{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_43630/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_43630","id":"gutenberg_43630","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43630","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Catholic Church -- Controversial literature","Future punishment","Universalism"],"text":"Note: Images of the original pages are available through\n      Internet Archive. See\n      http://archive.org/details/paganoriginofp00pitr\n\n\nTranscriber's note:\n\n      Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).\n\n      Greek characters have been transliterated to English\n      characters. The transliterations are denoted by [Greek:\n\n\n\n\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF PARTIALIST DOCTRINES.\n\nby\n\nREV. JOHN CLAUDIUS PITRAT,\n\nA Member of the University of France; Author of \"Jesuits\nUnveiled,\" of \"Paul and Julia,\" etc., and\nFormerly a Romish Priest.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPublished by the Author.\n\nCincinnati:\nLongley Brothers, Printers,\n168 Vine St., Above Fourth.\n1857.\n\nEntered according to act of Congress, in the year 1857, by\nJohn Claudius Pitrat,\nIn the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Southern District\nof Ohio.\n\n\n\n\nTO BROTHER JOHN A. GURLEY.\n\n\n_Dear Friend Gurley_,--To you, who have fed me when I was starving,\nsheltered me when I was a homeless exile, and befriended me when I was\nforlorn, and my life was sought by my persecutors, this volume I\ninscribe, as a feeble token of my lasting gratitude and friendship.\n\n     J. C. PITRAT.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nTwo arguments can be brought forth to prove that the Partialist\ndoctrines are not taught in the Scriptures: the one is drawn from the\nScriptures themselves, and the other is drawn from history.\n\nThe first argument, drawn from the Scriptures, is this:\n\nThe Partialist doctrines are not taught in the Scriptures, if it can be\nproved by the Scriptures themselves that the Partialist doctrines are\nnot contained therein. But it can be proved by the Scriptures themselves\nthat the Partialist doctrines are not contained therein. Then the\nPartialist doctrines are not taught in the Scriptures.\n\nThe second argument, drawn from history, is this:\n\nThe Partialist doctrines are not taught in the Scriptures, if it can be\nproved by history, that the origin of the Partialist doctrines is Pagan.\nBut it can be proved by history that the origin of the Partialist\ndoctrines is Pagan. Then the Partialist doctrines are not taught in the\nScriptures.\n\nThese two arguments, as he who reflects can easily perceive, not only\ncorroborate each other, but their respective proving force is such,\nthat, if considered separately, each one is sufficient to peremptorily\nprove that the Partialist doctrines are not taught in the Scriptures.\nThe former, till now, we Universalists have exclusively used, and it\nhas been efficacious in causing the scales of early and strong\nprejudices to fall from the eyes of thousands. However, it is\nunfortunately a fact, confirmed by daily experience, that the\nconclusions arrived at through scriptural controversies are striking\nonly to minds of a particular bent and culture. On the contrary, the\nconclusions arrived at through historical facts present themselves to\nthe mind of _all_, clear, vivid and irresistible. It is for this reason\nthat the author, in this book, presents to the consideration of the\nUniversalist denomination, and of the public in general, the second\nargument, drawn from history. The vast number of historical facts, of\nquotations, extracts, etc., contained in this volume, have been\ntranslated from many languages, with as much accuracy as possible.\n\nMay God bless this work, intended to confirm the Universalists in their\nbeloved faith; and also to break the chain of prejudice which keeps\nmillions of men in ignorance, in superstition, in perpetual fear, and\nthereby in spiritual bondage: \"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth\nshall make you free.\"\n\n     THE AUTHOR.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n  DEDICATION.                                                      iii\n\n  PREFACE.                                                           v\n\n  CHAPTER I.\n\n  TRUE SPIRIT OF PAGAN RELIGIONS.                                    9\n\n  CHAPTER II.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF MYSTERIES.                                        28\n\n  CHAPTER III.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A PERSONAL DEVIL.                 58\n\n  CHAPTER IV.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN.                     68\n\n  CHAPTER V.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF TRINITY.                          80\n\n  CHAPTER VI.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE SUPREME DIVINITY OF\n  JESUS CHRIST.                                                     87\n\n  CHAPTER VII.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF ENDLESS HELL.                    111\n\n  ARTICLE I.--Metempsychosis or Transmigration of the Souls.       111\n\n  ARTICLE II.--Tartarus.                                           129\n\n  ARTICLE III.--Did the Christians of the First Centuries\n  believe in Endless Hell.                                         136\n\n  ARTICLE IV.--How the Church of Rome borrowed the doctrine\n  of Endless Hell from the Pagans; and how, afterwards, the\n  self-called Orthodox Protestant Churches borrowed it from\n  the Church of Rome.                                              170\n\n  CHAPTER VIII.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A FIRST JUDGMENT, BY JESUS\n  CHRIST, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SEPARATION OF THE SOUL FROM\n  THE BODY.                                                        182\n\n  CHAPTER IX.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE\n  BODY.                                                            190\n\n  CHAPTER X.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A GENERAL JUDGMENT AT\n  THE END OF THE WORLD.                                            205\n\n  CHAPTER XI.\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF VICARIOUS ATONEMENT.             229\n\n  VALEDICTORY.                                                     246\n\n\n\n\n  PAGAN ORIGIN\n  OF\n  PARTIALIST DOCTRINES.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\nTRUE SPIRIT OF PAGAN RELIGIONS.\n\n\nIT seems to be an undeniable fact, that, before the coming of Jesus\nChrist, nations had immemorially and universally believed, that the\nuniverse, or nature, was an uncreated but animated being, whose vast\nbody comprised the earth, the sun, the planets and the stars, to which\none great soul impressed motion and life. Also they believed that all\nthose principal parts, or, in other words, principal members of the body\nof the universe, were animated by emanations or irradiations of the\ngreat soul of the universe, or nature. This Pantheistic doctrine we find\nrecorded by the Chaldean Zoroaster, in his Zend-Avesta; by the\nPhoenician Sanchoniaton in his Mythological History; by the author of\nthe Indian Vedam; and by the Chinese Confucius, in his Theology. Weighty\nis the testimony of those authors, who lived, Confucius perhaps\nexcepted, at about the time of Moses. Also, the above doctrine they\nthemselves believed and taught. More, we find the same testimony, the\nsame doctrine, and the same teaching, in nearly all the works of the\ncelebrated poets, orators and philosophers of posterior ages.\n\nPliny, the historian and naturalist, writes: \"The world, or what we call\nthe heaven, which, in its vast embrace, encircles all beings, is a God\neternal, immense, uncreated and immortal. To seek any thing beyond it is\nbeyond man's reach, and is vain labor. Behold, the universe is the Being\ntruly sacred, the Being eternal, immense, comprising all in himself: he\nis all in all, or rather he is himself all. He is the work of nature,\nand nature itself.\"\n\nWe read in the sixth book of Eneida, by Virgil: \"Know, O my son! that\nthe heavens and the earth, the deep, the bright globe of the moon, and\nall stars are moved by a principle of inly life, which perpetuates its\nexistence; that it is a great intelligent soul, extending to all the\nparts of the vast body of the universe; and which, connected with all,\nimpresses to all an eternal movement. This soul is the source of the\nlife of man, of that of flocks, birds, and of all the monsters of the\ndeep. The bright force that animates them emanates from that eternal\nfire that shines in the sky, and which, a captive in the gross matter of\nbodies, develops itself only as permitted by the divers mortal\norganizations that blunt its force and activity. At the death of each\nanimal those germs of particular life return to their source, and to the\nprinciple of life that circulates in the starry sphere.\"\n\nThis belief led men to the worship of the universe, or nature, and\nbecame the basis of their mythology. They adored the vast body of\nnature, and its great soul, under the name of Supreme Being, of Jupiter,\nof Vichnou, of Pan, etc. They adored the earth, the sun, the planets and\nthe stars under other names. They erected temples, altars, statues and\nchapels to those deities, and worshiped them--not the wood, stone, or\nmarble, as they are unjustly accused of, but the emanations of the great\nsoul of the universe, which animated all those principal members of the\nvast body of nature, whose might and influence impressed them with\nwonder, terror or gratitude, and thus attracted their adoration.\n\nThe Chinese adored the heavens under the name of great Tien. The Supreme\nBeing in the Chou-King is designated by the name of Tien, which means\nfrom heaven, and of Chang-Tien, supreme heaven. They had reared temples\nto the sun, to the moon, and to the stars; and also one to the great\nbeing formed of the sky, of the earth and of the elements,--being which\nis the universe named by them Tay-ki. They worshiped the heavens at the\ntime of the two solstices. The Japanese adored the stars and planets\nwhich they supposed to be animated by geniuses or gods. They had a\ntemple dedicated to the splendor of the sun. They celebrated the feast\nof the moon on the 7th of September, and spent the whole night in\nrejoicing by her light. The Chinese and the Japanese practice the same\nworship even in our days.\n\nThe Egyptians adored the sun under the name of Osiris, and the moon\nunder the name of Iris. To them both they ascribed the government of the\nworld. They built, to honor Osiris, the City of the Sun, or Heliopolis,\nand also a splendid temple in which they placed his statue. They\nworshiped all the stars and planets which compose the Zodiac. The\nanimals consecrated in the Egyptian temples, and religiously revered,\nrepresented the various functions of the supreme cause; and they\nreferred to the sky, to the sun, to the moon, and to the constellations.\n\nThe Phoenicians worshiped the moon and the stars. They adored the sun\nunder the name of Hercules. The Ethiopians adored the sun and the moon;\nand Diodorus informs us, that those of their tribes who inhabited the\ncountry above Meroe adored the sun, the moon, and the universe. They\ncalled themselves the sons of the sun: Persina was the priestess of the\nmoon, and the king, her husband, was the priest of the sun. All the\nAfricans who were settled along the coast of Angola, and of Congo,\nworshiped the sun and the moon; so the inhabitants of the island of\nTeneriffe did. The oldest worship of the Arabs was Sabism, the religion\nuniversally spread in the Orient: the heaven and the stars were objects\nof veneration. The moon was more especially adored. The Saracens called\nher Cabar, which means great: even now-a-days her crescent adorns the\nreligious monuments of the Turks. Among the Arabs each tribe was under\nthe invocation or patronage of a star.\n\nThe Sabism was also the religion of the ancient Chaldeans. Even now\nthere is at Helle, on the ruins of Babylon, a mosque named Meshed\nEschams, or Mosque of the Sun. In this city was the temple of Belus, or\nof the sun, the great deity of the Babylonians. To this same god the\nPersians reared temples and consecrated images, under the name of\nMithra. They also honored the heaven under the name of Jupiter, the moon\nand Venus, the fire, the earth, the air or wind, and water. The fire\nether that circulates in the whole universe, and of which the sun is the\nmain force, was represented in the Pyrees by the sacred fire kept\nincessantly burning by the wizards, or priests. At Tymbree, in Troades,\nthe sun was adored under the name of Apollo. The island of Rhodes was\nconsecrated to the sun, to whom the colossal statue, known under the\nname of the Colossus of Rhodes, was erected. The Massagetes, the\nAbasges, the Derbises, the Tartars, the Moscanians, the Tchouvaches, the\nToungouses, the Huns, all the Scytic nations, the Iberians, the\nAlbanians, the Colchidians, the Phrygians, and the Laodiceans, worshiped\nthe earth, the sun, the moon, and the stars, under various emblems.\n\nPlato informs us that the ancient Greeks had no other gods than the sun,\nthe moon, the earth, the stars, water, and fire. Orpheus considered the\nsun as the greatest of the gods, and adored him upon mounts at his\nrise. Epicharmis, disciple of Pythagoras, called gods the sun, the moon,\nthe stars, the earth, water and fire. Agamemnon, in Homer, sacrificed to\nthe sun and to the earth. The choir, in the Oedipus of Sophocles,\ninvokes the sun as being the first among the gods, and their chief. The\nearth was worshiped in the island of Cos. Also the earth had a temple at\nAthens and at Sparta; and an altar and oracle at Olympia.\n\nWhen we read Pausanias, who has described Greece and her religious\nmonuments, we find everywhere traces of the worship of nature. We see\ntemples, altars, and statues, consecrated to the sun, to the moon, to\nthe earth, to the Pleiades, to the celestial auriga, to the goat, to the\nbear, or Calisto, to the night, to rivers, etc. The inhabitants of\nMegalopolis sacrificed to the wind Boreas, and had planted a grove in\nhis honor. The Macedonians adored Estia, or fire, and prayed to Bedy, or\nwater. Alexander, king of Macedonia, sacrificed to the sun, to the moon,\nand to the earth. The oracle of Dodone, in all its answers, ordered\nsacrifices to the Achelous river. Homer gave the epithet of sacred to\nthe waters of the Alpheus. Nestor and the Pylians sacrificed a bull to\nthe same river. Achilles let his hair grow in honor of Sphercius; he\nalso invoked the wind Boreas and the Zephyrus.\n\nRivers were reputed as being sacred and divine, because of their utility\nto vegetation, to animals, and to commerce; and because nations\nconsidered water as one of the first principles of nature, and one of\nthe most efficacious agents of the universal life of the Great-Being in\nwhich they believed. In Thessalia a sacred crow was fed in honor of the\nsun. This bird is seen yet on the monuments of Mithra, in Persia. The\ntemples of old Byzantium were consecrated to the sun, to the moon, and\nto Venus. Their idols represented them; also the star Arcture, and the\ntwelve signs of the Zodiac. Rome and Italy had also a vast number of\nmonuments of worship addressed to nature, and to its principal agents.\nTatius, coming to Rome to share the sceptre of Romulus, erected altars\nand temples to the sun, to the moon, to Saturn, to light, and to fire.\nThe undying fire, or Vesta, was the most ancient object of worship of\nthe Romans; virgins had the care to perpetuate it in the temple of this\nGoddess, as the wizards did in their Pyrees. \"It was,\" Jornandes said,\n\"an image of the eternal lights which shine in the heavens.\"\n\nIn Rome there was a famous temple called Tellus, or of the earth, in\nwhich the senate often met. The earth was called mother, because it was\nconsidered as a deity as well as the manes. There was in the Latium a\nfountain of the sun, and, near it, two altars upon which \u00c6neas, when\nlanding in Italy, sacrificed. Romulus established the games of the\ncircus to honor both the sun, who in his course measures the year, and\nthe four elements which he modifies by his mighty influence. Aurelian\nbuilt at Rome the temple of the sun, and decked it with gold and\nprecious stones. Augustus, before Aurelian, had ordered the images of\nthe sun and of the moon to be brought from Egypt, in order to adorn his\ntriumph over Anthony and Cleopatra. The moon had a temple on the mount\nAventine.\n\nIn Sicily oxen were consecrated to the sun; and the island itself was\ncalled the Island of the Sun. The oxen which the companions of Ulysse\nate when they landed, were consecrated to this god. The citizens of\nAssora adored the Chrysas river, that bathed their walls. At Enguyum the\npeople revered the mother-goddesses, the same deities honored in Crete;\nnamely, the major and minor Ursas. In Spain the people of Betic had\nbuilt a temple to the morning star. The Accitans had erected to the god\nSun, under the name of Mars, a statue whose head imitated the rays of\nthe sun. At Cadix the sun was also adored, under the name of Hercules.\nAll the nations of northern Europe, called Celtes, worshiped fire,\nwater, the air, the sun, the moon, the stars, the trees, and the\nsprings. The conqueror of Gaul, C\u00e6sar, writes that the Germans\nimmemorially adored the visible cause, and its principal agents, the\nsun, the moon, fire or Vulcain, and the earth, under the name of Herta.\nNear Narbonne, a city of Gaul, a temple was dedicated to the wind\nCircius which purified the atmosphere. At Toulouse there was a temple\nof the sun. The Franks professed the same religion.\n\nIn America the Incas of Peru called themselves the sons of the sun: they\ndedicated temples and altars to this god, and had instituted feasts in\nhis honor. The moon was associated to his worship, and was considered as\nthe mother of all the sublunar productions; and as the spouse and sister\nof the sun. In Peru, the star Venus was adored, and also the meteors,\nthe thunder, and Iris, or rainbow. Virgins had the care of keeping alive\nthe perpetual fire. In Mexico the same religion existed. The inhabitants\nof the Isthmus of Panama, of Brazil, of Florida; the Indians of the\ncoast of Cumana, the Floridians, Virginians, and the Canadians believed\nthat there was a god in the heavens, and that this god was the sun, the\nspouse of the moon. They worshiped them as the two supreme causes which\nruled the world.\n\nThe above historical facts lead us to the conclusion that the adoration\nof the vast body of nature, together with the great soul which was\nsupposed to animate it; and of its principal parts or members, together\nwith the multifarious emanations of the great soul, which was supposed\nto animate them, was the former and universal religion of mankind,\nbefore the coming of Jesus Christ. Therefore the heathens did not\nworship the idols themselves, to which they had given such and such\nforms to represent the objects of their adorations; but they worshiped\nwhat in their mind they represented, the universe taken collectively,\nas in the idol of Pan; and the universe taken separately; namely, the\nimportant parts of the universe, as in their innumerable idols of the\nplanets, stars, rivers, etc.\n\nAs we wish to leave no doubt in the minds of the reader in regard to the\ncertainty of these two great facts, which are a key to the origin of the\ndogma of endless misery, and of others which we are to trace out, we\nwill bring forth other proofs from the religious and political monuments\nof ancient peoples; from their celebrations, and from the opinions of\ntheir philosophers.\n\nThe famous labyrinth of Egypt was dedicated to the sun. It formed twelve\npalaces, representing the twelve signs of the Zodiac. There were in\nHeliopolis, or City of the Sun, twelve columns adorned with symbols\nrelating to the elements, and to the twelve signs. These gigantic piles\nhad a pyramidal shape to better represent the rays of the sun, and the\nform of his rising blaze. The statue of Apollo Agyeus was pyramidal. In\nEgypt, artists were not entrusted with determining the form of the\nimages and statues of the gods. It was one of the prerogatives of the\nHierophants, or priests, who were more familiar with astronomy. This\nfact explains why the number seven, which represented the number of\nplanets, and the number twelve, which represented the number of the\nsigns, were sacred numbers, and were reproduced under all kinds of\nforms. So the twelve altars of Janus; the twelve works of Hercules or\nsun; the twelve shields of Mars; the twelve brothers Arvaux; the twelve\ngods Consentes; the twelve rays of light; the twelve governors in the\nManichean system; the twelve adeetyas of the Indians; the twelve azes of\nthe Scandinaves; the twelve wards of the city planned by Plato; the four\ntribes of Athens subdivided into three _frateries_ according to Cecrops'\ndivision; the twelve cushions on which the creator sits, in the theogony\nof the Japanese; the twelve cantons of the Etruse league, and their\ntwelve Lucumons, or chiefs of cantons; the confederation of the twelve\ncities of Ionia, and that of the twelve cities of Eolia; the twelve\nTcheou into which Chun divided China; the twelve countries into which\nthe Coreans divided the world; the twelve officers chosen to draw the\ncoffin at the funeral of the King of Tunquin; the twelve horses; the\ntwelve elephants, etc., used in that ceremony.\n\nIt was the same with the number seven representing the planets. So the\nseven divisions of the city of Ecbatane; the seven gates of the cavern\nof Mithra, or sun; the seven floors of the tower of Babylon, with\nanother representing the heaven, and also the temple of Jupiter; the\nseven gates of the city of Thebes, called each one by the name of a\nplanet; the seven piped flute placed in the hands of the god Pan who\nrepresented the universe; the seven stringed lyre of Apollo, or sun;\nthe book of fate composed of seven memorandums; the seven prophetic\nrings of the Brachmanes, on which the name of a planet was engraved; the\nseven stones dedicated to planets in Laconia; the immemorial division\ninto seven tribes adopted by the Egyptians and the Indians; the seven\nidols pompously carried every year by the Bonzes into seven different\ntemples; the seven mystical vowels which formed the sacred formula in\nthe temples of the planets; the seven Pyrees or altars of the monument\nof Mithra; the seven Amshaspands, or great geniuses, invoked by the\nPersians; the seven Archangels of the Chaldeans; the seven sounding\ntowers of old Byzantium; the week in all nations, or the period of seven\ndays consecrated each one to a planet, as can be illustrated. For\ninstance, in French, Monday is called Lundi, which is derived from the\nlatin Luna, meaning moon. Tuesday is called Mardi, meaning Mars.\nWednesday is called Mercredi, meaning Mercury. Thursday is called Jeudi,\nmeaning Jupiter. Friday is called Vendredi, meaning Venus. Saturday is\ncalled Samedi, meaning Saturn. It could also be illustrated by other\nlanguages derived from the Latin.\n\nThe number three hundred and sixty, which is that of the days of the\nyear, not comprising, however, the epagomenes or complementary days, was\nalso retraced by the three hundred and sixty days comprised in the\ntheology of Orpheus; by the three hundred and sixty cups of the water of\nthe Nile, of which one was poured every day, by the Egyptian priests,\nin a sacred cask, in the city of Achante; by the three hundred and sixty\nEons, or geniuses of the Gnostics; by the three hundred and sixty idols\nplaced in the palace of the Da\u00efri in Japan; by the three hundred and\nsixty saints, or geniuses, who, the Papists believe, preside to each day\nof the year, (as seen in their almanacs,) dogma borrowed from the\nheathens; by the three hundred and sixty minor statues which surrounded\nthat of Hebal, or the god sun, Belus, adored by the ancient Arabs; by\nthe three hundred and sixty chapels built around the mosque of Balk,\nerected by the care of the chief of the family of the Barmecides; by the\nthree hundred and sixty temples built on the mountain Louham, in China;\nby the wall of three hundred and sixty stadiums with which Semiramis\nencompassed the city of Belus, or of the sun, the famous Babylon. In\nfine, the division of the Zodiac into twenty-seven parts, which express\nthe stations of the moon, and into thirty-six which is that of the\n_decans_, was also the object of the political and religious\ndistributions.\n\nNot only the divisions of the heaven, but the constellations themselves\nwere represented in the temples, and their images consecrated among the\nreligious monuments, and on the medals of the cities. The bright star\nCapella, in the constellation Auriga, had a statue of brass gilt in the\ncity of the Phliassians. To the constellation Auriga statues and other\nmonuments had been erected in Greece under the names of Myrtile, of\nHippolyte, of Spheroeus, of Cillas, of Erectee, etc. There were seen,\nalso, the statues and tombs of the Atlantides. Near Argos was seen a\nmound, which was said to cover the head of the famous Medusa, whose type\nis in the heaven, under the feet of Perseus. The moon, or Diana of\nEphesus, was adorned with the figure of the Cancer, which is one of the\ntwelve signs, and the mansion of this planet. The Ursa, adored under the\nname of Calisto, and the Bootes, under that of Arcas, had their tombs on\nArcadia, near the altars of the sun. To the same Bootes a statue was\nerected at Byzantium, and also to Orion, the famous Nembrod of the\nAssyrians.\n\nThe Syrians had consecrated in their temples the images of Pisces,\n(fishes,) one of the signs. The constellations Nesra, or Eagle, Aiyuk,\nor Goat, Yagutho, or Pleiades, and Suwaha, or Alhouwoa, and the\nSerpentarius were objects of idolatry among the ancient Sabians. These\nnames are found even now in Hyde's commentary on Ulug-Beigh. Lucian\nwrites that the whole religious system of the Egyptians was taken from\nthe heaven. The most of the cities were founded and built under the\ninspection and protection of one of the signs of the Zodiac. Their\nhoroscope was drawn; hence the images of stars on their medals. The\nmedals of Antioch represent the Ram, (Aries) with the crescent of the\nmoon; those of the Mamertines the image of the Bull, (Taurus); those of\nthe kings of Comargene, the image of the Scorpion; and those of Zeugma\nand of Anazarba, the image of the Goat, (Capricornus). Nearly all the\nsigns are found on the medals of the Antonines. The star Hesperus was on\nthe national seal of the Locrians, of the Ozoles, and of the Opuntians.\n\nLikewise we shall remark that the ancient feasts, or celebrations, were\nconnected with the principal epochs of nature, and with the heavenly\nsystem. Everywhere the solsticial and equinoxial celebrations are found;\neven in our days the Catholics celebrate the beginning of each season of\nthe year by fasting and abstaining from meat. Fohi, one of the most\nancient emperors of China, ordered sacrifices to be offered to the gods\nat the commencement of each season. Four pavilions were erected to the\nmoons of the four seasons. The ancient Chinese, Confucius says,\nestablished a sacrifice in honor of Chang-Ty, at the winter solstice,\nand one in the spring. The emperor alone has the privilege to preside at\nthese two ceremonies, as being the son of heaven. The Greeks and the\nRomans did the same for like reasons.\n\nThe Persians have their Neurouz, or feast of the sun, when this king of\nthe day passes under the Ram, or under the sign of the equinox of the\nspring. It is even now one of the greatest festivities in Persia. At the\nwinter's solstice the ancient Egyptians led the sacred cow seven times\naround the temple; and at the equinox of the spring they solemnly\ncelebrated the coming of the sun to once more vivify nature. The\ncelebration of the triumph of fire and light took place in the city of\nthe sun, in Assyria, and was called the celebration of wood-piles. The\nCatholic Church has borrowed this celebration from the heathen, and has\nfixed it on the Saturday before Easter.\n\nThe feasts celebrated by the Sabians to honor the planets, were fixed\nunder the sign of their exaltation; sometimes under that of their\nmansion; so the feast of Saturn was celebrated by the Romans in\nDecember, under the Capricornus (Goat), mansion of this planet. All the\ncelebrations of the old calendar of the Pontiffs were connected with the\nrise or setting of some constellation or star, as can be ascertained by\nreading the _Fastes_ of Ovide. The religious genius of the Romans, and\nthe relations of their celebrations with nature, are more especially\nseen in the games of the circus. The sun, the moon, the planets, the\nelements, the universe and its principal parts, were represented with\nemblems analagous to their nature. In the Hippodrome the sun was seen\nwith steeds which imitated its course in the heavens.\n\nThe fields of Olympia were represented by a vast arena consecrated to\nthe sun. In the middle there was a temple of this god, crowned with his\nimage. The limits of the course of the sun, the Orient and the Occident,\nwere traced, and marked by limits placed at the extremities of the\ncircus. The races took place from the east to the west seven times,\nbecause of the seven planets. The sun, the moon, Jupiter and Venus, had\neach one a chariot. The Aurig\u00e6 or drivers, wore garments representing\nthe colors of the elements. The chariot of the sun was drawn by four\nsteeds, and that of the moon by two. The Zodiac was represented in the\ncircus by twelve gates; and also the revolution of the major and minor\nUrsas. The sea, or Neptune, the earth, or Ceres, and the other elements,\nwere personified in actors who contended for the prize.\n\nThe phases of the moon were also celebrated, and particularly the\nneomeny or new-moon; for temples images and mysteries had been dedicated\nto the god Month, or Mensis. All the ceremonial of the procession of\nIsis, described in Apuleo, refers to nature and its parts. The sacred\nhymns of the ancients had the same object, if we may judge of them by\nthose of Orpheus. Chun, one of the most ancient emperors of China,\nordered many hymns to be composed to honor the sun, the moon, the stars,\netc. All the prayers contained in the books Zends had the same objects.\nThe poetical chants of ancient authors, who have transmitted to us the\ntheogonies of Orpheus, of Linus, of Hesiod, etc., relate to nature and\nits agents. Hesiod thus addresses the Muses: \"Sing the gods immortal,\nsons of the earth and of the starry sky; gods born from the bosom of\nnight, and nursed by the Ocean; the bright stars, the immense vault of\nthe firmament, and the gods sprung from them; the sea, the rivers, etc.\"\n\nThe songs of Iopas, in the banquet offered by Dido to the Trojans,\ncontain the lessons of the learned Atlas about the course of the sun and\nof the moon; about the origin of men, of animals, etc. In the Pastorals\nof Virgil, the old Silene sings the chaos and the organization of the\nworld. Orpheus does the same in the Argonautics of Apollonius. The\ncosmogony of Sanchoniaton, or of the Phoenicians, conceals under the\nveil of allegories the great secrets of nature which were taught to\nthose initiated. The philosophers who succeeded to the poets called all\nthe parts of the universe divine. In the opinion of Pythagoras the\ncelestial bodies were immortal and divine. The sun, the moon, and all\nthe stars superabundantly contained heat, or principle of life. He\nplaced the substance of the deity in the ethereal fire, of which the\nsun, he said, was the main focus.\n\nParmenides imagined a halo around the world, and called it the substance\nof the deity; the stars partook of the nature thereof. Alimeon of\nCrotona taught that the sun, the moon, and the stars were the gods.\nAntisthenes acknowledged but one deity, nature. Plato attributed\ndivinity to the world, to the sky, to the stars, and to the earth.\nXenocrates and Heraclides admitted eight great gods, the seven planets\nand the heaven of the fixed stars. Theophrastes called the stars and the\ncelestial signs first causes. Zenon said that the ether, the stars, time\nand its parts were gods. Cleanthes admitted the dogma of the divinity of\nthe universe, and more especially of the ethereal fire that envelops\nthe spheres, and penetrates them. Diogene, the Babylonian, related the\nwhole mythology to nature. Chrysippus held that the world was God. He\nplaced the divine substance in the ethereal fire, in the sun, in the\nmoon, in the stars, in one word, in nature and its principal parts.\nAnaximandre, Anaximenes and Zenon had the same belief.\n\nFrom this exposition of the religious and political monuments of ancient\npeoples, of their celebrations, and of the opinions of their\nphilosophers; and also of the historical facts brought forth before, we\ndraw these two logical and vital conclusions:--\n\n1st. Therefore the adoration of the vast body of nature, together with\nthe great soul which was supposed to animate it; and of its principal\nparts and members, together with the multifarious emanations of the\ngreat soul which was supposed to animate them, was the former and\nuniversal religion of mankind (excepting the Hebrews) before the coming\nof Jesus Christ.\n\n2d. Therefore the heathens did not worship the idols themselves, to\nwhich they had given such and such forms to represent the objects of\ntheir adorations, but they worshiped what in their mind they\nrepresented, the universe taken collectively, as in the idol of Pan; and\nthe universe taken separately, namely, the important parts of the\nuniverse, as in their innumerable idols of the planets, stars, rivers,\netc.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF MYSTERIES.\n\n\nWHETHER the word mystery is derived from the Greek _muo_, I close, or\nfrom _mueo_, I teach, is not an important question, for the word mystery\nhas always implied the double idea of secrecy and of instruction. Kings,\nemperors, and even the most liberal of the legislators, seem to have\nbelieved, from the very cradle of nations, that people ought to be\ngoverned with fables, because they are too weak minded, and too ignorant\nto understand and bear the truth. Of all the errors which have\nenshrouded the human race, none has been more injurious to progress,\nvirtue, and happiness among men. Even in our days, of all the existing\ngovernments, there is but one, if any at all, which does not place its\nstrength upon the erroneous basis that the people, being not able to\nunderstand and bear the truth, are more easily ruled by being kept in\ntheir ignorance and superstition. This great error gave birth to\nmysteries.\n\nWhen men constituted themselves into national bodies, they chose men,\nand vested them with the power of administering their interests. Those\nmen forfeited their mandate, and became the tyrants of their\nconstituents. In order to secure and perpetuate their sway, they\nassociated to their personal interests hierophants, priests of all\nkinds, astronomers, philosophers, and poets, who composed fables,\nintended to have a moral bearing upon the people, and to make their\nmasses believe them as being the truth. Those fables they called\nmysteries.\n\nEgypt had her initiations, known under the name of mysteries of Osiris\nand Isis; from which those of Bacchus and Ceres were mostly copied. When\nwe compare the courses and adventures of the Ceres of the Greek, with\nthose of the Egyptian Isis, we can not but see the filiation of these\ntwo fables. The poems whose Bacchus is the hero, and the history of the\nOsiris, the ceremonies practiced to honor these two deities, and the\nidentity of both acknowledged by the ancients, evidently prove that the\nmysteries of the latter have given birth to the former. Cybele and Atys\nhad their initiations, and the Cabires also.\n\nThe Chinese had and still have mysteries on Fo\u00eb, and Pousa; the Japanese\nupon Xaca and Amida; the Siamois on Sommonacodom; the Indians on Brama\nand Rudra; the Parsis upon Ormuzd and Ahriman. The Selles studied the\nmysterious words of the doves of Dodone; Persia, Ethiopia, Scythia,\nGaul, and Scandinavia, had their caverns, their holy mounts, their\nsacred oaks, where the brahmanes, the astrologers, the gymnosophists\nand the druids, pronounced the inexplicable oracle of the immortals. The\nMahomedans have mysteries on the miracles of Mahomet.\n\nWe hope to interest and instruct the reader in translating the following\nextract from the Voyage of Anacharsis, a reliable work. Anacharsis is\nsupposed to have traveled in Greece, in the fourth century before the\nChristian era. He thus relates the mysteries of Eleusis:\n\n\"I shall speak of the most important point of the religion of the\nAthenians, of those mysteries whose origin is lost in the night of ages;\nwhose ceremonies inspire no less terror than veneration; and whose\nsecret has never been revealed, except by a few persons who were\nimmediately devoted to death, and to public execration; for the law not\nonly pronounces against them the confiscation of their property and the\nloss of their life, but it orders that a column be erected, to\nperpetuate the rememberance of their crime and of their punishment.\n\n\"Of all the mysteries established in honor of the gods, none were more\ncelebrated than those of Ceres. This goddess herself, it is said,\nregulated them, while she was wandering on the earth for the purpose of\nfinding Proserpine, ravished by Pluto, she arrived in the plain of\nEleusis. Pleased with the welcome extended to her by the inhabitants,\nshe presented them with two signaled blessings, agriculture, and\ninitiation to a sacred doctrine. It is added, that the minor mysteries\nwhich are preparatory to the major, were instituted to the honor of\nHercules.\n\n\"People believe, that, wherever the Athenians established the mysteries\nof Eleusis, the spirit of union and humanity became more general;\nbecause they free the soul from ignorance and stains; procure the\nparticular assistance of the gods; the means of arriving at the\nperfection of virtue; the sweets of a holy life; the hope of a peaceable\ndeath, and of an endless bliss. Those initiated will occupy a\ndistinguished place in the Elysian fields; they will enjoy a pure light,\nand they will dwell in the bosom of the Deity; whereas, those who are\nprofane will dwell hereafter in abodes of darkness and of horror.\n\n\"In order to avoid such an alternative the Greeks flocked from\neverywhere to Eleusis to find the promised bliss. Though young, the\nAthenians are admitted to the ceremonies of the initiation; and those\nwho never participated to them ask this favor before they die; the\nmenaces and the pictures of the sufferings of another life, before\nconsidered as a subject of derision, cause a more vivid impression on\nthe mind; and then terror generates weakness. However, there are\nenlightened men who do not believe that there is any need for them to be\ninitiated in order to be virtuous. Socrates constantly declined joining\nthe mysteries; and, one day, Diogenes being solicited, in my presence,\nto ask for initiation, answered: 'Pat\u00e6cion, a famous thief, was\ninitiated; Epaminondas and Agesilas never asked for it. Can I believe\nthat the former will go to the Elysian fields and the latter to the\nTartarus.'\n\n\"All the Greeks can aspire to participate to the mysteries: an ancient\nlaw excludes the foreigners. The major mysteries are celebrated every\nyear on the fifteenth of the month of Boedromion. The celebration of the\nminor mysteries is also annual, and takes place six months before.\nDuring the celebration of the major mysteries the tribunals are closed.\nThe day following, the senate pronounces the penalty of death against\nthose who have willfully disturbed the ceremonies. This severity is\nrequired to maintain order among the immense multitude of people. In\ntime of war the Athenians send to their foes safe conducts to induce\nthem to assist at the celebration.\n\n\"On the fourteenth of Boedromion, in the second year of the one hundred\nand ninth Olympiad, I left Athens with several of my friends. The gate\nthrough which the Athenians pass to go to Eleusis is called sacred. The\nspace between these two cities is of about one hundred stadiums. After\ncrossing a high hill decked with rosy laurels, we entered the territory\nof Eleusis; and we arrived on the banks of two small brooks consecrated,\nthe one to Ceres, and the other to Proserpine. I mention them because\nthe priests of the temple are the only ones who are permitted to fish in\nthem; and because their waters are salted, and are used in the\nceremonies of initiation. Farther, on the bridge of a river named\nCephize, we had to bear the mockeries of a numerous populace, who stand\nthere to criticize the comers, and more especially the most\ndistinguished men of the Republic. It is an old tradition that Ceres had\nbeen welcomed on this very spot by an old woman, called Yambe.\n\n\"At a short distance from the sea there is a high and long hill, at the\neastern end of which the famous temple of Ceres and Proserpine has been\nreared. Further down is the small city of Eleusis. In the vicinity, and\non the hill itself, there are chapels and altars, and rich\ncountry-seats. The temple, built under the care of Pericles, on the bare\nrock, is of pantelic marble; and is turned towards the Orient. It is so\nvast as magnificent; its enclosure at the south is of about three\nhundred and eighty-four feet, and at the east of three hundred and\ntwenty-five. The most celebrated artists have adorned this temple with\nmaster-pieces of art.\n\n\"Among the numerous priests who officiate in the temple, there are four\nprincipal. The first is the Hierophant; his name designates the one who\nreveals the sacred things, and his main office is to initiate the\npostulants to the mysteries. He appears with a distinguished tunic; his\nforehead is decked with a diadem, and his hair is floating on his\nshoulders. His age must be mature enough to correspond with the gravity\nof his ministry, and his voice fine enough to be pleasing to the ears.\nHis priesthood is for life; and he is obliged to keep celibacy. The\nsecond priest carries the sacred flambeau in the ceremonies, and\npurifies the candidates; he has also the privilege of wearing a diadem.\nThe two others are the sacred herald, and the assistant at the altar.\n\n\"The holiness of their ministry is rendered even more respectable by\ntheir noble birth. The Hierophant is chosen in the family of the\nEumolpides, one of the most ancient of Athens; the sacred herald in that\nof the Ceryces, which is a collateral branch of the other; the two other\npriests belong also to illustrious families. These four priests have\nunder their command other ministers, such as the interpreters, the\nsingers, and other officers, who have the direction of the processions\nand other ceremonies. Also there are at Eleusis priestesses consecrated\nto Ceres and to Proserpine. They have the privilege of initiating\ncertain persons on particular days, and to offer sacrifices.\n\n\"The celebrations are presided by the second of the Archontes, whose\nduty is to keep order, and to prevent any change or alteration in the\nworship. They last several days. Sometimes those initiated interrupt\ntheir sleep to continue their pious exercises: we saw them during the\nnight crossing the enclosure, walking in silence two by two, and holding\neach one a lighted torch. When they reentered the sacred asylum they\nhastened their march; and I learned that they were going to figure the\ncourses of Ceres and of Proserpine; and that, in their rapid evolutions,\nthey shook their torches, and handed them to each other. The light which\nsprings out, it is said, has the virtue of purifying the souls, and\nbecomes the symbol of the light which ought to instruct them.\n\n\"One day games were celebrated in the honor of the two goddesses. Famous\nchampions had come from various parts of Greece, and the prize was a\nmeasure of barley, raised in the neighboring plain, whose inhabitants\nhold from Ceres the art of cultivating this sort of wheat. On the sixth\nday, the most brilliant of all, the priests of the temple, and those\ninitiated, carried from Athens to Eleusis, the statue of Iacchus, said\nto be the son of Ceres or of Proserpine. The god, crowned with myrtle,\nheld a flambeau. About thirty thousand people followed, making the air\nresound with the name of Iacchus. The march, led by the sound of\ninstruments and the singing of hymns, was sometimes suspended to perform\ndances and sacrifices. The statue was introduced in the temple of\nEleusis, and then taken back in his own, with the same splendors, and\nthe same ceremonies.\n\n\"Many of those who composed the procession had been initiated only to\nthe minor mysteries, annually celebrated in a small temple, situated\nnear the Illissus. There a priest examines and prepares the candidates;\nhe excludes them if they are guilty of enormous crimes, and particularly\nif they have committed murder, even without purpose. He imposes upon\nthe others frequent expiations, and teaches them the first rudiments of\nthe sacred doctrine. This noviciate sometimes lasts several years, but\ngenerally one only. During the time of probation, the candidates assist\nat the celebration of the major mysteries; but they remain at the door\nof the temple.\n\n\"The initiation to the great mysteries had been appointed for the night\nfollowing. One of the preparatory ceremonies was the offering of\nsacrifices, for the prosperity of the state, presided by the second of\nthe Archontes. The novices were crowned with myrtle. Their robes seem to\ncontract such a holiness that many of them wear them until they are worn\nout; others make of them swaddling-clothes for their children, or hang\nthem in the temple. We saw them enter in the sacred hall; and, on the\nnext morning, one of my friends, who had been newly initiated, related\nto me many of the ceremonies which he had witnessed.\n\n\"He told me, 'We found the ministers of the temple dressed in their\npontifical robes. The Hierophant, who, in that moment, represents the\nauthor of the universe, had symbols which designated the power supreme.\nThe flambeau-bearer and the assistant to the altar appeared with the\nattributes of the sun and of the moon; and the sacred herald with those\nof Mercury. We had just taken our seats when the herald exclaimed: 'Away\nfrom here ye profane and impious men, and all those whose souls are\ncontaminated with crimes!' The penalty of death was decreed against\nthose who had the temerity of remaining in the temple without being\nentitled to it, after this admonition. The second of the priests ordered\nthat the skins of the victims be spread beneath our feet; and he\npurified us anew. The rituals of initiation were loudly read, and hymns\nin the honor of Ceres were sung.\n\n\"Soon after a roar was heard. The earth seemed to shake. Amid lightning\nand thunder phantoms and spectres were seen roaming in darkness. They\nfilled the holy hall with soul-rending groans and howlings. Sufferings,\ncares, diseases, poverty, and death, under hideous forms, struck our\ngaze. The Hierophant explained these various emblems, and his vivid\npictures added to our terror. However, guided by a feeble light, we were\nadvancing towards the regions of the Tartarus, where the souls get\npurified before they reach the abode of bliss. Amidst sorrowful voices\nwe heard the bitter regrets of those who had committed suicide. They are\npunished, the Hierophant said, because they have deserted the posts\nassigned to them by the gods.\n\n\"He had scarcely pronounced these words, when brass gates were thrown\nopen before us with a frightful roar, and then we saw the horrors of the\nTartarus. It resounded with the rattle of chains, and the yells of its\nunfortunate inmates. Learn from us, did they say, to respect the gods,\nand to be just and grateful. We saw the furies, armed with whips,\nunmercifully torturing the criminals. These frightening pictures, made\nmore so by the sonorous and imposing voice of the Hierophant, who seemed\nto exercise the ministry of divine vengeance, filled our soul with\nterror. In fine, we were introduced in delightful thickets; in enameled\nmeadows; fortunate abodes, image of the Elysean fields, where a pure\nlight shone, where charming voices were heard. We passed into the\nsanctuary, where we saw the statue of the goddess resplendent with\nbrightness, and dressed in the richest attire. In this sanctuary our\ntrials ended; there our eyes saw, and our ears heard, what we are\nforbidden to reveal. I will simply confess that in the delirium of a\nholy joy we sung hymns of joy.'\n\n\"Such was the recital of the newly-initiated. Another told me a\ncircumstance which the other omitted. One day, during the celebrations,\nthe Hierophant uncovered the mysterious baskets, which are carried in\nthe procession, and which are the object of the public veneration. They\ncontained the sacred symbols, whose sight is prohibited to those\nuninitiated, and which are but cakes of various forms, grains of salt,\nand other objects, which relate to the history of Ceres, and to the\ndogmas taught in the mysteries. When those initiated have taken them\nfrom a basket, and put them in another, they say that they have fasted\nand drank the Ciceon.\n\n\"I often met with men who were not initiated, and who freely expressed\ntheir opinions about the secret doctrines taught in the mysteries. One\nof the disciples of Plato said: 'It seems to be certain that the\nHierophant teaches the necessity of pains and rewards beyond the grave;\nand that he represents to the postulants the various destinies of men\nhere below and hereafter. Also it seems to be certain that he teaches\nthem, that, among the great number of deities adored by the multitude,\nthe ones are pure spirits, who, ministers of the will of the god\nsupreme, regulate under his command the motion of the universe; and the\nothers have been simple mortals, whose tombs are kept yet in several\nparts of Greece. Is it not natural to think, that, in order to give a\nmore accurate idea of the Deity, the institutors of mysteries endeavored\nto maintain, and to thus perpetuate a dogma, whose vestiges are more or\nless visible in the opinions, and ceremonies, of nearly all\nnations--that of a God, who is the principal and end of all things? Such\nis, in my opinion, the august secret revealed to those initiated.'\n\n\"No doubt political ends encouraged the institution of this religious\nassociation. Polytheism was generally spread, and was pleasing the\npeople, but on account of the multiplicity of the gods it was dangerous\nto society. It was thought wiser not to destroy this belief, but to\ncounterbalance it by a purer religion. As the people are more restrained\nby the laws than by abstract principles of morals, the legislators\ncontrived to harmonize the superstition of the people with purer\nreligious and moral principles, which they should simultaneously teach.\n'Thus,' the disciple of Plato added, 'you understand why the gods are\nrepresented on the theatre of Athens: the magistrates who do not believe\nthe false doctrines of Polytheism are very careful not to repress a\nsuperstition and a license, which amuse the people, and whose repression\nwould indispose them.\n\n\"'Also you understand how two religions, though opposed in their dogmas,\nconjointly exist in peace and harmony in the same cities. The reason of\nit is, that, though their dogmas are different, these religions use the\nsame language, and that the truth has for the error the same tolerance,\nand courtesy, which the truth should obtain from the error. Externally\nthe mysteries present but the worship adopted by the people. The hymns\nsung in public, and the most of the ceremonies retrace to the masses\nmany circumstances of the rape of Proserpine, of the courses of Ceres,\nof her arrival and sojourn at Eleusis. The vicinity of this city is full\nof monuments reared in the honor of the goddess, and the priests show,\nas yet, the stone upon which, tradition relates, she rested when\nexhausted with fatigue. Thus, on one hand, the ignorant people believe\nappearances as if they were realities; and on another hand, those who\nhave been initiated, having a clear sight of the spirit of the\nmysteries, think they are right on account of the purity of their\nintentions.'\n\n\"Whatever it may be of the supposition I have related, the initiation is\nnow but a vain ceremony. Those who have been initiated are not more\nvirtuous than the others; every day they violate their pledge of\nabstaining from fowl, from fish, from pomegranates, from beans, and\nseveral other kinds of fruits, and of vegetables. Several have\ncontracted this sacred engagement through unworthy means; for, not long\nago, we have seen the government permitting the sale of the privilege of\nparticipating to the mysteries; and, for a long while, women of ill fame\nhave been admitted to initiation.\"\n\nAs it would require volumes to describe the ceremonies of all these\nPagan mysteries, we shall only examine their general character; show\nforth their end; group together their common features, and glance at the\nmeans used by political and religious leaders, to give a full scope to\nthis powerful governmental engine.\n\nThe mysteries of Eleusis, and in general of all mysteries, aimed at the\namelioration of mankind, at the reformation of morals, and at taking\nhold of the souls of men with more power than through the means of the\nlaws. If the means used was not lawful, we must however confess that the\naim was laudable, not in the minds of kings, emperors, hierophants and\nother priests, but in itself. Cicero, the illustrious Roman orator,\nsaid, that the institution of mysteries was one of the most useful to\nhumanity; at least the mysteries of Eleusis, whose effects, he added,\nhave been to civilize nations; to soften the barbarous and ferocious\nhabits and morals of the first societies of men; and to make known the\nmost important principles of morals, which initiate man to a sort of\nlife that is worthy of his nature.\n\nThe same was said of Orpheus, who introduced in Greece the mysteries of\nBacchus. Poets wrote of him, that he had tamed tigers and lions; and\nthat he attracted even trees and rocks with the melodious strains of his\nlyre. Mysteries aimed at the establishment of the reign of justice and\nof religion, in the system of the rulers, who, from policy, maintained\nthe one by the other. This double end is contained in this verse of\nVirgil:--\"Learn from me to respect justice and the gods;\" this was the\ngreat lesson given by the Hierophant when the postulants were initiated.\n\nThose initiated learned in those profound sanctuaries, under the dark\nand deep veil of fables, their duties towards their fellow men;\npretended duties which they were taught to the gods, and, more\nunfortunately yet, pretended duties towards their political and\nreligious leaders, or rather tyrants.\n\nRulers used all imaginable means to give a supernatural character to\ntheir laws, and to make the people believe that they had this character.\nThe imposing picture of the universe, and the poetry of mythological\nconceptions, gave to the legislators the subject of the varied and\nwonderful scenes which were represented in the temples of Egypt, of\nAsia, and of Greece. All that can produce illusion, all the resources of\nwitchcraft and of theatrical exhibitions, which were but the secret\nknowledge of the effects of nature, and the art of imitating them; the\nbrilliant pomp of festivities; the variety and riches of decorations and\ncostumes; the majesty of the ceremonial; the captivating power of music;\nthe choirs; the chants; the dances; the electrifying sounds of cymbals,\ncalculated to produce enthusiasm and delirium, and more favorable to\nreligious exaltation than the calm of reason, all was brought to action\nto attract the people to the celebration of the mysteries; and to create\nin their souls a want, a desire for them.\n\nUnder the charms of pleasure, of rejoicings and of celebrations,\nlegislators and other rulers oftentimes concealed a salutary aim; and\nthey treated the people like a child, which can never be more\nefficaciously instructed, than when he thinks that his preceptor intends\nonly to amuse him. They resorted to great institutions to shape society;\nto form habits; and to direct public opinion and morals.\n\nHow magnificent was the procession of those initiated advancing to the\ntemple of Eleusis! The banners, the sacred chants, the music, the\ncostumes, and the dances, had a rapturous effect on the masses. They\nthronged an immense temple; we say immense, for if we judge the number\nof those initiated by the number of those who assembled in the plains\nof Thriase, when Xerxes went to Attic, they were more than thirty\nthousand. The costly and glowing ornaments which decked the vast hall,\nthe symbolic statues, which were master-pieces of sculpture, and the\nmysterious pictures which were symmetrically arranged in the rotunda of\nthe sanctuary, filled the soul with amazement, and with a religious\nrespect.\n\nAll that was seen in the temple, the decorations, costumes, ceremonies,\nsplendor; and all that was heard, the sacred chants, the melody of\ninstruments, the mythological teaching, the elevating poetry and the\neloquence of orators, struck the spectators with wonder, produced and\nleft in their souls the most profound impressions. Not only the universe\nwas presented to their gaze under the emblem of an egg divided into\ntwelve parts, representing the months of the year, but also the division\nof the universe into cause active and cause passive, and its division\ninto the Principle of light, or good god, and the Principle of darkness,\nor bad god.\n\nVarron informs us that the great gods adored at Samothrace were the\nheaven and the earth, considered, the first as the cause active, and the\nsecond as the cause passive of generation. In other mysteries the same\nidea was retraced by the exposition of the Phallus and of the Cteis. It\nis the Lingham of the Indians.\n\nThe same was done in regard to the division of the world into two\nPrinciples, the one of light, or good god, and the other of darkness,\nor bad god. Plutarch writes, that this religious dogma had been\nconsecrated in the initiations, and in the mysteries of all nations; and\nthe example which he puts forth, extracted from both the theology of the\nChaldeans, and from the dogma of the symbolic egg produced by these two\nPrinciples, is a proof of it. In the temple of Eleusis there were scenes\nof darkness and of light, which were successively presented to the eyes\nof the candidates to initiation: those scenes retraced the combats of\nthe Principle of light, or good god, and of the Principle of darkness,\nor bad god.\n\nIn the cavern of the god Sun, or Mithra, the priests had represented,\namong the mysterious pictures of the initiation, the descent of the\nsouls to the earth, and their return to the heavens through the seven\nplanetary spheres. Also were exhibited the phantoms of invisible powers,\nwhich chained them to bodies, or freed them from their bonds. Several\nmillions of men witnessed those various spectacles, of which they were\nmost severely forbidden to speak before the public. However the poets,\nthe orators, and the historians give us in their writings some idea of\nwhat were those scenes, formulas, ceremonies, fables, and morals,--as,\nfor instance, in what they have written about the adventures of Ceres,\nand of her daughter. There was seen the chariot of this goddess drawn by\ndragons; it seemed to hover above the earth and the seas. It was a true\ntheatrical exhibition. The variety of the scenes was pleasing, and the\nplay of machines was attractive. Grave were the actors, majestic the\nceremonial, and passion-stirring the fables and representations.\n\nThe hierophants, or priests, profoundly versed in the knowledge of the\ngenius of the people, and in the art of leading them, availed of the\nminutest circumstances to create in them the desire to be initiated to\ntheir mysteries. Night seems to be the mother of secrecy and the emblem\nof mystery; it is favorable to prestige and illusion; in consequence\nthey celebrated their mysteries in the night. The fifth day of the\ncelebration of the mysteries of Eleusis was renowned by the superb\ntorchlight procession, in which those initiated, holding each one a\nbright torch, walked two by two wearing enigmatic emblems.\n\nIt was during the night, that the Egyptians solemnly and processionally\nwent to the shore of a lake; they embarked, and landed in an island\nbeautifully situated in the middle of the lake; and there they\ncelebrated the mysteries of the passion of Osiris. At other times those\ncelebrations took place in vast and dark grottos, or in retired and\nshady thickets. Even now, in France, are seen caverns where the Druids\ncelebrated their mysteries; and forests where the Gauls assembled at\nmidnight; hung the heads of their vanquished enemies; immolated a young\nvirgin on the altar of Teutates; and celebrated their mysteries under\nthe leadership of the Druids.\n\nThe ceremonial of the mysteries was ordained, particularly among the\ncivilized and populous nations, in such a manner that it could not fail\nto excite the curiosity of the people, who naturally eagerly desire and\nseek to know what is held in secrecy. Legislators and hierophants\nrendered this curiosity more intense by the extremely stringent law of\nsecrecy imposed upon those initiated. Thus the profane, namely, those\nuninitiated, were the more desirous to be acquainted with the mysteries,\nand thus they joined them in large numbers. Legislators gave to this\nspirit of secrecy the most specious pretext. It was proper, they said,\nto imitate the gods who concealed themselves from man's gaze, for the\npurpose of creating in his soul the desire to find them; and who have\nmade the phenomena of nature a profound secret to them, in order to\nstimulate them to the study of the universe. Those initiated were not\npermitted to speak of the mysteries except among themselves. The penalty\nof death had been decreed against the one who would have revealed them,\neven without purpose; and also against any one who would have entered\nthe sacred temple before having been previously initiated.\n\nAristoteles was accused of impiety by the hierophant Eurymedon, for\nhaving sacrificed to the manes of his wife, according to the rite\npracticed in the worship of Ceres. He had to flee, and to retire at\nChalcis to save his life; and in order to clear his name from this stain\nhe ordered his heirs to erect a statue to Ceres. Eschyles, having been\ncharged with having written about mysterious subjects, saved his life\nonly by proving that he had never been initiated. The entry of the\ntemple of Ceres, and the participation to her mysteries, were prohibited\nto the slaves, and to those whose birth was not legal; to women of ill\nfame, to the philosophers who denied a Providence, such as the\nEpicureans, etc. This interdiction was considered as a great\ndeprivation, for it was generally believed among the people that\ninitiation was the greatest blessing.\n\nIn fact, those initiated were taught that they belonged to a class of\nprivileged beings, and were the favorites of the gods. The priests of\nSamothrace credited their initiation by promising favorable winds, a\nspeedy and safe navigation to travelers who were candidates to their\nmysteries. Those initiated to the mysteries of Orpheus believed that\nthey were no longer under the rule of the evil principle; that\ninitiation made them holy, and secured to them future happiness. After\nthe ceremonies of the initiation the candidate thus answered to the\npriest: \"I have rejected the evil and found the good.\" After that he\nconsidered himself, and was considered by his fellows, wholly purified.\n\nThose who were initiated to the mysteries of Eleusis believed that the\nsun shone brighter and purer to their eyes than to the sight of other\nmen; also that the goddesses inspired and gave them counsels from the\nheaven, as seen by the example of Pericles. Initiation was considered as\nfreeing the soul from the darkness of error; as preventing misfortunes;\nand as securing happiness on earth.\n\nOne of the greatest blessings and privileges of the initiation, the\nhierophant and other priests taught, was to secure here below a direct\ncommunion with the gods, and more especially beyond the grave. According\nto Cicero, Isocrates, and the rhetor Aristides, when he who had been\ninitiated departed from this earthly life he inhabited meadows enameled\nwith flowers of a celestial beauty, and lighted with a sun brighter and\npurer than the one we see. In that charming abode he was to live\ncenturies, and long preserve his youth. When arrived at an old age, he\nwas to become young again. There was no labor, no sorrow, but all was\nrapture and delight.\n\nIn the Greek and Roman mysteries the unity and also the trinity of God\nwere consecrated dogmas. Jupiter was adored as the father of the gods\nand of men, and as filling the whole universe with his power. He was the\nsupreme monarch of nature: the names of gods ascribed to the other\ndeities were more of an association in the title than in the nature of\ntheir power, for each one of them had a particular work to perform under\nthe command of the supreme God. In the mysteries of the religion of the\nGreeks, a hymn expressing the unity of God or Jupiter was sung; and the\nHigh Priest, turning towards the worshipers, said: \"Admire the master\nof the universe; he is one; he is everywhere.\" It was acknowledged by\nEusebius, St. Augustine, Lactance, Justin, Athenagoras, and many other\nFathers of the Church, that the dogma of the unity of God was admitted\nby ancient philosophers, and was the basis of the religion of Orpheus,\nand of all the mysteries of the Greeks.\n\nThe Platonicians believed in the unity of the archetype, or model on\nwhich God formed the world; also they believed in the unity of\ndemiourgos, or god-forming, by a consequence of the same philosophical\nprinciples, namely, from the unity itself of the universe, as can be\nseen in Proclus, and in the writings of the Platonician authors.\n\nTrinity also, (see chapter fifth) was taught in the mysteries.\nPythagoras, and many other philosophers, explained the unity and trinity\nof God by the theory of numbers. They called the monade cause, or\nprinciple. They expressed by the number one, or unit, the first cause,\nand they concluded to the unity of God from mathematical abstractions.\nNext to this unity they placed triades, which expressed faculties or\npowers emanated from them, and also intelligences of a second order. The\ntriple incarnation of the god Wichnou into the body of a virgin was one\nof the doctrines taught in the mysteries of Mithra.\n\nSo much for the mysteries of Paganism; however, we shall, in the course\nof this work, refer to them several times. Let us now examine the\norigin of the mysteries, which, the Partialists say, Jesus Christ has\ntaught. Mysteries suppose secrecy; but Jesus Christ preached his Gospel\nin the open air to his apostles, to his disciples, to crowds of people,\nand to all who were willing to hear his doctrines. He urged upon his\ndisciples to preach above the roofs what he taught them. When, after his\ndeath, his apostles spread his gospel, they spoke in open air,\neverywhere, to masses of people; Paul to the Areopagus, to thousands in\nJerusalem, etc. How then can it be supposed that Jesus Christ taught\nmysteries? Indeed, he did not, but afterwards several Christian churches\ndid.\n\nThe Protestant historian, Mosheim, cites in his History of the Church,\nseveral authors, who state, that, in the second century, several\nChristian churches imitated the mysteries of Paganism. The profound\nrespect, they say, that the people entertained for those mysteries, and\nthe extraordinary sacredness ascribed to them were for the Christians a\nmotive sufficient to give a mysterious appearance to their religion, so\nas to command as much respect to the public as the religion of the\nPagans. To this effect they called mysteries the institutions of the\nGospel, particularly the Eucharist. They used in this ceremony, and in\nthat of baptism, several words and rites consecrated in the mysteries of\nthe Pagans. This abuse commenced in Orient, chiefly in Egypt; Clement of\nAlexandria, in the beginning of the third century, was one of those who\ncontributed the most to this innovation, which then spread in Occident\nwhen Adrian had introduced the mysteries in that portion of the Empire.\nHence, a large portion of the service of the Church hardly differed from\nthat of Paganism.\n\nThat the Church of Rome copied many of the ceremonies, rites, customs,\nand fables of Pagan mysteries is certain, for they have been perpetuated\nin that Church down to our days. From the Pagan mysteries the Roman\nChurch borrowed the following:\n\nIn the initiation to the Pagan mysteries there were degrees; so in the\nRoman Church there are the degrees of porter or door-keeper, of acolyte,\nof reader and of exorcist; the latter degree confers the power of\nexpelling the devil. The ecclesiastical ornaments in the Church of Rome,\nwith the difference of the cross represented on them and of some\ntrimming, are like those used in the mysteries of the Pagans, at least\nin Rome, and in Greece. The long floating gown, the girdle, the casula,\nthe stola, the dalmatica, the round and pyramidal cap, the capa, and\nseveral other garments and ornaments, are alike to those used in the\ntemples, where the mysteries of the Pagans were celebrated.\n\nIn those temples there was an altar richly decorated; so it is in the\nChurch of Rome. In those temples there were twelve flambeaux,\nrepresenting the twelve months of the year: so there are in Catholic\nchurches, upon the first degree above the altar, six chandeliers with\nsix tapers burning during the celebration of the mysteries or mass; six\nothers are on the second degree. The vestals kept a light constantly\nburning in the Pagan temples: so a lamp is kept burning, day and night,\nnear the altar, in the Catholic churches. In the Pagan temples the disc\nof the sun and his beams were represented: so they are in the Catholic\nchurches. Upon the altar, in the Pagan temples, there was an image of\nthe god Osiris or Bacchus, and the emblems of an aries or lamb: so upon\nthe altar, in Catholic churches, there is a tabernacle in which God is\nsaid to dwell, and the door of the tabernacle represents a bleeding\nlamb.\n\nThe Pagans solemnly and processionally carried the image of Osiris, or\nBacchus, around the head of which there was a halo representing the rays\nof the sun: so in the Romish church the priests processionally and with\ngreat pomp, carry, both in the aisles of the churches and on the\nstreets, a wafer which they call God. It is encased in a silver or gold\nostenserium, whose circular centre, in which their pretended God is seen\nbetween two crystals, is shaped like the disc of the sun; and the\noutside, of which called halo or glory, is shaped like his rays. In the\nPagan temples there was a sanctuary exclusively reserved to the\nhigh-pontiff, and to the priests: so it is in the Catholic churches. In\nthe Pagan temples the sanctuary was turned towards the Orient: so it is\nin the Catholic churches.\n\nThe Pagans did not permit their candidates to initiation to assist at\nthe celebration of the mysteries, which was always preceded by this\nformula, solemnly and loudly spoken by an officer, \"Away from here ye\nprofane and impious men, and all those whose soul is contaminated with\ncrimes!\" So in Catholic churches, not now, but from the first centuries\ndown to the middle age, the deacon arose after the homily, turned toward\nthe assistant, and ordered the catechumens to leave the church, because\nthe celebration of the mysteries was to commence. Those mysteries are\nthe mass, during which the priest who officiates commands Jesus Christ\nto descend from heaven into a wafer, which he, (priest,) holds in his\nhands, and to change it into his own blood, flesh, soul, and divinity.\nThe Pagans initiated the candidates near the front door of their\ntemples: so in the Catholic churches, the baptismal fonts where the\ncatechumens are initiated, namely, baptized, are placed near the portal.\nHere we shall remark, that, for many centuries, children are baptized,\n(even now parents are obliged under the pain of mortal sin to have their\nchildren taken to the church to be baptized) three days after they are\nborn. The Pagans initiated candidates chiefly on the eve of great\ncelebrations: so, in the Romish church, catechumens are baptized chiefly\non the eve of Easter, and of Pentecost.\n\nThe Pagans believed that initiation made them holy; so the Romish church\nholds that baptism remits the original and all other sins, and makes\nholy. The Pagans revered in their temples the statue of Pan, in whose\nhands was a seven-pipe flute; also, they revered other emblems of the\nseven planets: so in the Romish Church holds the doctrine of the seven\ngifts of the Holy Spirit, and of the doctrine of the seven sacraments.\nIn the month of February the Pagans celebrated the Lupercales, and the\nfeast of Proserpine: so the Church of Rome celebrates the Candlemas-day.\nWe cite the very words of Bergier, a Catholic priest, and an ultra\nPapist, who writes thus in his Theological Dictionary; article\nCandlemas:\n\n\"Several authors ascribe the institution of Candlemas-day to the pope\nGelase, for the purpose of opposing it to the Lupercales of the Pagans,\nwho went processionally out in the fields making exorcisms. It is the\nopinion of the venerable Bede. 'The Church,' he says, 'has happily\nchanged the lustrations of the Pagans, which took place in February\naround the fields. She has substituted to them processions, in which the\npeople carry in their hands burning tapers.' Others ascribe this\ninstitution to the pope Vigil, and say that it has been substituted to\nthe feast of Proserpine, which the Pagans celebrated in the first days\nof February with torches.'\n\nThe Pagans worshiped Juno as the wife of the god Jupiter: so the Church\nof Rome worships the virgin Mary as the wife of God. The Pagans\ncelebrated the exaltation of the virgo or virgin, the sixth sign and\nseventh constellation in the ecliptic; so the Romish Church has\nestablished the feast of Assumption, namely, of the ascension of the\nvirgin Mary to heaven. The Pagans made solemn processions to honor the\ngoddess Ceres; so the Romish Church has instituted pompous processions\nin the honor of the virgin Mary.\n\nREMARK.--All the above institutions and doctrines of the Romish Church,\nand also those which we shall examine in the following chapters, date\nfrom the first centuries. All the Catholic doctors, theologians, and\nhistorians, confess it.\n\nFrom the numerous and undeniable historical facts summed up in this\nchapter we legitimately draw the conclusions, 1st. That, in the first\ncenturies of the Christian era, the Church of Rome established\nmysteries; 2d. That the Church of Rome borrowed her mysteries from the\nmysteries of the Pagans; and, 3d. That a law of secrecy was binding the\ncatechumens after their initiation, though this law was not so stringent\nas it was among the Pagans.\n\nWhen, in the sixteenth century, the Protestants shook the yoke of the\nPope, they rejected many of the mysteries of the Church of Rome;\nhowever, they kept several of them, such as the mystery of Trinity,\nnamely, of three Gods composing but one God; the mystery of incarnation,\nnamely of God himself descending from the heavens, vesting our mortal\nclay in the womb of a woman for the purpose of being persecuted and\nslain on a cross by men, thus pay to himself the debt owed to him by\nmen who had disobeyed him, (though they did not live yet,) in the person\nof Adam. These, we say, and other mysteries of the Romish Church, the\nProtestants or Heterodox in the opinion of the Catholics, preserved and\ntransmitted them to their sons, or Partialists, who now call the Roman\nCatholics heathens; call the liberal Christian Churches heterodox, and\ncall themselves most emphatically Evangelical Churches, Orthodox\nChurches.\n\nThe final and strictly logical conclusion of this chapter is this:\n\n_Therefore the mysteries of the Romish Church, and those of the\nself-called Orthodox Protestant Churches, are of Pagan origin._\n\n_Corollary._ Since mysteries are of Pagan origin, and since Jesus Christ\nand his apostles did not establish mysteries, there ought not to be\nmysteries in Christianity. Since Jesus Christ and his apostles preached\nthe Gospel in open air to all, everywhere, there cannot be any mysteries\nin their teaching, and there cannot be any mysteries in their writings,\nwe mean in the New Testament.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A PERSONAL DEVIL.\n\n\nTHE celebrated Plutarch, historian, philosopher, and priest of Apollo,\nin the first century of the Christian era, thus writes: \"We ought not to\nbelieve that the Principles of the universe are not animated, as\nDemocrite and Epicure thought; nor that an inert matter be organized,\nand ordained by a Providence that disposes of all, as the Stoicians\ntaught. It is impossible that one sole being, either good or bad, be the\nauthor of all, for God can cause no evil. The harmony of the world is a\ncombination of contraries like the strings of a lyre, or like the string\nof a bow capable of being bent and unbent. In no case, the poet\nEuripedes says, good is separated from evil: there must be a mixture of\nthe one and of the other. This opinion is of immemorial antiquity, and\nhas been held by theologians, legislators, poets, and philosophers. Its\ninventor is unknown, but it is verified by the traditions of mankind; it\nis consecrated by mysteries and sacrifices among the Barbarians, as well\nas among the Greeks. They all acknowledge the dogma of two opposite\nPrinciples in nature, who, by their opposition, produce the mixture of\ngood and evil.\n\n\"Therefore it may not be said, that a single dispenser draws events like\na liquor from two casks to mix them together; for this mixture is found\nin all the phenomena of nature. We must admit two opposite causes, two\ncontrary powers, bearing the one to the right, and the other to the\nleft; and who thus govern our life and the whole sublunar world, which\nfor this reason is subject to all the irregularities and vicissitudes we\nwitness, for nothing is done without a cause. As the good cannot produce\nevil, then there is a principle causing evil, as one causing good.\"\n\nWe see by this passage of Plutarch, that the true origin of two\nPrinciples proceeds from the difficulty which men, in all times, found\nin explaining, by one sole cause, good and evil in nature, and in making\nflow from one sole spring, virtue and crime, light and darkness. \"This\ndogma,\" Plutarch adds, \"has been admitted by nearly all nations, and\nmore especially by those renowned by their wisdom. They believed in two\ngods of different trade, if I may say so, who caused, the one good, and\nthe other evil. They called the first God by excellence, and the second\nDemon.\"\n\nIn fact the Persians, disciples of Zoroaster admitted, and even in our\ndays, the Parsis, their successors, admit two principles, the one called\nOromaze, and the other Ahriman. Plutarch says: \"The Persians believed\nthat the first was of the nature of light, and the second of that of\ndarkness. Among the Egyptians the first was called Osiris, and the\nsecond Typhon, eternal foe to the first.\"\n\nAll the sacred books of the Persians, and of the Egyptians, contain the\nmarvellous and allegorical recital of the various combats given by\nAhriman and his angels to Oromaze, and by Typhon to Osiris. These fables\nhave been rehearsed by the Greeks in the war of the Titans against the\nGiants, against Jupiter, or Principle of good and light; for Jupiter,\nPlutarch remarks, was the Oromaze of the Persians, and the Osiris of the\nEgyptians.\n\nTo these examples quoted by Plutarch, and which he extracted from the\nTheogony of the Persians, of the Egyptians, of the Greeks, and of the\nChaldeans, we shall add others, which are living yet, at least the most\nof them. The inhabitants of the kingdom of Pegu admit two Principles;\nthe one author of good, and the other of evil. They particularly\nendeavor to obtain the favor of the latter. The Indians of Java\nacknowledge a chief supreme of the universe, and address offerings and\nprayers to the evil genius lest he harm them. The Indians of the Moluc\nand Philippine islands do the same. The natives of the island of Formose\nworshiped a good god, Ishy, and demons, Chouy; they sacrifice to the\nlatter, but seldom to the former.\n\nThe negroes of the Cote-d'or admit two Gods, the one good, and the\nother bad; the one white, and the other black and evil. They do not\nadore the former often, whereas they try to appease the latter with\nprayers and sacrifices; the Portuguese have named him Demon. The\nHottentots call the good Principle the Captain of above, and the bad\nprinciple the Captain of below. The ancients believed that the source of\nevil was in the underneath matter of the earth. The Giants and Typhon\nwere sons of the Earth. The Hottentots say, that, whether the good\nPrinciple is prayed to or not he does good; whereas it is necessary to\npray to the evil Principle, lest he might do harm. They call the bad god\nTouquoa, and represent him small, crooked, irritable, a foe to them; and\nthey say that from him all evils flow to this world.\n\nThe natives of Madagascar believe in two Principles. They ascribe to the\nbad one the form and badness of a serpent, they call him Angat: they\nname the good one Jadhar, which means great, omnipotent God. They rear\nno temple to the latter because he is good. The Mingrelians more\nparticularly honor the one of their idols, which they think to be the\nmost cruel. The Indians of the island of Teneriffe believe in a supreme\nGod, whom they call Achguaya-Xerax, which means the greatest, the most\nsublime, the preserver of all things. Also they admit an evil genius\nnamed Guyotta.\n\nThe Scandinaves have their god Locke, who wars against the gods, and\nparticularly against Thor. He is the slanderer of the gods, Edda says,\nthe great forger of deceit. His spirit is evil; he engendered three\nmonsters; the wolf Feuris, the serpent Midgard, and Hela, or death. He\ncauses the earthquakes. The Tsouvaches and the Morduans recognize a\nsupreme being, who gave men all the blessings they enjoy. They also\nadmit evil spirits whose occupation is to injure mankind.\n\nThe Tartars of Katzchinzi adore a benevolent god, in kneeling towards\nthe Orient; but they fear another god, To\u00fcs, to whom they pray to disarm\nhis wrath; and to whom, in the spring, they sacrifice a stallion. The\nOstiaks and the Vogouls name that evil god Koul; the Samoyedes name him\nSjoudibe; the Motores, Huala; the Kargasses, Sedkyr. The Thibetans admit\nevil spirits which they place in the regions above. The religion of the\nBonzes supposes two Principles. The Siamoeses sacrifice to an evil\nspirit, whom they consider as being the cause of all the misfortunes of\nmankind.\n\nThe Indians have their Ganga and their Gournatha, spirits whom they try\nto appease with prayer, sacrifices, and processions. The inhabitants of\nTolgony, India, believe that two Principles govern the universe; the one\ngood, he is light; and the other bad, he is darkness. The ancient\nAssyrians, as well as the Persians, admitted two Principles; and they\nhonored, Augustine says, two gods, the one good, and the other bad. The\nChaldeans also had their good and bad stars, animated by geniuses or\nintelligences also good and bad.\n\nIn America the dogma of two Principles, and of good and bad spirits, is\nalso found. The Peruvians revered Pacha-Camac as being a good god, and\nCupa\u00ef as being a bad god. The Cara\u00efbs admitted two sorts of spirits; the\none benevolent, who dwell in the heaven; and the other evil, who hover\nover us to lead us to temptation. The former, on the contrary, invite us\nto do good, and each of us is guarded by one of them. Those of\nTerra-Firma think that there is a god in the heaven, namely, the sun.\nBesides they admit a bad Principle, who is the author of all evils; they\npresent him with flowers, fruits, corn, and perfumes. The Tapayas,\nsituated in America by about the same latitude as the Madegasses in\nAfrica, believe also in two Principles.\n\nThe natives of Brazil believe in a bad genius: they call him Aguyan; and\nthey have conjurors who can, they say, divert his wrath. The Indians of\nFlorida and of Louisiana adored the sun, the moon, and the stars. They\nalso believed in an evil spirit named To\u00efa. The Canadians, and the\nsavage tribes of the Bay of Hudson, revered the sun, the moon, the\nstars, and the thunder; but they more particularly prayed to the evil\nspirits. The Esquimaux believe in a god supremely good, whom they call\nUkouma, and in another, Ouikan, who is the author of all evils; who\ncauses the tempests, and who capsizes the boats. The savages of the\nstrait of Davis believe in beneficent and malignant spirits.\n\nThis distinction of two Principles, of a god, and of geniuses or\nspirits, authors of good and light; and of a god and geniuses, authors\nof evil and darkness, is immemorial. This opinion has been so\nuniversally adopted for the only reason, that those who observed the\nopposite phenomena of nature could not account for them, and could not\nreconcile them with the existence of a single cause. As there are good\nand bad men, they believed that there were good and bad gods, the ones\ndispensers of good, and the others authors of evil.\n\nSuch was the universal belief when Jesus Christ came to the world. The\nJews themselves, since the captivity of Babylon, generally believed in\nthose two Principles. They went so far as to immolate their own children\non the altars of evil deities, in order to appease them. Jesus preached\nhis Gospel, died, and left on earth his apostles with the trust of\ncontinuing, among men, his saving mission. As in the writings of the\nEvangelists the word demon, or devil, was used figuratively, meaning\nlust, wrong desire, etc., some of the first Christians understood the\ntrue sense of these figurative words, and others did not. In the third\ncentury the Church of Rome, which had been tending to supremacy over\nother churches, and which, from policy, to gain more adepts, was\ncompromising with Paganism, understood the word demon, or devil,\nliterally, and preserved the heathen doctrine, which, as she grew,\nbecame widely spread, and afterwards an article of faith.\n\nThe Fathers of the Church, of that age, believed that the demons, or\ndevils, were innumerable; that their chief, Lucifer, had entrusted a\ndemon to accompany each man through life, to tempt him to sin; that\nLucifer had as many bad angels, or demons, under his command, as God had\ngood angels; that all those demons were corporeal, and that those male\ncommitted fornication and adultery with the daughters of men; and those\nfemale with the sons of men; that they had generated the giants; and\nthat they had incited the oppressors of the Christians to persecute\nthem. Thus thought Justin, Tatian, Minutius-Felix, Athenagoras,\nTertullian, Julius-Firmicus, Origen, Synesius, Arnobe, St. Gregory of\nNazianze, Lactance, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, etc., as seen in their\nworks in either edition of the Benedictines, or of the canon Caillot, of\nMigne, a priest, now editor in Paris. Even in our days the most of the\nsuperstitious practices of the Pagans, in regard to evil spirits, are\npreserved in the Papal Church,--conjurations, exorcisms, Agnus Dei, holy\nwater, etc., and others which they have added, such as the sign of the\ncross, the expulsion of the devil from houses, barns, wells, wagons,\nbeasts, fields, etc. These ceremonies are oftentimes performed, as a\nmatter of course, for money.\n\nThe same took place in the Church of Rome in reference to the heathen\ndogma of good angels being under the command of the good spirit, or God;\nthis dogma was generally believed even by the Jews, at least since the\ncaptivity of Babylon. We say _generally_, because the Sadduceans did not\nbelieve it; and perhaps, also, the Samaritans and the Cara\u00eftes, for we\nhave but two testimonies that prove they partook of the opinion of the\nSamaritans on this point, namely, the testimony of Abusa\u00efd, author of an\nArabic version of the Pentateuch, and that of Aaron, in his commentaries\nof the same. The Papal Church holds still that the angels form three\nhierarchies, or choirs. The first is that of the Seraphims, Cherubims,\nand thrones; the second comprises the dominations, the virtues, and the\npowers; and the third is composed of the principalities, of the\narchangels, and of the angels. One of these angels, called guardian, is\nobliged to stand by each one of us all the days of our life. Temples,\naltars, prayers and sacrifices are offered to them.\n\nTertullian, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, etc., thought that the bodies\nof the good angels were formed of a very thin, subtle matter. Other\nFathers, Basile, Athanase, Cyrille, Gregory of Nysse, John-Chrysostomus,\netc., considered them as spiritual beings; however, they believed that\nthey may take a body when they please. The Church of Rome holds, as an\narticle of faith, that the good angels ought to be adored.\n\nAs seen above, the Church of Rome has preserved, with a very slight\nmodification, if any, the heathen dogma of two Principles, the one good,\nGod; and the other bad, Lucifer, or the devil; also the nomenclature of\ngeniuses, or spirits, or angels, which are, the ones under the command\nof God, and the others under the command of Lucifer. When, in the\nsixteenth century, the Protestants parted with the Church of Rome, they\ncut off many branches of this dogma; but they kept its body, namely,\ninstead of understanding the words demon, or devil, as meaning lust,\nabuse of free agency, wrong desire, etc., they understood them of\npersonal beings, either material or immaterial, but existing, tempting\neach man to sin; and relentlessly seeking the ruin of mankind.\n\n_Therefore the doctrine of a Personal Devil is of Pagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN.\n\n\nTHE Roman Catholic writers are unanimous in the opinion that it was the\nbelief of a large number of Pagans that man had fallen from a higher\nstate of existence. St. Augustine, more especially, lengthily and\nemphatically insists upon the general belief of the Pagans in original\nsin, when he writes against Pelage. However, we shall bring forth other\ntestimonies, which will not leave, in the mind of the reader, any doubt\nthat the Pagans generally believed in original sin.\n\nCicero, in his work De Republica, book third, after painting the\ngrandeur of the human nature, and then contrasting its subjection to\nmiseries, to diseases, to sorrow, to fear, and to the most degrading\npassions, was at a loss to define man. He called him _a soul in ruins_.\nIt was for the same reason that, in Plato, Socrates reminds to his\ndisciples that those who had established mysteries, and who, he said,\nwere not to be despised, taught that according to their ancestors, any\none who dies without having been purified is plunged into the mire of\nthe Tartarus; whereas, he who has been purified dwells with the gods.\nClement of Alexandria, in his Stromata, book third, writes, that,\naccording to the testimony of Philola\u00fcs, the Pythagorician, all the\nancient theologians and poets said that the soul was buried in the body,\nas in a grave, as a punishment for some sin. It was also the doctrine of\nthe Orphics, as can be seen in Plat., Cratyl., Opera, tome third.\n\nIn the pages 48, 50, and 51, of the treatise of Plutarch, on the Delays\nof Divine Justice, we read: \"A State, for instance, is one same thing\ncontinued, a whole, alike to an animal which is ever the same, and the\nage thereof does not change the identity. The State then being one, as\nlong as the association maintains the unity, the merit and the demerit,\nthe reward and the punishment for all that is done in common are justly\nascribed to it, as they are to a single individual. But if a State is to\nbe considered in this point of view, it ought to be the same with a\nfamily proceeding from the same stock, from which it holds I do not know\nwhat sort of hidden strength; I do not know what sort of communication\nof essence and qualities, which extend to all the individuals of the\nrace. Beings produced through the medium of generation are not similar\nto the productions of arts. In regard to the latter, when the work is\ncompleted it is immediately separated from the hand of the workman, and\nit no longer belongs to him: true it is done by him, but not from him.\nOn the contrary, what is engendered proceeds from the substance itself\nof the generating being; so that it holds from him something which is\njustly rewarded or punished in his stead, for that something is\nhimself.\"\n\nAccording to the doctrine of the Persians, Meshia and Meshiane, or the\nfirst man and first woman, were first pure, and submitted to Ormuzd,\ntheir maker. Ahriman saw them and envied their happiness. He approached\nthem under the form of a serpent, presented fruits to them, and\npersuaded them that he was the maker of man, of animals, of plants, and\nof the beautiful universe in which they dwelled. They believed it; and\nsince that Ahriman was their master. Their nature became corrupt, and\nthis corruption infected their whole posterity. This we find in\nVendidat-Sade, pages 305, and 428.\n\nThus sin does not originate from Ormuzd; but, Zoroaster says, from the\nbeing hidden in crime. This testimony is found in the Exposition of the\nTheological System of the Persians, extracted from the books Zends,\nPehlvis, and Parsis, by Anquetil du Perron. The following passage,\n\"There are stains brought by man when he comes to life,\" is found in the\n69th tome of the Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions.\n\nWe read in the Ezour-Vedam, book 1, chapter 4, tome 1, pages 201 and\n202: \"God never created vice. He cannot be its author; and God, who is\nholiness and wisdom, can be the author but of virtue. He gave us his law\nin which he prescribes what we ought to do. Sin is a transgression of\nthis law by which it is prohibited. If sin reigns on the earth, we\nourselves are its authors. Our perverse inclinations have induced us to\ntransgress the law of God; hence, the first sin which has induced us to\ncommit others.\" The same author in book 5, chapter 5, tome 2,\nacknowledges that the first man was created in a state of innocence; and\nthat he was happy because he controlled his passions and desires.\n\nMaurice in his Indi\u00e6 Antiquitates, vol. 6, page 53, proves that the\nIndians had a knowledge of the fall of the first man and of the first\nwoman; he proves also that the dogma of original sin was taught by the\nDruids. Voltaire, on the seventeenth page of his work, Additions to\nGeneral History, confesses that the Bramas believed that man was fallen\nand degenerated: \"this idea,\" he adds, \"is found among all the ancient\npeoples.\"\n\nThe Father Jesuit Bouchet, in a letter to the Bishop of Avranches,\nwrites: \"The gods,\" our Indians say, \"tried by all means to obtain\nimmortality. After many inquiries and trials, they conceived the idea\nthat they could find it in the tree of life, which was in the Chorcan.\nIn fact they succeeded; and in eating once in a while of the fruits of\nthat tree, they kept the precious treasure they so much valued. A famous\nsnake, named Cheiden, saw that the tree of life had been found by the\ngods of the second order. As probably he had been entrusted with\nguarding that tree, he became so angry because his vigilance had been\ndeceived, that he immediately poured out an enormous quantity of poison,\nwhich spread over the whole earth.\"\n\nIn the Ta-Hio, or Moral of Confucius, page 50, Confucius, after saying\nthat reason is a gift from heaven, adds, \"Concupiscence has corrupted\nit, and it is now mixed with many impurities. Therefore take off those\nimpurities so that it resume its first luster, and all its former\nperfection.\" The philosopher Tchouangse taught, in conformity with the\ndoctrine of King or sacred books of the Chinese, \"that in the former\nstate of heaven, man was inly united to the supreme reason; and that he\npracticed all the works of justice. The heart relished the truth. There\nwas in man no alloy of falsity. Then the four seasons of the year were\nregular. Nothing was injurious to man, and man was injurious to nothing.\nUniversal harmony reigned in all nature. But the columns of the\nfirmament having been broken, the earth was shaken in its very\nfoundations. Man having rebelled against the heavens the system of the\nuniverse was deranged; evils and crimes flooded the earth.\" This\ntestimony is extracted from the Discourse of Ramsey on Mythology, pages\n146, and 148.\n\nM. de Humboldt, in the tome 1, pages 237 and 274, and also in the tome\n2, page 198 of his Views of the Cordilleras and of the monuments of\nAmerica, says, \"That the mother of our flesh; the serpent Cihuacohuati,\nand her are famous in the Mexican traditions. Those traditions\nrepresent the mother of our flesh fallen from her first state of\ninnocence and happiness.\" Voltaire, in Questions on Encyclopedia, says;\n\"The fall of man degenerated is the basis of the theology of all the\nancient nations.\"\n\nThere were nearly among all nations expiatory rites, to purify infants\nwhen they were born. Usually this ceremony was done in the day when the\nchild was named. Macrob informs us, in his Saturn, book 1, that \"that\nday, among the Romans, was the ninth for the boys and the eighth for the\ngirls. That day was called lustricus, because of the lustral water used\nto purify the new born child.\" In the Analysis of the Insc. of Rosette,\npage 145, we read that the Egyptians, the Persians, and the Greeks had a\nsimilar practice. In Yucatan the new born child was brought in the\ntemple, where the priest poured on his head the waters destined to this\nuse; and then he gave him a name. In the Canary islands the women\nperformed this priestly function. Caril, in his American Letters, tome\n1, pages 146, and 147, speaks of these ceremonies. A law prescribed\nthese expiatory rites among the Mexicans.\n\nM. de Humboldt, Views of the Cordilleras, and of the Monuments of\nAmerica, tome 1, page 223, writes: \"The midwife, in invoking the god\nOmeteuctly, (the god of celestial paradise,) and the goddess Omecihuatl,\nwho live in the abode of the blessed, poured water on the forehead and\non the breast of the new-born child. After pronouncing several prayers,\nin which water was considered as the symbol of the purification of the\nsoul, the midwife called near her the children who had been invited to\ngive a name to the new-born child. In some provinces a fire was kindled\nat the same time, and they did as if really the child was passed through\nthe flame to purify him both with water and fire. This ceremony reminds\nthe practices whose origin, in Asia, seems to be immemorial.\"\n\nLikewise, the Thibetans have similar expiatory rites: this we find in\nthe thirty-first page of the preface of the Thibetan Alphabet. We\nextract the following from the Works of the Society of Calcutta: \"In\nIndia, when a name is given to a child, his name is written on his\nforehead, and he is plunged three times into the water of the river.\nThen the Brama exclaims, 'O God, pure, one, invisible and perfect! to\nthee we offer this offspring of a holy tribe, anointed with an\nincorruptible oil, and purified with water.'\"\n\nIn the mysteries, the Hierophant taught the doctrine that our nature had\nbeen corrupted by a first sin. The sixth book of the poem Eneida is\nnothing but a brilliant exposition of this doctrine; and perhaps\nantiquity offers nothing that proves more the power of tradition on the\nhuman mind, than the passage in which the poet, following Eneas in the\nabode of the dead, describes in magnificent verses the dismal spectacle\nwhich first strikes his gaze. If there is any thing in the world that\nwakes up in our mind the idea of innocence, assuredly it is a child who\nhas been unable neither to know nor to commit sin; and the supposition\nthat he is subject to punishment and to suffering, is a thought which\nour soul abhors. However, Virgil, in the 6th book, verses 426, and 429,\nplaces the children dead when yet nursing, at the entry of the sad\nkingdoms, where he represents them in a state of pain, weeping and\nmoaning--vagitus ingens. Why those tears, those cries of sufferings?\nWhich faults do those children, to whom their mothers had not smiled,\nexpiate? (Virgil, Ecloga 4, verse 62.) What has inspired the poet with\nthis surprising fiction? On what does it rest? Whence does it originate,\nif not from the ancient belief that man was born in sin?\n\nTherefore, the doctrine of original sin was generally believed by the\nPagans.\n\nWe stated, at the commencement of this chapter, that the Roman Catholic\nwriters are unanimous in the opinion that it was the belief of a large\nnumber of Pagans, that man had fallen from a higher state of existence.\nHowever, a small number only of the same writers are of the opinion that\nthe Jews believed in the doctrine of original sin; and they find no\nother proof of the assertion than the ceremony of circumcision, which,\nas is familiar to all, was a mere legal and national observance, and had\nnot the virtue of remitting sin. In the first centuries of the\nChristian era, baptism was considered as a mere ceremony for initiating\ncatechumens to the Christian profession.\n\nIt was only towards the end of the third century, that the belief of the\ntransmission of Adam's sin to all his descendants was introduced in the\nChurch of Rome, which already considered herself the mistress of the\nother churches. Soon afterwards the dogma that baptism had the virtue of\nremitting original sin was established. As proof of these two facts, we\nhave the testimony of more than twenty-three Christian sects of the\nfirst centuries, which did not admit the dogma of original sin; and did\nnot believe that baptism had the virtue of remitting sin. We quote a few\nof those sects: the Simonians, the Nicola\u00eftes, the Valentinians, the\nBasilidians, the Carpocratians, the Ophites, the Sethians, the\nPelagians, all the Gnostic sects, etc.\n\nTherefore, the Church of Rome borrowed the dogma of original sin from\nthe Pagans. To this many Roman Catholic writers say: true the Pagans\nheld this doctrine, but we did not borrow it from them; we found it in\nthe first chapters of Genesis. We rejoin that even the fathers of the\nfourth century did not understand those chapters literally, and thereby\nas teaching the dogma of original sin. St. Augustine, in his work, City\nof God, avers that it was a general opinion among Christians, that the\nfirst three chapters of Genesis are allegorical, and that he himself is\ninclined to think so. He confesses that it is impossible to take them\nliterally without hurting piety, and ascribing to God unworthy actions.\nOrigen says: \"Where is the man of good sense, who can ever believe that\nthere have been a first, a second, and a third days, and that those days\nhad each an evening and morning, though there were not yet neither sun,\nnor moon, nor stars? Where is the man credulous enough to believe, that\nGod was working like a gardener, and that he planted a garden in Orient;\nthat the tree of life was a real tree, whose fruit would preserve life?\"\n\nOrigen compared the temptation of Adam to that of the birth of Love,\nwhose father was Porus, or Abundance, and whose mother was Poverty. He\nadds that there are in the Old Testament facts, which, if understood\nliterally, are absurd, and which, if understood allegorically, contain\nvaluable truths. We refer the reader for the above to the following\nworks: See St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, liber xi, cap. 6, et liber 2,\ncap. xi, No. 24.--De Genesi ad Litteram, liber 4, No. 44.--De Catechis\nRudibus, cap. 13. The opinion of St. Athanase can be found in his Oratio\nContra Arium, No. 60.--That of Origen, in his work De Principiis, liber\niv, No. 16, contra Celsum, liber 6, No. 50, 51. That of St. Ambrosius,\nin his Hexam, liber one, cap. 7, et Sequentia. That of Theodoret, in his\nQuest. in Genes. interpr. cap. v. et Sequentia, and that of St. Gregory\nin his Moral, in Job, liber 32, cap. 9.\n\nThe Fathers and the Christian sects named above, did not take the first\nthree chapters of Genesis literally, because it would imply absurdity\nand blasphemy. The idea of God, namely, of the supreme and eternal\ncause, who clothes our clay for the pleasure of walking in a garden; the\nidea of a woman conversing with a serpent; listening to its counsels and\nheeding them; that of a man and a woman organized for reproduction, and\nyet destined to be immortal on earth, and to procreate a mathematical\ninfinity of beings, immortal like themselves, who also will infinitely\nmultiply, and will all find their food in the fruits of the trees of a\ngarden where they will all dwell; a fruit culled that is to kill Adam\nand Eve, and to be transmitted as a hereditary crime to all their\ndescendants, who did not participate to their disobedience, crime which\nwill be forgiven only in as much as men will commit another crime,\ninfinitely greater, a deicide--if such a crime might exist; the woman\nwho since that time is condemned to bring forth with pain, as if the\npains of childbirth were not natural to her organization, and were not\ncommon to her, as well as to the other animals which have not tasted the\nforbidden fruit; the serpent forced to crawl, as if a footless reptile\ncould move any other way: so many absurdities and follies, heaped in\nthose first three chapters, they could not believe and ascribe them to\nGod.\n\nMaimonide, one of the most learned Rabbins of the Jews, thus wrote in\nthe twelfth century: \"We ought not to understand literally what is\nwritten in the books of the creation; nor entertain about the creation\nthe opinions generally agreed. It is for this reason that our wise men\nurged upon us to keep their true teaching secret, and not to lift up the\nveil of allegory which conceals the truths they contain. If taken\nliterally the relation of the creation gives us the most absurd and\nextravagant ideas of the Deity. Whoever will find out their true\nteaching, ought to keep it to himself; this is the earnest\nrecommendation of our wise men, and more especially in regard to the\nfirst six days. Those who know ought to speak about it but obscurely, as\nI do myself, so as to let their hearers guess if they can.\"\n\nThe above facts and proofs lead us to the conclusion that the Church of\nRome borrowed the dogma of original sin from the Pagans.\n\nAs the Protestants, who call themselves Orthodox, borrowed it in the\nsixteenth century from the Church of Rome, it follows that they also\nhold it from the Pagans.\n\n_Therefore, the doctrine of Original Sin is of Pagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF TRINITY.\n\n\nTHE Roman Catholic writers themselves confess that the Pagans believed\nin Trinity; also the most of the self-called Protestant Orthodox\nhistorians and authors. The neutral authors are unanimous on this point.\nThe following facts and proofs we shall impartially extract from those\nthree classes of writers:\n\nThe Egyptians believed in Trinity; the Greek inscription of the great\nObelisk of the major circus, at Rome, reads thus: Megas Theos, the great\ngod, Theogentos, the begotten of god; and Pamphegges, the all-bright,\n(Apollo, the Spirit.) Heraclide, of Pont, and Porphyre relate a famous\noracle of Serapis: Prota Theos, metepeita logos, kai pneuma soun autois.\nSumphuta de tria panta, kai eis en eonta. [Translation:] All is God in\nthe beginning; then the word and the spirit; three Gods coengendered\ntogether and united in one.\n\nThe Chaldeans had a sort of Trinity in their Metris, Oromasis, and\nAraminis, or Mithra, Oromase and Aramine. The Chinese had also, and\nstill have, a mysterious Trinity. The first god generates the second\none, and both generate the third one. The Chinese say that the great\nterm, or great unity, contains three, one is three, and three are one.\nIn India Trinity was immemorially known. The Father Jesuit Calmet\nwrites: \"What I have seen mostly surprising is a text extracted from\nLamaastambam, one of the books of the Indians.... It begins thus: The\nLord, the good, the great God, in his mouth is the word. (The term which\nthey use personifies the word.) Then it speaks of the Holy Spirit in\nthese words: Ventus seu spiritus perfectus; [translation] breath or\nperfect spirit,--and it ends by the creation, ascribing it to God\nalone.\"\n\nThe Jesuit Calmet says, writing about the Thibetans: \"I learned the\nfollowing about their religion. They call God Konciosa, and they seem to\nhave some idea of the adorable Trinity; for they call God sometimes\nKonsikosick, God-one, and at other times Kocioksum, God-three. They use\na kind of bead on which they pronounce these words: _om_, _ha_, _hum_.\nWhen they are asked the explanation, they answer that _om_ signifies the\nintelligence, or arm, namely power; that _ha_ is the word; that _hum_ is\nthe heart or love, and that these three words signify God.\"\n\nThe Father Bouchet, a Roman Catholic missionary in India, wrote the\nfollowing to the bishop of Avranches: \"I commence by the confused idea\nwhich the Indians preserve about the adorable Trinity. My Lord, I have\nspoken to you of the three principal deities of the Indians, Bruma,\nWishnou, and Routren. The greater portion of the people say, it is true,\nthat they are three different gods, and really separate. But several\nNianigneuls, or spiritual men, assure that these three gods, apparently\ndistinct, compose in reality but one god: that this god is called Bruma,\nwhen he creates and exercises his all-power; that he is called Wishnou,\nwhen he preserves the created beings, and does them good; and that,\nfinally, he takes the name of Routren, when he destroys the cities,\nchastises the wicked, and makes men feel his just anger.\"\n\nEnglish missionaries have found at Ota\u00efti some traces of the Trinity\namong the religious dogmas of the natives.\n\nPlato refers to this doctrine in several passages of his works. \"Not\nonly,\" says Dacier in his translation, \"it is believed that he knew\nabout the Word, eternal Son of God; but also that he knew about the Holy\nSpirit, for he thus writes to the young Denis:\n\n\"'I must declare to Archedemus what is much more precious and more\ndivine, and which you so eagerly desire to know; for you sent him to me\nfor this express purpose. According to what he told me, you think that I\nhave not sufficiently explained to you my opinion about the first\nPrinciple, therefore I shall write it to you, enigmatically, however, in\norder that, if my epistle is intercepted at sea or on land, he who will\nread it will be unable to understand it. All things are around their\nking; they exist through him, and he is the only cause of good things,\nsecond for the second things, and third for the third things.'\n\n\"In the Epinomis,\" continues Dacier, \"Plato establishes as Principle,\nthe first good, the Word, or intelligence and the soul. The first good\nis God;... the Word, or intelligence, is the son of this first good, who\nbegets him similar to himself; and the soul, which is the term between\nthe Father and the Son, is the Holy Spirit.\"\n\nPlato had borrowed this doctrine about Trinity from Timee of Locre, who\nheld it from the Italian philosophical school. Marsile Ficin, in one of\nhis remarks on Plato, shows from the testimonies of Jamblic, Porphyre,\nPlato and Maxim of Tyr, that the Pythagoricians knew also the excellence\nof the Ternary; Pythagoras himself indicated it in this symbol: Protima\nto Schema, kai Bema, kai Triobolon. The Jesuit Kirker, dissenting about\nthe unity and trinity of the first Principle, traces vestiges of the\ndoctrine of Trinity up to Pythagoras, and to the Egyptians.\n\nSt. Augustine himself, though the staunchest defender of the dogma of\nTrinity, confessed that, among all the nations of the world, a Trinity,\nnearly similar to the one he believed in, had been held. He added that\nthe Pythagoricians, the Platonicians, and that a great number of\nAtlantes, Lybian, Egyptian, Persian, Chaldean, Scythian, Gallenses, and\nHibernian philosophers, held several dogmas about the unity of the God,\nLight, and Good, in common with the Church of Rome.\n\nMacrobe gives us a summary of ancient or Platonician theology, which\ncontains a true Trinity, of which that of the Papists and of the\nself-called Protestant Orthodox is but a copy. According to this\nsummary, the world has been formed by the universal soul: this soul is\nthe same as their spiritus, or spirit. They also call the Holy Spirit\nCreator: \"Veni Creator spiritus,\" etc., [translation,] Come Spirit\nCreator, etc., (Catholic hymn.) Macrobe adds, that from this spirit or\nsoul the intelligence, which he calls _men's_ proceeds. Is this not the\nFather, the Son, or wisdom, and the Spirit that creates and vivifies\nall? Even is not the expression _to proceed_ common to the ancient and\nto the Papist and Protestant Orthodox Churches in the filiation of the\nfirst three beings?\n\nMacrobe goes farther. He recalls the three Principles to a primitive\nunit, who is the sovereign God. After resting his theory on this Trinity\nhe adds: \"You see how this unit, or original monade of the first cause,\nis preserved entire and indivisible up to the soul, or spirit, which\nanimates the world.\" This testimony of Macrobe has so much more bearing,\nthat he wrote in the beginning of the fifth century; that he was the\nfirst Chamberlain of the emperor Theodose, and was the most learned\nantiquarian of that age.\n\nAnother most important fact we shall record. It is beyond any doubt\nthat before the coming of Jesus Christ the Jews did not hold the dogma\nof Trinity, nor do they now. Their Rabbins, and all the Roman Catholic\ntheologians, agree on this point.\n\nDuring the first three centuries of the Christian era the dogma of\nTrinity was not generally believed. The Simonians, the Nichola\u00eftes, the\nValentinians, the Basilidians, the Carpocratians, the Ophites, the\nSethians, all the Gnostics, and many other Christian sects rejected it.\nIt was only in the fourth century, that Arius and the above sects were\ncondemned in the council of Nice, because they denied the divinity of\nJesus Christ. This council was assembled by the order of the emperor\nConstantine I., who was urged to it by the Bishop of Rome, (or Pope,)\nwhose Church held the dogma of Trinity. As a matter of course the\nbishops of the council had to decide according to the will of those two\nleaders; for Constantine threatened them with deposition and exile: in\nfact he banished Arius, and deposed seventeen bishops, who did not\nsubscribe to the decision of the council.\n\nThe doctrine that Jesus Christ was not God himself was so generally\nspread, and so deeply rooted in the minds, that several successors of\nConstantine I. embraced Arianism; and it was only after centuries that\nArianism, which was spread nearly all over the East, was crushed by the\npapal and the imperial power.\n\nNow let us draw our conclusions. Since the Jews had no knowledge of the\ndogma of Trinity, the Church of Rome could not borrow it from them;\nsince the generality of the Christian sects during the first three\ncenturies did not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, the Church of\nRome did not find the dogma of Trinity in the Gospel; (besides, the\nCatholic theologians never pretended that the Scriptures teach it--they\nsimply pretended, and still pretend, that it was a tradition.) Since the\ndogma of Trinity was believed by many Pagan sects, then the Roman Church\nborrowed it from them.\n\nIn turns, the self-called Orthodox Protestant Churches borrowed this\ndoctrine from the Church of Rome, in the sixteenth century.\n\n_Therefore the doctrine of Trinity is of Pagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE SUPREME DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.\n\n\nIT will be demonstrated that the doctrine of the supreme divinity of\nJesus Christ is of Pagan origin, if it can be proved, 1st, That the\nChurch of Rome, from which the self-called Orthodox Protestant Churches\nborrowed this doctrine, in the sixteenth century, did not hold it from\nthe apostles of Jesus Christ; and, 2d, That the Church of Rome uses, in\nher adoration to Jesus Christ, rites and ceremonies of a striking\nsimilarity with those used by the Pagans, in their adoration to the sun,\nunder the names of Bacchus, Hercules, Osiris, Mithra, Atys, etc.\n\nBut it can be proved, 1st, That the Church of Rome, from which the\nself-called Orthodox Protestant Churches, in the sixteenth century,\nborrowed the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ, did not\nhold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ; and, 2d, That the Church of\nRome uses, in her adoration to Jesus Christ, rites and ceremonies of a\nstriking similarity with those used by the Pagans in their adoration to\nthe sun, under the names of Bacchus, Hercules, Osiris, Mithra, Atys,\netc.\n\n1st. We prove that the Church of Rome, from which the self-called\nOrthodox Protestant Churches, in the sixteenth century, borrowed the\ndoctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ, did not hold it from\nthe apostles of Jesus Christ.\n\nIt will be evident that the Church of Rome, from which the self-called\nOrthodox Protestant Churches, in the sixteenth century, borrowed the\ndoctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ, did not hold it from\nthe apostles of Jesus Christ, if, until nearly the end of the third\ncentury, the various Christian denominations, or sects, did not believe\nthe doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ. But, until nearly\nthe end of the third century, the various Christian denominations, or\nsects, did not believe the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus\nChrist.\n\nThis we prove:--\n\nWe request the readers to bear in mind, in reading this chapter, that\nwe have extracted all the proofs and statements brought forth therein,\nfrom the works of the Roman Catholic priest Bergier, which we have\nstudied in our Catholic theological school; from the works of\nthe Rev. Father Jesuit Feller; from the History of the Church,\nby Berrault-Ber-Castel, a Roman Catholic priest; and from the\nEcclesiastical History, by the Roman Catholic clergyman Fleury. Those\nproofs and statements can be verified, in the first two writers, at the\narticles of the sects, and of their authors, arranged in alphabetical\norder; and in the other authors at the dates of the centuries and years.\n\nBergier says: \"The Cerinthians pretended that Jesus Christ was born from\nJoseph and Mary like other men; but that he was endowed with a superior\nwisdom and holiness; that when he was baptized, Christ, or the Son of\nGod, had descended on him under the form of a dove, and had revealed to\nhim God the Father, till then unknown, in order that he might make him\nknown to men.\" The Cerinthians sprung up, according to St. Epiphane, in\nthe middle of the first century, but according to St. Ireneus, at about\nthe year 88.\n\nTherefore the Cerinthians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nBergier says: \"The Carpocratians supposed the pre-existence of the\nsouls; pretended that they had sinned in an anterior life; that as a\npunishment of their crimes they had been condemned to be shut up in\nbodies.... In their belief, the soul of Jesus Christ, before her\nincarnation, had been more faithful to God than the others. It is for\nthis reason that God had endowed her with more knowledge than the souls\nof other men; also with more strength both to defeat the geniuses\nopposed to humanity, and to return to heaven against their will. God,\nthey said, grants the same favor to those who love Jesus Christ; and\nwho, like him, know the dignity of their souls. Thus the Carpocratians\nconsidered Jesus Christ as being simply a man, though more perfect than\nthe others; they believed that he was the son of Joseph and Mary, and\nconfessed his miracles and sufferings. They are not accused of denying\nthe resurrection, but of denying the general resurrection; and of\nholding that the soul only (not the body) of Jesus Christ, had ascended\nto the heavens.\" The sect of the Carpocratians commenced towards the end\nof the first century.\n\nTherefore the Carpocratians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nBergier writes thus about the Ebionites: \"It is very probable that\n(although some authors say that they date from the year 72 of the first\ncentury) they commenced to be known only in the year 103, or even later,\nunder the reign of Adrian, after the total ruin of Jerusalem, in the\nyear 119; that the Ebionites and the Nazarenes are two different sects;\nit is the opinion of Mosheim, Hist. Christ., soec. 1, par. 58, soec. 2,\npar. 39.... The Ebionites considered Jesus Christ as being simply a man\nborn from Joseph and Mary.\"\n\nConsequently the Ebionites did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Christian sect of the Basilidians was founded in the beginning of\nthe second century by Basilide of Alexandria, Feller says; he had been\nconverted from the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato to Christianism.\nBergier writes about the Basilidians: \"They believed that God had sent\nhis Son, or intelligence, under the name of Jesus Christ, to liberate\nthose who would believe in him; that Jesus Christ had really performed\nthe miracles ascribed to him by the Christians; but that he had only a\nfantastical body and the appearances of a man.\"\n\nTherefore the Basilidians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe sect of the Marcionites was established, in the middle of the second\ncentury, by Marcio, the son of a bishop of Pontus. The Marcionites held\nthat God, principle of the spirits, had given to one of them, Jesus\nChrist, the appearances of humanity; and had sent him to the earth to\nabolish the law and the prophets; to teach to men that their souls come\nfrom heaven, and that they cannot be restored to happiness except in\nreuniting to God.\n\nTherefore the Marcionites did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nValentin founded the sect of Valentinians in 140. He was an Egyptian,\nand had been converted from philosophy to Christianism. Bergier, after\nlengthily exposing the doctrines of his sect, says, \"Consequently the\nValentinians neither admitted the eternal generation of the Word, nor\nhis incarnation, nor the divinity of Jesus Christ, nor the redemption of\nmankind, in the proper sense. In their opinion, the redemption of\nmankind by Jesus Christ did not extend farther than this--Jesus Christ\nhad come to the world to liberate men from the tyranny of the Eons, and\nhad given them examples and lessons of virtue, and had taught them the\ntrue means of obtaining eternal happiness.\"\n\nTherefore the Valentinians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Ptolema\u00eftes did not believe the doctrine of Jesus Christ, and held\nthat he was but the Son of God.\n\nSt. Epiphane in his work H\u00e6re. 36, and Bergier, inform us that the\nHeracleonites, whose chief was Heracleon, and who were widely spread,\nparticularly in Sicily, believed that the Word divine did not create the\nworld, but that it had been created by one of the Eons, or spirits. In\ntheir opinion, there were two worlds, the one corporeal and visible, and\nthe other spiritual and invisible, and they only ascribed the formation\nof the latter to Jesus Christ, who was one of the greatest Eons, or\nspirits. The Heracleonites were organized as a sect in the year 140.\n\nThe Colarbasians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme divinity of\nJesus Christ.\n\nSanderus and Bergier say, that the Barules professed to believe that the\nSon of God had but a fantastical body; that there was no original sin;\nthat all our souls had been created before the world, and all had sinned\nin that former state of existence; and that Jesus Christ was not God.\n\nThe Bardesanists, thus named from their founder, Bardesanes, a Syrian,\nwho lived in the second century, became a large sect. Beausobre in his\nHistory of Manicheanism, tome 2, book 4, chap. 9, writes, that they\nbelieved in two Principles, originators of all things, the one good and\nthe other bad. They denied that the eternal Word, or Son of God, had\ntaken a human flesh; they said that he had taken only a celestial and\naerial body. They denied the future resurrection of the body. Bergier,\nFeller, etc., say the same.\n\nThen the Bardesanists did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Marcosians rejected the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus\nChrist, and held only that he was one of the principal Eons, or spirits.\nThe Marcosians were founded by Marc in the second century.\n\nThe Theodotians, Bergier says, believed that Jesus Christ was not God\nbut a man; that he was above the other men only by his miraculous birth,\nand by his extraordinary virtues. Theodote, a native of Bysance, founded\nthem in the second century.\n\nThe Artemonians also denied the doctrine of the supreme divinity of\nJesus Christ.\n\nThe Docetes held that Jesus Christ was only the Son of God, and that he\nhad but apparently suffered humiliations, torments, and death.\n\nThe Tatianists did not believe the doctrine of the supreme divinity of\nJesus Christ. Tatian gave them his name when he organized them as a\nChristian denomination, in the second century. Bergier pretends that\nsome passages of the writings of this learned author can be understood\nof the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ, but Fauste Socin, and others,\nin the Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum, in ten volumes, in folio, proves\nthe contrary; and at the same time they prove that Clement of Alexandria\nand other Fathers of the second century disbelieved the doctrine of the\nsupreme divinity of Jesus Christ. Bergier confesses, however, that it is\ndoubtful that Tatian had been Orthodox about the generation of the Word.\n\nThe Apellites denied the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus\nChrist. In their belief there was but one God, who sent to the world his\nSon, who took a body not in the womb of the virgin Mary, but from the\nfour elements. Their sect widely spread in the East during the second\ncentury.\n\nBergier says, writing about the doctrines of the Ophites, a Christian\nsect of the second century: \"In their belief, matter was eternal; the\nworld was created against the will of God, and was governed by a\nmultitude of spirits who govern the world. Christ united to the man\nJesus to destroy the empire of the Demiourge, or creator of the world.\"\n\nTherefore the Ophites did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nOne of the doctrines of the Cainites was, that Jesus Christ was a spirit\nsent by God to save the world.\n\nThe Hermogenians, or followers of Hermogene, a Stoician philosopher,\nconverted to Christianism at the end of the second century, believed\nthat matter was eternal; that there was but one God, who had sent a\nspirit, Jesus Christ, to correct the evil that was among men.\n\n\"The Hermians, or disciples of Hermias,\" Bergier says, \"taught that\nmatter is eternal; that God is the soul of the world; that Jesus Christ,\nascending to the heavens left his body in the Sun, from whom he had\ntaken it; that the soul of man is composed of fire and of subtle air;\nthat the birth of children is the resurrection, and that the world is\nhell.\" Bergier adds, in another article, that they believed that there\nwas but one God, who had sent to the world a spirit, Jesus Christ.\n\nTherefore the Hermians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nBergier, writing about the Sethians, says: \"They said that the soul of\nSeth had passed to the body of Jesus Christ, and that Seth and Jesus\nChrist were the same person.\"\n\nSt. Augustine informs us that the Severians did not believe the doctrine\nof the resurrection of the flesh, and rejected the Old Testament. They\ndid not believe that Jesus Christ was God himself.\n\nThe Encratites never held that Jesus Christ was God. Bergier says, \"They\ndid not believe that the Son of God was truly born from the virgin\nMary.\"\n\nThe Valesians rejected the doctrine that Jesus Christ was God himself.\n\nBergier writes: \"The Hieracites, heretics of the third century, were\nestablished by Hierax, or Hieracas, a physician by profession, born at\nLeontium, or Leontople, in Egypt. St. Epiphane, who relates and refutes\nthe errors of this Sectarian, confesses that the austerity of his morals\nwas exemplary; that he was familiar with the Greek and Egyptian\nsciences; that he had thoroughly studied the Scriptures, and that he was\ngifted with a persuasive eloquence. He denied the resurrection of the\nbody, and admitted but a spiritual resurrection of the souls. He\nconfessed that Jesus Christ had been generated by the Father; that the\nHoly Ghost proceeds from the Father as well as the Son; but he had\ndreamed that the Holy Ghost had taken a human body under the form of\nMelchisedek. He denied that Jesus Christ had a true human body.\"\n\nTherefore the Hieracites denied the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nBergier thus writes about the Samosatians: \"They were disciples and\nfollowers of Paul of Samosate, bishop of Antioch, at or about the year\n262. This heretic taught that there is in God one sole person, namely,\nthe Father; that the Son and the Holy Spirit are only two attributes of\nGod, under which he manifested himself to men: that Jesus Christ is not\nGod, but a man to whom God has communicated his wisdom in an\nextraordinary manner.\"\n\nTherefore the Samosatians did not believe the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Manicheans denied the divinity of Jesus Christ, and believed that\nJesus Christ had not a real body while on earth. His soul, they said,\nwas of a nature similar to the nature of the souls of other men, though\nmore perfect. He was the Son of God.\n\nTherefore the Manicheans denied the doctrine of the supreme divinity of\nJesus Christ.\n\nAll the above sects composed nearly the whole Christian body, during the\nfirst three centuries; and, as shown to the reader, every one either\nignored or denied the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nThen it remains evident that the Church of Rome, from which the\nself-called Orthodox Protestant Churches, in the sixteenth century,\nborrowed the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ, did not\nhold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ.\n\n_Confirmatur._--As a confirmation of this last and very important\nconsequence, we are to prove,\n\n1st. That in the Church of Rome, herself, the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ was established only at about the year 180.\n\n_Remark._--By the Church of Rome, we mean only the church whose bishop\n(who after centuries assumed the title of Pope,) was at Rome, and which,\nthen, did not extend farther than the province of Rome, and a few other\noccidental places.\n\n2d. That in the council of Nice, held in 325, despite the efforts of\nthe Bishop of Rome; and despite the tyranny of the emperor Constantine\nI., who invoked the council at his own expense, attended, surrounded,\nand enforced it with military force, it was with the greatest difficulty\nthat the Church of Rome obtained, from the bishops who composed it, a\ndecision in favor of the doctrine she held, that Jesus Christ was God\nhimself.\n\n3d. That it was only long after the council of Nice that its decision,\nin favor of the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ,\nprevailed among the churches which depended on the Emperor of\nConstantinople, and on the Bishop of Rome.\n\n4th. We will also present a succinct view of the large number of\nChristians, who, without the pale of the communion of Rome, preserved\nthe former belief that Jesus Christ was not God.\n\n1st. We prove that in the Church of Rome herself, the doctrine of the\nsupreme divinity of Jesus Christ was established only at about the year\n180.\n\nBergier himself makes the following confession: \"An ancient author, who\nis believed to be Ca\u00efus, bishop of Rome, who had written against\nArtemon, and of whom Eusebe has related the words, Ecclesiastical\nHistory, book 5, chap. 22, seems to confound together the Theodotians\nand the Artemonians.... They maintain, he says, that their doctrine is\nnot new; that it has been taught by the apostles, and that it has been\nfollowed in the church until the pontificates of Victor and of Zephyrine\nhis successor, but that since that time the truth has been altered.\"\n\nBergier adds, \"The Theodotians believed that Jesus Christ was a man, and\nnot God, that Jesus Christ was above the other men only by his\nmiraculous birth, and by his extraordinary virtues.\" Also, Bergier says,\nthat, although Theodote was a native of Bysance, he resided in Rome,\nwhere he preached the same doctrine as Theodote, at least in regard to\nJesus Christ being a man and not God.\n\nTherefore in the Church of Rome herself, the doctrine of the supreme\ndivinity of Jesus Christ was established only at about the year 180.\n\n2d. We prove that in the council of Nice, held in 325, despite the\nefforts of the Bishop of Rome; and despite the tyranny of the emperor\nConstantine I., who convoked the council at his own expense, attended,\nsurrounded, and enforced it with military force, it was with the\ngreatest difficulty that the Church of Rome obtained, from the bishops\nwho composed it, a decision in favor of the doctrine she held, that\nJesus Christ was God.\n\nArius, a priest of Alexandria, surprised at hearing Alexander, his\nbishop, teaching in an assembly of priests, that Jesus Christ was God,\nprotested against this new doctrine. An animated controversy between him\nand Alexander, and then between the friends of the Church of Rome,\nwhich held this doctrine, and other churches which did not, ensued. The\ncouncil of Nice assembled, and there seventeen bishops boldly faced the\nlegate of Sylvestre, the emperor Constantine and his military force; and\nthey sided with Arius. Eusebe, bishop of Cesarea, the most learned of\nthe bishops who composed the council, sided with Arius. He is the same\nEusebe who wrote the Evangelical Preparation and Demonstration, in two\nvolumes in folio; who wrote an Ecclesiastical History, the Life of\nConstantine, a Chronic and a Commentary on the Psalms and on Isaiah.\nConstantine forced them either to yield and to acquiesce to the doctrine\nof the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ, or to be expelled from their\nepiscopal sees; and Arius, exiled, had to retire in Palestine.\n\nConsequently, in the council of Nice, held in 325, despite the efforts\nof the Bishop of Rome; and despite the tyranny of the emperor\nConstantine I., who convoked the council at his own expense, attended,\nsurrounded, and enforced it with military force, it was with the\ngreatest difficulty that the Church of Rome obtained, from the bishops\nwho composed it, a decision in favor of the doctrine she held, that\nJesus Christ was God himself.\n\n3d. We prove that it was only long after the council of Nice, that its\ndecision in favor of the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus\nChrist, prevailed among the churches which depended on the Emperor of\nConstantinople, and on the Bishop of Rome.\n\nBergier, despite his partiality in favor of the Church of Rome, is\nobliged to make the following avowal:\n\n\"The anathema pronounced against Arianism did not destroy it; _the\nlarger portion of those_ (bishops) _who had signed the decision of the\ncouncil, only for fear of being exiled, remained attached to the party\nof Arius_. Constantine himself, influenced by an Arian priest,\nrecommended to him by his sister Constantia, at her death bed, and who\nhad gained his confidence, consented to the repeal of Arius from his\nexile, in 328. This heretic reunited to his partisans, and commenced\nspreading his errors with even more earnestness than before. But St.\nAthanase, who had succeeded to Alexander in the episcopal see of\nAlexandria, constantly refused to commune with him, and by this firmness\ndispleased Constantine I.\n\n\"Since that time the Arians became a redoubtable party. They held\nseveral councils where they obtained the majority.... Arius died in a\ntragic manner, in the year 337. After the death of Constantine I., in\n337, the party of the Arians was alternatively the stronger, in ratio of\nthe less or greater protection extended to them or to the Orthodox by\nthe Emperors. Under Constance, who favored them, they filled the Orient\nwith seditions and troubles; but Constantine Junior and Constant, who\nreigned in Occident, prevented Arianism from spreading. In 351,\nConstance, who had become the master of the whole empire by the death of\nhis two brothers, protected Arianism more openly than before. Several\ncouncils were held in Italy, in which the Arians had the majority; and\nothers, in which the Catholics had the superiority.... Julian, who was\nemperor in 362, sided neither with one party nor with the other. Valens,\nemperor of the Orient, in 364, favored and embraced Arianism; whereas\nValentinian, his brother, did all in his power to extirpate it from the\nOccident.\n\n\"Gratian, and afterwards Theodose, proscribed Arianism from the whole\nempire.... In the beginning of the fifth century, the Goths, the\nBurgundians, and the Vandals, spread it in Gaul and in Africa. The\nVisigoths introduced it in Spain, where it subsisted as long as the\nkings of that country were Arians themselves, until the year 660.\n\n\"Arianism was to be revived in the sixteenth century. It is probable\nthat Arianism would have invaded the whole Orient if the Arians had been\nunited.\"\n\nTherefore, it was only long after the Council of Nice, that its\ndecision, in favor of the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus\nChrist, prevailed among the churches which depended on the Emperor of\nConstantinople, and on the Bishop of Rome.\n\n4th. We will also present a succinct view of the large number of\nChristians, who, without the pale of the communion of Rome, preserved\nthe former belief that Jesus Christ was not God.\n\nWe have proved, in the course of this chapter, that the following\nChristian sects, or denominations, did not believe the doctrine of the\ndivinity of Jesus Christ: the Corinthians, the Carpocratians, the\nEbionites, the Basilidians, the Marcionites, the Valentinians, the\nPtolema\u00eftes, the Heracleonites, the Colarbasians, the Barules, the\nBardesanists, the Marcosians, the Theodotians, the Artemonians, the\nDocetes, the Tatianists, the Apellites, the Ophites, the Cainites, the\nHermogenians, the Hermians, the Sethians, the Severians, the Encratites,\nthe Valesians, the Hieracites, the Samosatians, and the Manicheans. But\nnearly all these Christian sects of the first three centuries outlived\nthe Council of Nice, and preserved through centuries the doctrine that\nJesus Christ was not God himself: this is the unanimous testimony of\nhistorians.\n\nFrom the four heads of convincing historical proofs brought forth in\nthis _confirmatur_, we draw once more the conclusion:\n\n1st. Then the Church of Rome, from which the self-called Orthodox\nProtestant Churches, in the sixteenth century, borrowed the doctrine of\nthe divinity of Jesus Christ, did not hold it from the apostles of Jesus\nChrist.\n\n2d. We prove the second proposition of the argument of this chapter,\nnamely, that the Church of Rome uses, in her adoration to Jesus Christ,\nrites and ceremonies of a striking similarity with those used by the\nPagans in their adoration to the sun, under the names of Bacchus,\nHercules, Osiris, Mithra, Atys, etc.\n\nEvery year the Pagans celebrated with pomp the death of Bacchus. Those\ncelebrations were called Titanical, and celebrations of the perfect\nnight. They supposed that this god had been slain by the Giants; but\nthat his mother, or Ceres, had reunited his bones. To retrace his death\nthey killed a bull, whose raw flesh they ate, because Bacchus,\nrepresented with the horns of an ox, had been thus torn by the Titans.\nJulius-Firmicus, an orthodox author of the fourth century, who wrote\nabout the legend of Bacchus, says that the Pagans considered those\nfictions as solar fables. He adds that the sun was irritated at being\nthus worshiped: here, in being immersed into the Nile river, under the\nnames of Osiris and of Horus; there, in being mutilated under the names\nof Atys and of Adonis; and in other places, in being boiled or roasted,\nlike Bacchus. The Bacchanals, or disorderly, noisy, tumultuous, and\nfrantic scenes took place.\n\nSt. Athanase, St. Augustine, Theophile, Athenagoras, Minutius-Felix,\nLactance, Firmicus, and other Christian writers of the first centuries,\nas well as more ancient authors, describe the general mourning of the\nEgyptians in the anniversary day of the death of Osiris. They describe\nthe ceremonies practiced on his tomb, and the tears shed thereon during\nseveral days. The mysteries in which the representation of his death was\nexhibited, and which took place during the night, were called mysteries\nof night.\n\nLikewise the death of Mithra was celebrated. To the usual magnificence\nof his temples succeeded a gloomy sight. The priests, during the night,\ncarried his image in a tomb, and laid it on a litter, in the same manner\nas the Phoenicians laid the image of Adonis. This ceremony was\naccompanied with dismal songs, and with groans. The priests, after this\nfeigned expression of grief, kindled a flambeau, called sacred; anointed\nthe image of Mithra with chrisma, or with perfumes; and then one of\nthem, in a solemn and loud voice, pronounced these words: \"Cheer up,\nholy mourners, your god is come again to life; his sorrows and his\nsufferings will save you.\"\n\nJulius Firmicus, who relates this, exclaims: \"Why do you exhort those\nunfortunate to rejoice? Why do you deceive them with false promises? The\ndeath of your god is known; but his new life is not proved. There is no\noracle that ascertains his resurrection; he has not appeared to men\nafter his resurrection to prove his divinity. An idol you bury; upon an\nidol you mourn; an idol you lift up from the tomb, and having expressed\nyour grief you rejoice,\" etc.\n\nThe Church of Rome practices alike ceremonies in celebrating the\nanniversary day of the death of Jesus Christ. All the ornaments of each\nchurch, the statues and images of saints, etc., are clothed in black. In\none of the chapels of the church a tomb is prepared, in which, on the\nHoly Thursday morning, Jesus Christ--namely, a wafer which has been\nconsecrated--is laid, shut up, not in the ostensorium, but in a\nciborium, as a sign of mourning. The priests perform this ceremony.\nDuring the whole day the church is thronged with people, who come to\nexpress to Jesus Christ their sympathy in his sufferings. At about eight\no'clock in the evening, a gloomy procession, composed of the priests and\nthe people, march along the streets in the dark (this procession takes\nplace only in Catholic countries,) now and then reciting in a low and\ndismal tone a verse of the psalm, _Miserere mei Deus_, [translation,]\nLord have mercy on me. When this procession has taken place, hymns of\nsuffering and of death are sung in the church, around the tomb in which\nJesus Christ lays. At eleven o'clock a priest goes to the pulpit, and in\nan affecting manner relates to the sobbing and weeping multitude the\nsufferings and death of Jesus Christ. This address is called Passion's\nsermon.\n\nThe people spend the whole night in the church to keep company to Jesus\nChrist in his sufferings, they say, and to relieve him by their\nsympathy. In the morning of the Holy Friday the church is yet filled\nwith mourners. The priests, processionally, but in silence, go to the\ntomb where Jesus Christ lays, take him out, and carry him into the\ntabernacle, where they shut him up, but without leaving any taper\nburning in the whole church. In the evening, after the recitation of the\n_Officium Tenebrarum_, [translation,] Office of Darkness, boys, men,\nwomen and all, fill the church with their yells, with the sharp sound of\nrattles, with the blows they strike on boards with small and large\nsticks, and with sounding, sonorous instruments, such as horns, etc. A\nfew days after they eat the wafer, which they pretend to be the raw\nflesh and blood of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Pagans, in celebrating the resurrection of Bacchus, Osiris, etc.,\nwho represented the sun, lighted the lamps of their temples with a fire,\nwhich the priests obtained by striking a piece of steel with silex, and\nwas called new fire. That day the priests were clothed in white\nornaments; the lustral waters were renewed, and also the decorations of\nthe temples: so in every church the Romish priests strike a piece of\nsteel with silex, and obtain a fire called new fire; with it they light\nthe lamps, and the taper called Paschal taper. They renew the holy\nwater, which the people piously carry to their homes, and keep for\nprotection during the storms, etc. The priests change their priestly\ngarments, and clothe in white.\n\nThe Pagans worshiped the sun under the name of Aries, because the Aries\nwas one of the celestial signs: so the Church of Rome worships Jesus\nChrist under the form of a lamb. Formerly, the Roman Catholic parents\nsuspended on the necks of their children the symbolic image of a lamb;\nand the women, instead of wearing a cross, as they do now, wore a lamb.\nThis practice had been introduced by the Romish priests, who sold, as\nthey sell now, Agnus Dei, which have been consecrated with prayers and\nsprinkled with holy water, as being the emblems of Jesus Christ.\n\nA lamb was represented bleeding, and under it was a vessel in which the\nblood dropped. This practice was in use till the year 680, under the\npontificate of the pope Agathon, and under the reign of the emperor\nConstantine III., surnamed Pogonat. Then it was ordered by the sixth\ncouncil of Constantinople, canon 82, that a man nailed to a cross should\nbe substituted to the ancient symbol of a lamb. However, this symbol was\npartly preserved in the church, as seen above. The symbol of a lamb is\nyet seen on the tabernacle, or small box of marble, or of wood, richly\nwrought upon, placed on the altar; also on the ostensorium, and on the\nforepart of the altars.\n\nThe Pagans placed a sunlike halo around the heads of the statues of\nOsiris, Bacchus, and other gods, who, in their opinion, represented the\nsun: likewise in the Church of Rome the priests place the wafer, which,\nthey think, is Jesus Christ himself, in an ostensorium, which is shaped\nlike the disc of the sun; and which represents his beams; the wafer\nitself is circular. This ostensorium is of silver, or of gold, and\nadorned with diamonds, or gems. Above the altar a large sun is\ngenerally either painted, or carved, or formed with draperies. The\nPagans kept in their temples a lamp burning, in the honor of the sun:\nso, in the Roman Catholic churches a lamp is kept burning, day and\nnight, near the altar, in the honor of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Pagans built their temples so that the sanctuary was turned towards\nthe rising sun: likewise, the Roman Catholic churches are built so that\nthe sanctuary be turned towards the rising sun.\n\nThe Pagans carried in triumph, processionally, and with the most\nbrilliant pomp, the statues of Bacchus, Osiris, and other gods,\nrepresenting the sun: likewise, on the feast day of the body of Jesus\nChrist, the consecrated wafer is carried in triumph, processionally, and\nwith the most brilliant pomp. The priestly and other ornaments are of a\ntissue of silver, or of gold. A multitude of people follow: the various\nconfraternities of Penitents, the ones grey, the others blue, the others\nwhite, etc., and the many confraternities of virgins, of married women,\nall in variegated costumes, march before the consecrated wafer. The\ncivil, judiciary, and military authorities, regiments of soldiers with\nbrass bands, with drums beating, with banners and flags unfurled, escort\nthe consecrated wafer, which is carried by the first priest of the\nparish, under a canopy of the most costly and magnificent tissue.\n\nThe Pagans burnt flambeaux before the statues of Osiris, Bacchus, etc.,\nto represent the planets; and sometimes to represent the signs of the\nZodiac: so, in the Roman Catholic churches, upon the altar, there are\nsix chandeliers, with candles burning around the consecrated wafer,\nnamely, Jesus Christ, who is in the middle.\n\nFrom all the above facts we may legitimately draw the conclusion, that\nthe Church of Rome uses, in her adoration to Jesus Christ, rites and\nceremonies of a striking similarity with those used by the Pagans in\ntheir adoration to the sun, under the names of Bacchus, Hercules,\nOsiris, Mithra, Atys, etc.\n\nWe now come to the general conclusions of the present chapter.\n\nIt has been proved, 1st, That the Church of Rome, from which the\nself-called Orthodox Protestant Churches, in the sixteenth century,\nborrowed the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus Christ, did not hold it\nfrom the apostles of Jesus Christ.\n\n2d. It has been proved that the Church of Rome uses, in her adoration to\nJesus Christ, rites and ceremonies of a striking similarity with those\nused by the Pagans in their adoration to the sun, under the names of\nBacchus, Hercules, Osiris, Mithra, Atys, etc.\n\nThen the Church of Rome, from which, in the sixteenth century, the\nself-called Orthodox Protestant Churches borrowed the doctrine of the\nsupreme divinity of Jesus Christ had borrowed it from the Pagans.\n\n_Therefore the doctrine of the supreme divinity of Jesus Christ is of\nPagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF ENDLESS HELL.\n\n\nARTICLE I.\n\n_Metempsychosis, or Transmigration of the Souls._\n\nTHE rulers of nations, and the authors of the initiations, had a\nprofound knowledge of the human nature, and of the genius of the people.\nFrom the fact that an ox, unaware of his strength, yields to the leading\nhand of a child, so they knew that would they let the masses ignore\ntheir power, they could easily control them, mould their opinions,\nhabits, and morals. Also aware of the terror that death impressed upon\ntheir minds, and knowing that it is an infirmity of man's nature, when\nuncultivated by philosophy, to fear more a distant and indefinite, but\nunavoidable misery beyond the grave, than the most excruciating tortures\non earth, they found in those prejudices of the people a sure means to\nlead and rule them. Therefore they endeavored to make them believe that\nthose who would transgress the laws, or would commit some other crimes,\nshould be punished by the gods immortal in the future life.\n\nThey had to invent the nature of that punishment, and as there were many\ndegrees of wickedness, they had to admit, also, various degrees in the\npunishment. To more easily and more surely make the people believe their\ninvention, they thought it was wise to make the punishment, and its\ndegrees, coincide with the then universally established religion, which\nwas but one, though there were many systems of theology. That religion\nwas the one we have examined in the first chapter of this work, and\nwhich consisted in the belief that nature was an uncreated but animated\nbeing, whose vast body comprised the earth, the sun, the planets, and\nthe stars, to which one great soul impressed motion and life; and that\nthose principal parts, or members, of the body of the universe were\nanimated by emanations or irradiations of the great soul of the\nuniverse, or nature.\n\nThis pantheistic doctrine was materialist; for it supposed that the\ngreat soul of the universe was the purest substance of the fire ether,\nand thereby man's soul was of the same nature. It was the belief even of\nthe famous philosopher Pythagoras, and of his disciples. All animals,\naccording to Servius, the commentator of Virgil, draw their flesh from\nthe earth, their humors from water, their breath from the air, and their\nsoul from the breath of the Deity. Thus the bees have a small portion of\nthe Deity. Our soul is like a drop of water which is not annihilated,\nwhether it evaporates in the air, or condenses and falls again in rain,\nor rolls into the sea to add its littleness to the massy waters. When we\ndie our life melts, reenters into the great soul of the universe, and\nthe remains of our body mix again with the elements of the air.\n\nVirgil believed that our death is not annihilation, but that it is a\nseparation of two sorts of matters, the one thereof remains here below,\nand the other reunites to the sacred fire of the stars, as soon as the\nmatter of which our soul is composed has reacquired all the purity of\nthe subtle matter, from which it had emanated, _aur\u00e6 simplicis ignem_.\nNothing, Servius says, is lost in the great whole, and in the pure fire\nwhich constitutes the substance of the soul. Virgil says of the souls:\n_igneus est ollis vigor, et coelestis origo_; that they are formed of\nthe active fire that shines in the heaven, and that they return thither\nwhen they are separated from the body by death.\n\nThe same doctrine we find in the dream of Scipio: \"It is from there,\" he\nsays, speaking of the regions of the fixed stars, \"that the souls\ndescended, thereto they shall return; they were emanated from those\neternal fires we name stars. What ye call death is but a return to true\nlife; the body is but a prison, in which the soul is momentarily\nchained. Death breaks her ties, and restores her to liberty, and to her\ntrue state of existence.\"\n\nFrom this pantheistic doctrine, it followed that man's soul is immortal\nthough material.\n\nUpon this sort of immortality of our soul, the rulers built a system of\npunishment, called Metempsychosis, or transmigration of the souls. This\nsystem was so much the better adapted to the then received religion,\nthat all the souls being simply different emanations from the same fire\nether, the consequence was that all the souls were homogeneous, and\ndiffered only in appearance, and by the nature of the bodies to which\nthe fire-principle, which composed their substance, united. Virgil said\nthat the souls of all animals are an emanation of the fire ether, and\nthat the difference of their operations on earth is to be ascribed only\nto the difference of vases, or organized bodies, which receive this\nsubstance; or, according to the words of Servius, the lesser or greater\nperfection of their operations is in ratio of the nature of the bodies.\n\nThe Indians, among whom, even in our days, the system of Metempsychosis\nprevails, think that man's soul is absolutely of the same nature as that\nof other animals. They say that man is superior to them, not in his soul\nbut in his body, whose organization is more perfect and more apt to\nreceive the action of the great Being, viz., of the universe, than\ntheirs are. They ground their opinion on the example of children and of\nold men, whose organs being too weak yet, or having been weakened, do\nnot permit their senses to have the same activity which is displayed in\na mature age.\n\nThe soul, in the exercise of her operations, being necessarily in\nsubmission to the body which she animates; and all souls flowing from\nthe immense reservoir called universal soul, it follows that the portion\nof the fire ether which animates a man, might as well animate an ox, a\nlion, an eagle, a whale, or any other beast. Fate caused that she would\nanimate a man, and such a man; but when the soul will be disengaged from\nthis first body, and will return to her source, she will be able to pass\ninto the body of another animal; and her activity will be lesser or\ngreater, in ratio of the organization of the new body into which she\nwill pass.\n\nAll the great work of nature being reduced to successive organizations\nand destructions, in which the same matter is ten thousand times used\nunder ten thousand forms, the subtle matter of the soul, carried in that\ncurrent, brings life to all the moulds which open to receive her. Thus\nthe same water flown from a same reservoir, enters the various pipes\nwhich are opened, rolls on and empties either as a fountain, or as a\ncascade, according to the forms of the orifices of the pipes; then it\ncongregates, evaporates, and forms clouds which brings it back down to\nthe earth, to experience again an infinity of modifications. It is the\nsame of the fluid of the soul spread in the various canals of the animal\norganization, flowing from the bright mass of which the ethereal\nsubstance is composed; thence being carried to the earth by the\ngenerating force distributed among the animals, continually ascending\nand descending in the universe, and circulating within new bodies\ndiversely organized.\n\nSuch was the basis of Metempsychosis, which became one of the most\npowerful political engines in the hands of the ancient rulers,\nlegislators and mystagogues. Pythagoras brought this doctrine from the\nOrient to Greece, and to Italy. This philosopher, and Empedocles after\nhim, taught that the souls of the criminals, when death separated them\nfrom the bodies they animated, passed into the bodies of beasts in order\nto suffer, under those divers forms the punishment of their wickedness,\nuntil they might recover, by expiation, their native purity. So this\ntransmigration of the souls was a punishment of the gods. The Stoicians\nheld this doctrine; and the emperor Marcus-Aurelius, in the ninth book\nof his Works, said: \"The spiritus, or breath, which animates us, passes\nfrom one body into another.\"\n\nTo give the reader a general idea of what was the belief of the\nancients, and of their philosophers, in regard to Metempsychosis, we\ntake from the tenth and last book of the Republic of Plato the following\nlengthy but instructive extract:--\n\n\"It is not the narration of Alcino\u00fcs (namely, a false story, such as the\none of Ulysse to the Pheacians,) that I will tell you; but that of a\nnoble man, of Her, the Armenian, a native of Pamphily. He had been\nkilled in a battle; but when, ten days after, the dead bodies were taken\naway for inhumation, his, instead of being in putrefaction like the\nothers, was found natural and entire. It was carried to his house, and,\non the twelfth day, when laid on the wood-pile, he came again to life;\nand he related to the assistants what he had seen in the other world.\n\n\"'As soon,' he says, 'as my soul left my body, I arrived, in company\nwith a great number of souls, at a mysterious place, where were seen two\nopenings near each other, and two others corresponding in the sky.\nBetween these two regions were judges sitting: when they had pronounced\ntheir sentence they ordered the righteous to take the right hand side\nroute through one of the openings of the sky, after having previously\nplaced on their breast a mark containing the judgment rendered in their\nfavor; also they ordered the wicked to take the left hand side route\nthrough one of the openings of the earth, carrying on their back a mark\ncontaining all their evil actions. When I was presented to the judges,\nthey decided that I should return to the earth to inform men of what was\ndone in the other world; and they bade me listen and observe all I was\nto witness.\n\n\"'First I saw the souls of those who had been judged, the ones ascending\nto the heavens, and the others descending below the earth through the\ntwo corresponding openings. Withal I saw, through the other opening of\nthe earth, many souls coming out, covered with filthiness and dust; and\nalso, through the other opening in the sky, I saw souls pure and\nspotless descending: they seemed to return from a long voyage, and to\nstop with pleasure in the meadow, as if in a place of reunion. Those who\nknew each other mutually inquired what they had seen in the heaven, and\nin the earth. The ones related their adventures with groans and tears,\ncaused by the recollection of the sufferings they had endured, or seen\nothers endure, during their voyage below the earth, whose duration was\nof a thousand years. The others, who returned from the heaven, related\nthe rapturous pleasures they had enjoyed, and the marvellous things they\nhad seen.'\n\n\"It would be too long, my dear Glaucon, to relate the whole discourse of\nHer on this subject. It might be summed up in saying that the souls were\npunished ten times for each injustice they had committed while on earth;\nthat the duration of each punishment was of one hundred years, natural\nlength of man's life, in order that the punishment be ever tenfold for\neach crime. Thus those who had contaminated themselves with murder; who\nhad betrayed States and armies, and reduced them to servitude; or who\nhad committed similar crimes, were punished tenfold for each one of\nthose crimes. Whereas those who had done good to their fellow men, who\nhad been holy and virtuous, received in the same proportion the reward\nof their good deeds. In regard to children who die immediately, or a\nshort time after they are born, Her gave details which it is useless to\nrelate. According to his narration there were great recompenses for\nthose who had honored the gods, and had respected their parents; and\nalso there were extraordinary tortures for the parricides, and for\nimpious men.\n\n\"'I was present,' said he, 'when a soul asked another where was the\ngreat Ardiee. This Ardiee had tyrannized over a city of Pamphily a\nthousand years before; he had killed his father, who was an old man, and\nhe was guilty, it was said, of many other atrocious crimes. He does not\ncome, the soul answered, and he will never come here. We all have\nwitnessed, in relation to him, the most dreadful spectacle. When we were\nabout leaving the subterraneous abyss after our pains ended, we saw\nArdiee, and a great number of others, the most of whom had been tyrants\nlike himself; there were also others, who, though in a private\ncondition, had been great criminals.\n\n\"'When those souls were about going out, the opening was closed; and\nwhenever one of those wretched souls, whose crimes were irremissible,\ntried to get out of the abyss, she howled. Thereupon hideous and\nfirelike beings came. They violently wrested away several of those\ncriminals; then they seized Ardiee and others, tied their feet, their\nhands and their heads; and after throwing them on the ground and\ntorturing them with lashes, they dragged them through bleeding thorns,\ntelling the shadows which they met on their route the reason why they\ntreated so those souls, and adding that they were going to throw them\ninto the Tartarus. Those souls added, that of the various fears they\nhad on the route none was so horrible as that of hearing that howl; and\nthat it had been an inexpressible pleasure for them not to have heard it\nwhen they were released from the abyss.\n\n\"'Behold what took place in regard to the judgments, tortures, and\nrewards. After each one of those souls had spent seven days in the\nmeadow they left on the eighth, and arrived, after a march of four days,\nat a designated spot, wherefrom was seen a light crossing the heaven and\nthe earth, as straight as a column, and similar to the rainbow, but\nbrighter and purer. They reached this light in one day's march. There\nthey saw that the extremities of the heaven meet at the middle of this\nlight, which united them fast, and which embraced all the circumference\nof the heaven, in nearly the same manner as the beams which girdle the\nsides of galleys, and which bear their frame. At the extremities the\nspindle of Necessity hung, and determined the revolutions of the\ncelestial spheres.'\"\n\nHere Her describes the spindle. This description we omit, for it does\nnot relate to our subject.\n\nHer continues:--\n\n\"'Near the spindle, and at equal distances, sat on thrones the three\nParques, daughters of Necessity, Lachesis, Clotho, and Atropos, dressed\nin white, and their heads crowned with a bandelet. They united their\nchant to that of the Sirenes; Lachesis sung the past, Clotho the\npresent, and Atropos the future. Clotho, now and then, touched the\nspindle with her right hand, and made it revolve externally. Atropos,\nwith her left hand, impressed motion to each one of the interior whirls,\nand Lachesis, with both hands, touched now the spindle, and then the\ninterior whirls. When the souls arrived they appeared before Lachesis.\nFirst a Hierophant assigned a rank to each one; then taking from the lap\nof Lachesis the fates and the various conditions of human life, he\nmounted on a high stand, and spake thus:--\n\n\"'This is what the virgin Lachesis, daughter of Necessity, says:\nVoyaging souls you are to commence another career, and return into a\nmortal body. The genius will not choose for you: each one of you shall\nchoose hers. The first one that fate will designate shall choose first,\nand her choice shall be irrevocable. Virtue has no master; she clings to\nhim who honors her, and flies from him who despises her. The error of\nthe choice shall fall on you. God is innocent.\n\n\"'Thereupon the Hierophant casting the fates, each soul picked up the\none that fell before her, except myself who had been forbidden it. Each\none knew then in which rank she had to choose. Then the same Hierophant\nplaced before them callings of all kinds, whose number was greater than\nthat of the souls who were to choose; for all the conditions of men and\nbeasts were assembled therein. There were tyrannies, the ones were to\nlast till death; and the others were to be suddenly interrupted, and\nwere to end by exile, poverty and indigence. Also there were seen\nconditions of illustrious men, the ones for beauty, for strength, for\nfame in the combats; and the others by their nobleness, and the great\nqualities of their ancestors; there were seen also obscure conditions.\nThere were destinies of women of the same variety. But there was no\nregulation for the rank of the souls, because each one was necessarily\nto change of nature according to her choice. Besides, wealth, poverty,\nand diseases, were found in all conditions: here without any mixture,\nthere in a just proportion of advantages and disadvantages.'\n\n\"But this is evidently, my dear Glaucon, the redoubtable trial for\nmankind.... The Hierophant added: he who chooses the last, provided he\nbe judicious, and then be consistent in his conduct, may hope to be\nblessed in life. Therefore let him who is to have the first choice, be\nnot presumptuous; and let him who has the last choice, despair not. When\nthe Hierophant had thus spoken, he to whom the first fate had been\ndevolved, hastily advanced, and took, without any deliberation, the\ngreatest tyranny; but when he had considered it, and seen that his\ndestiny was to eat his own children, and to commit other enormous\ncrimes, he lamented; and, forgetting the recommendation of the\nHierophant, charged upon the fortune and the gods, with the wretchedness\nof his fate. This soul was one of those who came from heaven; she had\npreviously lived in a well governed state, and had been virtuous more\nfrom temper and habit, than from philosophy.\n\n\"On the contrary, the souls who had sojourned in the subterranean\nregion, and who had both the experience of their own sufferings, and the\nknowledge of the misfortunes of others, were cautious in their choice.\nThis experience on one side, and that inexperience on the other,\ntogether with the fate which decided the rank for the choice, were the\ncause that the most of the souls exchanged a good condition for a bad\none, and a bad one for a good one. He also said, that it was a strange\nspectacle to see in what manner each soul made her choice, nothing was\nmore extraordinary, nor more pitiful; the most of them were guided in\ntheir choice by the habits they had contracted in their previous life.\nHe had seen the soul of Orpheus choosing the condition of a swan, from\nhatred to women who had killed him, and from whom he did not wish to\nreceive birth. He saw the soul of Thamyris choosing the condition of\nnightingale; likewise he saw a swan and several other birds choosing the\nhuman condition.\n\n\"Another soul had chosen the condition of a lion; it was that of Ajax,\nson of Telamon, who, remembering the offense she had received in the\njudgments rendered about the arms of Achilles, refused to take again a\nhuman body. Then came the soul of Agamemnon, who, from antipathy against\nmankind on account of her past sufferings, chose the condition of an\neagle. The soul of Atalante, desirous of the athletic honors, chose to\nbe a champion. The soul of Epee, son of Panope, preferred the condition\nof a woman skillful in handiworks. The soul of the buffoon Thersite came\none of the last, and entered the body of a monkey. There were, Her\nadded, souls of animals which exchanged their condition against ours,\nand human souls which passed into bodies of beasts. The souls\nindistinctly passed from the bodies of animals into human bodies, and\nfrom human bodies into bodies of animals; those of the righteous into\nspecies of a higher order.\n\n\"When all the souls had chosen their new condition of existence,\naccording to the rank determined by fate, they came to Lachesis in the\nsame order. She gave to each one the genius of her choice, and this\ngenius was to be her guardian during her mortal life, and was to aid her\nin the accomplishment of her destiny. This genius first led her to\nClotho, who, with her hand, and with a revolution of the spindle\nconfirmed the chosen destiny. When the soul had touched the spindle, the\ngenius took her to Atropos, who rolled the thread in her fingers, to\nrender irrevocable what had been already spun by Clotho. After that, the\nsoul proceeded to the throne of Necessity, under which the soul and her\ngenius, or demon, passed together. When all had passed, they went to the\nplain of the Lethe river, where they were oppressed by an intense heat;\nfor there was in this plain, neither tree nor shrub. The evening came\nand they spent the night near the river Ameles, whose water can be\ncontained in no vessel. Every soul was obliged to drink some of its\nwater. They fell asleep; but at about midnight the thunder roared, and\nall the souls suddenly waking up were dispersed, like shooting stars,\ntowards the various places where they were to commence their new life.\n\n\"As to Her, he had been forbidden to drink of the water of the Lethe\nriver; nevertheless, he knew not in what manner his soul had returned\ninto his body, but having opened his eyes in the morning, he had seen\nthat he was laying on a wood-pile.\n\n\"This tradition, my dear Glaucon, has been handed down to us; and if we\nbelieve it, it is very apt to save us; we will safely cross the Lethe\nriver, and we will preserve our soul free from stain.\"\n\nThe reader has undoubtedly remarked the last sentence of this extract,\nwhich proves the antiquity of the doctrine of the transmigration of the\nsouls. Burnet wrote, that it was so ancient and so universally spread in\nEgypt, Persia, India, and other countries of the Orient, that it seemed\nit had descended from heaven, and been believed by the first inhabitants\nof the earth. Herodote found it established in Egypt in the remotest\nages. It was the basis of the theology of the Indians, and the subject\nof the celebrated Metamorphosis and incarnations of their legends.\nMetempsychosis has been immemorially believed in Japan, where the\npeople, even in our days, according to Koempsfer, abstain from meat, and\nlive exclusively upon fruits and vegetables. In Siam, where the\nTalapoins or monks hold it as a sacred dogma; in China by the Tao-See;\nalso among the Kalbouls and the Mongols, and among the Thibetans, who\nadmit that the souls pass even into the plants, into the trees, and even\ninto the roots. However, the Thibetans believe that it is only by\nuniting to human bodies, that the souls can, after successive changes,\nbe restored to their former purity.\n\nThe aim of the doctrine of Metempsychosis was to accustom man to detach\nhimself from the gross matter, to which he is tied here below, and to\nexcite in him the desire of promptly returning there, wherefrom he had\nformerly descended. The rulers of the people frightened them with the\npictures of humiliating transformations of their souls, as the Catholic\npriests and the Partialist preachers do among us, with their teaching of\nan endless hell. The people, amazed and terrified, for the masses were\nignorant, believed all those politico-religious fables. They firmly\nbelieved that the souls of the wicked passed into vile bodies; that they\nwere punished with cruel and loathesome diseases; that those who did not\nreform after a certain number of transmigrations were delivered up to\nthe Furies and to the evil spirits (or devils) to be tortured; and that,\nafter that, they were sent again to the earth, as in a new school, and\nwere obliged to run a new race. Thus we see that the whole system of\nMetempsychosis rested on the false supposition, that it was necessary,\nin order to govern the people here below, to frighten them with absurd\nand visionary tales of atrocious tortures beyond the grave, which were\nthe more terrifying for the very reason of their absurdity and\natrociousness.\n\nTimee of Locre, one of the disciples of Socrates, wrote, that among the\nvarious means of governing those who are not able to reach the truth of\nthe principles, on which nature has established justice and morals,\nMetempsychosis is an efficacious one. He said: \"Let them be taught those\ndogmas which inform us that the souls of effeminate and pusillanimous\nmen transmigrate into female bodies; those of murderers into bodies of\nwild beasts; those of licentious men into bodies of wild boars and hogs;\nthose of fickle and inconstant men into bodies of birds; those of idle,\nignorant and silly men into bodies of fishes. The just Nemesis regulates\nthose pains in the future life conjointly with the gods of the earth,\navengers of the crimes they have witnessed. The supreme God has\nentrusted them with the government of this inferior world. Let them be\nfrightened, even, by the religious terrors conveyed to the soul by those\ndiscourses which describe the vengeance of the celestial gods, and the\nunavoidable torments reserved to the criminals in the Tartarus; and also\nby the other fictions which Homer has found in the ancient sacred\nopinions. Sometimes the body is cured by poisonous substances; so the\nsouls can be ruled by fables when they cannot be governed by truth.\"\n\nThis philosopher plainly gives us his secret, which has been, and still\nis, the secret of all legislators and priests. True, the belief of these\nfables has restrained many from vice and crime; nevertheless we firmly\nbelieve that men ought to be led to justice by the bright light of the\ntruth, and not by the dismal light of error, and of superstition: the\none elevates man, but the other keeps him in an eternal infancy and\nignorance. How sad it is to see, even now-a-days, in free and\nenlightened America, priests, and Protestant ministers themselves,\nkeeping down in intellectual, moral and religious bondage, millions of\nChristians, who, from fear of endless curse, kiss the very chains which\nheavily they drag through life; who believe that God will endlessly\nroast men--his children--in an undying fire! More surely, and more\neasily, could those purely minded, but unfortunate Christians, be guided\nto love God, if they knew that he is not worse than a tiger; that, on\nthe contrary, he is truly good and loving; more virtuous they would be\nif they were taught that virtue is the source, and the only true source,\nof happiness. Truer fraternity would reign in our communities, if\npriests and pretended Protestants, who tyrannize over the souls of their\nmisled victims, and, like the Pharisees of old, lay upon their shoulders\na burden they would not be willing to touch with their own\nfingers--yea, they lay upon their mind and heart the leaden weight of\nthe dogma of endless misery, which they, at least the leaders of the\nleaders, reject--truer fraternity would exist, we say, for there would\nnot be in our communities, a class of Christians, believing that they\nare the elect of God for righteousness and eternal bliss, while all the\nothers shall be endlessly damned. Hence their indifference, or rather\naversion for them; hence a spirit of Pharisaism: hence a spirit of\nreligious aristocracy, which unfortunately ramifies into a social\naristocracy!\n\n\nARTICLE II.\n\n_Tartarus._\n\nWhen legislators, priests and philosophers had invented the doctrine of\nMetempsychosis, the mystagogues and the poets took hold of it, and\nendeavored to spread it among the people, in consecrating it, the ones\nin their chants, and the others in the celebration of their mysteries.\nThey clothed it with the charms of poetry, and presented it with magical\nillusions. All united to deceive the people, under the specious pretext\nof bettering and governing them with a surer hand. The widest field was\nopened to fictions; and the genius of the poets, as well as the cunning\nof the priests, were inexhaustible in portraying the bliss of the\nrighteous hereafter, and the horror of the horrible prisons wherein\ncrime was to be punished.\n\nEach one portrayed them according to his own fancy, and added new scenes\nand views to the descriptions of those unknown lands; of that world of\nnew creation, which the imagination of poets peopled with shadows,\nchimeras and phantoms, for the purpose of frightening the people: for\nrulers wrongly thought that their minds could not rise up to the\nabstract notions of metaphysics and morals. The Elysium and the Tartarus\nwere more pleasing and more vividly striking to the imagination of the\npeople: therefore darkness and light were successively presented to the\ngaze of those initiated to the mysteries. To the darkest night, and to\nfrightful spectres, succeeded a bright day, whose light shone around the\nstatue of the Deity: one could not help feeling a mysterious terror,\nwhen entering that sanctuary, where all was disposed to represent the\nTartarus and the Elysium. It was in this sanctuary that the one\ninitiated, being finally introduced, saw the picture of charming\nmeadows, lighted by a pure sky: there he heard harmonious voices, and\nthe majestic chants of sacred choirs. It was then that, entirely free,\nand rid of all evils, he joined the multitude of those initiated; and\nthat, a crown of flowers on his head, he celebrated the holy orgies.\n\nThus the ancients represented here below, in their initiations, what\nwas, they said, to happen hereafter to the souls, when they would be\ndisengaged from their bodies; and would be liberated from the obscure\nprison, wherein fate had chained them by uniting them to terrestrial\nmatter. In the mysteries of Isis, of which we hold the details from\nApuleo, the candidate passed through the dark region of the empire of\nthe dead; thence into a vast enclosure, which represented the elements;\nand then he was admitted into the bright region, where the brightest sun\nsucceeded to the darkness of the night, namely, in the three worlds, the\nterrestrial, the elementary, and the celestial. He who had been\ninitiated said: \"I have approached the boundaries of death in treading\nthe thresh hold of Proserpine; therefrom I have returned through the\nelements. Then I saw a bright light, and I found myself in the presence\nof the gods.\" This was the autopsy.\n\nWhat mystagogy exhibited in the sanctuaries, poets, and even\nphilosophers, in their fictions, publicly taught to the people: hence\nthe descriptions of the Elysium and of the Tartarus found in Homer,\nVirgil and Plato, and all those given us by many systems of theology. We\nnever had a description of the earth and of its inhabitants, a\ndescription as complete as that transmitted to us, by the ancients,\nabout those countries of new creation, known under the names of Hell,\nTartarus, and Elysium. Those men, whose geographical knowledge was so\nlimited, have given us the minutest details of the abode of the souls\nbeyond the grave; of the government of each one of the two empires,\nwhich form the domain of the shadows; of their habits; of their diet; of\ntheir pains and pleasures; and even of the costume of the inhabitants\nof these two regions. The same poetical imagination which had invented\nthat new world, arbitrarily traced out its plan and distribution.\n\nSocrates, in the Ph\u00e6do of Plato, a work intended to prove the\nimmortality of our soul, and the necessity of practicing virtue, speaks\nof the place where the souls go after death. He imagines a sort of\nethereal land, superior to the one we inhabit, and situated in a sunnier\nregion. There is nothing on our earth that can compare to the beauties\nof this wonderful abode. There colors are brighter, the vegetation\nricher; the trees, flowers and fruits are infinitely superior to those\nof our earth. There precious stones are so bright that those of our\nearth are but their shadow. This ethereal land is strewed with pearls of\nthe purest crystal; everywhere gold and silver are dazzling. There\nbeasts are more beautiful, and more perfectly organized than ours. There\nthe air is the sea, and ether is the air. There seasons are so\nharmoniously combined, that the fortunate inhabitants are not subject to\ninfirmities and to diseases. There the temples are inhabited by the gods\nthemselves, who familiarly converse with men. The inmates of this\ndelightful mansion are the only ones who see the sun, the moon, and the\nstars, as they truly are.\n\nTo this Socrates adds, that men, who, here below, distinguish themselves\nfor their piety and exactitude in discharging their social duties, will\nbe admitted in this abode of happiness when death destroys their mortal\nform. There all those whom philosophy has led to wisdom will dwell.\nSocrates concludes thus:\n\nThen it is for us a strong inducement to study wisdom, and to practice\nvirtue, while we are on earth. These expectations are high enough for us\nto risk the chances of this opinion, and not to break its charms.\n\nThis is a plain avowal of the motive of the fiction: such is the secret\nof nearly all legislators, and the deceitfulness of the most renowned\nphilosophers.\n\nThe second part of the land of the dead, called Tartarus, the leaders of\nthe people also minutely described. According to their description, this\nabode of the wicked presents the horrid view of precipices, caverns, and\nabysses, more frightful than those we see on earth. Those caverns\ncommunicate to each other in the profundities of the earth, through the\nmedium of sinuosities vast and dark, and of subterraneous canals, in\nwhich waters flow; the ones cold, and the others warm: also in several\nof those canals flow torrents of fire, and in others the filthiest mire.\nThe vastest of those caverns is in the center; and into it four main\nrivers ebb, to spring out again. The first is the Acheron, which forms\nbeneath the earth a shoreless marsh, wherein the souls assemble. The\nsecond is the Pyriphlegeton, which rolls torrents of burning sulphur.\nThe third is the Cocyte; and the fourth is the Styx.\n\nIn this horrible abode divine justice tortures the criminals. At the\ngate of the Tartarus the frightful Tisiphon, whose gown is reeking with\nblood, watches day and night. The gate is also defended by a strong\ntower, backed by three walls, which are surrounded by the burning waves\nof the Phlegeton river, that rolls huge stones on fire. There are\nincessantly heard the rattle of chains dragged by wretched victims;\ntheir groans; and the strokes of lashes that tear their flesh. There is\nseen an hydra with a hundred heads, whose mouths are ever gaping for new\nvictims to be devoured. There a vulture is constantly feeding on the\never re-growing entrails of a criminal. Other victims carry a heavy rock\nto the summit of a mountain, where they must set it; but, vain are their\nefforts, it rolls down to the bottom of the valley. Other criminals,\ntied to a wheel, relentlessly revolving, are not permitted the slightest\nrest in their torture. Others, placed near refreshing waters, and near\ntrees loaded with fruit, are ever devoured with unquenchable thirst and\nhunger. If they stoop to drink the water flies from their mouth, and a\nstinking mire sticks to their lips. If they lower a limb to cull a\nfruit, the limb slips from their hand.\n\nFarther, fifty female victims are forced to fill up with water a cask,\nwhose bottom is riddled. Indeed, there is no sort of torment that was\nnot invented by legislators, mystagogues, poets, and philosophers, to\nfrighten the people, under the false assumption of making them better;\nbut the truth is that it was rather to keep them down in subjection.\nThose terrifying pictures were painted on the walls of the temple of\nDelphos. Those fables were repeated to infants by nurses and mothers.\nThus their souls grew weak and pusillanimous, for strong and durable are\nthe first impressions, and more especially, when the general opinion,\nthe example of the credulity of others, the authority of philosophers,\nof poets, of learned Hierophants, and the sight of pompous rites, and\nceremonies in the overpowering sacredness of sanctuaries; when the\nmonuments of arts, music, statues, and pictures, in short, when all\ntends to insinuate in the soul, through the senses stricken with hope\nand terror, a great error presented as a sacred truth revealed by the\ngods themselves for man's bliss.\n\nSuch was the general teaching and belief of the Pagans in regard to\nfuture punishment, before the coming of Jesus Christ, and the preaching\nof his Gospel.\n\nAs to the Jewish nation, not the slightest vestiges of any kind of\nbelief regarding future punishment, can be traced out, neither in the\nOld Testament, nor in Josephus, nor in the writings of other historians,\nat least before the captivity of Babylon, which took place in the year\n598 before the Christian era. Afterwards the Jews divided into four\nsects, the Essenes, the Sadducees, the Samaritans, who denied the\nexistence of any future punishment, and the Pharisees, who, according to\nthe testimony of Josephus, adopted the belief of Metempsychosis, or\ntransmigration of the souls.\n\n\nARTICLE III.\n\n_Did the Christians of the First Centuries believe in Endless Hell?_\n\nWe emphatically answer, no. If the Christian Fathers of the first\ncenturies, have neither taught the dogma of endless hell, nor mentioned,\nin their writings, that their fellow-Christians knew or believed it, and\nif the same is proved by the testimony of the then existing Christian\nsects or denominations, it is evident that the first Christians did not\nbelieve in endless hell. But the Christian Fathers of the first\ncenturies have neither taught the dogma of endless hell, nor mentioned,\nin their writings, that their fellow-Christians knew or believed it; and\nthe same is proved by the testimony of the then existing Christian\nsects. These two members of the proposition we are to successively\nprove: 1st _member_: In the first century the four Gospels, and other\nbooks of the New Testament were written by the apostles, but history\ndoes not inform us of any other Christian writing, or author, in that\nage, except perhaps Clement, bishop of Rome, who, it is said, has left a\nletter to the Corinthians: critics call it Apocryphal. We have not read\nit. Therefore in order to know whether the first Christians believed in\nendless hell or not, we must recur to the works of the Christian Fathers\nwho lived and wrote in the following centuries, and particularly to\nthose who lived and wrote during the second.\n\nSt. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, who suffered martyrdom at Rome, in the\nyear 107, was the first apostolic Father of the second century. There\nare in the collection of the works of the holy Fathers, six letters\nascribed to him by some authors; some others, Saumaise, Blondel, Daill\u00e9,\netc., say that they are apocryphal. Mosheim, in his Histor. Christ.,\nsays, that it is doubtful whether they are of Ignatius or not. We have\nread those six letters, of which five are addressed to different\nChurches, and one to Polycarpus. Although they treat of the most\nimportant points of the Christian faith and duties, they are silent upon\nthe question of endless hell. In the year 131, St. Quadratus presented\nto the emperor Adrian an apology of the Christian religion, which\ncontained the principal Christian doctrines. Adrian was so pleased with\nthis apology, that, if we must believe what Lampride says in his Life of\nAlexander Severus, he designed to rear a temple to Jesus Christ, and to\nplace him among the gods of the empire. A fragment of this apology can\nbe found in the works of Eusebe; but not a word is said about the dogma\nof endless hell.\n\nSt. Justin, a Platonician philosopher, was born at Naplouse, Palestine,\nin 103. He was converted to Christianity in 133. He wrote the following\nworks: Exhortation to Gentiles; two Apologies of the Christian religion,\nthe one to the emperor Antonine, and the other to the emperor\nMarcus-Aurelius; a Dialogue with the Jew Triphon; a treatise on\nMonarchy, or Unity of God; and an Epistle to Diognet, in which he states\nthe reasons why Christians left the worship of the gods, and did not\nadopt that of the Jews. He composed other works, but they exist no more.\nThe main editions of his works are those of Robert Etienne in 1551 and\n1771, in Greek and Latin; that of Commelin in 1593, in Greek and Latin;\nthat of Morel in 1656, and that of Don Marand in 1742, in folio. All\nthese editions, and afterwards that of Migne, we have compared in the\nvoluminous library of the theological seminary of Brou, France, where we\nhave been ordained a priest. Although there were alterations of the\ntext, we did not find any passage referring to the dogma of endless\nhell. True, addressing the Romans, he says: \"Come, O Romans, to find\ninstruction! Formerly I was like you, now be what I am. The power of the\nChristian religion has enlightened me, and freed me from servitude to my\nsenses and passions: it has afforded me peace and serenity. The soul\nthus free is sure to reunite to her Creator, because it is right that\nshe return to him from whom she emanated.\" But this passage neither\nexplicitly nor implicitly supposes that he believed, or that the first\nChristians believed, in endless hell; it is simply a Platonician and\nChristian doctrine, in regard to the purity of our soul which is worthy\nof God only when unstained. However Bailly, a Catholic theologian, says\nthat on page 74 of the first Apology there is a passage proving his\nbelief in endless hell. We did not find it.\n\nMeliton, bishop of Sardes, Lybia, under the reign of Marcus-Aurelius,\npresented to this emperor an Apology of the Christian religion, in 171.\nEusebe and several other authors praise it. Only a few fragments of it\nare found in the Bibliotheca Patrum; in none of them is a question of\nthe dogma of endless hell.\n\nAthenagoras, a Platonician philosopher, was converted to the Christian\nreligion, and presented, in 177, an Apology of the Christian doctrines\nto the emperors Marcus-Aurelius and Lucius-Aurelius-Commode. He\njustified the Christians, who were charged by the Pagans with atheism:\nwith sacrificing and eating a child in their assemblies; and with\nindulging to impudicity. In this Apology he ascribed to God but a\ngeneral providence; and he expressed the Platonician opinion, that\nangels, or spirits, had the government of this world. He admitted that\nthere were pains and rewards in the future life. Let us not infer from\nthis that he referred to the dogma of endless hell. No; he merely meant,\nby those pains and rewards, the Platonician doctrine about\nMetempsychosis.\n\nIreneus was born in Greece, in 140. He became bishop of Lyons, Gaul. He\nwrote several theological works in the Greek language. He believed in a\ngeneral judgment, and in the millenium, namely, in a temporal kingdom of\nJesus Christ on earth, which was to last one thousand years immediately\nbefore the general judgment. During this reign of Jesus Christ, the\nChristians were to enjoy a happiness which was to be a foretaste of the\nhappiness they should enjoy after the general judgment. Not only this\nFather did not teach the dogma of endless hell, but according to the\nultramontane Bergier, he has been charged by the pretended Orthodox\ndivines with having expressed himself in an heterodox manner upon the\ndivinity of the Word; upon the spirituality of the angels and of the\nhuman soul; upon free agency and the necessity of grace; and upon the\nstate of the souls after death. He seemed to be inclined to believe\nMetempsychosis--this, however, is our private opinion, resting on his\ngeneral views on the state of the souls after death. The Catholics\ninvoke but one passage of his writings against this opinion. Grabe, a\nProtestant, published at Oxford, in 1702, an edition of his works; it is\nquite different from the Catholic editions.\n\nTheophile was promoted to the episcopal see of Antioch, in 168. We have\nfrom his pen but three Books to Autolic; they have been edited by Don\nPrudent Marand. He is the first Father who used the word Trinity. His\nworks are a refutation of Paganism, and an apology of Christianism. We\ncould not find in them the dogma of endless hell; he only vaguely\nspeaks of rewards and pains hereafter.\n\nWe have seen that the above Fathers, who compose the complete list of\nthe Fathers of the second century, neither taught the dogma of endless\nhell, nor have recorded that the first Christians held such a dogma.\nTherefore we may draw the conclusion that the first Christians did not\nbelieve the doctrine of endless hell.\n\nWe pass to the Fathers of the third century. Titus Flavius Clement, of\nAlexandria, a Platonician philosopher, became a Christian, and succeeded\nto Pantenus, a professor of the school of Alexandria, in 190; and he\ndied in 217. Alexander of Jerusalem and the celebrated Origen were his\ndisciples. He wrote many works, the principal thereof are: Exhortations\nto Pagans; his Pedagogue; his Hypotyposes; and his Stromatas, which are\ndivided into eight books. It is said that the best edition of his works\nis that of Potter, published at Oxford, in 1715, in two vols. folio. I\nread only the Paris edition, published in 1696. In his Exhortations to\nPagans, he pointed out the absurdity of idolatry, and of the fables of\nPaganism. In his Stromatas he compared the doctrines of the philosophers\nwith those of Jesus Christ. In the treatise headed, Which rich man will\nbe saved? he shows that he who will use his riches properly will obtain\nsalvation: he does not say salvation from endless hell. His Pedagogue is\na treatise of morals in which he relates how the first Christians\nrighteously lived and fervently served the Lord. In all these works it\nis not a question of the dogma of endless hell, either taught to the\nChristians or believed by them.\n\nAccording to Le Clerc, Beausobre, d'Argens, Barbeyrac, Scultet, Daill\u00e9,\nMosheim, Brucker, Semler, etc., this Father did not believe the\nspirituality of God and of man's soul.... It is a fact that, in his\nStromatas, he says that God is composed of a body and of a soul, and\nthat so is our soul. He believed in the Pagan fable that the angels had\nsexual intercourse with human females, and had begotten giants; he\nrefers probably to the Giants who had fought against the Titans. All the\nCatholic theologians themselves admit the above, and say, that, though a\nChristian, he was too much of a Platonician philosopher. This is the\nreason why the Pope, Benedict XIV., opposed his worship, as a saint, in\nthe Romish Church. These statements show how far this Father was from\nholding the dogma of endless hell.\n\nTertullian was one of the Fathers who wrote at the end of the second\ncentury; however, as he died in 216, we class him among the Fathers of\nthe beginning of the third century. His works are on Prayer, on Baptism;\nalso he wrote Exhortation to Patience; two Books to his Wife; Testimony\nof the Soul; treatises on Spectacles and Idolatry; treatise on\nPrescription; two books against the Gentiles; one against the Jews; one\nagainst Hermogenes; one against the Valentinians; one against the\nGnostics; one on the Crown; one to Scapula; books against Praxeas; books\non Pudicity, on Persecutions, on Fast, against the Physics, on Monogamy.\nThese works we had not the advantage to read; but we have studied the\nfollowing in our theological school: his treatise on Penance; his five\nbooks against Marcion; his treatise on the Flesh of Jesus Christ; his\nbook on the Resurrection of the Flesh; and his Apology of the Christian\nReligion.\n\nIn these works which, let this be cursorily said, were written in Latin,\nfor Tertullian was the first Father who wrote in this language, we read\nseveral times the word _infernus_, synonimous to _Tartarus_, and the\nwords _ignem eternum_, used in speaking of pains, which will be\ninflicted upon the wicked after the general judgment; but nothing\npositive in regard to the duration of the punishment, for he might have\nused the adjective _\u00e6ternum_ hyperbolically; nor anything in regard to\nthe belief of the first Christians in regard to it, nor even of his\ncontemporaneous Christians. If the dogma of endless hell had been\ngenerally believed by the Christians, he would have certainly mentioned\nit in his Apology of the Christian Religion; for one of the main charges\nof the Pagans against them was that they were Atheists; and thereby\ndenied the Elysium and the Tartarus. However, in no one of the fifty\narguments which compose the Apology does he say a word about endless\nhell, even about any punishment beyond the grave. He only, in the\nforty-eighth argument, says, that there will be a resurrection of the\nflesh.\n\nSextus Julius Africanus, a Christian historian, who wrote in the\nbeginning of the third century, is altogether silent about the dogma of\nendless hell, at least in the fragments of his works which have been\npreserved by Eusebe.\n\nOrigen was born at Alexandria, in 185. He has been one of the most\ntalented and learned among the Fathers. He wrote the following works:\nExhortation to Martyrdom; Commentaries on the Holy Scriptures. He\nundertook an edition of the Bible in six columns, and headed it\nHexaples. The first column contained the Hebrew text in hebraic letters;\nthe second, the same text in Greek letters; the third contained the\nversion of Aquila; the fourth column, the version of Symmaque; the\nfifth, that of the Septuagint; and the sixth, that of Theodotion. He\nconsidered the version of the Septuagint as the most authentical. The\nOctaples contained, also, two Greek versions, which had been recently\nfound, and whose authors were unknown. He wrote more than one thousand\nsermons; he wrote his celebrated work about Principles, and a treatise\nagainst Celse.\n\nAll the above works have not been transmitted to us entire, though the\nmost of them are, as can be seen in the Bibliotheca Sanctorum Patrum,\npublished in Paris, in 1826. This Catholic edition, we positively know,\nis not as impartial as it ought to be. So much has been written, for\ncenturies, against Origen and for his justification, that a mere\nsummary of those writings would fill volumes. Besides, would we make\nthis summary we might perhaps be suspected of partiality, because\nOrigen's doctrines are favorable to the bearing of this work; therefore\nwe shall extract from the works of Feller, a Romish priest and a Jesuit,\nwhat we have to write about his accusation and justification, and about\nthe summary of his doctrines.\n\nFeller says, Article Origen: \"In the fourth century, the Arians invoked\nhis authority to prove that Jesus Christ was not God. St. Athanase, St.\nBasile, and St. Gregory of Nazianze, defended him. Hilaire, Tite de\nBostres, Didyme, Ambrosius, Eusebe of Verceil, and Gregory of Nysse have\nlaudably spoken of his works; whereas, Theodor of Mopsueste, Apollinary,\nand Cesary, have disparagingly written of them. Origen was condemned in\nthe fifth general council, held at Constantinople, in 553. The pope\nVigil condemned him anew. St. Epiphane, Anastase the Sina\u00efte, St. John\nClimaque, Leonce of Byzantium, Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, and\nAntipater, bishop of Bostres, violently denounced his writings; the pope\nPelage II. said that heretical works were not worse than Origen's\nwritings. There are, in the acts of the sixth council, an edict of the\nemperor Constantine Pogonat, and a letter of the pope Leon II., in which\nhe is counted with Didyme and Evagrius among the Theomaques, or enemies\nof God.\n\n\"The pope St. Martin I., anathematized him in the first council of\nLatran, in 649. St. Augustine, St. John of Damas, and St. Jerome, wrote\nagainst the Origenists, namely, the sect of Christians who believed the\ndoctrines of Origen. In the same century, when a dispute arose about the\northodoxy of Origen, John of Jerusalem, and Rufin made his apology, and\nSt. John Chrysostomus did the same. St. Pamphyle also took his part.\nTheotime of Tomi refused to condemn him, and Didyme tried to give an\northodox meaning to his doctrine on Trinity; others in condemning the\nerrors contained in his books pretended that they had been added by the\nheretics. Theophile of Alexandria accused the monks of Nitria of\nOrigenism, and condemned them in a council held at Alexandria; the pope\nAnastasius ratified the sentence. In the seventh century, the emperor\nJustinian declared himself hostile to the memory of Origen; wrote a\nletter to Memnas against his doctrine; issued an edict against him, in\n640; and obtained his condemnation in a council held the same year at\nConstantinople, whose acts were added to those of the fifth general\ncouncil.\"\n\nWe read in the acts of the fifth general council of Constantinople, held\nin 553, that Origen was condemned by the council for having taught the\nfollowing doctrines: 1st, That in the dogma of Trinity the Father is\ngreater than the Son, and the Son greater than the Holy Spirit. 2d, That\nhuman souls have been created before the bodies, to which they have\nbeen chained as a punishment for sins, which they had committed in an\nanterior state of existence. 3d, That the soul of Jesus Christ had been\nunited to the Word before his incarnation. 4th, That the planets and\nstars are animated, and contain a soul intelligent and endowed with\nreason. 5th, That, after the resurrection, all bodies will have a\nspheroidal shape. 6th, _That the punishment of the wicked in a future\nlife will not be endless_; and that Jesus Christ, who has been crucified\nto save the world, will be crucified once more to save the devils.\n\nAccording to this testimony of the Romish Church--which carries\nfanaticism farther than any other sect, in regard to the dogma of\nendless hell, for it holds as an article of faith even that the\nreprobates are tortured in hell, in their bodies and in their souls,\nthough their bodies are in the grave, and though a material fire cannot\nburn an immortal soul--according to the above testimony of the Romish\nChurch, we say, it is an established, an undeniable fact, that Origen\ntaught the doctrine of Metempsychosis, or transmigration of the souls;\nand also the doctrine that the punishment of the wicked in a future life\nwould not be endless.\n\nFrom this testimony we draw the following argument, which we invite the\nreader to attentively examine, and to carefully weigh, for this\nargument, _alone_, would unanswerably prove that the Christians of the\nfirst, of the second, of the third, and even of the fourth, and of the\nfifth centuries, did not generally believe the dogma of endless hell.\n\nArgument: In the beginning of the third century, Origen (he was born in\n185) taught the doctrine of Metempsychosis, or transmigration of the\nsouls, and the doctrine that the punishment of the wicked in a future\nlife would not be endless; these two doctrines were condemned only in\nthe sixth century by the fifth general council held at Constantinople,\nin 553, and composed of 151 bishops. But if the Christians of the first,\nof the second, of the third, and even of the fourth, and of the fifth\ncenturies, had generally believed the dogma of endless hell, the above\ntwo doctrines would have certainly been condemned before the sixth\ncentury. This minor proposition we prove:\n\nBy the orders of the bishop of Rome, Sylvester, and of the emperor\nConstantine I., an oecumenical council, composed of 381 bishops, was\nheld at Nice, in 325, to frame a symbol of faith, and to condemn Arius.\n\nIn 381, a second general council, composed of 150 bishops, was held at\nConstantinople, to condemn Macedonius, who denied the divinity of the\nHoly Spirit; and to alter the symbol of Nice, (striking inconsistency of\nthe Romish Church which holds as an article of faith that a general\ncouncil is infallible in its decisions.)\n\nIn 431, the bishop of Rome, Celestine I., assembled a general council at\nEphesus, to obtain the condemnation of Nestorius, who denied that Mary\nwas, strictly speaking, the mother of God.\n\nIn 451, a general council was held at Chalcedony, Asia Minor, for the\ncondemnation of Eutyches, and of Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, who\nheld the doctrine that there was in Jesus Christ but one nature.\n\nFrom the beginning of the second century, the time when Origen taught\nthe above two doctrines, up to the year 553, several thousand synods and\nprincipal councils were held.\n\nThereupon we say: The doctrine of Metempsychosis, or transmigration of\nthe souls; and the doctrine that the punishment of the wicked in a\nfuture life will not be endless, were as important as the most of the\ndoctrines discussed in those councils; and Origen had a weightier\ninfluence upon the Christian communities by his talents, learning,\nvirtue, and fame, and by the diffusion of his works, than Arius,\nMacedonius, Nestorius, Eutiches, Dioscorus and others put together.\nTherefore, if the dogma of endless hell had been generally believed by\nthe Christians of the first, of the second, of the third, of the fourth,\nand of the fifth centuries, the doctrine of Metempsychosis, and the\ndoctrine that the punishment of the wicked in a future life will not be\nendless, held and taught by Origen, would have been called up,\ndiscussed, and condemned in the above councils. But they were called up,\ndiscussed, and condemned, _only_ in the fifth general council, held at\nConstantinople, in 553. Therefore, it is an irrefutable fact that the\nChristians of the first, of the second, of the third, of the fourth, and\nof the fifth centuries, did not generally believe the dogma of endless\nhell.\n\nGregory of Neocesaree, was a disciple of Origen, and was promoted to the\nepiscopal see of Neocesaree, in 240. He wrote the following works:\nThanks to Origen, Profession of Faith on the Dogma of Trinity, Canonical\nEpistle, and Paraphrase of the Book of Ecclesiastes. In these works the\nspirit of the doctrines of Origen is seen at every page; and the dogma\nof endless hell is neither taught, nor declared to have been the belief\nof the first Christians, nor of the Christians of the third century. St.\nCyprian, made bishop of Carthage in 248, is silent about the dogma of\nendless hell.\n\nWe pass to the Fathers of the fourth century.\n\nPamphile Eusebe obtained the bishopric of Cesarea in 313. He wrote the\nPanegyric, and the Life of Constantine; a Chronicle, viz: a compilation\nof Pagan authors, and several other works, whose fragments have\nremained. His principal work is his Ecclesiastical History, which we\nhave studied in our theological school. If the dogma of endless hell had\nbeen the belief of the first Christians, and had been generally believed\nin his age, he would have certainly mentioned it therein: however, he\nhas not. Therefore, the first Christians, and those of his age, did not\nhold the dogma of endless hell.\n\nAthanase succeeded to Alexander on the episcopal see of Alexandria, in\n326. His works are: Defense of Trinity and of Incarnation; apologies;\nletters; and treatises against the Arians, the Melecians, the\nApollinarists, and the Macedonians. In these works there is not a word\nconcerning the dogma of endless hell being believed by the first\nChristians, or by his contemporaries. The famous symbol which is headed\nsymbol of Athanase, which the Romish priests read every Sunday in the\nPsalms-Breviary, is not from his composition nor from his pen; every one\nof the Catholic theologians and authors confesses it.\n\nBasile, bishop of Cesarea, was born in 329. He has left several letters,\nhomilies, treatises of morals, and sermons on the six days of the\ncreation. We have examined the Latin edition of his works, or rather of\nthe fragments of his works, for they are not entire, by Don Gamier and\nDon Prudent; but though in many passages he speaks of salvation, of\neternal bliss, and of the punishment of the wicked hereafter, he does\nnot positively declare that the punishment will be endless; and he does\nnot say that the first Christians believed it, nor that it was a dogma\nof the Church in his age. Theodor of Mopsueste, who wrote in the fifth\ncentury, is charged by the Catholic writers to have taught that future\npunishment will not be endless.\n\nSince that time, down to the sixth century, the question of the eternal\nduration of the punishment of the wicked in a place called hell, was\ndiscussed by the ecclesiastical writers, who, nevertheless, did not\nassert that it was the belief of the first Christians. Ambrosius\nsupposed that it would be infinite in duration; so Augustine, his\ndisciple, wrote in his work, De Civitate Dei, book 21; St. Fulgence; the\npope Gregorius, etc. The opinion of those leading doctors was preached,\nand, little by little, it became the belief of a large number of\nChristians. They even designated the place where hell was: some thought\nit was in the profundities of the earth; Augustine opposed them; then he\nrecanted himself, and agreed that it was there. Finally, in 553, a\ngeneral council was held in Constantinople, and it was decided that the\ndogma of endless hell shall be henceforth an article of faith. It was\nonly many years after that this council was considered oecumenical.\n\nWe have proved by the testimony of the Fathers themselves, that the\nChristians of the first, of the second, of the third, of the fourth, and\nof the fifth centuries, did not believe the dogma of endless hell; we\nshall now prove it by the various Christian sects, which existed, and\nwere organized religious denominations, in those centuries.\n\nLest we might be suspected of partiality in the exposition of the belief\nof those Christian sects in regard to future punishment, we will\n_exclusively_ make our extracts from the works of Bergier, Feller, and\nother Catholic theologians and historians.\n\nThe Cerinthians did not believe the doctrine of endless hell. The\nBasilidians believed in Metempsychosis, or transmigration of the souls.\nIn consequence they did not hold the dogma of endless hell. Eusebe\ninforms us, in his Ecclesiastical History, that Basilide had written on\nthe four Gospels twenty-four books; and that his sect was numerous. It\nflourished till the fourth century.\n\nThe Millenaries, who existed mainly in the second and third centuries,\nbelieved that Jesus Christ would soon come from heaven, to reign one\nthousand years over the righteous; that this reign would be temporal;\nand that it would be followed by a general judgment: but they did not\nhold that future punishment would be endless, for they were silent about\nits nature.\n\nThe Marcionites believed in a good principle, God, and in a bad one, the\nDevil; the latter had created our body. Jesus Christ had but an apparent\nflesh. Our body should not come again to life; they believed like\nPythagoras, of whom Marcion was a follower, in the doctrine of\nMetempsychosis: such was their belief. They made so many proselytes,\nthat, even in the fifth century, their sect was numerous in Italy, in\nEgypt, in Palestine, in Syria, in Arabia, in Persia, and in other\noriental countries.\n\nThe Valentinians held that Jesus Christ was not God; that he had\nredeemed the world only from sin, by freeing men of the empire of evil\nEons, or geniuses, who had the government of the universe. They believed\nin the doctrine of Metempsychosis, or transmigration of the souls. In\nconsequence, they neither knew nor believed the dogma of endless hell.\nValentin had an immense number of disciples, and his sect spread in\nAsia, and in Africa; in Europe it extended as far as Gaul, where,\naccording to the testimony of Ireneus, bishop of Lyons, the Valentinians\nwere very numerous.\n\nThe Marcosians formed a numerous religious body towards the end of the\nsecond century. Their sect spread as far as Gaul. They believed the\ndoctrine of Metempsychosis.\n\nThe Theodotians and the Artemonians, in the second century, professed\nthat Jesus Christ was not God, and believed in Metempsychosis.\n\nThe Carpocratians believed in the pre-existence of the souls, and taught\nthat they had sinned in an anterior state of existence; that, as a\npunishment for those crimes, they had been condemned to animate other\nbodies, and would pass into other bodies as long as they would not have\nbeen sufficiently purified by this expiation. They denied the divinity\nof Jesus Christ, and the belief of the resurrection of the body.\nCarpocrate, of Alexandria, founded this sect in the second century.\n\nThe Docetes professed the same belief as the Carpocratians, with the\ndifference that they did not admit that Jesus Christ had a natural body.\nThey had exactly the same belief in regard to Metempsychosis. This sect\nexisted in the second century. The Patripassians, the Noetians, the\nPraxeans, and the Sabellians have been silent on the dogma of endless\nhell.\n\nTatian, one of the most prominent ecclesiastical writers of the second\ncentury, established the sect of the Tatianists, who believed that Jesus\nChrist had not really suffered, and that he had not redeemed the world\nby his blood. They also held the doctrine of Metempsychosis. Of the many\nworks of Tatian we have only his Discourse against the Pagans, and his\nDiatessaron.\n\nApelles established a sect of his name, in 145. The Apellites denied the\nresurrection of the body; believed in Metempsychosis; and also that God\nhad entrusted a spirit of fire to create the world.\n\nIn the second century, Montan, a native of Ardaban, in Mysia,\nestablished the sect of the Montanists, which split and ramified into\nthe Artotyrites, the Ascites, Ascodrutes, etc. They all believed the\ndoctrine of Metempsychosis.\n\nThe Ophites, a sect of the second century, professed that the world had\nbeen created, and was governed by evil Eons or geniuses, and that God\nhad sent Jesus Christ, his Son, to oppose the evil geniuses. They held\nthe doctrine of Metempsychosis.\n\nIn the second century the sect of the Cainites denied the resurrection\nof the body, and believed in Metempsychosis.\n\nThe above sects compose the large body of Christians in the second\ncentury; and yet we do not find in their doctrines anything like the\ndogma of endless hell. They all, except perhaps the Millenaries,\nbelieved in the doctrine of Metempsychosis. And as those extracts are\nfrom Roman Catholic authors, who had the greatest interest in disguising\nthe true doctrines of those sects, it follows that it is an undeniable\nfact, that the Christians of the second century neither did believe nor\nknew any thing about such a dogma as endless hell.\n\n_Corollary._ Since the Christians of the second century neither believed\nthe dogma of endless hell, nor knew anything about it, therefore the\nChristians of the first century neither believed this dogma, nor knew\nanything about it; for had they believed it, or known any thing about\nit, the Christians of the second century would have preserved that\nbelief, or at least would have mentioned it. Consequently, it is an\nundeniable fact that the Christians of the first century were not taught\nby the apostles the dogma of endless hell.\n\nLet us examine, now, the doctrines of the various Christian sects, which\nsprung up in the third century.\n\nTertullian, one of the Fathers of whom we have spoken above, had joined\nthe Montanist sect; but afterwards he disagreed with them, and he\nfounded, at about the fifth year of the third century, another sect,\ncalled Tertullianists. This sect lived several centuries, for in the\ntime of St. Augustine, towards the end of the fourth century, they had a\ndenominational organization at Carthage, Africa. Probably they held the\nsame belief as Tertullian, in regard to the dogma of endless hell.\n\nThe Hermogenians believed that the earth and the whole universe have\nbeen uncreated, and are eternal. Hermogene said: \"God has either taken\nevil from himself, or from nothing, or from a pre-existing matter. He\ncould not take evil from himself, for he is indivisible; and, besides,\nevil could not abide in a being infinitely perfect. He could not take\nevil from nothing, for in this case it would have been in his power not\nto produce it; therefore, evil is derived from a matter pre-existing,\nco-eternal to God, and the defects of which God could not amend.\" The\nHermogenians believed in Metempsychosis. Their sect spread more\nparticularly in Galatia.\n\nBerylle, bishop of Ostres, in Arabia, established, in 207, the sect of\nthe Arabics. They believed that the soul was born and died with the\nbody, and that both would come again to life. Origen wrote against this\nbelief, and converted the most of them to his opinions. As Origen\nthought and taught that the punishment of the wicked would not be\nendless, and that the souls transmigrated, we may safely conclude that\nthe Arabics embraced his opinions.\n\nThe Novatians were organized into a sect by Novat and Novatian, priests\nof the Church of Carthage. We have perused the treatises on Trinity and\non the Viands, written by Novatian, whose fragments are found in the\nworks of Tertullian; but we have found no opinion expressed in regard to\nthe dogma of endless hell. We heard since that there is a complete\nedition of his works, published in 1728, by Jackson, at London: we have\nnot been able to obtain it.\n\nAccording to the testimony of Epiphane, the Valesians held many of the\ndoctrines of the Gnostics. From this we may safely infer that they\nbelieved in Metempsychosis. Tillemont, in his Memoirs for the\nEcclesiastical History, tome 3d, says that the Valesians sprung up in\n240. St. Epiphane and Tillemont are the only authors who have referred\nto them in their writings.\n\nThe Samosatians, whose chief was Paul of Samosate, Patriarch of Antioch,\nprofessed that the three persons of the Trinity were not three Gods, but\nthree attributes, under which God has manifested himself to men; that\nJesus Christ was not a God, but a man to whom wisdom had been\nextraordinarily given. We did not find any thing in the Ecclesiastical\nHistory in regard to their doctrines about future punishment. However,\nas they considered Jesus Christ only as an extraordinary man, it is most\nprobable that they kept the immemorially, and, even then, generally\nbelieved doctrine of Metempsychosis. This sect was established in 260.\nThe famous Zenobia, who then reigned in Syria, and believed the Jewish\nreligion, was converted to this sect.\n\nManes was born in Persia, in 240. He was the father of the sect of the\nManicheans. We shall give a summary of their doctrines, and as their\nsect has been one of the most numerous, one of the most widely spread,\nand one whose denominational organization seems to have outlived nearly\nall those of the first centuries, we will add a summary of their\nhistory. We will find in their doctrines, and in their history, a\nweighty proof that the dogma of endless hell was not generally believed\nby the Christians of the first five centuries, to say the least.\n\nTo remove the least shadow of doubt about our impartiality, we continue,\nas done before, to take our extracts from Roman Catholic authors, who\nhad an interest to make it appear that the dogma of endless hell was\nco-eval to the apostles.\n\nWe extract from Cotelier, a Roman Catholic author, tome 1, of the\nApostolic Fathers, page 543, and following, these doctrines of the\nManicheans:\n\nIn their opinion, the souls, or spirits, are an emanation from the good\nspirit, whom they considered as an uncreated light; and all bodies have\nbeen formed by the bad principle, whom they called Satan, and the power\nof darkness. They held that there are portions of light enclosed within\nall the bodies of the universe, and that they give them motion and life,\nwherefore those souls cannot reunite to the good principle, except when\nthey have been purified by the means of various transmigrations from one\nbody into another. They denied the future resurrection of the body.\n\nIt is therefore evident that the Manicheans either knew nothing about\nthe dogma of endless hell, or did not believe it.\n\nFrom the year 285 to the year 491, the Manicheans were persecuted. The\nemperors of Orient confiscated their property, and decreed the penalty\nof death against them. Thousands of them died in the most cruel\ntortures, rather than to give up their faith; we read even in our days,\nin the Theodosian code, the laws enacted against them. Despite those\npersecutions they rapidly and widely spread. In the fourth century St.\nAugustine was converted to their sect, but he afterwards left them, and\nbecame their most powerful opponent. They formed a large body in Africa.\nIn 491, the mother of the emperor Anastase, who was a Manichean,\nobtained the suspension of the laws enacted against them. They were\nallowed, during twenty-seven years, to have churches, and to freely\nworship; but during the reign of Justin, and under his successors, they\nwere again forbidden it. Towards the end of the seventh century, the\nfamous Gallinice, who was a Manichean, brought up her two sons, Paul and\nJohn, in her belief, and sent them to Armenia as missionaries. Paul made\nso many proselytes that the new converts took the name of Paulicians.\n\nIn the beginning of the ninth century the Paulicians split; but soon\nafter they reunited, at the persuasion of one of their most influential\nmembers, named Theodote. The aversion of the Manicheans for the worship\nof the virgin Mary, of the cross, of the saints, and of images, pleased\nthe Saracens, who made frequent irruptions in the empire: through their\ninfluence they obtained more credit among their opponents.\n\nIn the year 841, the empress Theodora, who had declared herself in favor\nof the worship of the virgin Mary, of the cross, of the saints, and of\nimages, went so far in her fanatical zeal for this doctrine, that she\nresolved to exterminate the Manicheans, and their religion. By her\norders more than one hundred thousand of them were arrested and put to\ndeath; nearly all expired in the most cruel tortures. Then the\nManicheans sought a refuge among the Saracens; they retired in fortified\ntowns, repelled the repeated assaults of the imperial armies, and\nmaintained themselves during about forty years; but having been defeated\nin a great battle they were forced to disperse.\n\nSome went to Bulgaria, and since took the name of Bulgarians; others\nwent to Italy, and mainly settled in Lombardy, wherefrom they sent\nmissionaries to France, to Germany, and to other countries. In the year\n1022, under the king Robert, several canons of Orleans, who had joined\nthe Manicheans, were burnt alive. Although the penalty of death had been\ndecreed against the Manicheans, they established a large number of\nconvents all over France, and particularly in the provinces of Provence,\nof Languedoc, and, more especially, in the diocese of Albi, where they\ntook the name of Albigenses.\n\nAlanus, monk of C\u00eeteaux, and Peter, monk of Vaux-Cernay, who wrote\nagainst them, accused them, 1st, of admitting two principles or\ncreators, the one good and the other bad; the first, creator of\ninvisible and spiritual things, and the second, creator of bodies. 2d,\nOf denying the resurrection of the body. 3d, Of denying the Purgatory.\n4th, Of denying the utility of prayers for the dead. 5th, Of denying the\npains of hell. 6th, Of believing the transmigration of the souls into\nother bodies of men, or of animals, according to the degree of their\nguilt in an anterior state of existence, until by successive expiatory\ntransmigrations they become purified. 7th, Of disbelieving the seven\nsacraments. 8th, Of rejecting the worship of the virgin Mary, of the\ncross, of the saints, and of images, etc.\n\nIn 1176, the council of Albi, which some authors call council of Lombez,\nwas held against the Manicheans, who, as said above, were called\nAlbigenses. In this council they were condemned under the calling of\nGood Men. Fleury, who, in the seventy-second book of his Ecclesiastical\nHistory, quotes the acts of the council, ascribes to them the above\ndoctrines; so does the historian Rainerius; and Bossuet, in the ninth\nbook of his History of Variations, cites other authors who confirm all\nthese accusations. The condemnation of the Manicheans, or Albigenses,\nwas confirmed by the general council of Latran, in 1179. A crusade was\nordered against them by the Pope, Innocent III., and a strict\ninquisition was organized. Simon, count of Montford, was appointed, by\nthe Pope, general-in-chief of the crusaders; then the slaughter\ncommenced. It lasted eighteen years: the Albigenses, or Manicheans, were\nexterminated, a few only secretly found their way to the Alps, where\nthey concealed themselves, and afterwards united to the Valdenses.\nSeveral hundred thousands were either burnt alive, or tortured on racks,\nor put to the sword; all were slain: men, old men, young men, women,\nchildren, and infants; and during those horrible ceremonies of death,\nthe soldiers of the Pope sung the Veni Creator Spiritus, etc., a hymn of\ninvocation to the Holy Spirit.\n\nFrom the doctrines and history of the Manicheans we draw the following\nargument:\n\nAccording to the unanimous testimony of the Roman Catholic authors\nthemselves, from about the middle of the third century to the\nthirteenth, the Manicheans composed a numerous body of Christians, and\ndid not believe the dogma of endless hell. So constant were they in this\ndisbelief, that they persisted in it till nearly every one of them was\nexterminated; therefore it is an undeniable historical fact that this\nlarge denomination of Christians did not hold the dogma of hell, in the\nthird, fourth, fifth, etc., centuries.\n\nLet us examine the doctrine of the Christian sects, which sprung up in\nthe fourth century, in regard to endless hell. We continue to take our\nextracts from Roman Catholic authors.\n\nPriscillian, a Spaniard, was the founder of the Christian sect of\nPriscillianists, in the year 380. This denomination of Christians\nbelieved in the doctrine of Metempsychosis. They held that the souls\npassed into the bodies of other men, until they were purified, by their\ntransmigrations, of the sins they had committed in an anterior life.\nThey denied the resurrection of human bodies. Priscillian was condemned\nto death, and the penalty of death was decreed against the\nPriscillianists. The emperor Maxime, and the pope Leon, used fire,\nracks, and swords against them; they slew thousands of them,\nnevertheless they increased so that they were numerous yet in the sixth\ncentury in Spain and in Italy. Tillemont, in his Ecclesiastical Memoir,\ntome 8, refers to Sulpice-Sev\u00e8re, to Ambrosius, and to St. Augustine,\nfor the confirmation of the above, said concerning the doctrines of the\nPriscillianists.\n\nThe other principal sects of the fourth century were the Donatists, the\nPhotinians, the Macedonians, the Apollinarists, the Jovinians, the\nCollyridians, and the Pelagians. The Nestorians, the Eutichians, and the\nMonothelites, sprang up in the fifth century. We have not found in their\nwritings any passages referring to the dogma of endless hell. However we\nmust state that we had the opportunity of perusing only about two-thirds\nof the numerous and voluminous, we would add tedious, works composed pro\nand con concerning their respective tenets.\n\n_Remark._--Let the reader bear in mind that the most of the Christian\nsects, whose disbelief of the dogma of endless hell we have traced out\nabove, composed the majority of the Christian body; and also that they\nhave existed, at least, till the middle of the sixth century, the epoch\nwhen the fifth council of Constantinople condemned the doctrine held by\nOrigen--that of the transmigration of the souls, and of their temporary\npunishment.\n\n_Conclusion._ Therefore the dogma of endless hell was not generally\nbelieved by the Christians of the third, of the fourth, and of the fifth\ncenturies.\n\nGeneral conclusion of this third article:\n\n1. We have proved, by the testimony of the Fathers of the second\ncentury, and by the doctrines of the numerous Christian sects of the\nsame century, that the dogma of endless hell was even unknown to the\nChristians of the first and of the second centuries. Then we must\nconclude that not only the first Christians, namely, the Christians of\nthe first and of the second centuries did not believe in endless hell,\nbut even that they knew nothing about such a dogma.\n\n2. We have proved, by the testimony of the Fathers of the third, of the\nfourth, and of the fifth centuries, and also by the many Christian sects\nwhich existed in the third, in the fourth, and in the fifth centuries,\nthat the Christians did not generally believe, in the said centuries,\nthe dogma of endless hell. Therefore the Christians of the third, of the\nfourth, and of the fifth centuries, did not _generally_ believe in\nendless hell.\n\nTherefore the proposition we were to prove in the present article, _that\nthe first Christians did not believe in the doctrine of endless hell_,\nremains peremptorily established.\n\n_Objection._--Since the fourth century the Church of Rome obtained the\ncondemnation of the above Christian sects in five general councils. But\nif the above sects had composed the majority of the body of Christians,\nthe Church of Rome would not have obtained their condemnation.\nConsequently the above sects did not compose the majority of the body of\nChristians during the third, the fourth, and the fifth centuries.\n\n_Answer._--We deny the minor proposition of this syllogism, which is:\nBut if the above sects had composed the majority of the body of\nChristians, the Church of Rome would not have obtained their\ncondemnation--and we prove our denegation as follows:--\n\nSupposing that the United States be constituted into an empire--God\nforbid!--that the emperor would have the control of Church property,\nwould side, say with the Presbyterian Church, or any other, claiming\nsupremacy over the other Christian denominations; and that the emperor\nwould assemble councils conjointly with that Church, would attend and\neven be vice-president of those councils, would enforce them with civil\nand military force, and also the execution of their acts condemning\nanother sect arrayed before those councils, without permitting the other\nsects to vote in those councils, would it follow from this that all the\nother Christian sects do not compose the body of Christians in the\nUnited States? Certainly not.\n\nBut the case was the same with the Church of Rome. Since the end of the\nsecond century the bishop of Rome (we do not say the Pope, for it was\nonly centuries after that he had the boldness, or rather impudence, to\ncall himself exclusively Pope,) commenced to claim a personal supremacy\nover the other bishops, and also a supremacy of his church over the\nother Christian churches. Vain were his efforts until the beginning of\nthe fourth century, when Sylvestre, bishop of Rome, obtained for himself\nand for his church the favors and protection of the emperor Constantine\nI., who afterwards joined it, (we will state in the last chapter of this\nwork the reasons why this tyrant took these steps.) In behalf of the\nChurch of Rome, he convoked the council of Arles, and the general\ncouncil of Nice, and defrayed the expenses of the bishops out of his own\ntreasure. His protection to the Church of Rome the most of his\nsuccessors on the imperial throne continued; and thus the power and\nsupremacy of this church grew in ratio of the persecutions directed\nagainst the other Christian denominations, which were debarred from\nvoting in the councils; whose church property was oftentimes\nconfiscated; and which many of them were prohibited to publicly worship.\nIn consequence, it is not true to say that, if the various Christian\nsects spoken of before had composed the majority of the body of\nChristians, the Church of Rome would not have obtained their\ncondemnation. Therefore the various sects spoken of before composed the\nmajority of the body of Christians during the third, the fourth and the\nfifth centuries.\n\n\nAPPENDIX\n\n_To the proofs that the first Christians did not believe in endless\nhell._\n\nFrom the second to the fourth centuries many Apocryphal Gospels had been\nwritten. Some of them have been transmitted down to us, at least their\nfragments; and others have not been preserved except their titles.\n\nAmong those gospels are: 1st, the Gospel according to the Hebrews; 2d,\naccording to the Nazareans; 3d, according to the Twelve Apostles; 4th,\naccording to St. Peter. It is supposed that these four Gospels were that\nof Matthew, altered by the Hebrews. This circumstance has led the\ncritics to believe, that the Hebrew or Syriac text of Matthew had been\nabandoned, lest it might be altered; and that the Greek version had been\npreserved.\n\n5th, The Gospel according to the Egyptians; 6th, that of the birth of\nthe virgin Mary: we have read it in Latin; 7th, the Protogospel of\nJames, written in Greek and in Latin; 8th, the Gospel of the Infancy, in\nGreek and in Arabic; 9th, that of St. Thomas; 10th, the Gospel of\nNicodemus, in Latin; 11th, the Gospel Eternal; 12th, that of Andrew;\n13th, that of Bartholomew; 14th, that of Apelles; 15th, that of\nBasilides; 16th, that of Cerinthus; 17th, that of the Ebionites--perhaps\nit was the same as that of the Hebrews; 18th, that of Tatian; 19th, that\nof Eve; 20th, that of the Gnostics; 21st, that of Marcion; 22d, that of\nSt. Paul; 23d, the Gospel of the small and great interrogations of Mary;\n24th, that of the birth of Jesus: probably the same as the Protogospel\nof James; 25th, that of John, or of the death of the virgin Mary; 26th,\nthat of Matthias; 27th, that of Perfection; 28th, that of the Simonians;\n29th, that of the Syrians; 30th, that of the Encratites: probably the\nsame as that of Tatian; 31st, the Gospel of Thadeus, or of Jude; 32d,\nthat of Valentine; 33d, that of Life, or of the Living God; 34th, that\nof Philip; 35th, that of Barnabeus; 36th, that of James, the major;\n37th, that of Judas; 38th, of the Truth: probably the same as that of\nValentine; 39th, the Gospels of Leucius, of Seleucus, of Lucianus, and\nof Hesychius.\n\nFor a more extensive information concerning the Apocryphal Gospels, we\nrefer the reader to the Codex Apocryphus Novi Testamenti Collectus,\nCastigatus, published at Hamburg, in 3 vols. octavo, in 1719. The author\nwas John Albert Fabricius, one of the most learned antiquarians of the\n17th century.\n\nWe had the opportunity of reading, in the rich library of the\ntheological school of Brou, France, several of these Apocryphal\nGospels, that of the birth of the virgin Mary, the Protogospel of James;\nthat of the death of the virgin Mary, and that of the Twelve Apostles;\nbut we do not recollect to have seen in these gospels anything, in\nregard to endless hell, more positive than what is found in the Gospel\nconcerning the ruin of Jerusalem.\n\nOf course this proof, drawn from the Apocryphal Gospels, has not the\nsame weight as if it was drawn from authentical authors, (it is for this\nreason that we have not inserted it in the body of proofs,) however as\nit is certain that they have been written from the second to the fourth\ncenturies, they at least show that their authors, and the many\nChristians who used them, did not believe in endless hell.\n\n\nARTICLE IV.\n\n_How the Church of Rome borrowed the doctrine of Endless Hell from the\nPagans; and how, afterwards, the self-called Orthodox Protestant\nChurches borrowed it from the Church of Rome._\n\nIt has been proved in the foregoing article, and, we think, to\ndemonstration, that the Christians of the first and of the second\ncenturies, neither knew nor believed the dogma of endless hell;\nwherefore we may logically make this argument:\n\nThe Christians of the first and of the second centuries neither knew nor\nbelieved the dogma of endless hell: But if the dogma of endless hell\nhad been taught in the New Testament, the Christians of the first and\nof the second centuries would have known and believed it. This we prove:\n\nThose of the apostles who wrote the New Testament certainly knew\nwhether, in the New Testament they wrote, they had taught the dogma of\nendless hell. If they had known that, in the New Testament they wrote,\nthey had taught the dogma of endless hell, they would have certainly\ninformed the Christians of the first century, in their oral\npredications, that, in the New Testament they wrote, they had taught the\ndogma of endless hell, for it was one of the most important points of\ndoctrine. If they had informed the Christians of the first century, in\ntheir oral predications, that they had taught, in the New Testament they\nwrote, the dogma of endless hell, the Christians of the first century\nwould have certainly believed that they had taught, in the New Testament\nthey wrote, the dogma of endless hell. If the Christians of the first\ncentury had believed that they had taught, in the New Testament they\nwrote, the dogma of endless hell, they would have certainly believed in\nendless hell. If the Christians of the first century had believed in\nendless hell, those of the beginning of the second century would have\nalso believed it; for the apostle and evangelist John was still living\nat the end of the year 100; (even many authors say that he died only in\n104,) and therefore if any discussion had arisen in regard to the dogma\nof endless hell, he would have declared whether it was taught in the\nNew Testament or not. If the Christians of the beginning of the second\ncentury had also believed the dogma of endless hell, those who would\nhave lived in the middle and at the end of the second century would have\nbelieved it also; because learning, from the lips, or from the writings,\nof those who were co-eval to some of the apostles, the dogma of endless\nhell, no traditional alteration might have taken place towards this\ndogma; so much so that it would have been generally spread and believed\namong Christians, owing to its importance.\n\nTherefore the minor proposition of our argument is true: _But if the\ndogma of endless hell had been taught in the New Testament, the\nChristians of the first and of the second centuries would have known and\nbelieved it._ Wherefore we draw this logical conclusion: Then the dogma\nof endless hell is not taught in the New Testament.\n\nMoreover, if the Christians of the third, of the fourth, and of the\nfifth centuries, had thought that the dogma of endless hell was taught\nin the New Testament they would have at least _generally_ believed it.\nBut they did not _generally_ believe it, as it has been proved, to\ndemonstration, in the foregoing Article: consequently the dogma of\nendless hell is not taught in the New Testament.\n\nFrom the fact that, according to the Christians of the first and of the\nsecond centuries themselves, the dogma of endless hell is not taught in\nthe New Testament, we draw the conclusion that the Church of Rome,\nwhich first, and successively, introduced in the body of Christians the\ndogma of hell and of endless hell, did not originate it from the New\nTestament; because there would have been a general protestation against\nit from all the other churches.\n\nIt has been proved, in the second Article of this chapter, that the Jews\ndid not believe the dogma of endless hell. Therefore the Church of Rome\ndid not originate the dogma of endless hell from the Jews, or from their\nHoly Writs.\n\nWherefrom, then, did the Church of Rome originate the dogma of endless\nhell?\n\nFrom Paganism:--\n\nThe Church of Rome established mysteries towards the beginning of the\nthird century. They were an imitation of the Pagan mysteries.\n\nWe refer the reader for the proofs of this proposition to the last pages\nof the second chapter of this work.\n\nThereupon we continue. It was only successively, and to make more\nproselytes, that the Church of Rome had established those ceremonies,\nrites and doctrines, to the reading thereof we have invited the reader,\nand which were not only unspoken of in the Scriptures, but which were a\npure imitation of those of the mysteries of the Pagans. We say, _to make\nmore proselytes_; for the aim of the Church of Rome was evidently to\ndiminish the abruptness of the transition between Paganism and\nChristianity; to throw a bridge, if we may thus illustrate our idea,\nover the steep, wide, and deep abyss that lies between Paganism and\nChristianity.\n\nNow let us compare the hell of the Church of Rome with the Tartarus of\nthe Pagans. The Pagans called the place where the wicked were punished,\nTartarus, or Infernus; the Church of Rome called, and still calls, the\nsame place, Tartarus, or Infernus. The Pagans believed that the Tartarus\nwas in the profundities of the earth; the Church of Rome held, and still\nholds, that the Tartarus, called in English, Hell, is in the\nprofundities of the earth.\n\n_Remark._--Before proceeding further, let us give the native\nsignification of the words Tartarus, Infernus and Hell. [Greek:\nTartaros, ou], dark and deep place: [Greek: Tartara gains], [in\nHesiode,] abysses of the earth. The word [Greek: Tartaros] has been\nadopted and kept in the Latin, though with the change of the final\n[Greek: os] into _us_, Tartarus, and its native meaning preserved. The\nLatin word Infernus derives from the word inferior, which signifies a\nplace under, below an other, a cavity, a profundity. The words Tartarus,\nInfernus, have been kept in French, Tartare, Enfer; in Spanish, Tartaro,\nInfierno; and also in the other languages derived from the Latin. The\nEnglish word _hell_ is the genitive case of the Anglo-Saxon word _hole_,\n[See Webster's Dictionary,] which means a cavity, a profundity. The word\nTartarus has been kept from the Latin, with its native signification. In\nGreek [Greek: Tartaros] has a plural, as seen before. In Latin\n_Tartarus_ has a plural, _Tartari_; so _Infernus_, _Inferi_. In French\n_Tartare_ has a plural, _Tartares_; so, _Enfer_, _Enfers_. In Spanish\n_Tartaro_ has a plural, _Tartaros_; so, _Infierno_, _Infiernos_.\n\nNow we continue the comparison that we have commenced between the\nInfernus of the Pagans and the Infernus, or Hell, of the Church of Rome.\nWe will use the word Hell, to express the Tartarus, or Infernus, of both\nthe Pagans and the Church of Rome.\n\nThe Pagans believed that there was a gate to their hell; so the Church\nof Rome believes that there is a gate to the hell of the Christians. The\nPagans believed that the frightful Tisiphon watched day and night at the\ngate of their hell; so the Church of Rome believes that Lucifer holds\nthe keys of the gate of hell, as St. Peter holds the keys of Paradise.\n\nThe Pagans believed that the deepest darkness reigned in their hell; so\nthe Church of Rome believes that the deepest darkness reigns in the hell\nof the Christians.\n\nThe Pagans believed that, in their hell, the Phlegeton river rolled huge\nstones on fire, burning the wicked without consuming them; so the Church\nof Rome believed, and still believes, [even now it is an article of\nfaith which must be believed under the penalty of excommunication, of\nbeing a heretic, and thereby of infallibly going to hell,] that, in the\nhell of the Christians, the wicked are plunged into a corporeal, or\nmaterial, fire of sulphur, and of brimstone. St. Augustine, in his work\nDe Civitate Dei, Liber 21, Capitulum 10, writes: \"_Gehenna illa, quod\netiam stagnum ignis et sulphuris dictum est, corporeus ignis erit._\"\n[Translation.--\"That Gehenna, which is said to be a marsh of fire and of\nsulphur, will be a corporeal fire.\"]\n\nThe Pagans believed that, in their hell, the wicked were tortured in\ntheir bodies and in their souls, although their bodies were in the\ngrave; so the Church of Rome believed, and still believes that, in the\nhell of the Christians, the wicked are tortured in their bodies and in\ntheir souls, although their bodies are in the grave.\n\nThe Pagans believed that, in their hell, hideous furies were armed with\nwhips and other instruments of torture; so the Church of Rome believed,\nand still believes, that, in the hell of the Christians, the devils are\nhideous and armed with whips, tridents, harpoons, and other instruments\nof torture. We invite the reader to go to Catholic stores of images, and\nto see the representation of devils with tails, horns, and armed with\ninstruments of torture.\n\nThe Pagans believed that, in their hell, the wicked were whipped and\ntortured in various cruel manners by the furies, though their bodies\nwere in the grave; so the Church of Rome believed, and still believes,\nthat, in the hell of the Christians, the wicked are whipped and\ntortured in various cruel manners by the devils, though their bodies\nare in the grave. The Pagans believed that, in their hell, the wicked\ndragged heavy chains; so the Church of Rome believed, and still\nbelieves, that, in the hell of the Christians, the wicked drag heavy\nchains. The Pagans believed that, in their hell, there were two\nprincipal abodes, the one expiatory, in which the common wicked were\ndetained and tortured, until they had expiated their faults, and been\npurified enough to be admitted in the Elysium; and the other, the\nvastest, the darkest, and the deepest cavern, where great criminals were\nburnt and excruciated endlessly, and without any hope of cessation or\nrelief in their torments; so the Church of Rome believed, and still\nbelieves, that in the hell of the Christians, there are two principal\nabodes, the one, Purgatory, where the common wicked, namely, those\nguilty of venial sins, are tortured and burnt in a material fire, until\nthey have expiated their faults, and been purified enough to be\npermitted to crave St. Peter to open to them the gate of Paradise, and\nthe other the vastest, the darkest, and the deepest profundity, where\nthe heretics, the schismatics, those who eat meat on Friday, do not pay\nthe tithe to the priests, or who disobey kindred laws of the Church, are\nplunged, bodies and souls, (though their bodies are in the grave,) into\na devouring fire, and where they are excruciated endlessly, without any\nhope of cessation or relief in their torments.\n\nThe Pagans believed that, in the expiatory abode of their hell, there\nwere many different degrees of tortures; so the Church of Rome believed,\nand still believes, that, in the Purgatory of the hell of the\nChristians, there are many different degrees of tortures. The Pagans\nbelieved that supplications could relieve and free from their tortures,\nthe common wicked detained in the expiatory abode of their hell; so the\nChurch of Rome believed, and still believes, that, in the Purgatory of\nthe hell of the Christians, the common wicked, namely, those guilty of\nvenial sins, can be relieved in their torments, and be freed from them\nby supplications; hence the incalculable sums of money paid to the\npriests, to say masses for the deliverance of those wicked; hence the\ncountless splendid churches, the vast number of monasteries, convents,\nnunneries, abbeys, and other costly edifices, founded in behalf of those\nwicked.\n\nThe Pagans believed that there were an innumerable quantity of different\ndegrees of tortures in the second principal abode of their hell; so the\nChurch of Rome believed, and still believes, that, in the second\nprincipal abode of the hell of the Christians, there is an innumerable\nquantity of different degrees of tortures. The Pagans believed that, in\ntheir hell, the wicked condemned to endless misery, would, mingle with\ntheir yells of anguish, torment, and despair, vociferations,\nmaledictions, and curses, against the gods, and against themselves; so\nthe Church of Rome believed, and still believes, that, in the hell of\nthe Christians, the wicked, condemned to endless misery, will mingle\nwith their yells of anguish, torment, and despair, vociferations,\nmaledictions, and curses against God, and against themselves; that they\nwill exclaim, _Montes cadite super nos!_--Mountains fall upon us! The\nPagans believed that, in their hell, the wicked condemned to endless\nmisery will vainly endeavor to kill and annihilate themselves; so the\nChurch of Rome believed, and still believes, that the wicked condemned\nto endless misery, will vainly attempt to put an end to their miserable\nexistence.\n\nTherefore there is a most striking similarity, or rather identity,\nbetween the hell of the Pagans, and the hell of the Church of Rome.\n\nTherefore, since as proved above,\n\n1st, The Church of Rome was the first Church which introduced the dogma\nof endless hell in the body of Christians;\n\n2d, Since, as proved above, the Church of Rome did not originate the\ndogma of endless hell from the New Testament;\n\n3d, Since, as proved above, the Church of Rome did not borrow from the\nJews, or from their Holy Writs, the dogma of endless hell;\n\n4th, Since, as proved above, the Church of Rome, at the imitation of the\nPagans, established, towards the beginning of the third century,\nmysteries, many of the ceremonies, rites and doctrines thereof were\nalike to those ceremonies, rites and doctrines, of the mysteries of the\nPagans;\n\n5th, Since, as proved above, there is a most striking similarity, or\nrather identity, between the hell of the Pagans, and the hell of the\nChurch of Rome,\n\nWe legitimately draw this important conclusion:\n\nTherefore the Church of Rome borrowed from the Pagans the dogma of\nendless hell.\n\nWhen the Protestants, now self-called Orthodox Churches, left the Church\nof Rome, in the sixteenth century, they cut off many of the appendices\nand concomitant particularities of the dogma of endless hell; but they\npreserved, and even in our days profess to believe, the main features of\nthis dogma, namely, that in hell there is sulphur, brimstone, and fire;\nthat in hell there are devils; that in hell there are many degrees of\ntorments; that in hell the wicked are constantly burning in fire without\nconsuming, and are constantly tortured by the devils without any relief;\nthat hell shall exist forever and evermore, as long as endless eternity\nshall endure; and that the torments of the wicked in hell shall no more\nend than hell itself.\n\nThat the Protestants, now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches,\nborrowed from the Church of Rome, in the sixteenth century, the dogma of\nendless hell; and that they preserved the above belief in regard to\nendless hell, is proved by the unanimous testimony of modern historians\nand of chroniclers. That they, now-a-days, profess the above belief in\nregard to endless hell, is a fact which we can daily, and particularly\nevery Sunday, in all cities, towns, and villages of this country, and of\nall Protestant countries, verify with our own eyes in their writings,\nand with our own ears in their temples.\n\nNow we draw our general conclusions:\n\n1st, Therefore the Church of Rome borrowed from the Pagans the dogma of\nendless hell.\n\n2d, Therefore the now self-called Orthodox Protestant, or Christian\nChurches, borrowed from the Church of Rome the dogma of endless hell.\n\nConclusion of the chapter:\n\n_Therefore the Partialist doctrine of endless hell is of Pagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A FIRST JUDGMENT, BY JESUS CHRIST,\nIMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SEPARATION OF THE SOUL FROM THE BODY.\n\n\nIT will be evident that the origin of the doctrine of a first judgment,\nby Jesus Christ, immediately after the separation of the soul from the\nbody, is Pagan, if it can be proved, 1st, That the Pagans believed in a\nfirst judgment, by a god, immediately after the separation of the soul\nfrom the body; 2d, That the particulars of this first judgment, believed\nin by the Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity\nwith the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans;\nand 3d, That the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century,\ntransmitted to the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches this\ndoctrine of a first judgment, which they accepted full and entire, did\nnot hold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ nor from the Jews.\n\nBut it can be proved, 1st, That the Pagans believed in a first judgment,\nby a god, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body;\n2d, That the particulars of this first judgment, believed in by the\nPartialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity with the\nparticulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans; and 3d,\nthat the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century transmitted to\nthe now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches this doctrine of a first\njudgment, which they accepted full and entire, did not hold it from the\nApostles of Jesus Christ nor from the Jews.\n\n1st, It can be proved that the Pagans believed in a first judgment, by a\ngod, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body.\n\nWe extract the following from the History of the Egyptians, by Rollin.\nArticle--Funerals: \"Before the dead were admitted in the sacred asylum\nof the tomb, they underwent a solemn judgment. And this circumstance of\nthe funerals among the Egyptians, is one of the most remarkable things\nin the ancient history. It is a consolation to us to leave behind us,\nwhen we die, a name honored among men; and of all blessings it is the\nonly one of which we cannot be deprived by death. But in Egypt, it was\nnot permitted to indistinctly praise the dead; this honor was conferred\nonly after a favorable public judgment. The assembly of the judges was\nheld on the other side of a lake, which they crossed on a bark. He who\nconducted the bark was called, in the Egyptian tongue, _Charon_; and it\nis from this name that the Greeks, instructed by Orpheus, who had been\nin Egypt, had invented the fable of the bark of _Charon_.\n\n\"When a man died he was brought to judgment. The public accuser was\nheard. If he proved that the conduct of the dead had been wicked, his\nmemory was stigmatized, and he was deprived of the honor of funerals.\nThe people admired the power of the laws, which extended even beyond\ndeath; and everybody, influenced by the example of others, was afraid to\ndishonor his family, and his own memory. If the dead was not convicted\nof any crime, he was honorably buried. What was the most astonishing in\nthis judgment of the dead was that royalty itself was not spared. The\nkings were not judged during their life, the public good demanded it;\nbut they were not exempted from the after death's judgment, and several\nof them were deprived of honorable funerals. This custom passed among\nthe Israelites. We read in the Old Testament that wicked kings were not\nburied in the tombs of their fathers. Thus kings learned, that, if their\nmajesty places them above the judgments of men, it is so no longer when\ndeath has placed them on the same level with their fellow-men.\n\n\"When the judgment, which had been pronounced, was favorable to the\ndead, they proceeded to the ceremony of the burial. A panegyric was\ndelivered in which nothing was said of his birth, because every Egyptian\nwas considered to be a noble man. His personal virtues only were\npraised. Then the whole assembly supplicated the gods to welcome him in\nthe assembly of the virtuous dead, and to associate him to their\neternal bliss.\"\n\nThis judgment gave birth to the fable of a judgment rendered by the\ngods, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body. Charon\nwas represented carrying the souls of the dead on board his bark, across\nthe Styx river, to be judged by the great judge, Minos. This became a\ngeneral belief among the Pagans, not only in Egypt, but in Greece, in\nItaly, and in nearly all the Oriental countries; as proved by the\nunanimous consent of the mythological authors. This belief has been\nperpetuated among the Pagans of those countries. Even in our days, the\nIndians believe in this judgment, and call the great judge, Zomo, or\naccording to others, Jamen. The Japanese, followers of Buda, also\nbelieve in this judgment; and they call the great judge, Zomo. Likewise\nthe Lamas believe in this judgment, and call the great judge Erlik-kan.\n\nTherefore the Pagans believed in a first judgment, by a god, immediately\nafter the separation of the soul from the body.\n\n2d. It can be proved that the particulars of this first judgment,\nbelieved in by the Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking\nsimilarity with the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by\nthe Pagans:\n\nThe Pagans believed that their great judge, Minos, sat on a throne, to\njudge the souls immediately after their separation from the bodies that\nthey animated; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that Jesus\nChrist sits on a throne, to judge the souls, immediately after their\nseparation from the bodies that they animated. The Pagans believed that,\nnear to Minos' throne, and at his right hand, good geniuses, or spirits,\nstood; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that, near to Jesus\nChrist's throne, and at his right hand, good angels stand. The Pagans\nbelieved that, near to Minos' throne, and at his left hand, furies\nstood; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that, near to Jesus\nChrist's throne, and at his left hand, devils stand.\n\nThe Pagans believed that the souls were driven to the redoubtable\ntribunal of Minos by their respective guardian angel, who had\naccompanied them during their whole life on earth; had watched day and\nnight over their conduct; and had kept a record of all they had done,\nright or wrong; so the Church of Rome, and some other Partialist\nChristian Churches, believe that the souls are driven to the redoubtable\ntribunal of Jesus Christ by their respective guardian angel, who has\naccompanied them during their whole life on earth; has watched day and\nnight over their conduct, and has kept a record of all they have done,\nright or wrong. The Pagans believed that Minos based his judgments on\nthe contents of two books, the one called book of life, and the other\nbook of death; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that Jesus\nChrist bases his judgments on the contents of two books; the one called\nbook of life, and the other book of death. The Pagans believed that the\nsouls who had obtained from Minos a favorable sentence, were led to the\nElysium by their respective guardian angel; and that those who had been\ncondemned to the Tartarus, were apprehended by the furies, and hurled\ninto it; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that the souls who\nobtain from Jesus Christ a favorable sentence, are led to Paradise by\ntheir respective guardian angel; or, [in the opinion of those of the\nPartialist Christian Churches, which do not believe in a guardian angel]\nby other angels.\n\nConsequently the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the\nPartialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity with the\nparticulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans.\n\n3d. It can be proved that the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth\ncentury, transmitted to the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches\nthe doctrine of a first judgment, which they accepted full and entire,\ndid not hold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ, nor from the Jews:--\n\nThe Church of Rome does not hold the doctrine of a first judgment from\nthe apostles of Jesus Christ, for this doctrine implies a\nblasphemy--whether Jesus Christ be considered as being God himself--and\nall the Partialist Christian Churches hold that he is God himself--and\nwhether Jesus Christ be considered as being only the Son of God. But\nthe doctrine of a first judgment implies a blasphemy, whether Jesus\nChrist be considered as being God himself, and whether he be considered\nas being only the Son of God.\n\nFirst, it implies a blasphemy, if Jesus Christ is considered as being\nGod himself. Jesus Christ, being God himself, would necessarily know all\nthe good and bad actions done by the souls, while they animate their\nrespective bodies on earth, in consequence it is an insult to his\nattribute of wisdom, and thereby a blasphemy, to say that the guardian\nangels of the souls, as they bring them to his tribunal, inform him of\ntheir good and bad actions, which they have recorded. Even in the case\nof those of the Partialist Christian Churches, which reject the\ncircumstance of the guardian angels, the doctrine of a first judgment\nimplies an insult to the wisdom of Jesus Christ, (in their opinion God\nhimself), and thereby a blasphemy; for a judgment supposes a trial; a\ntrial supposes an investigation; an investigation supposes the ignorance\nof the deeds to be pronounced upon, and the supposition that God has not\na perfect knowledge of those deeds, is an insult to his wisdom, and\nthereby is a blasphemy.\n\nSecond, The doctrine of a first judgment implies a blasphemy, if Jesus\nChrist is considered as being only the Son of God. If God had vested\nJesus Christ with the power of discerning rewards and punishments to the\nsouls after death, he would have given him a knowledge of the good and\nbad actions of the souls. But the doctrine of a first judgment supposes\nthat Jesus Christ, the Son of God, would come to this knowledge only\nthrough the means of a trial, which supposition is an insult to the\nwisdom of God, and thereby a blasphemy.\n\nThen the doctrine of a first judgment implies a blasphemy, whether Jesus\nChrist be considered as being God himself, and whether Jesus Christ be\nconsidered as being only the Son of God.\n\nTherefore the Church of Rome does not hold the doctrine of a first\njudgment from the apostles of Jesus Christ.\n\nGeneral conclusions:--\n\nIt has been proved in this chapter, 1st, That the Pagans believed in a\nfirst judgment, by a god, immediately after the separation of the soul\nfrom the body; 2d, That the particulars of this first judgment, believed\nin by the Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity\nwith the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans;\nand, 3d, That the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century,\ntransmitted to the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches this\ndoctrine of a first judgment, which they accepted full and entire, did\nnot hold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ; neither did she hold it\nfrom the Jews; for not a single passage can be traced out in the Old\nTestament, or in Josephus, referring to a first judgment.\n\n_Therefore the origin of the doctrine of a first judgment, by Jesus\nChrist, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body, is\nPagan._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE BODY.\n\n\nIF it is proved, 1st, That in the first centuries of the Christian era,\nand before the coming of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of the resurrection\nof the body was held by a large number of Pagans; 2d, That the Church of\nRome which, in the sixteenth century, transmitted it to the now\nself-called Orthodox Christian Churches, did not hold it either from the\napostles of Jesus Christ, or from the Jews, it will remain evident that\nthe Church of Rome borrowed it from the Pagans, and consequently that\nits origin is Pagan.\n\nBut it can be proved, 1st, That in the first centuries of the Christian\nera, and before the coming of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body was held by a large number of Pagans; 2d, That\nthe Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century, transmitted it to\nthe now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches, did not hold it from\nthe apostles of Jesus Christ; and, 3d, That she did not hold it from the\nJews.\n\n1st. It can be proved that in the first centuries of the Christian era,\nand before the coming of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of the resurrection\nof the body was held by a large number of Pagans:\n\nThe doctrine of the resurrection of the body had been taught by\nZoroaster. All the Persians believed it; and even now the Parsis, or\nfollowers of the religion of Zoroaster, who live in Turkey and in\nPersia, hold it. It was also one of the dogmas of the Chaldeans, and of\nmany other oriental countries. In India the Pagans, now-a-days, believe\nthat their bodies will come again to life, and it is owing to this\nbelief, the Roman Catholic priest Bergier says, that the wives throw\nthemselves on the same wood piles on which lay the dead bodies of their\nhusbands, to be burnt alive, and to come again to life with them. This\nbelief and practice are immemorial in India. Interesting particulars in\nregard to the doctrine of the resurrection believed by ancient nations,\ncan be read in the French work, M\u00e9moires de l'Acad\u00e9mie des Inscriptions,\ntome 69, pages 270, and following; in the work of Hyde, on the Religion\nof the Persians; and also in the writings of Plutarch, article Isis and\nOsiris.\n\nAccording to the testimony of Diodore, and of Herodote, the Egyptians\nbelieved in Metempsychosis; and it was an immemorial doctrine among\nthem. Also, many of them believed that their bodies would come again to\nlife, after a sojourn of one thousand years in the grave. The Sybilline\nverses treat of the resurrection of the body. Much has been written\nabout it by Bocchus, in Solin, chap. 8; and by Lactance, book 7, chap.\n29, book 4, chap. 15, 18, and 19. The Stoicians, who were the most\nlearned philosophers of antiquity, and in the three centuries which\npreceded the coming of Jesus Christ, and also in the three that\nfollowed, believed in Metempsychosis; however, a portion of their school\nbelieved in the resurrection of the body. Of this we are informed by\nSeneca, Epist. 40; by Laerta, book 7; and by Plutarch, writing on the\nResignation of the Stoicians.\n\nPliny, deriding Democrite, informs us that this philosopher believed in\nthe resurrection of the body; see book 7, chap. 45, where he says: \"Vain\nis the promise made by Democrite that we will live again.\" The doctrine\nof the resurrection of the body is taught in these verses of Phocylides\nabout the remains of the dead:\n\n  \"[Greek: Ou kalon harmoni\u00ean analyemen anthr\u00f4poio;\n           Kai tacha d' ek gai\u00eas elpizomen es phaos elthein\n           Leipsan' apoichomen\u00f4n opiso te theoi telethontai.]\"\n\nTranslation:--\"It is impious to disperse the remains of man; for the\nashes and the bones of the dead will come again to light, and will\nbecome similar to the gods.\"\n\nVirgil speaks of the resurrection of the body, though in an obscure\nmanner, in the sixth book of his poem Eneida.\n\nTherefore in the first centuries of the Christian era, and before the\ncoming of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of the resurrection of the body was\nheld by a large number of Pagans.\n\n2d. It can be proved that the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth\ncentury, transmitted the doctrine of the resurrection of the body to the\nnow self-called Orthodox Christian Churches, did not hold it from the\napostles of Jesus Christ:--\n\nIt will be evident that the Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine of\nthe resurrection of the body from the apostles of Jesus Christ, if it\ncan be proved, 1st, That the Fathers of the first centuries did not\nagree on this doctrine; 2d, That nearly all the Christian denominations\nof the first two centuries, and the majority, to say the least, of those\nof the century following, disbelieved it; and, 3d, That this doctrine is\nirrational.\n\nBut it can be proved, 1st, That the Fathers of the first centuries did\nnot agree about the doctrine of the resurrection of the body; 2d, That\nnearly all the Christian denominations of the first two centuries, and\nthe majority, to say the least, of the century following, disbelieved\nit; and, 3d, That this doctrine is irrational.\n\n1st. It can be proved that the Fathers of the first centuries did not\nagree about the doctrine of the resurrection of the body.\n\nTatian believed in Metempsychosis, but not in the resurrection of the\nbody. St. Gregory of Nysse denied that there was anything corporeal in\nthe person of Jesus Christ, since the time he ascended to the heavens.\nOrigen admitted the resurrection of the bodies, but not that of the\nflesh. Synesius, bishop of Ptolema\u00efda, in his Series of Epistles,\ndeclares that the doctrine of the resurrection of the body is a mystery,\nwhose solution ought to be kept secret, and considered as sacred: that\nit is well to teach it to the people; and that he, the bishop, would\npublicly profess and preach this doctrine, though it is not his personal\nbelief. If the reader desires to find lengthier particulars, about the\ndivergency of the opinions of the Fathers concerning the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body, we refer him to the work of Beausobre, headed,\nHistory of Manicheanism, tome 2, book 8, chap. 5, No. 3, and following.\n\nTherefore the Fathers of the first centuries did not agree about the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the body.\n\n2d. It can be proved that nearly all the Christian sects, or\ndenominations, of the first two centuries, and the majority, to say the\nleast, of those of the century following, disbelieved the doctrine of\nthe resurrection of the body:----\n\nAccording to the unanimous testimony of the Roman Catholic authors\nthemselves, Bergier, Feller, Fleury, etc., etc., the following Christian\nsects of the first three centuries held the dogma of Metempsychosis: The\nBasilidians, the Bardesanists, the Barules, the Barborians, the\nValentinians, the Marcionites, the Marcosians, the Theodotians, the\nArtemonians, the Carpocratians, the Docetes, the Tatianists, the\nApellites, the Montanists, the Artotyrites, the Severians, the Ascites,\nthe Ascodrutes, the Ophites, the Cainites, the Sethians, the\nHermogenians, the Hermians, the Valesians, the Hieracites, the\nSamosatians, and the Manicheans: this latter sect, Catholic authors say,\nwere subdivided into more than sixty sects, which professed, each one of\nthem, to believe in Metempsychosis. The same authors add, that many of\nthe other sects named above denied the resurrection of the body. Though\nthey do not say so of all, we may safely affirm that every one of the\nabove named Christian sects disbelieved the doctrine of the resurrection\nof the body. This we demonstrate thus:--\n\nAccording to the doctrine of Metempsychosis, when, at death, a soul\nseparates from the body, she passes into another body to animate it; and\nto thus expiate, by many and successive transmigrations, the faults she\nhas committed in an anterior existence, and so continually. But the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the body teaches that the same soul\nwhich animated it in its prior existence, shall animate it anew when it\nwill come again to life. How can then this same soul animate this same\nbody, and at the same time the thousands of other human bodies, which\nshe had also animated in her various transmigrations? Therefore the\nbelief of the doctrine of Metempsychosis necessarily implies a disbelief\nof the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. Consequently, although\nthe Roman Catholic authors do not positively state that all the above\nnamed Christian sects disbelieved the doctrine of the resurrection of\nthe body, we may safely affirm, from the fact that they held the\ndoctrine of Metempsychosis, that they disbelieved the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body.\n\nTherefore nearly all the Christian sects, or denominations, of the first\ntwo centuries, and the majority, to say the least, of those of the\ncentury following, disbelieved the doctrine of the resurrection of the\nbody.\n\n3d. It can be proved that the doctrine of the resurrection of the body\nis irrational.\n\nAll the reasons which have been brought forth by St. Cyrille, bishop of\nJerusalem, in his Catechism, page 18; by St. Gregory of Nysse, in his\noratio on the Resurrection of the Flesh; by St. Augustine, in his City\nof God, book 20; by St. Chrysostome, in his homily on the Resurrection\nof the Flesh; by Tertullian, in his treatise on the Resurrection of the\nFlesh; by St. Gregory, the Pope, in his Fourth Dialogue; by St.\nAmbrosius, in his sermon on the Faith of the Resurrection of the Flesh;\nand by St. Epiphane, Ancyrot, page 38, can be summed up as follows:--\n\nGod himself has formed with his own hands man's body; he has animated it\nwith the breath of his own mouth, and has placed within it a soul made\nto his likeness. The flesh of the Christian is, in some manner,\nassociated to all the functions of its soul, and is the instrument of\nall the graces of God. It is the body that is washed by baptism to\npurify the soul, it is the body that in order to feed the soul receives\nthe Eucharist; it is the body that is immolated to God by\nmortifications, by fasts, by vigils, by virginity, and by martyrdom.\nThus St. Paul reminds that our bodies are the members of Jesus Christ,\nand the temples of the Holy Spirit. Would God leave in the grave forever\nthe work of his own hands, the master-piece of his might, the depository\nof his breath, the king of the other bodies, the canal of his graces,\nand the victim of his worship?\n\nIf God has condemned the body to death as a punishment for sin, Jesus\nChrist came to save all that was lost. Without this complete reparation,\nwe would not know how far the goodness, the mercy, and the parental\ntenderness of our God, extend. The flesh of man, restored by incarnation\nto its former dignity, ought to come again to life, as well as that of\nJesus Christ. Is not he who created the flesh mighty enough to bring it\nagain to life? Nothing entirely perishes in nature: forms change, but\nall renews itself, and seems to grow young again; God has stamped\nimmortality upon all his works. Night follows the day, eclipsed stars\nappear anew; the spring makes us forget the winter; plants grow again,\nand resume their hues and perfumes; and several animals which seem to\ndie receive a new life. Thus, by the lessons of nature, God has prepared\nthe lessons of the revelation; and he has shown us the image of the\nresurrection, before showing us its reality.\n\nGod's justice demands the resurrection of our body. God ought to judge,\nto reward, or to punish the whole man. The body is the instrument of\nthe soul for good or for evil; even the thoughts of the soul are\nreflected on man's face. The soul cannot experience pleasure or pain\nwithout the co-participation of the body, and the principal exercise of\nvirtue consists in the repression of the desires of the flesh. Then it\nis just that the soul of the wicked be tormented, by being reunited to\nthe same body which has been the instrument of her crimes; and that the\nsoul of the saints be rewarded, by her eternal reunion to a body which\nhas been the instrument of her merits.\n\nAll these reasons can be generalized thus:\n\nMan's body has been the instrument of our soul to do good or evil. Then\nthe justice of God requires that man's body come again to life, to\nshare, with its soul, eternal reward, or eternal punishment.\n\nWe answer: Since man's body is but the instrument of our soul to do good\nor evil, his body is capable neither of merit nor of demerit. But, since\nman's body is capable neither of merit nor of demerit, it is capable\nneither of reward nor of punishment. Therefore the justice of God does\nnot require that man's body come again to life, to share, with its soul,\neternal reward or eternal punishment.\n\nMore, it is irrational that the same particles of matter be, at the same\ntime, in many places. But the doctrine of the resurrection of the body\nsupposes that the same particles of matter will be, at the same time,\nin many places. This we prove:\n\nThe cannibals live upon man's flesh; and they assimilate to their own\nbodies the particles of flesh which compose the bodies of the men they\ndevour. Consequently, at the resurrection of the bodies, these particles\nof flesh will compose the bodies of the cannibals, and, at the same\ntime, the bodies of the men they have devoured. Therefore, the doctrine\nof the resurrection of the body supposes, that the same particles of\nmatter will be, at the same time, in many places.\n\nBesides, when, after death, man's body putrefies, the particles of\nflesh, of which it is composed, dissolve into gases, which the plants\nconvert to their own nature. Those vegetables and fruits, thousands of\nmen eat; and thus they assimilate to themselves those same particles,\nwhich formerly composed the bodies of other men. Consequently, at the\nresurrection of the bodies, those particles will compose a multitude of\nbodies. Therefore, the doctrine of the resurrection of the body\nsupposes, that the same particles of matter will be, at the same time,\nin many places.\n\nThen the doctrine of the resurrection of the body is irrational.\n\n_Objection._--Jesus Christ came again to life with a spiritual body.\nThen these proofs do not demonstrate that the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body is irrational.\n\n_Answer._--Jesus Christ came again to life with a spiritual body; this\nwe concede. Then these proofs do not demonstrate that the doctrine of\nthe resurrection of the body is irrational. This we deny; for it is an\narticle of faith in the Church of Rome; and it is nearly unanimously\nbelieved by all the other Partialist Churches, that the bodies of the\nrighteous _alone_ will be spiritual bodies; and that the bodies of the\nwicked will be after the resurrection, as they were while on earth.\nConsequently, it does not follow, from the fact that Jesus Christ came\nagain to life with a spiritual body, that the above proofs do not\ndemonstrate that the doctrine of the resurrection of the body is\nirrational.\n\n_Remark._--The Partialists quote passages of the Scriptures to prove the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the body. We shall not discuss the true\nmeaning of those passages; for such a discussion does not enter in the\nplan of this work, which is exclusively intended to prove historically\nthe true origin of the Partialist doctrines. However, in regard to those\ntexts we say:\n\nIt would be a blasphemy against God to suppose that the Scriptures teach\nus an irrational doctrine. But, as demonstrated above, the doctrine of\nthe resurrection of the body is irrational. Then the Scriptures do not\nteach it. Then those texts ought not to be understood of the\nresurrection of the body.\n\n3d. It can be proved that the Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine\nof the resurrection of the body from the Jews.\n\nThe Church of Rome did not hold from the Jews the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body, if, 1st, the Roman Catholic theologians do not\nhold that this doctrine is taught in the Old Testament; 2d, If this\ndoctrine was traditional only among the illiterate portion of the Jewish\nnation; and, 3d, If this tradition was not of an ancient and national\norigin.\n\nBut, 1st, The Roman Catholic theologians do not hold that the doctrine\nof the resurrection of the body is taught in the Old Testament; 2d, This\ndoctrine was traditional only among the illiterate portion of the Jewish\nnation; and, 3d, This tradition was not of an ancient and national\norigin.\n\n1st, The Roman Catholic theologians do not hold that the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body is taught in the Old Testament.\n\nThe Roman Catholic theologians do not pretend that the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body is taught in the Old Testament; they only\nassert that it may be that it is taught therein. Bergier, who is their\norgan, and whose works, written in the last century, were, and still now\nare, classical among the priests, writes--Article, Resurrection of the\nBody, page 159:--\"We presume that Job, Daniel, and the seven Maccabean\nbrothers, had some knowledge of this essential dogma.\" Consequently the\nRoman Catholic theologians do not hold that the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body is taught in the Old Testament.\n\n2d, The doctrine of the resurrection of the body was traditional only\namong the illiterate portion of the Jewish nation.\n\nJosephus states, in his Antiq. Jud., book 18, ch. 2; and in his De Bello\nJudaico, book 2, ch. 7, al. ch. 12, that the Sadducees were the literate\nportion of the Jewish people; that they held nearly all the public\noffices; that they were well educated, courteous, and that they avoided\npublic discussions and controversies on the subject of religion. He\nstates also that they disbelieved the doctrine of the resurrection of\nthe body. Therefore the doctrine of the resurrection of the body was\ntraditional only among the illiterate portion of the Jewish nation.\n\n3d, The tradition of the doctrine of the resurrection of the body was\nnot of an ancient and national origin.\n\nIn the year 587 before the Christian era, in the second year of the\nreign of Sedecias, Jerusalem was besieged, taken, destroyed; Sedecias\nand the whole nation were led captives to Babylon. There they were\ndetained seventy years, until Cyrus permitted them to return to their\nown country. During those seventy years of captivity, the Jewish people\nborrowed from the Pagans many religious practices, ceremonies, rites,\nand doctrines--this is the testimony of Josephus--and among them the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the body, which, as has been proved\nbefore, was believed by a large number of Pagans. When the people\nreturned from Babylon to Jerusalem a portion of them preserved some of\nthose religious practices, ceremonies, rites, and doctrines, and\nrejected the others. Those which they preserved they transmitted to\ntheir posterity, and among them was the doctrine of the resurrection of\nthe body. Therefore the tradition of the doctrine of the resurrection of\nthe body was not of an ancient and national origin.\n\nWe have proved, 1st, That the Roman Catholic theologians do not hold\nthat the doctrine of the resurrection of the body is taught in the Old\nTestament; 2d, That this doctrine was traditional only among the\nilliterate portion of the Jewish nation; and, 3d, That this tradition\nwas not of an ancient and national origin.\n\nTherefore, 3d, The Church of Rome did not hold from the Jews the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the body.\n\nWe come now to the general conclusions of this chapter.\n\nIt has been proved, 1st, that in the first centuries of the Christian\nera, and before the coming of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of the\nresurrection of the body was held by a large number of Pagans; 2d, That\nthe Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century, transmitted it to\nthe now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches, did not hold it either\nfrom the Apostles of Jesus Christ or from the Jews.\n\nTherefore the Church of Rome borrowed from the Pagans the doctrine of\nthe resurrection of the body.\n\n_Therefore the origin of the doctrine of the resurrection of the body is\nPagan._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A GENERAL JUDGMENT AT THE END OF THE\nWORLD.\n\n\nTHE Church of Rome and the other Partialist Christian Churches profess\nto believe that, at the end of the world, a general judgment of all the\nthen living, and of all the dead, shall take place. When, in the\nsixteenth century, the great Protestant scission took place, the new\nChurches formed preserved this doctrine of the Church of Rome, with only\naccessory modifications; and since that time they have professed it;\neven now-a-days they cling to it. We shall prove in this chapter that\nthe origin of this doctrine is Pagan.\n\nThe origin of the doctrine of a general judgment of all the then living\nand of all the dead, which shall take place at the end of the world, is\nPagan, 1st, If the Pagans held the doctrine of a general judgment of all\nthe then living and of all the dead, which shall take place at the end\nof the world; 2d, If there is a striking similarity between the\nparticulars of the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the\nPagans, and the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the Church\nof Rome, and by the other Partialist Christian Churches; 3d, If the\nChurch of Rome did not hold the doctrine of a general judgment from the\napostles of Jesus Christ; and, 4th, If the Church of Rome did not hold\nthis doctrine from the Jews.\n\nBut, 1st, The Pagans held the doctrine of a general judgment of all the\nthen living and of all the dead, which shall take place at the end of\nthe world; 2d, There is a striking similarity between the\nparticularities of the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the\nPagans, and the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the Church of\nRome; 3d, The Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine of a general\njudgment from the apostles of Jesus Christ; and, 4th, The Church of Rome\ndid not hold this doctrine from the Jews.\n\nThese four heads of questions we are to successively prove.\n\n1st, We prove that the Pagans held the doctrine of a general judgment of\nall the then living and of all the dead, which shall take place at the\nend of the world.\n\nPlato, and other philosophers and writers of the Pagans, taught that a\nsolemn general judgment of the dead was to decide their fate. Minos sat\non a throne, and shook the fatal urn. By his side were the avenging\nfuries, and a host of evil spirits, executioners of the sentences of\nMinos. Eacus, Rhadamante, and Triptolem, were his assistant judges.\n\nEven now the Indians believe that Zomo will judge the world; so the\nJapanese. The Lamas ascribe this power to Erlik-kan.\n\nAt the sound of a trumpet the earth was to deliver up her dead to be\njudged. It was to be destroyed by fire after a great commotion of the\ncelestial spheres, and fears of the then living mortals.\n\nThe souls, at the sound of a trumpet, assembled in a vast meadow,\nadorned with asphodels, where Minos sat on his throne. The dead were led\nto his redoubtable tribunal by their respective guardian angels, who had\naccompanied them during their whole life; watched over their conduct;\nand had kept a record of all they had done, right or wrong. This meadow,\nwhere the dead were to be judged, was called the field of truth, because\nthere the whole truth about the past doings of the dead was made known,\nand no crime could escape the knowledge and justice of the great judge.\nThe dead, once assembled, were divided into three classes. The first\nclass was composed of those who had been virtuous on earth: they were\nthe smallest number. The second class was composed of those who were\nguilty of great crimes; and the third class, of those who had been\nneither virtuous nor great criminals.\n\nThis triple division, which we naturally find in society, was taught by\nPlato in his Ph\u00e6do, a work in which, writing about the judgment of the\ndead, he divides them as said before. This same division we also find\nin Plutarch, treating the same subject, and disserting, in his answer to\nthe Epicureans, about the state of the dead to be judged. Minos used\nthree books in judging the dead; the first was called book of life, it\nwas used for the righteous: the second was called book of death; it was\nused for the great criminals: the third book was used for those who had\nbeen neither righteous nor great criminals. The judge pronounced the\nsentence only after the severest examination of the virtues and crimes\nof every one of the dead; and he affixed a seal on their forehead as he\njudged them.\n\nSocial laws and duties were the particular subjects of his judgments. He\namply rewarded social virtues, and severely punished social vices. Among\nthe Greeks and the Romans, this great priestly fiction was intended for\nthe maintenance of laws; for stimulating patriotism, national and social\nvirtues by the hope of the rewards of the Elysium; and also to check\ncrime and vice in society, by the fear of terrible sufferings in the\nTartarus. Were sentenced to the Tartarus all those who had conspired\nagainst the State, or fostered a conspiration; those who had been\nbribed; those who had delivered up a city to the enemy; those who had\nprovided the foes of the country with weapons, vessels, provisions,\netc.; those who had contrived to enslave their fellow-citizens, or had\ntyrannized over them, etc. This last dogma had been added to the others\nby the free States.\n\nAfterwards, philosophy turned these fictions against despotism itself,\nwhich had invented them. Plato placed in the Tartarus ferocious tyrants,\nsuch as Ardiee of Pamphylia, who had murdered his brother, his father,\nand had committed many other crimes. The soul preserved after death all\nher stains, and was sentenced accordingly. Plato represented the souls\nof the kings, and of other rulers, as being the most stained. Tantalus,\nTityus, and Sisiphus, who had been kings, were the greatest criminals,\nand endured in the Tartarus the most excruciating pains. However, kings\ndid not believe those fictions, and were not restrained from oppressing\nthe people.\n\nVirgil enumerates the principal crimes which divine justice punished in\nthe Tartarus. He represents, here, a brother who from hatred has slain\nhis brother; a son who has ill-treated his father; a man who has\ndeceived his patrons; an avaricious man, an egotist, and a selfish man;\nthere, are seen an adulterer, an unfaithful servant, and a citizen who\neither waged war against his fellow citizens, or sold his country for\ngold, or was bribed for the enactment of unjust laws. Farther are seen\nan incestuous father, and wives who have murdered their husbands.\n\nIt is to be remarked that the authors, or originators of these fictions,\npronounced pains only against crimes which might have injured society,\nwhose progress and happiness was one of the great ends of the initiation\nto the mysteries of Eleusis and others.\n\nIn the Tartarus Minos punished the same crimes which he would have\npunished on earth according to the wise laws of the Cretenses, supposing\nthat he had in reality reigned over them. If crimes against religion\nwere to be punished in the Tartarus, it was because religion, being\nconsidered as a duty, and as the principal bond of society, it\nnecessarily followed that irreligion was to be one of the greatest\ncrimes, which was to be avenged by the gods. Hence the people were\ntaught that the great crime of many of the famous criminals, tortured in\nthe Tartarus, was their disrespect for the mysteries of Eleusis; that\nthe great crime of Salmone was to have tried to imitate Jove's thunder;\nand that the great crime of Ixion, of Orion, and of Tityus, was to have\nviolated goddesses.\n\nThe fiction of the Elysium was directed to the same moral and political\naim. Virgil places in the Elysium the heroes who laid down their lives\nfor the defense of their country; also the inventors of arts, and all\nthose who have been useful to their fellow men, and have a title to\ntheir gratitude. It was to strengthen this idea that apotheosis was\ninstituted; hence it was taught in the mysteries that Hercules, Bacchus,\nand the Dioscores were but men, who, by their virtues and their services\nhad obtained immortality. Afterwards the Romans placed Scipio in the\nElysium. Cicero ascribed a high station in the Elysium to the true\npatriots; to the friends of justice; to good sons; to good parents; and\nto good citizens.\n\nIn the Elysium, as Plato described it, kindness and justice were\nrewarded: there the true patriot, the modest and just Aristides, had\nbeen admitted. To this divine recompense piety, eagerness in seeking for\ntruth, and love to it, were the surest titles. When the dead had been\njudged those who had been pronounced worthy of the Elysium passed to the\nright hand side, and were led to the Elysium, every one by his guardian\nangel. Those who had been sentenced to the Tartarus passed to the left\nhand side, and were dragged thereto, each one by the evil genius that\nbeguiled him while on earth. Onward they were driven, carrying on their\nback their sentence of condemnation, and the enumeration of all their\ncrimes. Those whose vices were curable were to be released after due\nexpiation and reform.\n\nAccording to Plato, the dead who have been guilty of murder, sacrilege,\nand other enormous crimes, shall be endlessly miserable in the Tartarus.\nThose whose crimes have not been so great shall be detained therein for\na year; and, at the expiration of this time they will be brought out,\nnear the marsh of Acheron, by the waters of the Cocyte, and of the\nPyriphlegeton rivers. Then they shall humbly beg pardon from those they\nhave wronged; and, if they obtain it, they shall be released; if not\nthey shall be taken back to the Tartarus on the rivers. Virgil also\nspeaks of that state of expiation and purification of the souls of the\ndead.\n\nTherefore the Pagans held the doctrine of a general judgment of all the\nthen living, and of all the dead, which shall take place at the end of\nthe world.\n\n2d. We prove that there is a striking similarity between the\nparticularities of the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the\nPagans, and the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the Church of\nRome.\n\nThe Pagans believed that, immediately before the end of the world, there\nwould be mighty and frightful signs in the heavens; and that the then\nliving mortals would be struck with terror: likewise the Church of Rome\nbelieves that, at the end of the world, the columns of the heavens will\nbe shaken; that the signs on high will be so frightful that the then\nliving men will be appalled: also there will be famine, pestilence, war\nand murders over the whole earth. The Pagans believed that, at the sound\nof a trumpet, the earth would deliver up her dead to be judged: likewise\nthe Church of Rome believes that four angels will sound a trumpet; and\nthat, when the four trumpets will resound over the earth, all the dead,\nwho had been buried either in the sea or in the earth, will come again\nto life to be judged.\n\nThe Pagans believed that geniuses would force men to the place of\njudgment: likewise the Church of Rome believes that angels will gather,\nfrom the four cardinal points of the earth, the multitude of men to the\nplace of judgment. The Pagans believed that men would be judged in a\nmeadow covered with astophels: likewise the Church of Rome believes that\nthe general judgment will take place in the valley of Josaphat. The\nPagans believed that, in the meadow, a throne would be erected, on which\nMinos, the great judge, would sit: likewise the Church of Rome believes\nthat Jesus Christ, the great judge, will descend from heaven on clouds,\nand will sit on a throne erected in the valley of Josaphat. The Pagans\nbelieved that, near to the throne of Minos, Eacus, Rhadamante and\nTriptolem, his assistant judges, and good geniuses, or spirits, would\nstand: likewise the Church of Rome believes, that, near to the throne of\nJesus Christ, good angels will stand.\n\nThe Pagans believed that, near to the throne of Minos, would stand\navenging furies, and a host of evil spirits, executioners of the\nsentences of Minos against the wicked: likewise the Church of Rome\nbelieves that there will be, at some distance from the throne of Jesus\nChrist, a host of devils, executioners of the sentences of Jesus Christ\nagainst the wicked. The Pagans believed that each man was led to the\nredoubtable tribunal of Minos by the guardian spirit, who had\naccompanied him during his whole life on earth: likewise the Church of\nRome believes that each man will be led to the redoubtable tribunal of\nJesus Christ by the guardian angel who has accompanied him during his\nwhole life on earth.\n\nThe Pagans believed that Minos used three books in his judgments: the\nfirst called book of life, for the righteous; the second called book of\ndeath, for the great criminals; and the third for those who had been\nneither righteous nor great criminals: likewise the Church of Rome\nbelieves that Jesus Christ will use two books: the one called book of\nlife, for the righteous; and the other called book of death, for the\nwicked.\n\n_Remark._--The Church of Rome does not hold that, at the general\njudgment, Jesus Christ will use the third book; but holds that, in the\nfirst judgment, he uses it for those of the dead who have been neither\nrighteous nor great criminals, and who thereby shall be sentenced to\nPurgatory, which shall finish at the end of the world. Apropos of this\nlimitation of the duration of Purgatory, we might cursorily say that\nthis restriction has been wisely made by the far-sighted ministers of\nthe Church; for as, after the general judgment, they would be no longer\non earth, they could not say masses and other prayers, for the\ndeliverance of the souls detained in Purgatory; and thus it would be\nquite useless to make the torments of Purgatory last any longer.\n\nThe Pagans believed that the guardian spirit of each man, who had\naccompanied him through life, and had kept a record of all his good and\nbad actions, would testify to Minos in his favor, or against him:\nlikewise the Church of Rome believes that the guardian angel of each\nman, who has accompanied him through life, and has kept a record of all\nhis good and bad actions, will testify to Jesus Christ in his favor, or\nagainst him. The Pagans called the meadow of the general judgment, the\nfield of the truth: likewise the Church of Rome calls the valley of\nJosaphat, the valley of the truth. The Pagans believed that the crimes\nfor which Minos was to inflict the severest punishment were those\nagainst religion, against its hierophants, and against other ministers:\nlikewise the Church of Rome believes that the crimes for which Jesus\nChrist is to inflict the severest punishment, are those against the\nChurch, against its Pope, against its bishops and its priests. The\nPagans believed that the neglect or omission of lustrations, and other\npractices and teachings of the priests, would be severely punished by\nMinos: likewise the Church of Rome believes that the neglect or omission\nof the practices, ceremonies, and other prescriptions of the priests,\nwill be severely punished by Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Pagans believed that those found righteous would be placed at the\nright hand side of Minos, but the wicked at his left hand side: likewise\nthe Church of Rome believes that the righteous will be placed at the\nright hand side of Jesus Christ, but the wicked at his left hand side.\nThe Pagans believed that the righteous would be destined, by Minos, to\neternal bliss in the Elysium; but that the wicked would be sentenced, by\nMinos, to endless misery in the Tartarus: likewise the Church of Rome\nbelieves that the righteous will be destined, by Jesus Christ, to\neternal bliss in Paradise; but that the wicked will be sentenced, by\nJesus Christ, to endless misery. The Pagans believed that the wicked\nwould carry on their back their sentence of condemnation, and the\nenumeration of all their crimes: likewise the Church of Rome believes\nthat the wicked will carry on their back their sentence of condemnation,\nand the enumeration of all their crimes.\n\nThe Pagans believed that the guardian spirits of the righteous would\nlead them to the Elysium: likewise the Church of Rome believes that the\nangels of the Lord will lead them to heaven, in a procession preceded by\nJesus Christ. The Pagans believed that Furies, and other evil spirits,\nwould drag the wicked to the Tartarus: likewise the Church of Rome\nbelieves that the devils will drive, with whips, the wicked to hell. The\nPagans believed that, after the general judgment, the earth would be\ndestroyed by fire: likewise the Church of Rome believes that the earth\nwill be destroyed by fire, and that then will the world end.\n\nTherefore there is a striking similarity between the particularities of\nthe doctrine of a general judgment, as held by the Pagans, and the\ndoctrine of a general judgment as held by the Church of Rome.\n\n3d. We prove that the Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine of a\ngeneral judgment from the apostles of Jesus Christ.\n\nThe Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine of a general judgment from\nthe apostles of Jesus Christ, 1st, If the Roman Catholic theologians did\nnot understand the 24th chapter of Matthew, and the last sixteen verses\nof the 25th; the 24th, 25th, 26th, and 27th verses of the 13th chapter\nin Mark, and also the 25th, 26th, 27th, and 28th verses of the 21st\nchapter in Luke, as meaning a general judgment; 2d, If nearly all the\nChristian sects, or denominations, of the first and of the second\ncenturies, did not believe the doctrine of a general judgment; and, 3d,\nIf the doctrine of a general judgment is irrational.\n\nBut, 1st, The Roman Catholic theologians did not understand the 24th\nchapter of Matthew, and the last sixteen verses of the 25th; the 24th,\n25th, 26th, and 27th verses of the 13th chapter in Mark; and also the\n25th, 26th, 27th, and 28th verses of the 21st chapter in Luke, as\nmeaning a general judgment; 2d, Nearly all the Christian sects, or\ndenominations, of the first and of the second centuries, did not believe\nthe doctrine of a general judgment; and, 3d, The doctrine of a general\njudgment is irrational.\n\n1st. We prove that the Roman Catholic theologians did not understand the\n24th chapter of Matthew, and the last sixteen verses of the 25th; the\n24th, 25th, 26th, and 27th verses of the 13th chapter in Mark; and also\nthe 25th, 26th, 27th, and 28th verses of the 21st chapter in Luke, as\nmeaning a general judgment.\n\n_Remark._--To save the reader the trouble of referring to his Bible, we\ninsert here the above passages of the Gospel, which the Partialists\nsuppose to teach the doctrine of a general judgment.\n\nMatthew, chap. 24.-1. \"And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple:\nand his disciples came to _him_ for to show him the buildings of the\ntemple. 2. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily\nI say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another,\nthat shall not be thrown down.\n\n3. And as he sat upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him\nprivately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what _shall\nbe_ the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? 4. And Jesus\nanswered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5. For\nmany shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.\n6. And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that ye be not\ntroubled; for all _these things_ must come to pass, but the end is not\nyet. 7. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against\nkingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes,\nin divers places. 8. All these _are_ the beginning of sorrows. 9. Then\nshall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye\nshall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. 10. And then shall\nmany be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one\nanother. 11. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.\n12. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.\n13. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14.\nAnd this Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a\nwitness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. 15. When ye,\ntherefore, shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel\nthe prophet, stand in the holy place; (whoso readeth, let him\nunderstand;) 16. Then let them which be in Judea flee into the\nmountains: 17. Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take\nany thing out of his house: 18. Neither let him which is in the field\nreturn back to take his clothes. 19. And wo unto them that are with\nchild, and to them that give suck in those days! 20. But pray ye that\nyour flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day: 21. For\nthen shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of\nthe world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22. And except those days\nshould be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's\nsake those days shall be shortened. 23. Then if any man shall say unto\nyou, Lo, here _is_ Christ, or there; believe _it_ not. 24. For there\nshall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great\nsigns and wonders; insomuch that, if _it were_ possible, they shall\ndeceive the very elect. 25. Behold, I have told you before. 26.\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_ not. 27.\nFor as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the\nwest; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 28. For wheresoever\nthe carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together. 29.\nImmediately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be\ndarkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall\nfall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 80. And\nthen shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall\nall the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man\ncoming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31. And he\nshall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall\ngather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to\nthe other.\n\n32. Now learn a parable of the fig-tree; When his branch is yet tender,\nand putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33. So likewise\nye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, _even_ at\nthe doors. 34. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,\ntill all these things be fulfilled. 35. Heaven and earth shall pass\naway, but my words shall not pass away. 36. But of that day and hour\nknoweth no _man_, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37.\nBut as the days of Noah _were_, so shall also the coming of the Son of\nman be. 38. For as in the days that were before the flood, they were\neating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that\nNoah entered into the ark, 39. And knew not until the flood came, and\ntook them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 40.\nThen shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other\nleft. 41. Two _women shall be_ grinding at the mill; the one shall be\ntaken, and the other left.\n\n42. Watch therefore; for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. 43.\nBut know this, that if the good man of the house had known in what watch\nthe thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered\nhis house to be broken up. 44. Therefore be ye also ready; for in such\nan hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh. 45. Who then is a\nfaithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his\nhousehold, to give them meat in due season? 46. Blessed _is_ that\nservant, whom his lord, when he cometh, shall find so doing. 47. Verily\nI say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods. 48. But\nand if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his\ncoming; 49. And shall begin to smite _his_ fellow-servants, and to eat\nand drink with the drunken; 50. The lord of that servant shall come in a\nday when he looketh not for _him_, and in an hour that he is not aware\nof, 51. And shall cut him asunder, and appoint _him_ his portion with\nthe hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.\"\n\nMatthew, chapter 25.-31. \"When the Son of man shall come in his glory,\nand all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of\nhis glory: 32. And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he\nshall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth _his_ sheep\nfrom the goats: 33. And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but\nthe goats on the left. 34. Then shall the King say unto them on his\nright hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared\nfor you from the foundation of the world: 35. For I was a hungered, and\nye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger,\nand ye took me in: 36. Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye\nvisited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37. Then shall the\nrighteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee a hungered, and fed\n_thee_? or thirsty, and gave _thee_ drink? 38. When saw we thee a\nstranger, and took _thee_ in? or naked, and clothed _thee_? 39. Or when\nsaw we thee sick, or in prison, and come unto thee? 40. And the King\nshall answer and say unto them. Verily I say unto you. Inasmuch as ye\nhave done _it_ unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done\n_it_ unto me. 41. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand.\nDepart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil\nand his angels: 42. For I was a hungered, and ye gave me no meat: I was\nthirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43. I was a stranger, and ye took me\nnot in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye\nvisited me not. 44. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when\nsaw we thee a hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick,\nor in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45. Then shall he answer\nthem, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did _it_ not to one\nof the least of these, ye did _it_ not to me. 46. And these shall go\naway into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal.\"\n\nLuke, chapter 21.-25. \"And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the\nmoon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with\nperplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26. Men's hearts failing them\nfor fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the\nearth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27. And then shall they\nsee the Son of man coming in a cloud, with power and great glory. 28.\nAnd when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up\nyour heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.\"\n\nMark, chapter 13.-24. \"But in those days, after that tribulation, the\nsun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light. 25. And\nthe stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall\nbe shaken. 26. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the\nclouds with great power and glory. 27. And then shall he send his\nangels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from\nthe uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost parts of heaven.\"\n\nBergier, one of the most classical of the Roman Catholic theologians,\nsays, in the first volume of his works, article Agnoetes, that, in the\nsixth century, the theologians answered the Agnoetes as follows: \"In\nthese texts, it is not a question of the day of the general judgment,\nbut of the day when Jesus Christ was to come to punish the Jewish nation\nby the sword of the Romans.\" Then the Roman Catholic theologians did not\nunderstand these texts as meaning a general judgment.\n\nMoreover, Bergier, writing against the Millenaries, says, article\nWorld:--\"The disciples of Christ, sometime before his resurrection,\nspake to him of the structure of the temple of Jerusalem, Matthew, ch.\n24, Mark, ch. 13, Luke, ch. 21. Jesus Christ told them that it shall be\ndestroyed; and that not one of the stones will be left upon the other.\nThe disciples, surprised, asked him when this shall take place; what\nwill be the signs of his coming, and of the end of the century. Then\nthere will be, he said, wars and seditions, earthquakes, pests, and\nfamines; ye yourselves will be persecuted and put to death; Jerusalem\nwill be surrounded with an army; the temple will be polluted; false\nprophets will appear; there will be signs in the heaven; the sun and the\nmoon will be darkened, and the stars will fall from the firmament. Then\nthe Son of man will be seen coming in the clouds with great power and\nmajesty; his angels will gather the elect from one end of the world to\nthe other, etc. He announces all this as events to be witnessed by his\napostles; and he adds: 'Verily I say unto you, this generation shall\nnot pass, till all these things be fulfilled.'\n\n\"Is it a question of the end of the world in all this? Opinions are\ndivided on this point. Some commentators think that, in these texts,\nJesus Christ simply prophesied the ruin of the religion, republic, and\nnation of the Jews; and that all the circumstances were verified when\nthe Romans took and destroyed the nation; that, however, a few\nexpressions ought not to be taken literally, such as the fall of the\nstars, etc.; that Jesus Christ has used the same style, and the same\nimages used by prophets, when they prophesied other events. Consequently\nthese commentators say that these words of Jesus Christ, 'This\ngeneration shall not pass,' etc., signify, the Jews who now live will\nnot all be dead when these events will take place. In fact, Jerusalem\nwas taken and ruined less than forty years after. In this opinion it is\nnot a question in these texts of the end of the world.\n\n\"Other commentators believe that Jesus Christ has joined the signs,\nwhich were to precede the devastation of Judea, to those which will\nappear at the end of the world, and before the general judgment; that\nwhen he says: 'This generation shall not pass,' etc., he means that the\nJewish nation will not be entirely destroyed, but will subsist till the\nend of the world. It cannot be denied that the word generation is used\nseveral times in this sense in the Gospel.\"\n\nFrom this passage of Bergier we draw the following argument:\n\nSince the Roman Catholic theologians were, and are, divided in regard to\nthe meaning of the above texts, it follows that the Church of Rome did\nnot rest her doctrine of a general judgment on the above text. Therefore\nthe Church of Rome did not understand the above texts, namely, the 24th\nchapter of Matthew, and the last sixteen verses of the 25th:--the 24th,\n25th, 26th, and 27th verses of the 13th chapter in Mark; and also the\n25th, 26th, 27th, and 28th verses of the 21st chapter in Luke, as\nmeaning a general judgment.\n\n2d. We prove that nearly all the Christian sects, or denominations, of\nthe first and of the second centuries, did not believe the doctrine of a\ngeneral judgment.\n\nThe Basilidians, the Valentinians, the Marcionites, the Marcosians, the\nTheodotians, the Carpocratians, the Docetes, the Tatianists, the\nApellites, the Montanists, the Artotyrites, the Ascites, the Ascodrutes,\nthe Ophites, the Cainites, and the Hermogenians believed in\nMetempsychosis, and denied the resurrection of the body. From the fact\nthat these sects believed in Metempsychosis, and denied the resurrection\nof the body, we argue:\n\nThe doctrine of a general judgment supposes the resurrection of all the\ndead; but the above sects denied the resurrection of the dead. Therefore\nthey denied also the doctrine of a general judgment. Therefore nearly\nall the Christian sects, or denominations, of the first and of the\nsecond centuries, did not believe the doctrine of a general judgment.\n\nMore, we might say all the Christian sects of the first two centuries;\nfor, it was only at the end of the second century, that the sect of the\nMillenaries, who believed in a general judgment, sprung up; and,\nbesides, history is silent about the belief of the Church of Rome (which\nthen was confined within the boundaries of the Province of Rome,) in\nregard to the doctrine of a general judgment.\n\n3d. The doctrine of a general judgment is irrational, because a first\njudgment, by Jesus Christ, having taken place, a second one would be\nuseless.\n\n4th. We prove that the Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine of a\ngeneral judgment from the Jews.\n\nThe Roman Catholic authors never pretended, and still now do not\npretend, that the Jews believed the doctrine of a general judgment.\n\nThen the Church of Rome did not hold the doctrine of a general judgment\nfrom the Jews.\n\nWe draw the general conclusions of this chapter:\n\nIt has been proved, 1st, That the Pagans held the doctrine of a general\njudgment of all the then living, and of all the dead, which shall take\nplace at the end of the world; 2d, That there is a striking similarity\nbetween the particularities of the doctrine of a general judgment, as\nheld by the Pagans, and the doctrine of a general judgment, as held by\nthe Church of Rome; 3d, That the Church of Rome did not hold the\ndoctrine of a general judgment from the apostles of Jesus Christ; and,\n4th, That the Church of Rome did not hold this doctrine from the Jews.\n\nTherefore the Church of Rome borrowed the doctrine of a general judgment\nfrom the Pagans.\n\n_Therefore the doctrine of a general judgment of all the then living,\nand of all the dead, which shall take place at the end of the world, is\nof Pagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\nPAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF VICARIOUS ATONEMENT.\n\n\nTHE doctrine of Vicarious Atonement supposes the dogma of a Personal\nDevil, the dogma of Original Sin, the dogma of Trinity, and the dogma of\nthe Supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ. As in four chapters of this work\nwe have proved that these four dogmas are of Pagan origin, we shall\nexamine, in this chapter, the true origin of the body itself of the\ndoctrine of Vicarious Atonement, which consists in the belief that a\nsmall number of privileged Christians obtain the forgiveness of their\nsins, and are exempted from the punishment of those sins through the\nmedium of a substitute. Our historical researches will also lead us to\nthe conclusion that it is of Pagan origin.\n\nIn the sixteenth century the Church of Rome held, and still now holds,\nthe doctrine that Jesus Christ had washed away with his blood all the\npast, present and future sins of the men who would be within the pale of\nhis only true Church, which was herself, and also that he had exempted\nthem from the punishment of their sins. However, they were to enjoy\nthese two privileges only on the condition that they would obey her\nprescriptions. The Partialist Protestant Churches rejected nearly all\nthe prescriptions of the Church of Rome; rejected the doctrine that she\nwas the only true Church of Jesus Christ; but they preserved the\nsubstance of the doctrine, namely, that Jesus Christ had washed away all\nthe sins of those who would feel the descent of the Holy Spirit in their\nsouls; who would experience a supernatural change of heart, or, as they\ncommonly term it, would get religion; and also that through his\natonement they are exempted from the punishment of their sins.\n\nConsequently, the Partialist Protestant Churches, as well as the Church\nof Rome, hold the doctrine that a small number of privileged Christians\nobtain the forgiveness of their sins, and are exempted from the\npunishment of those sins through the medium of a substitute. Then if it\nis proved that the origin of the doctrine that a small number of\nprivileged Christians obtain the forgiveness of their sins, and are\nexempted from the punishment of those sins, through the medium of a\nsubstitute--as held by the Church of Rome--is Pagan, it will thereby be\nproved that the doctrine that a small number of privileged Christians\nobtain the forgiveness of their sins, and are exempted from the\npunishment of those sins, through the medium of a substitute--as held by\nthe Partialist Protestant Churches--is also of Pagan origin.\n\nIn this chapter we shall prove that the origin of the doctrine that a\nsmall number of privileged Christians obtain the forgiveness of their\nsins, and are exempted from the punishment of those sins through the\nmedium of a substitute--as held by the Church of Rome--is Pagan.\n\nIt will be evident that the origin of the doctrine that a small number\nof privileged Christians obtain the forgiveness of their sins, and are\nexempted from the punishment of their sins, through the medium of a\nsubstitute--as held by the Church of Rome--is Pagan, if it is proved,\n1st, That there is a striking similarity between the practices required\nby the Church of Rome to obtain the forgiveness of sins, and to be\nexempted from the punishment of those sins, and those which were, and\nstill now are, required in the Pagan religion for the same purpose; and,\n2d, That those practices were not instituted among Christians in the\nfirst two centuries. But it can be proved, 1st, That there is a striking\nsimilarity between the practices required by the Church of Rome to\nobtain the forgiveness of sins, and to be exempted from the punishment\nof those sins, through the medium of a substitute, and those which were,\nand still now are, required in the Pagan religion for the same purpose;\nand, 2d, That those practices were not instituted among Christians in\nthe first two centuries.\n\n1st. We prove that there is a striking similarity between the practices\nrequired by the Church of Rome to obtain the forgiveness of sins, and\nto be exempted from the punishment of those sins, through the medium of\na substitute, and those which were, and still now are, required in the\nPagan religion for the same purpose.\n\nThe Pagans, publicly and privately, used lustral water, which, they\nthought, had the virtue of purifying the soul, and of remitting the\npunishment of certain impurities and sins. The Priests, in solemn\nreligious ceremonies, aspersed the assistants with it; and the people\nkept and used it in their families. In the same manner, the Church of\nRome believes that holy water has the virtue of purifying the soul, and\nof remitting the punishment of certain impurities and sins. The Roman\nCatholics use it publicly and privately. Every Sunday, before the\ncelebration of the high mass, the priests asperse the people with holy\nwater for the aforesaid end; and also pour it on the coffins of the dead\nat the funerals. The laymen keep and use it in their families for the\nsame end.\n\nThese lustrations are practiced, even in our days, by many of the\nPagans. The Madegasses believe that they can obtain the forgiveness of\nthe punishment of their sins in dipping a piece of gold in a vessel full\nof water, and in drinking that water. The Father Jesuit Bouchet, a\nmissionary in India, writes: \"The Indians say that in bathing in certain\nrivers sins are _entirely_ remitted; and that their mysterious waters\nwash not only the bodies, but also purify the souls in an admirable\nmanner.\"\n\nThis testimony, Chateaubriand adds, is confirmed by the Memoirs of the\nEnglish Society of Calcutta. The waters of the Ganges are reputed as\nhaving the greatest expiatory virtue: so the Church of Rome holds that\nthe baptismal waters remit the original and all other sins, and exempt\nthose baptized from punishment.\n\nThe Pagans believed that certain ceremonies, and their medals\nrepresenting the gods, had an expiatory virtue: so the Church of Rome\nholds that genuflexions, the Agnus Dei, the beads, the medals of the\nsaints, and of the virgin Mary, have an expiatory virtue. The Pagans\nbelieved that certain prayers remitted certain sins and their\npunishment; so the Church of Rome believes that Novenas, indulgences,\nthe recitation of the first chapter of the Gospel of John, etc., remit\nvenial sins, and their punishment. The Pagans went in pilgrimage to\nchapels, where the prayers of the priests, they thought, had an\nexpiatory virtue greater than in other temples; this practice and this\nbelief have been preserved even by the Mahomedans. Now there are at the\ndoor of the Mosque of Ali, at Mesched-Aly, dervishes, who, for money,\nexpiate with their prayers the sins of the pilgrims: so the Church of\nRome believes that the expiatory virtue of the prayers made by priests,\nin certain chapels of saints and of Mary, where multitudes of pilgrims\nresort, is greater than that of the prayers made in other temples.\n\nIn China, the invocation of Omyto is sufficient to remit the punishment\nof the greatest crimes. It is on account of it that the followers of the\nsect of Fo repeat oftentimes, every day, the words, O-myto-Fo! The\nIndians believed, and still believe, that when a man expires in\npronouncing the name of God, and in holding, at the same time, the tail\nof a cow, he immediately ascends to Paradise. The Bramas never failed,\nand even do not now, to read every morning the mysterious legend of\nGosgendre-Mootsjam; because it is a dogma of the Indian religion that\nany one who reads this legend every morning, obtains the forgiveness of\nthe punishment of all his sins; so the Church of Rome holds that any one\nwho recites the Angelus when the bell rings, in the morning, at noon,\nand at sun down, or recites the acts of faith, of hope, and of charity,\nobtains the remittance of the punishment of several of his venial sins;\nand, also, that any one who regularly recites the prayers of Saint\nBrigitte, or who, when he dies, recites with great devotion the prayer\nMemorare o piissima, etc., will go to Paradise.\n\nGreece was flooded with rituals, ascribed to Orpheus and to Museus,\nprescribing ceremonies, rites, and practices, which had the virtue of\npurifying the soul, and of exempting the sinners from the punishment of\ntheir sins. The priests of the Pagans persuaded entire towns, cities,\nand nations, that they could be purified of their crimes, and be\nexempted from the punishment, which the Deity would inflict upon them,\nthrough the means of expiatory rites, of feasts, and of initiations.\nThey made the people believe that this purification, and this exemption,\ncould extend to the living and to the dead, in what they called Teletes,\nor mysteries; and it was as a consequence of this belief that the\npriests of Cybel, those of Isis, the Orpheotelestes and others, went\namong the people to initiate them; but on the condition that they would\npay to them large sums of money. This traffic was practiced even by\npriestesses, and bad women. Demosthenes informs us that the mother of\nEschine made a living by it, and also in prostituting her body.\n\nLikewise, the Church of Rome is flooded with rituals prescribing\nceremonies, rites, and practices, which have the virtue of purifying the\nsoul, and of exempting the sinners from the punishment of their sins.\nThe priests make towns, cities, and nations believe that they can be\npurified of their crimes, and be exempted of the punishment they\ndeserve, by fasting, by going processionally to churches, or to chapels\nof saints and of the virgin Mary. The priests, the monks, the\nbegging-friars, and even the nuns, go among the people; they pledge\nthemselves to obtain the forgiveness of their sins, and the exemption\nfrom divine punishment, if they give them sums of money.\n\nThe priests of the Pagans offered expiatory sacrifices for the living\nand for the dead for money; so, in the Church of Rome, the priests offer\nthe sacrifice of Mass for the expiation of the sins of the living and\nof the dead, if they are well paid. The Pagans believed that the\nfoundation of temples, their endowment, and other gifts presented to the\ngods and to their priests, had an expiatory virtue. Socrates portrayed\nthe unjust man in saying, that initiation to mysteries caused them to\ndespise the Tartarus with all its torments. He made the following\nremark: \"The apologist of injustice says, they frighten us with the\nthreat of the pains of the Tartarus; but who ignores that we find in the\ninitiations a remedy to that fear? They are a great resource to us; and\nthey inform us that there are gods who exempt us from the punishment\ndeserved by crime. True, we have committed injustice, but injustice has\nbeen pecuniarily profitable to us. We are told that the gods are\nappeased by prayers, sacrifices, and offerings.\" Biache, one of the\ninterlocutors in the Ezourvedam, said, that there is in the country\ncalled Magouodechan, a sacred spot, where, through some offerings,\nancestors can be freed from the tortures of hell.\n\nLikewise, the Church of Rome holds that the foundation of churches, of\npriest's houses, of monasteries, of convents, and of nunneries, and\ntheir endowment; or any other gift, presented to the saints, bishops,\npriests, monks, and nuns have a virtue so much the more expiatory for\nsins, as they are greater and more valuable. It is owing to this\nhorrible doctrine, that the Church of Rome has acquired so much church\nproperty that its valuation is beyond any approximate calculation. The\nFrench poet, Boileau, spoke the truth when, in his ninth satire, he\nsaid:\n\n       \"Si l'on vient \u00e0 chercher pour quel secret myst\u00e8re,\n       Alidor, \u00e0 ses frais, b\u00e2tit un monast\u00e8re....\n       C'est un homme d'honneur, de pi\u00e9t\u00e9 profonde,\n       Et qui veut rendre \u00e0 Dieu ce qu'il a pris au monde.\"\n\n_Translation_: \"If we wish to inquire for what secret mystery Alidor, at\nhis own expense, built a monastery.... He is a man of honor, of profound\npiety, and who wishes to restore to God what he stole from the world.\"\n\nThe Pagans believed that in piously gazing upon certain statues of the\ngods their souls were purified; and that the punishment of their sins\nwas remitted; so, even now, the Indians believe that in simply gazing\nupon the shrub Toulouschi they obtain the forgiveness of their sins, and\nobtain the exemption from their punishment. Likewise the Church of Rome\nholds, that, in gazing piously upon the cross, the Catholics obtain the\nforgiveness of their venial sins, and the exemption from their\npunishment. The ancient initiations of the Pagans had tribunals of\npenance, where a priest, under the name of Ko\u00ebs, heard from the mouth of\nthe sinners themselves the avowal of their sins, of which their souls\nwere to be purified, and from the punishment of which they wished to be\nexempted. One day the famous Lysandre, confessing his sins to one of\nthose Ko\u00ebs, was asked by him impudent questions. Lysandre answered him\nwith this question, \"Do you address me those questions in your own name,\nor in the name of the Deity?\" The Ko\u00ebs answered: \"In the name of the\nDeity.\" \"Well,\" Lysandre rejoined, \"let me be; if God questions me, I\nwill answer him.\" Likewise the Church of Rome has tribunals of penance,\nwhere priests hear from the mouth of the sinners themselves the avowal\nof their sins, of which their souls are to be purified, and from the\npunishment of which they wish to be exempted. Through the absolution of\nthe priests the greatest sins, without any exemption, are remitted\nentirely, so that they not only are forgiven, but even their punishment.\n\nEven the Church of Rome goes farther in regard to the pretended virtue\nof her expiatory practices, than the Pagans ever went. Indeed, it was a\ncommon thing among the Pagans to stigmatize certain crimes, and to call\nthem irremissible--unexpiable. They excluded from the sanctuaries of\nEleusis, the murderers, the traitors to their country, in a word, all\nthose who were guilty of atrocious crimes; they were to be excluded from\nthe Elysium forever, and to be endlessly tortured in the Tartarus. There\nwere purifications for murder, it is true, but only for involuntary or\nnecessary murder. When the ancient heroes had committed a murder, they\nresorted to expiation; after the sacrifices which were required,\nlustral water was poured on the murderous hand; from that moment they\nwere readmitted in society; and they prepared themselves to new deeds of\nbravery. Hercules resorted to expiation when he had slain the Centaurs.\nBut those sorts of expiations did not purify the soul from all\nimpurities and crimes.\n\nThe great criminals had to dread all their lifetime the horrors of the\nTartarus, or could not expiate their crimes, except by constantly\npracticing virtue, and constantly doing good to their fellow men. The\nlegal purifications were not considered as having the virtue of securing\nto all criminals the hope of bliss, to which the righteous were\nentitled. Nero did not dare present himself to the temple of Eleusis;\nbecause he was debarred from entering its sanctuary on account of his\natrocious crimes.\n\nThe famous Constantine I., to whom the Church of Rome is indebted for\nall her past and present aggrandizement, wealth, and power; and whose\nname has been, is, and shall always be, accursed by nations, because of\nthe rivers of blood, of the deluge of ignorance, of superstition, in one\nword, of the ocean of crimes against God, against Christ, and against\nmankind, which the Church of Rome, enabled by his protection, poured\nover the world: Constantine, we say, guilty of all sorts of crimes; his\nhands reeking with the blood of his own mother, whom he had slain; and\nwith the blood of the many, whom he had murdered; and guilty of many\nperjuries, presented himself to the Pagan priests to obtain the\nabsolution of those atrocious crimes, and the exemption from their\npunishment.\n\nConstantine was answered, that, among the various sorts of expiations,\nthere was not one which had the virtue of purifying his soul from so\nmany and so atrocious crimes, and of exempting him from the punishment\nthey deserved; and that no religion had resources enough to appease the\njustice of the irritated gods; and, let us mark: Constantine was a\nmighty emperor. One of his courtiers, seeing the trouble and agitation\nof his soul, devoured by the restless and undying remorse, told him that\nhis sufferings were not hopeless; that there were in the Church of Rome,\npurifications which had the virtue of expiating all crimes, without any\nexception, that this Church held, that whoever joined it, whatever may\nbe his crimes, might hope that all his crimes will be forgiven by the\nDeity, and that the exemption from their punishment will be obtained.\n\nFrom that time Constantine took the Church of Rome under his protection.\nHe was a wicked man who tried to deceive himself, and to appease the\nremorse of his conscience. He gave then full scope to his\nflagitiousness; and he postponed being baptized until the hour of his\ndeath, because it was, as it is now, a dogma of the Church of Rome, that\nbaptism purifies the soul from the original and all other sins and\ncrimes, and that it has also the virtue of exempting those baptized\nfrom the punishment of all their sins. Thus the entry of the temple of\nEleusis was interdicted to Nero; and yet the Church of Rome would have\nadmitted him within her pale; would have purified his soul; and would\nhave exempted him from the punishment of all his monstrous crimes, if he\nhad taken her under his protection. How abominable a Church must be,\nwhen she deals so with tyrants and monsters with a human face! What! if\nNero had been a Roman Catholic and had protected the Church of Rome, she\nwould have canonized him! Why not? Constantine, as great a criminal as\nhe was, has been canonized. In the ninth century his name was invoked at\nRome in the ceremonies of the Church, and even now he is considered as a\nsaint.\n\nIn England several churches have been built under the invocation of this\npretended Saint Constantine, who founded at Constantinople a vast and\ncostly establishment of ill fame. Such are the saints worshiped by the\nChurch of Rome when she obtains their protection. Christ, reason, and\nnature, would never have absolved Nero from his crimes, and from the\npunishment they deserved; and yet the Church of Rome would have done it.\nSophocles, in his \u00c6dipe, says, that all the waters of the Danube, and of\nthe Phase, would have been insufficient to purify, from their crimes,\nthe souls of the family of La\u00efus; and yet the Church of Rome would have\ndone it. How truly the Arab poet Abu-Naovas exclaimed: \"Lord, we have\nindulged to sin and to crime, because we saw that forgiveness soon\nfollowed them.\"\n\nTherefore there is a striking similarity between the practices required\nby the Church of Rome, to obtain the forgiveness of sins, and to be\nexempted from the punishment of those sins, through the medium of a\nsubstitute, and those which were required in the Pagan religion for the\nsame purpose.\n\n2. We prove that the practices required by the Church of Rome to obtain\nthe forgiveness of sins, and to be exempted from the punishment of those\nsins, through the medium of a substitute, were not instituted among\nChristians in the first two centuries.\n\nThe Roman Catholic theologians do not pretend that the Christians of the\nfirst two centuries held those practices, nor that the Church of Rome\nherself held them; but they say that the Church of Rome established them\nsuccessively, as the good of Christians required it, according to the\npower of government and infallibility granted to her, and to her alone,\nby Jesus Christ.\n\nConsequently, the practices required by the Church of Rome, to obtain\nthe forgiveness of sins, and to be exempted from the punishment of those\nsins, were not instituted among Christians in the first two centuries.\n\nWe draw the general conclusions of this chapter:\n\nIt has been proved that there is a striking similarity between the\npractices required by the Church of Rome to obtain the forgiveness of\nsins, and to be exempted from the punishment of those sins, and those\nwhich were, and still now are, required in the Pagan religion for the\nsame purpose; and that those practices were not instituted among\nChristians in the first two centuries.\n\nTherefore the Church of Rome borrowed from the Pagans the doctrine of\nVicarious Atonement, namely, that a small number of privileged\nChristians obtain the forgiveness of their sins, and are exempted from\nthe punishment of their sins, through the medium of a substitute.\n\nSince, though the other Partialist Christian Churches rejected the most\nof the practices used by the Church of Rome to obtain the forgiveness of\nsins, and the exemption from the punishment of those sins, they\npreserved the substance of the doctrine, namely, that Jesus Christ had\nwashed away, or, in other words, atoned for all the sins of those who\nwould feel the descent of the Holy Spirit in their souls; who would\nexperience a supernatural change of heart, or, as they commonly term it,\nwould get religion; and also that through his atonement they were\nexempted from the punishment of their sins--the doctrine which they hold\nis nothing but the very doctrine, though modified in its circumstances,\nof the Church of Rome. Therefore its origin is the same. But it has been\nproved that the Church of Rome borrowed from the Pagans, the doctrine\nthat a small number of privileged Christians obtain the forgiveness of\ntheir sins, and are exempted from the punishment of those sins, through\nthe medium of a substitute--as she holds it. Therefore it is thereby\nproved, that the other Partialist Christian Churches truly borrowed,\nfrom the Pagans, though through the medium of the Church of Rome, the\ndoctrine that a small number of privileged Christians obtain the\nforgiveness of their sins, and are exempted from the punishment of those\nsins, through the medium of a substitute--as she holds it.\n\nTherefore the doctrine that a small number of privileged Christians\nobtain the forgiveness of their sins, and are exempted from the\npunishment of those sins, through the medium of a substitute, is of\nPagan origin. And as, on another hand, it has been proved, in four other\nchapters of this work, that the doctrine of a Personal Devil, the\ndoctrine of Original Sin, the doctrine of Trinity, and the doctrine of\nthe Supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ, are of Pagan origin--then we\nlogically draw the conclusion that all the characteristics of the\ndoctrine of Vicarious Atonement are of Pagan origin. Since all the\ncharacteristics of the doctrine of Vicarious Atonement are of Pagan\norigin, then the body itself of the doctrine of Vicarious Atonement is\nof Pagan origin.\n\n_Therefore the doctrine of Vicarious Atonement is of Pagan origin._\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION OF ALL THE CHAPTERS.\n\nTHEREFORE PARTIALIST DOCTRINES ARE OF PAGAN ORIGIN.\n\n\n_Corollary._--Since the Partialist doctrines are of Pagan origin they\nare not taught in the Scriptures, for the Scriptures do not reveal\nPaganism. Consequently they ought to be rejected from Christian\nChurches, as being Heathen doctrines.\n\n\n\n\nVALEDICTORY.\n\n\n_Dear Reader_,--Before I drop the pen permit me to address to you a few\nvaledictory words. If you believe the _Impartialist_, namely,\nUniversalist doctrines, you are now in possession of an irrefutable\nhistorical proof corroborating your beloved faith, which is satisfactory\nto your mind, and sweet to your heart. If from your infancy up to this\nday you have been taught, and have believed, the Partialist doctrines,\nperhaps you say to yourself: My religious creed is now shaken to its\nvery foundation; what then will my religious belief be, for the want of\nreligious principles is the most earnest longing of my soul? Friend,\nstudy the _Impartialist_, namely, Universalist doctrines; compare them\nwith the teaching of the Scriptures, and you will find them recorded\ntherein. They truly are the embodiment of the teaching of the\nScriptures, which are themselves embodied in these two vital maxims of\nJesus Christ, written in golden letters on the Universalist banner:\n\"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy\nsoul, and with all thy mind.--This is the first and great commandment.\nAnd the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as\nthyself.--On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.\"\n\n\n\n\n      *      *      *      *      *      *\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's note:\n\n  Blank pages have been eliminated.\n\n  Variations in spelling and hyphenation have been left as in the\n  original.\n\n  A few typographical errors have been corrected.","title":"Pagan Origin of Partialist Doctrines","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":58261}