Blog

Chapter 4: Effects of Greek Philosophers: Pelagius

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

The only other intellectual person of a caliber capable of challenging Augustine on a philosophical level, was Pelagius. He was an educated Monk from Britain whose temperament, lifestyle and personal experience was very different from that of Augustine.

His chief concern was the immorality of the Roman Empire. Augustine’s conclusions, as far as he was concerned, would have a very damaging effect on the faith of the people. More specifically, he concluded, it killed the incentive of those who might be inclined to think of themselves as elect or already saved. How could they repent? Why would they feel it necessary when there was nothing they could do, good or bad, which could alter their God given status. And what about those who were not elect? Would this not have a detrimental effect if they were doomed to rot in hell regardless of what good they might do? What incentive would they have to improve their lot both here and in the here-after? The idea of such an arrangement most appealed to those who wanted salvation but were not interested in living the gospel to acquire it. 

Pelagius rejected the concepts of:
1/ Infant baptism.
2/ Inherited sin. (We inherited Sin of Adam and Eve’s partaking of the fruit of the tree.)
3/ Adam having been born mortal.
4/ Grace being for only select individuals.

His own Doctrine included:
1/ Confession of faults and responsibility for choices.
2/ 10 commandments were an obligation to personal, moral cleanliness.
3/ Free agency or the ability of man to choose salvation or reject it for himself.
4/ Salvation obtained through obedience to God’s commandments.
5/ Saving power of Good Works contributes to Salvation.
6/ Baptism and Redeeming Blood of Christ (atonement) was essential.
7/ Man was not inherently evil, but by his own volition, he could overcome evil by doing good without recourse to Grace.
8/ No original sin resulted from the fall of man.
9/ Man responsible for his own sins.
10/ God does not pre-destine man to Heaven or Hell. Man makes this choice though his own behaviour.

Pelagius began his teaching in Rome where he met no opposition. However, when he went to Africa the reaction to his teaching was violent. There he was brought before a council in Carthage and his teachings condemned. In Palestine he was attacked by Jerome, even though Pelagius had the support of Bishop John of Jerusalem. The source of his main opposition came from the influence of Augustine. In the Western world, Augustine’s word on things theological was considered to be the ultimate authority.

Pope Innocence I of Rome condemned Pelagius and his teachings. When he refused to acquiesce, Pelagius was excommunicated and banned from Rome. This effectively silenced him as he no longer had credentials or access to an audience. 

Their differences however divided the Church. The timing was not in his favour. At the first opportunity, Pelagius would be labelled a heretic. With Augustine’s new powers, he achieved far more from connections than corrections. Pelagius was eliminated. We do not know if he was executed but history lost contact with him about 422.A.D. We cannot help but wonder how much better off the fledgling church might have been had this power struggle ended differently.


Chapter 5: Councils

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

Over the centuries many councils in many locations were called. Some were considered to be without authority or legitimacy and others were of an insufficient nature so as not to affect the entire Christian World. Only the first 8 conferences have been accepted generally as they established orthodoxy.

The views express in these councils, instead of bringing unity of thought and purpose, caused a war that festered and never, ever healed. Dethroning, anathematizing, beatings and killings could not impose one side’s doctrine on the other. Nor could they ever come to a common solution acceptable to both deeply entrenched sides. Their bitterness and rivalry are exposed in raw reality through the minutes of the Councils.

After personally reading a summary of the minutes of those councils beginning in 325 AD, at the Council of Nicaea that stretched over 1,500 years to the First General Council of the Vatican 1870, I can only express a feeling of sadness, loss and betrayal by those who had been entrusted with the stewardship of the Church of Jesus Christ following the death of the Apostles and the loss to the church of the Apostles’ inspired leadership. 

The following is a list of the first of those councils:

1st Nicea (325 AD)
– Resolve Christ’s divinity and Status
– Establish Common Creed, Settle Arien Controversy

1st Constantinople (381 AD)
– Refine Nicene creed
– Abolish Arianism
– Clarify Trinity (Three in One God Head)
– Define role of Holy Ghost

1st Ephesus (431 AD)
– Character and Nature of Christ
– Condemn Nestorians

2nd Ephesus (449 AD)
– Solve divisions over the 1 or 2 possible natures of Christ
– Flavian, supporter of two natures, was beaten and died.
-Pope Leo was anathematized along with most Eastern Bishops.
This entire Council was rejected and declared a “Robber Synod.”

Chalcedon (451 AD)
– To reverse the results of the 2nd Council of Ephesus
– Two natures of Christ accepted

2nd Constantinople (553 AD)
– Monophysite (One Nature of Christ) movement continued to split the Empire. Council condemned controversial writings which only resulted in a deeper split.

3rd Constantinople (680 AD)
– To settle arguments of Doctrine, ( I.E the nature of Christ.)

The Great Schism
– In 800 AD, Pope Leo 3rd is crowned Charlemagne, King of the Franks, as Emperor of Rome. This act cemented loyalty between Rome and the Franks, instead of the Byzantines. This split the Empire into two: the Roman Church (Franks) and the Church of Constantinople (Byzantines).  
– The schism became formal by 1054 AD under Pope Leo 4th.
– Byzantine and Roman Church Popes excommunicate each other. Each declared the other heretics.

Now we have two Churches, Roman Catholic in Rome and Eastern Orthodox in Africa.

During the seventh century, the Byzantine Empire split violently over the argument of the natures of Christ. Both East and West were severely weakened by constant external wars and violent internal religious strife. Both sides deemed their stand as absolute and non-negotiable. These religious wars did as much, if not more, to destroy the Roman Empire than any other major threat it faced. The worst and the best minds of its academics, the dim witted as well as the most devious of leaders, all tried but could not provide the solution.  

Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. 
All the Kings horses and all the King’s men
Couldn’t put Humpty together again.

Chapter 6: The Great Schism

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

The Western interpretation regarding the two natures of Christ, carved in stone, prevailed in the Christian world in the end, but not because of its merits Both sides were wrong. They had based their conclusions on the single false doctrine derived from a miss-translation, “God Created everything from nothing”. (EX NEHILO) Genesis 1:1

However, there was an other equally dangerous threat that arose that no one was anticipating. It began in 605 AD and its founder was called Mohamed. The threat was Islam. By the time the Catholic Church of the Western Roman Empire were able to call for another vote of its orthodoxy of the two natures of Christ, the Muslims had over run the Christian Church in the East including Constantinople and there was no one left standing to oppose them.

It is hard to imagine that the Leaders of the Roman Empire who were constantly and completely occupied with the running of State Affairs during a period of perpetual military wars, would allow themselves to become so deeply involved in the affairs of a religious nature.

From the time of the first Council, Constantine was clever enough to have figured out that a people divided over their allegiance to their God would only be a short step away from becoming divided over their allegiance to their Emperor. His main concern was his Empire and anything that threatened that, threatened him. He called a council and selected Christianity to become the State religion. That put an end to the persecution of Christians. The second council he called was to establish a common creed that everyone could agree upon to avoid future divisions and disagreements. 

When Constantine built a New Rome in the East (Constantinople) it created many advantages but also exacerbated its one big disadvantage. You can shift a Capital relatively easily, but you cannot as easily shift a people’s loyalty. Rome had always been the center of the civilized world. There were many who felt it should stay that way. The Empire was slipping into chaos. With communications slow and unreliable, moving to a new, far away center of power was very challenging to say the least. However, if you could unite the people through their religion and have control over them as a result, the chances of survival of the Emperor would be multiplied many fold. To have power over a man’s life is a high level of control. To have power over a man’s religion means you have power over him even after he was dead. Now that is total control, and it was the kind of total control Constantine was desperate for.

The Chalcedon Creed was crafted to establish the doctrine of the two natures of Christ called in Greek, Dyophysite. The first nature being Divine, while the second being Human. According to such belief, it was the “man nature of Christ” that was born of Mary. She would be called  Christostokos giver of life to Christ’s body. However it was an unacceptable and impossible proposition. Such a concept did not take into account that she could not possibly bring life to a God, who already existed before she or for that matter all mankind had even been created. It must have been the “man nature of Christ” that was born to the woman called Mary. Likewise, it must have been the “man nature of Christ” that died on the cross because a God cannot die. When the “divine nature of Christ” retook the Body of Christ, he was resurrected as a God. Further, as God is pure intelligence surely he would have no need to have been born at all, or to require a resurrected physical body which was composed of lesser and opposite substance to himself. 

The opposing group was a called the Monophysites. They believed that Christ had only one nature and that nature was divine. This school of thought originated in the Eastern Christianity. They saw  Christ as a God who was Incarnate– born as a man. At the same time, he became a fusion of both man and God sometime later when he was adopted by God the Father and became his Son. Mary, as a woman, gave birth to him and is therefore deserving of the title Christostokos because she was the giver of life to God.

Nestorius was one of the Bishops with this view. We must not forget there were many other views and opinions. Arianism was still a problem. Arius, a Libyan and Priest from Egypt, was teaching that Christ the son, was a God also but that there was a time when only God existed. Therefore, the Son was not equal to the Father. This thought was not original with Arius but had been debated for decades before he was born. Nonetheless, the movement that he founded bore the name Arianism and was deemed by the Pope or senior Bishop of Rome to be heretical doctrine.

These issues may sound like micro-minor nitpicking to us today but at the time it was a black or white issue upon which everything hung. Attempting to put a creed together that appeased both opposing sides was impossible. Nonetheless, The Nicean Creed was a final attempt after much maneuvering through compromises, bickering and personal threats. It is understandable why many today dismiss this amazing Creed’s linguistic achievement as simply a smoke screen of political doublespeak. 

Comparison between Creed of 325 and Creed of 381 AD

The following table which indicates by square brackets the portions of the 325 text that were omitted or removed in 381 A.D. and uses italics to indicate what phrases, absent in the 325 text, were added in 381, juxtaposes the earlier (325 AD) and later (381 AD) forms of this Creed in the English translation given in Schaff’s work, Creeds of Christendom.

First Council of Nicea
(325)
First Council of
Constantinople (381)
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all
things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;
By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];by whom all things were made;
Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man;
He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.From thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.
And in the Holy Ghost.And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets.
We Believe In one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
[But those who say: There was a time when he was not and He was not before he was made;’ and ‘He was made out of nothing,’ or ‘He is of another substance’ or ‘essence,’ or ‘The Son of God is created,’ or changeable,’ or ‘alterable’— they are condemned by the holy Catholic and apostolic Church.]

We must remember that while these very fine, barely distinguishable differences, caused nonetheless, considerable trouble for the proud and influential participants of their day. They were not fringe radicals or eccentrics but scholars with credentials and reputations at stake. Others were Monks hardened by years of tortuous self-denial having achieved a mental fortitude that only comes from isolated solitude. Then there were the Bishops with large congregations and followers trying to influence the Ego-maniacal Emperors whose total political and religious powers allowed them to impose and enforce whatever they could be persuaded to believe.

Such were the main players in this very serious and dangerous game. They met, not to discover the nature of Christ, but to win. Each took to the conference a fanatical conviction of their own orthodoxy that was “poured and set in concrete.” Now, their agenda was to root out those who did not believe as they believed and pronounce their curses (anathemas) upon them. They were not willing to even compromise on the equally logical conclusions already reached by their opponents. Rather they simply asked, “Are you an orthodox believer or a heretic?” What did that mean? What was orthodox at one conference was heresy at the next. One had to be very astute and focused just to stay alive. The answer they gave could bring them a cherished appointment or cost them their head.

At each conference there were winners and losers. The winners however could never be assured their triumph at one conference would survive long enough to influence the next. The losers could be vilified, judged, condemned or beaten to death before the news reached their home supporters. In some cases, the judgments were reversed but that was of little use to those who had perished. Emperors died and were replaced by new ones. There were no guarantees as to where the new Emperor’s sympathies lay. The same was true for Popes. What the Emperor giveth to one Pope, another Emperor taketh away. Blessed be the names of the Emperor.

Although the Niacin Creed was accepted by all at the council while under the ever-watchful eye of Emperor Constantine, it was by no means a done deal. It still had to be implemented throughout the Empires, both East and West. But as soon as the members returned home, the bickering, squabbling and disagreements regarding both the words and the intents of the Creed, always began afresh. It continued to simmer and boil and smolder for decades.

Finally, another Council, 46 years later was called to meet at Constantinople. Again, the most important business was to refine the creed so as to make perfectly clear what was orthodoxy and what wasn’t. What would be deemed heretical and what deemed acceptable. As before, even this tinkering and rearranging did not “a meeting of minds” make.

Two additional councils were called at Ephesus to clarify the one nature verses the two natures problem. Unfortunately, the one nature or Arianism group were victorious this time and the representatives even got so carried away as to beat the Bishop of Constantinople, Flavian, so badly that he died of his injuries a few days later.

Incensed at the death of their Bishop, and at the outcome of the council’s actions, Pope Leo and Emperor Marcian, both supporting the two natures theory, called a fourth council to reverse all that had been done at Ephesus. Chalcedon was still considered a safe place for the moment. All areas were too dangerous due to the threat from the advances of the army of Attila the Hun, so it was decided to convene the conference there.

At Chalcedon in 451 A.D. then, with Marcian presiding and Leo leading, all conclusions reached, and all anathemas pronounced upon the opposing Bishops of the East at the former council at Ephesus, were reversed. It was labelled as a gangster Council and deleted from the list of council as non- existent. Those who were responsible were deposed as Bishops, exiled and anathematized. The new creed, the Chalcedon Creed was formulated and not only approved but made orthodoxy. Any deviant to this Creed would result in a charge of heresy which had now been raised to a crime equal to treason and thereby, punishable by death.

An English translation of the Chalcedonian Creed

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable soul and body; co-substantial with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.”

Its purpose was:
1/ To exclude all those who still upheld the Monophonic theory of Arius or any other opposing view.
2/ To stop the destructive religious wars that were dividing the two Empires. 
3/ To bring the polarized and fractured Empire together. 

So much for the common creed which would bring peace and unite the Empire. What about the Biblical teachings of Christ? What about love, tolerance, good will to those that despise or use you? All that had been scrapped. The Hawks had won. The Church had lost. From hence forth, the decrees were to be backed up by sword.

By the fifth century, the knowledge that we are children of a Heavenly Father had been lost and this was the result of that loss. What greater example of the reliance on the spirit of the Holy Ghost to guide us could we have? Without that influence what other outcome could we have expected?

Everything that the convention at Chalcedon was expected to achieve, history reveals that it was denied. The Roman Empire imploded, with the Eastern Empire the first to go down. One half of the civilized Christian World was lost. Each side blamed the other. Eastern Christians thought it was God’s punishment against Rome because she had cast off the Eastern Empire through her heretical, compulsory teachings. They welcomed the Muslims and actually experienced greater freedom of religion under them than while under Roman rule.

When Rome fell, the survivors in the West thought it was a replay of the Fall of Jerusalem – God’s punishment because they did not rid themselves from the heretics of the east as they should have done. 

East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet. Neither in thought nor in correcting their faults, it appears.

The latest of God’s attempt to establish a Zion society had failed miserably. He had tried with the freed Israelite slaves under Moses. Again, he tried with Lehi in the Promised Land. And now with the successors of Peter in the Covenanted Land, he tried and again another failure.

God has been reduced to:
 1/ An abstract (having no material existence)
2/ Irrelevant (of no value)
3/ Incomprehensible (beyond understanding)
4/ Inconceivable (impossible to imagine)
5/ Inexplicable (impossible to explain)
This definition may have been a good excuse at the time when they were seeking conformity to avoid the church being extinguished. However, for the generation in which we live, the result has been a headlong rush to abandonment of all responsibility.

The latest of God’s attempt to establish a Zion society had failed miserably. He had tried with the freed Israelite slaves under Moses. Again, he tried with Lehi in the Promised Land. And now with the successors of Peter in the Covenanted Land, he tried and again another failure.

Today’s Christians have spiritually fallen asleep, so far as the “great division because of the two natures of God” are concerned. If you were to ask most Christians today about the one or two natures and which they accept, I would venture to predict they would say, “I don’t understand the question.” Or they may ask, “What difference does it make?” As far as religion goes, with its pained dark history, it has all now become totally irrelevant. 

God has been reduced to:
 1/ An abstract (having no material existence)
2/ Irrelevant (of no value)
3/ Incomprehensible (beyond understanding)
4/ Inconceivable (impossible to imagine)
5/ Inexplicable (impossible to explain)

This definition may have been a good excuse at the time when they were seeking conformity to avoid the church being extinguished. However, for the generation in which we live, the effect of an impotent God is obvious. We are led to blindly believe there are no long-term consequences for our actions. We suffer only if we are foolish enough to be caught.

In the midst of all this blind wandering and wanton behavior, has come a still, soft voice of reason, a musical note in a cacophony of chaos, heard only by those who are tuned to its pitch.

The soft voice of Jesus Christ can be felt more than heard. He is coming as planned and “Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess” his name (Romans 14: 11). God has restored the truth through Joseph Smith in these latter days. The struggle today is not between two untruths, but between ignorance and truth. Yet much like the days of ancient Rome, there will be a lot of challenges, cleansing, self-correcting and repenting before the night ends and the day dawn breaks.

The definition of ignorance is to “make fools out of madmen and madmen out of fools.” Truth restores knowledge and the truth is what ultimately really makes you free (John 8: 32), from both madmen and fools. 

Will we of the final dispensation be able to achieve what others in history could not? We are about to find out.

Chapter 7: Monasticism 

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

The idea of monks, monasteries and hermits began long before Christ. It is thought to have begun in India and early writings of such holy monks date back to 2400, B.C. Its origin was not Christian and there were no Christian monks or monasteries prior to the middle of the third century. It was certainly never a teaching of Christ who taught love, serve and treat your neighbours as yourself. Rather, it was motivated by a more selfish withdrawal from the wicked world in an attempt to save one’s own self. Somehow, the idea of torturing the body to increase the purification of the soul seems to be linked to all sects who embrace this style of life.

The beginnings of Christian monks began as a movement of individuals without any kind of Church authority or encouragement. All were laymen without priesthood or office. During the period of the Decian persecutions (250 A.D.), many Christians fled to the caves in Upper Egypt spawning a legacy of hermits and small communities.

There were of course no rules and each not only lived as they saw fit but also developed lifestyles that included a competition to see who could out do the other in their extremes of self-punishment. Athanasius, defender of the Nicaean Creed, wrote a biography of one such person known only as Anthony. He, like his mentor Augustine, was influenced by the words of Christ who said, “If thou wouldst be perfect, Go, sell all that thou hast and give to the poor and come follow me.” Strange how some people react to that scripture. They seem to get the first part right, “go sell all that thou hast,” but totally miss the next part, “Come follow me.” They all seem to get lost by trying to find themselves.

Living a life in rags, solitude and perpetual pain was never what Christ advocated. How could such behaviour produce the leaven for the bread that Christ spoke about? (1 Corinthians: 5: 7-8) This lifestyle was more like the salt that had lost its savour (Matthew 5: 13). The idea of fleeing to the wilderness and giving up all luxuries has a very luring melody. Even in our society today, there are those who yield to it. Alaska, British Columbia, Montana and other areas of North America have become havens for those who have the desire to do the exact same thing for the exact same purpose: “Me first”. In the process, they have become lost to Christ, to the rest of society and most of all, to themselves.

Anthanasius’ biography of Anthony, pictured such a lifestyle choice with such colour and allure that it started a headlong rush to the hills and caves. Before too long, Saint Anthony, as he has since become known, had over 15,000 followers. Well know personalities of the early Church promoted the concept. Hilary brought monastic life to Palestine. Cassian took it to Gaul. Even Anthanasius became a monk and when he was banished to Alexandria, his lifestyle drew admiration. To those in Rome who could see the Church absolutely devoid of morals, this life of asceticism became a very attractive option for those still seeking personal salvation. By the end of the fourth century there were legions of hermit monks. The life of a hermit was even more popular than the institute of Monasteries. Neither had any sort of ecclesiastical authority or formal connection to the Church. 

It was not until the Bishop of Caesarea, Basil, visited the Monks in Egypt, Syria and Palestine that things changed for the better. He started to live the life of a monk at age 21 but became disgusted by those he perceived had, through ignorance, self-deprivation and austerity, reduced themselves to a collection of wasted lives and meaningless ideals. As a priest first, then a Bishop, he was determined to turn the lives of Monks towards religious channels or at least something that could be beneficial to both the Church and the lost legion of humanity of self-imposed exiles. He drew up a new rule to be added to the three existing rules of Voluntary, Poverty and Chastity. The fourth was “Irrevocable vows.”

Many monks began to join his order. He insisted upon law and order and in particular, absolute obedience. The monastic life began to shift somewhat to being subject to the supervision of the Church, which was Basil’s hope and desire. This all took place about the same time that Jerome was busy translating the Bible from Greek to Latin. So the timing was perfect to rewrite the rules regarding Church Monasteries into Latin as well.

The movement towards the Monastic life had a great revitalizing effect to the flagging Christian Church in the fourth Century. By the fifth century convents for Nuns began to appear. Christianity found its greatest strength in the cloisters of the monks. Here they provided training, discipline and education as they qualified themselves as missionaries, teachers and even leaders of the Church. At first things seemed to benefit everyone:,the monasteries, the Church, the monks and those common people both in and out of the Church. But the fundamental ideals of monastic living are not supported or in harmony with the gospel of Jesus Christ for a very good reason. 

As the monasteries grew, they became prosperous. Various orders of monks (Augustine, Benedictine, Trappist, Cistercians, Medicant Friars, Dominicans, Jesuits and Franciscan), each in their own time and in their own turn became rich, powerful, corrupt and self-indulgent. In the medieval monasteries, the majority of monks were priests. The abbots became landowners and as such they wielded great social and political power. They became immoral and their behavior brought denunciation and condemnation from the very populous they were commissioned to teach. They became so impervious to Christian virtues and moral living, the core principles of personal salvation, as to produce extreme personal and offensive selfishness.

Under the leadership of corrupt Bishops or despot Emperors, they became, in some cases, armies or militias to enforce edicts and suppress heretics. Fanatical and cruel, they fought soldiers as well as one another. To press their cause, they incited riots and intimidated members of meetings into submission. They were instrumental in keeping Bishops in office or likewise, deposing them. Through it all, lots of innocent blood was shed. Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose and many others tried to contain the abuses and corruption but with little success. The persecution and obliteration of the Albigenses was just a forerunner to the period of the inquisitions when thousands were tortured before dying on the rack, burned alive or mercifully beheaded. They interfered in the political affairs and drew the wrath and hatred of every nation in Europe. 

Started by the noble and pure intent of seeking salvation for themselves by purifying themselves to the honour of Christ, and while rejected by a cruel and corrupt society themselves, they evolved instead into the perhaps most brutal, cruel and completely corrupt religious force the Christian world had ever known. 

In hindsight it was entirely predictable what the end result would be. Such men, living such austere conditions without the moderating influence of the Holy Ghost, became what King Mosiah described as the “Natural Man.” (Mosiah 3 :19)

“For the natural man is an enemy to God and has been from the fall of Adam and will be for ever and ever unless he yields to the enticing s of the Holy Spirit and putteth off the natural man and becometh a Saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord and becometh as a child, submissive, meek humble, patient, full of love willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him even as a child doeth submit to his Father.”

The Holy Ghost is the source of such virtues as love, compassion, mercy and forgiveness. And we are obliged to mention women for whom in this world is more responsive, generally speaking, to the enticing of the Holy Spirit than women?

Proverbs 31: 10 – 31Who can find a virtuous woman for her price is far above rubies …”

Men most often truly only learn such virtues by the examples they see at the feet of their mothers and in the arms of their wives. In monasteries, the monks would have had none of these influences. Once they were brought into the political influence and control of the most powerful Emperors of Europe as well as the Roman Church, what should anyone have expected? 

Through such a willing, natural minded, brutal army to enforce its will, the Church was able to survive as a powerful political entity well into the nineteenth century.

Chapter 8: The Development of Papacy

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

The Papacy grew up in silence and obscurity. The names of the early Bishops of Rome are known only by barren lists, spurious decrees and epistles inscribed centuries later with their names. After the embellishment , if not the invention of St Peter’s pontificate, his conflict with Simon Magus in the presence of the Emperor and the circumstances of his martyrdom, it was content with raising the successive Bishops to the rank of martyrs without any particular richness or fullness of legend.” 
For some considerable part of the first three centuries, the Church of Rome and most, if not all the Churches of the West were, if we may so speak, Greek religious colonies.” Africa, not Rome, gave Birth to Latin Christianity.”
Historians History of the World vol 8 pp 519-522

The word “Pope” means Supreme Pontiff or Pontifex Maximus and was first used in the third century A.D. by Tertullian when he referred to Callixtus (217- 222 AD) as having assuming too much unilateral authority in his capacity as leader of the Christian Church. In fact, the title Pontifex Maximus had been used long before this time by the Pagans as their title of the highest position within the Roman Republic’s Religion. No scripture in the Bible makes any reference to such an office, and Peter and all other apostles certainly never made any reference to such a person holding power over all Christians. 

It is astonishing to believe that the sarcastically intended label would eventually become a title that instantly evoked fear and terror throughout the civilized world. The truth is, the development of the Papacy, as it was later called, was the result of political conquest, political aid and outright fraud perpetrated by the Roman Church on itself and by itself.

A review of the historical facts discloses that the concept of a superior Bishop, especially in Rome, that held jurisdiction over the entire Church in the West prior to the fifth century, is entirely fictional. So far as Rome holding any such jurisdiction over the Eastern Church, it too is fictional as Rome never at any time, held any such authority. 

In the early Church, under the Apostles, the Church was organized from the top down. Christ was at it head. A Presidency of three apostles had authority over the rest of the quorum of twelve apostles. They had the authority to call Bishops who were sustained by the people through a show of hands. 

After the death of the apostles, the Church was organized from the bottom up. The clergy called the Bishop and the people approved or disapproved by vote. Over time, the church organization began to resemble the Roman Imperial organization with the Bishops becoming Metropolitans. Branches resembled small communities which were under the Bishops’ jurisdiction. He had the authority to call councils. With no ground rules or limitations on their authority, there were widespread abuses. Bishops, irritated by the squabbling members whose votes were necessary for the appointment of other clergy, soon lobbied and got the members’ right to vote abolished.

Metropolitans themselves became competitive. Many of the Bishops were ambitious, specifically those in Antioch, Alexandria and Rome. It was for that very purpose that Constantine intervened hoping to solve the constant feuding among these Bishops and to bring peace and harmony to the Church. Constantine called the Nicaea Council which approved doctrine and gave legal recognition to Metropolitans by defining their jurisdictions.

The Bishop of Rome, of course, was one of those Metropolitans and had no universal authority granted to him above and beyond that which was also was given to all the other Bishops. Later claims to the line of authority from Peter being passed to Bishop Linus of Rome are bogus. Peter never was the Bishop of Rome or of any other Metropolitan. There was no transfer of apostolic authority to Linus or any other Bishop. The same applies to universal authority in jurisdiction or authority to the interpretation of policy, doctrine or the receiving of revelation for the entire Church.

In the First Council of Constantinople, called to settle Doctrinal disputes, Rome was not even present. It had no administrative function outside Italy and its islands. The term “Catholic Church,” meaning “Universal Church,” was really meant to signify “Universal Unity in Faith.” 

In the primitive Church, no one volunteered for the office of Bishop. It carried too great a risk to life and limb. However, with the change of recognition of Bishops, or Metropolitans, by the imperial authority, such an office became a coveted opportunity for wealth and power. Presents were showered upon the Bishops, and bribes were made in the hopes of future favours to the donors and parties for those held. The Churches formed by Paul and other missionaries were almost all in the capital cities rather than in outlying towns and villages. That’s where most people were and where the highest rate of conversions could be expected to come from. Just as today, one can see how easily the smaller branches, being weaker, would of necessity look to the more mature branches for leadership. This of course is exactly what happened. Disagreements or transgressions were referred to the larger centers to be resolved. Again, as the Church grew from the bottom up, the lack of any central figure or divine authority at the top to unify them, administration, common standards, guidelines or rules where made up on the spot and much confusion and abuse resulted.

Meanwhile, with the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria in the East, and Rome in the West, all vying for superiority because of their claim to Peter as their Founder, competition and friction among the Bishops was rampant. When Constantinople became the “Second Rome” it did not hesitate to claim its Superiority as well. Couple that problem with the inability of the Bishops to come to a common consensus among themselves regarding doctrine, a common creed, orthodoxy or acceptable scriptures, the need for the Holy Ghost was never greater. As expected, only bickering, fighting and discord resulted. The battle lines drawn up between these factions formed a spiritual as well as a geographical fault line running between East and West. Eventually, that fault line would become a permanent split, a division of Christianity that, when it came, proved to be simultaneously catastrophic, calamitous and crippling. The Church was beyond repair and the greatest tragedy was, it was preventable. 

The fact that the Bishop of Rome began to acquire more recognition than his rival Bishops was due to his location, greed and political timing. Rome was located at the historical seat of the Empire. Having the ear and the cooperation of the Emperor was no small advantage. He, no doubt, used this advantage often. 

Another was an event which at first seemed innocuous and of little consequence. It started when the Council of Constantinople gave a designation of a purely religious Honorarium to the Bishop of Jerusalem called “Patriarchate”. This was an ancient title and tradition, which, because it was not the real title, significantly, fell short of satisfying the ambitious Bishops of Jerusalem. They were hoping for the official title of Patriarch.

At the Conference at Nicaea, they were finally given their coveted title along with jurisdiction and supremacy over Phoenicia and Arabia. Palestine had already been given to them by Emperor Theodosius. But the rank of Patriarch was a coveted position that had been considered for many years but not as yet officially instituted. The Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria also received their title 50 years after the council of Nicaea. How is it that Rome had been left out? Obviously at that time, Rome, as the only Western Metropolitan, was not considered that important. Even the preference of the new seat of power at Constantinople, resulted in the Bishop there obtaining the title of Patriarch. That was years before Rome’s Bishop was finally granted his Patriarch title in 451.A.D.

Now, all five Patriarchs occupied a superior position when compared to the other Bishops. These were the Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch, Rome and Alexandria. All of them however continued to act independently because they could not exercise authority beyond their own diocese. They couldn’t even form a quorum when they were asked to call an ecumenical council by the Emperor.

The first evidence of seismic trouble was felt when the Emperor decreed, because of their location, (one in the old Capital and the other in the New), the two Patriarchs of Rome and Constantinople, would be given “pre-eminence” above the other three. This served to emphasize that their locations gave them no-small preferential advantage. This political favouritism was not received well by the other Bishops. As feared, at the Council of Constantinople 381A.D., the Bishops gave the first priority to Constantinople.

The second seismic tremor was felt when a statement regarding the status of superiority of Rome above all other Bishops was made by Bishop Damasus ( 366-384 AD). Being emboldened by the newly granted favouritism by Emperor Theodosius the Great, and taking the statement made by Christ to Peter as his justification, he pronounced that:
The Holy Roman Church is raised above all others not by decrees of councils, but by the words of our Lord who said, “Thou art Peter and on this rock will I build my Church.” 

He went on to explain,  “By the presence and victory of Peter, Rome was raised above all other cities. The Eastern patriarchates are next in line and owe their origin to their relation to Peter the Apostle. The second see was consecrated at Alexandria in the name of Peter by his disciple Mark. It is also on account of the blessed apostle Peter that the third see, that of Antioch, must be honoured because Peter sojourned there before coming to Rome.”

Bishop Siricius (384-399 AD) issued what is called The First Decretal saying, “Peter Speaks through Sericius.” Leo, Bishop of Rome (440 – 461 AD) also sent a doctrinal letter to Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople, in which he stated, Peter has spoken through Leo.” These consecutive assertions were followed up by a further attempt to establish Rome as superior at the next Council.

At the council of Nicaea, Alexandria had been the most prominent. But now at the council of Constantinople, some 56 years later, Rome made its bid for first place. They supported the claim by a falsified version of the 6th cannon of the council of Nicaea.

The council saw it quite differently. They judged that Constantinople and Rome were of an equal political level and therefor they reasoned, the two should be on equal ecclesiastical levels as well. Rome, sensing that a rival in Constantinople with equal prerogatives was dangerous, protested against this action. It again quoted the sixth cannon of the council of Nicaea in which there had been interpolated, the words “Rome has always held the primacy.” 

As far as is known, the first use of this statement was at the council of Chalcedon by representatives of Leo the Great. After the falsified cannon was read, the cannon was again read in its original form, this time without the addition. When the council reconvened with its verdict, it went against the motion from Rome, in spite of its protests, and gave Constantinople equal status with Rome.

What is to be noted here is that it was the council that held a superior authority over the Bishops. It also reconfirms that Rome enjoyed no special status or superiority over the other Patriarchs in spite of their several attempts to have such.

This episode reveals the lengths to which the Patriarchs were willing to go to establish their superiority. If anyone held authority over all other Patriarchs, it was the State through the councils. Therein is evidence that Rome had no special power of jurisdiction over any of the other Bishops or Patriarchs. But this was the date when the earth began to shift in that direction.

The Roman Empire fell in 476 A.D.

The wars and strife continued unabated after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. Germanic tribes, the Barbarians, Huns, Goths, Franks, Burgundians, Vandals, Angles, Jutes and Saxons each extracted their toll. Most of these tribes had been converted to Arian Christianity and not bound by the Roman Church. Then Clovis, an ambitious King of the Franks, began taking over Gaul and some of the German tribes. When Clovis converted to Christianity, those under his rule were forced to accept the Roman Pope and Church upon threat of death.

Meanwhile, the Roman senate in Constantinople, no longer supported by a distant weak Emperor, began to crumble. People began to look at the church as the only instrument of authority that had not been beaten down and could be relied upon. This greatly boosted the recognition of the Patriarch of Rome and in turn, rekindled his desire for Western Empire domination. Rome as an Empire, had always looked upon the Church as a means to control both the lives and religion of its people to advance the unity of the Empire.

That, as it turns out, was also the dream of Gregory the Great who was Bishop of Rome (590 – 604A.D.). His goal was to expand Christianity beyond the Borders of the Empire and unite all Christians, binding (subjecting) them to the Church in Rome ecclesiastically, just as they had been united to the Empire politically.

By the time of Pope Leo III (795 to 816 AD), the church had managed to get some extra resources, thanks to a forged document known as the Donation of Constantine. With this boost of military might, all Leo III needed was a like-minded Commander to lead the troops. Charlemagne, King of the Franks fit that profile exactly. 

Charlemagne set out to reclaim all the territories the Church had lost, and he succeeded. They were restored to the Western Empire through Charlemagne’s successful campaigns and then placed under the rule of the Bishop of Rome.

Step by step, country after country, as Charlemagne invaded, he first persuaded, and when that failed, secured conversions through force. In this manner, the Roman ecclesiastic power was extended to Britain, France, Spain, Germany and Africa. 

For the first time, the Bishop of Rome had an army big enough to match his ambitions. Charlemagne had saved Leo III from the Lombards and given Leo III unprecedented power. In recognition, on Christmas day 800 A.D. Leo III placed the crown of gold on the head of Charlemagne and proclaimed him Emperor. Leo II had now created what he had always envisioned, A Holy Roman Empire working hand in hand with the Holy Catholic Church. Each would have world-wide dominion, each advancing the interests of the other, and each supreme in their own domain. The Church and the Empire. The Emperor and the Pope, each looking at the world with the goal of total domination.  

In the minds of ambitious men, there is never room for the word “sufficient.” There can never be enough to satisfy greed, power or the need for possessions. The beautiful arrangement spoke by words of the mouth was doomed the moment they spoke them because the men who were bound by it never had accepted its limitations as a condition in their hearts.

While the Pope had the right to crown the Emperor and to govern all the affairs of the Western Universal Christian Church of Rome, it was not long before Charlemagne began to resort to his old familiar tactic of force to exercise his superiority over the Church. He began by appointing and deposing Bishops. He made them vassals of the State, swearing them by allegiance to the Empire, not the Church. It was he who called the councils and it was upon his own authority decisions were made regarding doctrine and dogma.

As the church became more and more to resemble their civic counterparts, a movement broke out among the Bishops, eager to strengthen the hand of the Pope whose reason for existence had been removed, and of course to free themselves from the oaths that bound them to the State. 

In the middle of the ninth century, there appeared a document known as the “Isidorian Decretals”. Citing ancient cannon laws, the Bishops claimed that the Roman Church had received revenues, large tracts of lands and endowments from Constantine. This, they claimed proved that:

1/ The temporal power of the Pope was in existence before Charlemagne made his offering to the Church. 

2/ The spiritual power of the Pope is infinitely superior to the secular powers held by the Emperor and Princesses. (The Pope had given him the crown and the powers vested in it.)

3/ The Bishops stand in the same relationship to the Pope as the apostles stood in relation to Peter.

4/ Provincial Synods (meeting of Bishops) cannot be held unless summoned by the Pope.

5/ The conclusions reached by the Synods can only be valid if recognized as such by the Pope.

6/ None of the clergy can be summoned before a secular tribunal. A layman cannot accuse a Priest.  (It requires 72 trustworthy witnesses to substantiate a charge against a Bishop.)

It was brilliant, it was effective enough to convince the Emperor to back off.

There was only one problem with these Decretals: they were, all of them, to the very last, forgeries.

Throughout the middle ages, the decretals were held to be genuine. By the time they were found to be otherwise, the sixteenth century had arrived and so many other things were going on, including the Protestant Reformation, that this affair mattered little. There was already an abundance of evidence to bring a solid case of corruption against the Church by the reformers.

Upon the death of Charlemagne in 843, his empire was divided among his three grandsons. One formed modern Germany, one modern France and the third, a zone between the two.

Before too long they had broken into smaller kingdoms or fiefdoms. This left Europe without any leadership. The most wealthy or powerful of the nobility and landowners gathered the dispossessed peasants around them for mutual protection. Man’s god ruled without opposition. His word was sacrosanct, and the mighty hand of the kings’ forces were there to see they were obeyed. And thus, the age of Feudalism had begun. 

Chapter 9: Under the Control of Evil Families

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

With the loss of any superior Empirical power to check the aggressive aristocracy, the Papacy was totally without a protector. That exposed it to the forces and dictates of rich, corrupt and ruthless Italian, French and German families. For the next century (870 AD to 970 AD) unholy princes and princesses bought, sold and totally controlled the office of Pope.

With the loss of any superior Empirical power to check the aggressive aristocracy, the Papacy was totally without a protector. That exposed it to the forces and dictates of rich, corrupt and ruthless Italian, French and German families. For the next century (870 AD to 970 AD) unholy princes and princesses bought, sold and totally controlled the office of Pope.

The family of Counts of Tusculum and the Family of the Theophylact imposed the candidates of their choice upon clergy and people alike. These they elected only from the ranks of the nobility. Included are:
Pope John X, Pope John XI, Pope John XII, Benedict VIII, Benedict IX, Benedict X

Wars of conquest and retaliation were waged constantly between the rival warlords. Meanwhile Otto I had succeeded at getting himself crowned King of the German tribes. His ambition was to rebuild the Empire of Charlemagne. Pope John XII felt threatened by both the Romans and the Lombards (one of the powerful Italian families), so he called upon Otto of Germany to come to his rescue. Otto, assuming the crown of Italy, proudly marched into Rome on Feb 2, 962 AD. While he was at it, he also accepted for his pretentious services the title of “Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire”. It was definitely not holy, and it certainly was no longer Roman. Far from protecting the Church, Otto oppressed it. 

Pope Leo XII realized too late that he had exchanged a terrible fate for a deadly one. After quarrelling, Otto I chose a new Pope, Leo VIII, and Pope John XII fled. Within a year John XII was dead.

The Roman Italian families elected another PopeBenedict. Otto of Germany threatened to besiege Rome unless Benedict was delivered to him and Leo VIII reinstated. The Romans had no choice but to surrender. This showdown gave Otto total power over the Papal seat and brought a temporary end to the control and domination of the Italian families.

Otto I strengthened his Empire by strengthening his hold on the Church. He appointed Bishops and made them Princes of the Realm. They swore allegiance to him before they were invested as Bishops. The custom of conferring a ring and a crosier (ornamental staff) upon Bishops, as a sign of episcopal dignity, can be traced back to this very ceremony. This combined office of Bishop and Prince now became very lucrative to the incumbent, and the basest of practices of simony and corruption developed. The power of the offices was sold, bought, rented, given as dowries and even in some cases, included their entire parish. The clergy no longer even made an attempt to keep up the visible charade of trustworthiness or honesty. 

After Otto’s death, Otto III, who was only four years old, became Emperor. Under the influence of the corrupt and ambitious Cresentius Family a number of Popes were killed while they plotted to install a grand total of three of their own family members in their place.

When Henry III, Holy Roman Emperor, visited Rome in 1048 he found three rival Popes each claiming the coveted position: The Northern Italian city-states, divided by the Guelph and Ghibe lines had each appointed their own candidate because of the unprecedented, unbecoming behaviour of Benedict IX. Henry deposed all three and installed his own preference, Pope Clement II. The history of the Popes between 1048 and 1257 is replete with soiled and gangrenous incumbents followed by their tainted and corrupt replacements. The struggle for ultimate control for power between Emperor and Pope continued unabated.

Into this cesspool of infamy, Hildebrand, a monk from Cluny, appeared in Rome with an unbridled passion for reform. Fired up by the reform movement of the monasteries who were forced to return to the rules of St. Benedict and discontented with the complete corruption of everything to do with religion in Rome, he was imbued with a spirit for change. The manner of choosing Popes by the Emperor for instance, must cease. In 1059 a new Papal decree was issued demanding that the Pope must be chosen by the College of Cardinals, which consisted of Elders and Deacons of the Italian Churches in Rome. Hildebrand, was adviser to five succeeding Popes and eventually became Pope himself in 1073, taking the name of Gregory VII. More than everything else, he was obsessed with the idea of Papal World Supremacy. His conception of the Office was expressed in his own words:

The Roman Church was founded by God alone. The Roman Pope alone can with right be called universal; he alone may use the Imperial Insignia, his feet only shall be kissed by all the Princes. He may depose the Emperors; he himself may be judged by no one, the Roman Church has never erred, nor will it ever err in all eternity.”

In 1075 Hildebrand, now Pope Gregory VII, issued a decree prohibiting Princes from ordaining Bishops. Still, the German King would not give up his right. The Germans had the bigger army, but the Pope held the more effective weapons. The Pope Gregory VII had five weapons at his command. Each were deadly. And they all hung on an incorrect principle of doctrine.

Weapon 1: That belief was that there was no salvation outside the Roman Church and of course, the Pope held all the keys to that door. 
Weapon 2: The Pope could call Kings and release them.
Weapon 3: The Pope could excommunicate anyone he pleased. By a decree of excommunication, princes and all other such people, could not be provided with food or shelter as long as they lived, and a Christian burial would be denied to them when they died. Anybody helping an excommunicated person, would suffer the same fate.
Weapon 4: Sacrament was essential to Salvation. Excommunicated persons would be deprived of the sacrament. That meant they would be cut off from all rights provided by the Church. A Mass could not even be held in their presence. If it was a king, no services would be held in his kingdom. No funeral would be held. And no one would hear a prayer or a bell ring. Church buildings would be closed. Extreme unction applied.
Weapon 5: In the case of an errant king, the Pope could release the king’s subjects from their oath of allegiance to him. The king would then be without power, purse or pity. With this power, the Pope did not hesitate to both threaten and apply his total weight on all peoples, kings, rulers and subjects, with impunity. The horrors of facing hell had been taught since Augustine’s false interpretation of the teachings of Christ. Now, it successfully silenced all who would dare challenge the Pope. While Gregory did not see the fulfillment of his goal to raise the Papacy to ultimate superiority over all the Western World in his lifetime, it did reach that epitome under his successors, Urban II (1088 – 1099) and Innocent III (1179- 1180). This is also the point at which the Eastern and Western Ecclesiastical authorities, chose to excommunicate each other. 

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the Kings horses and all the Kings men,
Couldn’t put Humpty together again

-English Nursery Rhyme

Often, when we think things cannot get worse, it proves to be the very point at which they do. Pope Urban II, the consummate warlord of Europe, having obtained what other Popes could only dream of, possessed complete power to enforce anything he wanted or imagined, in the name of the God. Looking around from this most enviable position, he decided that what was most needed was something or some cause to unite his people.

There are those who think the motivation for Pope Urban II’s solution to this problem was much more sinister. Perhaps it was a diversion to involve, and even cull out, many young heirs to thrones who were thirsty to make their name known in battle. Restless for fame or notoriety, these youth left to their own devises might cause great harm to the realm. Whatever his real reason might have been, the answer he came up with for forging unity would have been absolutely brilliant if it were not for its total lack of foresight and planning. Maybe that was the appeal and beauty of it. The plan was not impeded by facts and its gross stupidity was rationalized by the equally gross ignorance of those who were called upon to participate in its fulfillment. There is almost no other explanation for what was to have faultlessly become the most mind boggling, colossal failure of the middle ages. We are referring to, of course, the Crusades

At the Council of Clermont in 1095 AD, Pope Urban II issued his infamous first rally call. He asked for a mighty army to repossess the Holy Lands then in the hands of the infidels. 

What instantly emerged from the streets, jails, asylums, convents and slums of Europe, were the desperate and the destitute, almost to a person. Over half-a-million naive, poorly informed and unprepared men, women and children, rushed headlong onto the roadways to begin walking to The Holy Land. With their wholehearted acceptance and approval, they chanted and sang as they threw what little sanity they possessed to the winds and rushed blindly into hell.

As mentioned, the Pope had become the highest-ranking position of power in the Western World. The Pope, not the Emperor was the great warlord of Europe. Now he had opened a new front in his campaign. The First Crusade’s initial goal was simply to move in a mass against the infidels in the Holy Land. To ensure sufficient manpower, he issued indulgences to all who would go, the most enticing being the forgiveness of sins past and sins not as yet committed. Next he opened the doors of the prisons in Europe for the worst of criminals to join under the same generous conditions. A monstrous hoard of hundreds of thousands of people, of all ages and stages, lacking health, wealth or wisdom, obliviously worked their way like a vast lava flow directly aimed to the most inhospitable and hostile place in the world. 

Exempted from any spiritual consequence regarding their immoral actions, they were instructed to find their own food and lodgings along the way. Can you imagine what those in the path of this hoard must have thought as they learned of its impending arrival in their community? It would be a worse fear than of a descending plague of the entire forces of Atilla the Hun. Pestilence, famine, destruction of crops and loss of property would have followed every footstep of the way. There would be nothing left to eat, drink or sleep under for those who survived after the “Pilgrims” had passed through. By the time they arrived to liberate Jerusalem, there were only 40,000 pilgrims left. The Islam forces, of course, attacked and killed most of those that were still alive. It was a total and complete annihilation, serving only to embolden the infidels.

There were ten crusades in all, each ending in failure like the first.

The second crusade had over a million, two hundred thousand soldiers. Sickness, heat, contaminated water and lack of food constantly reduced their force to impotency.

The third crusade involved Richard the Lion-Hearted of England. He fought, lost and left ignobly.

The fourth crusade of roughly the same proportions and objectives were terribly massacred.

The fifth crusade was aimed at Constantinople but achieved no military advantage. It only served to create a further alienation between the Eastern and Western Churches.

The six, seventh, eighth and ninth crusade were repeats.

The Children’s Crusade was led by a boy who vanished. Thousands were captured and sold into slavery.

All failed miserably. Most of the pilgrims carried no weapons of defense against Arab armies or other hostile forces, such as the many robbers, pirates, thieves and scoundrels who lay waiting in great anticipation of their arrival. All they brought was enthusiasm, and that, as everyone discovered, was woefully inadequate.

Hoping to reverse their failures, the next Pope, Innocent II started a crusade against heretics and Jews in France instead. But the Bishops of France did not participate with enough enthusiasm against their own people. The Crusade began to falter. Sensing another fiasco, Innocent II turned the episcopal inquiry over to the Mendicant orders and the Dominican and Franciscan Monks who had sworn allegiance to only the Pope himself. This action was called the Papal Inquisition. The efficiency and barbarity of the methods used against even the innocent, who were tortured to obtain confessions, and the despotic actions of the Pope, eventually led to a call for reform.

Pope Boniface VIII, an arrogant, delusional man, attempted to enforce his edicts by quelling the rebellious German King Phillip who had initiated the reform. But the time when those bullying tactics worked had passed. Phillip cut off vast resources which were generating tremendous revenue to the Pope by disallowing their removal to Italy. Included in King Phillip’s reforms were a call to cease:

1/ The shedding of blood.
2/ The widespread simony (or money charged for ecclesiastical services).
3/ Nepotism (or favouring relatives).
4/ Unethical means of securing money, such as the selling of priesthood offices to the highest bidder.
5/ Selling indulgences.
6/ The immoral and luxurious lifestyles of Pope and Papal staff.
7/ The uncontrolled tyranny of the Popes.

The Pope issued a Bull or edict which made extravagant claims regarding the authority of the Pope. 

The gospel informs us that there are in the Church and in the power of the Church, two swords, the spiritual and the temporal. Both swords, therefore the spiritual and the temporal are in the power of the Church, but the latter must be drawn for the Church and the former by the Church.
The first by the hand of the Priest and the second by the hand of Kings and Soldiers, but always with the consent and the will of the Priest. 
As a consequence, we state, declare and define that all creatures must be subject to the sovereign Pontiff in order to be saved.”

Phillip reacted by calling together the heads of states of the realm, including the ecclesiastical leaders, and accused Boniface of crimes. Phillip’s accusations were brought before the General Council.

Following Phillip’s lead, Germany, England and Bohemia revolted from Papal authority. These countries were followed by the Italian Provinces under Austrian control. In 1849, an assembly elected by the people, striped the Pope of his temporal power and confiscated all his Ecclesiastical property. Under the leadership of Victor Emmanuel and military support from Garibaldi, all Italy was brought under one single government. Rome was made its capital. Thus, the career of Pius IX saw the grasp of temporal world power ripped from him. Since 1866, all that was left was the Vatican, which the Pope was allowed to occupy, as a virtual prisoner, until the end of his life.

We see through a review of historical evidence that the office of Pope never did have a continual link from Peter to itself. Peter was never a Bishop anywhere, let alone in Rome, where he died. The office was foreign and in complete contrast to the nature of the Bishops in the first and second centuries. If there is a continual link of any description that binds the Pope of the Roman church to its past, it has to be the link of continual fighting and quarreling about doctrine (with its bloody enforcement by torture and excommunications) and the continual destructive warring between Church and State for control over people, subjects, dominions and principalities. 

Rome, as a center for the church, came to prominence through intrigue, fraud, manipulation, self-assertion and the process of elimination.

After the fall of the Eastern Church in Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch, Rome in the West was the only Patriarch left standing. There was no one else left to challenge what the Roman Patriarch did or said, so he ruled by default. The original church doctrines and scriptural messages were so completely missing and misunderstood by the Greek philosophers and apologists that all understanding of the nature of God and our relationship to him was completely skewed and lost by the fourth Century.

The long slow evolution of the church from apostles to apostates was complete by the end of the first millennium, transforming the Church of Jesus Christ into a politically powerful Empire, with absolute control over the spiritual and temporal affairs of all its subjects. It was enforced with blood, sweat and tears upon the entire Western civilized world until the middle of the nineteenth century, when its power was finally wrestled to the ground.

The “Times of the Gentiles” was coming to its inevitable end. 

Chapter 10: Devolution

 Part 1: From Apostles to Apostates

After passing through the hands of Greek philosophers, the Early Church experienced major changes in its understanding and interpretation of their basic Doctrine. When the apostles were lost to the Church, the organization was cut off from its spiritual channels to God. Church government began to be run from the bottom up, with clergy and members choosing Bishops who represented them at Councils. Doctrine and dogmas were discussed and resolved by debate and consensus.

Based on a false conclusion by Augustine regarding the nature of God, council members could not reach correct principles or agree on doctrine thereafter. Conclusions were then reached either by negotiations, intimidation or outright force. Before too long differences between these doctrines and the original teachings of Jesus were numerous and immense.

Many councils were called to resolve the differences, but no agreement could be reached that satisfied all sides of the argument. Settlements were imposed arbitrarily from the top down and enforced. Disagreement was punishable by any one of three alternatives:

  1. Excommunication
  2. Banishment
  3. Execution

Under such circumstances, it is easy to understand how common folk accepted what they were told to believe – even if and when it was changed. To think differently than the orthodoxy was a dangerous choice. It could lead to a charge of heresy and that would bring any of those three penalties down on your head.

Over time, as the doctrine changed, it was accepted and written in credos. Here is a comparison between the original teachings of Christ and what they became as a result of this system.

BeliefEarly Christian BeliefBelief Became
God
Speaks
God spoke in
Biblical times.
He speaks to
his Prophets today.
God spoke in
Biblical times. 
He does not
speak today.
God
Same as Early Church
God is the father of
our spirits.
He is loving and
caring.
We are the center of
His glory.  
He is material
substance
and spirit in a
glorified body.
He is omnipotent,
omniscient and
omnipresent.
We are made in his
image.
We are his sons and
daughters.
Christ told us to pray to God and he will
answer our prayers.
God is an
immaterial being.
He is omnipotent,
omniscient and
omnipresent.
God is unlike us in
every way. He is made
of a different matter
than we are.
We cannot 
communicate
with him.

We cannot understand God or his Purposes
We are not of the same spiritual
matter as God
Man cannot communicate with God
Jesus
Christ
Same as in Early
Church
Jesus is the son of
the Father.
He is a separate
person, distinct from
his Father.
He was chosen to be
the creator of this
world.
He volunteered to be
our Saviour.
He was perfect.
He was crucified for
our sins and
resurrected
on the third day.
He will return in the
last days and will reign
in the Millennium
on earth with the
Father.
Jesus was the spirit
son of God both in
Heaven as well as
on earth.
When he was born,
he was clothed in a
physical body of
flesh and bone,
just as we are. 
Jesus is co-eternal
with the Father.
Jesus is of the same
substance as the
Father.
He was crucified, died and raised again on the third day. 
Jesus returned to the
substance of the
Father. 
He is immaterial.
Jesus, the Word, is
immaterial and
co-eternal.
He became flesh,
at which time his
two natures, which are entirely different and separated, were united.
Holy
Ghost
Same as Taught
in Early Church.
The Holy Ghost is
personage of spirit.
He is third member of
the God Head.
He reveals, testifies,
teaches and bears
witness that Jesus is
the Christ.     
The Holy Ghost
proceeds from the
Father and the Son.
He is of the substance of the Father:
Immaterial.
The Trinity of the Godhead is:
One material substance, yet three
distinct natures.
Man/
Mankind

Same
as
early
Church
Man is the spirit child
of Heavenly parents.
He is of divine nature
and potential.
At birth, man was
clothed in a physical
body.
He existed before birth
in the realm of his
Heavenly parents.
Man is on earth to be
tested and to gain
experience, for which
he will be judged.
Man was created out of
nothing.
He is a creature built 
for God’s glory.
If he is evil, it is to
show God’s redeeming love.
If he is good, then God works through him to reveal his glory and
achieve his good works among men.
Man did not exist until mortal
conception.
Man is entirely different from the
divine nature of God.
Adam
and
Eve
Same as early Church
Adam and Eve are
man’s first parents.
They transgressed and
forfeited their home
in Eden so that they
might have children
and learn the Plan of
Salvation.
Man does not suffer
for their
transgression,
other than he has
inherited a mortal
body like theirs,
which will die.
Christ atoned for
Adam and Eve’s sin
and all mankind’s sins
on the condition of
repentance.
This act, which
overcomes the effects of death on the
physical body, also
negates the effects of
sins on his spirit.
Man inherits the sins
of Adam and Eve.
By nature, man is
sinful, weak and 
incapable of becoming good by
himself or being able to accept
Christ.
Man must receive the gift of free
grace from God, which may be
received through the ordinances of
the Church.
Same as
early
church
Salvation is a process.
Mankind is on earth to
determine “if they will do all things
whatsoever
the Lord their God
shall command them”.
Sin and virtue are
placed before him, and he must choose for
himself, by his own
freewill.
Time is permitted for
him to experience the
consequences of both.
An option to repent is
granted if he chooses
to do so.
Thus, through a series
of tests, man choses
and gains experience
and wisdom through
trial and error.
Man may progress
in strength by
forsaking sin and
living in accordance to
the commandment:
“Be ye perfect even
as your Father in
Heaven is perfect.”
The ordinances of
the Gospel are
essential as a measure
of man keeping the
commandments and
doing the will of the
Father.
This Plan of Salvation
existed before man
was on earth and
is the means by which
God himself qualified
to became God.  
Man’s salvation was
given to him only
once, when it was
introduced
by Jesus Christ
during his lifetime.
Salvation is offered to
those who are the
elect of God, which
he predestined he
would save before they were born.
The outward signs of
the elect are those
who receive baptism
and receive the rites
of the Church for
their sins, no matter
how many times
those sins are
committed.
These rites are
indispensable and
have saving power
in themselves.
The majority of
mankind, unless they have been
chosen by God to be saved, are
doomed to hell with no possibility of hope or salvation – except by
the intercession of the
Saints, or merits of Mary or Jesus
Christ.
Baptize
total
emergence in
water
Same
as
early
Church
Baptism is performed
for the remission of
personal sins and
admission into the
Church.
It is a required
ordinance performed
by an authorized
Priesthood holder.
A person must have
reached the age of
accountability
(normally 8-years-
old) before being
baptized.
The candidate is
completely emerged
in water, as
demonstrated by
John the Baptist
when he baptized
Jesus.
Baptism is performed
by priests on babies,
or a child of any
age, for forgiveness
of the original sin of
Adam.
Baptism is performed
on adults for the same
reason, plus
forgiveness of
personal sin and
admission to the
Church.
The candidate is
sprinkled with water.
Gift of
the
Holy
Ghost

Same
as
Early
Church
The gift of the Holy
Ghost is a required
ordinance performed
by an authorized
priesthood holder.
The directive given
during the ordinance,
is to “Receive the HolyGhost”, which for
many may require
a lifetime of faithful
living in order to fully
received these many
blessing.
These blessings
include a testimony of the divinity of Christ,
discernment and
other blessings, such
as those outlined
in D&C 46: 8-26.  
There is no Gift of the
Holy Ghost other than
that experienced
in the early Church
on the Day of
Pentecost.
Revelation
Same as taught in
Early Church
Revelation is the
revealing of God’s
will by direct personal
communication from
the Father, the Son o
through the influence
of the Holy Ghost.
Without this revealing
of God’s will, man is
left to himself to
determine the best use
of his talents and
abilities, and what is
right and what is
wrong for himself and
others.
In order for man to
receive revelation, he
must first be living in
accordance to the
commandments he
has already received
from God. 
There is no revelation from God. It ceased
after the death of the
last apostles.
All that God wanted to
tell or reveal to us, has
been revealed.
Nonetheless, when any Pope speaks officially
for the Church, he is
infallible regardless of the personal behaviour or character of the
Pope.
New doctrine comes
about from speculative thinking, discussion
and debate. It must
also be accepted by the majority of council or
it will not be binding
on the Church.

As time passed more and more of the original teachings disappeared or were thought of as myths and fables. Lost to man was the understanding of the following:

1/ The purpose and nature of God, Christ and the Holy Ghost.
2/ The purpose and nature of man and his relationship to God.
3/ The premortal, present, future, post-earth life and the eternal nature of mankind.
4/ The plan of happiness / salvation.
5/ The role, atonement, and sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
6/ The purpose of evil and role of Satan.
7/ The three degrees of glory.
8/ The organization and purpose of the Church.
9/ The priesthood and its functions and offices.
10/ The necessity of the temple: the work and ordinances for the living and dead.
11/ Continuous revelation.

By the end of the 5th Century the original Church was no longer in existence and what was being taught was unrecognizable.

What followed was a form of Humanitarianism and Materialism. Below is a table of devolution of comparative theories resulting from a lack of understanding and the availability of revelation.

Original Teachings Apostate Religions  Humanitarianism
The nature and
purpose of the
Godhead.
Tangible and loving
Father.
We are his offspring.
An indifferent,
incomprehensible,
spiritual, superior God
who we must obey or
suffer eternal
damnation.
There is no God.
There is no right or
wrong. 
Religion prohibits
the progression of
mankind.
We are here to be
tested to see if we will
be obedient to God and choose good, or
disobedient and chose
evil.
Obedience bring
happiness here in this
life and eternal
happiness in the
hereafter.
God is responsible for everything.
We can only appease
him and save ourselves by confessing our sins
and praying to the
early Saints to
intercede on our
behalf.
We have no say in our
Salvation.
We should seek ways
and means of solving
human problems
through our own
knowledge and new
technical or medical
discoveries.
God is a waste of our
time and talents.
Obedience to God’s
will leads to new
knowledge.
All knowledge comes
from God and is useful.
We learn by experience how to use that
knowledge for the
benefit of all.
Revelation ceased with the apostles.
New knowledge come
from debate and
philosophical
reasoning.
The Pope has final say
and he is infallible.
Science and education
are the means of
discovery and
progress.
The use of such
knowledge will be
determined by those
in authority.
There are no
exceptions.
This life is a time of
probation and testing.
We are to work our
way through to
understanding and
eternal life by
discovering for
ourselves the
consequences of both
evil and good choices.As we conform to
Christ’s teachings, we
become more like him.
Thus, we become
acceptable to God as
Christ was loved and
acceptable.
There is nothing we
can do to override the
will of God.
He works his goodness through us, and if we
are evil, we are an
example to others why
evil is wrong.
God forgives the
sinners to show his
love and mercy
towards us.  
We do not have to wait
for some miraculous
hereafter to find
happiness.
Through science and
the use of our own
talents we can build it
for ourselves by
discovering the secrets of nature and
applying them for the
betterment of
everyone.  

Through this comparison we can see how humanitarianism evolves from false teachings, which in turn leads to extreme forms of humanitarianism such as socialism and communism. Under these philosophies, man becomes no more than a superior animal and the value of life depreciates accordingly. Survival is its main objective and brutality is its means of achieving and retaining it. Instead of evolving upward towards God, we devolve downwards towards the beasts/animals.

This condition was described by Mosiah as “the natural man”. (Mosiah 3: 19)
For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit…”

“If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves”. – Joseph Smith.

And this is life Eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17: 3)

The decline and apostasy of the Church established in the Meridian of time was in the deepest depths of its despair. Yet God had not abandoned them. Like the parents of misbehaving children he had left them to their own devises until they could see the folly and foolishness of their choices. Now it was time to slowly reintroduce them to the principles of good behavior which he had given them freely and they had recklessly rejected. The time for the course correction of mankind was again at hand. A day of rebirth would be introduced again. The Lord would place righteous souls at the right time and in the right place for that to happen.

CHAPTER 1: THE REFORMERS: Protestants and Martyrs

 Part 2: From Apostates to Apostles

Prior to Constantine, the various fractions of the church rarely agreed with each other. After Constantine became Emperor, he was determined to wipe out this dangerous practice and unite the factions under a single banner. 

The faction that Constantine favoured to carry the banner wanted assurance that the deal that would allow it to banish all of its opposition from the Empire. This included the rights to the other factions’ properties as well. This favoured Church was thereby able to gain complete control over the masses by the support of the Empire, and also by its unique claim to be able to act as the intermediary power between mankind and God. By this power they could forgive sins or condemn to “the fires of hell” any and all who dared to oppose them.

But power has its price. Like Dante’s Inferno, a deal with the Devil always means, in the end, you lose your soul, even if you think you won. In this case, the Popes and Bishops sold their souls and they were now owned by the devil who owned the Empire. This became even more obvious as time went on. 

After the separation of Rome in the West and Constantinople in the East, even when the Bishops and Popes were grossly immoral and owned by powerful Italian families, the masses clung to the idea that somehow the Church Leaders were still the representatives of God. All this common folk had left was their lives and to not accept the current belief of what God was, would rob them of even that. No faith, no hope, no life.

The Emperor Constantine forced unity through his military power. When he needed help to ensure his orthodoxy and to stamp out opposition, Constantine first called upon the Frankish Kings, then the French Kings, followed by the Kings of Spain. Terrible abuses followed in the wake of this overwhelming military might and power. Bribes to obtain offices, torture to force compliance, cronyism to gain revenue, selling of indulgences to sweeten obedience, Mafia like tyranny from powerful Italian families who bought the office of the Pope, the redirecting of two of the crusades to capture the Christian City of Constantinople and the crushing of the Albigensians in Southern France, all led to the growing conviction that the Church was as black as bile and had to be gutted – starting with its head and reaching into all vile extremities. 

Only a person of sufficient bold, cold courage, willing to risk torture worse than death, would attempt to raise a voice of opposition against that sort of deeply established regime. One such was Peter of Bruys, a priest in a parish in the High Alps. He began preaching vehemently against the Church basing his outbursts on the Gospels in the New Testament. He had gathered a stack of wooden crosses to burn when a furious mob tied him to one of the crosses and burned him with them.

Henry of Blois, Dean and Monk of Cluny in France, was next. He began preaching against the immorality and vice of the clergy. His license to preach was revoked and he was imprisoned by the Archbishop.

Then Arnoldo of Brescia began to preach of the separation of Church and State. He accused the Pope of living a life unlike the apostles and preaching nothing they taught. He said the Pope should be given no obedience or respect. Pope Adrian III had Arnaldo strangled, then burned and threw his ashes into the Tiber River. 

Peter Waldo, a converted rich Merchant, paid two of his friends who were Priests, to translate the Latin Bible into the French provincial language and set out to preach from it. Quickly, the Archbishop demanded he stop. Waldo appealed to Pope Alexander III. Unfortunately, the Pope was dealing with many dissenters and in a desperate move, had them all banned, including Waldo and his followers. They were expelled, persecuted and banished from Lyon, their stronghold. The dissenters moved into other parts of France, Italy and the valleys of Piedmont where they are still found today.

During the inquisition, many were sought out and slaughtered. Later, during the crusades, an army headed for Jerusalem was redirected to Beziers in the South of France where they slaughtered men women and children. More were slaughtered at Carcasonne. At a later day, Pope Innocent III offered feudal Lords a remission of their sins if they would take part in the extermination of the Waldenese. As a result, over 100,000 heretics were reported killed. 

Another group of dissenters called the  Albigensians, who were considered the most numerous of the groups of heretics, was totally annihilated. 

In England, the country was exhausted from a long and bitter war. King John had indebted England to pay tribute to the Pope, but they had been unable to do so for 35 years.

John Wycliffe (Wyclif), a leader of a strong reform movement, saw the difference of what was taught in the Bible and what was being taught by the Roman Church. He contended that no foreign power, especially if it was religious, should have authority over governments and States. Parliament declared than neither King nor citizen had the right to subject England to any foreign power without its consent. Wycliffe was invited to give his opinion as to whether King John’s action was null and void from the civil and cannon laws. He confirmed it was and assailed the practice of the confession, the doctrine of transubstantiation and the self-seeking clergy for their subservience to the Pope. He supported the literal interpretation of the Bible and of Priests teaching in the language of the people. He was equally critical of the selling of indulgences, the squandering of charities by unfit priests, the misuse of properties, and the evils of the papal courts. In his judgment, the King had authority over the Pope in temporal matters.

In Jan 1377, Pope Gregory XI sent copies of a Bull against Wycliffe to the Bishop of London, Edward III, the Chancellor and the University of Oxford. Wyciffe was supported by the Mendicant Order, many of the Nobility and John of Gaunt. While most of his writings had formerly been written in Latin, he now began to write in English. Wycliffe was the first responsible for having the Bible printed in English. 

The Roman Church retaliated and brought a charge that Wycliffe allowed even laymen to have the Bible.

Despite his reform measures and differences with it, Wycliffe remained a member of the Church until after the Great Schism. The Great Schism occurred when two Popes were elected by the same College of Cardinals. It strengthened Wycliffe’s position and intensified his protests. In 1384 Wycliffe suffered a stroke while hearing New Year’s Eve mass and died. At the council of Constance in 1414, Wycliffe was declared a heretic and the Church and State united to suppress Wyclifism. His remains were dug up, burned and thrown into the River Swift.

While his works were spurned in England, they found fertile soil in Bohemia and that is where it bore fruit. That fruit was John Huss

John Huss was a lecturer at the University of Prague and was born to poor parents in the Bohemian town of Husinec in 1369. In 1401 Huss was chosen to be preacher over a Church called Bethlehem, or House of Bread. It had been founded by John of Milhiem, a member of the Royal Council of Bohemia.

Very early the writings of Wycliffe had found their way to Huss’s region through the sister of the King Wenceslaus. Coincidentally, she was also the wife of Richard II of England. Huss was attracted to the teachings of Wycliffe and as early as 1402 began to defend them. It was only a matter of time before this came to the attention of the Church authorities.

Sure enough, an order came to the Archbishop of Prague to seize all copies of Wycliffe’s writings and burn them. Two days later, Huss was excommunicated. When the edict prohibited any of Wycliffe’s teachings to be preached, Huss continued in spite of it. He was ordered to appear before the tribunal in Constance.

Huss wrote to Pope John XXIII citing he was in agreement with the Church and not a heretic. But in that same year the Pope proclaimed a crusade against Ladislaus of Naples and promised indulgences to all who made gifts or enlisted in the war. Huss fired off a denouncement against the right of the Pope to do this. The Pope’s bulls offering the indulgences were publicly dishonoured and burned. The King, aroused by the anger and contempt of the masses against the Pope, took three men who had been involved with publicly dishonoring the Pope and had them burned. Their bodies were taken to Huss’s Church of Bethlehem.

The King persuaded Huss to leave the city. While the Church turned against Huss, the populous supported him and prevented the Pope’s sentence from being carried out.

While exiled, Huss wrote It is better to die well than to live badly. We dare not sin in order to avoid the punishment of death.”He denounced the Pope’s bulls as unchristian in spirit and not to be obeyed. He denounced the Pope’s right to declare war on a people and grant indulgences to another people to fight them. In fact, any Pope who did so was himself in mortal sin.

This was a dangerous proposition. If the Church was to admit to this, then they would have to admit that the authority of the Church had been in doubt many times.

Emperor Sigmund urged his brother King Wenceslaus of Bohemia to make certain Huss went to Constance. Promising Huss protection, safe passage there and back, and provision to be heard before the council, Huss complied with the Emperor. When Huss arrived, the council of course declared the Emperor had no such authority to give him protection.

The Chancellor, the presiding authority of the council, was in a difficult position. He, as well as many others, were in flavor of reformation. However, they could not allow Huss to assert his private authority over Church authority. This man, a heretic, living in sin and destined to damnation, surely could not have power over others of a Christian nature. Also, to admit that Huss was right in charging the Pope guilty and in mortal sin by his granting indulgences to members who donated or enlisted in an unjust war, was more perilous than he could handle. In other words, if you are saying it is inconceivable to have a man, a sinful man, even a priest, rule and have jurisdiction over others of the Christian faith, then how can any sinful man, even a Pope have rule and jurisdiction over other people of the Christian faith? To find Huss guilty would be to find the Pope guilty. To find the Pope guilty would find other Popes just as guilty. 

There had been indeed many Popes much more guilty of living in sin than the current Pope. To find all these Popes guilty as well would be to admit the entire Church was apostate. While Huss made his point, he did not make any friends.

Other charges of heresy were brought against Huss. He was denied the right to defence, denied the right to reply and found guilty as charged. He was condemned to be burned at the stake.

Huss was chained by the neck to a stake and straw and wood piled up to his neck. As the flames arose, he sang. His voice was stilled by the fire and his ashes were thrown into the Rhine River. Pagans had disposed of the ashes of Polycarp, another Christian martyr, in the same fashion, in the 2nd century. Now it was the Christians who were behaving worse than the Pagans.

Bohemia was torn by civil war for 30 years because of the death of Huss. The hatred of Rome, and the disgust, dissatisfaction and disrespect for the Church by its members was building fuel throughout all of Europe. All that was needed now was something to ignite it. 

Chapter 2: Martin Luther

Part 2: From Apostates to Apostles

The protestant reformation officially began with Martin Luther. He was not the first reformer, yet because of a multitude of converging events, his arrival on the scene at this time in history allowed him to achieve actual change and survive.

These included some of the most glaring abuses by the Pope and clergy. But there are other major discoveries and events to consider. With these quickly converging historical developments, his chances for survival were becoming both time sensitive and uniquely optimal.

Have you noticed how many times in the history of man, when the light of Christ seems to be threatened with total extinction, somehow, a person steps forward and proves to be the right man, in the right place, under the right conditions? Is it not self-evident that the hand of God had arranged in advance every detail necessary for accomplishment of a rescue at this very critical hour?

Consider the following for instance:

1/ The Renaissance age or the grand awakening of men’s minds had just begun.

2/ The printing press, capable of creating thousands of copies of books had just been perfected.

3/ The discovery of the Americas, which included about 50% of available habitable landmass, hitherto unknown, became available with all its natural resources and unlimited possibilities.

4/ The military and moral support of the German Princes became available to Luther’s cause.

5/ The capture of Constantinople by the Muslims weakened the power of the Pope.

6/ There was an influx of Greek scholars from the vanquished Eastern Christian cities. These keen intellectuals were eager to engage in a religious reformation.

7/ The Bible becoming available to the common people making the word of God available in the common language of the masses for the first time.

8/ The Pope’s refusal to correct himself added determination to those thirsting for change.

9/ The refusal of the Roman Church to purge itself of corruption left no option but that which was offered by Luther.

10/ An immoral and corrupt Pope, Rodrigo Borgia, and his son Caesar Borgia bought the Office of Pope. He appointed his private master-assassin Don Michelotto to assist him, which heightened public loathing of the Church leadership and priests to a fever pitch.

11/ Compulsory collection of tithes from the peasants turned yet another group away in bitterness from Roman Church support.

12/ Bishops support of relics, another publicly hated money generating scheme by the clergy.

13/ The selling of Priesthood Offices to the highest bidders crystallized condemnation of Church officers for gross corruption.

14/ The selling of indulgences was condemned as fraudulent and shameful.

Things had become so desperate for the people, believers and non-believers alike, that the protest by Luther was like a burning torch flung into the tinder-dry, rotting, heap of foul stinking stench the Church and its clergy had become. It was more than sufficient to light the fires of reform.

When Luther compiled his 95 complaints, he posted them on the University’s equivalent of a Bulletin Board, the Door of the Church at Wittenberg. That act was electrifying and much more far reaching than anyone could ever anticipated or imagined. They were immediately copied and spread throughout Germany. 

Luther was a monk of the Augustinian order, a priest and a professor of philosophy at the University of Wittenberg. He was well known and very well respected. He totally believed the doctrine and never revised or altered any of Augustinian thought. His ambition was not to start a new church or to reform Church orthodoxy. That would be the challenge for later reformers. His calling was to reform the church of its deplorable corrupt practices.

Luther saw the Church through the eyes of the New Testament. When Jesus had said “My Kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36), Luther saw the contrast played out in what was taught and what had become of the Roman Church. It confirmed all that had been reported in his theses. There is little doubt that if the Roman Church, starting with the Pope, had reformed itself, there would have been no need for the protestant reformation. But the Councils of the Bishops had been not only dismissed, but were no longer being called. There was no avenue for reform from within. Luther maintained that not only was the Pope not “Infallible” but he was also major contributor to the Church’s problems.

Luther used the writings of Paul frequently to underscore his views, but when they opposed his own views, he was quick to denounce Paul. Eventually Luther was called before a court council in Worms by the Emperor (in 1521) and asked that his theses be retracted or he would be deemed to be a heretic. Luther’s famously replied, “Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise. God help me, Amen.”

Luther left Worms and on the road to Eisenach, his carriage was attacked by a group of armed horsemen. He was carried away captive. Rumours spread like wild fire. Was he alive or dead? Had he been put in prison by emissaries of the Pope? It was not until much later that it became known that the Elector of Saxony had ordered his counsellors to hide Luther until the threat to his life had passed. It was even later that the Elector himself was told that Luther was in disguise and hiding in the Elector’s very own castle.

Luther’s opposition to the Roman Church was at its peak at this time. The Church threatened Luther and his followers with extermination, but the German princes refused to carry out the order. There had been too much of an uproar from mere rumours that Luther had been killed. Fearing a war, they delayed instead. Meanwhile Luther’s books were circulating everywhere including England and Scotland. King Henry VIII ordered that all Luther’s Books be burned and earned himself and all English kings thereafter, the title of “Defender of the Faith”.

The Emperor was embroiled in a war with France. Upon his departure from Germany there was no will to enforce his edict. This gave Luther time to work upon his translation of the New Testament. Luther’s stand for the rights of individual conscience began to have an effect on the population of Germany. It had become divided into two camps, Lutheran and Catholic. 

In 1524, what was called “The Peasants War”, broke out. This was more a war against high taxes than religion. The peasants had endured crippling taxes imposed by the nobles and princely Bishops. When the news reached Luther, he demanded the Bishops put the peasants down for rebelling against God and his constituted authority. Over 100,000 thousand people lost their lives and had their property confiscated under the guise that they had allegiance to Lutheran teachings. 

At two subsequent meetings at Spires, with representation from the Emperor and the German Princes, the Emperor attempted to enforce the will of the Pope. It was their intent to secure unity against the protesters by execution, unless they agreed to the sole supremacy of the Catholic Church. Again, the Lutherans protested. They pointed out that in the meeting held at Worms, it had been determined that each Prince would be responsible for their own subjects. No state could impose their executions on another state. They also contended that what had been decided unanimously at one meeting, could not be revoked by a simple majority at another. As a result of this protest, the Lutherans were given the name of Protestants. 

Just when it appeared that the protestant minority would have to submit to force, an independent religious revolt began in Switzerland. The leader was Ulrich Zwingli. Under the insistence of Phillip, Landgrave of Hesse, the most influential of Protestant Princes, a meeting was held between Zwingli and Luther. The purpose of the meeting was to consider unity. Luther could not come to a compromise on the understanding of the sacrament and dismissed the idea of unity. Luther was not about to become tolerant of any views other than his own in spite of his newly confessed belief that each individual has the right to his own interpretation of the scriptures. In the end neither Luther, Zwingli nor Calvin for that matter, could agree. That was the end of unity for protection.

In 1530, the Emperor called a meeting at Augsburg. He needed the help of the German Princes and wanted to resolve how best to deal with the differences of the Holy Church and the division of the Christian religion. Luther, being under a ban since the meeting in Worms could not attend but could only wait in the castle in Coburg, overlooking the town. Presented at the meeting to the Emperor were three “Confessions” or proposals. One was approved by Luther, one from the Lutherans of Southern Germany, and one written by Zwingli. The Emperor refused to read or hear the latter two. Attempts were made to show that Lutheran doctrines were in agreement with the traditional Roman doctrines and Luther was attempting to influence the church only so far as it should abolished certain abuses. The proposal referred to seven errors and abuses, and 21 defined differing beliefs of the Lutherans. They were refuted. The Roman Church demanded the protestants recant or be suppressed by force. The Lutherans, believing they did not constitute a new Church but rather a continuation of the early church, broke ranks with the Roman Church. The Protestant schism was official and final.

So, we might ask: What effect did Luther have upon the Lutheran Church and the Protestant reformation of the Roman Church?

Answer 1: The effect was major in both instances. So far as the Lutheran Church is concerned, Luther was able to succeed in establishing an alternative religious answer to the dominant rule of a corrupt, self-serving, political power that had thwarted the individual incentive of millions of people for over 1500 years. His contribution to the liberty of the individual from both spiritual and physical bondage was extremely beneficial to everyone. He encouraged the reading of the Bible by everyone and made it accessible to them in their own language.

Answer 2: He did not succeed in changing orthodoxy or the Government of the Church. His interpretation was not any different from that of the Roman Church. Still clinging to the teachings of Augustine, he adopted the Roman views of infant baptisms, and baptism without authority. He modified only the idea of transubstantiation, and claimed the merits of Christ was all that was needed for the salvation of man. The Roman Church believed that the “Treasury of the Church” consisted of Christ’s merits and the deeds of the Saints which could be used by the righteous living and dead for their salvation. Luther did not think the offices of the Church were needed at all. A person’s own faith in Christ was sufficient for his own salvation. In theory, Luther’s idea of Church government was democratic, but in practice he appointed himself as Bishop of Bishops. His source of revenue came from State support, which was levied against the people in the form of a compulsory tithing, just as the Catholics did before him.

In order to rationalize his split from the Roman church, Luther cited the corruption of the Papacy and maintained there was an invisible Church and a visible Church. Rome was the visible Church, but the invisible Church was one that would last forever. This was what Christ had referred to in Matthew 28:20 when he exclaimed “…Lo, I am with you always even unto the end of the world“. This Church was formed by the believers of the Church, for wherever the Church is formed by believers in Christ who preach and administer the sacrament correctly, there is also Christ.

He later realized that this idea was insufficient and that there had to be a visible Church too. Equally important as well was that Pastors with congregations had to exist.

Baptism, he believed, conferred the priesthood authority, so accordingly, he and all the German princes who had been baptized had as much authority as the Priests or Pope.

While his contribution to new thinking about Church doctrine was limited, the political and religious freedoms were immense. Without these freedoms, any attempt to reform or restore truths later would have failed. In 1583, Luther died having bequeathed this great blessing and freedom to us all.