{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_35514/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_35514","id":"gutenberg_35514","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/35514","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity","Great Apostasy (Mormon doctrine)","Latter Day Saint churches -- Doctrines","Latter Day Saints"],"text":"</pre>\n\n\n\nProduced by the Mormon Texts Project,\nhttp://bencrowder.net/books/mtp. Volunteers: Benjamin\nBytheway, Jean-Michel Carter, Byron Clark, Ben Crowder,\nMeridith Crowder, Tom DeForest, Eric Heaps.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE\nGREAT APOSTASY\n\nCONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF\nSCRIPTURAL AND SECULAR\nHISTORY\n\n\nBy JAMES E. TALMAGE\nD. Sc. D., Ph. D., F. R. S. E.\n\n\nPress of Zion's Printing and Publishing Company\nIndependence, Jackson County, Missouri.\n\n\n\n\nPublished by the Missions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day\nSaints in America\n\nBUREAU OF INFORMATION--Temple Block, Salt Lake City, Utah.\nCALIFORNIA MISSION--153 W. Adams St., Los Angeles, Calif.\nCANADIAN MISSION--36 Ferndale Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.\nCENTRAL STATES MISSION--302 S. Pleasant St., Independence, Mo.\nEASTERN STATES MISSION--273 Gates Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y.\nHAWAIIAN MISSION--P. O. Box 3228, Honolulu, Hawaii.\nMEXICAN MISSION--3531 Fort Blvd., El Paso, Texas, U. S. A.\nNORTHERN STATES MISSION--2555 N. Sawyer Ave., Chicago, Ill.\nNORTHCENTRAL STATES MISSION--2725 3d Ave.S., Minneapolis, Minn.\nNORTHWESTERN STATES MISSION--264 East 25th St., Portland, Ore.\nSOUTHERN STATES MISSION--371 E. North Ave., Atlanta. Ga.\nWESTERN STATES MISSION--538 East 7th Ave., Denver, Colo.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims the\nrestoration of the Gospel and the re-establishment of the Church as of\nold, in this, the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. Such\nrestoration and re-establishment, with the modern bestowal of the Holy\nPriesthood, would be unnecessary and indeed impossible had the Church\nof Christ continued among men with unbroken succession of Priesthood\nand power, since the \"meridian of time.\"\n\nThe restored Church affirms that a general apostasy developed during\nand after the apostolic period, and that the primitive Church lost its\npower, authority, and graces as a divine institution, and degenerated\ninto an earthly organization only. The significance and importance of\nthe great apostasy, as a condition precedent to the re-establishment\nof the Church in modern times, is obvious. If the alleged apostasy of\nthe primitive Church was not a reality, the Church of Jesus Christ of\nLatter-day Saints is not the divine institution its name proclaims.\n\nThe evidence of the decline and final extinction of the primitive\nChurch among men is found in scriptural record and in secular history.\nIn the following pages the author has undertaken to present a summary\nof the most important of these evidences. In so doing he has drawn\nliberally from many sources of information, with due acknowledgment of\nall citations. This little work has been written in the hope that it\nmay prove of service to our missionary elders in the field, to classes\nand quorum organizations engaged in the study of theological subjects\nat home, and to earnest investigators of the teachings and claims of\nthe restored Church of Jesus Christ.\n\nSalt Lake City, Utah,                     JAMES E. TALMAGE.\n    November 1, 1909.\n\n\nPREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.\n\n\nThe first edition of \"The Great Apostasy\" was issued by the Deseret\nNews, Salt Lake City, in November, 1909, and comprised ten thousand\ncopies. The author has learned, with a pleasure that is perhaps\npardonable, of the favorable reception accorded the little work by the\nmissionary elders of the Church, and by the people among whom these\ndevoted servants are called to labor. The present issue of twenty\nthousand copies constitutes the second edition, and is published\nprimarily for use in the missionary field. The text of the second\nedition is practically identical with that of the first.\n\nSalt Lake City, Utah,                     JAMES E. TALMAGE.\n    February, 1910.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n  _Introduction: The Establishment of the Church of Christ_.\n\n  Conditions at beginning of Christian era.--Religious systems,\n  Jewish, Pagan, and Samaritan.--Jewish sects and parties.--Law of\n  Moses fulfilled and superseded.--Apostles chosen and ordained.--\n  Apostolic administration.--The Church established on the western\n  hemisphere.--The \"meridian of time.\"\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n  _The Apostasy Predicted_.\n\n  The Church has not continued in unbroken succession.--Divine\n  fore-knowledge.--The divine purposes not thwarted.--Apostasy from\n  the Church compared with the apostasy of the Church.--Specific\n  predictions concerning the apostasy.--The Law of Moses a temporary\n  measure.--Isaiah's fateful prophecy.--Predictions by Jesus\n  Christ.--By Paul.--By Peter.--By Jude.--By John the Revelator.--\n  Apostasy on the western hemisphere predicted.\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n  _Early Stages of the Apostasy_.\n\n  The apostasy recognized in apostolic age.--Testimony of\n  Paul.--\"Mystery of iniquity.\"--Summary of Paul's utterances\n  concerning early apostasy.--Testimony of Jude.--Of John the\n  Revelator.--Messages to the churches of Asia.--Nicolaitanes\n  denounced.--Testimonies of Hegesippus.--Early schisms in the\n  Church.--Declension of the Church before close of first\n  century.--Apostasy on the western hemisphere.--Destruction of\n  Nephite nation by the Lamanites.\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n  _Causes of the Apostasy.--External Causes Considered_.\n\n  Causes of the apostasy, external and internal.--Persecution as an\n  external cause.--Judaism and Paganism arrayed against the\n  Church.--Judaistic persecution.--Predictions of Judaistic\n  opposition.--Fulfillment of the same.--Destruction of Jerusalem.\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n  _Causes of the Apostasy.--External Causes, Continued_.\n\n  Pagan persecution.--Roman opposition to Christianity, explanation\n  of.--Number of persecutions by the Romans.--Persecution under\n  Nero.--Under Domitian.--Under Trajan.--Under Marcus Aurelius.--Later\n  persecutions.--Persecutions under Diocletian.--Extent of the\n  Diocletian persecution.--Diocletian boast that Christianity was\n  extinct.--The Church taken under state protection by Constantine the\n  Great.\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n  _Causes of the Apostasy.--Internal Causes_.\n\n  Diverse effect of persecution.--Imprudent zeal of some.--Return to\n  idolatry by others.--\"Libels\" attesting individual apostasy.--Sad\n  condition of the Church in third century.--Testimony as to\n  conditions of apostasy at this period.--Decline of the Church\n  antedates the conversion of Constantine.--Departure from\n  Christianity.--Specific causes of the growing apostasy.\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n  _Internal Causes.--Continued_.\n\n  First specific cause: \"The corrupting of the simple principles of\n  the gospel by the admixture of the so-called philosophic systems of\n  the times.\"--Judaistic perversions.--Admixture of Gnosticism with\n  Christianity.--Gnosticism unsatisfying.--New platonics.--Doctrine of\n  the Logos.--\"The World.\"--Sibellianism.--Arianism.--The Council of\n  Nice and its denunciation of Arianism.--The Nicene Creed.--The Creed\n  of Athanasius.--Perverted view of life.--Disregard for truth.\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n  _Internal Causes.--Continued_.\n\n  Second specific cause: \"Unauthorized additions to the ceremonies of\n  the Church, and the introduction of vital changes in essential\n  ordinances.\"--Simplicity of early form of worship ridiculed.--\n  Formalism and superstition increase.--Adoration of images, etc.--\n  Changes in baptismal ordinance.--Time of its administration\n  restricted.--Ministrations of the exorcist introduced.--Immersion\n  substituted by sprinkling.--Infant baptism introduced.--Changes in\n  the sacrament of the Lord's Supper.--Fallacy of\n  transubstantiation.--Adoration of the \"host.\"--Proof of apostate\n  condition of the Church.\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n  _Internal Causes.--Continued_.\n\n  Third specific cause: \"Unauthorized changes in church organization\n  and government.\"--Early form of church government.--Equality of the\n  bishops.--Origin of synods or church councils.--Bishops of Rome\n  claimed supremacy.--Title of Pope assumed.--Secular authority\n  asserted by the Pope.--Indulgences or pardons.--Infamous doctrine of\n  supererogation.--The traffic in indulgences.--Tetzel the papal\n  agent.--Copy of an indulgence.--The sin of blasphemy.--\n  Scripture-reading forbidden to the people.--Draper's arraignment of\n  the papacy.\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n  _Results of the Apostasy.--Its Sequel_.\n\n  Revolts against the Church of Rome.--John Wickliffe in England.--\n  John Huss and Jerome of Prague.--The Reformation inaugurated.--\n  Martin Luther, his revolt; his excommunication; his defense at\n  Worms.--The Protestants.--Zwingle and Calvin.--The Inquisition.--\n  Zeal of the reformers.--Rise of the Church of England.--Divine\n  over-ruling in the events of the Reformation.--The \"Mother Church\"\n  apostate.--Fallacy of assuming human origin of divine authority.--\n  Priestly orders of Church of England declared invalid by \"Mother\n  Church.\"--The apostasy admitted and affirmed.--Wesley's\n  testimony.--Declaration by Church of England.--Divine declaration of\n  the apostasy.--The sequel.--The Revelator's vision of the\n  Restoration.--The Church re-established in the nineteenth century.\n\nCOPYRIGHT\nby\nJAMES E. TALMAGE.\n1909.\n\n\n\n\nThe Great Apostasy.\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n**Introduction: The Establishment of the Church of Christ**.\n\n\n1. A belief common to all sects and churches professing Christianity\nis that Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race,\nestablished His Church upon the earth by personal ministration in the\nmeridian of time. Ecclesiastical history, as distinguished from\nsecular history, deals with the experiences of the Church from the\ntime of its establishment. The conditions under which the Church was\nfounded first claim our attention.\n\n2. At the beginning of the Christian era, the Jews, in common with\nmost other nations, were subjects of the Roman empire.--(See Note 1,\nend of chapter.) They were allowed a considerable degree of liberty in\nmaintaining their religious observances and national customs\ngenerally, but their status was far from that of a free and\nindependent people.\n\n3. The period was one of comparative peace,--a time marked by fewer\nwars and less dissension than the empire had known for many years.\nThese conditions were favorable for the mission of the Christ, and for\nthe founding of His Church on earth.\n\n4. The religious systems extant at the time of Christ's earthly\nministry may be classified in a general way as Jewish and Pagan, with\na minor system--the Samaritan--which was essentially a mixture of the\nother two. The children of Israel alone proclaimed the existence of\nthe true and living God; they alone looked forward to the advent of\nthe Messiah, whom mistakenly they awaited as a prospective conqueror\ncoming to crush the enemies of their nation. All other nations,\ntongues, and peoples bowed to pagan deities, and their worship\ncomprised naught but the sensual rites of heathen idolatry.\nPaganism--(See Note 2, end of chapter.) was a religion of form and\nceremony, based on polytheism--a belief in the existence of a\nmultitude of gods, which deities were subject to all the vices and\npassions of humanity, while distinguished by immunity from death.\nMorality and virtue were unknown as elements of heathen service; and\nthe dominant idea in pagan worship was that of propitiating the gods,\nin the hope of averting their anger and purchasing their favor.\n\n5. The Israelites, or Jews, as they were collectively known, thus\nstood apart among the nations as proud possessors of superior\nknowledge, with a lineage and a literature, with a priestly\norganization and a system of laws, that separated and distinguished\nthem as a people at once peculiar and exclusive. While the Jews\nregarded their idolatrous neighbors with abhorrence and contempt, they\nin turn were treated with derision as fanatics and inferiors.\n\n6. But the Jews, while thus distinguished as a people from the rest of\nthe world, were by no means a united people; on the contrary, they\nwere divided among themselves on matters of religious profession and\npractice. In the first place, there was a deadly enmity between the\nJews proper and the Samaritans. These latter were a mixed people\ninhabiting a distinct province mostly between Judea and Galilee,\nlargely made up of Assyrian colonists who had intermarried with the\nJews. While affirming their belief in the Jehovah of the Old\nTestament, they practiced many rites belonging to the paganism they\nclaimed to have forsaken, and were regarded by the Jews proper as\nunorthodox and reprobate.\n\n7. Then the Jews themselves were divided into many contending sects\nand parties, among which the principal were the Pharisees and the\nSadducees; and beside these we read of Essenes, Galileans, Herodians,\netc.\n\n8. The Jews were living under the Law of Moses, the outward observance\nof which was enforced by priestly rule, while the spirit of the law\nwas very generally ignored by priest and people alike. That the Mosaic\nlaw was given as a preparation for something greater was afterward\naffirmed by Paul, in his epistle to the saints at Galatia: \"Wherefore\nthe law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.\"--(Galatians\n3:24.) And the fact that a higher law was to supersede the lower is\nabundantly shown in the Savior's own teachings: \"Ye have heard that it\nwas said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall\nkill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, that\nwhosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger\nof the judgment: * * * Ye have heard that it was said by them of old\ntime, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you that\nwhosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery\nwith her already in his heart. * * * Again, ye have heard that it hath\nbeen said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but\nshall perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, swear not\nat all. * * * Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye\nand a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil.\n* * * Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy\nneighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies,\nbless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for\nthem which despitefully use you and persecute you.\"--(Matthew 5:21-44;\nread the entire chapter.)\n\n9. These teachings, based on love, so different from the spirit of\nretaliation to which they had been accustomed under the law, caused\ngreat surprise among the people; yet in affirmation of the fact that\nthe law was not to be ignored, and could only be superseded by its\nfulfillment, the Master said: \"Think not that I am come to destroy the\nlaw, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For\nverily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one\ntittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.\"--\n(Matt. 5:17, 18.)\n\n10. It is very evident the Master had come with a greater doctrine\nthan was then known, and that the teachings of the day were\ninsufficient. \"For I say unto you, that except your righteousness\nshall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall\nin no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.\"--(Verse 20.)\n\n11. Jesus Himself was strict in complying with all rightful\nrequirements under the law; but He refused to recognize an observance\nof the letter alone, however rigidly required, as a substitute for\ncompliance with the spirit of the Mosaic injunction.\n\n12. The excellent teachings and precepts of true morality inculcated\nby the Christ prepared the minds of those who believed His words for\nthe introduction of the gospel in its purity, and for the\nestablishment of the Church of Christ as an earthly organization.\n\n13. From among the disciples who followed Him, some of whom had been\nhonored by preliminary calls, He chose twelve men, whom He ordained to\nthe apostleship:--\"And He ordained twelve, that they should be with\nHim, and that He might send them forth to preach.\"--(Mark 3:14.)\nAgain: \"And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of\nthem he chose twelve whom also he named apostles.\"--(Luke 6:13;\ncompare Matt. 10:1, 2.) The twelve special witnesses of Him and His\nwork were sent out to preach in the several cities of the Jews. On\nthis, their first mission, they were instructed to confine their\nministrations to the house of Israel, and the burden of their message\nwas \"The kingdom of heaven is at hand.\"--(Matt. 10:7; study the entire\nchapter.) They were told to use the power with which they had been\ninvested by ordination, in preaching, in healing the sick, in raising\nthe dead even, and in subduing evil spirits; the Master's admonition\nwas, \"Freely ye have received, freely give.\" They were to travel\nwithout money or provisions, relying upon a higher power to supply\ntheir needs through the agency of those to whom they would offer the\nmessage of truth; and they were warned of the possible hardships\nawaiting them and of the persecution which sooner or later would\nsurely befall them.\n\n14. At a later date Christ called others to the work of the ministry,\nand sent them out in pairs to precede Him and prepare the people for\nHis coming. Thus we read of \"the seventy\" who were instructed in terms\nalmost identical with those of the apostolic commission.--(Luke 10;\ncompare with Matt. 10.) That their investiture was one of authority\nand power and no mere form is shown by the success attending their\nadministrations; for, when they returned they reported triumphantly,\n\"Lord, even the devils are subject to us through thy name.\"--(Luke\n10:17.)\n\n15. The specific commission given unto the apostles at the time of\ntheir ordination was afterward emphasized. They were the subjects of\nthe particularly solemn ordinance spoken of as the washing of feet, so\nnecessary that in reply to Peter's objection the Lord said: \"If I wash\nthee not, thou hast no part with me.\"--(John 13:4-9.) And unto the\neleven who had remained faithful, the Risen Lord delivered His parting\ninstructions, immediately before the ascension: \"Go ye into all the\nworld, and preach the gospel to every creature.\" After our Lord's\ndeparture the apostles entered upon the ministry with vigor: \"And they\nwent forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and\nconfirming the word with signs following.\"--(Mark 16:14-10; compare\nMatt. 28:19, 20.)\n\n16. These scriptures indicate the authority of the apostles to\nadminister the affairs of the Church after the ascension of the\nResurrected Messiah. That Peter, the senior member of the apostolic\ncouncil, was given a position of presidency, appears from the Savior's\nspecial admonition and charge on the shores of the Tiberian sea.--\n(John 21:15-17.)\n\n17. That the apostles realized that though the Master had gone He had\nleft with them authority and command to build up the Church as an\nestablished organization, is abundantly proved by scripture. They\nfirst proceeded to fill the vacancy in the presiding council or\n\"quorum\" of twelve, a vacancy occasioned by the apostasy and death of\nJudas Iscariot; and the mode of procedure in this official act is\ninstructive. The installation of a new apostle was not determined by\nthe eleven alone; we read that the disciples (or members of the\nChurch) were gathered together--about a hundred and twenty in number.\nTo them Peter presented the matter requiring action, and emphasized\nthe fact that the man to be chosen must be one who had personal\nknowledge and testimony of the Lord's ministry, and who was therefore\nqualified to speak as a special witness of the Christ, which\nqualification is the distinguishing feature of the apostleship.\n\"Wherefore,\" said Peter, \"of these men which have companied with us\nall the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning\nfrom the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from\nus, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his\nresurrection.\"--(Acts 1:21, 22; read verses 15-26 inclusive.) We are\nfurther informed that two men were nominated, and that the divine\npower was invoked to show whether either, and if so, which, was the\nLord's choice. Then the votes were cast \"and the lot fell upon\nMatthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.\"\n\n18. It is evident that the apostles considered their council or quorum\nas definitely organized with a membership limit of twelve; and that\nthe work of the Church required that the organization be made\ncomplete. Nevertheless, we read of none others subsequently chosen to\nfill vacancies in the council of twelve. Paul, who previous to his\nconversion was known as Saul of Tarsus, received a special\nmanifestation, in which he heard the voice of the Risen Lord declaring\n\"I am Jesus whom thou persecutest,\"--(Acts 9:5; read verses 1-22) and\nthereby he became a special witness of the Lord Jesus, and as such was\nin truth an apostle, though we have no definite scriptural record that\nhe was ever made a member of the council of twelve. As showing the\nimportance of ordination to office under the hands of duly constituted\nauthorities, we have the instance of Paul's ordination. Though he had\nconversed with the Resurrected Jesus, though he had been the subject\nof a special manifestation of divine power in the restoration of his\nsight, he had nevertheless to be baptized; and later he was\ncommissioned for the work of the ministry by the authoritative\nimposition of hands.--(Acts 13:1-3.)\n\n19. Another instance of official action in choosing and setting apart\nmen to special office in the Church arose soon after the ordination of\nMatthias. It appears that one feature of the Church organization in\nearly apostolic days was a common ownership of material things,\ndistribution being made according to need. As the members increased,\nit was found impracticable for the apostles to devote the necessary\nattention and time to these temporal matters, so they called upon the\nmembers to select seven men of honest report, whom the apostles would\nappoint to take special charge of these affairs. These men were set\napart by prayer and by the laying on of hands.--(Acts 6:1-7.) The\ninstance is instructive as showing that the apostles realized their\npossession of authority to direct in the affairs of the Church and\nthat they observed with strict fidelity the principle of common\nconsent in the administration of their high office. They exercised\ntheir priestly powers in the spirit of love, and with due regard to\nthe rights of the people over whom they were placed to preside.\n\n20. Under the administration of the apostles, and others who labored\nby their direction in positions of lesser authority, the Church grew\nin numbers and in influence.--(See Note 3, end of chapter.) For ten or\ntwelve years after the ascension of Christ, Jerusalem remained the\nheadquarters of the Church, but branches, or, as designated in the\nscriptural record, separate \"churches,\" were established in the\noutlying provinces. As such branches were organized, bishops, deacons,\nand other officers were chosen, and doubtless ordained by authority,\nto minister in local affairs.--(See Philip. 1:1; compare I Tim.\n3:1,2,8,10.)\n\n21. That the commission of the Lord Jesus to the apostles, instructing\nthem to preach the gospel widely, was executed with promptness and\nzeal, is evident from the rapid growth of the Church in the early\napostolic times.--(Acts 6:7; 12:24; 19:20.) Paul, writing about A. D.\n64--approximately thirty years after the ascension--declares that the\ngospel had already been carried to every nation--\"preached to every\ncreature under heaven,\"--(Col. 1:23; compare verse 6) by which\nexpression the apostle doubtless means that the gospel message had\nbeen so generally proclaimed, that all who would might learn of it.\n\n22. Details as to the organization of the Church in apostolic days are\nnot given with great fulness. As already shown, the presiding\nauthority was vested in the twelve apostles; and furthermore, the\nspecial calling of the seventies has received attention; but beside\nthese there were evangelists, pastors, and teachers;--(Eph. 4:11) and\nin addition, high priests,--(Heb. 5:1-5) elders,--(Acts 14:23; 25:6;\nI Peter 5:1) bishops,--(I Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7) etc. The purpose of\nthese several offices is explained by Paul to be:--\"For the perfecting\nof the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the\nbody of Christ.\"--(Eph. 4:12; read also verses 13-16.) The Church with\nits graded offices and its spiritual gifts has been aptly compared to\na perfect body with its separate organs and its individual members,\neach necessary to the welfare of the whole, yet none independent of\nthe rest. As in the human organism so in the Church of Christ, no one\nwith propriety can say to another, \"I have no need of thee.\"--(See I\nCor. 12. See note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n**The Church of Christ on the Western Hemisphere**.\n\n23. We have seen, on the evidence of the Jewish scriptures, how the\nChurch was established and made strong in Asia and Europe in and\nimmediately following the meridian of time. The scriptures cited are\nsuch as appeal to all earnest Christians; the authority is that of the\nNew Testament. We have now to consider the establishment of the Church\namongst those who constituted another division of the house of\nIsrael--a people inhabiting what is now known as the American\ncontinent.\n\n24. For the benefit of those who are unfamiliar with the Nephite\nscriptures published to the world as the Book of Mormon, a brief\nhistorical summary is here presented.--(See Note 5, end of chapter.)\nIn the year 600 B. C., in the reign of King Zedekiah, a small colony\nwas led from Jerusalem by an inspired prophet named Lehi. These people\nwere brought by divine assistance to the shores of the Arabian Sea,\nwhere they constructed a vessel in which they crossed the great waters\nto the western coast of South America. They landed 590 B. C. The\npeople were soon divided into two parties, led respectively by Nephi\nand Laman, sons of Lehi; and these factions grew into the opposing\nnations known in history as Nephites and Lamanites. The former\ndeveloped while the latter retrograded in the arts of civilization.\nNephite prophets predicted the earthly advent of the Messiah, and\nforetold His ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection.\n\n25. The record states that the Messiah appeared in person among the\nNephites on the western continent. This was subsequent to His\nascension from the Mount of Olives. A foreshadowing of this great\nevent was given by Christ in a declaration made while yet He lived on\nearth. Comparing Himself to the good shepherd who giveth his life for\nthe sheep, He said: \"And other sheep I have, which are not of this\nfold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there\nshall be one fold, and one shepherd.\"--(John 10:16; read verses 1-18\ninclusive. Compare III Nephi 15:21.)\n\n26. According to the Nephite record, certain predicted signs of the\nSavior's death had come to pass. Destructive earthquakes and other\ndread convulsions of nature had taken place in the west, while the\nsupreme tragedy was being enacted on Calvary. The people of the land\nBountiful, comprising the northern portion of South America, were\nstill marveling over the great convulsions that had terrified them a\nfew weeks earlier, and on a certain occasion, were gathered together\ndiscussing the matter, when they heard a voice as from the heavens\nsaying: \"Behold my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I\nhave glorified my name: hear ye him.\"--(III Nephi 11:7; read the\nentire chapter.) Looking up, they beheld a man descending. He was\nclothed in a white robe, and as He reached the earth He said: \"Behold,\nI am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the\nworld. * * * Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your\nhands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails\nin my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of\nIsrael, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the\nsins of the world.\"--(Verses 10:14.)\n\n27. Having thus declared Himself, Christ proceeded to instruct the\npeople in the plan of the gospel as He had preached it, and in the\nconstitution of the Church as He had established it in the east. He\nvisited the Nephite people on subsequent occasions, taught them many\nof the precepts previously given to the Jews; emphasized the doctrine\nof baptism and other ordinances essential to salvation; instituted the\nsacrament in commemoration of His atoning death; chose and\ncommissioned twelve apostles, on whom He conferred authority in the\nChurch; explained the importance of designating the organization by\nits proper name--the Church of Christ; and announced the fulfilment of\nthe law of Moses and the fact that it was thenceforth superseded by\nthe gospel embodied within the Church as established by Himself. In\nplan of organization, in doctrine and precept, and in prescribed\nordinances, the Church of Christ in the west was the counterpart of\nthe Church in Palestine.\n\n---\n\n28. Thus in the meridian of time the Church of God was founded on both\nsides of the earth. In its pristine simplicity and beauty it exhibited\nthe majesty of a divine institution. It is now our saddening duty to\nconsider the decline of spiritual power within the Church, and the\neventual apostasy of the Church itself.\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _Conditions at the Beginning of the Christian Era_. \"At the birth\nof Christ this amazing federation of the world into one great monarchy\nhad been finally achieved. Augustus, at Rome, was the sole power to\nwhich all nations looked. * * * No prince, no king, no potentate of\nany name could break the calm which such a universal dominion secured.\n* * * It was in such a unique era that Jesus Christ was born. The\nwhole earth lay hushed in profound peace. All lands lay freely open to\nthe message of mercy and love which He came to announce. Nor was the\nsocial and moral condition of the world at large, at the birth of\nChrist, less fitting for His advent than the political. The prize of\nuniversal power struggled for through sixty years of plots and\ndesolating civil wars, had been won at last by Augustus. Sulla and\nMarius, Pompey and Caesar, had led their legions against each other,\nalike in Italy and the provinces, and had drenched the earth with\nblood. Augustus himself had reached the throne only after thirteen\nyears of war, which involved regions wide apart. The world was\nexhausted by the prolonged agony of such a strife; it sighed for\nrepose.\" (Cunningham Geikie, \"The Life and Works of Christ,\" New York,\n1894; vol. 1, p. 25.)\n\n\"The Roman empire, at the birth of Christ, was less agitated by wars\nand turmoils than it had been for many years before. For though I\ncannot assent to the opinion of those who, following the account of\nOrosius, maintain that the temple of Janus was then shut, and that\nwars and discords absolutely ceased throughout the world, yet it is\ncertain that the period in which our Savior descended upon earth may\nbe justly styled the 'pacific age,' if we compare it with the\npreceding times. And indeed the tranquillity that then reigned was\nnecessary to enable the ministers of Christ to execute with success\ntheir sublime commission to the human race.\" (Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory,\" Cent. I, Part I; ch. 1:4).\n\n2. _Paganism at the Beginning of the Christian Era_. \"Every nation\nthen had its respective gods, over which presided one more excellent\nthan the rest; yet in such a manner that this supreme deity was\nhimself controlled by the rigid empire of the fates, or what the\nphilosophers called 'external necessity.' The gods of the east were\ndifferent from those of the Gauls, the Germans, and the other northern\nnations. The Grecian divinities differed widely from those of the\nEgyptians, who deified plants, animals, and a great variety of the\nproductions both of nature and art. Each people also had their own\nparticular manner of worshipping and appeasing their respective\ndeities, entirely different from the sacred rites of other countries.\n* * * One thing, indeed, which at first sight appears very remarkable,\nis, that this variety of religions and of gods neither produced wars\nnor dissensions among the different nations, the Egyptians excepted.\nNor is it perhaps necessary to except even them, since their wars\nundertaken for their gods cannot be looked upon with propriety as\nwholly of a religious nature. Each nation suffered its neighbors to\nfollow their own method of worship, to adore their own gods, to enjoy\ntheir own rites and ceremonies, and discovered no sort of displeasure\nat their diversity of sentiments in religious matters. There is,\nhowever, little wonderful in this spirit of mutual toleration, when we\nconsider that they all looked upon the world as one great empire,\ndivided into various provinces, over every one of which a certain\norder of divinities presided; and that therefore none could behold\nwith contempt the gods of other nations, or force strangers to pay\nhomage to theirs. The Romans exercised this toleration, in the amplest\nmanner. For, though they would not allow any changes to be made in the\nreligions that were publicly professed in the empire, nor any new form\nof worship to be openly introduced, yet they granted to their citizens\na full liberty of observing in private the sacred rites of other\nnations, and of honoring foreign deities (whose worship contained\nnothing inconsistent with the interests and laws of the republic) with\nfeasts, temples, consecrated groves and such like testimonies of\nhomage and respect.\" (Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. I, Part I; ch.\n1:7-8.)\n\n3. _Rapid Growth of the Church_. Eusebius, who wrote in the early part\nof the fourth century, speaking of the first decade after the Savior's\nascension, says:\n\n\"Thus, then, under a celestial influence, and co-operation, the\ndoctrine of the Savior, like the rays of the sun, quickly irradiated\nthe whole world. Presently, in accordance with divine prophecy, the\nsound of His inspired evangelists and apostles had gone throughout all\nthe earth, and their words to the ends of the world. Throughout every\ncity and village, like a replenished barn floor, churches were rapidly\nabounding and filled with members from every people. Those who, in\nconsequence of the delusions that had descended to them from their\nancestors, had been fettered by the ancient disease of idolatrous\nsuperstition, were now liberated by the power of Christ, through the\nteachings and miracles of His messengers.\" (Eusebius, \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory,\" Book I, ch. 3.)\n\n4. _Divine Instrumentality in the Apostolic Ministry_. \"When we\nconsider the rapid progress of Christianity among the Gentile nations,\nand the poor and feeble instruments by which this great and amazing\nevent was immediately effected, we naturally have recourse to an\nomnipotent and invisible hand, as its true and proper cause. For,\nunless we suppose here a divine interposition, how was it possible\nthat men, destitute of all human aid, without credit or riches,\nlearning, or eloquence, could, in so short a time, persuade a\nconsiderable part of mankind to abandon the religion of their\nancestors? How was it possible, that an handful of apostles, who, as\nfishermen and publicans, must have been contemned by their own nation,\nand as Jews must have been odious to all others, could engage the\nlearned and mighty, as well as the simple and those of low degree, to\nforsake their favorite prejudices, and to embrace a new religion which\nwas an enemy to their corrupt passions? And, indeed, there were\nundoubted marks of a celestial power perpetually attending their\nministry. Their very language, an incredible energy, an amazing power\nof sending light into the understanding and conviction into the\nheart.\" (Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical History,\" Cent. I, Part 1, ch. 4:8.)\n\n5. _Nephites and Lamanites_. The progenitors of the Nephite nation\n\"were led from Jerusalem 600 B. C., by Lehi, a Jewish prophet of the\ntribe of Manasseh. His immediate family, at the time of their\ndeparture from Jerusalem, comprised his wife Sariah, and their sons\nLaman, Lemuel, Sam, and Nephi; at a later stage of the history,\ndaughters are mentioned, but whether any of these were born before the\nfamily exodus we are not told. Beside his own family, the colony of\nLehi included Zoram and Ishmael, the latter an Israelite of the tribe\nof Ephraim. Ishmael, with his family, joined Lehi in the wilderness;\nand his descendants were numbered with the nation of whom we are\nspeaking. The company journeyed somewhat east of south, keeping near\nthe borders of the Red Sea; then changing their course to the\neastward, crossed the peninsula of Arabia; and there, on the shores of\nthe Arabian Sea, built and provisioned a vessel in which they\ncommitted themselves to Divine care upon the waters. Their voyage\ncarried them eastward across the Indian Ocean, then over the south\nPacific Ocean to the western coast of South America, whereon they\nlanded (590 B. C.) * * * The people established themselves on what to\nthem was the land of promise; many children were born, and in the\ncourse of a few generations a numerous posterity held possession of\nthe land. After the death of Lehi, a division occurred, some of the\npeople accepting as their leader Nephi, who had been duly appointed to\nthe prophetic office; while the rest proclaimed Laman, the eldest of\nLehi's sons, as their chief. Henceforth the divided people were known\nas Nephites and Lamanites respectively. At times they observed toward\neach other fairly friendly relations; but generally they were opposed,\nthe Lamanites manifesting implacable hatred and hostility toward their\nNephite kindred. The Nephites advanced in the arts of civilization,\nbuilt large cities, and established prosperous commonwealths; yet they\noften fell into transgression; and the Lord chastened them by making\ntheir foes victorious. They spread northward, occupying the northern\npart of South America; then, crossing the Isthmus, they extended their\ndomain over the southern, central, and eastern portions of what is now\nthe United States of America. The Lamanites, while increasing in\nnumbers, fell under the curse of darkness; they became dark in skin\nand benighted in spirit, forgot the God of their fathers, lived a wild\nnomadic life, and degenerated into the fallen state in which the\nAmerican Indians,--their lineal descendants,--were found by those who\nre-discovered the western continent in later times.\" (The Author,\n\"Articles of Faith,\" Lect. 14:7, 8.)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n**The Apostasy Predicted**.\n\n\n1. In proceeding with our present inquiry we accept as demonstrated\nfacts the establishment of the Church of Christ under the Savior's\npersonal administration and the rapid growth of the Church in the\nearly period of the apostolic ministry.\n\n2. A question of the utmost importance is: Has the Church of Christ,\nthus authoritatively established, maintained an organized existence\nupon the earth from the apostolic age to the present? Other questions\nare suggested by the first. If the Church has continued as an earthly\norganization, where lies the proof or evidence of legitimate\nsuccession in priestly authority, and which among the multitude of\ncontending sects or churches of the present day is the actual\npossessor of the holy priesthood originally committed to the Church by\nthe Christ, its founder?\n\n3. Again, have the spiritual gifts and graces by which the early\nChurch was characterized and distinguished been manifest on earth\nthrough the centuries that have passed since the meridian of time; and\nif so, in which of the numerous churches of these modern times do we\nfind such signs following the professed believers?--(See Mark 16:17.)\n\n4. We affirm that with the passing of the so-called apostolic age the\nChurch gradually drifted into a condition of apostasy, whereby\nsuccession in the priesthood was broken; and that the Church, as an\nearthly organization operating under divine direction and having\nauthority to officiate in spiritual ordinances, ceased to exist.\n\n5. If therefore the Church of Christ is to be found upon the earth\nto-day it must have been re-established by divine authority; and the\nholy priesthood must have been restored to the world from which it was\nlost by the apostasy of the Primitive Church.--(See Note 1, end of\nchapter.)\n\n6. We affirm that the great apostasy was foretold by the Savior\nHimself while He lived as a Man among men, and by His inspired\nprophets both before and after the period of His earthly probation.\nAnd further, we affirm that a rational interpretation of history\ndemonstrates the fact of this great and general apostasy.\n\n7. Before we take up in detail the specific predictions referred to,\nand the evidence of their dread fulfilment, we may profitably devote\nbrief attention to certain general considerations.\n\n8. Respecting the foreknowledge of God, let it not be said that divine\nomniscience is of itself a determining cause whereby events are\ninevitably brought to pass. A mortal father who knows the weaknesses\nand frailties of his son may by reason of that knowledge sorrowfully\npredict the calamities and sufferings awaiting his wayward boy. He may\nforesee in that son's future a forfeiture of blessings that could have\nbeen won, loss of position, self-respect, reputation and honor; even\nthe dark shadows of a felon's cell and the sight of a drunkard's grave\nmay appear in the saddening visions of that fond father's soul; yet,\nconvinced by experience of the impossibility of bringing about that\nson's reform, he foresees the dread developments of the future, and he\nfinds but sorrow and anguish in his knowledge. Can it be said that the\nfather's foreknowledge is a cause of the son's sinful life? The son,\nperchance, has reached his maturity; he is the master of his own\ndestiny; a free agent unto himself. The father is powerless to control\nby force or to direct by arbitrary command; and while he would gladly\nmake any effort or sacrifice to save his son from the fate impending,\nhe fears for what seems to be an awful certainty. But surely that\nthoughtful, prayerful, loving parent does not contribute to the son's\nwaywardness because of his knowledge. To reason otherwise would be to\nsay that a neglectful father, who takes not the trouble to study the\nnature and character of his son, who shuts his eyes to sinful\ntendencies, and rests in careless indifference as to the probable\nfuture, will by his very heartlessness be benefiting his child,\nbecause his lack of forethought cannot operate as a contributory cause\nto dereliction.\n\n9. Our Heavenly Father has a full knowledge of the nature and\ndispositions of each of His children, a knowledge gained by long\nobservation and experience in the past eternity of our primeval\nchildhood; a knowledge compared with which that gained by earthly\nparents through mortal experience with their children is\ninfinitesimally small. By reason of that surpassing knowledge, God\nreads the future of child and children, of men individually and of men\ncollectively as communities and nations; He knows what each will do\nunder given conditions, and sees the end from the beginning. His\nforeknowledge is based on intelligence and reason; He foresees the\nfuture as a state which naturally and surely will be; not as one which\nmust be because He has arbitrarily willed that it shall be.\n\n10. But, it may be argued that in the illustrative instance given\nabove--that of the earthly parent and the wayward son,--the father\nhad not the power to change the sad course of sin whereby his son is\nhastening to ignominy and destruction; while the omnipotent Father can\nsave if He will. In reply this is to be said: The Father of souls has\nendowed His children with the divine birthright of free agency; He\ndoes not and will not control them by arbitrary force; He impels no\nman toward sin; He compels none to righteousness. Unto man has been\ngiven freedom to act for himself; and, associated with this\nindependence, is the fact of strict responsibility and the assurance\nof individual accountability. In the judgment with which we shall be\njudged, all the conditions and circumstances of our lives shall be\nconsidered. The inborn tendencies due to heredity, the effect of\nenvironment whether conducive to good or evil, the wholesome teachings\nof youth, or the absence of good instruction--these and all other\ncontributory elements must be taken into account in the rendering of a\njust verdict as to the soul's guilt or innocence. Nevertheless, the\ndivine wisdom makes plain what will be the result with given\nconditions operating on known natures and dispositions of men; while\nevery individual is free to choose good or evil within the limits of\nthe many conditions existing and operative..--(See Note 2, end of\nchapter.)\n\n11. Another matter worthy of thought in the present connection is\nthis: Is the fact of the great apostasy,--the virtual overthrow and\ndestruction of the Church established by Jesus Christ,--to be regarded\nas an instance of failure in the Lord's plans? Is it a case of defeat\nin which Satan was victor over Christ? Consider the following. What\nmortal has yet measured the standard by which Omniscience gages\nsuccess or failure? Who dares affirm that what man hails as triumph or\ndeplores as defeat will be so accounted when tested by the principles\nof eternal reckoning?\n\n12. The history of the world abounds with instances of the temporary\ntriumph of evil, of justice seemingly miscarried, of divine plans for\nthe time being frustrated, of God's purposes opposed and their\nconsummation delayed.\n\n13. We read of the Lord's covenant with Israel? Unto Abraham, Isaac,\nand Jacob He declared that their descendants should be a people chosen\nfor His special service among the nations. Through that lineage the\nSavior of mankind was to be born; in the posterity of Abraham all\nnations of the earth were to be blessed. Blessings beyond the heart of\nman to conceive, beyond the mind of man to comprehend, were promised\non condition of loyal allegiance to Him who proclaimed Himself their\nGod and their King. Moreover the Lord predicted calamity and\nsuffering, and individual affliction and national disgrace, if Israel\ndeparted from the service of Jehovah and yielded to the enticements of\ntheir heathen neighbors who knew not God. Think you that the Lord was\nignorant of the course His people would choose? Did He fail to foresee\nthat Israel would follow the evil way, forfeiting the blessings and\nreaping the harvest of sorrow? Jehovah's plans failed not, though the\nrealization of the blessings so abundantly promised has been long\ndelayed. Equally forceful with the prediction of calamity in case of\nsin, was the promise of eventual restoration to favor. The dispersion\nof Israel already accomplished, was to be followed by the gathering of\nIsrael now in progress.--(See the Author's \"Articles of Faith,\"\nlectures 17 and 18.)\n\n14. What would have been the world's verdict as to the success or\nfailure of the mission of the Christ, had a vote been taken at the\ntime of the crucifixion? Seemingly His enemies had triumphed; He who\nproclaimed Himself the Messiah, the Son of God, the resurrection and\nthe life, over whom death could not prevail, had suffered the fate of\nmalefactors, and His body was in the tomb. But the verdict of the\ncenturies, which is the verdict of the eternities to come, acclaims\nthat \"failure\" as the greatest triumph of the ages, the victory of\nvictories.\n\n15. Even so with the Church. For a season the powers of evil\ntriumphed, and the spirit of apostasy ruled. But beyond the darkness\nof the spiritual night the glorious dawn of the restoration was seen\nin prophetic vision, and both the night with its horrors, and the\nawakening day with its splendor, were foreseen and foretold.\n\n16. In our study of the predictions of the apostasy as embodied in\nscripture and of their realization as attested by later history, we\nshall recognize two distinct phases or stages of the progressive\nfalling away as follows:\n\n    (1) Apostasy _from_ the Church; and\n    (2) The apostasy _of_ the Church.\n\n17. In the first stage we have to deal with the forsaking of the truth\nand severance from the Church by individuals, at times few, at other\ntimes many. Such conditions can scarcely be considered otherwise than\nas natural and inevitable. History fails to present any example of\ngreat undertakings upon which multitudes enter with enthusiasm, and\nfrom which many do not desert. Unless such cases of individual\nabandonment are so numerous as to show the operation of some vital\ncause of disaffection, we would not need the authority of divine\nprediction and inspired prophecy to explain the occurrence. We find,\nhowever, that apostasy from the Primitive Church was widespread and\ngeneral, and that the causes leading to such a condition were of vital\nsignificance.\n\n18. In the second of the two stages already specified we are\nconfronted with conditions of far greater import than those attending\nindividual secession from the Church; for here we find the Church\nsinking to the degraded level of a human institution, with plan of\norganization and mode of operation foreign to the constitution of the\noriginal, without priesthood or authority to officiate in spiritual\nordinances, and devoid of the gifts and graces with which the Savior\nendowed His Church at the time of its establishment. In short, we find\nthe Church itself apostate, boasting of temporal power, making its own\nlaws, teaching its own dogmas, preserving only a form of godliness,\nwhile denying the power thereof.--(See II Tim. 3:1-6.)\n\n**Specific Predictions of the Apostasy**.\n\n19. The Lord foresaw the great and general departure from the\nprinciples of righteousness, and from the beginning knew that men\nwould set up their own forms of worship, wrongfully claiming divine\nauthority for the same. Through the mouths of His chosen prophets He\nhas repeatedly predicted the inevitable event.--(See note 3, end of\nchapter.)\n\n20. Among the prophecies antedating the birth of Christ the following\nmay be noted. Isaiah beheld in vision the condition of the earth in\nthe era of spiritual darkness, a period in which all classes would be\ninvolved in a general condition of unrighteousness, a time when the\nworld of mankind would be in a helpless and practically hopeless\ncondition. He pictures the earth mourning and languishing in\ndesolation and assigns the reason for the sad condition as follows:\n\"The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they\nhave transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the\neverlasting covenant.\"--(Isaiah 24:5; read verses 1 to 6 inclusive.)\n\n21. It may be thought that this prophecy has reference to a violation\nof the law of Moses under which ancient Israel lived. Let it be\nremembered, however, that the Mosaic law is nowhere called an\neverlasting covenant. The covenant between the Lord and Abraham\nantedated the giving of the law by four hundred and thirty years, and,\nas pointed out by Paul,--(Galatians 3:17; read the entire chapter.) In\nhis epistle to the Galatians, whom he designates as foolish because of\ntheir confusing the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ, the law\ncould not nullify the earlier covenant the fulfillment of which could\ncome only through Christ. The \"law,\" by which the inspired apostle\nplainly means the Mosaic statutes, was but a preparation for the\n\"faith,\" by which latter expression the gospel as revealed by Christ\nis clearly intended. \"But before faith came,\" says Paul, \"we were kept\nunder the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be\nrevealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto\nChrist, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is\ncome, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are the children\nof God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been\nbaptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor\nGreek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor\nfemale: for ye are all one in Jesus Christ. And if ye be Christ's then\nare ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.\"--(Verses\n23-29.)\n\n22. It is evident from the tenor of the entire chapter, that while the\ngospel was preached unto Abraham, and covenant made with him relating\nto the coming of the Messiah through his posterity, the gospel did not\nabide with Israel, and this because of transgression;--(Verse 19.) but\nin lieu thereof the Mosaic law was instituted as a disciplinary\nmeasure, temporary in character, destined to be superseded by the\ngospel of Christ, and assuredly not an everlasting covenant. On the\nother hand, the blood of Christ, through the shedding of which the\natoning sacrifice was wrought, is distinctively called \"the blood of\nthe everlasting covenant,\"--(Hebrews 13:20.)\n\n23. It is evident then that Isaiah's fateful prophecy relating to the\nbreaking of the everlasting covenant could have no reference to a\ndeparture from the Mosaic requirements, but must refer to a then\nfuture condition of apostasy following the establishment of the\neverlasting covenant. Moreover, part of the great prediction,\nreferring to the burnings and widespread calamities,--(See Isaiah\n24:6.) yet awaits its complete fulfillment.\n\n24. Another prediction applicable to the period when there should be\nno Church of Christ to be found, and when, in consequence there should\nbe lamentation and suffering, is that of Amos. \"Behold, the days come,\nsaith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a\nfamine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of\nthe Lord: And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north\neven to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the\nLord, and shall not find it.\"--(Amos 8:11, 12.)\n\n25. Christ instructed His followers in terms at once direct and\nconclusive, as to the apostasy then impending. In reply to certain\ninquiries concerning the signs by which His second advent would be\nheralded, He said: \"Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall\ncome in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.\"--(Matt.\n24:4, 5.) Then He told of approaching wars and political disturbances,\nand added: \"And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one\nanother, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall\nrise and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the\nlove of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end,\nthe same shall be saved.\"--(Verses 10-13. See note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n26. Further specifying the conditions incident to the growing\napostasy, Christ declared to His disciples: \"Then shall they deliver\nyou up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of\nall nations for my name's sake.\"--(Verse 9.) And again: \"Then if any\nman shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.\nFor there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall\nshew great signs and wonders; insomuch that if it were possible, they\nshall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before.\nWherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go\nnot forth; behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it\nnot.\"--(Verses 23-26.)\n\n27. After the departure of Christ from earth His apostles continued to\nwarn the people of the darkness to come. In that memorable address to\nthe elders of Ephesus, when, as he told them, they were looking upon\nhis face for the last time, Paul reminded his hearers of the\ninstructions he had previously given them, and then charged them with\nthis solemn warning: \"For I know this, that after my departing shall\ngrievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of\nyour own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw\naway disciples after them.\"--(Acts 20:29, 30; read verses 17 to 31\nincl.)\n\n28. Not only would outsiders ingratiate themselves with the saints for\npurposes of selfish gain,--wolves entering in, and not sparing the\nflock,--but schisms and divisions were imminent; and these dissensions\nwere to come through some then present,--men who would aspire to\nleadership, and who would set up their own doctrines, thus drawing\ndisciples away from the Church and unto themselves.\n\n29. The same apostle warns Timothy of the approaching apostasy, and\nrefers to some of the erroneous teachings that would be impressed upon\nmisguided people,--teachings which he calls \"doctrines of devils.\" He\nadmonishes Timothy to put the brethren in remembrance of these things,\nas is becoming in a good minister of Christ, \"nourished up in the\nwords of faith and of good doctrine.\" Note the inspired prediction:\n\"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some\nshall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and\ndoctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their\nconscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding\nto abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with\nthanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.\"--(I Tim.\n4:1-3. See Note 5, end of chapter.)\n\n30. In a second epistle to his beloved Timothy, while laboring under\nthe premonition that his martyrdom was near at hand, Paul urges zeal\nand energy in the preaching of the gospel; for the shadows of the\napostasy were gathering about the Church. His admonition is pathetic\nin its earnestness: \"I charge thee therefore, before God, and the Lord\nJesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing\nand his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season;\nreprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine. For the\ntime will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after\ntheir own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching\nears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be\nturned unto fables.\"--(II Tim. 4:1-4.)\n\n31. In addressing the Thessalonian saints, Paul warns them against the\nerror strongly advocated by some that the day of Christ's second\nadvent was then near at hand. It appears that deception was being\npracticed, and that even forgery was suspected, for the apostle\ninstructs the people that they be not deceived \"by word nor by letter\nas from us.\" The admonition is forceful: \"Now we beseech you,\nbrethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering\ntogether unto Him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled,\nneither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the\nday of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for\nthat day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and\nthat man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and\nexalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped;\nso that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that\nhe is God.\"--(II Thess. 1:2-14.) We shall see how painfully literal\nhas been the fulfilment of this prophecy in the blasphemous\nassumptions of the apostate church, centuries later.\n\n32. The Apostle Peter prophesied in language so plain that none may\nfail to comprehend, concerning the heresies that would be preached as\ndoctrine in the period of the apostasy; and he reminds the people that\nthere were false teachers in olden times, even as there would be in\ntimes then future: \"But there were false prophets also among the\npeople, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily\nshall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought\nthem, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall\nfollow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall\nbe evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned\nwords make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time\nlingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.\"--(II Peter 2:1-3.\nRead the entire chapter, noting the description of conditions existing\nin the world today.)\n\n33. Jude, the brother of James, in his general epistle to the saints,\nreminds them of earlier warnings: \"But, beloved, remember ye the words\nwhich were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; How\nthat they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who\nshould walk after their own ungodly lusts.\"--(Jude 17, 18.)\n\n34. John, who is called the Revelator, saw in vision the state of the\nworld in the days then future. Describing the spirit of\nunrighteousness as a hideous beast, and its author, Satan, as the\ndragon, he says: \"And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto\nthe beast: and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the\nbeast? who is able to make war with him? * * * And he opened his mouth\nin blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle,\nand them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war\nwith the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over\nall kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the\nearth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of\nlife of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. If any man\nhave an ear, let him hear.\"--(Rev. 13:4,6-9.)\n\n35. Note another prophecy based on the vision of John the Revelator.\nAgain referring to latter-day conditions he declares: \"And I saw\nanother angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting\ngospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every\nnation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice,\nFear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come:\nand worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the\nfountains of water.\"--(Rev. 14:6, 7.)\n\n36. While it is true that the scripture last quoted does not\nspecifically predict the apostasy, the breaking up of the Church is\ntreated as an event actually accomplished. The Revelator looked beyond\nthe period of disruption and saw the brighter day of the restoration\nof the gospel,--a re-establishment of the Church through the ministry\nof an angel. It is illogical to assume that the gospel was to be\nbrought to earth by a heavenly messenger if that gospel was still\nextant upon the earth. Equally unreasonable is it to say that a\nrestoration or re-establishment of the Church of Christ would be\nnecessary or possible had the Church continued with rightful\nsuccession of priesthood and power. If the gospel had to be brought\nagain from the heavens, the gospel must have been taken from the\nearth. Thus the prophecy of a restoration is proof of an apostasy\ngeneral and complete.\n\n**Apostasy on the Western Hemisphere Predicted**.\n\n37. In the preceding chapter it was shown that the Church of Christ\nwas established by the Risen Lord among the Nephites of the western\nworld. It was foreseen that the powers of evil would be permitted to\nprevail in the west as in the east. Consider the fateful words of the\nprophet Alma addressed to his son Helaman: \"Behold, I perceive that\nthis very people, the Nephites, according to the spirit of revelation\nwhich is in me, in four hundred years from the time that Jesus Christ\nshall manifest himself unto them, shall dwindle in unbelief; Yea, and\nthen shall they see wars and pestilence, yea, famines and bloodshed,\neven until the people of Nephi shall become extinct; Yea, and this\nbecause they shall dwindle in unbelief, and fall into the works of\ndarkness, and lasciviousness, and all manner of iniquities; yea, I say\nunto you, that because they shall sin against so great light and\nknowledge; yea, I say unto you, that from that day, even the fourth\ngeneration shall not pass away, before this great iniquity shall\ncome.\"--(Alma 45:10-12.)\n\n38. An earlier prophecy relating to the degradation of the surviving\nremnant of Lehi's descendants, was uttered by Nephi, as a result of a\nrevelation communicated to him through angelic visitation. He thus\ndescribes his vision of the future: \"I beheld and saw that the seed of\nmy brethren did contend against my seed, according to the word of the\nangel; and because of the pride of my seed, and the temptations of the\ndevil, I beheld that the seed of my brethren did overpower the people\nof my seed. And it came to pass that I beheld and saw the people of\nthe seed of my brethren, that they had overcome my seed; and they went\nforth in multitudes upon the face of the land. And I saw them gathered\ntogether in multitudes; and I saw wars and rumors of wars among them;\nand in wars and rumors of wars, I saw many generations pass away. And\nthe angel said unto me, Behold these shall dwindle in unbelief. And it\ncame to pass that I beheld after they had dwindled in unbelief, they\nbecame a dark, and loathsome, and filthy people, full of idleness and\nall manner of abominations.\"--(I Nephi 12:19-23. For other Book of\nMormon predictions of spiritual decline on the western continent, see\nII Nephi 27:1; read also II Nephi 26:19-22, and chapter 29.) The\ndegraded state of the North American Indians,--descendants of a\nprophet-father--is a striking realization of this prophetic\ndeclaration.\n\n39. The scriptures cited are sufficient to show that widespread\napostasy from the Church was foreseen; that the corruption of the\nChurch itself was likewise foreknown; and that on both hemispheres a\ngeneral apostasy was foretold.\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _The Church, Primitive and Restored_. The Church of Jesus Christ of\nLatter-day Saints declares by its name a distinction from the\nPrimitive Church as established by Christ and His early apostles. The\nessential designation of the restored Church is the Church of Jesus\nChrist; its authorized name is the Church of Jesus Christ of\nLatter-day Saints, the final phrase being added to distinguish the\nChurch as established in the present dispensation from the Church as\norganized by the Savior during the period of His earthly ministry.\nThis distinction is shown in one of our Articles of Faith: \"We (the\nChurch of today) believe in the same organization that existed in the\nPrimitive Church.\"\n\n2. _Man's Free Agency_. The teachings of the restored Church\nrespecting individual freedom of action are thus summarized: \"The\nChurch holds and teaches as a strictly scriptural doctrine, that man\nhas inherited among the inalienable rights conferred upon him by his\ndivine Father, absolute freedom to choose the good or the evil in life\nas he may elect. This right cannot be guarded with more jealous care\nthan is bestowed upon it by God Himself; for in all His dealings with\nman, He has left the mortal creature free to choose and to act, with\nno semblance of compulsion or restraint, beyond the influences of\npaternal counsel and loving direction. True, He has given\ncommandments, and has established statutes, with promises of blessings\nfor compliance and dire penalties for infraction; but in the choice of\nthese, God's children are untrammeled. In this respect, man is no less\nfree than are the angels and the Gods, except as he has fettered\nhimself with the bonds of sin, and forfeited his power of will and\nforce of soul. The individual has a full measure of liberty to violate\nthe laws of health, the requirements of nature, and the commandments\nof God in matters both temporal and spiritual, as he has to obey all\nsuch; in the one case he brings upon himself the sure penalties that\nbelong to the broken law; as in the other he inherits the specific\nblessings and the added freedom that attend a law-abiding life.\nObedience to law is the habit of the free man; 'tis the transgressor\nwho fears the law, for he brings upon himself deprivation and\nrestraint, not because of the law, which would have protected him in\nhis freedom, but because of his rejection of law. The predominant\nattribute of justice, recognized as part of Divine nature, forbids the\nthought that man should receive promises of reward for righteousness,\nand threats of punishment of evil deeds, if he possessed no power of\nindependent action. It is no more a part of God's plan to compel men\nto work righteousness, than it is His purpose to permit evil powers to\nforce His children into sin. In the days of Eden, the first man had\nplaced before him commandment and law, with an explanation of the\npenalty which would follow a violation of that law. No law could have\nbeen given him in righteousness, had he not been free to act for\nhimself. 'Nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is\ngiven unto thee; but remember that I forbid it,' said the Lord God to\nAdam. Concerning His dealings with the first patriarch of the race,\nGod has declared in this day, 'Behold I gave unto him that he should\nbe an agent unto himself.'\" (The Author, \"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture\n3:1, 2.)\n\n3. _The Testimony of Prophecy to the Apostasy_. \"What is prophecy but\nhistory reversed? Nothing. Prophecy is a record of things before they\ntranspire. History is a record of them after they have occurred; and\nof the two prophecy is more to be trusted for its accuracy than\nhistory: for the reason that it has for its source the unerring\ninspiration of Almighty God; while history,--except in the case of\ninspired historians--is colored by the favor or prejudice of the\nwriter, depends for its exactness upon the point of view from which he\nlooks upon the events; and is likely to be marred in a thousand ways\nby the influences surrounding him,--party considerations, national\ninterest or prejudice; supposed influence upon present conditions and\nfuture prospects--all these things may interfere with history; but\nprophecy is free from such influences. Historians are\nself-constituted, or appointed by men; but prophets are chosen of God.\nSelected by divine wisdom, and illuminated by that Spirit which shows\nthings that are to come, prophets have revealed to them so much of the\nfuture as God would have men to know, and the inspired writers record\nit for the enlightenment or warning of mankind, without the coloring\nor distortion so liable to mar the work of the historian. Thus Moses\nrecorded what the history of Israel would be on condition of their\nobedience to God: and what it would be if they were disobedient.\nIsrael was disobedient, and historians have exhausted their art in\nattempts to tell of their disobedience and suffering; but neither in\nvividness nor accuracy do the histories compare with the prophecy. So\nwith the prophecy of Daniel in respect to the rise and succession of\nthe great political powers that should dominate the earth, and the\nfinal triumph of the Kingdom of God. So with well-nigh all of the\nprophecies.\"--(B. H. Roberts, \"A New Witness for God,\" pp. 113, 114.)\n\n4. _Christ's Prediction of the Apostasy_. The forceful prophecy,\ncouched in terms of vivid description, uttered by our Lord in response\nto inquiries by His disciples, has been the subject of diverse opinion\nand varied comment, particularly as regard the time to which the\nprediction refers. As recorded in the twenty-fourth chapter of\nMatthew, a significant sign of the progress of events to precede the\nsecond coming of Christ was stated as follows: \"And this gospel of the\nkingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all\nnations; and then shall the end come.\" (Verse 14.) It is claimed by\nmany that the \"end\" referred to in the passage quoted is not\nnecessarily the close of the final dispensation, not what is commonly\nspoken of as the end of the world, but the closing up of the gospel\ndispensation then current; and in support of this interpretation it is\nurged that following the utterance quoted Christ proceeded to predict\nthe calamities then awaiting Jerusalem. That during the period covered\nby the earthly ministry of the apostles, the gospel was preached in\nall the civilized nations of the Eastern hemisphere, is evident alike\nfrom scripture and from the uncanonical writings of repute relating to\nthat period. Paul speaks of the Gospel as having been carried in his\nday to the world, and as having been preached to every creature under\nheaven (see Colos. 1:6, 23; compare Romans 10:18; see also Note 3,\nfollowing chapter I of this work, page 15.)\n\nIn Joseph Smith's version of the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew the\nparagraph relating to the preaching of the gospel in all the world as\none of the signs specified by Jesus Christ, is transposed so as to\napply more directly to the modern or last dispensation. (See Pearl of\nGreat Price, Writings of Joseph Smith, 1.) The scripture under\nconsideration has direct application to the conditions characteristic\nof present times--the period now current and immediately precedent to\nthe second advent of the Christ. This fact, however, does not\nnecessarily nullify its application to the earlier period as well.\nHistory repeats itself in many instances in this, \"the dispensation of\nthe fulness of times;\" indeed, the very name is expressive of a\nsummarizing or gathering together of things past, and this involves\nrecurrence of earlier conditions and re-enactment of laws. The\nprediction of world-wide evangelization is not the only instance of a\ngeneral prophecy having more than a single limited horizon of\nfulfillment. In the apostolic period the gospel was carried to all\nnations known to the Lord's ministers; a similar work is in progress\ntoday, on a scale greatly exceeding that of the past, for the world,\nas measured by human occupancy, is vastly greater than of old.\n\n5. _Scriptures Relating to the Apostasy_. That the application of the\nscriptures cited in the text is proof of the predicted apostasy is not\npeculiar to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is shown\nby the fact that these predictions are similarly interpreted by\ntheologians of other churches. Thus, in his \"Bible Commentary,\" Dr.\nAdam Clarke annotates Paul's admonition to Timothy as below. First\nnote the passage: \"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the\nlatter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing\nspirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;\" etc.\nDr. Clarke says:\n\n\"_In the latter times_: This does not necessarily imply the last ages\nof the world; but any times consequent (subsequent) to those in which\nthe church then lived.\"\n\n\"_Depart from the faith_: They will apostatize from the faith, i. e.\nfrom Christianity, renouncing the whole system in effect by bringing\nin doctrines which render its essential truths null and void; or\ndenying and denouncing such doctrines as are essential to Christianity\nas a system of salvation. A man may hold all the truths of\nChristianity, and yet render them of none effect, by holding other\ndoctrines, which counteract their influence; or he may apostatize by\ndenying some essential doctrine, though he bring in nothing\nheterodox.\"\n\n\"_Speaking lies in hypocrisy_: Persons pretending not only to divine\ninspiration, but also to extraordinary degrees of holiness,\nself-denial, mortification, etc., in order to credit the lies and\nfalse doctrines which they taught. Multitudes of lies were framed\nconcerning miracles wrought by the relics of departed saints as they\nwere termed.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n**Early Stages of the Apostasy**.\n\n\n1. As shown in the preceding chapter a general apostasy from the\nPrimitive Church was both foreseen and foretold. Prophets who lived\ncenturies before the time of Christ predicted the great event, as did\nalso the Savior Himself and the apostles who continued the work of the\nministry after His resurrection and ascension. We are now to inquire\nas to the fulfillment of these predictions.\n\n2. Evidence that the apostasy occurred as had been predicted is found\nin the sacred scriptures and in the records of history other than\nscriptural. From certain utterances of the early-day apostles it is\nmade plain to us that the great \"falling away\" had begun even while\nthose apostles were living. The preaching of false doctrines and the\nrise of unauthorized teachers were referred to as conditions then\nactually existing in the Church, and not as remote developments of the\ndistant future.--(See Note 1, end of chapter.)\n\n3. Scarcely had the gospel seed been committed to the soil before the\nenemy came, and by night sowed tares amongst the wheat; and so\nintimate was the growth of the two that any attempt to forcibly uproot\nthe weeds would have threatened the life of the grain.--(Study the\nparable of wheat and tares, Matt. 13:24-30. See Note 2, end of\nchapter.)\n\n4. Paul recognized the fact that the people amongst whom he labored\nwere losing the faith they had professed, and were becoming victims of\nthe deception practiced by false teachers. In his letter to the\nchurches of Galatia he wrote: \"I marvel that ye are so soon removed\nfrom him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:\nWhich is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would\npervert the gospel of Christ.\" And then, to emphasize the sin of those\nwho thus sought to \"pervert the gospel of Christ,\" he continued: \"But\nthough we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you\nthan that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we\nsaid before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel\nunto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.\"--(Galatians\n1:6-9; read the entire chapter. See Note 3, end of chapter.)\n\n5. The context of the passages just quoted shows the nature of the\nerror into which \"the churches of Galatia\" were in danger of falling.\nThey were embroiled in a discussion as to whether they were bound by\ncertain requirements of the law of Moses, notably that respecting\ncircumcision. The apostle instructs them to the effect that the gospel\nof Christ was superior to the law; and that moreover, they were\ninconsistent in contending for one item of the law and neglecting the\nrest. We have here indication of the effort so persisted in even by\nthose who had joined the Church, to modify and change the simple\nrequirements of the gospel by introducing the elements of Judaism. It\nmust be remembered that even among the apostles some difference of\nopinion had existed as to the necessity of circumcision; but this had\nbeen settled by their prayerful efforts to learn the Lord's will in\nthe matter; and those who sought to foment dissension on this or any\nother matter of authoritative doctrine were declared to be enemies to\nthe Church, seeking to \"pervert the gospel of Christ.\"\n\n6. In his second epistle to the \"church of the Thessalonians\" Paul\ndeclares that the spirit of iniquity was then already operative. After\npredicting the rise of the apostate church, with its blasphemous\nassumptions of power, as a condition antecedent to the second coming\nof Christ, the apostle continued as follows: \"For the mystery of\niniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let until he\nbe taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom\nthe Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy\nwith the brightness of his coming.\"--(II Thess. 2:7, 8.)\n\n7. The seemingly obscure expression, \"he who now letteth will let,\"\nmay be more readily understood by remembering that in the older style\nof English \"let\" had the meaning of \"restrain\" or \"hinder.\"--(An\nexample of this old-time use of the verb \"let\" is found in\nShakespeare. Hamlet is made to say, \"Unhand me, gentlemen. By heaven\nI'll make a ghost of him who lets me,\" i. e., of him who restrains or\nhinders me.) The passage therefore may be understood as a declaration\nthat the spirit of iniquity was already active though restrained or\nhindered for a time; and that later even this restraint would be\nremoved and the evil one would be in power. In the Revised Version of\nthe New Testament this passage is rendered thus:--\"lawlessness doth\nalready work: only there is one that restraineth now, until he be\ntaken out of the way.\"\n\n8. Just who or what is referred to as exercising a restraint on the\npowers of iniquity at that time has given rise to discussion. Some\nwriters hold that the presence of the apostles operated in this way,\nwhile others believe that the restraining power of the Roman\ngovernment is referred to. It is known that the Roman policy was to\ndiscountenance religious contention, and to allow a large measure of\nliberty in forms of worship as long as the gods of Rome were not\nmaligned nor their shrines dishonored. As Roman supremacy declined\n\"the mystery of iniquity\" embodied in the apostate church operated\npractically without restraint.\n\n9. The expression \"mystery of iniquity\" as used by Paul is\nsignificant.--(See Note 1, end of chapter.) Prominent among the early\nperverters of the Christian faith were those who assailed its\nsimplicity and lack of exclusiveness. This simplicity was so different\nfrom the mysteries of Judaism and the mysterious rites of heathen\nidolatry as to be disappointing to many; and the earliest changes in\nthe Christian form of worship were marked by the introduction of\nmystic ceremonies.\n\n10. Paul's zeal as a missionary and a proselyter is abundantly shown\nin scripture; he was equally zealous in seeking to maintain the faith\nof those who had accepted the truth. The Pauline epistles abound in\nadmonitions and pleadings against the increasing influence of false\ndoctrines, and in expressions of sorrow over the growth of apostasy in\nthe Church. His words addressed to Timothy are both emphatic and\npathetic. \"Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of\nme, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. That good thing which\nwas committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost, which dwelleth in us.\nThis thou knowest, _that all they which are in Asia be turned away\nfrom me_.\"--(II Timothy 1:13-15; italics introduced; compare 4:10,\n16.)\n\n11. An excellent summary of important utterances by the Apostle Paul\nrelating to the beginning of the apostasy as a fact in the early\napostolic age, has been made by one of the latter-day apostles, Orson\nPratt. He writes as follows: \"The great apostasy of the Christian\nChurch commenced in the first century; while there were yet inspired\napostles and prophets in their midst; hence Paul, just previous to his\nmartyrdom, enumerates a great number who had 'made shipwreck of their\nfaith,' and 'turned aside unto vain jangling;' teaching 'that the\nresurrection was already past,' 'giving heed to fables and endless\ngenealogies,' 'doubting about questions and strifes of words whereof\ncame envyings, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men\nof corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is\ngodliness.' This apostasy had become so general that Paul declares to\nTimothy, 'that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me;' and\nagain he says, 'at my first answer no man stood with me, but all men\nforsook me;' he further says that 'there are many unruly, and vain\ntalkers and deceivers, teaching things which they ought not, for\nfilthy lucre's sake.' These apostates, no doubt, pretended to be very\nrighteous; for, says the apostle, 'they profess that they know God;\nbut in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and\nunto every good work reprobate.'\"\n\n12. Jude admonished the saints to be on their guard against men who\nwere in the service of Satan seeking to corrupt the Church. Addressing\nhimself \"to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved\nin Jesus Christ,\" he said: \"It was needful for me to write unto you,\nand exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which\nwas once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in\nunawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation,\nungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and\ndenying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.\"--(Jude 3, 4.\nSee Note 5, end of chapter.) It is plain that Jude considered \"the\nfaith which was once delivered unto the saints\" as in danger; and he\nurges the faithful to contend for it and openly defend it. He reminds\nthe saints that they had been told \"there should be mockers in the\nlast time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts;\" and adds\n\"These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the\nSpirit.\"--(Verses 18, 19.) Clearly he is referring to the apostates of\nsuch time, who, because of sensual appetites and lustful desires, have\nseparated themselves from the Church.\n\n13. During the banishment of John the Revelator on the Isle of Patmos,\nwhen nearly all the apostles had been taken from the earth, many of\nthem having suffered martyrdom, the apostasy was so widespread that\nonly seven \"churches,\" _i. e._, branches of the Church, remained in\nsuch condition as to be considered deserving of the special\ncommunication John was instructed to give. In a marvelous vision he\nbeheld the seven churches typified by seven golden candlesticks, with\nseven stars representing the presiding officers of the several\nchurches; and in the midst of the golden candlesticks, with the stars\nin his hand, stood \"one like unto the Son of Man.\"\n\n14. The church at Ephesus was approved for its good works,\nspecifically for its rejection of the Nicolaitean heresies;\nnevertheless reproof was administered for disaffection and neglect,\nthus:--\"thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence\nthou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will\ncome unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his\nplace, except thou repent.\"--(Rev. 2:4,5.)\n\n15. To the church at Pergamos John was commanded to write, denouncing\nthe false doctrines of certain sects and teachers, \"which thing I\nhate,\" said the Lord.--(See verses 12-16.) The church of the\nLaodiceans was denounced as \"lukewarm,\" \"neither hot nor cold,\" and as\npriding itself as rich and not in need, whereas it was in reality\n\"wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.\"--(Rev. 3;\nsee verses 14-21.)\n\n16. The foregoing scriptures are ample as proof that even before the\nancient apostles had finished their earthly ministry, apostasy was\ngrowing apace. The testimony of the early \"Christian fathers\" who\nwrote in the period immediately following the passing of the apostles,\nis to the same effect. According to the generally accepted chronology,\nthe prophetic message of John the Revelator to the churches of Asia\nwas given in the last years of the first century.--(Probably about\nA. D. 96; see Oxford Bible, margin.)\n\n17. Among the historians of that period whose writings are not\nregarded as canonical or scriptural, but which are nevertheless\naccepted as genuine and reliable, was Hegesippus, who \"flourished\nnearest the days of the apostles.\" Writing of the conditions marking\nthe close of the first century and the beginning of the second,\nEusebius cites the testimony of the earlier writer as follows:--\"The\nsame author, [Hegesippus] relating the events of the times, also says,\nthat the Church continued until then as a pure and uncorrupt virgin;\nwhilst if there were any at all that attempted to pervert the sound\ndoctrine of the saving gospel, they were yet skulking in dark\nretreats; but when the sacred choir of apostles became extinct, and\nthe generation of those that had been privileged to hear their\ninspired wisdom had passed away, then also the combinations of impious\nerror arose by the fraud and delusions of false teachers. These also,\nas there were none of the apostles left, henceforth attempted, without\nshame to preach their false doctrine against the gospel of truth. Such\nis the statement of Hegesippus.\"--(Eusebius, \"Ecclesiastical History,\"\nBook III, chapter 32.)\n\n18. There can be little doubt that the false teachers referred to in\nthe testimony last cited, were professed adherents of the Church, and\nnot outside opponents, inasmuch as they were restrained by the\ninfluence and authority of the apostles, and waited the passing of the\nauthorized leaders as an opportunity to corrupt the Church by evil\nteachings.\n\n19. A later writer, commenting on the schisms and dissensions by which\nthe Church was rent in the latter part of the first century--the\nperiod immediately following that of the apostolic ministry, says: \"It\nwill easily be imagined that unity and peace could not reign long in\nthe Church, since it was composed of Jews and Gentiles, who regarded\neach other with the bitterest aversion. Besides, as the converts to\nChristianity could not extirpate radically the prejudices which had\nbeen formed in their minds by education, and confirmed by time, they\nbrought with them into the bosom of the Church more or less of the\nerrors of their former religions. Thus the seeds of discord and\ncontroversy were easily sown, and could not fail to spring up soon\ninto animosities and dissensions, which accordingly broke out and\ndivided the Church.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. History,\" Cent. I, Part II;\nchap. 3:11. See Note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n20. Another recognized authority on ecclesiastical history, and one\nwhose avowed purpose was to present the truth respecting the Church in\nits most favorable light, is Joseph Milner, author of a comprehensive\n\"History of the Church of Christ.\" He comments on the state of the\nChurch at the close of the first century in this wise: \"Let us keep in\nview what that [the spirit of the gospel] really is. The simple faith\nof Christ as the only Savior of lost sinners, and the effectual\ninfluences of the Holy Ghost in recovering souls altogether depraved\nby sin--these are the leading ideas. When the effusion of the Holy\nGhost first took place, these things were taught with power; and no\nsentiments which militated against them could be supported for a\nmoment. As, through the prevalence of human corruption and the crafts\nof Satan, the love of truth was lessened, heresies and various abuses\nof the gospel appeared; and in estimating them we may form some idea\nof the declension of true religion toward the end of the [first]\ncentury.\" The same writer continues: \"Yet a gloomy cloud hung over the\nconclusion of the first century. The first impressions made by the\neffusion of the Spirit are generally the strongest and the most\ndecisively distinct from the spirit of the world. But human depravity,\noverborne for a time, arises afresh, particularly in the next\ngeneration. Hence the disorders of schism and heresy. Their tendency\nis to destroy the pure work of God.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent.\nI, ch. 15.)\n\n21. The purpose of this chapter has been that of demonstrating the\nearly beginning of the apostasy, so soon to become general, and later,\nuniversal. The specific causes directly contributing to the\ndegradation of the Church are reserved for future consideration.\n\n**The Growth of Apostasy on the Western Hemisphere**.\n\n22. Now let us see what was the condition of the Church established by\nthe Resurrected Lord among the descendants of Lehi on the American\nContinent. In this undertaking we shall not restrict ourselves to the\nbeginning of the disruption alone. Inasmuch as the course of apostasy\namong the Nephites was so rapid, and the period intervening between\nthe establishment of the Church and the destruction of the nation was\nso brief, we shall consider the history of the Church to its close,\nand thus obviate the necessity of recurring to the subject in later\nchapters. We read that the Church had prospered until about 200 A. D.\nThen apostasy became general, as evidence of which note the following:\n\n23. \"And now in this two hundred and first year, there began to be\namong them those who were lifted up in pride. * * * And they began to\nbe divided into classes, and they began to build up churches unto\nthemselves, to get gain, and began to deny the true Church of Christ.\nAnd it came to pass that when two hundred and ten years had passed\naway there were many churches in the land; yea, there were many\nchurches which professed to know the Christ, and yet they did deny the\nmore parts of his gospel, insomuch that they did receive all manner of\nwickedness, and did administer that which was sacred unto him to whom\nit had been forbidden, because of unworthiness. And this church did\nmultiply exceedingly, because of iniquity, and because of the power of\nSatan, who did get hold upon their hearts. And again, there was\nanother church which denied the Christ; and they did persecute the\ntrue Church of Christ because of their humility, and their belief in\nChrist; and they did despise them because of the many miracles which\nwere wrought among them.\"--(IV Nephi 1:24-29; read the entire\nchapter.)\n\n24. The Book of Mormon record is definite in its specifications of the\nimmediate reasons for, or causes of the great apostasy on the western\nhemisphere. While the members of the Church remained faithful to their\ncovenants and obligations, they as individuals and the Church as an\norganization prospered; and their enemies were unable to prevail\nagainst them. With prosperity, however, came pride and class\ndistinctions, the rich dominated the poor, and earthly gain became the\nobject of life.--(See IV Nephi 1:2-7 and compare with verses 25, 26.)\nSecret organizations of evil purpose flourished,--(Verse 42.) the\npeople were divided into two opposing factions, those who still\nprofessed a belief in Christ being known as Nephites and their enemies\nas Lamanites, without regard to actual descent or family relationship.\nWith the growth of pride and its attendant sins, the Nephites became\nas wicked as the non-professing Lamanites;--(Verse 45.) and in their\nwickedness these people sought each other's destruction. Consider the\npathos and dire tragedy expressed in the words of Moroni, the solitary\nsurvivor of a once blessed and mighty nation:\n\n25. \"Behold, four hundred years have passed away since the coming of\nour Lord and Savior. And behold, the Lamanites have hunted my people,\nthe Nephites, down from city to city, and from place to place, even\nuntil they are no more; and great has been their fall; yea, great and\nmarvelous is the destruction of my people, the Nephites. And behold,\nit is the hand of the Lord which hath done it. And behold also, the\nLamanites are at war one with another; and the whole face of this land\nis one continual round of murder and bloodshed; and no one knoweth the\nend of the war. And now behold, I say no more concerning them, for\nthere are none, save it be the Lamanites and robbers that do exist\nupon the face of the land; and there are none that do know the true\nGod, save it be the disciples of Jesus,--(See III Nephi 28:1-7.) who\ndid tarry in the land until the wickedness of the people was so great,\nthat the Lord would not suffer them to remain with the people; and\nwhether they be upon the face of the land no man knoweth.\"--(Mormon\n8:6-10.)\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _The Early Apostasy Recognized_. The fact of the early beginning of\nthe apostasy is generally recognized by theologians and authorities on\nbiblical interpretation. Clarke's commentary on the declaration of\nPaul as to the \"mystery of iniquity\" then at work (See II Thess. 2:7)\nis as follows:\n\n\"_For the mystery of iniquity doth already work_: There is a system of\ncorrupt doctrine which will lead to the _general apostasy, already in\nexistence; but it is a mystery_; it is as yet hidden; it dare not show\nitself because of that which hindereth or withholdeth. But when that\nwhich now restraineth is taken out of the way, then shall that wicked\none be revealed; it will then be manifest who he is and what he is.\"\n\n2. _Early Dissensions in the Church_. As instances of the\ndisagreements and differences that troubled and disturbed the Church\neven in apostolic days Mosheim says: \"The first of these\ncontroversies, which was set on foot in the church of Antioch,\nregarded the necessity of observing the law of Moses, and its issue is\nmentioned by St. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles (chap. 15). This\ncontroversy was followed by many others, either with the Jews who were\nviolently attached to the worship of their ancestors, or with the\nvotaries of a wild and fanatical sort of philosophy, or with such as,\nmistaking the true genius of the Christian religion, abused it\nmonstrously to the encouragement of their vices, and their indulgence\nof the appetites and passions. St. Paul and the other apostles have in\nseveral places of their writings, mentioned these controversies, but\nwith such brevity that it is difficult at this distance of time to\ncome at the true state of the question in these various disputes. The\nmost weighty and important of all these controversies was that which\ncertain Jewish doctors raised at Rome, and in other Christian Churches\nconcerning the means of justification and acceptance with God, and the\nmethod of salvation pointed out in the word of God. The apostles,\nwherever they exercised their ministry, had constantly declared all\nhopes of acceptance and salvation delusive, except such as were\nfounded on Jesus the Redeemer, and His all-sufficient merits; while\nthe Jewish doctors maintained the works of the law to be the true\nefficient cause of the soul's eternal salvation and felicity. This\nlatter sentiment not only led to many other errors extremely\nprejudicial to Christianity, but was also injurious to the glory of\nthe divine Savior.\"--(Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical History,\" Cent. I, Part\nII, 11-12.)\n\n3. _Unauthorized Writings in the Apostolic Age_. Paul's reference to\n\"another gospel\" in his epistle to the Galatians (1:6) suggested to\nDr. Adam Clarke the following commentary on the passage:\n\n\"_Another gospel_: It is certain that in the very earliest ages of the\nChristian Church, there were several spurious gospels in circulation;\nand it was the multitude of these false or inaccurate relations that\ninduced St. Luke to write his own (see Luke 1:1). We have the names of\nmore than seventy of these spurious narratives still on record, and in\nancient writers many fragments of them remain; these have been\ncollected and published by Fabricius in his account of the apocryphal\nbooks of the New Testament (3 vols, 8 vo.) In some of these gospels\nthe necessity of circumcision and subjection to the Mosaic law, in\nunity with the gospel, were strongly inculcated.\"--(Clarke, \"Bible\nCommentary.\")\n\n4. _Some Authorities on Ecclesiastical History_. Among the authorities\ncited in the text are those named below. A brief note as to each may\nbe of interest.\n\n_Eusebius_: Eusebius Pamphilus, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine. He\nlived from about 260 to about 339 A.D., though there is some\nuncertainty as to the exact time of his death. He was an eye witness\nof and a participant in some of the sufferings incident to heathen\npersecution of the Christians, and has been called the \"Father of\nChurch History.\" He was the author of several works, among them one of\nthe earliest on \"Ecclesiastical History.\" The quotations from this\nwork by Eusebius, as given in the text, are from the version\ntranslated from the Greek by C. F. Cruse.\n\n_Mosheim_: Dr. J. L. von Mosheim, chancellor of the University of\nGottingen; a German writer, noted for his contributions to church\nhistory. He is the author of an exhaustive work on \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory\" (6 vols.), dated 1755. The excerpts from Mosheim's\n\"Ecclesiastical History\" given in the text are taken from the version\ntranslated into English by Dr. Archibald Maclaine, dated 1764.\n\n_Milner_: Rev. Joseph Milner. An English authority on church history,\nand author of a comprehensive \"History of the Church of Christ\" (5\nvols.) from which the excerpts in the text are taken.\n\n5. _Commentary on the Passage from Jude_:--The passage quoted in the\ntext--\"For there are certain men crept in unawares, _who were before\nof old ordained to this condemnation_, ungodly men.\" etc. (Jude 4),\nhas given rise to discussion, the question at issue being as to\nwhether the principles of pre-appointment or fore-ordination is here\ninvolved. A hasty and casual reading of the passage may suggest the\ninference that the \"ungodly men\" referred to had been appointed or\n\"ordained\" in the providence of God to sow the seeds of discord and\ndissension in the Church. A careful study of this scripture shows that\nno such inference is warranted. The \"ungodly men\" \"who were before of\nold ordained to this condemnation\" were men who had already, i. e.,\npreviously, been denounced, proscribed and condemned for the very\nheresies which now they were endeavoring to perpetuate in the Church,\nthey having crept in unawares, or in other words, they having become\nmembers of the Church by false pretenses and profession, and being\nable because of their membership, to spread their false teachings more\neffectively. Dr. Adam Clarke, in his Bible Commentary, thus treats the\npassage under consideration:\n\n\"_For there are certain men crept in unawares_.\" They have got into\nthe church under specious pretenses, and when in, began to sow their\nbad seed.\n\n\"_Before of old ordained_: Such as were long ago proscribed and\ncondemned in the most public manner; this is the import of the\n[original] word in this place, and there are many examples of this use\nof it in the Greek writers.\"\n\n\"_To this condemnation_: To a similar punishment to that about to be\nmentioned.\n\n\"In the sacred writings all such persons, false doctrines and impure\npractices have been most openly proscribed and condemned, and the\napostle immediately produces several examples, viz., the disobedient\nIsraelites, the unfaithful angels, and the impure inhabitants of Sodom\nand Gomorrah. This is most obviously the apostle's meaning, and it is\nas ridiculous as it is absurd, to look into such words for a decree of\nreprobation, etc., such a doctrine being as far from the apostle's\nmind as from that of Him in whose name he wrote.\"--(Clarke, \"Bible\nCommentary,\" Jude 4.)\n\nIn the Revised Version of the New Testament the passage is rendered\nthus: \"I was constrained to write unto you exhorting you to contend\nearnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the\nsaints. For there are certain men crept in privily, even they who were\nof old set forth unto this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the\ngrace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying our only Master and\nLord, Jesus Christ.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n**Causes of the Apostasy.--External Causes Considered**.\n\n\n1. We are now to consider some of the principal causes contributing to\napostasy from the Primitive Church and leading later to the apostasy\nof the Church as an earthly institution; and we are to study the\nmanner in which those causes have operated.\n\n2. In the scriptures before cited as proof of the early beginning of\nthe apostasy, many of the contributing causes are indicated, such as\nthe rise of false teachers, the spread of heretical doctrines, and the\ngrowth of the power of Satan in general. These may be classed as\ninternal causes, originating within the Church itself. In contrast\nwith these there were other conditions operating upon the Church from\nwithout; and such may be classed as external causes. For convenience\nin study we shall consider the subject in the following order of\ntreatment: (1) External causes; (2) Internal causes.\n\n**External Causes of the Great Apostasy**.\n\n3. External conditions operating against the Church, tending to\nrestrict its development and contributing to its decline may be\ndesignated by the general term; _persecution_. It is a matter of\nhistory, undisputed and indisputable, that from the time of its\ninception to that of its actual cessation, the Church established by\nJesus Christ was the object of bitter persecution, and the victim of\nviolence. The question as to whether persecution is to be regarded as\nan element tending to produce apostasy is worthy of present\nconsideration. Opposition is not always destructive; on the contrary\nit may contribute to growth. Persecution may impel to greater zeal,\nand thus prove itself a potent factor of advancement. A proverb still\nin favor declares that \"the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the\nChurch.\" But proverbs and adages, aphorisms and parables, while true\nas generalities, are not always applicable to special conditions.\n\n4. Undoubtedly the persistent persecution to which the early Church\nwas subjected caused many of its adherents to renounce the faith they\nhad professed and to return to their former allegiances, whether\nJudaistic or pagan. Church membership was thus diminished; but such\ninstances of apostasy from the Church may be regarded as individual\ndesertions and of comparatively little importance in its effect upon\nthe Church as a body. The dangers that affrighted some would arouse\nthe determination of others; the ranks deserted by disaffected\nweaklings would be replenished by zealous converts. Let it be repeated\nthat apostasy from the Church is insignificant as compared with the\napostasy of the church as an institution. Persecution as a cause of\napostasy has operated indirectly but none the less effectively upon\nthe Church of Christ.--(See Notes 1 and 2, end of chapter.)\n\n5. We have considered briefly the testimony of early church historians\nshowing that schisms, contention, and perversion of doctrine invaded\nthe Church immediately after the passing of the apostles; we have seen\nhow wolves had awaited the departure of the shepherds that they might\nthe more effectively worry the flock. It cannot be denied that the\nearly persecutions were directed most particularly against the leaders\nof the people; the sharpest shafts were aimed against the officers of\nthe Church. In the fierce battle between Christianity and its allied\nfoes--Judaism and heathendom--the strong men who stood for Christ were\nthe first to fall. And with their fall, the traitors within the\nChurch, the ungodly and the rebellious, those who had crept in\nunawares, and whose sinister purpose it was to pervert the gospel of\nChrist, were relieved of restraint, and found themselves free to\npropagate their heresies and to undermine the foundations of the\nChurch. Persecution, operating from without, and therefore essentially\nan external cause, served to set in motion the enginery of disruption\nwithin the Church, and therefore must be treated as an effective\nelement contributing to the great apostasy.\n\n6. A further purpose in introducing here a brief summary of the\npersecutions of which the early Church was the victim, is that of\naffording a basis of ready comparison between such and the\npersecutions waged by the apostate church itself in later centuries.\nWe shall find that the sufferings of the Church in the days of its\nintegrity, are surpassed by the cruel inflictions perpetrated in the\nname of Christ. Moreover, a study of the early persecutions will\nenable us to contrast the conditions of opposition and poverty with\nthose of ease and affluence as affecting the integrity of the Church\nand the devotion of its adherents.\n\n7. The persecution to which the Primitive Church was subjected was\ntwo-fold; viz., Judaistic and pagan. It must be remembered that the\nJews were distinguished from all other nations of antiquity by their\nbelief in the existence of a living God. The rest of the world before\nand at the time of Christ was idolatrous and pagan, professedly\nbelieving in a host of deities, yet with no recognition of a Supreme\nBeing as a living personage. The Jews were bitter in their opposition\nto Christianity, which they regarded as a rival religion to their own;\nand moreover, they recognized the fact that if Christianity ever came\nto be generally accepted as the truth, their nation would stand\nconvicted of having put to death the Messiah.\n\n**Judaistic Persecution**.\n\n(See Note 3, end of Chapter.)\n\n8. Opposition to Christianity on the part of those who belonged to the\nHouse of Israel was rather Judaistic than Jewish. The conflict was\nbetween systems, not between peoples or nations. Christ was a Jew: His\napostles were Jews, and the disciples who constituted the body of the\nChurch at its establishment and throughout the early years of its\nexistence were largely Jews. Our Lord's instructions to the chosen\ntwelve on their first missionary tour restricted their ministry to the\nHouse of Israel;--(See Matt. 10:5, 6.) and when the time was\npropitious for extending the privileges of the gospel to the Gentiles,\na miraculous manifestation was necessary to convince the apostles that\nsuch extension was proper.--(See Acts, chapters 10 and 11.) The Church\nwas at first exclusively and for a long time pre-eminently Jewish in\nmembership. Judaism, the religious system founded on the law of Moses,\nwas the great enemy of Christianity. When therefore we read of the\nJews opposing the Church, we understand that Judaistic Jews are\nmeant--defenders of Judaism as a system, upholders of the law and\nenemies of the gospel. With this explanation of the distinction\nbetween the Jews as a people and Judaism as a system, we may employ\nthe terms \"Jews\" and \"Jewish\" according to common usage, keeping in\nmind, however, the true signification of the terms.\n\n9. Judaistic opposition to the Church was predicted. While Jesus\nministered in the flesh He specifically and repeatedly warned the\napostles of the persecution they would have to meet. In answering\ncertain inquiries Christ said to Peter and others: \"But take heed to\nyourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils, and in the\nsynagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers\nand kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.\"--(Mark 13:9;\ncompare Matt. 10:16-18; 24:9-13; Luke 21:12.)\n\n10. Shortly before His betrayal the Lord repeated the warning with\nsolemn impressiveness, citing the persecutions to which He had been\nsubject, and declaring that His disciples could not escape: \"If the\nworld hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye\nwere of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are\nnot of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore\nthe world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The\nservant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they\nwill also persecute you.\"--(John 15:18-20.)\n\n11. The extreme of depravity to which the bigoted persecutors would\nsink is set forth in these further words of the Savior: \"They shall\nput you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever\nkilleth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things\nwill they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor\nme.\"--(John 16:2, 3; compare 9:22, and 12:42.)\n\n12. These predictions had speedy and literal fulfilment. From the time\nof the crucifixion, Jewish malignity and hatred were directed against\nall who professed a belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ. In the\nearly stages of their ministry several of the apostles were\nimprisoned--(Acts 5:18; compare 4:3.) and the priestly leaders sought\nto take their lives.--(Acts 5:33.) Stephen was stoned to death because\nof his testimony;--(See Acts 6:8-15; 7:54-60.) and the persecution\nagainst the Church became general.--(See Acts 8:1.) James, the son of\nZebedee, was slain by order of Herod,--(Acts 12:1, 2.) and Peter was\nsaved from a similar fate only by a miraculous intervention.--(Verses\n3:10.) The scriptural record informs us as to the ultimate fate of but\nfew of the apostles; and secular history is likewise incomplete. That\nPeter would be numbered with the martyrs was made known by the\nresurrected Lord.--(See John 21:18, 19.) Paul sets forth the fact that\nthe apostles lived in the very shadow of death--(I Cor. 4:9.) and that\npersecution was their heritage.--(Verses 11-13; see also II Cor. 4:8,\n9; 6:4, 5.)\n\n13. Not only did the Jews wage relentless persecution against those of\ntheir number who professed Christ, but they sought to stir up\nopposition on the part of the Romans, and to accomplish this end\ncharged that the Christians were plotting treason against the Roman\ngovernment. Even during the personal ministry of the early apostles,\npersecution of the saints had spread from Jerusalem, throughout\nPalestine and into the adjacent provinces. In this evil work the Jews\nsought to incite their own people living in the outlying parts, and\nalso to arouse the opposition of the officers and rulers of the Roman\ndominions. As evidence of this phase of the persecution, partly Jewish\nand partly pagan, instigated by Jews and participated in by others,\nthe following quotation from Mosheim may suffice:\n\n14. \"The Jews who lived out of Palestine, in the Roman provinces, did\nnot yield to those of Jerusalem in point of cruelty to the innocent\ndisciples of Christ. We learn from the history of the Acts of the\nApostles, and other records of unquestionable authority, that they\nspared no labor, but zealously seized every occasion of animating the\nmagistrates against the Christians, and setting on the multitude to\ndemand their destruction. The high priest of the nation and the Jews\nwho dwelt in Palestine were instrumental in inciting the rage of these\nforeign Jews against the infant Church, by sending messengers to\nexhort them, not only to avoid all intercourse with the Christians,\nbut also to persecute them in the most vehement manner. For this\ninhuman order they endeavored to find out the most plausible pretexts;\nand therefore, they gave out that the Christians were enemies to the\nRoman emperor, since they acknowledged the authority of a certain\nperson whose name was Jesus, whom Pilate had punished capitally as a\nmalefactor by a most righteous sentence, and on whom, nevertheless,\nthey conferred the royal dignity.\"--(Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory,\" Cent. I, Part I, 5:2.)\n\n15. In the latter half of the first century, the scene of Judaistic\npersecution of the church had shifted from Jerusalem to the outlying\nprovinces; and the cause of this was the general exodus of Christians\nfrom the city whose destruction had been decreed.--(See Note 4, end of\nchapter.) Our Lord's predictions as to the fate of Jerusalem and His\nwarnings to the people--(See Luke 21:5-9, 20-24.) had been very\ngenerally heeded. Eusebius--(Eusebius, \"Ecclesiastical History,\" Book\nIII, ch. 5.) informs us that the body of the Church had moved from\nJerusalem into the provinces beyond the Jordan, and thus largely\nescaped the calamities of the Jews who remained.\n\n\nNOTES\n\n1. _Persecution in Different Dispensations_. It may be argued that,\njudging from the history of the re-established Church in the present\ndispensation, may tend to strengthen rather than to weaken the Church,\nand that therefore violent opposition in earlier times cannot be\nconsidered a true cause leading to final disruption. In reply it may\nbe said that the present is the dispensation of the fulness of\ntimes,--a period in which the Church shall triumph, and during which\nthe powers of evil are limited and restrained in their opposition;\nwhereas the period of the apostasy was one of temporary victory for\nSatan. Our belief in the eventual triumph of good over evil must not\nblind us to the fact that evil is frequently allowed a short-lived\nsuccess, and a seeming victory. The permanency of the Latter-day\nChurch has been not less surely predicted than was the temporary\nduration of the Primitive Church. Satan was given power to overcome\nthe saints in former days, and the persecutions he waged against them\nand the officers of the Church contributed to his passing success. It\nhas been decreed that he shall not have power to destroy the Church in\nthe last dispensation, and his persecution of the saints today will be\nfutile as a means of bringing about a general apostasy in these latter\ntimes.\n\n2. _Persecution as a Possible Cause of Apostasy_. \"Let it not be a\nmatter of surprise that I class those persecutions as among the means\nthrough which the church was destroyed. The force of heathen rage was\naimed at the leaders and strong men of the body religious; and being\nlong-continued and relentlessly cruel, those most steadfast in their\nadherence to the Church invariably became its victims. These being\nstricken down, it left none but weaklings to contend for the faith,\nand made possible those subsequent innovations in the religion of\nJesus which a pagan public sentiment demanded, and which so completely\nchanged both the spirit and form of the Christian religion as to\nsubvert it utterly. Let me further ask that no one be surprised that\nviolence is permitted to operate in such a case. The idea that the\nright is always victorious in this world, that truth is always\ntriumphant and innocence always divinely protected, are old, fond\nfables with which well-meaning men have amused credulous multitudes;\nbut the stern facts of history and actual experience in life correct\nthe pleasing delusion. Do not misunderstand me. I believe in the\nultimate victory of the right, the ultimate triumph of truth, the\nfinal immunity of innocence from violence. These--innocence, truth and\nthe right--will be at the last more than conquerors; they will be\nsuccessful in the war, but that does not prevent them from losing some\nbattles. It should be remembered always that God has given to man his\nagency; and that fact implies that one man is as free to act wickedly\nas another is to do righteousness. Cain was as free to murder his\nbrother as that brother was to worship God; and so the pagans and Jews\nwere as free to persecute and murder the Christians as the Christians\nwere to live virtuously and worship Christ as God. The agency of man\nwould not be worth the name if it did not grant liberty to the wicked\nto fill the cup of their iniquity, as well as liberty to the virtuous\nto round out the measure of their righteousness. Such perfect liberty\nor agency God has given man; and it is only so variously modified as\nnot so thwart His general purposes.\" (B. H. Roberts, \"A New Witness\nfor God,\" pp. 47, 48.)\n\n3. _Early Persecutions by the Jews_. \"The innocence and virtue that\ndistinguished so eminently the lives of Christ's servants the\napostles, the purity of the doctrine they taught, were not sufficient\nto defend them against the virulence and malignity of the Jews. The\npriests and rulers of that abandoned people not only loaded with\ninjuries and reproach the apostles of Jesus and their disciples, but\ncondemned as many of them as they could to death, and executed in the\nmost irregular and barbarous manner their decrees. The murder of\nStephen, of James the son of Zebedee, and of James surnamed the Just,\nbishop of Jerusalem, furnished dreadful examples of the truth of what\nwe here advance. This odious malignity of the Jewish doctors against\nthe heralds of the gospel, was undoubtedly owing to a secret\napprehension that the progress of Christianity would destroy the\ncredit of Judaism, and bring on the ruin of their pompous ceremonies.\"\nIn a footnote to the foregoing, references appear as follows. \"The\nmartyrdom of Stephen is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles 7:55; and\nthat of James the son of Zebedee, Acts 12:1, 2, and that of James the\nJust, bishop of Jerusalem, is mentioned by Josephus in his Jewish\nAntiquities, book XX, chap. 8; and by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical\nHistory, book II, chap. 23.\"--(Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical History,\"\nCent. I, Part I, 5:1.)\n\n4. _Destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans_. \"A rebellious disturbance\namong the Jews gave a semblance of excuse for a terrible chastisement\nto be visited upon them by their Roman masters, which culminated in\nthe destruction of Jerusalem, A. D. 71. The city fell after a six\nmonths' siege before the Roman arms led by Titus, son of the Emperor\nVespasian. Josephus, the famous historian, to whom we owe most of our\nknowledge as to the details of the struggle, was himself a resident in\nGalilee and was carried to Rome among the captives. From his record we\nlearn that nearly a million Jews lost their lives through the famine\nincident to the siege; many more were sold into slavery, and uncounted\nnumbers were forced into exile. The city was utterly destroyed, and\nthe site upon which the temple had stood was plowed up by the Romans\nin their search for treasure. Thus literally were the words of Christ\nfulfilled, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that\nshall not be thrown down.--(Matt. 24:1, 2; see also Luke 19:44.)\" (The\nAuthor, \"The Articles of Faith,\" Lecture 17:18.)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n**Causes of Apostasy.--External Causes, Continued**.\n\n\n1. As already pointed out, it is convenient to study the causes\nleading to the great apostasy as belonging to two classes, external\nand internal, or (1) causes due to conditions operating against the\nChurch from without; and (2) causes arising from dissension and heresy\nwithin the Church itself. We have summarized external causes under\nthe general term persecution; and we have drawn a distinction between\nJudaistic and pagan persecution waged against the Church. Having dealt\nwith the opposition suffered by the early Christians at the hands of\nthe Jews or through Jewish instigation, we have now to consider the\npersecution brought upon the believers in Christ by pagan nations.\n\n**Pagan Persecution**.\n\n2. The term \"pagan\" as here used may be taken as a synonym of\n\"heathen,\" and is to be understood as referring to persons or peoples\nwho did not believe in the existence of the living God, and whose\nworship was essentially idolatrous. The motives impelling\nnon-believing Jews to oppose the establishment and spread of\nChristianity may readily be understood, in view of the fact that the\nreligion taught by Christ appeared as a rival of Judaism, and that the\ngrowth and spread of one meant the decline if not the extinction of\nthe other. The immediate motive leading to bitter and widespread\npersecution of the Christians by heathen peoples is not so easy to\nperceive, since there was no uniform system of idolatrous worship in\nany single nation, but a vast diversity of deities and cults of\nidolatry, to no one of which was Christianity opposed more than to\nall. Yet we find the worshipers of idols forgetting their own\ndifferences and uniting in opposition to the gospel of peace,--in\npersecution waged with incredible ferocity and indescribable\ncruelty.--(See Note 1, end of chapter.)\n\n3. Unfortunately, historians differ widely in their records of\npersecution of Christians, according to the point of view from which\neach writer wrote. Thus, in a general way, Christian authors have\ngiven extreme accounts of the sufferings to which the Church and its\nadherents individually were subjected; while non-Christian historians\nhave sought to lessen and minimize the extent and severity of the\ncruelties practiced against the Christians. There are facts, however,\nwhich neither party denies, and to which both give place in their\nseparate records. To make a fair interpretation of these facts,\ndrawing just and true inferences therefrom, should be our purpose.\n\n4. Among pagan persecutors of the Church, the Roman empire is the\nprincipal aggressor. This may appear strange in view of the general\ntolerance exercised by Rome toward her tributary peoples; indeed, the\nreal cause of Roman opposition to Christianity has given rise to many\nconjectures. It is probable that intolerant zeal on the part of the\nChristians themselves had much to do with their unpopularity among\nheathen nations. This subject is conservatively summed up by Mosheim\nas follows:\n\n5. \"A very natural curiosity calls us to inquire, how it happened that\nthe Romans, who were troublesome to no nation on account of their\nreligion, and who suffered even the Jews to live under their own laws,\nand follow their own methods of worship, treated the Christians alone\nwith such severity. This important question seems still more difficult\nto be solved, when we consider, that the excellent nature of the\nChristian religion, and its admirable tendency to promote both the\npublic welfare of the state, and the private felicity of the\nindividual, entitled it, in a singular manner, to the favor and\nprotection of the reigning powers. One of the principal reasons of the\nseverity with which the Romans persecuted the Christians,\nnotwithstanding these considerations, seems to have been the\nabhorrence and contempt with which the latter regarded the religion of\nthe empire, which was so intimately connected with the form, and\nindeed, with the very essence of its political constitution. For,\nthough the Romans gave an unlimited toleration to all religions which\nhad nothing in their tenets dangerous to the commonwealth, yet they\nwould not permit that of their ancestors, which was established by the\nlaws of the state, to be turned into derision nor the people to be\ndrawn away from their attachment to it. These, however, were the two\nthings which the Christians were charged with, and that justly, though\nto their honor. They dared to ridicule the absurdities of the pagan\nsuperstition, and they were ardent and assiduous in gaining proselytes\nto the truth. Nor did they only attack the religion of Rome, but also\nall the different shapes and forms under which superstition appeared\nin the various countries where they exercised their ministry. From\nthis the Romans concluded, that the Christian sect was not only\ninsupportably daring and arrogant, but, moreover, an enemy to the\npublic tranquillity, and every way proper to excite civil wars and\ncommotions in the empire. It is probably on this account that Tacitus\nreproaches them with the odious character of haters of mankind, and\nstyles the religion of Jesus as destructive superstition; and that\nSuetonious speaks of the Christians and their doctrine in terms of the\nsame kind.\n\n6. \"Another circumstance that irritated the Romans against the\nChristians, was the simplicity of their worship, which resembled in\nnothing the sacred rites of any other people. The Christians had\nneither sacrifices, nor temples, nor images, nor oracles, nor\nsacerdotal orders; and this was sufficient to bring upon them the\nreproaches of an ignorant multitude, who imagined that there could be\nno religion without these.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. 1, Part 1,\nch. 5:6, 7.)\n\n7. Persecution of the Church by Roman authority may be said to have\nbegun in the reign of Nero (A. D. 64) and to have continued to the\nclose of Diocletian's reign (A. D. 305.) Within this range of time\nthere were many periods of diminished severity, if not of comparative\ntranquillity; nevertheless, the Church was the object of heathen\noppression for about two and a half centuries. Attempts have been made\nby Christian writers to segregate the persecutions into ten distinct\nand separate onslaughts; and some profess to find a mystic relation\nbetween the ten persecutions thus classified, and the ten plagues of\nEgypt, as also an analogy with the ten horns mentioned by John the\nRevelator.--(See Rev. 17:14.) As a matter of fact attested by history,\nthe number of persecutions of unusual severity was less than ten;\nwhile the total of all, including local and restricted assaults, would\nbe much greater.--(See Note 2, end of chapter.)\n\n8. _Persecution under Nero_. The first extended and notable\npersecution of Christians under the official edict of a Roman emperor\nwas that instigated by Nero, A. D. 64. As students of history know,\nthis monarch is remembered mostly for his crimes. During the latter\npart of his infamous reign, a large section of the city of Rome was\ndestroyed by fire. He was suspected by some of being responsible for\nthe disaster; and, fearing the resentment of the infuriated people, he\nsought to implicate the unpopular and much-maligned Christians as the\nincendiaries, and by torture tried to force a confession from them. As\nto what followed the foul accusation, let us consider the words of a\nnon-Christian writer, Tacitus, whose integrity as a historian is held\nin esteem.\n\n9. \"With this view, he (Nero) inflicted the most exquisite tortures on\nthose men who, under the vulgar appellation of Christians, were\nalready branded with deserved infamy. They derived their name and\norigin from Christ, who, in the reign of Tiberius had suffered death\nby the sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate. For a while this\ndire superstition was checked but it again burst forth; and not only\nspread itself over Judea, the first seat of this mischievous sect, but\nwas even introduced into Rome, the common asylum which receives and\nprotects whatever is impure, whatever is atrocious. The confessions of\nthose that were seized discovered a great multitude of their\naccomplices, and they were all convicted, not so much for the crime of\nsetting fire to the city, as for their hatred of human kind. They died\nin torments, and their torments were embittered by insults and\nderision. Some were nailed on crosses; others sewn up in the skins of\nwild beasts and exposed to the fury of dogs; others, again, smeared\nover with combustible materials, were used as torches to illuminate\nthe darkness of the night. The gardens of Nero were destined for the\nmelancholy spectacle, which was accompanied with a horse-race, and\nhonored with the presence of the emperor, who mingled with the\npopulace in the dress and attitude of a charioteer. The guilt of the\nChristians deserved indeed the most exemplary punishments, but the\npublic abhorrence was changed into commiseration, from the opinion\nthat those unhappy wretches were sacrificed, not so much to the public\nwelfare as to the cruelty of a jealous tyrant.\"--(Tacitus, Annals,\nBook 15, ch. 44.)\n\n10. There is some disagreement among historians as to whether the\nNeronian persecution is to be regarded as a local infliction,\npractically confined to the city of Rome, or as general throughout the\nprovinces.--(See Note 3, end of chapter.) The consensus of opinion\nfavors the belief that the provinces followed the example of the\nmetropolis, and that the persecution was common throughout the Church.\n\n11. This, the first persecution by Roman edict, practically ended with\nthe death of the tyrant Nero, A. D. 68. According to tradition handed\ndown from the early Christian writers, the Apostles Paul and Peter\nsuffered martyrdom at Rome, the former by beheading, the latter by\ncrucifixion, during this persecution; and it is further stated that\nPeter's wife was put to death shortly before her husband; but the\ntradition is neither confirmed nor disproved by authentic record.\n\n12. _Persecution under Domitian_. The second officially appointed\npersecution under Roman authority began 93 or 94 A. D. in the reign of\nDomitian. Both Christians and Jews came under this prince's\ndispleasure, because they refused to reverence the statues he had\nerected as objects of adoration. A further cause for his special\nanimosity against Christians, as affirmed by early writers, is as\nfollows. The emperor was persuaded that he was in danger of losing his\nthrone, in view of a reputed prediction that from the family to which\nJesus belonged there would arise one who would weaken if not overthrow\nthe power of Rome. With this as his ostensible excuse, this wicked\nruler waged terrible destruction on an innocent people. Happily, the\npersecution thus started was of but few years duration. Mosheim and\nothers aver that the end of the persecution was caused by the\nemperor's untimely death; though Eusebius, who wrote in the fourth\ncentury, quotes an earlier writer as declaring that Domitian had the\nliving descendants of the Savior's family brought before him, and that\nafter questioning them he became convinced that he was in no danger\nfrom them; and thereupon dismissed them with contempt and ordered the\npersecution to cease. It is believed that while the edict of Domitian\nwas in force the Apostle John suffered banishment to the isle of\nPatmos.\n\n13. _Persecution under Trajan_. What is known in ecclesiastical\nhistory as the third persecution of the Christian Church took place in\nthe reign of Trajan, who occupied the imperial throne from 98 to 117\nA. D. He was and is regarded as one of the best of the Roman emperors,\nyet he sanctioned violent persecution of the Christians owing to their\n\"inflexible obstinacy\" in refusing to sacrifice to Roman gods. History\nhas preserved to us a very important letter asking instructions from\nthe emperor, by the younger Pliny, who was governor of Pontus, and the\nemperor's reply thereto. This correspondence is instructive as showing\nthe extent to which Christianity had spread at that time, and the way\nin which believers were treated by the officers of the state.\n\n14. Pliny inquired of the emperor as to the policy to be pursued in\ndealing with the Christians within his jurisdiction. Were young and\nold, tender and robust, to be treated alike, or should punishment be\ngraded? Should opportunity be given the accused to recant, or was the\nfact that they had once professed Christianity to be considered an\nunpardonable offense? Were those convicted as Christians to be\npunished for their religion alone, or only for specific offenses\nresulting from their membership in the Christian Church? After\npropounding such queries the governor proceeded to report to the\nemperor what he had done in the absence of definite instructions. In\nreply the emperor directed that the Christians were not to be hunted\nnor sought after vindictively, but if accused and brought before the\njudgment seat, and if then they refused to denounce their faith, they\nwere to be put to death.--(See Note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n15. _Persecution under Marcus Aurelius_. Marcus Aurelius reigned from\n161 to 180 A. D. He was noted as one who sought the greatest good of\nhis people; yet under his government the Christians suffered added\ncruelties. Persecution was most severe in Gaul (now France.) Among\nthose who met the martyr's fate at that time, were Polycarp, bishop of\nSmyrna, and Justin Martyr, known in history as the philosopher. With\nreference to the seeming anomaly that even the best of rulers\npermitted and even prosecuted vigorous opposition to Christian\ndevotees, as exemplified by the acts of this emperor, a modern writer\nhas said: \"It should be noted that the persecution of the Christians\nunder the pagan emperors sprung from political rather than religious\nmotives, and that is why we find the names of the best emperors, as\nwell as those of the worst, in the list of persecutors. It was\nbelieved that the welfare of the state was bound up with the careful\nperformance of the rites of the national worship; and hence, while the\nRoman rulers were usually very tolerant allowing all forms of worship\namong their subjects, still they required that men of every faith\nshould at least recognize the Roman gods, and burn incense before\ntheir statues. This the Christians steadily refused to do. Their\nneglect of the service of the temple, it was believed, angered the\ngods, and endangered the safety of the state, bringing upon it\ndrought, pestilence, and every disaster. This was the main reason of\ntheir persecution by the pagan emperors.\"--(General History by P. V.\nN. Myers, edition of 1889, p. 322.)\n\n16. _Later Persecutions_. With occasional periods of partial\ncessation, the Christian believers continued to suffer at the hands of\nheathen opponents throughout the second and third centuries. A violent\npersecution marked the reign of Severus (193-211 A. D.) in the first\ndecade of the third century; another characterized the reign of\nMaximin (235-238 A. D.) A period of unusual severity in persecution\nand suffering befell the Christians during the short reign of Decius\nknown also as Decius Trajan (219-251 A. D.) The persecution under\nDecius is designated in ecclesiastical history as the seventh\npersecution of the Christian Church. Others followed in rapid\nsuccession. Some of these periods of specific oppression we pass over\nand come to the consideration of the\n\n17. _Diocletian Persecution_, which is spoken of as the tenth, and\nhappily the last. Diocletian reigned from 284 to 305 A. D. At first he\nwas very tolerant toward Christian belief and practice; indeed it is\nof record that his wife and daughter were Christians, though \"in some\nsense, secretly.\" Later, however, he turned against the Church and\nundertook to bring about a total suppression of the Christian\nreligion. To this end he ordered a general destruction of Christian\nbooks, and decreed the penalty of death against all who kept such\nworks in their possession.\n\n18. Fire broke out twice in the royal palace at Nicomedia, and on each\noccasion the incendiary act was charged against the Christians with\nterrible results. Four separate edicts, each surpassing in vehemence\nthe earlier decrees, were issued against the believers; and for a\nperiod of ten years they were the victims of unrestrained rapine,\nspoliation and torture. At the end of the decade of terror the Church\nwas in a scattered and seemingly in a hopeless condition. Sacred\nrecords had been burnt; places of worship had been razed to the\nground; thousands of Christians had been put to death; and every\npossible effort had been made to destroy the Church and abolish\nChristianity from the earth. Descriptions of the horrible extremes to\nwhich brutality was carried are sickening to the soul. A single\nexample must suffice. Eusebius, referring to the persecutions in\nEgypt, says: \"And such too was the severity of the struggle which was\nendured by the Egyptians, who wrestled gloriously for the faith at\nTyre. Thousands, both men, and women and children, despising the\npresent life for the sake of our Savior's doctrine, submitted to death\nin various shapes. Some, after being tortured with scrappings and the\nrack, and the most dreadful scourgings, and other innumerable agonies\nwhich one might shudder to hear, were finally committed to the flames;\nand some plunged and drowned in the sea, others voluntarily offering\ntheir own heads to their executioners, others dying in the midst of\ntheir torments, some wasted away by famine, and others again fixed to\nthe cross. Some, indeed, were executed as malefactors usually were;\nothers, more cruelly, were nailed with the head downwards, and kept\nalive until they were destroyed by starving on the cross\nitself.\"--(Eusebius, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Book 8, ch. 8.)\n\n19. A modern writer, whose tendency ever was to minimize the extent of\nChristian persecution, is Edward Gibbon. His account of the conditions\nprevailing during this period of Diocletian outrage is as follows:\n\"The magistrates were commanded to employ every method of severity\nwhich might reclaim them from their odious superstition, and oblige\nthem to return to the established worship of the gods. This rigorous\norder was extended, by a subsequent edict, to the whole body of\nChristians, who were exposed to a violent and general persecution.\nInstead of those salutary restraints which had required the direct and\nsolemn testimony of an accuser, it became the duty as well as the\ninterest of the imperial officers to discover, to pursue, and to\ntorment the most obnoxious among the faithful. Heavy penalties were\ndenounced against all who should presume to save a proscribed sectary\nfrom the just indignation of the gods and of the emperors.\"--(Gibbon,\n\"Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,\" ch. XVI.)\n\n20. So general was the Diocletian persecution, and so destructive its\neffect, that at its cessation the Christian Church was thought to be\nforever extinct. Monuments were raised to commemorate the emperor's\nzeal as a persecutor, notably two pillars erected in Spain. On one of\nthem is an inscription extolling the mighty Diocletian \"_For having\nextinguished the name of Christians who brought the Republic to\nruin_.\" A second pillar commemorates the reign of Diocletian, and\nhonors the imperator \"_for having everywhere abolished the\nsuperstition of Christ; for having extended the worship of the gods_.\"\nA medal struck in honor of Diocletian bears the inscription \"_The name\nof Christian being extinguished_.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent.\nIV, ch. 1:38.) To the fallacy of these assumptions subsequent events\ntestify.\n\n21. The Diocletian oppression was the last of the great persecutions\nbrought by pagan Rome against Christianity as a whole. A stupendous\nchange, amounting to a revolution, now appears in the affairs of the\nChurch. Constantine, known in history as Constantine the Great, became\nemperor of Rome A. D. 306, and reigned 31 years. Early in his reign he\nespoused the hitherto unpopular cause of the Christians, and took the\nChurch under official protection. A legend gained currency that the\nemperor's conversion was due to a supernatural manifestation, whereby\nhe saw a luminous cross appear in the heavens with the inscription,\n\"By this sign, conquer.\" The genuineness of this alleged manifestation\nis doubtful, and the evidence of history is against it. The incident\nis here mentioned to show the means devised to make Christianity\npopular at the time.\n\n22. It is held by many judicious historians that Constantine's\nso-called conversion was rather a matter of policy than a sincere\nacceptance of the truth of Christianity. The emperor himself remained\na catechumen, that is, an unbaptized believer, until shortly before\nhis death, when he became a member by baptism. But, whatever his\nmotives may have been, he made Christianity the religion of state,\nissuing an official decree to this effect in 313. \"He made the cross\nthe royal standard; and the Roman legions now for the first time\nmarched beneath the emblem of Christianity.\" (Myers.)\n\n23. Immediately following the change there was a great competition for\nchurch preferment. The office of a bishop came to be more highly\nesteemed than the rank of a general. The emperor himself was the real\nhead of the Church. It became unpopular and decidedly disadvantageous\nin a material sense to be known as a non-Christian. Pagan temples were\ntransformed into churches, and heathen idols were demolished. We read\nthat twelve thousand men and a proportionate number of women and\nchildren were baptized into the Church of Rome alone within a single\nyear. Constantine removed the capital of the empire from Rome to\nByzantium, which city he re-named after himself, Constantinople. This,\nthe present capital of Turkey, became headquarters of the state\nChurch.\n\n24. How empty and vain appears the Diocletian boast that Christianity\nwas forever extinguished! Yet how different was the Church under the\npatronage of Constantine from the Church as established by Christ and\nas built up by His apostles! The Church had already become apostate as\njudged by the standard of its original constitution.\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _Cause of Pagan Opposition to Christianity_. \"The whole body of\nChristians unanimously refused to hold any communion with the gods of\nRome, of the empire, and of mankind. It was in vain that the oppressed\nbeliever asserted the inalienable rights of conscience and private\njudgment. Though his situation might excite the pity, his arguments\ncould never reach the understanding, either of the philosophic or of\nthe believing part of the pagan world. To their apprehensions, it was\nno less a matter of surprise that any individuals should entertain\nscruples against complying with the established mode of worship, than\nif they had conceived a sudden abhorrence to the manners, the dress,\nor the language of their native country. The surprise of the pagans\nwas soon succeeded by resentment; and the most pious of men were\nexposed to the unjust but dangerous imputation of impiety. Malice and\nprejudice concurred in representing the Christians as a society of\natheists, who, by the most daring attack on the religious constitution\nof the empire, had merited the severest animadversion of the civil\nmagistrate. They had separated themselves (they gloried in the\nconfession) from every mode of superstition which was received in any\npart of the globe by the various temper of polytheism; but it was not\naltogether so evident what deity or what form of worship they had\nsubstituted to the gods and temples of antiquity. The pure and sublime\nidea which they entertained of the Supreme Being escaped the gross\nconception of the pagan multitude, who were at a loss to discover a\nspiritual and solitary God, that was neither represented under any\ncorporeal figures or visible symbol, nor was adored with the\naccustomed pomp of libations and festivals, of altars and sacrifices.\"\n(Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,\" chap. XVI.)\n\n2. _As to the Number of Persecutions by the Romans_. \"The Romans are\nsaid to have pursued the Christians with the utmost violence in ten\npersecutions, but this number is not verified by the ancient history\nof the church. For if, by these persecutions, such only are meant as\nwere singularly severe and universal throughout the empire, then it is\ncertain that these amount not to the number above mentioned. And, if\nwe take the provincial and less remarkable persecutions into the\naccount, they far exceed it. In the fifth century, certain Christians\n(were) led by some passages of the holy scriptures and by one\nespecially in the Revelations (Rev. 17:14), to imagine that the church\nwas to suffer ten calamities of a most grievous nature. To this\nnotion, therefore, they endeavored, though not all in the same way, to\naccommodate the language of history, even against the testimony of\nthose ancient records, from whence alone history can speak with\nauthority.\" (Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical History,\" Cent. I, Part I; ch.\n5:4.)\n\nSpeaking on the same subject, Gibbon says: \"As often as any occasional\nseverities were exercised in the different parts of the empire, the\nprimitive Christians lamented and perhaps magnified their own\nsufferings; but the celebrated number of ten persecutions has been\ndetermined by the ecclesiastical writers of the fifth century, who\npossessed a more distinct view of the prosperous or adverse fortunes\nof the church from the age of Nero to that of Diocletian. The\ningenious parallels of the ten plagues of Egypt and of the ten horns\nof the Apocalypse first suggested this calculation of their minds; and\nin their application of the faith of prophecy to the truth of history\nthey were careful to select those reigns which were indeed the most\nhostile to the Christian cause.\" (Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the\nRoman Empire,\" ch. XVI.)\n\n3. _Extent of the Neronian Persecution_. \"Learned men are not entirely\nagreed concerning the extent of this persecution under Nero. Some\nconfine it to the city of Rome, while others represent it as having\nraged throughout the whole empire. The latter opinion, which is also\nthe most ancient, is undoubtedly to be preferred; as it is certain\nthat the laws enacted against the Christians were enacted against the\nwhole body, and not against particular churches, and were consequently\nin force in the remotest provinces.\" (Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory,\" Cent. I. Part I, 5:14.)\n\n4. _Correspondence Between Pliny and Trajan_. The inquiry of the\nyounger Pliny, governor of Pontus, addressed to Trajan, emperor of\nRome, and the imperial reply thereto, are of such interest as to be\nworthy of reproduction in full. The version here given is that of\nMilner as appears in his \"History of the Church of Christ,\" edition of\n1810, Cent. II, ch. 1.\n\n\"_Pliny to Trajan, Emperor_:\n\n\"Health.--It is my usual custom, Sir, to refer all things, of which I\nharbor any doubts, to you. For who can better direct my judgment in\nits hesitation, or instruct my understanding in its ignorance? I never\nhad the fortune to be present at any examination of Christians, before\nI came into this province. I am therefore at a loss to determine what\nis the usual object either of inquiry or of punishment, and to what\nlength either of them is to be carried. It has also been with me a\nquestion very problematical,--whether any distinction should be made\nbetween the young and the old, the tender and the robust;--whether any\nroom should be given for repentance, or the guilt of Christianity once\nincurred is not to be expiated by the most unequivocal retraction;--\nwhether the name itself, abstracted from any flagitiousness of\nconduct, or the crimes connected with the name, be the object of\npunishment. In the meantime, this has been my method, with respect to\nthose who were brought before me as Christians. I asked them whether\nthey were Christians: if they pleaded guilty, I interrogated then\ntwice afresh with a menace of capital punishment. In case of obstinate\nperseverance I ordered them to be executed. For of this I had no\ndoubt, whatever was the nature of their religion, that a sudden and\nobstinate inflexibility called for the vengeance of the magistrate.\nSome were infected with the same madness, whom, on account of their\nprivilege of citizenship, I reserved to be sent to Rome, to be\nreferred to your tribunal. In the course of this business,\ninformations pouring in, as is usual when they are encouraged, more\ncases occurred. An anonymous libel was exhibited, with a catalogue of\nnames of persons, who yet declared that they were not Christians then,\nnor ever had been; and they repeated after me an invocation of the\ngods and of your image, which, for this purpose, I had ordered to be\nbrought with the images of the deities. They performed sacred rites\nwith wine and frankincense, and execrated Christ,--none of which\nthings I am told a real Christian can ever be compelled to do. On this\naccount I dismissed them. Others named by an informer, first affirmed,\nand then denied the charge of Christianity; declaring that they had\nbeen Christians, but had ceased to be so some three years ago, others\neven longer, some even twenty years ago. All of them worshiped your\nimage, and the statues of the gods, and also execrated Christ. And\nthis was the account which they gave of the nature of the religion\nthey had once professed, whether it deserves the name of crime or\nerror,--namely--that they were accustomed on a stated day to meet\nbefore daylight, and to repeat among themselves a hymn to Christ as to\na god, and to bind themselves by an oath, with an obligation of not\ncommitting any wickedness;--but on the contrary, of abstaining from\nthefts, robberies, and adulteries;--also of not violating their\npromise or denying a pledge;--after which it was their custom to\nseparate, and to meet again at a promiscuous harmless meal, from which\nlast practice they however desisted, after the publication of my\nedict, in which, agreeably to your order, I forbade any societies of\nthat sort. On which account I judged it the more necessary to inquire,\nby torture, from two females, who were said to be deaconesses, what is\nthe real truth. But nothing could I collect except a depraved and\nexcessive superstition. Deferring, therefore, any further\ninvestigation, I determined to consult you. For the number of culprits\nis so great as to call for serious consultation. Many persons are\ninformed against of every age and of both sexes; and more still will\nbe in the same situation. The contagion of the superstition hath\nspread not only through cities, but even villages and the country. Not\nthat I think it impossible to check and correct it. The success of my\nendeavors hitherto forbids such desponding thoughts; for the temples,\nalmost once desolate, begin to be frequented, and the sacred\nsolemnities, which had long been intermitted, are now attended afresh;\nand the sacrificial victims are now sold everywhere, which once could\nscarcely find a purchaser. Whence I conclude that many might be\nreclaimed were the hope of impunity, on repentance, absolutely\nconfirmed.\"\n\nThe emperor's reply follows:\n\n\"_Trajan to Pliny_:\n\n\"You have done perfectly right, my dear Pliny, in the inquiry which\nyou have made concerning Christians. For truly no one general rule can\nbe laid down, which will apply itself to all cases. These people must\nnot be sought after. If they are brought before you and convicted, let\nthem be capitally punished, yet with this restriction, that if any one\nrenounce Christianity, and evidence his sincerity by supplicating our\ngods, however suspected he may be for the past, he shall obtain pardon\nfor the future, on his repentance. But anonymous libels in no case\nought to be attended to; for the precedent would be of the worst sort,\nand perfectly incongruous to the maxims of my government.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n**Causes of the Apostasy.--Internal Causes**.\n\n\n1. The cruel persecution to which the adherents of Christianity and\nthe Church as an organized body were subjected during the first three\ncenturies of our era have been treated as external causes,\ncontributing at least indirectly to the general apostasy. Details of\nJudaistic and heathen opposition have been given with sufficient\nfulness to show that the unpopular Church had a troubled existence,\nand that such of its members as remained faithful to the tenets and\nprinciples of the gospel were martyrs in spirit if not in fact.\n\n2. As would naturally be expected, the immediate effect of persistent\npersecution on those who professed a belief in the divinity of the\nLord Jesus was diverse and varied; indeed it ranged from unrestrained\nenthusiasm expressed in frenzied clamoring for martyrdom, to ready and\nabject apostasy with ostentatious display of devotion in idolatrous\nservice.\n\n3. Many of the Christian devotees developed a zeal amounting to mania,\nand, disregarding all prudence and discretion, gloried in the prospect\nof winning the martyr's crown. Some who had been left unassailed felt\nthemselves aggrieved, and became their own accusers; while others\nopenly committed acts of aggression with intent to bring resentment\nupon themselves.--(See Note 1, end of chapter.) These extravagances\nwere doubtless encouraged by the excessive veneration accorded the\nmemories and the bodily remains of those who had fallen as victims in\nthe cause. The reverential respect so rendered developed later into\nthe impious practice of martyr worship.\n\n4. Commenting on the imprudent enthusiasm of the early Christians,\nGibbon says: \"The Christians sometimes supplied by their voluntary\ndeclaration the want of an accuser, rudely disturbed the public\nservice of paganism, and, rushing in crowds round the tribunal of the\nmagistrates, called upon them to pronounce and to inflict the sentence\nof the law. The behavior of the Christians was too remarkable to\nescape the notice of the ancient philosophers; but they seem to have\nreceived it with much less admiration than astonishment. Incapable of\nconceiving the motives which sometimes transported the fortitude of\nbelievers beyond the bounds of prudence and reason, they treated such\nan eagerness to die as the strange result of obstinate despair, of\nstupid insensibility or of superstitious frenzy.\"--(Gibbon, \"Decline\nand Fall of the Roman Empire,\" ch. XVI.)\n\n5. But there is another side to the picture. While imprudent zealots\ninvited dangers from which they might have remained exempt, others,\naffrighted at the possibility of being included among the victims,\nvoluntarily deserted the Church and returned to heathen allegiances.\nMilner, speaking of conditions existing in the third century, and\nincorporating the words of Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, who lived at\nthe time of the incident described, says: \"Vast numbers lapsed into\nidolatry immediately. Even before men were accused as Christians, many\nran to the forum and sacrificed to the gods as they were ordered; and\nthe crowds of apostates were so great, that the magistrates wished to\ndelay numbers of them till the next day, but they were importuned by\nthe wretched suppliants to be allowed to prove themselves heathens\nthat very night.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent. III, ch. 8.)\n\n6. In connection with this individual apostasy of Church members under\nthe pressure of persecution, there arose among the provincial\ngovernors a practice of selling certificates or \"libels\" as these\ndocuments were called, which \"attested that the persons therein\nmentioned had complied with the laws and sacrificed to the Roman\ndeities. By producing these false declarations, the opulent and timid\nChristians were enabled to silence the malice of an informer, and to\nreconcile, in some measure, their safety with their religion.\"--\n(Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,\" ch. XVI.) A\nmodification of this practice of quasi-apostasy consisted in procuring\ntestimonials from persons of standing certifying that the holders had\nabjured the gospel; these documents were presented to the heathen\nmagistrates, and they, on receipt of a specified fee, granted\nexemption from the requirement of sacrificing to the pagan gods.--(See\nMilner, \"Church History,\" Cent. III, ch. 9.) As a result of these\npractices, whereby under favorable circumstances the wealthy could\npurchase immunity from persecution, and at the same time maintain a\nsemblance of standing in the Church, much dissension arose, the\nquestion being as to whether those who had thus shown their weakness\ncould ever be received again into communion with the Church.\n\n7. Persecution at most was but an indirect cause of the decline of\nChristianity and the perversion of the saving principles of the gospel\nof Christ. The greater and more immediate dangers threatening the\nChurch must be sought within the body itself. Indeed, the pressure of\nopposition from without served to restrain the bubbling springs of\ninternal dissension, and actually delayed the more destructive\neruptions of schism and heresy.--(See Note 2, end of chapter.) A\ngeneral review of the history of the Church down to the end of the\nthird century shows that the periods of comparative peace were periods\nof weakness and decline in spiritual earnestness, and that with the\nreturn of persecution came an awakening and a renewal in Christian\ndevotion. Devout leaders of the people were not backward in declaring\nthat each recurring period of persecution was a time of natural and\nnecessary chastisement for the sin and corruption that had gained\nheadway within the Church.--(See Note 3, end of chapter.)\n\n8. As to the condition of the Church in the middle of the third\ncentury, Cyprian, the bishop of Carthage, thus speaks: \"If the cause\nof our miseries be investigated, the cure of the wound may be found.\nThe Lord would have his family to be tried. And because long peace had\ncorrupted the discipline divinely revealed to us, the heavenly\nchastisement hath raised up our faith, which had lain almost dormant:\nand when, by our sins, we have deserved to suffer still more, the\nmerciful Lord so moderated all things, that the whole scene rather\ndeserves the name of a trial than a persecution. Each had been bent on\nimproving his patrimony; and had forgotten what believers had done\nunder the apostles, and what they ought always to do:--they were\nbrooding over the arts of amassing wealth:--the pastors and the\ndeacons each forgot their duty: Works of mercy were neglected, and\ndiscipline was at the lowest ebb.--Luxury and effeminacy prevailed:\nMeretricious arts in dress were cultivated: Frauds and deceit were\npracticed among brethren.--Christians could unite themselves in\nmatrimony with unbelievers; could swear not only without reverence,\nbut even without veracity. With haughty asperity they despised their\necclesiastical superiors: They railed against one another with\noutrageous acrimony, and conducted quarrels with determined\nmalice:--Even many bishops, who ought to be guides and patterns to the\nrest, neglecting the peculiar duties of their stations, gave\nthemselves up to secular pursuits:--They deserted their places of\nresidence and their flocks: They traveled through distant provinces in\nquest of pleasure and gain; gave no assistance to the needy brethren;\nbut were insatiable in their thirst of money:--They possessed estates\nby fraud and multiplied usury. What have we not deserved to suffer for\nsuch conduct? Even the divine word hath foretold us what we might\nexpect.--'If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my\njudgments, I will visit their offenses with the rod, and their sin\nwith scourges.' These things had been denounced and foretold, but in\nvain. Our sins had brought our affairs to that pass, that because we\nhad despised the Lord's directions, we were obliged to undergo a\ncorrection of our multiplied evils and a trial of our faith by severe\nremedies.\"--(As quoted by Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent. III, ch. 8.)\n\n9. Milner, who quotes approvingly the severe arraignment of the Church\nin the third century as given above, cannot be charged with bias\nagainst Christian institutions, inasmuch as his declared purpose in\npresenting to the world an additional \"History of the Church of\nChrist\" was to give due attention to certain phases of the subject\nslighted or neglected by earlier authors, and notably to emphasize the\npiety, not the wickedness, of the professed followers of Christ. This\nauthor, avowedly friendly to the Church and her votaries, admits the\ngrowing depravity of the Christian sects, and declares that toward the\nend of the third century the effect of the Pentecostal outpouring of\nthe Holy Spirit had become exhausted, and that there remained little\nproof of any close relationship between Christ and the Church.\n\n10. Note his summary of conditions: \"The era of its actual declension\nmust be dated in the pacific part of Diocletian's reign. During this\nwhole century the work of God, in purity and power, had been tending\nto decay. The connection with philosophers was one of the principal\ncauses. Outward peace and secular advantages completed the corruption.\nEcclesiastical discipline, which had been too strict, was now relaxed\nexceedingly; bishops and people were in a state of malice. Endless\nquarrels were fomented among contending parties, and ambition and\ncovetousness had in general gained the ascendency in the Christian\nChurch. * * * The faith of Christ itself appeared now an ordinary\nbusiness; and here _terminated_, or nearly so, as far as appears, the\nfirst great effusion of the Spirit of God, which began at the day of\nPentecost. Human depravity effected throughout a general decay of\ngodliness; and one generation of men elapsed with very slender proofs\nof the spiritual presence of Christ with His Church.\"--(Milner,\n\"Church History,\" Cent. III, ch. 17.)\n\n11. If further evidence be wanted as to the fires of disaffection\nsmoldering within the Church, and so easily fanned into destructive\nflame, let the testimony of Eusebius be considered with respect to\nconditions characterizing the second half of the third century. And,\nin weighing his words, let it be remembered that he had expressly\nrecorded his purpose of writing in defense of the Church, and in\nsupport of her institutions. He bewails the tranquillity preceding the\nDiocletian outbreak, because of its injurious effect upon both\nofficers and members of the Church. These are his words: \"But when by\nexcessive liberty we have sunk into indolence and sloth, one envying\nand reviling another in different ways, and we were almost, as it\nwere, on the point of taking up arms against each other, and were\nassailing each other with words, as with darts and spears, prelates\ninveighing against prelates, and people rising up against people, and\nhypocrisy and dissimulation had arisen to the greater heights of\nmalignity, then the divine judgment, which usually proceeds with a\nlenient hand, whilst the multitudes were yet crowding into the Church,\nwith gentle and mild visitations began to afflict its episcopacy; the\npersecution having begun with those brethren that were in the army. *\n* * But some that appeared to be our pastors, deserting the law of\npiety, were inflamed against each other with mutual strifes,\naccumulating quarrels and threats, rivalry, hostility, and hatred to\neach other, only anxious to assert the government as a kind of\nsovereignty for themselves.\"--(Eusebius, \"Ecclesiastical History,\"\nBook VIII, ch. 1. See note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n12. As further illustrative of the decline of the Christian spirit\ntoward the end of the third century, Milner quotes the following\nobservation of Eusebius, an eye-witness of the conditions described:\n\"The heavy hand of God's judgment began softly, by little and little,\nto visit us after His wonted manner; * * * but we were not at all\nmoved with His hand, nor took any pains to return to God. We heaped\nsin upon sin, judging like careless Epicureans, that God cared not for\nour sins, nor would ever visit us on account of them. And our\npretended shepherds, laying aside the rule of godliness, practiced\namong themselves contention and division.\" He adds that the \"dreadful\npersecution of Diocletian was then inflicted on the Church as a just\npunishment, and as the most proper chastisement for their\niniquities.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent. III, ch. 17.)\n\n13. It will be remembered that the great change whereby the Church was\nraised to a place of honor in the state, occurred in the early part of\nthe fourth century. It is a popular error to assume that the decay of\nthe Church as a spiritual institution dates from that time. The\npicture of the Church declining as to spiritual power in exact\nproportion to her increase of temporal influence and wealth has\nappealed to rhetoricians and writers of sensational literature; but\nsuch a picture does not present the truth. The Church was saturated\nwith the spirit of apostasy long before Constantine took it under his\npowerful protection by according it official standing in the state.\nIn support of this statement, I quote again from Milner, the avowed\nfriend of the Church: \"I know it is common for authors to represent\nthe great declension of Christianity to have taken place only after\nits external establishment under Constantine. But the evidence of\nhistory has compelled me to dissent from this view of things. In fact,\nwe have seen that for a whole generation previous to the [Diocletian]\npersecution, few marks of superior piety appeared. Scarce a luminary\nof godliness existed; and it is not common in any age for a great work\nof the Spirit of God to be exhibited but under the conduct of some\nremarkable saints, pastors, and reformers. This whole period as well\nas the whole scene of the persecution is very barren in such\ncharacters. * * * Moral and philosophical and monastical instructions\nwill not effect for men what is to be expected from evangelical\ndoctrine. And if the faith of Christ was so much declined (and its\ndecayed state ought to be dated from about the year 270), we need not\nwonder that such scenes as Eusebius hints at without any\ncircumstantial details, took place in the Christian world. * * * He\nspeaks also of the ambitious spirit of many, in aspiring to the\noffices of the Church, the ill judged and unlawful ordinations, the\nquarrels among confessors themselves, and the contentions excited by\nyoung demagogues in the very relics of the persecuted Church, and the\nmultiplied evils which their vices excited among Christians. How sadly\nmust the Christian world have declined which could thus conduct itself\nunder the very rod of divine vengeance? Yet let not the infidel or the\nprofane world triumph. _It was not Christianity, but the departure\nfrom it_, which brought on these evils.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\"\nCent. IV, ch. 1. The italics are introduced by the present writer.\nSee also Note 5, end of chapter.)\n\n14. The foregoing embodies but a few of the many evidences that could\nbe cited in demonstration of the fact that during the period\nimmediately following the apostolic ministry--the period covered by\nthe persecutions of the Christians by the heathen nations,--the Church\nwas undergoing internal deterioration, and was in a state of\nincreasing perversion. Among the more detailed or specific causes of\nthis ever widening departure from the spirit of the gospel of Christ,\nthis rapidly growing apostasy, the following may be considered as\nimportant examples:\n\n(1). The corrupting of the simple principles of the gospel by the\nadmixture of the so-called philosophic systems of the times.\n\n(2). Unauthorized additions to the ceremonies of the Church, and the\nintroduction of vital changes in essential ordinances.\n\n(3). Unauthorized changes in Church organization and government.\n\n15. We shall consider in due order each of the three causes here\nenumerated. It may appear that the conditions set forth in these\nspecifications are more properly to be regarded as effects or results,\nthan as causes, incident to the general apostasy,--that they are in\nthe nature of evidences or proofs of a departure from the original\nconstitution of the Church, rather than specific causes by which the\nfact of apostasy is to be explained or accounted for. Cause and\neffect, however, are sometimes very intimately associated, and\nresulting conditions may furnish the best demonstration of causes in\noperation. Each of the conditions given above as a specific cause of\nthe progressive apostasy was, at its inception, an evidence of\nexisting unsoundness, and an active cause of the graver results that\nfollowed. Each succeeding manifestation of the spirit of apostasy was\nat once the result of earlier disaffection, and the cause of later and\nmore pronounced developments.\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _Inordinate Zeal Manifested by Some of the Early Christians_: \"The\nsober discretion of the present age will more readily censure than\nadmire, but can more easily admire than imitate, the fervor of the\nfirst Christians; who, according to the lively expression of Sulpicius\nSeverus, desired martyrdom with more eagerness than his own\ncontemporaries solicited a bishopric. The epistles which Ignatius\ncomposed as he was carried in chains through the cities of Asia,\nbreathe sentiments the most repugnant to the ordinary feelings of\nhuman nature. He earnestly beseeches the Romans that when he should be\nexposed in the amphitheatre, they would not by their kind but\nunreasonable intercession, deprive him of the crown of glory, and he\ndeclares his resolution to provoke and irritate the wild beasts which\nmight be employed as the instruments of his death. Some stories are\nrelated of the courage of martyrs who actually performed what Ignatius\nhad intended: who exasperated the fury of the lions, pressed the\nexecutioner to hasten his office, cheerfully leaped into the fires\nwhich were kindled to consume them, and discovered a sensation of joy\nand pleasure in the midst of the most exquisite torture.\"--(Gibbon,\n\"Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,\" ch. XVI.)\n\n2. _Internal Dissensions During Time of Peace_. As stated in the text,\nthe early part of Diocletian's reign--the period immediately preceding\nthe outburst of the last great persecution to which the Christians\nwere subjected--was a time of comparative freedom from opposition, and\nthis period was characterized by internal disturbances and dissensions\nwithin the Church. Illustrative of the tolerance shown by the emperor\nbefore he became hostile to the Church, and the accompanying decline\nof spiritual earnestness among the Christians themselves, Gibbon says:\n\"Diocletian and his colleagues frequently conferred the most important\noffices on those persons who avowed their abhorrence of the worship of\nthe gods, but who had displayed abilities proper for the service of\nthe state. The bishops held an honorable rank in the respective\nprovinces, and were treated with distinction and respect, not only by\nthe people, but by the magistrates themselves. Almost in every city\nthe ancient churches were found insufficient to contain the increasing\nmultitudes of proselytes; and in their place more stately and\ncapacious edifices were erected for the public worship of the\nfaithful. The corruption of manners and principles so forcibly\nlamented by Eusebius, may be considered not only as a consequence, but\nas a proof, of the liberty which the Christians enjoyed and abused\nunder the reign of Diocletian. Prosperity had relaxed the nerves of\ndiscipline. Fraud, envy, and malice prevailed in every congregation.\nThe presbyters aspired to the episcopal office, which every day became\nan object more worthy of their ambition. The bishops who contended\nwith each other for ecclesiastical preeminence, appeared by their\nconduct to claim a secular and tyrannical power in the church; and the\nlively faith which still distinguished the Christians from the\nGentiles, was shown much less in their lives than in their\ncontroversial writings.\"--(Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the Roman\nEmpire,\" ch. XVI.)\n\n3. _The Effect of Peace on the Early Church_. \"Disastrous as the\npersecutions of the early Christian centuries were, still more\nmischievous to the Church were those periods of tranquillity which\nintervened between the outbursts of rage which prompted them. Peace\nmay have her victories no less renowned than those of war; and so,\ntoo, she has her calamities, and they are not less destructive than\nthose of war. War may destroy nations, but ease and luxury mankind\ncorrupt--the body and the mind. Especially is peace dangerous to the\nchurch. Prosperity relaxes the reins of discipline; people feel less\nand less the need of a sustaining providence; but in adversity the\nspirit of man feels after God, and he is correspondingly more devoted\nto the service of religion. We shall find the early Christians no\nexception to the operation of this influence of repose. Whenever it\nwas accorded them, either through the mercy or the indifference of the\nemperors, internal dissensions, the intrigues of aspiring prelates,\nand the rise of heresies, characterized those periods.\"--(B. H.\nRoberts, \"A New Witness for God,\" p. 70.)\n\n4. _Schisms and Heresies in the Early Church_. Eusebius, whose\nwritings date from the early part of the fourth century, cites the\nwritings of Hegesippus, who lived in the first quarter of the second\ncentury, as follows: \"The same author [Hegesippus] also treats of the\nbeginning of the heresies that arose about this time, in the following\nwords: 'But after James the Just had suffered martyrdom, as our Lord\nhad for the same reason, Simeon, the son of Cleophas, our Lord's\nuncle, was appointed the second bishop [of Jerusalem] whom all\nproposed as the cousin of our Lord. Hence they called the Church as\nyet a virgin, for it was not yet corrupted by vain discourses.\nThebuthis made a beginning, secretly to corrupt it on account of his\nnot being made bishop. He was one of those seven sects among the\nJewish people. Of these also was Simeon, whence sprang the sect of\nSimonians; also Cleobius, from whence came the Cleobians; also\nDositheus, the founder of the Dositheans. From these also sprung the\nGortheonians from Gortheoeus; and also Masbotheans from Masbothoeus.\nHence also the Meandrians, the Marcionists, and Carpocratians and\nValentinians, and Basilidians, and the Saturnillians, every one\nintroducing his own peculiar opinions, one differing from the other.\nFrom these sprung the false Christs and the false prophets and false\napostles, who divided the unity of the Church by the introduction of\ncorrupt doctrines against God and against His Christ.\"--(Eusebius,\n\"Ecclesiastical History,\" Book IV, ch. 22.)\n\n5. _Early Decline of the Church_: Milner, summing up the conditions\nattending the Church at the end of the second century, says: \"And here\nwe close the view of the second century, which, for the most part\nexhibited proofs of divine grace, as strong, or nearly so, as the\nfirst. We have seen the same unshaken and simple faith of Jesus, the\nsame love of God and of the brethren; and--that in which they\nsingularly excelled modern Christians--the same heavenly spirit and\nvictory over the world. But a dark shade is enveloping these divine\nglories. The Spirit of God is grieved already by the ambitious\nintrusions of self-righteous, argumentative refinements, and Pharisaic\npride; and though it be more common to represent the most sensible\ndecay of godliness as commencing a century later, to me it seems\nalready begun.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent. II, ch. 9.)\n\nMosheim, writing of conditions attending the closing years of the\nthird century, says: \"The ancient method of ecclesiastical government\nseemed in general still to subsist, while, at the same time, by\nimperceptible steps, it varied from the primitive rule and degenerated\ntoward the form of a religious monarchy. * * * This change in the form\nof ecclesiastical government was soon followed by a train of vices,\nwhich dishonored the character and authority of those to whom the\nadministration of the Church was committed. For, though several yet\ncontinued to exhibit to the world illustrative examples of primitive\npiety and Christian virtue, yet many were sunk in luxury and\nvoluptuousness, puffed up with vanity, arrogance and ambition,\npossessed with a spirit of contention and discord, and addicted to\nmany other vices that cast an undeserved reproach upon the holy\nreligion of which they were the unworthy professors and ministers.\nThis is testified in such an ample manner by the repeated complaints\nof many of the most respectable writers of this age, that truth will\nnot permit us to spread the veil, which we should otherwise be\ndesirous to cast over such enormities among an order so sacred. The\nbishops assumed in many places a princely authority, particularly\nthose who had the greatest number of churches under their inspection,\nand who presided over the most opulent assemblies. They appropriated\nto their evangelical function the splendid ensigns of temporal\nmajesty. A throne, surrounded with ministers, exalted above his equals\nthe servant of the meek and humble Jesus; and sumptuous garments\ndazzled the eyes and the minds of the multitude into an ignorant\nveneration of their arrogated authority. The example of the bishops\nwas ambitiously imitated by the presbyters, who, neglecting the sacred\nduties of their station, abandoned themselves to the indolence and\ndelicacy of an effeminate and luxurious life. The deacons, beholding\nthe presbyters deserting thus their functions, boldly usurped their\nrights and privileges, and the effects of a corrupt ambition were\nspread through every rank of the order sacred.\"--(Mosheim,\n\"Ecclesiastical History,\" Cent. III, Part II, ch. 2:3, 4.)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n**Internal Causes.--Continued**.\n\n\n1. First among the specific causes of disturbance operating within the\nChurch, and contributing to its apostasy, we have named: \"_The\ncorrupting of the simple principles of the gospel by the admixture of\nthe so-called philosophic systems of the times_.\"\n\n2. The attempted grafting of foreign doctrines on the true vine of the\ngospel of Christ was characteristic of the early years of the\napostolic period. We read of the sorcerer Simon, who professed belief\nand entered the Church by baptism, but who was so devoid of the true\nspirit of the gospel that he sought to purchase by money the authority\nand power of the priesthood.--(See Acts 8:9, 13, 18-24.) This man,\nthough rebuked by Peter, and apparently penitent, continued to trouble\nthe Church, by inculcating heresies and winning disciples within the\nfold. His followers were distinguished as a sect or cult down to the\nfourth century; and, writing at that time, Eusebius says of them:\n\"These, after the manner of their founder, insinuating themselves into\nthe Church, like a pestilential and leprous disease, infected those\nwith the greatest corruption, into whom they were able to infuse their\nsecret, irremediable, and destructive poison.\"--(Eusebius,\n\"Ecclesiastical History,\" Book II, ch. 1.) This Simon, known in\nhistory as Simon Magus, is referred to by early Christian writers, as\nthe founder of heresy, owing to his persistent attempts to combine\nChristianity with Gnosticism. It is with reference to his proposition\nto purchase spiritual authority that all traffic in spiritual offices\nhas come to be known as simony.\n\n3. Through the mouth of the Revelator, the Lord reproved certain of\nthe churches for their adoption or toleration of doctrines and\npractices alien to the gospel. Notably is this the case with respect\nto the Nicolaitanes, and the followers of the doctrines of\nBalaam.--(See Rev. 2:15; compare verse 6; see also verse 20. See Note\n1, end of chapter.)\n\n4. The perversion of true theology thus developed within the Church is\ntraceable to the introduction of both Judaistic and pagan\nfallacies.--(See Note 2, end of chapter.) Indeed, at the opening of\nthe Christian era and for centuries thereafter, Judaism was more or\nless intimately mixed with pagan philosophy, and contaminated with\nheathen ceremonies. There were numerous sects and parties, cults and\nschools, each advocating rival theories as to the constitution of the\nsoul, the essence of sin, the nature of Deity, and a multitude of\nother mysteries. The Christians were soon embroiled in endless\ncontroversies among themselves.\n\n5. Judaistic converts to Christianity sought to modify and adapt the\ntenets of the new faith so as to harmonize them with their inherited\nlove of Judaism, and the result was destructive to both. Our Lord had\nindicated the futility of any such attempts to combine new principle\nwith old systems, or to patch up the prejudices of the past with\nfragments of new doctrine. \"No man,\" said He, \"putteth a piece of new\ncloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up\ntaketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse. Neither do men\nput new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine\nrunneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new\nbottles, and both are preserved.\"--(Matt. 9:16, 17.) The gospel came\nas a new revelation, marking the fulfilment of the law, it was no mere\naddendum, nor was it a simple reenactment of past requirements; it\nembodied a new and an everlasting covenant. Attempts to patch the\nJudaistic robe with the new fabric of the gospel could result in\nnothing more sightly than a hideous rent. The new wine of the covenant\ncould not be bottled in the time-eaten leathern containers of Mosaic\nlibations. Judaism was belittled and Christianity perverted by the\nincongruous association.\n\n6. Among the early and most pernicious adulterations of Christian\ndoctrine is the introduction of the teachings of the Gnostics. These\nself-styled philosophers put forth the boastful claim that they were\nable to lead the human mind to a full comprehension of the Supreme\nBeing, and a knowledge of the true relationship between Deity and\nmortals. They said in effect that a certain being had existed from all\neternity, manifested as a radiant light diffused throughout space, and\nthis they called the _Pleroma_. \"The eternal nature, infinitely\nperfect and infinitely happy, having dwelt from everlasting in a\nprofound solitude, and in a blessed tranquillity produced at length\nfrom itself, two minds of a different sex, which resembled their\nsupreme parent in the most perfect manner. From the prolific union of\nthese two beings, others arose, which were also followed by succeeding\ngenerations; so that in process of time a celestial family was formed\nin the Pleroma. This divine progeny, immutable in its nature, and\nabove the power of mortality, was called, by the philosophers,\n_Aeon_--a term which signifies, in the Greek language, an eternal\nnature. How many in number these Aeons were was a point much\ncontroverted among the oriental sages.\"--(Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory,\" Cent. I, Part II, 1:7.)\n\n7. Then one of the Aeons, distinctively called the Demiurge, created\nthis world, and arrogantly asserted dominion over the same, denying\nabsolutely the authority of the supreme parent. The Gnostic doctrine\ndeclares man to be a union of the body, which, being the creation of\nthe Demiurge, is essentially evil, and a spirit, which, being derived\nfrom Deity, is characteristically good. The spirits thus imprisoned in\nevil bodies will be finally liberated, and then the power of the\nDemiurge will cease, and the earth will be dissolved into nothingness.\n\n8. Our justification for introducing here this partial summary of\nGnosticism is the fact that early efforts were made to accommodate the\ntenets of this system to the demands of Christianity; and that Christ\nand the Holy Ghost were declared to belong to the family of Aeons\nprovided for in this scheme. This led to the extravagant absurdity of\ndenying that Jesus had a body even while He lived as a man; and that\nHis appearance as a corporeal being was a deception of the senses\nwrought by His supernatural power.--(See Note 3, end of chapter.)\n\n9. That the doctrines of the Gnostics were unsatisfying even to those\nwho professed to believe therein is evident from the many cults and\nparties that came into existence as subdivisions of the main sect; and\nit is interesting to note that in modern times certain free-thinkers\nhave prided themselves in assuming a title expressing the full\nantithesis of the name Gnostics, viz. Agnostics.\n\n10. The practical effect of the principles of Gnosticism in the lives\nof its adherents is strangely diverse. One division of the sect\nfollowed a life of austerity, embracing rigorous self-denial, and\nbodily torture, in the vain belief that the malignant body could thus\nbe subdued, while the spirit would be given added power and increased\nfreedom. Another cult sought to minimize the fundamental difference\nbetween right and wrong, by denying the element of morality in human\nlife; and these abandoned themselves to the impulses of the passions\nand the frailties of the bodily nature without restraint, on the\nassumption that there was no such relation between body and soul as\nwould cause injury to the latter through bodily indulgences and\nexcesses.\n\n11. Another sect or school whose doctrines were in a measure\namalgamated with those of Christianity was that of the New Platonics.\nThe ancient sects of Platonists or Platonics were allied in some\npoints of doctrine with the Epicureans, and were rivals if not\nopponents of the Stoics. The early Platonics held that unorganized\nmatter has existed from all eternity, and that its organizer, God, is\nsimilarly eternal. As God is eternal, so also His will or intelligence\nis without beginning, and this eternal intelligence existing as the\nwill or intent of Deity, was called the _Logos_. Such precepts had\nbeen taught long before the Christian era, and the philosophy\nprofessed by some of the contending sects among the Jews in the time\nof Christ had been influenced thereby.\n\n12. As the principles of Christianity became generally known, certain\nleaders in the sect of Platonics found in the new doctrine much to\nstudy and admire. By this time, however, Platonism itself had\nundergone much change, and the more liberal adherents had formed a new\norganization and distinguished themselves by the appellation New\nPlatonics. These professed to find in Jesus Christ the incarnation of\nthe Logos, and accepted with avidity the declaration of St. John: \"In\nthe beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word\nwas God. * * * And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among\nus.\"--(John 1:1, 14.) According to the Eclectic or New Platonic\nphilosophy, the \"Word\" referred to by St. John was the \"Logos\"\ndescribed by Plato.\n\n13. The Platonic conception of the Godhead as consisting of the Deity\nand the Logos, was enlarged in accordance with Christian tenets to\nembrace three members, the Holy Ghost being the third. Thence arose\nbitter and lasting dissension as to the relative powers of each member\nof the Trinity, particularly the position and authority of the Logos\nor Son. The many disputes incident to the admixture of Platonic theory\nwith Christian doctrine continued through the centuries, and in a\nsense may be said to trouble the minds of men even in this modern age.\n\n14. It is wholly beyond our purpose to classify or describe the hybrid\noffspring resulting from the unnatural union of pagan philosophy and\nChristian truth; nor shall we attempt to follow in detail the\ndissensions and quarrels on theological points and questions of\ndoctrine. Our purpose is achieved when by statement of fact and\ncitation of authority, the reality of the apostasy is established. We\nshall consider therefore only the most important of the dissensions by\nwhich the Church was troubled.--(See Note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n15. About the middle of the third century, Sibellius, a presbyter or\nbishop of the church in Africa, strongly advocated the doctrine of\n\"trinity in unity\" as characterizing the Godhead. He claimed that the\ndivine nature of Christ was no distinct nor personal attribute of the\nman Jesus, but merely a portion of the divine energy, an emanation\nfrom the Father, with which the Son was temporarily endowed; and that\nin like manner the Holy Ghost was a part of the divine Father. These\nviews were as vigorously opposed by some as defended by others, and\nthe disagreement was rife when Constantine so suddenly changed the\nstatus of the Church, and brought to its support the power of the\nstate. Early in the fourth century the dispute assumed a threatening\naspect in a bitter contention between Alexander, bishop of Alexandria,\nand Arius, one of the subordinate officers of the same church.\nAlexander proclaimed that the Son was in all respects the equal of the\nFather, and also of the same substance or essence. Arius insisted that\nthe Son had been created by the Father, and therefore could not be\nco-eternal with His divine Parent; that the Son was the agent through\nwhom the will of the Father was executed, and that for this reason\nalso the Son was inferior to the Father both in nature and dignity. In\nlike manner the Holy Ghost was inferior to the other members of the\nGodhead.\n\n16. Arianism, as the doctrine came to be known, was preached with\nvigor and denounced with energy; and the dissension thus occasioned\nthreatened to rend the Church to its foundation. At last the emperor,\nConstantine, was forced to intervene in an effort to establish peace\namong his contending churchmen. He summoned a council of church\ndignitaries which assembled in the year 325, and which is known from\nits place of session as the Council of Nice. This council condemned\nthe doctrine of Arius, and pronounced sentence of banishment against\nits author. What was declared to be the orthodox doctrine of the\nuniversal or Catholic church respecting the Godhead was promulgated as\nfollows:\n\n17. \"We believe in one God, the Father, Almighty, the maker of all\nthings visible and invisible; and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son\nof God, begotten of the Father, only begotten, (that is) of the\nsubstance of the Father; God of God, Light of Light; Very God of Very\nGod; begotten not made; of the same substance with the Father, by whom\nall things were made, that are in heaven and that are in earth: who\nfor us men, and for our salvation, descended and was incarnate, and\nbecame man; suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into the\nheavens and will come to judge the living and the dead; and in the\nHoly Spirit. But those who say there was a time when he [the Son] was\nnot, and that he was not before he was begotten, and that he was made\nout of nothing, or affirm that he is of any other substance or\nessence, or that the Son of God was created, and mutable, or\nchangeable, the Catholic Church doth pronounce accursed.\"\n\n18. This is the generally accepted version of the Nicene Creed as\noriginally promulgated. In form it was somewhat modified, though left\npractically unchanged as to essentials, by the council held at\nConstantinople half a century later. What is regarded as a restatement\nof the Nicene Creed has been attributed to Athanasius, one of the\nchief opponents of Arianism, though his right to be considered the\nauthor is questioned by many and emphatically denied by some\nauthorities on ecclesiastical history. Nevertheless, the statement\nreferred to has found a place in literature as the \"Creed of\nAthanasius,\" and whether rightly or wrongly named it persists as a\ndeclaration of belief professed by some Christian sects today. It has\na present place in the prescribed ritual of the Church of England. The\n\"Creed of Athanasius\" reads as follows:\n\n19. \"We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither\nconfounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one\nperson of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy\nGhost. But the Godhead of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is all one:\nthe glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such\nis the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son\nuncreate and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the\nSon incomprehensible and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father\neternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet there are\nnot three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three\nincomprehensibles, nor three uncreated; but one uncreated, and one\nincomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son\nAlmighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty; and yet there are not three\nAlmighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God,\nand the Holy Ghost is God, and yet they are not three Gods but one\nGod.\"\n\n20. The Council of Nice is known in ecclesiastical history as one of\nthe most famous and important gatherings ever assembled as an official\nbody concerned with church administration. Not only was the Arian\ndispute disposed of, so far as ecclesiastical decree could dispose of\na question vitally affecting the individual conscience, but many other\nsubjects of controversy were similarly quieted for the time. Thus the\nlong-standing dispute as to the time of celebrating Easter was settled\nby vote, as was also the question agitated by Novatus and his\nfollowers--as to the propriety of re-admitting repentant apostates to\nthe Church; and the schism caused by Meletius, a bishop of Upper\nAfrica, who had refused to recognize the superior authority of the\nbishop of Alexandria. From the number and diversity of the questions\nbrought before the Nicene Council for adjudication, we may safely\nconclude that the newly enthroned Church was not characterized by\nunity of purpose nor harmony of action. However, compared with the\nbitter contentions that follow, the dissensions in the reign of\nConstantine were but as the beginnings of trouble.\n\n21. The moral effect of the potent spirit of apostasy operating\nthrough the first three centuries of the Church's existence and\nnourished by the contributions of heathen philosophy, proved, as was\ninevitable, highly injurious and evil. Some of the most pernicious of\nthese effects it becomes our duty to consider.\n\n22. _Perverted Views of Life_. One of the heresies of early origin and\nrapid growth in the Church was the doctrine of antagonism between body\nand spirit, whereby the former was regarded as an incubus and a curse.\nFrom what has been said this will be recognized as one of the\nperversions derived from the alliance of Gnosticism with Christianity.\nA result of this grafting in of heathen doctrines was an abundant\ngrowth of hermit practices, by which men sought to weaken, torture,\nand subdue their bodies, that their spirits or \"souls\" might gain\ngreater freedom. Many who adopted this unnatural view of human\nexistence retired to the solitude of the desert, and there spent their\ntime in practices of stern self-denial and in acts of frenzied\nself-torture. Others shut themselves up as voluntary prisoners,\nseeking glory in privation and self-imposed penance. It was this\nunnatural view of life that gave rise to the several orders of\nrecluses, hermits and monks.\n\n23. Think you not that the Savior had such practices in mind, when,\nwarning the disciples of the false claims to sanctity that would\ncharacterize the times then soon to follow, He said: \"Wherefore if\nthey shall say unto you, Behold he (Christ) is in the desert; go not\nforth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.\"--(Matt.\n24:26.)\n\n24. When the Church came into the favor of the state under Constantine\nin the fourth century, there sprang up many orders of recluses who\n\"maintained that communion with God was to be sought by mortifying\nsense, by withdrawing the mind from all external objects, by\nmacerating the body with hunger and labor, and by a holy sort of\nindolence, which confined all the activity of the soul to a lazy\ncontemplation of things spiritual and external.\" Mosheim, the author\njust quoted, continues: \"The Christian church would never have been\ndisgraced by this cruel and unsocial enthusiasm, nor would any have\nbeen subjected to those keen torments of mind and body to which it\ngave rise, had not many Christians been unwarily caught by the\nspecious appearance and the pompous sound of that maxim of the ancient\nphilosophy: 'That in order to the attainment of true felicity and\ncommunion with God, it was necessary that the soul should be separated\nfrom the body, even here below; and that the body was to be macerated\nand mortified for this purpose.'\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. IV,\nPart II, ch. 3:12, 13.)\n\n25. The fruit of this ill-sowing was the growth of numerous orders of\nmonks, and the maintenance of monasteries. Celibacy was taught as a\nvirtue, and came to be made a requirement of the clergy, as it is in\nthe Roman Catholic church to-day. An unmarried clergy, deprived of the\nelevating influences of home life, fell into many excesses, and the\ncorruption of the priests has been a theme of reproach throughout the\ncenturies. \"The Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be\nalone; I will make him an help meet for him,\"--(Gen. 2:18.) and again,\n\"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall\ncleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.\"--(Verse 24.) His\ninspired apostle proclaimed: \"Neither is the man without the woman,\nneither the woman without the man, in the Lord.\"--(I Cor. 11:11.\nCompare I Tim. 4:3.) Nevertheless an apostate church decrees that its\nministers shall be forbidden to follow the law of God.\n\n26. _Disregard for Truth_. As early as the fourth century, certain\npernicious doctrines embodying a disregard for truth gained currency\nin the Church. Thus, it was taught \"that it was an act of virtue to\ndeceive and lie, when by that means the interests of the church might\nbe promoted.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. IV, Part II, ch. 3:16.)\nNeedless to say, sins other than those of falsehood and deceit were\njustified when committed in the supposed interests of church\nadvancement, and crime was condoned under the specious excuse that the\nend justifies the means. Many of the fables and fictitious stories\nrelating to the lives of Christ and the apostles, as also the spurious\naccounts of supernatural visitations and wonderful miracles, in which\nthe literature of the early centuries abound, are traceable to this\ninfamous doctrine that lies are acceptable unto God if perpetrated in\na cause that man calls good.--(See Note 5, end of chapter.)\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _The Nicolaitanes_. This sect is mentioned specifically in the\ndivine communication wherein John the Revelator was instructed to\nwrite to the churches of Asia (Rev. 2:6, 15); and the reference proves\nthe abhorrence with which the Lord regarded the teachings and\npractices of the cult. The attempt to corrupt Christianity by the\nintroduction of Nicolaitan ceremonies was a real danger threatening\nthe Church. The following extract from Smith's Bible Dictionary is\ninstructive:\n\n\"The sect itself comes before us as presenting the ultimate phase of a\ngreat controversy, which threatened at one time to destroy the unity\nof the Church, and afterward to taint its purity. The controversy\nitself was inevitable as soon as the Gentiles were admitted in any\nlarge numbers into the Church of Christ. Were the new converts to be\nbrought into subjugation to the whole Mosaic law? The apostles and\nelders at Jerusalem met the question calmly and wisely. The burden of\nthe Law was not to be imposed on the Gentile disciples. They were to\nabstain, among other things, from 'meats offered to idols,' and from\n'fornication' (Acts 15:20, 29), and this decree was welcomed as the\ngreat charter of the Church's freedom. Strange as the close union of\nthe moral and positive commands may seem to us, it did not seem so to\nthe synod at Jerusalem. The two sins were very closely allied, often\neven in the closest proximity of time and place. The messages to the\nchurches of Asia, and the later Apostolic Epistles (II Peter, and\nJude,) indicate that the two evils appeared at that period also in\nclose alliance. The teachers of the Church branded them with a name\nthat expressed their true character. The men who did and taught such\nthings were followers of Balaam (II Peter 2:15; Jude II.) They, like\nthe false prophet of Pethor, united brave words with evil deeds. In a\ntime of persecution, when the eating or not eating of things\nsacrificed to idols was more than ever a crucial test of faithfulness,\nthey persuaded men more than ever that it was a thing indifferent\n(Rev. 2:13, 14). This was bad enough, but there was a yet worse evil.\nMingling themselves in the orgies of idolatrous feasts, they brought\nthe impurities of those feasts into the meetings of the Christian\nChurch. And all this was done, it must be remembered, not simply as an\nindulgence of appetite, but as part of a system supported by a\n'doctrine,' accompanied by the boast of a prophetic illumination (II\nPeter 2:1).\"\n\n2. _Imitation of Heathen Mysteries, and the Result_. The worship of\nGod by the early Christians was decried and ridiculed because of its\nsimplicity and the absence of mystic ceremonies. True, the zeal of\npersecutors soon made necessary a prudent secrecy in religious service\nand worshipping assemblies, but aside from such necessity, there was a\nvoluntary effort to feign a secrecy that was uncalled for. On this\npoint Gibbon remarks as follows: \"The precautions with which the\ndisciples of Christ performed the offices of religion were at first\ndictated by fear and necessity; but they were continued from choice.\nBy imitating the awful secrecy of the Eleusinian mysteries, the\nChristians had flattered themselves that they should render their\nsacred institutions more respectable in the eyes of the pagan world.\nBut the event, as it often happens to the operations of subtle policy,\ndeceived their wishes and their expectations. It was concluded that\nthey only concealed what they would have blushed to disclose. Their\nmistaken prudence afforded an opportunity for malice to invent, and\nfor suspicious credulity to believe, the horrid tales which described\nthe Christians as the most wicked of human kind, who practiced in\ntheir dark recesses every abomination that a depraved fancy could\nsuggest, and who solicited the favor of their unknown God by the\nsacrifice of every moral virtue. There were many who pretended to\nconfess or to relate the ceremonies of this abhorred society.\"--\n(Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,\" chap. XVI.)\n\n3. _Ebionites and Gnostics._ \"Beside the general design of fixing on a\nperpetual basis the divine honors of Christ, the most ancient and\nrespectable of the ecclesiastical writers have ascribed to the\nevangelic theologian [St. John] a particular intention to confute two\nopposing heresies, which disturbed the peace of the primitive Church.\nI. The faith of the Ebionites, perhaps of the Nazarenes, was gross and\nimperfect. They revered Jesus as the greatest of the prophets, endowed\nwith supernatural virtue and power. They ascribed to His person and to\nHis future reign all the predictions of the Hebrew oracles which\nrelate to the spiritual and everlasting kingdom of the promised\nMessiah. Some of them might confess that He was born of a virgin; but\nthey obstinately rejected the preceding existence and divine\nperfections of the Logos, or Son of God, which are so clearly defined\nin the Gospel of St. John. * * * II. The Gnostics, who were\ndistinguished by the epithet of Docetes, deviated into the contrary\nextreme, and betrayed the human while they asserted the divine, nature\nof Christ. Educated in the school of Plato, accustomed to the sublime\nidea of the Logos, they readily conceived that the brightest Aeon or\nEmanation of Deity, might assume the outward shape and visible\nappearance of a mortal; but they vainly pretended that the\nimperfections of matter are incompatible with the purity of a\ncelestial substance. While the blood of Christ yet smoked on Mount\nCalvary, and the Docetes invented the impious and extravagant\nhypothesis that, instead of issuing from the womb of the Virgin, he\nhad descended on the banks of the Jordan in the form of perfect\nmanhood; that he had imposed on the senses of His enemies and of His\ndisciples, and that the ministers of Pilate had wasted their impotent\nrage on an airy phantom, who seemed to expire on the Cross, and, after\nthree days, to rise from the dead.\"--(Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the\nRoman Empire,\" ch. XXI.)\n\n4. _Admixture of Pagan Doctrines With Christianity_. The following\nstatements by modern writers as to the effect of pagan \"philosophy\" on\nthe Church are worthy of attention. Summarizing conditions prevailing\nin the latter part of the second century, Milner says: \"We have\nhitherto found it no hard matter to discover, in the teachers and\nwriters of Christianity, the vital doctrines of Christ. We shall now\nperceive that the most precious truths of the gospel begin to be less\nattended to, and less brought to view. Even Justin Martyr, before the\nperiod of eclectic corruption, by his fondness for Plato, adulterated\nthe gospel in some degree, as we have observed particularly in the\narticle of free will. Tatian, his scholar, went bolder lengths, and\ndeserved the name of heretic. He dealt largely in the merits of\ncontinence and chastity; and these virtues, pushed into extravagant\nexcesses, under the notion of superior purity, became great engines of\nself-righteousness and superstition; obscured men's views of the faith\nof Christ, and darkened the whole face of Christianity. Under the\nfostering hand of Ammonius and his followers, this fictitious holiness\ndisguised under the appearance of eminent sanctity, was formed into a\nsystem; and it soon began to generate the worst of evils. * * * St.\nPaul's caution against philosophy and vain deceit, it appears, was now\nfatally neglected by the Christians. False humility, 'Will-worship,'\ncurious and proud refinements, bodily austerities mixed with high,\nself-righteous pretensions, ignorance of Christ and of the true life\nof faith in Him, miserably superseded by ceremonies and\nsuperstitions,--all these things are divinely delineated in the second\nchapter to the Colossians; and, so far as words can do it, the true\ndefense against them is powerfully described and enforced.\"--(Milner,\n\"Church History,\" Cent. II, ch. 9.)\n\n\"The schisms and commotions that arose in the church, from a mixture\nof the oriental and Egyptian philosophy with the Christian religion\nwere, in the second century, increased by those Grecian philosophers\nwho embraced the doctrine of Christ. The Christian doctrine,\nconcerning the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the two natures united\nin our blessed Savior, were by no means reconcilable with the tenets\nof the sages and doctors of Greece, who therefore endeavored to\nexplain them in such a manner as to render them comprehensible.\nPraxeas, a man of genius and learning, began to propagate these\nexplications at Rome, and was severely persecuted for the errors they\ncontained. He denied any real distinction between the Father, Son, and\nHoly Ghost; and maintained that the Father, sole Creator of all\nthings, had united to Himself the human nature of Christ. Hence his\nfollowers were called Monarchians, because of their denying a\nplurality of persons in the Deity; and also Patropassians, because,\naccording to Tertullian's account, they believed that the Father was\nso intimately united with the man Christ, His Son, that He suffered\nwith Him the anguish of an afflicted life and the torments of an\nignominious death. However ready many may have been to embrace this\nerroneous doctrine, it does not appear that this sect formed to\nthemselves a separate place of worship, or removed themselves from the\nordinary assemblies of Christians.\"--(Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical\nHistory,\" Cent. II, Part II, ch. 5:20.)\n\n5. _Spurious Writings in the Apostolic Period_. \"Not long after\nChrist's ascension into heaven, several histories of His life and\ndoctrines, full of pious frauds and fabulous wonders, were composed by\npersons whose intentions, perhaps, were not bad, but whose writings\ndiscovered the greatest superstition and ignorance. Nor was this all:\nproductions appeared which were imposed upon the world by fraudulent\nmen, as the writings of the holy apostles. These apocryphal and\nspurious writings must have produced a sad confusion, and rendered\nboth the history and the doctrine of Christ uncertain, had not the\nrulers of the church used all possible care and diligence in\nseparating the books that were truly apostolical and divine from all\nthat spurious trash.\"--(Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical History,\" Cent. I,\nPart II, ch. 2:17.)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n**Internal Causes.--Continued**.\n\n\n1. As one of the effective causes leading to the apostasy of the\nPrimitive Church we have specified: _Unauthorized additions to the\nceremonies of the Church, and the introduction of vital changes in\nessential ordinances_.\n\n2. The ridicule heaped upon the early Church by the pagans on account\nof the simplicity of Christian worship has already received mention.\nThis cause of reproach was none the less emphasized by Judaistic\ncritics, to whom rituals and ceremony, formalism and prescribed rites,\nfigured as essentials of religion. Very early in its history, the\nChurch manifested a tendency to supplant the pristine simplicity of\nits worship by elaborate ceremonies, patterned after Judaistic ritual\nand heathen idolatries.\n\n3. As to such innovations, Mosheim writes as follows, with reference\nto conditions existing in the second century: \"There is no institution\nso pure and excellent which the corruption and folly of man will not\nin time alter for the worse, and load with additions foreign to its\nnature and original design. Such in a particular manner was the fate\nof Christianity. In this century many unnecessary rites and ceremonies\nwere added to the Christian worship, the introduction of which was\nextremely offensive to wise and good men. These changes, while they\ndestroyed the beautiful simplicity of the gospel, were naturally\npleasing to the gross multitude, who are more delighted with the pomp\nand splendor of external institutions than with the native charms of\nrational and solid piety, and who generally give little attention to\nany objects but those which strike their outward senses.\"--(Mosheim,\n\"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. II, Part II, ch. 4.) The author just cited\nexplains that the bishops of that day increased the ceremonies and\nsought to give them splendor \"by way of accommodation to the\ninfirmities and prejudices of both Jews and heathen.\"--(See Note 1,\nend of chapter.)\n\n4. To more effectually reconcile the gospel requirements with Jewish\nprejudice, which still clung to the letter of the Mosaic law, the\nofficers of the Church in the first and second centuries took to\nthemselves the ancient titles; thus, bishops styled themselves chief\npriests, and deacons, Levites. \"In like manner,\" says Mosheim, \"the\ncomparison of the Christian _oblation_ with the Jewish _victim_ and\n_sacrifice_, produced a multitude of unnecessary rites, and was the\noccasion of introducing that erroneous notion of the _eucharist_,\nwhich represents it as a real sacrifice, and not merely as a\ncommemoration of that great offering that was once made upon the cross\nfor the sins of mortals.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. II, Part II,\nch. 4:4.)\n\n5. In the fourth century we find the Church still more hopelessly\ncommitted to formalism and superstition. The decent respect with which\nthe remains of the early martyrs had been honored degenerated or grew\ninto a superstitious reverence amounting to worship. This practice was\nallowed in deference to the heathen adoration paid to deified heroes.\nPilgrimages to the tombs of martyrs became common as an outward form\nof religious devotion; and the ashes of martyrs as well as dust and\nearth brought from places said to have been made holy by some uncommon\noccurrence were sold as sovereign remedies against disease and as\nmeans of protection against the assaults of malignant spirits.\n\n6. The form of public worship was so changed during the second and\nthird centuries as to bear little resemblance to the simplicity and\nearnestness of that of the early congregations. Philosophic discourses\ntook the place of fervent testimony bearing and the arts of the\nrhetorician and controversial debater supplanted the true eloquence of\nreligious conviction. Applause was allowed and expected as evidence of\nthe preacher's popularity. The burning incense, at first abhorred by\nChristian assemblies because of its pagan origin and heathen\nsignificance, had become common in the Church before the end of the\nthird century.\n\n7. In the fourth century the adoration of images, pictures, and\neffigies, had been given a place in the so-called Christian worship;\nand the practice became general in the century following. An effort to\ncheck the abuses arising from this idolatrous practice in the eighth\ncentury, actually led to civil war.--(See Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\"\nCent. VIII, Part II, ch. 3:9, 10.)\n\n8. In considering such evidences of pagan ceremonial and superstitious\nrites taking the place of the simple procedure incident to genuine\nworship characteristic of the Church in the days of its integrity, who\ncan question the solemn and awful fact of actual apostasy?--(See Note\n2, end of chapter.) But more important yet, more significant still\nthan mere additions to the ritualistic ceremonial, are the perversions\nand changes introduced into the most sacred and essential ordinances\nof Christ's Church. As it is common with ecclesiastical authorities to\nconsider the most essential ordinances of the gospel originally\nestablished by Christ and maintained by His apostles, as comprising\nbaptism and the sacrament of the Lord's supper, we shall examine into\nthese alone as examples of the unauthorized alterations now under\nconsideration. In this restriction of our illustrative examples we do\nnot admit that baptism and the sacrament named were the only\nordinances characterizing the Church; indeed, there is abundant proof\nto the contrary. Thus, the authoritative imposition of hands for the\nbestowal of the Holy Ghost in the case of baptized believers was\nequally essential with baptism itself,--(See Acts 8:5-8, 12, 14-17;\nalso 19:1-7; see also 2:38; Matt. 3:11; and Mark 1:8.) and was\nassuredly regarded as a vital ordinance from the first.--(See Matt.\n3:11.) Furthermore, ordination in the priesthood, whereby men were\ncommissioned by divine authority was indispensable to the maintenance\nof an organized Church. The examples selected, however, will be\nsufficient for the purposes of our present inquiry.\n\n**The Ordinance of Baptism Changed**.\n\n9. First, then, as to baptism,--in what did the ordinance originally\nconsist, as to purpose and mode of administration, and what changes\ndid it undergo in the course of progressive apostasy through which the\nChurch passed? That baptism is essential to salvation calls for no\ndemonstration here; this has been generally held by the Christian\nChurch in both ancient and modern times.--(For a concise treatment of\nthis subject, see the author's \"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture 6:8-29.)\nThe purpose of baptism was and is the obtaining of a remission of\nsins; compliance with the requirement has been from the first the sole\nmeans of securing admission to the Church of Christ.--(See Mark 1:4\nand Luke 3:3; also Acts 2:38; I Peter 3:21; and Acts 22:16. Compare II\nNephi 31:17.)\n\n10. In the early Church, baptism was administered on profession of\nfaith and evidence of repentance, and was performed by immersion--(See\nNote 3, end of chapter) at the hands of one invested with the\nrequisite authority of priesthood. There was no delay in administering\nthe ordinance after the eligibility of the candidate had been shown.\nAs instances we may cite the promptness with which baptism was\nadministered to the believers on that eventful day of Pentecost;--\n(Acts 2:37-41) the baptism administered by Philip to the Ethiopian\nconvert immediately following due profession of faith;--(Acts 8:26-39)\nthe undelayed baptism of devout Cornelius and his family;--(Acts\n10:47, 48) and the speedy baptism of the converted jailer by Paul, his\nprisoner.--(Acts 16:31-33.)\n\n11. In the second century, however, priestly mandate had restricted\nthe baptismal ordinance to the times of the two Church festivals,\nEaster and Whitsuntide, the first being the anniversary of Christ's\nresurrection, and the second the time of Pentecostal celebration. A\nlong and tedious course of preparation was required of the candidate\nbefore his eligibility was admitted; during this time he was known as\na _catechumen_, or novice in training. According to some authorities a\nthree years' course of preparation was required in all but exceptional\ncases.--(Schlegel, Book VIII, ch. 32.)\n\n12. During the second century the baptismal symbolism of a new birth\nwas emphasized by many additions to the ordinance; thus the newly\nbaptized were treated as infants and were fed milk and honey in token\nof their immaturity. As baptism was construed to be a ceremony of\nliberation from the slavery of Satan, certain formulas used in the\nfreeing of slaves were added. Anointing with oil was also made a part\nof the ceremony. In the third century the simple ordinance of baptism\nwas further encumbered and perverted by the ministrations of an\nexorcist. This official indulged in \"menacing and formidable shouts\nand declamation\" whereby the demons or evil spirits with which the\ncandidate was supposed to be afflicted were to be driven away. \"The\ndriving out of this demon was now considered as an essential\npreparation for baptism, after the administration of which the\ncandidates returned home, adorned with crowns, and arrayed in white\ngarments, as sacred emblems,--the former of their victory over sin and\nthe world; the latter of their inward purity and innocence.\"--\n(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. III, part II, ch. 4:4.) It is not\ndifficult to see in this superstitious ceremony the evidence of pagan\nadulteration of the Christian religion. In the fourth century it\nbecame the practice to place salt in the mouth of the newly baptized\nmember, as a symbol of purification, and the actual baptism was both\npreceded and followed by an anointing with oil.\n\n13. The form or mode of baptism also underwent a radical change during\nthe first half of the third century,--a change whereby its essential\nsymbolism was destroyed. Immersion,--(See Note 3, end of chapter)\ntypifying death followed by resurrection, was no longer deemed an\nessential feature, and sprinkling with water was allowed in place\nthereof. No less an authority than Cyprian, the learned bishop of\nCarthage, advocated the propriety of sprinkling in lieu of immersion\nin cases of physical weakness; and the practice thus started, later\nbecame general. The first instance of record is that of Novatus, a\nheretic who requested baptism when he thought death was near.--(As to\nthe scriptural doctrine of baptism, the mode of its administration and\nthe symbolism thereof, see the author's \"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture\n7.)\n\n14. Not only was the form of the baptismal rite radically changed, but\nthe application of the ordinance was perverted. The practice of\nadministering baptism to infants was recognized as orthodox in the\nthird century, and was doubtless of earlier origin. In a prolonged\ndisputation as to whether it was safe to postpone the baptism of\ninfants until the eighth day after birth--in deference to the Jewish\ncustom of performing circumcision on that day--it was gravely decided\nthat such delay would be dangerous, as jeopardizing the future\nwell-being of the child should it die before attaining the age of\neight days, and that baptism ought to be administered as soon after\nbirth as possible.--(See Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent. III; ch. 13.)\nA more infamous doctrine than that of the condemnation of unbaptized\ninfants can scarcely be imagined, and a stronger proof of the heresies\nthat had invaded and corrupted the early Church need not be sought.\nSuch a doctrine is foreign to the gospel and to the Church of Christ,\nand its adoption as an essential tenet is proof of apostasy.--(For a\ndiscussion of infant baptism, see the author's \"Articles of Faith,\"\nLecture 6. See Note 4, end of chapter.)\n\n**Changes in the Ordinance of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper**.\n\n15. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper has been regarded as an\nessential ordinance from the time of its establishment in the Church\nby Jesus Christ. Yet in spite of its sanctity it has undergone radical\nalteration both as to its symbolism and its accepted purpose. The\nsacrament, as instituted by the Savior and as administered during the\ndays of the apostolic ministry, was as simple as it was sacred and\nsolemn. Accompanied by the true spirit of the gospel, its simplicity\nwas sanctifying; as interpreted by the spirit of apostasy its\nsimplicity became a reproach. Hence we find that in the third century,\nlong sacramental prayers were prescribed, and much pomp was\nintroduced. Vessels of gold and silver were used by such congregations\nas could afford them, and this with ostentatious display. Nonmembers\nand members \"who were in a penitential state\" were excluded from the\nsacramental service--in imitation of the exclusiveness accompanying\nheathen mysteries. Disputation and dissension arose as to the proper\ntime of administering the sacrament--morning, noon, or evening; and as\nto the frequency with which the ordinance should be celebrated.--(See\nNote 5, end of chapter.)\n\n16. At a later date the doctrine of _Transubstantiation_ was\nestablished as an essential tenet of the Roman Church. This briefly\nsummarized, is to the effect that the species--i. e., the bread and\nwine used in the sacrament--lose their character as mere bread and\nwine, and become in fact the flesh and blood of the crucified Christ.\nThe transmutation is assumed to take place in such a mystical way as\nto delude the senses; and so, though actual flesh and actual blood,\nthe elements still appear to be bread and wine. This view, so strongly\ndefended and earnestly reverenced by orthodox members of the Roman\nChurch, is vehemently denounced by others as \"an absurd tenet,\"--\n(Milner) and a \"monstrous and unnatural doctrine.\"--(Mosheim.)\n\n17. There has been much discussion as to the origin of this\ndoctrine,--(See Note 6, end of chapter.) the Roman Catholics claiming\nfor it a great antiquity, while their opponents insist that it was an\ninnovation of the eighth or ninth century. According to Milner it was\nopenly taught in the ninth century;--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent.\nIX, ch. 1.) was formally established as a dogma of the Church by the\nCouncil of Placentia A. D. 1095,--(The same, Cent. XI, ch. 1) and was\nmade an essential article of creed, belief in which was required of\nall by action of the Roman ecclesiastical court about 1160.--(The\nsame, Cent. XIII, ch. 1.) An official edict of the pope, Innocent III,\nconfirmed the dogma as a binding tenet and requirement of the Church\nin 1215;--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. XIII, Part II, ch. 3:2.) and\nit remains practically in force in the Roman Catholic Church today.\nThe doctrine was adopted by the Greek Church in the seventeenth\ncentury.--(The same. Cent. XVII, Part II, ch. 2:3.)\n\n18. The consecrated emblems, or \"host,\" being regarded as the actual\nflesh and blood of Christ, were adored as of themselves divine. Thus,\n\"a very pernicious practice of idolatry was connected with the\nreception of this doctrine. Men fell down before the consecrated host,\nand worshipped it as God; and the novelty, absurdity, and impiety of\nthis abomination very much struck the minds of all men who were not\ndead to a sense of true religion.\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent.\nXIII, ch. 1.) The \"elevation of the host,\"--i. e., the presentation of\nthe consecrated emblems before the congregation for adoration, is a\nfeature of the present day ritual of worship in the Roman Catholic\nChurch. The celebration of the mass is taught to be an actual though\nmystic sacrifice, in which the Son of God is daily offered up anew as\na constantly recurring atonement for the present sins of the assembled\nworshippers. A further perversion of the sacrament occurred in the\nadministration of bread alone, instead of both bread and wine as\noriginally required.\n\n19. Thus was the plain purpose and assured efficacy of the sacrament\nhidden beneath a cloud of mystery and ceremonial display. Contrast\nsuch with the solemn simplicity of the ordinance as instituted by our\nLord,--He took bread and wine, blessed them and gave to His disciples\nand said, \"This do in remembrance of me.\"--(Luke 22:19, 20; compare\nMatt. 26:27, 28.) Of the bread He said, \"This is my body;\" of the\nwine, \"This is my blood;\" yet at that time His body was unpierced, His\nblood was unshed. The disciples ate bread, not flesh of a living man,\nand drank wine, not blood; and this they were commanded to do in\nremembrance of Christ.--(For a general treatment of the Sacrament of\nthe Lord's Supper, see the author's \"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture 9.)\nThe perversion of the sacrament is evidence of departure from the\nspirit of the gospel of Christ, and when made an essential dogma of a\nchurch is proof of the apostate condition of that church.\n\n20. Behold, \"_they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance,\nbroken the everlasting covenant_.\"--(See Isaiah 24:4-6.)\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _Ceremonies Added as a Compromise_. \"Both Jews and heathens were\naccustomed to a vast variety of pompous and magnificent ceremonies in\ntheir religious service. And as they considered these rites as an\nessential part of religion, it was but natural that they should behold\nwith indifference, and even with contempt, the simplicity of the\nChristian worship, which was destitute of those idle ceremonies that\nrendered their service so specious and striking. To remove then, in\nsome measure, this prejudice against Christianity, the bishops thought\nit necessary to increase the number of rites and ceremonies, and thus\nto render the public worship more striking to the outward senses. This\naddition of external rites was also designed to remove the opprobrious\ncalumnies which the Jewish and pagan priests cast upon the Christians\non account of the simplicity of their worship, esteeming them little\nbetter than atheists, because they had no temples, altars, victims,\npriests, nor anything of that external pomp in which the vulgar are so\nprone to place the essence of religion. The rulers of the Church\nadopted, therefore, certain external ceremonies, that thus they might\ncaptivate the senses of the vulgar, and be able to refute the\nreproaches of their adversaries.\" (Mosheim, \"Ecclesiastical History,\"\nCent. II, Part II, ch. 4:2, 3.)\n\nA note appended to the foregoing excerpt by the translator, Dr.\nArchibald Maclaine, reads as follows:\n\n\"A remarkable passage in the life of Gregory, surnamed Thaumaturgus,\ni. e., the wonder worker, will illustrate this point in the clearest\nmanner. The passage is as follows: 'When Gregory perceived that the\nignorant multitude persisted in their idolatry, on account of the\npleasures and sensual gratifications which they enjoyed at the pagan\nfestivals, he granted them a permission to indulge themselves in the\nlike pleasures, in celebrating the memory of the holy martyrs, hoping\nthat in process of time, they would return of their own accord to a\nmore virtuous and regular course of life.' There is no sort of doubt,\nbut that by this permission, Gregory allowed the Christians to dance,\nsport, and feast at the tombs of the martyrs upon their respective\nfestivals, and to do everything which the pagans were accustomed to do\nin their temples during the feasts celebrated in honor of their gods.\"\n\nThe Gregory referred to in the note last quoted flourished about the\nmiddle of the third century. He acquired the title Thaumaturgus from\nhis fame as a worker of miracles, the genuineness of which\nachievements is disputed by many authorities. He was bishop of New\nCaesarea, and a man of great influence in the Church. His sanction of\nceremonies, patterned after pagan rites, was doubtless of far-reaching\neffect.\n\n2. _Church Ceremonial in the Fifth Century_. \"The sublime and simple\ntheology of the primitive Christians was gradually corrupted, and the\nMonarchy of heaven, already clouded by metaphysical subtleties, was\ndegraded by the introduction of a popular mythology, which tended to\nrestore the reign of polytheism. As the objects of religion were\ngradually reduced to the standard of the imagination, the rites and\nceremonies were introduced that seemed most powerfully to affect the\nsenses of the vulgar. If, in the beginning of the fifth century,\nTertullian or Lactantius had been suddenly raised from the dead, to\nassist at the festival of some popular saint or martyr, they would\nhave gazed with astonishment and indignation on the profane spectacle,\nwhich had succeeded to the pure and spiritual worship of a Christian\ncongregation. As soon as the doors of the Church were thrown open they\nmust have been offended by the smoke of incense, the perfume of\nflowers, and the glare of lamps and tapers, which diffused, at\nnoonday, a gaudy, superfluous, and, in their opinion a sacriligious\nlight. If they approached the balustrade of the altar, they made their\nway through the prostrate crowd, consisting for the most part, of\nstrangers and pilgrims, who resorted to the city on the vigil of the\nfeast; and who already felt the strong intoxication of fanaticism, and\nperhaps of wine. Their devout kisses were imprinted on the walls and\npavements of the sacred edifice; and their fervent prayers were\ndirected, whatever might be the language of their church, to the\nbones, the blood, or the ashes of the saints, which were usually\nconcealed by a linen or silken veil from the eyes of the vulgar. The\nChristians frequented the tombs of the martyrs, in the hope of\nobtaining, from their powerful intercession, every sort of spiritual,\nbut more especially of temporal blessings. * * * The same uniform\noriginal spirit of superstition might suggest, in the most distant\nages and countries, the same methods of deceiving the credulity, and\nof affecting the services, of mankind; but it must ingeniously be\nconfessed that the ministers of the Catholic Church imitated the\nprofane model which they were impatient to destroy. The most\nrespectable bishops had persuaded themselves that the ignorant rustics\nwould more cheerfully renounce the superstitions of Paganism, if they\nfound some resemblance, some compensation, in the bosom of\nChristianity. The religion of Constantine achieved, in less than a\ncentury, the final conquest of the Roman empire; but the victors\nthemselves were insensibly subdued by the arts of their vanquished\nrivals.\"--(Gibbon, \"Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,\" ch.\nXXVIII.)\n\n3. _Early Form of Christian Baptism_. History furnishes ample proof\nthat in the first century after the death of Christ, baptism was\nadministered solely by immersion. Tertullian thus refers to the\nimmersion ceremony common in his day: \"There is no difference whether\none is washed in a sea or in a pool, in a river or in a fountain, in a\nlake or in a channel; nor is there any difference between those whom\nJohn dipped in Jordan, and those whom Peter dipped in the Tiber. * * *\nWe are immersed in the water.\"\n\nJustin Martyr describes the ceremony as practiced by himself. First\ndescribing the preparatory examination of the candidate, he proceeds:\n\"After that they are led by us to where there is water, and are born\nagain in that kind of new birth by which we ourselves were born again.\nFor in the name of God, the Father and Lord of all, and of Jesus\nChrist, our Savior, and of the Holy Spirit, the immersion in water is\nperformed; because the Christ hath also said, 'Except a man be born\nagain, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.'\"\n\nBishop Bennet says concerning the practices of the early Christians:\n\"They led them into the water and laid them down in the water as a man\nis laid in a grave; and then they said those words, 'I baptize (or\nwash) thee in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost;' then they\nraised them up again, and clean garments were put on them; from whence\ncame the phrases of being baptized into Christ's death, of being\nburied with Him by baptism into death, of our being risen with Christ,\nand of our putting on the Lord Jesus Christ, of putting off the old\nman, and putting on the new.\"\n\n\"That the apostles immersed whom they baptized there is no doubt. * *\n* And that the ancient church followed their example is very clearly\nevinced by innumerable testimonies of the fathers.\"--(Vossius.)\n\n\"Burying as it were the person baptized in the water, and raising him\nout again, without question was anciently the more usual\nmethod.\"--(Archbishop Seeker.)\n\n\"_Immersion_ was the usual method in which baptism was administered in\nthe early Church. * * * Immersion was undoubtedly a common mode of\nadministering baptism, and was not discontinued when infant baptism\nprevailed. * * * Sprinkling gradually took the place of immersion\nwithout any formal renunciation of the latter.\"--(Canon Farrar.)\n\n4. _Historical Notes on Infant Baptism_. \"The baptism of infants, in\nthe first two centuries after Christ, was altogether unknown. * * *\nThe custom of baptizing infants did not begin before the third age\nafter Christ was born. In the former ages no trace of it appears; and\nit was introduced without the command of Christ.\"--(Curcullaeus.)\n\n\"It is certain that Christ did not ordain infant baptism. * * * We\ncannot prove that the apostles ordained infant baptism. From those\nplaces where baptism of a whole family is mentioned (as in Acts 16:33;\nI Cor. 1:16) we can draw no such conclusion, because the inquiry is\nstill to be made, whether there were any children in the families of\nsuch an age that they were not capable of any intelligent reception of\nChristianity; for this is the only point on which the case turns. * *\n* As baptism was closely united with a conscious entrance on Christian\ncommunion, faith and baptism were always connected with one another;\nand thus it is in the highest degree probable that baptism was\nperformed only in instances where both could meet together, and that\nthe practice of infant baptism was unknown at this (the apostolic)\nperiod. * * * That not till so late a period as (at least certainly\nnot earlier than) Irenaeus, a trace of infant baptism appears; and\nthat it first became recognized as an apostolic tradition in the\ncourse of the third century, is evidence rather against than for the\nadmission of its apostolic origin.\"--(Johann Neander, a German\ntheologian who flourished in the first half of the nineteenth\ncentury.)\n\n\"Let them therefore come when they are grown up--when they can\nunderstand--when they are taught whither they are to come. Let them\nbecome Christians when they can know Christ.\"--(Tertullian, one of the\nLatin \"Christian Fathers;\" he lived from 150 to 220 A. D.)\nTertullian's almost violent opposition to the practice of pedo-baptism\nis cited by Neander as \"a proof that it was then not usually\nconsidered an apostolic ordinance; for in that case he would hardly\nhave ventured to speak so strongly against it.\"\n\nMartin Luther, writing in the early part of the sixteenth century,\ndeclared: \"It cannot be proven by the sacred scriptures that infant\nbaptism was instituted by Christ, or begun by the first Christians\nafter the apostles.\"\n\n\"By _tekna_ the Apostle understands, not infants, but posterity; in\nwhich significance the word occurs in many places of the New Testament\n(see among others John 8:39); whence it appears that the argument\nwhich is very commonly taken from this passage for the baptism of\ninfants, is of no force, and good for nothing.\"--(Limborch, a native\nof Holland, and a theologian of repute; he lived 1633-1712.)\n\n5. _Summary of Changes in the Sacrament as an Ordinance_. \"Errors\nconcerning the sacrament, and its signification, and the manner of\nadministering it, grew rapidly in the professed Christian churches\nduring the early centuries of the Christian era. As soon as the power\nof the priesthood had departed, much disputation arose in matters of\nordinance, and the observance of the sacrament became distorted.\nTheological teachers strove to foster the idea that there was much\nmystery attending this naturally simple and most impressive ordinance;\nthat all who were not in full communion with the Church should be\nexcluded, not only from participation in the ordinance, which was\njustifiable, but from the privilege of witnessing the service, lest\nthey profane the mystic rite by their unhallowed presence. Then arose\nthe heresy of transubstantiation,--which held that the sacramental\nemblems by the ceremony of consecration lost their natural character\nof simple bread and wine, and became in reality flesh and\nblood,--actually parts of the crucified body of Christ. Arguments\nagainst such dogmas is useless. Then followed the veneration of the\nemblems by the people, the bread and wine--regarded as part of\nChrist's tabernacle, being elevated in the mass for the adoration of\nthe people; and later, the custom of suppressing half of the sacrament\nwas introduced. By the innovation last mentioned, only the bread was\nadministered, the dogmatic assertion being that both the body and the\nblood were represented in some mystical way in one of the 'elements.'\nCertain it is, that Christ required His disciples to both eat and\ndrink in remembrance of Him.\"--(The Author, \"Articles of Faith,\"\nLecture 9, Note 4.)\n\n6. _As to the Antiquity of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation_. As\nstated in the text, the date of origin of the Catholic doctrine of\ntransubstantiation has been debated. The following summary is\ninstructive. \"Protestants combatting the Catholic idea of the real\npresence of the flesh and blood in the eucharist--transubstantiation--\nhave endeavored to prove that this doctrine was not of earlier origin\nthan the eighth century. In this, however, the evidence is against\nthem. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, writing early in the second\ncentury, says of certain supposed heretics: 'They do not admit of\neucharists and oblations, because they do not believe the eucharist to\nbe the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, who suffered for our sins.'\n(Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrneans.) So Justin Martyr, also writing\nin the first half of the second century: 'We do not receive them [the\nbread and the wine] as ordinary food or ordinary drink, but as by the\nword of God, Jesus Christ, our Savior, was made flesh and took upon\nhim both flesh and blood for our salvation, so also the food which was\nblessed by the prayer of the word which proceeded from Him, and from\nwhich our flesh and blood, by transmutation, receive nourishment, is,\nwe are taught, both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made\nflesh.' (Justin's Apology to Emperor Antoninus.) After Justin's time\nthe testimony of the fathers is abundant. There can be no doubt as to\nthe antiquity of the idea of the real presence of the body and blood\nof Jesus in the eucharist; but that proves--as we said of infant\nbaptism--not that the doctrine is true, but that soon after the\napostles had passed away, the simplicity of the gospel was corrupted\nor else entirely departed from.\"--(B. H. Roberts, \"Outlines of\nEcclesiastical History,\" p. 133.)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n**Internal Causes.--Continued**.\n\n\n1. Among the controlling causes leading to the general apostasy of the\nChurch, we have specified as third in the series: _Unauthorized\nchanges in Church organization and government_.\n\n2. A comparison between the plan of organization on which the\nPrimitive Church was founded and the ecclesiastical system which took\nits place will afford valuable evidence as to the true or apostate\ncondition of the modern Church. The Primitive Church was officered by\napostles, pastors, high priests, seventies, elders, bishops, priests,\nteachers, and deacons.--(See Luke 6:13 and Mark 3:14; Eph. 4:11; Heb.\n5:1-5; Luke 10:1-11; Acts 14:23; 15:6; I Peter 5:1; I Tim. 3:1; Titus\n1:17; Rev. 1:6; Acts 13:1; I Tim. 3:8-12.) We have no evidence that\nthe presiding council of the Church, comprising the twelve apostles,\nwas continued beyond the earthly ministry of those who had been\nordained to that holy calling during the life of Christ or soon after\nHis ascension. Nor is there record of any ordination of individuals to\nthe apostleship, irrespective of membership in the council of twelve,\nbeyond those whose calling and ministry are chronicled in the New\nTestament, which, as a historical record, ends with the first century.\n\n3. Ecclesiastical history other than the holy scriptures informs us,\nhowever, that wherever a branch, or church, was organized, a bishop or\nan elder (presbyter) was placed in charge. There is no doubt that\nwhile the apostles lived, they were recognized and respected as the\npresiding authorities of the Church. As they established branches or\nchurches, they selected the bishops, and submitted their nominations\nto the vote of the members. As already stated, the principle of\nself-government, or common consent, was respected in apostolic days\nwith a care amounting to sacred duty. We read that the bishops were\nassisted in their local administration by presbyters and deacons.\n\n4. After the apostles had gone, bishops and other officers were\nnominated by, or at the instance of, the existing authorities. The\naffairs of each church or branch were conducted and regulated by the\nlocal officers, so that a marked equality existed among the several\nchurches, none exercising or claiming supremacy except as to the\ndeference voluntarily paid to those churches that had been organized\nby the personal ministry of the apostles. Throughout the first and the\ngreater part of the second century, \"the Christian churches were\nindependent of each other; nor were they joined together by\nassociation, confederacy, or other bonds but those of charity. Each\nChristian assembly was a little state, governed by its own laws, which\nwere either enacted, or, at least, approved by the society.\"--\n(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. II, Part II, ch. 2:2.)\n\n5. As with the churches, so with their bishops,--there was a\nrecognized equality among them. Late in the second, and throughout the\nthird century, however, marked distinctions and recognitions of rank\narose among the bishops, those of large and wealthy cities assuming\nauthority and dignity above that accorded by them to the bishops of\nthe country provinces. The bishops of the largest cities or provinces,\ntook to themselves the distinguishing title of Metropolitans,--(See\nMosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. II, Part II, ch. 2:3; also Cent. IV,\nPart II, ch. 2:3, and compare Cent. I, Part II, ch. 2:14.) and assumed\na power of presidency over the bishops of more limited jurisdiction.\n\n6. The second century was marked by the custom of holding synods or\nchurch councils; the practice originated among the churches in Greece,\nand thence became general. These councils grew rapidly in power, so\nthat in the third century we find them legislating for the churches,\nand directing by edict and command in matters which formerly had been\nleft to the vote of the people. Needless to say that with such\nassumptions of authority came arrogance and tyranny in the government\nof the Church. As the form of church government changed more and more,\nmany minor orders of clergy or church officers arose; thus in the\nthird century we read of sub-deacons, acolytes, ostiars, readers,\nexorcists, and copiates. As an instance of the pride of office, it is\nworthy of note that a sub-deacon was forbidden to sit in the presence\nof a deacon without the latter's express consent.\n\n7. Rome, so long the \"mistress of the world\" in secular affairs,\narrogated to herself a pre-eminence in church matters, and the bishop\nof Rome claimed supremacy. It is doubtless true that the church at\nRome was organized by Peter and Paul. Tradition, founded on error,\nsaid that the apostle Peter was the first bishop of Rome; and those\nwho successively were acknowledged as bishops of the metropolis\nclaimed to be, in fact, lineal successors of the presiding apostle.\nThe high but none the less false claim is made by the Catholic Church\nin this day, that the present pope is the last lineal successor--not\nalone to the bishopric but to the apostleship.\n\n8. The rightful supremacy of the bishops of Rome, or Roman pontiffs as\nthey came to be known, was early questioned; and when Constantine made\nByzantium, or Constantinople, the capital of the empire, the bishop of\nConstantinople claimed equality. The dispute divided the Church, and\nfor five hundred years the dissension increased, until in the ninth\ncentury (855 A. D.) it developed into a great disruption, in\nconsequence of which the bishop of Constantinople, known distinctively\nas the patriarch, disavowed all further allegiance to the bishop of\nRome, otherwise known as the Roman pontiff. This disruption is marked\ntoday by the distinction between Roman Catholics.\n\n9. The election of pontiff, or bishop of Rome, was long left to the\nvote of the people and clergy; later the electoral function was vested\nin the clergy alone; and in the eleventh century the power was lodged\nin the college of cardinals, where it remains vested today. The Roman\npontiffs strove with unremitting zeal to acquire temporal as well as\nspiritual authority; and their influence had become so great that in\nthe eleventh century we find them claiming the right to direct\nprinces, kings, and emperors in the affairs of the several nations. It\nwas at this, the early period of their greatest temporal power, that\nthe pontiffs took the title of _pope_, the word meaning literally papa\nor father, and applied in the sense of universal parent. The power of\nthe popes was increased during the twelfth century, and may be said to\nhave reached its height in the thirteenth century.\n\n10. Not content with assumed supremacy in all church affairs, the\npopes \"carried their insolent pretensions so far as to give themselves\nout for lords of the universe, arbiters of the fate of kingdoms and\nempires, and supreme rulers over the kings and princes of the\nearth.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. XI, Part II, ch. 2:2.) They\nclaimed the right to authorize and direct in the internal affairs of\nnations, and to make lawful the rebellion of subjects against their\nrulers if the latter failed to keep favor with the papal power.\n\n11. Compare this arrogant and tyrannical church of the world with the\nChurch of Christ. Unto Pilate our Lord declared, \"My kingdom is not of\nthis world.\"--(John 18:36.) and on an earlier occasion, when the\npeople would have proclaimed Him king with earthly dominion,--(John\n6:15.) He departed from them. Yet the Church that boasts of its divine\norigin as founded by the Christ, who would not be a king, lifts itself\nabove all kings and rulers, and proclaims itself the supreme power in\nthe affairs of nations.\n\n12. In the fourth century the Church had promulgated what has been\nsince designated as an infamy, viz.: that \"errors in religion, when\nmaintained and adhered to after proper admonition, were punishable\nwith civil penalties, and corporal tortures.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl.\nHist.,\" Cent. IV, Part II, ch. 3:16.) The effect of this unjust rule\nappeared as more and more atrocious with the passage of the years, so\nthat in the eleventh century, and later, we find the Church imposing\npunishment of fine, imprisonment, bodily torture, and even death, as\npenalties for infraction of church regulations, and, more infamous\nstill, providing for mitigation or annulment of such sentences on\npayment of money. This led to the shocking practice of selling\n_indulgences_ or pardons, which custom was afterwards carried to the\nawful extreme of issuing such before the commission of the specific\noffense, thus literally offering for sale licenses to sin, with\nassurance of temporal and promise of spiritual immunity.\n\n13. The granting of indulgences as exemptions from temporal penalties\nwas at first confined to the bishops and their agents, and the\npractice dates as an organized traffic from about the middle of the\ntwelfth century. It remained for the popes, however, to go to the\nblasphemous extreme of assuming to remit the penalties of the\nhereafter on payment of the sums prescribed. Their pretended\njustification of the impious assumption was as horrible as the act\nitself, and constitutes the dreadful _doctrine of supererogation_.\n\n14. As formulated in the thirteenth century, this doctrine was thus\nset forth: \"That there actually existed an immense treasure of\n_merit_, composed of the pious deeds and virtuous actions which the\nsaints had performed _beyond what was necessary for their own\nsalvation_, and which were therefore applicable to the benefit of\nothers; that the guardian and dispenser of this precious treasure was\nthe Roman pontiff, and that of consequence he was empowered to assign\nto such as he thought proper a portion of this inexhaustible source of\nmerit, suitable to their respective guilt, and sufficient to deliver\nthem from the punishment due to their crimes.\"--(As cited by Mosheim;\nsee \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. XII, Part II, ch. 3:4.)\n\n15. The doctrine of supererogation is as unreasonable as it is\nunscriptural and untrue. Man's individual responsibility for his acts\nis as surely a fact as is his agency to act for himself. He will be\nsaved through the merits and by the atoning sacrifice of our Redeemer\nand Lord; and his claim upon the salvation provided is strictly\ndependent on his compliance with the principles and ordinances of the\ngospel as established by Jesus Christ. Remission of sins and the\neventual salvation of the human soul are provided for; but these gifts\nof God are not to be purchased with money. Compare the awful fallacies\nof supererogation and the blasphemous practice of assuming to remit\nsins of one man in consideration of the merits of another, with the\ndeclaration of the one and only Savior of mankind: \"But I say unto\nyou, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give\naccount thereof in the day of judgment.\"--(Matt. 12:36.) His inspired\napostles, seeing in prophetic vision the day of awful certainty,\nsolemnly testifies, \"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before\nGod; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is\nthe book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which\nwere written in the books, _according to their works_. And the sea\ngave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the\ndead which were in them: _and they were judged every man according to\ntheir works_.\"--(Rev. 20:12, 13. Italics intro.)\n\n16. The scriptures proclaim the eternal fact of individual\naccountability;--(For a concise treatment of the doctrine of man's\nresponsibility see the author's \"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture 3.) the\nChurch in the days of its degeneracy declares that the merit of one\nmay be bought by another and paid for in worldly coin. Can such a\nChurch be in any measure the Church of Christ?\n\n17. In illustration of the indulgences as sold in Germany in the\nsixteenth century, we have the record of the doings of John Tetzel,\nagent of the pope, who traveled about selling forgiveness of sins.\nSays Milner: \"Myconius assures us that he himself heard Tetzel declaim\nwith incredible effrontery concerning the unlimited power of the pope\nand the efficacy of indulgences. The people believed that the moment\nany person had paid the money for the indulgence he became certain of\nhis salvation; and that the souls for whom the indulgences were bought\nwere instantly released out of purgatory. * * * John Tetzel boasted\nthat he had saved more souls from hell by his indulgences than St.\nPeter had converted to Christianity by his preaching. He assured the\npurchasers of them, their crimes, however enormous, would be forgiven;\nwhence it became almost needless for him to bid them dismiss all fears\nconcerning their salvation. For, remission of sins being fully\nobtained, what doubt could there be of salvation?\"--(Milner, \"History\nof the Church,\" Cent. XVI, ch. 2.)\n\n18. A copy of an indulgence written by the hand of Tetzel, the vendor\nof popish pardons, has been preserved to us as follows: \"May our Lord,\nJesus Christ, have mercy upon thee and absolve thee by the merits of\nHis most holy passion. And I, by His authority, that of His Apostles\nPeter and Paul, and of the most holy pope granted and committed to me\nin these parts, do absolve thee, first from all ecclesiastical\ncensures, in whatever manner they have been incurred; and then from\nall the sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they\nmay be, even for such as are reserved for the cognizance of the holy\nsee; and as far as the keys of the holy church extend, I remit to thee\nall the punishment which thou deservest in purgatory on their account;\nand I restore thee to the holy sacraments of the church, to the unity\nof the faithful, and to that innocence and purity which thou\npossessedst at baptism; so that when thou diest, the gates of\npunishment shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delight\nshall be opened; and if thou shalt not die at present, this grace\nshall remain in full force when thou art at the point of death. In the\nname of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.\"--(Milner,\n\"Church History,\" Cent. XVI, ch. 2.)\n\n19. By way of excuse or defense, it has been claimed for the Roman\nCatholic Church that a profession of contrition or repentance was\nrequired of every applicant for indulgence, and that the pardon was\nissued on the basis of such penitence, and not primarily for money or\nits equivalent; but that recipients of indulgences, at first\nvoluntarily, and later in compliance with established custom, made a\nmaterial offering or donation to the Church. It is reported, moreover,\nthat some of the abuses with which the selling of indulgences had been\nassociated were disapproved by the Council of Trent, about the middle\nof the sixteenth century. Nevertheless, the dread fact remains that\nfor four hundred years the Church had claimed for its pope the power\nto remit all sins, and that the promise of remission had been sold and\nbought.--(See Note 1, end of chapter.)\n\n20. The awful sin of blasphemy consists in taking to one's self the\ndivine prerogatives and powers. Here we find the pope of Rome, the\nhead of the only church recognized at the time, assuming to remit the\npunishment due in the hereafter for sins committed in mortality. A\npope assuming to sit in judgment as God Himself! Is this not a\nfulfilment of the dread conditions of apostasy foreseen and foretold\nas antecedent to the second advent of Christ? Read for yourselves:\n\"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come,\nexcept there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be\nrevealed, the son of perdition; _who opposeth and exalteth himself\nabove all that is called God, or that is worshipped: so that he as God\nsitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is\nGod_.\"--(Thess. 2:3, 4. Italics introduced. See Note 4, end of\nchapter.)\n\n21. Another abuse perpetrated by the councils through which assemblies\nthe supreme pontiffs exercised their autocratic powers, is seen in the\nrestrictions placed on the reading and interpretation of scripture.\nThe same Council of Trent, which had disclaimed authority or blame for\nthe acts of church officials regarding the scandalous traffic in\nindulgences, prescribed most rigid regulations forbidding the reading\nof the scriptures by the people. Thus: \"A severe and intolerable law\nwas enacted, with respect to all interpreters and expositors of the\nscriptures, by which they were forbidden to explain the sense of these\ndivine books, in matters of faith and practice, in such a manner as to\nmake them speak a different language from that of the church and the\nancient doctors. The same law further declared that the church alone\n(i. e., its ruler, the Roman pontiff) had the right of determining the\ntrue meaning and signification of scripture. To fill up the measure of\nthese tyrannical and iniquitous proceedings, the church of Rome\npersisted obstinately in affirming, though not always with the same\nimprudence and plainness of speech, that _the holy scriptures were not\ncomposed for the use of the multitude, but only for that of their\nspiritual teachers_; and, of consequence, ordered these divine records\nto be taken from the people in all places where it was allowed to\nexecute its imperious demands.\"--(Mosheim, \"Eccl. Hist.,\" Cent. XVI,\nPart I, ch. 1:25. The italics are introduced by the present writer.)\n\n22. Is it possible that a church teaching such heresies can be the\nChurch established by Jesus Christ? The Lord Jesus commanded all:\n\"_Search the scriptures_; for in them ye think ye have eternal life:\nand they are they which testify of me.\"--(John 5:39; compare verse 46;\nalso Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29; and Acts 17:11.)\n\n23. Surely a pall of darkness had fallen upon the earth. The Church of\nChrist had long since ceased to exist. In place of a priesthood\nconferred by divine authority, a man-created papacy ruled with the\niron hand of tyranny and without regard to moral restraint. In a\nscholarly work Dr. J. W. Draper gives a list of pontiffs who had stood\nat the head of the Church from the middle of the eighth to the middle\nof the eleventh centuries, with biographical notes of each.--(See Note\n3, end of chapter.) And what a picture is there outlined! To win the\npapal crown no crime was too great, and for a period of centuries the\nimmoralities of many of the popes and their subordinates are too\nshocking for detailed description. It may be claimed that the author\nlast cited, and whose words are given below, was an avowed opponent of\nthe Roman Catholic Church, and that, therefore, his judgment is\nprejudiced; in reply let it be said that the attested facts of history\nsupport the dread arraignment. In commenting on the facts set forth,\nDr. Draper says:\n\n24. \"More than a thousand years had elapsed since the birth of our\nSavior, and such was the condition of Rome. Well may the historian\nshut the annals of those times in disgust. Well may the heart of the\nChristian sink within him at such a catalogue of hideous crimes. Well\nmay we ask, Were these the vicegerents of God upon earth--these, who\nhad truly reached the goal beyond which the last effort of human\nwickedness cannot pass? Not until several centuries after these events\ndid public opinion come to the true and philosophical conclusion--the\ntotal rejection of the divine claims of the papacy. For a time the\nevils were attributed to the manner of the pontifical election, as if\nthey could by any possibility influence the descent of a power which\nclaimed to be supernatural and under the immediate care of God. * * *\nNo one can study the development of the Italian ecclesiastical power\nwithout discovering how completely it depended on human agency, too\noften on human passion and intrigue; how completely wanting it was of\nany mark of the divine construction and care--the offspring of man,\nnot of God, and therefore bearing upon it the lineaments of human\npassions, human virtues, and human sins.\"--(Draper, \"Intellectual\nDevelopment of Europe;\" Vol. 1, p. 382.)\n\n25. By increasing changes and unauthorized alterations in organization\nand government, the earthly establishment known as \"the Church,\" with\npopes, cardinals, abbots, friars, monks, exorcists, acolytes, etc.,\nlost all semblance to the Church as established by Christ and\nmaintained by His apostles. The Catholic argument that there has been\nan uninterrupted succession of authority in the priesthood from the\nApostle Peter to the present occupant of the papal throne, is\nuntenable in the light of history, and unreasonable in the light of\nfact. Authority to speak and act in the name of God, power to\nofficiate in the saving ordinances of the gospel of Christ, the high\nprivilege of serving as a duly commissioned ambassador of the court of\nHeaven,--these are not to be had as the gifts of princes, nor are they\nto be bought for money, nor can they be won as trophies of the bloody\nsword. The history of the papacy is the condemnation of the Church of\nRome.--(See Notes 2 and 3, end of chapter.)\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _The Roman Church Responsible for the Traffic in \"Indulgences_.\" In\nview of the claim asserted by some defenders of the Roman Church, to\nthe effect that the shameful traffic in indulgences was not sanctioned\nby the church, and that the church cannot be held accountable for the\nexcesses to which its subordinates may go in their alleged official\nacts, the following remarks by Milner, the judicious authority on\nChurch History (Cent. XVI, chap. 2.), may be of interest: \"It does not\nappear that the rulers of the hierarchy ever found the least fault\nwith Tetzel as exceeding his commission, till an opposition was openly\nmade to the practice of indulgences. Whence it is evident, that the\nprotestants have not unjustly censured the corruption of the court of\nRome in this respect. * * * The indulgences were farmed to the highest\nbidders, and the undertakers employed such deputies to carry on the\ntraffic as they thought most likely to promote their lucrative views.\nThe inferior officers concerned in this commerce were daily seen in\npublic houses enjoying themselves in riot and voluptuousness\n(Maimbourg, p. 11). In fine, whatever the greatest enemy of popery\ncould have wished, was at that time exhibited with the most\nundisguised impudence and temerity, as if on purpose to render that\nwicked ecclesiastical system infamous before all mankind.\"\n\nThe author proceeds to comment on the graded prices by which these\nindulgences were placed within the pecuniary reach of all classes, and\nfinds in the wholesale traffic proof of profound ignorance and dire\nsuperstition, and then points out the need of a new gospel\ndispensation as follows: \"This, however, was the very situation of\nthings _which opened the way for the reception of the gospel_. But who\nwas to proclaim the gospel in its native beauty and simplicity? The\nprinces, the bishops, and the learned men of the times saw all this\nscandalous traffic respecting the pardon of sins; but none was found\nwho possessed the knowledge, the courage, and the honesty, necessary\nto detect the fraud, and to lay open to mankind the true doctrine of\nsalvation by the remission of sins through Jesus Christ.\" Milner finds\nthe inauguration of a new era in the \"Reformation\" during the\nsixteenth century. It is sufficient for our present purpose to know\nthat he recognized the need of preparation whereby the way would be\nopened \"for the reception of the gospel.\"--(Milner, \"Ch. Hist.,\"\nCent. XVI, ch. 2; italics introduced.)\n\n2. _Three Popes at One Time_. \"One of the severest blows given both\nthe temporal and the spiritual authority of the popes, was the\nremoval, in 1309, through the influence of the French king, Philip the\nFair, of the papal chair from Rome to Avignon, in Provence, near the\nfrontier of France. Here it remained for a space of about seventy\nyears, an era known in church history as the Babylonian Captivity.\nWhile it was established here, all the popes were French, and of\ncourse all their policies were shaped and controlled by the French\nkings. * * * The discontent awakened among the Italians by the\nsituation of the papal court at length led to an open rupture between\nthem and the French party. In 1378 the opposing factions each elected\na pope, and thus there were two heads of the church, one at Avignon\nand the other at Rome. The spectacle of _two rival popes_, each\nclaiming to be the rightful successor of St. Peter, and the sole\ninfallible head of the church, very naturally led men to question the\nclaims and infallibility of both. It gave the reverence which the\nworld had so generally held for the Roman See a rude shock, and one\nfrom which it never recovered. Finally, in 1409, a general council of\nthe church assembled at Pisa, for the purpose of composing the\nshameful quarrel. The council deposed both popes, and elected\nAlexander V as the supreme head of the church. But matters, instead of\nbeing mended hereby, were only made worse; for neither of the deposed\npontiffs would lay down his authority in obedience to the demands of\nthe council, and consequently _there were now three popes instead of\ntwo_. In 1414 another council was called, at Constance, for the\nsettlement of the growing dispute. Two of the claimants were deposed\nand one resigned. A new pope was then elected--Pope Martin V. In his\nperson the Catholic world was again united under a single spiritual\nhead. The schism was outwardly healed, but the wound had been too deep\nnot to leave permanent marks upon the church.\"--(P. V. N. Meyers,\n\"Gen. Hist.,\" pp. 457, 458. Italics introduced.)\n\nThe rupture between the French and Italian factions, referred to by\nMeyers in the quotation given above, is known in history as the Great\nSchism. It may be regarded as the decisive beginning of decline in the\ntemporal power of the popes.\n\n3. _The Papacy Condemns Itself._ The line of succession in the papacy\nfor a limited period as referred to in the text, is given by Draper as\nfollows:\n\n\"To some it might seem, considering the interests of religion alone,\ndesirable to omit all biographical reference to the popes; but this\ncannot be done with justice to the subject. The essential principle of\nthe papacy, that the Roman pontiff is the vicar of Christ upon earth,\nnecessarily obtrudes his personal relations upon us. How shall we\nunderstand his faith unless we see it illustrated in his life? Indeed,\nthe unhappy character of those relations was the inciting cause of the\nmovements in Germany, France, and England, ending in the extinction of\nthe papacy as an actual political power, movements to be understood\nonly through a sufficient knowledge of the private lives and opinions\nof the popes. It is well, as far as possible, to abstain from\nburdening systems with the imperfections of individuals. In this case\nthey are inseparably interwoven. The signal peculiarity of the papacy\nis that, though its history may be imposing, its biography is\ninfamous. I shall, however, forbear to speak of it in this latter\nrespect more than the occasion seems necessarily to require; shall\npass in silence some of those cases which would profoundly shock my\nreligious reader, and therefore restrict myself to the ages between\nthe middle of the eighth and the middle of the eleventh centuries,\nexcusing myself to the impartial critic by the apology that these were\nthe ages with which I have been chiefly concerned in this chapter.\n\n\"On the death of Pope Paul I, who had attained the pontificate A. D.\n757, the Duke of Nepi compelled some bishops to consecrate\nConstantine, one of his brothers, as pope; but more legitimate\nelectors subsequently, A. D. 768, choosing Stephen IV, the usurper and\nhis adherents were severely punished; the eyes of Constantine were put\nout; the tongue of the Bishop Theodoras was amputated, and he was left\nin a dungeon to expire in the agonies of thirst. The nephews of Pope\nAdrian seized his successor, Pope Leo III, A. D. 79, in the street,\nand, forcing him into a neighboring church, attempted to put out his\neyes and cut out his tongue; at a later period, this pontiff, trying\nto suppress a conspiracy to depose him, Rome became the scene of\nrebellion, murder and conflagration. His successor, Stephen V, A. D.\n816, was ignominiously driven from the city: his successor, Paschal I,\nwas accused of blinding and murdering two ecclesiastics in the Lateran\nPalace; it was necessary that imperial commissioners should\ninvestigate the matter, but the pope died, after having exculpated\nhimself by oath before thirty bishops. John VIII, A. D. 872, unable to\nresist the Mohammedans, was compelled to pay them tribute; the Bishop\nof Naples, maintaining a secret alliance with them, received his share\nof the plunder they collected. Him John excommunicated, nor would he\ngive him absolution unless he would betray the chief Mohammedans and\nassassinate others himself. There was an ecclesiastical conspiracy to\nmurder the pope; some of the treasures of the church were seized; and\nthe gate of St. Pancrazia was opened with false keys, to admit the\nSaracens into the city. Formosus, who had been engaged in these\ntransactions, and excommunicated as a conspirator for the murder of\nJohn, was subsequently elected pope, A. D. 891; he was succeeded by\nBoniface VI, A. D. 896, who had been deposed from the diaconate, and\nagain from the priesthood, for his immoral and lewd life. By Stephen\nVII, who followed, the dead body of Formosus was taken from the grave,\nclothed in the papal habilaments, propped in a chair, tried before a\ncouncil, and the preposterous and indecent scene completed by cutting\noff three of the fingers of the corpse and casting it into the Tiber;\nbut Stephen himself was destined to exemplify how low the papacy had\nfallen: he was thrown into prison and strangled. In the course of five\nyears, from A. D. 896 to A. D. 900, five popes were consecrated.\nLeo V, who succeeded in A. D. 904, was in less than two months\nthrown into prison by Christopher, one of his chaplains, who usurped\nhis place, and who, in his turn, was shortly expelled from Rome by\nSergius III, who, by the aid of a military force, seized the\npontificate, A. D. 905. This man, according to the testimony of the\ntimes, lived in criminal intercourse with the celebrated prostitute\nTheodora, who, with her daughters Marozia and Theodora, also\nprostitutes, exercised an extraordinary control over him. The love of\nTheodora was also shared by John X: she gave him first the\narchbishopric of Ravenna, and then translated him to Rome, A. D. 915,\nas pope. John was not unsuited to the times; he organized a\nconfederacy which perhaps prevented Rome from being captured by the\nSaracens, and the world was astonished and edified by the appearance\nof this warlike pontiff at the head of his troops. By the love of\nTheodora, as was said, he had maintained himself in the papacy for\nfourteen years; by the intrigues and hatred of her daughter Marozia he\nwas overthrown. She surprised him in the Lateran Palace; killed his\nbrother Peter before his face; threw him into prison, where he soon\ndied, smothered, as was asserted, with a pillow. After a short\ninterval Marozia made her own son pope as John XI, A. D. 931. Many\naffirmed that Pope Sergius was his father, but she herself inclined to\nattribute him to her husband, Alberic, whose brother Guido she\nsubsequently married. Another of her sons, Alberic, so called from his\nsupposed father, jealous of his brother John, cast him and their\nmother Marozia into prison. After a time Alberic's son was elected\npope, A. D. 956; he assumed the title of John XII, the amorous Marozia\nthus having given a son and a grandson to the papacy. John was only\nnineteen years old when he thus became the head of Christendom. His\nreign was characterized by the most shocking immoralities, so that the\nEmperor Otho I was compelled by the German clergy to interfere. A\nsynod was summoned for his trial in the Church of St. Peter, before\nwhich it appeared that John had received bribes for the consecration\nof bishops; that he had ordained one who was but ten years old, and\nhad performed that ceremony over another in a stable; he was charged\nwith incest with one of his father's concubines, and with so many\nadulteries that the Lateran Palace had become a brothel; he put out\nthe eyes of one ecclesiastic, and castrated another, both dying in\nconsequence of their injuries; he was given to drunkenness, gambling\nand the invocation of Jupiter and Venus. When cited to appear before\nthe council, he sent word that 'he had gone out hunting;' and to the\nfathers who remonstrated with him, he threateningly remarked 'that\nJudas, as well as the other disciples, received from his Master the\npower of binding and loosing, but that as soon as he proved a traitor\nto the common cause, the only power he retained was that of binding\nhis own neck.' Hereupon he was deposed, and Leo VIII elected in his\nstead, A. D. 963; but subsequently getting the upper hand, he seized\nhis antagonists, cut off the hand of one, the nose, finger, tongue of\nothers. His life was eventually brought to an end by the vengeance of\na man whose wife he had seduced.\n\n\"After such details it is almost needless to allude to the annals of\nsucceeding popes: to relate that John XIII was strangled in prison;\nthat Boniface VII imprisoned Benedict VII and killed him by\nstarvation; that John XIV was secretly put to death in the dungeons of\nthe Castle of St. Angelo; that the corpse of Boniface was dragged by\nthe populace through the streets. The sentiment of reverence for the\nsovereign pontiff, nay, even of respect, had become extinct in Rome;\nthroughout Europe the clergy were so shocked at the state of things,\nthat, in their indignation, they began to look with approbation on the\nintention of the Emperor Otho to take from the Italians their\nprivilege of appointing the successor of St. Peter, and confine it to\nhis own family. But his kinsman Gregory V, whom he placed on the\npontifical throne, was very soon compelled by the Romans to fly; his\nexcommunications and religious thunders were turned into derision by\nthem; they were too well acquainted with the true nature of those\nterrors; they were living behind the scenes. A terrible punishment\nawaited the Anti-Pope John XVI. Otho returned into Italy, seized him,\nput out his eyes, cut off his nose and tongue, and sent him through\nthe streets mounted on an ass, with his face to the tail, and a\nwinebladder on his head. It seemed impossible that things could become\nworse, yet Rome had still to see Benedict IX, A. D. 1033, a boy of\nless than twelve years, raised to the apostolic throne. Of this\npontiff, one of his successors, Victor III, declared that his life was\nso shameful, so foul, so execrable, that he shuddered to describe it.\nHe ruled like a captain of banditti rather than a prelate. The people\nat last, unable to bear his adulteries, homicides, and abominations\nany longer, rose against him. In despair of maintaining his position,\nhe put the papacy up at auction. It was bought by a presbyter named\nJohn, who became Gregory VI, A. D. 1045.\"--(J. W. Draper,\n\"Intellectual Development of Europe,\" Vol. 1, ch. XII, pp. 378-381.)\n\n4. _Commentary on the Passage from II Thess. 2:3, 4_. It should be\nremembered that the application of Paul's declaration as to the\napostasy made in the text, is the one generally made by theologians of\nProtestant denominations. It is in no way peculiar to the Church of\nJesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Let us read the passage again: \"Let\nno man deceive you by any means: for that day [the day of Christ's\npromised advent] shall not come except there come a falling away\nfirst, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who\nopposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is\nworshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing\nhimself that he is God.\"\n\nIn his Bible Commentary, Dr. Adam Clarke says of this scripture: \"The\ngeneral run of Protestant writers understand the whole as referring to\nthe popes and church of Rome, or the whole system of the papacy. * * *\nBishop Newton has examined the whole prophecy with his usual skill and\njudgment. * * * The principal part of modern commentators follow his\nsteps. He applies the whole to the Romish church: the apostasy, its\ndefection from the pure doctrines of Christianity; and the 'man of\nsin,' etc., the general succession of the popes of Rome.\" An\nabridgment of Bishop Newton's interpretation is then added; this, in\npart, is as follows:\n\n\"_For that day shall not come except, etc._--The day of Christ shall\nnot come except there come the apostasy first. The apostasy here\ndescribed is plainly not of a civil, but of a religious nature; not a\nrevolt from the government, but a defection from the true religion and\nworship. * * *\n\n\"_So that he as God sitteth in the temple, etc._--By the temple of God\nthe apostle could not well mean the temple of Jerusalem, because that,\nhe knew, would be destroyed within a few years. After the death of\nChrist, the temple of Jerusalem is never called the temple of God; and\nif, at any time, they make mention of the house or temple of God, they\nmean the church in general or every particular believer. Whoever will\nconsult I Cor. 3:16, 17; II Cor. 6:16; I Tim. 3:15; Rev. 3:12, will\nwant no examples to prove that under the gospel dispensation, the\ntemple of God is the Church of Christ; and the man of sin's sitting\nimplies his ruling and presiding there. * * *\n\n\"Upon this survey, there appears little room to doubt of the general\nsense and meaning of the passage. The Thessalonians, (as we have seen\nfrom some expressions in the former epistle,) were alarmed as if the\nend of the world was at hand. The apostle, to correct their mistake\nand dissipate their fears, assures them that a great apostasy or\ndefection of the Christians from the true faith and worship must\nhappen before the coming of Christ. This apostasy, all the concurrent\nmarks and characters will justify us in charging upon the church of\nRome. The true Christian worship is the worship of the only true God,\nthrough the one only Mediator, the man Jesus Christ, and from this\nworship the church of Rome has most notoriously departed, by\nsubstituting other mediators, and invoking and adoring saints and\nangels; nothing is apostasy if idolatry be not. * * * If the apostasy\nbe rightly charged upon the church of Rome, it follows, of\nconsequence, that the 'man of sin' is the pope, not meaning any pope\nin particular, but the pope in general, as the chief head and\nsupporter of this apostasy.\"\n\nThe opinion of Dr. MacKnight is also cited with approval by Clarke. In\nhis \"Commentary and Notes\"--(Vol. III, p. 100, etc.) MacKnight says:\n\"As it is said, the man of sin was _to be revealed in his season_,\nthere can be little doubt that the dark ages, in which all learning\nwas overturned by the irruption of the northern barbarians, were the\nseason allotted to the man of sin for revealing himself. Accordingly\nwe know, that in these ages, the corruptions of Christianity, and the\nusurpations of the clergy, were carried to the greatest height. In\nshort, the annals of the world cannot produce persons and events to\nwhich the things written in this passage can be applied with so much\nfitness as to the bishops of Rome.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n**Results of the Apostasy.--Its Sequel**.\n\n\n1. The thoroughly apostate and utterly corrupt condition of the Church\nof Rome as proclaimed by its history down to the end of the fifteenth\ncentury,--(See Note 1, end of chapter.) was necessarily accompanied by\nabsence of all spiritual sanctity and power, whatever may have been\nthe arrogant assumptions of the Church as to authority in spiritual\naffairs. Revolts against the Church, both as rebellion against her\ntyranny and in protest against her heresies, were not lacking. The\nmost significant of these anti-church agitations arose in connection\nwith the awakening of intellectual activity which began in the latter\npart of the fourteenth century. The period from the tenth century\nonward to the time of the awakening has come to be known as the dark\nages--characterized by stagnation in the progress of the useful arts\nand sciences as well as of fine arts and letters, and by a general\ncondition of illiteracy and ignorance among the masses.\n\n2. Ignorance is a fertile soil for evil growths, and the despotic\ngovernment and doctrinal fallacies of the Church during this period of\ndarkness were nourished by the ignorance of the times. With the change\nknown in history as \"the revival of learning\" came the struggle for\nfreedom from churchly tyranny.\n\n3. One of the early revolts against the temporal and spiritual\ndespotism of the papal church was that of the Albigenses in France\nduring the thirteenth century. This uprising had been crushed by the\npapal autocracy with much cruelty and bloodshed. The next notable\nrevolt was that of John Wickliffe in the fourteenth century. Wickliffe\nwas a professor in Oxford university, England. He boldly assailed the\nevergrowing and greatly abused power of the monks, and denounced the\ncorruption of the Church and the prevalence of doctrinal errors. He\nwas particularly emphatic in his opposition to the papal restrictions\nas to the popular study of the scriptures, and gave to the world an\nEnglish version of the Holy Bible translated from the Vulgate. In\nspite of persecution and sentence, he died a natural death; but years\nafterward the Church insisted on revenge, and in consequence, his\nbones were exhumed and burned, and the ashes scattered to the winds.\n\n4. On the continent of Europe the agitation against the Church was\ncarried on by John Huss and by Jerome of Prague, both of whom reaped\nmartyrdom as the harvest of their righteous zeal. These instances are\ncited to show that though the Church had long been apostate to the\ncore, there were men ready to sacrifice their lives in what they\ndeemed to be the cause of truth.\n\n5. Conditions existing at the opening of the sixteenth century have\nbeen concisely summarized by a modern historian as follows: \"Previous\nto the opening of the sixteenth century there had been comparatively\nfew--though there had been some, like the Albigenses in the south of\nFrance, the Wickliffites, in England, and the Hussites, in\nBohemia--who denied the supreme and infallible authority of the bishop\nof Rome in all matters touching religion. Speaking in very general\nmanner it would be correct to say that at the close of the fifteenth\ncentury all the nations of Western Europe professed the faith of the\nLatin or Roman Catholic Church and yielded obedience to the Papal\nSee.\"--(Myers, \"Gen. Hist.,\" p. 520.)\n\n**The Reformation**.\n\n6. The next notable revolt against the papal Church occurred in the\nsixteenth century, and assumed such proportions as to be designated\nthe Reformation. The movement began in Germany about 1517, when Martin\nLuther, a monk of the Augustinian order and an instructor in the\nUniversity of Wittenberg, publicly opposed and strongly denounced\nTetzel, the shameless agent of papal indulgences. Luther was\nconscientious in his conviction that the whole system of church\npenances and indulgences was contrary to scripture, reason, and right.\nIn line with the academic custom of the day--to challenge discussion\nand debate on disputed questions--Luther wrote his famous ninety-five\ntheses against the practice of granting indulgences, and a copy of\nthese he nailed to the door of Wittenberg church, inviting criticism\nthereon from all scholars. The news spread, and the theses were\ndiscussed in all the scholastic centers of Europe. Luther then\nattacked other practices and doctrines of the Roman Church, and the\npope, Leo X, issued a \"Bull\" or papal decree against him, demanding an\nunconditional recantation on pain of excommunication from the Church.\nLuther publicly burned the pope's document, and thus declared his open\nrevolt. The sentence of excommunication was pronounced.\n\n7. We cannot follow here in detail the doings of this bold reformer.\nSuffice it to say, he was not long left to fight singlehanded. Among\nhis able supporters was Philip Melancthon, a professor in Wittenberg.\nLuther was summoned before a council or \"Diet\" at Worms in 1521. There\nhe openly declared for individual freedom of conscience. There is\ninspiration in his words: \"I cannot submit my faith either to the pope\nor to the council, because it is as clear as the day that they have\nfrequently erred and contradicted each other. Unless, therefore, I am\nconvinced by the testimony of scripture, or by the clearest\nreasoning--unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have\nquoted,--and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the word\nof God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a\nChristian to speak against his conscience. _Here I stand, I can do no\nother, may God help me! Amen!_\"\n\n8. The religious controversy spread throughout Europe. At the Second\nDiet of Spires (1529) an edict was issued against the reformers; to\nthis the representatives of seven German principalities and other\ndelegates entered a formal _protest_, in consequence of which action\nthe reformers were henceforth known as _Protestants_. John, Elector of\nSaxony, supported Luther in his opposition to papal authority, and\nundertook the establishment of an independent church, the constitution\nand plan of which were prepared at his instance by Luther and\nMelancthon. Luther died in 1546, but the work of revolution, if not in\ntruth reformation, continued to grow. The Protestants, however, soon\nbecame divided among themselves, and broke up into many contending\nsects.\n\n9. In Switzerland, Ulrich Zwingle led in the movement toward reform.\nHe was accused of heresy, and when placed on trial, he defended\nhimself on the authority of the Bible as against papal edict, and was\nfor the time successful. The contest was bitter, and in 1531 the\nCatholics and Protestants of the region engaged in actual battle, in\nwhich Zwingle was slain, and his body brutally mutilated.\n\n10. John Calvin next appeared as the leader of the Swiss reformers,\nthough he was an opponent of many of Zwingle's doctrines. He exerted\ngreat influence as a teacher, and is known as an extremist in\ndoctrine. He advocated and vehemently defended the tenet of absolute\npredestination, thus denying the free agency of man. In France,\nSweden, Denmark, and Holland, leaders arose and the Protestants became\nstrong in their opposition to the Roman Church, though the several\ndivisions were antagonistic to one another on many points of doctrine.\n\n11. One effect of this Protestant uprising was the partial awakening\nof the Roman Church to the need of internal reform, and an\nauthoritative re-statement of Catholic principles was attempted. This\nmovement was largely accomplished through the famous Council of\nTrent--(1545-1563), which body disavowed for the Church the extreme\nclaims made for \"indulgences\" and denied responsibility for many of\nthe abuses with which the Church had been charged. But in connection\nwith the attempted reform came a demand for more implicit obedience to\nthe requirements of the Church.\n\n12. Near the end of the fifteenth century, in the reign of Ferdinand\nand Isabella, the court of the Inquisition, then known as the Holy\nOffice, had been established in Spain. The prime purpose of this\nsecret tribunal was the detection and punishment of heresy. Of this\ninfamous institution as operative in Spain, Myers says: \"The Holy\nOffice, as the tribunal was styled, thus became the instrument of the\nmost incredible cruelty. Thousands were burned at the stake, and tens\nof thousands more condemned to endure penalties scarcely less\nterrible. Queen Isabella, in giving her consent to the establishment\nof the tribunal in her dominions, was doubtless actuated by the purest\nreligious zeal, and sincerely believed that in suppressing heresy she\nwas discharging a simple duty, and rendering God good service. 'In the\nlove of Christ and His Maid-Mother,' she says, 'I have caused great\nmisery. I have depopulated towns and districts, provinces and\nkingdoms.'\"--(Myers, \"Gen. Hist.\" p. 500.)\n\n13. Now, in the sixteenth century, in connection with the attempted\nreform in the doctrines of Catholicism, the terrible Inquisition\n\"assumed new vigor and activity, and heresy was sternly dealt with.\"\nConsider the following as throwing light on the condition of that\ntime: \"At this point, in connection with the persecutions of the\nInquisition, we should not fail to recall that in the sixteenth\ncentury a refusal to conform to the established worship was regarded\nby all, by Protestants as well as Catholics, as a species of treason\nagainst society and was dealt with accordingly. Thus we find Calvin at\nGeneva consenting to the burning of Servetus (1553) because he\npublished views that the Calvinists thought heretical; and in England\nwe see the Anglican Protestants waging the most cruel, bitter, and\npersistent persecutions, not only against the Catholics but also\nagainst all Protestants that refused to conform to the Established\nChurch.\"--(Myers, \"Gen. Hist.,\" p. 527.)\n\n14. What shall be said of a Church that seeks to propagate its faith\nby such methods? Are fire and sword the weapons with which truth\nfights her battles? Are torture and death the arguments of the gospel?\nHowever terrible the persecutions to which the early Church was\nsubjected at the hands of heathen enemies, the persecutions waged by\nthe apostate church are far more terrible. Can such a church by any\npossibility be the Church of Christ? Heaven forbid!\n\n15. In the revolts we have noted against the Church of Rome, notably\nin the Reformation, the zeal of the reformers led to many fallacies in\nthe doctrines they advocated. Luther, himself, proclaimed the doctrine\nof absolute predestination and of justification by faith alone, thus\nnullifying belief in the God-given rights of free agency, and\nimpairing the importance of individual effort.--(See the Author's\n\"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture 5.) Calvin and others were no less\nextreme. Nevertheless their ministry contributed to the awakening of\nindividual conscience, and assisted in bringing about a measure of\nreligious freedom of which the world had long been deprived.--(See\nnote 2, end of chapter.)\n\n**Rise of the Church of England**.\n\n16. At the time of Martin Luther's revolt against the Church of Rome,\nHenry VIII reigned in England. In common with all other countries of\nwestern Europe, Britain was profoundly stirred by the reformation\nmovement. The king openly defended the Catholic Church and published a\nbook in opposition to Luther's claims. This so pleased the pope, Leo\nX, that he conferred upon King Henry the distinguishing title,\n\"Defender of the Faith.\" This took place about 1522, and from that\ntime to the present, British sovereigns have proudly borne the title.\n\n17. Within a few years after his accession to this title of\ndistinction, we find King Henry among the bitterest enemies of the\nRoman Church, and the change came about in this wise. Henry desired a\ndivorce from his wife, Queen Catherine, to give him freedom to marry\nAnne Boleyn. The pope hesitated in the matter of granting the divorce,\nand Henry, becoming impatient, disregarded the pope's authority and\nsecretly married Anne Boleyn. The pope thereupon excommunicated the\nking from the Church. The English parliament, following the king's\ndirections, passed the celebrated Act of Supremacy in 1534. This\nstatute declared an absolute termination of all allegiance to papal\nauthority, and proclaimed the king as supreme head of the Church of\nBritain. Thus originated the Church of England, without regard for or\nclaim of divine authority, and without even a semblance of priestly\nsuccession.\n\n18. At first there was little innovation in doctrine or ritual in the\nnewly formed church. It originated in revolt. Later a form of creed\nand a plan of organization were adopted, giving the Church of England\nsome distinctive features. During the reigns of Edward VI, Queen Mary,\nand Queen Elizabeth, persecutions between Catholics and Protestants\nwere extensive and violent. Several non-conformist sects arose, among\nthem the Puritans and the Separatists. These were so persecuted that\nmany of them fled to Holland as exiles. From among these came the\nnotable colony of the Pilgrim Fathers, who crossed in the Mayflower to\nthe shores of the then recently-discovered continent, and established\nthemselves in America.\n\n19. The thoughtful student cannot fail to see in the progress of the\ngreat apostasy and its results the existence of an overruling power,\noperating toward eventual good, however mysterious its methods. The\nheart-rending persecutions to which the saints were subjected in the\nearly centuries of our era, the anguish, the torture, the bloodshed,\nincurred in defense of the testimony of Christ, the rise of an\napostate church, blighting the intellect and leading captive the souls\nof men--all these dread scenes were foreknown to the Lord. While we\ncannot say or believe that such exhibitions of human depravity and\nblasphemy of heart were in accordance with the divine will, certainly\nGod willed to permit full scope to the free agency of man, in the\nexercise of which agency some won the martyr's crown, and others\nfilled the measure of their iniquity to overflowing.\n\n20. Not less marked is the divine permission in the revolts and\nrebellions, in the revolutions and reformations, that developed in\nopposition to the darkening influence of the apostate church. Wycliffe\nand Huss, Luther and Melancthon, Zwingle and Calvin, Henry VIII in his\narrogant assumption of priestly authority, John Knox in Scotland,\nRoger Williams in America--these and a host of others builded better\nthan they knew, in that their efforts laid in part the foundation of\nthe structure of religious freedom and liberty of conscience,--and\nthis in preparation for the restoration of the gospel as had been\ndivinely predicted.\n\n21. From the sixteenth century down to the present time, sects\nprofessedly founded on the tenets of Christianity have multiplied\napace. They are now to be numbered by hundreds. On every side the\nclaim has been heard, \"Lo, here is Christ,\" or \"Lo, there.\" There are\nchurches named after their place of origin--as the Church of England;\nother sects are designated in honor of their famous promoters--as\nLutherans, Calvinists, Wesleyans; others are known from some\npeculiarity of creed or doctrine--as Methodists, Presbyterians, and\nBaptists; but down to the beginning of the nineteenth century there\nwas no church even claiming name or title as the Church of Christ. The\nonly Church existing at that time venturing to assert authority by\nsuccession was the Catholic Church, which as shown was wholly without\npriesthood or divine commission.\n\n22. If the \"Mother Church\" be without divine authority or spiritual\npower, how can her children derive from her the right to officiate in\nthe things of God? Who dares affirm the absurdity that man can\noriginate for himself a priesthood which God shall honor and respect.\nGranted that men may, can and do, create among themselves societies,\nassociations, sects, and churches if they choose so to designate their\nreligious organizations; granted that they may formulate laws,\nprescribe rules, and construct elaborate plans of organization and\ngovernment, and that all such laws, rules and schemes of\nadministration are binding upon those who voluntarily assume\nmembership,--granted all these powers and rights--whence can such\nhuman creations derive the authority of the holy Priesthood, without\nwhich there can be no Church of Christ? If the power and authority be,\nby any possibility, of human origin, there never has been a Church of\nChrist on earth, and the alleged saving ordinances of the gospel have\nnever been other than empty forms.\n\n23. Our review of the Great Apostasy as presented in this treatise,\ndoes not call for any detailed or critical study of the Roman Catholic\nChurch as it exists in modern times, nor of any of the numerous\nProtestant denominations that have come into existence as dissenting\nchildren of the so-called \"Mother Church.\" The apostasy was complete,\nas far as actual loss of priesthood and cessation of spiritual power\nin the Church are concerned, long prior to the sixteenth century\nrevolt, known in history as the Reformation. It is instructive to\nobserve, however, that the weakness of the Protestant sects as to any\nclaim to divine appointment and authority, is recognized by those\nchurches themselves. The Church of England, which, as shown,\noriginated in revolt against the Roman Catholic Church and its pope,\nis without foundation of claim to divine authority in its priestly\norders, unless, indeed, it dare assert the absurdity that kings and\nparliaments can create and take unto themselves heavenly authority by\nenactment of earthly statutes.\n\n24. The Roman Catholic Church is at least consistent in its claim that\na line of succession in the priesthood has been maintained from the\napostolic age to the present, though the claim is utterly untenable in\nthe light of a rational interpretation of history. But the fact\nremains that the Catholic Church is the only organization venturing to\nassert the present possession of the holy priesthood by unbroken\ndescent from the apostles of our Lord. The Church of England, chief\namong the Protestant sects, and all other dissenting churches, are by\ntheir own admission and by the circumstances of their origin, man-made\ninstitutions, without a semblance of claim to the powers and authority\nof the holy priesthood.\n\n25. As late as 1896 the question of the validity of the priestly\norders in the Church of England was officially and openly discussed\nand considered, both in England and at Rome. Lord Halifax, chairman of\nthe English Church Union, conferred with the Vatican authorities to\nascertain the possibility of bringing about closer union between the\nRoman Catholic Church and the Church of England. This involved the\nquestion of the recognition of the priestly orders of the Anglican\nChurch by the pope and Church of Rome. The movement was favored in the\ninterests of unity and peace by the English premier, Mr. Gladstone.\nThe pope, Leo XIII, finally issued a decree refusing to recognize in\nany degree the authority of the Anglican orders, and expressly\ndeclaring all claims to priestly authority by the Church of England as\nabsolutely invalid.\n\n26. Assuredly the Church of Rome could take no other action than this\nand maintain the consistency of its own claim to exclusive possession\nof the priesthood by descent. Assuredly the Church of England would\nhave sought no official recognition of its priestly status by the\nChurch of Rome had it any independent claim to the power and authority\nof the priesthood. The Roman Catholic Church declares that all\nProtestant denominations are either apostate organizations, or\ninstitutions of human creation that have never had even a remote\nconnection with the church that claims succession in the priesthood.\nIn short, the apostate \"Mother Church\" aggressively proclaims the\nperfidy of her offspring.\n\n**The Apostasy Admitted**.\n\n27. The fact of the great apostasy is admitted. Many theologians who\nprofess a belief in Christianity have declared the fact. Thus we read:\n\"We must not expect to see the Church of Christ existing in its\nperfection on the earth. It is not to be found thus perfect, either in\nthe collected fragments of Christendom or still less in any one of\nthose fragments.\"--(Smith's \"Dictionary of the Bible.\")\n\n28. John Wesley, who lived from 1703 to 1791 A. D., and who ranks as\nchief among the founders of Methodism, comments as follows on the\napostasy of the Christian Church as evidenced by the early decline of\nspiritual power and the cessation of the gifts and graces of the\nSpirit of God within the Church: \"It does not appear that these\nextraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit--(See I Cor., ch. 12.) were\ncommon in the Church for more than two or three centuries. We seldom\nhear of them after that fatal period when the Emperor Constantine\ncalled himself a Christian, and from a vain imagination of promoting\nthe Christian cause thereby heaped riches and power and honor upon\nChristians in general, but in particular upon the Christian clergy.\nFrom this time they almost totally ceased, very few instances of the\nkind being found. The cause of this was not, as has been supposed,\nbecause there was no more occasion for them, because all the world was\nbecome Christians. This is a miserable mistake; not a twentieth part\nof it was then nominally Christians. The real cause of it was that the\nlove of many, almost all Christians, so-called, was waxed cold. The\nChristians had no more of the spirit of Christ than the other\nheathens. The Son of Man, when He came to examine His Church, could\nhardly find faith upon earth. This was the real cause why the\nextraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in\nthe Christian church--because the Christians were turned heathens\nagain, and only had a dead form left.\"--(John Wesley's Works. Vol.\nVII, 89:26-27. See Note 3, end of chapter.)\n\n29. The Church of England makes official declaration of degeneracy and\nloss of divine authority in these words: \"Laity and clergy, learned\nand unlearned, all ages, sects, and degrees, have been drowned in\nabominable idolatry most detested by God and damnable to man for eight\nhundred years and more.\"--(Church of England 'Homily on Perils of\nIdolatry,' p. 3.) The \"Book of Homilies,\" in which occurs this\ndeclaration by the Church of England, dates from about the middle of\nthe sixteenth century. According to this official statement,\ntherefore, the religious world had been utterly apostate for eight\ncenturies prior to the establishment of the Church of England. The\nfact of a universal apostasy was widely proclaimed, for the homilies\nfrom which the foregoing citation is taken were \"appointed to be read\nin churches\" in lieu of sermons under specified condition.\n\n30. _The great apostasy was divinely predicted; its accomplishment is\nattested by both sacred and secular writ_.\n\n31. To the faithful Latter-day Saint, a concluding proof of the\nuniversal apostasy and of the absolute need of a restoration of\nPriesthood from the heavens will be found in the divine reply to the\ninquiry of the boy prophet, Joseph Smith, as to which of all the\ncontending sects was right: \"I was answered that I must join none of\nthem, for they were all wrong; and the personage who addressed me said\nthat all their creeds were an abomination in His sight; that those\nprofessors were all corrupt; that 'they draw near to me with their\nlips, but their hearts are far from me; they teach for doctrines the\ncommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the\npower thereof.'\"--(Pearl of Great Price, p. 85, par. 19.)\n\n**The Sequel**.\n\n32. The sequel of the Great Apostasy is the Restoration of the Gospel,\nmarking the inauguration of the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times.\nThis epoch-making event occurred in the early part of the nineteenth\ncentury, when the Father and the Son manifested themselves to man, and\nwhen the Holy Priesthood with all its powers and authority was again\nbrought to earth.\n\n33. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims to the\nworld this glorious restoration,--at once the consummation of the work\nof God throughout the ages past, and the final preparation for the\nsecond advent of Jesus, the Christ. The Church affirms that after the\nlong night of spiritual darkness, the light of heaven has again come;\nand that the Church of Christ is authoritatively established. The\nChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stands alone in the\ndeclaration that the Holy Priesthood is operative upon earth, not as\nan inheritance through earthly continuation from the apostolic age,\nbut as the endowment of a new dispensation, brought to earth by\nheavenly ministration. In this restoration, divinely predicted and\ndivinely achieved, has been witnessed a realization of the Revelator's\nvision:\n\n\"_And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the\neverlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to\nevery nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud\nvoice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment\nis come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and\nthe fountains of waters_.\"--(Rev. 14:6, 7. For treatment of the\nRestoration of the Gospel see the Author's \"Articles of Faith,\"\nLecture 11. See Notes 4 and 5, end of chapter.)\n\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. _Papist Testimony to the Corruption of the Church_. \"The judicious\nstudent of ecclesiastical history will observe that I constantly\nendeavor to draw my proofs from the most unexceptionable sources. For\nexample: To prove the corrupt state of the clergy, and the abominable\npractices of the Roman See, I would produce the evidence of George of\nSaxony, a most bigoted papist, whom the Roman Catholics always reckon\namong the most sincere and most active of the holy defenders of their\nreligion. Now, as with them the assertions of Luther and the other\nreformers go for nothing but exaggerations, misrepresentations, or\ndirect falsehoods, let them listen at least to this duke, their steady\nfriend and advocate, who generally, in religious concerns, opposed his\nrelation, the elector of Saxony, and who also entirely approved of\nLuther's condemnation at Worms. This George of Saxony exhibited to the\nDiet twelve heads of the grievances which called loudly for reform.\nTwo of these are briefly as follows: 1. Indulgences, which ought to be\nobtained by prayers, fastings, benevolence towards our neighbor, and\nother good works, are sold for money. Their value is extolled beyond\nall decency. The sole object is to gain a deal of money. Hence the\npreachers, who are bound to set forth truth, teach men nothing but\nlies and frauds. They are not only suffered to go on thus, but are\nwell paid for their fraudulent harangues. The reason is the more\nconviction they can produce among their hearers, the more money flows\ninto the chest. Rivers of scandalous proceedings arise from this\ncorrupt fountain. The officials of the bishops are equally attentive\nto scrape money together. They vex the poor with their censures for\ngreat crimes, as whoredom, adultery, blasphemy; but they spare the\nrich. The clergy commit the very same crimes, and nobody censures\nthem. Faults which ought to be expiated by prayers and fastings are\natoned for by money, in order that the officials may pay large sums to\ntheir respective bishops, and retain a portion of the gain for\nthemselves. Neither when a mulct is inflicted, is it done in a way to\nstop the commission of the same fault in future, but rather so that\nthe delinquent understands he may soon do that very thing again,\nprovided he be but ready to pay. Hence, all the sacraments are sold\nfor money; and where that is not to be had, they are absolutely\nneglected. 2. Another distinct head of the grievances produced by this\nzealous duke was expressed thus: 'The scandalous conduct of the clergy\nis a very fruitful source of the destruction of poor souls. There must\nbe a universal reformation; and this cannot be better effected than by\na general council. It is therefore, the most earnest wish of us all\nthat such a measure be adopted.'\"--(Milner, \"Church History,\" Cent.\nXVI, ch. 6. Footnote.)\n\n2. _Extremes Incident to the Reformation_. \"What were the reproaches\nconstantly applied to the Reformation by its enemies? Which of its\nresults are thrown in its face, as it were, unanswerable? The two\nprincipal reproaches are, first, the multiplicity of sects, the\nexcessive license of thought, the destruction of all spiritual\nauthority, and the entire dissolution of religious society; secondly,\ntyranny and persecution. 'You provoke licentiousness,' it has been\nsaid to the Reformers: 'you produce it; and, after being the cause of\nit, you wish to restrain and repress it. And how do you repress it? By\nthe most harsh and violent means. You take upon yourselves, too, to\npunish heresy, and that by virtue of an illegitimate authority.'\"--\nGuizot.\n\n\"The Sectarian dogma of Justification by Faith alone has exercised an\ninfluence for evil since the early days of Christianity. The idea upon\nwhich this pernicious doctrine was founded, was at first associated\nwith that of an absolute predestination, by which man was foredoomed\nto destruction, or to an utterly undeserved salvation. Thus, Luther\ntaught as follows: 'The excellent, infallible, and sole preparation\nfor grace, is the eternal election and predestination of God.' 'Since\nthe fall of man, free-will is but an idle word.' 'A man who imagines\nto arrive at grace by doing all that he is able to do, adds sins to\nsin, and is doubly guilty.' 'That man is not justified who performs\nmany works; but he who without works has much faith in Christ.' (For\nthese and other doctrines of the Reformation see D'Aubigne's 'History\nof the Reformation,' Vol. I, pp. 82, 83, 119, 122.) In Milner's\n'Church History' (Vol. IV, p. 514) we read: 'The point which the\nreformer Luther had most at heart in all his labors, contests and\ndangers, was the justification by faith alone.' Melancthon voices the\ndoctrine of Luther in these words: 'Man's justification before God\nproceeds from faith alone. This faith enters man's heart by the grace\nof God alone;' and further, 'As all things which happen, happen\nnecessarily, according to the divine predestination, there is no such\nthing as liberty in our wills.'--(D'Aubigne, Vol. III, p. 340.) It is\ntrue that Luther strongly denounced, and vehemently disclaimed\nresponsibility for, the excesses to which this teaching gave rise, yet\nhe was not less vigorous in proclaiming the doctrine. Note his words:\n'I, Doctor Martin Luther, unworthy herald of the doctrine of our Lord\nJesus Christ, confess this article, that faith alone without works\njustifies before God; and I declare that it shall stand and remain\nforever in despite of the emperor of the Romans, the emperor of the\nTurks, the emperor of the Persians,--in spite of the pope and all the\ncardinals, with the bishops, priests, monks and nuns,--in spite of\nkings, princes and nobles, and in spite of all the world and of the\ndevils themselves; and that if they endeavor to fight against this\ntruth they will draw the fires of hell upon their heads. This is the\ntrue and holy gospel, and the declaration of me, Doctor Luther,\naccording to the teachings of the Holy Ghost.'\"--(See the Author's\n\"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture V, Note 2.)\n\n3. _Diverse Views Concerning Continuance or Decline of Spiritual\nGifts_. \"Protestant writers insist that the age of miracles closed\nwith the fourth or fifth century, and that after that the\nextraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost must not be looked for. Catholic\nwriters, on the other hand, insist that the power to perform miracles\nhas always continued in the Church; yet those spiritual manifestations\nwhich they describe after the fourth and fifth centuries savor of\ninvention on the part of the priests, and childish credulity on the\npart of the people; or else, what is claimed to be miraculous falls\nshort of the power and dignity of those spiritual manifestations which\nthe primitive Church was wont to witness. The virtues and prodigies,\nascribed to the bones and other relics of the martyrs and saints, are\npuerile in comparison with the healings by the anointing with oil and\nthe laying on of hands, speaking in tongues, interpretations,\nprophecies, revelations, casting out of devils in the name of Jesus\nChrist; to say nothing of the gifts of faith, wisdom, knowledge,\ndiscerning of spirits, etc.--common in the Church in the days of the\napostles--(I Cor. 12:8-10). Nor is there anything in the scriptures or\nin reason that would lead one to believe that they were to be\ndiscontinued. Still this plea is made by modern Christians--explaining\nthe absence of these spiritual powers among them--that the\nextraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were only intended to accompany\nthe proclamation of the gospel during the first few centuries, until\nthe Church was able to make its way without them, and they were to be\ndone away. It is sufficient to remark upon this that it is assumption\npure and simple, and stands without warrant either of scripture or\nright reason; and proves that men had so far changed the religion of\nJesus Christ that it became a form of godliness without the power\nthereof.\"--(B. H. Roberts, \"Outlines of Ecclesiastical History,\" Part\nII, Sec. 5:6-8.)\n\n4. _Commentary on the Revelator's Vision of the Restoration_. It is\ninstructive to inquire into the interpretation given by biblical\nstudents to the prophecy voiced by John the Revelator predicting the\nadvent of the angel \"having the everlasting gospel.\" Dr. Clarke offers\nthe following reflections on the passage: \"_And I saw another angel\nfly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel_: Whether\nthis angel means any more than a particular dispensation of providence\nand grace, by which the gospel shall be rapidly sent through the whole\nworld; or whether it means any especial messenger, order of preachers,\npeople, or society of Christians, whose professed object it is to send\nthe gospel of the kingdom throughout the earth, we know not. But the\nvision seems truly descriptive of a late institution, entitled 'The\nBritish and Foreign Bible Society,' whose object it is to print and\ncirculate the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments through all the\nhabitable world, and in all the languages spoken on the face of the\nearth.\"--(Clarke, \"Bible Commentary,\" Rev. 14:6.)\n\nThe learned commentator is to be commended for his frank avowal as to\nuncertainty regarding the precise interpretation of this scripture,\nand for the provisional and tentative manner in which he indicates a\npossible application to the wide distribution of the Holy Bible\nthrough the efforts of a most worthy and influential society. It is to\nbe noted that Dr. Clarke wrote his famous commentary on the Bible\nshortly before the actual restoration of the gospel through angelic\nagency which resulted in the establishment of the Church of Jesus\nChrist of Latter-day Saints. Of necessity his search for the\nfulfillment of the prediction was unsatisfactory, and, indeed,\nunsuccessful, inasmuch as the fulfillment had not then occurred. The\ncommendable work of the Bible Society was a preparation for the\nfulfillment of the momentous prophecy, but not the fulfillment itself.\n\n5. _Restoration of the Church_. \"In the first ten centuries\nimmediately following the ministry of Christ, the authority of the\npriesthood was lost from among men, and no human power could restore\nit. But the Lord in His mercy provided for the re-establishment of His\nChurch in the last days, and for the last time, and prophets of olden\ntime foresaw this era of renewed enlightenment, and sang in joyous\ntones of its coming.\"--(See Dan. 2:44, 45; 7:27; Matt. 24:14; Rev.\n14:6-8.) \"This restoration was effected by the Lord through the\nprophet, Joseph Smith, who, together with Oliver Cowdery, in 1829,\nreceived the Aaronic Priesthood under the hands of John the Baptist,\nand later the Melchizedek Priesthood under the hands of the former-day\napostles, Peter, James and John. By the authority thus bestowed, the\nChurch has been again organized with all its former completeness, and\nmankind once more rejoices in the priceless privileges of the counsels\nof God. The Latter-day Saints declare their high claim to the true\nChurch organization, similar in all essentials to the organization\neffected by Christ among the Jews; these people of the last days\nprofess to have the Priesthood of the Almighty, the power to act in\nthe name of God, which power commands respect both on earth and in\nheaven.\"--(The Author, \"Articles of Faith,\" Lecture 11:12.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<pre id=\"pg-footer\">","title":"The Great Apostasy, Considered in the Light of Scriptural and Secular History","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":52032}