• THE MARK OF THE BEAST, A HISTORICAL LOOK.

    From Eddie Wilson@RICKSBBS to All on Tue Feb 3 06:58:48 2026
    Be patient, this is a rather long story but it gets to the
    point. For a more detailed study on this subject please call
    404-299-1832 and ask for Bible studies, or for more
    information.

    THE MARK OF THE BEAST, A HISTORICAL LOOK.


    How fair was the morning of the Church! how swift its
    progress! What expectations it would have been natural to
    form of the future history which had begun so well! Doubtless
    they were formed in many a sanguine heart: but they were
    clouded soon. It became evident that, when the first
    conflicts were passed, others would succeed; and that the
    long and weary war with the powers of darkness had only just
    begun. The wrestlings "against principalities and powers,
    and the spiritual forces of wickedness in heavenly places"
    (Eph 6:12) were yet to be more painfully felt, and believers
    were prepared to be "partakers of Christ's sufferings," and
    not to "think it...strange concerning the fiery trial
    which...[was] to try...[them], as though some strange thing
    happened unto...[them]" (1 Pe 4:12, 13, [KJV]).

    But worse for the Church than the fightings without were the
    fears within. Men who had long professed the Gospel "had
    need to be taught again what were the first principles of the
    oracles of God" (Heb 5:12). They were falling "from grace,"
    and turning back to weak and beggarly elements, whereunto
    they desired again to be in bondage" (Gal 5:4; 4:9). "Some
    had already turned aside after Satan (1 Ti 5:15)," and, where
    there was no special prevalence of error, a coldness and
    worldliness of spirit drew forth the sad reflection that "all
    seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's" (Php
    2:21). Contentions were rife, and schisms were spreading;
    and men, in the name of Christ and of truth, were "provoking
    one another, envying one another." New forms of error began
    to arise, from the combination of Christian ideas with the
    rudiments of the world and the vagaries of oriental
    philosophy.

    Here were men, like Jannes and Jambres who withstood Moses,
    "resisting the truth, reprobate concerning the faith" (2 Ti
    3:8). Here were "Hymenaeus and Philetus, who concerning the
    truth had erred, saying that the resurrection was past
    already" (2 Ti 2:17). Here was the "knowledge falsely so
    called" (1 Ti 6:20), teeming with a thousand protean forms of
    falsehood.

    While the Apostles wrote, the actual state and the visible
    tendencies of things showed too plainly what Church history
    would be; and, at the same time, prophetic intimations made
    the prospect still more dark: for "the Spirit spake
    expressly, that in the latter times men would depart from the
    faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of
    devils" (1 Ti 4:1)--that "in the last days grievous times
    should come," marked by a darkness of moral condition which
    it might have been expected that Gospel influences would have
    dispelled (2 Ti 3:1-5)--that "there would be scoffers in the
    last days, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where
    is the promise of His coming?" (2 Pe 3:3)--that the day of
    the Lord would not be "till the apostasy had come first, and
    the man of sin had been revealed, the son of perdition, the
    adversary who exalts himself above all that is called God or
    an object of worship, so that he sits in the Temple of God,
    showing himself that he is God" (2 Th 2:4-4). "The mystery
    of lawlessness was already working, and as antichrist should
    come, even then were there many antichrists" (1 Jn 2:18, 22),
    men "denying the Father and the Son," "denying the Lord that
    bought them" (2 Pe 2:1), "turning the grace of God into
    lasciviousness" (Jude 4), and "bringing upon themselves swift
    destruction."

    I know not how any man, in closing the Epistles, could
    expect to find the subsequent history of the Church
    essentially different from what it is. In those writings we
    seem, as it were, not to witness some passing storms which
    clear the air, but to feel the whole atmosphere charged with
    the elements of future tempest and death. Every moment the
    forces of evil show themselves more plainly. They are
    encountered, but not dissipated. Or, to change the figure, we
    see battles fought by the leaders of our band, but no
    security is promised by their victories. New assaults are
    being prepared; new tactics will be tried; new enemies pour
    in; the distant hills are black with gathering multitudes,
    and the last exhortations of those who fall at their posts
    call on their successors to "endure hardness as good soldiers
    of Jesus Christ" (2 Ti 2:3), and "earnestly to contend for
    the faith which was once delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).

    The fact which I observe is not merely that these
    indications of the future are in the Epistles, but that they
    increase as we approach the close, and after the doctrines
    of the Gospel have been fully wrought out, and the fullness
    of personal salvation and the ideal character of the Church
    have been placed in the clearest light, the shadows gather
    and deepen on the external history. The last words of St.
    Paul in the second Epistle to Timothy, with the Epistles of
    St. John and St. Jude, breathe the language of a time in
    which the tendencies of that history had distinctly shown
    themselves.

    The Church was in the beginning a community of brethren,
    guided by a few of the brethren. All were taught of God, and
    each had the privilege of drawing for himself from the divine
    fountain of light. The Epistles which then settled the great
    questions of doctrine did not bear the pompous title of a
    single man--of a ruler. We learn from the Holy Scriptures,
    that they began simply with these words: "The apostles and
    elders and brethren send greetings unto the brethren."

    But these very writings of the apostles already
    foretell that from the midst of this brotherhood there shall
    arise a power that will destroy this simple and primitive
    order.

    Let us contemplate the formation and trace the development
    of this power so alien to the Church.

    Paul of Tarsus, one of the greatest apostles of the new
    religion, had arrived at Rome, the capital of the empire and
    of the world, preaching in bondage the salvation which cometh
    from God. A Church was formed beside the throne of the
    Caesars. Composed at first of a few converted Jews, Greeks,
    and Roman citizens, it was rendered famous by the teaching
    and the death of the Apostle of the Gentiles. For a time it
    shone out brightly, as a beacon upon a hill. Its faith was
    everywhere celebrated; but erelong it declined from its
    primitive condition. It was by small beginnings that both
    imperial and Christian Rome advanced to the usurped dominion
    of the world.

    The first pastors or bishops of Rome early employed them-
    selves in converting the neighboring cities and towns. The
    necessity which the bishops and pastors of the Campagna felt
    of applying in cases of difficulty to an enlightened guide,
    and the gratitude they owed to the church of the metropolis,
    led them to maintain a close union with it. As it has always
    happened in analogous circumstances, this reasonable union
    soon degenerated into dependence. The bishops of Rome
    considered as a right that superiority which the surrounding
    Churches had freely yielded. The encroachments of power form
    a great part of history; as the resistance of those whose
    liberties are invaded forms the other portion. The
    ecclesiastical power could not escape the intoxication which
    impels all who are lifted up to seek to mount still higher.
    It obeyed this general law of human nature.

    Nevertheless the supremacy of the Roman bishops was at
    that period limited to the superintendence of the Churches
    within the civil jurisdiction of the prefect of Rome. But
    the rank which this imperial city held in the world offered a
    prospect of still greater destinies to the ambition of its
    first pastor. The respect enjoyed by the various Christian
    bishops in the second century was proportionate to the rank
    of the city in which they resided. Now Rome was the largest,
    richest, and most powerful city in the world. It was the
    seat of empire, the mother of nations. "All the inhabitants
    of the earth belong to her," said Julian; and Claudian
    declared her to be "the fountain of laws."

    If Rome is the queen of cities, why should not her
    pastor be the king of bishops? Why should not the Roman
    church be the mother of Christendom? Why should not all
    nations be her children, and her authority their sovereign
    law? It was easy for the ambitious heart of man to reason
    thus. Ambitious Rome did so.

    Thus, when pagan Rome fell, she bequeathed to the humble
    minister of the God of peace, sitting in the midst of her
    ruins, the proud titles which her invincible sword had won
    from the nations of the earth.

    The bishops of the different parts of the empire,
    fascinated by that charm which Rome had exercised for ages
    over all nations, followed the example of the Campagna, and
    aided this work of usurpation. They felt a pleasure in
    yielding to the bishop of Rome some portion of that honor
    which was due to the queen of the world. There was
    originally no dependence implied in the honor thus paid. They
    treated the Roman pastor as if they were on a level with him.
    But usurped power increased like an avalanche. Admonitions,
    at first simply fraternal, soon became absolute commands in
    the mouth of the pontiff. A foremost place among equals
    appeared to him a throne.

    The Western bishops favored this encroachment of the
    Roman pastors, either from jealousy of the Eastern bishops,
    or because they preferred submitting to the supremacy of a
    pope, rather than to the dominion of a temporal power.

    On the other hand, the theological sects that distracted
    the East, strove, each for itself, to interest Rome in its
    favor they looked for victory in the support of the principal
    church of the West.

    Rome carefully enregistered these applications and
    intercessions, and smiled to see all nations voluntarily
    throwing themselves into her arms. She neglected no
    opportunity of increasing and extending her power. The
    praises and flattery, the exaggerated compliments and
    consultations of other Churches, became in her eyes and in
    her hands the titles and documents of her authority. Such is
    man exalted to a throne: the incense of courts intoxicates
    him, his brain grows dizzy. What he possesses becomes a
    motive for attaining still more.

    The doctrine of the Church and the necessity of its
    visible unity, which had begun to gain ground in the third
    century, favored the pretensions of Rome. The Church is,
    above all things, the assembly of "them that are sanctified
    in Christ Jesus" (1 Cor. i. 2)--"the assembly of the
    first-born which are written in heaven"(Heb. xii. 23). Yet
    the Church of our Lord is not simply inward and invisible; it
    is necessary that it should be manifested, and it is with a
    view to this manifestation that the sacraments of Baptism and
    the Lord's Supper were instituted. The visible Church has
    features different from those which distinguish it as an
    invisible Church. The invisible Church, which is the body of
    Christ, is necessarily and eternally one. The visible Church
    no doubt partakes of the unity of the former; but, considered
    by itself, plurality is a characteristic already ascribed to
    it in the New Testament. While speaking of one Church of
    God, it no sooner refers to its manifestation to the world,
    than it enumerates "the Churches of Galatia, of Macedonia, of
    Judea, all Churches of the saints." These Churches may
    undoubtedly, to a certain extent, look for visible unity;
    but if this union be wanting, they lose none of the essential
    qualities of the Church of Christ. The strong bond which
    originally united the members of the Church, was that living
    faith of the heart which connected them all with Christ as
    their common head. Different causes soon concurred to
    originate and develop the idea of a necessity for external
    union. Men accustomed to the political forms and
    associations of an earthly country, carried their views and
    habits into the spiritual and eternal kingdom of Christ.
    Persecution, powerless to destroy or even to shake this new
    community, made it only the more sensible of its own
    strength, and pressed it into a more compact body. To the
    errors that sprung up in the theosophic schools and in the
    various sects, was opposed the one and universal truth
    received from the apostles, and preserved in the Church. This
    was well, so long as the invisible and spiritual Church was
    identical with the visible and external Church. But a great
    separation took place erelong: the form and the life became
    disunited. The semblance of an identical and exterior
    organization was gradually substituted for that interior and
    spiritual communion, which is the essence of the religion of
    God. Men forsook the precious perfume of faith, and bowed
    down before the empty vessel that had contained it. They
    sought other bonds of union, for faith in the heart no longer
    connected the members of the Church; and they were united by
    means of bishops, archbishops, popes, mitres, canons, and
    ceremonies. The living Church retiring gradually within the
    lonely sanctuary of a few solitary hearts, an external
    Church was substituted in its place, and all its forms were
    declared to be of divine appointment. Salvation no longer
    flowing from the Word, which was henceforward put out of
    sight, the priests affirmed that it was conveyed by means of
    the forms they had themselves invented, and that no one could
    attain it except by these channels. No one, said they, can
    by his own faith attain to everlasting life. Christ
    communicated to the apostles, and these to the bishops, the
    unction of the Holy Spirit; and this Spirit is to be procured
    only in that order of succession! Originally, whoever
    possessed the spirit of Jesus Christ was a member of the
    Church; now the terms were inverted, and it was maintained
    that he only who was a member of the Church could receive the
    Spirit.

    As these ideas became established, the distinction
    between the people and the clergy was more strongly marked.
    The salvation of souls no longer depended entirely on faith
    in Christ, but also, and in a more especial manner, on union
    with the Church. The representatives and heads of the Church
    were made partakers of the trust that should be placed in
    Christ alone, and became the real mediators of their flocks.
    The idea of a universal Christian priesthood was gradually
    lost sight of; the servants of the Church of Christ were
    compared to the priests of the old covenant; and those who
    separated from the bishop were placed in the same rank with
    Korah, Dathan, and Abiram! From a peculiar priesthood, such
    as was then formed in the Church, to a sovereign priesthood,
    such as Rome claims, the transition was easy.

    In fact, no sooner was the erroneous notion of the
    necessity for a visible unity of the Church established, than
    another appeared--the necessity for an outward
    representation of that union. Although we find no traces in
    the Gospel of Peter's superiority over the other apostles;
    although the very idea of a primacy is opposed to the
    fraternal relations which united the brethren, and even to
    the spirit of the Gospel dispensation, which on the contrary
    requires all the children of the Father to "minister one to
    another," acknowledging only one teacher and one master;
    although Christ had strongly rebuked his disciples, whenever
    ambitious desires of pre-eminence were conceived in their
    carnal hearts the primacy of St. Peter was invented and
    supported by texts wrongly interpreted, and men next
    acknowledged in this apostle and in his self-styled
    successors at Rome, the visible representatives of visible
    unity--the heads of the universal Church.

    The constitution of the Patriarchate contributed in like
    manner to the exaltation of the Papacy. As early as the
    three first centuries the metropolitan Churches had enjoyed
    peculiar honor. The council of Nice, in its sixth canon,
    mentions three cities, whose Churches, according to it,
    exercised a long- established authority over those of the
    surrounding provinces: these were Alexandria, Rome, and
    Antioch. The political origin of this distinction is
    indicated by the name which was at first given to the bishops
    of these cities: they were called Exarchs, from the title of
    the civil governors. Somewhat later they received the more
    ecclesiastical appellation of Patriarchs. We find this title
    first employed at the council of Constantinople, but in a
    different sense from that which it afterwards received. It
    was not until shortly before the council of Chalcedon that it
    was given exclusively to the great metropolitans. The second
    general council created a new patriarchate, that of
    Constantinople itself, the new Rome, the second capital of
    the empire. The church of Byzantium, so long obscure,
    enjoyed the same privileges, and was placed by the council of
    Chalcedon in the same rank as the Church of Rome. Rome at
    that time shared the patriarchal supremacy with these three
    churches. But when the Mahometan invasion had destroyed the
    sees of Alexandria and of Antioch,--when the see of
    Constantinople fell away, and in later times even separated
    from the West, Rome remained alone, and the circumstances of
    the times gathered all the Western Churches around her see,
    which from that time has been without a rival.

    New and more powerful friends than all the rest soon came
    to her assistance. Ignorance and superstition took
    possession of the Church, and delivered it, fettered and
    blindfold, into the hands of Rome.

    Yet this bondage was not effected without a struggle.
    Frequently did the Churches proclaim their independence; and
    their courageous voices were especially heard from
    Proconsular Africa and from the East.

    But Rome found new allies to stifle the cries of the
    churches. Princes, whom those stormy times often shook upon
    their thrones, offered their protection if Rome would in its
    turn support them. They conceded to her the spiritual
    authority, provided she would make a return in secular power.
    They were lavish of the souls of men, in the hope that she
    would aid them against their enemies. The power of the
    hierarchy which was ascending, and the imperial power which
    was declining, leant thus one upon the other, and by this
    alliance accelerated their twofold destiny.

    Rome could not lose by it. An edict of Theodosius II and
    of Valentinian III proclaimed the Roman bishop "rector of
    the whole Church." Justinian published a similar decree.
    These edicts did not contain all that the popes pretended to
    see in them; but in those times of ignorance it was easy for
    them to secure that interpretation which was most favorable
    to themselves. The dominion of the emperors in Italy
    becoming daily more precarious, the bishops of Rome took
    advantage of this circumstance to free themselves from their
    dependence.

    But already had issued from the forests of the North the
    most effectual promoters of the papal power. The barbarians
    who had invaded and settled in the West, after being satiated
    with blood and plunder, lowered their reeking swords before
    the intellectual power that met them face to face. Recently
    converted to Christianity, ignorant of the spiritual
    character of the Church, and feeling the want of a certain
    external pomp in religion, they prostrated themselves, half
    savage and half heathen as they were, at the feet of the
    high-priest of Rome. With their aid the West was in his
    power. At first the Vandals, then the Ostrogoths, somewhat
    later the Burgundians and Alans, next the Visigoths, and
    lastly the Lombards and Anglo-Saxons, came and bent the knee
    to the Roman pontiff. It was the sturdy shoulders of those
    children of the idolatrous north that succeeded in placing on
    the supreme throne of Christendom a pastor of the banks of
    the Tiber.

    At the beginning of the seventh century these events were
    accomplishing in the West, precisely at the period when the
    power of Mahomet arose in the East, prepared to invade
    another quarter of the world.

    From this time the evil continued to increase. In the
    eighth century we see the Roman bishops resisting on the one
    hand the Greek emperors, their lawful sovereigns, and
    endeavouring to expel them from Italy, while with the other
    they court the mayors of the palace in France, begging from
    this new power, just beginning to rise in the West, a share
    in the wreck of the empire. Rome founded her usurped
    authority between the East, which she repelled, and the West,
    which she summoned to her aid. She raised her throne between
    two revolts. Startled by the shouts of the Arabs, now become
    masters of Spain, and who boasted that they would speedily
    arrive in Italy by the gates of the Pyrenees and Alps, and
    proclaim the name of Mahomet on the Seven Hills; alarmed at
    the insolence of Astolphus, who at the head of his Lombards,
    roaring like a lion, and brandishing his sword before the
    gates of the eternal city, threatened to put every Roman to
    death: Rome, in the prospect of ruin, turned her frightened
    eyes around her, and threw herself into the arms of the
    Franks. The usurper Pepin demanded her pretended sanction of
    his new authority; it was granted, and the Papacy obtained in
    return his promise to be the defender of the "Republic of
    God." Pepin wrested from the Lombards the cities they had
    taken from the Greek emperor; yet, instead of restoring them
    to that prince, he laid they keys on St. Peter's altar, and
    swore with uplifted hands that he had not taken up arms for
    man, but to obtain from God the remission of his sins, and to
    do homage for his conquests to St. Peter. Thus did France
    establish the temporal power of the popes.

    Charlemagne appeared; the first time he ascends the
    stairs to the basilic of St. Peter, devoutly kissing each
    step. A second time he presents himself, lord of all the
    nations that formed the empire of the West, and of Rome
    itself. Leo III thought fit to bestow the imperial title on
    him who already possessed the power; and on Christmas day, in
    the year 800, he placed the diadem of the Roman emperors on
    the brow of the son of Pepin. From this time the pope
    belongs to the empire of the Franks: his connection with the
    East is ended. He broke off from a decayed and falling tree
    to graft himself upon a wild and vigorous sapling. A future
    elevation, to which he would have never dared aspire, awaits
    him among these German tribes with whom he now unites
    himself.

    Charlemagne bequeathed to his feeble successors only the
    wrecks of his power. In the ninth century disunion
    everywhere weakened the civil authority. Rome saw that this
    was the moment to exalt herself. When could the Church hope
    for a more favorable opportunity of becoming independent of
    the state, than when the crown which Charles had worn was
    broken, and its fragments lay scattered over his former
    empire?

    Then appeared the False Decretals of Isidore. In this
    collection of the pretended decrees of the popes, the most
    ancient bishops, who were contemporary with Tacitus and
    Quintilian, were made to speak the barbarous Latin of the
    ninth century. The customs and constitutions of the Franks
    were seriously attributed to the Romans in the time of the
    emperors. Popes quoted the Bible in the Latin translation of
    Jerome, who had lived one, two or three centuries after them;
    and Victor, bishop of Rome, in the year 192, wrote to
    Theophilus, who was archbishop of Alexandria in 385. The
    impostor who had fabricated this collection endeavored to
    prove that all bishops derived their authority from the
    bishop of Rome, who held his own immediately from Christ. He
    not only recorded all the successive conquests of the
    pontiffs, but even carried them back to the earliest times.
    The popes were not ashamed to avail themselves of this
    contemptible imposture. As early as 865, Nicholas I drew
    from its stores of weapons by which to combat princes and
    bishops. This impudent invention was for ages the arsenal of
    Rome.

    Nevertheless, the vices and crimes of the pontiffs
    suspended for a time the effect of the decretals. The Papacy
    celebrated its admission to the table of kings by shameful
    orgies. She became intoxicated: her senses were lost in the
    midst of drunken revellings. It is about this period that
    tradition places upon the papal throne a woman named Joan,
    who had taken refuge in Rome with her lover, and whose sex
    was betrayed by the pangs of childbirth during a solemn
    procession. But let us not needlessly augment the shame of
    the pontifical court. Abandoned women at this time governed
    Rome; and that throne which pretended to rise above the
    majesty of kings was sunk deep in the dregs of vice. Theodora
    and Marozia installed and deposed at their pleasure the
    self-styled masters of the Church of Christ, and placed their
    lovers, sons, and grandsons in St. Peter's chair. These
    scandals, which are but too well authenticated, may perhaps
    have given rise to the tradition of Pope Joan.

    Rome became one wild theater of disorders, the possession
    of which was disputed by the most powerful families of
    Italy. The counts of Tuscany were generally victorious. In
    1033, this house dared to place on the pontifical throne,
    under the name of Benedict IX, a youth brought up in
    debauchery. This boy of twelve years old continued, when
    pope, the same horrible and degrading vices. Another party
    chose Sylvester III in his stead; and Benedict, whose
    conscience was loaded with adulteries, and whose hands were
    stained with murder, at last sold the Papacy to a Roman
    ecclesiastic.

    The emperors of Germany, filled with indignation at such
    enormities, purged Rome with the sword. The empire,
    asserting its paramount rights, drew the triple crown from
    the mire into which it had fallen, and saved the degraded
    papacy by giving it respectable men as its chiefs. Henry III
    deposed three popes in 1046, and his finger, decorated with
    the ring of the Roman patricians, pointed out the bishop to
    whom the keys of St. Peter should be confided. Four popes,
    all Germans, and nominated by the emperor, succeeded. When
    the Roman pontiff died, the deputies of that church repaired
    to the imperial court, like the envoys of other dioceses, to
    solicit a new bishop. With joy the emperor beheld the popes
    reforming abuses, strengthening the Church, holding councils,
    installing and deposing prelates, in defiance of foreign
    monarchs: The Papacy by these pretensions did but exalt the
    power of the emperor, its lord paramount. But to allow of
    such practices was to expose his own authority to great
    danger. The power which the popes thus gradually recovered
    might be turned suddenly against the emperor himself. When
    the reptile had gained strength, it might wound the bosom
    that had cherished it: and this result followed.

    And now begins a new era for the papacy. It rises from
    its humiliation, and soon tramples the princes of the earth
    under foot. To exalt the Papacy is to exalt the Church, to
    advance religion, to ensure to the spirit the victory over
    the flesh, and to God the conquest of the world. Such are
    its maxims: in these ambition finds its advantage, and
    fanaticism its excuse.

    The whole of this new policy is personified in one man:
    Hildebrand.

    This pope, who has been by turns indiscreetly exalted or
    unjustly traduced, is the personification of the Roman
    pontificate in all its strength and glory. He is one of
    those normal characters in history, which include within
    themselves a new order of things, similar to those presented
    in other spheres by Charlemagne, Luther, and Napoleon.

    This monk, the son of a carpenter of Savoy, was brought
    up in a Roman convent, and had quitted Rome at the period
    when Henry III had there deposed three popes, and taken
    refuge in France in the austere convent of Cluny. In 1048,
    Bruno, bishop of Toul, having been nominated pope by the
    emperor at Worms, who was holding the German Diet in that
    city, assumed the pontifical habits, and took the name of Leo
    IX; but Hildebrand, who had hastened thither, refused to
    recognize him, since it was (said he) from the secular power
    that he held the tiara. Leo, yielding to the irresistible
    power of a strong mind and of a deep conviction, immediately
    humbled himself, laid aside his sacerdotal ornaments, and
    clad in the garb of a pilgrim, set out barefoot for Rome
    along with Hildebrand (says an historian), in order to be
    there legitimately elected by the clergy and the Roman
    people. From this time Hildebrand was the soul of the
    Papacy, until he became pope himself. He had governed the
    Church under the name of several pontiffs, before he reigned
    in person as Gregory VII. One grand idea had taken
    possession of this great genius. He desired to establish a
    visible theocracy, of which the pope, as vicar of Jesus
    Christ, should be the head. The recollection of the universal
    dominion of heathen Rome haunted his imagination and animated
    his zeal. He wished to restore to papal Rome all that
    imperial Rome had lost. "What Marius and Caesar," said his
    flatterers, "could not effect by torrents of blood, thou hast
    accomplished by a word."

    Gregory VII was not directed by the spirit of the Lord.
    That spirit of truth, humility, and long-suffering was
    unknown to him. He sacrificed the truth whenever he judged
    it necessary to his policy. This he did particularly in the
    case of Berenger, archdeacon of Angers. But a spirit far
    superior to that of the generality of pontiffs--a deep
    conviction of the justice of his cause--undoubtedly animated
    him. He was bold, ambitious, persevering in his designs, and
    at the same time skillful and politic in the use of the means
    that would ensure success.

    His first task was to organize the militia of the
    church. It was necessary to gain strength before attacking
    the empire. A council held at Rome removed the pastors from
    their families, and compelled them to become the devoted
    adherents of the hierarchy. The law of celibacy, planned and
    carried out by popes, who were themselves monks, changed the
    clergy into a sort of monastic order. Gregory VII claimed
    the same power over all the bishops and priests of
    Christendom, that an abbot of Cluny exercises in the order
    over which he presides. The legates of Hildebrand, who
    compared themselves to the proconsuls of ancient Rome,
    travelled through the provinces, depriving the pastors of
    their legitimate wives; and, if necessary, the pope himself
    raised the populace against the married clergy.

    But chief of all, Gregory designed emancipating Rome from
    its subjection to the empire. Never would he have dared
    conceive so bold a scheme, if the troubles that afflicted the
    minority of Henry IV, and the revolt of the German princes
    against that young emperor, had not favored its execution.
    The pope was at this time one of the magnates of the empire.
    Making common cause with the other great vassals, he
    strengthened himself by the aristocratic interest, and then
    forbade all ecclesiastics, under pain of excommunication, to
    receive investiture from the emperor. He broke the ancient
    ties that connected the Churches and their pastors with the
    royal authority, but it was to bind them all to the
    pontifical throne. To this throne he undertook to chain
    priests, kings, and people, and to make the pope a universal
    monarch. It was Rome alone that every priest should fear: it
    was in Rome alone that he should hope. The kingdoms and
    principalities of the earth are her domain. All kings were
    to tremble at the thunderbolts hurled by the Jupiter of
    modern Rome. Woe to him who resists! Subjects are released
    from their oaths of allegiance; the whole country is placed
    under an interdict; public worship ceases; the churches are
    closed; the bells are mute; the sacraments are no longer
    administered; and the malediction extends even to the dead,
    to whom the earth, at the command of a haughty pontiff,
    denies the repose of the tomb.

    The pope, subordinate from the very beginning of his
    existence successively to the Roman, Frank, and German
    emperors, was now free, and he trod for the first time as
    their equal, if not their master. Yet Gregory VII was
    humbled in his turn: Rome was taken, and Hildebrand compelled
    to flee. He died at Salerno, exclaiming, "I have loved
    righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore do I die in
    exile." Who shall dare charge with hypocrisy these words
    uttered on the very brink of the grave?

    The successors of Gregory, like soldiers arriving after
    a victory, threw themselves as conquerors on the enslaved
    Churches. Spain rescued from Islamism, Prussia reclaimed from
    idolatry, fell into the arms of the crowned priest. The
    Crusades, which were undertaken at his instigation, extended
    and confirmed his authority. The pious pilgrims, who in
    imagination had seen saints and angels leading their armed
    bands,--who, entering humble and barefoot within the walls of
    Jerusalem, burnt the Jews in their synagogue, and watered
    with the blood of thousands of Saracens the places where they
    came to trace the sacred footsteps of the Prince of
    Peace,--carried into the East the name of the pope, who had
    been forgotten there since he had exchanged the supremacy of
    the Greeks for that of the Franks.

    In another quarter the power of the Church effected what
    the arms of the republic and of the empire had been unable to
    accomplish. The Germans laid at the feet of a bishop those
    tributes which their ancestors had refused to the most
    powerful generals. Their princes, on succeeding to the
    imperial dignity, imagined they received a crown from the
    popes, but it was a yoke that was placed upon their necks.
    The kingdoms of Christendom, already subject to the spiritual
    authority of Rome, now became her serfs and tributaries.

    Thus everything was changed in the Church.

    It was at first a community of brethren, and now an absolute
    monarchy was established in its bosom. All Christians were
    priests of the living God, with humble pastors as their
    guides. But a haughty head is upraised in the midst of these
    pastors; a mysterious voice utters words full of pride; an
    iron hand compels all men, great and small, rich and poor,
    bond and free, to wear the badge of its power. The holy and
    primitive equality of souls before God is lost sight of. At
    the voice of one man Christendom is divided into two unequal
    parties: on the one side is a separate caste of priests,
    daring to usurp the name of the Church, and claiming to be
    invested with peculiar privileges in the eyes of the Lord;
    and, on the other, servile flocks reduced to a blind and
    passive submission--a people gagged and fettered, and given
    over to a haughty caste. Every tribe, language, and nation
    of Christendom, submits to the dominion of this spiritual
    king, who has received power to conquer.

    What is the official pronouncement concerning the Pope in
    our day? Here it comes:

    " The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is
    not a mere man, but as it were God and the VICAR OF GOD."

    "The Pope is of such lofty and supreme dignity that, properly
    speaking, he has not been established in any rank of dignity,
    but rather has been placed upon the very summit of all ranks
    and dignities..."

    "He is likewise the divine monarch and supreme emperor and
    king of kings."

    "HENCE THE POPE IS CROWNED WITH A TRIPLE CROWN, AS KING OF
    HEAVEN AND OF EARTH AND OF THE LOWER REGIONS." Ferraris'
    Eccl. Dictionary (CATHOLIC) Article, Pope.


    "What are the letters supposed to be in the Pope's crown and
    what do they signify, if anything?"

    "The letters inscribed in the Pope's miter are these:
    VICARIVS FILII DEI, which is the latin for 'VICAR OF THE SON
    OF GOD.' Catholics hold that the church, which is a visible
    society, must have a visible head. Christ, before HIS
    ascension into heaven, appointed St. Peter to act as his
    representative . . . Hence to the Bishop of Rome, as head of
    the church, was given the title, 'VICAR OF CHRIST.'

    Our Sunday Visitor. (Catholic Weekly) "Bureau of information
    Huntington, Ind. April 18, 1915.

    If you take the roman numerals from the Popes title and add
    them up you will get 666, thus he wears 666 on his miter. In
    his book "The Great Apostasy," Joseph F Berg, after having
    proved that 666 can be gotten from the Greek word LATEINOS
    and the Hebrew word ROMIITH which also refer to the Cathioic
    Church, he states: "Now we challenge the world to find
    another name in these languages: Greek, Hebrew, and Latin,
    which shall designate the same number."

    Even the Romanists themselves shame you in their clear-
    sighted comprehension of the issues of this question.
    Cardinal Manning says, "The Catholic Church is either the
    masterpiece of Satan or the kingdom of the Son of God."
    Cardinal Newman says, "a sacerdotal order is historically the
    essence of the church of Rome; if not divinely appointed, it
    is doctrinally the essence of antichrist." In both these
    statements the issue is clear, and it is the same. Rome
    herself admits, openly admits, that if she is not the very
    kingdom of Christ, she is that of Antichrist. Rome declares
    that she is one or the other. She herself propounds and
    argues this solemn alternative.

    You shrink from it, do you? I accept it. Conscience
    constrains me. History compels me. The past, the awful past
    rises before me. I see THE GREAT APOSTASY, I see the
    desolation of Christendom, I see the smoking ruins, I see the
    reign of monsters; I see those vicegods, that Gregory VII.,
    that Innocent III., that Boniface VIII., that Alexander VI.,
    that Gregory XIII., that Pius IX.; I see their long
    succession, I hear their insufferable blasphemies, I see
    their abominable lives; I see them worshipped by blinded
    generations, bestowing hollow benedictions, bartering lying
    indulgences, creating a paganized Christianity; I see their
    liveried slaves, their slaven priests, their celibate
    confessors; I see the infamous confessional, the ruined
    women, the murdered innocents; I hear the lying absolutions,
    the dying groans; I hear the cries of the victims; I hear the
    anathemas, the curses, the thunders of the interdicts; I see
    the racks, the dungeons, the stakes; I see that inhuman
    Inquisition, those fires of Smithfield, those butcheries of
    St. Bartholomew, that Spanish armada, those unspeakable
    dragonnades, that endless train of wars, that dreadful
    multitude of massacres. I see it all, and in the name of the
    ruin it has wrought in the church and in the world, in the
    name of the truth it has denied, the temple it has defiled,
    the God it has blasphemed, the souls it has destroyed; in the
    name of the millions it has deluded, the millions it has
    slaughtered, the millions it has damned; with holy
    confessors, with noble reformers, with innumerable martyrs,
    with the saints of ages, I denounce it as the masterpiece of
    Satan, as the body and soul and essence of antichrist.



    X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X

    Another file downloaded from: NIRVANAnet(tm)

    & the Temple of the Screaming Electron Jeff Hunter 510-935-5845
    Burn This Flag Zardoz 408-363-9766
    realitycheck Poindexter Fortran 510-527-1662
    Lies Unlimited Mick Freen 415-583-4102
    My Dog Bit Jesus Suzanne D'Fault 510-658-8078
    New Dork Sublime Demented Pimiento 415-566-0126

    Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,
    arcane knowledge, political extremism, diverse sexuality,
    insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS.

    Full access for first-time callers. We don't want to know who you are,
    where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.

    "Raw Data for Raw Nerves"

    X-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-X

    Eddie,
    telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23
    http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Rick's BBS telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23