Just to find out where my source fits in, I would like to know what others on this forum might know of the earliest individuals who called the RCC the antichrist. My 'source' is very, very interesting, I'll tell you later on. First yours please!
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Who first called the the papal power antichrist?
- Thread starter Gerhard Ebersoehn
- Start date
Agnus_Dei said:
GE
Don't worry, it won't cost you anything. It's for free, but the suspense must first kill us a while longer.
papal antichrist............
here are some quotes , from learned men from ages past .
Roger Williams (First Baptist Pastor in America)
He spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Taken from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52
John Knox (Scotch Presbyterian)
Knox wrote to abolish "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church" and that the pope should be recognized as "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." Taken from The Zurich Letters, pg. 199 by John Knox.
John Calvin (Presbyterian)
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Taken from Institutes by John Calvin
Arnulf Bishop of Orleans (Roman Catholic)
"deplored the roman popes as "monsters of guilt" and declared in a council called by the King of France in 991ad that the pontiff, clad in purple and gold, was, "Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God" -Phillip Schaff, History of the Christian church, 8 vols., reprint of the 3d (1910)ed. (Grand Rapids Mich.: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d
Eberhard II, archbishop of Salzburg (Roman Catholic)
"stated at a synod of bishops held at Regensburg in 1240 (some scholars say 1241) that the people of his day were "accustomed" to calling the pope antichrist." -LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers, 4 vols. (Wash DC: Review and Herald publishing assc, 1950-1954)
John Wycliffe
"When the western church was divided for about 40 years between two rival popes, one in Rome and the other in Avigon, France, each pope called the other pope antichrist - and John Wycliffe is reputed to have regarded them as both being right: "two halves of Antichrist, making up the perfect Man of Sin between them."
_________________________________________________________________
You cannot antagonize and influence at the same time. john knox
here are some quotes , from learned men from ages past .
Roger Williams (First Baptist Pastor in America)
He spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Taken from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52
John Knox (Scotch Presbyterian)
Knox wrote to abolish "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church" and that the pope should be recognized as "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." Taken from The Zurich Letters, pg. 199 by John Knox.
John Calvin (Presbyterian)
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Taken from Institutes by John Calvin
Arnulf Bishop of Orleans (Roman Catholic)
"deplored the roman popes as "monsters of guilt" and declared in a council called by the King of France in 991ad that the pontiff, clad in purple and gold, was, "Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God" -Phillip Schaff, History of the Christian church, 8 vols., reprint of the 3d (1910)ed. (Grand Rapids Mich.: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d
Eberhard II, archbishop of Salzburg (Roman Catholic)
"stated at a synod of bishops held at Regensburg in 1240 (some scholars say 1241) that the people of his day were "accustomed" to calling the pope antichrist." -LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers, 4 vols. (Wash DC: Review and Herald publishing assc, 1950-1954)
John Wycliffe
"When the western church was divided for about 40 years between two rival popes, one in Rome and the other in Avigon, France, each pope called the other pope antichrist - and John Wycliffe is reputed to have regarded them as both being right: "two halves of Antichrist, making up the perfect Man of Sin between them."
_________________________________________________________________
You cannot antagonize and influence at the same time. john knox
Thanks! I appreciate! Wycliffe seems to be the earliest among all so far?
All right, one reason why I asked is, people like Eliyahu often say the 'movements' like the Albigenses and / or Waldensians said the pope was antichrist. I have never seen it quoted from them - o yes, they haven't had many documents that survived the persecutions. Nevertheless. Anyone could supply me with quotes - their sources?
But - here's another very interesting aspect - actually I asked my question wrongly at first. Who would you say was the first to say the papal system or rule began with Constantine?
All right, one reason why I asked is, people like Eliyahu often say the 'movements' like the Albigenses and / or Waldensians said the pope was antichrist. I have never seen it quoted from them - o yes, they haven't had many documents that survived the persecutions. Nevertheless. Anyone could supply me with quotes - their sources?
But - here's another very interesting aspect - actually I asked my question wrongly at first. Who would you say was the first to say the papal system or rule began with Constantine?
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
The first to do this was the RCC. Popes called rival popes "Antichrist" eventually they got Wycliff and Luther to start doing it. Did you mean to ask "Who were the first non-Catholics to call the Pope Antichrist"?? (Of course it would be hard to argue that Wycliff and Luther were not in fact Catholics)
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan said:
GE
Sorry, I made a blunder with my initial question. I want to find out whom the residents think the first person was who first linked or identified papal Rome as antichrist with Constantine. - Specifically the Church at Rome and its pope after Constantine as antichrist, one could say with Constantine originator of Roman Catholicism. The surprise I wanted to share is that it wasn't the Seventh Day Adventists! Who do you think, was it?
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
The rival popes only called each other anti-christ not the RCC of the Constantine era - as you note.
I don't know who was the first to make the connection between the 4 beast little horn and the Papacy starting at the time of Constantine.
But it is an interesting study.
in Christ,
Bob
I don't know who was the first to make the connection between the 4 beast little horn and the Papacy starting at the time of Constantine.
But it is an interesting study.
in Christ,
Bob
Thank you all for your input!
Was I surprised while reading from Milton's poems, a couplet (or whatever it is called, a poem) that usually in publishing is deleted because he in so many words say ... now let me first get that page ... I'll be back !
Was I surprised while reading from Milton's poems, a couplet (or whatever it is called, a poem) that usually in publishing is deleted because he in so many words say ... now let me first get that page ... I'll be back !
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
Why would anyone think that SDAs are the source for this? Are you implying that things have come to the point that people associate this particular idea with a distinctive for SDAs??
SDAs are possibly the largest single Sabbath keeping Christian group today - so I understand why some think that they started that idea for Christians or they are the only ones who accept the Sabbath (as mistaken as those ideas are)... but why would they think SDAs are the source for the Papacy-Pagan-Rome connection?
CarpentersApprentice
New Member
GE,
RE I want to find out whom the residents think the first person was who first linked or identified papal Rome as antichrist with Constantine. - Specifically the Church at Rome and its pope after Constantine as antichrist, one could say with Constantine originator of Roman Catholicism.
This doesn't mention Constantine directly, but Sylvester I was pope from 314 to 335 and Constantine the Great became sole emperor in 325. Here is a quote from Bonacursus, ca. 1176-1190:
"... (The Cathars) assert that the Blessed Sylvester was the Antichrist of whom we read in the Epistle: 'The son of perdition," is he "who is lifted up above all that is called God.' From that day, they say, the Church was lost..."
from An Exposure of the Heresy of the Cathars, Made before the People of Milan by Bonacursus, Who Formerly Was One of Their Masters
Quoted in Heresies of the High Middle Ages (1991) page 170.
CA
RE I want to find out whom the residents think the first person was who first linked or identified papal Rome as antichrist with Constantine. - Specifically the Church at Rome and its pope after Constantine as antichrist, one could say with Constantine originator of Roman Catholicism.
This doesn't mention Constantine directly, but Sylvester I was pope from 314 to 335 and Constantine the Great became sole emperor in 325. Here is a quote from Bonacursus, ca. 1176-1190:
"... (The Cathars) assert that the Blessed Sylvester was the Antichrist of whom we read in the Epistle: 'The son of perdition," is he "who is lifted up above all that is called God.' From that day, they say, the Church was lost..."
from An Exposure of the Heresy of the Cathars, Made before the People of Milan by Bonacursus, Who Formerly Was One of Their Masters
Quoted in Heresies of the High Middle Ages (1991) page 170.
CA
Last edited by a moderator:
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
GE
Last night it was World Cup, and hurrah, we won! Congratulations Bokke! Bokke! Bokke! Bokke! Lekkerrrrrrrrr!
So you will understand why it's only now I return. Here is it:
Constantine
Extract from, Milton, Poetical Works, Oxford University Press 1979, edited by Douglas Bush
Of Reformation Touching Church Discipline in England (1641)
“... In his five anti-episcopal tracts Milton translates from Dante, Petrach, and Ariosto, “three the most famousest men for wit and learning that Italy at this day glories of”, as witnesses for “for a received opinion even among men professing the Romish faith, that Constantine marred all in the Church.” (Works, 3, 1, 26-27; C.P.W., 1, 558-60). The point of the excerpts can be best appreciated in the setting of Milton’s prose:
(Milton of Dante says, GE)
“Dante in his 19. Canto of Inferno [115-17] hath thus, as I will render it you in English blank verse:
Dante: Ah Constantine, of how much ill was cause
Not thy conversion, but those rich domains
That the first wealthy pope received of thee.
(Milton of Petrach continues, GE)
“So in his 20. Canto of Paradise [55-60] he makes the like complaint, and Petrach seconds him in the same mind in his 108. Sonnet which is wiped out by the Inquisitor in some editions; speaking of the Roman Antichrist as merely bred up by Constantine:
Petrach: Founded in chaste and humble poverty,
‘Gainst them that raised thee dost thou lift thy horn,
Impudent whore, where hast thou placed thy hope?
In thy adulterers, or thy ill-got wealth?
Another Constantine comes not in haste.
(Milton of Aristo continues, GE)
“Aristo of Ferrara, after both these in time but equal in fame, following the scope of his poem in a difficult knot how to restore Orlando his chief hero to his lost senses, brings Astolfo, the English knight up into the moon, where St. John, as he feigns, met him (canto 34):
Aristo: And to be short, at last his guide him brings
Into a goodly valley, where he sees
A mighty mass of things strangely confused,
Since that on earth were lost, or were abused.
(GE, Douglas Bush notes, “These four lines Milton quoted from Sir John Harington’s translation (1591), canto 34, stanza 72. The next four lines, from stanza 79, have several verbal echoes of Harington.)
(Milton remarks, GE)
“And amongst these so abused things listen what he met withal, under the conduct of the Evangelist:
Aristo: Then passed he to a flow’ry mountain green,
Which once smelt sweet, now stinks as odiously;
This was that gift (if thou the truth will have)
That Constantine to good Sylvestro gave.”
GE: So that’s it – not the Seventh Day Adventists, not even the Puritans, but the Roman Catholics themselves! Is it not amazing! ‘Constantine the first pope’ is what I have heard said, and thought mad.
CarpentersApprentice said:
GE
Thanks! But I wanted, first, THEIR (the Cathars') statement, not a reference to, their claim.
Next, a direct connection with Constantine. All right, they speak of Sylvester --- who from, Constantine, received! That's the point I wanted. I gave it as to me it was an astonishing association made by the papists themselves! The date - Bonacursus - just unbelievable! Excellent, thanks. It far outdates the three references Milton refers to!
Last edited by a moderator:
GE,
I'd say it was Peter or John. I refer to their meeting with Simon Magus in Acts 8:20-23. He who tried to buy the Spirit for money then went on to Rome as "Simon Patrus" (vs. Simon Petras) and is likely the "first pope" of the RCC.
John and Paul seemed to know about this AC thing and that it already existed before Rome (one of the first epistles was 2Thes where Paul says "the mystery of iniquity doth already work"). He, no doubt, would have heard about Simon Magus at the Jerusalem council.
And, of course, he never mentions seeing Simon Peter in Rome -- when, by all accounts he should have been -- only Luke and some others.
skypair
I'd say it was Peter or John. I refer to their meeting with Simon Magus in Acts 8:20-23. He who tried to buy the Spirit for money then went on to Rome as "Simon Patrus" (vs. Simon Petras) and is likely the "first pope" of the RCC.
John and Paul seemed to know about this AC thing and that it already existed before Rome (one of the first epistles was 2Thes where Paul says "the mystery of iniquity doth already work"). He, no doubt, would have heard about Simon Magus at the Jerusalem council.
And, of course, he never mentions seeing Simon Peter in Rome -- when, by all accounts he should have been -- only Luke and some others.
skypair
CarpentersApprentice
New Member
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
Well... remember... Bonacursus isn't agreeing with the statement, he's just reporting what the Cathars said.
CA
CarpentersApprentice said:
GE
Who was this Bonacursus? I'll read up, but don't know if the books I have will have him in. It's the first time, if I haven't forgotten, that I heard of him. So, the lazy man's handbook, the net, may help? Thanks!
skypair said:
GE
Ja. and no. a mysterie in itself, this story, wouldn't you agree?
It's true the mysterie of iniquity already in the life-time of Paul operated. For me the question, What are its properties or characteristics - recognisable outstanding 'marks'? I mean now in the NT writings. I think I have at least one. But won't mention it now. I would first like to hear what others may have found or reckon to have found. So again, thanks in advance!