plain terms, and enforce by direct acts, a claim which they had put forth only inferentially as yet. But to make good this claim was the grand object of Rome from the beginning; and this object she steadily pursued through a variety of fortune and a succession of centuries. The vastness of the object was equalled by the ability and perseverance with which it was prosecuted. The policy of Rome was profound, subtle, patient, unscrupulous, and audacious. And as she has had no rival as respects the greatness of the prize and the qualities with which she has contended for it, so neither has she had a rival in the dazzling success with which at last her contest was crowned.

With Charlemagne expired the military genius and political sagacity which had founded the empire. His power now passed into hands too feeble to save the state from convulsions or the empire from dissolution. Quarrels and disputes arose among the inheritors of his dominions. The popes were called in, and asked to employ their paternal authority and ghostly wisdom in the settlement of these differences. With a well-feigned coyness, but real delight at having found so plausible a pretext for advancing their own pretensions, they undertook the task, and executed it to such good purpose, that while they took care of the interests of their clients, they very considerably promoted their own. Hitherto the pontiff bad been raised to his dignity by the suffrages of the bishops, accompanied by the acclamation of the Roman people and the ratification of the emperor. For till the imperial consent had been signified, the newly-elected pontiff could not be legally consecrated. But this badge of subordination, if not of servitude, the popes resolved no longer to wear. Was it to be endured that the vicegerent of God should reign only by the sufferance of the French emperor? Must that authority which came direct from the great apostle be countersigned by a mere dignitary of earth? These ambitious projects the popes had found it prudent to repress hitherto; but now the sword of Charlemagne was in the dust, and they could deal as they listed with the puppets who had stood up in his room. A course of policy was adopted, consisting of alternate cajolery and browbeating, in which the emperors had decidedly the worst of it. Their privilege of giving a valid and legal right to the tiara was wrested from them; and the popes manoeuvred so successfully as to keep the imperial prerogative in abeyance till the times of Otho the Great. Inimitable adroitness did the Papacy display in turning to account the troubles of the times. Like a knowing trader at a commercial crisis with plenty of ready cash in hand, the popes did such an amount of business in Peter’s name, that they vastly increased the credit and revenues of his see. So wisely did they lay out their available stock of influence, that their house now became, and for some time afterwards continued to be, the first establishment in Europe. Of the many bidders for a share in the trade of the great Fisherman, none were admitted into the concern but such as brought with them, in some shape or other, good solid capital; and thus the business went on every day improving. Monarchs were aided, but on all such occasions the popes took care that the chair of Peter should receive in return sevenfold what it gave.

The posterity of Charlemagne at this time contested with one another, in a sanguinary war, their rights to the throne of their illustrious father. By large presents, and yet larger promises, Charles the Bald was fortunate enough to engage the reigning pontiff, John VIII., in his interests. From that moment the contest was no longer doubtful. Charles was proclaimed Emperor by the Pope in A.D. 876. A service so important deserved to be suitably acknowledged. The monarch’s gratitude for his throne was embodied in an act, by which he surrendered for himself and his successors all right of interfering in the election to the pontifical chair. Henceforward, till the middle of the tenth century, the imperial sanction was dispensed with, and the pontiffs mounted the chair of Peter without acknowledging in the matter either king or kaisir. In this the pontificate had achieved a great victory over the empire. Nor was this the only advantage which the pontiffs gained in that struggle with the imperial power into which they had been temptingly drawn by the unsettled character of the times. In the case of Charles the Bald the Pope had nominated the Emperor. The same act was repeated in the case of his successors, Carloman and Charles the Gross. It was continued in the contests for the empire which followed the reigns of these princes. The candidate who was rich enough to offer the largest bribe, or powerful enough to appear with an army at the gates of Rome, was invariably crowned emperor in the Vatican. Thus, as the State dissolved, the Church waxed in strength. What the one lost the other drew to herself. The popes did not trouble the world with any formal statement of their principles on the head of the supremacy; they were content to embody them in acts. They were wise enough to know, that the speediest way of getting the world to acknowledge theoretic truth is to familiarize it with its practical applications,–to ask its approval of it, not as a theory, but as a fact. Thus the popes, by a bold course of dexterous management, and of audacious but successful aggression, laboured to weave the doctrine of the supremacy into the general policy of Europe. But for the rise, in the tenth century, of a new power superior to the Franks, Rome would now have reached the summit of her wishes.[3]

No weapon was too base for the use of Rome. Her hand grasped with equal avidity the forged document and the hired dagger. Both were sanctified in her service. In the beginning of the ninth century came the decretals of Isidore. These professed to be a collection of the decrees and rescripts of the early councils and popes, the object of their infamous author, who is unknown, being to show that the see of Rome possessed from the very beginning all the prerogatives with which the intrigues of eight centuries had invested it. Their style was so barbarous, and their anachronisms and solecisms were so flagrant, that in no age but the most ignorant could they have escaped detection for a single hour. Rome, nevertheless, infallibly decreed the truth of what is now universally acknowledged to be false. These decretals supported her pretensions, and that with her decided the question of their authenticity or spuriousness. There are few who have earned so well the honours of canonization as this unknown forger. For ages the decretals possessed the authority of precedents, and furnished Rome with appropriate weapons in her contests with bishops and kings.[4]

The French power was declining; that of the Germans had not yet risen. The pontifical influence was, on the whole, the predominating element in Europe; and the popes, having now no superior, and freed from all restraint, began to use the ample license which the times afforded them, for purposes so infamous, that they transcend description, and well-nigh belief. With the tenth century commence the dark annals of the Papacy. The popes, although wholly devoted to selfish and ambitious pursuits, had found it prudent hitherto to maintain the semblance of piety; but now even that pretence was laid aside. Thanks to Rome, the world was now prepared to see the mask thrown off. Europe had reached a pitch of ignorance and superstition, and the Papacy a height of insolence and truculence, which enabled the popes to defy with impunity the fear of man and the power of God. Not only were the forms of religion contemned; the ordinary decencies of manhood were flagrantly outraged. We dare not pollute our page with such things as the pontiffs of this age practised in the face of Rome and the world. The palaces of the worst emperors, the groves of pagan worship, saw nothing so foul as the orgies of the Vatican. Men sat in the chair of Peter, whose consciences were loaded with perjuries and adulteries, and whose hands were stained with murders; and claimed, as the vicars of Christ, a right to govern the Church and the world. The intrigues, the fraud, the violence, that now raged at Rome, may be conceived of from the fact, that from the death of Benedict IV., A.D. 903, to the elevation of John XII., A.D. 956,–an interval of only fifty-three years,–not fewer than thirteen popes held successively the pontificate. The attempt were vain to pursue these fleeting pontifical phantoms. Their brief but flagitious career was ended most commonly by the lingering horrors of the dungeon, or the quick despatch of the poignard. It is enough to mention the names of a John the Twelfth, a Boniface the Seventh, a John the Twenty-third, a Sixtus the Fourth, an Alexander the Sixth (Borgia), a Julius the Second. These names stand associated with crimes of enormous magnitude. This list by no means exhausts the goodly band of pontifical villains. Simony, the good-will of a prostitute, or the dagger of an assassin, opened their way to the pontifical throne; and the use they made of their power formed a worthy sequel to the infamous means by which they had obtained it. In the chair of Peter, the pontiffs of this and succeeding eras revelled in impiety, perjury, lewdness, sacrilege, sorcery, robbery, and blood; thus converting the palace of the apostle into an unfathomable sink of abomination and filth. “A mass of moral impurity,” says Edgar, “might be collected from the Roman hierarchy, sufficient to crowd the pages of folios, and glut all the demons of pollution and malevolence.” The age, too, was scandalized by frequent and flagrant schisms. These divided the nations of Christendom, engendered sanguinary wars, and unhinged society itself. For half a century rival pontifical thrones stood at Rome and Avignon; and Europe was doomed daily to listen to the dreadful vollies of spiritual thunder which the rival infallibilities, Urban and Clement, ever and anon launched at one another, and which, in almost one continuous and stunning roar, reverberated between the Tiber and the Rhone.[5] There is no need to darken the horrors of the time by the fable (if fable it be) of a female pope, who is said about this time to have filled St. Peter’s chair. The traditionary Pope Joan is found, perhaps, in the sister-prostitutes, the well-known Marozia and Theodora, who now governed Rome. Their influence, founded on their wealth, their beauty, and their intrigues, enabled them to place on the pontifical throne whom they would; and not unfrequently they promoted, without a blush, their paramours to the holy chair. Such were the dark transactions of the period, and such the scones that signalized the advent of the Papacy to temporal power. The revels of Ahasuerus and Haman were concluded with the bloody decree which delivered over a whole nation to the sword. The yet guiltier revels of the Papacy were, in like manner, followed in due time by ages of proscription and slaughter.[6]

In tracing the rise of the temporal supremacy, we are now brought to the middle of the tenth century. Otho the Great appears upon the stage. With a vigorous hand did these German conquerors grasp the imperial diadem which the degenerate descendants of Charlemagne were no longer either worthy to wear or able to defend. Otho found the Papacy running a career of crime, and in some danger of perishing in its own corruption. He interposed his sword, and averted its otherwise inevitable fate. It did not suit the designs of the German emperors that the Papacy should suffer a premature extinction. It might be turned, they were not slow to perceive, to great account in the way of consolidating and extending their own imperial dignity, and therefore they strove to reform, not destroy, Rome. They rescued the chair of Peter from its worst foes, its occupants. They deposed several popes notorious for their vices, and exalted others of purer morals to the pontifical dignity.[7] Thus the Papacy had found a new master; for Otho and his descendants were as much the liege lords of the popedom as the monarchs of the Carlovingian line had been.[8] The popes were now obliged to surrender the powers they had usurped during the time that the imperial sceptre was in the feeble hands of the last of the posterity of Charlemagne. In particular, the rights of which Charles the Bald had been stripped were now given back.[9] The emperors again nominated the pope.[10] When a vacancy occurred in the chair of St. Peter, envoys from Rome announced the fact at the court of the emperor, and waited the signification of his will respecting a successor. This substantial right of interfering when a new pope was to be elected, which the emperors possessed, was very inadequately balanced by the empty and nominal power enjoyed by the popes, of placing the imperial crown on the emperor’s head. “The prince elected in the German Diet,” says Gibbon, “acquired from that instant the subject kingdoms of Italy and Rome; but he might not legally assume the titles of Emperor and Augustus, till he had received the crown from the hands of the Roman pontiff,”[11]–a sanction that could be withheld with difficulty so long as the emperor was master of Rome and her popes. But the intimate union now existing between the empire and the pontificate was productive of reciprocal advantages, and tended greatly to consolidate and extend the power of both. The rise of the French monarchy had been owing in no small degree to the favourable dispositions which the kings of France discovered towards the Church. The western Goths and Burgundians were sunk in Arianism; the Franks, from the beginning, had been truly Catholic; and the popes did all they could to foster the growth of a power which, from similarity of creed, as well as from motives of policy, was so likely to become their surest ally. The miraculous succours vouchsafed to the arms of the French resolve themselves, without doubt, into the material aids given by the popes and their agents to a people in whose success they felt a deep interest. Hence the legend, according to which St. Martin, in the form of a hind, discovered to Clovis the ford over the Vienne; and hence also that other fable which asserts that St. Hillary preceded the Frank armies in a column of fire.[12] The St. Martin and the St. Hillary of these legends were doubtless some bishop, or other ecclesiastic, who rendered important services to the Frank monarch and his army, on the ground that, with the triumph of their arms was identified the progress of the Church.

The same influence was vigorously exerted, from the same motive, in behalf of the German power. Monks and priests preceded the imperial arms, especially in the east and north of Germany; and the annexation of these countries to the empire is to be attributed fully as much to the zeal of the ecclesiastics as to the valour of the soldiers. Nor did the German chiefs show that they were either unable to appreciate or unwilling to reward these important services. They lavished unbounded wealth upon the clergy, their policy being to bind thereby this important class to their interests. No one was more distinguished for his munificence in this respect than Henry II. This monarch created numerous rich benefices; but the rigour with which he insisted upon his right to nominate to the livings he had endowed betrayed the motives that prompted this great liberality. Abbots and bishops were exalted to the rank of barons and dukes, and invested with jurisdiction over extensive territories. “The bishoprics of Germany,” says Gibbon, “were made equal in extent and privilege, superior in wealth and population, to the most ample states of the military order.”[13] “Baronial, and even ducal rights,” says Ranke, “were held in Germany by the bishops and abbots of the empire, not within their own possessions only, but even beyond them. Ecclesiastical estates were no longer described as situated in certain counties, but these counties were described as situated in the bishopricks. In upper Italy, nearly all the cities were governed by the viscounts of their bishops.”[14] Military service was exacted of these ecclesiastical barons, in return for the possessions which they held; and not unfrequently did bishops appear at the head of their armed vassals, with lance in hand and harness on their backs. They were, moreover, addicted to the chase, of which the Germans in all ages have been passionately fond, and for which their vast forests have afforded ample scope. “Rude as the Germans of the middle ages were,” observes Dunham, “to see a successor of St. Peter hallooing after his dogs certainly struck them as incongruous. Yet the bishops, in virtue of their fiefs, were compelled to send their vassals to the field; and no doubt they considered as somewhat inconsistent, a system which commanded them to kill men, but not beasts.”[15]

The acquisition of wealth formed an important element in the growth of the Papacy. The Roman law did not permit lands to be held on mortmain; nevertheless the emperors winked at the possession by the Church of immoveable possessions, whose revenues furnished stipends to her pastors and alms to her poor. No sooner did Constantine embrace Christianity, than an imperial edict invested the Church with a legal right to what she had possessed hitherto by tolerance only.[16] Neither under the empire, nor under any of the ten kingdoms into which the empire was ultimately divided, did the Church ever obtain a territorial establishment; but the ample liberality, first of the Christian emperors, and next of the barbarian kings, did more than supply the want of a general provision. For ages, wealth had been flowing in upon the Church in a torrent; and now, from being the poorest she had become the wealthiest corporation in Europe. A race of princes had succeeded to the fishermen of Galilee; and the opulent nobles and citizens of the empire represented that society whose first bonds had been cemented in the catacombs under the city. Under the Carlovingian family, and the Saxon line of emperors, “many churches possessed seven or eight thousand mansi,” says Hallam. “One with but two thousand passed for only indifferently rich.[17] This vast opulence represented the accumulations and hoardings of many ages, and had been acquired by innumerable, and sometimes not very honourable, means. When a wealthy man entered a monastery, his estate was thrown into the common treasury of the brotherhood. When the son of a rich man took the cowl, he recommended himself to the Church by a donation of land. To die without leaving a portion of one’s worldly goods to the priesthood came to be rare, and was regarded as a fraud upon the Church. The monks sometimes supplemented the incomes of their houses by intromitting with the funds of charities placed under their control. The wealthy sinner, when about to depart, expressed his penitence in a well-filled bag of gold, or in a certain number of broad acres; and the ravening baron was compelled to disgorge, with abundant interest, on the bed of death, the spoliations of church-property of which he had been guilty during his lifetime. The fiefs of the nobility, who had beggared themselves by profligacy, or in the epidemic folly of the crusades, were not unfrequently brought into the market; and, being offered at a cheap rate, the Church, which had abundance of ready money at her command, became the purchaser, and so augmented her possessions. It is but fair to state also, that the clergy helped, in that age, to add to the wealth and beauty of the country, by the cultivation of tracts of waste lands which were frequently gifted to them. The Church found additional sources of revenue in the exemption from taxes; though not from military service, which her lands enjoyed, and in the institution of tithes, which, in imitation of the Jewish law, was originated about the sixth century, formed the main topic of the sermons of the eighth, and finally obtained a civil sanction in the ninth, under Charlemagne. But, not content with these varied facilities of getting rapidly and enormously rich, the monks betook themselves to forging charters,–an exploit which their knowledge of writing enabled them to achieve, and which the ignorance of the age rendered of very difficult detection. “They did nearly enjoy,” says Hallam, “one half of England, and, I believe, a greater proportion in some countries of Europe.”[18] This wealth was far beyond the measure of their own enjoyment, and they had no families to whom they might bequeath it. Such rapacity, then, does seem as unnatural as it was enormous. But, in truth, the Church had fallen as entirely under the dominion of an unreasonable and uncontrollable passion as the miser; she was, in fact, a corporate miser. This vast wealth, it may easily be apprehended, inflamed her insolence and advanced her power. The power of the Church became greater every day,–not its power as a Church, but as a confederation,–and might well excite alarm as to the future. Here was a body of men placed under one head, bound together by a community of interest and feeling, superior in intelligence, and therefore in influence, to the rest of the empire, enormously rich, and exercising civil jurisdiction over extensive tracts and vast populations. It was impossible to contemplate without misgivings, so numerous and compact a phalanx. It must have struck every one, that upon the moderation and fidelity of its members must depend the repose of the empire and the world in time to come. The emperors, secure, as they imagined themselves, in the possession of the supremacy, saw without alarm the rise of this formidable body. They looked upon it as one of the main props of their power, and felicitated themselves not a little in having been so fortunate as to entrench their prerogative behind so firm a bulwark. The appointment to all ecclesiastical benefices was in the emperor’s hands; and in augmenting the wealth and grandeur of the clergy, they doubted not that they were consolidating their own authority. It required no prophet to divine, that so long as the imperial sceptre continued to be grasped by a strong hand and guided by a firm mind, which it had been since it came into the possession of the German race, no danger would arise; but that the moment this ceased to be the case, the pontificate, already almost on a level with the empire, would obtain the mastery. Rome had been often baulked in her grand enterprise; but now her accommodating, patient, and persevering policy was about to receive its reward. The hour was near when her grandest hopes and her loftiest pretensions were to be realized,–when the throne of God’s vicegerent was to display itself in its fullest proportions, and be seen towering in proud supremacy above all the other thrones of earth.

The emergency that might have been foreseen had arisen. We behold on the throne of the empire a child, Henry IV. and in the chair of St. Peter, the astute Hildebrand. We find the empire torn by insurrections and tumults, whilst the Papacy is guided by the clear and bold genius of Gregory VII. Savoy had the honour to give birth to this man. He was the son of a carpenter, and comprehended from the first the true destiny of the Papacy, and the height to which its essential principles, vigorously maintained and fearlessly carried out, would exalt the popedom. To emancipate the pontificate from the authority of the empire, and to establish a visible theocracy with the vicar of Christ at its head, became the one grand object of his life. He brought to the execution of his task a profound genius, a firm will, a fearless courage, and a pliant policy,–a quality in which the popes have seldom been deficient. From the moment that he chid Leo IX. for accepting the tiara from the hands of the secular power, his spirit had governed Rome.[19] At length, in A.D. 1073, he ascended the pontifical throne in person. “No sooner was this man made Pope,” says Du Pin, “but he formed a design of becoming lord, spiritual and temporal, over the whole earth; the supreme judge and determiner of all affairs, both ecclesiastical and civil; the distributer of all manner of graces, of what kind soever; the disposer not only of archbishopricks, bishopricks, and other ecclesiastical benefices, but also of kingdoms, states, and the revenues of particular persons. To bring about this resolution, he made use of the ecclesiastical authority and the spiritual sword.”[20] The times were favourable in no ordinary degree. The empire of Germany was enfeebled by the disaffection of the barons; France was ruled by an infant sovereign, without capacity or inclination for affairs of state; England had just been conquered by the Normans; Spain was distracted by the Moors; and Italy was parcelled out amongst a multitude of petty princes. Everywhere faction was rife throughout Europe, and a strong government existed nowhere. The time invited him, and straightway Gregory set about his high attempt. His first care was to assemble a Council, in which he pronounced the marriage of priests unlawful. He next sent his legates throughout the various countries of Europe, to compel bishops and all ecclesiastics to put away their wives. Having thus dissevered the ties which connected the clergy with the world, and given them but one object for which to live, namely, the exaltation of the hierarchy, Gregory rekindled, with all the ardour and vehemence characteristic of the man, the war between the throne and the mitre. The object at which Gregory VII. aimed was twofold:–1. To render the election to the pontifical chair independent of the emperors; and, 2. To resume the empire as a fief of the Church, and to establish his dominion over the kings and kingdoms of the earth. His first step towards the accomplishment of these vast designs was, as we have shown, to enact clerical celibacy. His second was to forbid all ecclesiastics to receive investiture at the hands of the secular power.[21] In this decree he laid the foundation of the complete emancipation of the Church from the State; but half a century of wars and bloodshed was required to conduct the first enterprise, that of the investitures, to a successful issue; while a hundred and fifty years more of similar convulsions had to be gone through before the second, that of universal domination, was attained.

Let us here pause to review the rise of the war of investitures which now broke out, and which “during two centuries distracted the Christian world, and deluged a great portion of Italy with blood.”[22] In the primitive age the pastors of the Roman Church were elected by the people. When we come down to those times, still early, when the office of bishop began to take precedence of that of presbyter, we find the election to the episcopate effected by the joint suffrages of the clergy and people of the city or diocese. After the fourth century, when a regular gradation of offices or hierarchy was set up, the bishop chosen by the clergy and people had to be approved of by his metropolitan, as the metropolitan by his primate. It does not appear that the emperors interfered at all in these elections, farther than to signify their acceptance or rejection of the persons chosen to the very highest sees,–the patriarchates of Rome and Constantinople. In this their example was followed by the Gothic and Lombard kings of Italy. The people retained their influence in the election of their pastors and bishops down till a comparatively late period. We find popular election in existence in the end of the fourth century. A canon of the third Council of Carthage, in A.D. 397,[23] decrees that no clergyman shall be ordained who has not been examined by the bishop and approved of by the suffrages of the people. Even at the middle of the sixth century popular election had not disappeared from the Church. We find the third Council of Orleans, held in A.D. 538, regulating by canon the election and ordination of metropolitans and bishops. As regarded the metropolitan, the Council enacted that he should be chosen by the bishops of the province, with the consent of the clergy and people of the city, “it being fitting,” say the fathers, “that he who is to preside over all should be chosen by all.” And, as respected bishops, it was decreed that they should be ordained by the metropolitan, and chosen by the clergy and people.[24] “The people fully preserved their elective rights at Milan,” observes Hallam, “in the eleventh century; and traces of their concurrence may be found in France and Germany in the next age.”[25] >From the people the right passed to the sovereigns, who found a plausible pretext for granting investitures of bishops, in the vast temporalities attached to their sees. These possessions, which had originated mostly in royal gifts, were viewed somewhat in the light of fiefs, for which it was but reasonable that the tenant should do homage to the lord paramount. Hence the ceremony introduced by Charlemagne of putting the ring and crosier into the hands of the newly consecrated bishop. The bishops of Rome, like their brethren, were at first chosen by popular election. In process of time, the consent of the emperor was used to ratify the choice of the people. This prerogative came into the possession of Charlemagne along with the imperial crown, and was exercised by his posterity,–if we except the last of his descendants, during whose feeble reigns the prerogative which the imperial hands had let fall was caught up by the Roman populace. This right came next into the possession of the Saxon emperors, and was exercised by some of the race of Otho in a more absolute manner than it had ever been by either Greek or Carlovingian monarch. Henry III., impatient to put down the scandal of three rival popes, assembled a council at Sutri, which deposed all three, placed Henry’s friend, the Bishop of Bamberg (Clement II.), in Peter’s chair, and added this substantial boon, that henceforward the imperial throne should possess the entire nomination of the popes, without the intervention of clergy or laity.[26] But what the magnanimity of Henry III. had gained came to be lost by the tender age and irresolute spirit of his son Henry IV. Nicolas II., in 1059, wrested the prerogative from the emperors, to place it, not in the people, but in a new body, which presents us with the origin of the conclave of cardinals. According to the pontifical decree, the seven cardinal bishops holding sees in the neighbourhood of Rome were henceforward to choose the pope.[27] A vague recognition of some undefinable right possessed by the emperors and the people in the election was made in the decree, but it amounted in reality to little more than a permission to both to be present on the occasion, and to signify their acquiescence in what they had no power to prevent. The real author of this, and of similar measures, was Hildebrand, who was content meanwhile to wield, in the humble rank of a Roman archdeacon, the destinies of the Papacy, and to hide in the monk’s garb that dauntless and comprehensive genius which in a few years was to govern Europe. Hildebrand in no long time took the quarrel into his own hands.

He ascended the pontifical throne, as we have already stated, in 1073, under the style of Gregory VII. He comprehended the Emperor’s position with regard to the princes of Germany better than the Emperor himself did, and shaped his measures accordingly. He began by promulgating the decree against lay investitures, to which we have already adverted. He saw the advantage of having the barons on his side. He knew that they were impatient and envious of the power of Henry, who was at once weak and tyrannical; and he found it no difficult matter to gain them over to the papal interests,–first, by the decree of the Pope, which declared Germany an electoral monarchy; and, second, by the influence which the barons were still permitted to retain in the election of bishops. For although Gregory had deprived the Emperor of the right of investiture, and in doing so had broken the bond that held together the civil and spiritual institutions, as Ranke remarks, and declared a revolution,[28] he did not claim the direct nomination of the bishops, but referred the choice to the chapters, over which the higher German nobility exercised very considerable influence. Thus the Pope had the aristocratic interests on his side in the conflict. Henry, reckless as impotent, proceeded to give mortal offence to his great antagonist. Hastily assembling a number of bishops and other vassals at Worms, he procured a sentence deposing Gregory from the popedom. He mistook the man and the times. Gregory, receiving the tidings with derision, assembled a council in the Lateran palace, and solemnly excommunicated Henry, annulled his right to the kingdoms of Germany and Italy, and absolved his subjects from their allegiance. Henry’s recklessness was succeeded by panic. He felt that the spell of the pontifical curse was upon him; that his nobles, and bishops, and subjects, were fleeing from him or conspiring against him; and in prostration of spirit he resolved to beg in person the clemency of the Pope. He crossed the Alps in the depth of winter, and, arriving at the gates of the castle of Canossa, where the Pope was residing at the time, shut up with his firm adherent and reputed paramour the Countess Matilda, he stood, during three days, exposed to the rigours of the season, with his feet bare, his head uncovered, and a piece of coarse woollen cloth thrown over his person, and forming his only covering. On the fourth day he obtained an audience of the pontiff; and though the lordly Gregory was pleased to absolve him from the excommunication, he straitly charged him not to resume his royal rank and functions till the meeting of the Congress which had been appointed to try him.[29] But the pontiff was humbled in his turn. Henry rebelling a second time, a furious war broke out between the monarch and the pontiff. The armies of the Emperor passed the Alps, besieged Rome, and Gregory, being obliged to flee, ended his days in exile at Salerno, bequeathing as a legacy to his successors the conflict in which he had been engaged, and to Europe the wars and tumults into which his ambition had plunged it.[30]

Gregory was gone, but his principle survived. He had left the mantle of his ambition, and, to a large extent, of his genius also, to his successors, Urban II. and Paschal II. Urban maintained the contest in the very spirit of Gregory; the opposition of Paschal may deserve to be accounted as partaking of a higher character. A conviction that it was utterly incongruous in a layman to give admission to a spiritual office, seems to have mainly animated him in prosecuting the contest. He actually signed an agreement with Henry V. in 1110, whereby all the lands and possessions held by the Church in fief were to be given back to the Emperor, on condition that the Emperor should surrender the right of investiture. The prelates and bishops of Paschal’s court, who saw little attractive in the episcopate save the temporalities, believed that their infallible master had gone mad, and raised such a clamour, that the pontiff was obliged to desist from his design.[31] At length, in 1122, the contention was ended by a compromise between Henry and Calixtus II. According to this compact, the election of bishops was to be free, their investiture was to belong solely to ecclesiastical functionaries, while the Emperor was to induct them into their temporalities, not by the crozier and ring, as before, but by the sceptre.

It is not improbable that the sovereigns and barons of the age believed that this concordat left the substantial power in the election of bishops still in their own hands. With our clearer light it is not difficult to see that the advantage greatly preponderated in favour of the Church. It extricated the spiritual element from the control of the secular. It was a solemn ratification of the principle of spiritual independence, which, in the case of a church spurning co-ordinate jurisdiction, and claiming both swords, was sure speedily and inevitably to grow into spiritual supremacy. The temporalities might come in some cases to be lost; but in that age the risk was small; and granting that it was realized, the loss would be more than counterbalanced by the greatly enlarged spiritual action which was now secured to the Church. The election of bishops, in which the emperors had ceased to interfere, was now devolved, not upon the laity and clergy, whose suffrages had been deemed essential in former times, but upon the chapters of cathedral churches,[32] which tended to enlarge the power of the pontiff and the higher clergy. In this way was the conflict carried on. The extent of supremacy involved in the principle that the Pope is Christ’s Vicar, had been fully and boldly propounded to the world by Gregory; and, what was more, had been all but realized. Rome had tasted of dominion over kings, and was never to rest till she had securely seated herself in the lofty seat which she had been permitted for so brief a season to occupy, and which she only, as she believed, had a right to possess, or could worthily and usefully fill. The popes had to sustain many humiliations and defeats; nevertheless, their policy continued to be progressively triumphant. The power of the empire gradually sank, and that of the pontificate steadily advanced. All the great events of the age contributed to the power of the popedom. The ecclesiastical element was universally diffused, entered into all movements, and turned to its own purposes all enterprises. There never perhaps was an age which was so completely ecclesiastical and so little spiritual. Spain was reclaimed from Islamism, Prussia was rescued from Paganism, and both submitted to the authority of the Roman pontiff. The crusades broke out, and, being religious enterprises, they tended to the predominance of the ecclesiastical element, and silently moulded the minds and the habits of men to submission to the Church. Moreover, they tended to exhaust the resources and break the spirit of kingdoms, and rendered it easier for Rome to carry out her scheme of aggrandizement. The same effect attended the wars and convulsions which disturbed Europe, and which grew out of the struggles of Rome for dominion. These weakened the secular, but left the vigour of the spiritual element unimpaired. The deepening ignorance of the masses was exceedingly favourable to the pretensions of Rome. It formed a basis of power, not only over them, but, through them, over kings. Add to all this, that of the two principles between which this great contest was waged, the secular was divided, whereas the spiritual was one. The kings had various interests, and frequently pursued conflicting lines of policy. The most perfect organization and union reigned in the ranks of the Papacy. The clergy in all countries were thoroughly devoted to the papal see, and obeyed as one man the behests which came from the chair of St. Peter. It is also to be borne in mind, that in this conflict the emperors could contend with but secular weapons; whereas the popes, while they by no means disdained the aid of armies, fought with those yet more formidable weapons which the power of superstition furnished them with. Is it wonderful that with these advantages they triumphed in the contest,–that every successive age found Rome growing in influence and dominion,–and that at last her chief was seen seated, god-like, on the Seven Hills, with the nations, tribes, and languages of the Roman world prostrate at his feet? “After long centuries of confusion,” says Ranke,–“after other centuries of often doubtful strife,–the independence of the Roman see, and that of its essential principle, was finally attained. In effect, the position of the popes was at this moment most exalted; the clergy were wholly in their hands. It is worthy of remark, that the most firm-minded pontiffs of this period,–Gregory VII. for example,–were Benedictines. By the introduction of celibacy, they converted the whole body of the secular clergy into a kind of monastic order. The universal bishopric now claimed by the popes bears a certain resemblance to the power of an abbot of Cluny, who was the only abbot of his order; in like manner, these pontiffs aspired to be the only bishops of the assembled Church. They interfered, without scruple, in the administration of every diocese, and even compared their legates with the pro-consuls of ancient Rome! While this closely-knit body, so compact in itself, yet so widely extended through all lands,–influencing all by its large possessions, and controlling every relation of life by its ministry,–was concentrating its mighty force under the obedience of one chief, the temporal powers were crumbling into ruin. Already, in the beginning of the twelfth century, the Provost Gerohus ventured to say, ‘It will at last come to this, that the golden image of the empire shall be shaken to dust; every great monarchy shall be divided into tetrarchates, and then only will the Church stand free and untrammelled beneath the protection of her crowned high priest.'”[33] Thus did Rome seize the golden moment when the iron of the German race, like that of the Carlovingian before it, had become mixed with miry clay, to complete her work of five centuries. She had watched and waited for ages; she had flattered the proud and insulted the humble; bowed to the strong and trampled upon the weak; she had awed men with terrors that were false, and excited them with hopes that were delusive; she had stimulated their passions and destroyed their souls; she had schemed, and plotted, and intrigued, with a cunning, and a malignity, and a success, which hell itself might have envied, and which certainly it never surpassed; and now her grand object was within her reach,–was attained. She had triumphed over the empire; she was lord paramount of Europe; nations were her footstool; and from her lofty seat she showed herself to the wondering tribes of earth, encompassed by the splendour, possessing the attributes, and wielding the power, not of earthly monarchs, but of the Eternal Majesty.

Accordingly, we are now arrived at the golden age of the Papacy. In A.D. 1197, Innocent ascended the papal chair. It was the fortune of this man, on whose shoulders had fallen the mantle of Lucifer, to reap all that the popes his predecessors had sowed in alternate triumphs and defeats. The traditions and principles of the papal policy descended to him matured and perfected. The man, too, was equal to the hour. He had the art to veil a genius as aspiring as that of Gregory VII. under designs less avowedly temporal and worldly. He affected to wield only a spiritual sceptre; but he held it over monarchs and kingdoms, as well as over priests and churches. “Though I cannot judge of the right to a fief,” wrote he to the kings of France and England, “yet it is my province to judge where sin is committed, and my duty to prevent all public scandals.”[34] So lofty were his notions of the spiritual prerogative, and so much did he regard temporal rule as its inseparable concomitant, that he disdained to hold it by a formal claim. He exercised an omnipotent sway over mind, and left it to govern the bodies and goods of men. We find De Maistre comparing the Catholic Church in the days of Charlemagne to an ellipse, with St. Peter in one of the foci, and the Emperor in the other.[35] But now, in the days of Innocent, the Church, or rather the European system, from being an ellipse, had become a circle. The two foci were gone. There was but one governing point,–the centre; and in that centre stood Peter’s chair. The pontificate of Innocent was one continued and unclouded display of the superhuman glory of the popedom. From a height to which no mortal had before been able to climb, and which the strongest intellect becomes giddy when it contemplates, he regulated all the affairs of this lower world. His comprehensive scheme of government took in alike the greatest affairs of the greatest kingdoms, and the most private concerns of the humblest individual. We find him teaching the kings of France their duty, dictating to the emperors their policy, and at the same time adjudicating in the case of a citizen of Pisa who had mortgaged his estate, and to whom Innocent, by spiritual censures, compelled the creditor to make restitution of the goods on receiving payment of the money; and writing to the Bishop of Ferentino, giving his decision in the case of a simple maiden for whose hand two lovers contended.[36] Thus the thunder of Rome broke alike over the heads of puissant kings and humble citizens. The Italian republics he gathered under his own sceptre, and, binding them in leagues, cast them into the political scale, to counterpoise the empire. The kings of Castile and Portugal, as they hung on the perilous edge of battle, were separated by a single word from his legate. The king of Navarre held some castles of Richard’s, which his power did not enable him to retake. The pontiff hinted at the spiritual thunder, and the castles were given up. Monarchs, intent only on a present advantage, failed to see that, by accepting the aid of such a power, they were the abettors of their own future vassalage. The King of France had offended the Pope by repudiating his wife and contracting a new marriage. An interdict fell upon the realm. The churches were closed, and the clergy forbore their offices to both the living and the dead. The submission of the powerful Philip Augustus illustrated the boundless spirit and appeased the immeasurable pride of Innocent. After this great victory, we name not those which he gained over the kings of Spain and England, the latter of whom he excommunicated, placing his kingdom under interdict, and compelling him to hold his crown and realm as the vassal of the Roman see. But the coronation of the Emperor Otho IV., and the varied and substantial concessions included in the oath which Otho took on that occasion, are worthy of being enumerated among the trophies of this mighty pope. The terror of his name extended to distant lands,–to Bohemia, to Hungary, to Norway. The pontifical thunder was heard rolling in even the latter northern region, where it smote a certain usurper of the name of Swero. As if all these labours had been too little, Innocent, from his seat on the Seven Hills, guided the progress of those destructive tempests which swept along the shores of Syria and the Straits of the Bosphorus. Constantinople fell before the crusaders, and the kings of Bulgaria and Armenia acknowledged the supremacy of Innocent.

“His legs bestrid the ocean; his reared arm
Crested the world; his voice was propertied
As all the tuned spheres, and that to friends
And when he meant to quail and shake the orb,
He was as rattling thunder. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . In his livery
Walked crowns and crownets.”

But the mightiest efforts of Innocent were reserved for the extirpation of heresy. He was the first to discover the danger to the popedom which lurked in the Scriptural faith, and in the mental liberty of the Albigenses and Waldenses. On them, therefore, and not on eastern schismatics or recalcitrating sovereigns, fell the full storm of the pontifical ire. Assembling his vassal kings, he pointed to the peaceful and thriving communities in the provinces of the Rhone, and inflamed the zeal and fury of the soldiers by holding out the promise of immense booty and unbounded indulgence. For a forty days’ service a man might earn paradise, not to speak of the worldly spoil with which he was certain to return laden home. The poor Albigenses were crushed beneath an avalanche of murderous fanaticism and inappeasable rapacity. To Innocent history is indebted for one of her bloodiest pages,–the European crusades; and the world owes him thanks for its most infernal institution, the Inquisition. He had for his grand object to bestow an eternity of empire upon the papal throne; and, to accomplish this, he strove to inflict an eternity of thraldom upon the human mind. His darling aim was to make the chair of Peter equally stable and absolute with its fellow-seat in pandemonium.[37]

The noon of the Papacy synchronises with the world’s midnight. Innocent III. was emphatically the Prince of the Darkness. There was but one thing in the universe which he dreaded, and that was light. The most execrable shapes of night could not appal him;–these were congenial terrors: he knew they had no power to harm him or his. But the faintest glimmer of day on the horizon struck terror into his soul, and he contended ceaselessly against the light, with all the artillery of anathemas and arms. During the whole century of his pontificate the globe was seen reposing in deep shadow, girdled round with the chain of the papal power, and corruscated fearfully with the flashes of the pontifical thunder. Like a crowned demon, Innocent sat upon the Seven Hills, muffled up in the mantle of Lucifer, and governed earth as Satan governs hell. At a great distance below, realizing by anticipation the boldest vision of the great poet, were the crowned potentates and mitred hierarchies of the world over which he ruled, lying foundered and overthrown, like the spirits in the lake, in the same degrading and shameful vassalage. Princes laid their swords, and nations their treasures, at the foot of the pontifical throne, and bowed their necks to be trodden upon by its occupant. Innocent might say, as Caesar to the conquered queen of Egypt,–

“I’ll take my leave.”

And the subject nations might reply with Cleopatra,–

“And may, through all the world: ’tis yours; and we
Your scutcheons, and your signs of conquest, shall
Hang in what place you please.”

The boast better became his mouth than it did the proud Assyrian who first uttered it. “By the strength of my hand I have done it, and by my wisdom; for I am prudent: and I have removed the bounds of the people, and have robbed their treasures, and I have put down the inhabitants like a valiant man. And my hand hath found, as a nest, the riches of the people; and as one gathereth eggs that are left, have I gathered all the earth; and there was none that moved the wing, or opened the mouth, or peeped.”[38]

Thus have we traced the course of the papal power, from its feeble rise in the second century, to its full development in the thirteenth. We have seen how the infant pontiff was suckled by the imperial wolf (for the fables of heathen mythology find their truest realization in the Papacy, and, from being myths, become vaticinations), and how, waxing strong on the pure milk of Paganism, he grew to manhood, and, being grown, discovered all the genuine pagan and vulpine qualities of the mother that nursed him,–the passion for images and the thirst for blood. The Ethiopian cannot change his skin; and the world has now found out that the beast of the Roman hill is but a wolf in sheep’s clothing. How often have slaughter and carnage covered the fold which he professed to guard! Take it all in all, the story of the papal power is a dismal drama,–the gloomiest that darkens history! We look back upon the past; and, as we behold this terrible power growing continually bigger and darker, and casting fresh shadows, with every succeeding age, upon the liberty and religion of the world, till at last both came to be shrouded in impenetrable night, we are reminded of those tragedies and horrors with which the imagination of Milton has given grandeur to his song. To nothing can we liken the progress of the Papacy, through the wastes of the middle ages to the universal domination of the thirteenth and succeeding centuries, save to the passage of the fiend from the gates of pandemonium to the sphere of the newly-created world. The old dragon of Paganism, broken loose from the abyss into which he had been cast, sallied forth in quest of the world of young Christianity, as Satan from with the like fiendish intent of marring and subjugating it. He had no “narrow frith” to cross; but he held his way with as cautious a step and as dauntless a front as his great prototype. His path, more especially in its first stages, was bestrewn with the wrecks of a perished world, and scourged by those tempests which attend the birth of new states. On this hand he shunned the whirlpool of the sinking empire, and on that guarded himself against the fiery blast of the Saracenic eruption. There he buffeted the waves of tumultuous revolutions, and here he planted his foot on the crude consistence of a young and rising state. Now “the strong rebuff of some tumultuous cloud” hurried him aloft, and, “that fury stayed,” he was anon “quenched in a boggy Syrtis.” Now he was upborne on the shield of kings; and now his foot trode upon their necks. Now he hewed his way with the bloody brand; and now, in more crafty fashion, with the forged document. Sometimes he wore his own shape, and showed himself as Apollyon; but more frequently he hid the hideous lineaments of the destroyer beneath the fair semblance of an angel of light. Thus he maintained the struggle through the weary ages, till at last the thirteenth century saw

“His dark pavilion spread
Wide on the wasteful deep; with him enthroned
Sat sable vested night, eldest of things,
The consort of his reign; and by them stood
Orcus and Ades, and the dreaded name
Of Demogorgon.”

The scheme of Rome, viewed simply as an intellectual conception, is the most comprehensive and gigantic which the genius and ambition of man ever dared to entertain. There is a unity and vastness about it, which, apart from its moral aspect, compels our admiration, and awakens a feeling of mingled astonishment and terror. The depth of its essential principles, the boldness of the design, the wisdom and talent brought into play in achieving its realization, the perseverance and vigour with which it was prosecuted, and the marvellous success with which it was at last crowned, were all equal, and were all colossal. It is at once the grandest and the most iniquitous enterprise in which man ever embarked. But, as we have shown in our opening chapter, we ought not to regard it as a distinct and separate enterprise, springing from principles and contemplating aims peculiar to itself, but as the full development and consummation of man’s original apostacy. The powers of man and the limits of the globe do not admit of that apostacy being carried higher; for had it been much extended, either in point of intensity or in point of duration, the human species would have perished. A corruption so universal and a tyranny so overwhelming would in due time have utterly depopulated the globe. In the domination of the Papacy we have a glimpse of what would have been the condition of the world had no scheme of salvation been provided for it. The history of the Papacy is the history of the rebellion of our race against Heaven.

Before dismissing this subject, let us glance a moment at another and different picture. What became of Truth in the midst of such monstrous errors? Where was a shelter found for the Church during storms so fearful? To understand this, we must leave the open plains and the wealthy cities of the empire, and retire to the solitude of the Alps. In primitive times the members of the then unfallen Church of Rome had found amid these mountains a shelter from persecution. He who built an ark for the one elect family of the antediluvian world had provided a retreat for the little company chosen to escape the mighty shipwreck of Christianity. God placed his Church aloft on the eternal hills, in the place prepared for her.[39] Nature had enriched this abode with pine forests, and rich mountain pastures, and rivers which issue from the frozen jaws of the glacier, and made it strong as beautiful by a wall of peaks that pierce the clouds, and look down on earth from amidst the firmament’s calm, white with everlasting snows. Here it is that we find the true apostolic Church. Here, far from the magnificence of Dom, the fragrance of incense, and the glitter of mitres, holy men of God fed the flock of Christ with the pure Word of Life. Ages of peace passed over them. The storms that shook the world, the errors that darkened it, did not approach their retreat. Like the traveller, amid their own mountains they could mark the clouds gather and hear the thunders roll far below, while they enjoyed the uninterrupted sunshine of a pure gospel. An overruling Providence made the same events which brought trouble to the world to minister peace to them. Rome was entirely engrossed with her battles with the empire, and had no time to think of those who were bearing a testimony against her errors by the purity of their faith and the holiness of their lives. Besides, she could see danger only in the material power of the empire, and never dreamt the while that a spiritual power was springing up among the Alps, before which she was destined at last to fall. By and by these professors of primitive Christianity began to increase, and to spread themselves over the surrounding regions, to an extent that is but little known. Manufactures were established in the valley of the Rhone, and in those provinces of France which border on the Mediterranean or lie contiguous to the Pyrenees; as also in Lombardy and the towns of northern Italy. In fact, this region of Europe became in those ages the depot of the western world as regards arts and manufactures of all kinds. Villages grew into cities, new towns sprung up, and the population of the surrounding districts were insufficient to supply the looms and forges of these industrial hives. The pious mountaineers descended from their native Alps to find employment in the workshops of the plains, just as at this day we see the population of the Highlands crowding to Glasgow and Manchester, and other great manufacturing centres; and, as they brought their intelligence and steadiness along with them, they made admirable workmen. The workshop became a school, conversions went on, and the pure faith of the mountains extended itself over the plains, like the dawn, first seen on the hill-tops, but soon to descend and gladden the valley. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries manufactures and Christianity,–the loom and the Bible–went hand in hand, and promised to achieve the peaceful conquest of Europe, and rescue it from the hands of those pontifical and imperial barbarians who were doing their best to convert it into an unbroken expanse of solitudes and ruins. These manufacturing and Christian societies took possession of the whole of the Italian and French provinces adjoining the Alps. The valley of the Rhone swarmed with these busy and intelligent communities. They covered with population, industry, and wealth, the provinces of Dauphine, Provence, Languedoc, and, in short, all southern France. They were found in great numbers in Lombardy. Their factories, churches, and schools, were spread over all northern Italy. They planted their arts and their faith in the valley of the Rhine, so that a traveller might journey from Basle to Cologne, and sleep every night in the house of a Christian brother. In some of the dioceses in northern Italy there were not fewer than thirty of their churches with schools attached. These professors of an apostolic creed were noted for leading pure and peaceful lives, for the pains they took in the instruction of their families, for their readiness to benefit their neighbours both by good offices and religious counsel, for their gift of extempore prayer, and for the large extent to which their memories were stored with the Word of God. Many of them could recite entire epistles and gospels, and some of them had committed to memory the whole of the New Testament. The region which they occupied formed a belt of country stretching on both sides of the Alps and the Pyrenees, from the sources of the Rhine to the Garonne and the Ebro, and from the Po and the Adriatic to the shores of the Mediterranean. Monarchs found that this was the most productive and the most easily governed part of their dominions. Amid the wars and feudalism that oppressed the rest of Europe, in which towns were falling into decay, and the population in some spots were becoming extinct, and little appeared to be left, especially in France, “but convents scattered here and there amid vast tracts of forest,”[40] this Populous tract, rich in the marvels of industry and the virtues of true religion, resembled a strip of verdure drawn across the wastes of the desert. Will it be believed that human hands rooted out this paradise, which a pure Christianity had created in the very heart of the desert of European Catholicism? Rome about this time had brought to an end her wars with the empire, and her popes were reposing, after their struggle of centuries, in the proud consciousness of undoubted supremacy. The light had been spreading unobserved, and the Reformation was on the point of being anticipated. The demon Innocent III. was the first to descry the streaks of day on the crest of the Alps. Horror-stricken, he started up, and began to thunder from his Pandemonium against a faith which had already subjugated provinces, and was threatening to dissolve the power of Rome in the very flush of her victory over the empire. In order to save the one half of Europe from perishing by heresy, it was decreed that the other half should perish by the sword. The monarchs of Europe dared not disobey a summons which was enforced by the most dreadful adjurations and threats. They assembled their vassals, and girded on the sword, not to repel an invader or to quell insurrection, but to extirpate those very men whose industry had enriched their realm, and whose virtue and loyalty formed the stay of their power.

Lest the work of vengeance should slacken, Rome held out dazzling bribes, equally compounded of paradise and gold. She could afford to be prodigal of both, for neither cost her anything. Paradise is always in her gift for those who will do her work, and the wealth of the heretic is the lawful plunder of the faithful. With such a bank, and permission to draw upon it to an unlimited amount, Rome had no motive, and certainly would have had no thanks, for any ill-judged economy. The fanatics who mustered for the crusade hated the person and loved the goods of the heretic. Onward they marched, to earn heaven by desolating earth. The work was three centuries a-doing. It was done effectually at last, however. “Neither sex, nor age, nor rank, have we spared,” says the leader of the war against the Albigenses; “we have put all alike to the sword.”[41] The churches and the workshops, the Christianity and the industry, of the region, were swept away by this simoom of fanaticism. Before it was a garden, behind it a desert. All was silent now, where the solemn melody of praise and the busy hum of trade had before been so happily blent. Monarchs had drained their exchequers to desolate the wealthiest and fairest portion of their dominions; nevertheless they held themselves abundantly recompensed by the assurance which Rome gave them of crowns and kingdoms in paradise.


[1] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 15. [Back]

[2] It is still undecided among Romanist writers whether the Pope’s ejection of Childeric was a point of authority or a point of casuistry. The Ultra-montanists maintain the former. [Back]

[3] As the author’s object here is simply to trace the influence of admitted facts upon the development of the Papacy, he thinks it enough to refer generally to his authorities. His leading authorities are, Ranke, vol. i.; Gibbon, vol. ix.; Mosheim, cent. ix. and x.; Hallam’s Hist. of the Middle Ages, vol. i. chap. vii.; Sismondi’s Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. xix. xx.; &c. &c. [Back]

[4] See Du Pin, cent. ix.; Hallam, vol. i. pp. 523, 524. [Back]

[5] Romanist historians have drawn this part of the pontifical annals in colours as dark as those employed by Protestant writers. The best friends of the Popedom, such as Petavius, Luitprand, Baronius, Hermann, Labbe, Du Pin, &c. &c. labour for language to depict the enormous abuses of the papal rule. Baronius speaks of these pontiffs entering as thieves, and dying, as they deserved, by the rope. Of the three candidates which occasioned the Schism Of A.D. 1044, Binius and Labbe remark, “A three-headed BEAST, rising from the gates of hell, infested in a woful manner the holy chair.” This monster, of course, is a link in the chain of apostolic succession. (See Edgar’s Variations, chap. i.) [Back]

[6] See Gibbon, vol. ix. p. 200; and even the papal historians of the period. [Back]

[7] Sismondi’s Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. ii. p. 244.; Lond. 1834. [Back]

[8] Ranke, vol. i. p. 18. [Back]

[9] Hallam, vol. i. p. 538. [Back]

[10] Ranke, vol. i. chap. i. sec. iii. [Back]

[11] Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, vol. ix. pp. 193,194. [Back]

[12] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 11. [Back]

[13] Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, vol. ix. p. 212. [Back]

[14] Ranke, vol. i. p. 17. [Back]

[15] Dunham’s Europe during the Middle Ages, vol. ii. p. 100. [Back]

[16] Euseb. Vita Const. lib. ii. cap. xxi. xxxix. [Back]

[17] Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 501. [Back]

[18] Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. chap. vii. [Back]

[19] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 209: Dunham’s Europe during the Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 150. [Back]

[20] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 211. [Back]

[21] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 212; Gibbon, vol. ix. p. 201, 202. [Back]

[22] Dunham’s Europe during the Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 158. [Back]

[23] Concil. Carthag. can. xxii. “Ut nullus ordinetur clericus, nisi probatus vel episcoporum examine vel populi testimonio.” (Harduin. vol. i. p. 963.) [Back]

[24] Concil. Aurelian. can. iii. “Ipse tamen metropolitanus a comprovincialibus episcopis, sicut decreta sedis Apostolicae continent, cum consensu cleri vel civium eligatur; quia aequum est, sicut ipsa sedes Apostolica dixit, ut qui praeponendus est omnibus, ab omnibus eligatur.” (Harduin. vol. ii. p. 1424.) [Back]

[25] Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 535. [Back]

[26] Dunham’s Europe during the, Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 147,148: Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 206. [Back]

[27] Machiavelli’s History of Florence, book i.: Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 539. [Back]

[28] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 21. [Back]

[29] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 212-216: Dunham’s Europe in the Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 158. [Back]

[30] The extensive gap in the city of Rome, extending from the Lateran to the Coliseum, formerly covered with ruins, but now with vineyards, remains a monument of the war of investitures. [Back]

[31] Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 543. [Back]

[32] Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 546. [Back]

[33] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 22. [Back]

[34] Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 552. [Back]

[35] Du Pape, Discours Preliminaire. [Back]

[36] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 402. [Back]

[37] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. pp. 401-422 : Sismondi’s Italian Republics, pp. 60-64; Lond. 1832: Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. xi. p. 145: Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. pp. 551-556: Sismondi’s Crusades, pp. 10-20; Lond. 1826. [Back]

[38] Isaiah, x. 13, 14. [Back]

[39] Revelations, xii. 6. [Back]

[40] Sismondi’s Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. ii. p. 169. [Back]

[41] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 24.[Back]


Continued in Chapter V. Foundation and Extent of the Supremacy.

All chapters History of the Papacy




All Roads Lead to Rome?

All Roads Lead to Rome?

This is a re-post from https://www.chick.com/information/article?id=All-Roads-Lead-to-Rome&utm_medium=Email&e=90f931ed4b29423893d407f69ad6b860&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_campaign=2024-0920

In a shocking statement to an ecumenical conference last week, Pope Francis said, “There’s only one God, and each of us has a language to arrive at God. Some are Seikh, Muslim, Hindu, Christian, and they are different paths [to God].”

He doubled down several days later in a video conference to another ecumenical group. This time, he said, “Contemplate the diversity of your traditions as a wealth, a wealth willed by God.”

Astoundingly, this Pope told Buddhists, Sikhs, Catholics, Muslims, and people of any religious flavor whatsoever that their individual religion is “wealth willed by God.” In essence, he told them, ‘You are who you are, according to the will of God, so don’t even try to find the truth.’

This is how the spokesman for one false religion is essentially praising all other false religions as equal. Why not? Every false religion does lead to the same place – it’s just not to God or Heaven.

The Pope’s statements are an example of syncretism. Syncretism is the practice of merging separate, distinct religions into one hybrid religion that appeals to everyone in those belief systems. We see this practice in Catholic holidays like Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead), where indigenous practices of ancestor worship and the Catholic traditions of saint veneration go hand-in-hand. We also see syncretism in Japan where the majority follow a blend of Shinto and Buddhist traditions.

Even some Muslims promote syncretism, claiming that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is the bridge between Christianity and Islam. Muslim professor and scholar Ayatollah Ahmad Moballeghi recently stated in another interfaith conference, “… the Quranic focus on [Mary] made her a bridge between Islam and Christianity… Her character contributes to strengthening solidarity and cooperation between Muslims and Christians.”

Gian Matteo Roggio, a Catholic priest in Italy, who shares a similar view, helped launch a 10-week webinar promoting Mary as a model of faith for Christianity and Islam. After working closely with the Grand Mosque of Rome and the Islamic Cultural Center of Italy, he stated that Mary is “a Jewish, Christian, and Muslim woman.”

Unsurprisingly, Pope Francis agrees with Ayatollah Moballeghi and Gian Roggio. In May he said, “Mary is a figure common to both Christianity and Islam. She is a common figure; she unites us all.”

These statements are concerning on several levels. Though the Pope routinely speaks for the Catholic church, unbelievers around the world may not realize that he speaks only for Catholics, not true Bible believers.

What would an unbeliever think who is searching for truth, who hears the Pope essentially say that everybody has the truth? That certainly won’t help him or her find it. Catholic clergy are concerned that Pope Francis’ statement may keep people away from the Catholic church. His statement could keep people from seeking the Gospel altogether, unless we born-again believers bring them the true gospel.

This should be ringing a warning bell for us, after reading statements like these, as we get closer and closer to the end times. Satan’s goal is a one-world government, one-world religion, and complete control.

One day, the antichrist will stand up and demand worship. If the Pope declares that all roads lead to Rome today, what will he say during the tribulation? Surely, his recent statements are a prelude to the future announcement that the anti-Christ is the world’s savior and should be worshipped as such.

The world is hurtling at breakneck speed toward the end times. In the meantime, we are responsible with going to the world, sharing the hope of the Gospel, and preaching Jesus Christ alone. The lost need to be shown that there is capital-T truth, and that their very souls depend on it. That is why we have the gospel message clearly printed in every Chick tract.

If you want to see many examples of Catholic syncretism, read “Babylon Religion” by David W. Daniels. Illustrated by Jack T Chick, it makes it easy to see how the Catholic Church absorbs other religions, producing the idolatrous mixture we see today.




History of the Papacy Chapter III. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Sovereignty.

History of the Papacy Chapter III. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Sovereignty.

Continued from Chapter II. Rise and Progress of Ecclesiastical Supremacy.

Over the abyss in which the Roman empire of the west had been engulphed there now floated the portentous form of the Papacy. If the idolatrous nations, in their victorious march from the Upper Danube to southern Europe, had not brought the gods of their ancestors along with them, they were not on that account the less pagan. Their conversion to Christianity was merely nominal. Ignorant of its doctrines, destitute of its spirit, and captivated by its splendid ceremonial, they were scarcely conscious of any change, when they transferred to the saints of the Roman Church the worship they had been accustomed to pay to their Scandinavian deities. The process by which these nations, from being pagan, became Christian, may be adequately likened to the contrivance by which the statue of Jupiter at Rome was converted from the representative of the prince of pagan deities to the representative of the prince of Christian apostles, namely, by the substitution of the two keys for the thunderbolt. After the same manner the newly arrived nations were taught to wear the outward badges of the Christian faith, but at heart they were as much pagan as before. Most of the new tribes became professors of the Arian faith. In this heresy were involved the barbarians which occupied Italy, Africa, Spain, and Gaul; and the Popes were obliged to exercise the utmost circumspection and management, in order to surmount the perils and profit by the advantages presented by the new order of things. The convulsions, combinations, and heresies of the times, formed a maze so intricate and dangerous, that no power less wary and sagacious than the papal could have threaded its way with safety through it. The bark of Peter was now navigating a sea full of rocks and maelstroms, and had to shape its course,

“Harder beset,
And more endangered, than when Argo passed
Through Bosphorus, betwixt the justling rocks,
Or when Ulysses on the larboard shunn’d
Charybdis, and by the other Whirlpool steer’d.”

PARADISE LOST.

In A.D. 496, an event took place destined to exercise a momentous influence on the fate of the Papacy and of Europe. In that year Clovis, king of the Franks, in fulfilment of a vow made on the field of Tolbiac, where he was victorious over the Allemanni, was baptized at Rheims. “On the memorable day,” observes Gibbon, “when Clovis descended from the baptismal font, he alone in the Christian world deserved the name and prerogatives of a catholic king.”[1] Rome hailed the auspicious event as a token of a long series of similar triumphs; and she rewarded the devotion of Clovis by bestowing upon him the title,-which he has transmitted downward through 1400 years to his successors the kings of France,-of Eldest Son of the Church. During the course of the sixth century, others of the barbarian kings,-the Burgundians of southern Gaul and Savoy, the Bavarians, the Visigoths of Spain, the Suevi of Portugal, and the Anglo-Saxons of Britain,-presented themselves before the apostolic throne as its spiritual vassals. Thus, the dominion which their swords had taken away, their superstition restored to Rome. The various nations who were now masters of the western empire found in the Papacy, and nowhere else, to use Muller’s words, “a point of union.”[2] The sagacious measures of pope Gregory the Great contributed at this juncture material assistance to the rising Papacy. The barbarian kings being now submissive to the Roman faith, Gregory exerted himself, with a large measure of success, to establish it as a law throughout their kingdoms, that the metropolitan should receive the sanction of the pontiff. For this end it now became the practice to send from Rome a pallium[3] to the metropolitan, in token of investiture; and without the pall he could not lawfully enter on the exercise of his functions. The zeal of Boniface, the apostle of Germany a century later, completed what Pope Gregory had commenced. This man, a Briton by birth, travelled throughout Germany and Gaul, preaching profound submission to Peter and his representative the Roman bishop; and he succeeded in inducing the German and Frank bishops to take the vow he himself had taken of implicit obedience to the Roman see. Henceforward, without the pallium no metropolitan entered upon the duties of his office.[4] How much this tended to consolidate the spiritual supremacy, and to pave the way for the temporal usurpations of the popes, it is not difficult to perceive.

In the seventh century, we find a prevalent disposition among the princes of the west to submit themselves implicitly, in all matters that pertained to religion, to the Roman see. In their pagan state they had been accustomed to undertake no affair of consequence without the advice and consent of their priests, by whom they were held in the most degrading vassalage; and after their conversion they transferred this implicit obedience to the Roman clergy, who most willingly accepted the implied superiority and power, and used every means to improve and extend their influence. “It was the sturdy shoulders of these children of the idolatrous north,” remarks Dr. D’Aubigné, “that succeeded in placing on the supreme throne of Christendom a pastor of the banks of the Tiber.”[5] The people venerated the clergy, and the clergy were bound to implicit obedience to the pontiff. By this time, too, the unity of the Church, not in the Scriptural, but Romish sense,-not as consisting in one baptism, one faith, one hope; but as consisting in one outward body governed by a visible head, the Roman pontiff,-had established itself in the minds of men. The term POPE or FATHER, originally a divine, and next an imperial title, formerly given to all bishops, now came to be restricted to the Bishop of Rome,[6] according to the saying afterwards employed by Gregory VII., that there was but one pope in the world. The overthrow of the Ostrogoths and Vandals about this time, by the arms of Belisarius, contributed also to the expansion of the Papacy. The former had established themselves in Italy, and the latter in Sardinia and Corsica; and their near presence enabled them to overawe the popedom; but their extirpation by the victorious general of Justinian rid the Pope of these formidable neighbours, and tended to the authority as well as the security of the Roman see.

But it was in the eighth century that the most considerable addition was made to the temporal power of the popes. A singular combination of dangers at that period threatened the very existence of the Papacy. The iconoclast disputes, then raging with extreme violence, had engendered a deep and lasting variance between the Roman see and the emperors of the east. The Arian kings of Lombardy, intent on the conquest of all Italy, were brandishing their swords before the very gates of Rome; while in the west, the Saracens, who had overrun Africa and conquered Spain, were arrived at the passes of the Pyrenees, and threatened to enter Italy and plant the crescent on the Seven Hills. Pressed on all sides, the Pope turned his eyes to France. He wrote to the mayor of the palace, and so framed the terms of his letter, that Peter, with all the saints, supplicated the Gallic soldier to hasten to the rescue of his chosen city, and of that church where his bones reposed. The succour was not more earnestly craved than it was cordially and promptly granted. The bold Pepin had just seated himself on the throne of the pusillanimous Childeric,[7] and needed the papal confirmation of his usurped dignity. Bargaining for this, he girded on the sword, crossed the Alps, defeated the Lombards, and, wresting from them the cities they had taken from the Greek emperor, he laid the keys of the conquered towns upon the altar of St. Peter. This was in the year 755; and by this act was laid the foundation of the temporal power of the popes.[8]

The gifts thus bestowed by Pepin were confirmed by his yet more distinguished son Charlemagne. The Lombards had again become troublesome to the Pope; in fact, they were besieging him in his city of Rome. The pontiff again supplicated the aid of France; and Charlemagne, in answer to his prayer, entered Italy at the head of his army. Defeating the Lombards, he visited the Pope in his capital; and so profound was his deference for the see of Rome, that he kissed the steps of St. Peter as he ascended, and, at the interview that followed, ratified and enlarged the donations of his father Pepin to the Church.[9] A second time Charlemagne appeared in the Eternal City.[10] The factions that now reigned in Rome threatened to put an end, by their violence, to the authority of the pontiff; and the third time did France interpose to save the Papacy from apparent destruction. Charlemagne, says Machiavelli, decreed, “that his Holiness, being God’s Vicar, could not be subject to the judgment of man.”[11] Charlemagne was now master of nearly all the Romano-Germanic nations of the west; and, as a recompense for these repeated succours, the Pope (Leo III.), on Christmas eve, A.D. 800, placed upon the head of the French king the crown of the western empire.[12] In this act the pontiff displayed his power not less than his gratitude. As one who had crowns and kingdoms at his disposal, we behold him selecting the son of Pepin, and placing upon his brow the imperial diadem.. In this light at least have the partisans of Rome regarded the act. They have “generally maintained,” says Mosheim, “that Leo. III., by a divine right, vested in him as Bishop of Rome, transported the western empire from the Greeks to the Franks.”[13] “Whereas formerly,” says Machiavelli, in his History of Florence, “the popes were confirmed by the emperors, the emperor now, in his election, was to be beholden to the pope; by which means the power and dignity of the empire declined, and the Church began to advance, and by these steps to usurp upon the authority of temporal princes.”[14] One thing at least is clear, that great advantages accrued to both parties from this proceeding. It added new lustre to the dignity of Charlemagne, and gave the title to him who already possessed the power; while, on the other hand, it greatly enlarged the temporal possessions of the Church, and secured a powerful friend and protector to the Pope in the person of the Emperor. Thus the perils which had threatened to destroy the Papacy tended ultimately to consolidate it; and thus did Rome, skilled to profit alike by the weakness and the strength of monarchs, steadily pursue that profound scheme of policy, the object of which was to chain kings, priests, and people, to the pontifical chair. Henceforward the Pope takes his place among the monarchs of the earth. First the Vandals and Ostrogoths, and now the Lombards, had fallen before him. Their territories were given to the Church, and formed the patrimony of St. Peter; and the haughty pastor by whom these powers had been supplanted, unaware that prophecy had pointed very significantly to the fact, and marked it as a noted stage in the rise of Antichrist,[15] now appeared in the glories of the triple crown.

While the Papacy was laboriously building up its external defences, conciliating princes, contracting alliances with powerful monarchs, and intriguing to acquire in its own right temporal sovereignty, let us mark the growth of that superstition in which lay the life and strength of the Popedom. These two,-the inward principle and the outward development,-we find ever advancing pari passu. By the time the barbarians arrived in southern Europe, Christianity had been grossly corrupted. It lacked, as a consequence, the power to dispel the ignorance or to purify the morals of those whom the convulsions of the times brought into contact with it. As they issued from their native forests, so were they received within the pale of the Church,-uninstructed, unreformed, unchristianized. The only change the Christianity of the age exacted had respect to the names of those divinities in whose honour the invading nations continued to celebrate the same rites, slightly modified, which they had been accustomed to pay to their Druidical and Scandinavian idols. It follows that the term Christendom is simply a geographical expression. The nations that inhabit western Europe have not till this hour been evangelized, if we except the partial enlightenment of the Reformation. The barbarism of the times had extinguished the light of philosophy and of letters. No polite study, no elegant art, no useful science, helped to tame the fierceness, refine the manners, or expand the intellect, of these nations. The clergy, wallowing in wealth, and abandoning themselves to dissolute pleasures, were grossly and shamefully ignorant, and unable to compose the homilies which they recited in the presence of the people. The genius of Charlemagne saw and bewailed these evils; but neither his power nor his munificence,-and both were largely employed,-could avail to reform these gross abuses.[16] The singular infelicity of the times rendered all his attempts at reformation abortive. If we except a few individuals, belonging chiefly to Ireland and Britain, where the enlightened and beneficent patronage of Alfred the Great maintained a better order of things, no illustrious names illumined the darkness of that barbarous night. Till partially restored by the Saracens in the tenth century, learning and science were unknown in the west.[17] The state of matters as regards religion was even more deplorable. We have already seen the height to which superstition had risen in the fourth century. We will search in vain, amid the ignorance, the follies, the vices, of the eighth and ninth centuries, for the early purity of the gospel, the simple grandeur of its worship, or the attractive virtues of its first confessors. A general dissolution of manners characterized the age: the corruption had infected all classes, not excepting even the clergy, who, instead of being examples of virtue, were notorious for their impieties and vices. In the same proportion in which they declined in piety and learning, did they increase in riches and influence. A notion now began to be propagated, that crimes might be expiated by donations to the Church at the moment of death. This proved a fertile source of wealth to the clergy. Rich legacies and ample donations of lands and houses flowed in upon the churches and monasteries, the gifts of men who hoped by these generous deeds, performed at the expense of their heirs, to obliterate the sins of a lifetime, and purchase salvation for their souls.[18] By and by, bequests on a yet larger scale began to be made. It was at this time customary for princes to distribute munificent gifts among their followers, partly as the reward of past services, and partly with a view to secure their support in future. The great credit which the clergy enjoyed with the people made it a matter of the last importance to secure their influence. Whole provinces, with their cities, castles, and fortresses, were not unfrequently bestowed upon them; and over the domains so bestowed they were permitted to exercise sovereign jurisdiction. Raised thus to the rank of temporal princes, they vied with dukes and sovereigns in the splendour of their court and the number of their retinue. They raised armies, imposed taxes, waged bloody wars, and by their ceaseless intrigues and boundless ambition plunged Europe into interminable broils and conflicts. Those men who were bound by their sacred calling to preach to the world the vanity of human grandeur, furnished in their own persons the most scandalous examples of worldly pride and ambition. To fulfil their sublime mission as ministers of Christ,-to instruct the ignorant, reclaim the wandering, succour the distressed, and console the dying,-formed no part of their care. These duties were forsaken for the more tempting paths of pleasure and wealth, the intrigues of courts, and the tumults of camps. A crafty priesthood, moreover, made it an inviolable rule, that property gifted to the Church should be regarded as the property of God, and be held for ever inalienable. Henceforward to touch it was sacrilege; and whoever adventured on so bold an act was destined to experience the full measure of the Church’s vengeance. The natural law which limits the growth of bodies corporate was set aside by this kind of spiritual entail; and the wealth of the Church, and, by consequence, her power, grew to be enormous.[19]

The evils of the time were LEGION; but all flowed from one colossal error: the cardinal truth of Christianity, that salvation is of grace, was completely obscured. By the most plausible pretexts and the most subtle devices was man led away from God, and taught to centre all his hopes in himself. Faith was overthrown, and works were put in its room. The sacrifice of Christ was neglected, and man became his own saviour. We trace the operation of this grand error in the superstitious and burdensome rites in which all holiness now began to be placed. Sanctification was no longer sought in a pure heart and a mind enlightened by divine truth, but in certain external rites, which were seldom either important or dignified. To nourish the passions and mortify the body was now the grand secret of holiness. Pilgrimages were undertaken, and their merits were regulated by the length and the perils of the way, and the renown of the shrine visited. Penances were imposed, fasts were enjoined; and in proportion to the severity of the suffering and the rigour of the abstinence, was the efficacy of the act to atone for sin, and recommend to the favour of God.[20] A mind debased by ignorance, and not unfrequently by vice, and a body emaciated by flagellations and fastings, was a sure sign of eminent sanctity. Piety no longer consisted in love to God and obedience to his will, but in the observance of the most frivolous ceremonies, to which there attached an extraordinary value and a mysterious influence. To endow a convent or erect a cathedral was among the most illustrious deeds which one could perform. To possess a finger or a toe of a saint was a rare privilege; and the owner of so inestimable a treasure derived therefrom unspeakably more benefit than could possibly accrue from the possession of any moral or spiritual excellence, however exalted. Relics so precious were sought for with a perseverance and a zeal that set all difficulties at defiance; and what was so eagerly sought was in most cases happily found. The caves of Egypt, the sands of Libya, and the deserts of Syria, were ransacked. The bones of dead men, and, if history may be credited, of the lower animals, were exhumed, were hawked over Christendom, and purchased at a high rate. They were worn as amulets, or enshrined in cabinets of silver and gold; and, being placed in cathedrals, were exhibited at stated times to the devout. To abandon society, with the obligations it imposes and the duties it exacts, and to consume life in the midst of filth, indolence, and vice, was accounted an effort of uncommon holiness. To shirk the plough and the loom, and mount the wallet of the beggar,-to abscond from the ranks of honest industry, and fleece the labouring classes in predatory bands or as single sorners,-was to be heroically self-denied and virtuous. Such holy men were rather unpleasantly common; for the west, as formerly the east, now began to swarm with monks and hermits. Such of the pagan sophists as lived to witness the rise of this superstition, no less amazed than indignant, pointed the keen shafts of their powerful satire against that filthy race, which had renounced the beautiful mythology of Greece and the martial gods of Rome, to fall prostrate before the bones and mouldering relics of the dead.[21]

So wretched did man’s condition become, so soon as he turned away from God, and sought salvation in himself. In the same hour in which he forsook the light he lost his liberty. When he surrendered his faith he parted with his peace. From that moment his life became barren of all good, because he strove to produce by an effort of his will, what God had ordained to spring only from love. Hope, too, forsook the breast, in which she found no solid footing, and a “doubtsome faith,” the result partly of scepticism and partly of indifference, took her place. The overmastering force of evil desires began now to be felt; and man found his own strength but a feeble substitute for the grace of God. Having taken upon himself the burden of his own salvation, he laboured, in a round of mortifying and painful acts, to accomplish a task utterly beyond his power. His success was far indeed from being in proportion to his efforts. But in this lay one of the deep artifices of Popery. That system employed the defilement of guilt, the slavery of fear, the thrall of sensuality, to complete its conquest over man. Having put out his eyes, Popery led man away to grind in her prison-house. The perfection of error is the perfection of slavery; and man surrendered himself without a struggle to the dominion of this tyrant. It was not till Truth came at the Reformation, that his prison-doors were opened, and that the bondman was loosed and led forth.

But the master corruption of the age was image-worship. Blinded by error, and grown carnal in their imaginations, men saw not the true glory of the sanctuary, and sought to beautify it with the fictitious splendour of statues and pictures. The promise, “Lo, I am with you,” was forgotten; and when the worshipper ceased to realize the presence of a spiritual Being, the hearer of his prayer, he strove to stimulate his flagging devotion by corporeal representations. The churches, already polluted with relics, began now to be disgraced with images. Pictures of the saints and the martyrs covered the walls, while the vestibules and niches were occupied with statues of Christ and the apostles. These were first introduced under pretext of doing honour to those whom they represented; but the feeling, by a natural and unavoidable process, rapidly degenerated into worship. This was a master-stroke of the enemy. In no other way could he so effectually have withdrawn the contemplation of man from the region of the spiritual, and defaced, and ultimately destroyed in his mind, all true conceptions of the invisible Jehovah. It trained man, even in his devotions, to think only of what he saw; and from thinking only of what he sees, the step is an easy one to believe only in what he sees. It brought man from the heavens, and chained him to the earth. The rise of image-worship was the return of the ancient idolatry. The body ecclesiastic had ceased to be Christian, and had become pagan. The Church, planted by the labours of the apostles, and watered by the blood of martyrs, had disappeared; and an idolatrous and polytheistic institute had been substituted in its room. There was not less cause than formerly for the lament, “I planted thee a noble vine; how then art thou become the degenerate plant of a strange vine?”

We enter at greater length on the subject of image-worship, because it forms an important branch of the idolatry of Rome, and because it is intimately connected with the rise of the temporal sovereignty. It was in the east that this superstition first arose, but it was in the west that it found its most zealous patrons and champions; and none discovered greater ardour in this evil cause than the popes of Rome. Its rise was as early as its progress was gradual. “The first notice,” says Gibbon, “of the use of pictures is in the censure of the Council of Illiberis, three hundred years after the Christian era.”[22] “The first introduction of a symbolic worship,” continues the historian, “was in the veneration of the cross and of relics. . . . . But a memorial more interesting than the skull or the sandals of a departed worthy, is a faithful copy of his person and features, delineated by the arts of painting or sculpture. . . . . By a slow though inevitable progression, the honours of the original were transferred to the copy; the devout Christian prayed before the image of a saint, and the pagan rites of genuflexion, luminaries, and incense, again stole into the Catholic Church. . . . . The use, and even the worship, of images was firmly established before the end of the sixth century.”[23] >From this time the idolatry rapidly increased. Writing of the seventh century, we find Gibbon stating that “the throne of the Almighty was darkened by a cloud of martyrs, and saints, and angels.”[24] In this Gibbon is confirmed by the testimony of Mosheim, who states that “in this age, (i. e. the seventh century), they who were called Christians worshipped the wooden cross, the images of saints, and bones of men, they know not whom.”

A century later, the famous dispute between the eastern emperors and the western popes had broken out. The Christians of the east, alarmed by the magnitude of the abuse, and stung by the reproaches of the Jews, and the railleries-all the more severe that they were merited-of the Mussulmans, who now reigned at Damascus, strove to effect a partial reformation. Their wishes were powerfully seconded by the Emperor Leo, III., who proscribed by edict the worship of images, and ordered the churches to be cleansed. These proceedings roused the ire of the reigning pontiff, Gregory II. The eloquence of the monks was evoked, and the thunders of excommunication were hurled against the imperial iconoclast; and Leo was pronounced an apostate, because he worshipped as the apostles and primitive Christians had worshipped, and because he sought to lead back his people to the same scriptural model. When it was found that the spiritual artillery had failed to take effect, earthly weapons were employed. Italy was excited to revolt, and a contest was commenced, which was continued for a hundred and twenty years. The Italians were absolved by the pontiff from their allegiance to the Emperor, and the revenue of Italy ceased to be sent to Constantinople. To chastise these rebellious proceedings, Leo despatched his fleet to the coast of Italy; but the Italians, inspired by fanaticism and rebellion, made a desperate resistance, and after a vast loss of life, and the ravage of several of the fairest provinces of the empire, the expedition was forced to return without having accomplished its object. The quarrel was taken up by successive emperors on the one side and successive popes on the other, and prosecuted with unabated violence and various success. Councils were convoked to give judgment in the matter. The Council of Constantinople, A.D. 754,[25] summoned by Constantine Copronymus, condemned the worship, and also the use, of images. The Council of Nice, in Bithynia, A.D. 786, known as the second Nicene Council, convoked by the fair but flagitious Irene, the widow and murderess of Leo IV., reversed the sentence of the Council of Constantinople, and restored the worship of images.[26] Leo V. condemned these idols to a second exile, but they were recalled by the Empress Theodora, A.D. 842,[27] never more to be expelled from the east, till they and their worshippers were extirpated together in the fourteenth century by the sword of the Turks. Rome and Italy yielded in this matter the most profound submission to the Popes, who showed themselves throughout the zealous and truculent defenders of image-worship. The churches of France, Germany, England, and Spain, held a middle course. They condemned the adoration of images, but they adopted the perilous course of tolerating them in their churches as “the memorials of faith and history.”[28] Of these sentiments was Charlemagne, who endeavoured, but in vain, to stem the torrent of superstition. The unanimous decree of the Council which he assembled at Frankfort, A.D. 794, could not counteract the influence arising from the example and authority of the pontiff. Charlemagne found that the power which had enabled him to become master of all the western nations, was not sufficient to enable him to cope successfully with the rising superstition of the age. The cause of image-worship continued silently to progress, and it speedily attained in the west, as it had already done in the east, a universal triumph.

Though the quarrel, as regards the main point in dispute, had the same issue, both in the east and in the west, it led nevertheless to a final separation between the two churches. It directly contributed, as we have already said, to lay the foundation of the Pope’s temporal sovereignty. In the heat of the conflict, the Italian provinces were torn from the emperor, and their government was virtually assumed by the pontiffs. “In that schism,” says Gibbon, “the Romans had tasted of freedom, and the popes of sovereignty.”[29] “Rome raised her throne,” to use D’Aubigné’s words, “between two revolts.” On the one side Italy threw off the yoke of the eastern emperors; on the other, France discarded her ancient dynasty, and both revolts were zealously encouraged and formally sanctioned by the popes. It is difficult to say which of the two,-the Greek schism or the Gallic usurpation,-contributed most to elevate the Papacy to temporal sovereignty.

Such is the real origin of the Pope’s power. According to his own claim, it is of heaven; but history refuses to let the claim pass current, and points unequivocally to a different quarter as the source of his prerogative. Of the two branches of his power,-the sacerdotal and the regal,-it is hard to determine which is the most disreputable and infamous in its beginnings. His mitre he had from the murderer Phocas; his crown from the usurper Pepin. A spotless and noble lineage forsooth! The pontifical trunk has one stem rooted rankly in blood, and the other foully grafted on rebellion. As a priest, the Pope is qualified to minister in the ensanguined temples of Moloch; as a sovereign, his title is indisputable to act the satrap under the arch-rebel and “anarch old.” No one can glance a moment at the contour of his character, as seen in history, without feeling that the hideous likeness on which he gazes is that of the Antichrist. Every line of his visage, every passage of his history, is full of antagonism, is the very counterpart of that of the Saviour. “All these things will I give thee,” said the tempter to Christ in the wilderness, “if thou wilt fall down and worship me.” “Get thee hence, Satan,” was the reply. The fiend returned after three hundred years, and, leading the pontiff to the summit of the Roman hill, showed him “all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them.” “All these,” said he, “will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.” No second denial awaited the tempter: instantly the knee was bent, and the pontiff raised his head crowned with the tiara. Twice has Christianity been crowned in bitter derision and mockery of her character. Once with a crown of thorns by the blasphemers of Caiaphas’ hall; and now again with the tiara, in the person of the pontiff. Never did she demean herself with such divine dignity as when the thorns girt her brow; but, ah! the burning shame of the tiara.

It is further worthy of notice, that at the same time, and to a great degree by the same acts, did the bishops of Rome establish the worship of images, and consolidate their own jurisdiction as temporal sovereigns. These two form analogous stages in the career of the Papacy. They manifest an equal decline and advance,-a decline in the spiritual, and an advance in the secular element. By the first, Rome perfected the corruption of her worship; by the second, she perfected the corruption of her government. There was a meetness, therefore, in the two being attained at the same period. These two constitute the leading branches of the Romish apostacy,-idolatry and tyranny. These are the two arms of the apostacy,-SUPERSTITION and the SWORD: both arms were now grown; and thus Rome was equipped for her terrible mission. Her inglorious task was to bow down the world in ignominious thraldom, and her two-edged sword made it equally easy to enslave the mind and to tyrannize over the body. Her idolatry was to display itself in yet grosser forms, and her political power was to be vastly enlarged by new accessions of dominion and influence; but the world had now a fair specimen of the leading principles and organization of the Roman Catholic Church. Rome was to be a temple of idols, not a sanctuary of truth; a hierarchy, not a brotherhood. Were we called upon to fix on a period when Rome completed her transition from Christianity to Paganism, we would fix on this era. Henceforward she did not deserve to be regarded in any sense as a Church. She was not simply a corrupt Church; she was a pagan institute. The symbols of the Apocalypse had now found their verification in the corruptions of Europe: the temple had been measured; the outer court and the city had been given over to the Gentiles; and the Church was restricted to the select company which ministered at the altar within.

Into this sad condition had the Roman Church now come. She had begun in the spirit and been made perfect in the flesh. The spiritual she had renounced, as containing neither truth, nor beauty, nor power. An impassable gulph now divided her from the form not less than from the spirit of the early Church. She stood before the world as the legitimate successor of those systems of error and idolatry which in former ages had burdened the earth and affronted heaven. Her members kneeled before idols, and her head wore an earthly crown. She “had left heaven and its spheres of light, to mingle in the vulgar interests of citizens and princes.”[30] An hundred and twenty years (the period of the iconoclast disputes) had God striven with the men of the western Church, as he strove with the antediluvians in the days of Noah, when the ark was a-building; but his waiting had been in vain; and henceforward Rome was to pursue her career without let or hinderance. The spirit had ceased to strive with her. The Gothic scourge, sent to turn her from those dumb idols, had failed to induce repentance or reformation. Righteously, therefore, was she given over to the dominion of grosser delusions, to the commission of more aggravated crimes, and to the infliction, at last, of an unspeakably tremendous doom.


[1] Gibbon ‘s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. vi. p. 320: also Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. chap. i.; Lond. 1841. [Back]

[2] Universal History, vol. i. p. 412. [Back]

[3] The pall is formed of the fleece of certain lambs selected for that purpose, and is manufactured by the nuns of St. Agnes. [Back]

[4] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. pp. 11, 12. [Back]

[5] History of the Reformation, vol. i. p. 43. [Back]

[6] Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. vii, p. 39. [Back]

[7] Pope Zachary had probably given his express sanction beforehand to the usurpation of Pepin. (Du Pin, vol. ii. pp. 33-39: Mosheim, cent. vii. part ii. p. 2-7: Bower’s History of the Popes, vol. iii. p. 332; Lond. 1754.) [Back]

[8] Mosheim, cent. viii. part ii. chap. ii. sec. vii. viii.: Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 14: Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 7. [Back]

[9] Ranke’s History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 14. [Back]

[10] First so called by Ammianus Marcellinus, the well-known Historian and soldier. [Back]

[11] Works of Nicolo Machiavelli, p. 8; Lond. ed. 1679. [Back]

[12] Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. ix. pp. 159-176: Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 49. [Back]

[13] Mosheim, cent. viii. part ii. chap. ii. sec. x. [Back]

[14] Works of Nicolo Machiavelli, p. 8. [Back]

[15] Daniel, vii, 8, 20-24. [Back]

[16] See the summary of his Capitularies, or Ecclesiastical Laws, in Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 43. [Back]

[17] Mosheim, cent. vii. part i. chap. i. sec. ii. iii. The reader will find a fair specimen of the literature and intellect of the age in Du Pin’s short notice of Joannes Moschus, a presbyter of the seventh century, and author of the “Spiritual Meadow.” Joannes Moschus having visited the monasteries of the east, returned to Rome, where he published in one book what he had learned of “the life, actions, sentences, and miracles of the monks of divers countries.” (See Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 11.) [Back]

[18] D’Aubigné’s History of the Reformation, vol. i. p. 61: Mosheim, cent. vii. part ii. chap. ii.-iv. [Back]

[19] Mosheim, cent. viii. part ii, chap, ii. sec. iv.-vi. [Back]

[20] D’Aubigné’s History of the Reformation, vol. i. pp. 59-60. [Back]

[21] Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. v. pp. 124-130. “Many of the eminent fathers, both for learning and devotion, made rhetorical panegyrics of the Christians deceased, wherein, by apostrophes and prosopopeias, they seemed to invoke souls departed.” Thus St. Jerome, in his epitaph of Paula, saith, “Farewell, O Paula; and by thy prayers help the decrepit age of him that honours thee.” And so Nazianzen, in his invectives against Julian, saith, “Hear, O, thou soul of great Constantine.” (Du Pin’s Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 45.) [Back]

[22] Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. ix. pp. 117, 118. [Back]

[23] Ibid. vol. ix. p. 119. [Back]

[24] Ibid. vol. ix. p. 262. [Back]

[25] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii., Councils of the Church, p. 32. The cause of images was supported then, as now, by a goodly array of miracles. One woman was smitten with “a pain in the back, for speaking with little respect of the relics of St. Anastasius;” while another woman., possessed with a devil, was cured by reverently touching Anastasius’ image at Rome. (See Du Pin, ut supra.) [Back]

[26] See Second Council of Nice, Du Pin, vol. ii. p. 32. [Back]

[27] Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 43. [Back]

[28] Mosheim, cent. viii. part ii. chap. iii. sec. xiv.: Gibbon, vol. ix. p. 171. Anastasius, an abbot of the monastery of St. Euthemius, in Palestine, and who flourished about A.D. 740, observes, in a work on the Christian religion, a copy of which is found in Greek in the Vatican Library,-“When Christians honour images, they do not adore the wood, but their respect refers to Christ and his saints; and that they are so far from adoring images, that when they are grown old and spoiled, they burn them to make new ones.” (Du Pin, Eccles. Hist. vol. ii. p. 35.) [Back]

[29] Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. ix. p. 172. [Back]

[30] D’Aubigné, vol. i. p. 71. [Back]

Continued in History of the Papacy Chapter IV. Rise and Progress of the Temporal Supremacy.

All chapters History of the Papacy




Who or What is Leading Kamala Harris?

Who or What is Leading Kamala Harris?

Normally I don’t want to talk about individual politicians on this website. Many them are unsaved and are only following the agenda of elite people over them. But I was shocked to see this meme of Kamala Harris being possibly possessed by a demon entity! It does make sense when you think about it knowing how she talks and laughs.

I found the meme on Facebook and reposted it on my timeline to see the reactions. Because of the favorable reactions to it, I felt led to share it here too.

I wondered if there is any confirmation of the demon named Gyllou. I found it on https://www.creativespirits.net/gello/

Here are some quotes from that article:

Gello (Greek: Γελλώ), in Greek mythology, is a female demon or revenant (One who returns after death. ) who threatens the reproductive cycle by causing infertility, spontaneous abortion, and infant mortality. By the Byzantine era, the gelloudes (γελλούδες) were considered a class of beings. Women believed to be under demonic possession by gelloudes might stand trial or be subjected to exorcism. Gyllou, Gylou, Gillo, or Gelu are some of its alternate forms.
Gello possibly derives from Gallû, a Babylonian–Assyrian demon believed to bring sickness and death. The theory was advanced by Carl Frank (1881–1945) and supported by M.L. West, Walter Burkert, and others. The name is also preserved in the later word ghoul.
Greek folk etymology links the word to the root gel-, “grin, laugh,” in the sense of mocking or grimacing, like the expression often found on the face of the Gorgon, to which Barb linked the reproductive demons in origin. Such demons are often associated with or said to come from the sea, and demonologies identify Gyllou with Abyzou, whose name is related to abyssos, the abyss or “deep.”

In my opinion, America is in deep trouble for even considering her to be the next president of the United States! None of her policies are in accordance with the Bible. And she calls herself a Baptist?! Ref: https://www.womenshealthmag.com/life/a35267341/kamala-harris-religion/