(Continued from page 58)
In Roman Catholic circles 1978 will be particularly remembered as the year of the three Popes. Paul VI died in August and his successor John-Paul I seven weeks afterward. The present John-Paul II was then elected and inaugurated. There were two breaks with tradition: the John-Pauls were not publicly enthroned like their predecessors and the surviving one is a non-Italian. The mass-media manipulators saw to it that millions throughout the world were made aware of what was happening. The pomp and pageantry of the successive inaugurations with a centre-stage Pope surrounded by scarlet-robed cardinals and mitred bishops provided the spectacular setting for what was described as “magnificent theatre”.
The fact that the present Pontiff was not ceremonially crowned does not, as we see it, mean that he has renounced in any way the claims made by his predecessors who were. The very title “John-Paul II” implies a regal or imperial claim. The adoption of a double name by the last two Popes was an innovation and some have thought that this was done to indicate the bond of continuity with immediate predecessors on the papal throne. Both John XXIII and Paul VI were crowned and we do not believe that John-Paul II regards himself as in any way inferior to them. The three-tiered crown with the inscription “Vicarius Filii Dei” (Vicar — or substitute — of the Son of God) was not actually, or publicly at least, placed on his head but all that is symbolised by it is still laid claim to. When Paul VI was crowned in 1963 he was addressed thus: “Receive this tiara, adorned with these three crowns and know that thou art Father of Princes and Kings, the Pastor of the Universe, and the Vicar on earth of the Lord Jesus Christ“. Have we heard or read of the present Pontiff declaring himself as not to be regarded as invested with the same titles and powers as Paul VI and all his 262 supposed predecessors right back as it is claimed to the Apostle Peter? We have not, and we would be naive in the extreme were we to think that at some future date John-Paul II will announce to the world that such claims were both blasphemous and spurious! The Papal coat of arms in 1981 still prominently features the crossed keys and three-tiered tiara; the Papal seal bears the title JOHANNES PAVLVS II — PONTIFEX MAXIMUS and he is, by all accounts, as authoritarian as ever any of his predecessors. A recent publication from a Roman Catholic source and issued, it is believed, with the full approval of the present Pope sets forth the position with unmistakeable clarity. “The Bishop of the Church of Rome is the successor of St Peter and therefore the ultimate Guarantor of the Teaching and Will of the Divine Founder, and he cannot fail in this role” … “He is not a first among equals, a prime minister; he is a Sovereign, by divine authority as well as election.” If the claim to be the Vicar or Substitute of Christ on earth is to be with credibility and consistency maintained then the claimant must still demand recognition as one invested with both temporal and spiritual jurisdiction over all nations. Christ is “King of Nations” as well as “King of Saints” and His “vicar” must be supreme in both spheres also. The Pope’s claim to temporal jurisdiction may be played down in our day but that is only because it is not politic or expedient to emphasise it. If Rome were to gain total ascendancy we would soon know the truth. In the line of Papal succession Leo X occupies a prominent place. There were no television or cine cameras around when he was crowned in the early 16th century but the event was still to be kept in remembrance by means of a medal which was struck at Rome. It may be seen in the British Museum. The medal gives us an insight into the manner in which the coronation was carried out and at a glance we should be able to discern the blasphemous nature of the ceremony and see that the mitred attendants of John-Paul II’s 1978 inauguration were present there also.
On the reverse, it will be noted, is the inscription (found also, we are told, on other medals) Quem creant adorant (“whom they create, they adore”). Does not what Rome herself has stamped in enduring metal confirm the Reformers’ view, that the incumbent of the Papal chair was none other than the “Man of sin” and “Son of perdition” of 2 Thessalonians, Chapter 2, “who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God?”
Leo X goes down in history as the Pope defied and denounced by Luther. It was he who authorised Tetzel to practice the nefarious trade of indulgence-selling. Wylie neatly sums up Leo’s design. “From the Seven Hills would flow a river of spiritual blessing. To Rome would flow back a river of Gold.” Tetzel led the procession from town to town carrying a great red cross on which the Papal coat of arms were suspended. “The Lord our God no longer reigns,” Tetzel was wont to preach, “He has resigned all power to the Pope.” Collision with Luther was inevitable. When the Wittenberg professor heard of what was being perpetrated in the name of the Christian religion, he said, “By the help of God, I will make a hole in his drum.” That was no idle boast and the carrying of it into effect was to lead to the shaking of Europe and the rending of the very foundations of Leo’s imperial throne in Rome. It led to the burning of the “execrable bull of Antichrist” and to the identification of the Church of Rome with apocalyptic Babylon. Four hundred and sixty years later Leo X’s successor came to Germany and met the leaders of Martin Luther’s Evangelical Church and, in the interests of ecumenism, acknowledged that the Roman Catholic Church’s conduct in 16th Century Germany was not blameless. To be of any value we would think any admission of guilt ought to be commensurate with the notoriety of the evils perpetrated at the time. That was not forthcoming.
In common with Leo X, John-Paul II, as noted already, styles himself “PONTIFEX MAXIMUS” or Supreme Pontiff. Hislop investigated the origin of that title as well as the whole of the Papal system and the conclusion he came to (fully documented) we give in his own words. “From the Pope downwards, all can be shown to be now radically Babylonian. The College of Cardinals, with the Pope at its head, is just the counterpart of the Pagan College of Pontiffs, with its “Pontifex Maximus”, or “Sovereign Pontiff,” which had existed in Rome from the earliest times, and which is known to have been framed on the model of the grand original Council of Pontiffs at Babylon. The Pope now pretends to supremacy in the Church as the successor of Peter, to whom it is alleged that our Lord exclusively committed the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. But here is the important fact that, till the Pope was invested with the title, which for a thousand years had had attached to it the power of the keys of Janus and Cybele, no such claim to pre-eminence, or anything approaching to it, was ever publicly made on his part, on the ground of his being the possessor of the keys bestowed on Peter. Very early indeed, did the bishops of Rome show a proud and ambitious spirit; but, for the first three centuries, their claim for superior honour was founded simply on the dignity of their see, as being of the imperial city, the capital of the Roman world. When, however, the seat of empire was removed to the East, and Constantinople threatened to eclipse Rome, some new ground for maintaining the dignity of the Bishop of Rome must be sought. That new ground was found when, about 378, the Pope fell heir to the keys that were the symbols of two well-known Pagan divinities at Rome. Janus bore a key, and Cybele bore a key; and these are the two keys that the Pope emblazons on his arms as the ensigns of his spiritual authority. How the Pope came to be regarded as wielding the power of these keys will appear in the sequel; but that he did in the popular apprehension, become entitled to that power at the period referred to is certain. Now, when he had come, in the estimation of the Pagans, to occupy the place of the representatives of Janus and Cybele, and therefore to be entitled to bear their keys, the Pope saw that if he could only get it believed among the Christians that Peter alone had the power of the keys, and that he was Peter’s successor, then the sight of these keys would keep up the delusion, and thus, though the temporal dignity of Rome as a city should decay, his own dignity as the Bishop of Rome would be more firmly established than ever. On this policy it is evident he acted. Some time was allowed to pass away, and then, when the secret working of the mystery of iniquity had prepared the way for it, for the first time did the Pope publicly assert his pre-eminence, as founded on the keys given to Peter. About 378 was he raised to the position which gave him, in Pagan estimation, the power of the keys referred to. In 431, and not before, did he publicly lay claim to the possession of Peter’s keys. This surely, is a striking coincidence. Does the reader ask how it was possible that men could give credit to such a baseless assumption? The words of Scripture, in regard to this very subject, give a very solemn but satisfactory answer (2 Thessalonians 2: 10,11): “Because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved . . . For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” Few lies could be more gross; but, in course of time, it came to be widely believed; and now, as the statue of Jupiter is worshipped at Rome as the veritable image of Peter, so the keys of Janus and Cybele have for ages been devoutly believed to represent the keys of the same apostle.”