The apostle Paul, in his second letter to the Thessalonians, foretold the great apostasy which would result in the establishment of the papal power. He declared that the day of Christ should not come, “except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.” And furthermore, the apostle warns his brethren that “the mystery of iniquity doth already work.” 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4, 7. Even at that early date he saw, creeping into the church, errors that would prepare the way for the development of the papacy.
Public Domain https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Byzantinischer_Mosaizist_um_1000_002.jpg…
Little by little, at first in stealth and silence, and then more openly as it increased in strength and gained control of the minds of men, “the mystery of iniquity” carried forward its deceptive and blasphemous work. Almost imperceptibly the customs of heathenism found their way into the Christian church. The spirit of compromise and conformity was restrained for a time by the fierce persecutions which the church endured under paganism. But as persecution ceased, and Christianity entered the courts and palaces of kings, she laid aside the humble simplicity of Christ and His apostles for the pomp and pride of pagan priests and rulers; and in place of the requirements of God, she substituted human theories and traditions. The nominal conversion of Constantine, in the early part of the fourth century, caused great rejoicing; and the world, cloaked with a form of righteousness, walked into the church. Now the work of corruption rapidly progressed. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church. Her doctrines, ceremonies, and superstitions were incorporated into the faith and worship of the professed followers of Christ.
This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of “the man of sin” foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan’s power—a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will.
Satan once endeavored to form a compromise with Christ. He came to the Son of God in the wilderness of temptation, and showing Him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them, offered to give all into His hands if He would but acknowledge the supremacy of the prince of darkness. Christ rebuked the presumptuous tempter and forced him to depart. But Satan meets with greater success in presenting the same temptations to man. To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan —the bishop of Rome.
It is one of the leading doctrines of Romanism that the pope is the visible head of the universal church of Christ, invested with supreme authority over bishops and pastors in all parts of the world. More than this, the pope has been given the very titles of Deity. He has been styled “Lord God the Pope”i, and has been declared infallible. He demands the homage of all men. The same claim urged by Satan in the wilderness of temptation is still urged by him through the Church of Rome, and vast numbers are ready to yield him homage.
But those who fear and reverence God meet this heaven-daring assumption as Christ met the solicitations of the wily foe: “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.” Luke 4:8. God has never given a hint in His word that He has appointed any man to be the head of the church. The doctrine of papal supremacy is directly opposed to the teachings of the Scriptures. The pope can have no power over Christ’s church except by usurpation.
Romanists have persisted in bringing against Protestants the charge of heresy and willful separation from the true church. But these accusations apply rather to themselves. They are the ones who laid down the banner of Christ and departed from “the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Jude 3.
Satan well knew that the Holy Scriptures would enable men to discern his deceptions and withstand his power. It was by the word that even the Saviour of the world had resisted his attacks. At every assault, Christ presented the shield of eternal truth, saying, “It is written.” To every suggestion of the adversary, He opposed the wisdom and power of the word. In order for Satan to maintain his sway over men, and establish the authority of the papal usurper, he must keep them in ignorance of the Scriptures. The Bible would exalt God and place finite men in their true position; therefore its sacred truths must be concealed and suppressed. This logic was adopted by the Roman Church. For hundreds of years the circulation of the Bible was prohibited. The people were forbidden to read it or to have it in their houses, and unprincipled priests and prelates interpreted its teachings to sustain their pretensions. Thus the pope came to be almost universally acknowledged as the vicegerent of God on earth, endowed with authority over church and state.
The detector of error having been removed, Satan worked according to his will. Prophecy had declared that the papacy was to “think to change times and laws.” Daniel 7:25. This work it was not slow to attempt. To afford converts from heathenism a substitute for the worship of idols, and thus to promote their nominal acceptance of Christianity, the adoration of images and relics was gradually introduced into the Christian worship. The decree of a general councilii finally established this system of idolatry. To complete the sacrilegious work, Rome presumed to expunge from the law of God the second commandment, forbidding image worship, and to divide the tenth commandment, in order to preserve the number.
The spirit of concession to paganism opened the way for a still further disregard of Heaven’s authority. Satan, working through unconsecrated leaders of the church, tampered with the fourth commandment also, and essayed to set aside the ancient Sabbath, the day which God had blessed and sanctified (Genesis 2:2, 3), and in its stead to exalt the festival observed by the heathen as “the venerable day of the sun.” This change was not at first attempted openly. In the first centuries the true Sabbath had been kept by all Christians. They were jealous for the honor of God, and, believing that His law is immutable, they zealously guarded the sacredness of its precepts. But with great subtlety Satan worked through his agents to bring about his object. That the attention of the people might be called to the Sunday, it was made a festival in honor of the resurrection of Christ. Religious services were held upon it; yet it was regarded as a day of recreation, the Sabbath being still sacredly observed.
To prepare the way for the work which he designed to accomplish, Satan had led the Jews, before the advent of Christ, to load down the Sabbath with the most rigorous exactions, making its observance a burden. Now, taking advantage of the false light in which he had thus caused it to be regarded, he cast contempt upon it as a Jewish institution. While Christians generally continued to observe the Sunday as a joyous festival, he led them, in order to show their hatred of Judaism, to make the Sabbath a fast, a day of sadness and gloom.
In the early part of the fourth century the emperor Constantine issued a decree making Sunday a public festival throughout the Roman Empire.iii The day of the sun was reverenced by his pagan subjects and was honored by Christians; it was the emperor’s policy to unite the conflicting interests of heathenism and Christianity. He was urged to do this by the bishops of the church, who, inspired by ambition and thirst for power, perceived that if the same day was observed by both Christians and heathen, it would promote the nominal acceptance of Christianity by pagans and thus advance the power and glory of the church. But while many God-fearing Christians were gradually led to regard Sunday as possessing a degree of sacredness, they still held the true Sabbath as the holy of the Lord and observed it in obedience to the fourth commandment.
The archdeceiver had not completed his work. He was resolved to gather the Christian world under his banner and to exercise his power through his vicegerent, the proud pontiff who claimed to be the representative of Christ. Through half-converted pagans, ambitious prelates, and world-loving churchmen he accomplished his purpose. Vast councils were held from time to time, in which the dignitaries of the church were convened from all the world. In nearly every council the Sabbath which God had instituted was pressed down a little lower, while the Sunday was correspondingly exalted. Thus the pagan festival came finally to be honored as a divine institution, while the Bible Sabbath was pronounced a relic of Judaism, and its observers were declared to be accursed.
The great apostate had succeeded in exalting himself “above all that is called God, or that is worshiped.” 2 Thessalonians 2:4. He had dared to change the only precept of the divine law that unmistakably points all mankind to the true and living God. In the fourth commandment, God is revealed as the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and is thereby distinguished from all false gods. It was as a memorial of the work of creation that the seventh day was sanctified as a rest day for man. It was designed to keep the living God ever before the minds of men as the source of being and the object of reverence and worship. Satan strives to turn men from their allegiance to God, and from rendering obedience to His law; therefore he directs his efforts especially against that commandment which points to God as the Creator.
Protestants now urge that the resurrection of Christ on Sunday made it the Christian Sabbath. But Scripture evidence is lacking. No such honor was given to the day by Christ or His apostles. The observance of Sunday as a Christian institution had its origin in that “mystery of lawlessness” (2 Thessalonians 2:7, R.V.) which, even in Paul’s day, had begun its work. Where and when did the Lord adopt this child of the papacy? What valid reason can be given for a change which the Scriptures do not sanction?
In the sixth century the papacy had become firmly established. Its seat of power was fixed in the imperial city, and the bishop of Rome was declared to be the head over the entire church. Paganism had given place to the papacy. The dragon had given to the beast “his power, and his seat, and great authority.” Revelation 13:2. And now began the 1260 years of papal oppression foretold in the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation. Daniel 7:25; Revelation 13:5-7.ivChristians were forced to choose either to yield their integrity and accept the papal ceremonies and worship, or to wear away their lives in dungeons or suffer death by the rack, the fagot, or the headsman’s ax. Now were fulfilled the words of Jesus: “Ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for My name’s sake.” Luke 21:16, 17. Persecution opened upon the faithful with greater fury than ever before, and the world became a vast battlefield. For hundreds of years the church of Christ found refuge in seclusion and obscurity. Thus says the prophet: “The woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and three-score days.” Revelation 12:6.
The accession of the Roman Church to power marked the beginning of the Dark Ages. As her power increased, the darkness deepened. Faith was transferred from Christ, the true foundation, to the pope of Rome. Instead of trusting in the Son of God for forgiveness of sins and for eternal salvation, the people looked to the pope, and to the priests and prelates to whom he delegated authority. They were taught that the pope was their earthly mediator and that none could approach God except through him; and, further, that he stood in the place of God to them and was therefore to be implicitly obeyed. A deviation from his requirements was sufficient cause for the severest punishment to be visited upon the bodies and souls of the offenders. Thus the minds of the people were turned away from God to fallible, erring, and cruel men, nay, more, to the prince of darkness himself, who exercised his power through them. Sin was disguised in a garb of sanctity. When the Scriptures are suppressed, and man comes to regard himself as supreme, we need look only for fraud, deception, and debasing iniquity. With the elevation of human laws and traditions was manifest the corruption that ever results from setting aside the law of God.
Those were days of peril for the church of Christ. The faithful standard-bearers were few indeed. Though the truth was not left without witnesses, yet at times it seemed that error and superstition would wholly prevail, and true religion would be banished from the earth. The gospel was lost sight of, but the forms of religion were multiplied, and the people were burdened with rigorous exactions.
They were taught not only to look to the pope as their mediator, but to trust to works of their own to atone for sin. Long pilgrimages, acts of penance, the worship of relics, the erection of churches, shrines, and altars, the payment of large sums to the church—these and many similar acts were enjoined to appease the wrath of God or to secure His favor; as if God were like men, to be angered at trifles, or pacified by gifts or acts of penance!
Notwithstanding that vice prevailed, even among the leaders of the Roman Church, her influence seemed steadily to increase. About the close of the eighth century, papists put forth the claim that in the first ages of the church the bishops of Rome had possessed the same spiritual power which they now assumed. To establish this claim, some means must be employed to give it a show of authority; and this was readily suggested by the father of lies. Ancient writings were forged by monks. Decrees of councils before unheard of were discovered, establishing the universal supremacy of the pope from the earliest times. And a church that had rejected the truth greedily accepted these deceptions.v
The few faithful builders upon the true foundation. (1 Corinthians 3:10, 11) were perplexed and hindered as the rubbish of false doctrine obstructed the work. Like the builders upon the wall of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s day, some were ready to say: “The strength of the bearers of burdens is decayed, and there is much rubbish; so that we are not able to build.” Nehemiah 4:10. Wearied with the constant struggle against persecution, fraud, iniquity, and every other obstacle that Satan could devise to hinder their progress, some who had been faithful builders became disheartened; and for the sake of peace and security for their property and their lives, they turned away from the true foundation. Others, undaunted by the opposition of their enemies, fearlessly declared: “Be not ye afraid of them: remember the Lord, which is great and terrible” (verse 14); and they proceeded with the work, everyone with his sword girded by his side. Ephesians 6:17.
The same spirit of hatred and opposition to the truth has inspired the enemies of God in every age, and the same vigilance and fidelity have been required in His servants. The words of Christ to the first disciples are applicable to His followers to the close of time: “What I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.” Mark 13:37.
The darkness seemed to grow more dense. Image worship became more general. Candles were burned before images, and prayers were offered to them. The most absurd and superstitious customs prevailed. The minds of men were so completely controlled by superstition that reason itself seemed to have lost its sway. While priests and bishops were themselves pleasure-loving, sensual, and corrupt, it could only be expected that the people who looked to them for guidance would be sunken in ignorance and vice.
Another step in papal assumption was taken, when, in the eleventh century, Pope Gregory VII proclaimed the perfection of the Roman Church. Among the propositions which he put forth was one declaring that the church had never erred, nor would it ever err, according to the Scriptures. But the Scripture proofs did not accompany the assertion. The proud pontiff also claimed the power to depose emperors, and declared that no sentence which he pronounced could be reversed by anyone, but that it was his prerogative to reverse the decisions of all others.vi
A striking illustration of the tyrannical character of this advocate of infallibility was given in his treatment of the German emperor, Henry IV. For presuming to disregard the pope’s authority, this monarch was declared to be excommunicated and dethroned. Terrified by the desertion and threats of his own princes, who were encouraged in rebellion against him by the papal mandate, Henry felt the necessity of making his peace with Rome. In company with his wife and a faithful servant he crossed the Alps in midwinter, that he might humble himself before the pope. Upon reaching the castle whither Gregory had withdrawn, he was conducted, without his guards, into an outer court, and there, in the severe cold of winter, with uncovered head and naked feet, and in a miserable dress, he awaited the pope’s permission to come into his presence. Not until he had continued three days fasting and making confession, did the pontiff condescend to grant him pardon. Even then it was only upon condition that the emperor should await the sanction of the pope before resuming the insignia or exercising the power of royalty. And Gregory, elated with his triumph, boasted that it was his duty to pull down the pride of kings.
How striking the contrast between the overbearing pride of this haughty pontiff and the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who represents Himself as pleading at the door of the heart for admittance, that He may come in to bring pardon and peace, and who taught His disciples: “Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.” Matthew 20:27.
The advancing centuries witnessed a constant increase of error in the doctrines put forth from Rome. Even before the establishment of the papacy the teachings of heathen philosophers had received attention and exerted an influence in the church. Many who professed conversion still clung to the tenets of their pagan philosophy, and not only continued its study themselves, but urged it upon others as a means of extending their influence among the heathen. Serious errors were thus introduced into the Christian faith. Prominent among these was the belief in man’s natural immortality and his consciousness in death. This doctrine laid the foundation upon which Rome established the invocation of saints and the adoration of the Virgin Mary. From this sprang also the heresy of eternal torment for the finally impenitent, which was early incorporated into the papal faith.
Then the way was prepared for the introduction of still another invention of paganism, which Rome named purgatory, and employed to terrify the credulous and superstitious multitudes. By this heresy is affirmed the existence of a place of torment, in which the souls of such as have not merited eternal damnation are to suffer punishment for their sins, and from which, when freed from impurity, they are admitted to heaven.vii
Still another fabrication was needed to enable Rome to profit by the fears and the vices of her adherents. This was supplied by the doctrine of indulgences. Full remission of sins, past, present, and future, and release from all the pains and penalties incurred, were promised to all who would enlist in the pontiff’s wars to extend his temporal dominion, to punish his enemies, or to exterminate those who dared deny his spiritual supremacy. The people were also taught that by the payment of money to the church they might free themselves from sin, and also release the souls of their deceased friends who were confined in the tormenting flames. By such means did Rome fill her coffers and sustain the magnificence, luxury, and vice of the pretended representatives of Him who had not where to lay His head.viii
The Scriptural ordinance of the Lord’s Supper had been supplanted by the idolatrous sacrifice of the mass. Papal priests pretended, by their senseless mummery, to convert the simple bread and wine into the actual “body and blood of Christ.”—Cardinal Wiseman, The Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Blessed Eucharist, Proved From Scripture, lecture 8, sec. 3, par. 26. With blasphemous presumption, they openly claimed the power of creating God, the Creator of all things. Christians were required, on pain of death, to avow their faith in this horrible, Heaven-insulting heresy. Multitudes who refused were given to the flames.ix
In the thirteenth century was established that most terrible of all the engines of the papacy—the Inquisition. The prince of darkness wrought with the leaders of the papal hierarchy. In their secret councils Satan and his angels controlled the minds of evil men, while unseen in the midst stood an angel of God, taking the fearful record of their iniquitous decrees and writing the history of deeds too horrible to appear to human eyes. “Babylon the great” was “drunken with the blood of the saints.” The mangled forms of millions of martyrs cried to God for vengeance upon that apostate power.
Popery had become the world’s despot. Kings and emperors bowed to the decrees of the Roman pontiff. The destinies of men, both for time and for eternity, seemed under his control. For hundreds of years the doctrines of Rome had been extensively and implicitly received, its rites reverently performed, its festivals generally observed. Its clergy were honored and liberally sustained. Never since has the Roman Church attained to greater dignity, magnificence, or power.
But “the noon of the papacy was the midnight of the world.”—J. A. Wylie, The History of Protestantism, b. 1, ch. 4. The Holy Scriptures were almost unknown, not only to the people, but to the priests. Like the Pharisees of old, the papal leaders hated the light which would reveal their sins. God’s law, the standard of righteousness, having been removed, they exercised power without limit, and practiced vice without restraint. Fraud, avarice, and profligacy prevailed. Men shrank from no crime by which they could gain wealth or position. The palaces of popes and prelates were scenes of the vilest debauchery. Some of the reigning pontiffs were guilty of crimes so revolting that secular rulers endeavored to depose these dignitaries of the church as monsters too vile to be tolerated. For centuries Europe had made no progress in learning, arts, or civilization. A moral and intellectual paralysis had fallen upon Christendom.
The condition of the world under the Romish power presented a fearful and striking fulfillment of the words of the prophet Hosea: “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee: . . . seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.” “There is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. By swearing, and lying, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out, and blood toucheth blood.” Hosea 4:6, 1, 2. Such were the results of banishing the word of God.
i. Titles.—In a passage which is included in the Roman Catholic Canon Law, or Corpus Juris Canonici, Pope Innocent III declares that the Roman pontiff is “the vicegerent upon earth, not of a mere man, but of very God;” and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is “very God and very man.” See Decretales Domini Gregorii Papae IX (Decretals of the Lord Pope Gregory IX), liber 1, de translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, ch. 3; Corpus Juris Canonici (2d Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Decretales, col. 205. The documents which formed the Decretals were gathered by Gratian, who was teaching at the University of Bologna about the year 1140. His work was added to and re-edited by Pope Gregory IX in an edition issued in 1234. Other documents appeared in succeeding years from time to time including the Extravagantes, added toward the close of the fifteenth century. All of these, with Gratian’s Decretum, were published as the Corpus Juris Canonici in 1582. Pope Pius X authorized the codification in Canon law in 1904, and the resulting code became effective in 1918.
ii. Image worship.—”The worship of images . . . was one of those corruptions of Christianity which crept into the church stealthily and almost without notice or observation. This corruption did not, like other heresies, develop itself at once, for in that case it would have met with decided censure and rebuke: but, making its commencement under a fair disguise, so gradually was one practice after another introduced in connection with it, that the church had become deeply steeped in practical idolatry, not only without any efficient opposition, but almost without any decided remonstrance; and when at length an endeavor was made to root it out, the evil was found too deeply fixed to admit of removal. . . . It must be traced to the idolatrous tendency of the human heart, and its propensity to serve the creature more than the Creator. . . .
“Images and pictures were first introduced into churches, not to be worshiped, but either in the place of books to give instruction to those who could not read, or to excite devotion in the minds of others. How far they ever answered such a purpose is doubtful; but, even granting that this was the case for a time, it soon ceased to be so, and it was found that pictures and images brought into churches darkened rather than enlightened the minds of the ignorant—degraded rather than exalted the devotion of the worshiper. So that, however they might have been intended to direct men’s minds to God, they ended in turning them from Him to the worship of created things.”—J. Mendham, The Seventh General Council, the Second of Nicaea,Introduction, pages iii-vi.
For a record of the proceedings and decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea, A.D. 787, called to establish the worship of images, see Baronius, Ecclesiastical Annals, vol. 9, pp. 391-407 (Antwerp, 1612); J. Mendham, The Seventh General Council, the Second of Nicaea; Ed. Stillingfleet, Defense of the Discourse Concerning the Idolatry Practiced in the Church of Rome(London, 1686); A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d series, vol. 14, pp. 521-587 (New York, 1900); Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, From the Original Documents, b. 18, ch. 1, secs. 332, 333; ch. 2, secs. 345-352 (T. and T. Clark ed., 1896), vol. 5, pp. 260-304, 342-372.
iii. The Sunday Law of Constantine.—The law issued by the emperor Constantine on the seventh of March, A.D. 321, regarding a day of rest from labor, reads thus:
“All judges and city people and the craftsmen shall rest upon the venerable Day of the Sun. Country people, however, may freely attend to the cultivation of the fields, because it frequently happens that no other days are better adapted for planting the grain in the furrows or the vines in trenches. So that the advantage given by heavenly providence may not for the occasion of a short time perish.”—Joseph Cullen Ayer, A Source Book for Ancient Church History (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1913), div. 2, per. 1, ch. 1, sec. 59, g, pp. 284, 285.
The Latin original is in the Codex Justiniani (Codex of Justinian), lib. 3, title 12, lex. 3. The law is given in Latin and in English translation in Philip Schaff’s History of the Christian Church, vol. 3, 3d period, ch. 7, sec. 75, p. 380, footnote 1; and in James A. Hessey’s Bampton Lectures, Sunday, lecture 3, par. 1, 3d ed., Murray’s printing of 1866, p. 58. See discussion in Schaff, as above referred to; in Albert Henry Newman, A Manual of Church History (Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, printing of 1933), rev. ed., vol. 1, pp. 305-307; and in Leroy E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Assn., 1950), vol. 1, pp. 376-381.
iv. Prophetic dates.—An important principle in prophetic interpretation in connection with time prophecies is the year-day principle, under which a day of prophetic time is counted as a calendar year of historic time. Before the Israelites entered the land of Canaan they sent twelve spies ahead to investigate. The spies were gone forty days, and upon their return the Hebrews, frightened at their report, refused to go up and occupy the Promised Land. The result was a sentence the Lord passed upon them: “After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years.” Numbers 14:34. A similar method of computing future time is indicated through the prophet Ezekiel. Forty years of punishment for iniquities awaited the kingdom of Judah. The Lord said through the prophet: “Lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year.” Ezekiel 4:6. This year-day principle has an important application in interpreting the time of the prophecy of the “two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings” (Daniel 8:14, R.V.) and the 1260-day period, variously indicated as “a time and times and the dividing of time” (Daniel 7:25), the “forty and two months” (Revelation 11:2; 13:5), and the “thousand two hundred and threescore days” (Revelation 11:3; 12:6).
v. Forged writings.—Among the documents that at the present time are generally admitted to be forgeries, the Donation of Constantine and the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals are of primary importance. “The ‘Donation of Constantine’ is the name traditionally applied, since the later Middle Ages, to a document purporting to have been addressed by Constantine the Great to Pope Sylvester I, which is found first in a Parisian manuscript (Codex lat. 2777) of probably the beginning of the ninth century. Since the eleventh century it has been used as a powerful argument in favor of the papal claims, and consequently since the twelfth it has been the subject of a vigorous controversy. At the same time, by rendering it possible to regard the papacy as a middle term between the original and the medieval Roman Empire, and thus to form a theoretical basis of continuity for the reception of the Roman law in the Middle Ages, it has had no small influence upon secular history.”—The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, vol. 3, art. “Donation of constantine,” pp. 484, 485.
The historical theory developed in the “Donation” is fully discussed in Henry E. Cardinal Manning’s The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, London, 1862. The arguments of the “Donation” were of a scholastic type, and the possibility of a forgery was not mentioned until the rise of historical criticism in the fifteenth century. Nicholas of Cusa was among the first to conclude that Constantine never made any such donation. Lorenza Valla in Italy gave a brilliant demonstration of its spuriousness in 1450. See Christopher B. Coleman’s Treatise of Lorenzo Valla on the Donation of Constantine (New York, 1927). For a century longer, however, the belief in the authenticity of the “Donation” and of the False Decretals was kept alive. For example, Martin Luther at first accepted the decretals, but he soon said to Eck: “I impugn these decretals;” and to Spalatin: “He [the pope] does in his decretals corrupt and crucify Christ, that is, the truth.”
It is deemed established that the “donation” is (1) a forgery, (2) the work of one man or period, (3) the forger has made use of older documents, (4) the forgery originated around 752 and 778. As for the Catholics, they abandoned the defense of the authenticity of the document with Baronius, Ecclesiastical Annals, in 1592. Consult for the best text, K. Zeumer, in the Festgabe fur Rudolf von Gneist (Berlin, 1888). Translat- ed in Coleman’s Treatise, referred to above, and in Ernest F. Henderson, Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages (New York, 1892), p. 319; Briefwechsel (Weimar ed.), pp. 141, 161. See also The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1950), vol. 3, p. 484; F. Gregorovius, Rome in the Middle Ages, vol. 2, p. 329; and Johann Joseph Ignaz von Doellinger, Fables Respecting the Popes of the Middle Ages (London, 1871).
The “false writings” referred to in the text include also the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, together with other forgeries. The Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals are certain fictitious letters ascribed to early popes from Clement (A.D. 100) to Gregory the Great (A.D. 600), incorporated in a ninth century collection purporting to have been made by “Isidore Mercator.” The name “Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals” has been in use since the advent of criticism in the fifteenth century.
Pseudo-Isidore took as the basis of his forgeries a collection of valid canons called the Hispana Gallica Augustodunensis, thus lessening the danger of detection, since collections of canons were commonly made by adding new matter to old. Thus his forgeries were less apparent when incorporated with genuine material. The falsity of the Pseudo-Isidorian fabrications is now incontestably admitted, being proved by internal evidence, investigation of the sources, the methods used, and the fact that this material was unknown before 852. Historians agree that 850 or 851 is the most probable date for the completion of the collection, since the document is first cited in the Admonitio of the capitulary of Quiercy, in 857.
The author of these forgeries is not known. It is probable that they emanated from the aggressive new church party which formed in the ninth century at Rheims, France. It is agreed that Bishop Hincmar of Rheims used these decretals in his deposition of Rothad of Soissons, who brought the decretals to Rome in 864 and laid them before Pope Nicholas I.
Among those who challenged their authenticity were Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464), Charles Dumoulin (1500-1566), and George Cassender (1513- 1564). The irrefutable proof of their falsity was conveyed by David Blondel, 1628.
An early edition is given in Migne Patrolgia Latina, CXXX. For the oldest and best manuscript, see P. Hinschius, Decretales Pseudo-Isidorianiae at capitula Angilramni (Leipzig, 1863). Consult The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge(1950), vol. 9, pp. 343-345. See also H. H. Milman, Latin Christianity (9 vols.), vol. 3; Johann Joseph Ignaz von Doellinger, The Pope and the Council (1869); and Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity (1939), vol. 3; The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5, art. “False Decretals,” and Fournier, “Etudes sure les Fausses Decretals,” in Revue d’Historique Ecclesiastique (Louvain) vol. 7 (1906), and vol. 8 (1907).
vi. The Dictate of Hildebrand (Gregory VII).—For the original Latin version see Baronius, Annales Ecclesiastici, ann. 1076, vol. 17, pp. 405, 406 of the Paris printing of 1869; and the Monumenta Germaniae Historica Selecta, vol. 3, p. 17. For an English translation see Frederic A. Ogg, Source Book of Medieval History (New York: American Book Co., 1907), ch. 6, sec. 45, pp. 262-264; and Oliver J. Thatcher and Edgar H. Mcneal, source Book for Medieval History (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1905), sec. 3, item 65, pp. 136-139.
For a discussion of the background of the Dictate, see James Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, rev. ed., ch. 10; and James W. Thompson and Edgar N. Johnson, An Introduction to Medieval Europe, 300-1500, pages 377-380.
vii. Purgatory.—Dr. Joseph Faa Di Bruno thus defines purgatory: “Purgatory is a state of suffering after this life, in which those souls are for a time detained, who depart this life after their deadly sins have been remitted as to the stain and guilt, and as to the everlasting pain that was due to them; but who have on account of those sins still some debt of temporal punishment to pay; as also those souls which leave this world guilty only of venial sins.”—Catholic Belief (1884 ed.; imprimatur Archbishop of New York), page 196.
See also K. R. Hagenbach, Compendium of the History of Doctrines (T. and T. Clark ed.) vol. 1, pp. 234-237, 405, 408; vol. 2, pp. 135-150, 308, 309; Charles Elliott, Delineation of Roman Catholicism, b. 2, ch. 12; The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 12, art. “Purgatory.”
viii. Indulgences.—For a detailed history of the doctrine of indulgences see Mandell Creighton, A History of the Papacy from The Great Schism to the Sack of Rome (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1911), vol. 5, pp. 56-64, 71; W. H. Kent, “Indulgences,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 7, pp. 783-789; H. C. Lea, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church (Philadelphia: Lea Brothers and Co., 1896); Thomas M. Lindsay, A History of the Reformation (New York; Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1917), vol. 1, pp. 216-227; Albert Henry Newman, A Manual of Church History (Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1953), vol. 2, pp. 53, 54, 62; Leopold Ranke, History of the Reformation in Germany (2d London ed., 1845), translated by Sarah Austin, vol. 1, pp. 331, 335-337, 343-346; Preserved Smith, The Age of the Reformation (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1920), pp. 23-25, 66.
On the practical outworkings of the doctrine of indulgences during the period of the Reformation see a paper by Dr. H. C. Lea, entitled, “Indulgences in Spain,” published in Papers of the American Society of Church History, vol. 1, pp. 129-171. Of the value of this historical sidelight Dr. Lea says in his opening paragraph: “Unvexed by the controversy which raged between Luther and Dr. Eck and Silvester Prierias, Spain continued tranquilly to follow in the old and beaten path, and furnishes us with the incontestable official documents which enable us to examine the matter in the pure light of history.”
ix. The Mass.—For the doctrine of the mass as set forth at the Council of Trent see The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent in Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, vol. 2, pp. 126-139, where both Latin and English texts are given. See also H. G. Schroeder, Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent (St. Louis, Missouri: B. Herder, 1941).
For a discussion of the mass see The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol 5, art. “Eucharist,” by Joseph Pohle, page 572 ff.; Nikolaus Gihr, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Dogmatically, Liturgically, Ascetically Explained, 12th ed. (St. Louis, Missouri: B. Herder, 1937); Josef Andreas Jungmann, The Mass of the Roman Rite, Its Origins and Development, translated from the German by Francis A. Brunner (New York: Benziger Bros., 1951). For the non-Catholic view, see John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, b. 4, chs. 17, 18; and Edward Bouverie Pusey, The Doctrine of the Real Presence (Oxford, England: John H. Parker, 1855).