The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan

Page 50.Titles.—In a passage which forms a part of the Roman canon law, Pope Innocent III. declares that the Roman pontiff is “the vicegerent upon earth, not of a mere man, but of very God;” and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is “very God and very man.” (See Decretal. D. Gregor. Pap. IX. lib. 1. de translat. Episc. tit. 7. c. 3. Corp. Jur. Canon. ed. Paris, 1612; tom. II. Decretal. col. 205.)

For the title, “Lord God the Pope,” see a gloss on the Extravagantes of Pope John XXII., title 14, ch. 4, “Declaramus.” In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, dated 1584, the words “Dominum Deum nostrum Papam” ("Our Lord God the Pope") occur in column 153. In a Paris edition, dated 1612, they occur in column 140. In several editions published since 1612, the word “Deum” ("God") has been omitted.

Page 52.Image Worship.—“The worship of images ... was one of those corruptions of Christianity which crept into the church stealthily and almost without notice or observation. This corruption did not, like other heresies, develop itself at once, for in that case it would have met with decided censure and rebuke: but, making its commencement under a fair disguise, so gradually was one practice after another introduced in connection with it, that the church had become deeply steeped in practical idolatry, not only without any efficient opposition, but almost without any decided remonstrance; and when at length an endeavor was made to root it out, the evil was found too deeply fixed to admit of removal.... It must be traced to the idolatrous tendency of the human heart, and its propensity to serve the creature more than the Creator....

“Images and pictures were first introduced into churches, not to be worshiped, but either in the place of books to give instruction to those who could not read, or to excite devotion in the minds of others. How far they ever answered such a purpose is doubtful; but, even granting that this was the case for a time, it soon ceased to be so, and it was found that pictures and images brought into churches darkened rather than enlightened the minds of the ignorant—degraded [pg 680] rather than exalted the devotion of the worshiper. So that, however they might have been intended to direct men's minds to God, they ended in turning them from Him to the worship of created things.”—J. Mendham, “The Seventh General Council, the Second of Nicæa,” Introduction, pp. iii-vi.

For a record of the proceedings and decisions of the Second Council of Nice, A.D. 787, called to establish the worship of images, see Baronius, “Ecclesiastical Annals,” Vol. IX, pp. 391-407 (1612 Antwerp ed.); J. Mendham, “The Seventh General Council, the Second of Nicæa;” Ed. Stillingfleet, “Defence of the Discourse Concerning the Idolatry Practiced in the Church of Rome” (London, 1686); “A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,” second series, Vol. XIV, pp. 521-587 (N. Y., 1900); C. J. Hefele, “History of the Councils of the Church, from the Original Documents,” bk. 18, ch. 1, sec. 332, 333; ch. 2, sec. 345-352 (T. & T. Clark ed., 1896, Vol. V, pp. 260-304, 342-372).

“Let all judges, and all city people, and all tradesmen, rest upon the venerable day of the sun. But let those dwelling in the country freely and with full liberty attend to the culture of their fields; since it frequently happens, that no other day is so fit for the sowing of grain, or the planting of vines; hence the favorable time should not be allowed to pass, lest the provisions of heaven be lost.”—A. H. Lewis, “History of the Sabbath and the Sunday,” pp. 123, 124 (2d ed., rev., 1903).

The original (in the “Codex of Justinian,” lib. 3, tit. 12, leg. 3) is quoted by Dr. J. A. Hessey in his Bampton Lectures on “Sunday,” lecture 3, par. 1, and by Dr. Philip Schaff in his “History of the Christian Church,” Vol. III, sec. 75, par. 5, note 1. See also Mosheim, “Ecclesiastical History,” cent. 4, part 2, ch. 4, sec. 5; Chambers' Encyclopædia, art. Sabbath; Encyclopædia Britannica, ninth ed., art. Sunday; Peter Heylyn, “History of the Sabbath,” part 2, ch. 3 (2d ed., rev., London, 1636, pp. 66, 67).

“Though this document is unquestionably spurious, it would be difficult to determine with precision the date of its fabrication. M. de Marca, Muratori, and other learned critics, are of the opinion that it was composed in the eighth century, before the reign of Charlemagne. Muratori, moreover, thinks it probable that it may have induced that monarch and Pepin to be so generous to the Holy See.”—Gosselin, “The Power of the Pope during the Middle Ages,” Vol. I, p. 321 (translated by the Rev. Matthew Kelly, St. Patrick's College, Maynooth; Baltimore, J. Murphy & Co., 1853).

On the date of the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, see Mosheim, “Ecclesiastical History,” bk. 3, cent. 9, part 2, ch. 2, sec. 8. As Dr. Murdock, the translator, points out in a foot-note, the learned Catholic historian, M. L'Abbé Fleury, in his “Ecclesiastical History” (diss. 4, sec. 1), says of these decretals, that “they crept to light near the close of the eighth century.” Fleury, writing near the close of the seventeenth century, says further that these “false decretals were looked upon as authentic for the space of eight hundred years; and it was with much difficulty that they were given up in the last century. It is true that at present there are hardly any, though meanly instructed in these matters, who do not acknowledge that these decretals are false.”—Fleury, “Ecclesiastical History,” bk. 44, par. 54 (G. Adam's translation, London, 1732, Vol. V, p. 196). See also Gibbon, “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,” ch. 49, par. 16.

Page 57.Dictates of Hildebrand (Gregory VII.).—See Baronius. “Ecclesiastical Annals,” An. 1076 (Antwerp ed., 1608, Vol. XI, page 479). A copy of the “Dictates,” in the original, may also be found in Gieseler, “Ecclesiastical History,” period 3, sec. 47, note 4 (ed. 1836, tr. by F. Cunningham). An English translation is given in Mosheim, “Ecclesiastical History,” bk. 3, cent. 11, part 2, ch. 2, sec. 9, note 8 (Soames' ed., tr. by Murdock).

Page 59.Purgatory.—Dr. Joseph Faa Di Bruno thus defines purgatory: “Purgatory is a state of suffering after this life, in which those souls are for a time detained, who depart this life after their deadly sins have been remitted as to the stain and guilt, and as to the everlasting pain that was due to them; but who have on account of those sins still some debt of temporal punishment to pay; as also those souls which leave this world guilty only of venial sins.”—“Catholic Belief,” page 196 (ed. 1884; imprimateur Archbishop of New York).

See also K. R. Hagenbach, “Compendium of the History of Doctrines,” Vol. I, pp. 234-237, 405, 408; Vol. II, pp. 135-150, 308, 309 (T. & T. Clark ed.); Chas. Elliott, “Delineation of Roman Catholicism,” bk. 2, ch. 12; Catholic Encyclopædia, art. Purgatory.

Page 59.Indulgences.—For a detailed history of the doctrine of indulgences, see the Catholic Encyclopædia, art. Indulgences (contributed by W. H. Kent, O. S. C., of Bayswater, London); Carl Ullmann, “Reformers before the Reformation,” Vol. I, bk. 2, part 1, ch. 2; M. Creighton, “History of the Papacy,” Vol. V, pp. 56-64, 71; L. von Ranke, “History of the Reformation in Germany,” bk. 2, ch. 1, par. 131, 132, 139-142, 153-155 (2d London ed., 1845, tr. by S. Austin, Vol. I, pp. 331, 335-337, 343-346); Chas. Elliott, “Delineation of Roman Catholicism,” bk. 2, ch. 13; H. C. Lea, “A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences;” G. P. Fisher, “The Reformation,” ch. 4, par. 7.

On the practical outworkings of the doctrine of indulgences during the period of the Reformation, see a paper by Dr. H. C. Lea, entitled, “Indulgences in Spain,” published in “Papers of the American Society of Church History,” Vol. I, pp. 129-171. Of the value of this historical sidelight, Dr. Lea says, in his opening paragraph: “Unvexed by the controversy which raged between Luther and Dr. Eck and Silvester Prierias, Spain continued tranquilly to follow in the old and beaten path, and furnishes us with the incontestable official documents which enable us to examine the matter in the pure light of history.”

Page 59.The Mass.—On the doctrine of the mass, see Cardinal Wiseman's work, “The Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Blessed Eucharist;” also Catholic Encyclopædia, art. Eucharist (contributed by J. Pohle, S. T. D., Breslau); “Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent,” sess. 13, ch. 1-8 (London ed., 1851, tr. by T. A. Buckley, pp. 70-79); K. R. Hagenbach, “Compendium of the History of Doctrines,” Vol. I, pp. 214-223, 393-398, and Vol. II, pp. 88-114; J. Calvin, “Institutes,” bk. 4, ch. 17, 18; R. Hooker, “Ecclesiastical Polity,” bk. 5, ch. 67; Chas. Elliott, “Delineation of Roman Catholicism,” bk. 2, ch. 4, 5.

Page 65.Waldensian Versions of the Bible.—On early Waldensian translations of portions of the Bible into the language of the common people, see Townley, “Illustrations of Biblical Literature,” Vol. I, ch. 10, par. 1-13; E. Petavel, “The Bible in France,” ch. 2, par. 3, 4, 8-10, 13, 21 (Paris ed., 1864); G. H. Putnam, “The Censorship of the Church of Rome,” Vol. II, ch. 2.

Page 77.Edict Against the Waldenses.—A considerable portion of the text of the papal bull issued by Innocent VIII. in 1487 against the Waldenses (the original of which is in the library of the University of Cambridge) is given, in an English translation, in Dowling's “History of Romanism,” bk. 6, ch. 5, sec. 62 (ed. 1871).

Page 85.Wycliffe.—For the original text of the papal bulls issued against Wycliffe, with an English translation, see J. Foxe, “Acts and Monuments,” Vol. III, pp. 4-13 (Pratt-Townsend ed., London, 1870). See also J. Lewis, “Life of Wiclif,” pp. 49-51, 305-314 (ed. 1820); Lechler, “John Wycliffe and His English Precursors,” ch. 5, sec. 2 (pp. 162-164, London ed., 1884, tr. by Lorimer); A. Neander, “General History of the Christian Church,” period 6, sec. 2, part 1, par. 8.

Page 86.Infallibility.—On the doctrine of Infallibility, see Catholic Encyclopædia, art. Infallibility (contributed by P. J. Turner, S. T. D.); Geo. Salmon, “The Infallibility of the Church;” Chas. Elliott, “Delineation of Roman Catholicism,” bk. 1, ch. 4; Cardinal Gibbons, “The Faith of Our Fathers,” ch. 7 (49th ed., 1897).

Page 104.Council of Constance.—On the calling of the Council of Constance by Pope John XXIII., at the instance of the emperor Sigismund, see Mosheim, “Ecclesiastical History,” bk. 3, cent. 15, part 2, ch. 2, sec. 3; J. Dowling, “History of Romanism,” bk. 6, ch. 2, par. 13; A. Bower, “History of the Popes,” Vol. VII, pp. 141-143 (London ed., 1766); Neander, “History of the Christian Religion and Church,” period 6, sec. 1 (1854, 5-vol. ed., tr. by Torrey, Vol. V, pp. 94-101).

Page 234.Jesuitism.—For a statement concerning the origin, the principles, and the purposes of the “Society of Jesus,” as outlined by members of this Order, see a work entitled “Concerning Jesuits,” edited by the Rev. John Gerard, S. J., and published in London, 1902, by the Catholic Truth Society. In this work it is said that “the mainspring of the whole organization of the Society is a spirit of entire obedience: ‘Let each one,’ writes St. Ignatius, ‘persuade himself that those who live under obedience ought to allow themselves to be moved and directed by divine Providence through their superiors, just as though they were a dead body, which allows itself to be carried anywhere and to be treated in any manner whatever, or as an old man's staff, which serves him who holds it in his hand in whatsoever way he will.’

“This absolute submission is ennobled by its motive, and should be, continues the ... founder, ‘prompt, joyous, and persevering; ... the obedient religious accomplishes joyfully that which his superiors have confided to him for the general good, assured that thereby he [pg 684] corresponds truly with the divine will.’ ”—The Comtesse R. de Courson, in “Concerning Jesuits,” p. 6.

See also L. E. Dupin, “A Compendious History of the Church,” cent. 16, ch. 33 (London ed., 1713, Vol. IV, pp. 132-135); Mosheim, “Ecclesiastical History,” cent. 16, sec. 3, part 1, ch. 1, par. 10 (including notes 5, 6); Encyclopædia Britannica (ninth ed.), art. Jesuits; C. Paroissien, “The Principles of the Jesuits, Developed in a Collection of Extracts from Their Own Authors” (London, 1860—an earlier edition appeared in 1839); W. C. Cartwright, “The Jesuits, Their Constitution and Teaching” (London, 1876); E. L. Taunton, “The History of the Jesuits in England, 1580-1773” (London, 1901).

Page 235.The Inquisition.—See Catholic Encyclopædia, art. Inquisition (contributed by J. Blötzer, S. J., Munich); H. C. Lea, “History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages;” Limborch, “History of the Inquisition,” Vol. I, bk. 1, ch. 25, 27-31 (London ed., 1731, tr. by S. Chandler, Vol. I, pp. 131-142, 144-161); L. von Ranke, “History of the Popes,” bk. 2, ch. 6.

Page 265.Causes of the French Revolution.—On the far-reaching consequences of the rejection of the Bible, and of Bible religion, by the people of France, see H. von Sybel, “History of the French Revolution,” bk. 5, ch. 1, par. 3-7; H. T. Buckle, “History of Civilization in England,” ch. 8, 12 (N. Y. ed., 1895, Vol. I, pp. 364-366, 369-371, 437, 550, 540, 541); Blackwood's Magazine, Vol. XXXIV, No. 215 (November, 1833, p. 739); J. G. Lorimer, “An Historical Sketch of the Protestant Church in France,” ch. 8, par. 6, 7.

Page 267.Efforts To Suppress and Destroy the Bible.—Referring to the long-continued efforts in France to suppress the Bible—particularly versions in the language of the common people, Gaussen says: “The decree of Toulouse, 1229,” which established the “tribunal of the Inquisition against all the readers of the Bible in the vulgar tongue, ... was an edict of fire, bloodshed, and devastation. In its 3d, 4th, 5th, and 6th chapters, it ordained the entire destruction of the houses, the humblest places of concealment, and even the subterranean retreats of men convicted of possessing the Scriptures; that they should be pursued to the forests and caves of the earth; and that even those who harbored them should be severely punished.” As a result, the Bible “was everywhere prohibited; it vanished, as it were, underground; it descended into the tomb.” These decrees were “followed for five hundred years by innumerable punishments, in which the blood of the saints flowed like water.”—L. Gaussen, “The Canon of the Holy Scriptures,”[pg 685] part 2, bk. 2, ch. 7, sec. 5, prop. 561; and ch. 13, sec. 2, prop. 641, par. 2.

On the special efforts made to destroy Bibles during the Reign of Terror, late in 1793, Dr. Lorimer says: “Wherever a Bible could be found it might be said to be persecuted to death; so much so, that several respectable commentators interpret the slaying of the two witnesses in the eleventh chapter of the Apocalypse, of the general suppression, nay, destruction, of the Old and New Testaments in France at this period.”—J. G. Lorimer, “An Historical Sketch of the Protestant Church in France,” ch. 8, par. 4, 5.

See also G. P. Fisher, “The Reformation,” ch. 15, par. 16; E. Petavel, “The Bible in France,” ch. 2, par. 3, 8-10, 13, 21 (Paris ed., 1864); G. H. Putnam, “The Censorship of the Church of Rome,” Vol. I, ch. 4 (1906 ed., pp. 97, 99, 101, 102); Vol. II, ch. 2 (pp. 15-19); S. Smiles, “The Huguenots: Their Settlements, Churches, and Industries,” etc., ch. 1, par. 32, 34; ch. 2, par. 6; ch. 3, par. 14; ch. 18, par. 5 (with note); S. Smiles, “The Huguenots in France after the Revocation,” ch. 2, par. 8; ch. 10, par. 30; ch. 12, par. 2-4; J. A. Wylie, “History of Protestantism,” bk. 22, ch. 6, par. 3.

Page 276.The Reign of Terror.—On the responsibility of misguided leaders, in both church and state, and particularly in the church, for the scenes of the French Revolution, see W. M. Sloane, “The French Revolution and Religious Reform,” Preface, and ch. 2, par. 1, 2, 10-14 (1901 ed., pp. vii-ix, 19, 20, 26-31, 40); P. Schaff, in “Papers of the American Society of Church History,” Vol. I, pp. 38, 44; S. Smiles, “The Huguenots after the Revocation,” ch. 18, par. 4, 6, 9, 10, 12-16, 27; J. G. Lorimer, “An Historical Sketch of the Protestant Church of France,” ch. 8, par. 6, 7; A. Galton, “Church and State in France, 1300-1907,” ch. 3, sec. 2 (London ed., 1907); Sir J. Stephen, “Lectures on the History of France,” lecture 16, par. 60.

Page 280.The Masses and the Privileged Classes.—On social conditions prevailing in France prior to the period of the Revolution, see H. von Holst, “Lowell Lectures on the French Revolution,” lecture 1; also Taine, “Ancient Régime,” and A. Young, “Travels in France.”