SPALDING STUDIES LIBRARY -- SPECIAL  COLLECTIONS
Sp. Col. Index   |   Mormon Classics   |   Bookshelf   |   Newspaper Articles   |   History Vault

Brigham H. Roberts
(1857-1933)
New Witnesses For God
 Part I -- Volume I
(SLC: Deseret News, 1911)
  • Title
  • Contents

  • Volume II
  • Volume III

  • Transcriber's Comments


    •
    1888 Contributor article  |  1905 YMMIA Manual  |  1908 Am. Hist. Magazine
    1907 Defense of the Faith and Saints I  |  1912 Defense of the Faith and Saints II

     





    NEW  WITNESSES  FOR  GOD



    I.

    JOSEPH  SMITH  THE  PROPHET.






    By B. H. Roberts,

    Author of "The Gospel," "Outlines of Ecclesiastical History,"
    "Mormon Doctrine of Deity," "Defense of the Faith and the Saints,"
    "The Prophet-Teacher," etc., etc.




    IN  THREE  VOLUMES
    VOL. I.



    THE DESERET NEWS
    Salt Lake City
     1911




     






    TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.



    PREFACE.

    CHAPTER  I.

    CHAPTER  II.

    CHAPTER  III.

    CHAPTER  IV.

    CHAPTER  V.

    CHAPTER  VI.

    CHAPTER  VII.

    CHAPTER  VIII.

    CHAPTER  IX.

    CHAPTER  X.

    CHAPTER  XI.

    CHAPTER  XII.

    CHAPTER  XIII.

    CHAPTER  XIV.

    CHAPTER  XV.

    CHAPTER  XVI.

    CHAPTER  XVII.

    CHAPTER  XVIII.

    CHAPTER  XIX.

    CHAPTER  XX.

    CHAPTER  XXI/XXII.

    CHAPTER  XXIII.

    CHAPTER  XXIV.

    CHAPTER  XXV.

    CHAPTER  XXVI.

    CHAPTER  XXVII.

    CHAPTER  XXVIII.

    CHAPTER  XXIX.

    CHAPTER  XXX.

    CHAPTER  XXXI.

    CHAPTER  XXXII.


    (under construction)




     
    (This text is still under construction)

    [ iii ]




    PREFACE.


    Nearly a century has passed away since Joseph Smith first declared to the world that he had received a revelation from God. From that revelation and others that followed there has sprung into existence what men call a new religion -- "Mormonism;" and a new church, the institution commonly known as the "Mormon Church," the proper name of which is THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS.

    The reader should know, however, that "Mormonism" is not a new religion. Those who accept it do not so regard it; it makes no such pretensions. The institution commonly called the "Mormon Church," is not a new church; it makes no such pretensions, as will be seen by its very name -- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This of itself discloses what "The Mormon Church" claims to be -- the Church of Jesus Christ; and to distinguish it from the Church of Jesus Christ that existed in former days, the phrase "of Latter-day Saints" is added.

    "Mormonism," I repeat, is not a new religion; it is the Old Religion, the "Everlasting Gospel," restored again to the earth through the revelations received by Joseph Smith.

    At a glance the reader will observe that these claims in behalf of "Mormonism" pre-suppose an apostasy of the world from the Christian religion; and hence, from the standpoint of a believer, "Mormonism" is the Gospel of Jesus Christ restored; and the institution which grows out of it -- the church -- is the Church of Jesus Christ re-established among men.

    The author has chosen for his work the title, "NEW WITNESSES FOR GOD;" and in volume I. presents Joseph Smith, the Prophet, as one of these Witnesses. That is the relationship that Joseph Smith sustains to this generation; and it is the author's purpose to prove, first, that the world stands in need of such a Witness; and, second, that Joseph Smith is that Witness.




    iv.                                               PREFACE.                                              


    The subject is treated under four THESES.

    I.
    The world needs a New Witness for God.

    II.
    The Church of Christ was destroyed; there has been an apostasy from the Christian religion so universal as to make necessary a New Dispensation of the Gospel.

    III.
    The Scriptures declare that tire Gospel of Jesus Christ in the last days -- "in the hour of God's judgment" -- will be restored to the earth by a re-opening of the heavens, and giving a New Dispensation thereof to the children of men.

    IV.
    Joseph Smith is a New Witness for God; a prophet divinely authorized to preach the Gospel and re-establish the Church of Jesus Christ on earth.

    How well the writer has succeeded in sustaining these propositions, the reader will judge for himself; he only asks that his treatment of the subjects be considered with candor.

    To guard against error or inaccuracy in doctrine the writer applied to the First Presidency of the Church for a committee of brethren well known for their soundness in the faith, and broad knowledge of the doctrines of the Church, to hear read the manuscript of this book. Whereupon Elder Franklin D. Richards, one of the Twelve Apostles of the New Dispensation, and Church Historian; Elder George Reynolds, one of the author's fellow-Presidents in the First Council of the Seventy, and Elder John Jaques, Assistant Church Historian, were appointed as such committee; and to these brethren, for their patient labor in reading the manuscript, and for their suggestions the writer is under lasting obligations.

    This Volume I. of New Witnesses was first published in 1895; it is now, in its second edition, 1911, published in uniform style with its companion volumes of New Witnesses, the two volumes which treat of the Book of Mormon as a Witness for God, and which issued from the press in 1909.

    B. H. ROBERTS.
    Salt Lake City, January, 1911.


     

    [ 11 ]




    CHAPTER  I.


    The Necessity Of New Witnesses.

    The very title of this work may give offense. "New Witnesses for God!" will exclaim both ministry and laity of Christendom; "are not the Old Witnesses sufficient? Has not their testimony withstood the assaults of unbelievers, atheists and agnostics alike for nineteen centuries? What need have we of New Witnesses? Every weapon that hostile criticism could suggest has been brought to bear against the tower of our faith based on the testimony of the Old Witnesses; and it stands more victorious now than ever, four square to all the winds that blow. [a] The testimony of the Old Witnesses has outlived the ridicule of Voltaire, the solemn sneers of Gibbon, the satire of Bolingbroke, the ribaldry of Paine; just as it will outlive the insidious assaults of the German mythical school and the rationalistic school of critics, which are now much in vogue. Such the confident boast of orthodox Christians.

    [p.12]

    "Meanwhile, every diocesan conference rings with the wail over 'infidel opinions.' It grows notoriously more and more difficult to get educated men to take any interest in the services or doctrines of the church; * * * * literature and the periodical press are becoming either more indifferent, or more hostile to the accepted Christianity year by year; the upper strata of the working class, upon whom the future of that class depends, either stand coldly aloof from all the Christian sects, or throw themselves into secularism. Passionate appeals are made to all sections of Christians, to close their ranks, not against each other, but against the 'skepticism rampant' among the cultivated class and the religious indifference of the democracy." [b]

    In the face of these facts, notwithstanding the confident boasts of orthodox Christians about the invulnerableness of the testimony of the Old Witnesses, it will be well for us to look a little more closely into the achievements of Christianity, Catholic as well as Protestant, and see if they are as satisfactory when measured by actual results, as they are claimed to be in the fervid rhetoric of the orthodox special pleader.

    [p.12 - p.13]

    What is distinctly and commonly recognized as the Christian religionc was founded some twenty centuries ago, [c] by the personal ministry of Jesus Christ, and those whom he chose as Apostles. For about three centuries it had a hard struggle for existence. The persecutions waged against it, first by the Jews, from whose religious faith it may be said to have been amplified; and second, from the pagans, then in possession of all secular power, well-nigh overcame it. The "beast" made war upon the saints and "prevailed against them." Then Constantine, the friend of Christianity, succeeded to the imperial throne of Rome, and external persecution ceased. Christian ministers were invited to the court of the emperor and loaded with wealth and honors. Magnificent churches were erected, and the hitherto despised religion became the favorite protege of the imperial government. From a precarious and wretched existence, the Christian church was suddenly raised to a position of magnificence and power. Nor was it long in playing the part of the camel which, being permitted by the kind indulgence of its master to put its head within the tent during a violent storm, next protruded its shoulders, then its whole body, and turning about kicked out its master. [d] So did the Christian ecclesiastical power with the civil power. That is to say, that which was at first granted to the church as a privilege was soon demanded as a right; and what was at first received by grace, was at the last taken by force. On the ruins of pagan Rome, rose papal Rome, and while the latter power did not abolish secular government, it did make it subservient to ecclesiasticism. From the chair of St. Peter, the Roman pontiffs ruled the world absolutely. Kings and emperors obeyed them, and all stood in awe before the throne of the triple-crowned successor of St. Peter.

    [p.13 - p.14]

    Finally, through the mutual jealousy and ambition of the bishops of Rome and Constantinople, a controversy arose which, in the ninth century, resulted in a great and lasting division of Christendom into two great ecclesiastical bodies, viz.: the Greek Catholic or Eastern Church, and the Roman Catholic or Western Church. In the Western Church the secular or civil power continued to be regarded as subordinate to ecclesiastical authority, a sort of convenient instrument to execute the decrees of the church. Hence Roman Catholic Christianity drew to itself all that prestige in the propagation of its doctrines which comes from the authority and support of the state; and though the power of the state was held to be subordinate to that of the church, no one who has read our Christian annals can help being struck with the importance of the civil power as a factor in the propagation of Roman Catholic Christianity. The barbarous peoples who came in contact with the Christian nations, were often compelled to accept the so-called Christian religion as one of the terms of capitulation; and the fear of the sword often ekes out the arguments of the priests, and was generally much more effective.

    [p.14]

    I think it proper that the above statement should be emphasized by the following proofs:

    "In the year 772, A.D., Charlemagne, king of the Franks, undertook to tame, and to withdraw from idolatry, the extensive nation of the Saxons, who occupied a large portion of Germany, and were almost perpetually at war with the Franks, respecting their boundaries and other things; for he hoped that if their minds could become imbued with the Christian doctrines they would gradually lay aside their ferocity, and learn to yield submission to the empire of the Franks. The first attack upon their heathenism produced little effect, being made not with the force of arms, but by some bishops and monks whom the victor had left for that purpose among the vanquished nation. But much better success attended the subsequent wars which Charlemagne undertook, in the years 775, 776 and 780 A. D., against that heroic people, so fond of liberty, and so impatient, especially of sacerdotal domination. For in these assaults, not only rewards, but also the sword and punishments were so successfully applied upon those adhering to the superstition of their ancestors, that they reluctantly ceased from resistance, and allowed the doctors whom Charles employed to administer to them Christian baptism. Widekind and Albion, indeed, who were two of the most valiant Saxon chiefs, renewed their former insurrections; and attempted to prostrate again by violence and war, that Christianity which had been set up by violence. But the martial courage, and the liberality of Charles at length brought them, in the year 785, solemnly to declare that they were Christians, and would continue to be so. * * * The Huns inhabiting Pannonia were treated the same way as the Saxons; for Charles so exhausted and humbled them by successive wars, as to compel them to prefer becoming Christians to being slaves." [e]

    [p.15]

    In Denmark, during the tenth century --

    "The Christian cause had to struggle with great difficulties and adversities, under King Gorman, although the queen was a professed Christian. But Harald, surnamed Blatand, the son of Gorman, having been vanquished by Otto the Great, about the middle of the century, made a profession of Christianity in the year 949, and was baptized. * * * * Perhaps Harald, who had his birth and education from a Christian mother, Tyra, was not greatly averse from the Christian religion; and yet it is clear that in the present transaction he yielded rather to the demands of his conqueror, than to his own inclinations. For Otto, being satisfied that the Danes would never cease to harrass their neighbors with wars and rapine, if they retained the martial religion of their fathers, made it a condition of the peace with Harald that he and his people should become Christians." [f]

    [p.15 - p.16]

    "Waldemar I., king of Denmark, obtained very great fame by the many wars he undertook against the pagan nations, the Slavs, the Wends, the Vandals, and others. He fought not only for the interests of his subjects, but likewise for the extension of Christianity; and wherever he was successful, he demolished the temples and images of the gods, the altars and groves, and commanded the Christian worship to be set up. * * * * The Fins who infested Sweden with frequent inroads, were attacked by Eric IX., King of Sweden, called St. Eric, after his death, and by him subdued after many bloody battles. * * * * The vanquished nation was commanded to follow the religion of the conqueror, which most of them did with reluctance and disgust."

    [p.16]

    "Towards the close of the century [the tenth], * * * some merchants of Bremen or of Lubec, trading to Livonia, took along with them Mainhard, a regular canon of St. Augustine in the monastery of Segberg in Halsatia, to bring that warlike and uncivilized nation to the Christian faith. But as few listened to him, Mainhard consulted the Roman pontiff, who created him the first bishop of the Livonians, and desired that war should be waged against the opposers. This war, which was the first waged with the Esthonians, was extended farther and prosecuted more rigorously by Berthold, the second bishop of the Livonians, after the death of Mainhard; for this, Berthold, formerly Abbot of Lucca, marched with a strong army from Saxony, and recommended Christianity not by arguments but by slaughter and battle. Following his example, the third bishop, Albert, previously a canon of Bremen, entering Livonia in the year 1198, well supported by a fresh army raised in Saxony, and fixing his camp at Riga, he instituted, by authority of Innocent III., the Roman pontiff, the military order of knight's sword-bearers, who should compel the Livonians by force of arms to submit to baptism. New forces were marched from time to time from Germany, by whose valor and that of the sword-bearers the wretched people were subdued and exhausted, so that they at last substituted the images of Christ and the saints in place of their idols." [g]

    A volume of evidence similar in import to the foregoing could be compiled, showing that from the accession of Constantine the Great down to the sixteenth century, the Roman Catholic Church did not hesitate to employ the civil power to enforce conversion and punish recalcitrants.

    [p.16 - p.17]

    If the Eastern Church has been less successful in extending the borders of Christianity by means of conquests waged by the civil power, it was because the division of the world it occupied afforded less opportunity than Western Europe, where a great struggle was on between the race of men made weak by the effete civilization of Rome and the more vigorous barbarians. But while the Eastern Church made less direct use of the sword to extend its dominions, it nevertheless had the state for an ally which sustained it at need.

    [p.17]

    When in the sixteenth century the great revolt against the authority of the pope and the religion of the Roman Catholic Church gave birth to the Protestant churches, they, too, in the main, formed alliances with the states in which they were founded. Nay, in the very struggle for their existence. the states of Germany, of Holland, Scandinavia and of England, drew the sword in their behalf and by their support made it possible for the seceding religionists to establish churches despite all efforts of the Roman pontiffs to prevent them; and after the revolution was an accomplished fact, the states above enumerated continued to give support to the churches founded within their borders. If the church and the state in some instances were regarded as separate and distinct societies, they acted at the same time as close neighbors, and nearly interested in each other's welfare. If they lived separate, they were not estranged; and each at need gave the other support.

    [p.17 - p.18]

    I have thought it necessary to call the attention of the reader to the conditions in which Christianity has existed since the days of Constantine under all three great divisions of Christendom -- the Roman Catholic, the Greek Catholic, and protestant -- in order that he that he might be reminded of the fact that circumstances of the most propitious character have existed for the propagation of the so-called Christian religion. Christendom has had at its command the wealth and intelligence of Europe; it has been able to follow the commerce of European states into every country of the world; and not only its commerce, but its conquests as well; and wherever the love of adventure or the desire for conquest has led Christian soldiers, Christian priests have either accompanied or followed them, that the gospel, in the hands of the Christian ministers, might be a balm for the wounds inflicted by the sword in the hands of Christian soldiers; so if Christian armies were a bane to the savages, the Christian priests might be an antidote!

    [p.18]

    Yet with all the advantages which came to Christianity through the support of the state; with the intelligence and wealth of Europe behind it; with the privilege of following in the wake of its commerce and conquests; what has Christendom done in the way of converting the world to its religion? Only about one third of the inhabitants of the earth are even nominally Christian! There are in the world, according to the latest reliable statistics published on the subject: [g]

    Belonging to all religions in the world there are 1,429,682,199

    Of these the Christians number in A. D. 1910 476,560,733

    Tabulated more in detail into their various faiths they stand as follows:

    CREED Number of Followers

    1 Christian 477,080,158

    2 Worshipers of Ancestors and Confucianism 256,000,000

    3 Hindooism 190,000,000

    4 Mohammedanism 176,834,372

    5 Buddhism 147,900,000

    6 Taoism 43,000,000

    7 Shintoism 14,000,000

    8 Judaismh 7,186,000

    9 Polytheism 117,681,669

    The Christian millions are divided as follows:

    1 Catholic Church 230,866,533

    2 Protestant Churches 143,237,625

    3 Orthodox Greek Church 98,016,000

    4 Church of Abyssinia 3,000,000

    5 Coptic Church 120,000

    6 Armenian Church 1,690,000

    7 Nestorians 80,000

    8 Jacobites 70,000

    Total 477,080,158

    [p.19]

    Surely when the superior advantages for the propagation of the Christian religion are taken into account, one could reasonably expect better results than this, after a period of nineteen centuries, sixteen of which may be said to have been of a character favorable to the extension of the borders of the church.

    But let us take a nearer view of the status of Christendom. As seen in the foregoing, but about one-third of the population of the earth is even nominally Christian. No one will contend that all those nominally Christian are really Christians. Church membership may be one thing, conversion to the Christian religion quite another. If those who are Christians in name only, and church members from custom or for worldly advantage were separated from those who are Christians upon principle, upon conversion and real faith, the number of Christians in the world would be materially reduced. For it cannot be denied that when any religion becomes popular there are multitudes of insincere men who will outwardly accept it, and give it lip-service in return for the advantages that accrue to them socially, financially or politically.

    [p.19 - p.20]

    Moreover, Christendom is not united in one great body or church; but on the contrary it is divided into numerous contending factions whose differences are so far fundamental that there appears no prospect of reconciliation among them. The Catholics refuse to recognize any divine authority in the ministry of the Protestant churches, [i] or power of salvation in Protestantism. To the Catholic the Protestant is an heretic, a renegade child; and on the other hand, to the Protestant, the Catholic is an idolator, and the pope the very anti-Christ, prophesied of in scripture.

    [p.20]

    Nor are the Roman and Greek Catholics much nearer at one with each other than the Roman Catholics and Protestants. Away back in the ninth century, as a result of the controversy between the Eastern and Western churches, Pope Nicholas, in a council held at Rome, solemnly excommunicated Photius, the patriarch of Jerusalem, and had his ordination declared null and void. The Greek emperor resented this conduct of the pope, and under his sanction Photius, in his turn, convened what he called an acumenical council, in which he pronounced sentence of excommunication and deposition against the pope, and got it subscribed by twenty-one bishops and others amounting in number to one thousand.

    [p.20 - p.21]

    Although this breach was patched up after the death of the Emperor Michael, difficulties broke out again between the East and the West from time to time, until finally in the eleventh century, when Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Constantinople, opposed the Western churches with respect to their making use of unleavened bread in the sacrament, their observation of the Sabbath, and fasting on Saturday, charging therein that they lived in communion with the Jews. Pope Leo IX. replied, and in his apology for the Western churches declaimed warmly against the false doctrine of the Greeks, and ended by placing on the altar of Santa Sophia, by his legates, a deed of excommunication against the Patriarch, Michael Cerularius. This was the first rupture. From that time the mutual hatred of the Greeks and the Latins became insuperable, insomuch that they have continued ever since separated from each other's communion. [j]

    [p.21]

    Though both the Greek and the Protestant churches are separated from the Roman Catholic Church, yet there is no union or fellowship between them; on the contrary, they hold doctrines so opposite that union between them is out of the question. At least so remote is the prospect, that all attempts at union have been ineffectual.

    Turn now to Protestant Christendom. Surely we shall find a union of organization and agreement of sentiment here! But no; division, on the contrary, is multiplied. Protestant Christendom is divided into numerous sects between some of which the gulf of separation is almost as broad and deep as that which separates Protestants from Catholics. Such is the distracted condition of Protestant Christendom that sects are daily multiplying, and confusion is constantly increasing. Nor can one refrain from saying with Cardinal Gibbons, that "This multiplying of creeds is a crying scandal, and a great stumbling-block in the way of the conversion of the heathen nations." [k] And I will add, equally a stumbling block to the conversion of the unbelievers living among the Christians, and of the Jews.[l]

    [p.22]

    This last class of persons named, the unbelievers living among Christians, we must now consider; and note the effect of their assaults upon Christianity. They are, for the most part, without organization; without unity of purpose, except in so far as they are united in their disbelief of revealed religion. Their position being essentially a negative one, the incentive to organization is not active. It required unity of purpose and organization of effort to build; those who content themselves with pointing out the defects, real or imagined, of the work of the builders, or saying the structure does not answer well the purposes for which it was erected, feel no such necessity for organization as the builders do.

    In consequence of having no organization, infidels keep no account of their numerical strength; they publish no statistics, and therefore we have no way of estimating how numerous they are. But no one with large acquaintance in Christian countries, and who is in touch with the trend of modern religious thought, can doubt that the number of unbelievers is considerable, and their influence upon the Christian religion more damaging than Christian enthusiasts are willing to admit.

    [p.22 - p.23]

    What a motley crowd this great body of unbelievers is! First is the downright atheist who says plainly, "There is no God. Nothing but blind force is operating in the universe, there is no Providence whose will can interrupt the destined course of nature." Providence they set down as a dream "The universe and all its varied phenomena are generated by natural forces out of cosmic atoms, and into atoms to be again resolved," is their creed.

    [p.23]

    Following the atheist is the deist, who, while not on, whit behind the atheist in rejecting revealed religion, is of the opinion that mind is somewhere operating in the universe but refuses to recognize that Intelligence as associated with a personality. Still that Intelligence, whatever or wherever it be, is God; but with them is always "It," never "He."

    Then comes the agnostic. He prefers to suspend his judgment on the question of Deity; and with a modesty, not always free from affectation, says: "I don't know. The evidence in the case is not quite clear; in fact it is sometimes quite conflicting." He questions; is debating; but you find his sympathies, at bottom, on the side of unbelief.

    Next to the agnostic comes the rationalist, who, while he leaves God more or less of an open question, has his rain. made up in respect to Jesus Christ. He recognizes him a a good man, though mistaken on many questions; but though he strips Jesus of all divinity, he nevertheless recognize him as the friend of God and of man; and sees embodied in him, moreover, "the symbol of those religious forces in man which are primitive, essential and universal." [m]

    [p.23 - p.24]

    Such are the varied classes which assail the Christian religion. Their methods of assault, though having much in common, are as varied as the kinds of unbelievers. The atheist mockingly asks if there be a God why he does not make himself manifest to all the world; why he keeps himself shrouded in mystery? Why not reveal himself to all as well as to a chosen few? Pushing aside the testimony of those who say they have stood in his presence, he boldly asserts there is no God, because no one has ever seen him; he has not made himself known to men, and in conclusion he points to the natural and uninterrupted order of things in the universe as proof that all things are governed by blind forces instead of intelligence, whether a personality or apart from personality.

    [p.24]

    The deists say nearly all that the atheists say; but admitting an intelligence back of all phenomena in the universe, they pretend to read his will in the book of nature, [n] and contrast its perfections with the imperfections of all written books of revelation. To them the Bible -- the Christian volume of revelation -- is imperfect and contradictory; in their view their view it teaches a morality and seems to tolerate practices unworthy of a Being of infinite goodness.

    [p.24 - p.25]

    The agnostics join with the deists in their objections. They see all the contradictions, imperfections and alleged immorality that deists see in the Christian volume of revelation conclusion; and with them question the authenticity and credibility of the scriptures. If they differ from the deists in anything, it is simply in arriving at a less positive conclusion. But the worst is to come.

    [p.25]

    There has arisen within the last century, mainly in Germany, a class of theological writers, who indeed profess a reverence both for the name and person of Jesus Christ, and a real regard, moreover, for the scriptures as "embodiments of what is purest and holiest in religious feeling;" and yet they degrade Christ to a mere man, and strip the scriptures of all their force as the word of God, by denying the historical character of the Biblical narrative. Starting with the postulate that the miraculous is impossible and never happens, or at least has never been proven, [o] they relegate the scriptures -- the New Testament as well as the Old -- to the realm of poetry, legend or myth, because they are filled with accounts of the miraculous. [p]

    [p.25 - p.26]

    This movement of theological thought had its origin in a new science, the science of historical criticism, which had its birth in the nineteenth century. The new science consisted simply in applying to the mass of materials on which much of ancient history had been hitherto based -- myths, legends and oral tradition -- the rules [q] embodying the judgment of sound discretion upon the value of different sorts of evidence. The effect of the application of this principle to the materials out of which our ancient histories were constructed, was to banish to the realms of pure myth or doubtful legend much which our fathers accepted as historical fact. The narratives of ancient authors are no longer received with as ready a belief as formerly; nor are all ancient authors any longer put upon the same footing and regarded as equally credible, all parts of their work supposed to rest upon the same basis. [r]

    [p.26 - p.27]

    Many old, fond theories have been shattered; in some respects the whole face of antiquity has been changed, [s] and instead of now looking upon the ancients as demi-gods, and the condition in which they lived as being something supernatural, we are made to feel that they were men of like passions with ourselves, possessed of the same weaknesses, actuated by the same motives of self interest, ambition, jealousy love, hatred; and that the conditions surrounding them were no more supernatural than those which surround us. The science of historical criticism by the application of its main principle has stripped ancient times of their prodigies, and has either brought those demi-gods of legend to earth and made them appear very human, or has banished them entirely from real existence.

    [p.27]

    So long as the leading principle of this new science was applied to profane history alone; and the revolution it inaugurated confined to smashing the myths of ancient Greece, Rome, Babylon, Egypt and India, no complaints were heard. Indeed, the work was very generally applauded. But when the same principle began to be applied to what, by Christians at least, was considered sacred history, then an exception was pleaded.

    [p.27 - p.28]

    This difficulty was met by orthodox believers much in the same way that an earlier question, one about miracles, was met by Conyers Middleton. It will be remembered that the Catholic Church has always claimed for herself the power of working miracles from the earliest days until the present; and cites, in confirmation of her claims, testimony that seems at once respectable and sufficient. The Protestants, with the Anglican Church at their head, in the discussion to which reference is here made, conceded that the possession of the gift of working miracles was prima facie evidence of divine authority and soundness of faith. [t] So much being conceded, Protestants were puzzled when to fix the date that miracles ceased. They were certain that no miracles had happened in their times, but were equally positive that they had occurred in the early Christian centuries. But the recent testimony presented by their Catholic opponents was just as worthy of belief as the testimony of the early Christian Fathers; in some respects it was better, because it was within reach for examination.

    [p.28 - p.29]

    What was to be done? If this recent testimony of the Catholic Church concerning miracles was to be rejected, could the earlier testimony of the Christian Fathers stand? The discussion had reached this point when Middleton published his "Free Inquiry," in which he held that the miracles claimed by the Catholic Church, both in former and recent times, must stand or fall together. For if the testimony of the early Christian Fathers and contemporary witnesses could confirm the former, the testimony of the recent witnesses, being just as respectable as the former, and hence as worthy of belief, would confirm the latter. Middleton met the difficulty by rejecting all testimony to miracles after the close of the apostolic age. When it was suggested that the New Testament miracles might be treated in a life summary manner, he took the position that the New Testament account of miracles was inspired, and therefore beyond the reach of criticism.

    [p.29]

    So likewise I say, orthodox Christians were disposed to meet the application of this principle of Historical Criticism under consideration. They protested against the application of it to sacred history. They insisted that the marvelous occurrences related in the Bible, and which read so much like myth or legend, were recorded by inspired writers, hence above criticism. The exception pleaded, however, was not granted. There were bold spirits both within the church as well as outside of it, who did not hesitate, at least so far as the Old Testament was concerned, to apply the new methods of criticism to sacred history.

    [p.29 - p.30]

    The conclusions of those who started with the hypothesis that what we call the miraculous is impossible, would not be difficult to forecast. From the outset, with them, the Old Testament was doomed. In the wonderful incidents related as the experience of the patriarchs, of Moses, Aaron, Joshua and the kings and prophets of Israel, this school of critics could discern a striking parallel to the legends of Rome, of Greece and Egypt; and as readily rejected the one as the other. They rejected also the cosmogony of Genesis, insisting that it was not the history of the creation but poetry, and as such must be regarded, but not as fact.

    [p.30 - p.31]

    Suspicion once cast upon the historical value of sacred writings, the critics grew bolder and declared that portions of the sacred narrative presented the appearance of being simply myths; and from this by degrees it soon became the fashion to attach a legendary character to the whole of the Old Testament. It was decided by the same class of critics that the whole narrative, in the main, rests upon oral tradition and that that tradition was not written until long after the supposed events occurred. Moreover, when the old traditions were written, the work was done by poets bent rather on glorifying their country than upon recording facts; and it is claimed that at times they did not hesitate to allow imagination to amplify the oral traditions or at need to invent new occurrences, to fill up blanks in their annals. The authorship of the sacred books was held to be a matter of great uncertainty, as well as the date at which they were written; but certainly they were not written until long after the dates usually assigned for their production. This style of criticism not only got rid of the cosmogony of Genesis, but discredited as histories the whole collection of books comprising the Old Testament. "The Fall of Man," that fact which gives meaning to the Atonement of Christ, and without which the scheme of Christian salvation is but an idle fable -- was regarded as merely a myth. So, too, were the revelations of God to the patriarchs; his communion with Enoch; his warning to Noah, together with the story of the flood; the building of Babel's tower; the visions of Abraham; the calling of Moses; the splendid display of God's power in the deliverance of Israel from bondage; the law written upon the tables of stone by the finger of God, the ark of the covenant and the visible presence of God with Israel; the visitation of angels to the prophets; their communion with God and the messages of reproof, of warning or of comfort they brought to the people -- all, all were myths, distorted legends, uncertain traditions told by ecstatic poets, falsely esteemed prophets! Such was the wreck which this new science of criticism made of the Old Testament.

    [p.31]

    There was scarcely a halt between the wrecking of the Old Testament by this new school of critics and their assault upon the New. Their success gave them confidence, and they attacked the Christian documents with more vigor than they had the Old Testament. By research which did not need to be very extensive in order to conduct them to the facts, they discovered that the age which witnessed the rise of the Christian religion was one in which there existed a strong preconception in favor of miracles; that is, the miraculous was universally believed, and it was held by our new school of critics that this preconception in favor of miracles influenced the writers of the New Testament to insert them in their narratives.

    [p.31 - p.32]

    Ever present in their New Testament criticism as in that of the Old, was the cardinal principle that miracles never take place -- the miraculous is the impossible; [u] hence whenever our anti-miracle critics found accounts of miracles interwoven in the biographies of Jesus, or in the epistles of the apostles, they inexorably relegated them to the sphere of myth or legend. [v]

    [p.32 - p.33]

    Unhappily for orthodox believers who cling to the gospel narratives as reliable statements of fact, they themselves found it necessary to discard as apocryphal many of the books and writings which sprang into existence in the early Christian centuries; books which pretended to relate incidents in the life of Messiah, especially those which treated of his childhood and youth. The marvelous account of his moulding oxen, asses, birds and other figures out of clay, which at his command would walk or fly away; his power to turn his playmates into kids; his striking dead with a curse the boys who offended him; his stretching a short board to its requisite length; his silencing those who try to teach himw -- all this, and much more, Christians had to discard as pure fable. But they stopped short with the pruning process at the books of the New Testament as we now have them.

    [p.33 - p.34]

    Our new school of critics, however, infatuated with the chief principle of their new science, went right on with the pruning, and made as sad work of the New Testament as they had with the Old. They rejected the miraculous in the New Testament writings as well as the account of miracles which the Christians themselves rejected in the apocryphal writings. By this step they got rid of the story of the miraculous conception and birth of Christ; of the journey of the vision-led magi; of the dream-led Joseph; of the testimony of the Holy Ghost, and of the Father at Christ's baptism; of converting water into wine; of Christ walking upon the water; of the miraculously fed multitude with a few loaves and fishes, of the healing of the sick by a word or with a touch; casting out devils; the raising of the dead; the earthquake; the rending of the vail of the temple; and the miraculous three hours' darkness at the crucifixion; Christ's resurrection from the dead; his appearance after the resurrection; his final ascension into heaven; and the declaration of the two angels that he would come again to the earth as he had left it: in the clouds of heaven and in great glory. The new criticism got rid of all this -- all that makes Christ God, or one of the persons of the Godhead, or that scribes to him powers above those that may be possessed by a man. Christ's divinity is destroyed by this method of criticism, and if one instinctively asks what there is left, he is told -- "The manifestations of the God concealed in the depths of the human conscience." [x] "God-man, eternally incarnate, not an individual, but an idea!" [y]

    [p.34]

    To this then it comes at last, a Christianity without a Christ -- that is, without a divine Christ; and a Christ not divine -- not God manifest in the flesh, is no Christ. We had trusted that Jesus of Nazareth had been he who would have redeemed not only all Israel, but all the nations of the earth. We and our fathers had believed that he had brought life and immortality to light through the gospel; but alas! it turns out according to our new school of critics, that his "revelations of blissful scenes of existence beyond death and the grave, are but one of the many impostures which time after time have been palmed off on credulous mankind!" Christ but a man, "the moralist and teacher of Capernaum and Gennesaret" -- nothing more! On a level with Socrates, or Hillel, or Philo! What a void this new school of criticism makes! A Christianity without the assurance of the resurrection! without the hope of the glorious return of the Messiah, to reward every man according to his works!

    [p.34 - p.35]

    The new school of critics does not question so severely as other critics have done the authenticity of the Christian documents, or the date of their origin. Indeed, one of their chief apostles concedes the authenticity of the gospels and their antiquity. [z] But after having admitted the authenticity and antiquity of the Christian documents, they then proceed to mutilate the story they relate -- the gospel they teach -- as to render it practically valueless to mankind. This is accomplished by regarding the Christian documents as legends, [a] from which if we would arrive at historical truth must be excluded all that is miraculous, [b] and hence all that makes Christ God. And while to the imagination of the idealist much that is of value and that is beautiful may remain in the attenuated Christianity which the new criticism would leave us, yet for the great body of humanity such a Christianity would be worthless.

    [p.35 - p.36]

    For however beautiful the moral precepts of the merely human Jesus may be, they will have no perceptible influence on the lives of the multitude unless back of them stands divine authority, accompanied by a conviction of the fact of man's immortality and his accountability to God for his conduct. Shorn of these parts, what remains may be beautiful; but it would be as the beauty of a man from whom the spark of life has fled -- the beauty of the dead. Of course the orthodox Christian denies that this style of attack on the Christian religion has had any success. To him it is an "attack" which has "failed." "In spite of all the efforts of an audacious criticism," says one, "as ignorant as bold -- the truth of the sacred narrative stands firm, the stronger for the shocks that it has resisted; the boundless store of truth which for eighteen centuries has been the ailment of humanity is not (as Rationalism boasts) dissipated. God is not divested of his grace, nor man of his dignity -- nor is the tie between heaven and earth broken. The foundation of God -- the everlasting gospel -- still standeth secure -- and every effort that is made to effort that is made to overthrow, does but more firmly establish it." [c]

    [p.36]

    Let us examine this matter more nearly, and with less partiality than Rawlinson has done. If for the new school of critics to succeed means that the orthodox view respecting Jesus of Nazareth, and the religion he founded must be entirely overthrown by being driven out of existence, then the new criticism is an "attack" which has "failed," for orthodox Christianity, that is, the Christianity which recognizes Christ as divine -- as God, and the New Testament as divinely inspired and stating the substantial facts of Messiah's life -- is still with us.

    [p.36 - p.37]

    There are a number of reasons why the orthodox view of Christ has not been entirely overthrown by the new criticism. First, the great body of Christians which constitute the Catholic Church have been preserved in the orthodox faith of Christ by the protecting aegis afforded by the authority of that church. Recognizing the church as superior to the written word, alike its custodian and interpreter, and accepting the meaning which the church attaches to the Bible as infallible, Catholics, I say, have been preserved from the faith-shattering effects of the New Criticism. Second, the New Criticism, in the main, and especially in the early stages of it, was conducted in the German language, and hence for a time was largely confined to the German nation. Third, the discussion wherever it has taken place has been carried on over the heads of the laity; it has not been within their reach, hence to a large extent it has been without effect upon them -- an "attack that has failed." But in each case, let it be remembered, its non-effect is the result of not coming in contact with it. In one case it has been kept away from the people by the authority of the church; in the other through the inability of the laity, outside of German, to understand the language in which the attack was written; and thirdly, through the inability of the masses to bring the necessary scholarship to the investigation.

    [p.37 - p.38]

    But, on the other hand, if to attract to itself a large following, both among clergymen and laity, and especially among scholars; if to modify prevailing orthodox opinion concerning the historical character of the Old Testament, and force concessions respecting the character at least of some parts of the Christian documents; if to permeate all Christendom -- the Catholic Church perhaps excepted -- with doubt concerning the divinity of Christ, and Christ, and to threaten in the future the faith of millions of Christians -- if to do this is to succeed, then the New Criticism is succeeding, for that is what it is doing. Sixty years ago it was the complaint of German orthodox writers that this German neology, as the New Criticism is sometimes called, had left "No objective ground or standpoint" on which the believing theological science can build with any feeling of security. [d] "Nor," says the same authority, "is the evil in question confined to Germany. The works regarded as most effective in destroying the historical faith of Christians a, broad, have received an English dress, and are, it is to be feared, read by persons very ill-prepared by historical studies to withstand their specious reasoning, alike in our country and in America. The tone, moreover, of German historical writings generally is tinged with the prevailing unbelief; and the faith of the historical student is likely to be undermined, almost without his having his suspicions aroused, by covert assumptions of the mythical character of the sacred narrative, in works professing to deal chiefly, or entirely with profane subjects." [e]

    [p.38]

    It is more than fifty years since these admissions were made; since then the German works complained of have been more generally translated and widely read than before. Besides, since then, Renan has given his "Origins of Christianity" [f] to the world, and by his great learning, but more especially by the power and irresistible charm of his treatment of the subject. has popularized the conceptions of the Rationalists, until now the virus of their infidelity may be said to be poisoning all Protestant Christendom.

    What must ever be an occasion for chagrin, not to say humiliation, to orthodox Christendom is its inability to meet in any effectual way the assaults of this New Criticism. In Germany they complain against Strauss for having written his "Life of Jesus" in the German language. If he must write such a book. so full of unbelief in the orthodox conception of Jesus, he ought at least to have had the grace to have written it in Latin! [g]

    [p.39]

    For his rationalism Renan is driven out of the Church of Rome; but this only gives notoriety to his views, creates a desire to read his books and spreads abroad his unbelief. When the Presbyterian Church takes to task one of its most brilliant scholarsh for accepting the results of the New Criticism, he is sustained by the powerful Presbyterian Synod of New York and acquitted; and when an appeal is taken to the general assembly of the church and he is finally condemned, he is able to retort that while he was condemned by the general assembly, it was by numbers and not by intelligence that he was overcome; it was the less intelligent Presbyteries of the rural district that gave the necessary strength to his opponents. The better informed members -- members from the cities and centers of education and enlightenment -- were with him. [i]

    [p.39 - p.40]

    The defense commonly made for orthodox Christianity is an appeal to its antiquity and its past victories. Its defenders point with pride to the failure of the proud bost of Voltaire, who was foolish enough to say: "In twenty years Christianity will be no more. My single hand shall destroy the edifice it took twelve apostles to rear." "Some years after his death," say the orthodox, "his very printing press was employed in printing New Testaments, and thus spreading abroad the gospel." Gibbon, with solemn sneer, devoted his gorgeous history [j] to sarcasm upon Christ and his followers. "His estate," say the orthodox, "is now in the hands of one who devotes large sums to the propagation of the very truth Gibbon labored to sap." [k]

    [p.40]

    All this may be very well, but even in their day these men of the eighteenth century had a large following, and did much damage to orthodox belief. In fact, it is not inconsistent to claim that, in an indirect way, they were the forerunners of our new school of criticism; for many Christian scholars, not satisfied with the answers made to the infidel writers of the eighteenth century, have accepted the results of this New Criticism as a solution of the difficulties urged against Christianity by the infidels of the eighteenth century.

    It is time now to pause and summarize what has been thus far discussed:

    [p.40 - p.41]

    First, the divided state of Christendom of itself argues something wrong; for nearly every page of holy scripture urges the unity of Christ's Church. "Is Christ divided?" [l] is the ringing question that the apostle of the Gentiles asks the schismatically inclined church at Corinth. "I beseech, you, brethren," says he, "by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no division among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and the same judgment." [m] He then proceeds to tell them that they are utterly at fault in one saying that he was of Paul; another that he was of Apollos, and another that he was of Cephas. [n] What he would say of divided, not to say warring Christendom of today, one may not conjecture, further than to say that if the incipient divisions in Corinth provoked his condemnation, the open rupture and conflicting creeds of the Christianity of the nineteenth century would merit still harsher reproof.

    [p.41]

    Second, the failure of Christianity to evangelize the world in twenty centuries, sixteen of which, to all human judgment, appear to have been especially favorable to that evangelization, since at the back of Christianity stood the powerful nations of Europe whose commerce and conquests opened the gates of nearly all nations to Christian missionaries -- argues some weakness in a religion bottomed on divine revelation and sustained through all these centuries (so Christians claim) by divine power. To be compelled to admit after all these centuries favorable to the establishment of Christianity that now only about one-third of the population of our earth is even nominally Christian, is to confess that the results do not do credit to a religion making the claims and possessing the advantages of Christianity.

    Third, the existence of a broad and constantly widening stream of unbelief, not only in Christian lands and apart from Christian communion, but within the very churches claiming to be churches of Christ, together with the inability of the orthodox to meet and silence the infidel revilers of the Christian evidences to bring conviction to the doubting minds of many sincere and moral people.

    All these considerations proclaim in trumpet-tones --

    "'Tis time that some new Prophet should appear."

    [p.41 - p.42]

    Mankind stand in need of a New Witness for God -- a Witness who can speak not as the scribes or the pharisees, but in the clear, ringing tones of one clothed with authority from God. The world is weary of the endless wrangling of the scholastics. They settle nothing. Their speculations merely shroud all in profounder mystery, and beget more uncertainty. They darken counsel by words without knowledge. Therefore, to heal the schisms in Christendom; to bring order out of the existing chaos; to stay the stream of unbelief within the churches; to convert the Jews; to evangelize the world; to bring to pass that universal reign of truth, of peace, of liberty, of righteousness that all the prophets have predicted -- the world needs a New Witness for God.





    Chapter  I.  Notes.


    11 -- Ch. 1:

    The Necessity of a New Witness.

    a Such is the language, slightly paraphrased, which Mrs. Humphrey Ward pute in the mouth of the orthodox Ronalds in her dialogue entitled “The New Reformation” (See “Agnosticism and Christianity”--Humboldt Library series, page 151); and it accurately states the claims of the orthodox Christian.

    b “Agnosticism and Christianity,” p. 151. The passage is paraphrased.

    c I thus carefully qualify the statement for the reason that I believe the Christian religion--that is, the Gospel, has a much earlier existence than the birth of Christ. Messiah is spoken of in Scripture as “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world,” from which expression in connection with many other evidences--too numerous to mention here (see the Author’s work, “The Gospel,”--3rd edition always quoted--ch. xxiii)--I get the idea that the plan of man’s redemption through the atonement of Jesus Christ is at least as old as the foundation of the world. It was revealed to Adam, and the Patriarchs, to Abraham, to Moses, and to some of the prophets; and finally through the earthly ministry of the Son of God himself; but it is an error to suppose that it came into existence first through the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth on earth.

    d Aesop’s Fables.

    e Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical Institutes, book iii., cent. viii, part i., ch. i. (Murdock’s translation always quoted).

    f Mosheim, book iii., cent. x., part i., chap i.

    place of their idols g Mosheim, book iii., cent. xii., part i., ch. i.

    published on the subject: g The statistics here presented are the latest given out by a competent authority--M. Fournier de Flaix. See “The World Almanac, 1910, p. 513; also c.f. “New Century Book of Facts,” pp. 1067-8. Carroll D. Wright, Editor-in-Chief.

    h ?

    i In 1896 the question of the validity of Anglican Orders came fairly before the pope, urged upon his attention by no less a personage than the great English statesman, William Ewart Gladstone. The answer of Pope Leo was that “Ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been and are absolutely null and utterly void.” (See “Defense of the Faith and the Saints,” Art. Anglican Orders, p. 463, et seq.

    j Burder’s “History of All Religions” (1860), p. 140; also Buck’s Theol. Dic., Art. Greek Church.

    k “Faith of Our Fathers,” p. 109.

    l On this matter of difficulty in converting the Jews, Jortin, in his “Remarks upon Ecclesiastical History,” offers the following supposed soliloquy of a Jew contemplating an acceptance of Christianity: “If I should embrace Christianity, a Jew might say, I have just begun the laborious inquiry: it remains to consider to whom I should join myself, and here I am quite perplexed with your divisions. If I should go over to the church of Rome, the Protestants will condemn my judgment, and say that I have made a miserable choice; if I become a Protestant, the Papists will tell me I might as well have remained a Jew; schismatics and heretics are in their opinion in as bad a situation, and as much excluded from salvation as Jews, Mohammedans, deists, sceptics, and atheists; if I am a Protestant of this or that denomination, other sects of Protestants will blame me, and think me still in a dangerous condition, and perhaps call me a schismatic.” (Jortin, Vol. I, p. 502.)

    m “Christianity and Agnosticism,” p. 161.

    n “The true deist has but one Deity; and his religion consists in contemplating the power, wisdom and benignity of the Deity in his works, and in endeavoring to imitate him in everything moral, scientifical and mechanical. * * * * The Almighty Lecturer (Deity), by displaying the principles of science in the structure of the universe, has invited man to study and to imitation. It is as if he had said to the inhabitants of this globe we call ours, ‘I have made an earth for man to dwell upon and I have rendered the starry heavens visible, to teach him science and the arts. He can now provide for his own comfort, and learn from my munificence to all, to be kind to each other.’ * * * * In deism our reason and our belief become happily united. The wonderful structure of the universe, and everything we behold in the system of the creation, prove to us far better than books can do, the existence of a God and at the same time proclaim his attributes. It is by exercise of our reason that we are enabled to contemplate God in his works and imitate him in his ways. When we see his care and goodness extended over all his creatures, it teaches us our duty towards each other while it calls forth our gratitude to him.”--Thomas Paine, in “Age of Reason,” part I.

    o “It is not in the name of this or that philosophy, but in the name of constant experience that we banish miracle from history. We do not say ‘miracle is impossible;’ we say: ‘there has been hitherto no miracle proved.’ * * * Till we have new light, we shall maintain, therefore, this principle of historical criticism, that a supernatural relation cannot be accepted as such, that it always implies credulity or imposture.” Renan, “Life of Jesus,” E. T., pp. 44, 45.

    p “Let the gospels be in part legendary, that is evident since they are full of miracles and the supernatural.” Renan. “Life of Jesus,” p. 19. Renan is one of the chief writers of the rationalistic school. “No just perception of the true nature of history is possible without a just perception of the inviolability of the chain of finite causes, and of the impossibility of miracles.” Strauss, “Leben Jesu,” Vol. I., p. 64, E. T.

    q “Canons” is the scientific term.

    r “Inquiry into the Credibility of Early Roman History” (Sir G. C. Lewis), Vol. I., p. 2, of the Introduction.

    s The whole world of profane history has been revolutionized: * * * * The views of the ancient world formerly entertained have been in ten thousand points either modified or revised--a new antiquity has been raised up out of the old--while much that was unreal in the picture of past times which men had formed to themselves has disappeared, consigned to that “Limbo large and broad” into which “all things transitory and vain” are finally received, a fresh revelation has in many cases taken the place of the old view, which has dissolved before the wand of the critic; and a firm and strong fabric has arisen out of the shattered debris of the fallen systems.--George Rawlinson, “Historical Evidences” (London Edition), pp. 28, 29.

    t A footnote scarcely affords the space necessary in which to discuss the value of miracles as evidence to the truth of a religion or the divine authority of the miracle worker; but a few observations at this particular point will be, in the estimation of the author, apropos. It is a mistake on the part of the Protestants or any one else to concede that the power to work miracles is absolute evidence of the truth of a religion, or of the divine callingof the miracle worker. Too much importance has been given to miracles as evidence of divine authority. Looking upon what are commonly called miracles, not as events or effects contrary to the laws of nature, but interventions on the part of God (through the operation of natural, though perhaps to man unknown laws) for the benefit of his children, and recognizing God as the Father of all mankind, it would be an extremely narrow conception of the love and mercy of the Deity to suppose that he would confine these interventions to any one class of his children. Surely it is egotism run mad for a people to suppose that they have succeeded so far in becoming the special favorites of heaven that all God’s special providences will be confined to them. No, no; he who maketh his sun to rise on the evil as well as the good, and sendeth rain on the just and unjust alike, is capable of better things than men ascribe to him in this matter of miracles. But it does not follow that those who enjoy these special manifestations have correct religious creeds or possess the fulness of truth. Equally erroneous is it to suppose that the powers of evil cannot work what are called miracles; that is, put into operation forces as yet unknown to man which produce effects uncommon to his experience. Can it be that our Christian writers have forgotten that “to win us to our harm, the instruments of darkness tell us truths--win us with honest trifles, to betray us in deepest consequences”? Have they forgotten that the miracles of Moses were well nigh matches by those of the magicians of Egypt? That Simon Magus, notwithstanding he had no lot nor part in the things of God, yet had wrought miracles. Have they forgotten that in the description given us in Holy Writ (II. Thess. ii.) of the rise of Anti-Christ, that Satan shall have power to work “signs and lying wonders,” and that God will permit the strong delusions that those might be condemned who believe not the truth but have pleasure in unrighteousness? Have they forgotten that the word of prophecy hath said that even unclean spirits, “devils,” shall have the power of “working miracles,” even calling down fire from heaven, to deceive the inhabitants of the earth. (Rev. xvi)? If miracles are to be taken as an absolute test of divine authority, will not the unclean spirits, these miracle-working devils, prove the divinity of their mission? Again, it said that “John” (the baptist), than whom there is no greater prophet, “did no miracle” (John x. 41). It appears, therefore, that not all that are sent of God work miracles; and we see that devils have in the past and will in the future possess that power, hence miracles are not as important a class of testimony as they have usually been esteemed; and writers are utterly at fault who regard them as an absolute test of true religion or divine authority.

    u I find it necessary to say another word on miracles. There is a general misapprehension, I think, of what a miracle really is. The commonly accepted definition of the term is, “an event or effect contrary to the established constitution and course of things, or a deviation from the known laws of nature.” Renan defines a miracle to be, “not simply the inexplicable, it is a formal derogation from recognized laws in the name of a particular desire.” What is especially faulty in these definitions is this: Miracles are held to be outside or contrary to the laws of nature. Let us examine this. Two hundred years ago the only motive powers known to ocean navigators were wind and the ocean currents. Suppose at that time those old mariners had seen one of our modern ocean steamers running against both ocean currents and the wind; and, withal, making better speed in spite of both wind and tide than the old time sailing vessel could even when running before the wind and the ocean currents in her favor. What would have been the effect of such a sight on the mind of the old-time sailor? “It is a miracle!” he would have exclaimed; that is, it would have been an “effect contrary to the established constitution and course of things,” “a derogation from recognized laws.” But is such an effect to us who know something of the force of steam contrary to the laws of nature? No; it is simply the employment of forces in nature of which the old-time mariner was ignorant; and while it would have been a miracle to him, to us it is merely the application of a newly discovered force of nature, and it is now so common that we cease to look upon it with wonder. So with the things that we now in our ignorance call miracles--such as the healing of the sick, restoring the blind to sight, making the lame to walk, through the exercise of faith, and the resurrection of the dead--instead of these things being in “derogation from recognized laws,” we shall yet learn that they are done simply by the application of laws of which we are as yet in ignorance. With man’s limited knowledge of the laws of nature, how presumptuous it is in him to say that the healing of the sick or even the resurrection of the dead are in “derogation of the laws of nature,” or that deviation from those few laws of nature with which he is acquainted will never happen, or is impossible! Better reasoners are they who, like George Rawlinson, say, “Miraculous interpositions on fitting occasions may be as much a regular, fixed, and established rule of his (God’s) government as the working ordinarily by what are called natural laws.” In other words, what we in our ignorance call miracles, are to God merely the results of the application of higher laws or forces of nature not yet learned by man. Miracles are to be viewed as a part of the divine economy.

    sphere of myth or legend. v It will be observed that throughout a difference between myth and legend is recognized. Strauss thus distinguishes between them: “Myth is the creation of a fact out of an idea; legend the seeing of an idea in a fact, or arising out of it,” “The myth is therefore pure and absolute imagination,” says Rawlinson; “the legend has a basis of fact, but amplifies, abridges, or modifies that basis at its pleasure.” And thus De Wette: “The myth is an idea in a vestment of facts; the legend contains facts pervaded and transformed by ideas.”

    w All this and a hundred other things equally silly and unture which mar rather than dignify the character of Jesus Christ are related in the “First Gospel of the Infancy,” translated by Mr. Henry Sike, professor of Oriental languages at Cambridge. “The Infancy” was accepted by the Gnostics, a Christian sect of the second century.

    x “Life of Jesus” (Renan), p. 50, E. T.

    y “Life of Jesus” (Strauss), vol. III., p. 434, E. T.

    z “Upon the whole, I accept the four canonical gospels as authentic. All, in my judgment, date back to the first century, and they are substantially by the authors to whom they are attributed.” Renan’s “Life of Jesus,” Introduction, p. 34, E. T.

    aa “Let the Gospels be in part legendary, that is evidence since they are full of miracles and the supernatural. * * * * The historic value which I attribute to the Gospels is now, I think, quite understood. They are neither biographies, after the manner of Suetonius, nor fictitious legends, like those of Philostratus; they are legendary biographies.” Renan, “Life of Jesus,” Introduction, pp. 17, 38.

    bb “Till we have new light, we shall maintain, therefore, this principle of historical criticism, that a supernatural relation cannot be accepted as such, that it always implies credulity or imposture, that the duty of the historians is to interpret it, and to seek what portion of truth and what portion of error it may contain. Such are the rules which have been followed in this life” [of Christ]. Renan, “Life of Jesus,” p. 45, E. T.

    cc “Historical Evidences” (Rawlinson), p. 228

    dd “Historical Evidences,” (Rawlinson), Preface.

    ee “Historical Evidences” (Rawlinson), see Preface. See also Keil’s Preface to his “Comment on Joshua.”

    ff “Origins of Christianity,” in three volumes; “The Life of Jesus,” “The Apostles,” “Saint Paul.”

    gg See Preface of Strauss’ “Life of Jesus.”

    hh Dr. C. A. Briggs.

    ii The triumphant language of Dr. Briggs in the “North American Review” is: “The majority of votes in favor of the suspension was very great. But if the votes are weighed as wel as counted the disparity will not be regarded as serious. The basis of representation in the general assembly gives the small presbyteries in the country districts and on the frontiers a vastly greater power than they are entitled to by their numbers or influence, while the strong presbyteries in our large cities and in the great communities are put at a serious disadvantage. The general assemblies, as they are now constituted, represent the least intelligent portion of the church, and not unfrequently a majority in the Assembly really represents a minority of the ministers and people in the denomination. A majority of a general assembly is not taken seriously by intelligent Presbyterians.”

    jj “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.”

    kk The remarks in relation to both Gibbon and Voltaire are to be found in the “Christian Visitor” for 1889.

    ll I. Cor. i. 13.

    mm Ibid verse 10.

    nn I. Cor. i. 12.


     

    [ 45 ]




    CHAPTER  II.


    The Effect Of Pagan Persecution On The Christian Church.

    A variety of causes have operated to produce the result stated in my second Thesis, among which I shall first consider those terrible persecutions with which the saints were afflicted in the first centuries of our era.

    Let it not be a matter of surprise that I class those persecutions as among the means through which the church was destroyed. The force of heathen rage was aimed at the leaders and strong men of the body religious; and being long-continued and relentlessly cruel, those most steadfast in their adherence to the church invariably became its victims. These being stricken down, it left none but weaklings to contend for the faith, and made possible those subsequent innovations in the religion of Jesus which a pagan public sentiment demanded, and which so completely changed both the spirit and form of the Christian religion as an institution, as to subvert it utterly.

    [p.45 - p.46]

    Let me further ask that no one be surprised that violence is permitted to operate in such a case. The idea that the right is always victorious in this world; that truth is always triumphant and innocence always divinely protected, are old, fond fables with which well-meaning men have amused credulous multitudes; but the stern facts of history and actual experience in life correct the pleasing delusion. Do not misunderstand me. I believe in the ultimate victory of the right, the ultimate triumph of truth, the final immunity of innocence from violence. These -- innocence, truth and the right -- will be at the last more than conquerors; they will be successful in the war, but that does not prevent them from losing some battles. It should be remembered always that God has given to man his agency; and that fact implies that one man is as free to act wickedly as another is to act righteously. Cain was as free to murder his brother as that brother was to worship God; and so the pagans and Jews were as free to persecute and murder the Christians as the Christians were to live virtuously and worship Christ as God. The agency of man would not be worth the name if it did not grant liberty to the wicked to fill the cup of their iniquity, as well as liberty to the virtuous to round out the measure of their righteousness. Such perfect liberty or agency God has given man; and it is only so variously modified as not to thwart his general purposes. Hence it comes that even when stealthy Murder, in sight of his helpless victim, meditates the crime, no voice to prevent the act "speaks through the blanket of the dark" crying, "Hold! hold!" Of course it follows that running parallel with this fact of man's liberty is the solemn truth of his full responsibility for the use he makes of it.

    [p.46]

    In the light of these reflections, then, I say that after Christ, as before his day, the kingdom of heaven suffered violence and the violent took it by force. [a] How far that violence, as manifested in the persecutions of the first three Christian centuries, was effectual as a factor in causing the destruction of the church is now to engage our attention.

    [p.46 - p.47]

    At the outset, however, there is a difficulty I cannot pass without comment -- the disagreement of eminent writers on the extent and severity of the persecutions endured by the Christians up to the accession of Constantine to the imperial throne of Rome. On the one hand infidel writers, such as Gibbon and Dodwell, have sought to minimize the suffering of the Christians under the persecutions, and on the other, Christian writers, such as Milner, Paley and Fox, have sought to magnify it. The motive on the part of both infidels and Christians is obvious. The more violent and extensive the persecutions, the more the martyrs, the more glorious the triumph for the church. While on the other hand, if the persecutions can be proven to be limited, the suffering made to appear trifling and the martyrs few in number, the church is robbed of so much of her glory. Doubtless both parties have gone to extremes in the contention. Unfortunately for the Christian side of the controversy, there is much reason for believing that the account of Christian suffering within the period named has been much exaggerated. Their Chief authority -- Eusebius -- has thrown more or less suspicion upon the trustworthiness of all that he has written, by declaring in the opening chapter of his "Ecclesiastical History" and elsewhere that "Whatsoever, therefore, we deem likely to be advantageous to the proposed subject, we shall endeavor to reduce to a compact body by historical narration. For this purpose we have collected the materials that have been scattered by our predecessors, and culled, as from some intellectual meadows, the appropriate extracts from ancient authors." [b]

    [p.47 - p.48]

    On these passages Gibbon remarks: "The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he has related whatever might redound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace of religion. Such an acknowledgment will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of the fundamental laws of history, has not paid a very strict regard to the observance of the other." [c] Draper also refers to the same when commenting upon the inaccuracies of early Christian writers, he says: "In historical compositions there was a want of fair dealing and truthfulness almost incredible to us; thus, Eusebius naively avows that in his history he shall omit whatever might tend to the discredit of the church, and magnify whatever might conduce to her glory." [d]

    [p.48]

    But while it must be conceded that there is much reason for believing that the Christian fathers exaggerated both the extent and severity of those early persecutions, it remains clear that both the extent and severity of them were greater and more baneful to the church than infidel writers allow; and the truth of it may be proven independent of the testimonies of the Christian fathers. The proofs I refer to are the edicts themselves, considered in the light of the well-known cruelty of the Roman people, intensified by the malice of religious zeal aroused to suppress an obnoxious society whose doctrines were held to be destructive of the ancient religion of Rome, and a menace to the existence of the state itself.

    [p.48 - p.49]

    Passing by the persecutions inflicted upon the Christians by the Jews, an account of which is to be found in the New Testament, I call attention to the first great pagan persecution trader the edict of the Emperor Nero. For our information in respect to this persecution we are indebted not to any Christian writer, but to the judicious Tacitus, whom even "the most sceptical criticism is obliged to respect. [e] Nero having set on fire the city of Rome, in order that he might witness a great conflagration, and wishing to divert suspicion from himself, first accused and then tried to compel the Christians to confess the great crime -- and now Tacitus:

    [p.49]

    "With this view he inflicted the most exquisite tortures on those men who, under the vulgar appellation of Christians, were already branded with deserved infamy. They derived their name and origin from Christ, who, in the reign of Tiberius had suffered death by the sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate. For awhile this dire superstition was checked; and it again burst forth; and not only spread itself over Judea, the first seat of this mischievous sect, but was even introduced into Rome, the common asylum which receives and protects whatever is impure, whatever is atrocious. The confessions of those that were seized discovered a great multitude of their accomplices, and they were all convicted, not so much for the crime of setting fire to the city, as for their hatred of human kind. They died in torments, and their torments were embittered by insults and derision. Some were nailed on crosses; others sewn up in the skins of wild beasts, and exposed to the fury of dogs; others, again, smeared over with combustible materials, were used as torches to illuminate the darkness of the night. The gardens of Nero were destined for the melancholy spectacle, which was accompanied with a horse-race, and honored with the presence of the emperor, who mingled with the populace in the dress and attitude of a charioteer. The guilt of the Christians deserved indeed the most exemplary punishments, but the public abhorrence was changed into commiseration, from the opinion that those unhappy wretches were sacrificed, not so much to the public welfare as to the cruelty of a jealous tyrant. [f]

    [p.50]

    Eminent scholars are divided in opinion as to whether this persecution under Nero extended to the provinces or was confined to the city of Rome. Gibbon assumes that it was both brief and confined to the city. According to Milman, "M. Guizot, on the authority of Suplicious Severus and of Orosius inclines to the opinion of those who extend the persecution to the provinces. Mosheim rather leans to that side on this much disputed question. Neander takes the view of Gibbon, which is, in general, that of the most learned writers." [g]

    This controversy need not detain us a moment. It matters not to my purpose whether the edicts of Nero extended to the provinces or were limited in their operations to the Christians within the capital. The testimony of Tacitus is sufficient to prove, first, that the persecution was general within the city; second its terrible cruelty; and third, the great abhorrence in which the Christians were held by the Romans.

    [p.50 - p.51]

    I submit to the consideration of the reader that a people so greatly detested as the Christians, were not likely to meet with gentle treatment from the Romans; and when, as subsequently it came to pass, the people clamored for the sacrifice of the saints whom they abhorred as the enemies of mankind, instead of looking upon them with commiseration as the citizens of Rome did in their persecution under Nero -- when the Roman people, I say, clamored for the sacrifice of the Christians and the emperors were cruel enough, and unjust enough to issue edicts for their destruction, the persecutions of those times were neither so limited nor so free from severity as Gibbon and others would have us believe. Even in this persecution under Nero, if no edicts were sent into the provinces commanding the execution of Christians, it is not unreasonable to believe that the despisers of the followers of Christ, finding warrant for their conduct by what was taking place at Rome, under the supervision of the emperor himself, would not hesitate to inflict hardships upon the saints without the formality of his proclamation.

    [p.51]

    It was this unofficial persecution which, without doubt, arose in the provinces as an indirect result of the persecution in the capital, that has led a number of prominent writers to believe that Nero's persecution extended throughout the empire. However that may be, a "great multitude" suffered in the city of Rome, and were subject to such tortures and cruel modes of death -- described, mark you, by the unfriendly Tacitus -- that little is left to left to be added even by the fervid imaginations of the Christian fathers. It is reasonable to believe that the subsequent persecutions were not freer from cruelty than this one under Nero; and therefore, though some allowance must be made for exaggeration in the writings of the Christian fathers, it may be safely concluded that those persecutions which preceded the reign of Constantine were both widespread and horribly cruel.

    [p.51 - p.52]

    What is usually denominated the third persecution of the Christian Church occurred in the reign of Trajan, 98-117 A. D. Here, as in the persecution under Nero, we may determine something of the severity and manner of it from a Roman writer. Trajan intrusted the government of Bithynia and Pontius to his personal friend, the younger Pliny. The new governor, in his administration of the affairs of his provinces, found himself perplexed as to what course he should pursue in regard to the Christians brought before him for trial. He accordingly wrote to his master for instruction; and I deem his letter of such importance as showing the severity to which Christians were subject, the character of the Christians, and the number of unfaithful members who had evidently entered the church by that time, that I give it in extenso:

    [p.52 - p.53]

    PLINY'S LETTER.

    "Health. -- It is my usual custom, sir, to refer all things, of which I harbor any doubts, to you. For who can better direct my judgment in its hesitation, or instruct my understanding in its ignorance? I never had the fortune to be present at any examination of Christians, before I came into this province. I am, therefore, at a loss, to determine what is the usual object either of inquiry or of punishment, and to what length either of them is to be carried. It has also been with me a question very problematical, whether any distinction should be made between the young and the old, the tender and the robust; whether any room should be given for repentance, or the guilt of Christianity, once incurred is not to be expiated by the most unequivocal retraction; whether the name itself, abstracted from any flagitiousness of conduct, or the crimes connected with the name, be the object of punishment. In the meantime, this has been my method, with respect to those who were brought before me as Christians. If they pleaded guilty, I interrogated them twice afresh, with a menace of capital punishment. In case of obstinate perseverance, I ordered them to be executed. For of this I had no doubt, whatever was the nature of their religion, that a sullen and obstinate inflexibility called for the vengeance of the magistrate. Some who were infected with the same madness whom, on account of their privilege of citizenship, I reserve to be sent to Rome. to be referred to your tribunal. In the course of this business, information pouring in, as is usual when they are encouraged, more cases occurred. An anonymous libel was exhibited, with a catalogue of names of persons, who yet declared they were not Christians then or ever had been; and they repeated after me an invocation of the gods and of your image, which for this purpose I had ordered to be brought with the images of the deities. They performed sacred rites with wine and frankincense, and execrated Christ, none of which things I am told a real Christian can ever be compelled to do. On this account I dismissed them. Others named by an informer, first affirmed and then denied the charge of Christianity, declaring that they had been Christians, but had ceased to be so, some three years ago, others still longer, some even twenty years ago. All of whom worshiped your image, and the statues of the gods, and also execrated Christ. And this was the account which they gave of the nature of their religion they once professed, whether it deserves the name of crime or error, namely, that they were accustomed on a stated day to meet before daylight, and repeat among themselves a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by an oath with an obligation of not committing any wickedness; but on the contrary, of abstaining from thefts, robberies, and adulteries; also, of not violating their promise, or denying a pledge; after which it was their custom to separate, and to meet again at a promiscuous, harmless meal, from which last practice they however desisted, after the publication of my edict, in which, agreeably to your order, I forbade any societies of that sort. On which account I judged it the more necessary, to inquire, by torture, from two females, who were said to be deaconesses, what is the real truth. But nothing could I collect, except a depraved and excessive superstition. Deferring, therefore, any further investigation, I determined to consult you. For the number of the culprits is so great, as to call for serious consultation. Many persons are informed against of every age, and of both sexes; and more still will be in the same situation. The contagion of the superstition had spread not only through cities, but even villages and the country. Not that I think it impossible to check and correct it. The success of my efforts hitherto forbids such desponding thoughts; for the temples, once almost desolate, begin to be frequented, and the sacred solemnities which had long been intermitted, are now attended afresh, and the sacrificed victims are now sold everywhere, which once could scarcely find a purchaser. Whence, I conclude, that many might be reclaimed, were the hope of impunity, on repentance, absolutely confirmed." [h]

    [p.53]

    To this Trajan sent the following answer:

    [p.53 - p.54]

    "You have done perfectly right, my dear Pliny, in the inquiry which you have made concerning Christians. For truly no one general rule can be laid down which will apply itself to all cases. These people must not be sought after. If they are brought before you and convicted, let them be capitally punished, yet with this restriction, that if anyone renounce Christianity, and evidence his sincerity by supplicating our gods, however suspected he may be for the past, he shall obtain pardon for the future, on his repentance. But anonymous libels in no case ought to be attended to; for the precedent would be of the worst sort, and perfectly incongruous to the maxims of my government." [i]

    [p.54]

    Gibbon makes much of the perplexity of Pliny as to how to proceed against the Christians. For since the life of that Roman had been employed in the acquisition of learning and the business of the world; since from the age of nineteen he had pleaded with distinction in the tribunals of Rome; therefore, from the ignorance of this Roman governor, the great historian of the Decline and Fall concludes that there were no general laws or decrees of the senate in force against the Christians previous to Pliny accepting the governorship of Bithynia. [j] There is nothing, however, in the circumstance of Pliny's ignorance to justify such a conclusion.

    It is not difficult to conceive how laws and decrees against the Christians could exist and yet a man employed as Pliny was have no technical knowledge of the modus operandi of procedure against them. His very letter, quoted above, seems to recognize the existence of such laws before he went into Bithynia; for he pleads as an excuse for his ignorance of how to proceed in the business neither the nonexistence, nor the newness of the laws, but merely the fact that he had never been present at the examination of Christians brought to trial previous to accepting the governorship of his provinces.

    [p.55]

    In like spirit Gibbon points to the mildness of both the emperor and the governor as being against the idea that this persecution was very severe. Giving full credit for that mildness, what was the status of the Christians as to liability to persecution in Bithynia and Pontus after Pliny received the instruction of his master? (1) They were not to be sought after, that is, hunted down for the mere sake of destroying them; (2) anonymous complaints or libels were not to be entertained against them; (3) if brought before the judge and they would renounce their religion by supplanting the gods of Rome, they were to receive pardon. So far the tender mercies of Trajan extended. They could still be accused by any one bold enough to affix his name to the charge; and if the accused Christians refused to deny the faith, they were punished by sentence of death. When it is considered how bitter was the malice of their enemies, and how widespread the detestation of Christianity, it will be conceded that even in Bithynia and Pontus, notwithstanding the mildness of the emperor and the humanity of the governor, there was still left plenty of opportunity to vex the church and make persecution contribute to its destruction. I say even in Bithynia and Pontus this was the case; how much more was it so in those provinces where less humane magistrates than Pliny administered the laws, and who proceeded without asking for instruction from the emperor! In such provinces the saints were liable to be accused anonymously, put to the torture, not with a view to force from them a confession, but a denial of the charge, failing in which they were executed without mercy.

    The limits of this inquiry forbids anything like an exhaustive examination of the several persecutions endured by the Christians. I shall therefore content myself with a brief reference to those most disastrous to the church.

    [p.56]

    Passing by, then, the persecutions under Aurelius and Verus, in which the sufferings of the Christians in Gaul were most severe -- especially in the cities of Lyons and Vienne,k where churches were well nigh destroyed by its violence; and also passing by the persecutions which arose under the edicts of Severus, which were issued more especially to prevent the propagation of Christianity than to punish those already converts to it, I come to that general and terrible persecution under Decius Trajan, in the middle of the third century. The incentive which prompted the action of Decius against the Christians is variously ascribed to hatred of his predecessor, Philip, whom he had murdered, and who was friendly to the church; to his zeal for paganism; and lastly to his fear, feigned or real, that the Christians would usurp the empire. Perhaps all these motives combined impelled him to make war upon the church. According to the representations of one Dionysius, quoted by Eusebius, the persecution, at least in Africa, began before the edicts of Decius were issued:

    [p.56 - p.57]

    "The persecution with us did not begin with the imperial edict but precede it by a whole year. And a certain prophet and poet, inauspicious to the city [Alexandria], whoever he was, excited the mass of the heathens against us, stirring them up to their native superstition. Stimulated by him, and taking full liberty to exercise any kind of wickedness, they considered this the only piety, and the worship of their demons, viz, to slay us. * * * But as the sedition and civil war overtook the wretches, their cruelty was diverted from us to one another. We then drew a little breath, while their rage against us was a little abated. But, presently, that change from a milder reign was announced to us, and much terror was now threatening us. The decree [of Decius] had arrived, very much like that which was foretold by our Lord, exhibiting the most dreadful aspects so that, if it were possible, the very elect would stumble. All indeed were greatly alarmed, and many of the more eminent immediately gave way to them; others, who were in public offices, were led forth by their very acts; others were brought by their acquaintances and when called by name, they approached the impure and unholy sacrifices. But pale and trembling, as if they were not to sacrifice but themselves to be the victims and the sacrifices to the idols. They were jeered by many of the surrounding multitude, and were obviously equally afraid to die and to offer the sacrifice. But some advanced with greater readiness to the altar and boldly asserted that they had never before been Christians, concerning whom the declaration of our Lord is most true, that they will scarcely be saved. Of the rest, some followed the one or the other of the preceding; some fled, others were taken, and of these some held out as far as the prison and bonds, and some after a few days' imprisonment abjured Christianity before they entered the tribunal. And some, also, after enduring the torture for a time, at last renounced. Others, however, firm and blessed pillars of the Lord, confirmed by the Lord himself, and receiving in themselves strength and power, suited and proportioned to their faith, became admirable witnesses of his kingdom." [l]

    [p.57]

    Eusebius at great length recounts the suffering of individuals both in the east and west divisions of the empire, but it is not necessary to follow him through all those details. It will be sufficient to say that this persecution was more terrible than any which preceded it. It extended over the whole empire, and had for its avowed object the enforced apostasy of the Christians. [m]

    [p.57 - p.58]

    How unrelenting the efforts must have been to encompass either the destruction or the apostasy of the Christians will appear when it is known that the governors of the provinces were "commanded, on pain of forfeiting their own lives, either to exterminate all Christians utterly, or bring them back by pain and tortures to the religion of their fathers." "During two years," continues Mosheim, "a great multitude of Christians in all the Roman provinces were cut off by various species of punishment and suffering. This persecution was more cruel and terrific than any that preceded it; and immense numbers dismayed, not so much by the fear of death, as by the dread of the long-continued tortures by which the magistrates endeavored to overcome the constancy of the Christians, professed to renounce Christ; and procured for themselves safety. either by sacrificing, i.e., offering incense before the idols, or by certificates purchased with money." [n]

    [p.58]

    Gibbon, who never admits the severity of the persecutions under the emperors, except when compelled by undeniable facts, says, of this one under Decius:

    "The fall of Philip (the predecessor of Decius) introduced with a change of masters, a new system of government so oppressive to the Christians that their former condition, ever the time of Domitian, was represented as a state of perfect freedom and security, if compared with the rigorous treatment which they experienced under the short reign of Decius. * * * The bishops of the most considerable cities were removed by exile or death; the vigilance of the magistrates prevented clergy of Rome during sixteen months from proceeding to new election; and it was the opinion of the Christians that emperor would more patiently endure a competitor for the purple than a bishop for the capital." [o]

    Milner, quoting Cyprian, says concerning the effect this persecution:

    [p.59]

    "Vast numbers lapsed into idolatry immediately. Even before men were accused as Christians, many ran to the forum and sacrificed to the gods as they were ordered; and the crowds of apostates were so great that the magistrates wished to delay numbers of them till the next day, but they were importuned by wretched suppliants to be allowed to prove themselves heathens that very night." [p]

    The reign of Decius was brief, lasting only two years, and toward the close of it, as if surfeited with slaughter, the violent persecution against the saints relaxed somewhat of its severity; but his successors, Gallus and his son Volusian, renewed it. A pestilential disease broke out about this time and spread through a number of the provinces, and this the pagan priests persuaded the populace was a curse sent upon the people on account of the toleration shown to the Christians. This was sufficient to re-kindle the flames of hatred and for two years more the Church of Christ suffered violence as it had done under Decius.

    [p.59 - p.60]

    There remains but one more persecution to notice, that which is commonly known as the Diocletian. It could be called more properly the Galerian persecution; for Galerius, son-in-law to the emperor, and one with two others -- Constantius Chlorus and Maximian -- who who shared with him the responsibility of governing the empire, [q] had most to do with it. It is said that Galerius was urged to secure the edicts of Diocletian against the Christians by his mother, Romlia, a very haughty woman, who had taken offense because the saints had excluded her from their sacrament meetings. Be that as it may, it is generally conceded that this severest of all persecutions against the Church of Christ was inaugurated and carried on through the hatred and influence of Galerius.

    [p.60]

    According to Eusebius [r] the persecution began in the nineteenth year of the reign of Diocletian -- 303 A.D. The emperor in issuing his first edict could not be brought to the infamy of aiming at the lives of the saints; it appears he could only be brought to that by degrees. His first edict ordered the destruction of the Christian churches, and the surrender of the Holy Scriptures and the degradation of Christians from office. Shortly after this the royal palace at Nicomedia was twice set on fire, and from it Galerius fled, giving out that he feared Christian malice had attempted his life. The Christians being charged with the crime the incident was made the excuse for issuing a second edict, "in consequence of which whole families of the pious were slain at the imperial command, some with the sword, some also with fire. But the populace, binding another number upon planks, threw them into the depths of the sea." [s]

    [p.60 - p.61]

    A rebellion which occurred in Syria about this time was also charged to Christian intrigue, and a third edict was issued commanding that the heads of the church everywhere should be thrust into prison. "The spectacle of affairs after these events exceeds all description. Innumerable multitudes were imprisoned in every place, and the dungeons formerly destined for murderers and the vilest criminals were then filled with bishops, and presbyters, and deacons, readers and exorcists, so that there was no room left for those condemned for crimes." [t] It was ordered after a time that the prisoners should be granted their liberty on condition that they offer sacrifice at the shrine of the heathen gods. To effect that purpose the judges were commanded to employ the most excruciating tortures.

    [p.61]

    Diocletian thought to destroy the Christian "superstition" by overcoming the constancy of the leaders; but meeting with more resistance than he anticipated, he at last issued a fourth edict, directing the magistrates to compel all Christians, irrespective of age, sex, or official position, to offer sacrifice to the gods; and to employ tortures to compel that apostasy. The magistrates yielded strict obedience to the edict of the emperor, and the Christian church was reduced to the last extremity. [u] The scenes of suffering from tortures and bloodsheds throughout the empire, except in Gaul, where Constantine reigned, defy description. "Thousands, both men, and women, and children," says Eusebius, speaking of those who suffered in Egypt, "despising the present life for the sake of our Savior's doctrine, submitted to death in various shapes. Some, after being tortured with scrappings [v] and the rack, and the most dreadful scourgings, and other innumerable agonies which one might shudder to hear, were finally committed to the flames; and some plunged and drowned in the sea, others voluntarily offering their own heads to their executioners, others dying in the midst of their torments, some wasted away by famine, and others again fixed to the cross. Some, indeed, were executed as malefactors usually were; others, more cruelly, were nailed with the head downwards, and kept alive until they were destroyed by starving on the cross itself." [w]

    [p.62]

    After describing similar but still more cruel tortures endured by the Christians of Thebais, Eusebius continues: "And all these things were doing not only for a few days or some time but for a series of whole years. At one time ten or more, at another more than twenty, at another time not less than thirty, and even sixty, and again at another time, a hundred men with their wives and little children were slain in one day, whilst they were condemned to various and varied punishments. We ourselves have observed when on the spot, many crowded together in one day suffering decapitation, some the torments of the flames; so that the murderous weapon was completely blunted, and having lost its edge, broke to pieces; and the executioners themselves wearied with the slaughter, were obliged to relieve one another." [x]

    Gibbon, whose very reluctance to concede the severity of these persecutions induces me to quote him as often as admissions are forced from his unwilling lips, says of this persecution:

    "The magistrates were commanded to employ every method of severity which might reclaim them from their odious superstition, and obliged them to return to the established worship of the gods. This rigorous order was extended, by a subsequent edict, to the whole body of Christians, who were exposed to a violent and general persecution. Instead of those salutary restraints which had required the direct and solemn testimony of an accuser, it became the duty as well as the interest of the imperial officer to discover, to pursue, and to torment the most obnoxious among the faithful. Heavy penalties were denounced against all who should presume to save a prescribed sectary from the just indignation of the gods and the emperors." [y]

    [p.63]

    This persecution lasted for ten years; and at the end of that time the church presented a melancholy spectacle. Everywhere, even in Gaul, the Christian houses of worship were laid in ruins. Streams of Christian blood had flowed in every province of the empire, excepting in Gaul, where Constantine governed; and there, it will be remembered, a previous persecution under Aurelius and Verus had well-nigh destroyed the churches. Public worship was suspended. The saints were either driven to apostasy by tortures, had fled from the provinces to the barbarians, or kept themselves concealed. Meantime the magistrates, incited as much by avarice as by hatred of Christianity, confiscated not only the church property, but also the private possessions of the ministers. In other cases the church leaders were either slain, or mutilated and sent to the mines or banished from the country. "Many through dread of undergoing torture had made way with their own lives, and many apostatized from the faith; and what remained of the Christian community, consisted of weak, poor and timorous persons." [z]

    [p.63 - p.64]

    After adopting these measures for the destruction of the church, severities of another character were put in operation. "It was thought necessary to subject to the most intolerable hardships the condition of those perverse individuals who should still reject the religion of nature, of Rome, and of their ancestors. Persons of liberal birth were declared incapable of holding any honors or employments; slaves were forever deprived of the hopes of freedom, and the whole body of the people were put out of the protection of the law. The judges were authorized to hear and determine every action that was brought against a Christian. But the Christians were not permitted to complain of any injury which they themselves had suffered; and thus those unfortunate sectaries were exposed to the severity, while they were excluded from the benefits of public justice. This new species of martyrdom, so painful and lingering, so obscure and ignominious was, perhaps, the most proper to weary the constancy of the faithful; nor can it be doubted that the passions and interest of mankind were disposed on this occasion to second the designs of the emperors." [a] That the Romans considered the destruction of the Christian church completed by the Diocletian persecution is witnessed by the inscriptions upon monuments and medals. Two pillars in Spain, erected to commemorate the reign of Diocletian bore the following: On the first --

    [p.64]

    "DIOCLETIAN, JOVIAN, MAXIMIAN HERCULIUS, CAESARS AUGUSTI, FOR HAVING EXTENDED THE ROMAN EMPIRE IN THE EAST AND WEST, AND FOR HAVING EXTINGUISHED THE NAME OF CHRISTIANS, WHO BROUGHT THE REPUBLIC TO RUIN."

    On the second --

    "DIOCLETIAN, ETC., FOR HAVING ADOPTED GALERIUS IN THE EAST, FOR HAVING EVERYWHERE ABOLISHED THE SUPERSTITION OF CHRIST, FOR HAVING EXTENDED THE WORSHIP OF THE GODS."

    [p.65]

    And on the medal of Diocletian this:

    "THE NAME OF CHRISTIAN BEING EXTINGUISHED." [b]

    When it is remembered that these persecutions, to which I have briefly referred, ran through more than three centuries; that the emperors whose edicts inaugurated them possessed unlimited power to execute their decrees; that the age in which they occurred was cruel beyond modern comprehension; that Roman, that is to say, pagan hatred of Christians was venomously bitter, because they were made to believe that the existence of the ancient religion of Rome and latterly the existence of the empire itself depended upon the destruction of Christianity -- when all this is remembered, it is not to be wondered at that the saints were worn out, or so nearly so that only "weak and timorous" men were left to ineffectually resist the paganization of Christianity -- the destruction of the Church of Christ.




    Chapter  II.  Notes.


    45 -- Ch. 2:

    The Effect of Pagan Persecution on the Christian Church.

    a Matt. xi: 12.

    b Euseb. “Eccl. Hist.,” Book VIII., ch. ii and ch. xii.

    c “Decline and Fall,” Vol. I., p. 486, Ed. of 1880.

    d “Intellectual Development of Europe,” Vol. I., p. 360.

    e Of the burning of Rome, the punishment of the Christians and this celebrated passage in the writings of the famous Roman annalist, Gibbon, from whom I quote the phrase above, says: “The most sceptical criticism is obliged to respect the truth of this extraordinary fact and the integrity of this celebrated passage of Tacitus. The former [the burning of Rome and the punishment of the Christians] is confirmed by the diligent and accurate Suetonius, who mentions the punishment which Nero inflicted on the Christians, a sect of men who had embraced a new and criminal superstition. The latter may be proved by the consent of the most ancient manuscripts, by the inimitable character of the style of Tacitus, by his reputation, which guarded his text from the interpolation of pious fraud.”--“Decline and Fall,” Vol. I., p. 448.

    f “Tacitus Annl.,” lib., XV., ch. 44.

    g See Milman’s Note in “Decline and Fall,” Vol. I., p. 450.

    h I have taken Milner’s translation of the Epistle. See “Ch. Hist., Vol. I., p. 145.

    i Milner’s “Ch. Hist.,” Vol. I., p. 148.

    j “Decline and Fall,” Vol. I., p. 453.

    k An account of these persecutions at great length will be found in the letters of the survivors sent to the churches of Asia and Phrygia. “Eusebius,” Book V., ch. i.

    l That is, they were executed. Eusebius, Bb. vi., ch. xli.

    m See Murdock’s note in Mosheim’s “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. i., Cent. iii., ch. ii.

    n Mosheim (Murdock), Bk. i., Cent. iii., ch. ii.

    o “Decline and Fall,” Vol. I., ch. xvi.

    p Milner’s “Church Hist.,” Vol. I., Cent. iii, ch. viii.

    q The situation was this: A year after his elevation to the imperial throne, Diocletian, believing the government of the vast empire of Rome a task too great for a single mind, chose Maximianus Herculius, commonly called Maximian, to be his colleague and to share with him the title of Augustus. After a few years each of the emperors chose a colleague in order to still further divide the labor of administration. These were Constantius Chlorus and Galerius Maximianus, usually called by his first name. Constantius and Galerius occupied an inferior position to that of Diocletian and Maximian, and were honored only with the title of “Caesar.”

    r Eusebius, “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. ii.

    s Eusebius, “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. vi.

    t Eusebius, “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. vi.

    u Mosheim’s “Eccl. Hist.,” Cent. iv, Part i., ch. i.

    v This torture was raking the flesh from the body by means of an iron-toothed instrument.

    w Eusebius, “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. viii.

    x Eusebius, “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. ix.

    y “Decline and Fall,” Vol. I, p. 481. Gibbon claims, however, that ‘notwithstanding the severity of this law, the virtuous courage of many of the pagans in concealing their friends or relatives affords an honorable proof that the rage of superstition had not extinguished in their minds the sentiments of nature and humanity.”--Ibid.

    z Schlegel, quoted by Murdock; see note Mosheim’s “Eccl. Hist.,” Cent. iv, Bk. ii, ch. i.

    aa “Decline and Fall,” Vol. I, ch. xvi, p. 477. Gibbon undertakes to modify what he has here written by saying that the policy of a well-ordered government must sometimes have interposed in behalf of the oppressed Christians. “This wants proof,” says Milman, in a footnote on the remark. “The edict of Diocletian was executed in all its rigor during the rest of the reign,” and gives reference to Eusebius, “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. xiii.

    bb See Milner’s “Church History,” Vol. ii, Cent. iv, ch. ii. I also give the following in evidence of the severity of the persecution of the Christians in the early centuries of our era; and since it is taken from the funeral oration pronounced by Libanius over the body of his friend, the Emperor Julian, commonly called the apostate--because in manhood he renounced that Christianity which had been forced upon him in childhood, and attempted to restore the ancient religion of Rome--it is of the same character of evidence as that already found in the statements of Tacitus and Pliny--it is the testimony of one unfriendly to Christianity, of one who could have no motive for exaggerating the sufferings of the Christians. Referring to the mildness of the methods of persecution adopted by Julian against the Christians, Libanius says “They who adhered to corrupt religion [he means the Christians] were in great terrors [on Julian’s accession to the throne] and expected that their eyes would be plucked out, that their heads would be cut off, and that rivers of their blood would flow from the multitude of slaughters. They apprehended their new master would invent new kinds of torment, in comparison of which mutilation, sword, fire, drowning, being buried alive, would appear slight pains. For the preceding emperors had employed against them all these kinds of punishments.”



     

    [ 66 ]




    CHAPTER  III.


    The Effect Of Peace, Wealth and Luxury On Christianity.

    Disastrous as the persecutions of the early Christian centuries were, still more mischievous to the church were those periods of tranquility which intervened between the outbursts of rage that prompted them. Peace may have her victories no less renowned than those of war; and so, too, she has her calamities, and they are not less destructive than those of war. War may destroy nations, but ease and luxury mankind corrupt -- the body and the mind. Especially is peace dangerous to the church. Prosperity relaxes the reins of discipline; people feel less and less the need of a sustaining providence; but in adversity the spirit of man feels after God, and he is correspondingly more devoted to the service of religion.

    [p.67]

    We shall find the early Christians no exception to the operation of this influence of repose. Whenever it was accorded them, either through the mercy or the indifference of the emperors, internal dissensions, the intrigues of aspiring prelates and the rise of heresies characterized these periods. Even Milner, who wrote his great work to counteract the influence of the too candid Mosheim; who takes to task other ecclesiastical writers for making too much of the wickedness that has existed in the church; who declares in the introduction of his Church History that genuine piety is the only thing he intends to celebrate, and announces it to be his purpose to write the history of those men only, irrespective of the external church to which they belonged, who have been real, not nominally, Christians [a] -- even Milner, I say, admits and deplores the mischief wrought by these periods of peace which came to the church between the storms of persecution which plagued it; and refers in several places to the marked and steady declension of the Christian spirit in those centuries with which at present I am dealing. He admits that a gloomy cloud hung over the conclusion of the first century; and argues that the first impressions made by the effusion of the spirit are generally the strongest; that human depravity, overborn for a time, arises afresh, particularly in the next generation -- hence the disorders of schism and heresy that arose in the church, the tendency of which was to destroy the work of God. [b]

    [p.67 - p.68]

    The same writer upon the authority of Origen says that the long peace granted the church in the third century produced a great degree of luke-warmness and religious indecorum. "Let the reader," says he, "only notice the indifference which he [Origen] here describes, and the conduct of the Christians both in the first and second centuries, and he will be affected with the greatness of the declension." Then follows the picture drawn by Origen:

    [p.68]

    "Several come to church only on solemn festivals; and then not so much for instruction as diversion. Some go out again as soon as they have heard the lecture, without conferring or asking the pastors questions. Others stay not till the lecture is ended; and others hear not so much as a single word; but entertain themselves in a corner of the church."

    Coming to the middle of the third century, just previous to that severe persecution inaugurated by the Emperor Decius, and speaking of Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, Milman exclaims: “A star of the first magnitude! when we consider the times in which he lived. Let us recreate ourselves with the contemplation of it. We are fatigued with hunting for Christian goodness; and we have discovered but little and that little with much difficulty. We shall find Cyprian to be a character who partook indeed of the declension which we have noticed and lamented; but who was still far superior, I apprehended, in real simplicity and piety to the Christians of the East.” [c] This same Cyprian, in whom Milner delights, speaking of the effects of the long peace which preceded the Decian persecution, says:

    [p.68 - p.69]

    "Each had been bent on improving his own patrimony; and had forgotten what believers had done under the apostles, and what they ought always to do. They were brooding over the arts of amassing wealth; the pastors and the deacons each forgot their duty; works of mercy were neglected, and discipline was at the lowest ebb; luxury and effeminacy prevailed; meritricious arts in dress were cultivated; fraud and deception practiced among brethren. Christians would unite themselves in matrimony with unbelievers; could swear not only without reverence but even without veracity. With haughty asperity they despised their ecclesiastical superiors; they railed against one another with outrageous acrimony, and conducted quarrels with determined malice. Even many bishops, who ought to be guides and patterns to the rest, neglected the peculiar duties of their stations, gave themselves up to secular pursuits. They deserted their places of residence and their flocks; they traveled through distant provinces in quest of pleasure and gain; gave no assistance to the needy brethren; but were insatiable in their thirst of money. They possessed estates by fraud and multiplied usury. What have we not deserved to suffer for such conduct? Even the divine word hath foretold us what we might expect: 'If his children forsake my law and walk not in my judgments, I will visit their offenses with the rod and their sins with scourges.' These things had been denounced and foretold, but in vain. Our sins had brought our affairs to that pass, that because we had despised the Lord's directions, we were obliged to undergo a correction of our multiplied evils and a trial of our faith by severe remedies." [d]

    [p.69]

    The last forty years of the third century were years of peace to the church. That period began with the ascension of Gallienius, a man of taste, indolence, philosophy and toleration, to the throne; and his example was followed by the emperors to the end of the century. A new scene this, Christianity tolerated by a pagan government for forty years! "This new scene did not prove favorable to the growth of grace and holiness," writes Milner. "In no period since the apostles was there ever so great a general decay as in this; not even in particular instances can we discover during this interval much of lively Christianity." [e]

    [p.69 - p.70]

    Though conscious of having already quoted copiously upon the point under consideration, I cannot withhold the testimony of Eusebius who was a witness of the effects of that peace granted the church previous to the last great pagan persecution, the Diocletian. After describing the multitudes which flocked into the church before the declension in the spirit of true Christianity so greatly prevailed, he remarks:

    [p.70]

    "Nor was any malignant demon able to infatuate, no human machinations prevent them so long as the providential hand of God superintended and guarded his people as the worthy subjects of his care. But when by reason of excessive liberty, we sunk into negligence and sloth, one envying and reviling another in different ways, and we were almost, as it were, upon the point of taking up arms against each other with words as with darts and spears, prelates inveighing against prelates, and people rising up against people, and hypocrisy and dissimulation had arisen to the greatest height of malignity, then the divine judgment, which usually proceeds with a lenient hand, whilst the multitudes were yet crowding into the church, with gentle and mild visitation began to afflict the episcopacy; the persecution having begun with those brethren in the army. But as if destitute of all sensibility, we were not prompt in measures to appease and propitiate the Deity; some indeed like atheists, regarding our situation as unheeded and unobserved by a Providence, we added one wickedness and misery to another. But some that appeared to be our pastors deserting the law of piety, were inflamed against each other with mutual strifes, only accumulating quarrels and threats, rivalship, hostility and hatred to each other, only anxious to assert the government as a kind of sovereignty for themselves." [f]

    [p.70 - p.71]

    Let it be remembered that this is quoted from a writer contemporary with the events, and who says in the very chapter following the one from which the foregoing is taken that it was not for him to record the dissensions and follies which the shepherds of the people exercised against each other before the persecution. He also adds: "We shall not make mention of those that were shaken by the persecution, nor of those that suffered shipwreck in their salvation, and of their own accord were sunk in the depths of the watery gulf." [g] Then in his "Book of Martyrs," referring to events that occurred between the edicts ordering the persecution, he says:

    [p.71

    "But the events that occurred in the intermediate times, besides those already related, I have thought proper to pass by; I mean more particularly the circumstances of the different heads of the churches, who from being shepherds of the reasonable flocks of Christ, that did not govern in a lawful and becoming manner, were condemned, by divine justice, as unworthy of such a charge, to be the keepers of the unreasonable camel, an animal deformed in the structure of his body; and condemned further to be the keepers of the imperial horses. * * * Moreover, the ambitious aspirings of many to office, and the injudicious and unlawful ordinations that took place, the divisions among the confessors themselves, the great schisms and difficulties industriously fomented by the factions among the new members, against the relics of the church, devising one innovation after another, and unmercifully thrusting them into the midst of all these calamities, heaping up affliction upon affliction. All this, I say, I have resolved to pass by, judging it foreign to my purpose, wishing, as I said in the beginning, to shun and avoid giving an account of them." [h]

    [p.71 - p.72

    Hence, however bad the condition of the church is represented to be by ecclesiastical writers, we must know that it was still worse than that; however numerous the schisms, however unholy the ambition of aspiring prelates; however frequent and serious the innovations upon the primitive ordinances of the gospel; however great the confusion and apostasy in the church is represented to be; we must know that it is still worse than that, since the church historians contemporaneous with the events refused to record these things in their fullness lest it should prove disastrous to the church; just as some of our modern scholars professing to write church history express their determination to close their eyes to the corruption and abuses which form the greater part of the melancholy story of ecclesiastical history, for fear that relating these things would make it appear that real religion scarcely had any existence. [i] But it is all in vain. "It is idle, it is disingenuous," remarks the editor [j] of Gibbon's great work, "to deny or to dissemble the early depravations of Christianity, its gradual but rapid departure from its primitive simplicity and purity, still more from its spirit of universal love."

    [p.72 - p.73

    If the intermittent peace accorded to the church in the first three troubled centuries of its existence was productive of the evils admitted by the writers who have felt that the cause of religion demanded that these evils as much as possible should be covered up, naturally enough one exclaims, what then must have been the result of that repose which came to the church after the elevation of Constantine to the imperial throne! When from a proscribed religion Christianity was exalted to the dignity of the state religion of the empire; and her prelates and clergy, recalled from exile and suffering, poverty and disgrace, were loaded with the wealth and the honors that the lords of the Roman world could bestow! Let imagination do her best or worst in picturing the rapid decline of whatever remained of true Christianity, conjecture can scarcely outrun the facts. If when the office of bishop was attended with danger and scant revenues it aroused the inordinate ambition of men to possess it, how infinitely more must it have become the object of envy, strife and ambition when by the patronage of Constantine it became not only free from danger but endowed with revenues that a prince might envy, and accorded an influence in the palace scarcely second to that granted to the governors of the provinces!

    [p.73]

    "If before the Decian persecution the rivalry between the bishops of Rome and Carthage prompted a bitter controversy which threatened the unity of the church, how much more likely were such conflicts to arise between the bishops of Rome and Constantinople -- rival bishops or rival cities, Rome proud of her past, Constantinople vain of her present glory; the former jealous of the place she had filled in the world's history; the latter ambitious of future influence! If heresies were fomented and schisms created when to be a Christian invited espionage and perhaps death, what an increase there must have been in these and other disintegrating influences when it became a reproach rather than a praise not to be a Christian, and the door of the church stood wide open to the evil-minded, who sought membership, not to enjoy the consolation of religion but for worldly advantage!"




    Chapter  III.  Notes.


    66 -- Ch. 3:

    The Effect of Peace, Wealth and Luxury on Christianity.

    a Milner’s “Church History,” Vol. i, Introduction. In justification of his course, in a foot note he argues that “A history of the perversions and abuses of religion is not properly a history of the church; as absurd were it to suppose a history of the highwaymen that have infested their country to be a history of England.” He appears oblivious to the fact that he throws himself open to the retort: A history of the blessedness and charity of the purely good Christian men alone is not properly a history of the church; as absurd were it to suppose a history alone of the honest men of England, men that have blessed their race, to be a history of that country. Milner’s work is more properly a history of piety than of the church. In every age and country he seeks out the good men who have nearest conformed their lives to Christian precepts and celebrates them in his pages. Therefore, whatever admissions we find this author making as to the corruptions and abuses which found their way into the church; we shall be justified in considering as of special weight since they are admitted by him only on compulsion, and when there is no chance of either denying or excusing them. I have already called attention to the same disposition in Eusebius, p. 37; and hence his testimony may also be regarded as of special value in relation to the decline of the true Christian spirit.

    b Ch. Hist., Vol. i, ch. xv.

    c Milner’s “Ch. Hist.,” vol. i, cent. iii, ch. vi.

    d Milner’s “Ch. Hist.,” vol. i, cent. iii, ch. viii.

    e Milner’s “Ch. Hist.,” vol. i, cent. iii, ch. xvii.

    f Eusebius’ “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. i.

    g Eusebius’ “Eccl. Hist.,” Bk. viii, ch. ii.

    h “Book of Martyrs,” ch. xii.

    i See Milner’s Introduction to his Church Hist., Vol. i.

    j This is the Rev. H. H. Milman who edited and annotated Gibbon’s “Decline and Fall.” The above quotation will be found in the editor’s preface.



     

    [ 74 ]




    CHAPTER  IV.


    Changes In The Form And Spirit Of The Church Government -- Corruption Of The Popes.

    It is now my purpose to notice those alterations actually made in the form and spirit of the Christian church government. Necessarily my reference to these matters must be brief; sufficient only to demonstrate the fact for which I am contending in these chapters.

    I am forced to admit that the description of the church organization in the New Testament is not all one could wish it to be. Only the faintest outline may be traced in those documents which all Christians accept as authority, and as they are fragmentary the description of the church contained in them is necessarily imperfect.

    From what is written it appears that the quorum of the Twelve Apostles exercised a universal jurisdiction over the church, and a sort of primacy seems to be accorded to three of their number, Peter, James and John. Before the crucifixion Jesus also called into existence quorums of seventies to whom he gave similar powers to those bestowed upon the Twelve;a but for some reason, doubtless the imperfection of the Christian records, we can learn nothing more of them than is set down in the tenth chapter of Luke.

    [p.74 - p.75]

    After the departure of the resurrected Messiah from his disciples at Bethany, the apostles, as fast as men were brought to faith and repentance through their preaching, organized in the various cities where they labored branches of the church, over which they appointed elders or bishops to preside;b and these evidently were assisted in their duties by deacons. [c] In an enumeration of the church officers given by Paul we have other officers named besides apostles, prophets, seventies; viz., evangelists, pastors and teachers. [d]

    [p.75 - p.76]

    It is difficult from the New Testament to determine the exact nature and full extent of the duties of these respective officers in the church, or their gradation. But that there was a prescribed duty to each officer, a limit to the authority of each, and a gradation among them, which made a harmonious whole -- a complete ecclesiastical government, with all the parts properly adjusted and assigned their respective duties, there can be no question. For Paul likens the church of Christ to the body of a man, which, though it hath many members, yet is it one body; and all the members are necessary; one cannot say to the other, "I have no need of thee." So all these officers in the church, the apostle argues, are necessary; and as the head in the natural body cannot say to the foot, "I have no need of thee." neither in the church can the apostle say to the deacon. "I have no need of thee;" much less can the deacon say to the apostle, "I have no need of thee." [e] "Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers?" he asks. The implied answer is, No; but, as he elsewhere says, the whole body -- i. e., the church -- "is fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth." [f]

    [p.76 - p.77]

    This organization as given by the Master had for its purpose the perfecting of the saints; the work of the ministry; edifying the body of Christ; and to prevent the saints being carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the sleight and cunning of men. [g] The apostle who thus specifies the purposes of the church organization also intimates that it was to be perpetuated until the saints all come to the "unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God -- unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the fulness of the stature of Christ." [h] Furthermore, it is obvious that since the church organization was given for the purposes above enumerated, so long as there are saints to be perfected, or a necessity for work in the ministry; so long as the church needs edifying or the saints guarding from heresy, and the deceitfulness of false teachers -- just so long will this organization of the church with apostles and prophets, seventies and elders, bishops and pastors, teachers and deacons be needed; and since the kinds of work enumerated in the foregoing will always be necessary, we arrive at the conclusion that the church organization as established by the apostles was designed to be perpetual. [i] But that it was not perpetuated is clearly demonstrated by writers of the second century, who, with the single exception of Clement of Alexandria, who calls Clement of Rome an "Apostle," recognize no other officers in the church than bishops, presbyters (elders) and deacons. It is difficult to account for the sudden loss of so many orders of officers in the church, unless, indeed, the apostasy for which I contend had made very great progress as early as the opening of the second century, which, I believe, was the case.

    [p.77]

    It appears from a statement of Clement of Rome [j] that persons selected by the apostles to be bishops, and after the death of the apostles those selected by other men of repute in the church, were submitted to the people for their approval, and this was the custom until the fourth century. It was also the custom of the bishops to employ the elders as a sort of council; and to call upon the people for their assent in the important matters of church government. In course of time, however, early in the fourth century, this respect for the principle of common consent was lost. The people were first altogether excluded from a voice in ecclesiastical affairs; and the next step was to deprive the elders of their former authority. [k] Thus power was centralized in the hands of the bishops, which enabled them to control everything at their distretion, and paved the way for those abuses of power which bear evidence of the awful apostasy of the church.

    [p.77 - p.78]

    So far as can be learned from the Christian annals, the churches that grew up under the preaching of the apostles recognized in that quorum a general presidency over all the churches established; and in fact seemed to regard each separate church as but a member of the one great household of faith. But after the death of the apostles, these several branches seem to be considered separate and independent organizations, united in faith and charity, it is true, but in nothing further bound together. There is no evidence that there was such a thing as subordination among the churches, or rank among the bishops. As might be expected, however, there was a peculiar respect paid to the churches founded by the apostles. Those churches were appealed to in controversies on points of doctrine, as most likely to know what the apostles taught, but the appeal had no other significance. This equality of rank among the bishops, together with the simple form of church government, described above, was soon changed. The bishops who lived in cities, either by their own labors or those of the elders associated with them, raised up new churches in the adjacent villages and hamlets. The bishops of these rural districts being nominated and ordained by the bishops presiding in the cities, very naturally felt themselves under the protection and dependent upon the city bishops. This idea continued to grow until these bishops of "the suburbs and the fields" were looked upon as a distinct order of officers, possessing a dignity and authority above the elders, and yet subordinate to the bishops of the cities who, wherever they presided over bishops in outlying districts, soon came to be designated as archbishops.

    [p.78]

    Gradually, and perhaps almost imperceptibly, the church in the west in its government followed the civil divisions of the Roman empire. The bishop of the metropolis of a civil province, in time came to be regarded as having a general supervision of all the churches in that province, and soon it became the custom to style them metropolitans.

    [p.78 - p.79]

    The bishops of the great cities of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch, after the ascension of Constantine, were made to correspond to the four praetorian prefects created by Constantine in the civil government; and before the end of the fourth century received the title of patriarchs. [l] It is also said by Mosheim, though denied by other writers, that next to the patriarchs were bishops whose jurisdiction extended over several provinces and corresponded to the civil exarchs; next came the metropolitan bishops whose jurisdiction, as already stated, was limited to a single province, and corresponded to the governor of the provinces. The archbishops presided over a district including several bishoprics within a province; and lastly came the bishops of churches.

    [p.79]

    Concurrent with these changes arose the customs, first derived from the Greeks, of holding provincial councils. The bishops living in a single province met in council to confer upon matters of common interest to their churches. At first the attending bishops looked upon themselves as merely the representatives of their respective churches, without further jurisdiction than to discuss and come to agreement on matters of common concern. But gradually they usurped the power to order by decree where at first they were wont to advise or entreat. Nor was it long ere the decrees of these provincial councils were forced upon the respective churches as laws to be implicitly obeyed.

    [p.79 - p.80]

    There was some resistance to this from the lower clergy. but it was quickly overcome by the activity and ambition of the bishops, who were only too glad to escape the restraints imposed upon their movements by the doctrine of common consent. It is said also that as many changes occurred among the lower order of the clergy as among the bishops. The elders and deacons aping the conduct of their file leaders became too proud to attend to the humble duties of their offices, and hence a number of other officers were added to the church -- sub-deacons, acolythi, ostiarii, lectors, exorcists and copiataem -- while the elders and deacons spent much of their time in indolence and pleasure.

    [p.80]

    If the ambition of rival bishops distracted the church in the second and third centuries, much more did ambitious prelates -- patriarchs and metropolitans -- of the fourth and fifth fifth centuries disturb its tranquility. They contended about the limits of their respective jurisdiction with all the bitterness of temporal kings seeking an enlargement of their dominions. They made conquests and reprisals upon each other in much the same spirit, and at times were not above resorting to violence to attain their ends. It soon happened that the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem sank below their fellow patriarchs of Rome and Constantinople in wealth and dignity. The prelates of these latter cities fiercely contended for the title of universal bishop; and in that contest the bishop of Constantinople was not always unsuccessful.

    [p.80 - p.81]

    Over the protest of Leo the Great, in the fifth century, the council of Chalcedon decreed that the bishop of "New Rome" ought to enjoy the same honors and prerogatives with the pontiff of ancient Rome, on account of the equal rank and dignity of the two cities. In the following century, encouraged by past successes the bishop of "New Rome," John, surnamed the Faster, because of the austerity of his life, assembled a council of eastern bishops on his own account, to decide on charges brought against the patriarch of Antioch. It was on this occasion that he made such an assumption of the title of acumenical or universal bishop, that Gregory the Great supposed him to be aiming at a supremacy over all the Christian churches. In spite of the opposition of Gregory, the Faster, sustained by the emperor; continued to wear the title, though, it is said, not in the sense that Gregory supposed. The contest continued from this time forward with little interruption until that fatal schism came between the east and the west with which the reader has already been made acquainted. [n] The patriarchs of New Rome retained their hold upon the east; but the decay, moral and spiritual, which blighted those churches steadily went on, until at the last, Mohammedan civilization displaced Christian civilization. The crescent rose triumphantly above the cross, and the east sank into a settled gloom out of which it has not yet been able to rise.

    [p.81 - p.82]

    In the west it was otherwise. There all was activity. The Roman pontiffs not only sent their missionaries to the barbarians to preach the supremacy of the popes, but the barbarians came to Rome. They came with arms in their hands and as conquerors, it is true, and in the closing years of the fifth century obtained an easy victory over the western division of the empire. But if imperial Rome was vanquished, there arose above its ruins papal Rome, in majesty little inferior to that possessed by imperial Rome in her palmiest days; and in the course of time the victorious barbarians bowed in as humble submission to the wand of the popes as their ancestors had to the eagle-mounted standard of the emperors. Moreover, the barbarous nations that fell under the influence of the Roman missionaries were accustomed to hold their priests in a superstitious reverence. In portions of Western Europe the Druid priests had reigned over both people and magistrates, controlling absolutely the jurisdiction of the latter; and, in the case of the supreme priest, according to some authorities,o the reverence of the barbarians amounted to worship. This reverence, on their conversion to Christianity, was readily transferred to the supreme pontiff of the Catholic Church; and made possible that spiritual and temporal despotism before which monarchs trembled and the world stood in abject fear.

    [p.82]

    Having traced the rise of the Church of Rome to this point, it yet remains to say that the corruption of her clergy and members kept pace with the developing splendor of the hierarchy. The pride, ambition and wickedness which bishops and other ministers of the church practiced in the second and third centuries have already been pointed out, and at the same time it was suggested that in these matters there was not likely to be any improvement after ease and luxury -- ever the panderers to immorality -- had increased the increased the appetite for sensual pleasures and supplied the means of gratification.

    Early in the history of the church the morality of the times not only excused but justified lying and deceit whenever it was supposed that the interests of religion could be promoted by it; and hence the existence of that mass of childish fable and falsehood respecting the infancy and youth of Messiah, and the wonder-working power of the relics of the saints and martyrs which has brought the Christian religion into contempt. Not even the greatest and most pious teachers of the first five or six centuries are free from this leprosy; [p] and if such characters as Ambrose, Hilary, Augustine, Gregory Nazianzen, and Jerome are not free from it. how much more may we expect to find it a vice with men of less reputation!

    [p.82 - p.83]

    The attempt to live in a state of celibacy gave rise to many scandals in the church. Ambitious of a peculiar sanctity, the clergy began to abstain from marriage, but not from the pleasures supposed to be peculiar to the married state. It became the custom for the priests to live with "sub-introduced women," who "passed as sisters of the priests, the correctness of whose taste was often exemplified by the remarkable beauty of their sinful partners. [q] It is only fair to say that a law of Honorius condemned this practice, but it is to be feared that the only effect of the law upon those undertaking to live in the unnatural condition which celibacy imposes was merely to drive the practice from the public gaze.

    [p.83]

    Of all the writers who have given us a description of the moral condition of the church in the period of which I write, I think Salvian, who wrote about the middle of the fifth century, is the most vivid, and hence I quote in part his arraignment:

    [p.83 - p.84]

    "The very church which should be the body to appease the anger of God, alas! what reigns there but disorders calculated to incense the Most High? It is more common to meet with Christians who are guilty of the greatest abominations than with those who are wholly exempt from crime. So that today it is a sort of sanctity among us to be less vicious than the generality of Christians. We insult the majesty of the Most High at the foot of his altars. Men, the most steeped in crime, enter the holy places without respect for them. True, all men ought to pay their vows to God, but why should they seek his temples to propitiate him, only to go forth to provoke him? Why enter the church to deplore their former sins, and upon going forth -- what do I say? -- in those very courts they commit fresh commit fresh sins, their mouths and their hearts contradict one another. Their prayers are criminal meditations rather than vows of expiation. Scarcely is service ended before each returns to his old practices. Some go to their wine, others to their impurities, still others to robbing and brigandage, so that we cannot doubt that these things had been occupying them while they were in the church. Nor is it the lowest of the people who are thus guilty. There is no rank whatever in the church which does not commit all sorts of crimes.

    [p.84]

    "It may be urged that we are better at heart than the barbarians who oppose us. Suppose this to be granted: we ought to be better than they. But as a matter of fact, they are more virtuous than we. The mass of Christians are below the barbarians in probity. True, all kinds of sins are found among them; but what one is not found among us? The several nations have their peculiar sin; the Saxons are cruel, the Franks perfidious; the Gepid inhuman; the Huns lewd. But we, having the law of God to restrain us, are given over to all these offenses. Then, to confine ourselves to the single sin of swearing, can many be found among the faithful who have not the name of Jesus Christ constantly upon their lips in support of their perjuries? This practice coming down from the higher to the lower classes, has so prevailed that Christians might be deemed pagans. This, although the law of God expressly forbids to take his name in vain, We read this law; but we do not practice it; as a consequence the pagans taunt us that we boast ourselves the sole possessors of God's laws and of the rules of truth and of what that law enjoins. 'Christians, indeed, to the shame of Jesus Christ,' say they." [r]

    In book VI on The Providence of God, Salvian continues his arraignment:

    [p.84 - p.85]

    "We rush from the churches to the theatres, even in the midst of our perils. In Carthage the theatres were thronged while the enemy were before the walls, and the cries of those perishing outside under the sword mingled with the shouts of the spectators in the circus. Nor are we better here in Gaul. Treves has been taken four times, and has only increased in wickedness under her misfortunes. The same state of things exists in Cologne -- deplorable wickedness among young and old, low and high. The smaller cities have been blind and insensible to the dangers threatening, until they have overwhelmed them. It seems to be the destiny of the Roman empire to perish rather than reform; they must cease to be, in order to cease to be vicious. A part of the inhabitants of Treves, having escaped from the ruins, petitions the emperor for -- what? A theatre, spectacles, public shows! A city which thrice overthrown could not correct itself, well deserved to suffer a fourth destruction. * * * Would that my voice might be heard by all Romans! I would cry: Let us all blush that today the only cities where impurity does not reign are those which have submitted to the barbarians. Think not, then, that they conquer and we yield by the simple force of nature. Rather let us admit that we succumb through dissoluteness of our morals, of which our calamities are the just punishment."

    [p.85 - p.86]

    The moral condition of the church did not improve in the sixth nor the seventh century. It kept getting worse and worse until in the tenth century those writers most interested in upholding the purity of the church declare that this was an iron age, barren of all goodness; a leaden age, abounding in all wickedness; and a dark age, remarkable for the scarcity of writers and men of learning. Christ is represented as in a very deep sleep, the ship as covered with waves, and there were no disciples who by their cries might wake him, being themselves asleep. [s] "Infidel malice," says Milner, "has with pleasure recorded the vices and crimes of the popes of this century. Nor is it my intention to attempt to palliate the account of their wickedness. It was as deep and atrocious as language can paint; nor can a reasonable man desire more authentic evidence of history than that which the records both of civil and ecclesiastical history afford concerning the corruption of the whole church." [t]

    [p.86]

    As already remarked, it is the contention of the Roman Catholic Church that from Peter to Pius IX there has been an uninterrupted line of bishops in the see of Rome who have held divine authority; who succeeded both to the divine authority and mission of St. Peter; with power to bind and loose on earth and in heaven; who were, in fact, the vicars of Christ on earth, presidents of the church universal.

    It now becomes my duty to refute that claim and give further proof of the complete apostasy of the church by presenting the history of the popes for three hundred years, from the middle of the eighth to the middle of the eleventh century, I quote the sketch from Draper's "Intellectual Development of Europe:"

    [p.86 - p.87]

    "On the death of Pope Paul I., who had attained the pontificate A. D. 757, the Duke of Nepi compelled some bishops to consecrate Constantine, one of his brothers, as pope; but more legitimate electors subsequently, A. D. 768, choosing Stephen IV., the usurper and his adherents were severely punished; the eyes of Constantine were put out; the tongue of Bishop Theodorus was amputated, and he was left in a dungeon to expire in the agonies of thirst. The nephews of Pope Adrian seized his successor, Pope Leo III., A. D. 795, in the street, and forcing him into a neighboring church, attempted to put out his eyes and cut out his tongue; at a later period this pontiff trying to suppress a conspiracy to depose him, Rome became a scene of rebellion, murder and conflagration. His successor, Stephen V., A. D. 816, was ignominiously driven from the city; his successor, Pasohal I., was accused of blinding and murdering two ecclesiastics in the Lateran Palace; it was necessary that imperial commissioners should investigate the matter, but the pope died, after having exculpated himself by oath before thirty bishops. John VIII., A. D. 872, unable to resist the Mohammedans, was compelled to pay them tribute; the Bishop of Naples, maintaining a secret alliance with them, received his share of the plunder they collected. Him John excommunicated, nor would he give him absolution unless he would betray the chief Mohammedans and assassinate others himself. There was an ecclesiastical conspiracy to murder the pope; some of the treasures of the church were seized; and the gate of St. Pancrazia was opened with false keys, to admit the Saracens into the city. Formosus, who had been engaged in these transactions, and excommunicated as a conspirator for the murder of John, was subsequently elected pope, A. D. 891; he was succeeded by Boniface VI., A. D. 896, who had been deposed from the diaconate, and again from the priesthood, for his immoral and lewd life. By Stephen VII., who followed, the dead body of Formosus was taken from the grave, clothed in papal habiliments, propped up in a chair, tried before a council, and the preposterous and indecent scene completed by cutting off three of the fingers of the corpse and casting it into the Tiber; but Stephen himself was destined to exemplify how low the papacy had fallen; he was thrown into prison and strangled. In the course of five years from A. D. 896 to A. D. 900, five popes were consecrated. Leo V., who succeeded in A. D. 904, was in less than two months thrown into prison by Christopher, one of his chaplains, who usurped his place, and who, in his turn, was shortly expelled from Rome by Sergius III., who, by the aid of a military force, seized the pontificate, A. D. 905. This man, according to the testimony of the times, lived in a criminal intercourse with the celebrated prostitute Theodora, who, with her daughters Marozia and Theodora, also prostitutes, exercised an extraordinary control over him. The love of Theodora was also shared by John X.: she gave him the first arch-bishopric of Ravenna, and then translated him to Rome, A. D. 915, as pope. John was not unsuited to the times; he organized a confederacy which perhaps prevented Rome from being captured by the Saracens, and the world was astonished and edified by the appearance of this warlike pontiff at the head of his troops.

    [p.87 - p.88]

    By the love of Theodora, as was said, he maintained himself in the papacy for fourteen years; by the intrigues and hatred of her daughter, Marozia, he was overthrown. She surprised him in the Lateran Palace; killed his brother Peter before his face; threw him into prison, where he soon died, smothered, as was asserted, with a pillow. After a short interval Marozia made her own son pope as John XI., A. D. 931. Many affirmed that Pope Sergius was his father, but she herself inclined to attribute him to her husband Alberic, whose brother Guido she subsequently married. Another of her sons, Alberic, so called from his supposed father, jealous of his brother John, cast him and his mother Marozia into prison. After a time Alberic's son was elected pope, A. D. 956; he assumed the title of John XII., the amorous Marozia thus having given a son and a grandson to the papacy. John was only nineteen years old when he thus became head of Christendom. His reign was characterized by the most shocking immoralities, so that the Emperor Otho I. was compelled by the German clergy to interfere. A synod was summoned for his trial in the Church of St. Peter, before which it appeared that John had received bribes for the consecration of bishops, that he had ordained one who was but ten years old, and had performed that ceremony over another in a stable; he was charged with incest with one of his father's concubines, and with so many adulteries that the Lateran Palace had become a brothel; he put out the eyes of one ecclesiastic and castrated another, both dying in consequence of their injuries; he was given to drunkenness, gambling, and the invocation of Jupiter and Venus. When cited to appear before the council, he sent word that 'he had gone out hunting;' and to the fathers who remonstrated with him, he threateningly remarked 'that Judas, as well as the other disciples, received from his master the power of binding and loosing, but that as soon as he proved traitor to the common cause, the only power he retained was that of binding his own neck.' Hereupon he was deposed, and Leo VIII. elected in his stead, A. D. 963; but subsequently getting the upper hand, he seized his antagonists, cut off the hand of one, the nose, finger, tongue of others. His life was eventually brought to an end by the vengeance of a man whose wife he had seduced.

    [p.88 - p.89]

    "After such details it is almost needless to allude to the annals of succeeding popes; to relate that John XIII. was strangled in prison: that Boniface VII imprisoned Benedict VII., and killed him by starvation: that John XIV. was secretly put to death in the dungeons of the castle of St. Angelo; that the corpse of Boniface was dragged by the populace through the streets. The sentiment of reverence for the sovereign pontiff, nay, even of respect, had become extinct in Rome; throughout Europe, the clergy were so shocked at the state of things that, in their indignation, they began to look with approbation on the intention of the Emperor Otho to take from the Italians their privilege of appointing the successor of St. Peter, and confine it to his own family. But his kinsman, Gregory V., whom he placed on the pontificial throne, was very soon compelled by the Romans to fly; his excommunications and religious thunders were turned into derision by them; they were too well acquainted with the true nature of these terrors; they were living behind the scenes. A terrible punishment awaited the Anti-pope John XVI. Otho returned into Italy, seized him, put out his eyes, cut off his nose and tongue, and sent him through the streets mounted on an ass, with his face to the tail, and a wine-bladder on his head. It seemed impossible that things could become worse; yet Rome had still to see Benedict IX., A. D. 1033, a boy of less than twelve years, raised to the apostolic throne. Of this pontiff, one of his successors, Victor III., declared that his life was so shameful, so foul, so execrable, that he shuddered to describe it. He ruled like a captain of a banditti rather than a prelate. The people at last, unable to bear his adulteries, homicides and abominations any longer, rose against him. In despair of maintaining his position, he put up the papacy to auction. It was bought by a presbyter named John, who became Gregory V., A. D. 1045."

    [p.89]

    "More than a thousand years had elapsed since the birth of our Savior, and such was the condition of Rome. Well may the historian shut the annals of those times in disgust; well may the heart of the Christian sink within him at such a catalogue of hideous crimes; well may he ask, Were these the vicegerents of God upon earth -- those who had truly reached that goal beyond which the last effort of human wickedness cannot pass?" [u]

    [p.89 - p.90]

    Is it not difficult to reconcile one's mind to the thought that these men who ruled the Catholic Church for three centuries were the vicegerents of God on earth? Or that through them a divine authority and a divine mission has been transmitted to later and happier times? To do so one would be under the necessity of maintaining that no amount of immorality, however infamous, can possibly disqualify men from acting as God's representatives. And such a position would be contrary to all the evidence of scripture, as well as revolting to sound reason.




    Chapter  IV.  Notes.



    74 -- Ch. 4:

    Changes in the Form and Spirit of Church Government -- Corruption of the Popes.

    a Compare Luke x with Matt. x; also see Seventy’s Course in Theology, First Year Book.

    b Acts xiv: 23. Acts xx: 17, 28.

    c Philip i: 1. I Tim. iii. This also is the view of Clement of Rome who, in writing to the Corinthians in the third century, says of the apostles: “So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their first fruits when they had proved them by the spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe. And this they did do in no new fashion; for indeed it had been written concerning bishops and deacons from very ancient times; for thus saith the scriptures in a certain place: ‘I will appoint their bishops in righteousness and their deacons in faith.’”

    d Eph. iv.

    e I. Cor. xii.

    f Eph. iv.

    g Eph. iv.

    h Ibid.

    i In this connection it may be observed that the vacancy in the quorum of the Twelve, occasioned by the apostasy of Judas, was filled (Acts i: 24-26). Paul, too, though not in the original Twelve was an Apostle, and so subscribes himself in nearly all his letters. Clement of Alexandria, an elder and writer of the second century, calls Clement of Rome, the “Apostle Clement.” Though whether this is menat in a rather loose sense or because he had been ordained such by one of the apostles--for he was an associate of both Peter and Paul--does not appear. (Philip iv: 3.)

    j See epistle of Clement to the Corinthians.

    k Mosheim’s Eccl. Hist., Cent. iv, Bk. ii, Part ii, ch. ii. See also his remarks on the government of the church in Cent. iii and ii.

    l The bishops of Jerusalem, in the 5th century, also contended for and at last secured the title of Patriarch. (Mosheim’s Eccl. Inst., Cent. v, Part ii, ch. ii.)

    m Mosheim’s Eccl. Inst., Cent. iii, Part ii, ch. ii.

    n See pp. 20, 21.

    o Schlegel among them.

    p Mosheim’s Eccl. Inst., Cent. iv, Part ii, ch. ii.

    q Intellectual Development of Europe, Vol. i, p. 359. Draper remarks also that “the children arising from these associations do not appear to have occasioned any extraordinary scandal.”-- Ibid.

    r The above quotation is taken from the third and fourth books on “The Providence of God,” by Salvian.

    s Such are the representations of Caesar Baronius, a Catholic historian of the 16th century. He was a candidate for th papacy in 1605, and hence his devotion to the Catholic church cannot be doubted.

    t Milner’s Ch. Hist., vol. iii, Cent. x, ch. i.

    u Intellectual Development of Europe, Vol. i, pp. 378-382.



     

    [ 91 ]




    CHAPTER  V.


    Change In Public Worship -- in The Ordinances Of The Gospel.

    It yet remains to note some of those changes in the public worship of the church, and in the ordinances of the gospel, which contributed to the great apostasy.

    The simplicity of the Christian religion was made a reproach to the Church of Christ by the pagan priests. "The Christians have no temples, therefore they have no gods," was an argument sufficiently convincing to the heathens. It was but natural, perhaps, to seek to cast off this reproach: but the effort to do so led to the introduction of many ceremonies quite at variance with the gospel. The early Christian Saints were accustomed to meet on the first day of the week for public worship; the meetings, during the first century at least, being held, for the most part, in private houses. The ceremonies were of the simplest character. They consisted of reading the scriptures, the exhortation of the president of the assembly -- "neither eloquent nor long, but full of warmth and love," [a] -- the testimony of of such as felt moved upon by the Holy Ghost to bear testimony, exhort or prophesy; the singing of hymns; the administration of the sacrament and prayers.

    [p.91 - p.92]

    But all this was soon changed. The bishops and other public teachers in the third century, framed their discourses and exhortations according to the rules of Grecian eloquence; "and were better adapted," says a learned writer, [b] "to call forth the admiration of the rude multitude who love display, than to amend the heart. And that no folly and no senseless custom might be omitted in their public assemblies, the people were allowed to applaud their orators, as had been practiced in the forums and theatres; nay, they were instructed both to applaud and to clap the preachers." This was a wide departure from the spirit of meekness and humility enjoined by Messiah upon his ministers. And when to these customs was added the splendid vestments of the clergy, the magnificence of the temples, with all the pageantry of altars, surrounded with burning tapers, clouds of incense, beautiful images, the chanting of choirs, processions and other mummeries without number -- one sees but little left of that simple worship instituted by the Messiah and his apostles.

    [p.92]

    About the third century incense began to be used. The Christians of the first and second centuries abhorred the use of incense in public worship as being a part of the worship of idols. [c] It first became a custom to use it at funerals against offensive smells; then in public worship to disguise the bad air of crowded assemblies; then at the consecration of bishops and magistrates, and by these steps its use at last degenerated into a superstitious rite.

    In the fourth century matters became still worse. The public supplications by which the pagans were accustomed to appease their gods were borrowed from them, and were celebrated in many places with great pomp. To the temples, to water consecrated in due form, and the images of holy men, the same efficacy was ascribed and the same privileges assigned as had been attributed to the pagan temples, statues and lustrations before the advent of Christ. [d]

    [p.92 - p.93]

    In the third century also arose the worship of martyrs. It is true the worship or adoration paid to them was relative, and a distinction was made between the worship of martyrs and the worship paid to God; but by degrees the worship of martyrs was made to conform with that which the pagans had in former times paid to their gods. [e] This was done out of indiscreet eagerness to allure the pagans to embrace Christianity. [f] "Then Gregory [surnamed Thaumaturgus on account of the numerous miracles he is said to have wrought -- born in Pontus, in the second decade of the third century] perceived that the ignorant and simple multitude persisted in their idolatry, on account of the sensuous pleasures and delights it afforded -- he allowed them in celebrating the memory of the holy martyrs, to indulge themselves and give a loose to pleasure (i.e., as the thing itself, and both what precedes and what follows, place beyond all controversy, he allowed them at the sepulchres of the martyrs on their feast days, to dance, to use sports, to indulge in conviviality, and do all things that the worshipers of idols were accustomed to do in their temples, on their festival days), hoping that in process of time they would spontaneously come over to a more becoming and correct manner of life." [g]

    [p.93 - p.94]

    While pagan rites and ceremonies were increasing in the church, the gifts and graces characteristic of apostolic times seemed to have gradually departed from it. Protestant writers insist that the age of miracles closed with the fourth or fifth century, and that after that the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost must not be expected. Catholic writers, on the other hand, insist that miracles have always continued in the church yet those spiritual manifestations which they describe after the fourth and fifth centuries savor of invention on the part of the priests and childish credulity on the part of the people; or else what is claimed to be miraculous falls far short of the power and dignity of those spiritual manifestations which the primitive church was wont to witness. The virtues and prodigies ascribed to the bones and other relics of the martyrs and saints are purile in comparison with the healings, by the anointing with oil and the laying on of hands, speaking in tongues, interpretations, prophecies, revelations, casting out devils in the name of Jesus Christ; to say nothing of the gifts of faith, wisdom, knowledge, discernment of spirits, etc., common in the church in the days of the apostles. [h] There is nothing in the scriptures or in reason that would lead one to believe that the miraculous gifts were to be discontinued. Still this plea is made by modern Christians-explaining the absence of these spiritual powers among them -- that the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were only intended to accompany the proclamation of the gospel during the first few centuries until the church was able to make its way without them, and then they were to be done away. It is sufficient to remark upon this that it is mere assumption and stands without warrant either of scripture or right reason, and proves that men had so far changed the religion of Jesus Christ that it became a form of godliness without the power thereof. [i]

    [p.95]

    It appears to have been the custom of the apostles in the case of members of the church grievously transgressing the moral law of the gospel, to require repentance and confession before the church; and in the event of a stubborn adherence to sin the offender was excommunicated, that is, he was excluded from the communion of the church and the fellowship of the saints. For the crimes of murder, idolatry and adultery some of the churches excommunicated forever those guilty of them; in other churches they were received back, but only after long and painful probation.

    [p.95 - p.96]

    The manner in which excommunication was performed in apostolic times is not clear, but there is every reason to believe the process was very simple. In the course of time, however, this simple form of excommunication was changed, by being burdened with many rites and ceremonies borrowed from pagan sources. [j] It was not enough that the fellowship of the saints be withdrawn from the offender and he left to the mercy of God, or the buffetings of Satan, according as he was worthy of the one or the other; but the church must load him down with anathemas too terrible to contemplate. The power of excommunication, too, eventually, passed from the body of the church into the hands of the bishops, and finally into those of the pope. At first excommunication meant the loss of the fellowship of the saints and such other punishment as God himself might see proper to inflict; the church leaving the Lord to be the minister of his own vengeance. But gradually it came to mean in some instances banishment from home and country, the confiscation of property, the loss not only of church fellowship, but loss of civil rights and the rights of Christian burial. In the case of a monarch, excommunication absolved his subjects from their allegiance; and in the case of a subject, it robbed him of the protection of his sovereign. No anathema was so terrible but it was pronounced against the excommunicated, until the sweet mercies of God were overshadowed by the black pall of man's inhumanity.

    [p.96]

    The outward ordinances of the gospel consisted of baptism, the laying on of hands for the imparting of the Holy Ghost, and the Lord's supper. The laying on of hands was also employed in ordaining men to the priesthood and in administering to the sick. In the latter case it was accompanied by anointing with oil.

    Baptism was administered by immersing the candidate in water. The only prerequisites were faith in Jesus Christ and repentance.

    [p.96 - p.97]

    As soon as the candidate professed these he was admitted into the church by baptism. [k] In a short time, however, the simplicity of this ordinance was corrupted and burdened with useless ceremonies. In the second century the newly baptized. converts, since by baptism they had. been born again, were taught to exhibit in their conduct the innocence of little infants. Milk and honey, the common food of infants, were administered to them, after their baptism, to remind them of their infancy in the church. Moreover, since by baptism they were released from being servants of the devil, and became God's free men, certain forms borrowed from the Roman ceremony of manumission of slaves was employed in baptism. As by baptism also they were supposed to be made God's soldiers, like newly enlisted soldiers in the Roman army, they were sworn to obey their commander. [l] A century later (the third) further ceremonies were added. It was supposed that some evil spirit was resident in all vicious persons and impelled them to sin.

    [p.97 - p.98]

    Therefore, before entering the sacred fount for baptism, an exorcist by a solemn, menacing formula declared them free from the bondage of Satan, and hailed them servants of Christ. [m] After baptism the new converts returned home "decorated with a crown and a white robe; the first being indicative of their victory over the world and their lusts, the latter of their acquired innocence." [n] We have already noted the fact that baptism was administered in the days of the apostles as soon as profession of faith and repentance was made, but in the second and third centuries baptism was only administered twice a year, and then only to such candidates as had gone through a long preparation and trial. [o] The times chosen for the administration of the ordinance were on the vigils of Easter and Whitsuntide, [p] and in the fourth century it had become the custom to accompany the ceremony with lighted wax candles, to put salt -- an emblem of purity and wisdom -- in the mouth of the baptized, and everywhere a double anointing was administered to the candidates, the one before the other after baptism. [q]

    [p.98]

    It must have been early in the third century that the form of baptism began to be changed. Up to this time it had been performed only by immersion of the whole body. But in the first half of the third century, Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, during a controversy respecting the re-baptism of those who in times of persecution had denied the faith, decided that those whose weak state of health did not permit them to be immersed, were sufficiently baptized by being sprinkled. [r] The first case of this kind of baptism is related by Eusebius. The person to whom it was so administered was Novatus, a desperate heretic, who created a schism in the church and became the founder of a sect. He was among the number of so-called Christians who put off baptism as long as he dared, in order to enjoy a life of sin and then through baptism, just before death, obtain forgiveness -- a custom very prevalent in those times. Novatus being attacked with an obstinate disease, and supposed to be at the point of death, was baptized by having water sprinkled upon him as he lay in bed; "if indeed," says Eusebius, "it be proper to say one like him did receive baptism." [s]

    [p.99]

    This innovation continued to spread until now the general rule among Christians is to baptize by sprinkling or pouring. For this change there is no warrant of revelation. It destroys the symbol there is in baptism as taught by Messiah and his apostles -- that of a burial and resurrection -- of a death and re-and re-birth -- a death unto sin, a birth unto righteousness. It is one of those innovations which changed an ordinance of the everlasting covenant. [t]

    About the same time that the form of administering baptism was changed it began to be misapplied, that is, it was administered to infants. Just when this custom came into vogue may not be determined, but clearly it has no warrant for its existence either in the doctrine or practice of the apostles or any New Testament writer. No truth is more plainly taught by the apostles than that baptism is for the remission of sins, and must be preceded by faith and repentance; and as infants are incapable of sin, and of exercising faith, or of repenting, evidently they are not fit subjects for baptism.

    [p.99 - p.100]

    Still it became the custom in the latter part of the second century or early in the third to baptize infants. In the year 253 A. D., a council of sixty bishops, in Africa -- at which Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, presided -- considered the question whether infants should be baptized within two or three days after birth, or whether baptism should be deferred until the eighth day, as was the custom of the Jews in respect to circumcision. The council decided that they should be baptized at once, within a day or two after birth. [u] It will be observed that the question was not as to whether infants should be baptized or not, but when they should be baptized, within a day or two after birth or not until they were eight days old.

    [p.100]

    The matter was treated in the council as if infant baptism was a custom of long standing. This proves, not that infant baptism is a correct doctrine, or that it was derived from the teachings of the apostles -- as some aver [v] -- but that in a century or so after the introduction of the gospel, men began to pervert it by changing and misapplying its ordinances. The false doctrine of infant baptism is now practiced by nearly all so-called Christian churches, both Catholic and Protestant.

    [p.100 - p.101]

    Much as the simple rite of baptism was burdened with useless ceremonies, changed in its form and misapplied, it was not more distorted than was the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. The nature of the sacrament -- usually called Eucharist -- and the purposes for for which it was instituted are so plain that he who runs may read. From Paul's description of the ordinance, it is clear that the broken bread was intended to be an emblem of the Messiah's broken body; the wine an emblem of his blood, shed for sinful man; and his disciples were to eat the one and drink the other in remembrance of him until. he should return; and by this ceremony show forth the Lord's death. [w] It was designed as a memorial of Messiah's great atonement for mankind, a token and witness unto the Father that the Son was always remembered. It was to be a sign that those partaking of it were willing to take upon them the name of Christ, to remember him always and keep his commandments. In consideration of these things being observed, the saints were always to have the Spirit of the Lord to be with them.

    [p.101 - p.102]

    In this spirit and without great ceremony the sacrament was administered for some time. But in the third century there were longer prayers and more ceremony connected with the administration of the sacrament than in the century preceding. Disputations arose as to the proper time of administering it. Some considered the morning, others the afternoon, and some the evening the most suitable time. All were not agreed either as to how often the ordinance should be celebrated. Gold and silver vessels were used, and neither those doing penance, nor those unbaptized, though believers, were permitted to be present at the celebration of the ordinance; "which practice, it is well known, was derived from the pagan mysteries." [x] Very much of mystery began to be associated with it even at an early date. The bread and the wine through the prayer of consecration were considered to undergo a mystic change, by which they were converted into and became the very body and the very blood of Jesus Christ: so that they were no longer regarded as emblems of Messiah's body and blood, but the body and blood itself. [y] This is the doctrine of transubstantiation. This dogma established, it was but a short step to the "elevation of the host;" that is, the elevation of the bread and wine before it was distributed, so that it might be viewed and worshiped by the people. This was called the adoration of the symbols. It was idolatry -- the worship of the bread and wine falsely taught to be the Lord Jesus. [z]

    [p.103]

    Hence came the Mass, or the idea of a sacrifice being connected with the celebration of the Eucharist. It was held that as Jesus was truly present in the bread and wine he could be offered up as an oblation to his eternal Father. The death of the victim was not supposed to occur in reality, but mystically, in such a way, however, as to constitute a true sacrifice, commemorative of that of the cross and not different from it in essence. The same Victim was present, and offered up by Christ through his minister the priest. The sacrifice at the cross was offered with real suffering, true shedding of blood, and real death of the Victim; in the mass it was taught there was a mystical suffering, a mystical shedding of blood and a mystical death of the same Victim.

    Into such absurdities was the simple sacrament of the Lord's Supper distorted! When attended with all the pomp and ceremony of splendid altars, lighted tapers, processions, elevations and chantings; offered up by the priests and bishops clad in splendid vestments and in the midst of clouds of incense, accompanied by mystic movements and genuflections of bishops and priests, the church could congratulate itself on having removed the reproach at the first fastened upon the Christians for not having altars and a sacrifice. The mass took away the reproach; and the new converts to Christianity were accustomed to see many of the same rites and ceremonies employed in this mystical sacrifice of the Son of God as they had seen employed in offering up sacrifices to the pagan deities.

    [p.103 - p.104]

    In time the idea became prevalent that the body and blood of Messiah were equally and entirely present under each "species" -- that is, equally and entirely present in the bread and in the wine; and was equally and entirely given to the faithful which ever they received. This idea, of course, rendered it unnecessary to partake of both bread and wine -- hence the practice of communion in one kind. That is, the sacrament was administered by giving bread alone to the communicant. To remark that this was changing the ordinance of the sacrament as instituted by Messiah -- suppressing half of it in fact -- can scarcely be necessary, since it is so well known that he administered both bread and wine when instituting the sacred ordinance. [a]

    [p.104 - p.105]

    Thus, through changing the ordinances of the gospel; by misapplying them in some cases, and adding pagan rites to them in others; by dragging into the service of the church the ceremonies employed in heathen temples in the worship of pagan gods; by departing from the moral law of the gospel, until the pages of Christian church history are well nigh as dark in immorality, as cruel and bloody as those that recount the wickedness of pagan Rome;b by changing the form and departing from the spirit of government in the church as fixed by Jesus, coupled with the corrupting influence of luxury which came with repose and wealth, together with the destruction visited upon the noblest and best of the servants and saints of God by the pagan persecutions which continued through three centuries -- all this, I say, contributed to bring to pass the destruction of the Church of Christ on earth.





    Chapter  V.  Notes.


    91 -- Ch. 5:

    Change in Public Worship -- In the Ordinances of the Gospel.

    a Justin Martyr, First Apology to the Emperor Antoninus Pius.

    b Mosheim.

    c Tertullian’s Apology, ch. xiii.

    d Mosheim’s Eccl. Hist., vol. i, bk. ii, ch. iv.

    e Historie de Manicheism, tom ii, p. 642.

    f Eccl. Hist. (Mosheim), vol. i, bk. ii, part ii.

    g Nyssen’s Life of Gregory Thaumaturgus.

    h I Cor. xii: 8-10.

    i It does not appear that these extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit (speaking of I Cor. xii) were common in the church for more than two or three centuries. We seldom hear of them after that fatal period when the Emperor Constantine called himself a Christian; and from a vain imagination of promoting the Christian cause thereby heaped riches and power and honor upon Christians in general, but in particular upon the Christian clergy. From this time they [the spiritual gifts] almost totally ceased; very few instances of the kind were found. The cause of this was not (as has been supposed) because there was no more occasion for them, because all the world was become Christians. This is a miserable mistake, not a twentieth part of it was then nominally Christians. The real cause of it was the love of many, almost all Christians, so-called, was waxed cold. The Christians had no more of the spirit of Christ than the other heathens. The Son of Man, when he came to examine his church, could hardly find faith upon earth. This was the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost were no longer to be found in the Christian Church-- because the Christians were turned heathens again and only had a dead form left.”--John Wesley (Wesley’s Works, vol. vii, Sermon 89, pages 26, 27).

    j “That it was proper for the Christian bishops to increase restraints upon the licentiousness of transgressors will be readily granted by all who consider the circumstances of those times. But rather it was for the advantage of Christianity to borrow rules for this salutary ordinance from the enemies of truth, and thus to consecrate, as it were, a part of pagan superstition, many persons very justly call in question.”--Eccl. History (Mosheim), book i, cent. ii, part ii, ch. iii.

    k Acts ii: 41. Acts viii: 12, 35-40.

    l Mosheim, vol. i, book i, part ii, ch. iv.

    m That exorcism was not annexed to baptism till some time in the third century, and after the admission of the Platonic philosophy into the church, may almost be demonstrated. The ceremonies used at baptism in the second century are described by Justin Martyr in his second apology, and by Tertullian in his book “de Corono Militis.” But neither makes mention of exorcism. This is a cogent argument to prove that it was admitted by Christians after the times of these fathers, and of course in the third century. Egypt perhaps first received it.--Murdock’s Mosheim, vol. i, p. 190. (Note.)

    n Mosheim, vol. i, book i, part ii, ch. iv.

    o According to Schlegel, the so-called apostolic constitution (b. viii. ch. xxxii) enjoined a three years’ course of preparation; yet with allowance of some exceptions.

    p That is, in the evening preceding the day on which Messiah is supposed to have arisen from the dead, and the evening preceding the seventh Sunday after Easter, the anniversary of Pentecost, when the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Apostles in a remarkable manner. (Acts ii.)

    q Mosheim, vol. i, book ii, part ii, ch. iv.

    r Cyprian’s Epistles, letter 76.

    s Eusebius Eccl. Hist., b. vi, ch. 43.

    t In writing to the saints of Rome, Paul says: “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likness of his resurrection” (Rom. vi: 3-5). In writing to the saints of Colosse, the same apostle reminds them that they had been “Buried with him [Christ] in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead” (Col. ii: 12). In these passages the terms “buried” and “planted” are in plain allusion to the manner in which the saints had received the ordinance of baptism, which could not have been by sprinkling or pouring, as there is no burial or planting in the likeness of Christ’s death, or being raised in the likeness of his resurrection in that; but in immersion there is.--“The Gospel” (Roberts), page 185.

    u Milner’s Church Hist., vol. i, pp. 429, 430.

    v Such is the opinion of Milner--Church Hist., vol. i, p. 430.

    w “The Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner he took the cup, when he had supped, saying: This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” (I. Cor. xi: 23-26.)

    x Mosheim’s Eccl. Hist., bk. i, cent. iii, part ii, ch. iv.

    y Protestants combating the Catholic idea of the real presence of the flesh and blood in the Eucharist--transubstantiation--have endeavored to prove that this doctrine was not of earlier origin than the eighth century. In this, however, the evidence is against them. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, writing early in the second century, says of certain supposed heretics: “They do not admit of Eucharist and oblations, because they do not believe the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, who suffered for our sins.” (Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrneans.) So Justin Martyr, also writing in the first half of the second century: “We do not receive them (the bread and wine) as ordinary food or ordinary drink; but as by the word of God Jesus Christ our Savior was made flesh, and took upon him both flesh and blood for our salvation, so also the food which was blessed by the prayer of the word which proceeded from him, and from which our flesh and blood, by transmutation, receive nourishment, is, we are taught, both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. (Justin’s Apology to Emperor Antoninus.) After Justin’s time the testimony of the fathers is abundant. There can be no doubt as to the antiquity of the idea of the real presence of the body and blood of Jesus in the Eucharist; but the proves--as we said of infant baptism--not that the doctrine is true, but that soon after the apostles had passed away, the simplicity of the gospel was corrupted or else entirely departed from.

    z As evidence of the superstition which was connected with the Eucharist, note the following: “If any one through negligence, shall destroy the Eucharist, i.e., the sacrifice; let him do penance one year. * * * If he lets it fall on the ground, carelessly, he must sing fifty Psalms. Whoever neglects to take care of the sacrifice, so that worms get into it, or it lose its color, or taste, must do penance thirty or twenty days; and the sacrifice must be burned in the fire. Whoever turns up the cup at the close of the solemnity of the mass must do penance forty days. If a drop from the cup should fall on the altar, the minister must suck up the drop and do penance three days; and the linen cloth which the drop touched must be washed three times, over the cup, and the water in which it is washed be cast into the fire.”--Decisions of Pope Gregory III.--Harduin’s Concilia.

    aa Luke xxii. Matt. xxvi.

    bb The wickedness of the Christian world in the dark ages and during the progress of the “Reformation” was such that the author of the “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,” in closing his famous sixteenth chapter which deals with the persecution of the Christians during the first three centuries of our era, can say, and his arraignment cannot be successfully contradicted: “We conclude this chapter by a melancholy truth which obtrudes itself on the reluctant mind; that even admitting without hesitation or inquiry, all that history has recorded, or devotion has feigned, on the subject of martyrdom, it must still be acknowledged, that the Christians, in course of their intestine dissensions, have inflicted far greater severities on each other, than they had experienced from the zeal of infidels. During the ages of ignorance which followed the subversion of the Roman Empire in the west, the bishops of the imperial city extended their dominion over the laity as well as the clergy of the Latin church. The fabric of superstition which they had erected, and which might long have defied the feeble efforts of reason, was at length assaulted by a crowd of daring fanatics, who from the twelfth to the sixteenth century assumed the popular character of reformers. The church of Rome defended by violence the empire which she had acquired by fraud; a system of peace and benevolence was soon disgraced by proscriptions, war, massacres and the institution of the holy office (the Inquisition). And as the reformers were animated by the love of civil as well as of religious freedom, the Catholic princes connected their own interest with that of the clergy, and enforced by fire and the sword the terrors of spiritual censurers. In the Netherlands alone more than one hundred thousand of the subjects of Charles V. are said to have suffered by the hand of the executioner; and this extraordinary number is attested by Grotius (See Grotius Annal. de Rebus Belgiers). * * * * If we are obliged to submit our belief to the authority of Grotius, it must be allowed, that the number of Protestants who were executed in a single province and a single reign, far exceed that of the primitive martyrs in the space of three centuries, and of the Roman Empire.”--“Decline and Fall,” vol. i, ch. xvi.



     

    [ 106 ]




    CHAPTER  VI.


    Departure Of "Christendom" From The True Doctrine Of Deity.

    In nothing perhaps was there a wider departure from the real truth of Christianity than in the doctrine concerning God defined by a general council of the Church held within the life time of Constantine, and which council, in fact, he assembled upon his own authority. This was the celebrated Council of Nicea in Bithynia, Asia Minor, held in 325 A. D. The main purpose for which this first general council of the church was assembled was to settle a dispute between one Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria, and his bishop, Alexander, of the same city, respecting the doctrine of the Godhead. The dispute proved to be far-reaching in its effects, and for three hundred years the rivalry of the contending factions disturbed the peace of Christendom. We shall have clearer conceptions of the subject, however, and be better able to judge of the extent to which there was a departure from the true doctrine respecting the Godhead, by the definitions formulated and enforced upon the church by the council of Nicea, if we first consider the doctrine of the Godhead as found in the Testament.

    The Christian Doctrine of God.

    The existence of God both Jesus and the apostles accepted as a fact. In all the teachings of the former he nowhere seeks to prove God's existence. He assumes that, and proceeds from that basis with his doctrine. He declares the fact that God was his Father, and frequently calls himself the Son of God. [a] After his resurrection and departure into heaven, the apostle taught that he, the Son of God, was with God the Father in the beginning; that he, as well as the Father, was God; that under the direction of the Father he was the Creator of worlds; that without him was not anything made that was made. [b] That in Him dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; [c] and that he was the express image of the Father's person. [d] Jesus himself taught that he and the Father were one; [e] that whosoever had seen him had seen the Father also; [f] that it was part of his mission to reveal God, the Father, through his own personality; for as was the Son, so too was the Father. [g] Hence Jesus was God manifested in flesh -- a revelation of God to the world. [h] That is, a revelation not only of the being of God but, of the kind of being God is.

    [p.107]

    Jesus also taught (and in doing so showed in what the "oneness" of himself and his Father consisted) that the disciples might be one with him, and also one with each other, as he and the Father were one. [i] Not one in person -- not all merged into one individual, and all distinctions of personality lost; but one in mind, in knowledge, in love, in will -- one by reason of the indwelling in all of the one spirit, even as the mind and will of God the Father was also in Jesus Christ. [j]

    [p.107 - p.108]

    The Holy Ghost, too, was upheld by the Christian religion to he God. [k] Jesus ascribed to him a distinct personality; as proceeding from the Father; as sent forth in the name of the Son, as feeling love; experiencing grief; as forbidding; as abiding; as teaching; as bearing witness; as appointing to work; and as interceding for men. All of which clearly establishes for him a personality.

    [p.108]

    The distinct personality of these three individual Gods (united however into one Godhead, or Divine Council), was made apparent at the baptism of Jesus; for as he, God the Son, came up out of the water from his baptism at the hands of John, a manifestation of the presence of the Holy Ghost was given in the sign of the dove which rested upon Jesus, while out of the glory of heaven the voice of God the Father was heard saying, "This," referring to Jesus, "is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." The distinctness of the personality of each member of the Godhead is also shown by the commandment to baptize those who believe the Gospel equally in the name of each person of the Holy Trinity. That is, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [l] And again, also, in the Apsotolic benediction, viz. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and communion of the 'Holy Ghost, be with you all." [m]

    These three personages constitute the Christian Godhead, the Holy Trinity. In early Christian theology they were regarded as the Supreme Governing and Creating power in heaven and in earth. Of which Trinity the Father was worshiped in the name of the Son, while the Holy Ghost bore record of both the Father and the Son. And though the Holy Trinity was made up of three distinct persons, yet did they constitute but one Godhead, or Supreme Governing Power.

    [p.108 - p.109]

    This outline of the doctrine of God derived from the New Testament represents him as anthropomorphic; that is, like man in form or, rather, it re-affirms the old doctrine found in the book of Genesis, viz., that man is created in the image of God, and after his likeness. The outline of New Testament doctrine of God also ascribes to him what are called human attributes and feelings; but as in the foregoing we first say that God is represented as being in human form, and then to get the exact truth say: "Or, rather, man was created in the image and likeness of God," so in this latter case, when we have said that the doctrine of the New Testament ascribes human attributes and feelings to God, to get the exact truth we should say: "Or, rather, man possesses the attributes of God -- " the attributes of knowing, willing, judging, loving, etc. -- though it should be stated, of course, that man does not possess these attributes in their perfection as God does. The same may also be said of the physical perfections. While man has been created in the image and likeness of God, yet our bodies in their present state of imperfection -- sometimes stunted in growth, diseased, subject to sickness, wasting, decay, and death -- cannot be said to be like God's glorious, perfect physical body, yet we have the Divine word that our bodies shall be like his:

    [p.109]

    "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." [n]

    [p.109 - p.110]

    So also the attributes of the spirit of man -- the attributes of the mind -- now imperfect, impure, unholy, and limited in the range of vision and apprehension of things, owing largely to the conditions in which man finds himself placed in this earth-life (and all for a wise purpose in God's economy); yet the time will come that it will be with the spirit as with the body; for God shall change our vile spirit that it may be fashioned like unto his own glorious spirit, "according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." That whereas now we see only as through a glass, darkly, then we shall see as we are seen; that whereas now we know but in part, then we shall know even as we are known. [o]

    [p.110]

    The foregoing doctrine of God, taught to the Christians in Apostolic times, awakened their pious reverence without exciting their curiosity. They dealt with no metaphysical abstractions, but were contented to accept the teachings of the Apostles in humble faith, and believed that Jesus Christ was the complete manifestation of Deity, and the express image of God his Father; and hence a revelation to them of God; while the Holy Ghost they accepted as God's witness and messenger to them.

    [p.110 - p.111]

    Paganization of the Christian Doctrine of God.

    But Christianity, as is well known, came in contact with other doctrines concerning Deity. It was almost immediately brought in touch with the mysticism of the Orient and also with the philosophy of the Greeks, who took so much delight in intellectual subtleties. In the Oriental philosophies, and in the Greek, there was conceived the idea of a trinity in Deity; an idea which possibly may have come down from the doctrines revealed to the patriarchs concerning the Godhead, but which had been corrupted and rendered unintelligible by the vain philosophizings of men. In some of the Oriental systems the trinity or Trimurti consisted of Brahma, the Creator: Vishnu, the Preserver; and Siva, the Destroyer. It will be seen however, that this trinity is not necessarily one of persons, or individuals, but may be one of attributes, qualities, or even a trinity of functions in one being; and in this way it is usually understood. [p]

    [p.111 - p.113]

    Plato's trinity is sometimes stated in the terms, "First Cause; Reason, or Logos; and Soul of the Universe;" but more commonly in these: "Goodness, Intellect, and Will." The nature of the Greek trinity has long been a matter of contention among the learned, and one indeed that is not settled to this day. Is there indicated in his system "a true and proper tri-personality, or merely a personification of three impersonalities," a trinity of attributes or functions? The answers to these questions are varied, and would require too much space for consideration here. Christians having been taught to accept the New Testament doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as constituting one Godhead. Christianity no sooner came in contact with the philosophies of the Greeks and Egyptians than there was an effort made to identify the Christian trinity with that of the Greek and other philosophies. The temptation to do this was very great. Christianity was a proscribed religion and its followers detested. Whenever it could be shown, therefore, that under new symbols the Church really taught the same doctrines that the old philosophers, which were held in esteem, it was regarded as a distinct gain to Christianity. The mere fact of Christianity teaching a trinity of any kind was a sufficient basis of comparison under the temptation offered, and hence in a short time we have the alleged followers of Christ involved in all the metaphysical disputations of the age. The chief difficulty in those speculations was to define the nature of the Logos, or Word of God; a title that is given to our Savior by the Apostle St. John, [q] be it remembered. Adopting absolute being as the postulate of their conception of God, absolute oneness, and therefore absolute singleness, their difficulties arose in trying to reconcile the existence of three persons in the Godhead to the postulate of unity. The disputations were carried on chiefly concerning Christ, the "Word" in his relationship to the Godhead; and the disputants concerned themselves with such questions as these: "Is Jesus the Word?" "If he be the Word, did he emanate from God in time or before time?" "If he emanated from God, is he co-eternal and of the same, that is identical, substance with him, or merely of a similar substance?" "Is he distinct from the Father, that is, separate from him, or is he not?" "Is he made or begotten?" "Can he beget in his turn?" "Has he paternity, or productive virtue without paternity?" Similar questions were asked as to the other Person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit. These questions were violently agitated at Alexandria by the bishop of that city, Alexander, and one of the presbyters, Arius, 318-321 A. D.; thence spread throughout Christendom, and culminated finally in the Council at Nicea, 325 A.D. Arius held the doctrine that the Logos or Word was a dependent or spontaneous production created out of nothing by the will of the Father, hence the Son of God, by whom all things were made, begotten before all worlds; but there had been a time when the Logos was not; and also he was of a substance, however similar it might be, different from the Father. This doctrine, in the minds of the opponents of Arius, detracted from the divine nature of Christ, denied him true Deity, in fact, and relegated him to the position of a creature, against which the piety of a large number of Christians rebelled. After six years of hot disputation and frequent appeals by the contestants to the Emperor, the council of Nicea was assembled and the mysteries of the Christian faith submitted to public debate, a portion of the time, at least, in the presence of the emperor, who, to some extent, seemed to exercise the functions of president over the assembly. The doctrine of Arius was condemned, and after "long deliberations, among struggles, and scrupulous examinations," the following creed was adopted:

    [p.113]

    "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, creator of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made in heaven and in earth, who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, was incarnate, was made man, suffered, rose again the third day, ascended into the heavens, and he will come to judge the living and the dead; and in the Holy Ghost. Those who say there was a time when he was not, and he was not before he was begotten, and he was made of nothing (he was created), or who say that he is of another hypostatis, or of another substance (than the Father), or that the Son of God is created, that he is mutable, or subject to change, the Catholic church anathematizes." [r]

    [p.113 - p.114]

    Arius himself was condemned as a heretic and banished into one of the remote provinces, Ilyricum, his friends and disciples branded by law, with the odious name of "Porphyrians," because it is supposed that Arius, like Porphyry, had sought to injure Christianity. His writings were condemned to the flames and a capital punishment was pronounced against those in whose possession they should be found. Three years later, however, through the influence of the women at the imperial court, Constantine softened in his demeanor towards Arius and his followers. The exiles were recalled and Arius himself was received at court and his faith approved by a synod of prelates and presbyters at Jerusalem; but on the day that he was to be publicly received in the cathedral church at Constantinople, by the order of the emperor, who, by the way, received the sacrament at the hands of Arians, he expired under circumstances which have led many to believe that other means than the prayers of the orthodox against him were the cause of his death. The leaders of the orthodox party, Athanasius of Alexandria, Eustathius, of Antioch, and Paul, of Constantinople, were now to feel the wrath of the first Christian emperor. They were deposed on various occasions and by the sentence of numerous councils, and banished into distant provinces. In fact, so far from the adoption of the Nicene creed ending the conflict which had arisen, it was more like the opening of that controversy which agitated Christendom for so long,' and resulted in so many shameful conflicts. Councils were arrayed against councils, and though they never could convince one another of error, they never failed, in the spirit of such Christian charity as was then extant, to close their decrees with curses. Votes were bartered for and purchased in those councils, and the facts justify the latent sarcasm in Gibbon's remark, that "the cause of truth and justice was promoted by the influence of gold." There were persecutions and counter-persecutions, as now one party and then the other prevailed; there were assassinations and bloody battles over this doctrine of Deity, the accounts of which fill, as they also disgrace, our Christian annals. The creed which was adopted at Nicea, however, became the settled doctrine of orthodox Christendom, and remains so to this day.

    [p.114 - p.115]

    It is difficult to determine which is really the worst, the creed itself or the explanations of it. At any rate, we do not clearly see the impiety of its doctrines until we listen to the explanations that have been made of it. Athanasius himself has left on record a creed explanatory of the one adopted at Nicea. True, among the learned, many doubt Athanasius being the author of the creed which bears his name; but, however much doubt may be thrown upon that question, no one hesitates to accept it as the orthodox explanation of the doctrine of Deity, and, in fact, it is accepted as one of the important symbols of the Christian faith, and is as follows:

    [p.115]

    "We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreate, but one uncreate and one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty; and yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet there are not three Gods, but one God."

    [p.115 - p.116]

    As already stated, this creed of St. Athanasius is accepted as one of the symbols of the orthodox Christian faith. It is understood that these two creeds teach that God is incorporeal, that is to say, an immaterial being. The Catholic Church says: "There is but one God, the creator of heaven and earth, the supreme incorporeal, uncreated being who exists of himself and is infinite in all his attributes." [s] While the Church of England teaches in her articles of faith "that there is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, [t] or passions, of infinite power, wisdom and goodness." This view of God as an incorporeal, immaterial, bodiless, partless, passionless, being is now and has been from the days of the great apostasy from God and Christ, in the second and third centuries, the doctrine of Deity generally accepted by apostate Christendom. The simple doctrine of the Christian Godhead, set forth in the New Testament is corrupted by the meaningless jargon of these creeds, and their explanations; and the learned who profess a belief of them are wandering in the darkness of the mysticisms of the old pagan philosophies. No wonder that Athanasius himself, whom Gibbon with a quiet sarcasm calls the most sagacious of the Christian theologians, candidly confessed that whenever he forced his understanding to meditate on the divinity of the Logos (and which, of course, involved the whole doctrine of the Godhead), his "toilsome and unavailing efforts recoiled on themselves; that the more he thought, the less he comprehended; and the more he wrote, the less capable was he of expressing his thoughts!" It is a fine passage with which Gibbon closes his reflections upon this subject, and hence I shall give it place here:

    [p.116]

    In every step of the inquiry, we are compelled to feel and acknowledge the immeasurable disproportion between the size of the object and the capacity of the human mind. We may try to abstract the notions of time, space, and of matter, which so closely adhere to all the perceptions of our experimental knowledge; but as soon as we presume to reason of infinite substance, or spiritual generation; as often as we deduce any positive conclusions from a negative idea, we are involved in darkness, perplexity, and inevitable contradiction. [u]

    [p.117]

    Recurrence to the New Testament doctrine of God, and a comparison of it with the doctrine of Deity set forth in the Nicean and Athanasian creeds, will exhibit the wide departure -- the absolute apostasy -- that has taken place in respect of this most fundamental of all doctrines of religion -- the doctrine of God. Truly "Christians" have denied the Lord that bought them,v and turned literally to fables. They have enthroned a conception of a negative idea of "being," which can stand in no possible relationship to man, nor man to it; and to this they ascribe divine attributes and give it title, knee and adoration which belong to God alone.





    Chapter  VI.  Notes.


    106 -- Ch. 6:

    Departure Of "Christendom" From The True Doctrine Of Deity.

    a John x; Matt. xxvii; Mark xiv: 61, 62.

    b For all of which see John i: 1-4; Heb. i: 1-3.

    c Col. i: 15-19, and ii: 9.

    d Heb. i: 2, 3.

    e John x: 30, xvii: 11-22.

    f John xiv: 9.

    g John xiv: 1-9; John i: 18.

    h I Tim. iii: 16.

    i John xiv: 10, 11, 19, 20; also John xvii.

    j Eph. iii: 14-19.

    k Acts v: 1-14. To lie to the Holy Ghost is to lie to God, because the Holy Ghost is God.

    l Matt. xxviii: 19, 20.

    m II Cor. xiii: 14.

    n Phil. iii: 20, 21.

    o I Cor. xiv.

    p See Shedd’s History of Christian Doctrine, vol. i, p. 342, et seq. and note.

    q John i: 1-5; 14.

    r Hist. Christian Councils (Hefele), p. 294.

    s Catholic belief (Bruno), p. 1.

    t i.e, without materiality.

    u Decline and Fall, ch. xxi.



     

    [ 118 ]




    CHAPTER  VII.


    The Testimony Of Prophecy To The Apostasy.

    "What is prophecy but history reversed?" Nothing. Prophecy is a record of things before they transpire. History is a record of them after they have occurred; and of the two prophecy is often more to be trusted for its accuracy than history: for the reason that it has for its source the unerring inspiration of God; while history -- except in the case of inspired historians -- is colored by the favor or prejudice of the writer, depends for its exactness upon the point of view from which he looks upon the events; and is likely to be marred in a thousand ways by the influences surrounding him -- party considerations, national interest or prejudice; supposed influence upon present conditions and future prospects -- all these things may interfere with history; but prophecy is free from such influences. Historians are self-constituted, or appointed by men; but prophets are chosen of God. Selected by divine wisdom, and illuminated by that spirit which shows things that are to come, [a] prophets have revealed to them so much of the future as God Would have men to know, and the inspired writers record it for the enlightenment or warning of mankind, without the coloring or distortion so liable to mar the work of the historian.

    [p.119]

    Thus Moses recorded what the history of Israel would be on condition of their obedience to God; and what it would be if they were disobedient. Israel was disobedient, and historians have exhausted their art in attempts to tell of their disobedience and suffering; but neither in vividness nor accuracy do the histories compare with the prophecy. [b] So with the prophecy of Daniel in respect to the rise and succession of the great political powers that should dominate the earth, and the final triumph of the Kingdom of God. [c] So with well nigh all of the prophecies.

    With these observations upon the trustworthiness of prophecy it is my purpose to show that. prophecy no less than the facts of history, sustains the conclusion arrived at in the foregoing chapters on the apostasy from the Christian religion, and the destruction of the Christian Church.

    Paul warned the church at Ephesus that after his departing grievous wolves would enter in among them, not sparing the flock; and "also of your own selves," said he, "shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them." [d] "Preach the word," said the same apostle in writing to Timothy, "be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, with all long suffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap teachers to themselves having itching ears; and they shall turn their ears from the truth and be turned to fables." [e] The prophet Peter also warned the church of the rise of false teachers, who privily would bring in damnable heresies; deny the Lord who bought them; bring upon themselves swift destruction, speak evil of the way of truth and through covetousness, with feigned words would make merchandise of the saints. [f]

    [p.119 - p.120]

    Referring again to Paul's prophecies we have him foretelling the rise of anti-Christ before the glorious coming of the Messiah to judgment. He plainly foresaw the "falling away" -- the long night of spiritual darkness and apostasy that would brood over the world before the coming of the Son of God, in the glory of his Father, to reward the righteous, to condemn the wicked. He said of this apostasy:

    [p.120]

    "We beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him; that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit nor by word, nor letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. [g] Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day shall not come except there be a falling away first and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Remember ye not that when I was yet with you I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way, and then shall that wicked be revealed whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming; even him whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." [h]

    [p.120 - p.121]

    The reader with the facts of history before him, cannot see more clearly the "falling away," the rise of that corrupt ecclesiastical power which opposed and exalted itself above all that was called God; lorded it over God's heritage; shrouded itself in mystery; placed its foot on the neck of kings; forbade marriage; transgressed the laws; changed the ordinances, and broke the everlasting covenant -- I say the reader with the facts of history before him cannot see these things more clearly than Paul foresaw and predicted them in this remarkable prophecy.

    [p.121]

    But not to the prophets of the New Testament alone was the great apostasy revealed. Isaiah as well as Paul and with equal clearness foresaw and predicted it. In a prophecy, which beyond all question relates to conditions that can only exist in the last days, he writes:

    "Behold, the Lord maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof. And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him. The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the Lord has spoken this word. The earth mourneth, and fadeth away; the world languisheth, and fadeth away; the haughty people of the earth do languish. The earth is also defiled under the inhabitants thereof." Why? "Because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore hath a curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men are left." [i]

    [p.121 - p.122]

    Of this prophecy it is to be observed that the defilement of the earth, and the wretched condition of the inhabitants thereof described in the opening sentences, and in the remaining verses of the chapter, not quoted, are the result of transgressing the law, changing the ordinance and breaking the "everlasting covenant." The prophet cannot have reference to transgressing the law, and changing the ordinance of the Mosaic covenant, for the Mosaic Law was not an everlasting covenant, but merely a temporary law "added to the Gospel because of transgression." It was a law of carnal commandments to act as a school master to bring the people to Christ; and when Christ came was laid aside, having fulfilled its purpose. [j] It was not, therefore, an everlasting covenant, and hence was not the thing the prophet Isaiah had in mind in his great prophecy. On the other hand, Paul refers to the blood of Christ as "the blood of the everlasting covenant," [k] hence it is the covenant sealed by that blood to which Isaiah must have had reference -- the Gospel; and the transgression of its laws, the changing of its ordinances, the breaking of that covenant was to result in making desolate the earth and the inhabitants thereof.

    [p.122 - p.123]

    As additional evidence that it was not the transgression of the Mosaic Law, nor transgression against any former dispensation of the Gospel, that the prophecy refers to, the reader's attention is called to the fact that the disasters of the great apostasy find their culmination in the burning of the inhabitants of the earth, from which but few men shall be left. That is a calamity that has not yet overtaken men. It is a judgment that will fall upon them in the future. Yet a few shall escape. As the prophet in another place in this remarkable chapter says -- referring to the general desolation of the earth and its inhabitants -- "When thus it shall be in the midst of the land among the people, there shall be as the shaking of an olive tree, and as the gleaning of grapes when the vintage is done. They shall lift up their voices, they shall sing for the majesty of the Lord, they shall cry aloud from the sea." [l] From which is is to be understood that there will be a few even in those disastrous times, whose righteousness will call down the favor of God. And though the earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and the transgressions thereof shall be heavy upon it; though the Lord shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth; though as prisoners they shall be gathered into the pit, and will not be visited for many days; though the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, yet shall the Lord of Hosts reign in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously. [m]

    [p.123]

    My direct argument for the apostasy is completed. The facts of history have testified to the destruction of the church, to the apostasy from the Christian religion; and prophecy with a voice no less certain has testified to the same things.





    Chapter  VII.  Notes.


    118 -- Ch. 7:

    The Testimony of Prophecy to the Apostasy.

    a St. John xvi: 13.

    b Deut. xxviii.

    c Daniel ii.

    d Acts xx: 27-30.

    e II Tim. iv: 1-4.

    f II Peter ii: 1-3.

    g That is, he would not have them believe that the day of Messiah’s glorious coming was at hand.

    h II Thess. 1-12.

    i Isaiah xxiv.

    j Gal. iii.

    k Heb. xiii: 20.

    l Isa. xxiv: 13, 14.

    m Isaiah xxiv: 20-23.



     

    [ 124 ]




    CHAPTER  VIII.


    Catholic Arguments -- Protestant Admissions.

    But what of the Catholic argument that there has been an unbroken line of authority from Peter to Leo XIII.; and running parallel with that line of authority, a continuation of all that is essential to the Gospel, both in doctrine and ordinances? My reply is: Of what avail is argument in the face of facts which contradict it? The facts of both history and prophecy are against the contention that there has been such a line of divine authority, accompanied by a continuation of all the essentials of the Gospel; and therefore, the argument is worthless. But that we may see how weak the argument is in itself, let us examine it.

    "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost * * * And lo I am with you to the end of the world." [a] On this Catholic writers remark: "Now the event has proved * * * that the apostles themselves were only to live the ordinary term of man's life; therefore the commission of preaching and ministering together with the promise of the divine assistance, regards the successors of the apostles, no less than the apostles themselves. This proves that there must have been an uninterrupted series of such successors of the apostles, in every age since their time; that is to say, successors to their doctrines, to their jurisdiction, to their orders, and to their mission." [b]

    Cardinal Gibbons, commenting on the same passage, says:

    [p.124 - p.125]

    "This sentence contains three important declarations: 1st, the presence of Christ with his Church, 'behold, I am with you;' 2nd, his constant presence without an interval of one day's absence, 'I am with you all days;' 3rd, his perpetual presence to the end of the world, and consequently the perpetual duration of the church, 'even to the consummation of the world.' Hence it follows that the true church must have existed from the beginning; it must have had not one day's interval of suspended animation, or separation from Christ, and must live to the end of time." [c]

    [p.125]

    Of the conclusion here arrived at, it is only necessary to say that it is founded upon an assumption. Look again at the passage upon which the argument is based, in connection with its context:

    "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying: All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations; * * * * and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." [d]

    It will be seen that the promise was to the eleven apostles, not to the church. To say that this promise "regards the successors of the apostles no less than the apostles themselves," is an assumption unwarranted by the text; and it is upon that assumption that the Rev. John Milner and other Catholic writers, base their conclusions that the word of Jesus is pledged to an uninterrupted continuation of his church in the earth.

    [p.125 - p.126]

    The argument of Cardinal Gibbons is still worse than that of Dr. Milner. He says the promise of Jesus to the apostles contains three important declarations, the first of which is: "The presence of Christ with his church." This is worse than assumption. The learned Cardinal has written "church," where he should have written "apostles;" and therefore the conclusion he reached, namely, the perpetual duration of the church, is based upon a misstatement; and as the premises upon which the argument is based are untrue, the conclusion is false.

    [p.126]

    The argument by Catholics is thought to be invulnerable, because the promise of Jesus to be with the apostles to the end of the world is impossible of fulfillment, unless it "regarded the successors of the apostles no less than the apostles themselves." But to be with their successors is not to be with the apostles. Hence the device arranged by Catholics for the fulfillment of this promise of the Lord, misses its purpose altogether. Moreover, there is no need of such device to explain how the promise of Jesus could be fulfilled. "In my Father's house," said he, addressing these same men, "are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you, * * * that where I am there ye may be also;" [e] And there they are with Jesus in the place he prepared for them, and they will continue to be with him even unto the end of the world.

    [p.126 - p.127]

    No less erroneous is the Catholic argument for the uninterrupted continuation of the church of Christ on earth, based on the passage in the sixteenth chapter of Matthew, when Jesus in the course of a conversation with Peter says to him: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. "By this promise," says a foot-note on this passage in the Douay Bible -- the version accepted by the Catholic Church, -- "we are fully assured that neither idolatry, heresy, nor any pernicious error whatever, shall at any time prevail over the church of Christ." "Our blessed Lord clearly intimates here," says Cardinal Gibbons, "that the church is destined to be assailed always but to be overcome never." [f] The argument of Catholics is, that if the great apostasy took place which, as we have seen, is clearly predicted in the scriptures, and, as I believe, confirmed by the facts already presented to the reader in this volume, then the express promise of Jesus Christ that the gates of hell should not prevail against his church has failed. If the prediction of our Savior about the preservation of his church from error be false, then Jesus Christ is not God, since God cannot lie. He is not even a prophet, since he predicted falsehood. Nay, he is an imposter, and all Christianity is a miserable failure, and a huge deception, since it rests on a false prophet." [g]

    [p.127 - p.128]

    This argument and its conclusion is based upon too narrow a conception of the Church of Christ. That church exists not only on earth, but in heaven; not only in time, but in eternity. It has not been prevailed against, because men on earth have departed from it; corrupted its doctrines, changed its ordinances, transgressed its laws. The Church of Christ in heaven, consisting of "an innumerable company of angels -- the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven" [h] -- the church there has been far beyond the reach of the powers of hell; and ultimately here on earth it shall be triumphant. To repeat an illustration I before used: Truth may lose a single battle, it may lose two or three, and yet be victorious in the war. So with the Church of Christ: many of those enrolled as its members may be stricken down by cruel persecution; those remaining may capitulate with the enemy, and by compromises betray the cause of Christ, and put him to an open shame. Repose and luxury, the reward of the above perfidy, may bring in such floods of wickedness that virtue can scarce be found among men, and no abiding place found on earth for the church of the Redeemer. That church, however, still exists in heaven, in all the glory of the general assembly of the firstborn; and from time to time dispensation after dispensation of the gospel will be sent from thence to the children of men, until a people shall be found who will remain true to all its doctrines, accept its ordinances, obey its precepts, preserve its institutions, and the Church of Christ everywhere become triumphant as well on earth as in heaven. The promise of the Lord Jesus will not fail -- the gates of hell will not finally prevail against his church.

    [p.128 - p.129]

    The reader's faith in the above view will doubtless be strengthened if I remind him that the apostasy contended for in the foregoing pages, is not the first time in the experience of men that the gospel has been taken from among them. It is written by Paul that, "the scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith preached before the gospel unto Abraham. A little further on the apostle asks: "Wherefore then serveth the law?" Referring to the law of Moses. That is to say, if the gospel was preached unto Abraham, wherefore serveth the law of Moses? His answer is, "It was added because of transgression till the seed should come, to whom the promise was made * * * Wherefore the law was our school master to bring us unto Christ that we might be justified by faith." [i] Having in the third chapter of his epistles to the Hebrews referred to the dealings of God with the children of Israel in the wilderness, and having in the opening verse of the fourth chapter warned the saints against similar sins to those committed by Israel, Paul says: "For unto us was the gospel preached as well unto them [ancient Israel], but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixeed with faith in them that heard it." The only conclusions to be drawn from these passages is this: In very ancient time the Gospel was introduced among men; but because of disinclination or inability to keep its laws and live in harmny with its precepts -- "because of transgression," it was taken from among them. God, however, not willing to leave his children utterly without light, gave unto them a less exalted law -- the law of carnal commandments. A law better suited to their condition, wherein were froms and ceremonies foreshadowing thingsto come, designed to act as a school to master to bring the people to Christ.

    [p.129 - p.130]

    Taking away the gospel from the earth, then, is not a new thing; not a thing peculiar to the first centuries of the Christian era. It had been done before when transgression led the people to depart from its ordinances and disregard its precepts. So, too, after the introduction of the gospel by the personal ministry of the Son of God, when men transgressed itws laws, and corrupted its teaching and ordinances by their vain and foolish fancies, or by their efforts to modify or make it acceptable to a pagan nation, because of transgression, it was taken from among the,. Not abruptly. Not in such a sense as that the Christians some night in the third century all laid down to sleep good, faithful saints and awoke next morning stripped of the Gospel and turned pagans. No; but as the elders and bishops who held divine authority were destroyed by persecution, or passed away by natural death, the people with each succedding generation growing worse and worse, and less and less worthy of the gospel -- false teachers without authority from God usurped power, corrupted the church until the false displaced the true, and anti-Christ sat in the temple of God.

    [p.130]

    Nothing remained but fragments fot he gospel; here a doctrine and there a principle, like single stones fallen and rolled away from the ruined wall; but no one able to tell where they belonged in the structure, and so many of the stones missing that tto reconstruct the wall with what remains is out of the question.

    The fragmentary accounts of the gospel, as recorded by some of the apostles, and their associates, is allt htat was left to the world. All! But this was mcuh. It has stood to the people since toe days of the great postasy as the law of carnal commandments did to Israel after the transgression which occasioned the gospel to be taken from them. Those fragments fo the truth, however disconnected, have been as the light of the moon and the stars to the night traveler; not the sunlight, indeed, which makes so clear the way, but the light which, however dim, is still better than absolute darkness; and will, I trust, yet lead many of our Father's children into the sunlight of Christ's restored gospel.

    It will nto be necessary to examine at lenght the Protestant argument, viz.: The gospel had been corrupted, and buried under the rubbish of idolatry for ages it is true, but the "Reformers" of the sixteenth century cleared away the rubbish and brought to light again the gospel, and resotred the Church of Christ in all its simplicity of organization, and efficacy of power. Of this one need only say that the gospel having been taken from the earth, and divine authority lost, the only way for their resotration is thorugh the re-opening of the heavens and giving a new dispensation of the gospel to men. As this answers the argument, it is only necessary to prove that Protestanst admit the apostasy.

    [p.131]

    Luther said of hilself: "At first I stood alone." Calvin in his epistle says: "the first Protestants were obliged to break off from the whole world." [j] The editor of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the Rev. H. H. Milman, a Protestant divine, wirtes in his preface to that work: "It is idle, it is disingenoues to deny or to dissemble the early depravations of Christianity, its gradual and rapid departure from its primitime simplicity, still more from its spirit of universal love."

    The reader is alreadt acquainted with the declaration of Wesley that the Christians had turned heathens again and only had a dead form of faith left." [k]

    In Smith's Dictionary of the Bible -- the work is endorsed by sixty-three learned divines and Bible scholars -- the following occurs: "We must not expect to see the Church of Christ existing in perfection on the earth. It is not to be found thus perfectm either in the collected fragments of Chrtendom, or still less in any one of those fragments." [l]

    Roger Williams refused to continue as pator over the oldestBaptist Church in America on the ground that there was no cregulary constituted church on earth, nor any person authorized to administer any church ordinance; "nor can there be until new apostles are sent by the great head of church for whose coming I am seeking." [m] Alexander Campbell, founder of the sect of the "Disciples," says: "The meaning of this institution (the kingdom of heaven) has been buried under the rubbish of human tradition for hundreds of years. It was lost in the dark ages and has never, until recently been disinterred." [n]

    [p.132]

    And lastly, that greatest of all Protestant sects, the Church of England in its homily on the Perils of Idolatry, says: "Laity and clergy, learned and unlearned, all ages and sects and degrees have been drowned in abominable idolatry, most detested by God and damnable to man, for eight hundred years and more." [o]

    Recently my attention was called by the Episcopal Bishop of Salt Lake City to a slight inaccuracy in the quotation from "Perils of Idolatry" here quoted, and inasmuch as I hold the Bishop in the very highest esteem, both on account of his learning, fairness, and high Christian character, and because it will give an added value to this quotation which has been so frequently used in Mormon literature, to have not only an exact quotation of the passage but also the interpretation put upon it by an authoritative representative of the great English Church, and also what may be said in reply thereto, I give the Bishop's letter in extenso and my own answer thereto.

    [p.132 - p.133]

    BISHOP'S HOUSE,

    444 FIRST SOUTH ST., SALT LAKE CITY,

    Feb. 19, 1910.

    Mr. Brigham H. Roberts,

    Templeton Building,

    Salt Lake City.

    [p.132 - p.133]

    My Dear Mr. Roberts -- Knowing your desire to be careful and accurate in any statement you may make. I am taking' the liberty of calling your attention to an error in the quotation printed by you on page 127 of the first volume of your "New Witnesses for God," from the Book of Homilies of the Church of England. and quoted doubtless from you by Dr. Talmage in his book "The Great Apostasy." I discovered the error in preparing a lecture which I hope to deliver in St. Paul's Church on March 11th upon the Church of England and "The Great Apostasy." The quotation is not on page 3, but occurs in the third part of the sermon "Perils of Idolatry," on page 216 of the American edition of 1855. The following is an exact quotation:

    [p.133]

    "And thus you see, how from having of images privately, it came to public setting of them up in churches and temples, although without harm at the first, as was then of some wise and learned men judged; and from simple having them there, it came at the last to worshiping of them; first, by the rude people, who specially (as the scripture teacheth) are in danger of superstition and idolatry, and afterwards by the bishops, the learned, and by the whole clergy. So that laity and clergy, learned and unlearned, all ages, sects, and degrees of men, women, and children of whole christendom (an horrible and most dreadful thing to think) have been at once drowned in abominable idolatry, of all other vices most detested of God, and most damnable to man, and that by the space of eight hundred years and more. [p] And to this end is come that beginning of setting up of images in churches, then judged harmless, in experience proved not only harmful, but exitious and pestilent, and to the destruction and subversion of all good religion universally."

    You will see, however, that the statement refers to one definite case of superstition and irreligion and does not involve the admission of the break in continuity which you and Dr. Talmage quote it to prove. That this is true seems to me to be proved by the preface to the Ordinal of the Prayer Book of 1549, published two years after the Homily, which reads as follows:

    [p.133 - p.134]

    "It is evident [q] unto all men, diligently readine holye scripture, and auncient aucthours, that fro the Apostles tyme, there hathe bene these orders of Ministers in Christes church, Bisshoppes, Priestes and Deacons, which Offices were evermore had in such reverent estimacion, that no ma by his own priuvate aucth-or/fie, might presume to execute any of them, except he were first called, tried, examined and knowen, to haue suche qualities, as were requisite for the same. And also by publique prayer, with imposicion of hands, approued, and admitted thereunto. And therefore to the intent these orders should bee continued, and reuerentlye used, and esteemed in this Church of England, it is requysite, that no man, (not beynge at thys presente Bishop, Priest, nor Deacon) shall execute anye of them, except he be called, tryed, examined, and admitted, accordynge to the forme here after folowinge."

    [p.134]

    And also from Canon 3 of the Canons of 1603 which is printed in the same volume with the Homilies:

    "III. the Church of England, a true and Apostolical Church. Whosoever shall hereafter affirm, That the Church of England, by law established under the king's majesty, is not a true and apostolical church, teaching and maintaining the doctrine of the apostles; let him be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored, but only by the archbishop, after his repentance, and public revocation of this his wicked error."

    I hope you will pardon the liberty I am taking in calling your attention to this matter but I know that you, like myself, desire to be scrupulously accurate in any statements we make and especially with reference to an important matter like this.

    Yours faithfully,

    (Signed) F. S. SPALDING.

    FEB. 28, 1910.

    Rt. Rev. F. S. Spalding,

    444 East First South St.,

    City.

    [p.134 - p.135]

    My Dear Bishop: -- I thank you for your very kind favor of the 19th inst. calling my attention to the quotation in my first volume of New Witnesses, page 127, from the Book of Homilies of the Church of England.

    [p.135]

    I have not yet seen Dr. Talmage's work on the "Apostasy" so cannot say what application he makes of the passage in question, or whether he makes a more extended quotation than I use or not. While between the passage as quoted in your favor of the 19th inst. and as given in my book "New Witnesses," there are some words omitted in the latter, yet I think no injustice is done the Church of England, since the universal idolatry proclaimed in her Homily is not made more emphatic by the abbreviated quotation than in the more extended one kindly given by you. In fact the abbreviated one is less forcible on the universality of the Idolatry than the more exact one given by you.

    [p.135 - p.136]

    I understand, however, that your complaint of my use of the passage is that I quote it in proof of universal apostasy of the Church, whereas from your viewpoint it can rightly go only to the question of idolatry in the church. Desiring, as you say, to be accurate and careful in any statement I may make in matters of this kind, I shall hereafter he careful to point out the distinction made by you in any future use I may make of the passage (and' a new edition of the first Vol. of New Witnesses is soon to be undertaken); but will you pardon me if I suggest that the distinction which appears so material to you, does not impress me as important. For if it is truthfully said of Christendom that -- quoting the passage as you give it in your letter -- "So that laity and clergy, learned and unlearned, all ages, sects, and degrees of men, women, and children of whole Christendom (an horrible and most dreadful thing to think) have been at once drowned in abominable idolatry, of all other vices more detested of God, and most damnable to man, and that by, the space of eight hundred years and more. And to this is come that beginning of setting up of images in churches, then judged harmless, in experience proved not only harmful, but exitious and pestilent and to the destruction and subversion of all good religion universally." After such a condition as to idolatry, has prevailed universally and for "eight hundred years or more," I am doubtful if any valid orders or true Church of Christ can survive such a wreck of religion -- or, as the Homily puts it, "the destruction and subversion of all good religion universally."

    [p.136]

    By the way, if I can make it convenient, I should be very pleased to listen to your lecture on the 11th of March, and promise myself that pleasure if I can be in town. And again thanking you for your very kind letter, and your desire to be frankly helpful to me, I am,

    Very truly yours,

    B. H. ROBERTS.





    Chapter  VIII.  Notes.


    124 -- Ch. 8:

    Catholic Arguments -- Protestant Admissions.

    a Matt. xxviii: 19, 20.

    b End of Religious Controversy (Rev. John Milner), p. 281.

    c Faith of our Fathers, p. 72.

    d Matt. xxviii: 16-20.

    e John xiv: 2.

    f Faith of our Fathers, p. 72.

    g Faith of our Fathers, p. 87.

    h Heb. xii: 22, 23.

    i This should be remembered by the student of the Bible. The law of Moses, with its formalisms and numerous rites, does not reflect the fullness of divine wisdom. It was not the best and highest code of laws and morals which God could give, but the best the people could be induced to accept.

    j Quoted by Rev. John Milner in End of Religious Controversy.

    k See pp. 94-5.

    l Smith’s Dict. of Bible, p. 163.

    m Picturesque America, p. 502.

    n Christianity Restored, p. 184.

    o Perils of Idolatry, part iii, p. 216. American Edition--1855.

    p ???



     

    [ 139 ]




    CHAPTER  IX.


    The Necessity Of A New Revelation -- the Arguments Of Modern Christians Against It Considered.

    I shall take it for granted that those who have followed me to this point are convinced that the world has need of New Witnesses for God; that the Church of Christ was destroyed; that there has been an apostasy from the Christian religion so complete and universal as to make necessary a new dispensation of the gospel.

    I have already remarked, in noticing the Protestant claim that the Church of Christ was re-established by the Reformers of the sixteenth century, that the gospel having been once taken from among men, and divine authority lost, the only way that either one or the other could ever be restored would be by the Lord giving a new revelation, and re-commissioning men with divine authority, both to teach the gospel and administer in its ordinances. This is a proposition so obvious to reason that I can scarcely persuade myself that it requires either argument or proofs to sustain it.

    [p.139 - p.140]

    If there are those, however, who think that the plan of salvation might be clearly defined from the fragmentary documents which comprise the New Testament, without the aid of more revelation, I ask them to consider the Protestant effort to accomplish that task. The Protestants accepted the Bible as an all-sufficient guide in matters of faith and morals and church discipline. But when they undertook to formulate from it a creed that should embody the whole plan of salvation, and prescribe a government for their church, it was found that well nigh each doctor understood the Bible differently. One saw in it the authorization of the Episcopal form of church government; another the Presbyterian form; and another the Congregational. One saw in the Bible authority for believing there was a trinity of persons in the God-head; another that there was but one. One saw authority for believing that God had predestined an elect few to be saved; another that salvation was equally within reach of all. One saw that baptism was essential to salvation; another regarded it indifferently. One said that baptism must be administered even to infants; others that it should be administered only to those capable of repentance, and understanding its purpose. Some saw in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper a sacrifice, in which was the real presence of the Lord Jesus; others saw in it only the symbols of the Lord's body and blood, and a memorial of our Lord's passion. And so on through all the vexed questions that have distracted Protestant Christendom and divided it into a hundred contending sects.

    [p.140]

    It must be remembered that to this effort to construct from the New Testament scriptures a creed which would embody all the principles and ordinances essential to salvation, and re-construct the Church of Christ, all the zeal and learning that we can hope to see brought to such a task was possessed by Protestant "Reformers," and they failed miserably; for the confusion grows greater by the constant multiplication of sects, led by men making the vain attempt to re-construct the Church of Christ and define the gospel by their own wisdom from fragmentary Christian documents.

    [p.140 - p.141]

    But if the theory of salvation could be clearly defined from the scriptures, by the wisdom of man; if all the doctrines to be believed and all the ordinances to be obeyed could be formulated, where, without further revelation, is the divinely authorized ministry to teach the gospel or administer its ordinances? However distinctly the gospel as a theory might be defined from the New Testament, the dead letter authorizes no one to perform its ceremonies, or even teach its doctrines. The New Testament writers have recorded in a number of places how Jesus called his apostles and commissioned them to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature, saying in one place, that "He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned;a and in another place, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the world." [b] But to say this authorizes anyone else but those to whom the commission was directly given is to advocate the stealing of other men's commissions, and presumptuously attempting to act in the name of God without divine appointment.

    [p.141]

    A case of this kind is related in the Acts of the Apostles, the result of which should be a warning to those who would advocate such a course now. Among the Jews who witnessed the power of God displayed through the administrations of Paul -- the Holy Ghost imparted by laying on hands, the sick healed and unclean spirits cast out -- were seven sons of one Sceva, a chief priest among the Jews, who took it upon themselves to call over one possessed of an evil spirit the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, "We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. * * * And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? And the man in whom the evil spirit was, leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded." [c]

    [p.142]

    Another case in point is the incident of Uzziah stretching forth his hand to steady the ark of God without authority -- "And God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God." [d]

    King Uzziah's presumption in this case also points a warning. Made king when but sixteen years of age, he was wonderfully blessed of the Lord, and his fame went abroad until he was feared or honored by all the surrounding nations. In the height of his glory he presumptuously entered the temple of God and essayed to exercise the functions of the priest's office -- to burn incense before the Lord. Azariah, the chief priest, withstood the king's usurpation, saying, "It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests, the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honor from the Lord God." The king was not inclined to yield to the admonition, and while he was yet angry with the priests the leprosy arose in his forehead, and he lived a leper the remainder of his life, separated from his people and from the house of the Lord. [e]

    [p.142 - p.143]

    If the usurpation of authority to act in the name of the Lord in casting out an evil spirit, in steadying the ark of God and burning incense called forth such pronounced evidences of the divine displeasure, would usurpation in administering the more sacred ordinances of the gospel meet with divine approbation? If men by usurping authority could not drive out an evil spirit from one possessed through calling over him the name of Jesus, just as they had seen Paul do, would there likely be any more efficacy attend upon their administrations if they baptized in the name of the holy Trinity for the remission of sins, or laid on hand to impart the Holy Ghost? The reasonable answer is obvious.

    [p.143]

    "Every high priest taken form among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God; * * * and no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron." [f] Aaron was called by revelation, and ordained by one already holding divine authority." [g] It amounts to nothing to say that this particular passage relates to high priests of the Mosaic law. The principle is announced in it that those who officiate for men in things pertaining to God must be called of God by revelation through a divinely established authority; and that holds good in the gospel as well as in the Mosaic law; aye, and more abundantly is it true; for as the gospel is more excellent than the carnal law, so is it to be expected that more care will be taken to have it administered by a divinely authorized ministry. "You have not chosen me," said Jesus to the Twelve, in Judea, "but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye may bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain." [h] This sounds the keynote relative to an authorized ministry for the gospel. Men are not to take it upon themselves to administer in things pertaining to God. They must be called as Aaron was, as the Twelve were, as Jesus himself was; for even "Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee * * * * Thou are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." [i]

    [p.143 - p.144]

    But I must not be drawn into an argument on a point that is obviously true, namely, that the gospel of Christ having been. taken from among men and divine authority lost, the only way of regaining them is by a re-opening of the heavens and a re-commitment of them to man from God. This, of course, would constitute a new dispensation, a new revelation; and as all Christendom, both Catholics and Protestants, hold that the volume of scripture is completed and forever closed -- that divine inspiration, prophecy and revelation, together with the visitation of angels has ceased forever, and this belief more abundantly prevailed at the beginning of the nineteenth century, just before the commencement of Joseph Smith's ministry, than in the twentieth century -- I think it necessary to inquire into those reasons that are assigned for such a belief, or rather unbelief.

    [p.144]

    It is a necessity to inquire into this question; for disbelief in new revelation bars the way to a consideration of the claims of the New Witnesses I am introducing. The case stands thus: The Christians in the early centuries of our era having turned heathens again, thereby losing the gospel and divine authority, it seems reasonably clear that the only way these precious things can be regained is through a new dispensation of the gospel, by means of a new revelation, which shall restore all that was lost. But since all Christians have been persuaded that the volume of the scripture is completed; that God will give no more revelation; and that the Bible sustains that view of the case, it becomes necessary to investigate the reasons given for this doctrine.

    [p.144 - p.145]

    I apprehend that this Christian belief respecting the discontinuance of revelation came into existence as an excuse offered fox the absence of revelation. Ministers of apostate churches in the early Christian centuries, found themselves without communication with God, either through the visitation of angels or direct revelation. Finding themselves with-out these powers so abundantly possessed by the servants of God in an earlier age of the church, they attempted a defense of their own powerless state by saying these things were no longer needed. They were extraordinary powers only to be employed at the commencement of the work of God, in order to establish it in the earth, and afterwards to be put aside as childish things.

    [p.145]

    In support of the theory that the volume of revelation is closed forever, the following passage in the Book of Revelation is usually quoted:

    "I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." [j]

    As this passage occurs in the last book of the New Testament -- and also the last book of the Bible -- in the last chapter, and the last but two of the closing verses of the chapter. it has been argued that it is a formal closing up of God's revelation to man. No more is to be added -- nothing is to be taken from it, it is completed and sealed up, and therefore no more revelation is to be given after that.

    [p.145 - p.146]

    Upon this it should be observed, first, that it was not by the arrangement of the inspired writer himself that the Book of Revelation was made the last book of the Bible; nor is that book the last inspired book of the New Testament collection that was written. It is the prevailing opinion of the early Christian writers that the Book of Revelation was written while the apostle John was an exile on the isle of Patmos, and that he did not write his book called "The Gospel according to St. John," until after his return from Patmos. [k] "The weight of evidence now tends to prove," says Canon Farrar, speaking of the Book of Revelation, "that it is not the last book in chronological order; that it was written nearer the beginning than the end of St. John's period of apostolic activity amid the churches of Asia; that the last accents of revelation which fall upon our ears are not those of a treatise which, though it ends in such music, contains so many terrible visions of blood and fire; but rather those of the gospel which tells us that the 'Word was made flesh,' and of the epistle which first formulated the most blessed truth which was ever uttered to human hearts -- the truth that 'God is love.'" [l] And again:

    [p.146]

    "Some may think it an exaggeration to say that this closing of the Holy Book with the Apocalypse has not been without grave consequences for the history of Christendom; but certainly it would have been better both for the church and for the world if we had followed the divine order, and if those books had been placed last in the canon which were last in order of time. Had this been done, our Bible would have closed as the Book of God to all intents and purposes did close, with the epistle and solemn warning of the last apostle, 'Little children, keep yourselves from idols.'" [m]

    [p.146 - p.147]

    If the words in the last chapter in the Book of Revelation mean that no more scripture or revelation was to be written after the prohibitory words under consideration, then John himself became a violator of the word of God which he himself had written; for according to the testimony here adduced his gospel and first epistle were written after the Book of Revelation. Such an alternative as makes the divinely inspired writer a violator of his own supposed inhibition of further revelation is so absurd, so unlike the conduct of an inspired apostle, that it is sufficient in itself to overthrow the theory that the passage in the last chapter of the Apocalypse intended to close the volume of revelation:

    [p.147]

    Second: Since the Apocalypse had no connection with the other books of the New Testament for many years after it was written, its prohibitory clause under the most liberal construction could only have reference to itself -- it forbade men adding anything more to that particular book of prophecy, the Apocalypse, not to a volume of scripture with which, at the time, it had no connection.

    [p.147 - p.148]

    Third: A careful reading of the passage discloses that it is only man who is prohibited from adding anything more to that book of prophecy, not God. While man may have added to him the plagues which are written in the book if he presumptuously adds to the words of the prophecy and passes them off for the word of God, yet God would still be left free to give revelation ad infinitum. I must needs think that this is the proper view to take of the prohibition, since in Deuteronomy I find it recorded: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it." [n] To give to this passage the same interpretation that is placed by modern Christians on the passage under consideration from the Apocalypse (and it is just as reasonable to place such an interpretation on the passage in Deuteronomy as to place it on the one in Revelation) would result in rejecting all scripture that was given after the prohibitory clause in the writings of Moses -- which would be the greater part of the Old Testament and all of the New. The same is true of the prohibitory passage in Proverbs: "Every word of the Lord is pure. * * * Add thou not unto his words lest he reprove thee and thou be found a liar." [o] There can be no doubt that these passages mean only this: Man must not add his own words to the revelation of God and pass them off as God's word. To say that they mean that no more revelation is to be given after they were uttered is to condemn all the scripture written subsequent to that time. What those passages mean the passage in Revelation means. Man must not add to the words of Deity; but God is left as free to give more revelation as he was before this prohibition to man was placed on record. The passage in question does not in the remotest refer to the close of the volume of revelation.

    [p.148]

    When the last act of indignity which the wicked ingenuity of his persecutors could suggest was perpetrated on the Son of God, Jesus bowed his thorn-crowned head and exclaimed "It is finished." By some who contend against new revelation it is held that this means that no more revelation is to be expected -- revelation is finished! Such a construction would exclude the inspired revelations, visions, dreams and revelations given to the apostles after the crucifixion of Jesus and abundantly testified of in the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles and the Apocalypse. It is so clearly evident that the exclamation, "It is finished," [p] had reference to the suffering of the Son of God, that it is not necessary to enter further into a refutation of the claim that it means the revelation of God to man was finished.

    Again it is contended that Paul predicted that prophecies should cease:

    [p.148 - p.149]

    "Whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge it shall vanish away." [q]

    [p.149]

    Unfortunately, however, for those who see in this passage a prophecy of the discontinuance of revelation, Paul tells us when prophecy or revelation (for prophecy must needs always be founded on revelation) will cease; that it is not in this mortal life, but "when that which is perfect is come."

    "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. * * * For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then [when that which is perfect is come] face to face. Now I know in part, but then [when that which is perfect is come] shall I know even as also I am known." [r]

    That this refers not to this life, where the best and purest only see in part and know in part, but is to be looked for in that future and perfect existence where men shall see as they are seen and know as they are known, is too obvious to need comment. That prophecy, and the revelation on which it is based, was designed to continue with the saints in this mortal existence is evident from the fact that in the opening verse of the succeeding chapters the apostle admonishes the saints to "follow after charity and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy."

    [p.149 - p.150]

    The whole genius of the gospel contemplates continuous revelation in the church; and so far is the Bible from justifying the belief that the time will come when it will cease, that on the contrary it teaches that revelation will increase more and more, especially becoming abundant in the last days.

    [p.150]

    Revelation is the very "rock" or principle upon which the Church of Christ is founded. "Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am?" was the abrupt question which Jesus once put to his disciples. The answers given were varied. "But whom say ye that I am?" Then Peter answered: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona," was the Lord's reply, "for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." [t] That is as if the Master had said: "Blessed art thou, Simon, for flesh and blood hath not revealed unto you that I am the Christ, the Son of the living God, but my Father which is in heaven; and I say unto thee, Peter, upon this principle of revelation will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

    [p.150 - p.151]

    This I hold to be the plain meaning of the passage, and not the interpretation given it by the Catholic Church, which is as follows: First let me remind the reader that when Peter was introduced by his brother Andrew to the Lord Jesus, the latter said to him: "Thou are Simon, the son of Jona; thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretatation a stone." [u] Therefore when on the occasion above referred to Jesus said: "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say unto thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church," Catholics say that "the words of Christ to Peter, -- spoken in the vulgar language of the Jews * * * were the same as if he had said in English: 'Thou art a rock, and upon this rock will I build my church,' so that by plain course of the words, Peter is here declared to be the rock upon which the church was to be built, Christ himself being both the principal foundation and founder of the same." [v] But this interpretation strikes wide of the real truth. To say the least it is a far-fetched assumption to hold that Jesus when He addressed Peter on this occasion had any reference to the name He had given him on a former occasion, which, by interpretation, meant a stone. If the Master meant to announce his intention to build his church on Peter, one cannot refrain from asking why he did not explicitly say so? The passage would then doubtless have read: 'I say unto thee, Peter, that thou art a stone, and upon thee I will build my church." Unfortunately for the Catholic contention such is not the reading, and it is only by juggling with the words that such a meaning can be read into the passage. The subject under consideration was not Peter, but the principle upon which he had learned that Jesus was the Son of God -- revelation, and on that principle, and not on Peter, the Lord promised to build his church.

    [p.152]

    But I said the whole genius of the gospel contemplates the continuation of revelation -- a statement incumbent upon me to prove. We have seen that the Lord promised to build his church upon revelation. It is the very life and light of it. The means by which it preserves its correspondence with heaven, and learns the will of God under the constantly varying conditions through which it is called to pass.

    The means by which revelation may be communicated to the church or to man are varied. Revelation may be given by direct communication with God, as in the case when the Lord walked with Enoch, [w] or talked face to face with Moses, as a man speaks to his friend. [x] Or it may be by the ministrations of angels, of which we have numerous instances, both in the Old and New Testaments; but more generally the communication of God's will to man is through the medium of the Holy Ghost.

    [p.152 - p.153]

    No one can doubt that prophecy is based upon revelation. No man can truthfully predict the future save God reveals it to him. "Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man," writes Peter, "but holy men of God spake as they were moved upon by the Holy Ghost." [y] Again, in further proof that the Holy Ghost is the means of revelation and the source of prophecy -- "When the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear that he shall speak; and he will show you things to come." [z] This Jesus said of the Holy Ghost. If anything were lacking to prove that the Holy Ghost is a medium of revelation, the very spirit of prophecy, it would be found in the following: "When the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of Truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me." [a] To this Paul agrees: "No man speaking by the Spirit of God, calleth Jesus accursed, and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." [b] It is the Holy Ghost, then, that testifies that Jesus is the Christ. Now mark what follows: An angel appeared to John, the Apostle, on Patmos, "and," says John, "I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: Worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." [c] This is the sum of my argument: The Holy Ghost testifies that Jesus is the Christ, and that "testimony of Jesus" is the spirit of prophecy; and since prophecy must of necessity be based on revelation, the "testimony of Jesus" -- the Holy Ghost must also be the spirit of revelation.

    [p.153 - p.154]

    When Peter, on the day of Pentecost, preached the famous sermon by which three thousand souls were converted, he made an unqualified promise of the Holy Ghost unto all who would obey the gospel. Replying to the cry of the multitude, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" he said: "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." [d] This simply means that the Holy Ghost is promised to all who will obey the gospel. It was promised to those that were listening to the apostle, to their children, to all that were afar off, not only as to distance, but as to time; to those a hundred years off, five hundred, or five thousand years off; 'even to as many as the Lord our God shall call' -- that is, called to obedience to the gospel. It is a promise that reaches our own generation as well as the first generation of the Christian era.

    [p.154]

    We, then, are promised the Holy Ghost, the spirit of prophecy and of revelation; and indeed we are instructed by the Master himself that except we are born of the Spirit, that is, receive the Holy Ghost, we cannot enter into the kingdom of God. [e] So clearly is receiving the Holy Ghost a part of the plan of salvation, that, so far as I know, there is not a Christian sect or church, but teaches the necessity and right and duty of the Christian to possess it. But oh, strange inconsistency of "Christendom!" While teaching that men must be baptized with the Holy Ghost, and must possess it, and walk in the light thereof, they deny to it the chiefest of its powers -- revelation and prophecy! Modern Christian teachers have dared, without the warrant of divine authority, to divide the manifestations of the Holy Ghost into "ordinary" and "extraordinary" powers; and then have had the further presumption to tell us that the "ordinary" powers of the Spirit, such as love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance, are to remain with men; but the "extraordinary" powers, such as revelation, prophecy, healing the sick, discernment of spirits, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues, etc., these are to be discontinued! Unhesitatingly I pronounce such unwarranted assumption blasphemous!

    [p.154 - p.155]

    Instead of trying to excuse the absence among them of the mighty powers of the Holy Ghost as manifested anciently in revelation and prophecy, by falsely saying it was the design of Almighty God that the Holy Ghost should discontinue the exercise of these "extraordinary" powers, the proper thing for modern Christendom to do would be to humble itself, and confess that it has strayed from God's ordinances, transgressed his laws, changed his ordinances, broken the covenant of the gospel, and denied the powers of the Holy Ghost, because it receives not the manifestations thereof. How absurd to contend that part of the powers of the Holy Ghost are to be exercised and not the others! What a denying and splitting up of the powers of God are here! One class of his powers to be exercised in one age, but to lie dormant in another, and man presuming to tell which are necessary to be active and which dormant!

    [p.155]

    So far from leading us to believe in the discontinuance of the "extraordinary powers" of the Holy Ghost in the last days, the teachings of scripture on the contrary lead us to expect an increase of them. Peter, in the sermon already referred to above, says, quoting the prophet Joel:

    "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out, in those days, of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: and I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood and fire and vapor of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved." [f]

    [p.155 - p.156]

    I know that the general understanding among Christians is that this prophecy was fulfilled upon the occasion of the Holy Ghost being poured out upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost; because, in replying to the accusation of the multitude that the apostles who were speaking in tongues were drunk, Peter said: "These are not drunken as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel." Then follows the quotation already given. But that Peter meant by this that the prophecy of Joel was completely fulfilled is out of all harmony with the facts of the case. First, Joel's prophecy relates to "the last days" -- not to the days in which Peter was living and speaking; second, according to Joel's prophecy, the Spirit of God was to be poured out upon "all flesh;" on the occasion of its outpouring on the day of Pentecost, it was confined to twelve men; third, both the "sons and daughters" of the people are to prophesy, according to Joel's prediction; young men are to see visions; old men to dream dreams; and on his servants and his handmaidens the Lord promises to pour out of his Spirit "and they shall prophesy."

    [p.156]

    This describes so general an outpouring of the Spirit of the Lord upon his people that the conditions existing on the day of Pentecost by no manner of means fulfill the prophecy. What then could mean the saying of Peter-"This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel?" It means this: The Spirit that you here see manifestations of is that Spirit spoken of by Joel that will eventually be poured out upon "all flesh;" doubtless in that happy time spoken of by other prophets when "The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. * * * They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." [g] Then and not till then will Joel's great prophecy have its complete fulfillment.

    [p.157]

    Moreover, connected with this outpouring of the Spirit of the Lord upon all flesh in the last days, is the fact that God will also "show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood and fire and vapor of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come;" but, "whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved." These judgments that are to be poured out upon the earth, together with the mercy that shall be shown to those who turn to the Lord, are so nearly identical with those which are described as preceding or connected with the glorious appearing of the Lord Jesus in the last days, [h] that they must be the same; and these judgments, as also the outpouring of the Holy Spirit of God upon all flesh, look to the last days, and not to the days when Peter preached to the people, for their complete fulfillment.

    [p.157 - p.158]

    If we contemplate the Church of Christ as having existed, without a moment's interruption from the time it was founded by the Savior and his apostles until now, instead of losing or having any spiritual powers discontinued, the Christians ought to have increased in the enjoyment of them more and more. And instead of saying that the "extraordinary powers" of the Holy Ghost have been discontinued, they ought to be able to say the circle of those possessed of and able to employ all the spiritual gifts of the gospel to their own and the salvation of others, has been marvelously enlarged. The spirit of prophecy and revelation, which, as we have seen, is the Holy Ghost, is absolutely necessary in the church to call its officers. How else shall the church have a divinely authorized ministry? How else shall men be called of God as was Aaron? The church today has as much need of inspired men able to say, separate unto the Lord such and such men for the work whereunto God has called them,' as it was for the church in Antioch, in the early days of Christianity, to have prophets and teachers who, as they ministered before the Lord and fasted, heard the Holy Ghost say, "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." [i]

    [p.158 - p.159]

    The spirit of prophecy and revelation is necessary in the church to direct the officers thereof in the performance of their duties. It is useless to contend that the directions given by the spirit of revelation to the ancient servants of the Lord will answer for God's ministry now. As well might it be argued that the miller today could grind with the water which passed his mill-wheel yesterday. The conditions under which the Church of Christ exists in various ages are constantly changing; and the officers of the church always require divine direction, which can only be supplied by revelation. The revelations given to the patriarchs from Adam to Abraham and Melchisedek were not esteemed sufficient to direct Moses in the management of the dispensation committed to him. Nor were the numerous revelations given to Moses sufficient to guide his successor, Joshua, in leading Israel; but a means for obtaining the word of the Lord was provided for him through the use of the Urim and Thummim, in the hands of the high priest. So also the revelations given to Moses, to Joshua and his successors, the judges and prophets of Israel, were not considered sufficient to direct the labor of the apostles and seventies and elders in the dispensation of the gospel introduced by the Lord Jesus. Nor were the revelations given to the first apostle sufficient to direct the labors of Paul and his associates in the constantly-changing circumstances in the midst of which they found themselves. After having gone throughout Phrygia and the whole region of Galatia, Paul, had he followed his own inclinations, would have gone into Asia to preach; but he was forbidden of the Holy Ghost [j] -- that is, by revelation. Afterwards he would have gone into Bithynia, but the Spirit suffered him not [k] -- that is, gave a revelation forbidding him to go into that land. Afterwards, through an inspired vision, he was called into Macedonia, [l] and began that wonderful missionary career which resulted in spreading a knowledge of the gospel throughout Macedonia, Greece and the western division of the Roman empire. In like manner, in all succeeding generations, and no less in our own than in any that has preceded it, the ministry of the Church of Christ stands absolutely in need of the spirit of prophecy and revelation to direct its labors, if those labors are to be efficient and acceptable to God.

    [p.159]

    The spirit of prophecy and revelation is necessary in the church not only to call its ministers and direct their labors but also to teach, correct, reprove, comfort and warn the members thereof. How else shall they be preserved from error in doctrine, and from the strife and division consequent upon it? Man's ways are not as God's ways; and it seems almost inherent in human nature to wander from the ways of the Lord, to seek out many strange inventions. Human wisdom is not sufficient for this work of correcting errors and reproving saints; for "the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God;" [m] hence the necessity of the ministry of the church having the spirit of prophecy and revelation.

    [p.159 - p.160]

    And then, for another reason should the ministry of the church teach, "not with the enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and of power;" that the faith of the saints stands not in "the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." [n]

    [p.160]

    Nor is it enough for the ministry to be inspired of God, the lay members of the church no less than the ministry have a right to it -- to the people as well as to the priests is the Holy Ghost promised; and the people have need of it as well as the ministry; for "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, for they are spiritually discerned." [o] Hence the importance of those who listen being inspired by the same spirit as those who teach. "It is written," says Paul, that "eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. * * * Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God." [p] If thus the saints in primitive Christian times enjoyed the spirit of revelation and of prophecy, why should not the saints in all succeeding ages also enjoy it, since it is promised to them as well as unto the first Christians, and God is no respecter of persons? [q] Why should not Christians in all ages have the spirit of prophecy to enlighten and comfort their souls and warn them of events to come? But the argument is interminable, and I only desired to pursue it far enough to prove that the whole genius of the gospel contemplates the continuance of revelation.

    [p.160 - p.161]

    How long I have delayed the direct consideration of my Thesis! The foregoing remarks, however, were necessary since the belief that the volume of scripture was completed and forever closed; that the voice of prophecy is no more to be heard; that the visitation of angels is not to be expected; that revelation has forever ceased -- all stood as so many obstacles to be removed before we could consider the direct testimony supporting the proposition that the gospel in the last days is to be restored to the earth by re-opening the heavens and giving a new dispensation thereof to the children of men. But now all things are ready. I have shown that since men corrupted and lost the gospel, together with divine authority to administer its ordinances, the only way to regain possession of it is by receiving a new dispensation of it through a revelation from God; that the sectarian teaching that the volume of scripture is completed and closed is based upon assumption merely; that the same sectarian teaching that revelation and prophecy had ceased forever is equally false; on the contrary we have seen that the very spirit and genius of the gospel contemplates the continuation of revelation both to the church and to individuals; therefore it can be neither unscriptural nor unreasonable to expect a new revelation that will restore the gospel.





    Chapter  IX.  Notes.


    139 -- Ch. 9:

    The Necessity of a New Revelation -- The Arguments of Modern Christians Against It Considered.

    a Mark xvi.

    b Matt. xxviii.

    c Acts xix.

    d See II Samuel vi, in connection with Numb. iv: 5-15.

    e II Chron. xxvi.

    f Heb. v: 1-4.

    g “And take unto thee Aaron, thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.”--Word of the Lord to Moses, Ex. xxviii: 1.

    h John xv: 16.

    i Heb. v: 5, 6.

    j Rev. xxii: 18, 19.

    k “Vide Biblical Literature” (Kitto), Art. “Book of Revelation.”

    l “Early Days of Christianity,” ch. xxvii.

    m This would make the First Epistle of John the closing book of the canon.

    n Deut. iv: 2.

    o Proverbs xxx: 6.

    p St. John xix: 30.

    q I Corinth. xiii: 8.

    r Ibid, verses 9-12.

    s It should be remembered that the division of the Epistle, and for that matter the whole of the New Testament, into chapters and verses was not made by the writers of it, but is quite a modern work. The verse with which the fourteenth chapter opens is a direct and close continuation of the subject with which the thirteenth chapter closes, and ought not to have been separated form it into another chapter. It is an instance of how clumsily the work of dividing the New Testament into chapters and verses was done.

    t Matt. xvi.

    u St. John i: 42.

    v Footnote in the Douav Bible on Matt. xvi: 17, 18. The Protestant interpretation is that Christ was the “Rock” and the foundation upon which the Church was builded. “It is most certain that Augustine has said many times that the ‘Rock was Christ,’ and perhaps not more than once that it was Peter himself. But even should St. Augustine and all the Fathers say that the Apostle is the ‘Rock’ of which Christ speaks I would resist them, single-handed, in reliance upon the Holy Scriptures, that is, on Divine right; for it is written: ‘Other foundatino can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ’ (I Cor. iii: 11). Peter himself terms Christ the chief cornerstone, on which we are built up a spiritual house.” Martin Luter’s Answer to Dr. Eck, “Hist. Reformation (D’Aubigne), Bk. V, p. 172.

    w Genesis v: 24; Heb. xi: 5.

    x Exodus xxxiii: 11.

    y II Peter i: 20, 21.

    z John xvi: 13.

    aa John xv: 26--Jesus to the apostles.

    bb I Cor. xii.

    cc Rev. xix: 10.

    dd Acts ii: 38, 39.

    ee John iii: 5.

    ff Acts ii.

    gg Isaiah xi.

    hh See Matt. xxiv.

    ii Acts xiii.

    jj Acts xvi: 6.

    kk Acts xvi: 7.

    ll Acts xvi: 9, 10.

    mm I Cor. ii: 11.

    nn I Cor. ii: 4, 5.

    oo I Cor. ii: 14.

    pp I Cor. ii: 9, 10, 12.

    qq Rom. ii: 11.



     

    [ 162 ]




    CHAPTER  X.


    Prophetic History Of The Church -- The Restoration Of The Gospel By An Angel.

    And now as to the direct testimony for the restoration of the gospel by means of a new revelation. It is to be found in one of the revelations of St. John upon the Isle of Patmos. While there, either as an exile, or a prisoner in the mines during the persecution under the Emperor Domitian -- and in either case suffering for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ -- the apostle received many visions pertaining to the past, the present and the future of the Church of Christ. Especially are the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of his revelation instructive. There is a unity of design in them that cannot be mistaken. They contain a history of the church from the time it was presided over by the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb, unto the time when the judgments of God fall upon Babylon to her utter destruction. Without entering into minute detail let me point this out.

    In the first two verses of the twelfth chapter, under the figure of a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and about her head a crown of twelve stars, and ready to be delivered of a child, John describes the church presided over by the apostles, and ready to bring forth the complete organization of the priesthood -- the male child that is to rule the nations.

    [p.162 - p.163]

    In the third and fourth verses, under the figure of a great red dragon, whose tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and who stood before the woman to devour her child as soon as it was born -- we have a description of Lucifer standing ready to destroy the priesthood so soon as it should be brought forth.

    [p.163]

    In verses five and six, under the figure of the woman bringing forth the male child, the child being caught up into heaven, and the flight of the woman into the wilderness, where God has a place prepared for her, where she is nourished for a thousand two hundred and three score days -- we have a description of the coming forth of the priesthood as an organization, its being taken up into heaven out of reach of Lucifer, and also the flight of the church beyond his power into the wilderness, where it is nourished for a certain time.

    In the verses from seven to twelve, inclusive, we have a deflection from the main line of history to explain who and what the great red dragon is. We are told of the war in heaven, where Michael and his angels fought and the dragon and his angels fought, but prevailed not; and how at last the dragon, that old serpent called the Devil and Satan, was cast out of heaven into the earth and his angels with him. We are told of the joy there was in heaven when the accuser of the brethren was cast out; and how there had come salvation and strength and the kingdom of God and the power of his Christ. But those who thus rejoiced in heaven cry woe unto the inhabitants of the earth, because the devil had come down unto them having great wrath.

    [p.163 - p.164]

    The thirteenth verse brings us back from the deflection to the line of history again; and from there to the close of the chapter under the figure of the woman flying into the wilderness, the dragon casting out of his mouth floods of water to carry her away if possible, and the return of the dragon full of wrath to make war on the seed of the woman, -- "which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus" -- we have repeated the story of the flight of the church from the earth, and Lucifer, by his floods of slander, still seeking to destroy the church, now beyond the direct influence of his power, and his return to make war upon the few saints that remained after the church as an organization had been taken from among men.

    [p.164]

    In the first and second verses of the thirteenth chapter, under the figure of a monstrous, hydra-headed beast rising out of the sea, and the dragon giving unto him his power and his seat and great authority -- we have a description of the rise and nature of pagan Rome, and Lucifer giving unto it his power and inspiring it with his spirit of hatred towards the saints.

    In the third and fourth verses, under the figure of one of the heads of the beast being wounded and afterwards healed, all the world wondering after the beast, the dragon who gave him his power being worshiped, and the beast being worshiped -- we have the transition from the pagan to the papal power of Rome described, and the worship of Lucifer in return for giving his power to the beast.

    Then follows in verses from the fifth to the tenth, inclusive, the proclamation of this devil-inspired power to blaspheme against God, against his tabernacle and the saints in heaven; "to make war upon the saints and to overcome them;" his dominion over all kindreds and tongues and nations; the prophecy that all who dwell upon the earth shall worship him whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of life from the foundation of the world; and also the prophecy of the captivity of this power which has led into captivity, and the killing of him by the sword who killed with the sword.

    [p.164 - p.165]

    From the tenth verse to the close of the chapter we have the rise of other powers described which shall under new forms inaugurate the old worship, exercise the old tyranny, practice the old deceptions, and confirm them by the performance of miracles.

    [p.165]

    The first five verses of the fourteenth chapter describe the blessedness of a special company of the servants of God who have been redeemed from the earth, an hundred and forty and four thousand of them, being the first fruits unto God and the Lamb, in whose mouth was found no guile, and who are without fault.

    The sixth and seventh verses describe an angel flying "in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters."

    [p.165 - p.166]

    The eighth verse proclaims the fall of Babylon which has made all nations drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornication. The rest of the chapter forbids the worship of the beast or his image, pronouncing the wrath of God against those who do so; and deals with the successive judgments which shall overtake the earth to cleanse it of its wickedness. Thus in prophecy was the history of the church written, its establishment; the war made upon its priesthood by Lucifer; the taking away of the priesthood and the church from within the circle of his power; Lucifer's league first with pagan and afterwards with papal Rome; the establishment of devil and man worship; the blaspheming of God, his tabernacle and the saints in heaven; the rise of other powers who under new forms establish old blasphemies and devil-worship; the restoration of the gospel in the hour of God's judgment; and the final fall of Babylon and the cleansing of the earth preparatory to the reign of peace and righteousness inaugurated by the restoration of the gospel. There it is, a mighty compendium of history written in prophecy!

    [p.166]

    It is, however, with that part of it which relates to the restoration of the gospel that here I have most to do. This the passage:

    "I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." [a]

    However obscure some parts of the Book of Revelation may be considered, this prophecy is perfectly clear. Looked at from any standpoint, it means simply this: In the hour of God's judgment an angel will come from heaven bringing with him the everlasting gospel, which is thence to be preached unto all nations and peoples of the earth. The fact that the gospel is to be restored in the hour of God's judgment by the ministry of an angel, and thence is to be preached to every nation and kindred and tongue and people is proof positive that every nation and kindred and tongue and people in the hour of God's judgment would be without the gospel, hence the necessity of restoring it in the manner described. For if the Lord had a church on the earth, possessing divine authority, there would be no necessity to bring in a new dispensation of the gospel as described in the prophecy under Consideration.

    [p.166 - p.167]

    In this passage several of the facts for which I have contended meet: First, that there has been a universal apostasy from the gospel, so complete in its departure from the doctrines and rites of the Christian religion, so universal, as to destroy the church of Christ; second, the necessity of restoring the gospel by a re-opening of the heavens; and third, the fact of the restoration of the gospel by the ministration of an angel who commits a new dispensation of it to man, to be preached throughout the world.





    Chapter  X.  Notes.


    162 -- Ch. 10:

    Prophetic History of the Church -- The Restoration of the Gospel by an Angel.

    a Rev. xiv: 6, 7.



     

    [ 171 ]




    CHAPTER  XI.


    The New Witnesses Introduced.

    At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the western part of the State of New York was a new country, by which I mean -- one recently settled, and comparatively a wilderness. At the close of the Revolutionary War, which secured to the former British Colonies independence, the people of the newborn nation found their country and themselves impoverished. Manufactures, owing to the narrow and selfish policy of England toward her colonies (that policy had been to discourage the colonies from manufacturing, lest they should compete with the manufactures of England) could scarcely be said to have an existence. Commerce, owing to the fact that the new nation had not yet established a commercial standing in the world, afforded little opportunity for American activity. Moreover, the American people themselves, of that generation, because of the conditions which had surrounded them in the New World, were neither skilled artisans capable of competing with the British workmen in manufacturing, nor had they the cunning that comes by training, which qualified them for immediate success. What they did possess was sturdy physical frames -- constitutions unimpaired either by the excesses practiced among barbarians, or by the vices which abound in older civilizations. They possessed strong hands, superb courage and simple tastes, and with these they entered into that almost boundless empire of wilderness to the west of them, to make homes for themselves and their children.

    [p.171 - p.172]

    Looking from the standpoint of our modern life, which knows so much of ease and comfort, the lot of these pioneers was a hard one. The soil which their rude shares upturned to the sun was indeed virgin and fertile, but before it could be cultivated it had to be cleared of its heavy growth of timber and underbrush, and with the means then employed, to clear a farm was well-nigh the labor of a life-time. Each pioneer with the help of a few neighbors -- which help he paid for by helping them in return built his own house, his barn, his sheds, and fenced his "clearing." Each family within itself was practically self-supporting. The hum of the spinning-wheel, the rattle of the shuttle and the thumping of the loom was heard in every home, as wool and flax were converted into fabrics to clothe the family; and every pioneer cultivated such a variety of products that his farm and his labor supplied his wants and those of his household. Happily for their contentment, the conditions in which they lived rendered their wants but few.

    [p.172]

    In settling the wilderness the pioneers were not disposed to crowd each other. They settled far apart. It often happened that a man's nearest neighbor would be two or three miles away, so that the country for a long time was but sparsely settled. Towns were few and far between, and were only slowly builded. No such mushroom-growth of towns was known as that which characterized the settlement of the great prairie states in subsequent years. A few families settling on a stream furnishing water power for a grist-mill, or at some point on lake or stream frequented by the Indians for the purpose of trading their furs, formed the nucleus of these towns, and soon school-houses and churches increased their attractions.

    [p.172 - p.173]

    It was a simple, honest life these pioneers led. A life full of toil; for it was a stubborn fight they had with the wilderness to subdue it. And yet their very hardships tended to-wards virtue. A busy life in honorable pursuits can never be a vicious one; and the constant toil of these men in wood and field so kept hands and head employed that there was left no time nor opportunity nor much of inclination to pursue evil. Their amusements were few and simple, consisting in the main of the occasional gathering of neighbors for social enjoyments -- the love of youth and maiden seeking its legitimate expression in that companionship which alone satisfies the hunger of the heart, I doubt not, was the incentive which brought about these gatherings -- at least their frequency; and the old, well pleased to see their own youth reflected in that of their sons and daughters, looked on with unconcealed delight.

    [p.173]

    Not only was this life in the wilderness favorable to morality, it contributed equally well to the cultivation of the religious sentiment in man. Man is by nature a religious animal, and where natural conditions prevail instead of artificial ones, true to his nature, man inclines toward a religious state of mind. There is something in the awful stillness of the wood that says to man -- "God is in this solitude!" The murmur of the brook, splashing over its pebbly bed, and the mournful sighing of the winds through the tree tops, whisper to his spirit the fundamental truth of all religion -- "God lives!" The stars looking down through the trees or mirrored in stream or lake bear witness to the same great truth; while the orderly course of the seasons, bringing with such undeviating regularity seed time and harvest, the period of summer's growth and winter's rest, accompanied by the fact of the sun shining for the evil as for the good; and the rain falling upon the just and the unjust alike, gives ample evidence of God's interest in the world lie has created and of his beneficence and mercy towards all men.

    [p.173 - p.174]

    When conditions were so favorable for the development of natural religion, it is not surprising that profound interest was manifested also in revealed religion. Especially when we remember that these pioneers of the wilderness were but from one to three generations removed from ancestors who had left the Old World for the express purpose of worshiping God according to their understanding of that same revealed religion. That skepticism of the eighteenth century which in some quarters had such a baneful influence upon religious belief, was scarcely felt in these settlements remote from the old centers of the New World civilization. These men of the wilderness believed the Bible and looked upon it with the reverence worthy of men descended from Protestant fathers who had in their system of theology made it take the place of pope and church, and established it as their sole authority and infallible guide in the matters of faith and morals. While many of them refused to identify themselves with any of the various sects about them, or subscribe to their creeds, they were profound believers in the word of God, and often confessed this short creed which they duly impressed upon their descendants: "I believe in God, in the Bible, and in a state of future rewards and punishments."

    [p.174]

    There was no lack of zealous churchmen among the pioneers, sectaries who taught special forms of faith and contended for the necessity of particular dogmas and formulas with all that ardor and narrowness of view that usually characterizes the sectarian mind. Their contentions for the correctness of their respective creeds were not always free from bitterness; but for all that the Protestant sects in the main recognized each other as parts of a great universal church, and occasionally would so far put away the differences of creed which separated them as to unite for the purpose of holding union protracted meetings for the conversion of unbelievers.

    [p.175]

    During the continuance of these meetings the minister avoided preaching any doctrine except such as could be accepted by all the sects -- evangelical doctrine. Professedly their sole effort was to lead the unconverted to believe in and accept Christ, let them join what sect they pleased. Usually matters went on very agreeably until the converts made by these united efforts began to express their preference for one or the other of the different religious sects. Then would break out those fierce sectarian struggles for advantage which ever have been so disgraceful to Protestant Christendom. The good feeling temporarily exhibited during the union meetings nearly all disappeared, and by the fact of its vanishing impressed an observer with the idea that all along it was more pretended than real. Sectarian zeal was unbounded in its efforts to secure as many of the new converts as possible to its own peculiar denomination. There was a cry of lo here and of lo there, not unfrequently accompanied with remarks of detraction about the opposing sects. The priests, each jealous for his own church, contended fiercely with one another, so that they who ought to have been the most exemplary in that conduct which makes for peace on earth and good will towards men, were often the most to be blamed for stirring up contention.

    [p.175 - p.176]

    Such a wave of religious fervor brought about in the manner above set forth, and attended with results described, passed over the western part of the State of New York in the winter and spring of 1820. The movement at that time was of unusual interest, first on account of its extent, and second on account of the intensity of the religious excitement produced. It can well be imagined that with these two conditions existing, the bitterness among the sects taking part in the movement would be correspondingly great when it came to dividing up the spoils. By which I mean when the converts made by a unity of effort began to file off some to one sect and some to another. Such was the case. Presbyterians opposed Methodists, and Methodists Baptists; and Baptists opposed both the other sects. All was strife, contention, confusion, beneath which Christian charity and good will to man -- these weightier matters of the law -- were buried so far out of sight that it might be questioned if they ever existed.

    [p.176]

    Standing somewhat apart from, but watching with intense interest this religious excitement, and wondering greatly at the confusion and strife attendant upon it was a lad fourteen years old. [a] He was born of parents numbered among the pioneers of the wilderness, and up to that time had lived with them surrounded by the conditions already described in the first part of this chapter as so favorable to morality and the development of religious sentiment. By this religious agitation the mind of the lad was stirred to serious reflection accompanied with great uneasiness on account of the sectarian strife so incessant and so bitter. He saw several members of his father's family connect themselves with the Presbyterian sect, but he himself was more partial to the Methodist Church; and at times he felt some desire to be united with it. The tumult arising from the religious contention, however, was such as to bewilder him, and he felt himself incompetent to decide who was right and who was wrong. "What is to be done?" he would often ask himself. "Who of all these parties are right? Or are they all wrong together? If any one of them be right, which is it and how shall I know it?" [b]

    [p.176 - p.177]

    Young as he was, his native intelligence taught him that something was radically wrong with all this contention over religion. It was clear even to his boyish mind that God could not be the author of all this confusion. God's church would not be split up into factions in this fashion; if he taught one society to worship one way, and administer one set of ordinances, he would not teach another principles diametrically opposed. [c]

    [p.177]

    Influenced by these reflections he refrained from joining any of the sects and in the meantime studied the scriptures as best he could for himself. While thus engaged his attention was attracted to that passage in James which says:

    "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him."

    [p.177 - p.178]

    That passage was like the voice of God to his spirit. "Never," he was wont to say in later life -- "never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart." [d] He reflected upon it again and again, and as he did so the impression grew stronger that the advice of the ancient apostle offered a solution to his perplexities. It never occurred to him to think that the passage meant other than it said, or to question the universal application of the advice it gives. He knew nothing of the sophistry of the schools of theology which too often made the word of God of none effect by their learned exegesis. Through the innocent eyes of a mere boy, he looked the proposition of James squarely in the front, and, thanks to the teachings of parents who revered the word of God, he believed what the man of God said, and he believed further that he expressed that which the Lord inspired him to say; so that it came to him with the full force of a revelation. Under such circumstances what was more natural than for him to reason thus: If any person needs wisdom from God, I do, for how to act I do not know, and unless I can get more wisdom than I now have, I shall never know. [e] But one conclusion could be arrived at through such a course of reflection: he must either remain in darkness and confusion or do as James directed -- ask of God. And since he gives wisdom to them that lack wisdom, and will give liberally and not upbraid, he thought he might venture. And so at last he did. He selected a place in a grove near his father's house, and there one beautiful morning in the spring of 1820, [f] after looking timidly about to ascertain that he was alone, the boy knelt in his first attempt at vocal prayer, to ask God for wisdom.

    [p.178 - p.179]

    No sooner had he begun calling upon the Lord than there sprang upon him a being from the unseen world, who so entirely overcame him, and bound his utterance, that he could not speak. Thick darkness gathered about him, and it seemed to the struggling boy that he was doomed to sudden destruction. He still exerted all his power to call upon the Lord to deliver him from the power of the enemy who had seized him. But still his unseen though none the less real enemy continued to prevail. Despair filled his heart. He was about to abandon himself to destruction when at the moment of his greatest alarm he saw a pillar of light exactly over his head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon him. No sooner did this light appear than he was free from the enemy which had held him bound. As the light rested upon him he saw within it two Personages whose brightness and glory defy all description. They stood above him in the air, and one of them pointing to the other said:

    [p.179]

    "JOSEPH, THIS IS MY BELOVED SON, HEAR HIM."

    The object of the lad in going to that place to engage in secret prayer was to learn of God which of all the sects was right, that he might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did he recover his self-possession than he asked the personage to whom he was thus introduced, which of all the sects was right -- which he should join. He was answered that he must join none of them; for they were all wrong. Their creeds were an abomination in God's sight; the professors of them were all corrupt -- "They draw near me with their lips," said the personage, talking to him, "but their hearts are far from me; they teach for doctrine the commandments of men; having a form of Godliness but denying the power thereof!"

    Again he was told that he must join none of them.

    Many other things were said to him on that occasion which the Prophet has not recorded, except to say that he was promised that the fullness of the gospel would at some future time be made known to him. [g]

    With this the vision closed, and the boy on coming to himself was lying upon his back looking up into heaven. He arose to his feet and looked upon the place of his fierce struggle with his unseen though powerful enemy -- the place also of his splendid vision!

    [p.179 - p.180]

    What a change had come to the lad in one brief hour! He was no longer struggling with doubts or troubled with perplexities as to which of the sects was right. He had gone to that place of prayer plagued with uncertainty, now no one among the children of men so well assured as he of the course to pursue. He had proved the correctness of James' doctrine -- men may ask God for wisdom, receive liberally and not be upbraided. He knew that the religious creeds of the world were untrue; that they taught for doctrine the commandments of men; that religionists observed a form of godliness, but in their hearts denied the power of God; that they drew near to the Lord with their lips, but their hearts were far from him. He knew that God, the Father, lived, for he had both seen him and heard his voice; he knew that Jesus lived and was the Son of God, for he had been introduced to him by the Father, conversed with him in heavenly vision and had received instruction and a promise that the fullness of the gospel should yet be made known to him. Up to that time his life had been uneventful, and of a character to make him of no particular consequence in the world; now he stood as God's WITNESS among the children of men. Henceforth he must bear witness to the great truths he had learned. His testimony will arouse the wrath of men, and with unrelenting fury they will pursue him. Slander, outright falsehood and misrepresentation will play havoc with his reputation. Everywhere his name will be held up as evil. Derision will laugh at his testimony, Ridicule mock it. On every hand he will be met with the cry of "False prophet! false prophet!" Chains and the dungeon's gloom await him; mobs with murderous hate will assail him again and again; and at the last, while under the protection of the law, and the honor of a great commonwealth pledged for his safety, he will be murdered in cold blood for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus!

    [p.180 - p.181]

    How little that fair-haired boy, standing there in the unpruned forest, with the sunlight stealing through the trees about him, realized the burden placed upon his shoulders that morning by reason of the visitation he received in answer to his prayer!

    [p.181]

    Here is not the place for argument, that is to come later; but let us consider the wide-sweeping effect of this boy's vision upon the accepted theology of Christendom.

    First, it was a flat contradiction to the assumption that revelation had ceased, that God had no further communication to make to man.

    Second, it reveals the errors into which men had fallen concerning the personages of the Godhead. It makes it manifest that God is not an incorporeal being without body, or parts; on the contrary he appeared to the Prophet in the form of a man, as he did to the ancient prophets. Thus after centuries of controversy the simple truth of the scriptures which teach that man was created in the likeness and the very image of God -- hence God must be the same in form as man -- was reaffirmed.

    Third, it corrected the error of the theologians respecting the oneness of the persons of the Father and the Son. Instead of being one in person as the theologians taught, they are distinct in their persons, as much so as any father and son on earth; and the oneness of the Godhead referred to in the scriptures, must have reference to unity of purpose and of will; the mind of the one being the mind of the other, and so as to the will and other attributes. The Godhead is made up of harmonized, divine intelligences.

    [p.181 - p.182]

    The announcement of these truths, coupled with that other truth proclaimed by the Son of God, viz.: that none of the sects and churches of Christendom were acknowledged as the church or kingdom of God, furnish the elements for a religious revolution that will affect the very foundations of modern Christian theology. In a moment all the rubbish concerning religion which had accumulated through all the centuries since the gospel and authority to administer its ordinances had been taken from the earth, was grandly swept aside -- the living rocks of truth were made bare upon which the Church of Christ was to be founded -- a New Dispensation of the gospel was about to be committed to the earth -- God had raised up a Witness for himself among the children of men.





    Chapter  XI.  Notes.



    171 -- Ch. 11:

    The New Witness Introduced.

    a Joseph Smith the prophet was born in Sharon, Windsor County, State of Vermont, 23rd of December, 1805.

    b “Pearl of Great Price,” p. 83. (1902 edition always quoted.)

    c See Joseph’s reasoning upon this subject, published in his account of the rise of the church, written for Mr. John Wentworth, proprietor of the “Chicago Democrat” (1842). This article is also found in a pamphlet published by Geo. A. Smith, entitled “Answers to Questions,” p. 37. Also “History of the Church,” Vol. IV, ch. xxxi.

    d “History of the Church,” Vol. I, p. 4.

    e His reasoning set down here is paraphrased from his own account of what he thought. “History of the Church,” Period I, Vol. I, p. 4.

    f The exact date of this occurrence is not known.

    g “Answers to Questions,” p. 37. Also the Wentworth Letter, “History of the Church,” Vol. IV, p. 536.



     

    [ 183 ]




    CHAPTER  XII.


    A New Dispensation Of The Gospel.

    The true test of moral courage is to stand alone against the world and maintain what one believes or knows to be the truth. It is easy enough to join in the chorus that cries "Amen" to orthodox doctrines, or even to lead in advocating opinions that the multitude by very force of tradition accept with applause. Even unpopular opinions are maintained and that stoutly by men whose moral courage falls very far short of the sublime, if only they are supported by a following. Just as men of indifferent physical courage will sometimes show a spirit of desperate daring, and rush into the jaws of death, borne up against the danger by the sheer consciousness of moving upon it with a large number of their fellows. Examples are furnished by armies in battle. Not a few of those who charge the enemy with apparent reckless bravery are borne along by the strength which comes from the support of numbers. The charge upon the enemy, therefore, even in the face of a galling fire, is not the truest test of the courage of the soldier.

    [p.184]

    A better evidence of courage is given by the solitary sentinel upon his beat; when alone under the quiet stars he walks the path of danger, uncertain where it may be lurking or from what quarter it may come; when the shouts of his comrades are hushed in slumber; when the soul-stirring drum and ear-piercing fife are silent; when the excitement which comes from action, and the tumult of glorious battle no longer sustain him -- then if his spirit fails him not, and he calmly and alone faces the danger and does his duty, he gives his commander a better evidence of his courage than he will ever give in the mad recklessness of the charge.

    As dogs best hunt in packs, so men best fight in armies; and so, too, do men best stand by their convictions when strengthened by that moral support which comes from the approval of their fellows. But, as I remarked, the truest test of moral courage is to stand alone and maintain what one either knows or believes to be the truth against the sneers and ridicule of the world.

    When the one who stands alone against millions is young, and the influences brought to bear against him are the most powerful that can be employed; if he break not down, but steadily holds to the assertion or principle which gives offense, his courage and integrity must stand as presumptive evidence that he either has the truth or what he believes to be the truth, for out and out falsehood has no such heroes. The truth alone, or what is honesty taken for it, can support men in such an issue as this. And more especially is this the case if the one undergoing the trial, in addition to tender years, is also unschooled in the vices of the world, is of quick sympathies and easily persuaded.

    [p.184 - p.186]

    Such was Joseph Smith when he received that vision of the Father and the Son described in the preceding chapter. He had but just completed his fourthteenth year. The conditions amid which he spent his childhood -- not yet ended -- were such as to keep him innocent; and his deep filial love and strong affection for brothers and sisters gave evidence of the existence in him of those quick sympathies which in later life developed into that deep universal love for his fellow-men so characteristic of him; while the disposition to yield to the persuasion of his friends was so prominent in him as well nigh to amount to weakness. [a] Thus in him were all those qualities of character, and about him were all those conditions, which make his stand for the truth of his story of such great force as presumptive evidence of its correctness; for notwithstanding his youth, his inclination to yield to the persuasions of friends, his deep sympathetic soul, which was pained at the abuse heaped upon his parents as well as upon himself for asserting that he had seen a vision -- notwithstanding all this, he never could be induced either by persuasion, by threats, by scoffs, by scorn or ridicule, or religious influence, or abuse heaped upon himself and family, to retract his declaration that he had seen a heavenly vision in which he beheld both God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ.

    [p.186]

    He made no secret of the vision. Only a few days after receiving it, being in company with a prominent Methodist minister, he gave him an account of the revelation which he had received from God, when to the boy's astonishment the minister railed most viciously against it. Writing of those early experiences later in life the Prophet said:

    "He treated my communication not only lightly but with great contempt, saying it was all of the devil, that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days; that all such things had ceased with the apostles, and that there would never be any more of them. I soon found, however, that by telling the story I had excited a great deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was the cause of great persecution, which continue to increase, and though I was an obscure boy, only between fourteen and fifteen years of age, and my circumstances in life such as to make a boy of no consequence in the world, yet men of high standing would take notice sufficient to excite the public mind against me, and create a bitter persecution, and this was common among all the sects, all united to persecute me.

    [p.187]

    "It caused me serious reflection then, and often has since, how very strange it was that an obscure boy, of a little over fourteen years of age, and one, too, who was doomed to the necessity of obtaining a scanty maintenance by his daily labor, should be thought a character of sufficient importance to attract the attention of the great ones of the most popular sects of the day, so as to create in them a spirit of the most bitter persecution and reviling. But strange or not, so it was, and it was often the cause of great sorrow to myself. However, it was, nevertheless, a fact that I had beheld a vision. I have thought since that I felt much like Paul when he made his defense before King Agrippa, and related the account of the vision he had when he saw a light and heard a voice, but still there were but a few who believed him; some said he was dishonest; others said he was mad, and he was ridiculed and reviled; but all this did not destroy the reality of his vision. He had seen a vision, he knew he had, and all of the persecution under heaven could not make it otherwise; and though they should persecute him unto death, yet he knew and would know to his latest breath that he had both seen a light, and heard a voice speaking unto him, and all the world could not make him think or believe otherwise.

    "So it was with me; I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely, for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute for telling the truth? I had actually seen a vision, and who am I that I can withstand God? Oh why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision, I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God and come under condemnation." [b]

    [p.187 - p.188]

    This statement the boy maintained alone (save such support as came from the belief of his own family, none of the immediate members of which, so far as I have learned, ever doubting his story), against the world for three years; without even the encouragement of a further spiritual manifestation. It would be improper, as I believe, to say that God did this to prove him. The Almighty, who is also All Knowing, knew before the test was made that he would endure it. God knew his spirit and its nobility and strength as he knew Messiah's or Abraham's; he knew it as he knew the spirit of Jeremiah and ordained him, too, to be a prophet to the nations before he was born. [c] But if God needed no new evidence of the strength of character possessed by his New Witness; if he needed no proof of his integrity, his devotion to the truth -- the world did; and during that period of three years of sore trial, when alone he maintained the truth against scoffing priests, the gibes of his companions, and the sneers, ridicule and unbelief of the world, he gave to the generation in which he lived and to all generations succeeding, such evidence of his integrity to the truth, or what at least he believed to be true, as ought and will secure the respectful attention of sincere men to the testimony he bears for God.

    [p.188 - p.189]

    The constancy of the lad, under all the circumstances, laid deep the foundation for faith in the man, and in the work which, under God, he founded. There were so many interests -- the peace of himself and family; his own and his family's good name and standing in society; the applause of religionists who would have hailed with delight his renunciation of the vision as a delusion of the devil -- all these things cried out, "Renounce it!" But the fact that to all such demands the lad shouted back, "'Tis God's truth, I saw the vision!" -- will go far towards making men believe that he did; for had he been base enough to invent such a story, when he found that it made against his interest and brought nothing but reproaches, without doubt, he would have denied it; for men seldom persist in conscious falsehood which works only to their disadvantage. And in this instance the renunciation would have been so easy by calling it a delusion wrought by the adversary of men's souls, by which he had been deceived. But neither ease of denial nor the seeming advantages to accrue from it moved him; against it all he was supported by the consciousness of having told the truth. Unless indeed we can believe him so insane as to have been a candidate for disgrace, and ambitious of the contempt of his fellows.

    [p.189]

    At the end of three years' silence, viz., on the 21st of September, 1823, he was blessed with another vision. During the three years he was left to stand alone he lays no claim to perfect sanctity, but freely confesses to have fallen frequently into "foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the corruption of human nature." In consequence of these things he often felt condemned; and on the above mentioned 21st of September, he betook himself to prayer to Almighty God, sought a remission of his sins, and asked for a manifestation of his standing before the Lord.

    While thus calling upon God in prayer, the room in which he knelt was filled with light, and an angel stood in his presence, who announced himself a messenger sent from God to inform him that the Lord had a work for him to do; and that his name should be had for good and evil among all nations; or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people. [d]

    [p.189 - p.190]

    Moroni, for such was the angel's name, was one of the ancient prophets who had lived in America; he was now raised from the dead, [e] and had come to make known the existence of the record of the ancient inhabitants of the western hemisphere. Besides giving an account of the ancient peoples who inhabited America, and the source whence they sprang, this record also contained the fullness of the gospel as delivered by the Savior to them. Hidden with the record were two stones in silver bows, and the bows fastened to a breastplate, constituting the Urim and Thummim. The ability to use the Urim and Thummim was what constituted seers in ancient times, and they had been deposited with this record for the purpose of translating it.

    [p.190]

    After these explanations, Moroni began quoting and explaining a number of the prophecies of the Old Testament. Following are the passages in the order in which he quoted them: Part of the 3rd chapter of Malachi, 4th chapter of Malachi; 11th chapter of Isaiah -- saying it was about to be fulfilled; 3rd chapter of Acts, 22nd and 23rd verses, saying that the prophet therein named was Jesus Christ, but the time when those who would not hear his voice should be cut off from among the people had not yet come, but would soon come; 2nd chapter of Joel, from 28th verse to the last: this was not fulfilled, but soon would be.

    Some of the passages he quoted differently from the way they read in our English version. Malachi 3rd chapter, 1st verse, for example, he quoted as follows:

    "For behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall burn as stubble; for they that come shall burn them, saith the Lord of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch."

    The 5th and 6th verses he quoted thus:

    "Behold I will reveal unto you the priesthood by the hand of Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers; if it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming."

    [p.190 - p.191]

    This heavenly messenger appeared to him three times during that night and each time related the same things to him, the interviews occupying nearly the whole night.

    [p.191]

    The next day while working beside his father in a field Joseph was taken ill. His father observing it advised him to go to the house. This the boy started to do, but in climbing over the fence, which separated the field from the house, his strength utterly failed him, and he sank to the ground unconscious. He was aroused by some one calling his name, and when he regained consciousness the messenger of the night before stood near him. Again the things of the night before were repeated; and he received a commandment to go and tell his father the vision. This he did and his father encouraged him to do as he had been commanded. He accordingly went as directed in his vision to the place where the record of the ancient Americans was concealed -- to a hill called by them Cumorah.

    Removing the grass and soil which was about the edges of the stone box that contained the ancient record, with a lever he raised the lid and there saw the gold plates and the Urim and Thummim. He was about to take them from the box, when the angel Moroni again stood before him, and forbade his taking them out, as the time for them to be given to him for translation had not yet come, nor would it come until four years from that date. He was commanded to come at the end of each year to that place, and the angel would meet him to give the necessary instruction.

    This Joseph did for four successive years, and each time met the same heavenly messenger and received instruction. On the occasion of the fourth meeting, viz., on the 22nd of September, 1827, the record was given into his hands to translate. This work of translation, through the grace of God, he accomplished, and in 1830 the Book of Mormon was published to the world.

    [p.192]

    Before it was published, the plates of gold on which it had been engraven by the ancient inhabitants of the land, were shown by the angel Moroni to Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris, together with the Urim and Thummim through which the translation was effected; and their testimony to this fact was printed over their signatures on the fly-leaf of the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith himself exhibited the plates to eight other persons, viz.: Christian, Jacob, Peter and John Whitmer; Hiram Page, Joseph Smith, Sen., Hyrum Smith and Samuel H. Smith. The testimony of these eight witnesses to the effect that they had seen, and handled the plates from which the Book of Mormon had been translated, and examined the characters engraven thereon, was also printed in the first and all subsequent authorized editions of the book. [f]

    It must be understood that during the progress of the young Prophet's work, persecution was continuous; and slander with her thousand tongues was inventing falsehood to destroy the work of God. But while opposition was strong, the Lord from time to time raised up friends to assist him in his labors and share his responsibilities. Among such persons was one Oliver Cowdery, a young school teacher, who while following his profession in the town of Manchester, was boarding in the family of Joseph Smith's parents, from whom he learned of the revelations of God to Joseph, and of his having the record of the ancient inhabitants of America.

    [p.192 - p.193]

    The youthful Prophet at this time was living at Harmony, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. He had married a Miss Emma Hale and settled there on a piece of land purchased of his father-in-law. Oliver Cowdery went to Harmony to investigate the claims of Joseph Smith, both in respect to his receiving revelations from God and having the Book of Mormon. He became satisfied upon both points and remained with him to act as his scribe in the work of translation.

    [p.193]

    In May, 1829, the work of translation drawing near to completion, they came upon a passage in the Book of Mormon respecting baptism, upon which they held different views. They retired to the woods on the 15th of May to present the matter before the Lord for further light, and while engaged in calling upon God in prayer, a personage appeared to them surrounded by a glorious light, who, as he laid his hands upon their heads, said: "Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness."

    The Messenger who thus conferred the Aaronic priesthood upon them was named John, the same that is called the Baptist in the New Testament. He had been raised from the dead, and was now sent as a messenger from God to confer the keys of the Aaronic priesthood upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. He told them that he acted under the direction of the apostles Peter, James and John, and that some time in the near future the Melchizedek or higher priesthood would be conferred upon them. He then commanded them to each baptize the other, Joseph to first baptize Oliver, and then Oliver to baptize Joseph. Thus the work of baptizing men for the remission of sins began in the new dispensation.

    [p.193 - p.194]

    Some time in the following month, June, 1829, the promise made by John to Joseph and Oliver that the Melchizedek priesthood would be conferred upon them was fulfilled. In the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna County, Penn., and Colesville, Broom County, New York, on the banks of the Susquehanna River, Peter, James and John conferred upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery the apostleship, the keys of the Melchizedek priesthood, which gave them the right to build up the church of Christ in all the world, and organize it in all its departments.

    [p.194]

    It is proper here to say a few words upon the subject of priesthood. Priesthood is power which God confers upon man, by which he becomes an agent for God, authorized to act in his name. It may be to warn a city or nation of approaching calamity because of corruption; it may be to teach faith in God, or cry repentance to the wicked; it may be to baptize in water for the remission of sins, or lay on hands, as the ancient apostles did, for the baptism of the Holy Spirit; or it may be to lay on hands for the healing of the sick, or all these things combined. Men who hold the priesthood possess divine authority thus to act for God; and by possessing part of God's power they are in reality part of God, that is, in the sense of being part of the great governing power that extends throughout the universe. This is the authority of men that hold the priesthood, and when those who possess it walk in obedience to the commandments of God, men who honor the priesthood in them, honor God; and those who reject it reject God, even the power of God.

    [p.194 - p.195]

    It was doubtless these considerations which led Jesus to say, when sending out his apostles to preach the gospel: "He that receiveth you receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me. * * * And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." [h]

    [p.195]

    Considered in the light of these sayings of Jesus, the priesthood is a solemn thing. To hold power delegated to one by Almighty God -- to have authority to speak and act in his name, and have it of the same binding force as if the Deity himself spoke or acted, is both an honor and a responsibility which few men comprehend. It is an awe-inspiring thing. Yet such authority God does confer upon men. It was bestowed upon the Patriarchs before the flood, upon Melchizedek, Abraham, Moses, and the prophets. It was given to the apostles through Jesus; he said to Peter, "'I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." [i] These mighty keys of authority were conferred, as related in the foregoing, upon Joseph Smith, and by that authority he organized the Church and regulated its affairs up to the time of his death.

    [p.195 - p.196]

    The Church of Jesus Christ, in the new dispensation under the direction of revelation from God, was organized on the 6th day of April, 1830. That organization was very simple; it was effected with six members. Joseph Smith was acknowledged as the first Elder of the Church, and Oliver Cowdery as the second Elder; but before the meeting which organized the Church adjourned, the Church was commanded to keep a record in which the Prophet Joseph was to be called "a seer, a translator, a prophet, an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, an Elder of the church." [j] The more complete organization of the Church with Apostles, Seventies, High Priests, Elders, Bishops, Priests, Teachers and Deacons, was a later development, and will receive attention in a subsequent chapter.

    [p.196]

    In the month of February, 1832, Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon [k] were wrapt in vision, in which they beheld the Son of God and conversed with him -- let them bear their own testimony:

    [p.196 - p.197]

    "We, Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, being in the spirit on the sixteenth of February, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-two, by the power of the spirit our eyes were opened and our understandings were enlightened, so as to see and understand the things of God -- even those things which were from the beginning, before the world was, which were ordained of the Father, through his Only Begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, even from the beginning, of whom we bear record, and the record which we bear is the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, who is the Son, whom we saw and with whom we conversed in the heavenly vision for while we were doing the work of translation, which the Lord had appointed unto us, we came to the twenty-ninth verse of the fifth chapter of John, which was given to us as follows. Speaking of the resurrection of the dead, concerning those who shall hear the voice of the Son of Man, and shall come forth: They who have done good in the resurrection of the just and they who have done evil in the resurrection of the unjust. [l] Now this caused us to marvel, for it was given unto us of the Spirit; and while we meditated upon these things, the Lord touched the eyes of our understandings and they were opened, and the glory of the Lord shone round about; and we beheld the glory of the Son, on the right hand of the Father, and received of his fullness; and saw the holy angels, and they who are sanctified before his throne, worshiping God, and the Lamb, who worship him forever and ever. And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony last of all, which we give of him, that he lives; for we saw him, even on the right hand of God, and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father -- that by him, and through him, and of him the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God. [m]

    [p.197]

    Four years after the vision of Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, viz., April 6th, 1836, other visions of Jesus Christ and several mighty angels were given to the Prophet and Oliver Cowdery. The visions occurred during the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. The first was of Jesus Christ, who declared his acceptance of the temple. The angels came to deliver certain keys of authority to Joseph Smith. Following is the Prophet's account of the several manifestations:

    [p.197 - p.198]

    "The vail was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us, and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold in color like amber. His eyes were as a flame of fire, the hair of his head was white like the pure snow, his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying I am the first and the last, I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain, I am your advocate with the Father. Behold, your sins are forgiven you, you are clean before me, therefore lift up your heads and rejoice. Let the hearts of your brethren rejoice, and let the hearts of all my people rejoice who have, with their might, built this house to my name, for behold, I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here, and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in the house, yea, I will appear unto my servants, and speak unto them with mine own voice, if my people will keep my commandments, and do not pollute this holy house, yea, the hearts of thousands and tens of thousands shall greatly rejoice in consequence of the blessings which shall be poured out, and the endowment with which my servants have been endowed in this house; and the fame of this house shall spread to foreign lands, and this is the beginning of the blessing which shall be poured out upon the heads of my people, even so. Amen.

    [p.198]

    "After this vision closed, the heavens were again opened unto us, and Moses appeared before us and committed unto us the keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth, and the leading of the ten tribes from the land of the north.

    "After this, Elias appeared, and committed the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, saying, that in us, and our seed, all generations after us should be blessed.

    "After this vision had closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us, for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us, and said: Behold the time is fully come, which was spoken by the mouth of Malachi, testifying that he [Elijah] should be sent before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse. Therefore the keys of this dispensation are committed into your hands, and by this ye may know that the great and dreadful day of the Lord is near, even at the doors." [n]

    [p.198 - p.199]

    There were numerous other revelations given to Joseph Smith and to others through him; for he was God's mouthpiece to men in this new dispensation, both before and after the church was organized. Some of these revelations were received through the Urim and Thummim which the angel Moroni gave into his possession in connection with the gold plates of the Book of Mormon. [o] Other revelations were received through inspiration from God acting directly upon the Prophet. Of the manner in which these last named revelations were received, a prominent writer and officer in the church who was present on several such occasions, says:

    [p.199]

    "Each sentence was uttered slowly and very distinctly, and with a pause between each sufficiently long for it to be recorded by an ordinary writer in long hand. This was the manner in which all his written revelations were dictated and written. There was never any hesitation, reviewing or reading back to keep the thread of the subject; neither did any of these communications undergo revisions, interlinings, or corrections. As he dictated them, so they stood, so far as I have witnessed; and I was present to witness the dictation of several communications of several pages." [p]

    With the revelations thus received, as well as those received through the Urim and Thummim, we shall have more or less to do in this work; but the visions and ministrations of angels related in this and the preceding chapter constitute the basis upon which the work of God in this new dispensation is founded. From the information and authority received through them comes the organization of the Church of Christ and the proclamation of the Gospel in all the world.

    [p.199 - p.200]

    The manifestations are of a character which preclude all possibility of the parties who received them being mistaken. If the great work of God in these last days, were founded alone upon the internal inspiration or illumination of the Prophet Joseph, the probability of his belonging to that very large number of well-meaning but mistaken men who have thought themselves inspired of God would be very much in creased; for nothing is more common perhaps, in the phenomena of mind than self-deception in such matters. "Mormonism," however, came into existence not alone from internal inspiration, or divine inward illumination of Joseph Smith; but from revelations that had an external source as well; revelations which appeal to the senses -- perceptions of the mind, as well as to the inner consciousness. Review them I pray you:

    [p.200]

    1. God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ are beheld in the full light of day -- nay, in an effulgence of light, brighter than the sunlight at noon-day. And a direct conversation is held with them upon a matter-of-fact subject for some length of time.

    2. One of the resurrected prophets of ancient America, Moroni, appears three times in one night to the Prophet, and twice the following day; he conversed upon a variety of subjects, but the main purpose of his visitation was to reveal the existence of the record of an ancient people. At the end of each year, for four successive years, this same heavenly messenger repeats his visits, and at the last gives into the possession of Joseph Smith a volume of gold plates, the engravings on which the Prophet translated into the English language.

    3. An angel exhibits these same plates to three other men, and permits them to examine the engravings thereon. [q]

    4. Eight other men see and handle the plates and examine the characters engraven on them. [r]

    5. Another angel, John the Baptist, also a resurrected prophet, appears in broad day light and lays his hands upon the heads of two men, viz: Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, and ordains them to the Aaronic priesthood.

    [p.201]

    6. Three of the ancient apostles, (Peter, James and John) appear and ordain the same men to the Melchizedek or higher priesthood.

    7. Jesus is seen by two men, viz., Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, at the right hand of God the Father, and a protracted conversation ensues. [s]

    8. Jesus is again seen in the Temple at Kirtland, by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and again his voice is heard.

    9. On the same occasion Moses, Elias, and Elijah, the prophet, appeared and conferred certain keys of authority upon two men -- Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery.

    Now all this appeals to the outward senses. It is matter of fact. It is tangible. It all occurred and is a solemn verity, or it is all wicked fabrication. A fabrication it is possible for it to be, but it can never be resolved into a mere mistake -- a self-deception. The men who affirm all of it to have taken place may have been villains, bent on deluding mankind; for wicked men still lie in wait to deceive; but they can never be classed as well-meaning but mistaken men. Either what Joseph Smith and his associates affirm is true, or they are base and conscious imposters. The manifestations of which they proclaim themselves witnesses are so palpable to the senses -- to sight, and touch and hearing; they occur at such times and places, and under such circumstances, and are so frequently repeated, that there can be no possibility of mistake. In the consideration of their testimony, therefore, there is no middle ground between the extremes of absolute truthfulness or absolute falsehood, and I ask the readers of this book to take up the investigation upon which we are about to enter in this spirit.





    Chapter  XII.  Notes.



    183 -- Ch. 12:

    A New Dispensation of the Gospel.

    a After the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated were delivered to the Prophet Joseph, the Lord had occasion to reprove him several times for his disposition to yield to the persuasion of men. When he received the record of the Nephites the Lord put him under a covenant to how them to no one except to those to whom the Lord should command him to show them (Doc. & Cov., Sec, v: 3). When he had translated enough to make 116 pages of old foolscap manuscript, Martin Harris continually importuned him to be allowed to show that much of the work to his friends. This the Lord forbade, but Harris continuing his importunings, and Joseph in turn petitioning the Lord at Harris’ request, permission was at last granted, and the MS. was stolen. Joseph, for thus yielding to the persuasion of Martin Harris after the word of the Lord was known, lost for a season his gift to translate, and the plates were taken from him. When they were returned, and permission given to continue the work of translation, the Lord thus reproved him for his disposition to yield to persuasion: “Behold, you have been intrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember, also, the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them; and behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men!” (Doc. & Cov., Sec. iii.) And again the Lord said to him: “And now, I command you, my servant Joseph, to repent and walk more uprightly before me, and yield to the persuasions of men no more; and that you be firm in keeping the commandments wherewith I have commanded you, and if you do this, behold I grant unto you eternal life, even if you should be slain.” (Doc. & Cov., Sec. v.) But this characteristic was only manifested early in his career. Or if it appeared later in life, it was only in relation to things indifferent--that is, in things that did not involve a sacrifice of principle.

    b Extracts from the History of Joseph Smith, “Pearl of Great Price,” (1902 edition always quoted), pp. 86-87. Also “History of the Church,” Vol. I, ch. i.

    c “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.”--The Lord to Jeremiah (Jeremiah ch. i: 5).

    d “Pearl of Great Price,” pp. 88, 89.

    e It certainly ought not to be difficult for Christians to believe in the existence of resurrected men; for in Matthew’s Gospel we read: ‘And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his [Christ’s] resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many” (Matt. xxvii: 52, 53). If the ancient saints on the eastern hemisphere who were worthy arose from the dead after the resurrection of Jesus, it is not improbable, but rather reasonable, that the worthy saints who had lived upon the western hemisphere also should be raised from the dead.

    f This is a very brief and imperfect account of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. A fuller account is given in Vol. II, Part II, ch. iv. of this work--“New Witnesses.”

    g ??? -- none ?

    h Matt. x.

    i Matt. xvi.

    j Doc. & Cov., Sec. xxi.

    k Sidney Rigdon, born in Pennsylvania, 19th of February, 1793, had been prominently connected with what is known as the “Campbellite” or Reformed Baptist movement in the United States; but was converted to a belief in the restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith, by Elder Parley P. Pratt, who first presented him with the Book of Mormon. At the time indicated in the text he was a prominent Elder in the Church and closely associated with Joseph Smith.

    l In the English version of the New Testament the passage reads: “And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life: and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of damnation.” St. John v. 29.

    m Doc. and Dov., Sec. lxxvi.

    n Doc. and Cov., Sec. cx.

    o The revelations known to have been received through the Urim and Thummim are the following: Doc. and Cov. Sec. iii, Ibid, Sec. vi, Sec. vii, Sec. xi, Sec. xiv, Sec. xv, Sec. xvi, Sec. xviii. There were doubtless others received through that sacred instrument, but these are specially mentioned as being so received.

    p “Autb. of Parley P. Pratt,” pp. 65, 66.

    q See Testimony of the Three Witnesses, published with the Book of Mormon.

    r Ibid, Testimony of the Eight Witnesses.



     

    [ 202 ]




    CHAPTER  XIII.


    Objections To The Witness Considered.

    Since, as we have seen, a new dispensation of the gospel in the last days is to be given to man; and as neither the "Reformers" of the sixteenth century, nor any person since their day and before Joseph Smith has even made any pretension that God by a new revelation and the ministry of angels restored the gospel; and as that is the manner in which God has promised to restore the gospel, may not Joseph Smith be the prophet of the New Dispensation, the instrument in the hands of God to bring to pass his purpose in the great work of the last days? Some man must be chosen, why not he?

    These questions lead me to the consideration of those objections urged against Joseph Smith as reasons for believing that he was not a prophet of God. First of all, I shall consider the one made against him on account of his humble birth and lowly station in life.

    It would be well-nigh an endless, as also a useless task to repeat what has been said of Joseph Smith on this score. Not content with the facts in the case, malice has employed misrepresentation to degrade his family in the estimation of the world; and sneer and ridicule have done what they could to cast discredit upon his pretensions, by pointing to the rock from whence he was hewn, and the supposed pit from whence he was digged. His friends and followers are prepared to admit the whole truth in respect to his humble origin and lowly station in life. The character of his parents, the circumstances under which he himself was reared are detailed in chapter ten of this book.

    [p.202 - p.203]

    It will be remembered that his forefathers were among the earlier settlers of New England; that his father was a farmer, industrious, honorable, though in humble circumstance; and under the necessity of laboring with his hands in wood or field to support his large family. It has already been said that the youthful Prophet Joseph shared these labors.

    [p.203]

    But of what value is the objection of lowly birth and humble station? Is it to be argued that if the Lord had a communication to make to mankind, such as Joseph Smith claims to have received, he would have chosen some of the great ones of the earth, one of high birth, of vast fortune, of profound learning, of deep knowledge and famous for eloquence? Such a one man might choose, but how often has God done otherwise! Let the roll in part be called: Moses and Aaron, the sons of an Israelitish slave; Joshua, the same; David, a shepherd; the prophet Amos, a shepherd and dresser of sycamore trees; the apostles of Jesus Christ, men of the lowliest birth and humblest occupations; Peter and Andrew his brother, were fishermen; John and James, the sons of Zebedee, also fishermen; Matthew, a despised tax-collector; Paul, a tent-maker; and while of the occupations of the rest of the apostles nothing is known definitely, we have every reason to believe that they were men of humble extraction and occupation.

    [p.203 - p.204]

    These are some of those whom God called to do his work. He has not always confined his choice to men of this class; sometimes he has chosen men of royal descent and from what are called the higher walks of life. Because Deity has chosen his servants so frequently from those of humble extraction and occupation, it is not for me to flout the rich and learned and great. That were an arrogance as offensive to the spirit of right reason and to heaven, as that which I condemn in those who affect to despise the Prophet Joseph because of his humble birth and circumstances. By citing the fact that God in other ages has chosen men of lowly birth and humble occupation, I only desire to show that there is no value in the objection urged against Joseph Smith on the ground of his humble station in life.

    [p.204]

    Let Joseph Smith's birth be as humble as it will, it cannot be more lowly than that of Jesus Christ. The fortunes of the mother of the Prophet were not more fallen than those of Mary, the mother of Jesus. A log house in Sharon, Vermont, was not a more humble birthplace than a stable in Bethlehem. The rude cradle of Joseph Smith, made by his father's hands, though rough hewn, was at least equal to the ruder manger of the stable at Bethlehem; and the occupation of husbandman, which the father of Joseph followed, and in which the Prophet in boyhood assisted him, is not more humble as an occupation than that of a carpenter which the supposed father of Jesus followed, and in which Jesus doubtless assisted him, before entering upon his public ministry. Indeed, I may say that neither Joseph Smith nor any other prophet has been permitted to start from a more lowly station in life than the Son of God; for it is fitting that he who is to ascend above all things -- all heights, principalities and powers, should also descend below all things, that he might in all things touch all points of human experience so that whatever the experience of man might be, however lowly his station, however distressing his misfortunes; however poor, forsaken, desolate; however ridiculed, despised, hated, persecuted; however tempted -- looking down from his exalted throne at the right hand of God, with his soul swelling with compassion, Jesus might say -- "The Son of Man hath descended below them all." [a]

    [p.205]

    The objections urged against Joseph Smith on the ground of his lowly birth and humble occupation are without value. Writing to the saints at Corinth, the apostle to the Gentiles says: "For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to naught things which are." [b] The reason God assigns for pursuing such a course in the selection of his servants is said to be, "That no flesh should glory in his presence. * * * That, according as it is written, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." [c] If the wisdom of this method of procedure does not appeal to the intelligence of man, let him accept it as an evidence that God's ways are not as man's ways, nor his thoughts as man's thoughts. Of this, too, we may be assured-that as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are God's ways higher than man's ways; and his thoughts than man's thoughts. [d] Moreover, as I have remarked elsewhere,e it has become proverbial that all great movements, all reformations, all revolutions must produce their own leaders; and this is true of the great work of the last days -- the establishment of the Church of Christ on earth -- as it is of any other great movement. Leaders in established usages and institutions, political, social or religious, are seldom or never converted to innovations. They usually consider it to their interest to oppose change, especially those changes which from their very nature, cast any shadow of doubt upon the correctness of existing customs or institutions with which they are connected. Hence it happened that the Jewish Rabbis, the priests, the scribes, the members of the great Sanhedrin did not accept the doctrine of Messiah and become the chief apostles, seventies and elders of the new church. On the contrary, this class were the stubbornest opponents of the doctrines taught by the Son of God, and his most implacable enemies. It was the common people who heard him gladly, and from their number he chose the apostles, who through the God-given powers of the priesthood conferred upon them, shook the old systems of morals and religion from their foundations.

    [p.206 - p.207]

    From the very nature of things it must be necessary that men whose minds are unwarped by prevailing customs and traditions, should be selected to establish a new order of religion, of government or society. How could the Jewish priests and rabbis, bound by long custom to a slavish adherence to the outward forms and ceremonies of the Mosaic ritual, the spirit of which had long been made of no effect by the rubbish of false traditions, open their minds to receive the larger and nobler doctrines of the gospel of Christ unmixed with the pomp and circumstance which men of that age considered essential to religion? Can men educated to an attachment for despotic government, and whose interests are bound up with its maintenance, be expected to look with favor on democratic principles, or become the champions of a republic?

    [p.207]

    Finally, were the religious leaders of the early part of the nineteenth century, educated to the idea that revelation had ceased; that the voice of prophecy was forever silenced; that the ministration of angels was ended; that the miraculous powers of the Holy Ghost were done away; that the ancient organization of the church was no longer needed -- were such men, filled with pride which the learning of the world too often infuses into the hearts of those who possess it -- were such men qualified to stand at the head of and become leading actors in the dispensation of the fullness of times? A dispensation opened by a new revelation, by numerous visitations of angels, and to end eventually in the full establishment of the Church of Christ, the restoration of the house of Israel and the complete redemption of the earth and all its inhabitants?

    Such a work was too large, too high and too deep for minds filled with false sectarian ideas. Hence God chose for his servant to stand at the head of this great and last dispensation, a man whose mind was unwarped by false education; but one of large capacity; possessing breadth and freedom of thought, of sanguine, fearless temperament: a child of nature, with a conscience unseared by worldly guile and a stranger to motives other than those dictated by an honest purpose; and withal, full of implicit confidence in God -- a confidence born of a living faith in the fact of Deity's existence, and a consciousness of the rectitude of his own intentions and life.

    [p.208]

    As ill-founded as the objection based upon his humble parentage and station in life is that objection which arises out of the fact that he was evil spoken of by the world. Let not the reader here confound reputation with character. They are quite distinct, I assure you. The latter is what one is; the former may be a fool's estimate of one; or, even worse, it may be and often is a thing created by liars and knaves -- formed by misrepresentations and set on its feet by malice. When favorable it is often obtained without merit, and as often lost without deserving. But with character it is not so. That stands independent of the estimate of fools or the misrepresentation of knaves. It is formed in great part by ourselves; in part by our surroundings; in part by God. It is what we are irrespective of what the world may think or say of us.

    I have said so much that the reader may be reminded that a man's character may be good, while his reputation may be villainous; or vice versa. There is nothing, therefore, that is so unsafe a criterion by which to estimate a man as by what the world says of him -- by his reputation.

    Especially is this true of the servants of God. Commissioned as they usually are to reprove the world of sin and unrighteousness, and to call mankind to repentance, they have appeared as rude disturbers of the peace and ease of mankind -- iconoclasts bent on breaking the images on which men set their hearts. The world does not love them, and what it hates it maligns -- and thence, with the world, springs the reputation of the servants of God. The balances in which they are weighed are false, hence the announcement of their value from that source is untrue.

    [p.208 - p.209]

    Judged by his reputation with the world when he lived among men, the Lord Jesus himself would be condemned as a blaspheming malefactor; a violator of ancient customs; a traitor to Caesar's government; one so base as to be in league with Lucifer by whose power he cast out devils; by magic healed the sick and blind and halt; who for his many crimes was crucified between two thieves; and whose body his disciples -- being of like spirit with their master -- stole, and then sent out the lying report that Jesus was risen from the dead. Such was the world's account of Christ, in his day, and in the days of his apostles -- such the reputation of the Son of God! If judged by it would he not be rejected as an imposter? How unjust would such a judgment be! To those who reject Joseph Smith as a servant and witness for God, because he was, and is evil spoken of by the world, I put this question: "May not the judgment you pass upon him -- which you base upon what the world, and generally what his enemies, say of him, be equally unjust and untrue?"

    [p.209]

    Jesus said to the apostles:

    "If the world hate you ye know it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world but I have chosen you out of the world; therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, the servant is not greater than his Lord. If they have persecuted me they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying they will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake because they know not him that sent me." [f]

    [p.209 - p.210]

    In the light of these sayings of the Lord Jesus, of what value is the objection urged against Joseph Smith as a Prophet and witness for God based upon the fact that he was evil spoken of by the world? Why, since he was a servant of the Most High, sent to reprove the world of its unrighteousness, may we not reasonably expect that the world would speak evil of him? Would there not be something manifestly wrong if it did not do it? "Blessed are ye," said Jesus, "when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil for the Son of Man's sake. Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy; for behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in like manner did their fathers unto the prophets." [g]

    It is nothing strange, then, that the great Prophet of the new dispensation should be spoken evil against. 'Tis an old tale, this slandering of God's servants by the world, so old that one wonders that men have not become so accustomed to it that they can assign to it its true importance, or rather its want of importance. But it seems to be the doom of every age in this matter to follow in the footsteps of that which preceded it -- to build the tombs of the prophets and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, "If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets." [h] And yet with strange inconsistency, these builders of tombs, these garnishers of sepulchres, while they profess to honor the prophets of past ages, persecute to the death the prophets of their own days. Stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, they do always resist the Holy Ghost: as their fathers did, so do they -- which of the prophets have they not persecuted? [i]

    [p.210 - p.211]

    "Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers of the false prophets!" [j] Stranger grows the inconsistency of human conduct. The true rejected; the false enshrined! and so common has become the practice that one great thinkerk touching the theme said: 'There is always something great in that man against whom the world exclaims, at whom every one throws a stone, and on whose character all attempt to fix a thousand crimes without being able to prove one."

    [p.211]

    Here I may pause again to ask: What is the value of the objection made to Joseph Smith as a Prophet and witness for God, based upon the fact that he was evil spoken of by the world? That has been the heritage of the servants of God so long that the memory of man runneth not to the contrary. Had Joseph Smith failed to have received this treatment at the hands of the world, he would have failed of one of the marks of a true Prophet. Had he been received with open arms by the world, he could with some effect have been denounced as a false prophet; for in such manner they have been received: -- "Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you, for so did their fathers of the false prophets!" The fact here stated by the Son of God is a complete answer to the objections based on the calumny of the world against the prophets of God in all subsequent times; and no less an answer to the objections urged against Joseph Smith than to other prophets.





    Chapter  XIII.  Notes.


    202 -- Ch. 13:

    Objections to the Witness Considered.

    a These were the words of the Lord to Joseph Smith when confined a prisoner for the truth’s sake in Liberty Jail, Clay County, State of Missouri: “If thou art called to pass through tribulation: if thou art in perils among false brethren; if thou art in perils among robbers; if thou art in perils by land or by sea; if thou art accused with all manner of false accusations; if thine enemies fall upon thee * * * * and if thou shouldst be cast into the pit, or into the hands of murderers, and the sentence of death be passed upon thee; if thou be cast into the deep; if the billowing surge conspire against thee; if fierce winds become thine enemy; if the heavens gather blackness, and all the elements combine to hedge up thy way; and above all, if the very jaws of hell shall gape open the mouth wide after thee, know thou, my son, that all these things shall give thee experience, and shall be for thy good. The Son of Man hath descended below them all.” (Doc. and Cov. Sec. cxxii.) So also Paul: “Where in all things it behooved him [Jesus] to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For that he himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted. (Heb. ii: 17, 18.)

    b I Cor. i: 26, 27.

    c I Cor. i: 29, 31.

    d Isaiah lv: 8, 9.

    e Life of John Taylor, chapter 1.

    f St. John xv: 18-21.

    g Luke vi: 22, 23.

    h Matt. xxiii: 29.

    i Acts vii: 51, 52.

    j Luke vi: 26.

    k Zimmerman.



     

    [ 212 ]




    CHAPTER  XIV.


    The Character Of The New Witnesses.

    It will be argued that the ancient and true prophets were falsely accused, and proceeded against, not because they were law-breakers and immoral persons, but because of the message they bore; while it is charged that Joseph Smith was a very vile person, lawless and immoral, and so odious at the last that the people rose en masse and crushed him! Thus has reasoned every persecutor in every age from Cain to the last under whose hands a martyr fell. Can it in reason be expected that human nature will fall so low that we shall find men who will be so recklessly wicked as to avow their intention to kill men for righteousness sake? Why even devils seek out some semblance of virtue in which to enshroud their evil deeds. There never yet was man so vile, if he retained his reason, but sought out some excuse to sanctify his crime. It was not because Jesus of Nazareth was pure and upright in his own heart; gracious in speech; dignified and gentle in action; merciful to the wayward; considerate to the unfortunate; loving and kind to the poor -- God-like in spirit, in thought, in conduct -- a reprover of the wicked, a reformer of evil ways -- it was not for these qualities that he was hailed before the high priest, thence to the Sanhedrin, there condemned and thence dragged to Pilate's judgment seat to have the sentence confirmed; and thence whipped through the streets of Jerusalem to Golgotha and there crucified! Not for his virtues was this done. Could any one suppose that the Sanhedrin of Israel, the dignified senate of the Jews, could condemn anyone to death for righteousness? No, certainly not!

    [p.213]

    It was because Jesus was to them a wicked imposter; who, being in the form of man, and so far as they could discern, very like the rest of his fellow-men -- made himself Goda -- was guilty of blasphemy. It was written in their law that he that blasphemed should be put to death, and all the people should say Amen. [b] Jesus was found guilty of blasphemy by the Sanhedrin, and accordingly condemned to death. The sentence was confirmed by the Roman judge and executed. The procedure was strictly according to the forms of the law, and to the Jews of that generation Jesus of Nazareth was not condemned and executed for that he was a prophet, and the Son of God; but because he was a pestilential fellow, a mover of sedition, a blaspheming imposter. And so it has been in all ages of the world. All the martyrs that ever fell were, to those who struck the blow, lawless, dangerous characters, of whom it were a blessing to rid the world; and so it promises to be to the last hour of recorded time.

    In view of the fact that so much which is evil has been said of Joseph Smith I think it proper here to give some account of his character. Of necessity what is said must be brief.

    [p.213 - p.214]

    It would be impossible as also unprofitable to reproduce all or any considerable part of what has been said of him by his enemies, since it would be only a repetition of slanders and untruths which have spent their force and accomplished nothing. It will be sufficient to say that on the unfriendly side it is claimed that -- in the language of one who in his life time was recognized as one of the world's leading scientists -- Professor Huxley -- "There is a complete consensus of testimony that the founder of Mormonism, one Joseph Smith, was a low-minded, ignorant scamp, and that he stole the 'scriptures,' which he propounded; not being clever enough to forge even such contemptible stuff as they contain. Nevertheless, he must have been a man of some force of character, for a considerable number of disciples soon gathered about him." [c]

    [p.214]

    I have selected this passage from a mass of such matter at command, first, because of the prominence of the one who utters it; second, because in it is focused the spirit of coarseness and vulgarity characteristic of all that has been said by those who have rejected the claims of Joseph Smith as a witness and Prophet of God; and third, because it may be looked upon as the "Complete consensus of the testimony" of his enemies, and presents all they have to say against him in a single sentence, slightly modified by one other sentence, recognizing the prophet's force of character.

    I am happy also in having another utterance, representative of another class of men who have viewed the character of the Prophet from the standpoint of the savant -- the dispassionate philosopher looking at passing events without prejudice, and speculating upon what shall grow out of them -- such was Josiah Quincy, author of the book "Figures of the Past." He visited Joseph Smith at Nauvoo a short time before the tragedy at Carthage, and after the Prophet's death, wrote:

    [p.214 - p.215]

    "It is by no means improbable that some future text-book, for the use of generations yet unborn, will contain a question something like this: What historical American of the nineteenth century has exerted the most powerful influence upon the destinies of his countrymen? And it is by no means impossible that the answer to that interrogatory may be thus written: Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet. And the reply, absurd as it doubtless seems to most men now, may be an obvious commonplace to their descendants. History deals in surprises and paradoxes quite as startling as this. The man who establishes a religion in this age of free debate, who was and is today accepted by hundreds of thousands as a direct emissary from the Most High -- such a rare human being is not to be disposed of by pelting his memory with unsavory epithets. * * * * The most vital questions Americans are asking each other today have to do with this man and what he has left us. * * * * Burning questions, they are, which must give a prominent place in the history of the country to that sturdy self-asserter whom I visited at Nauvoo. Joseph Smith, claiming to be an inspired teacher, faced adversity, such as few men have been called to meet, enjoyed a brief season of prosperity, such as few men have ever attained, and, finally, forty-three days after I saw him, went cheerfully to a martyr's death. When he surrendered his person to Governor Ford, in order to prevent the shedding of blood, the Prophet had a presentiment of what was before him. 'I am going like a lamb to the slaughter,' he is reported to have said, 'but I am as calm as a summer's morning. I have a conscience void of offense and shall die innocent.'" [d]

    [p.215]

    Of course testimony which sustains the virtue and uprightness of Joseph Smith is abundant, but I shall content myself by a very limited reference to it; depending not so much upon the testimony of men as upon the work he has accomplished for the vindication of his character. But I think it proper that the world should know in what esteem he was held by his friends and followers.

    First, I introduce the description and estimation of the character of the Prophet by Parley P. Pratt, who was intimately associated with him, who shared his toils, labors, persecutions and imprisonment; and who spent his life in preaching the gospel taught him by the youthful Prophet. Elder Pratt says:

    [p.216]

    "President Joseph Smith was in person tall and well built, strong and active; of a light complexion, light hair, blue eyes, very little beard, and of an expression peculiar to himself, on which the eye naturally rested with interest, and was never weary of beholding. His countenance was ever mild, affable, beaming with intelligence and benevolence, mingled with a look of interest and an unconscious smile of cheerfulness, and entirely free from all restraint or affectation of gravity; and there was something connected with the serene and penetrating glance of his eye, as if he could penetrate the deepest abyss of the human heart, gaze into eternity, penetrate the heavens and comprehend all worlds.

    "He possessed a noble boldness and independence of character; his manner was easy and familiar; his rebuke terrible as the lion; his benevolence unbounded as the ocean; his intelligence universal, and his language abounding in original eloquence peculiar to himself -- not polished -- not studied -- not smoothed and softened by education and refined by art, but flowing forth in its own native simplicity, and profusely abounding in variety of subject and manner. He interested and edified, while, at the same time, he amused and entertained his audience; and none listened to him that were ever weary with his discourse. I have even known him to retain a congregation of willing and anxious listeners for many hours together, in the midst of cold or sunshine, rain or wind, while they were laughing at one moment and weeping the next. Even his most bitter enemies were generally overcome, if he could once get their ears. I have known him when chained and surrounded with armed murderers and assassins who were heaping upon him every possible insult and abuse, rise up in the majesty of a son of God and rebuke them, in the name of Jesus Christ, till they quailed before him, dropped their weapons, and, on their knees, begged his pardon and ceased their abuse.

    [p.216 - p.217]

    "In short, in him the characters of a Daniel and a Cyrus were wonderfully blended. The gifts, wisdom and devotion of a Daniel were united with the boldness, courage, temperance, perseverance and generosity of a Cyrus. And had he been spared a martyr's fate till mature manhood and age, he was certainly endowed with powers and abilities to have revolutionized the world in many respects, and to have transmitted to posterity a name associated with more brilliant and glorious acts than has yet fallen to the lot of mortal. As it is his works will live to endless ages, and unnumbered millions yet unborn will mention his name with honor, as a noble instrument in the hands of God, who, during his short and youthful career, laid the foundation of that kingdom spoken of by Daniel, the prophet, which should break in pieces all other kingdoms and stand forever." [e]

    [p.217]

    Brigham Young, the successor of Joseph Smith in the Presidency of the Church, said of him:

    "From the first day I knew Brother Joseph to the time of his death, a better man never lived upon the face of the earth. * * * * Joseph Smith was not killed because he was deserving of it, nor because he was a wicked man; but because he was a virtuous man. I know that to be so, as well as I know that the sun now shines. * * * * I know for myself that Joseph Smith was the subject of forty-eight lawsuits, and the most of them I witnessed with my own eyes. But not one action could over be made to bear against him. No law or constitutional right did he ever violate. He was innocent and virtuous; he kept the laws of his country and lived above them; out of forty-eight lawsuits, not one charge could be substantiated against him. He was pure, just and holy as to the keeping of the law." [f]

    John Taylor, who succeeded Brigham Young as President of the Church, and who in Carthage jail may be said to have shared martyrdom with the Prophet Joseph -- for he was savagely wounded when the Prophet was slain -- says of him:

    [p.217 - p.218]

    "I was acquainted with Joseph Smith for years. I have traveled with him; I have been with him in private and in public; I have associated with him in councils of all kinds; I have listened hundreds of times to his public teachings, and his advice to his friends and associates of a more private nature. I have been at his house and seen his deportment in his family. I have seen him arraigned before the courts of his country, and seen him honorably acquitted, and delivered from the pernicious breath of slander, and the machinations and falsehoods of wicked and corrupt men. I was with him living, and with him when he died; when he was murdered in Carthage jail by a ruthless mob with their faces painted, and headed by a Methodist minister named Williams -- I was there, and was myself wounded in my body. I have seen him under all these various circumstances, and I testify before God, angels and men that he was a good, honorable, virtuous man -- that his doctrines were good, scriptural and wholesome -- that his precepts were such as became a man of God -- that his private and public character was unimpeachable -- and that he lived and died as a man of God." [g]

    [p.218]

    If of these testimonies it shall be said they are borne by men who were Joseph Smith's friends and followers -- interested parties, bent on perpetuating the frauds he inaugurated, I would reply by asking: Whose testimony do Christians accept as representing the true character of Jesus Christ? Certainly not the testimony of the Sadducees and Pharisees; but the testimony of Matthew, of Peter, of James and John -- "his friends and followers," the infidel exclaims -- "interested parties, bent on perpetuating the frauds he inaugurated!" Will the Christian world because of that preposterous claim that Christ's friends and followers are not proper witnesses of his life and character, give up the evidence supplied in the testimonies of his friends to the uprightness and purity of his life, and the divinity of himself and his mission? Ah, no! They will ask rather, Who so competent to bear testimony of his life and the divinity of his character as those who intimately knew him, who lived with him, who shared his joys and his sorrows; who were in sympathy with his life's mission and could enter into its spirit? I only ask that the same reasoning be applied to the testimony given by the friends of Joseph Smith.

    [p.219 - p.220]

    One thing connected with the character of Joseph Smith, and one that distinguishes him from false prophets and mere enthusiasts is the unaffectedness of his conduct. It was the prevailing idea of his day and even now that the calling of a prophet is inseparably connected with a life of austerity -- with inordinate fastings and midnight prayers; with the vows of monastic life, with gloom and self-mortifications; with hair shirts, long robes, and sandals; with long hair, beard unkempt and bodies filthy -- as if prophets had no time to keep clean -- with solemn, awful brows and measured tread -- lives wherein there is nothing natural -- no sunshine, nor smiles nor rose-lipped laughter -- as if communing with God was such awful business that it chills the heart and drives all happiness out of the life of man! Joseph Smith was nothing of all this. There was no affectation about him. He complied with the customs of his time and nation in respect to his apparel -- scrupulously neat and clean therein; face smooth shaven, and hair cut according to the prevailing fashion. While temperate in his habits and content with the humble fare which adverse circumstances during the most of his life forced upon him, he was not averse to good food and pleasant surroundings he was not the prophet of sack-cloth and ashes. While dignified in deportment and having a due comprehension of the magnitude of his calling and the work committed to his hands, there was nothing strained or unnatural in his demeanor -- no striving after effect; and often he unbent, played ball, wrestled, or romped with children -- with whom he was a general favorite -- with all the joyousness and freedom of a boy. And what may be regarded as one of the true tests of his greatness is, that while here and there his happiness and freedom shocked some over-pious persons who looked on from without, and expected austerity and gloom in one claiming to be a prophet, he never lost caste with his friends for his unconventional conduct. He was the Prophet of a joyous countenance; of unconventional but upright deportment; the apostle of cleanliness and becoming apparel. He believed that serving God should make men happier and that the good things of the earth were made for the comfort and to increase the happiness of the righteous.

    [p.220]

    To take such a stand as this in the face of the traditional idea of a prophet, stamps him as an original character, and separates him by long distances from the mere enthusiasts and the false prophets whose extreme pretensions to sanctity, whose studied gloom, whose affectation of impassioned devotion and assumption of the garb and supposed severe demeanor of ancient prophets -- all too plainly proclaim their hypocrisy and declare them players of parts they have assigned themselves.





    Chapter  XIV.  Notes.


    212 -- Ch. 14:

    The Character of the New Witness.

    a John x: 22-37, also ch. v: 17, 18.

    b Levit. xxiv: 15, 16.

    c Agnosticism and Christianity (Humbolt Library ed.) p. 28.

    d “Figures of the Past,” pp. 376, 377, 378.

    e “Autobiography of P. P. Pratt,” pp. 47, 48.

    f “Journal of Discourses.”

    g “Life of John Taylor,” pp. 213, 214.



     

    [ 221 ]




    CHAPTER  XV.


    Fitness In The Development Of The New Dispensation.

    Having considered the objections urged against Joseph Smith and ascertained their value, I am now prepared to proceed with the testimony and argument which sustain my fourth thesis; viz.: -- Joseph Smith is a New Witness for God, a Prophet divinely authorized to teach the gospel and establish the Church of Christ on earth.

    I have already argued at some length that the only way the gospel could be restored to the earth when once taken from it was by a new revelation. It was upon the principle of revelation that Jesus promised to build his church; it was through the ministration of an angel that the Apostle John foresaw that the gospel would be restored in the hour of God's judgment; and it was at this particular point that Joseph Smith started, thus differing from all other religious teachers who have arisen in modern times.

    [p.221 - p.222]

    He appealed to God for wisdom, as we have seen; and that appeal brought a revelation from God the Father, who introduced his Son Jesus Christ. The lad was informed that God accepted none of the religious societies as his church or kingdom, but was promised that the Church of Christ would be restored to the earth and that he should be an instrument in the hands of the Lord in bringing the event to pass. [a] Subsequently, the angel Moroni visited him, revealing the existence of the Book of Mormon and finally giving it into his hands to translate into the English language. This book itself contains the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught to the ancient inhabitants of the western hemisphere; but in addition to this the angel Moroni met with Joseph Smith at the hill Cumorah on the 22nd of September for four successive years, and from him, at each of the annual meetings, he "received instruction and intelligence * * * respecting what the Lord was going to do, and how and in what manner his kingdom was to be conducted in the last days." [b] Thus Joseph Smith started right. He started upon the only principle that the church could again be re-established; he received the gospel through the ministration of an angel -- in just the manner a recognized prophet of God had foretold it would be restored.

    [p.222 - p.223]

    All this, however, I may be told, was but a bold stroke of genius on the part of a bold imposter. That might answer for an explanation if it were not for the fact that it all happened in connection with a youth not yet parted from the innocence of childhood. Then, again, why is it, if this happiness on the part of Joseph Smith in starting right is to be attributed to the master stroke of genius -- why is it that some one of the many imposters who have arisen among Christians, and founded sects, have not hit upon the plan of announcing a new revelation from God and the restoration of the gospel through the ministration of an angel? Surely among the many imposters and "reformers" who have arisen since the days of Jesus there have been some who were not lacking that which men recognize as genius! Why was it left for a mere lad in the wilds of Western New York to display more "genius" than all the imposters since the days of Christ? The fact that one so unsophisticated in the ways of the world had the boldness to announce a new revelation to the world, and proclaim a restoration of the gospel through the ministration of an angel, carries on the face of it much evidence of its truth.

    [p.223]

    Not only, however, did our Prophet start right but he continued right. He not only received the gospel through the ministration of an angel; but he received his authority to preach it, administer its ordinances and build up the Church of Christ from those who last held the keys of that authority on earth. From John who, when on earth, was called the Baptist, now raised from the dead and become an angel of God, [c] he received the Aaronic Priesthood, which gave him power to preach repentance and baptize for the remission of sins; from Peter, James and John, the three chief apostles of the dispensation, ushered in by the personal ministry of the Lord Jesus, he received the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood -- the Holy Apostleship, which gave him power to establish the church of Christ to the uttermost and regulate all its affairs; from Moses he received the keys of the gathering of Israel from the four quarters of the earth and the leading of the ten tribes from the land of the north; [d] from Elijah the keys of the priesthood to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers, according to the prediction of Malachi. [e]

    Thus he was called and ordained of God through divinely appointed agents as was Aaron, and therefore fulfilled the law which provides that those who minister for men in things pertaining to God, must be called of God as Aaron was, by prophecy and revelation.

    [p.224]

    In this development of the work of God, one sees a fitness of things. Look for a moment at the work God has proposed to himself to accomplish. The time has come for the restoration of the gospel; for the re-establishment of his church; for the ushering in of the dispensation of the fullness of times in which he has promised to gather together in one all things in Christ, "both which are in heaven, and which are on earth." [f] A reign of peace, a reign of righteousness is about to be inaugurated -- the Millennium which the scriptures promised -- long looked for by earth's troubled children -- despaired of -- given up -- is about to be realized! The remnant of Israel is to be gathered to Zion; Jerusalem is to be established, no more to be thrown down; the nations are to beat their swords into plow-shares, and their spears into pruning-hooks and nation shall not lift up sword against nation, nor shall they learn war any more -- the earth is to rest from its wickedness. To bring this to pass, the co-operation of man is necessary -- his obedience, his righteousness. To secure that obedience, that co-operation, faith is needed; and as faith is based on evidence, God proceeds to create the evidence by bringing a witness into existence who can not only testify of God's existence, but also of his purposes. He then enlarges the evidence by bringing forth the Book of Mormon, the voice of entire nations of people speaking out of the dust of ages, testifying that the Lord is God, that Jesus is the Christ, that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation; and by thus increasing the evidence the foundation for faith was enlarged; and by establishing faith in the hearts of men the seed of obedience was planted. For faith is the incentive to action, the cause of obedience, and the foundation of all righteousness.

    [p.224 - p.226]

    When the work reached that stage of development that men could be taught repentance, and receive baptism for the remission of sins, who so qualified or who with more propriety could be sent to deliver the keys of the priesthood that is especially appointed to cry repentance and administer baptism than the teacher of repentance and the Baptist? Or, when the time came for the restoration of the apostleship, who could restore it save those who last held the keys of it on earth -- Peter, James and John? Who so fit to restore the keys of the gathering of Israel and leading the ten tribes back from the north as Moses, the great prophet of Israel? Who so fitting to restore the keys of the priesthood which should turn the hearts of the fathers and children towards each other as Elijah, of whom it was prophesied that he would do that work? [g] Thus throughout there was a fitness in the development of the great work of God in the last days -- an appropriateness to be observed in the personages employed to restore the keys of authority which opened up the several departments of the great dispensation. And it is to be observed, too, that this fitness of things as here pointed out was not the result of working to a well-matured plan in the mind of Joseph Smith; he was too young and too inexperienced to preconceive it all and then set himself at work to unfold it in such beautiful order. It was of course working to a well-matured plan, but the plan existed in the mind of God; and it was given to Joseph Smith piece-meal -- incident following incident without an apparent suspicion in his mind that each incident was a step in the progress of the mighty march of events matured in the mind of God -- each key of authority, or part of the gospel but a fragment of a mighty and consistent whole that God was unfolding. The consistency and appropriateness of the development Joseph Smith never spoke of; it was left for others to note these things after the work was well advanced in the course of its development. The Prophet received the messengers God sent to him, and under their instruction proceeded with the unfoldment of the purposes of the Lord, and left it to others to admire the work and note the evidences of God's directing hand in the order of the events and the appropriateness of the parties entrusted with the introduction of the various departments of it.

    [p.226 - p.227]

    I am not claiming for this appropriateness in the development of the work of the Lord, as thus far seen, absolute proof that Joseph Smith was divinely inspired and commissioned of God, it is only one item of the cumulative evidence, and the inference but part of the cumulative argument it is my purpose to present; but certainly as part of such evidence and argument it is not insignificant. To see the strength of it, one needs to think what the pretensions of Joseph Smith would amount to, if this fitness of things did not exist. Having affirmed that the gospel had been taken from the earth and the church of Christ destroyed, suppose he had claimed to have obtained the former and founded the latter upon any other basis than through a revelation from God; how easy it would have been to show both from reason and from scripture, that the only way the gospel and the church could be re-established, would be by a new dispensation from God through a new revelation! Had he claimed to have received the gospel through any other means than by the ministration of an angel, how easy it would be to confound him and his followers, by showing that a recognized prophet of God had predicted its restoration in the hour of God's judgment through an angel! Had he claimed to have received divine authority in any other manner than through a revelation, and the ordination of one already known to hold authority from God, how easy it would have been to refute his claim by quoting the law of God to the effect that no man taketh the honor of administering in things pertaining to God upon himself, except he that is called of God as was Aaron!h But when in all these things it is seen that the pretensions of Joseph Smith were parallel with both reason and the prophecies and laws of scripture, and that there is a propriety in all the heavenly messengers doing just what Joseph Smith claims they did -- because of their known relation to the work of God in former dispensations -- it all forms a strong presumptive evidence, at least, that his claims are genuine -- that he was called of God.





    Chapter  XV.  Notes.


    221 -- Ch. 15:

    Fitness in the Development of the New Dispensation.

    a Wentworthy Letter, “History of the Church,” Vol. IV, p. 535 et seq.

    b Pearl of Great Price, p. 94.

    c And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, see thou do it not. I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren, that have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God; for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” (Rev. xix: 10). John’s account of the visitation of an angel to him; and he was John’s fellow servant, had lived on earth and had received the testimony of Jesus as John had.

    d Doc. and Cov. Sec. cx.

    e Doc. and Cov. Sec. cx.

    f Eph. i: 10.

    g Malachi iv: 5, 6.

    h Heb. v: 4-10.



     

    [ 228 ]




    CHAPTER  XVI.


    The Evidence Of Scriptural And Perfect Doctrines.

    Continuing to follow the line of presumptive evidence I call attention to the fact that the doctrines taught by Joseph Smith are scriptural and perfect in every particular. I do not mean this to apply to all that he is alleged to have taught and that is to be found in imperfectly reported discourses or handed down by the still more uncertain vehicle of word of mouth tradition; but those doctrines which he taught ex cathedra, by which I mean those doctrines that he taught in his official capacity as a Prophet and witness for God, as the President of the Church of Christ. [a]

    [p.228 - p.229]

    I do not wish to be understood as saying that Joseph Smith did not teach doctrines which perhaps are not to be found in the Bible; for since the Bible itself is fragmentary, containing at most but part of that which God has revealed to man, it does not contain all the truth; nor does it contain a fullness of the truth concerning some of those matters of which it treats; and hence in the revelations which the Lord has given to Joseph Smith, there are many truths in respect to which the Bible is silent; and in other instances the modern revelations contain the truths spoken of in the Bible in greater fullness. But since the Prophet recognized the Bible as the word of God; and imperfect only so far as imperfection may result from its being fragmentary and marred through faulty translations, his revelations and teachings must be in harmony with the truths of the Bible. The Bible thus becomes, in some measure, at least, a standard by which to test the truths of Joseph Smith's claims and work. Speaking broadly, his doctrines must be in harmony with the Bible, and while much that he teaches may go beyond that which was written in the Jewish scriptures, yet between his doctrines and those of the Bible, so far as the latter treats of the same themes, there must be substantial agreement.

    [p.229]

    The doctrines which our Prophet teaches as the revelations of God, must be perfect in every particular; for since he claims to have received them from the Lord Almighty at first hand, by revelation, there is left no room to plead the error of historians or of translators, and certainly the Lord would not reveal erroneous or untrue doctrines.

    [p.229 - p.230]

    The force of the argument in favor of the genuineness of the claims of Mr. Smith derived from the fact that his doctrines are scriptural and perfect in every particular, as in the case of the argument based upon the fitness there was in the order of the development of the great work, is best seen from the negative side, that is, by contemplating what the result would be if his doctrines were absolutely contrary to the Bible, and imperfect in some particulars. If such a thing could be demonstrated, it would prove fatal to the validity of his pretensions; and therefore, if on the one hand the finding of unscriptural and imperfect doctrine would be so disastrous to his pretensions, on the other, if it can be shown that his doctrines are in harmony with the Bible and perfect in every particular -- such a fact should be accepted as a strong presumptive evidence that he was a true witness and prophet sent of God.

    [p.230]

    With these considerations in mind, let us examine his doctrines. I wish to say, however, that some of the doctrines briefly noticed here will receive, because of their importance, special attention in subsequent chapters devoted to them.

    First, then, Joseph Smith taught the existence of God, the Father, the Creator of heaven and earth; that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, in whose name the Father is to be worshiped; that the Holy Ghost is a witness for the Father and the Son, and that these three constitute the Godhead or Grand Presidency of heaven and earth.

    Second, he taught that God the Father so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son for the redemption of mankind; that Jesus Christ suffered temptations but gave no heed to them; that he was crucified, died, and rose again the third, day; that he ascended into heaven to sit down on the right hand of the Father, to reign with almighty power according to the will of God. This is all so perfectly in harmony with the well known teachings of the Bible that I do not deem it necessary to give reference to particular texts in proof of it.

    [p.230 - p.231]

    Third, he taught that men will be punished for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression; that through the atonement of Christ all mankind may be saved by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. [b] Joseph Smith teaches that through all by the atonement wrought out in the suffering and death of Jesus Christ, and without obedience to any conditions whatsoever, all men will be saved from the consequences of Adam's transgression, that is, they will be redeemed through the resurrection of the dead from that death which came upon our race through Adam's disobedience. This teaching is in harmony with the scripture which says: "Now is Christ risen from the dead and become the first fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." [c]

    [p.231]

    But not alone from the consequences of Adam's transgression does the gospel save men, but also from the consequences of their own sins, on condition of their obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. The beauty and justice of this doctrine is apparent when we regard it in relation to the general salvation from the consequences of Adam's transgression. That transgression was necessary to the general purposes of God in order to bring men into the world, and to bring to pass the conditions under which their earth life was to be lived, hence all men are to be saved from the consequences of Adam's transgression without compliance with any conditions whatsoever; but to be saved from the consequences of their own sins their personal violations of God's laws, certain conditions are to be complied with because personal sin is not a necessary thing as Adam's transgression was, the agency of each individual is directly exercised in the act of transgression, and justice has a claim upon them and may command their obedience to conditions.

    [p.231 - p.232]

    Joseph Smith taught that those laws and ordinances to be obeyed are, first, faith in God and in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, repentance; third, baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost." [d]

    [p.232]

    Fourth, he taught that a man must be called of God, by prophecy and by the laying on of hands, by those who are in authority to preach the gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

    Fifth, he taught that the Church of Christ should be organized in the same manner -- i.e., with the same officers that existed in the primitive church, viz.: Apostles, prophets, seventies, bishops, elders, pastors, teachers, evangelists, etc.

    Sixth, he taught that all the spiritual gifts of the gospel could be possessed and exercised today as well as in former times -- the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healings, interpretation of tongues, etc. [e]

    Seventh, he taught that the Bible was the word of God as far as it is translated correctly and also taught that the Book of Mormon was the word of God. [f] Indeed the Prophet taught men to believe all that God has revealed, all that he at present reveals, and also said that the Lord would reveal many great and important things in the future pertaining to the kingdom of God. [g]

    [p.232 - p.233]

    Eighth, he taught that there would be a literal gathering of Israel, and a restoration of the ten tribes; that a city called Zion would be built upon the continent of North America; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth, and that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisic glory. [h]

    [p.233]

    Ninth, Joseph Smith claimed for himself and his followers the right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, but conceded the same privilege to all other men, let them worship how, where or what they may. [i] "We believe," said he, "in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men. Indeed we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul: 'We believe all things, we hope all things;' we have endured many things and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praise-worthy, we seek after these things." [j]

    This is, of course, but an epitome of the teachings of the Prophet, and as before stated a number of these doctrines will be considered in chapters by themselves; but even in this epitome there may be discerned the outlines of a great work, the harmonious parts of a great and perfect whole; a system which contemplates the completion of the work of redemption for the whole race of men and of the earth itself -- a conception of the mighty purposes of God which far out-runs anything which the mind of Joseph Smith unaided by the inspiration of God was capable of perceiving.





    Chapter  XVI.  Notes.


    228 -- Ch. 16:

    The Evidence of Scriptural and Perfect Doctrines.

    a I have been careful thus to limit the teachings of the prophet which I call “scriptural and perfect in every particular” to those doctrines that he taught officially as the word of the Lord; for the reason that there are some things accredited to him by individuals that I feel sure they must have misunderstood at the time, or unconsciously changed through imperfect recollectino of what the prophet said. Even some of his published sermons do him an injustice; for the reason that they are not accurately reported nor from the nature of the circumstances could they be. They were not reported by stenographers, but by men writing down what they could in long hand during the course of delivery, and published with such additions and corrections as could be made afterwards from memory. These published sermons therefore are little better than synopses of what the prophet said, and necessarily imperfect.

    b In this statement I have grounded together the second and third articles of faith as prepared by Joseph Smith for Mr. John Wentworth for publication in the “Chicago Democrat,” in 1842. See also Book of Alma, in Book of Mormon, chapter xi: 4-44. III Nephi (Book of Mormon), ch. xxvii: 12, 13.

    c I Cor. xv: 20-22 and Rom. v: 12-19.

    d See fourth Article of Faith. Those desirous of inquiring into the agreement of these doctrines with the scripture may examine the following text: Heb. xi: 6; Rom. l: 16, 17; Rom. x: 14, 15; James iii; Mark xvi: 15, 16; Acts ii: 38, 39; John iii: 5; Acts viii; Acts xix: 1-6; Heb. vi: 1-6. Also author’s “Gospel.”

    e Seventh Article of Faith. See also Mark xvi: 15-20; I Cor. xii; James v: 13-15; I Thess. v: 19, 20; John xiv: 12; Acts ii: 17.

    f The eighth Article of Faith. Volume II and III of this work is devoted to the consideration of the Book of Mormon as a witness for God, and the evidences of its divine authenticity there receive attention.

    g Let the reader examine the following passages in evidence of the truth of future revelation from God. Acts ii: 17, 18. See also Mal. iv; Mal. iii; Isaiah xi; Ezek. xx: 33-38; Matt. xxiv: 31; Zach. xiv.

    h See tenth Article of Faith. A subsequent chapter is devoted to the gathering of Israel and the other statements of the above paragraph.

    i Eleventh Article of Faith.

    j Thirteenth Article of Faith.



     

    [ 234 ]




    CHAPTER  XVII.


    Manner Of The Prophet's Teaching.

    Next to what Joseph Smith taught may be considered his manner of teaching; in which, as I think, may be seen evidences of divine inspiration as well as in the correctness of his doctrines. Before inquiring into his manner of teaching, however, it is necessary to explain that I shall feel at liberty to refer to any of the revelations he has published as illustrating this method. It must be ever borne in mind that it is claimed for Joseph Smith in these pages that he was a man inspired of God; and as at this point we are about to consider his manner of teaching as an evidence of his inspiration, it will be readily seen that the revelations he announced and any peculiar style they possess may properly be referred to in evidence.

    [p.234 - p.235]

    One other remark should be made, namely: That Joseph Smith was not a learned man in the sense that the world regards learning. How limited his scholastic attainments were has been already stated; and though his industry in pursuit of knowledge later in life did much to make up the deficiency occasioned by lack of opportunity in early life, yet, when that is allowed, it must still be said that he was not a learned man in the sense in which that phrase is understood by the world. He knew but little of history, less of languages, and still less of science or the world's philosophy. Nor can this be any reproach to him when the conditions in the midst of which he was reared and lived are taken into account; nor, for that matter, do I believe that the lack of education as that term is understood by the world, was any serious bar to his success in the work to which God called him. If indeed he lacked the polish and finish which a liberal and polite education are supposed to impart, he also escaped the bias and warping which a training in the schools and colleges might have given to his mind.

    [p.235]

    It has already been stated how Joseph Smith received his revelations; and from the fact that much of his teaching is in the form of revelations, it may naturally be expected that it will come in the tone and spirit of authority, and will not be like the teaching of men who make no such pretensions as the Prophet did, -- but satisfy themselves with deductions drawn from the revelations given in former dispensations, teaching as the Scribes and Pharisees of old. Joseph Smith announced himself a teacher sent of God; and necessarily must place the truth of what he taught upon that authority. It is that which is the peculiar characteristic of his teaching. It is a style that would be altogether out of place for the philosopher or moralist; but one that the position of our Prophet made imperative; and had he failed to teach in that style, his manner would have been out of all harmony with his pretensions and would have been a means of detecting an imposter. As an illustration of the style here pointed out, I quote the following:

    "The glory of God is intelligence."

    [p.236]

    "It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance."

    "A man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge."

    "Whatever principles of intelligence we attain unto in this life, will rise with us in the resurrection; and if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come."

    "There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated; and when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law on which it is predicated."

    "There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine and pure and can only be discerned by purer eyes. We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified, we shall see that it is all matter."

    "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also: but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of spirit. Were it not so the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us."

    "Adam fell that man might be, and men are that they might have joy."

    "This is the glory of God -- to bring to pass the immortality and the eternal life of man."

    "There are in the Church, two Priesthoods, namely, the Melchisedek, and Aaronic, including the Levitical Priesthood. Why the first is called the Melchisedek Priesthood is because Melchisedek was such a great high priest. Before his day it was called the Holy Priesthood after the order of the Son of God. But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called the Priesthood after Melchisedek, or the Melchisedek Priesthood."

    "Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land. Wherefore be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet."

    "Thou shalt not be proud in thy heart; let all thy garments be plain, and their beauty the beauty of the work of thine own hands."

    "Thou shalt not be idle; for he that is idle shall not eat the bread nor wear the garments of the laborer."

    [p.236 - p.237]

    This perhaps is enough for the purpose of illustration; and will exhibit the spirit of all his teaching. In this manner he sets the officers of the church in order, asserts the powers they severally possess, and defines their relations to the church and to each other. In like manner he states the laws of the church, and gives instruction as to the manner in which the ordinances are to be administered. For example, of baptism -- about which there has been so much controversy in Christendom -- he says:

    [p.237]

    "Baptism is to be administered in the following manner: The person who is called of God, and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented him or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name -- Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen."

    And so on throughout in the ordinances to be performed, instruction is given in this spirit. Not a statement deduced from ancient scripture, sustained by labored logic, but stated in bold, round terms by virtue of the authority he possessed. It is to be observed, too, that in all such cases the simplicity and appropriateness of the language employed bear witness to its inspiration. The tendency of man is to verbosity in administering in sacred things; to introduce form and pomp and ceremony; while simplicity and directness mark all the works of God in revelation as in nature. Looked at with a view to the discovery of these excellencies in them, to what advantage do the formulas for ordinances given by Joseph Smith appear! Take this ceremony for baptisms -- not a superfluous word in it -- direct -- covering all the ground necessary, and yet how simple withal!

    So it is with the formula given for administering the sacrament of the Lord's supper, which is as follows:

    "O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him, and keep his commandments which he has given them, that they may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen."

    [p.238]

    "The formula for administering the wine or water is only slightly different from this. Of the above prayer I may say "that for a succession of solemn thoughts, for fixing the attention upon a few great points, for suitableness, * * for sufficiency, for conciseness without obscurity for the weight and real importance of its petitions" [a] -- this prayer so far as I am aware is without an equal excepting, perhaps, the Lord's prayer.

    The same qualities, directness and simplicity, are to be observed in the ordination of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Aaronic Priesthood, by John the Baptist. This is the more surprising when the circumstances connected with that event are taken into account. The Aaronic Priesthood had not been upon the earth for many centuries; it is to be restored by the great forerunner of Messiah, whose business it is to prepare the way before him; he descends out of heaven in a pillar of light, and appears to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and lays his hands upon them. -- I am bold to affirm it as my steadfast belief that any mere enthusiast or imposter would have taken advantage of these really dramatic circumstances to have indulged in something theatrical in the ceremony of ordination that was to follow. Some reference to the long absence of the Priesthood from the earth; some glowing words relative to its importance; the awful solemnity of conferring part of God's power on men; the honor these men received in having it bestowed upon them -- the temptation to the mere enthusiast or impostor to have indulged in some extravagant expression would have been simply irresistible. But hear what the angel is reported to have said:

    [p.238 - p.239]

    "Upon you, my fellow-servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness."

    [p.239]

    That was all, except that the messenger explained that he acted under the direction of Peter, James and John, that a higher Priesthood would later be conferred upon them, and commanded them each to baptize the other.

    The simplicity, directness and appropriateness of this ordination in the presence of such temptation to introduce pomp and ceremony, stamp it with the seal of truth. It is just such an ordination as we could expect -- upon due reflection -- an angel to make, full, covering all necessary ground, but simple and direct.

    Thus it is seen that the manner of Joseph Smith's teaching is in harmony with his pretensions; and while not a conclusive it is at least presumptive evidence of the truth of his pretentions.





    Chapter  XVII.  Notes.


    234 -- Ch. 17:

    Manner of the Prophet's Teaching.

    a ??? none?



     

    [ 240 ]




    CHAPTER  XVIII.


    The Testimony Of Toil And Suffering -- Exhortion And Danger -- A Christian Argument Applied.

    Archdeacon Paley in his work, "The evidences of Christianity," says: "There is satisfactory evidence that many, pretending to be original witnesses of the Christian miracles, passed their lives in labors, dangers, and sufferings, voluntarily undertaken and undergone in attestation of the accounts which they delivered, and solely in consequence of their belief of the truth of those accounts."

    The learned archdeacon deducts from this fact a strong argument in support of the truth of Christianity. In order to display his confidence in the strength of his argument, he says:

    "If the Reformers in the time of Wicliffe, or of Luther; or those of England, in the time of Henry the Eighth, or of Queen Mary; or the founders of our religious sects since, such as were Mr. Whitefield and Mr. Wesley in our times -- had undergone the life of toil and exertion, of danger and suffering, which we know that many of them did undergo, for a miraculous story; that is to say, if they had founded their public ministry upon the allegation of miracles wrought within their knowledge, and upon narratives which could not be resolved into delusion or mistake; and if it had appeared that their conduct really had its origin in these accounts, I should have believed them." [a]

    [p.240 - p.241]

    Mr. Paley's argument is this: The early Christians came to the world with a miraculous story; their public ministry was founded upon the allegation of miracles wrought within their own knowledge, and upon narratives which could not be resolved into delusion or mistake; their conduct really had its origin in these miraculous accounts; and in support of their declarations they endured lives of toil, poverty, persecution, danger and suffering; and for these reasons Mr. Paley concludes that the religion they advocated "must be true." "These men," he says, "could not be deceivers. By only not bearing testimony they might have avoided all these sufferings and have lived quietly. Would men in such circumstances pretend to have seen what they never saw; assert facts which they had no knowledge of; go about lying, to teach virtue; and though not only convinced of Christ's being an imposter, but having seen the success of his imposture in his crucifixion, yet persist in carrying it on; and so persist as to bring upon themselves, for nothing, and with a full knowledge of the consequences, enmity and hatred, danger and death?" [b]

    [p.241 - p.242]

    The world, at least that part of it called Christian, accept as conclusive the argument of the archdeacon; and even unbelievers in the Christian story recognize the force of his reasoning. It is my intention to apply his argument to the new dispensation of the gospel introduced by Joseph Smith; for if the argument tends to prove the divinity of the mission of the ancient apostles of the church, it ought also to have tendency to prove the divinity of the mission of the apostles of the New Dispensation, provided, of course, that the same conditions exist in the latter as in the former case. Those conditions exist in the New Dispensation, as in the Old, men come to the world with a miraculous story -- a story that relates the personal appearing of God the Father, and His Son Jesus Christ; bringing to light the record of an ancient people and translating it by miraculous means into the English language; and the visitation of angels to restore divine authority. The public ministry of Joseph Smith and his associates was founded upon the allegation of these miracles wrought within their own knowledge, and which are of a character, as I have already said, that they can not be resolved into delusion or mistake; their conduct really had its origin in these miraculous accounts; and in support of their declarations they endured lives of toil, poverty, persecution, danger and suffering. The reader has the proof of all these statements in the preceding pages of this work, except in regard to the last, and it is now my purpose to furnish him proof of that.

    [p.242]

    It has already been stated how the story of the appearance of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith brought upon his youthful head the wrath of the ministers of the locality where he lived; how his own name and that of his parents were loaded with opprobrium for no other reason than because he asserted he had seen a vision.

    Persecution and annoyance increased when it was noised abroad that he had the plates from which he translated the Book of Mormon.

    Soon after the church was organized there were a number of vexatious law suits growing out of charges against him for setting the country in an uproar by preaching the Book of Mormon.

    [p.242 - p.243]

    In March, 1832, the Prophet's house was broken into in the night. He was dragged from his bed into an adjacent field, where the mob beat him in the most inhuman and brutal manner. His body was bruised and lacerated from head to foot. He was be-smeared all over with tar and covered with feathers. At the same time Sidney Rigdon, who was now connected with him in the ministry, was similarly treated. During the night the friends of the Prophet removed the tar and cleansed his body, and the next day (Sunday), scarred and bruised as he was, he preached to the people and baptized three persons.

    [p.243]

    By the year 1833 a large number of Saints had settled in Jackson County, in the western part of Missouri, that place being pointed out by revelation as the location of a great city to be called Zion. In November of the year above named the inhabitants of Jackson County rose against the church in that land and drove some twelve hundred men, women and children from their homes into the wilderness, where they lay exposed in the inclemency of the season, which in that latitude is very severe. In the course of the troubles a number of the Saints were killed, and others died from exposure. Two hundred and three houses and one grist mill were burned down. A printing press was destroyed, a store owned by members of the church looted, and much other property destroyed. These troubles arose from the fact of the Saints accepting the testimony of Joseph Smith concerning the miraculous events by which the New Dispensation of the gospel was introduced. [c]

    [p.243 - p.244]

    When Joseph Smith learned of the expulsion of his followers from Missouri he immediately organized a company and gathered together clothing and provisions to go to their relief; and, if possible, restore them to the lands from which they had been driven. This company in Mormon history is known as Zion's camp. During that journey from Ohio to Western Missouri many dangers were braved, many hardships encountered, much toil and sickness experienced. As the only assurance of assistance which could be obtained from the governor of Missouri was of a nature to invite more bloodshed,d the company called Zion's camp disbanded.

    [p.244 - p.245]

    The exiled Saints subsequently settled some fifty or sixty miles north of Jackson County, and organized Caldwell County, where they were joined by large numbers of their co-religionists from the East. Joseph Smith also settled with them. The religious intolerance of their neighbors, however, gave them no peace, and in the fall and winter of 1838 the whole state of Missouri arose against the church and expelled some twelve thousand peaceful and law-abiding United States citizens from their homes on account of their religious views. Joseph Smith, under circumstances of great cruelty, was torn from his family and friends, and with a number of his prominent brethren was thrust into prison where they remained about six months awaiting trial, while their families and the church in the midst of great suffering -- hunger, cold and nakedness -- the greater part of their property destroyed -- were driven from the state. Recognizing their inability to prove aught against the Prophet and his fellow-prisoners, after six months' incarceration, moving them from one part of the state to another, their guards, evidently through an understanding with the judges -- connived at their escape. After enduring many hardships the Prophet rejoined his family and the church in Illinois, where the Saints were then settling.

    [p.245]

    During his residence in Illinois the Prophet's life was one continual course of toil, excitement, sickness, and danger. Old foes and false friends were well-nigh constantly seeking to entrap him. New schemes were constantly hatching to destroy him. During his career some fifty times he was dragged before the tribunals of his country and as many times were the judges compelled to dismiss him. While living in Illinois three separate attempts were made to kidnap him and take him to Missouri among his old enemies. In the midst of these persecutions he was constantly preaching, translating, or completing the organization of the church -- setting in order the various quorums of the Priesthood and instructing them in their duties. He endured poverty and hardship throughout the greater part of his career and scarcely knew what it was to enjoy peace -- save that God-given peace that comes from within; and which, however great the tempest from without may be, gives serenity and joy unspeakable to the servants and prophets of God.

    At last, after a life of continual warfare with error: after enduring untold toil and persecution, illegal prosecutions and mob violence, hardships and suffering -- wicked men conspired against him, and while in the charge of the officers of the State of Illinois, with the honor of the great state pledged through the governor for his protection, he was murdered in cold blood for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus, in the thirty-ninth year of his age.

    [p.245 - p.246]

    Counting from the time that he received his first vision, when a lad of fourteen years, he stood a witness for God a little less than a quarter of a century; but in that short time he suffered more and accomplished more than has fallen to the lot of any other man to suffer and accomplish since the Son of God expired on the summit of Golgotha.

    [p.246 - p.247]

    Not only did Joseph Smith thus endure a life of toil, poverty, persecution, danger and suffering in support of the miraculous accounts in which his public ministry had its origin; but many of his followers (some of them also witnesses of the miraculous events which brought into existence the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) spent their lives in the same way. The first Elders of the church shared Joseph Smith's toils, mobbings, imprisonment, poverty, danger and exile; and some, while engaged in the ministry, even in later years have suffered death by violencee for testifying to the truth of the miraculous story in which the church had its origin. The servants of God have traveled in nearly all the nations of Europe; through the states of North America; and among the peoples of the Pacific Islands. They have usually gone without purse or scrip, and always without remuneration. They have sacrificed their business and professional interests, together with the associations of home and family that they might preach the gospel newly restored to the earth, through the ministration of angels to Joseph Smith. In telling the miraculous story in which the New Dispensation had its birth, they have "found leopards and lions in the path," and "have made abundant acquaintance with the hungry wolf, that with privy paw devoured apace and nothing said;" but they have kept right on in the work God called them to perform; and have endured toils and privations which even those of the ancient apostles do not surpass. Amid the ridicule of the learned, the indifference of the rich and the great, and the violence of the rabble they have faithfully borne witness to the truth of the miraculous restoration of the gospel in these last days, until the whole world is acquainted with the story; and in their ministry they have given as much evidence of the divinity of the message they proclaim to the world as ever the apostles and elders of the ancient Christian church did by their lives of serf-denial, of toil, exertion, danger and suffering.

    [p.247]

    These labors they continued after the death of their prophet leader; and I may say of them what Mr. Paley says of the first Christian ministers -- only slightly paraphrasing his words: These men could not be deceivers. By only not bearing testimony they might have avoided all these sufferings and have lived quietly. Would men in such circumstances pretend to have seen what they never saw; assert facts which they had no knowledge of; go about lying, to teach virtue; and though not only convinced of Joseph Smith's being an impostor but having seen the success of his imposture in his martyrdom, yet persist in carrying it on; and so persist, as to bring upon their own heads, for nothing, and with a full knowledge of the consequences, enmity and hatred, danger and death?

    The conditions demanded in Mr. Paley's argument all exist in the experience of the ministry of the New Dispensation of the gospel, and if the same weight be given the argument in the case of this dispensation as is accorded to it when employed to prove the truth of the Christian story as told by the ancient apostles and elders, the divinity of the mission of Joseph Smith is proven beyond all controversy.

    Mr. Paley, continuing his argument under the head I have been discussing, says that his belief in the miraculous story told by men who had on account of it endured lives of toil and exertion, of danger and suffering, would be very much increased --

    [p.248]

    "If the subject of the mission were of importance to the conduct and happiness of human life; if it testified of anything which it behooved mankind to know from such authority; if the nature of what was delivered, required the sort of proof which it alleged; if the occasion was adequate to the interposition, the end worthy of the means. In the last case my faith would be much confirmed, if the effects of the transaction remained; more especially, if a change had been wrought, at the time in the opinion and conduct of such members, as to lay the foundation of an institution, and of a system of doctrines, which had since overspread the greatest part of the civilized world." [f]

    In the New Dispensation of the gospel all these additional circumstances which Mr. Paley finds in the old dispensation of Christianity, exist; so that there is nothing wanting to justify the complete appropriation of this time-honored Christian argument to the divinity of Joseph Smith's mission. Let me point this out:

    First: The subject of the mission must be of importance to the conduct and happiness of human life. This is true of the message with which Joseph Smith came to the world, since it cries repentance to all men, warns them of the approaching judgments of God, and calls upon them to worship God who created heaven and earth. If such a message is not a subject of importance "to the conduct and happiness of human life" what message could be? This message was surely of such importance since the acceptance or rejection of it would affect the condition of men in time and in eternity.

    [p.248 - p.249]

    Second, it must testify of that which it behooves mankind to know from such authority. This the message brought to the world by Joseph Smith does, for it proclaims first, that the gospel together with the divine authority to administer its ordinances had been taken from among men; and second, that this same gospel and divine authority had been restored by a new revelation, the only way it could be re-established when once taken from the earth. I take it that it behooves mankind to know of such a great transaction as this from "such authority" -- that is, divine authority.

    [p.249]

    Third, the nature of what is delivered must require the sort of proof which is alleged. This the New Dispensation dose; for claiming to be a revelation from God it requires just the same kind of testimony that the old Christian dispensation did -- the testimony of suffering and toil on the part of those who receive it, and especially upon the part of those who enter its ministry. It may be remarked in passing that the New Dispensation is just as worthy of such testimony as the old Christian dispensation.

    Fourth, the occasion must be adequate to the divine interposition -- the end worthy of the means. This is true of the New Dispensation since restoring the gospel to the earth after its absence for many centuries, is not only an occasion worthy of the interposition but the only way in which the plan of salvation could be restored. To make such a restoration to the human race was surely an end worthy of such means -- that is, worthy of a revelation.

    Fifth, the effects of the original transaction must remain. This is true of the New Dispensation as the religious faith at the first promulgated by Joseph Smith and his associates is still in the earth, and the circle of its influence is constantly widening.

    [p.249 - p.250]

    Sixth, a change must be brought at the time of the transaction in the opinion and conduct of such members as to lay the foundation of an institution, and of a system of doctrines which have since overspread the greatest part of the civilized world. This condition also the New Dispensation fulfills. That is, a change was wrought at the time, and by the means of the introduction of the New Dispensation in the opinions and conduct of a sufficient number to lay the foundation of an institution, and of a system of doctrines which has since spread throughout the greater part of the civilized world.

    [p.250 - p.251]

    I do not mean to say by the last part of the statement that the New Dispensation has been accepted as true throughout the greater part of the civilized world; but I do mean to say that a knowledge of it has since overspread civilized nations; and that it has drawn to itself as great a number of disciples as Christianity did in the first eighty years of its existence. [g] The change wrought in the opinions of those who have accepted the testimony of Joseph Smith is quite as radical as that which came to those who accepted the gospel in the first century of Christianity. From believing that the volume of scripture was completed and closed, and that the Bible contained all that had been revealed to man, they turned to the belief that it contained but a few fragments of the revelations of God and accepted a new volume of scripture received and preserved by the people of the Western Hemisphere. From believing that the ministrations of angels had forever ceased, they turned to the belief that a number of angels had ministered to Joseph Smith, and that in the future the visitation of angels to men would be still more frequent. From believing that the spiritual graces and gifts of the gospel were no more to be expected, they turned to the belief that these blessings so abundantly enjoyed in the primitive Christian church could also be possessed by them. They consequently sought for and according to a volume of testimony that cannot be rejected, they enjoyed the spiritual gifts of healing the sick, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues, discernment of spirits, prophecy, revelation, etc.; And sought a closer walk with God, and read and practiced the moral law of the gospel more strictly.

    [p.251]

    Thus, as in the testimony of toil and suffering on the part of those who came with the new faith -- or the old faith renewed -- there is nothing wanting in these supplemental conditions which, in Archdeacon Paley's opinion, adds to the weight of the testimony of toil and suffering. Every condition in his argument for the truth of the old dispensation of Christianity is met in the circumstance in the midst of which the New Dispensation of Christianity came into existence, of course limiting the time for comparison to the first eighty years of both dispensations; so limited, I then claim for the latter all the force that has been demanded for this argument when applied to the former. The argument is the Archdeacon's, not mine; but finding the conditions existing in the New Dispensation that Mr. Paley claims existed when the old was brought forth, I merely apply the argument to the new; and throw the weight of Mr. Paley's reputation for logic and force of statement into the support of the divinity of Joseph Smith's mission.





    Chapter  XVIII.  Notes.


    240 -- Ch. 18:

    The Testimony of Toil and Suffering-Exertion and Danger -- A Christian Argument Applied.

    a Paley’s View of the Evidences of Christianity, Proposition II, chap. i.

    b Paley’s Evidences, Proposition I, ch. x.

    c Wight’s Affidavit, “Times and Seasons” for 1843, p. 26. The writer, for want of space cannot introduce the testimony to support these several statements, nor indeed is it necessary; for the injustice and cruelty of the conduct of the people of Missouri and Illinois against the Latter-day Saints are universally conceded; as is also the fact that these cruelties grew out of the prejudice existing against the religion professed by the Saints. Those desiring information on the subject may consult the writer’s “History of the Missouri Persecutions” and the “Rise and Fall of Nauvoo;” also his exhaustive “History of the Church,” published in “Americana,” 1909-1911. N. Y.

    d The governor recognized the right of the people to be returned to their lands, and agreed to call out the militia to accomplish that object; but held that he had no authority to keep a force in Jackson County to protect them from the mob. As to go back to their lands under such circumstances would only be inviting another expulsion--the Saints not being sufficiently strong to hold their possessions against the invasions of the mob--the attempt to reinstate the exiles was abandoned.

    e As late as August, 1884, two Elders, while in the act of beginning religious service, on Sunday, in the state of Tennessee, were murdered by a mob; two young men, members of the Church, were also killed, and an aged woman, a member of the Church, savagely wounded.

    f Paley’s Evidences, Proposition II, ch. i.

    g This brings us from the organization of the church, in 1830, to the year 1910.



     

    [ 252 ]




    CHAPTER  XIX.


    The Testimony Of Miracles -- The Evidence Of Fulfilled Promises.

    It has been already remarked that Christian writers have attached too much importance to miracles as evidences of the divine authority of those who worked them; for the reason that in some instances the prophets of God have worked no miracles; in other instances impostors have worked miracles, and it is predicted for the future that the spirits of devils will have power to work miracles to deceive men. I have also pointed out the fact that miracles are not, properly speaking, events which take place in violation of the laws of nature, but that they take place through the operation of higher laws of nature not yet understood by man; hence the occurrences which are called miracles are only so in appearance, and we may confidently expect the day to come when they will cease to appear as miraculous.

    [p.252 - p.253]

    I say that Christian writers have attached too much importance to the testimony based on what are called miracles; and yet I would not be understood as ignoring the importance which may attach to them as collateral evidence. When the miracles follow the claimants to divine authority in fulfillment of their promises, the testimony becomes very important indeed; for the reason that if certain miraculous gifts or powers are promised by the claimants of divine authority and then they do not follow -- then, granting of course that their disciples comply with the conditions upon which the promises are based, the failure in the fulfillment of their promises would prove them impostors. More especially would miracles under these circumstances be strong proof of divine authority if the promises were of a nature beyond the natural power of man to fulfill, or of Lucifer to imitate. For example: Peter on the day of Pentecost, in the boldest manner conceivable, told the people on condition of their repentance and baptism that they should receive the Holy Ghost.

    [p.253]

    That, I take it, was a promise that could not be fulfilled by the agency of man; and still more revolting to reason would it be to suppose that the spirit of devils could influence the fulfillment of such a promise. It would be insulting to the dignity of God -- blasphemy of the first degree -- to say that agencies of Lucifer could confer the Holy Ghost. However great the powers which God in his wisdom has permitted Lucifer to retain, to confer the Holy Ghost, or in any manner to operate through or by him, is not one of them. If this promise made by Peter, then, is fulfilled, the people to whom he made it would have most positive proof that he held divine authority. Or, on the other hand, if this or any other promise of heavenly gifts or powers, though of a subordinate nature to the great promise of the Holy Ghost, should fail of fulfillment -- provided always that the conditions were complied with -- it would be all that was necessary to prove that the one making it was an impostor.

    It is in the light of these reflections that I propose to submit the evidence of miracles to the divinity of Joseph Smith's mission. That is, making their chief weight as evidence consist in the fact that they are possessed and enjoyed by his followers in fulfillment of his promises to them.

    [p.253 - p.254]

    John the Baptist, when he conferred the Aaronic Priesthood upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, told them that this Priesthood did not hold the power of laying on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost; but that such power would be given to them later. Subsequently they received the higher or Melchizedek Priesthood under the hands of Peter, James and John, which gave them the authority promised by the Baptist -- the power to lay on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    [p.254]

    In September, 1832, on the occasion of a number of Elders coming into Kirtland from their missions in the eastern states, six of them met together, and Joseph Smith received a revelation directing their future labors, in the course of which the following commandment and promise were given to them:

    "Go ye into all the world, and whatsoever place ye cannot go into ye shall send, that the testimony may go from you into all the world unto every creature. And as I said unto mine apostles, even so I say unto you, for you are mine apostles, even God's high priests; ye are they whom my Father hath given me -- ye are my friends; therefore, as I said unto mine apostles I say unto you again, that every soul who believeth on your words, and is baptized by water for the remission of sins, shall receive the Holy Ghost." [a]

    [p.254 - p.255]

    I thought proper to call attention to the fact that Joseph Smith claimed to have received power through ordination by heavenly messengers to confer the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands; and then that afterwards in this revelation a promise of the reception of the Holy Ghost is made to all those who will believe the testimony of the servants of God in the New Dispensation and be baptized for the remission of their sins. Accordingly Joseph Smith and the Elders of the church have made this promise to all the inhabitants of the earth, and upon as many as have complied with the conditions prescribed, they have laid their hands and said -- "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." If this promise that they shall receive the Holy Ghost fails, then the men making the promise stand convicted as impostors. If it is fulfilled, since, as already remarked, neither man nor the agencies of Lucifer can fulfill such a promise -- God only -- then it stands as very positive evidence that Joseph Smith through whom the promise is made was divinely authorized, and that he conferred divine authority upon others. If he was authorized to impart the Holy Ghost by an ordinance of the gospel, it follows also that he was divinely authorized to preach a New Dispensation of the gospel, and re-establish the Church of Christ on earth. The only question that remains to be considered is, do those who comply with the conditions receive the fulfillment of the promise?

    [p.255 - p.256]

    For more than eighty years the gospel has been preached among nearly all the nations of the earth, during which time hundreds of thousands have received the message, and they have testified that to them the word of promise made to the ear has not been broken to the hope -- but they have realized its fulfillment. Not always, and indeed not frequently, in the earth-quake, or the whirlwind, have they seen the evidence of having received the Holy Ghost; but in the whisperings of the still, small voice of the Comforter, which fills the soul with assurance; which enlarges while it quickens the intellect; makes broader while it sanctifies the affections; shows things to come, or testifies that Jesus is the Christ; through adversity or affliction is a voice in the ear saying, when those who have it would turn to the right hand or to the left, this is the way, walk ye in it. The Holy Ghost, through his influence, brings together men and women from all nations and tribes of the earth, with all their diverse customs and peculiarities, yet makes them one people; blends all their desires in the accomplishment of a common purpose, and enables them to dwell together in perfect peace and unity. Such is the manner of his operations -- and in such operations the saints have evidence of his existence among them; and the whole Church of Christ is ready and does testify to the world that the Holy Ghost is given in fulfillment of the promise made through Joseph Smith, and that they have communion with God through him.

    [p.256]

    Following the promise of the Holy Ghost, in the revelation quoted, is this array of promises:

    "And these signs shall follow them that believe. In my name they shall do many wonderful works; in my name [b] they shall cast out devils; in my name they shall heal the sick; in my name they shall open the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf; and the tongue of the dumb shall speak; and if any man shall administer poison unto them, it shall not hurt them; and the poison of a serpent shall not have power to harm them. But a commandment I give unto them, that they shall not boast themselves of these things, neither speak them before the world; for these things are given unto you for your profit and for salvation." [c]

    [p.256 - p.257]

    The last part of the passage I have written in Italics that it might be the clearer understood that this promise of the miraculous gifts enumerated was not made that servants of God in the New Dispensation might have evidence of what are commonly looked upon as miracles to point to in attestation of their divine authority; but are blessings given to the saints for their profit and salvation. For the very reasons that they were not given as evidence of divine authority, but as a promise of blessing to the saints, they will become all the stronger proof of divine authority in the ministry of the New Dispensation, provided it can be proven that they follow those who believe. And I want to say, also, that because of the commandment that the servants of God shall not boast of these powers before the world is the very reason that so little has been said of them as proof of the divine mission of our New Witness; and even now I make their chief weight as evidence consist in the fact that their enjoyment is the fulfillment of a promise made by the God of heaven through Joseph Smith, which if it had not been fulfilled would prove him beyond all question an impostor. But I affirm that these promises are fulfilled in the experience of those who believe in, and accept the New Dispensation and offer the following testimony in evidence: --

    [p.257 - p.258]

    In the month of April, 1830, Joseph Smith was visiting at the house of a Mr. Joseph Knight, at Colesville, Broome County, New York. This gentleman had rendered the Prophet some timely assistance while translating the Book of Mormon, and he was anxious that Mr. Knight and his family should receive the truth. While in Mr. Knight's neighborhood the Prophet held a number of meetings. Among those who attended regularly was Newel Knight, son of Joseph Knight. He and the Prophet had many serious conversations on the subject of man's salvation. In the meetings held the people prayed much, and in one of the aforesaid conversations with the Prophet, Newel Knight promised that he would pray publicly. When the time came, however, his heart failed him, and he refused, saying that he would wait until he got into the woods by himself. The next morning when he attempted to pray in the woods, he was overwhelmed with a sense of having neglected his duty the evening before, in not praying in the presence of others. He began to feel uneasy and continued to grow worse both in body and mind, until upon reaching home his appearance was such as to alarm his wife. He sent for the Prophet, who, when he came found Newel in a sad condition and suffering greatly. His visage and limbs were distorted and twisted in every shape imaginable. At last he was caught up off the floor and tossed about most fearfully. The neighbors hearing of his condition came running in. After he had suffered for a time the Prophet succeeded in getting him by the hand, when Newel immediately spoke to him, saying he knew he was possessed of the devil, and that the Prophet had power to cast him out. "If you know I can, it shall be done," replied the Prophet; and then almost unconsciously he rebuked Satan and commanded him to depart from the man. Immediately Newel's contortions stopped, and he spoke out and said he saw the devil leave him and vanish from sight.

    [p.258]

    "This was the first miracle which was done in this church, or by any member of it," writes the Prophet; "and it was done not by man, nor by the power of man, but it was done by God and by the power of Godliness; therefore let the honor and praise, the dominion and the glory, be ascribed to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, for ever and ever. Amen."

    The following account of a miraculous healing is to be found in Hayden's History of the Disciples (Campbellites); and is the statement of witnesses hostile to the Prophet and the work in which he was engaged:

    [p.258 - p.259]

    "Ezra Booth, of Mantua, a Methodist preacher of much more than ordinary culture, and with strong natural abilities, in company with his wife, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, and some other citizens of this place, visited Smith at his house in Kirtland, in 1831. Mrs. Johnson had been afflicted for some time with a lame arm, and was not at the time of the visit able to lift her hand to her head. The party visited Smith, partly out of curiosity, and partly to see for themselves what there might be in the new doctrine. During the interview the conversation turned upon the subject of supernatural gifts; such as were conferred in the days of the apostles. Some one said: 'Here is Mrs. Johnson with a lame arm; has God given any power to men on the earth to cure her?' A few moments later, when the conversation had turned in another direction, Smith rose, and walking across the room, taking Mrs. Johnson by the hand, said in the most solemn and impressive manner: "Woman, in the name of Jesus Christ, I command thee to be whole; and immediately left the room. The company were awe stricken at the infinite presumption of the man, and the calm assurance with which he spoke. The sudden mental and moral shock -- I know not how better to explain the well-attested fact -- electrified the rheumatic arm -- Mrs. Johnson at once lifted it with ease, and on her return home the next day she was able to do her washing without difficulty or pain." [d]

    [p.259]

    When the saints first settled at Commerce, afterwards called Nauvoo, it was a very unhealthy locality. Malaria was prevalent and other people who had tried to make a settlement there had failed. The exposure to which the saints had been subjected in their expulsion from Missouri, made them easy victims to the malaria. By the middle of July, 1839, the greater part of them were stricken down of the fever, and in the most helpless condition. From the 21st of July to the 23rd, inclusive, there were remarkable manifestations of the power of God in the church through the administrations of the Prophet Joseph to the sick. His own account of the matter in his journal is extremely brief, it stands thus:

    "Sunday, 21st. There was no meeting on account of much rain and much sickness; however, many of the sick were this day raised by the power of God, through the instrumentality of the Elders of Israel ministering unto them in the name of Jesus Christ."

    "Monday and Tuesday, 22nd, 23rd. The sick were adminstered unto with great success, but many remain sick, and new cases are occurring daily." [e]

    [p.259 - p.260]

    Another hand, however, has recorded the manifestation of God's power on that memorable 22nd of July, 1839, that of Wilford Woodruff, late President of the church, and I quote his account of it:

    [p.260]

    "In consequence of the persecutions of the saints in Missouri, and the exposures to which they were subjected, many of them were taken sick soon after their arrival at Commerce, afterwards called Nauvoo; and as there were but a small number of dwellings for them to occupy, Joseph had filled his house and tent with them, and through constantly attending to their wants, he soon fell sick himself. After being confined to his house several days, and while meditating upon his situation, he had a great desire to attend to the duties of his office. On the morning of the 22nd of July, 1839, he arose from his bed and commenced to administer to the sick in his own house and door-yard, and he commanded them in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to arise and be made whole; and the sick were healed upon every side of him.

    "Many lay sick along the bank of the river; Joseph walked along up to the lower stone house, occupied by Sidney Rigdon, and he healed all the sick that lay in his path. Among the number was Henry G. Sherwood, who was nigh unto death. Joseph stood in the door of his tent and commanded him in the name of Jesus Christ to arise and come out of his tent, and he obeyed him and was healed. Brother Benjamin Brown and his family also lay sick, the former appearing to be in a dying condition. Joseph healed them in the name of the Lord. After healing all that lay sick upon the bank of the river as far as the stone house, he called upon Elder Kimball and some others to accompany him across the river to visit the sick at Montrose. Many of the saints were living at the old military barracks. Among the number were several of the Twelve. On his arrival, the first house he visited was that occupied by Elder Brigham Young, the President of the Quorum of the Twelve, who lay sick. Joseph healed him, then he arose and accompanied the prophet on his visit to others who were in the same condition. They visited Elder W. Woodruff, also Elders Orson Pratt and John Taylor, all of whom were living in Montrose. They also [arose and] accompanied him.

    [p.261]

    "The next place they visited was the home of Elijah Fordham, who was supposed to be about breathing his last. When the company entered the room, the prophet of God walked up to the dying man and took hold of his right hand and spoke to him; but Brother Fordham was unable to speak, his eyes were set in his head like glass, and he seemed entirely unconscious of all around him. Joseph held his hand and looked into his eyes in silence for a length of time. A change in the countenance of Brother Fordham was soon perceptible to all present. His sight returned, and upon Joseph asking him if he knew him, he, in a low whisper, answered "Yes." Joseph asked him if he had faith to be healed. He answered, 'I fear it is too late; if you had come sooner I think I could have been healed.' The prophet said, 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ?' He answered in a feeble voice, 'I do.' Joseph then stood erect, still holding his hand in silence several moments; then he spoke in a very loud voice, saying, "Brother Fordham, I command you in the name of Jesus Christ, to arise from this bed and be made whole.' His voice was like the voice of God, and not of man. It seemed as though the house shook to its very foundations. Brother Fordham arose from his bed, and was immediately made whole. His feet were bound in poultices which he kicked off; then putting on his clothes he ate a bowl of bread and milk and followed the prophet into the street.

    [p.261]

    "The company next visited Brother Joseph Bates Noble, who lay very sick. He also was healed by the prophet. By this time the wicked became alarmed and followed the company into Brother Noble's house. After Brother Noble was healed, all kneeled down to pray. Brother Fordham was mouth, and while praying, he fell to the floor. The prophet arose, and on looking around he saw quite a number of unbelievers in the house, whom he ordered out. When the room was cleared of the wicked, Brother Fordham came to and finished his prayer.

    "After healing the sick in Montrose, all the company followed Joseph to the bank of the river, where he was going to take the boat to return home. While waiting for the boat a man from the West, who had seen that the sick and dying were healed, asked Joseph if he would not go to his house and heal two of his children, who were very sick.

    [p.262]

    They were twins and were three months old. Joseph told the man he could not go, but he would send some one to heal them. He told Elder Woodruff to go with the man and heal his children. At the same time he took from his pocket a silk bandanna handkerchief, and gave to Brother Woodruff, telling him to wipe the faces of the children with it, and they should be healed; and remarked at the same time: 'As long as you keep that handkerchief it shall remain a league between you and me.' Elder Woodruff did as he was commanded, and the children were healed, and he keeps the handkerchief to this day.

    "There were many sick whom Joseph could not visit, so he counseled the Twelve to go and visit and heal them, and many were healed under their hands. On the day following that upon which the above-described events took place, Joseph sent Elders George A. and Don Carlos Smith up the river to heal the sick. They went up as far as Ebenezer Robinson's -- one or two miles -- and did as they were commanded, and the sick were healed." [f]

    The manifestation of God's power was by no means confined to the personal ministry of Joseph Smith, nor to the land of America. God honored the ministrations of those who received authority through his prophet, and poured out his blessings on those who received the message in distant lands, as will be seen by the testimony I now introduce.

    The following is an Editorial in The Merlin, a non-Mormon paper, published in Merthyr Tydvil, Wales, [g] under the caption of an "Extraordinary Occurrence:"

    [p.262 - p.263]

    "During the night of Friday week (Sept. 22nd, 1848) between the hours of eleven and twelve, a very extraordinary occurrence took place in Newport. A young man named Reuben Brinkworth was, in 1840(?) at Bermuda, on board the Terror, Commodore Franklin, in the Arctic expedition, when, in the midst of a storm of thunder and lightning, he was suddenly deprived of both hearing and speech, and in that deplorable condition returned to Stroud, in England, of which place he was a native. He has since been residing with Mr. Naish, basket maker, Market Street, Newport, who, with several other persons, is attached to the community of people known as 'Mormons.' Persons of this denomination have been able to communicate their doctrines to Brinkworth, by means of writing, signs, and the finger alphabet. His sad condition they allege, excited their sympathy for his spiritual as well as temporal welfare; and their doctrines made very considerable impression upon him -- perhaps, more especially, because their creed was that God did perform miracles in these days as he did in the days of old, and a miracle might be wrought in his favor. On Friday night week, the young man was seized with a kind of fit, in which he continued some time; and on his recovery he was called upon, by sight, [h] to believe in the Savior, that the healing power of God might be exercised in his behalf. He was moreover earnestly entreated to be baptized; but this was very strongly opposed by a person in the room. The deaf and dumb man, however, signified his acquiescence. He was taken to the canal and baptized in the name of our Savior; and immediately on coming up out of the water, he cried out, "Thank the Lord, I can speak and hear again as well as any of you!" He now speaks fluently and hears distinctly; which miraculous circumstance is attributed to the power of Providence by the friends of the young man; who called at our office with him, and gave us the details. We have heard from another source that this happy change in the young man's condition is supposed to have been produced by the action upon him of the electric fluid during the thunder storm of the Friday night. We shall not take upon ourselves to decide this matter."

    [p.263]

    Subsequently Mr. Reuben Brinkworth himself made a statement of the miraculous event, and it was published in the Millennial Star, from which I quote it.

    [p.263 - p.264]

    "On the 2nd of July, 1839, I entered on board the Terror, Commodore Sir J. Franklin being then about to set out on a voyage of discovery for a northwest passage to India. Upon returning to England we landed at Bermuda on the 16th of July, 1843, and in the afternoon of the same day a terrible thunder storm occurred, in which I was suddenly deprived of my hearing and speech. At the same time five of my comrades, viz., John Ennis, William Collins, John Rogers, Richard King, and William Simms were summoned into eternity. I remained insensible fifteen days -- perfectly unconscious of all that was passing around me; but upon the return of reason, came the dreadful conviction that I was deprived of two of my faculties. I well remember the period, and shall ever continue to do so -- language cannot describe the awful sensations that pervaded my mind when I became fully sensible of the reality of my condition.

    [p.264]

    "I will here remark that the subject of religion had never troubled my mind; nor did the calamity I was called to suffer awaken any feeling akin to it; nevertheless I felt a certain feeling of gratitude that I had not met with the same fate as my more unfortunate companions; yet I must, to my shame, confess that it was not directed to the Great Disposer of all events, who could have taken my life as those of my companions, had he willed it. But it was not his design. I was spared, and am now a living witness of his loving kindness to the most abandoned sinners, if they will turn and seek his face.

    "At that time I was about nineteen years old. After remaining at Bermuda about three weeks, we again set sail for England, and reached Chatham on the 14th of December. I remained there only fourteen days, after which I went to London, and, by the kind assistance of some gentlemen, entered the deaf and dumb school in Old Kent Road, where I remained for ten weeks, but not liking the confinement, and being from home, I became dissatisfied and unhappy, and resolved to leave it, and accordingly did so. I then went to George Lock's, Oxford Arms, Silver Street, Reading, with whom I lived eighteen months, supporting myself the whole of that period upon the wages I earned on board the Terror. I afterwards went to Rugby, not to remain there, but on the way to my mother at Stroud, Gloucestershire.

    [p.264 - p.265]

    "I will here relate a circumstance of cruelty of which I was made the sufferer; being thirsty, I stepped into a public house to get something to drink; there were gentlemen in the parlor, who, seeing that I was dumb, motioned me to them, and put many questions in writing, which I answered in the same manner. While I was thus being questioned, one of the men went out and brought in a policeman, who hauled me away to the lock-up, in which place I was kept all that night, the next day, and following night, and on the morning of the second day I was taken before a magistrate who ordered me to be taken to a doctor, where I underwent an operation, namely, having my tongue cut in two places; he became satisfied that I was both deaf and dumb, and then I was discharged. From the treatment I had received I was determined to go to another of the magistrates of that town, to whom I related by writing what had happened. He said very little to me, more than that he would write to London respecting it, and I have since heard from a gentleman that the magistrate who examined me has been removed from his office. I then continued my journey to Stroud, which I reached without any other inconvenience, and remained there two days. I then went to Newport, Monmouthshire, and occupied my time in teaching the deaf and dumb alphabet for about three years, at the end of which I became acquainted with the Latter-day Saints.

    [p.265 - p.266]

    At that time I was lodging at a public house, kept by James Durbin, sign of the "Golden Lion," Pentonville. One of the customers of this house became acquainted with me and prevailed upon me to go and live with him and his brother, who was a member of the Latter-day Saints' Church. There I first became acquainted with the doctrines taught by this people, by reading and by means of the finger alphabet. I continued to investigate them for about three months, when I felt convinced of the truth of those doctrines which have since become so beneficial to my temporal and eternal welfare. On the 22nd of September I had been, by means of the deaf and dumb alphabet, conversing freely with some of the Saints, and had fully determined to be baptized that evening; therefore I expressed my desire to receive the ordinance of baptism, and was taken to the canal early on the morning of the 23rd, and baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; and upon my head emerging from the water, I heard the voices of persons upon the towing path, and this was the first sound I had heard since my deprivation upon the island of Bermuda, in 1843. With my hearing came also my speech, and the first words I uttered were, 'Thank the Lord, I can speak and hear again as well as any of you.' I scarcely need state my own surprise at the moment, but such it was, and it appears marvelous in my own eyes, not that God is possessed of such power, but that he should manifest it in my behalf. I have much cause to praise him and glorify his holy name, for in obedience to his divine commands, I not only received the remission of my sins, which I esteem above all earthly blessings, but also the removal of my deafness and dumbness; and now I can hear as distinctly and speak as fluently as I ever did, although I have been deprived of both these faculties for upwards of five years, not being able to hear the loudest noise, nor to use my tongue in speech.

    [p.266]

    "There is a mistake in the "Merlin" of the date of my landing at Bermuda, it should have been 1843, instead of 1840. The same error appeared also in the "Millennial Star," No. 22, Vol. X, which was caused by extracting the account from that paper.

    "The following individuals are witnesses to my baptism:

    "HENRY NAISH,

    "JOHN ROBERTS,

    "JOHN WALDEN,

    Members of the Church.

    "JANE DUNBIN,

    "THOMAS JONES,

    "JACOB NAISH,

    Non-Members." [i]

    I quote the following cases from one of the publications of the church -- the Millennial Star -- from which alone could be selected enough of such incidents to fill a large volume. These letters were addressed to Elder Orson Pratt, one of the Twelve Apostles of the New Dispensation, who in 1848-50 was Editor of the Star and President of the European Mission:

    [p.267 - p.268]

    THE BLIND HEALED.

    BERRIEN, MONTGOMERYSHIRE; NORTH. WALES,

    May 23, 1849.

    I feel it my bounden duty to make the following narrative known to the authorities of the Church of Jesus Christ, to show that the manifestation of the power of God attends this church, in the last days, as it did the church of the early Apostles, viz. -- My daughter Sophia Matilda, aged eight years, was in the month of May, 1848, afflicted in her eyes; she soon lost the sight of her left eye, and on applying to medical aid, instead of the sight being restored she immediately lost the other, the surgeon stating that the pupils were closed, and feared she could never be restored to her sight. I was advised to try an eminent surgeon in Shrewsbury, in the county of Salop, where, in June, 1848, I sent her and her mother, as she was now quite blind, and the poor little creature's sufferings were indescribable, though the Lord enabled her to be patient in her afflictions; she remained in Shrewsbury a fortnight but found no benefit, and as the last resource to human aid, I was advised to send her to an eminent occulist in Liverpool (Dr. Neile) under whose treatment she was relieved, and a gradual improvement took place, to our great joy, until the Autumn of the same year. I corresponded with Dr. Neile, who desired me to continue the treatment he had prescribed, but it was all to no purpose, for she relapsed into the same state as before, and was in total darkness the whole of the winter, suffering acutely, and by February of the present year, 1849, she had wasted to a mere skeleton, when my brother-in-law paid me a visit previous to his embarkation to California, and told me that if I would have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and call for the Elders of the church, he believed she would be healed. I also soon was enabled to believe and obeyed the command of St. James. The church put up their prayers for us, and I found, thanks to the Giver of all good, some improvement ere the ordinance was performed. On the following Sabbath, Elders Dudley and Richards, from Pool Quay, came to my house, performed the ordinance upon my child, the pain soon left her, and she was soon by the power of God and the prayers of the faithful restored to sight and health and, thanks be to Almighty God, she is still in the enjoyment of these great blessings; trusting you will rejoice in the Lord with me for his great mercies manifested to me, I remain, etc., etc.,

    HENRY PUGH. [j]

    [p.268]

    Some years ago, the author speaking in Farmington, the county seat of Davis County, Utah, had occasion to refer to this instance of healing, and at the conclusion of his remarks a gentleman of the name of James Loynd arose and said he was well acquainted with the circumstance, as the person healed was a relative of his, and said the incident above related was true in every particular. Happening to remember this when making his selection of cases of healing that have occurred in the church, I wrote this gentleman and here give my letter to him and his reply:

    SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, DEC. 31, 1894.

    James Loynd, Esq., Farmington, Utah.

    DEAR BROTHER: -- A number of years ago, when delivering a public discourse in your village, I had occasion to refer to some of the testimonies to remarkable cases of healing in the church that were collected and published in the "Millennial Star," by Elder Orson Pratt. My recollection is that after I had read one of the many cases published by Elder Pratt, you arose in the body of the house and testified that the person healed -- I think restored to sight -- was a relative of yours, perhaps your wife.

    If the circumstance still lives in your memory I wish you would confirm my statement of the case, as I am about to go to press with a book where your confirmation of my recollection will be of service to me.

    I trust you will pardon me for thus intruding upon you, but believing you have an interest in the great cause of truth I make bold to trouble you.

    Very truly your brother,

    B. H. ROBERTS.

    [p.269]

    FARMINGTON, UTAH, DEC. 16, 1894

    Elder B. H. Roberts, Salt Lake City.

    DEAR BROTHER: -- I very distinctly remember the circumstance of you speaking some years ago in Farmington, and my confirming one of the cases of healing read by you on that occasion. It was the case of Sophia Matilda Pugh, who is now my wife, Sophia M. Loynd. The circumstance of her receiving her sight is accurately stated by her father in a letter to the "Star" (Vol. XI). It is now forty-six years ago since the miracle was performed. Sophia M. Loynd, who was then healed in so remarkable a manner, is still alive and joins me in signing this letter to you. She is fifty-four years old, in good health, and a living witness to the miraculous power that is in the church of Christ. She says that this case of healing is what brought her parents into the Church. They immigrated to Utah, where they died in the faith. I have written this in the presence of my wife, have read the same to her and she now joins me in saying that you may make such use of it as you choose.

    Very truly yours,

    (signed) JAMES LOYND,

    SOPHIA M. LOYND.

    [p.270]

    HEALING OF ONE BORN BLIND.

    BRISTOL, NOVEMBER 25, 1849.

    DEAR PRESIDENT PRATT: -- As you were so kind as to publish the letter I sent, dated July 9, 1849, containing an account of the miraculous power of God, displayed in the healing of Elizabeth Ann Bounsell, which made quite a stir amongst the pious Christians of this city, I now venture to write to you again, and say that the above circumstance caused many to call at the house to see if it were true. And upon seeing, many rejoiced, others mocked, saying, "She would have got well if the Elders had not laid their hands upon her." Among the latter was one would-be great man, by the name of Charles Smith (who has written a flimsy attack against the Saints,) who said it was not enough to satisfy him. So the mother took another of her daughters and put her upon his knee, and said, "Sir, is that child blind?" After he had examined the eyes he said "She is." "Well," said the mother, "she was born blind: and now she is four years old; and I am going to take her to the Elders of our church for them to anoint her eyes with oil and lay their hands upon her; and you can call again when you have time and see her with her eyes opened; for I know the Lord will heal her and she will see." "Well," said he, "if she ever does see it will be a great proof." Accordingly the mother brought the child to the Elders, and Elder John Hackwell anointed her eyes, and laid hands upon her, only once, and the Lord heard his prayer, so that the child can now see with both of her eyes, as well as any other person. For which we all feel thankful to our heavenly Father, and are willing to bear testimony of it to all the world.

    Yours in the Kingdom of God,

    GEORGE HALLIDAY.

    P.S. -- We, the father and mother of the child, do here sign our names to the above as being true.

    WILLIAM BOUNSELL,

    ELIZABETH BOUNSELL. [k]

    No. 12 Broad Street, Bristol.

    [p.271]

    BONES SET THROUGH FAITH.

    RUMFORD, MAY 1, 1849.

    DEAR BROTHER GIBSON: -- At your request, I now sit down to give you a short account of the goodness and power of God, made manifest in my behalf. About two years ago, while working at my trade of coach-builder, while assisting in removing a railway carriage, I dislocated my thigh, and was conveyed home, and my parents not being in the Church, and no Elders in the town (viz. Sterling) medical skill was called in, but from the swelling it could not be set. I was again examined by a Doctor Jeffrey, and one Taylor of Glasgow, who said that a kind of jeal had gathered in the hip joint, and before it could be set this must be removed by cupping; so I was cupped with twenty-four lances, but it did no good and I lingered in great pain for three weeks when it was proposed that I should again be cupped; but I was determined that it should not be; and hearing from you that Elder Samuel W. Richards, from America, was coming to Sterling, I told my friends that when he came they would see the power of God, and I should be healed. Accordingly, when he came, he anointed me in the name of the Lord, and the bone went into its place, and I got up in the morning and went to my work, to the astonishment of doctors and friends. I am now a traveling Elder, and have a great deal of walking, but experience no inconvenience from it. I can get a dozen witnesses to attest to the truth of this cure both in and out of the Church.

    I remain your brother,

    JAMES S. Low. [l]

    NANTYGWNITH, GEORGETOWN, MERTHYR TYDFIL,

    SEPTEMBER 14, 1850.

    DEAR PRESIDENT PRATT: -- I enclose a testimony of a miraculous case of healing which has taken place a few days ago in Abercanaid; I saw the brother in his affliction and the accompanying testimony he bore at my house more than two miles distant from his. I send it to you with permission to do with it as you think proper.

    WM. PHILLIPS.

    [p.272]

    THE TESTIMONY OF DAVID RICHARDS.

    MERTHYR TYDFIL, SEPTEMBER 10, 1850.

    On Friday, August 23rd, 1850, at about eleven o'clock, while I was working among the coal, a stone fell upon me, about 200 pounds weight. I was carried home, and the doctor who was present said he could do nothing for me, and told those around me to wrap me up in a sheet that I might die. There was a lump on my back as big as a child's head. The doctor afterwards told one of my relatives, about six o'clock in the evening, that I could not recover. Elder Phillips called to see me, attended to the ordinance of the church for the sick, and while commanding the bones in the name of Jesus, they came together, making a noise like the crushing of an old basket; my strength returned, and now I am able to go some miles to bear my testimony to this great miracle. The doctor who called to see me was astonished, and said in the hearing of witnesses that my backbone was broken; but that it now was whole, and that I was now recovering as well as any man he ever saw. Many of our greatest enemies confessed that I was healed by the power of God, and while coming here today, many who heard of my accident were struck with the greatest amazement. But I thank my heavenly Father for his kindness towards me, hoping I shall live to serve him more faithfully henceforth than ever.

    D. RICHARDS,

    MORGAN MILLS,

    THOMAS REES,

    JOHN THOMAS,

    HENRY EVANS. [m]

    Witnesses.

    LEPROSY HEALED.

    NO. 9 GUARDIAN STREET, SPRINGFIELD LANE,

    SALFORD, MAY 19, 1849.

    Last winter a young woman addressed me in the Carpenter's Hall, the daughter of a fustian cutter, named Lee, residing in Cook Street, Salford, and said her parents were desirous that I should go and see her brother, who was very bad with a leprosy. I went in company with one or two of my brethren. I think I never saw anything so bad as the boy was (the small pox excepted); the whole lower part of his face and under his chin, as well as the back of his hands and wrists, were one entire mass of scabs; indeed, you could not have inserted a needle point, they were so thick. He was eight and a half years of age, and had been afflicted since he was six months old; they had him at the Manchester Infirmary and the Salford Dispensary, and are at this time paying the surgeon's bill who attended him as a private patient. The surgeon told his parents he could do nothing for him, as the disease was too virulent for medicine to reach it. His parents told me they did not know what it was to get a regular night's rest with him, and it frequently took three hours to wash him. The first night we went they were not disturbed during the night, and in three weeks he was entirely free, and his flesh was renewed like that of a young child.

    JOHN WATTS.

    [p.273]

    To all whom it may concern: This is to certify that I was seized with a disease like the leprosy, in the year 1837, and tried all that I could to get a cure, but I could not, and all the doctors that I applied to could do me no good; and it continued with me over all my body till the month of September, 1843, when I went and was baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, by William McFarland, Elder of the Church, on the first of September, 1843, and on that same night the leprosy left me.

    JENET RIDD.

    WILLIAM MCFARLAND,

    JAMES CRYSTAL,

    ALEXANDER RIDD.

    Witnesses. [n]

    The instances of what are usually called miraculous cases of healing in the church are by no means confined to the past, they take place today and are of frequent occurrence. By permission of Elder Heber J. Grant, one of the Twelve Apostles, I give herewith a letter of his written to his cousin, Mrs. Julia MacDonald, living in St. George, Utah, that relates a case of quite recent date.

    TOOELE CITY, APRIL 28, 1894.

    MY DEAR COUSIN JULIA: -- I am half inclined to the opinion that you will be thinking that I have entirely forgotten the promise which I made you, some time ago, to write about the case of healing that came under my observation in connection with my brother Hyrum. I have not forgotten the promise, but I have been pretty busy with my usual duties, and the conference matters which needed attention before and since April 6th.

    [p.273 - p.274]

    * * * I will, to the best of my ability, now redeem my promise about giving an account of th