Imagine yourself being alive in 212 A.D. And you're just an average citizen of the Roman Empire. And if you were asked the question: "Of everything that you see in the Roman Empire, in the vastness of that Empire, everything you see, what will still exist in the year 2012?" In other words, 1800 years down the road, of everything you see as far as men's institutions, what will still be extant 1800 years later? If you look at the history, you have to ask yourself, "Okay, what institutions have lasted that period of time?"
Countries have come and gone. Governments have come and gone. Rulers have come and gone. But this one institution remains intact. Every European institution except this one has fallen or has failed or has ceased to exist.
And that institution, of course, is the Papacy. That is still here after 1800 years. It is the last of the ancient autocracies where you have a supreme unlimited authority in the hands of a single person. It is the last one.
And in referring to this Autocrat's power (the Pope), during World War II, Stalin asked the question, "How many division does the Pope have?" Well, of course, he has none. But the fact is that Stalin's country lasted on seventy-five years and the Papacy is still here after 1800 years. His power is still intact.
So, in the sermon today what we want to do, we want to do two things.
I. We want to examine how the Papal power and authority grew from nothing, literally nothing, to what it is today.
II. And then the second thing we want to do is we want to relate that rise of the Papacy from nothing to what it is today to what happened in the Worldwide Church of God and what, sadly, is happening today within the Greater Church of God and draw some parallels and some comparisons.
So, the title of the sermon is: The Papacy and the Greater Church of God.
What we're going to do in the beginning here is:
The word "Papacy" refers to the office of the Pope. He is the head of the Roman Catholic Church and the Bishop of Rome. When we refer to the Papacy, you're referring to his office. His seat of authority is Rome and that seat is called in Catholic terms "the Holy See." And it's a derivation of a Latin word. It's the seat of his power.
He lives in the Vatican Palace. That is a group of over a thousand interconnected buildings. The Pope has a lavish set of apartments there in the Vatican Palace. The Vatican Palace, of course, is located in the independent State of Vatican City, which lies within the city limits of Rome. It is the smallest independent state in the world. It's only 108 acres inside the city limits of Rome. And Vatican City is on the location of where Nero's public gardens were and where Nero's circus used to be.
The Vatican and Vatican City are protected by its own bodyguards. They have their own militia and, of course, the Swiss Guards. If you've seen any photographs of the Swiss Guards, they're the ones we would call them today with kinda funny hats and big pantaloons and swords and all of that. They were all recruited from Switzerland and it is considered an honor to be a member of the Swiss Guards. The uniforms were designed by Michelangelo in the 1500s and they wear them to this day.
Now let's talk a minute about the powers of the Pope, his spiritual powers. He claims to be the successor of the Apostle Peter. And, as such, he is infallible when he's speaking about spiritual matters. So, his spiritual powers are quite extensive—successor to Peter, infallible when he speaks religiously.
Now his physical powers, his temporal or non-religious powers: He is the Ruler of Vatican City, the absolute ruler of Vatican City. Vatican City has its own flag. It has its own coins. It has its own stamps. It has its own public utilities. It has its own mail system and telephone system and it has a world class broadcast system—television, radio, internet broadcast system—reaching all around the globe.
Now the Pope's title is the following; this is a quote of his official title. Listen to the…. It's not one title; it's a bunch of titles.
Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Christ…
The word "Vicar" means one who speaks in place of. So, he speaks in place of Jesus Christ.
… Successor of the Prince of the Apostles [referring to Peter, of course], Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Patriarch of the West, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, [and finally,] Sovereign of the State of Vatican City.
Quite a series of titles!
If you want to see him, you must address him as "Your Holiness." If you don't, you don't get to see him. So, I don't think any of God's people will be having an audience anytime soon because of that.
Now when a new Pope is elected by the College of Cardinals and you see the white smoke coming out of the chimney instead of the black smoke coming out of the chimney, the Senior Cardinal Deacon announces that the Pope is, and I'm going to quote now of his announcement every time a new Pope is elected. And remember this because it's going to come into play later. He announces that a new Pope has been elected and that he is:
Father of princes and kings, Ruler of the world on earth…
Now think about that.
… Ruler of the world on earth, and Vicar of our Savior Jesus Christ.
When the new Pope is elected, he comes to the balcony in St. Peter's Square. And they have the big tapestry falling down from the balcony. And the square is full of hundreds of thousands of people. His first message and blessing in Latin is called "Urbi et Orbi." I took Latin in high school and I don't remember much of it, but Urbi et Orbi means in English "To the City and to the World." And then he begins his address. It's interesting to note (And this comes into play later.) the city comes first and then to the world, but he is addressing the world, of course, as Ruler of the world on earth, which is one of his titles.
Now, that's a little bit of background about the Pope. That's the First Point.
How did a head of a church in Rome, how did he come from that, an elder in the church in Rome, progress to what we see today with the power and the authority and the scope of the Papacy? How did that happen?
As we read these events—and we're going to take them in hundred year chunks because it's just easier to divide them up—what you're going to see and please notice, there's a gradual progression of the acquisition of authority and power. It didn't happen overnight, but it was a steady progression of obtaining power and authority over several hundred years that leads to where the Pope is today.
So, we're going to talk now about up until about approximately 100 A.D.
The first mention of Christians in Rome is in Acts 2:10. We won't turn there, but it just talks about the "strangers" in Rome. So, there were beginning to be some Christians called out in Rome in the early days of the apostles.
Remember in 70 A.D. Jerusalem was sacked and the Temple was destroyed. What that did, because the Church—that was the home church, the "mother church" so to speak. The Gospel went out from Jerusalem. Let's understand that when Jerusalem was destroyed it created a leadership vacuum because the apostles had to flee. The Church had to flee. At that time, remember that Rome was the capital of the Empire. What we're going to see is that over a few hundred years, Rome gradually begins to fill the vacuum that was created when Jerusalem was sacked and the temple was destroyed.
Now, in the late 90s A.D., there was a letter from a Christian named Hamas. [That's kind of a—no correlation to the Hamas we know today in the twentieth century.] But there was a letter from a Christian named Hamas who was a member of the Church in Rome around 90 A.D. He mentions… notice this and I'm quoting now, "the elders who are in charge of the Church." There was no mention of the apostles. There was no mention of Peter or John or any of the other apostles.
Then, about that time in that last decade, there was a letter from a Christian named Clement that has been unearthed. And the letter speaks… Clement speaks only of two ranks in the church, only two. The first were the bishops or presbyters. They were two words for the same office, bishops or presbyters. A bishop means an overseer. A presbyter means an elder. We would say today "elders." And then the second were deacons. Nothing else—no apostles, no evangelists, no preaching elders, or pastors. It was just elders, overseers and deacons. That was all as of 90 A.D. And this held true into the early part of the next century.
Now, let's look at the time beginning 90 A.D., 100 A.D. all the way to 200 A.D. and see what happens. You're going to see a progression of the acquisition of power and authority toward Rome.
In the first decade of the second century, the Churches in Syria and Western Asia Minor were governed by single bishops, meaning single elders. Polycarp—and I think if you've studied Church History, you understand or are familiar with the name Polycarp. They think he was born about 69 A.D. and that he died around 155 A.D. He was the Bishop of Smyrna which is in modern day Turkey.
Irenaeus, who was the Bishop of Lyons (That's in France, modern day France.), wrote that Polycarp was trained by the Apostle John and was appointed Bishop of Smyrna by the apostles. So Polycarp has a pretty good pedigree. If he was ordained by John and it was witnessed and supported by the apostles.
Now, beginning in the second century around 100 A.D., the Bishop of Rome began to share prestige and eminence with Polycarp. Obviously, as I said, Polycarp had a very good pedigree. In Rome though, things began to change in a way that was different from what happened in Asia Minor or in Turkey or in Syria.
In 95 A.D. Clement was the Bishop of Rome. And Clement expected obedience. He wrote a letter to the Church in Corinth and notice what—this is a quote from this letter.
If any disobeys what has been said by him [referring to Jesus Christ] through us [meaning the royal "us," meaning me], let them know that they will involve themselves in no slight transgression or danger. (Emphasis added.)
Now, this is a little different tone than you see in letters from the other bishops. And he's saying, "If you don't obey me, you're on thin ice."
Now, Ignatius was the Bishop of Antioch, which was in Syria. He was the Bishop from about 110 to about 117 A.D. In his letters (There are many of his letters.), he wrote from Syria to other Churches around the area. And he wrote back to Rome. In his letters to other Churches, he will admonish from time to time or warn from time to time, but in his letters to the Church at Rome, he was unusually respectful and he made only requests. He didn't make demands.
So, you see now a subtle shift starting to occur.
Then, the Bishop in Rome from 154 to 166 (We're now in the middle of that century.) was Anicetus. And he was the first Bishop of Rome that acted like a monarch, acted like a king. In 154 A.D. he met with Polycarp, who was the Bishop of Smyrna, about the date of Passover. Anicetus and the Roman Church wanted to keep it on the Sunday following the 14th of Nisan. Polycarp and all the Churches in Asia Minor wanted to keep it as we keep it today, as the apostles kept it. So, the two of them, Polycarp and Anicetus in Rome agreed to disagree. Neither one could convince the other.
The point I'm making is that neither one of them had preeminence. They both had equality at that time. None could force the other to do anything.
Now Anicetus was the first Bishop of Rome to begin to start the cult that Peter was in Rome and Peter died in Rome. He began to associate a specific spot in Rome where Peter died. Up until this point, that had never happened before. In fact, by 160 A.D. there was a small shrine constructed over the spot where Peter allegedly died.
So, we have to ask ourselves the question: "Why a hundred years later? And how did they know a hundred years later?" But, nevertheless, Anicetus had this shrine built.
Of course, in Acts 28 (We won't turn there.) Paul was in Rome in 67 A.D. And it's obvious when you read Acts 28 the Jews in Rome knew nothing about Christ. Nobody knew anything about Christ, hardly at all. Paul in Acts 28 and in the rest, through the end of Acts, there was no mention of Peter being in Rome. At the end of acts, Paul was in prison there, but Peter was not mentioned at all. Interesting fact! Then in Paul's Letter to the Romans, there was no mention of Peter either being in Rome. No mention of him at all, but Anicetus had a spot where Peter allegedly died.
Then in 175 to 189 A.D., the Bishop of Lyons in France ruled during that period of time. His name was Irenaeus. He wrote a book called Against Heresies. He became famous for that book. And he was asked how the Gospel was handed down to that date. This is toward the end of the second century. He was asked, "What was the transition from the early apostles to this day?" He lists a succession of Roman Bishops. That's all he listed. He didn't talk about Polycarp. He didn't talk about anybody else, but just listed Roman Bishops down to that day. He was a Bishop in France. So, you could see that he was looking toward Rome at that time as where the leadership was.
He describes the Church at Rome, and I'm quoting from his book now:
… the very great, the very ancient and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church [meaning in Rome], on account of its preeminent authority.
So, here we are by the end of the second century, end of the 100s A.D. You see a shift now of Christians, Bishops, outlying Churches looking to Rome for their authority. In fact, in 189 through 199 A.D., the last decade of the second century, Victor was the Bishop of Rome. And in 196 A.D., Polycrates, who was a Bishop in Ephesus, writes to Victor the Bishop of Rome and I'm quoting from a letter:
I could mention the bishops who are present, whom you required me to summon and I did so. (Emphasis added.)
Now, all of a sudden, forty years later after Anicetus the Bishop of Rome and Polycarp agreed to disagree, now, all of a sudden, the tables are turned and the Roman Bishop is requiring an outside bishop (outside of Rome) to bring certain people together. So you see now a shift of power heading toward Rome.
And in fact, Victor wound up excommunicating Polycrates. When all the Asian Bishops refused to accept Easter Sunday, what he did is Polycrates in a letter told Victor that Ephesus, his domain; I'm quoting now from the letter:
… kept the date consecrated by the great luminaries, the apostles John and Philip.
And he said, "We're following the date that the apostles kept." So, Victor excommunicated Polycrates. He didn't excommunicate the Church, however, in Ephesus. I wonder why. Maybe money, tithes, money might come in—power and so on.
Let me read from The Encyclopedia of Early Christianity under the subject of "Sabbath" from page 808. This is amazing! I mean this is a modern day encyclopedia.
The Sabbath was replaced by Sunday as a result of three apostate influences in the second century [this century that we're talking about]:
The first [of the three apostate influences]:
… anti-Judaism, arising from the church's separation from the synagogue;
The second is:
… the influence of the sun cults in the Roman Empire which led the church into making Sunday the holy day;
And then the third, I'm quoting again:
… and the church of Rome's growing authority shown in changing that day.
This is from a modern encyclopedia.
Remember what Mr. Armstrong said? He said, "After the death of the apostle John, a curtain came down over the Church. And then two centuries later the curtain came up and it was a totally different church." And the reason it was a totally different church was there was an increasingly powerful Bishop at Rome. That's why it was a different Church. And that Bishop instituted changes in teaching and changes in doctrine. Now, this all happened from roughly 95 to 100 A.D. up until 200 A.D.
Now, let's look at the next century, 200 to 300 A.D. And we're going to see that during that hundred years, the Cult of Peter dying in Rome, being the first apostle or the first bishop of Rome takes hold.
Now approximately at the turn of the century, around 200 A.D., Tertullian was a North African Christian writer and historian that is often quoted today. He was battling the Gnostics at the time. In his writings, he was defending Christian beliefs against the Gnostics. (And I say "Christian" beliefs, the ones that were extant at that day. Not as necessarily we believe today.) And in his battle with the Gnostics, he defended the tradition that the apostles Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and that both of them died as martyrs there. Tertullian says this. He stated that from the Church of Rome—now I'm quoting from one of his writings—from the Church of Rome:
… come into our hands the very authority of the apostles themselves. (Emphasis added.)
The authority of the apostles themselves resides in Rome is what Tertullian is saying.
Then, in the middle of that century approximately 256 A.D., the Bishop of Rome (by now called Pope), the Bishop of Rome was Pope Stephen and he ruled from 254 to 257 A.D. He was the first one to claim the authority of Peter and to use Matthew 16 verses 18 and 19 to justify that authority. That's the first time that was in writing—256 A.D.
But the fact is that at that time none of the major bishops in Asia Minor accepted that authority. They did not go along with it, but here in just one hundred years, he is now claiming to have that authority.
We're jumping ahead now to 300 to 400 A.D. What we're going to find is Rome during the 300s A.D. begins to consolidate the position, its position, as the head of the Church, as the supreme authority—in that century from 300 to 400 A.D.
How did that happen? Very simple. One fact: The Pope got in bed with the Emperor and he consolidated his authority and the church's authority by joining forces with the worldly Roman Empire and the politicians and the government at that time.
In 313 A.D. Constantine, who was the Emperor (He was Emperor from 324 to 337 A.D.), he issues the famous Edict of Milan. And what that did was to give freedom of worship and equal rights to all religious groups. Christians previously, prior to that time, were persecuted. But he says now in 313, all religious groups have equal rights to worship as they please.
Then in 325 A.D., twelve years later, Constantine—now this is the Emperor of the Roman Empire—summons the Council of Nicea. So, here you have the Emperor summoning a church conference. A lot has changed in twelve years. Not the Bishop of Rome, not the Pope called a church conference. It would be today like the Governor of the State of Washington would convene a conference of the Pacific Church of God. That's the equivalent today.
And in 325, he summoned the Council of Nicea. This was the first general council of the "Christian Church." (And I say "Christian" in quotes because it had, obviously, morphed into something quite different.) It was the first general council, and he decided, Constantine, the Emperor decided, the date of Passover. He ruled in favor of Rome and not with the tradition of the apostles and the tradition we keep today.
The key here is that: He [Constantine] called the conference and he managed and ran the conference. He was the one in control.
Then in 337 A.D., he was baptized on his deathbed. That's where you get the notion of deathbed confession and deathbed repentance. Constantine was a notable person to do that.
Toward the end of the century in 378 A.D., Roman Emperor Gratian declared that the Bishop of Rome—Now get this!—could not be subject to a trial in a secular court. Now, obviously the Bishop of Rome had done something. We don't know what it is. But he [Emperor Gratian] made the edict that civilian courts cannot try the Bishop of Rome. That sets him apart from the average citizen or even a member of the Roman government. It's a breakthrough there for the Pope.
Then, in 382 A.D. Pope Damus claimed that Rome was—and I'm quoting now from one of his writings—"preeminent over the other churches" because of Christ's promise to Peter. You see now how this is evolving and control is being taken over by the Roman Bishops.
Then in 385 A.D., Pope Siricius wrote a letter to the Bishop of Tarragonia, which is in Spain, and he says, notice this is a quote:
… he who bears the burden in us…
Again, that's the royal "us," meaning himself.
… he who bears the burden in us is the Blessed Apostle Peter, who in everything, as we trust, protects and watches over us, the heirs of his administration [Peter]. (Emphasis added.)
So, here you have Pope Siricius saying, "I am the heir of Peter's administration. He looks over me. He inspires me. He guides me and leads me."
Then in the late 300s A.D., during the reign of Emperor Theodosius what happened is the great families of Rome, the wealthy families that owned lands and farms and mines and trade and commerce and all of that, those great families were being converted to "Christianity." So, you see before they had subsidized and supported the pagan temples. Now they begin to support, toward the end of the 300s, they begin to support the Bishop of Rome. So, now compared to churches out in Turkey and Asia Minor and the Middle East, now Rome had this huge inflow of money from the wealthy families of the Roman Empire, and particularly of Rome itself.
Now let's look at the century from 400 A.D. to 500 A.D. and you will see that by this time, the Pope's supremacy was unchallenged. It has been cemented between 400 and 500 A.D.
In 431 A.D., the Council of Ephesus was called. And by that time, Rome was the unchallenged leader of the Western Empire. Do you remember the Roman Empire divided at that time? The Eastern Empire was controlled in Constantinople. The Western Empire was controlled out of Rome. And it says, coming out of that, the Emperor was responsible for calling this council and he was responsible (the Emperor) responsible for deciding doctrinal matters and maintaining discipline in the Church. So, the Pope now had the Emperor on his side and had the Roman Army on his side to maintain discipline in the Church.
And in 445 A.D., the Emperor Valentinian demands obedience to the Pope (with his armies behind him, of course) because of the association with the Apostle Peter and with Rome's status as the capital city of the Empire. Now, the Popes were not stupid. Rather than have a plethora of religions (pagan religions) and with the growing power of the Bishop of Rome, it was much easier for an emperor to maintain control if there was one state religion and he had the Pope in his pocket. Of course, the Pope viewed it the other way. "I've got the Emperor in my pocket and we can establish the Bishop of Rome as the preeminent voice in the church. So, they both had things to gain by coming together and by 445, the Emperor is demanding obedience to the Pope in religious matters.
Then, one of the most famous Popes of all was Pope Leo. He ruled from 440 to 461 A.D. And he called the Council of Chalcedon. That was in 451 A.D. There were 630 bishops attending in Rome at the Council of Chalcedon. Notice the decree. I'm quoting now.
What Leo believes, we all believe; anathema to him who believes anything else. Peter has spoken through the mouth of Leo.
Look at the change! From 90 A.D., 50 A.D. to 450 A.D., now all of the sudden the Bishops are saying, "God, Christ, Peter speak through Leo."
Then in 452 A.D. Attila the Hun—he's the king of the Huns—threatened Rome. And remember at that time the Roman Empire was weakening. The Barbarians from the east and from the north were coming into the Roman Empire and they came right on the doorsteps of Rome. Attila the Hun in 452 threatened to sack Rome. He was just camped; his army was camped just outside of Rome. And Pope Leo goes out to meet Attila the Hun. They met privately in a tent. Nobody knows what was said in that tent, but when Pope Leo leaves and walks back to Rome, Attila the Hun walks out of the tent, tells his men to turn around and they leave. They don't touch Rome.
Wouldn't it be interesting to be a fly on the wall in that tent and see what actually happened? My guess is—this is just my opinion—is that there were spiritual influences inside that tent and those spiritual influences took hold of the mind of Attila the Hun and convinced him it would be a good idea to leave this guy Leo alone and to go somewhere else. That's exactly what happened.
Then, just three years later, Genseric, the leader of the Vandals, another mob of pagans coming in to sack Rome, again camped out outside of Rome, threatening to sack Rome and Leo intervenes and Genseric turns around and goes somewhere else.
So, Leo at that time was looked upon as the savior of Rome and some people looked at him almost as God in the flesh. That reinforces the position of the Pope saying, "Who but God could do this? Who but God's representative on earth could do this? Who but the Vicar of Christ could actually do this? God's obviously with Leo and we better be with Leo if we want to save our skin."
Then in 476 A.D. the Roman Empire falls. It had been in existence for 1300 years. It fell in 476 A.D. but the interesting thing is the Papacy didn't fall with it. Now think about that! You have this Empire that in the latter years backed the Papacy. This Empire just completely falls apart, but the Papacy stays in power. We're going to see where that comes from a little later. That was in 476 A.D.
Then, just as an aside, Pope Gregory right around 600 A.D. was the first Pope to insist that the clergy not marry. Up until that time it was fine. So, this didn't start with Peter. It started around 600 A.D.
Then in 800 A.D. Pope Leo III now (the third Pope to take the moniker Leo), do you remember what he did in 800 A.D.? He crowned Charlemagne as Emperor of the Resurrected Roman Empire on Christmas Day in 800 A.D. Now, what a change! Now, the Pope crowns the Emperor. The Emperor knelt at the Pope's feet. The Pope was the one that placed the crown on his head and asked God's blessing upon this Emperor. An Emperor kneeling in front of a Pope—what a change in two, three, four hundred years! Now think about that. That was in 800 A.D.
And then, of course, in 1870—we're jumping ahead a lot just for times' sake—but in 1870, the First Vatican Council occurred. It hadn't happened up until that time. And that Vatican Council of 1870 declared the Pope infallible when speaking on matters of faith and morals. The Latin term is Ex-Cathedra. When he speaks from the chair of Peter—he sits on that chair that we've all seen pictures of—when he sits on that chair and makes pronouncements of faith, morals and religion, he is declared infallible because God, Christ and Peter are speaking through him, 1870 at the First Vatican Council.
Then in 1929 between the two World Wars, a treaty was signed between the Pope and Italy. It's called the Lateran Treaty. The Pope did one thing. Italy did two things. Notice the trade-off here.
What the Pope did is he recognized Italy as a country. Now, think about this. The Pope recognizes Italy as a country. How long has Italy been around? But what he did in this [treaty], he recognized Italy as a legitimate country, described the boundaries of Italy. And God's representative on earth, the Vicar of Christ, said "Italy is a country."
Now, what Italy did—two things the Pope received in this—is Italy recognized that the Holy See was sovereign and independent in the field of international relations. In other words, the Vatican, the Pope, could do whatever they want. They were totally independent of the Italian government. They could make any treaty they want, any negotiations they want and Italy could not interfere. The second thing is Italy recognized the Holy See's jurisdiction, sovereign jurisdiction over the Vatican, over those 108 acres. In other words, Italy couldn't send troops in there. Italy couldn't send a lawyer in there. Italy couldn't send a policeman in there without the Vatican's permission. They were totally sovereign—that little 108 acres in the middle of Rome.
Now let's come to the Papacy today. Let's just take three or four facts to give you an idea where it's come from when we started in 90 A.D. all the way up to the twentieth century.
Nobody knows the wealth of the Papacy. And when you say the "wealth of the Papacy," you're talking the wealth of the Catholic Church because the Pope owns it all. And the estimate is—but it will never be known because much of the wealth is secret—but the estimates range from $10-15 billion. My guess is it is much greater, but we just don't know.
And look at the power and control because he has control and power over 1.2 billion Catholics. That's seventeen percent of the world's population! Now think of that. There is nobody in the world that has that much control over that many people. Nobody! Not the President of the United States. Not the President of China. Nobody has that amount of control. Granted China has more population, but the Pope has incredible control over the Catholics.
The fact is, too, contrary to popular opinion, the Catholic Church is now the fastest growing religion in the world. I was told the Muslims were the fastest growing, but they're not. The Catholic Church is the fastest growing religion in the world and primarily it is happening in the Southern Hemisphere—South America, Central America, Africa and sometimes in certain parts of Asia. It is the fastest growing religion in the world and one man is in control of all of that.
Now, let's go to Point Number Three. We've seen a little bit about the Pope himself and his titles and all of that. We've seen 1800 years of history. And now we come to the Third Point which is what we want to do is:
And we do this not to put anybody down or not to throw rocks at anybody, but to learn lessons.
You could say, "What on earth does the Papacy have to do with the modern day Church of God?" Let's go over to Ecclesiastes chapter 1 and verse 9 to see the wisdom of Solomon, because we're going to find out that there is nothing new under the sun. Ecclesiastes 1 and verse 9, notice what it says.
Ecclesiastes 1:9. The thing that [has] been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done [already happened] is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. (KJV)
Meaning: You can learn about today from studying what happened yesterday. You can learn lessons to avoid the mistakes of yesterday by studying them so you don't repeat them today because nothing new is happening under the sun. And, as an elder, I can tell you, you see the same patterns in people, in groups, in governments or whatever. It just happens over and over and over again. World War II was a result of the lessons not learned in World War I and on it goes. Viet Nam was a result of lessons not learned in from the decades previous to Viet Nam and so on.
If you like to outline this would be "III. A." We're going to cover some similarities between what happened in the Papacy with the Worldwide Church of God and what is currently happening among God's people today.
We've already covered that. They ran away from Judaism. They tried to distance themselves from the synagogues, from anything smacking of Judaism. They did so with the Passover and changing the Passover to Easter and instituting Christmas and all of that.
As the early Bishops of Rome fled from Judaism, we fled from Protestantism in the Church, particularly in the Worldwide Church of God.
Remember the early Bishops of Rome in an effort to change Saturday, the Sabbath, to Sunday, what they did is they first proclaimed the Sabbath as a fast day and then they proclaimed Sunday as a feast day to begin to get the people to look forward to Sunday and to not be too happy with Saturday. Then, they changed, obviously, the Passover and invented Easter and the sunrise service and all of that to appease the sun worshippers in the Empire of that day. All the while, they were distancing themselves from Judaism, from the Temple, what they called the influence of the Jews. So, they changed doctrine and they ran away from Judaism.
Now in the Worldwide Church of God, the same thing happened. I was there to witness it. Most of you were there to witness it.
Because the fact is that in the forties, fifties and sixties, Mr. Armstrong had a Protestant background, a Quaker background and then as he began to be called, he had Protestants coming into the Church. He had Evangelicals coming into the Church and they had a syrupy view of God's love. "Love, love, love. You don't have to keep the Commandments. All you have to have is love." And many were coming in the Church in the fifties and the sixties who had that same view.
So, Mr. Armstrong reacted to that. The Church reacted to that. The ministry reacted to that. And the Worldwide Church of God underemphasized God's love, God's love for us, and underemphasized our love for the Brethren, what we should have for the Brethren and overemphasized obedience.
In many cases, the obedience became majoring in the minors. We weren't focused on the Two Great Commandments. We were focused on "hair and wear." I can remember in the sixties, there was great emphasis on skirt lengths. And in some churches, the head deacon held out a yard stick and he would measure skirt lengths of young girls coming into the church. People, if it was men and your hair was too long, you got told. If it was women and your hair was too short, you got told. [There was a] major emphasis on that!
And what to eat, what not to eat, what was clean and what was unclean. I remember what one minister friend of mine laughingly called it—"The Great Jell-O Controversy of the 1960s" where there's this huge controversy about the contents of Jell-O. And was it clean? Or was it unclean? People purported to have the recipe for Jell-O and they were saying, "It's unclean." And other people were saying, "No, it's okay to eat." And we were getting letters going back and forth and sermons being given. And we were focused (instead of on the weightier matters of the Law) we were focused on the contents of Jell-O. Now that's not to say we shouldn't be careful in what we eat.
But the fact is that all of this focus was away from Protestantism where we wanted to run away from Protestantism just as the Catholic Church began to run away from Judaism.
The fact is; the balance is that we have to do both. We have to be obedient in every way. But yet, we also have to be focused on the weightier matters of the Law. We won't turn there, but you know Matthew 23:23. Christ was railing on the Sadducees and the Pharisees. He says, "You tithe of mint, anise and cumin—these tiny little leaves. And you count out all these little leaves." And He said, "You omit the weightier matters of the Law—justice, mercy and faith." But what did He say? "You should do these and not leave the other undone." He's saying, "You have to do both. You have to be obedient even to the smallest details and at the same time you have to get the big picture and look at the weightier matters of the Law."
We completely ignored Mark chapter 12. I don't say we completely ignored. We underemphasized Mark 12. Let's read verses 28 through 31. If somebody came to Christ and said, "What is the most important thing?" you would think our antenna would go up and we would laser like focus in on that and we would do that above all. But we didn't. Our emphasis was in other places. Mine too. I'm just as guilty as anybody. Mark 12:28.
Mark 12:28. And one of the scribes came [to Him], and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him [asking Christ], Which is the first commandment of all?
29) [Christ] answered him, [He says,] The first … commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (KJV)
The Hebrew—we've covered this before—simply means "Obey God only." Don't obey anybody else. Just obey God only.
Then verse 30:
Mark 12:30. And [you shall] love the Lord [your] God with all [your] heart, and with all [your life], and with all [your] mind, and with all [your] strength: this is the first commandment. (KJV)
That should be the prime focus of every Church member all the time.
Then He goes on to say in verse 31, He says, "The second…." The man asked Him, "Which is the great commandment?" And Christ says, "There are two. There is not just one. There are two." But He said:
Mark 12:31. And the second is like [it, like the first one] … [You shall] love [your neighbor] as [yourself]. (KJV)
Meaning: to the degree you love yourself. He goes on to say:
Mark 12:31b. There is none other commandment greater than these. (KJV)
And this is what we must focus on. It is so plain. It is so simple. And, yet, sometimes in the past—as I said I'm as guilty as anybody—we got off onto the twigs and the branches and got ourselves into trouble.
Look at John 13 and verse 35, very clear Scriptures. How do we know we're the disciples of Christ? How do we know? What is the litmus test to be a disciple of Christ? John 13 and verse 35, Christ says:
John 13:35. By this shall all know … (KJV)
The word "men" is in italics.
John 13:35. By this shall all know that [you] are my disciples, if… (KJV)
And what is the "if?"
John 13:35 continued. … [you] have love one [for] another. (KJV)
Huge focus! Huge emphasis! If we want to be known as a disciple of Christ, this is one of the measuring sticks by which we are measured.
Then let's jump to two Scriptures in I John chapter 3. This first one we're going to read is in verse 14. And I'll tell you this verse I've read it many times. But about twelve years ago, ten years ago, it hit me like a 2 by 4 between the eyes. I had read over it and over it and over it until finally you read it and the light bulb goes on. I John 3 and verse 14, John says (the last apostle alive):
I John 3:14. We know that we have passed from death unto life, (KJV)
How do we know if we've passed from death unto life? I want to know if I've passed from death unto life. He says:
I John 3:14b. … because we love the brethren. (KJV)
That's how we know! That's the demonstration.
I John 3:14 continued. He that [loves] not his brother [abides] in death. (KJV)
Very simple, profound Scripture!
Then, look at verse 22.
I John 3:22. And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, (KJV)
There's the obedience part.
I John 3:22b. … and [we] do those things that are pleasing in his sight. (KJV)
So, this tells us the overriding goal is that we have to please God. And the way we do it is through the power of His spirit and through what we read in His Word and we're like little kids wanting to please our Father. We just want to do what He wants us to do. And it comes down to that. "Just tell me what to do and I'll do it. Show me out of Your Word and I'll do it because I want to know that I'm Your disciple. I want to know I've passed from death to life. And I want You to hear my prayers." It's very simple.
We have to emphasize today, we have to emphasize both—God's love for us and our love for the Brethren and obedience to the point of tithing mint, anise and cumin. We have to do both.
So Point A was that: Rome fled from Judaism as we fled from Protestantism.
Sad to say.
Now, we've seen the gradual growth in the Papacy and how it happened over centuries. But the same thing happened to the Worldwide Church of God. I have Plain Truths going back solidly to the 1950s. And then I have scattered ones from the early fifties going into the forties and going into the thirties. I've just collected them over the years. And on one snowy winter afternoon here about a month ago, I got them all out—the Good News and Plain Truths—and began going through each one and looked at the Table of Contents in the 50s, then going to the 60s and then going to the 70s just to see…. This was primarily the Good News because the Good News was aimed toward the Church, not the public to see what was in the Table of Contents, what the focus was.
In the 1950s, early 50s, Mr. Armstrong held a conference for the ministry. And he said (and I’m quoting):
I will not impose my will on the elders.
It was a report of a ministerial conference. And he was saying that we have to reach a consensus as a group of elders, God guiding us through the power of His holy spirit.
But then in the late fifties and throughout the sixties, there was an increasing emphasis and articles on government and on authority in the Church and on the authority of Mr. Armstrong. And on the authority of Mr. Armstrong toward the latter part of the sixties, mid to late 60s, the fact that he was an apostle. That was first promoted by Dr. Hoeh and Mr. Armstrong rejected that. But then, over time, enough were referring to him as an apostle that he did accept that. But there was an increasing emphasis in the sixties on government and the authority of Mr. Armstrong.
Then, in the seventies, as I said, Mr. Armstrong assumed the role of God's only and true apostle on the earth. And you can read that in the articles in the sixties and going on into the seventies. In fact, in the seventies and right up to Mr. Armstrong's death, a traveling Evangelist sent out by headquarters said (and I'm quoting from notes from one of his sermons):
If you disagree with headquarters, you disagree with Christ.
And so what he was basically saying is that Mr. Armstrong and headquarters speak for Christ. Now, does that sound familiar to what we read about the Papacy and how that evolved? Yes, it did.
Since the death of Mr. Armstrong, that cycle is repeating itself again because several today say that Mr. Armstrong's "mantle" has been passed to them. Therefore, they claim to have the same apostolic authority that Peter did and Mr. Armstrong did. In fact, one man recently said—I heard it on a tape that somebody sent me—he said he has the authority to tell the Brethren to cash in their retirement funds, sell their homes, and send the money to him. He has the apostolic authority to do that. Now again, does that sound familiar?
The tragedy of looking to a man is the following (three areas):
Can't do that! We just can't do that.
In Matthew 4:10, we won't turn there, but Christ had been fasting for forty days and forty nights. Satan was tempting Him, testing Him. And do you remember? He said, "Satan, get you behind Me for it is written…" Remember what Christ said? "You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve."
And if you put a man between you and God, then you're obeying a man and worshipping a man. Not God. That is idolatry!
That's dangerous! Because I know how infallible I am—I mean how fallible I am (laughter). Sorry. I know how fallible I am and how many mistakes I make and how many sins I commit. I don't want anybody putting their salvation in my hands. And so, you don't want to put your salvation in the hands of another human being. You just don't want to do that.
I remember a very good friend of mine, a fellow in Texas said, "Well, if I follow so-and-so (And if I mentioned the person's name, everybody would know the name.), if I follow so-and-so I have a foot into the Kingdom of God." It's a dangerous place to follow a man.
We are personally responsible to God. There is a man today who claims to be an apostle. And I'm quoting again from one of his sermons. He says:
"If you obey me and I am wrong, God holds me accountable and not you."
That is dangerous! That is very dangerous. He says, "Follow me and you get a free pass," because you're not responsible at that point. We won't turn there but what Galatians 6 and verse 7 says:
Galatians 6:7. Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man [sows], that shall he also reap. (KJV)
We're responsible for our actions. We're responsible for our thoughts. We're responsible for our deeds. Not another person.
So it is indeed a tragedy to put a man or obedience to man before obedience to God. And many people, I think, are just misguided. Maybe they have some unbridled zeal in that area and it's just a dangerous situation to get into.
The Third, Points C under Similarities between the Greater Church of God, the Worldwide Church of God and Rome is that:
The Pope gradually claimed to speak for Christ and was, therefore, infallible. And sometime in the 1960s, things changed in the Worldwide Church of God. Mr. Armstrong went from not imposing his will on elders to proclaiming that he was God's apostle and that God spoke only through him. There was a change in the sixties and early seventies.
I know many people who viewed Mr. Armstrong and view Mr. Armstrong today the way the Catholics view the Pope—that Mr. Armstrong is infallible and his words are infallible. His words are taken with the authority of Scripture.
Mr. Armstrong, if you told him that when he was alive, he would just rail on you! I've been in conferences. Somebody began to suck up to him and say he was this or that. And he just… this poor man was about that high when Mr. Armstrong got through with him, but he told him, he says, "Don't you put me in front of Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ is the head of this Church." And it just went on and on and on.
And a lot of this that happened to Mr. Armstrong, I think happened without his knowledge. And people out of, as I said, misguided zeal, wanting to follow headquarters, wanting to follow Mr. Armstrong just went overboard. And what I say is not to diminish Mr. Armstrong in any way. We're here because of him. We're here because of the work God did through him. He put us on the right path, but he was not infallible.
Today, several groups teach that Mr. Armstrong "restored all things," and that all doctrine and that all teaching were frozen in January of 1986 when he died. Then they go on to say that because Mr. Armstrong's "mantle" was passed to them, this huge error, then, is being repeated within the modern day Church. In fact, several men portray themselves as "God's only voice on earth" because they are the only ones following in the footsteps of Mr. Armstrong. I can think of five—maybe there are more. But the fact is, if they say they are the only voice, then, one or two things are happening. Either four of them are wrong or all five of them are wrong! And I personally hold to the latter view that that isn't happening today. It's just not happening.
Let me ask the question: Was the Church perfect in doctrine and understanding in January of 1986? I think anybody who examines it carefully with an open mind realizes that "No, we weren't. We just weren't." We didn't achieve perfection in the Church in 1986. We just didn't because the Church is run by God's little children who stumble and fall, who poop in their pants, who make mistakes and we're very, very fallible human beings.
Now, let me close this section with a quote from a Polish physicist who escaped Hitler's Germany. He helped create the weapon that ended World War II. (You might ask, "What on earth does this have to do with our subject?" You'll see.) His name was Bronowski and he wrote the book Ascent of Man. Let me read out of page 374. The context is that he was back in Auschwitz standing in front of that camp.
It is said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers.
He was a scientist, as I said that developed the A-bomb. Going on he says—I'll read it again.
It is said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That is false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond…
There was a huge pond there at Auschwitz. He says:
Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people and that was not done by gas.
They were all gassed. He says but the fact is the people turned into ashes was not done by gas. This is what he says now. This is very important.
It was done by arrogance. It was done by dogma. It was done by ignorance. When people believe they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave.
And that is absolutely true. Yet, people today claim to have infallibity, claim to have the mantle of Mr. Armstrong, and, therefore, you should look to them and place them between you and God.
This was an error in the Roman Church and it's been an error among God's people. It's just something we have to remember that only God and Christ are infallible—only God and Christ! And we must realize that we are all imperfect and we all make mistakes. We just do.
The Fourth, and this is the important point.
What is the common denominator that allowed all of these… that caused all of these things to happen—this pattern to be repeated over and over and over again?
Looking on the surface, it seems impossible that a Bishop of Rome could morph into the Pope today with his power and his authority and his wealth. It just seems impossible. And it is impossible for human beings to do that.
It also, looking on the surface, it just seems impossible that the modern day Church could incorporate many of those same faults and many of those same problems. And then it could be repeated again after the death of Mr. Armstrong, and we're doing it all over again. It seems impossible.
What is the common denominator? The common denominator is a very patient and very deceptive Satan. That's the common denominator. We won't turn there, but in II Thessalonians 2 and verse 7, Paul says:
II Thessalonians 2:7. For the mystery of iniquity [is] already [at] work [in the Church]: (KJV)
And it began and it multiplied and multiplied and multiplied in the next several hundred years and look what happened! Of course, Satan is alive and he wants to destroy. He wanted to destroy the Worldwide Church of God and he wants to destroy each and every one of us.
Now think about this. Who controlled the government at the time of the early Church? And who is going to control the government today at the end-time, the world's government at the end-time? Let's go to Revelation 17. We're going to read the first seven verses and then jump to verse 18. This is what happened. There is a spirit being who is very powerful and very deceptive behind the scenes. Revelation 17 verse 1:
Revelation 17:1. And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come [here; I'm going to show you] the judgment of the great whore… (KJV)
Now, we understand "the great whore" is the Roman Catholic Church and the Papacy specifically.
Revelation 17:1b. … [this whore] that [sits] upon many waters: (KJV)
And we know that "waters" are symbolic of nations. "Sits on them," this whore sits on the nations.
Revelation 17:2. With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
3) So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, (KJV)
Now when somebody sits upon a beast, it's like a rider on top of a horse. You're controlling the horse. You're telling it where to go. And this is exactly what was happening here. Notice:
Revelation 17:3b. … [this beast that is] full of … blasphemy, having seven heads [the last seven resurrections of the Roman Empire] and ten horns. (KJV)
And let's understand just where this Beast gets its power. We won't turn there but back in Revelation 13 and the first two verses, it is very clear that the Beast receives its power from the dragon. And we know—many other Scriptures tell us—who the dragon is.
Going on in verse 4:
Revelation 17:4. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, (KJV)
This woman was very wealthy—$10-15 billion wealthy!
Revelation 17:4b. … having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: (KJV)
Fornicating with the Emperors, fornicating with the governments of the world, fornicating with pagan religions in the early days.
Verse 5:
Revelation 17:5. And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
6) And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus [Christ]: (KJV)
And we know that that great whore, the Catholic Church, has persecuted Sabbath keepers, Holy Day keepers down through the centuries.
Revelation 17:6b. … and when I saw her [he says], I wondered with great admiration.
7) And the angel said unto me, [Why do you] marvel? I will tell [you] the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that [carries] her, which [has] the seven heads and ten horns. (KJV)
Jump to verse 18:
Revelation 17:18. And the woman which [you saw] is that great city, which [reigns] over the kings of the earth. (KJV)
Now where could that only be? Rome. That's the only explanation.
Remember when we first started when the Pope was announced to the world, what did he say? "Father of princes and kings, Ruler of the world on earth, and Vicar of our Savior Jesus Christ." The Pope sits on the Beast.
It took Satan a few hundred years, but look at the billions of people he has influenced over the years—1.2 billion alive today. But look at all the people that have come and gone that were Catholics. Look at the influence. It took him a few hundred years to make that happen. Let's understand that. And we know in Revelation 12 we're told that "Satan deceives the whole world"—one way or another deceives the whole world.
And yet, we see this repeated in the modern-day Church of God. Let's go to 2 Corinthians chapter 11. Read verse 13 and 14. This is how it happens. 2 Corinthians 11 verse 13, Paul is saying:
2 Corinthians 11:13. For such are false apostles, (KJV)
Who motivates false apostles?
2 Corinthians 11:13b. … deceitful workers, (KJV)
Who motivates deceitful workers?
2 Corinthians 11:13 continued. … transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
Verse 14, He says:
2 Corinthians 11:14. [Don't] marvel; [because] Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (KJV)
This is how it happens. The common denominator is Satan the Devil and Satan attempts to work the same way with us today as he did back then and down through the centuries as an angel of light and with motivating false apostles and deceitful workers. And if he doesn't get to us today, guess what? He's going to try again tomorrow and then the next day and then the next day. Does he attack us on our strengths? Of course not! He's too smart for that. He attacks us where we're weak, where we're most vulnerable.
Let's understand we have a great adversary. You know 1 Peter 5 and verse 8. We won't turn there. It says, "Be sober. Be vigilant because your adversary the devil as a roaring lion seeks whom he may devour." Your adversary, he is a personal adversary to each one of us. And we have to understand that and take that seriously. He's a personal adversary to the Church, but he's a personal adversary to each one of God's people.
So, let's remember this Last Point that the common denominator in all of these 1800 years up to today is Satan the Devil. And he has been very successful with those who have let down and who don't stay close to God.
So, let's close now.
We've seen the rise of the Papacy from a Bishop of Rome to an infallible Pope. And we've seen a similar pattern in the twentieth century Church. Yet, today in the twenty-first century, we see that same Satan-inspired process going on in the greater Church of God today. And we've seen that the source of this is Satan the Devil.
The key is we must learn from history. Dale gave a great sermonette talking about the same subject. We must learn from history. George Santayana, who was a philosopher, he was born in the mid 1800s and died in the mid 1900s. He was a philosopher and he was a writer/an author. He says (You've heard it before.):
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
We must learn from the past. And like I said, we were all involved in it. It's been going on for 1800 years. So, let's learn from the past.
We're just little kids. And we learn from our Father. And we shouldn't learn from somebody who whispers in our ear and taps us on the shoulder. We have to look to our Father and our older Brother and the Pioneer of our faith and the Word that God has given us. We don't look to men. We don't look to organizations. We must not allow this process to repeat in the lives of the Church today or in our lives. We must never forget the following final Scripture, Ephesians 6 and verse 12. I'm going to read it out of the New Living Translation. It's in better modern English. Ephesians 6 and verse 12, this is what we must remember. We can't forget!
Ephesians 6:12. For we are not fighting against people made of flesh and blood, (NLT)
Sometimes we focus on people. This person's my enemy or this person did me wrong or this person said this or this person did that. No. We are not fighting against people made of flesh and blood:
Ephesians 6:12b. … but [we are fighting] against the evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, (NLT)
Satan and his demons—that's what we're fighting against. He says:
Ephesians 6:12 continued. … against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, and against wicked spirits in the heavenly realms. (NLT)
Let's never forget that. Let's learn from the past. Let's learn from what happened in ancient Rome. Let's learn from our own mistakes in the last century. And let's go forward looking to God and Jesus Christ only and following them into the Kingdom of God.
Transcribed by kb April 6, 2012
Verified April 10, 2012