Continued from The Approaching End of the Age by H. Grattan Guinness – Part III. Chapter II. The Man of Sin, or Antichrist. Part 1.

More on Indulgences

There was a published scale of the prices for which different sins could be pardoned; and that the gain of money was the only object was clear, from the enormous price charged for indulgences for certain crimes, likely to be committed by the rich, —crimes only by the laws of the church,—while the grossest violations of the law of God were excused for a trifle. The royal, and merely conventional crime, of marriage with a first cousin, cost £1000, while the terrible sins of wife murder or parricide cost only £4!

“The institution of indulgence,” says Spanheim, “was the mint which coined money, for the Roman Church; the gold mines for the profligate nephews and natural children of the Popes; the nerves of the Papal wars; the means of liquidating debt; and the inexhaustible fountain of luxury to the Popes.” The curse fell on Simon Magus for thinking that the gift of God might be purchased with money; what shall we say of him, who pretends that he has Divine authority to sell the grace of God for money? Of him, who leads millions of immortal souls to incur the guilt and curse of Simon Magus, under the delusion that they are securing salvation? And who leads them to do this for his own wicked and selfish ends? Is it possible to find guilt of a deeper die, perfidy of a more atrociously cruel and satanic character? Even the Jews could say, “None can forgive sins save God only;” what shall we say of him who professes to blot out guilt, and remove its penalty, from countless thousands who repose unlimited confidence in him, in order to secure his own evil ends?

“Whoso confesseth and forsaketh his sin, shall find mercy;” what shall we say of him who offers boundless mercy, to those who so love and cleave to their sins, as to be willing to pay enormous prices for permission to commit them? Of him who makes plenary pardon dependent on mere outward acts, prayers, pilgrimages, payments, or even on the commission of other gross sins, massacres, extirpation of heretics, etc.? The Psalmist prayed “Keep back thy servant from presumptuous sins, O Lord;” what shall we say of him, who encourages to presumptuous sin, by the prospect of plenary pardon at the moment of death, on condition of holding a candle, or kissing a bead?

That this practice is a mighty and effective inducement to sin, no one acquainted with human nature, and the operation of moral causes, can question: and, worse still, it misrepresents the atonement of Christ, asserting its insufficiency to put away sin; it denies the boundlessness and freedom of the love of God, and of the Gospel of grace, which offers pardon without money and without price; it gives false impressions of the true nature of sin, the guilt of which is so great that blood-shedding alone can remove it; it separates what God has indissolubly joined, justification and sanctification, providing pardon apart from a change of heart; it conceals from view the tribunal of the righteous Judge, and draws men to a fellowman, sinners to a fellow-sinner, for pardon, It is opposed to the doctrines of “repentance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ,” as well as to all practical godliness, and is a characteristic creation of “that wicked, whose coming is after the working of Satan.”

The Jesuit Order

Its institution and patronage of the Order of the Jesuits is another of the exceedingly sinful deeds of the Papacy. This Society, which has dared to appropriate to itself the Name which is above every name, by calling itself “The Order of Jesus,” deserves rather, from the nature of its doctrines, and from the work it has done in the world, to be called “The Order of Satan.” Founded by Ignatius Loyola, a Spanish officer, contemporary with Luther, its great object was, to subjugate the whole human race, to the power of the Papacy. From the book of the “Constitutions” of the Jesuits, we obtain the evidence that condemns their Order as a masterpiece of the father of lies.

Expediency, in its most licentious form, is the basis of their whole system of morality. Their doctrine of “probability;” their doctrine of “mental reservation,” by which lying and perjury are justified; their doctrine of “intention,” which renders the most solemn oath of no power to bind a man; the way in which, by their glosses, they make void the law of God in every one of its precepts, and give licence to every crime, not excepting murder, and even parricide, all these render their whole system of morals a bottomless abyss of iniquity.

This is no mere Protestant account of the Jesuits; their extraordinary viciousness, has led to their suppression, and expulsion, at various times, by different Catholic sovereigns in Europe. In stating their grounds for such action, these monarchs give descriptions of Jesuit morality, which could scarcely be worse. The Catholic king of Portugal says;

“It cannot be, but that the licentiousness introduced by the Jesuits, of which the three leading features are falsehood, murder, and perjury, should give a new character to morals. Their doctrines render murder innocent, sanctify falsehood, authorize perjury, deprive the laws of their power, destroy the submission of subjects, allow individuals the liberty of killing, calumniating, lying and forswearing themselves, as their advantage may dictate; they remove the fear of Divine and human laws, so that Christian and civil society could not exist, where they are paramount.”

In 1767 they were expelled from Spain on similar grounds. They were also expelled from Venice (1606); from Savoy (1729); from France (1764); from Sicily (1767), and from various other States. From 1555 to 1773 they suffered no less than thirty-seven expulsions, all on account of their iniquitous doctrines and evil practices.

The Catholic University of Paris, in 1643, said of them: “The laws of God have been so sophisticated by their unheard of subtleties, that there is no longer any difference between vice and virtue; they promise impunity to the most flagrant crimes; their doctrines are inimical to all order; and if such a pernicious theology were received, deserts and forests would be preferable to cities; and society with wild beasts, who have only their natural arms, would be better than society with men, who, in addition to the violence of their passions, would be instructed by this doctrine of devils, to dissimulate and feign, in order to destroy others with greater impunity. It is a device of the great enemy of souls.”

The Parliament of Paris, in 1762, used language quite as strong in a memorial to the king, accompanying a collection of extracts from 147 Jesuit authors, which they presented to him, “that he might be acquainted with the wickedness of the doctrine constantly held by the Jesuits, from the institution of their Society to the present moment—a doctrine authorizing robbery, lying, perjury, impurity; all passions, and all crimes; inculcating homicide, parricide, and regicide; overturning religion and sanctioning magic, blasphemy, irreligion, and idolatry.”

The book of “Secret Instructions,” generally attributed to Lainez, the second Father-general of the Order, contains directions so unprincipled, that on the first page it is ordained that, if the book fell into the hands of strangers, it was to be positively denied that these were the rules of the Society! This book gives directions for the attainment of power, influence, and wealth, by means of the vilest intrigues: the vices of the rich and great, were to be pandered to in every way; spies were to be diligently sought and liberally rewarded; animosities were to be fostered and stirred up among enemies, in order to weaken them; the dying were to be watched as if by vultures, and promised canonization by the Pope, if they would bequeath their property to this Order. Women who were found in confession to have bad husbands, were to be instructed to withdraw a sum of money secretly, to be given to the Society, as a sacrifice for their husbands’ sins. To all classes, but especially to the great and rich, any vicious indulgence they desired might be allowed, in order to soothe and win them, provided public scandal were avoided. These and multitudes of similar injunctions, are based on the doctrine, that we may do evil that good may come, that “the end sanctifies the means.” Scripture says of those who hold and teach this doctrine, that their “damnation is just.”

The same principle led Jesuit missionaries into the most sinful compromises with heathen superstitions and philosophies in different parts of the world. In India they swore that they were Brahmins of pure descent, sanctioned some of the most abominable habits of idolatry, and practised some of the worst Hindu austerities, to acquire fame. In China, they pretended that there was only a shade of difference between the doctrine of Christ and the teachings of Confucius; and to make proselytes, they taught, instead of pure Christianity, a corrupt system of religion and morality, that was quite consistent with the indulgence of all the passions. Nay, so far did they go, that, finding the Crucifixion was a stumbling-block to the philosophic Chinese, as to the Jews of old, they actually denied that Christ was ever crucified at all, and said it was a base calumny invented by the Jews, to throw contempt on the Gospel! They told the Red Indians that Jesus Christ was a mighty chief, who had scalped more men and women and children than any warrior that had ever lived! Having no real principles, they were willing to make any compromise, no matter how foul, provided they could by it advance the interests of their Order, or swell the roll of recruits to the Roman army.

Now, when we remember that the teachings of these Jesuits are not only permitted, but received as standard authorities in the Roman Catholic Church, and directly sanctioned by the Popes, what shall we say of the so-called Vicar of Christ? Is not this the deceivableness of unrighteousness? Is not this the doctrine of devils? And is not he who sanctions and patronizes such an “Order” of Satan, “the lawless one”? Is he not, and does he not richly deserve to be, “a son of perdition”? Is he not a “man of sin” who speaks lies in hypocrisy, having his conscience seared with a hot iron? Where, if not here, shall we ever detect the predicted mystery of iniquity?

The Man of Sin

That the line of Roman Pontiffs, have been for the most part personally wicked men, there can be no doubt; that many of their institutions, besides the two just considered, have been fearfully fruitful sources of deep deluges of sin, is also unquestionable; but perhaps nothing more fully warrants the application to them of the distinctive title, “The Man of Sin,” than the fact that they have commanded sin. If Aaron was doubly guilty because he led the people to worship the golden calf; if the wickedness of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, is intensified by the fact that he “caused Israel to sin,” what must be the dark guilt, and the dreadful doom of those, who have led the professing Church of Christ into the foulest idolatry, and into sin of every conceivable kind, not only by example, not only by false doctrines and evil practice, but also by direct commands—commands delivered in the name of the Lord, and believed by the people to have Divine authority; and this not to a few, not as an occasional thing, or during a brief period, but to all papal Christendom and throughout long ages!

This double dyed guilt, lies at the door of the power we are considering. Did not the Popes of Rome, for their own selfish ends, command, what Scripture forbids, the celibacy of the clergy, and thus lead the whole body, in all lands, into disobedience to God in this respect, a disobedience that was the direct cause of the wide-spread and unfathomable flood of moral corruption, that deluged Europe for ages? Have not the Popes, times without number, commanded idolatries, persecutions, treasons, rebellions, regicides? Any collection of papal bulls, presents a very harvest of commands to sin, commands which were, alas! only too faithfully obeyed by multitudes.

And how often have they prohibited, the very things enjoined by God! Is not this a negative command to sin? Christ bids all men, for instance, “Search the Scriptures,” “prove all things, and hold fast that which is good.” On no one point, are the Popes more resolved to enforce disobedience to the Divine will; in bull after bull they have forbidden the use of the Scriptures in their own tongue to the people, saying, “Let it be lawful for no man whatever to infringe this declaration of our will and command, or to go against it with bold rashness.” When Wickliffe published his translation, Pope Gregory sent a bull to the University of Oxford (1378) condemning the translator as having “run into a detestable kind of wickedness.” When Tyndale published his translation, it was condemned, In 1546, when Luther was preparing his German version, Leo X, published a bull, couched in the most vile and opprobrious language.

The indignation of Pius VII. (and other Popes) against Bible Societies, knows no bounds. He speaks of the Bible Society as a “crafty device by which the very foundations of religion are undermined,” as “a pestilence dangerous to Christianity;” “a defilement of the faith, eminently dangerous to souls;” “a nefarious scheme,” etc., and strictly commands, that every version of the Scriptures into a vulgar tongue, without the church’s notes, should be placed in the Index among prohibited books. Curses are freely bestowed on those who assert the liberty of the laity to read the Scriptures, and every possible impediment is thrown in the way of their circulation, Bible burning is a favourite ceremony with Papists; and their ignorance of the real contents of the book, is almost incredible, The famous bull “Unigenitus,” A.D. 1713, condemns the proposition that “the reading of the Scriptures is for everybody” as “false, shocking, scandalous, impious, and blasphemous.”

What must be the guilt, in the eyes of God, of the men who thus withhold the word, by which alone they can be born again, from myriads of perishing sinners, over whose consciences they have perfect sway!

III. Self-exalting Utterances.

One of the leading characteristics of the power symbolised by the “little horn” is “a mouth speaking great things.” The destruction of the beast is said to be, “because of the great words which the little horn spake.” The same point is noted also in Rev. xiii. 5, where the beast is said to have “a mouth speaking great things, and blasphemies.”* Paul similarly predicts of the man of sin, that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped.” We must therefore inquire whether self-exalting utterances of a peculiarly impious nature, have been a characteristic of the Papacy? We turn to the public documents, issued by various Popes, and find, that they have fulfilled in a marvellous way this prediction; the pretensions they have made are blasphemies, the claims they have put forth, are, to be equal, if not superior to God Himself; no power on earth has ever advanced similar pretensions.

Fox, in his “Acts and Monuments,” gives extracts from two hundred and twenty-three authentic documents, comprising decrees, decretals, extravagants, pontificals, and bulls, all of which are indisputable evidence. Twenty pages of small type in a large volume, are filled with the “great words” of the Popes, taken from these two hundred and twenty-three documents alone. What a crop would a complete collection of Papal publications afford! Space forbids many quotations; let the reader judge of the mass from the following samples, which we blend into one, in order to help the conception. If “he that exalteth himself shall be abased,” what degradation can be commensurate with such self-exaltation as this?

Add to these utterances, which might be multiplied by the thousand, the usual formula of investiture with the papal tiara: “Receive this triple crown, and know that thou art the father of princes, and the king and ruler of the world.” And in proof that the claims here advanced are no obsolete medieval assumptions, abandoned in modern times, but the unchangeable voice of the Papacy, take a few “great words” from a comparatively recent sermon of the principal representative of Rome in England, Cardinal Manning, who puts the following similar language into the mouth of the Pope.

In full harmony with this assumption is the new definition of Papal infallibility: “The Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ‘ex cathedra,’ that is, when, in discharge of his office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith and morals, to be held by the universal church, he enjoys infallibility, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the church. And if any one presume to contradict this definition, let him be anathema.”

But actions speak louder than words! The Popes have not confined their self-exaltation to empty boastings. They have practically exalted themselves “above all that is called God, or that is worshipped.” The following is extracted from the “Ceremoniale Romanum,” and describes the first public appearance of the Pope in St. Peter’s, on his election to the Pontificate. After the investiture with the scarlet papal robes, the vest covered with pearls, and the mitre studded with precious stones, the new Pope is conducted to the altar, before which he prostates himself in prayer, bowing as before the seat of God. An awful sequel then follows. We read:

“The Pope rises, and, wearing his mitre, is lifted up by the cardinals, and is placed by them upon the altar to sit there. One of the bishops kneels, and begins the Te Deum. In the meantime, the cardinals kiss the feet and hands and face of the Pope.”

This ceremony is commonly called by Roman Catholic writers “The adoration;” it has been observed for many centuries, and was performed at the inauguration of Pius IX. A coin has been struck in the papal mint which represents it, and the legend is, “Quem creant adorant,” “whom they create (Pope) they adore.” The language in which this adoration is couched is blasphemous to a degree. At the coronation of Pope Innocent X. Cardinal Colonna on his knees, in his own name and that of the clergy of St. Peter’s, addressed the following words to the Pope:

“Most holy and blessed father, head of the church, ruler of the world, to whom the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed, whom the angels in heaven revere, and the gates of hell fear, and all the world adores, we specially venerate, worship, and adore thee.”

The very assumption the Pope makes, to be Christ’s Vicar involves self-exaltation. How should one representing the Judge of all be judged by any? He might make laws, but he held himself above all law. Was not Christ King of kings and Lord of lords? How then could he, the representative of Christ, do other than regard all kings, and rulers, and potentates, as his subjects, to be crowned and uncrowned by him at his pleasure? His dominion he likened to that of the sun, all other dominion being like that of the moon and satellites, immeasurably inferior. Pope Celestine III. when crowning Henry VI, expressed in action his sense of his own superiority to all monarchs: “The Lord Pope sat in the pontifical chair, holding the golden imperial crown between his feet; and the Emperor, bending his head, and the Empress, received the crown from the feet of the Lord Pope. But the Lord Pope instantly struck with his foot the Emperor’s crown, and cast it upon the ground, signifying that he had the power of deposing him, from the empire, if he were undeserving of it. The cardinals lifted up the crown, and placed it upon the Emperor’s head.”

“Is not the king of England my bondslave?” said Innocent VI. “Hath not God set me as a prince over all nations, to root out and to pull down, to destroy and to build?” asks Boniface VIII. The glorious declarations of the world-wide homage yet to be paid to Messiah the Prince, have been applied by the Popes as descriptive of the respect due by earthly monarchs to them: “All kings shall fall down before Him, all nations shall serve Him;” and since Christ was God, and he was Christ’s representative and Vicar, was he not also to be regarded by men as God? Even to this height of blasphemy and folly did Antichrist push his pretensions.

Witness the address of Marcellus to the Pope at the Lateran Council; “Thou art another God on earth;” and the oft-accepted title, Our Lord God the Pope.” And since the Pope by his power of transubstantiation can even make God, and by his power of ordination can enable his countless priests to do the same, is he not in a sense the superior of God Himself? What adoration can be too profound for one exalted so high? Such worship is accepted by the Roman Pontiffs.

We read, “great is the mystery of godliness; God was manifest in the flesh,” the Most High stooped and made Himself of no reputation. May we not say, in considering the self-exaltation of the Popes of Rome, great is the “mystery of iniquity,” man, sinful, mortal man, exalting himself to be as God! And strange to say, men allowed it: “All the world wondered after the beast.” It was no empty boast of Gregory II.: “All the kings of the West reverence the Pope as a god on earth.”

Sismondi describes how Pepin and the Franks received him “as a divinity.” The mighty Emperor Charlemagne consented to receive his title and empire as a donation from the Pope; and ere long the coronation oath of Western kings came to include a vow, to be “faithful and submissive to the Pope.” Kings and emperors consented, like our own John, and like the Emperor Otho, and many others, to hold their dominions as vassals of the Pope, and to resign them at his bidding: to hold his stirrup, and lead his palfrey, like servants, to kiss his feet and bow in his presence like slaves. In his full fame, and flushed with victory, the great Francis I, of France, in his interview with Leo X. at Bologna, just before the Reformation, “knelt three times in approaching him, and then kissed his feet.” The Emperor Henry of Germany, driven to the most abject humiliation by the terror of a papal interdict, sought pardon, barefoot and clothed in sack-cloth, and was kept waiting three wintry days and nights at the doors of the supreme Pontiff, ere he could secure an interview.

It is difficult in this nineteenth century to credit the records which reveal, the unbounded power of the Pope during the dark ages, and the nature and extent of the claims he asserted, to the reverence and subjection of mankind. If kings and emperors yielded him abject homage, the common people regarded him as a deity. His dogmas were received as oracles, his bulls and sentences were to them the voice of God. The Sicilian ambassadors prostrated themselves before Pope Martin, with the thrice-repeated cry, “Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world.” “The people think of the Pope as the one God that has power over all things, in earth and in heaven,” said Gerston. The fifth Lateran Council subscribed, just before the Reformation, a decree which declared, that “as there was but one body of the church, so there was but one head, viz., Christ’s Vicar, and that it was essential to the salvation of every human being to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

“Every spiritual as well as every ecclesiastical office of Christ, was arrogated to himself by the ‘man of sin’” “If Christ was the universal Shepherd of souls, was not he, the Pope, the same? If Christ was the door of the sheep, was not he the door? If Christ was the truth, was not he the depository, source, and oracular expounder of the truth, authoritative, infallible, independent of Scripture, and even against it? If Christ was the Holy One, was not he the same, and did not the title, his holiness, distinctively and alone belong to him? If Christ was the husband of the Church, was not he the same? With the marriage ring in the ceremonial of his inauguration he signified it; and with his great voice in his canon law and papal bulls he proclaimed it to the world. The power of the keys of Christ’s Church and kingdom, given him, extended into the invisible world. He opened with them, and who might shut? He shut, and who might open? . . . the souls in purgatory and the angels in heaven were subject to him; and it was even his prerogative to add to the celestial choir; by his canonizing edicts he elevated whom he pleased of the dead to form part of heaven’s hierarchy, and become objects of adoration to men.” *

IV. Subtleties, False Doctrines, And Lying Wonders.

The foregoing are not the only characteristics which lead the careful student of Scripture and of history, to recognise in the Papacy, the great predicted power of evil, that was to arise in the latter times of the fourth great empire, and fix its seat at Rome. The coming of the Antichrist was to be “with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.” We must inquire whether this mark has been visibly impressed on the papal dynasty, whether subtleties, false doctrines, and lying wonders, have been an essential part of its policy. Again the abundance of evidence alone makes reply difficult!

Macaulay says: “It is impossible to deny, that the polity of the Church of Rome, is the very masterpiece of human wisdom. In truth nothing but such a polity could, against such assaults, have borne up such doctrines. The experience of twelve hundred eventful years, the ingenuity and patient care of forty generations of statesmen, have improved that polity to such perfection, that among the contrivances which have been devised for deceiving and oppressing mankind, it occupies the highest place. The stronger our conviction that reason and Scripture were decidedly on the side of Protestantism, the greater is the reluctant admiration with which we regard that system of tactics against which reason and Scripture were employed in vain.”

This wonderful policy of the Papacy may be viewed as an expression of Satanic genius, if we may use the expression, or as a fruit of human genius. Regarded as “the working of Satan,” it is in perfect harmony with all the other workings, of him, who has been a liar from the beginning. It has been by means of a counterfeit Christianity that Satan has, through the Papacy, resisted the spread of true Christianity. The Papacy has its counterfeit high priest, the Pope; its counterfeit sacrifice, the mass; its counterfeit Bible, tradition; its counterfeit mediators, the Virgin, the saints, and angels; the forms have been copied, the realities set aside. Satan inaugurated and developed a system, not antagonistic to Christianity, but a counterfeit of it; and as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so (i.e, by imitation) he has withstood Christ.

But viewed as a fabrication of human ambition and wickedness, the subtlety with which the Papacy has adapted itself to its end, is a marvel of genius. That end was, to exalt a man, and a class of men, the Pope and his priesthood, to the supreme and absolute control of the world and all its affairs; to reign, not only over the bodies, but over the minds of men. To attain this object it employed a policy, unmatched in dissimulation and craft, a sagacity distinguished by largeness of conception combined with attention to detail, irresistible energy, indomitable perseverance, and, when art was unavailing, overwhelming physical force.

In the selection of Rome as its seat of empire, the Papacy secured enormous prestige. “In no other spot, would its gigantic schemes of dominion have been formed, or, if formed, realized. Sitting in the seat which the masters of the world had so long occupied, the Papacy appeared the rightful heir of their power. Papal Rome, reaped the fruit of the wars and the conquests, the toils and the blood, of Imperial Rome. The one had laboured and gone to her grave, the other arose and entered into her labours. The Pontiffs were perpetually reminding the world, that they were the successors of the Caesars, that the two Romes were linked by an indissoluble bond, and that to the latter had descended the heritage of glory and dominion acquired by the former, . . . The Pontiffs also claimed to be successors of the Apostles: a more masterly stroke of policy still. As the successor of Peter, the Pope was greater, than as the successor of Caesar. The one made him a king, the other made him king of kings; the one gave him the power of the sword, the other invested him with the still more sacred authority of the keys. . . . The Papacy is the ghost of Peter crowned with the shadowy diadem of the old Caesars.” *

Every doctrine and dogma of the Papacy is framed with a similar design, to exalt the priesthood, at the expense of the intellect, the conscience, and the eternal well-being, of mankind. By the doctrine of tradition, the priest becomes the channel of Divine revelation, and by that of inherent efficacy in the sacraments, the channel of Divine grace: men are wholly dependent on the priesthood, for a knowledge of the will of God, and an enjoyment of the salvation of God.

Recognising that no religion enjoining a high morality could ever be a popular one, in a world of sinners, who love sin, the Papacy presented a religion of ritual observance, instead of one of spiritual power: heaven could be secured by outward acts; obedience to the church, not a change of heart, was the great essential of salvation. Men naturally seek to earn heaven; Popery sets them to work to do so, teaching salvation by merit, and denying salvation by faith. “It provides convents for the ascetic and the mystic; carnivals for the gay; missions for the enthusiast; penances for the man suffering from remorse; sisterhoods of mercy for the benevolent; crusades for the chivalrous; secret missions for the man whose genius lies in intrigue; the Inquisition, with its racks and screws, for the cruel bigot; indulgences for the man of wealth and pleasure; purgatory to awe the refractory, and frighten the vulgar; and a subtle theology for the casuist and the dialectitian.”* Its marvellous flexibility, its adaptation of its doctrines to all classes and conditions of men, is one phase of the exceeding subtlety of the Papacy. Many others might be adduced, as for instance its encouragement of ignorance, in the people, in order to the production and maintenance of that superstition, which alone makes spiritual imposture easy or even practicable.

The absurd and childish doctrine of purgatory, unknown in the church till the end of the sixth century, could never have obtained currency, but for the aid of fictitious miracles,— visions of departed persons broiling on gridirons, roasting on spits, shivering in water, or burning in fire, etc. Such “lying wonders” were therefore freely invented by the priests, and readily credited by the people; and by their means the doctrine, which was one of the most lucrative ever invented, was soon firmly established. Time would fail us, to speak of the “lying wonders” connected with the relics, shrines of pilgrimage, and false miracles of the Papacy: their name is legion, and their folly is exceeded by their guilt.

Continued in Part III. Chapter II. The Man of Sin, or Antichrist. Part 3.

Download a PDF file of this article.

Please follow and like us: