It was not long, however, before there was a marked departure from this

high moral level among the Christians. In tracing that decline I shall

use chiefly the History of the Church, by Joseph Milner, published in

1794. My reason for doing so is this, as I have already stated in this

writing, he wrote what some regard as his great history of the Church

to counteract the influence of Dr. Mosheim's splendid "Institutes

of Ecclesiastical History," which is evidently by some regarded as

too much a history of the perversions and abuses of religion. Milner

plainly informs his readers that he intends to write the history of

those only who have been real, not nominal, Christians, irrespective of

the external Church to which they belonged, proceeding upon the theory

that these good men constitute the Church of Christ. His history, in

other words, is a history of piety, not of the Church. It will be his

purpose, therefore, to exalt the morality of the Christians of all

ages, and I quote his work respecting the moral deterioration of the

Christians that I may not be charged with quoting authorities who some

think have made too much of Christian shortcomings. Milner says that a

gloomy cloud, concerning moral conditions, hung over the close of the

first century, and proceeds to argue that the first impressions made by

the effusions of the spirit are the strongest; that human depravity

overborne for a time arose afresh; particularly in the next generation,

and hence the disorders of schisms and heresies in the Church. Neander

does not agree with the philosophy of Milner. He says: "Christianity,

since it first entered human nature, has operated, wherever it has

struck root, with the same divine power for sanctification; and this

divine power cannot be weakened by the lapse of ages. In this respect,

therefore, the period of the first appearance of Christianity could

have no advantage over any of the following ages of the Christian

Church."[A] And he follows this declaration with a. statement that the

change which Christianity produced in the lives of those who accepted

it appeared so strongly marked, by the contrast it presented with what

they had previously been when pagans. The correctness of the philosophy

I shall leave these two great Christian authorities to settle between

themselves. I am concerned more particularly with the facts in the case.

[Footnote A: Neander Ch. Hist., vol. I, p. 259.]

In consequence of the prominence that has been given to the

persecutions of the Christians during the first three centuries, the

impression very extensively prevails that the early Christian Church

was constantly under the hard pressure of continuous and relentless

persecution. This, however, is not the case. There were many periods of

peace granted to the Christians. Indeed, their periods of persecution

were only occasional, and it is a question if these periods of

peace were not more detrimental to Christianity than the seasons of

persecution. Milner, under the authority of Origen, says that the

long peace granted the Church in the third century, during the reigns

of the several emperors, from about 260 A. D. to the opening of the

fourth century, produced a great degree of lukewarmness and religious

indecorum. "Let the reader," he says, "only notice the indifference

which Origen here describes and the conduct of the Christians both

in the first and second centuries, and he will be affected with the

greatness of the declension." Then he quotes Origen: "Several come to

church only on solemn festivals, and then not so much for instruction

as diversion. Some go out again as soon as they have heard the lecture,

without conferring or asking the pastors questions. Others stay not

till the lecturers ended, and others hear not so much as a single word,

but entertain themselves in a corner of the church."[A]

[Footnote A: Ibid.]

Coming to the middle of the third century, just previous to that severe

persecution inaugurated by the Emperor Decius, and speaking of Cyprian,

Bishop of Carthage, Milner exclaims: "A star of the first magnitude,

when we consider the time in which he lived! Let us recreate ourselves

with the contemplation of it. We are fatigued with hunting for

Christian goodness, and we have discovered but little, and that little

with much difficulty. We shall find Cyprian to be a character who

partook, indeed, of the declensions which we have noticed and lamented,

but who was still far superior, I apprehend, in real simplicity and

piety, to the Christians of the East."[A] This same Cyprian, in whom

Milner delights speaking of the effects of the long peace upon the

Church which preceded the Decian persecution, says:

[Footnote A: Milner's Ch. Hist. vol. I, cent. iii. ch. vi.]

Each had been bent on improving his own patrimony, and had forgotten

what believers had done under the Apostles, and what they ought

always to do. They were brooding over the arts of amassing wealth;

the pastors and the deacons each forgot his duty; works of mercy were

neglected, and discipline was at the lowest ebb; luxury and effeminacy

prevailed; meretricious arts in dress were cultivated; fraud and

deception practiced among brthren Christians would unite themselves in

matrimony with unbelievers; could swear, not only without reverence

but even without veracity. With haughty asperity they despised their

ecclesiastical superiors! They railed against one another with

outrageous acrimony, and conducted quarrels with determined malice.

Even many bishops, who ought to be guides and patterns to thhe rest,

neglected the peculiar duties of their stations, gave themselves up

to secular pursuits. They deserted their places of residence and

their flocks; they traveled through distant provinces in quest of

pleasure and gain; have no assistance to their needy brethren, but were

insatiable in their thirst of money. They possessed estates by fraud

and multiplied usury. What have we deserved to suffer for such conduct?

Even the divine word hath foretold us that we might expect: "If his

children forsake my law and walk not in my judgments, I will visit

their offenses with the rod and their sins with scourges." These things

had ben denounced and foretold, but in vain. Our sins had brought

our affairs to that pass, that because we had despised the Lord's

directions, we were obliged to undergo a correction of our multiplied

evils and a trial of our faith be severe remedies.[A]

[Footnote A: Ibid.]

Referring to the long reign of peace in the closing decades of the

third century, Milner says:

This new [the toleration of Christianity by a pagan government] did not

prove favorable to the growth of grave and holiness. In no period since

the Apostles was there ever so great a general decay as in this. Not

even in particular instances can we discover during this interval much

of lively Christianity.[A]

[Footnote A: Milner's Ch. Hist., vol. I, cent, iii, ch. xvii.]

Here I drop Milner to take up Eusebius, who was an eyewitness of the

moral declension among the Christians previous to the last great pagan

persecution under the emperor Diocletian. Referring to the long period

of peace which the Church had enjoyed--a period of forty years--he says:

But when, by reason of excessive liberty, we sunk into negligence

and sloth, one envying and reviling another in different ways, and

we were almost, as it were, upon the point of taking up arms against

each other with words as with darts and spears, prelates inveighing

against prelates, and people rising up against people, and hypocrisy

and dissimulation had risen to the greatest height of malignity, then

the divine judgment, which usually proceeds with a lenient hand, whilst

the multitude were yet crowding into the Church, with gentle and mild

visitations began to afflict the episcopacy; the persecution having

begun with those brthren in the army. But as if destitute of all

sensibility, we were not prompt in measures to appease and propitiate

the Deity; some inded like atheists, regarding our situation as

unheeded and unobserved by a Providence, we added one wickedness and

misery to another. But some that appeared to be our pastors deserting

the law of piety, were inflamed against each other with mutual strifes,

only accumulating quarrels and threats, rivalship, hostility and hatred

to each other, only anxious to assert the government as a kind of

sovereignty for themselves.[A]

[Footnote A: Eusebius' Eccl. Hist., bk. viii, ch. i.]

Here I shall avail myself of some reflections upon this condition

which I have elsewhere expressed:[A] Let it be remembered that what is

said in the foregoing quotation is from a writer contemporary with the

events, and who says, in the very chapter following the one from which

I have just quoted, that it was not for him to record the dissensions

and follies which the shepherds of the people exercised against each

other before the persecution. He also adds: "We shall not make mention

of those that were shaken by the persecution, nor of those that

suffered shipwreck in their salvation, and of their own accord were

sunk in the depths of the watery gulf."[B] Then in his Book of Martyrs,

referring to events that occurred between the edicts ordering the

persecution, he says: "But the events that occurred in the intermediate

times, besides those already related. I have thought proper to pass

by; I mean more particularly the circumstances of the different heads

of the churches, who from being shepherds of the reasonable flocks

of Christ, that did not govern in a lawful and becoming manner, were

condemned, by divine justice, as unworthy of such a charge, to be the

keepers of the unreasonable camel, an animal deformed in the structure

of his body: and condemned further to be the keepers of the imperial

horses. * * * * * Moreover, the ambitious aspirings of many to office,

and the injudicious and unlawful ordinations that took place, the

divisions among the confessors themselves, the great schisms and

difficulties industriously fomented by the factions among the new

members, against the relics of the Church, devising one innovation

after another, and unmercifully thrusting them into the midst of all

these calamities, heaping up affliction upon affliction. All this, I

say, I have resolved to pass by, judging it foreign to my purpose,

wishing, as I said in the beginning, to shun and avoid giving an

account of them."[C] Hence, however bad the condition of the Church is

represented to be by ecclesiastical writers, we must know that it was

still worse than that; however numerous the schisms, however unholy

the ambition of aspiring prelates, however frequent and serious the

innovations upon the primitive ordinances of the Gospel; howsoever

great the confusion and apostasy in the Church is represented to be, we

must know that it is still worse than that, since the Church historians

contemporaneous with the events refused to record these things in their

fullness, lest it should prove disastrous to the Church; just as some

of our modern scholars, professing to write Church history, express

their determination to close their eyes to the corruption and abuses

which form the greater part of the melancholy story of ecclesiastical

history, for fear that relating these things would make it appear that

real religion scarcely had any existence.[D]

[Footnote A: New Witness for God, pp. 75, 76.]

[Footnote B: Eusebius' Eccl. Hist., bk. viii, ch. ii.]

[Footnote c: Book of Martyrs, ch. xii.]

[Footnote D: See Milner's Introduction to his Church Hist., vol. I.]

_Constantine's Nicean Plan of Propaganda:_ I shall say no more

upon the matter of moral declensions among Christians, except this. If

there was such moral declension among Christians as is represented by

the foregoing high authorities on Christian affairs in the centuries

preceding Constantine, what moral declension must have prevailed when

from a proscribed religion Christianity was exalted to the dignity of

the state religion of the empire; and her prelates and clergy were

recalled from exile and suffering, poverty and disgrace, and loaded

with the wealth and honors that the lord of the Roman world could

bestow? Consider, in this connection, the propositions of Constantine

at the council of Nicea for the propaganda of Christianity, and pass

a candid judgment upon the moral or rather immoral effect they would

produce upon the Church. Neander thus states them:

"The heathen would be most easily led to salvation, if the condition of

the Christians were made to appear to them in all respects enviable.

"They (the bishops) should consider, that the advantage to be derived

from preaching could not belong to all.

"Some, he said, might be drawn to the faith by being seasonably

supplied with the means of subsistence.

"Others were accustomed to repair to that quarter where they found

protection and intercession (alluding to the intercessions of the

bishops).

"Others would be won by an affable reception.

"Others by being honored with presents.

"There were but few who honestly loved the exhibitions of religious

doctrine; but few were the friends of truth (therefore but few sincere

converts).

"For this reason they should accommodate themselves to the characters

of all, and like skillful physicians, give to each man that which might

contribute to his cure, so that in every way the saving doctrine might

be glorified in all."[A]

[Footnote A: Neander's Ch. Hist., vol. ii, pp. 29-30.]

The effect of adopting such methods for the more rapid propagation

of Christianity, as is here proposed by the emperor to the bishops

assembled at the council at Nicea, must be apparent to all, and is

quite universally lamented by Christian writers of later ages. "A

course of proceeding upon such principles," remarks Neander himself,

"must entirely have thrown open a wide door for all manner of

hypocrisy. Even Eusebius, the panegyrist of Constantine, blinded as

he was by the splendor which the latter had outwardly cast over the

Church--even he is obliged to reckon among the grievous evils of this

period, of which he was an eye witness, the indescribable hypocrisy

of those who gave themselves out as Christians merely for temporal

advantage, and who, by their outward show of zeal for the faith,

contrived to win the confidence of the emperor, which he suffered them

to abuse." [A] "The piercing eye of ambition and avarice," says Gibbon,

"soon discovered that the profession of Christianity might contribute

to the interest of the present as well as of a future life. The hopes

of wealth and honors, the example of an emperor, his exportations, his

irresistible smiles, diffused conviction among the venal and obsequious

crowds which usually fill the apartments of a palace. The cities,

which signalized a forward zeal by the voluntary destruction of their

temples, were distinguished by municipal privileges and rewarded with

popular donatives. * * * * As the lower ranks of society are governed

by imitation, the conversion of those who possessed any eminence

of birth, of power, or of riches, was soon followed by dependent

multitudes. The salvation of the common people was purchased at an easy

rate, if it be true that in one year twelve thousand men were baptized

at Rome, besides a proportionable number of women and children; and

that a white garment, with twenty pieces of gold had been promised by

the emperor to every convert."[B]

[Footnote A: Neander's Ch. His., vol. ii, p. 30.]

[Footnote B: Decline and Fall, ch. xx.]

Under all these circumstances it is small wonder if men exclaimed as

Augustine did somewhat later in his commentary on St. John--"How many

seek Jesus only that He may benefit them in earthly matters! One man

has a law suit, so he seeks the intercession of the clergy; another is

oppressed by his superior, so he takes refuge in the Church. Others

are seeking, one in this way and another in that, to be interceded

for in some quarter where they have but little influence themselves.

The Church is daily full of such persons. Seldom is Jesus sought for

Jesus' sake!"[A] After nicely balancing the possibility and probability

of those who came into the Church for present worldly advantage being

converted in time to a true faith in the Christian religion, Neander

says: "Beyond all doubt the number was far greater of those who grew

hardened in that worldly sense by which from the first they had

profaned a holy profession, and who were thus the means of introducing

into the Church a great mass of corruption."

[Footnote A: Augustine on St. John, tract 25, ch. 10.]

"Unhappily," he adds, "there were bishops whose only wish was to make

the conversion to Christianity a right easy thing for the pagans. * *

* * * Hence they baptized even those who lived in open sin, and who

plainly enough manifested that it was not their purpose to forsake it.

They imagined that when these were only baptized and introduced into

the fellowship of the Church, it was then time enough to admonish them

against sin."[A]

[Footnote A: Neander's Ch. Hist., vol. ii, p. 120.]

_The Evil Effects of the Nicean Program:_ Surely it was not

difficult among such a mass of unconverted members thus brought into

the Church to find elements that would foster the errors, both in

ethics and in doctrine, which about this time arose in the Church. It

is small wonder that it was well nigh publicly adopted in this age--as

we are informed by Mosheim--"That to deceive and lie is a virtue when

religion can be promoted by it, and that error in religion ought to

be visited with penalties and punishments." The first of these evils

resulted in the accumulation of that mass of myth and fable that

burdens the annals of the dark ages; the second established the "holy

inquisition," alike the shame of the Roman Catholic church and the

so-called Christian civilization she has influenced. "It is almost

incredible," continues Mosheim, speaking of the first evil referred

to, "what a mass of the most insipid fables, and what a host of pious

falsehoods have, through all the centuries, grown out of it, to the

great detriment of true religion. If some inquisitive person were

to examine the conduct and the writings of the great and most pious

teachers of this century, I fear he would find about all of them

infected with this leprosy." "Those idle fictions," he adds, "which a

regard for the Platonic philosophy, and for the prevailing opinions

of the day had induced most theologians to embrace, even before the

time of Constantine, were now in various ways confirmed, extended

and embellished. Hence it is that we see, on every side, evident

traces of excessive veneration for departed saints; of a purifying

fire for the soul when separated from the body; of the celibacy of

the clergy; of the worship of images and relics, and of many other

opinions, which in process of time almost banished the true religion,

or"--and here the Doctor perhaps remembered that he was a Protestant

and that his position as such would not admit of conceding the utter

subversion of the Christian religion, and hence added--"or at least

very much obscured and corrupted it." Genuine piety was supplanted by

a long train of superstitious observances, which originated partly

from opinions inconsiderately embraced, partly from a preposterous

disposition to adopt profane rites and combine them with Christian

worship, and partly from the natural predilection of mankind in general

for a splendid and ostentatious religion.

LESSON XXXVI.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

SPIRITUAL AND DOCTRINAL CHANGES.

ANALYSIS.

I. Spiritual Gifts.

1. Nature and Enjoyment of them by Early Christians.

2. Loss of them during the second and third Centuries.

II. The Christian Doctrine of Deity.

REFERENCES.

See the Authorities cited in the notes.

On the Christian Doctrine of Deity, see a Lecture "Jesus Christ the

Revelation of God," in Mormon Doctrine of Deity, ch. iv.

NOTES.

_The Loss of Spiritual Gifts:_ Not only did the moral declensions

in the Church which started soon after the demise of the Apostles,

proceed with accelerated pace after Constantine became the patron of

the Church, and with such resulting evils as I have pointed out, but

there was a like declension in the enjoyment of spiritual gifts in the

Church. It is well known that the Apostles promised the Holy Ghost to

those who received the Gospel, and the enjoyment of those supernatural

gifts which go with it. Indeed, Jesus Himself said in His last

commission to His disciples:

"Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He

that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth

not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In

my name shall they cast out devils: they shall speak with new tongues;

they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it

shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall

recover."[A]

[Footnote A: Mark xvi:15-18.]

Paul, in speaking of the spiritual gifts promised in the Gospel, says:

"Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there

are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are

diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all

in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to

profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to

another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by

the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another

discerning of spirits; to another diverse kinds of tongues; to another

the interpretation of tongues; but all these worketh that one and the

selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will."[A]

[Footnote A: I Cor. xii:1-11.]

It is well known that the spiritual gifts here enumerated were enjoyed

by the saints in the early Christian centuries; and especially in

Apostolic enjoyment of these gifts of the Spirit among the saints. Nor

is there any intimation of the discontinuance of them. On the contrary

it is reasonable to conclude that so long as the saints shall continue

in the enjoyment of the Holy Ghost, that long also will they enjoy the

spiritual gifts which proceed from a possession of Him. Moreover, "the

fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness,

goodness, faith, meekness, temperance; against such there is no law.

And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections

and lusts."[A]

[Footnote A: Gal. v. 22-24.]

_Effects of the Holy Spirit Upon Man:_ Such are the effects

of the operations of the Holy Ghost upon the nature of man. These

fruits of the Spirit indicate the change that the Spirit of God may

effect in human nature; by which that which is corrupted through sin

may be conformed to that which is pure and holy, according to the

working whereby the Spirit is able to subdue all things unto Himself,

in them that give place for His indwelling in their souls. This

effectual working of the Spirit in the souls of men, by which they

were transformed from vileness to holiness, was the boast of the early

saints. And upon reflection all will concede that the victories of the

Spirit in reforming the lives of men and making them in their very

nature conform to the likeness of Christ in righteousness, are more to

be desired and more to be celebrated than those victories which are

physical or intellectual merely in their nature. Indeed these latter

fruits of the Spirit derive their chief value from the extent to which

they contribute to the production of the former--that is, to the extent

that they establish men in the faith, enable them to crucify the flesh

with the lusts thereof, and help them to live in harmony with the

sweet influence of the Spirit of God. When men live in harmony with

that Spirit there will righteousness obtain; there will love abound;

there will the Gospel of Christ appear triumphant. Where these fruits

do not appear, there the Gospel of Christ is not; there the powers of

darkness for the time being, are triumphant. Yet notwithstanding this

promise concerning the enjoyment of the spiritual gifts of the Gospel,

the evidence is abundant and conclusive that when all the Apostles were

deceased, then there was a marked declension in the manifestations

of the spiritual powers of the Gospel. "With the close of the New

Testament records," says Dr. Phillip Smith, author of The Student's

Ecclesiastical History, "and the death of the last surviving Apostle,

the history of the Church passes from its sacred to its purely human

phase. The miraculous gifts which attested the divine mission of the

Apostles ceased; not indeed by any formal record of their withdrawal,

but by the clear evidence that they were possesed no longer."[A]

[Footnote A: Students' Ecclesiastical History, vol. i, p. 62.]

Dr. Jortin bears witness to the same fact. He says:

"The words of Eusebius intimate that he thought those extraordinary

powers to be, at least, not very common afterwards--(i. e., the

beginning of the second century). 'They went about,' says he, 'with

God's co-operative grace, for even then the divine Spirit performed

many miracles by them.' * * * * * This brings the probability of

miracles down to the beginning of the second century, in the middle

of which Justin Martyr says: 'There are prophetic gifts among us even

until now:' and amongst these gifts he reckons up miraculous powers,

as healing the sick, casting out evil spirits, etc. His words imply

an opinion that such gifts were not only exercised in his time, but

had been continued down to his time, and he may be justly supposed to

speak the sense of his contemporary Christians; and that is all that

I cite him for. It seems probable that if we had a full and authentic

history of the propagation of the Gospel, from the time of the Apostles

to the middle of the second century, composed by eye witnesses and by

the preachers of Christianity, we should find miracles wrought for the

conversion of the pagans. But from A. D. 70 to 150 is a dark interval,

and we have very short accounts of the transactions of those days,

unless we should accept the groundless rumors and frivolous tales."[A]

[Footnote A: Jortin's Eccl. Hist., vol. I, pp. 134-6.]

_Spiritual Gifts in the Second Century:_ So, also, Dr. Mosheim,

speaking of the second century, and after commenting on the extent to

which the extraordinary divine gifts contributed to the extension of

the limits of the Church, says: "The gift of foreign tongues appears

to have gradually ceased, as soon as many nations became enlightened

with the truth; * * * but the other gifts with which God favored the

rising Church of Christ were, as we learn from numerous testimonies of

the ancients, still conferred upon particular persons here and there."

And when writing of the fourth and succeeding centuries, he, too, bears

witness of the declension and final cessation of these spiritual powers

among the Christians; and, indeed, the most of our ecclesiastical

writers form the same conclusion.

Thus the Christians lost the enjoyment of the spiritual gifts of the

Gospel, such as inspired dreams, prophecies, healings, speaking in new

tongues, ministering of angels, and, most to be lamented of all, direct

revelation from God, by which the will of God might be made known to

His people and His Church preserved from error, from decadence, and

from destruction: and by the absence of these spiritual gifts and

powers among the Christians of the third and fourth centuries, we may

know that a mere man-made religion, having indeed a form of godliness,

but denying the power thereof, had succeeded to the spiritually gifted

religion of Jesus Christ, wherein the power of God is ever present and

outwardly as well as inwardly manifested.

_The Christian Doctrine of God:_ In nothing perhaps was there

a wider departure from the real truth of Christianity than in the

doctrine concerning God defined by the general council of the Church

held within the lifetime of Constantine, and which, in fact, he

assembled upon his own authority. This was the celebrated Council of

Nicea in Bithynia, Asia Minor, held in 325 A. D. The main purpose for

which the first general Council of the Church was assembled was to

settle a dispute between one Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria, and his

bishop. Alexander, of the same city, respecting the doctrine of the

Godhead. The dispute proved to be far-reaching in its effects, and for

three hundred years the rivalry of the contending factions disturbed

the peace of Christendom. We shall have clearer conceptions of the

subject, however, and be better able to judge of the extent to which

there was a departure from the true doctrine respecting the Godhead, by

the definitions formulated and enforced upon the Church by the Council

of Nicea, if we first consider the doctrine of the Godhead as found in

the Testament.

The existence of God both Jesus and the Apostles accepted as a fact.

In all the teachings of the former He nowhere seeks to prove God's

existence. He assumes that, and proceeds from that basis with His

doctrine. He declares the fact that God was His Father, and frequently

calls Himself the Son of God.[A] After His resurrection and departure

into heaven, the Apostles taught that He, the Son of God, was with God

the Father in the beginning; that He, as well as the Father, was God;

that under the direction of the Father He was the Creator of world;

that without Him was not anything made that was made.[B] That in Him

dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead body;[C] and that He was the

express image of the Father's person.[D] Jesus Himself taught that He

and the Father were one;[E] that whosoever had seen Him had seen the

Father also;[F] that it was part of His mission to reveal God, the

Father, through His own personality: for as was the Son, so too was the

Father.[G] Hence Jesus was God manifested in flesh--a revelation of God

to the world.[H] That is, a revelation not only of the being of God,

but of the kind of being God is.

[Footnote A: John x; Matt, xxvii; Mark xiv:61, 62.]

[Footnote B: For all of which see John i:1-4, 14; Heb. i:1-3.]

[Footnote C: Cor. i:15-19, and ii:9.]

[Footnote D: John x:30; xvii:11-22.]

[Footnote E: John xiv:9.]

[Footnote F: John xiv:1-9; John i:18.]

[Footnote G: Tim. iii:16.]

[Footnote H: John xiv:10, 11, 19, 20; also John xvii.]

Jesus also taught (and in doing so showed in what the "oneness" of

Himself and His Father consisted) that the disciples might be one

with Him, and also one with each other, as He and the Father were

one.[A] Not one in person--not all merged into one individual, and

all distinctions of personality lost; but one in mind, in knowledge,

in love, in will--one by reason of the indwelling in all of the one

spirit, even as the mind and will of God the Father was also in Jesus

Christ.[B]

[Footnote A: Eph. iii:14-19.]

[Footnote B: Acts v:1-14. To lie to the Holy Ghost is to lie to God,

because the Holy Ghost is God.]

The Holy Ghost, too, was upheld by the Christian religion to be God.

Jesus ascribed to Him a distinct personality; as proceeding from

the Father; as sent forth in the name of the Son, as feeling love;

experiencing grief; as forbidding; as abiding; as teaching; as bearing

witness; as appointing to work: and as interceding for men. All of

which clearly establishes for Him a personality.

_Distinct Personalities of Father, Son and Holy Ghost:_ The

distinct personality of these three individual Gods (united however

into one Godhead, or Divine Council), was made apparent at the baptism

of Jesus; for as He, God the Son, came up out of the water from His

baptism at the hands of John, a manifestation of the presence of the

Holy Ghost was given in the sign of the dove which rested upon Jesus,

while out of the glory of heaven the voice of God the Father was heard

saying, "This," referring to Jesus, "is my beloved Son, in whom I am

well pleased." The distinctness of the personality of each member of

the Godhead is also shown by the commandment to baptize those who

believe in the Gospel equally in the name of each person of the Holy

Trinity. That is, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the

Holy Ghost.[A] And again, also in the Apostolic benediction, viz., "The

grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion

of the Holy Ghost, be with you all."[B]

[Footnote A: Matt. xxviii:19, 20.]

[Footnote B: II Cor. xiii:14.]

These three personages constitute the Christian Godhead, the Holy

Trinity. In early Christian theology they were regarded as the Supreme

Governing and Creating Power in heaven and in earth. Of which Trinity

the Father was worshiped in the name of the Son, while the Holy Ghost

bore record of both the Father and the Son. And though the Holy Trinity

was made up of three distinct persons, yet did they constitute but one

Godhead, or Supreme Governing Power.

_The Doctrine That Man Was Made in the Image of God:_ This outline

of the doctrine of God, derived from the New Testament, represents Him

as anthropomorphic; that is, like man in form, and possessed of human

characteristics. It reaffirms the old doctrine found in the book of

Genesis, viz., that man is created in the image of God, and after His

likeness. The outline of New Testament doctrine of God also ascribes

to Him what are called human attributes and feelings; but as in the

foregoing we first say that God is represented as being in human form,

and then to get the exact truth say: "Or, rather, man was created in

the image and likeness of God," so in this latter case, when we have

said that the doctrine of the New Testament ascribes human attributes

and feelings to God, to get the exact truth we should say: "Or, rather,

man possesses the attributes of God"--the attributes of knowing,

willing, judging, loving, etc.--though it should be stated, of course,

that man does not possess these attributes in their perfection, as God

does. The same may also be said of the physical perfections. While

man has been created in the image and likeness of God, yet our bodies

in their present state of imperfection--sometimes stunted in growth,

diseased, subject to sickness, wasting, decay and death--cannot be

said to be like God's glorious, perfect physical body; yet we have the

Divine word that our bodies shall be like His:

"For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the

Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body, that it

may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working

whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself."[A]

[Footnote A: Phil. iii:20, 21.]

So also the attributes of the spirit of man--the attributes of the mind

--now imperfect, impure, unholy, and limited in the range of vision and

apprehension of things, owing largely to the conditions in which man

finds himself placed in this earth-life (and all for a wise purpose

in God's economy); yet the time will come that it will be with the

spirit as with the body; for God shall change our vile spirit that it

may be fashioned like unto His own glorious spirit, "according to the

working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself."

That whereas now we see only as through a glass, darkly, then we shall

see as we are seen; that whereas now we know but in part, then we shall

know even as we are known.[A]

[Footnote A: The foregoing doctrine of God, taught to the Christians

in Apostolic times, awakened their pious reverence without exciting

their curiosity. They dealt with no metaphysical abstractions, but were

contented to accept the teachings of the Apostles in humble faith, and

believed that Jesus Christ was the complete manifestation of Deity, and

the express image of God His Father; and hence a revelation to them of

God; while the Holy Ghost they accepted as God's witness and messenger

to them.]

LESSON XXXVII.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

CORRUPTION OF THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF DEITY.

ANALYSIS.

I. Early Pagan Views of Deity.

II. Adoption of Pagan Views by Early Christians.

III. The Paganization of Christian Doctrine Expressed--Creed of St.

Athanasius.

REFERENCES.

See Mormon Doctrine of Deity ch. iv; also authorities cited in the

notes.

NOTES.

_Pagan Trinities:_ Christianity, as is well known, came in contact

with other doctrines concerning Deity. It was almost immediately

brought in touch with the mysticism of the Orient and also with the

philosophies of the Greeks, who took so much delight in intellectual

subtleties. In the Oriental philosophies, and in the Greek philosophy,

there was conceived the idea of a trinity in Deity; an idea which

possibly may have come down from the doctrines revealed to the

patriarchs concerning the Godhead, but which had been corrupted and

rendered unintelligible by the vain philosophizings of men. In some of

the Oriental systems the trinity or Trimurti consisted of Brahma, the

Creator; Vishnu, the Preserver; and Siva, the Destroyer. It will be

seen, however, that this trinity is not necessarily one of persons, or

individuals, but may be one of attributes, qualities, or even a trinity

of functions in one being; and in this way it is usually understood.[A]

[Footnote A: See Shedd's History of Christian Doctrine, vol. i, p. 342,

et seq. and note.]

Plato's trinity is sometimes stated in the terms, "First Cause; Reason,

or Logos; and Soul of the Universe;" but more commonly in these:

"Goodness, Intellect, and Will." The nature of the Greek trinity has

long been a matter of contention among the learned, and one indeed

that is not settled to this day. Is there indicated in his system

"a true and proper tri-personality, or merely a personification of

three impersonalities," a trinity of attributes or functions? The

answers to these questions are varied, and would require too much

space for consideration here. Christians having been taught to accept

the New Testament doctrine of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as

constituting one Godhead, Christianity no sooner came in contact with

the philosophies of the Greeks and Egyptians than there was an effort

made to identify the Christian trinity with that of the Greek and other

philosophies. The temptation to do this was very great. Christianity

was a proscribed religion and its followers detested. Whenever it

could be shown, therefore, that under new symbols the Church really

taught the same doctrines that the old philosophers--who were held in

esteem--did, it was regarded as a distinct gain to Christianity.

_Early Christian Disputation on the Doctrine of Deity:_ The mere

fact of Christianity teaching a trinity of any kind was a sufficient

basis of comparison, under the temptation offered, and hence in a

short time we have the alleged followers of Christ involved in all

the metaphysical disputations of the age. The chief difficulty in

those speculations was to define the nature of the Logos, or Word of

God; a title that is given to our Savior by the Apostle St. John, be

it remembered. Adopting absolute "being" as the postulate of their

conception of God, absolute oneness, and therefore absolute singleness,

their difficulties arose in trying to reconcile the existence of three

persons in the Godhead to the postulate of unity. The disputations were

carried on chiefly concerning Christ, the "Word." in His relationship

to the Godhead; and the disputants concerned themselves with such

questions as these: "Is Jesus the Word?" "If He be the Word, did He

emanate from God in time or before time?" "If He emanated from God, is

He co-eternal and of the same, that is identical, substance with Him,

or merely of a similar substance?" "Is He distinct from the Father,

that is, separate from Him, or is he not?" "Is He made or begotten?"

"Can He beget in His turn?" "Has He paternity, or productive virtue

without paternity?" Similar questions were asked as to the other Person

of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.

_The Arian Controversy:_ These questions were violently agitated

at Alexandria by the bishop of that city, Alexander, and one of the

presbyters, Arius, 318-321 A. D. The controversy spread throughout

Christendom, and culminated finally in the Council at Nicea, 325 A.

D. Arius held the doctrine that the Logos or Word was a dependent

or spontaneous production created out of nothing by the will of the

Father; hence the Son of God, by whom all things were made, begotten

before all worlds; but there had been a time when the Logos was not;

and also He was of a substance, however similar it might be, different

from the Father. This doctrine, in the minds of the opponents of Arius,

detracted from the divine nature of Christ; in fact, denied Him true

Deity and relegated Him to the position of a creature, against which

the piety of a large number of Christians rebelled. After six years of

hot disputation and frequent appeals by the contestants to the emperor,

the Council of Nicea was assembled and the mysteries of the Christian

faith submitted to public debate, a portion of the time, at least, in

the presence of the emperor, who, to some extent, seemed to exercise

the functions of president over the assembly. The doctrine of Arius

was condemned, and after "long deliberations, among struggles, and

scrupulous examinations," the following creed was adopted:

"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, creator of all things

visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,

only-begotten of the Father, that is, of the 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, by whom all things were

made in heaven and in earth, who for us men and for our salvation came

down from heaven, was incarnate, was made man, suffered, rose again the

third day, ascended into the heavens, and He will come to judge the

living and the dead; and in the Holy Ghost. Those who say there was a

time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten, and He

was made of nothing (he was created), or who say that He is of another

hypostatis, or of another substance (than the Father), or that the

Son of God is created, that He is mutable, or subject to change, the

Catholic church anathematizes."[A]

[Footnote A: Hist. Christian Councils (Hefele), p. 294.]

Arius himself was condemned as a heretic and banished into one of the

remote provinces; Illyricum, his friends and disciples, branded by law

with the idious name of "Porphyrians," because it is supposed that

Arius, like Porphyry, had sought to injure Christianity. His writings

were condemned to the flames and a capital punishment was pronounced

against those in whose possession they should be found. Three years

later, however, through the influence of the women at the imperial

court, Constantine softened in his demeanor towards Arius and his

followers. The exiles were recalled and Arius himself was received at

court and his faith approved by a synod of prelates and presbyters at

Jerusalem; but on the day that he was to be publicly received in the

cathedral church at Constantinople, by the order of the emperor, who,

by the way, received the sacrament at the hands of Arius, he expired

under circumstances which have led many to believe that other means

than the prayers of the orthodox against him were the cause of his

death. The leaders of the orthodox party, Athanasius of Alexandria.

Eustathius of Antioch, and Paul of Constantinople, were now to feel

the wrath of the first Christian emperor. They were deposed on various

occasions and by the sentence of numerous councils, and banished into

distant provinces. In fact, so far from the adoption of the Nicean

creed ending the conflict which had arisen, it was more like the

opening of that controversy which agitated Christendom for so long, and

resulted in so many shameful conflicts. Councils were arrayed against

councils, and though they never could convince one another of error,

they never failed, in the spirit of such Christian charity as was

then extant, to close their decrees with curses. Votes were bartered

for and purchased in those councils, and the facts justify the latent

sarcasm in Gibbon's remark, that "the cause of truth and justice

was promoted by the influence of gold." There were persecutions and

counter-persecutions, as now one party and then the other prevailed;

there were assassinations and bloody battles over this doctrine of

Deity, the accounts of which fill, as they also disgrace, our Christian

annals. The creed which was adopted at Nicea, however, became the

settled doctrine of orthodox Christendom, and remains so to this day.

_The Athanasian Creed:_ It is difficult to determine which is

really the worst, the creed itself or the explanations of it. At

any rate, we do not clearly see the impiety of its doctrines until

we listen to the explanations that have been made of it. Athanasius

himself has left on record a creed explanatory of the one adopted

at Nicea. True, among the learned, many doubt Athanasius being the

author of the creed which bears his name; but, however much doubt may

be thrown upon that question, no one hesitates to accept it as the

orthodox explanation of the doctrine of Deity, and, in fact, it is

accepted as one of the important symbols of the Christian faith, and is

as follows:

"We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither

confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one

person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy

Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is all one:

the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such

is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father incomprehensible,

the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The

Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet

there are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not

three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreate, but one uncreate and one

incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty,

and the Holy Ghost almighty; and yet they are not three almighties, but

one almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost

is God; and yet there are not three Gods, but one God."

As already stated, this creed of St. Athanasius is accepted as one of

the symbols of the orthodox Christian faith. It is understood that

these two creeds teach that God is incoporeal; that is to say, an

immaterial being. The Catholic church says: "There is but one God, the

creator of heaven and earth, the supreme incoporeal, uncreated being,

who exists of Himself and is infinite in all His attributes."[A] While

the Church of England teaches in her articles of faith "that there is

but one living and true God, everlasting, without body,[B] parts, or

passions, of infinite power, wisdom and goodness." This view of God

as an incoporeal, immaterial, bodiless, partless, passionless being

is now and has been from the days of the great apostasy from God and

Christ, in the second and third centuries, the doctrine of Deity

generally accepted by apostate Christendom. The simple doctrine of the

Christian Godhead, set forth in the New Testament is corrupted by the

meaningless jargon of these creeds, and their explanations; and the

learned who profess a belief of them are wandering in the darkness of

the mysticisms of the old pagan philosophies. No wonder that Athanasius

himself, whom Gibbon with a quiet sarcasm calls the most sagacious

of the Christian theologians, candidly confesses that whenever he

forced his understanding to meditate on the divinity of the Logos (and

which, of course, involved the whole doctrine of the Godhead), his

"toilsome and unavailing efforts recoiled on themselves; that the more

he thought, the less he comprehended: and the more he wrote, the less

capable was he of expressing his thoughts!" It is a fine passage with

which Gibbon closes his reflections upon this subject, and hence I

shall give it place here:

[Footnote A: Catholic Belief (Bruno), p. 1.]

[Footnote B: i.e., without materiality.]

"In every step of the inquiry, we are compelled to feel and acknowledge

the immeasurable disproportion between the size of the object and the

capacity of the human mind. We may try to abstract the notions of time,

of space, and of matter, which so closely adhere to all the perceptions

of our experimental knowledge; but as soon as we presume to reason of

infinite substance, or spiritual generation; as often as we deduce any

positive conclusions from a negative idea, we are involved in darkness,

perplexity, and inevitable contradiction."[A]

[Footnote A: Decline and Fall, ch. xxi.]

Recurrence to the New Testament doctrine of God, and a comparison of

it with the doctrine of Deity set forth in the Nicean and Athanasian

creeds, will exhibit the wide departure--the absolute apostasy--that

has taken place in respect of this most fundamental of all doctrines of

religion--the doctrine of God. Truly "Christians" back in those early

Christian centuries denied the Lord that brought them,[A] and turned

literally to fables. They enthroned a conception of a negative idea of

"being," which can stand in no possible relationship to man, nor man to

it; and to this they ascribe divine attributes and give it title, knee

and adoration which belong to God alone. Small wonder that the angel

whom John saw flying in the midst of heaven having the everlasting

Gospel to commit to the earth in the hour of God's judgment, in the

last days, should cry aloud to the inhabitants of the earth, saying,

"Fear God and give glory to Him; * * * * * * and worship Him that made

heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of water"[B]--small

wonder, I repeat, that such should be part of his great message, for

truly the whole world had departed from the worship of the true and

living God.

[Footnote A: II Peter ii:1.]

[Footnote B: Rev. xiv:6, 7.]

LESSON XXXVIII.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST DISPLACED BY CHURCHES OF MEN.

ANALYSIS

I. The Christian Church.

II. The Roman Hierarchy.

III. Corruption of the Ministry.

REFERENCES.

I Cor. xii: Eph. iv. The Gospel ch. xxii. Outlines of Ecclesiastical

History, Section viii, 15-31 and note 5 and 6 in that section. See also

authorities cited in notes New Witness for God, ch. iv.

NOTES

_The Necessity of a Church:_ The departure from the form and

spirit of church government was no less marked than the moral and

spiritual declension among the Christians of the early centuries of

the era, or the departure from the true doctrine of Deity. Beyond

filling the vacancy in the council of the Twelve Apostles, occasioned

by the fall of Judas, there is no clear and satisfactory evidence that

other successors of the Apostles were ever chosen, though the fair

implication is that the organization of the Church, with Apostles,

Prophets, Evangelists, Seventies, Bishops, Teachers, etc., was to be

perpetuated as at first established. At least this organization was

given for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry,

until the saints should come to a unity of the faith and knowledge

of the Son of God;[A] so that the plain inference is that as long as

there are saints to be perfected, or edified, or united, or brought

to the knowledge of God; as long as there is work for a ministry, or

the necessity of a Church, through the agency of which the truth is to

be taught to the world, and the lives of those who accept the truth

perfected, so long will it be necessary to perpetuate the organization

given of God for the achievement of those high purposes. To say

that man could devise a better organization for the accomplishment

of these several objects would be to challenge the wisdom of God.

To say that any of these means provided in the Church organization

could be dispensed with, would be to contradict the plain teaching of

Scripture, which, in this very connection forbids the eye to say to

the hand, I have no need of thee; or the head to the feet, I have no

need of you; that is, one officer of the Church may not say to another

officer, I have no need of thee.[B] The doctrine of Scripture is that

all the officers of the Church, together with their several gifts,

are essential to the Church of Christ; essential to its perfection;

essential to the performance of the sacred functions assigned to it.

Yet it must be conceded that the organization described in the New

Testament did not survive the last of the Apostles; or preserve much

beyond that time the spirit which the Master impressed upon it.[C]

[Footnote A: I Cor. xii; Eph. iv.]

[Footnote B: Cor. xii.]

[Footnote C: Matt. xx.]

_Central Authority in the Christian Church:_ The Apostles,

while they lived, exercised a general jurisdiction over the Church,

to which all submitted without question. In the exercise of their

general authority they organized branches of the Church, appointed

Elders or Bishops to take the oversight of them, and instructed them

in Church government, and discipline, and doctrine. After the demise

of the Apostles, there seems to have been left no central authority to

exercise the functions of general supervision or presidency over the

entire Church, such as the Twelve had exercised. That center of unity,

together with the power thereof, seems to have vanished from the Church

with the Apostles. The Bishops and some subordinate officers remained,

it is true, but these were local, not general authorities. The Church

in each city or district of country after the Apostolic age seems to

have been regarded as a sort of independent republic of itself, without

any bond of consociation with any other church beyond that which was

the result of possessing a common faith in Christianity, which bond was

one of sympathy merely, not of hierachical association.

_Rise of the Roman Hierarchy:_ The rise of the hierarchy, with

the centralization of its powers in the Bishop of Rome, and which

ultimately dominated the whole Church, and not only the Church but,

directly and indirectly, the western civilized world, came later, and

was of gradual development; and when it was finally established, it

was not the organization described in the New Testament, the Church

with an inspired Priesthood of Apostles, and Prophets, Evangelists,

Seventies and Pastors, etc., but a hierarchy fashioned by man out of

such remnants of Church organization as survived Apostolic times.

As the number of Christians increased, the bishops of large cities

organized new branches of the Church in the suburbs of their cities,

and in the towns and villages adjacent, and ordained for them a

ministry. It was but natural perhaps that the officers of these new

branches of the Church, both the bishops and subordinate clergy, should

look to the one who had brought them into existence as a source of

general presiding authority over them. And hence in time arose what

were called metropolitan bishops, bishops who had under their direction

the bishops of neighboring towns and villages--bishops of the "suburbs

and the fields," they were sometimes called--and perhaps of the entire

province of which the metropolitan city was recognized as the center.

As the bishop of the metropolis, or of a province, became the center

of ecclesiastical unity for that province, so too in time, the bishops

of cities which were the capitals of the three great divisions of the

empire--Antioch, Alexandria and Rome--asserted a superior dignity

over metropolitan bishops. It was in these cities that the exarchs

of the empire resided, and if we may trust the authority of Neander.

the bishops of these cities also, at first, took that title, but

later made choice of the more ecclesiastical name of Patriarch.[A] In

addition to the importance attached to these cities as the capitals

of the great divisions of the empire, a superior dignity in the minds

of Christians attached to the Churches founded by the Apostles as the

surest depositories of the Apostolic teaching and doctrine; and as

Apostolic origin could be claimed for the churches in the three cities

named, it is not surprising, when their political importance is added,

that the bishops of those cities claimed superior dignity for their

office, and united under their jurisdiction the metropolitan bishops

of the respective three great divisions of the empire. Subsequently

the same title was granted to the bishop of Jerusalem, and to the

bishop of Constantinople; to the former it was granted in virtue of

the peculiar sanctity which attaches to Jerusalem, and the fact that

the first Christian Church was planted there; to the latter, because

it was made the capital of the empire, "New Rome;" and because it was

peculiarly the city of the first imperial patron of Christianity. Thus

five patriarchates were established.

[Footnote A: Neander Ch. Hist. vol. ii, p. 196.]

Through circumstances too numerous and intricate to detail here, the

bishops of Rome changed the primacy of mere precedence which had been

accorded them among associated brethren, to a primacy of power and

jurisdiction, which resulted in the bishops of Rome becoming recognized

as the supreme head of the Christian Church; and the papacy entered

upon that marvelous career which by the impartial can but be regarded

as the shame of the Christian name.

_Corruption of the Ministry:_ Attention has already been called

to the corruptions which prevailed in that period of peace in the

closing decades of the third century, where bishops are represented

as being full of pride and ostentation; as deserting the law of piety

and being inflamed against each other with mutual strifes, only

accumulating quarrels, threats, rivalships, hostilities, hatreds

towards each other, and only anxious to assert the Church government as

a kind of sovereignty for themselves. And all this when Christianity

was a proscribed religion; and when the Church, and especially its

leaders, the bishops, were liable to severest persecution. Reason and

a due consideration of human nature both combined to fix upon us the

conviction that the bitterness of rivalry, of hatred, of ambition,

must have greatly increased when metropolitan and patriarchal bishops,

formerly proscribed and hunted like wild beasts, rose to the dignity

of civil princes, and took upon them more and ever more of the spirit

of worldliness as wealth and honor and popular applause were made the

accompaniments of their ecclesiastical offices. History confirms what

reason and a knowledge of human nature suggests; for the history of the

Church after the elevation of proscribed Christianity to the dignity of

the state religion of the Roman empire, is but the melancholy history

of unholy ambition, jealousies, strifes, contentions, murders, and

wars between rival bishops and their adherents on the one hand; and

equally unholy struggles for worldly advantages with kings and rulers

of this world on the other. The spirit that actuated the bishops of

the Church after their elevation through the policy of Constantine is

admirably illustrated by a remark of Gregory of Nazianzus, made in

Constantinople, 380 A. D., when deploring the evils of the Church. He

says:

"Would to heaven there were no primacy, no eminence of place, and no

tyrannical precedence of rank; that we might be known by eminence of

virtue alone. But, as the case now stands, the distinction of a seat

at the right hand or the left, or in the middle; at a higher or a

lower place; of going before or aside of each other, has given rise to

many disorders among us, to no salutary purpose whatever, and plunged

multitudes in ruin."[A]

[Footnote A: This remark is quoted by Neander, Ch. Hist., vol. ii, p.

198.]

_The Fatal Gift of a Christian Emperor:_ Matters in Church

government did not mend with time, but grew worse and worse.

Pride increased; rivalship between contending prelates grew more

imbittered; ambition mounted higher and ever higher in the breasts

of the shepherds of the flock of Christ. In His association with His

Apostles--to whom He committed the keys of His kingdom--the Master had

discouraged ambition and had said that he who would be great among

His followers must be their minister; and whosoever would be chief

among them, was to be their servant; and the government of His Church

was to be distinct in these particulars from the governments of this

world.[A] But all in vain were the instructions of Messiah to the

worldly; ambitious prelates of an apostate Christianity had gradually

supplanted the religion of Jesus Christs; and henceforth we may see in

that hierarchy which usurped the place of the Church of Christ from

the time of Constantine, all the spirit of pride, envy, jealousy,

contention, strife, selfishness, bitterness, and unholy ambition which

characterized the princes and rulers of this world; attended, too,

with all the evils that wait upon these passions of rulers when once

let loose, viz., secret plottings, usurpations of authority, corrupt

elections, cruel imprisonments, banishments, secret and public murders,

and wars; all undertaken, of course, in the interest of the gentle

religion of Christ, and the maintenance of that authority which is

based on love, and whose control over men is through the means of

persuasion and the teaching of true knowledge. Is it not evident that

the kingdom of peace, wherein was to dwell righteousness and truth,

had become merely one of the kingdoms of this world? And were not the

Fratriceli of the thirteenth century, though denounced as heretics,

right when they loudly proclaimed their conviction that "the fatal

gift of a Christian emperor had been the doom of the true Christian

religion?"

[Footnote A: Matt. xx:26, 27.]

LESSON XXXIX.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

THE TESTIMONY OF PROPHECY.

ANALYSIS.

I. Predictions of the New Testament Prophets.

II. Paul's Great Prophecy to the Thessalonians.

III. The Prophecy of Isaiah on Breaking the "Everlasting Covenant."

IV. Concluding Reflections on the Whole Subject of the Dispensations.

REFERENCES.

Besides the authorities cited in the notes see "Outlines Ecclesiastical

History," Section vii. New Witness for God, chapter vi.

NOTES

_What is Prophecy but History Reversed:_ "What is prophecy but

history reversed?" Nothing. Prophecy is a record of things before they

take place. History is a record of them after they have occurred;

and of the two prophecy is more to be trusted for its accuracy than

history; for the reason that it has its source the unerring inspiration

of God; while history--except in the case of inspired historians--is

colored by the favor or prejudice of the writer, depends for its

exactness upon the point of view from which he looks upon the events;

and is likely to be marred in a thousand ways by the influences

surrounding him--party considerations, national interest or prejudice;

supposed influence upon present conditions and future prospects--all

these things may interfere with history; but prophecy is free from such

influences. Historians are self-constituted, or appointed by men; but

prophets are chosen of God. Selected by divine wisdom, and illuminated

by that spirit which shows things that are to come, prophets have

revealed to them so much of the future as God would have men to know,

and the inspired writers record it for the enlightenment or warning of

mankind, with out the coloring or distortion so liable to mar the work

of the historian. Thus Moses recorded what the history of Israel would

be on condition of their obedience to God; and what it would be if they

were disobedient. Israel was disobedient, and historians have exhausted

their art in attempts to tell of their disobedience and suffering;

but neither in vividness nor accuracy to the histories compare with

the prophecy. So with the prophecy of Daniel in regard to the rise

and succession of the great political powers that should dominate the

earth, and the final triumph of thhe Kingdom of God. So with well nigh

all of the prophecies. With these observations upon the trustworthiness

of prophecy it is my purpose to show that prophecy no less than the

facts of history, sustains the conclusion arrived at on the apostasy

from the Christian religion, and the destruction of the Christian

Church." (New Witness for God, pp. 113-4).

_Testimony of Prophecy to the Universal Apostasy:_ Clear as the

fact is made in this historical review that there was a complete and

universal apostasy from the religion established in the Dispensation of

the Meridian of Time; and clear as is the proof from the same review

that the Church of Christ then established was destroyed, there is

yet another line of evidence pointing to the same solemn fact that I

cannot altogether omit, though often used in our literature, viz., the

testimony of prophecy to the apostasy from the Christian religion, and

the destruction of the Church of Christ.

The Apostles themselves through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost were

fully aware that such an apostasy would take place, as the following

several predictions bear witness: Paul passing through Ephesus

admonished the Elders of that Church to take heed to thhe flock "over

which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers; * * * * * 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."[A]

[Footnote A: Acts xx:28-30.]

_Paul's Predictions:_ TO Timothy Paul said: "The Spirit speaketh

expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,

giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking

lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats."[A] And

again: "I charge the to preach the word; be instant in season, out of

season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but

after their own lusts they shall heap to themselves teachers, having

itching ears, and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and

shall be turned unto fables."[B]

[Footnote A: I Tim. iv:1, 2, 3.]

[Footnote B: II Tim. iv:1, 2, 3, 4.]

And still again he said to Timothy: "This know also, that in the last

days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own

selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents,

unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce breakers, false

accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of

God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from

such turn away."[A]

[Footnote A: II Tim. iii:1-5.]

Peter's prophecy concerning the rise of false teachers among the

saints, who privately would bring in damnable heresies, even denying

the Lord who bought them, and by reason of whom the way of truth would

be evil spoken of, we have already quoted.[A]

[Footnote A: See page xlviii, and II Peter i:3.]

_Paul's Prophecy to the Thessalonians:_ Paul, in his second

epistle to the Thessalonians, gives utterance to a prophecy which

covers the whole ground of the absolute and universal apostasy of

Christendom. A prophecy which, if the apostasy of so-called Christendom

has not been complete and universal, proves beyond all question that

the great Apostle of the Gentiles is a false prophet; or if fulfilled,

then it proves that the Church of Christ, so far as it existed in the

earth, was to be destroyed; that another and different religion was

to be substituted for the Christian religion; that another church,

one founded by men, was to take the place of the Church of Christ, a

worldly church dominated by the very spirit of Lucifer, who, under its

rule, would oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God;

and sit in the temple of God, showing himself, so far as this world

is concerned, that he is God. Moreover, Paul declared in this very

prophecy I am about to quote that the forces which would ultimately

bring to pass this universal apostasy from the Christian religion--"the

mystery of iniquity"--was already at work even in his day. With this

introduction, which is also to be considered as my comment upon and

interpretation of the passage, I quote Paul's great prediction on the

universal Apostasy.

Now we beseech you brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

and by our gathering together unto Him, that ye be not soon shaken in

mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as

from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you

by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling

away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the Son of Perdition; who

opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is

worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing

himself that he is God. Remember yet not, that, when I was yet with

you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he

might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already

work: only he who now letteth (hindereth) will let (hinder), until he

be taken out of the way. And then shall that wicked be revealed, whom

the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy

with the brightness of His coming: even him whose coming is after the

working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with

all deceiveableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because

they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And

for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should

believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believe not the truth,

but had pleasure in uprighteousness.[A]

[Footnote A: II Thes. ii:1-12.]

_Isaiah's Great Prophecy:_ A more ancient prophet than Paul also

predicted a like condition of the world in the last days. "Behold,"

says Isaiah, "the Lord maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste,

and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants

thereof. And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest. * *

* * * The land shall be utterly emptied and utterly spoiled: for the

Lord hath spoken this word. The earth mourneth and fadeth away, the

world languisheth and fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do

languish. The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof;

because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken

the everlasting covenant. Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth,

and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of

the earth are burned, and few men left."[A]

[Footnote A: Isaiah xxiv:1-16.]

Clearly all this prophecy of Isaiah's has not yet been fulfilled; for

the earth, however much it may have been defiled under the inhabitants

thereof, has not yet been burned, and but few men left. That is a

judgment that still hangs over the world; and will come upon it as

sure as the Lord has spoken the word; and that, too, because men have

transgressed the laws; because they have changed the ordinances;

because they have broken--not the covenant made with Moses, or with

Abraham--but because they have broken the everlasting covenant; of

which covenant the blood of Christ is the sign and seal.[A] in other

words, they have broken the Gospel covenant--departed from the Gospel

faith--hence the predicted judgment.

[Footnote A: Heb. xiii:10.]

Yet a few shall escape. As the prophet in another place in this

remarkable chapter says--referring to the general desolation of the

earth and its inhabitants--"When thus it shall be in the midst of the

land among the people, there shall be as the shaking of an olive tree,

and as the gleaning of grapes when the vintage is done. They shall lift

up their voices, they shall sing for the majesty of the Lord, they

shall cry aloud from the sea. From which it is to be understood that

there will be a few even in those disastrous times, whose righteousness

will call down the favor of God. And though the earth shall reel to and

fro like a drunkard, and the transgressions thereof shall be heavy upon

it; though the Lord shall punish the host of the high ones that are on

high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth; though as prisoners

they shall be gathered into the pit, and will not be visited for many

days; though the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, yet

shall the Lord of Hosts reign in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and

before his ancients gloriously." (Isaiah xxiv:20-23.)

If I did not think these two great prophecies foretold completely the

universal apostasy of Christendom, I should be tempted to enter into

the consideration of the great prophecies to be found in the book

of Daniel and the book of Revelation, and show how to both of these

prophets, as well as unto Paul and other New Testament writers, the

Lord revealed the rise of an earth-power that would not only open his

mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name and them who

dwell in heaven;[A] who would speak great words against the Most High,

and so magnify itself as to stand up against the Prince of princes--[B]

but who would also make war with the saints and "prevail against

them;"[C] who would "wear out the saints of the Most High;"[D] "destroy

the mighty and the holy people;"[E] "make war with the saints and

overcome them."[F] But believing that the two passages quoted at length

entirely cover the subject prophetically, I shall not here enter into

further prophetic proofs either of the corruptions of the Christian

religion or the destruction of the Christian Church, deeming that what

has already been set forth sufficient on that head.

[Footnote A: Rev. xiii:6.]

[Footnote B: Dan. vii:25; viii:25.]

[Footnote C: Dan. vii:21.]

[Footnote D: Dan. viii:25.]

[Footnote E: Dan. viii:24.]

[Footnote F: Rev. xiii:7.]

Notwithstanding the above remark I think it will be to the advantage of

the student to have placed before him in parallel form the predictions

of St. John and Daniel, to which allusion is made.

_John._

And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of

the sea, having seen seven heads and ten horns, and upon his heads the

name of blasphemy.--(Rev. xiii:1.)

And the Dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great

authority.--(Rev. xii:2.)

And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and

blasphemy; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two

months.--(Rev. xiii:5.)

And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God to blasphemy His name

and they who dwell in heaven.--(Rev. xiii:6.)

And it was given unto him to make war with the Saints, and to overcome

them.--(Rev. xiii:7.)

_Daniel._

Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast.--And of the ten horns

that were in his head, and of the other which came up, * * that had

eyes and a mouth that spake very great things.--(Dan. vii:19-20.)

And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power--(viii:2.)

And he shall speak great words against the most high; and think to

change times and laws, and they shall be given unto his hand until a

time times and the dividing of time.--(vii:25.)

And he shall magnify himself in his own heart. He shall also stand up

against the Prince of Princes,--(viii:25.)

I beheld and the same horn made war with the Saints and prevailed

against them.--(vii:21.) He shall wear out the Saints of the most

High.--(viii:25.) And he shall destroy the Mighty and the Holy

people.--(viii:24.)

_Concluding Reflections on the Whole Period Covered by the

Dispensations as Far as Developed:_ The sum of the whole matter,

thus far, is:--The purpose of man's creation and the plan of his

redemption, were known to God and the immense host of the spirits of

men before the creation of the earth. Adam came to the new creation,

the earth, under the divine commandment to people it with his

offspring. From Adam to Messiah numerous dispensations of the Gospel

were given to men; but these dispensations were limited in their

effectiveness, owing to the proneness of men to reject the truth, and

to walk in darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.

Yet God left not Himself without witnesses in the earth; for there were

a few in all dispensations that honored Him and his righteous laws.

Finally, when the appointed time was come, Jesus of Nazareth, the Son

of God, came and made the appointed Atonement for the sins of the world

and brought men under the dominion of His mercy, as well those who

lived before his coming, as those who lived after that event. He taught

the Gospel; He brought life and immortality to light; He brought into

existence His Church, and then ascended on high to His Father. For a

time the Gospel in its purity was preached in the world by the chosen

Apostles, though even in their days men began to mar it with their vain

philosophies, their doctrines of science, falsely so called; and when

the Apostles were all fallen asleep, then corruptions ran riot in the

Church, doctrines of men were taught for the commandments of God; a

church made by men was substituted for the Church of Christ; a church

full of pride and worldliness; a church which, while it clung to forms

of godliness, ran riot in excesses and abominations--until spiritual

darkness, fell like a pall over the nations; and thus they lay for

ages. In vain men sought to establish reforms, and through them bring

back the religion of Jesus Christ, and the Church of Christ. To do

that, however, was beyond the power of these men, however good their

intentions. The Gospel taken from the earth, divine authority lost,

the Church of Christ destroyed, there was but one way in which all

these could be restored, viz.: By reopening the heavens and dispensing

again a knowledge of the Gospel; by once more conferring divine

authority upon men, together with a commission to teach all the world,

and re-establish the Church of Christ on earth. In a word, it would

require the incoming of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times to

restore all things, and gather together in one all things in Christ,

both in heaven and in earth. Such a Dispensation is promised of God,

as we have seen; and it now only remains to add that such dispensation

was committed to the Prophet Joseph Smith; and this brings us to the

outline development of that dispensation in Part VI.

LESSON XL.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

LIFE AND CHARACTER OF CONSTANTINE--HIS INFLUENCE ON THE CHRISTIAN

CHURCH.

(A Lecture.[A])

[Footnote A: Of all the abused terms in our "Mormon" vocabulary,

perhaps this term "lecture" is the most abused. It is defined in

the Dictionaries as "a discourse read or pronounced on any subject:

especially, a formal or methodical discourse used for instruction." It

includes the idea of careful preparation and literary excellence; but

we style the most ordinary effort of our public speakers "lecturers."

An error that should be corrected. When a "lecture" is announced, it

should be understood that a treat is in store for the Quorum and their

invited guests. See suggestion in a former lesson.]

NOTES.

_Suggestions to the Speaker:_ In Lesson XXX some suggestions as

to "plans" for discourses were considered. Continuing the subject, we

quote from the authority (Mr. Pittinger) so often cited in these pages.

On the undesirability of allowing the plan of the discourse to appear,

he says:

"There may be occasions when a speaker is justified in announcing his

divisions and subdivisions, but such cases are exceptions. Hearers do

not care how a discourse is constructed, so it comes to them warm and

pulsating with life. To give the plan of a speech before the speech

itself is contrary to the order of nature. We are not required first

to look upon a grisly skeleton before we can see a graceful, living

body. There is a skeleton inside each body, but during life it is well

hidden, and there is no reason that the speaker should anticipate the

work of the tomb. It is hardly less objectionable to name the parts of

the discourse during the progress of the discussion, for--continuing

the former illustration--bones that project through the skin are very

unlovely. The only case, I presume to think, where it is justifiable to

name the parts of a discourse, either before or during its delivery, is

where the separate parts have an importance of their own, in addition

to their office of contributing to the general object. Much of the

proverbial "dryness" of sermons arises from the preacher telling what

he is about to remark, firstly, before he actually makes the remark

thus numbered. Whenever we hear a minister read his text, announce

his theme, state the parts into which he means to divide it, and then

warn us that the first head will be subdivided into a certain number

of parts, each of which is also specified in advance, we prepare our

endurance for a severe test. What great speeches require are deep,

strong appeals to the hearts of the people, through which shines the

radiance of great truths and the lightning of intense convictions.

These can all find their place in the most logically constructed

address if the logic be not brought out and paraded in its offensive

nakedness. No matter if the orator's mode of work is less understood.

A tree is far more beautiful and impressive when covered with waving

foliage, even if some of the branches are hidden. Let the tide of

eloquence flow on in an unbroken stream, bearing with it all hearts,

but giving no indication of the manner in which it is guided; or,

better still, let it move with the impetus of the cannon-ball, but

without proclaiming in advance the mark toward which it is flying.

The plan should go just as far as the intended speech, that we may

know exactly where to stop. Then we can arise with confidence, for

we are sure that we have something to say; we know what it is, and,

most important of all, we will know when it is finished. Most of the

objections urged against extempore speaking apply only to speeches that

have no governing plan. But when a firm and clear plan is prearranged,

there is no more danger of saying what we do not intend, or of running

into endless digressions, than if every word was written. Indeed, there

is no better way of guarding against undue discursiveness in a written

speech than by arranging such a plan before beginning to write. But

it may be urged that this laborious preparation--this careful placing

of every thought--will require as much time as to write in full. It

may at first. The mind needs to be drilled into the work, and it will

be of great value even as a mental discipline. No study of logic or

of metaphysics will give such practical insight into the nature of

the mind's workings as this prearrangement of thoughts and words to

frame a speech. But the work grows continually easier with practice,

until the mature speaker will save three-fourths or even more than

that proportion of the time consumed by the speech-writer. The speech

is now clearly indicated. A plan has been prepared that fixes each

item in its proper place. There is no further danger of the looseness

and desultoriness with which extempore speech has been reproached.

Yet there is abundant room for the inspiration of the moment. It is

possible, in all the fire of utterance, to leave the beaten track and

give expression to any new ideas that may be called up by the ardor of

speech. But a sure foundation is laid--a course is marked out which

has been deeply premeditated, ant which gives certainty to all we say."

(Extempore Speech, Pittinger. pp. 173-4-5-6.)

* * * *

_Clearness in Speech:_ In Lesson XXX we dealt with ambiguity of

speech through the use of too many pronouns: in this Lesson we propose

to show the ambiguity that arises from the uncertainty of antecedents

of pronouns.

_Pronouns Must Have Unmistakable Antecedents:_ "A pronoun may be

used a great number of times without destroying coherence, if it refers

always to the same antecedent. In the following passage from Macaulay,

"he" is used twelve times; yet the passage is firmly coherent:

"The situation of William was very different. He could not, like those

who had ruled before him, pass an Act in the spring and violate it

in the summer. He had, by assenting to the Bill of Rights, solemnly

renounced the dispensing power; and he was restrained, by prudence as

well as by conscience and honour, from breaking the compact under which

he held his crown. A law might be personally offensive to him: it might

appear to him to be pernicious to his people: but, as soon as he had

passed it, it was, in his eyes, a sacred thing. He had, therefore, a

motive, which preceding kings had not, for pausing before he passed

such a law. They gave their word readily, because they had no scruple

about breaking it. He gave his word slowly, because he never failed to

keep it." (Macaulay: History of England.)

There is much danger that in some way the antecedent of a pronoun will

be left uncertain. If the antecedent is shifted, if the pronoun stands

without any antecedent, or with only a vague antecedent, or if the word

to which it refers grammatically is not the word to which it refers in

sense, ambiguity surely results. The following sentences are cases in

point:

"Either way will be difficult, for the President will want the

Secretary of War to be inferior in rank to the commanding general, as

he will be more of a personal appointee, and so he will have a better

control over the army."

_Corrected:_ "Either way will be difficult, for the President will

want the Secretary of War to be inferior in rank to the commanding

general, because then the former will be more of a personal appointee,

and he himself will so gain a better control over the army."

The first "he" refers to the Secretary of War, the second to the

President; the shift in antecedent produces complete obscurity.

No doubt Banquo was ambitious, but it did not master him as it did

Macbeth.

_Corrected:_ No doubt Banquo was ambitious, but ambition (or the

craving for advancement) did not master him as it did Macbeth.

In the original form, "it" is without an antecedent, because a pronoun

may not refer grammatically to an adjective. The reader is left to

supply the noun "ambition" from the use of the adjective "ambitious."

We went to the Capitol determined to vote against him, but got there

too late for our votes to count, which seemed to our adherents a most

unwise policy.

_Corrected:_ We went to the Capital determined to vote against

him, though this determination seemed to our adherents a most unwise

policy, but we got there too late for our votes to count.

"Which" is here ambiguous, because its antecedent is vague. Speaking

strictly, it has no antecedent, for "which" may not refer grammatically

to a phrase or a clause, but, like all pronouns, must have one word

as its antecedent. Disregarding, however, the grammatical fault, we

may still condemn the sentence, because "which" may mean either the

determination to cast a negative vote or the carelessness of coming

late.

1. They (the Danes) did not care for grammar, and, consequently, their

influence unsettled the inflections of the language and prepared the

way for their complete disappearance.

_Corrected._ They (the Danes) did not observe the rules of

grammar, and, consequently, their influence unsettled the language and

prepared the way for the complete disappearance of inflection.

2. General Johnson's father, also a soldier, died in battle before his

twentieth year.

_Corrected._ General Johnson's father, also a soldier, died in

battle before his son was twenty.

In the first sentence, "their" refers grammatically to "the Danes," in

sense to "inflections;" in the second, "his" refers grammatically to

"father," in sense to "General Johnson." Be careful to make a pronoun

refer grammatically to the word it modifies in sense. In all these

cases, rewriting has increased the number of words, but when clearness

is at stake, to think of the number of words is a "penny-wise,

pound-foolish policy." (Composition and Rhetoric, Herrick and Damon,

pp. 305-7.)