menu_book Chapter 26

CHAPTER XI. CONTROVERSIES ON THE FAITH. part two the holy trinity one the greatest dogmatic conflict which the church had to endure broke out in the early part of the fourth century arius was a person of considerable mark among the presbyters of alexandria he is described as a man of impressive appearance and of strictly ascetic life yet with kindly and attractive manner and bearing but he was charged with a certain vanity and lightness of mind he had been a pupil of the famous lucian of antioch who had been accused of sharing the opinions of paul of samosata and these views he also was thought to hold the first beginnings of the strife are obscured by discrepancy of testimony but on the tenets of arius there is practically no doubt in his view the son is a creation out of nothing by the will of god the father a divine being created before the worlds but still a creature

as a father must exist before his son the son of god is not co eternal with the father there was a time when he was not it was through him that god made the worlds yet he is not in his proper nature incapable of sin though by the exertion of his own will he was preserved from it against this alexander bishop of alexandria asserted the co existence of god the father and god the son from all eternity never was there a time when the father was not the father when the son was not the son doctrines so startling as those of arius could not pass unquestioned for some years the church in alexandria was disturbed by the disputes which arose about them Alexander probably hoped to overcome Arius by gentle treatment. When he was disappointed in his hope, Arius was at length excommunicated by a synod of about one hundred African and Libyan bishops,

and with him certain presbyters and deacons of Alexandria, while the Libyan bishops, Theonus and Secundus, were deposed from their offices. Driven from Alexandria, Arius betook himself to Palestine, whence he wrote to his old fellow student under Lucian, Eusebius, the influential bishop of Nicomedia, who at once bestirred himself to gain adherence for him. He was so successful that a Bithynian synod, under his influence, pronounced in favor of the opinions of Arius, and Eusebius of Caesarea attempted to

mediate between Alexander and his presbyter. To whatever influence it may have been due, Ares returned to Alexandria and resumed his functions. Several bishops took his part, but Alexander and his friends remained firm. And not only did Bishop contend with Bishop, Mob contended with Mob in many cities of the East. It was at this critical time that Constantine overcame Licinius and became sole ruler of the Roman world. When the strife in the church came

to his knowledge, he wrote, or caused to be written, a remarkable letter to Alexander and Arius. The discussion appeared to him a mere play of nimble wits, asking questions which ought not to be asked, and giving answers which ought not to be given. He begs the combatants, therefore, to restore to their emperor his quiet days and tranquil nights by making such mutual concessions as may restore peace to the church. The letter, however, produced no good result. Nor could

Josias of Cordova, the emperor's confidential advisor, who brought it to Alexandria, effected a reconciliation between the opposing parties. There was one in Alexandria who, though his works belonged mainly to a later period, had already the influence which his character could not fail to win, and who would certainly not tolerate any compromise with error. This was Athanasius, who was constantly by the side of Alexander, and who maintained now, as throughout his eventful life, with all his force, the great truth, that the Son was gone from all eternity, that he became very man. It is to be observed that Athanasius connects the divinity of the Son with the redemption of man much more prominently than his contemporaries. How, he asks, could Christ make us partakers of the divine nature if he were himself only a partaker and not the source and origin of it?

This lies indeed at the root of the Athanasian theology. In the Son we have the Father. Whoso knoweth the Son knoweth the Father. if the son be a creature we cannot worship him one who held these views could evidently not concede one jot or one tittle to the arians constantine s well-meant attempt therefore came to nothing as however the emperor attached the utmost importance to the unity of the church which he hoped to make the chief bond of the unwieldy empire he determined to make yet another effort to secure it

he resolved by the advice of hosias to invite the bishops of the whole church to a council at nicaea in bithynia not far from the southern shore of the black sea the emperor himself issued the summonses placed the public posting-houses at the disposal of the bishops who journeyed to bithynia and provided for their maintenance from all parts of the empire they came and even from beyond its limits arrived a persian and a scythian they came we may well believe full of hope at the new prospects which were opening to the church and with some curiosity to see the great ruler of the roman world the bishop of rome who was precluded by his advanced age from undertaking the journey to nicaea was represented by two presbyters his name does not appear in any of the documents connected with the council and it is quite uncertain whether he was one of those whose advice the emperor privately sought eusebius reckons the number of bishops who took part in the council at more than two hundred and fifty and these were accompanied by a very large number of presbyters deacons and other attendants among the deacons was athanasius athanasius makes the whole number three hundred and eighteen a number which ambrose observed with delight was that of abraham s trained servants and which has ever since remained the traditional number of attendants at the council so that it is frequently referred to as the three hundred and eighteen

the greeks attended in large numbers of the latins who were much less numerous the most distinguished representatives were the well-known hosias and sicilian of carthage many of those who were present were highly respected for their piety and for the sufferings which they had endured in the still recent persecution some were distinguished theologians some were probably simple men to whom the very watchwords of the contest were new and strange there were present also at some of the preliminary discussions many laymen skilled rhetoricians ready to advocate the views of one side or the other it was the fluent talk of these gentlemen which roused one of the confessors himself a layman to declare that christ and the apostles handed down to us no dialectic art or vain craft but simple maxims guarded by faith and good works it is not improbable that as rafinus implies even heathen philosophers took part in these informal debates the great assembly met in the largest room of the palace at nicaea

in which there was placed at one end a gilded chair for the emperor while the seats of the bishops were arranged on each side when the members of the council were placed the emperor in splendid robes entered the hall without military guard and passed with stately tread to the seat placed for him in which however he did not place himself until some of the bishops motioned him to do so when he was seated one of the bishops either eusebius of caesarea or eustathius of antioch rose and addressed him when this address was ended constantine rose and with a pleasant countenance and in a gentle voice made his reply thanking god for having permitted him to see the representatives of the church brought together into one assembly and earnestly entreating his hearers to maintain the peace and harmony which became the ministers of god on concluding his speech which was in latin and was at once rendered into greek by an interpreter he handed over the conduct of the meeting to the presidents and left the hall who the presidents proedroi were is uncertain it is natural to suppose that hosias of cordova who was the emperor's confidant and whose name stands first among the signatures to the decrees was at any rate one of them

others were probably the prelates of the two great sees of alexandria and antioch alexander and eustathias perhaps also eusebius of caesarea there were three groups in the assembly the small party of arians under the guidance of eusebius of nicomedia the party of alexander to which the western bishops generally belonged and the moderate men who looked upon eusebius of caesarea as their leader it was acknowledged on all hands that the council was bound to produce such an authoritative statement of the true faith as might serve to guide the minds of believers in their present perplexity The party who were soon called Eusebians, from their leader the Bishop of Nicomedia, first proposed a form of creed which was little less than undisguised Arianism.

When this had been rejected with indignation, Eusebius of Caesarea put forward for adoption the creed which he had himself received as a catechumen and taught as a presbyter and a bishop. This was drawn up in terms either actually scriptural or already familiar to the church. The emperor approved it. the council at first said nothing against it but it did not in set terms repudiate arian doctrine alexander and his friends consequently insisted on the insertion of more exact definitions and this was supported by the earnest eloquence and keen dialectics of athanasius

after several proposals and long debates a formula was at length arrived at to which all but a very small minority were content to subscribe This differs in several particulars from the creed with which we are familiar under the name Nicene. The beginning of the second clause ran thus, And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father only born, that is from the essence of the Father, God from God, light from light,

very God from very God, begotten, not made, of one and the same essence with the Father, through whom all things were made. and the creed which ends with the words and in the holy ghost was followed by an anathema on those who say that there was a time when the son was not that before he was begotten he was not and that he came into being out of things that were not and on those who allege that he is of a different substance or essence from god the father and is capable of being created or changed or altered in a word all the characteristic opinions of the arians were condemned to this creed nearly all the bishops who were present assented some as eusebius of caesarea with great reluctance only two refused at the time to accept it but two others eusebius of nicomedia and theognus of nicaea continued to hold communion with arius

the latter was condemned and banished by a decree of the emperor who endeavoured to fix upon him and his adherents the nickname porphyrian from porphyry the well-known pagan enemy of the faith of christ it might have been expected that the almost unanimous decision of such an assembly as that of nicaea would have put an end to the strife this was however very far from being the case it was rather the beginning than the end the west indeed generally accepted the nicene faith but in the east there arose opponents of it in almost every city it was not that all these sympathized with the views of arius but that a large party in the church was reluctant to receive a document which described the mysteries of the faith in other than scriptural terms and which even adopted a word homoousias which had been condemned by a provincial council as favouring the views of paul of samosanta who denied the divinity of the son altogether this party was commonly called semi eusebius of caesarea however its leader was himself orthodox he expressly repudiates the two main theses of arius that the word was a creature and that there was a time when he was not

the opposition to the nicene decision was moreover strengthened by the fact that the views of the emperor himself changed probably under the influence of his sister constantia a disciple of eusebius of nicomedia this prelate kept up a vigorous agitation against athanasius who had become bishop of alexandria and several respected bishops took the side of arius who had meantime diffused his views in a popular work called Arius was allowed to submit to the emperor a statement of his belief which avoided the particular terms which had given most offense. Constantine was still bent upon promoting unity, and he seems to have been led to believe that it would conduce to this end if both Athanasius and his active supporter Eustathias were removed from the positions which they occupied.

eustathias was deposed and banished in the year 330 and eusebius of nicomedia then proceeded to attack athanasius by stirring up against him all the discontented in his own diocese especially the militans who thought that they were aggrieved athanasius however was able to defend himself successfully before the emperor against these attacks but his enemies gave him no rest and in the year three thirty five he had to appear before a synod convened by the emperor at tyre at which sixty bishops mainly eusebians were present this synod deposed athanasius from his see and the bishops who composed it proceeding to jerusalem for the consecration of the church of the anastasis which the emperor had built declared themselves favorable to the recall of arius athanasius meantime had presented himself before the emperor at constantinople and his visit had at first the effect which his remarkable personal influence seldom failed to produce but when his opponents appeared and alleged against him that he had boasted that he was able to prevent the usual fleet of corn-ships from leaving the harbour of alexandria the emperor changed his mind and sentenced him to be banished to treves

preparations were made for the solemn restitution of arius to his office in alexandria which were however stopped by his sudden death after the death of constantine athanasius returned to his see but the influence of eusebius of nicomedia who had been raised by constantius the new ruler of the east to the throne of constantinople rendered his position untenable he was compelled to give place to an intruding bishop gregory who was thrust upon the exasperated alexandrians by actual armed force he was kindly received in his exile by julius bishop of rome at rome too marcellus bishop of ancyra who had been at nicaea one of the most ardent defenders of the homo usian creed was hospitably entertained in his horror of arianism this prelate seems to have fallen into a doctrine too nearly resembling sabellianism he represented the word in such a way that he did not appear as the second person in the godhead the son from all eternity the name son is properly given to him in this view only so far as he was incarnate not in his proper nature doubtless the word proceeded forth from god and in his humanity was a distinct person

but he is destined when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to god the father again to be absorbed into the divine unity the synod at constantinople in three thirty six condemned his doctrine and deposed him from his office like athanasius he returned to his see on the death of constantine and like him he was compelled to flee for refuge which he found at rome here he presented to the bishop his confession of faith in terms practically identical with the creed of rome and was admitted to communion when it became known in the east that men deprived of office by eastern synods had been admitted to communion at rome great dissatisfaction arose an important synod was held at antioch known as the dedication synod from the circumstance that the bishops composing it attended the dedication of a church in that city the canons of which were afterwards adopted into the universal code at this assembly no less than four confessions of faith were produced the second of which known as lucians without using the word homo usios repudiated in the strongest terms the characteristic doctrine of the arians with regard to the person of the son

while the third condemned the opinions of marcellus who was classed with sebeleus and paul of samosata this synod confirmed the sentence passed at tyre upon athanasius and condemned generally any bishop who being deposed by a synod should appeal to another synod of the same kind or to the emperor in the winter of the same year pope julius held the council of which he had some months before given notice to the eastern prelates in rome athanasius after a full examination of the charges against him was pronounced innocent and his right to communicate with the roman church fully recognized marcellus was declared orthodox there was thus a clear divergence of the west from the east with a view of putting an end to this dissension the two emperors constans and constantius agreed to call a council at sardesa sophia in bulgaria on the frontiers of the two empires but in the dominion of the western this however was far from promoting unity no sooner did the eastern clergy who were present learn that their western brethren intended to treat athanasius and marcellus as lawful bishops then they left the council and assembled separately at philippopolis those who remained at sardesa again acquitted athanasius of the charges against him

and passed sentence of deposition against some of the most prominent bishops of the opposing party those who assembled at philipopolis on the other hand sent out to the bishops of their party and to the clergy in general a letter explaining their position and condemning the conduct of athanasius and marcellus to this was appended a confession of their faith founded on the fourth of those which had been produced at antioch they condemned the opinions of arius and those of marcellus alike the bishops of the east assembled at antioch feeling that they were regarded with suspicion in the western church as inclining to arianism again endeavoured to clear themselves from the charge in an exposition of their faith which from its length came to be known as the prolix exposition they expressed their belief in the only-born son of god begotten of the father before all ages god from god light from light through whom all things are made and they anathematized those who affirmed that the son was made from nothing ex or from a different substance ex heteros hypostaceos or that there was a time when he was not the ninth chapter of the product s exposition might indeed be considered as a paraphrase of the word homo

but they also condemned those who said that it was not by wishing or willing that the father begat the son in this they condemned the athanasians who held that the eternal generation of the son is of the essence of the father as inseparable from him as his holiness or his wisdom to say that the son was produced by the wish or will of the father seemed to them to approach perilously near to saying that he was a creature though against this conclusion the bishops at antioch had expressly guarded themselves the eastern bishops seem to have been genuinely anxious to find terms of agreement with their western brethren and they were certainly very far from holding those opinions of arius which had been condemned but no reconciliation was effected a western council at milan rejected their overture They also found themselves under the necessity of condemning a new heresy, that of Photinus. He was a fellow countryman and disciple of Marcellus, and the Antiochian sentence of condemnation seems to attribute to him little or nothing beyond the views of his master.

As, however, the Western Council at Milan also condemned Photinus while it protected Marcellus, It seems probable that he maintained not merely that the Son had no personal existence for eternity, but that Christ was simply a man, destined by God to a unique work, and so wrought upon by his inworking as to attain divine excellence. The emperor Constantius had hitherto been unfriendly to Athanasius and his party.

At last, hard-pressed by the Persians and anxious at all costs to restore peace in his dominions, he permitted the great bishop to return to Alexandria, where meanwhile the intruder Gregory had died. He was received with a tumult of joy by his faithful people. The Orientals were dissatisfied at the restoration of Athanasius without the decree of a council, but otherwise the difference between the opposing parties seems at this time to have been reduced to two points.

The refusal of the western bishops to condemn Marcellus, and the continued rejection by the easterners of the word homoousias. Those opinions of Arius which had been condemned at Nicaea were almost everywhere rejected. But the death of Constans brought about a great change in the politics of the time. Constantius had paid a certain deference to his brother, who favored Athanasius.

Now he asserted his independence, and perhaps wished to repay the humiliation which he thought he had suffered at the hands of the western bishops. A synod which first met at Sirmium in 351 put forth a confession of faith identical with the fourth of Antioch, and deposed Photinus, who had up to this time remained in possession of the seed of Sirmium. To the confession was appended a long series of anathemas, in the eighteenth of which the son is expressly declared to be subordinate to the father, Hupo Tectogmanos. This was not generally accepted in the West, though so high an authority as Hilary of Poitiers thought it compatible with orthodoxy. when shortly afterwards constantius became by his victory over the usurper magnatius the sole ruler of the empire he acted with more vigor and decision in the affairs of the church

from synods assembled at arlais and milan he succeeded in extorting the condemnation of athanasius as a rebel leaving the theological question for the present out of sight the orthodox were not compelled to accept any new formula of belief but the more sharp-sighted among them could not fail to be aware that in the condemnation of athanasius lurked more than a personal question the few bishops who refused to concur paulinus of treves eusebius of vercelli lucifer of cagliari and dionysus of milan were driven into exile and to these were soon added liberius of rome hilary of portiere and the aged hosius of cordova early in the year three fifty six his sentence of deposition was formally communicated to athanasius who at once withdrew into the wilderness and was lost to sight he was beyond the emperor s power for no one would earn the price put upon his head by betraying him to his enemies george of cappadocia was brought into alexandria by force of arms as his successor the unity of the church seemed to be restored the emperor seemed to be supreme over it the party opposed to athanasius seemed to be completely victorious

but in fact the political victory of the eastern bishops brought about their ruin no sooner was the pressure of adversity removed than the anti nicene party flew asunder they had only been united by their hostility to athanasius and the homo the real arianism the arianism which had been condemned at nicaea started once more into full view aetius and eunomius keen and ruthless dialecticians carried it to its logical issue and declined all compromise with orthodoxy These anomians declared that the son was different in essence from the father, unlike Anomoios in essence and in all respects. However superior the son might be to the other parts of creation, he was still created. The great majority of the oriental theologians did not share these views.

They maintained that the Son was like Homoios, the Father in essence and in all respects, and that his eternal generation was by no means an act of creation. But they declined, alarmed perhaps by the theories of Marcellus, to admit that the Father and the Son are of one and the same essence. The leaders of this Homoiusian party were George of Laodicea,

Eustathias of Sebast, Eusebius of Emesa, and Basil of Ancyra, and their views made some impression even upon eager advocates of the Nicene doctrines, like Hilary of Poitiers, who were in exile among them. The emperor were still eager for unity at any price, and the court party among the bishops, especially the pliant Arsicius of Syngidunum and Valens of Merso, with Acacius of Caesarea and Eudoxius of Antioch,

were anxious to devise a formula which should unite homoians and anomoians by a third sirmian council at which the emperor was present the words homoousias and homoousias were absolutely forbidden as not contained in scripture and as attempting to define matters above the reach of man s understanding the subordination of the son was again affirmed this formula was mainly the work of western bishops hitherto the great champions of orthodoxy but it was highly displeasing in the east constantius seems in some way to have been won over to the views of the more moderate party and a fourth sirmian council put forth as their faith that which had been set forth at the dedication council of antioch in the year three forty one together with the condemnation of paul of samosata and photinus which had been agreed upon at cirmium ten years later in the year three fifty eight the exiled liberius bought his return to rome by subscribing to use his own words the true catholic faith received at sirmium by many brethren and fellow bishops and by repudiating athanasius what was the formula which he subscribed whether the first or the second of sirmium has been matter of vehement dispute

it is however hardly possible to suppose that the indignation which hilary expresses against the weakness of the roman bishop can have been called forth by his having accepted a formula which he himself thought compatible with orthodoxy he must therefore have subscribed the second hosias was also allowed to return home on accepting this formula which he did under durrance but without repudiating athanasius the emperor however was still dissatisfied he designed that a great synod under his own influence should devise a formula in which the various parties might agree what actually came to pass however was not one synod but two in may three fifty nine four hundred western bishops assembled at ramene who were required by the emperor to debate only matters of doctrine and forbidden to separate until they should have arrived at a conclusion ursicius and valens however who acted as the emperor s ministers in ecclesiastical affairs were at first altogether unable to carry out his wish that the formula lately settled at sirmium should be accepted

the great majority of the assembly held firmly to the faith of nicaea condemned arianism and deposed its friends including ursacias and valens from their sees but the delegates who carried the decrees of the synod to the emperor without being admitted to an audience were carried by ursicius and his friends to nice in thrace where a small council was held which was compelled or persuaded to accept a formula known as that of nice in all its main points identical with that to which the western bishops had assented at sirmium two years before this declared the son like the father who begat him according to the scriptures whose beginning no man knows but the father who begat him bearing this confession and still carrying with them the delegates ursacias and balens returned to rumini where by mingled threats and persuasions they caused the weary and terrified bishops to accept it meantime an oriental synod had assembled at seleucia the homoousians with whom some of the nicene party had made common cause were in the majority among them being the much respected hilary of potpierre then in exile in the east but the minority of decided arians under the leadership of acasius and eudoxius was still considerable

passion ran high in the council and the majority ended by passing sentence of deposition on their chief opponents but the emperor had still to be reckoned with and he determined while shewing his repugnance to the extreme arians by banishing atius to force the formula of nice upon the east as well as the west he gained his end and in a council at constantinople in the following year this confession was again put forth with the addition that the word usia which was not commonly intelligible and which had given great offence should no longer be used and that the word hupostasis should not be applied to the persons of the holy trinity the emperor seemed from the moment to have brought to pass the unity for which he was so anxious but a scarcely disguised arianism was in fact established in the church and even eunomius obtained a bishopric in gaul where julian who was indifferent to christian dogma had already been proclaimed augustus the orthodox bishops made their voices heard in november three sixty one constantius died on his march against his cousin the emperor julian was an implacable enemy of christianity

yet his short reign was in fact a blessing in disguise for nearly two years the church however injured in its property and its privileges was entirely free from imperial interference in matters of doctrine the gain in this far outweighed the loss for during this period the leaders in the church no longer harassed by imperial politics came to understand each other better and even to discern points of agreement where all had once seemed hostile for some time past the homoousians seem to have been coming to the conviction that in spite of their repugnance to the homoousian their views were in fact much nearer to those of the nicene party than to those of such arians as aetius and eunomius athanasius again returned from banishment earnestly sought to unite all the parties which were not absolutely arian he did not indeed waver in his allegiance to the nicene faith but he induced a synod which met at alexandria to pardon the fall of those who had been unawares seduced into arianism and to facilitate their admission to communion with the orthodox church and what was even more important the opposing parties when they were face to face came to understand the ambiguity which lurks in such words as essence and substance

the nicene party admitted that their opponents when they spoke of three substances by no means intended to deny the unity of the godhead their opponents allowed that those who maintained the one essence did not intend to deny the trinity of persons it would seem that the synod deprecated the use of the ambiguous terms altogether the settlement of the dispute was however rendered difficult by two circumstances in the first place the doctrine of the personality of the holy spirit which had attracted little attention during the first thirty years of the arian divisions now came into prominence at nicaea the simplest expression of belief in the holy ghost had been held sufficient the leucianist confession of three forty one added to this the words which is given for the comforting and sanctifying and perfecting of them that believe the synod of sirmium of three fifty one indicates that diversity of opinion on this subject had already begun when it anathematizes those who spoke of the holy spirit as unbegotten when the question was once mooted athanasius as might have been expected made a firm stand against error it was clear to him that it was of vital importance to recognize the holy ghost as god

either the holy ghost is god or he is a creature and a creature he cannot be he cannot be as was held by some merely one of the ministering spirits sent forth to do service for them that shall inherit salvation as such views as these were in the air athanasius required the members of the alexandrian council not only to accept the creed of nicaea but to repudiate the doctrine that the holy spirit was a creature this was however vehemently opposed by a party to whom epiphanius gives the name but who were more commonly known as macedonians from their following the leadership of macedonius this macedonius had more than once appeared as the arian candidate for the episcopal throne of constantinople and was in fact chosen by his party and placed in possession of his church by the authority of constantius amid scenes of violence and blood it was by the favour of constantius that he was supported and when this was withdrawn he fell in his retirement he is said to have put forth the view with which his name is connected that the spirit is not very god and is therefore a creature and minister of god

many of those who shrank from the arian deprecation of the son of god were not yet disposed to admit that the holy spirit also is of one essence with the father from this arose divided councils in the end those who held the lower view of the holy spirit came to be so completely identified with the semi arians that this term was used as a synonym with the pneumatomachae the union of all the enemies of arianism was also much hindered by the state of affairs in the important metropolis antioch its bishop eustathias an active and much respected member of the nicene party had been deposed in the year three thirty he had been followed by men of the middle party which prevailed in the east until in 347 a decided arian eudoxius in an irregular manner became bishop on his translation to constantinople meletius previously bishop of sebaste in armenia was chosen by the dominant party to succeed him he though at the time of his election thought too inclined to arianism taught as bishop a doctrine too nearly allied to the nicene faith to be pleasing to the arians

he was consequently dispossessed by the emperor and the arian eusoius set up in his place but a considerable portion of the antiochian church continued to regard meletus as their lawful bishop there were thus in antioch at the time of the alexandrian council three separate communions the eustaphians whose leader and guide was then a presbyter called paulinus the meletans and the eusoyans the policy of athanasius and other leaders of the council was to permit so far as possible those in actual possession of ecclesiastical offices to retain them provided that they received the faith of nicaea with regard to antioch the council naturally felt itself bound to support the eustathians who in troublous times had adhered to the orthodox belief as however the eustathians differed in fact but little from the meletans and had no bishop of their own in antioch there was good ground for hope that they would accept meletius on his return as their bishop and that in this way the eustathians and meletans would unite

but the hot-headed lucifer of cagliari with more zeal than discretion hurried to antioch where he arrived before the delegates from the council and consecrated paulinus as bishop of that city there was thus introduced a discord which extended far beyond the walls of antioch since the orientals generally did not recognize paulinus but meletus as lawful bishop of antioch while athanasius and the western bishops could not repudiate paulinus as being the representative of the most steadfast confessors of the nicene faith lucifer an eager and honest fanatic was altogether opposed to the gentler methods which were in favour at alexandria from which it would occasionally result that men who had suffered and been banished for their steadfast adherence to the orthodox faith might on their return home find their places occupied by those whose greater pliancy had permitted them to adopt the views of the dominant power for the time being he contended that no one who had committed himself by adhesion to an erroneous creed under the iron rule of constantius should be admitted to the communion of the church without loss of the office which he held and that all who had been banished for conscience sake should re-enter on all their old privileges

as lucifer s principle would have deposed for instance all the bishops who had subscribed to the conclusions of rimini it could of course not be accepted and he as many other good men have done who cannot admit compromise gradually drifted away from the catholic church in which he thought that a base worldliness prevailed over right and justice the party of the luciferians was however neither numerous nor of long continuance In the following year an important synod was held at Antioch, at which the Nicene faith was accepted, and a document sent to the emperor, Julian's successor Jovian, in which it was explained that essence in the Nicene faith was not used in the philosophic sense, but was intended to repudiate the error of those who maintained that the son was created out of nothing. the hostility of valens jovian's successor who was a decided arian tended to consolidate the union of parties and the time was now at hand when men of philosophic training belonging to a generation which had not known the acrimony of the early struggles made their influence felt the most important of these were the great cappadocians basil and the two gregories of nissa and of nazianzus on the death of jovian valentian was chosen emperor by the troops and at once adopted as colleague his brother valens to whom he gave the charge of the east

valentian favored the nicene views which were dominant in the west here there was little arianism though a few arian bishops appointed by constantius as auxentius at milan still held their sees a roman synod under damasus declared its adhesion to the nicene faith deposed oxentius and excommunicated him and his followers and an illyrian council a few years later applied the word homoousius to each of the persons of the holy trinity the successor of oxentius at milan was the great ambrose who was not only himself a bulwark of orthodoxy but was able to control in ecclesiastical matters the young emperor in the east however valens who had been baptized by the arian bishop eudoxius of constantinople and was still under his influence wished to walk in the steps of constantius athanasius was too powerful a person in alexandria to be removed from his see but on his death his orthodox successor peter was thrust out by main force and an arian named lucius enthroned in his place

The Egyptian monks, who had been devoted to Athanasius, suffered persecution. But further east, where Valens generally resided with the view of watching the Persian frontier, suffered most from his ill-tempered violence. The most horrible act attributed to him was the death of a large number of delegates of the Orthodox party who had come to lay before him the wrong and injustice which they had to endure.

They were put on board a ship, which took fire when out at sea. Set on fire, it was believed, in accordance with instructions from high quarters, and all the delegates parished, the crew alone making their escape. Throughout this disastrous period, however, the reconciliation of the Homoeusian with the Nicene party continued to make progress. The former did indeed, in a council held at Lapsicus, maintain the views expressed in the Dedication Council at Antioch more than twenty years before. But as they condemned the Eudoxians, they had to suffer at the hands of the emperor the same persecution as the Nicene party.

In their distress, they turned to the Western emperor and the Roman bishop, sending three bishops as deputation to Valentian and Liberius, with instructions to accept the Homo usion and to seek communion with Rome. Valentian, being in Gaul, Liberius alone received them on their arrival in Rome. to him the deputies explained that when they spoke of the son as like the father in all things they meant precisely what was intended to be expressed by homo

and they handed him a document as the confession of their faith in which after anathematizing arius and several other heretics they declared their hearty assent to the nicene liberius now admitted them to communion and dismissed them with letters to the bishops who had sent them difficulties however were not at an end for one of the delegates eustathias of sebast fell back into arianism and drew others after him but it was now evident that the real convictions of the great majority of church teachers inclined to the doctrines of which athanasius had been the great exponent and defender the negotiations with rome for the restoration of peace to the church though supported by basil and so long as he lived by athanasius proceeded for some time but slowly in consequence of the distrust which the western leaders felt towards the theologians of the east on the death of valens however in the year three seventy eight a great change came over the political circumstances of the empire gratia the surviving emperor who had always been favorable to athanasian teaching

permitted the bishops who had been banished by valens to return to their sees in the autumn of the same year an important council of one hundred and forty-six eastern bishops was held in antioch at which the letter of damasus and the roman synod of the year three sixty nine in favor of the nicene faith was approved and accepted in the following year gratian chose as his colleague in the empire the noble spaniard theodosius who immediately after his baptism issued an edict in favor of the orthodox faith in the holy trinity and strongly condemnatory of heresy in the year three eighty one met the council of constantinople which though only attended by one hundred and fifty bishops and those entirely from the eastern empire came to be regarded from its epoch-making character as ecumenical This famous assembly confirmed the creed agreed upon at Nicaea, and anathematized those who rejected or impugned it. It has frequently been stated that at this council the creed of Nicaea was

brought, by certain alterations, omissions, and additions, into the form in which it is now recited in our churches. This is, however, an error. The creed, which we know as Nicene, is found in a tract of Epiphanias, which can scarcely be dated later than the year 374. and does not appear there as anything new it is in fact the creed of jerusalem with certain nicene additions no early historian mentions any creed having been put forth by this council as its own but all mention its adhesion to the nicene while the fathers of constantinople themselves assert most emphatically that whatever persecutions or afflictions they had endured they had borne for the sake of the evangelical faith ratified at nicaea in bithynia by the three hundred and eighteen fathers

no words could more plainly express the fact that they supposed themselves to have ratified the very creed adopted at nicene and not any subsequent modification of it if they put forth the constantinopolitan they can only have done so in the belief that it was the nicene and it is hardly credible that a hundred and fifty bishops from all parts of the east in an age when dogmatic formulas were keenly scrutinized can have been so mistaken what is certain is that the creed in question was produced at the council of chalcedon in four fifty one and was ultimately received by the whole church but theodosius was still anxious about the unity of the church which had even now been but imperfectly attained In the year 383 he caused a conference to be held at Constantinople, to which representatives of the various parties were summoned

and presented written statements of their faith. Even Eunomius gave in his creed. The emperor, after reading the various professions, accepted that which declared the several persons of the Holy Trinity homo usian. Those who refused it he declared heretical, forbade to teach,

to ordain bishops or even to meet together for worship in the west the empress justina who ruled in the name of her young son valentinian the second was a passionate supporter of the arians under her influence complete freedom of worship was granted to those who accepted the formula of her many and all who opposed the carrying out of this measure were threatened with severe punishment from all parts of the empire the discomfited arians sought refuge at milan where she held her court she would fain have given them possession of a church but here she found herself powerless against the great ambrose whose influence in the city was greater than hers justina however died in the year three eighty eight and her son could scarcely refuse to theodosius who had given him the victory over the usurper maximus the support which he desired for the orthodox party from this time arianism declined throughout the empire and gradually died away from the end of the fourth century it is only found as a living force among the nations which pressed in from the frontiers the arian controversy beginning with the great question of the nature of the divine son

his eternal sonship had in its course involved the question of the personality and coequality of the holy spirit and led to a more exact definition of the trinity in unity it came to be recognized that while the father is god the son is god and the holy ghost is god yet they are not three gods but one god in greek theology mainly under the influence of basil the great and his school the expression of the great mystery which obtained general currency was one essence in three substances or personalities the special characteristic of the father is that he is unbegotten of the son that he is begotten of the holy ghost that he proceeds from the father or to use the form now for many centuries current in the west from the father and the son there were however some who taking the word substance to be equivalent to essence preferred to express the distinction of being by the word person rather than substance in the west the language of theology on this point was elaborated mainly by saint augustine

he holding that in latin there was no distinction between essentia and substantia expressed a threefold distinction in the one substantia by the words tres personae the so-called athanasian creed probably does not fall within the period treated in this book it is however little more than a full and methodical expression of the views of st augustine with regard to the procession of the holy spirit the orientals anxious to avoid any appearance of recognizing more than one source or origin of being always clung to the expression of the constantinopolitan creed which represents the spirit as proceeding from the father in the west the great influence of hilary of potier ambrose and augustine gave weight to the preposition that the holy spirit proceeds from the father and the son and this received the authority of the first council at toledo in the year five eighty nine the third council at the same place set forth the constantinopolitan creed itself with the clause relating to the holy spirit in the form ex patre et filio procidentum

and in this form it has for many centuries been recited in the western church chapter eleven part two recording by sean f sawyers of fallon missouri