THE COUNCIL OF RIMINI.

373

the advantages of skill, of experience, and of discipline; and the minority was conducted by Valens and Ursacius, two bishops of Illyricum, who had spent their lives in the intrigues of courts and councils, and who had been trained under the Eusebian banner, in the religious wars of the East. By their arguments and negotiations, they embarrassed, they confounded, they at last deceived, the honest simplicity of the Latin bishops, who suffered the palladium of the faith to be extorted from their hands by fraud and importunity, rather than by open violence.* The council of Rimini was not allowed to separate, till the members had imprudently subscribed a captious creed, in which some expressions, susceptible of an heretical sense, were inserted in the room of the Homoousion. It was on this occasion, that, according to Jerome, the world was surprised to find itself Arian." But the bishops of the Latin provinces had no sooner reached their respective dioceses, than they discovered their mistake, and repented of their weakness. The ignominious capitulation was rejected with disdain and abhorrence; and the Homoousian standard, which had been shaken, but not overthrown, was more firmly replanted in all the churches of the West."

Conduct of

Such was the rise and progress, and such were the natural revolutions of those theological dis- the emperors putes, which disturbed the peace of Christianity under the reigns of Constantine and of his sons. But as those princes presumed to extend their despotism.

in the Arian controversy.

Ingemuit totus orbis et Arianum se esse miratus est. Hieronym. adv. Lucifer, tom. i. p. 145.

76 The story of the council of Rimini is very elegantly told by Sulpicius Severus (Hist. Sacra. 1. ii. pp. 419-430, edit. Lugd. Bat. 1647), and by Jerom, in his dialogue against the Luciferians. The design of the latter is to apologize for the conduct of the Latin bishops, who were deceived, and who repented.

* All lovers of truth must regret, whatever belief they may entertain, that the fathers of the early Christian church should thus descend to disgraceful misrepresentation and positive fraud. And this wicked conduct was not the exception in this particular council at Rimini, but the established and universal custom. Creeds were invented and successfully established by means that would disgrace a modern political caucus. Scriptures were interpolated, authoritics were forged, the venal were purchased, the ignorant were cajoled; and this was done in the name and for the advancement of Christianity. Ecclesiastical history," says the English Churchman (when speaking of the History of Christianity, on page 365), "requires honest expositors and unprejudiced students."

"Ecclesiastical history," says Dean Milman, on page 292, "is a solemn and melancholy lesson that the best, even the most sacred, cause will eventually "suffer by the least departure from truth."

On page 369, the bishop of Poitiers, the celebrated Hilary, sadly remarks: "Every year, nay every moon, we make new creeds to describe invisible mys"teries. We repent of what we have done, we defend those who repent, we "anathematize those whom we defended, and reciprocally tearing one another "to pieces, we have been the cause of each other's ruin."-E.

374

INDIFFERENCE OF CONSTANTINE.

over the faith, as well as over the lives and fortunes of their subjects, the weight of their suffrage sometimes inclined the ecclesiastical balance, and the prerogatives of the King of Heaven were settled, or changed, or modified, in the cabinet of an earthly monarch.

Indifference

of

A. D. 324.

The unhappy spirit of discord which pervaded the provinces of the East interrupted the triumph Constantine. of Constantine; but the emperor continued for some time to view, with cool and careless indifference, the object of the dispute. As he was yet ignorant of the difficulty of appeasing the quarrels of theologians, he addressed to the contending parties, to Alexander and to Arius, a moderating epistle;" which may be ascribed, with far greater reason, to the untutored sense of a soldier and statesman, than to the dictates of any of his episcopal counsellors. He attributes the origin of the whole controversy to a trifling and subtile question, concerning an incomprehensible point of the law, which was foolishly asked by the bishop, and imprudently resolved by the presbyter. He laments that the Christian people, who had the same God, the same religion, and the same worship, should be divided by such inconsiderable distinctions; and he seriously recommends to the clergy of Alexandria the example of the Greek philosophers; who could maintain their arguments without losing their temper, and assert their freedom without violating their friendship. The indifference

Eusebius, in Vit. Constant. 1. ii. c. 64-72. The principles of toleration and religious indifference, contained in this epistle, have given great offence to Baronius. Tillemont, &c., who suppose that the emperor had some evil counsellor, either Satan or Eusebius, at his elbow.* See Jortin's Remarks, tom. ii. p. 183.†

44

"Without Eusebius," says the learned Tillemont. " we should scarcely have any knowledge of the history of the first age of Christianity," and with him, it must be confessed, that we have very little that is reliable. "He had great zeal "for the Christian religion," says Dr. Lardner, and it seems erroneous for Christian writers to associate the name of Eusebius, the bishop of Cæsarea, with Satan, the arch enemy of mankind.-E.

Heinichen (Excursus, xi.) quotes with approbation the term "golden words," applied by Ziegler to this moderate and tolerant letter of Constantine. May an English clergyman venture to express his regret that the fine gold so soon "became dim" in the Christian Church?-MILMAN.

The worthy Dean deserves encouragement for his bashful and ingenuous apology. None can deny his modest request for permission to "express his regret" and all must admire his charming naïveté, while striving to conceal his blushes.-E.

"

"Philosophers," says Voltaire, "will never form a religious sect; and why? because they are without enthusiasm. Divide mankind into twenty parts; and "of these, nineteen consist of those who labor with their hands, and will never "know there has been such a person as Locke in the world. In the remaining "twentieth, how few will be found who read, and there are twenty who read "novels for one that studies philosophy. Those who think are excessively few, "and those few do not set themselves to disturb the world."--E.

THE COUNCIL OF NICE.

375

A. D. 325.

and contempt of the sovereign would have been, perhaps, the most effectual method of silencing the dispute, if the popular current had been less rapid and impetuous, and if Constantine himself, in the midst of faction and fanaticism, could have preserved the calm possession of his own mind. But his ecclesiastical ministers soon contrived to seduce the impartiality of the magistrate, and to awaken the zeal of the proselyte. He was provoked by the insults His zeal. which had been offered to his statues; he was alarmed by the real, as well as the imaginary, magnitude of the spreading mischief; and he extinguished the hope of peace and toleration, from the moment that he assembled three hundred bishops within the walls of the same palace. The presence of the monarch swelled the importance of the debate; his attention multiplied the arguments; and he exposed his person with a patient intrepidity, which animated the valor of the combatants.. Notwithstanding the applause which has been bestowed on the eloquence and sagacity of Constantine, a Roman general, whose religion might be still a subject of doubt, and whose mind had not been enlightened either by study or by inspiration, was indifferently qualified to discuss, in the Greek language, a metaphysical question, or an article of faith. But the credit of his favorite Ösius, who appears to have presided in the council of Nice, might dispose the emperor in favor of the orthodox party; and a well-timed insinuation, that the same Eusebius of Nicomedia, who now protected the heretic, had lately assisted the tyrant," might exasperate him against their adversaries. The Nicene creed was ratified by Constantine; and his firm declaration, that those who resisted the divine judgment of the synod, must prepare themselves for an immediate exile,* annihilated the murmurs of a feeble opposition, which, from seventeen, was almost instantly reduced

18 Eusebius in Vit. Constantin. 1. iii. c. 13.

79 Theodoret has preserved (l. i. c. 20) an epistle from Constantine to the people of Nicomedia, in which the monarch declares himself the public accuser of one his subjects; he styles Eusebius ὁ τῆς τυραννίγης ώμότητος συμμύστης, and complains of his hostile behavior during the civil war.

* Belief or banishment, was the convincing "argument used by this cruel tyrant, who, in the very year he presided at the council of Nice, inhumanly beheaded his own son, Crispus, after drowning, in a bath of boiling water, his wife. Fausta, and murdering many of his immediate relatives. "The preroga"tives of the King of Heaven," says Gibbon, "were settled, or changed or modified in the cabinet of an earthly monarch." And deluded enthusiasts have died a martyr's death for believing or disbelieving this Nicene creed, which was promulgated during the reign, and essentially moulded and formed by the influence of this zealous and depraved Christian emperor.-E.

376

He perse cutes the Arians.

CONCLUSION OF THE COUNCIL.

81

to two, protesting bishops.* Eusebius of Cæsarea yielded a reluctant and ambiguous consent to the Homoousion, and the wavering conduct of the Nicomedian Eusebius served only to delay, about three months, his disgrace and exile. The impious Arius was banished into one of the remote provinces of Illyricum; his person and disciples were branded, by law, with the odious name of Porphyrians; his writings were condemned to the flames, and a capital punishment was denounced against those in whose possession they should be found. The emperor had now imbibed the spirit of controversy, and the angry, sarcastic style of his edicts was designed to inspire his subjects with the hatred which he had conceived against the enemies of Christ.

80 See in Socrates (1. i. c. 8), or rather in Theodoret (1. i. c. 12), an original letter of Eusebius of Cæsarea, in which he attempts to justify his subscribing the Homoousion. The character of Eusebius has always been a problem; but those who have read the second critical epistle of Le Clerc (Ars Critica, tom. iii. pp. 30-69), must entertain a very unfavorable opinion of the orthodoxy and sin. cerity of the bishop of Cæsarea.

81 Athanasius, tom. i. p. 727. Philostorgius, 1. i. c. 10, and Godefroy's Commentary, p. 41.

82 Socrates, l. i. c. 9. In his circular letters, which were addressed to the several cities, Constantine employed against the heretics the arms of ridicule and comic raillery.

"The great object of Constantine," says Voltaire, "was to be master in "everything. He was so in the church as well as in the state. We behold him convoking and opening the Council of Nice; advancing into the midst of the assembled fathers, covered over with jewels, and with the diadem upon his "head, seating himself in the highest place, and banishing, unconcernedly, sometimes Arius and sometimes Athanasius. He put himself at the head of "Christianity without being a Christian, for at that time baptism was essential "to any person's becoming one. He was only a catechumen.

་་

64

It is believed that he put to death his eldest son, Crispus, and his own wife, "Fausta, the same year that he convened the council of Nice. He performed no penance for his parricide. It was at Rome that he exercised that cruelty, and from that time residence at Rome became hateful to him. He quitted it forever, and went to lay the foundations of Constantinople. How durst he say, in one "of his rescripts, that he transferred the seat of empire to Constantinople by the command of God himself? Is it anything but an impudent mockery of God and man? If God had given him any command, would it not have been, not to assassinate his wife and son?"-E.

The quarrel about the Trinity," says Voltaire, "existed long before Arius "took part in it, in the disputatious town of Alexandria, where it had been "beyond the power of Euclid to make men think calmly and justly.

"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 consubstantial "with him, or is he of a similar substance? Is he distinct 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? Is the Holy Ghost made! or begotten? or produced? or proceeding from the Father? or proceeding from the Son? or proceeding from both? Can he beget? Can he produce? Is his hypostasis consubstantial with the hypostasis of the Father and the Son? and how is it "that, having the same nature-the same essence as the Father and the Son, he 46 cannot do the same things done by those persons, who are himself?

"The Christians sophisticated, caviled hated, and excommunicated one 44 another, for some of these dogmas, inaccessible to human intellect, before the "time of Arius and Athanasius. The Egyptian Greeks were remarkably clever; "they could split a hair into four; but on this occasion they split it only into three. "St. Augustin himself, after advancing on this subject a thousand reasonings,

thodox party.

But, as if the conduct of the emperor had been guided by passion instead of principle, three And the oryears from the council of Nice were scarcely A. D. 328-337. elapsed before he discovered some symptoms

of mercy, and even of indulgence, towards the proscribed sect, which was secretly protected by his favorite sister. The exiles were recalled and Eusebius, who gradually resumed his influence over the mind of Constantine, was restored to the episcopal throne, from which he had been ignominiously degraded. Arius himself was treated by the whole court with the respect which would have been due to an innocent and oppressed man. His faith was approved by the synod of Jerusalem; and the emperor seemed impatient to repair his injustice, by issuing an absolute command, that he should be solemnly admitted to the communion in the cathedral of Constantinople. On the same day which had been fixed for the triumph of Arius, he expired;and the strange and horrid circumstances of his death might excite a suspicion, that the orthodox saints had contributed more efficaciously than by their prayers, to deliver the church from the most formidable of her enemies. The three principal leaders of the Catholics, Athanasius of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, and Paul of Constanti

83 We derive the original story from Athanasius (tom. i. p. 670), who expresses some reluctance to stigmatize the memory of the dead. He might exaggerate; but the perpetual commerce of Alexandria and Constantinople would have rendered it dangerous to invent. Those who press the literal narrative of the death of Arius (his bowels suddenly burst out in a privy) must make their option between poison and miracle.

was forced to confess that nothing intelligible could be said about the matter. "When it is asked,' said he, what are the three, the language of man fails, and "terms are wanting to express them.' 'Three persons, has, however, been said "-not for the purpose of expressing anything, but in order to say something, "and not remain mute." Dictum est, tres personæ, non ut aliquid disceretur, "' sed ne taceretur.' (De Trinit. 1. v., cap. 9.)

"Whether Jesus was created or uncreated, in no way concerned morality, which is the only thing essential. Whether Jesus was in time or before time, it is not the less our duty to be honest. After much altercation, it was at last "decided that the Son was as old as the Father, and consubstantial with the "Father. This decision is not very easy of comprehension, which makes it but "the more sublime.

"After the first council of Nice, another was held at Rimini. These bishops, "after months of contention, took from Jesus his consubstantiality. It has since been restored to him, except by the Socinians so nothing is amiss.

Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, a great persecutor of heretics, was him"self condemned as a heretic, for having maintained that, although Jesus was really God, yet his mother was not absolutely mother of God, but mother of Jesus. St. Cyril procured the condemnation of Nestorius; but the partisans of "Nestorius also procured the deposition of St. Cyril, in the same council; which put the Holy Ghost in considerable perplexity.

Here, gentle reader, oberve, that the gospel says not one syllable of the con"substantiality of the Word, nor of Mary's having had the honor of being the "mother of God, no more than of the other disputed points which brought together so many infallible councils."-E,