It appears that true believers being called “heretics” is not a new thing. Even Paul was accused of following “heresy”. A careful study of history will show that from the time of the Apostles till today, those who would believe “all things written in the law and in the prophets” have been labeled as such. The Montanists, the Paulicians, Donatists, Waldenses, the Anabaptists, all labeled heretics. Some would argue that indeed, these were heretics. However, one must keep in mind that it was the enemy of these people who wrote their history. They have made it appear that these groups were tiny, insignificant splinter groups at variance with the “great united Christian Church”, meaning Roman Catholicism. Truth be known, it is Roman Catholicism which teaches heresy and who did not splinter from the true church, but rather was never part of it. As a matter of fact, their doctrines and teachings are so far from what the Apostles taught, that one must come to the conclusion found in 1 John 2:19:

“They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt HAVE CONTINUED with us: but THEY WENT OUT that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”

Jeremiah 23:22 shows the impact of those who stand firm in the teachings of the word of God:

“But if they HAD STOOD IN MY COUNSEL, and caused my people to HEAR MY WORDS, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.” (Emphasis mine)

If Catholicism would have clung to the true teachings of the Apostles, they would have caused the people to turn from their idolatry and paganism. Instead, they have led multitudes further and deeper into superstition.

If Roman Catholicism did not originate with the Apostles, where did she originate? We can see the roots of Catholicism in the Bible, but not where one would think!

“But this thou hast, that thou HATEST THE DEEDS OF THE NICOLAITANES, WHICH I HATE ALSO…so hast thou also them that hold the DOCTRINE of the NICOLAITANES, WHICH THING I HATE.” (Rev.2:6,15) (Emphasis mine)

For those of you unfamiliar with the term Nicolaitanes, (#3531 in Strong’s Concordance) it is taken from two Greek words: nikos which means “conquest, i.e. (by implication) triumph;-victory” and laos which means “people”. Therefore Nicolaitanes means “victorious over the people”. This is the sect who wanted to introduce “holy orders” into the church to put men above other men. They had forgotten the words of Paul to the church:

“And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.” (1Cor.4:6 )

Revelation 2:15, when speaking of the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, is a reference to the notion of a dominating priesthood that would, and did, creep into the hierarchy of the church, just as Jesus prophesied.

According to The New Concise Bible Dictionary the Nicolaitanes “compromised with paganism”, which is exactly what history proves to be true of Catholicism. She herself admits to this:

“Temples, incense, oil lamps, votive offerings, holy water, holydays, and seasons of devotion, processions, blessing of fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure (of priests, monks and nuns), images, are all of pagan origin” (The Development of the Christian Religion , Cardinal Newman, 359) (Emphasis mine).

Not only does Roman Catholicism admit that her practices are of pagan origin, but also that her dogma is.

“Or again, dogma is like a cathedral stil in process of construction; so far we cannot grasp its exact proportions; only the nave is completed; we still have to wait for the placing of the last stone” (The Virgin Mary, Guitton, III) (Emphasis mine).

This is diametrically opposed to the word of God which states:

“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints .” (Jude.3:1)

The gospel did not “develop” or “evolve”. It does not change according to the century we live in. Paul clearly tells us that he has not “shunned to declare unto you ALL the counsel of God,” not just part of it. (Acts 20:27) The Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, 1984, vol. 4:

“The DEVELOPMENT of the Western notion ...of the priesthood is also dominated by legal concept...In the sphere of this kind of legal thinking the papacy and the doctrine of the papal primacy DEVELOPED. The idea of a jurisdictional primacy played a prominent role in the FORMATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE PAPACY...On the basis of this legal consciousness the Western church also DEVELOPED its own canon law...Judicial thinking was similarly significant in the theology of the West, TERTULLIAN, (200) INTRODUCED a series of fundamental juridical concepts into theology...Through indulgences, requiems, and other acts, the church expanded its spiritual-judicial authority even to this realm of the departed souls of purgatory…‘There EVOLVED the concept of CAESAROPAPISM...The Roman popes used this power, which was in fact allotted to them by circumstances, to DEVELOP a specific ecclesiastical state and to base this state upon a new theocratic ideology—the idea that the pope was the representative of Christ and the successor of Peter’”(508-509) (Emphasis mine).

Once again, Rome herself admits:

“Writers of the fourth century were prone to describe many practices as apostolic institutions which certainly had no claim to be so regarded” (Catholic Encyclopedia, III, 484) (Emphasis mine).

Though God has always had a people, and a remnant would always remain that did not bow to paganism: That such a religious system as the papacy would overtake the church, was the prophecy of Jesus, and that is exactly what happened! At first, the church was able to resist, but later it could not; because she let her guard down and did not “earnestly contend for the faith once delivered”. The church had forgotten the warning from the apostles:

“For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.” (Acts 20:29-31)

It wasn’t long before those who held to the deeds of the Nicolaitanes finally gained the upper hand in the visible (but not true) church. During the first century after Christ Jesus, the persecution endured by the Christian church kept it relatively pure and free from error; but with the cessation of persecution under Constantine, Christianity entered the courts of kings. The nominal conversion of Constantine in the early part of the 4th century opened the way for the apostasy to progress (develop) more rapidly. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church; her doctrines, ceremonies, rituals, and superstitions were incorporated into the faith of the professed followers of Christ. Constantine increased the role of the Catholic Church in Roman government by placing bishops in high political positions. So as any one can see, Constantine’s role in history was a major pivotal point in providing the Roman Catholic Church a power structure from which to build. The Roman Empire was slowly giving its power to the Roman Catholic Church. Pagan Rome was developing into Papal Rome. By the 6th century the papacy was firmly established and the Bishop of Rome declared to be the head of the entire church. No wonder the Lord HATES THE DOCTRINE of the Nicolaitanes! They claimed to be the head of the church yet the word of God is clear and God is not the author of confusion: “And he [Jesus] is the head of the body, the church....” (Col.1:18) (Emphasis mine) The claims of the papacy to rule the church are based on a forgery called the “Donation of Constantine”. It is historical fact that his “donation” is indeed a forgery. Rome herself now admits this. Let’s turn to the Encyclopedia Britannica again, Vol. 4, pages 511-512:

“On the ideological basis of the ‘gift of the emperor Constantine’ - THE DONATION OF CONSTANTINE (a forged document that granted the papacy territorial rights to much of the western world)-became possible, to which the later development of the papacy was connected. The Donation ATTEMPTED TO*** RECONSTRUCT THE HISTORY OF THE PAPACY IN RETROSPECT*** IN ORDER TO MAKE LEGITIMATE THE *** NEWLY GAINED ECCLESIASTICAL AND POLITICAL POSITION *** OF THE POPES after the extinction of the Western Roman imperial reign...In this theory, the myth of the Byzantium, the ‘new Rome,’ was reconstructed by a new myth of the Christian Rome: THE ROMAN BISHOP, THE *NEW* LORD in the Christian Rome, HAD TAKEN OVER ALL THE FUNCTIONS OF THE EMPEROR HIMSELF...The Roman popes not only based their claim to form and lead their own church state on a spiritual-SECULAR JUDICIAL UNDERSTANDING but they also created a theocracy within areas that until then were part of the provinces of the Byzantine emperor. They renounced a number of former imperial rights and claimed them for themselves. They extended a secular claim of government of the church beyond the borders of church-state and DEVELOPED the so-called theory of two swords, stating that Christ gave the pope not only spiritual power over the church, but also secular power over the worldly kingdoms” (Emphasis mine).

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, 1984, vol. 4, page 468 also states:

“Christianity...The early Christian church…** of the first three centuries *TURNED DECISIVELY AGAINST THE STATE RELIGION OF ROME...BECAUSE THEIR RELIGION** COULD NOT** BE FITTED INTO THE POLITICALLY SANCTIONED PAGAN RELIGIOUS SYSTEM...Constantine, in the 4th century...ended the persecution of the church and made it itself the basis for the spiritual unity of the Roman Empire. The church thereby BECAME the partner of the state....” (Emphasis mine)

Let it be known that it is a historical and well documented fact that the Roman Catholic Church has a long history of attempting to “reconstruct the history of the Roman papacy in retrospect.” Take Constantine for example, Rome would have you believe that he converted to Christianity and hence the reason for his “gift”. A careful study of the character of Constantine will reveal that from an early date Constantine combines the Christian symbol (a cross) with his personal image as a conquering general; the cross as a symbol of victory over darkness imposed with imperial fervor. His coins reveal a picture of him in the conqueror’s pose and armor next to a cross topped by a globe, while his helmet bears the name of Christ. The emperor stands in for the departed Christ, yet, for many years he used Apollonian imagery as well. A pragmatist, the image of Christ seemed to blur in his mind with that of the Sun god. He was aware that the majority of the inhabitants of the Empire were still pagans and so he cleverly incorporated some pagan imagery into his personality cult. A tactic Roman Catholicism continues to this day.

“To convert and civilize her new subjects SHE [Catholicism] DESCENDED TO THEIR LEVEL and EMPLOYED MEANS IN KEEPING WITH THEIR NOTIONS AND CUSTOMS” (History of the Church of God, B.J.Spalding,407) (Emphasis mine).

“Gregory ‘The Great’, 590 AD, ordered the heathen temples etc. be preserved in order to attract the heathens who once worshipped in them: ‘Among other directions, he advises them not to destroy the temples but only the idols of the false gods, and to consecrate to the worship of the true God the buildings still fit for use, ‘IN ORDER’, as he wisely said, ‘THAT THE PEOPLE SEEING YOU RESPECT THE MONUMENTS TO WHICH THEY ARE ACCUSTOMED, AND MAY MORE READILY COME TO THEM’” (General History of the Catholic Church,Darras, Vol.II, 188 - see Life of Saint Patrick, 73) (Emphasis mine).

We see that Rome has clung closer to paganism than to true Christianity and that instead of following the teachings of Christ, they developed and formed new doctrines. Their entire “authority” is based on a lie, a forgery. The Roman Catholic church has a long history of false statements deliberately presented as being true; saying things meant to deceive or give a wrong impression; presenting false information with the intention of deceiving; conveying false images and impressions, which coincidentally happens to be the definition of a liar. Therefore, nothing that comes out of her can be accepted as fact without further corroboration. Those whom Rome would label “heretics” are more than likely those who “believe all that is written in the law and in the prophets.” In order for a church to be considered true, it must meet certain requirements set forth in the word of God. It must have the right founder– Jesus Christ. (Matthew 16:18) Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, any church founded upon a lie such as the “Donation of Constantine” cannot be the true church. It must also cling to the faith “ONCE delivered unto the saints”. As Rome herself admits, she does not. Her doctrines and dogmas developed and evolved. And Roman Catholicism readily admits this self-damning fact:

“If only ONE INSTANCE could be given in which the [Catholic] Church CEASES TO TEACH A DOCTRINE WHICH HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY HELD, that SINGLE INSTANCE would be a DEATH BLOW of her claim to INFALLIBILITY” (Faith of our Fathers, Gibbons, 61) (Emphasis mine).

“...If it be not identical in belief, government, etc…with the primitive church, then it is not the church of Christ” (Catholic Facts, 27).

Amazing admission considering they also admit that the New Testament church knew nothing of the hierarchy of the Roman Church! Now that it has been proven that Roman Catholicism is not now, nor has it ever been part of the true church, we must look at those who came out from them during the Reformation. Could they have been the true church? Does it not seem ridiculous to you to believe that Christianity was given birth to by a lie? Protestantism was made up of those who, while seeing the corruption of the “Church”, broke off to form a new religion of their own, instead of returning to the “faith once delivered to the saints”. They retained many of the pagan practices of Roman Catholicism. As they did not remove themselves entirely from Catholicism, they are now readily returning to their “mother” with open arms. We see this in the ecumenical movement of today. Had these churches came out from Romanism in reality,and returned to the faith once delivered unto the saints, they would not even think of joining with her again. The “wound” (Rev.13:3) which the Reformation inflicted appears to be “healing”. The end result? The one-world church under the banner of the pope. So what are the characteristics of the true church? The following is from an excellent book by J.M. Carroll, tracing the Trail of Blood of the true martyrs of the faith:

11. Its independence—separation of church and state” (Matt.22:21) (Emphasis mine).

Now let’s look at an overview Mr. Carroll gives concerning the period known as the “Dark Ages” and of those Christians that existed at that time:

“1. During every period of the ‘Dark Ages’ there were in existence many Christians and many separate and independent Churches, some of them dating back to the times of the Apostles, which were never in any way connected with the Catholic Church. They always wholly rejected and repudiated the Catholics and their doctrines. This is a fact clearly demonstrated by credible history.

2. These Christians were perpetual objects of bitter and relentless persecution. History shows that during the period of the ‘Dark Ages’, about twelve centuries, beginning with AD 426, there were about fifty millions of these Christians who died martyr deaths. Very many thousands of others, both preceding and succeeding the ‘Dark Ages’ died under the same hard hand of persecution.

3. These Christians, during these dark days of many centuries, were called by many different names, all given to them by their enemies. These names were sometimes given because of some specially prominent and heroic leader and sometimes from other causes; and sometimes, yea, many times, the same people, holding the same views, were called by different names in different localities. But amid all the many changes of names, there was one special name or rather designation, which clung to at least some of these Christians, throughout all the ‘Dark Ages’, that designation being ‘Ana-Baptist.’ This compound word applied as a designation of some certain Christians was first found in history during the 3rd century; and a suggestive fact soon after the origin of Infant Baptism, and a more suggestive fact even prior to the use of the name Catholic. Thus the name ‘Ana-Baptists’ is the oldest denominational name in history.

4. A striking peculiarity of these Christians was and continued to be in succeeding centuries: They rejected the man-made doctrine of ‘Infant Baptism’ and demanded rebaptism, even though done by immersion for all those who came to them, having been baptized in infancy. For this peculiarity they were called ‘Ana-Baptists’.

5. This special designation was applied to many of these Christians who bore other nicknames; especially is this true of the Donatists, Paulicians, Albigenses, and Ancient Waldenses and others. In later centuries this designation came to be a regular name, applied to a distinct group. These were simply called ‘Ana-Baptists’ and gradually all other names were dropped. Very early in the sixteenth century, even prior to the origin of the Lutheran Church, the first of all the Protestant Churches, the word ‘ana’ was beginning to be left off, and they were simply called ‘Baptists’.

6. Into the ‘dark ages’ went a group of many churches which were never in any way identified with the Catholics.”

I am not promoting the Baptist Church here, but merely pointing out that anyone who refused to be part of Rome were labeled by their enemies as “Ana-Baptist”. So next time you hear someone tell you that all churches came from Roman Catholicism, be sure to inform them that in all reality, the Ana-Baptists predate Roman Catholicism. There was always a people true to the word of God, just as the Lord promised, a remnant that would not bow their knee to Baal. (Rom.11:2-5) And today there still exists a people who will hear the voice of the true Shepherd and will not listen to the voice of strangers. (John 10:1-5) They have the promise of God: “Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” (Matt. 28:20) God is never without a people, and His people are never without God! His people love His word and cling to it.

“But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.”

Will you follow Jesus, who is the way, the truth and the life, (John 14:6) or will you be like those who follow lies and falsehood? Which “church” do YOU fit in?

By Diane M. Schoeppner