I shall say no more upon the matter of moral declensions among Christians, except this: If there was such moral declensions 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: {LXXVI} "_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_." [149]