New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-12-16

| , n, the Christian fathers said also .h~. jus
| IT, MARTYR taught the derived and suooruhate
| no,urA Of Jesus doctrine utterly Inconsistent
| with the belief in the Trinity
rrbs fact TO which my critic refers OF 'he e1ist-
.nca Of Gnosticism. Manich@sm. Peasianlsm'
| Nfo,tanism etc. seems to me to confirm rather IMAM
! % ,n,n.a Oh my position So widespread were Some
~ these beliefs that at times they serlousy threat
| .oed 10 become dominant. great srusso was
| Going on as TO what opinions shouiu ii"4iy De-
! come supreme. This. which my critic IMPLIED IN
| his statement is the substance OF my contention.
| Soma few points OF belief may have been settled
from the Arst but beyond the fact that Jesus was
the Chriet chat is the expected Messiah( ana that
some form Of belief In Him was essental 10 chris
tian fellowship II is not very clear as TO what
these settled beliefs were. For as 10 the nature
NJ Christ His relation the Father. the relation
of the Holy Spirit to both OF Them as TO just no"
the life and teaching the death and the resurrec-
ton Of Jesus brought about the saIvaton oi 'ho
soul there certainly was no generally accepteu
belief for very many years
Ny critic refers the fact that TertuIian among
others fought the heretcs but he omits TO nouce
that he himself became Montanlst ana foush'
that branch Of the Church which at that tniie ae-
sumed to call itself Catholic. The existence OF
those great and widespread parties among chris
tians is Just what had In mind when said that
the thought In the first two three centuries was
seetbing chaotic and unsettled. l said, and say
again that there no settled authoritative ana
generally accepted statement OF Christian peheI
which covered what afterward came to be caileo
orthodoxy until after the struggle which issued
In the acceptance Of the Nicens Creed. This Is all
I said IN nv sermon and the points which my
critic makes onv illustrate and confirm my state
ment
In the second place as TO the Apostles Creed 1t
is ons thing 10 say Apostles Greed and another
TO say the Apostles Greed. The title hrst appears
In Christian literature In the writings Of Ambrose,
hnu-n
same as the which now appears IN the prayer
book Some OF the clauses differ from their present
form and others now included were not there at
al
II Is well known that the form OF tho statements
differed In different parts Of the Church The terms
of the original statement were defined ana ex-
banded as tho result Of controversies over one ana
another point OF belief. The creed was gradual
growth and in the words OF Professor j. Esthn
CARPENTER Of oxford, at first comes into view 10
the form In which now have II In the Church
OF Southern France between 40 and 800 II Mr.
Fenn will read the article Apostles Greed III
the schaY- Herzog Encyclopedias OF Religious
KnowIadze' (he work Of thoroughly orthodox
scholars) he will find that this article says that no
traces Of the creed IN It's present FORM can DO iooo
earlier than about tho year on
In the third place. my critic cnarsos me- win
error , regard TO the date Of the Eicene Creed He
helps establish my position, however, by saying
that the latter part Of the creed was not adopted
until the year ISL As had IN mind only the
essence Of the creed which dealt with the contro-
versy over the nature Of Christ did not care 10
refer TO the time when the latter clauses were
1894 The criticism on this part of my sermon
only shows that my position was little more con-
servative than that OF Mr.. Fem He calls atten-
t,on 70 the fact which did not mention that the
HoIv Spirit was not formally admitted to the Trim
ity for more than half q century later thah inc
date 10 which had referrea
y, tha nsxt Mace let me touch on mo Athanssian
Creed I refer my critic again 10 the Schan-Her-
zog "Encylcopedia OF Religious knowledge aru-