Prophetic Fulfillment in Current Events

In a time like this when one man can go out into space and circle around the whole world, how much more significant it is to see a whole world turning around one man—Pope John XXIII!" That statement by Fulton J. Sheen, bishop of New York, points up the vital place the Second Vatican Council holds in the minds of the Catholic clergy. Perhaps nothing that has happened in the last two centuries has so fired the imagina­tion of the religious world as has this im­portant council in the city of Rome. And as heralds of God's great prophetic message we must not fail to discern its significance.

For more than a century Adventists have been preaching that the Papacy would again assume world leadership and be­come the dominant influence among the nations. We were able to do this because of the clear word of prophecy. And before our very eyes the things our forefathers predicted are taking shape.

Rome, the city where ancient paganism and Christianity blend so uniquely, has al­ways captured the interest of the student of history. This was my tenth visit. It was in the beginning of 1930 that I first came to this great metropolis. The impressions received then have never been erased from my mind. Mussolini was then rising into world prominence, not only as the strong man of Italy but as a dominant figure in Europe. Just one year before I arrived in

Rome he had played a vital role in the cre­ation of the Vatican State, which again gave sovereign power to the Holy See and brought to an end the long but voluntary imprisonment of the popes.

For more than a century and a half the Catholic Church had been suffering a series of humiliations; the greatest, of course, be­ing at the time Pope Pius VI was taken prisoner in 1798 and died in exile. That seems to take precedence over most other events in our thinking because that also marked the beginning of "the time of the end" in our system of prophetic interpretation. Subsequent events, however, brought even greater changes. It was in 1860 that most of the Papal States were confiscated, leaving the church with prac­tically nothing more than Rome. And she was destined to suffer even further losses. Under Garabaldi's leadership Italy was united and the one remaining Papal State, the city of Rome, was now gone. More­over, it is claimed that 90 per cent of the church buildings also became the property of the state. A strange setting indeed for the calling of a big church council. But in 1870 Paul Ill convened the First Vatican Council.

Not since the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century had such a council been called. Under the preaching of the great Protestant Reformers the Papacy had been severely wounded by the sword of the Word of God. The Reformers' interpretation of the Scriptures, their insistence that faith alone was sufficient for salvation, their dec­laration that the "Pope was the Antichrist" and many of her doctrines only "old wives' fables" was a shattering blow. If the church was to survive at all, she must find an an­swer. Up till that time Roman Catholic doctrine had not been too well defined. Some kind of convocation was therefore essential to meet the onslaught of these fearless Bible preachers. So the bishops were summoned to Trent, a town on the Italian border. The pope was eager to clar­ify the teachings of the church as well as meet the attack of Protestantism. The council was therefore to be a counter-Ref­ormation.

Another important feature of the coun­cil was to establish the primacy of the pope. This was vital. So in accordance with the instructions of the council, Paul III prepared an Index of Prohibited Books. Such a council in the sixteenth century could have convened in any one of a dozen different places. But three hundred years later when Pius IX wanted to call a coun­cil there was only one place possible for it to convene and that was at the Vatican, for there seemed no place else left for the pope to reside. It was natural then for that coun­cil to be called the First Vatican Council. It was in the Cathedral of St. Peter's in Rome that the bishops met, just as they are in this Second Vatican Council. However, there is much more fanfare today than there was in 1870.

Many things grew out of that council al­most a century ago, the most important be­ing the issuing of the dogma of papal in­fallibility, which in a word means that when the pope speaks ex cathedra in his capacity as the "Vicar of Christ" that car­ries with it the same authority as if spoken by Christ Himself. Not all the bishops were in agreement with that. There were in attendance between 700 and 800 members, but only 533 voted on this issue. However, in order not to give the impression of a lack of unity, and also not to embarrass the situation, some sixty or more of those bishops who disagreed left the council be­fore the vote was taken.

That was in the month of July. The very next day the Franco-Prussian War broke out, and that brought a speedy ter­mination to the council, for Europe was then plunged into war.

During the early months of that war the Papal State of Rome was invaded by the Italian Army, resulting in the termination of the temporal sovereignty of the pope. The very one who a few weeks earlier had led out in the great church council now became a "voluntary prisoner" in the Vatican. Thus the church under Pope Pius IX was stripped of practically all her earthly possessions. Right away, how­ever, she began to set about re-educating the world. One of the plans for this was to be a series of eucharistic congresses to be held in many different countries. Thus the church would demonstrate to the peo­ples of the world that she was growing in strength and glory.

I personally attended one of those eucharistic congresses. It was held in Sydney, Australia, in 1928. The impact of such a spectacle upon the populace in general was tremendous. That was less than one year before the signing of the concordat in

Rome, which made the pope king again. When Mussolini came to power in 1922 it was by invitation of King Victor Emmanuel II. When he marched his Black Shirts into Rome a new era in Italian his­tory was marked. When he began his career as II Duce he could be called an atheist. In one of his early speeches he said, "My father was a blacksmith, he bent iron; I will bend the wills of men." Then to make it more emphatic, he added, "It is blood that turns the wheels of history." His mother was a schoolteacher who guided the minds of youth. But her son was des­tined to guide the thinking of a whole na­tion.

At the beginning he showed disdain for the church by removing crosses from public buildings. But he quickly discovered that if he was to carry the confidence of the Italian people he must make some alliance with the Papacy. He therefore changed his approach, and soon cardinals were saluting him on the streets. By the year 1929 the groundwork was laid for one of the most significant concordats in his­tory. When he and Cardinal Gaspari signed that important document on February 11 of that year, it was a long and visible step in the church's recovery.

This took place in the Lateran Palace, opposite the church of St. John's Lateran, one of the most historic churches in Rome and where Constantine was baptized. It stirred world interest and journalists and reporters gathered from all the leading countries of the world. Not all could wit­ness the actual scene because, even though the room was large, it was not large enough for all who were in attendance. An official Vatican reporter, however, recorded faith­fully the important proceedings. When the preliminaries were over and the men lifted their pens to sign the concordat this was the news that was flashed to the world. "We are now witnessing the passage of these two pens, the ink from which will heal the wound of fifty-nine years." Signif­icant words, especially in the light of Rev­elation 13:3. In a measure, at least, the wound was healed, for the pope was now a sovereign, a king among the kings of the earth as well as the head of a spiritual kingdom.

When the pope was taken prisoner in 1798 many secular historians expressed their belief that the Papacy had come to its end. I had opportunity to do considerable research on this while residing in London some thirty years ago, and was deeply im­pressed by the dogmatism of the majority of writers in books and newspapers of that time. "Never again will this dominant power arise" was the constant emphasis. Other men, however, were writing just the opposite. These were students of proph­ecy. They were declaring that although the Papacy had received this tremendous blow, she would rise again from the dust and ashes of defeat and assume a place in world leadership. They did not hesitate in their declaration. And they based their conclusions on the prophecies of the Revelation and Daniel. "The deadly wound will be healed," they declared, and then "all the world would wonder after the beast."

The thing that seemed impossible from the historian's point of view was clearly evident to the eyes of the preachers of prophecy. "We have also a more sure word of prophecy," they emphasized. And how wonderfully prophecy has been fulfilled.

We cannot help pondering what has hap­pened since 1798. Let us notice only a few points. It was in 1854 that the church pro­claimed her dogma of the Immaculate Con­ception, declaring that Mary was also born sinless. Then in 1870 in an hour of over­whelming defeat she proclaimed her dogma of papal infallibility. At the same time she inaugurated the eucharistic con­gresses. Then in 1929 under Mussolini and Cardinal Gaspari the papal wound was healed politically. In 1950 she issued her dogma of the Assumption of Mary. Other teachings related to the virgin Mary are in process of clarification, such as "Mary our Co-Redemptress" and "Mary our Media­trix or our Intercessor." These could possi­bly be proclaimed as dogma at this very council. Another vital step in Roman Catholicism's recovery is this Second Vati­can Council, 1962-1963, where not 750 bishops or less are in attendance as was the case in 1870 but where there are more than 2,600 bishops and 100 cardinals.

Even more significant still is this: that while the historic position of the Catholic Church since the Reformation has been to denounce Protestantism, the present atti­tude is to make it easy for "these brethren in Christ" to be received into some kind of fellowship. This new approach on the part of John XXIII aims to bring about Christian unity.

Very shortly after the announcement con­cerning the forthcoming council the Pope said: "We do not wish to institute a histor­ical trial, we do not want to show who was right and who was wrong; the responsibil­ity is divided. We wish only to say, let us come together. Let us put an end to these divisions.' "

In his first radio message his attitude of conciliation was expressed in these words: "To those who are separated from this apostolic See we lovingly open heart and arms." And that is the spirit that one finds in Rome at the present time. Never, since the sixteenth century have those who dis­agreed with Roman Catholicism been given the opportunity of participation in any of the church's councils. But today there is a change, for in Rome there are many official Protestant observers, who al­though not actually participating in the discussions, are nevertheless permitted and actually encouraged to remain while these discussions are in progress. In this way they are "allowed to share all secrets and to trace the very varied thoughts in Cathol­icism." This changed attitude is well noted and is regarded by many as an "important ecumenical achievement." Moreover, there is the most friendly interchange of even theological concepts between these official observers and Roman Catholic interpreters.

When Dr. Cullman of the Swiss Evan­gelical Church and professor of theology at the world-renowned seminary in Basel made his presentation before the journal­ists and others who cared to attend, this marked a high point in relationship. In company with Dr. Rossi, religious liberty secretary and public relations secretary of the Italian Union, I attended this impor­tant meeting. A number of bishops were there. In fact, the meeting was so crowded there was scarcely standing room. Dr. Cullman was expressing to the secretariat and the council in general the apprecia­tion felt by the observers for the courtesy and hospitality they were constantly receiv­ing.

"They have clone everything possible," he said, "to enable us to follow the council's sessions, to make our views known and to enter into contact with the Fathers of the council and other personalities of Rome." And to enable these Protestant observers to share in everything, Dr. Cullman pro­ceeded to state how "the Secretariat has most kindly put at our disposal a team of interpreters who are utterly selfless in their unwearied task of translating and summing up for us the Latin speeches of the Fathers of the Council in French, German, English, and Russian." Then with a note of humor he pointed out that "there is quite a difference between reading Latin (which most of us can do without diffi­culty) and hearing it spoken, especially when pronunciations vary." And with a whimsical smile which brought the same reaction from the whole group, he said, "I have the pleasure of sitting near a Bene­dictine Father who serves as interpreter. Some years ago he was my pupil at the Sorbonne. Today the roles are somewhat reversed; he has become my master as regards to spoken Latin. But I think I can say that our interpreters can see some progress in their pupils so far, and less need to turn to them than at first." He further added: "We observers have been struck by the freedom with which the Council Fa­thers state their opinions. . . . We have the most complete freedom to express our ideas and criticisms. In this way we can actually participate outwardly in the council. These discussions begin and end with prayer to­gether and, for the most part, are most fruit­ful. . . . The fact it is possible to hold so open and so brotherly a discussion, and at the fringe of the council at that, must be considered a very positive element and de­serves a special mention by any future his­torian of the Second Vatican Council."