10

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" height=90 BGCOLOR="#CC9900" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="043005a0dwnjzk.gif"> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="EDWARD WATSONS WEBWORLD"><U><B>home</B></U></A><B> | </B><FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFCC66" FACE="Arial" ><B>EDWARD WATS</B><B>ON'S WEBWORLD</B></FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="id166.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="SECTION 7: INTRODUCTION"><U><B>SECTION 7: INTRODUCTION</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id169.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="1"><U><B>1</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id170.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="2"><U><B>2</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id171.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="3"><U><B>3</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id172.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="4"><U><B>4</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id173.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="5"><U><B>5</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id174.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="6"><U><B>6</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id175.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="7"><U><B>7</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id176.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="8"><U><B>8</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id177.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="9"><U><B>9</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><B>10</B><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id179.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="11"><U><B>11</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id180.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="12"><U><B>12</B></U></A><B>   |   </B><A HREF="id181.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="SECTION 7: CONCLUSION"><U><B>SECTION 7: CONCLUSION</B></U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B>[MORMONISM. The Faith of the Twenty-first Century. Section 7. Edward K. Watson. (Liahona Publications. Copyright © 2002 Edward K. Watson.) pp 142-147. MORMONISM: Section 7, Chapter 10. All rights reserved.]</B></div> <bR> <div> <U>CHAPTER 10</U></div> <bR> <div> <B>THE CATHOLIC RELIANCE UPON FORGERIES FOR “PROOF”</B></div> <bR> <div>      History has proven that the Catholic Church deliberately engaged in forgeries under their popes to “prove” that the bishop of Rome inherited the keys and authority of Peter over all of Christianity. Pope Stephen III in 753 A.D. produced an “ancient” manuscript called <I>the Donation of Constantine</I> “dated” March 30, 315 to Pepin, king of Franks, which has Emperor Constantine giving Pope Sylvester and the church of Rome a gift of primacy over all the other Sees (Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem and Constantinople) and over the Roman Empire. This convinced Pepin to go to war against the Lombards and restore to the pope lands that was “rightfully” his.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >1</FONT> Hadrian IV also appealed to it for his right to give Ireland to the king of England.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >2</FONT> It wasn't until 1440 that it was proven to be a fraud by Lorenzo Valla (and published in a book in 1517).<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >3</FONT> Despite the overwhelming evidence of its fraudulent nature, the Catholic Church did not admit it was a fraud for nearly a thousand years.</div> <div>      Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085) has his own school of forgers led by Anselm of Lucca, Cardinal Deusdedit and subsequently Cardinal Gregory of Pavia who produced a massive amount of “ancient” manuscripts that then were inserted into canon law. They made Catholicism seem changeless and even edited authentic ancient documents to make them appear to teach the opposite of what they originally said.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >4</FONT> Symmachus also wrote forgeries for the Roman church.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >5</FONT></div> <div>      The most influential of all forgeries were the ninth-century <I>Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals</I> or <I>False Decretals</I> (a Decretal is a pronouncement or decree given [in this case from the bishop of Rome]<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >6</FONT> which consisted of 115 documents written by “the early popes” starting with Clement. An additional 125 documents had forged additions which increased the importance and power of the papacy.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >7</FONT> They were proven to be forgeries in 1660 by a French scholar but wasn't until 1789 when Pope Pius VI acknowledged their fraudulent nature.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >8</FONT> The False Decretals and the Donation of Constantine have been called “the two magic pillars of the spiritual and temporal monarchy of the popes.”<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >9</FONT></div> <div>      Cyril of Alexandria also had a forged book written in his name (<I>Libellus</I> from Cyril's <I>Treasury</I>) in the thirteenth century which has him teaching purely Roman Catholic doctrines which were non-existent in Cyril's time (The <I>filioque</I> addition to the Creed and Papal Supremacy of the bishop of Rome). Even after they were proven to be fraudulent, Roman Catholic apologists continued to use them for support in their disputations with opponents.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >10</FONT></div> <div>      To give an idea of how numerous these forgeries were, when Gratian wrote his <I>Decretum</I> or Code of Canon Law in the mid-12th century, <I>only 11 out of the 324 passages he quoted from popes in the first four centuries were</I> <I>authentic,</I><FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >11</FONT> and when Thomas Aquinas used <I>Decretum</I> as his source-book for his <I>Summa Theologica</I> a hundred years later, he based his arguments on the same forgeries.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >12</FONT> It is significant and sad to notice that the two greatest theological works ever produced by Catholics on authoritative law were based upon forgeries.</div> <div>      It is because of these forgeries the popes produced to give the appearance that they were the true church and the bishop of Rome is the inheritor of the keys of Peter that prompts me to reject any argument based on historical documents by the Catholic Church for its authenticity. It is extremely difficult for me to disregard the scale and constancy of the Roman Catholic Church's historical fraud. Nearly all the documents that purportedly has the bishop of Rome inheriting the keys and authority of Peter have been proven to be forgeries and the Catholic Church itself admitted that they were after referring to them for support for a thousand years. If they really were the true church and have always maintained an authentic tradition, why then the forgeries to give such an impression? </div> <bR> <div> <I>  If an institution has authentic documents for a claim, they will not need to produce forgeries for support</I>.</div> <bR> <div>      The mere fact that the overwhelming majority of Catholic arguments were based on proven forgeries and false claims, like Pope Innocent I's letter to bishop Decentius of Gubbio (416),<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >13</FONT> shows they do not have any evidence at all that they are the true church. Some Catholic apologists admit these forgeries existed but they argue that since they appeared long after the papacy was already firmly established, the papacy would still be what it is with or without them.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >14</FONT> This argument evades the real issue:</div> <bR> <div>   <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >Why was it necessary for the Roman church to produce these forgeries if it was recognized throughout Christendom that it had authority over all of Christianity? These forgeries gave legitimacy to papal pretensions, and were successful in eliminating doubts about these claims. The fact can't be avoided. The authentic documents of the first four centuries do not support the Papal Supremacy of the bishop of Rome in any way, shape or form.</FONT></div> <bR> <div>      In addition, our Catholic critics are looking back to the past with post-tenth century glasses. Since the papacy is what it is today, Roman Catholic apologists interpret ancient documents in a manner that conforms to what the Roman Catholic Church claims today. To the Catholic apologist, he is taught the doctrine of papal supremacy first, and <I>then</I> examines the earliest documents and interprets them to mean what his church claims they mean.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >15</FONT></div> <div>      The writings of the early Church Father Ignatius have also suffered “corrections” by scribes in later centuries to make them appear that he was teaching exclusive Roman Catholic doctrines.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >16</FONT> Scholars have identified many ancient works that have been “corrected” to give the appearance that the early Christian church was the Roman Catholic Church and believed in papal supremacy. </div> <div>      Such a rewriting of history is very understandable when one remembers how the transmission of the texts took place. The Catholic Church was the only religious (and sometimes political and military) institution in Europe for a thousand years and had sole possession of these books. During this time, all other Christian rivals were exterminated, and the Catholic Church taught it was the only one that has ever existed with all traces of the other 1st and 2nd century rival groups deliberately purged from every book. </div> <div>      An examination of the world these Catholic scribes lived in shows how the re-writing of history took place. A scribe is copying down a book written by let's say Ignatius. In his book he teaches a doctrine that the Catholic scribe knows is definitely opposed to what the Catholic Church teaches in his day. Supposing there was a passage in which Ignatius states that the true church will be taken (or has already been taken) from the earth and a counterfeit church will take over what remains of Original Christianity. What would this scribe do? He knows that the only copy in existence is the one in his possession and whatever he writes will be the only version of Ignatius' book that will be handed down to future generations. If the true church was indeed taken away, there is nothing he can do about it anyway. If he was honest, despite the disappointment and hurt he may feel, he would accurately write down what Ignatius said. What would his superiors say when they find out what Ignatius wrote? What would the scribe's superiors tell him to do with his copy? If he refuses to change it, they can always get someone else and he could end up being burned at the stake. </div> <div>      The mere fact that the Catholic Church had the monopoly on these books and of it knowing it had sole possession, they naturally made sure (who wouldn't) that the official Catholic version of history and doctrine is the only possible version. I have to give credit when credit is due. This deliberate rewriting of history has been accomplished is a very thorough manner. Fortunately for us, there are still remnants that weren't completely expunged from some books and manuscripts.</div> <div>      This can be called the Great Whitewash of History. A lot of researchers can point out specific areas that were obvious interpolations into certain ancient and biblical books but it is of course impossible to know where the originals end and where the interpolations begin.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >17</FONT> These later “correctors” usually will give themselves away if they performed a great amount of interpolations.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >18</FONT> Unfortunately, if they limited themselves to removing parts they didn't agree with like Marcion did or inserted just a sentence or even a couple of words that changed the original meaning, their corruptions would be next to impossible to detect. Some Roman Catholic scholars admit that some interpolations have occurred but insist that all these corruptions have been removed in the most recent translations of these ancient books. They will still insist that upon examination of these ancient texts these early Christians did teach Roman Catholic doctrine such as papal supremacy. There's a problem with that understanding:</div> <bR> <div> <I>  If the Early Christians did teach exclusive Catholic doctrine such as papal supremacy; why then was it necessary for later Catholic copyists to perform such interpolations to give the appearance that these early Christians were Roman Catholics?</I> </div> <bR> <div>      This alone shows that they were trying to change the original writings. Why? The main reason why these interpolations were discovered was because of non-Roman Catholic scholars. They didn't believe the Catholic Church was what it claimed to be and when they examined the so-called evidence of the Catholics, they discovered indications that parts of these copies of ancient books weren't original but insertions from a later age. These Catholic “correctors” would have been more careful if they knew that there would be non-believers examining their works with a critical eye.</div> <div>      We have absolutely no way of knowing which parts of these ancient books were authentic and which parts were interpolations from a later age. What did the originals contain that later Catholic scribes deleted or added to? The difficulty with deletions is without the original; we have no way of knowing what was taken out. How can one prove a copy of a book has suffered deletions if one doesn't have the original to compare the copy with? We know for a fact that obvious additions and changes did occur to give the appearance that early Christian writings taught exclusive Roman Catholic doctrine; why not deletions since such a process has great historical precedents?</div> <div>      The history of Catholicism and the transmission of books in its possession shows not only a tendency for forging documents in its possession but also a remarkable effort for creating books that advocate a view contrary to the earliest Christians'.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >19</FONT> Later writers would pretend that their books were written by a prominent early Christian which caused early leaders such as the Apostles, Clement, Ignatius, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Dionysius, etc.<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >20</FONT> to have a whole multitude of books falsely attributed to their authorship. This has caused difficulty in the past in discovering which books were actually written by the supposed authors.</div> <div>      Catholic scholars and copyists under the direction of various popes performed outright fabrications and interpolations into different writings of early church fathers to give the appearance that the Catholic Church was the New Testament church and possessed the sole authority that Christ gave to Peter. It is always convenient if one have all the records because he can change them to suit his purpose and no one could possibly know what the originals said aside from what he wanted it to say. No wonder the Eastern churches labeled Rome as “the den of lies.”</div> <div>      This terrible track record of historical forgeries is why non-Catholic scholars are reluctant to give the Roman Catholic Church free reign in managing historical documents such as the Nag Hammadi Library and the Dead Sea Scrolls. The world is fortunate the RCC was unsuccessful in taking control of the Nag Hammadi books since it has been shown they contain valuable information that contradicts the “official” version of first and second century Christianity. </div> <div> If the Catholic Church has nothing to hide and its version of history is indeed true, why then has it tried to monopolize the ancient books that date back to the first century whenever they have been discovered? This reluctance to allow ancient documents to be examined scientifically for fear that they may present views contrary to the “official” position is again visible when the Catholic Church refused to divulge the contents of the Codex Vaticanus, one of the oldest copies of the Bible that was in their possession and continually put obstacles in the way of independent researchers to prevent them from studying the book.</div> <div>      We are fortunate the stranglehold has been broken and people the world over are learning the truth about early Christianity. </div> <bR> <div> <B>[ENDNOTES]:</B></div> <bR> <div> 1.VICARS OF CHRIST (De Rosa). pp. 40-43.</div> <div> 2.THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY (Burn-Murdoch). p.342.</div> <div> 3.THE VICAR OF CHRIST (De Rosa). pp.41-42.</div> <div> 4.Ibid. pp.58-61.</div> <div> 5.THE PAPACY (Schimmelpfennig). p.261.</div> <div> 6.THE STORY OF THE CHURCH (Renwick and Harman). p.84.</div> <div> 7.VICARS OF CHRIST (De Rosa) p.59.</div> <div> 8.Ibid. p.174.</div> <div> 9.THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE (Gibbons). 2:603.</div> <div> 10.THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY (Burn-Murdoch). pp.345-347.</div> <div> 11.THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY (Burn-Murdoch). p. 329; VICARS OF CHRIST (De Rosa). p.60.</div> <div> 12.THE VICAR OF CHRIST (De Rosa). p.60.</div> <div> 13.THE PAPACY (Schimmelpfennig). pp.39-40.</div> <div> 14.CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM (Keating). p.213.</div> <div> 15.Karl Keating used the same type of argument against the Fundamentalists in his work, CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM wherein he states that the Fundamentalists are first taught the doctrine and then goes and utilized the Bible to justify them. pp.26,102,144-145,188,308-309. I agree with him when he admits in pp 144-145, “(sic) We naturally read back into the Bible the beliefs we already hold, each of us having been instructed in the Faith before ever picking up the Bible.” I would like to point out that this method is also done by Catholic apologists to ancient documents in reference to papal supremacy. They pick and choose (and sometimes mistranslate) quotations from ancient writers without regard for the context or the other places in a particular Church Father's writings where he explains the same doctrine that disproves him believing in papal supremacy.</div> <div> 16.THE ANTE-NICENE FATHERS Vol. 1. p.47; THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH. <I>The Apostolic Fathers</I>. (Glimm, Marique, & Walsh. Trans.). Vol 1. p.85. “(sic) In later centuries, the original seven letters were expanded by interpolations; and additional letters not written by Ignatius  were ascribed to him.”</div> <div> 17.THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS UNCOVERED (Eisenman & Wise). p.57.</div> <div> 18.Ibid. p.76. One technique that “correctors” did on original biblical books (sic), “was to `rewrite' biblical stories, expanding or revising them with new details in accordance with one's own understanding of what God required or how certain aspects of this legacy needed to be interpreted or approached.”</div> <div> 19.PAGANS AND CHRISTIANS (Fox). pp.266,468,557,648-649.</div> <div> 20.PATROLOGY Vol 1 (Quasten). pp.109-157 contains many examples of these forgeries.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="mailto:ewatson@shaw.ca" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:ewatson@shaw.ca"><U>e-mail me!</U></A></div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>