tuous garments dazzled the eyes and minds of the multitude into an ignorant veneration for their arrogant authority. The example of bishops was ambitiously imitated by the presbyters; who, neglecting the sacred duties of their station, abandoned themselves to the indolence and delicacy of an effeminate and luxurious life. The deacons, beholding the presbyters deserting thus their functions, boldly usurped their rights and privileges; and the effects of a corRUPT AMBITION, were spread through every rank of the sacred order."

So much for the third CENTURY. In the FOURTH appeared CONSTANTINE THE GREAT. A circumstance occurred, inviting his attention to; and his interference with, ecclesiastical matters, which reminds one of the visit paid to Gregory Thaumaturgus, by "the apostle John and the blessed Virgin," when he formed his celebrated confession of faith. A miraculous CROSS was seen in the air. This was enough. Constantine was converted, and, to the universal joy of Christians, became the PATRON of the church. But this new ecclesiastical HEAD, was very far from leading a religious life, or glorying in the CROSS of the Lord Jesus; and, instead of breaking up the dominion over the human conscience, which had been established by the ambitious EPISCOPACY, and subservient COUNCILS, he confirmed and extended it, appropriating to himself the pre-eminence. "Though he permitted the church to remain a body politic, distinct from that of the state, as it had formerly been, yet he assumed to himself the supreme power over this sacred body, and the right of modelling and governing it in such a manner, as should be most conducive to THE PUBLIC

GOOD. This right he enjoyed without any opposition, as none of the bishops presumed to call his authority in question."

At this juncture, and under these circumstances, Constantine called together the Synod, or Council, of NICE. It was denominated" ECUMENICAL," i. e. a council of the whole world, or the whole earth, because it was called together from all parts of the Roman empire, to which the title of the world, or the earth, was given." It was summoned in 325, and was composed of 318 bishops. In this assembly the disputes between Alexander and Arius, on the subject of the trinity, among other matters on which it was thought proper the council should legislate for the peace of the church, was to be adjusted by the exercise of ABSOLUTE POWER. The historian reports, that "after many keen debates, and violent efforts of the two parties, the doctrine of Arius was condemned; Christ was declared consubstantial, or of the same essence, with the Father; the vanquished presbyter banished among the Illyrians; and his followers COMPELLED to give their assent to the CREED or CONFESSION OF FAITH, which was composed by this counReader behold the ORIGIN of creeds as instruments of ecclesiastical POWER! Composed by the first œcumenical council, which was headed by an EMPEROR, the avowed champion of the SIGN of the CROSS, "whose authority no bishop presumed to call in question." See the ministers of Christ, humbled at the footstool of an earthly prince, and COMPELLED to SUBSCRIBE "the exhibition of scriptural doctrines in regular order," of whose ORTHODOXY his signature was the guaranty. If any reader will still advocate this

cil."

mighty system of mischief and imposition, he may at least forbear with one who can even indignantly rebel.

But it is no matter of wonder that the mind which can submit to all this should be easily alarmed by the cry of HERESY. He who is so far degraded may be alarmed at any thing. It would require all the implements of inquisitorial misrule to support his courage, or LIBERTY is a mere word.

But I must draw another parallel, inside of that which has just been completed. It is indispensably necessary, that the individual, who wishes to be accurately informed on the general subject, should take another view of the whole matter, and look at the history of THEOLOGY, as well as at that of POWER. If the reader is pleased so to do, he may follow me to the next chapter.

CHAPTER VIII.

Subject Continued Scholastic Theology.

Ir the historical abstract, contained in the preceding chapter, be true, what can be said for the THEOLOGY of those times? Under the new dispensation, as the Redeemer and his disciples testify, mysteries were revealed, uncovered, explained, or made known. But it has been shown, that, in imitation of pagan fully, MYSTERIES were again introduced; and as handed down to the present day, they render the study of the bible a very difficult matter even now. "Shadows and clouds and darkness rest" on moral science, as though "the light of the world" had not appeared:

while superstition, and awe, and ignorance are every where betrayed, as though Jehovah had not given to his people"the Spirit of love, of power, and of a sound mind."

Then again, what can be said for the THEOLOGY of the times, in which ministerial men aspired after, and successfully grasped at, a lordship over the human conscience? and when the people succumbed to and were degraded by, such a despotic sway?" Religion had preserved its native purity, as long as the celestial oracles were the only rule of faith;" but now "their decisions were either neglected, or postponed to the inventions of men;" and how could it be otherwise, than that religion should "degenerate from its primitive and divine simplicity?" Can either despots or slaves comprehend and maintain right principles ? If "out of the heart are the issues of life," and if men are to be "known "by their fruits," can there be any confidence in the moral systems which are to be traced back to such expositors? to an age, when, to use the language of another, "there was NO PEOPLE?" And shall those systems be the model for large, varied, and liberal thought now, when the fetters of despotism have been broken, and the PEOPLE are again appearing to claim their rights? If the gospel be a popular institute, and the ministry of reconciliation be a popu lar office-if, as now-a-days we are taught, while no one can reasonably doubt the maxim, intelligence, virtue, and liberty go hand in hand,-—if conscience, enlightened, vigorous and active, be the real glory of a human being, or if to have the kingdom of God set up in each heart be the source of all moral efficiency, verily that must have been, from the very nature of the

case, a most wretched condition of moral science, in which the episcopacy, the union of church and state, creeds and popery arose.-It will be well for the reader carefully to ascertain, whether that theology, thus introduced, be not that very thing, which, at this hour, is called ORTHODOXY? and whether it can deserve such a high-sounding appellative? What intelligent mind could possibly confide in the terms or measures derived from a system, thus originating?

My remarks are intended to include the speculations of Arius, as well as those of Alexander: What is popularly called unitarianism, as well as what is popularly called trinitarianism. When the controversy on the great topic now alluded to, or the dispute about homoousios, and homoiousios, arose, and when different councils determined different ways, how can any confidence be reposed on either side? Yet even now, as though theological science had not emerged from the darkness which then enveloped both the ministerial and the Christian mind, no one can abandon either side, without being accused of going to the other. We are not even permitted to go back to the scriptures, and judge for ourselves, without incurring an ecclesiastical suit for heresy.

If the historical sketch should be extended through subsequent centuries, when the things, already stated, worked out their legitimate consequences, we shall see that the bible entirely disappeared. All the fearful details of popery were introduced, and the dark ages came on. If we go on until the times of the reformation, even then a multitude of fragments were brought from the old schools,—mysteries were perpetuated, Calvin taught over again the dogmas of Au