Section IV. The Seven Epistles Typical of the Complete and Manifold Development of the Apostasy

Apostolic State of Christendom

The spiritual condition of the ecclesias in this state of things may be learned from the writings of the apostles and others as extant in the New Testament. Their faith in the “things of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” was unmixed with Nikolaitanism, or “philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of men, and the elements of the world;” and it worked by love and purified the heart—Gal. v. 6; Acts xv. 9. There was among christians, as the rule, a perfectly unselfish devotion to the interests of the truth, and to the well-being of one another. Their works, labor, and patience, were without rebuke. They labored for the name, and did not faint, although their labor endangered their lives, liberty, and goods. The rule was “poor

p. 428Chronological Tableau of the Apostasy

p. 429 in this world, rich in faith;” the reverse of this was the exception. When they received the word, they received it gladly and were immersed; and then “continued steadfastly in the apostle’s teaching and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers;” and while in their “first love,” “the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul; and great grace was upon them all.” In this primitive condition of affairs, the ecclesias were all the heritages, οι κληροι, or clergy, of God, constituting “the flock;” while “the rulers” or “elders” were its feeders under the supremacy of the Chief Shepherd at the right hand of the majesty in the heavens. These ruling brethren took the oversight of the flock, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; and they demeaned themselves, not as lords and reverends, but as examples to the generality of their brethren in the faith.

What precise number of years “the heritages of the Deity,” continued in this happy and uncorrupted condition, it is impossible to define. We know when the state began, but cannot tell the first year when the devil, or the flesh, began to pervert the truth. We may remark safely, that there is no well defined chronological line between the Apostolical State and the Ephesian State, by which it was succeeded. There was “One Body,” consisting of many ecclesias, pertaining to the Apostolical State; and before that body could be said to have passed into the Ephesian State, the Angel Presbyteries of the ecclesias or heritages generally must have responded to the apocalyptical description of the angel at Ephesus. This transition would therefore be gradual; for on the supposition, that “men speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them,” first arose in the Ephesian Angel, it would have taken several years to leaven all or a majority of the ecclesias extant with their tradition so as to give character to the Body. The entrance of the body into a new phase would be progressive; the process would be insidious; a change would come over it, and be discerned, not so much in the growing from month to month, as in the growth accomplished after a lapse of years.

Now, in the Apostolic State, which had not entirely passed till the destruction of Jerusalem, A. D. 72, the “first love” of the Angel-Presbyteries began very early to be impaired at different points. The agents of this unholy enterprize emanated from Judea, and began the work of “subverting souls” at Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. These were of the sect of the Pharisees, who enjoyed the fellowship of the apostles, and consorted with them in their meetings. They had, therefore, ample means and opportunities of knowing the truth. Aware that it would be useless for them to broach dogmas in their presence, p. 430 “they went out from them and troubled the Gentile brethren with words.” What they dared not teach in Jerusalem they taught in Antioch and other places; and “as the serpent through subtility” sought to corrupt their minds “from the simplicity that is in the Christ.” But, although this attempt was opposed, and apostolically denounced, the enterprize was not abandoned by the christianized Pharisees. They determined to popularize christianity so as to make it palatable to the Jews, in the hope that it would cause them to cease persecuting those who believed in Jesus as the Christ. They therefore taught that men should believe the gospel, be immersed, then be circumcized, and keep the law of Moses, if they would be saved. This was Judaizing and “inventing a lie.” The apostles taught no such doctrine as this; and in the decree they published, declared all beyond believing the gospel and being baptized, was unnecessary and vain.

The invention of this lie was the beginning of troubles to the body of Christ. Its inventors found their advantage in propagating it in defiance of the apostles. They made proselytes to their tradition both among the elders and private members of the flock; and wherever they succeeded in establishing their influence, there, and to the same extent, the authority of the apostles was set aside. They became the adversaries of these holy and self-denying men, and are therefore styled in the Apocalypse “the Satan,” and their “church,” “the Synagogue of the Satan,” of which we have spoken at large elsewhere.

But others arose after these, and added new elements to “the lie.” Truth is fixed, but lies never diminish in circulating, but always increase. Pious Jews began the work of corrupting the faith; and pious Gentiles, who had been subverted, added some of their “philosophy” and “gnosis,” or “science falsely so called,” to the original stock, and in their combination, produced what Paul styles, in 2 Thess. ii. 7, το μυστηριον της ανομιας, THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY. This, he says, was “already working;” and in its working through Judaizing and philosophizing teachers, gave him all the trouble and mortification he laments in his several epistles.

While, then, christendom was, as we have described it in the beginning, pure and uncorrupt in faith and practice, it had sadly degenerated at the time when the apostles had all finished their course, except John. The Apostolical State of the Body was not, therefore, all rose-colored, but was defaced by many unsightly blemishes. The seeds of death and corruption had been sown in it by the enemy; the germ of a Body of Death had been deposited in its womb; even of that Body Ecclesiastic styled popularly in our day “THE CHURCH,” and apocalyptically, “the Mother of Harlots and of all the Abominations of the Earth.” A p. 431 thoughtful perusal of the epistles will convince the reader that by the time of the apostles’ decease, the One Body was in a fallen or Ephesian State, and that consequently, the Apostolical State of things was pregnant with the Ephesian, as the Ephesian afterwards was of the Smyrnean, and the Smyrnean of the Pergamian, and the Pergamian of the Thyatiran, and the Thyatiran of the Sardian, and the Sardian of the Philadelphian, and the Philadelphian of the Laodicean, and the Laodicean of vomiting, corruption, and death.

The Mystery of Iniquity, then, had its beginning in the Apostolical State. The seeds of it were then sown broadcast by the enemy. But they did not ripen as soon as sown; they only began to grow. The fruit was to be “the Lawless One.” But fruit, when first formed, is not mature. Considerable time passes from the first appearance of the fruit to the time of ingathering because of ripeness. So with the Lawless One, he had to appear as the fruit of the Mystery of Iniquity; but after his appearing, he had to grow and ripen for the vintage, when he should be “consumed with the spirit of the Lord’s mouth, and destroyed with the brightness of his coming.”

Now the matter of the apocalyptical epistles in part consists of accusations, which, when put together, form a formidable indictment against the professing Christian community. These charges, as they increase, show also an increase in crime, until a climax is reached, which exposes the criminal to the most ignominious and condign punishment. The following ordinal summary will make this apparent to the reader. The Spirit accuses the Christian Body, saying, I have against thee—

1. That thou hast left thy first love;

2. That thou hast them that hold the teaching of Balaam, and the teaching of the Nikolaitans, which thing I hate;

3. That thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, who calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed to idols;

4. That thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead;

5. That thou hast little strength; and,

6. That thou art wretched, and pitiable, and poor, and blind, and naked.

Paul said that there would be “a falling away,” and here we behold it. As years rolled on, things waxed worse and worse, until the false apostles of the Synagogue of the Satan gained the ascendancy, and their chief, the Man of Sin, was brought forth of their mother Jezebel, as Constantine the Great. The falling away, or apostasy, was obviously progressive, and its progress may be clearly traced in the writings of the men whose names occupy the third column of the Chronological p. 432 Tableau of the Apostasy, already before the reader. In concluding, then, my exposition of the seven ethical states and stages of the falling away, I shall furnish specimens of the notions current as indicative of each. And first of the

1. Ephesian State

Ignatius was an elder of the ecclesia at Antioch, but possessed of a fanatical desire for martyrdom, which was contrary to the instruction of the Lord Jesus, who said, “when they persecute you in one city, flee to another.” But instead of this, when the Emperor Trajan came to Antioch, about A. D. 107, in his way to the Parthian war, Ignatius voluntarily delivered himself up to Trajan, into whose presence he was introduced. “What an impious spirit art thou,” said the emperor, “both to transgress our commands, and to inveigle others into the same folly to their ruin!”

Ignatius. Theophorus ought not to be called so, forasmuch as all wicked spirits are departed far from the servants of God. But if you call me impious because I am hostile to evil spirits, I own the charge in that respect. For I dissolve all their snares, through the inward support of Christ the heavenly King.

Trajan. Pray, who is Theophorus?

Ignat. He who has Christ in his breast.

Trajan. And thinkest thou not that gods reside in us also, who fight for us against our enemies?

Ignat. You mistake in calling the demons of the nations by the name of gods. For there is only one God, who made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that is in them; and one Jesus Christ, his only begotten son, whose kingdom be my portion.

Trajan. His kingdom, do you say, who was crucified under Pilate?

Ignat. HIS who crucified my sin with ITS AUTHOR; and has put all the fraud and malice of Satan under the feet of those who carry him in their hearts.

Trajan. Dost thou, then, carry him who was crucified within thee?

Ignat. I do; for it is written, “I dwell in them, and walk in them.”

Upon this Trajan said, “Since Ignatius confesses that he carries within himself him that was crucified, we command, that he be carried bound by soldiers to Great Rome, there to be thrown to the wild beasts, for the entertainment of the people.”

The brethren in Rome hearing of this sentence upon him, met him on his arrival at Ostia, a few miles from the city. They had written p. 433 to him before, proposing to intercede on his behalf. But he would listen to no such thing, but determined to be devoured at all events. Referring to this, Milner remarks, “I fear the example of Ignatius did harm in this respect to the church. Martyrdom was, as we know, made too much of in the third century.” Having shown how contrary was the course of the apostles, he says of Ignatius, “I suspect there was not an equal degree of calm resignation to the Divine Will.”

Besides his excessive desire of martyrdom, which was a species of suicide, Ignatius advocated an unscriptural supremacy of one whom it had become fashionable to style “the Bishop.” When the New Testament exhorts the faithful in relation to their rulers, it says, “Obey them that have the rule over you;” and these are particularized as “apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers;” and were all “bishops,” or επισκοποι, which means “overseers.” But Ignatius adopted a different style in speaking of these functionaries. “Let us,” says he in writing to the Ephesians, “study obedience to the Bishop, that we may be subject to God.” And again, “Since ye are subject to the Bishop as to Jesus Christ, ye appear to live, not after man, but after Jesus Christ.” And, “it is not lawful, without the Bishop, to baptize, or to make a love feast;” and lastly, “It behoves the married to enter into that connection with the consent of the Bishop, that the marriage may be after the will of God, and not to fulfil the lusts of the flesh.” These passages show that in that early day one man in each congregation had been set up above all the other elders of the presbytery, who, in proportion as he was aggrandized, were diminished, and caused to assume the position of his inferiors. These notions of Ignatius and his contemporaries laid the foundation of martyrolatry, episcopal usurpation and lordship, the invalidity of ordinances ministered by an unofficial brother, and of matrimony as “a sacrament of the church.” A mind running in this current of ideas, had evidently fallen a notch or two below the scriptural standard which characterized the apostolical state in its beginning. Yet Ignatius was more scriptural in his thinking upon religious topics, than any of the writers that succeeded him. He belonged to the fallen Ephesian State, the works of which were not so acceptable as the first.

2. Smyrnean State

The representative writers of this state were particularly Justin Martyr, and Irenæus. Justin, surnamed Martyr, which signifies a witness, but in after times restricted exclusively to those whose witness was sealed with their blood, published an Apology or defence of the p. 434 faith he professed, and presented it to the emperor Antoninus Pius, about A. D. 140. He was a pagan philosopher before he was converted to christianity; but, as he says, “having found the Divine Scriptures to be the only sure philosophy,” he became a christian. He was put to death about A. D. 163. One would suppose that, having satisfied himself that Gentile philosophy was false, he would thenceforth have abandoned it altogether. But this he did not do. He continued to dress in the garb of a philosopher, and to persevere in the profession of it; “hoping,” as Milner thinks, “to conciliate the affections of philosophers, and allure them to christianity. To draw gentlemen and persons of liberal education to pay attention to christianity, appears to have been his chief employment.” A right view of things would have convinced Justin of the futility of his expedients. It is “the poor in this world,” and the simple hearted, not “gentlemen” and “philosophers,” that God hath chosen to be heirs of his kingdom. In this policy Justin shows a departure from the true apostolic mind so prominent in Paul’s writings. Justin’s example was pernicious in giving sanction to the union of heathen philosophy with the teaching of Christ and his apostles. There is no agreement between them; and where the union is tolerated, it invariably results in the corruption or extinction from the mind, of the spirit and teaching of the word. Towards the close of his Second Apology, he declares that the doctrines of Plato were not heterogeneous to those of Christ; but only not altogether similar. And he seems to assert that Plato, and the Stoics, and the Pagan writers in prose and verse, saw something of truth from the portion of the seed of the Divine Word, which he makes to be the same as the Word, the only begotten Son of God. But Paul never allows unconverted men to have any portion at all of that light which is peculiarly christian. But Justin had lost sight of the guard, which cannot be too often repeated, against philosophy. Not long after him, mystics and heretics and platonizing christians jumbled these things together entirely; and tried to incorporate the philosophical doctrine of the το εν with the Gospel. Justin gave them a handle for this; and though philosophy had made its inroads upon the faith in the apostolic age, Milner may not be entirely wrong in saying, that “Justin was the first sincere christian who was seduced by human philosophy to adulterate the gospel, though in a small degree. It should ever be remembered, that christian light stands single and unmixed; and will not bear to be kneaded into the same mass with other systems, religious or philosophical. We may here mark the beginning of the decay of the first spiritual effusion among the Gentiles through false wisdom.”

In the year 167, the ecclesia of Smyrna in writing an account of the p. 435 martyrdom of Polycarp to the ecclesia at Philomelium seems to reflect upon the martyrdom of Ignatius in saying that it was “perfectly evangelical.” He did not precipitately give himself up to death, but waited till he was apprehended, as our Lord himself did, that we might imitate him. We do not approve of those who offer themselves to martyrdom; for we have not so learned Christ.” But, though right in this, they seem to have acquired the notion that martyrdom atoned for sin; for speaking of those who suffered, they say, “thus they despised the torments of this world, and by one hour redeemed themselves from eternal punishment. The fire of savage tormentors was cold to them; for they had steadily in view a desire to avoid that fire which is eternal and never to be quenched.” In the translation from which we quote, it reads thus; which may not express their idea. If it does they had gone astray respecting the punishment of the wicked, and must have been infected with immortal-soulism. But, I rather think, they had allusion to certain apocalyptic passages in the book sent to them as one of the seven ecclesias. The κολασις αιωνιος they refer to was probably the Aion-punishment of “the Hour of Judgment,” which cannot be quenched till its purpose is accomplished; and which is for the especial destruction of Babylon the Great, the conquest of the kingdoms, and the punishment of all their adherents and supporters. This occurs after the resurrection; and is provided also for the punishment of all who shall be raised to suffer it—Rev. xiv. 6-11. Its effects are permanent; but the execution of judgment does not transcend “the hour” appointed.

Polycarp who suffered and the Smyrneans who witnessed his death did not agree in their convictions. In his prayer Polycarp said, “O Father, I bless thee that thou hast counted me worthy to receive my portion in the number of martyrs, in the cup of Christ, for the resurrection to eternal life both of soul and body in the incorruption of the Holy Spirit; among whom may I be received this day before thee as a sacrifice well savored and acceptable.” His mind was fixed upon the resurrection, but when they tell the story of his death, and speak of his state after it while they were writing, they say, “the envious, malignant, and spiteful enemy of the just, observed the honor put upon his martyrdom and his blameless life; and knowing that he was crowned with immortality and the prize of unquestionable victory, studied to prevent us from obtaining his body, though many of us longed to have communion with his sacred flesh.” They gathered up his bones, however, which they term “more precious than gold or jewels,” and deposited them in a proper place; “where, if it be possible,” say they, “we shall meet in gladness and joy to celebrate the birthday of his martyrdom, both in p. 436 commemoration of those who have wrestled before us, and for the instruction and confirmation of those who come after.” This was the beginning of shrine-pilgrimage and relic-worship. The Smyrneans did not probably then visit the shrine and bones in the spirit of idolators; but what might be innocent in their celebration, in after times became a grossly superstitious and idolatrous observance.

Irenæus belonged to the Smyrnean State of christendom. He was a presbyter of an ecclesia at Lyons in France. He was instructed by Polycarp, who had been personally acquainted with John. About the year 169, Irenæus became the “Bishop” of the congregation. “Never,” says Milner, “was any pastor more severely tried by a tempestuous scene. Violent persecution without, and subtle heresies within, called for the exertion at once, of consummate dexterity and of magnanimous resolution. Irenæus was favored with a large measure of both; and he weathered out the storm.” His views of doctrine are of the same cast as those of Justin, whom he quotes in his Book of Heresies. His philosophy had its usual influence on the mind—in darkening some truths of scripture, and in mixing the doctrine of Christ with human inventions. Now that things had not improved at the close of Irenæus’s career, but had become worse, may be gathered from his letter to Florinus, in which he says, “I can witness before God, that if that blessed apostolical presbyter had heard some of the doctrines which are now maintained, he would have cried out, and stopped his ears, and in his usual manner have said, “O good God, to what times hast thou reserved me, that I should endure these things.” And he would immediately have fled from the place in which he had heard such doctrines.”

Irenæus was the author of “the epistle of the ecclesias of Vienna and Lyons to the brethren in Asia and Phrygia,” giving an account of the persecution there. Speaking in this of Vettius Epagathus who had been put to death, he says, “He was, and still is, a genuine disciple of Christ, following the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.” This is a quotation from Rev. xiv. 4; and by the use he makes of it, would indicate that his mind had been platonized with the dogma of immortal-soulism, which his instructor Polycarp did not believe. The Smyrnean State was certainly a degeneration from the Ephesian.

3. The Pergamian State

This state of the christian community is illustrated by the writings of Tertullian, Pantænus, Clemens Alexandrinus, and the Alexandrian School of “Divinity.”

p. 437 Tertullian, the first Latin writer among christians, flourished in the latter part of the second, and in the former part of the third century, at Carthage. But were it not for some light which he throws on the state of christianity in his own times, he would scarcely deserve to be distinctly noticed. Tradition with him was authoritative, and among the customs which it sanctioned in the Roman Africa was the very frequent signing of themselves with the sign of the cross.

He did not approve of flight in persecution, in direct contradiction of Christ’s instructions. He disapproved of second marriages, and called them adultery.

Human philosophy after the rudiments of the world formed the prominent corruption of the times of Tertullian and his contemporaries, and immediate successors. In the third century its effects appeared very distinctly.

Alexandria in Egypt was at this time the most renowned seminary of learning. A sort of philosophers appeared there who called themselves Eclectic, because they chose what they thought most agreeable to truth from different masters and sects. Ammonius Saccas, a famous Alexandrian teacher, reduced the opinions of this sect to a system. Plato was his principal guide, but he invented many things of which Plato had no idea. He was educated a christian, but of so doubtful a kind that he was claimed by Porphyry for a pagan, and by Eusebius for a saint. Ammonius fancied that all religions, vulgar and philosophical, Grecian and barbarous, Jewish and Gentile, meant the same thing at bottom. He undertook by allegorizing and subtilizing various fables and systems, to compound a coalition of all sects and religions; and from his labors, continued by his disciples, his followers were taught to look on Jew, philosopher, vulgar pagan, and christian, as all of the same creed.

Our more distinct information of christianity in this respectable city of the Roman Habitable begins with what is evil. It is said that a christian catechetical school was established there in the apostolic age; be this as it may, Pantænus is the first master of it of whom there is any account. He was much addicted to the sect of the Stoics, a sort of romantic pretenders to perfection. The combination of Stoicism with Christianity in the system of Pantænus very much debased the truth; and clouded must have been the light imparted by such an instructor to his disciples. He always retained the title of the Stoic Philosopher, after he had been admitted to eminent employments in the church. For ten years he laboriously discharged the office of Catechist, and freely taught all that desired him. He died not long after the beginning of the third century.

p. 438 Clemens Alexandrinus was a disciple of Pantænus, and of a mind blasted by the same wind of philosophy. He was of the eclectic sect. But let us hear what he says of himself: “I espouse neither this nor that philosophy, neither the Stoic nor Platonic, nor the Epicurean, nor that of Aristotle; but whatever any of these sects hath said, that is fit and just; whatever teaches righteousness with a divine and religious knowledge, all this I select; and call it philosophy.” But what was there even of good morals in all the philosophers he could not have learned in the New Testament; and much more perfectly, and without the danger of pernicious adulterations. Clemens as a Christian, should have known that it was no part of the business of philosophical writers to dictate to the believer: “the world by wisdom knew not God,” and “Beware of Philosophy.” The christian community was gradually learning to neglect the scriptures and their cautions; and to develop theology into a science so called.

Clemens succeeded Pantænus in the catechetical school, and under him were bred the famous, or rather infamous, Origen, and other eminent perverters of the gospel of the kingdom of Christ. Their preparation under his tuition may be learned from the following statement. “As the husbandman first waters the soil, and then casts in his seed, so the notions which I derive out of the writings of the Gentiles serve first to water and soften the earthy parts of the soul, that the spiritual seed may be the better cast in, and take vital root in the mind of men.”

This was not speaking according to the oracles of God. The apostles neither place Gentile philosophy in the foundation, nor believed that it would at all assist in raising the superstructure of christianity. On the contrary they looked at the philosophical religion of their own times as so much rubbish; but in all ages, the blandishments of mere reason on such subjects deceive us;—“vain man would be wise.”

This man, Clemens, besides his employment in the office of catechist, was made a presbyter in the ecclesia at Alexandria. Little is known of his life, and the time of his death is uncertain; and certain it is, that little else than evil could accrue to the saints from the ministrations of such a perverted mind.

He undertook to delineate a perfect christian, which, being the creation of his pago-christian eclecticism was just such a christian as would please the carnal mind, full of stoical rhapsodies, and the crotchetty asceticism of the flesh. After he had created him, he called him Gnosticus; but the Spirit, in the writing to the presbytery at Pergamos, styled him Nikolaitos, or a vanquisher of the people, like his great prototype Balaam, who loved the wages of unrighteousness, and place, p. 439 stumblingblocks in the people’s way, by which they were caused to fall. The Rev. Nikolaitos Gnosticus is the beau ideal of a modern “divine.”

4. Thyatiran State

The apostasy from “the truth as it is in Jesus” must have progressed very far when two such chiefs of the Roman Dragon, as the emperors Alexander and Philip, could be recognized as christians.

Alexander, the son of Mammæa, styled by Eusebius “a most godly and religious woman,” although she had not received the faith, began to reign in the sixteenth year of his age, A. D. 222. It is true, he was esteemed one of the best moral characters in profane history; and never persecuted, but approved and countenanced the christians, such as the multitude of them had now become; but still he was a philosophical worshipper of the shadows of the departed great. He had a domestic chapel, where, every morning, he worshipped those deceased princes whose characters were most esteemed; their statues were placed among those of the gods; and into this company he introduced Apollonius of Tyana, Jesus Christ, Abraham, and Orpheus. He had a desire to erect a temple to Christ, and to receive him regularly into the number of the gods.

While residing in Antioch, A. D. 229, he and his mother sent to Origen, then teaching his paganized christianity in the academy at Alexandria, and invited him to visit them. He obeyed the summons, and continued with them a while, conversing with them upon the things for which he had become famous. On returning to Alexandria, he left them in state and views similar to his own, and consequently with no clear and striking comprehension of the faith. “In truth,” says Milner, “a number of christians, so called, at this time, were much of the same religion with Alexander himself.” He seems to have learned, in some measure, the doctrine of the Divine Unity, and by the help of the eclectic philosophy, to have consolidated all religions into one mass. He and his mother were assassinated, A. D. 235, by Maximin, who reigned in his stead.

Pupienus and Balbinus, the successors of Maximin, being slain, they were succeeded by Gordian, who, after six years, was assassinated by Philip the Arabian, who ascended the throne A. D. 244. Eusebius, a christian of the Laodicean type, “the bishop” of Nicomedia, and companion of Constantine the Great, tells us, that this Philip was a christian. “That he was so,” says Milner, “by profession, seems well attested by the concurrent voice of antiquity.” He is said to have submitted p. 440 to certain ecclesiastical censures by a bishop. There is no doubt but in the fourth year of his reign, A. D. 247, he allowed and conducted the secular games, which were full of idolatry. Origen wrote an epistle to this emperor and his wife Severa, which was extant in Eusebius’ time. Philip was slain A. D. 248.

Origen, who had received christianity hereditarily, became catechetical tutor at the school in Alexandria at eighteen. He was a man of very presumptuous spirit, which impelled him to philosophize to the destruction of the faith. He was never content with plain truth, but ever hunting after something singular and extraordinary. He converted the school into a theological academy, which became the Collegiate Alma Mater of the Apostasy—the Mother of all future Divinity Schools. He maintained himself by the sale of the profane books which he had been wont to study. The christians of the unfallen ecclesia at Ephesus would have burned them—Acts xix. 19. But the times had changed; and Origen was a Thyatiran of the house of Jezebel, and a disseminator of “the depths of the Satan as they teach.” He was “a perfect christian” after the type of his master’s Gnosticus. He mutilated himself for the kingdom of heaven; made no provision for the morrow; inured himself to cold, nakedness, and poverty; abstained from wine, and in general lived so abstemiously as to endanger his life. Many persons imitated his excessive austerities, and were at that time honored with the name of “philosophers;” and some of them patiently suffered death. The reader is referred to Col. ii. for a comment on the conduct of Origen and his Alexandrian converts. One of these, a female named Potamiæna, told a soldier who protected her from the insolence of the mob on her way to execution, that after her departure she would entreat the Lord for him. Some time after her death, the soldier was imprisoned on the charge of being a christian. The Origenites visited him, and on being questioned as to the cause of the sudden change, he declared that Potamiæna, three days after her martyrdom, had appeared to him by night, and informed him that she had performed her promise, and that he should shortly die. After this he was put to death.

This anecdote of the times, shows the prevalence of fanatical philosophy, will-worship, and the like. The soldier, Basilides, is converted by a fiction, is ignorant of the word, and dies without baptism; nevertheless, he is called “a christian.” We have a multitude of such christians in our day, but what are they worth? They only illustrate a delusion, and adorn a tale.

The Thyatiran State of the christian community was in part parallel with a long period of peace, or absence of persecution. For the space of thirty-eight years—from the death of Severus to the reign of Decius p. 441 —if we except the short turbulent period of Maximin, the church enjoyed a continued calm. During this period of tranquility christianity was fatally paganized; and according to Origen himself, who had been ordained a presbyter, was followed by a great degree of lukewarmness, and much religious indecorum. Let the reader only notice the difference between the scenes he describes and the conduct of christians in the first century, and he will be convinced of the greatness of the declension.

“Several,” says he, “come to church only on solemn festivals; and then not so much for instruction as diversion. Some go out again as soon as they have heard the lecture, without conferring, or asking the pastors any questions. Others stay not till the lecture is ended; and others hear not so much as a single word, but entertain themselves in a corner of the church.” But the ability, as well as the taste for the conquest of this careless spirit, had much declined in the eastern part of the christian community. Origen complains elsewhere of the ambitious and haughty manners of pastors, and of the improper steps which some took to obtain preferments.

When Origen was about sixty years of age, he had a discussion with certain in Arabia who denied the inherent immortality of “the soul.” Being a professor of paganized christianity, it was natural enough for him to oppose them, and for both him and Eusebius to style the denial “a false opinion.” Eusebius says, that the Arabians asserted, that “the human soul, as long as the present state of the world existed, perished at death, and died with the body, but that it would be raised again with the body at the time of the resurrection.” This, as we have seen, was Polycarp’s view also. But Polycarp was not heathenized as the contemporaries of Origen and Eusebius were. A considerable council was therefore held by the philosophizers, for the support and sanction of their darling opinion; and as Origen was an expert sophist, they requested him again to discuss the point, which he did, “and with so much force,” says Eusebius, “that those who had been led astray, completely changed their opinions.”

Origen died during the Decian persecution aged seventy; and when he was about passing from the stage of life, that is, about five years before, the more excellent Cyprian was converted to the faith, A. D. 246. He was a professor of elocution in the city of Carthage, in the Roman Africa, and a man of wealth, quality, and dignity. About twelve years comprehended the whole scene of his christian life—from A. D. 246 to A. D. 258. He was converted under the reign of Philip, and put to death under that of Valerian. Two years after his conversion, he became “the Bishop” of the ecclesia in Carthage, a dignity which, through p. 442 the growth of superstition, was advancing to excess. Though expressions savoring of haughtiness and asperity are to be found in his writings, excited by particular provocations, ambition was not his vice; his zeal was fervid, and sustained by a temper remarkably active and sanguine, yet allied with the milder qualities of gentleness, love, and humility. He was a very different and superior character to Origen; and a remarkable consequence of which was, that while Origen, among the pagans, succeeded in gaining the favor of the great, and was heard by them with patience, Cyprian could not be endured in his preaching and writings, except by real christians.

But my purpose in the introduction of Origen and Cyprian to the reader, is not a biographical sketch and comparison of the men, but simply as representatives of their times. Persecution reigned with astonishing fury in the beginning of Cyprian’s pastorate; and he recognizes in it a punishment upon the church for the iniquity of professors. In a treatise of his upon “The Lapsed,” is an affecting account of the falling away of the generality from the spirit of christianity, which had taken place before his conversion, and which moved God to chastise them. “If the cause of our miseries,” says he, “be investigated, the cure of the wound may be found. The Lord would have his family to be tried. And because long peace had corrupted the discipline divinely revealed to us, the heavenly chastisement hath raised up our faith, which had lain almost dormant: and when by our sins we had deserved to suffer still more, the merciful Lord so moderated all things, that the whole scene rather deserves the name of a trial than a persecution. Each had been bent on improving his patrimony; and had forgotten what believers had done under the Apostles, and what they ought always to do. They were brooding over the arts of amassing wealth. The pastors and the deacons each forgot their duty. Works of mercy were neglected, and discipline was at the lowest ebb. Luxury and effeminacy prevailed. Meretricious arts in dress were cultivated. Fraud and deceit were practiced among brethren. Christians could unite themselves in marriage with unbelievers; could swear not only without reverence, but even without veracity. With haughty asperity they despised their ecclesiastical superiors. They railed against one another with outrageous acrimony, and conducted quarrels with determined malice. Even many bishops, who ought to be guides and patterns to the rest, neglecting the peculiar duties of their stations, gave themselves up to secular pursuits. They deserted their places of residence, and their flocks. They travelled through distant provinces in quest of pleasure and gain; gave no assistance to the needy brethren; but were insatiable in their thirst for money. They possessed estates p. 443 by fraud, and multiplied usury. What have we not deserved for such a conduct? Even the Divine Word hath foretold us what we might expect—‘If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments, I will visit their offences with the rod, and their sin with scourges.’ These things had been denounced and foretold, but in vain. Our sins had brought our affairs to that pass, that because we had despised the Lord’s directions, we were obliged to undergo a correction of our multiplied evils, and a trial of our faith, by severe remedies,”

From this testimony of Cyprian it is evident that the falling away from the apostolic standard had become intense in the middle of the third century. It was the very type itself of what exists in our day. Pastors and people were all commingled in the same deep declension from the faith and morals of the gospel. Justin and his philosophical admirers had caused them to commit fornication with Gentilism; and the Spirit had given them space to repent of it in the long peace they had enjoyed. But Pantænus, and Clemens, and Origen, had only led them on from bad to worse: and now, in the Decian persecution, they were cast into a bed of great tribulation, in which they were killed with death; so that all the ecclesias were brought to know, as Cyprian declares, that the Spirit is he who was searching their reigns and hearts; and giving to every one of them according to their works—Rev. ii. 21-24.

5. Sardian State

The state of things deplored by Cyprian was that which resulted in the Sardian, characterized by the Spirit as a death-state. By the generation of professors contemporary with it, it was not so considered. Peace and prosperity reigned, as they regarded it; and they flattered themselves that they were in the enjoyment of great spiritual life—“thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.” The Deity did not see as they saw themselves. He pronounced them dead. That is, christianity was on the verge of extinction; or, as the Spirit explains in the next verse, “ready to die.” Very little of genuine apostolic christianity could be found among the christians in the last half of the third century. The Platonism of the Alexandrian school had corrupted every thing, and eaten out its vitals as a cancre; so that the christian mind was prepared for any absurdities and follies in the name of true religion, as in our day.

Valerian reigned A. D. 253, and for upwards of three years was the friend and protector of the christians. His palace was full of them, p. 444 and he appears to have had a strong predilection in their favor, which was not at all promotive of spiritual health and vitality.

During the tranquility under this reign, a council was held in Africa by sixty-six bishops with Cyprian at their head. They came together to consider certain questions in agitation. In a letter to Fidus, Cyprian informs the reader of things which will convince him how far they had now departed from the genius, spirit, and principles of the faith. Fidus had denied that infants should be immersed within the second or third day after birth; and maintained that the ancient law of circumcision should be so far adhered to that they ought not to be immersed till the eighth day. But Cyprian and the Sixty-Six were all of a very different opinion. He calls infant immersion “spiritual circumcision;” and says it ought not to be impeded by the law of carnal circumcision; for that it was essential to the salvation of the soul, which would be lost if death ensued before the second or third day. The following is his argument, upon which the “divines” of our century have made no advance. “If even to the foulest offenders,” says he, “when they afterwards believe, remission of sins is granted, and none is prohibited from baptism and grace; how much more should an infant be admitted, who, just born, hath not sinned in any respect, except that, being carnally produced according to Adam, he hath, in his first birth, contracted the contagion of the ancient deadly nature; and who obtains the remission of sins with the less difficulty, because not his own actual guilt, but that of another, is to be remitted.

“Our sentence, therefore, dearest brother, in the council was, that none, by us, should be prohibited from immersion and the grace of God, who is merciful and kind to all.”

In these few lines from Cyprian, what a striking illustration of the Sardian state of spiritual death is here! We learn from them that the leaders of the ecclesias believed, and therefore taught,

1. The immortality of the soul according to Plato;

2. That said soul, if but two or three days old, would be lost, if the infant owner were not immersed;

3. That immersion and grace, without faith, imparted remission of sins to infants;

4. That infants were damned for a sin committed by Adam over four thousand years before;

5. That immersion and grace in the case of infants was not for the remission of their own sins, but for that of another—of Adam. Hence, Adam must have been pardoned every time an infant was dipped and regenerated by “grace!”

6. That infant immersion was “spiritual circumcision.”

p. 445 Such were the dogmata gravely affirmed by this African Council, A. D. 253, all its members pious professors of christianity, who had recently emerged from the horrors of the Decian trial. “They had a name to live.” We know what this means when we look at the clergy around us, and their dupes on every side. All these believe with Cyprian and the Sixty-Six, excepting that they think the Roman Africans used too much water. Our Cyprianites have substituted the sprinkling of the face for the immersion of the infants, in obedience to the See of Rome, on the plea that a few drops of water with “grace” is as good as an ocean; and so it is in the case before us; for water, much or little, is of no account at all, for infant or adult, where faith exists not in the subject; as it is written, “without faith it is impossible to please God; for he that cometh to him must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”

“They had a name to live,” and are thus spoken of by a Cyprianite historian. “Here is an assembly of sixty-six pastors, men of approved fidelity and gravity, who have stood the fiery trial of some of the severest persecutions ever known, and who have testified their love to the Lord Jesus Christ, in a more striking manner than any Antipedobaptists have had an opportunity of doing in our day; and, if we may judge of their religious views by those of Cyprian—and they are all in perfect harmony with him—they are not wanting in any fundamental of godliness.” Thus Milner commends them, and pronounces them christians of a holy and vital sort? But the Spirit gives a very different judgment in the case; and saith to the presbytery of the Sardian state, “I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead. I have not found thy works perfect before the Deity. Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent.” In 253, they had let slip the gospel originally preached by the apostles. The majority of professors, as in our day, had become oblivious of the truth; and only “a few names” in the Sardian state remained “who had not defiled their garments” with Origenism and Cyprianism.

Another dogma started about this time was, that “those whose weak state of health did not permit them to be washed in water, were yet sufficiently baptized by being sprinkled.” Cyprian observes, that “the virtue of baptism ought not to be estimated, in a carnal manner, by the quantity of external apparatus.” All “christendom,” now called “orthodox,” is essentially agreed with Cyprian; for even baptists admit the christianity of Quakers who repudiate the use of water altogether.

Dionysius of Alexandria, a pupil of Origen, flourished at this time. p. 446 He opposed the truth that the Millennium is introduced after the resurrection; and finding how much use had been made of the Apocalypse in supporting the doctrine, he gave his thoughts upon it, and confessed, that though he reverenced its contents, he did not understand their scope.

Paul of Samosata was another Sardian. He flourished A. D. 264, as bishop of Antioch, and instructor of Zenobia, the Queen of the East, in his own notions of christianity. He taught, that Jesus Christ was by nature a common man like others. He was artful, eloquent, deceitful, and otherwise immoral. He was deposed A. D. 269 by a council of seventy bishops whose indictment against him argues an awful degeneracy from the truth in this primitive arena of the labors of Saul of Tarsus and his companions in the gospel.

By this time Monkery, introduced by Paul the first hermit, received considerable impetus through Anthony the Egyptian. The spirit of Paul the Hermit was first incorporated by Anthony A. D. 270, whose biography was written by Athanasius, who was contemporary with monasticism in full blast. Anthony’s austerities were excessive, and the most ridiculous stories are told of his contests with the Devil, which forcibly illustrate the self-righteous pride and vain-glory of his disposition. But, as we are not writing a history of monkery, but only citing examples illustrative of the “falling away” in the successive stages of its development to the revelation of the Man of Sin-Power, we shall leave this celebrated monk busily engaged in the Sardian state of Christendom propagating the monastic disposition, and extending its influence not only into the fourth century, but for many ages after. We therefore dismiss him with the remark, that “the faith and love of the gospel received towards the close of this century a fatal blow from the encouragement of this unchristian practice.”

6. Philadelphian State

In the apostolical state of the christian community the faith, hope, and love of the brethren was conspicuous and strong. But after the One Body had passed through the Ephesian, Smyrnean, Pergamian, Thyatiran, and Sardian, states, it was greatly enfeebled in all its primitive forces; so that when it was fairly established in the Philadelphian, its brightest examples, who had kept the word and had not denied the name of the Spirit, constituted but “a little strength” for the whole. This “little strength” was the succession of the “few names” of the Sardian state which had not defiled their garments”—the few grains of salt that preserved the body from utter, or Laodicean, corruption.

p. 447 “An open door” was set before those who constituted this little strength of the christian community, which “no man could shut.” The emperor Valerian, who for the first three years of his reign, had been the friend and protector of christians, in the year 257, became their enemy. A magician, named Macrianus, a man of diabolical wickedness and folly, having gained an ascendancy over the mind of Valerian, induced him to persecute them with deadly animosity. The persecution lasted three years and a half, when Valerian was taken prisoner by Sapor king of Persia, who detained him the rest of his life, and made use of his neck in mounting his horse; and at last commanded him to be flayed and salted.

After Valerian’s captivity a door was opened to the christian community, through which entered rest and peace, which continued forty years. About the year 262, Valerian was succeeded by his son Gallienus, who proved a sincere friend to the christians, though in other respects, an emperor of no repute. By edicts he stopped the persecution, and gave the bishops letters of license to return to their pastorates. One of these letters, as preserved by Eusebius, runs thus:

“The emperor Cæsar Gallienus to Dionysius the bishop of Alexandria, and to Pinna and Demetrius, with the rest of the bishops. The benefit of our favor we command to be published through the world: and I have, therefore ordered every one to withdraw from such places as were devoted to religious uses; so that you may make use of the authority of my edict against any molestation; for I have sometime since, granted you my protection; wherefore Cyrenius the governor of the province will observe the rescript which I have sent.” He directed also another edict to certain bishops, by which he restored to them the places in which they buried their dead.

Thus the Spirit set an open door before the little strength, which no man in power could shut for forty years. Gallienus, the instrument in the hand of Providence through which this opening was effected, seems to have been more like a modern than an ancient sovereign—a man of taste, indolence, and philosophy—disposed to cherish everything that looked like knowledge and liberty of thinking; by no means so kind and generous in his constant practice as his profession might seem to promise; he was the slave of his passions, and led away by every sudden feeling that seized his imagination. The christians appear to have been considered by him as a sect of new philosophers; and as he judged it improper to persecute philosophers of any sort, they found a complete toleration under a prince, whose conscience seems to have been influenced by no religious attachment whatever.

We now behold in the full development of the Philadelphian state, p. 448 a new scene—Christians legally tolerated under a pagan government for forty years! How they must by this time have approximated in their principles to those of the tolerating power. The tolerance of Gallienus was adopted as the policy of the succeeding emperors to the end of the third century. It was violated only in one instance; the effect of which was presently dissipated by the Spirit who would not permit the door to be shut. The moral influence of this long peace was, however, exceedingly disastrous. “This new scene,” says Milner, “did not prove favorable to the growth of grace and holiness. In no period since the apostles was there ever so great a general decay as this; not even in particular instances, can we discover during this interval, much of lively christianity”—so very small was the “little strength.”

The profession of christianity was now becoming fashionable. Dioclesian began to reign A. D. 284. For the space of eighteen years he was extremely indulgent to its professors. His wife Prisca, and his daughter Valeria were in some sense christians secretly. The eunuchs of his palace and his most important officers were also “christians;” and their wives and families openly professed the faith. Christians, so-called, held honorable offices in various parts of the empire; innumerable crowds attended christian worship; the old buildings could no longer receive them; and in all cities wide and large edifices were erected.^a

If Christ’s kingdom were “the church,” and had been of the pre-Constantinian ages; and if its strength and beauty were to be measured by secular prosperity, the era of its greatness might be fixed in these earlier ages of Dioclesian. But, on the contrary, it was preëminently an era of great declension. During the whole of this third century the work of faith in purity and power, had been in rapid decay. The connexion with philosophers was one of the principal causes; outward peace and secular advantages completed the corruption. Discipline was now relaxed exceedingly; bishops and people were in a state of malice; endless quarrels were fomented among contending parties; and ambition and covetousness had, in general, gained the ascendancy in the christian body. Some there, doubtless, were who mourned in secret, and strove in vain to stop the abounding torrent of the evil. They were the “little strength, who kept the word, and denied not the Spirit’s name;” but with this exception, all the rest called “christian” were “of the Synagogue of the Satan who said they are Jews, and are not, but do lie.” The hour of temptation was concurrent with this period of forty years; a trial, from which the generation of believers in Philadelphia contemporary with John, were kept; as well as this “little p. 449 strength” coeval with the embryo formation of the Laodicean consummation of the Apostasy. For the space of thirty years there was an extreme dearth of real christian excellencies. No bishop or pastor eminent for intelligence, faith, zeal, and labor, appears in the history of the times. But notwithstanding this decline of zeal and principle, still christian worship was constantly attended; and the number of nominal converts was increasing; but the faith of Christ itself was now an ordinary business.

Eusebius, the ecclesiastical historian, who was born about the year 259, flourished in the transition of the Philadelphian into the Laodicean state, in which last he died A. D. 340. He was the most learned of all the christians, whose learning and philosophy were inimical to the simplicity which is in Christ. Plato and Origen were the masters in the school of his divinity.

In this Philadelphian state, which merged into the Laodicean fully developed at the opening of the Seventh Seal, “TERMINATED, or nearly so, as far as appears, that great first effusion of the “Spirit of God which began at the day of Pentecost. Human depravity effected throughout a general decay of goodliness; and one generation of men elapsed,” says Milner, “with very slender proofs of the spiritual presence of Christ with his Church.”

Eusebius confesses this declension in the following words:—“The heavy hand of God’s judgments began softly, by little and little to visit us after his wonted manner. The persecution which was raised against us, took place first among the christians who were in military service; but we were not at all moved with his hand, nor took any pains to return to God. We heaped sin upon sin, judging, like careless Epicureans, that God cared not for our sins, nor would ever visit us on account of them. And our pretended shepherds, laying aside the rule of godliness, practised among themselves contention and division.” He goes on to observe, that “the dreadful persecution of Dioclesian was then inflicted on the church (A. D. 303-13,) as a just punishment, and as the most proper chastisement for their iniquities.” This persecution will be treated of in illustration of the Fifth Seal.

7. Laodicean State

The “little strength” of the Philadelphian state of the christian community was now exhausted, at the end of the “little season” of ten years, during which the “fellow-servants and brethren” were being killed by Diocletian, Galerius, and Maximin, as foretold in the prediction p. 450 of the Fifth Seal. The revolution of the Sixth Seal had taken that which hindered the revelation of the Man of Sin out of the way, and had consequently restored peace and worldly prosperity to “the Church,” of which the emperor Constantine had become the Head. The Laodicean state, which had been forming previous to and during the Diocletian persecution, was now fully inaugurated, and emblazoned in the legislative union which Constantine decreed. Henceforth, appears before the world, not the “One Body” of the faithful in Christ Jesus, but a new thing, or wonder in the heaven, styled by its admirers “THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH.” In contemplating this Laodicean institution, the spirit of pure and undefiled religion, which is unspotted by the world, is not seen. Pompous apparatus, augmented superstitions and unmeaning forms of piety, much show and little substance appear. This is the impression which the account given by Eusebius leaves upon the mind.

The following extract from Milner strikingly illustrates the Laodicean character of the time. “If we look at the external appearance of christianity,” says he, “nothing can be more splendid. An emperor full of zeal for the propagation of the only divine religion, by edicts restores to the church every thing of which it had been deprived, indemnifies those who had suffered, honors the pastors exceedingly, recommends to governors of provinces to promote the gospel; and though he will neither oblige them nor any others to profess it, yet he forbids them to make use of the sacrifices commonly made by prefects; he erects churches exceedingly sumptuous and ornamental, with distinctions of the parts corresponding in some measure to those in Solomon’s temple; discovers with much zeal the Sepulchre of Christ at Jerusalem, real or pretended, and honors it with a most expensive sacred edifice. His mother Helena fills the whole Roman world with her munificent acts in support of religion; and after erecting churches, and travelling from place to place to evidence her zeal, dies before her son, aged eighty years. Nor is the christian (properly the catholic) cause neglected even out of the bounds of the Roman empire. Constantine zealously pleads, in a letter to Sapor, king of Persia, for the christians of his dominions; he destroys idol temples, prohibits impious pagan sights, puts an end to the savage fights of gladiators, stands up with respectful silence to hear the sermon of Eusebius, bishop of Cæsarea, the historian; furnishes him with the volume of the scriptures for the use of the churches; orders the observation of the festivals of martyrs; has prayers and reading of the scripture at his court; dedicates churches with great solemnity; makes christian orations himself, one of which, of considerable length, is preserved by the historian, his favorite bishop; directs p. 451 the sacred observance of the Lord’s day, to which he adds that of Friday also, the day of Christ’s crucifixion; and teaches the soldiers of his army to pray by a short form made for their use.

“It may seem invidious,” continues Milner, “to throw any shade upon this picture; but though the abolition of lewd, impious, and inhuman customs must have been of great advantage to society, and though the benefits of christianity compared with paganism, to the world, appear very strong by these means, yet all this, if sound principle be wanting, is but form and shadow”—a mere improvement on paganism. “As it was difficult to clear Origen of depreciating the divinity of Christ, so it is still more difficult to exculpate Eusebius, with whom he was a favorite author. There seems to have been both in Eusebius and some of his friends, and probably in the emperor himself, a disposition, of which, perhaps, they were not conscious, to lessen the honors of the Son of God. His sermons breathe little of christianity, so far as I have seen them; and is so rhetorical and indistinct in his theological discourses, that it is difficult to extract any determinate propositions from his writings.

“It was to be expected that great defectiveness of doctrine would not fail to influence practice. External piety flourished, monastic societies in particular places were also growing, but faith, love, heavenly mindedness, appear very rare; yet among poor and obscure christians there may have been more godliness than could be seen at courts, and among bishops and persons of eminence. The doctrine of real conversion was very much lost, or external baptism was placed in its stead; and the true doctrine of justification by faith, and the true practical use of a crucified saviour for troubled consciences, were scarcely to be seen at this time. There was much outward religion, but this could not make men saints in heart and life. The worst part of the character of Constantine is, that as he grew older he grew more culpable, oppressive in his own family, oppressive in the government, oppressive by eastern superfluous magnificence; and the history of the times shows how little true humility and charity were now known in the christian world, while superstition and self-righteousness were making vigorous shoots, and the real gospel of Christ was hidden from men who professed it.”

Such was the pass at which christianity had arrived at the opening of the Sixth Seal, A. D. 311. Laodiceanism had extinguished the “little strength” of the Philadelphian state which preceded it. In this, the Spirit had “come quickly,” or suddenly, upon them in the judgments of the Fifth Seal for the abominations of the existing and previous states. Christianity was now paganized; and as ministered by the bishops and presbyters of the churches, was ineffectual for the salvation p. 452 of men. It was no longer of use in their hands for the taking out of a people from among the Gentiles for the Name—Acts xv. 14. The time had therefore come to spue them out of the Spirit’s mouth. As Milner says, “their external appearance was splendid;” and they imagined that, being enriched and increased with goods by Constantine’s munificence, “they had need of nothing;” but the Spirit declares, that they were ignorant of their true spiritual condition; and that they were really “miserable, and pitiable, and poor, and blind, and naked.” For the great mass of them, he had no love. They preferred to bask in the imperial sunshine, and to enjoy the favors of the glorious emperor. He therefore left them to their own folly; and as they had set their affections upon things that perish, “God sent upon them a strong delusion unto their believing in the lie; that all might be condemned who believe not the truth, but have pleasure in the unrighteousnes”—2 Thess. ii. 11. “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten;” but these Laodiceans, of what had become under Constantine’s patronage “the Holy Roman Catholic Church,” were without chastisement, and were therefore “bastards, and not sons.” The sons were still a people subject to tribulation; and we see them in Rev. xii., as a fugitive woman fleeing for refuge into the wings of the Great Eagle, far removed from the presence of the new Imperio-Episcopal Despotism—a tyranny constituted by the unhallowed union of church and state.

Let the reader understand then distinctly, that the Constantinian era was that in which the Apostasy from true christianity as originally set forth by the apostles, was perfected; and that being perfected, the Spirit withdrew himself from it entirely. It became as completely separated from the Anointed Jesus and his love, as the loathsome ejecta vomited from the stomach of the person vomiting. The Holy Catholic Church so-called, is a mere spue; and all the churches of which she is “the Mother,” are “the Abominations” that have effervesced from its putrefaction. They are mere forms of Laodiceanism—the genuine progeny of the Roman Jezebel. Since the period of the Sixth Seal, the true believers of the gospel must be sought for in a different channel. They are not to be found among catholics, Greek or Latin; nor among any that recognize catholics in faith, practice, and spirit, as christians. They are not to be found among infant sprinklers of any “name” or “denomination;” nor among adult-immersionists, who understand not “the gospel of the kingdom” preached by Jesus and the apostles. Christians are a separate and distinct class from all these, who are but Laodiceans in faith, spirit, state, and practice. These have been the persecutors of the saints in all ages; that is, from the time the Spirit vomited them out of his mouth in the beginning of the fourth century to the p. 453 time in which I am now writing; and they will continue to persecute in word or deed, or in both where they are able, “until the Ancient of Days come;” for the Laodicean State being concurrent with the Seventh Seal, the judgments of which have been appointed especially for the punishment and tormentation of the Laodiceans, not for their chastisement as sons beloved, but for their destruction as despised bastards—it does not terminate till “the wrath of God” contained in the Seventh Vial section of the Seventh Seal, is poured out to the last drop—Rev. xv. 1, 8. In my “Chronological Tableau” I have, in the third column, inscribed certain names which are familiar to the readers of history. They are by no means all that might have been appropriately inserted there. They are but a specimen of an immense multitude who have figured in the arena of the Laodicean Apostasy in its internal strifes and agitations. I have inscribed them as names illustrative of the principal genera and species of the class, APOSTASIA; which Paul taught was to precede and extend to the epiphany of Christ’s parousia, or manifestation of his presence. All the popes from Constantine, and their cardinals, bishops, priests, and so forth; and all in fellowship with them; and all the several orders of monkery; and the hierarchies of protestantism, which is but a modification of Romanism, might have been detailed. But such an enumeration is unnecessary. The few we have selected will illustrate the whole, and stand as the representative of those who boast in them as the stars, and constellations of their pietism. Many of them have been useful in their day and generation. Justin, Origen, Clemens, and others, though corruptors of the faith, were useful in transforming paganism into Laodiceanism; which, though intrinsically contemptible and worthless as a means of salvation, is an improvement upon paganism. So Huss, Jerome, Luther, Calvin, Knox, and such like, all of them Romanists and ignorant of the gospel of the Kingdom, which consequently they never obeyed, were useful in blindly developing protestantism, which, with all its imperfections and worthlessness as a means of eternal life, is an improvement on Romish superstition and immorality. The last names on the list are representative of contemporary dilutions of protestantism. Whether they be improvements upon the original is questionable; they are at all events better than Romanism, if we except Mormonism, which is cruel as the grave. They are forms of error, which, however diversified among themselves, are essentially Laodicean; yet, are not without their use in contributing to antagonize the rich and powerful sects; and to prevent them from coalescing into a colossal despotism, by which the gospel of the kingdom might be utterly suppressed. Pious faithlessness of the word is characteristic of them all. They are without exception the exact p. 454 counterpart of the Laodicean Angel contemporary with John. The characteristics of this are equally those of Laodiceans from Constantine to the manifestation of the presence of the Christ—“miserable, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked.” The Spirit, in the present advocacy of the gospel of the kingdom, “counsels them to buy of him gold tried in the fire, that they may be rich; and white raiment that they may be clothed, and that the shame of their nakedness do not appear; and to anoint their eyes with eye-salve that they may see.” Thus, “he stands at the door and knocks;” and ready to come as a thief—Rev. xvi. 15. But for the most part they pay no heed. Yet, if any will open, he will enter in, and sup with him. Who then will hearken to what the Spirit saith to the churches?