is the old Apostolical Roman Creed revised with some additions, and particularly of that article in the Aquileian Creed of Christ's descent into hell. But though the Aquileian Creed contain the descent, the ancient Roman Creed, as I have told you, did not, neither does that Nicene Creed, which you hear at the end of the Communion of our Common Prayerbook. In a breviary of fundamentals ascribed to Thaddeus, the disciple of St. Thomas, we read, how "Christ was crucified, and descended into hell, and broke through into that prison which never had been broken in unto, and rose again, and raised up with him the dead, who had slept many ages." On this formulary, as it relates to the descent of Christ, no man of judgment will lay the smallest stress; and he will particularly notice that the Scriptures, by which we are guided, say not one syllable about the persons, who, as the formulary tells us, were raised with Christ from the dead. Let us then ba lance the evidence of Councils and Fathers, as they contain the omission or insertion of the descent. On the side of omission, we have three of the first councils; and as to the fourth Creed of the Council of Aquileia the evidence is doubtful, because the old Romish Creed, founded upon it, does not mention the article of descent. Irenæus and Tertullian, two distinguished fathers of the Christian Church, in the Creeds which they adopt, are silent about the descent. For the insertion, we have the breviary of fundamentals ascribed to Thaddeus, and this testimony is of no authority whatsoever.

As to the Creed which you read in your Prayer

book, which is commonly called the Apostles', it was of later date than the Creed of the Church of Jerusalem. In the original of the Church of Jerusalem, so far as we learn from Cyril, the words were not there; and therefore this part of the Creed, in its present form, can have no authority with diligent and impartial inquirers. As to the Creed commonly, but erroneously, called the Creed of St. Athanasius, there, doubtless, we do read that Christ descended into hell; but this Creed, however it may support the doctrine of the Trinity, is not worthy of being opposed to the more ancient Creeds.

In order to impress upon your minds more strongly the information which I have collected from the very learned and very pious Dr. Hicks, I will subjoin some pertinent extracts from a recent publication in our own country. You must have heard that Mr. Justice Bayley is much respected, not only for his knowledge of the laws, but for his zeal in religion. Hear now what he says of the Apostles' Creed-" It is not to be understood that this Creed was framed by the Apostles, or indeed existed as a Creed in their times." And after giving the Creed as it existed in the year 600, and which is here copied from his Common Prayer-book, he says, "how long this existed before the year 600 is not exactly known; the additions were probably made in opposition to particular heresies and errors."

The most important " addition" since the year 600 is that which affirms that Christ descended into hell. This has been proved not only to have been an invention after the Apostles' times, but even after

the time of Eusebius. Bishop Pearson says, "that the descent into hell was not in the ancient Creeds or rules of faith. It is not found in the rules of faith delivered by Irenæus, by Origen, or by Tertul lian. It is not expressed in those Creeds which were made by the councils, as larger explications of the Apostles' Creed, nor in the Nicene, or Constantinopolitan, nor in that of Ephesus or Chalcedon; nor in those confessions made at Sardica, Antioch, Seleucia, Sermium, &c. It is not mentioned in several confessions of faith delivered by particular persons; not in that of Eusebius Cæsariensis, presented to the council of Nice; not in that of Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyra, delivered to Pope Julius ; not in that of Arius and Euroius, presented to Constantine; not in that of Acacius, Bishop of Cæsaræn, delivered unto the synod of Seleucia; not in that of Eustathius, Theophilus, and Silvanus, sent to Liberius. There is no mention of it in the Creed of St. Basil; in the Creed of Epiphanius, Gelasius, Damasus, Macarius, &c. It is not in the Creed expounded by St. Cyril (though some have produced that Creed to prove it). It is not in the Creed expounded by St. Augustine, nor in that other attributed to St. Augustine in another place; nor in that expounded by Maximus Taurinensis; nor in that so often interpreted by Petrus Chrysologus; nor in that of the Church of Antioch, delivered by Cassianus. Neither is it to be seen in the MSS. Creeds set forth by the learned Archbishop of Armagh. It is affirmed by Ruffinus, "that in his time it was neither in the Roman nor the Oriental Creeds."

But further, you have heard from me and others, that for the descent of Christ into hell there is not clear and solid proof in Holy Writ. You have heard too, that for more than six centuries it was not an article in any Creed. You have heard that in number and authority, the Creeds which are silent upon the facts exceed those in which the mention of it is inserted. And finally, you have heard that the two great fathers of the church, Tertullian and Irenæus, however earnest in defending, and however copious in explaining their own faith, yet give not the slightest intimation of the persuasion that Christ, while his body was in the grave, went down into hell for the purpose of preaching there to wicked spirits. I will not however conceal from you, that there is a book in which it is positively asserted, and dwelt upon largely. The book, which I have in view, is the gospel ascribed to Nicodemus ; and as, by the consent of all learned men, the work is spurious, I should imagine that the advocates for the common opinion will not much rely for the success of their cause upon such a witness. The writer of the gospel employs four or five chapters upon the subject. In the 15th chapter there is a long and angry quarrel between Satan and the Prince of Hell, concerning the expected arrival of Christ in hell. In the 16th chapter, "While there was a voice of thunderings, and rushing of winds, Christ arrives at the gate of hell. Here the greatest confusion arises, and the gates of brass, and the bars of iron are cut asunder; and while David is speaking reverentially unto Christ, he descends into hell."

In the 17th chapter we read, "That Death and the devils were in great horror at Christ's coming; that he trampled upon Death; that he seized the Prince of Hell, and took Adam with him into heaven." In the 18th chapter we find, "That Beelzebub, Prince of Hell, vehemently upbraided Satan for persecuting and bringing him to their dark abode, and that Christ gave to Beelzebub dominion over Satan for ever, as a recompense for taking away Adam and his sons," who, it should seem, were in hell. In the 19th chapter we read, "That Christ took Adam by the hand; that all the saints were joined together for the power of the Most High, and that they all ascended with him into Paradise." Such is the representation of the subject in the Gospel of Nicodemus, and instead of the dignified plainness, the inartificial exactness, the occasional minuteness without prolixity, and the occasional, solemnity without obscurity, which adorn the gospels, we meet only with wild imagery or chimerical descriptions. We have a series of ludicrous wranglings, tumultuous and unedifying effusions of piety, and narratives here romantic without ingenuity, and there puerile without simplicity. Facts previously admitted acquire no increase of credibility; and facts, upon which men would have doubted, become more doubtful from the outrageous extravagance, and ostentatious amplification with which they are related.

You and I, my brethren, may gratify our curiosity, and take our chance of meeting with tales, some to amuse and some to disgust us, in the Gos