The Sabbath-School by Editor

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Dec 3, 1885

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 11, No. 46.

The Sabbath-School.

By Editor

LESSON FOR THE PACIFIC COAST—DEC. 26.

Sabbath-School Notes.

THE lesson for this date is a recapitulation, and as we have commented on nearly every point quite fully, to cover the ground again so soon might be wearisome to the reader. We shall therefore make only a few brief comments on a point that has not received the fullest attention.

WE have given 538 A. D. as the date for the beginning of the 1260 years of papal supremacy. But there are commentators who give other dates for the beginning of this period, and it becomes necessary to notice their claims, and see what worth there is to them. There are only two dates that need claim our attention,—A. D. 606 and A. D. 755. Dowling, in his "History of Romanism," gives 606 A. D. as the true date for the complete establishment of the papacy. His reason is that it was in 606 that Phocas, the Greek emperor, bestowed on Boniface III. the title of "Universal Bishop of Christendom." There are two reasons why we cannot accept this date as the one when papal supremacy began.

THE first reason that we offer against the date fixed upon by Dowling, is that nearly one hundred years before, the equivalent of the above-mentioned title had been bestowed on the bishop of Rome, and that the power of the papacy was then equal to what it was in 606. Says D'Aubigne:—

"To silence the cries of the churches [against the usurpations of Rome], Rome found new allies. Princes who in those troublesome times often saw their thrones tottering, offered their adherence to the church in exchange for her support. They yielded to her spiritual authority, on condition of her paying them with secular dominion. They left her to deal at will with the souls of men, provided only she would deliver them from their enemies. The power of the hierarchy in the ascending scale, and of the imperial power which was declining, leaned thus one toward another, and so accelerated the twofold destiny. "Rome could not lose by this. An edict of Theodosius II. and of Valentinian III. proclaimed the bishop of Rome 'ruler of all the churches.' Justinian issued a similar decree [A. D. 533]."—Hist. Ref., Book 1, chap. 1.

HERE we see that before 538 the power of the bishops of Rome was so great that secular princes sought their support. So great had become the influence of the Catholic Church in 370 A. D., that Ambrose, bishop of Milan, deprived the Emperor Theodosius of the communion for eight months, not permitting him to enter the church during that time, but subjecting him to severe penance, because he had allowed the massacre at Thessalonica. Socrates, the church historian, writing in the fifth century, shows in the following language, the power which was accorded to Rome nearly a hundred years before:—

"After experiencing considerable difficulties, Athanasius at last reached Italy. The whole western division of the empire was then under the power of Constans, the youngest of Constantine's sons, his brother Constantine having been slain by the soldiery, as before stated. At the same time also, Paul, bishop of Constantinople, Asclepas of Gaza, Marcellus of Ancyra, a city of Galatia Minor, and Lucius of Adrianople, having been expelled from their several churches on various charges, arrived at the imperial city. There each laid his case before Julius, bishop of Rome, who sent them back again into the East, restoring them to their respective sees, by virtue of his letters, in the exercise of the church of Rome's peculiar privilege; and at the same time, in the liberty of that prerogative, sharply rebuking those by whom they had been deposed."—Ecclesiastical History (Socrates), Book 2, chap. 15.

THUS we see that the power of Rome was almost supreme nearly two hundred years before the decree of Justinian; and when, in 538, the last opposing power—the Ostrogoths—was plucked up, nothing remained to hinder the pope of Rome from exercising to the full his special prerogative.

THE second reason why we reject 606 as the date for the establishment of the papacy is that, counting from that time, the 1260 years would end in 1866, at which time there was nothing of note that happened to the papacy. The temporal power of the pope was not taken away until 1870, and there was absolutely nothing in 1866 to mark a change in papal power. But in 1798, just 1260 years after 538, Pope Pius VI. was deposed by the French, and for two years the papacy was without a head, and therefore virtually dead. Thus we see that A. D. 538—1798 is established as the period of papal supremacy.

THE year A. D. 755 is given by quite a number of authors as the date for the beginning of the 1260 years. The argument by which they attempt to substantiate this claim is that as the papacy was diverse from all other powers, in that it combined both civil and ecclesiastical authority, the papacy cannot be said to have been fully set up until it received temporal dominion. It was in 755 A. D. that Pepin of France ceded to Pope Stephen and his successors in the see of Rome, the territory which he had conquered from the Lombards. Thus the pope became a temporal sovereign in 755, and therefore that date is thought by many to be the proper time for the beginning of the 1260 years.

IF we were living a hundred years ago, we might not be able to successfully refute this claim, but now we have no difficulty in showing its fallacy. Thus: If 755 be taken as the beginning of papal supremacy, then the 1260 years would not expire until 2,015 A. D. But the temporal dominion was taken away in 1870, and thus we would have the papacy continuing one hundred and forty-five years after its temporal power is destroyed. But this of itself kills the argument by which the beginning of the period is fixed at 755, because if the papacy could not exist until it had temporal power, it could not exist after that power should cease. So if 755 be taken as the date for the setting up of the papacy, the argument which fixes that date would make its supremacy end in 1870, thus allowing only 1115 years instead of the 1260 which the Bible allows. Therefore we see that this theory cannot stand; the year 538 A. D. stands without a rival, as the year when the papacy entered upon its unrestrained career of opposition to God and oppression of his people.

WE have thought it necessary to speak of these dates, because they are given by eminent commentators, and would cause confusion in the minds of those who might come across them in their reading. But the names and authority of eminent men cannot have any weight whatever, when opposed by facts.

IN closing, we copy from "Dowling's History of Romanism" the following interesting summary of events connected with the downfall of the temporal dominion of the pope:—

"There is something very remarkable in the rapidity with which events connected with the downfall of the temporal power of the pope followed each other in quick succession, after the establishment of the papal infallibility. Let us recapitulate them in the order of their sequence:— "On Wednesday, the 13th of July, 1870, the dogma of the infallibility of the pope was enacted into an article of faith, by the votes of the Council of the Vatican at Rome, and was publicly, and with great pomp and parade, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX. a few days afterward. "On July 15th, war was most unjustly and causelessly proclaimed and commenced by the Emperor Louis Napoleon of France, long the protector and favorite of the pope, against King William of Prussia, one of the foremost Protestant sovereigns of Europe. "On September 1st, this protector of the pope and 'eldest son of the church,' as he had been styled, Louis Napoleon, was captured by the aforesaid Protestant king, after a series of unsuccessful but fierce and bloody battles, and carried captive into Prussia as a prisoner of war. "On September 20th, the city of Rome and the pope himself were captured by the soldiers of Victor Emanuel, a king whom he had himself excommunicated, and the pope was permitted to retire to his palace of the Vatican, but divested of all sovereign authority. "On October 2d, the vote of the people of the city of Rome, subjects of the pope, was taken upon the question, whether Rome should be permanently annexed to the dominions of Victor Emanuel, and it be acknowledged as the capital of the Italian kingdom; or whether the city should continue, as heretofore, under the government of the pope. The question was decided against the pope by a majority of a thousand to one. Thus, by a virtually unanimous vote of the people of Rome, an end was put—it is to be hoped forever—to that anti-Christian usurpation, the temporal kingdom of the pope, after a continuance of about eleven hundred years."