amiable to every body. He prevailed on some by his reason, others he made to blush by the force of his explanations; he praised those who spoke well, and persuaded all to peace. In short, he did not cease till he had brought them to agree in the same faith and in the same sentiment, touching all points in dispute."

After many days, some say weeks, of hot controversy, it was resolved to settle the question by a "Declaration" which should define the nature of Christ in relation to God and put an end to all discord and secure perpetual peace and harmony in the Church Universal. Then came the most difficult task of all. Who should, who could, write such a Creed? The emperor counseled them to make one which could be "drawn from the books of the Evangelists and Apostles which should show plainly what we ought to believe, for which reason we ought to banish all controversies and collect from the testimonies of these books which are inspired of God the exposition of the controverted points." A Creed was drawn up which all admitted "used no terms but such as were authorized by the Scriptures." It did not satisfy the gnostics and mystics of Egypt. Others were made with no better success. None of them admitted the superiority of Egyptian bishops above all others. They demanded something more subtle and mysterious; something to sustain their speculative philosophy; something above the comprehension of common mortals. The simple, plain, positive principles which Jesus taught, explaining his relation to the Father and to mankind and the duties of men to God and to each other, did not secure to them their metropolitan pre-eminence. Like the ancient priests of Egypt they wanted to come out of the sacred Adytum, arrayed in mystery and marvel, pretending oracular wisdom, and commanding reverential assent to whatever they might offer or command. The simplicity of the gospel reasonably explained to reaso::able minds did not suit their ambition. They pretended to understand what they could not explain.

After long and severe disputation and much cunning and

cautious engineering, not unlike a modern political caucus, the whole matter was narrowed down to a single word, and to a single letter in that word, and that letter the least letter in the alphabet Iota. Homoiousion Homöousion. The — root of the word signifies, likeness, resemblance, image, similarity. All admitted Jesus was like God, "the brightness of his glory, the express image of his person," the "mediator between God and men," "the Son of God," "the Savior of the world. This did not suit the Egyptian mystics; it was too plain; so they dropped the iota and claimed Jesus was of the same substance with the Father. Hosius and Athanasius drew up a Creed thus: "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible, and in one Lord Jesus Christ," (so far all were agreed as before written, then added)" begotten of the Father, only begotten, that is to say, of the same substance of the Father, God of God, light of light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of the same substance with the Father," etc.

The Creed so made was signed, by some voluntarily, by more for the sake of peace, by others under the threat of banishment, and by some not at all. When it was presented to Constantine, and that prince considering the unanimous consent of so many prelates must be the work of heaven, received it with respect, and declared he would banish those who should oppose it." "Basil calls this Creed the great and invincible Crced. Athanasius says, it is alone sufficient to destroy all heresies. A great council at Rome under Damosus calls it the bulwark opposed to all the efforts of the devil; another council says, it is like a rock, against which all the waves of heresy dash and retire in froth. Hilary says the word Consubstantial is the great, and even the only means of securing our religion."

The second point was settled with little debate by refering it to the astronomers of Egypt to determine annually the true time for holding Easter. The chief attention and feeling centered on the Creed question.

The reader will naturally ask for the result of this long and

bitter discussion and final decision of this famous Council. Did it end, finally, all disputes, and secure the union and harmony for which it was called? The farthest from it posssible. It did what most councils have done since, assembled for like purpose; it widened the breach, exasperated the feelings, and hindered the influence of Christianity, all which continue to this day. It did not allay but raised the storm of controversy which became more furious and wide-spread than ever. The Creed so formed and so eulogized, and declared to be "the perfect rule of faith of the Church Universal," was interpreted differently, and many rejected the word consubstantial altogether. Athanasius says" the word consubstantial was not expressly in the Scriptures, and that gave a pretense to the Arians for rejecting it." At the Council at Ephesus that word led to a permanent schism. Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, the Eastern capital, where Constantine resided, at the time, and Theognis, bishop of Nicæa, who were accounted leading heretics, were banished in 625, soon after the great council, for interpreting the word differently from Hosius. They were recalled three years after, at the dying request of Constantia, the widow of Licinius, and sister of Constantine, who desired of them the consolations of religion. Two years later the Arians were restored to a full possession of the churches, and soon after the Homo-ousions, as they were called, were banished. Athanasius, the chief instigator of the severe proceedings, who had been promoted to the bishopric of Alexandria, was banished to Treves in Gaul; and, though three times restored, finally died in banishment. Hosius had returned. in disgrace, to Spain.

The innumerable Councils held since have generally been called to repair or enlarge the Creed, or denounce some new heresy, or somehow alter and improve" the perfect rule of faith," by interposing some new and stronger barrier against the freedom of thought and speech. By the severance of the Latin from the Greek church, a great gulf was fixed, hitherto impassable. The Greek, Armenian, Nestorian, Maronite, Jacobite, Coptic, Roman, and innumerable Protestant

sects maintain separate organizations on account of Creed differences, and a portion of them receive protection from Moslem and other heathen powers which they often refuse to each other. In Bethlehem, Jerusalem, and some other places several sects of different Creeds worship the one God in the name of the one Lord under the same roof, but never at each other's altar. A page could be filled with the names of sects which followed more fiercely the adoption of the Creed so loudly extolled as "invincible," "alone sufficient to destroy all heresies" and "all the efforts of the devil." The Creed itself has been several times altered. The filioque added by the Roman has never been accepted by the Oriental churches, and is the wall of partition between them.

Were it necessary to enter upon an analysis of the Creeds of Christendom, each claiming to be the right and only true and safe one, it would be easy to find in them a sufficient cause for the divisions and distractions existing in the church of God, and preventing its more rapid growth in purity, peace, union and good will. Selfishness, ambition, pride and prejudice, are imbeded in the foundations and permeate the parts of all Creeds, but each man's own!

Who with another's eye can read,
Or worship by another's creed?
Revering God's command alone,

We humbly seek and use our own.

The question of the retention or rejection of ready-made Creeds can best be answered by a knowledge of what they have done and are capable of doing. Mischievous as they have been in fostering pride and exclusiveness; and weak and weakening as they seem to be wherever light and liberty of thought and speech are permitted and wisely employed in the honest search for truth and righteousness, they still exert, unperceived at the time, a strong influence over the religious opinions, feelings and conduct of people; in some stronger than in others. Why else is it that, in all special efforts to revive the work of religion, it is found necessary to keep Creeds carefully out of sight, often disowned, until the gath

ering into flocks and labeling for the sect, and then but faintly read? Why else are churches so thinly attended where dogmas are so often and severely preached, and theories and systems insisted upon? Why, but for Creeds and names, do peo ple meet and pass with a bare nod when going to worship" the God and Father of all," in the name of the " one Lord of all," who are respectful, friendly and cordial on all other occasions? Why else these continued struggles, appeals and contrivances to raise funds to sustain sectarian schools, and build and sustain churches, where those already built are not half full? Why else these large funds to send missionaries with the proper trade-marks, to convert the heathen? To what?

In Mexico, a few years since, free toleration was proclaimed. Five sects are there with their separate Creeds, and not much "brotherly love" is wasted between them. M. E. South and M. E. North, Episcopal English and Episcopal American and Presbyterian. The English government compels China to buy opium (£125,000,000) against the earnest remonstrance of the Emperor; but missionaries carry Bibles and prayer-books to save them from their sins. America ships whiskey, uns, powder and missionaries of divers Creeds to convert the heathen to one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God, one Father of all and to the love of their neighbors as themselves." Most Christian nations of many Creeds send missionaries abroad, and maintain large military and naval establishments at home, to help keep peace where churches abound, and the gospel, in all shades, is preached for the instruction and guidance of the people Wealth, luxury, pride, distinction, ambition, rivalry, vain show, and much parade and pretension, with ease and indolence, are as distinctly seen in churches and in Christian nations, as among the heathen; as common among profes sors as non-professors. Where is more display of "gay clothing" to be seen than in the processions and at the altars of the high titled dignitaries of THE Church, which claims to represent the Man of the seamless coat, who had not where to lay his head. How must He who sits on the throne of perfect Justice, and understands all the imaginations of the