If it shall be asked, whence Arius derived these notions, probable it is, he took the hint from the doctrine of the later Platonists, who at this time governed the schools at Alexandria. For although the ancient doctrine of the Platonic Trinity, asserting three divine hypostases, the Tayalòv, the vous or Xóyos, and the yux, all eternal, necessarily existent, undestroyable, and in a manner infinite, and which had a common тò eîov, or Deity, though this scheme, rightly stated, gave little, if any encouragement to the principles of Arius, yet the junior Platonists of that time, out of spite to Christianity, (to which the old scheme did too near approach,) began to depart from the ancient doctrine of Plato in this matter, stretching the differences, and gradual subordination, which the elder Platonists had made amongst the hypostases, into too wide a distance, particularly they made the third hypostasis to be yuxỳ éykóσμios, the immediate soul of the world, informing and acting all parts of the creation, thereby blending God and the creature together, or rather debasing the Deity into the rank of creatures. Now Arius having been brought up in the schools of Alexandria, and being a person of a quick subtle wit, easily caught up these notions, and adapting them to the Christian Trinity, began to assert so wide a distance between the first and second person, (for as yet nothing was said concerning the third,) as plainly to degrade it into the form of created beings, though still sheltering himself under ambiguous expressions. And for this attempt he was not a little prepared by the principles which he had sucked in from Lucian of Antioch, (though whether at the first or second hand it is hard to say,) concerning the person of our blessed Saviour, whom he maintained to be no more than a mere man, which Lucian himself had derived from Paul of Samosata. For that Arius was one of that tribe, we shall see by and by. VII. These impious and pernicious principles, which Arius propagated both by word and writing, were greedily entertained by persons of loose and instable minds, as indeed the minds of men are naturally disposed to novel and curious opinions, and men are most apt to admire what they do not understand. Arius, like a man that was resolved to go on with what he had begun, preached diligently at his church, and liberally scattered his notions amongst the people, and not there only, but diffused the k k Theodor. 1. i. c. 2. venom in all public meetings and conferences where he came, and that no method of a subtle heretic might be left unattempted, went home to their houses, and, by crafty insinuations, gained proselytes to his doctrine: by which means he soon made himself a considerable interest amongst the common people, and had drawn over to him seven hundred women that professed virginity,' and gained footing amongst the guides themselves, and those both of the inferior and superior order, not only in Alexandria, but Pentapolis, and the parts thereabouts. It was high time for Alexander to have his eyes about him, while the envious man thus sowed the tares. He had treated the man by all prudent and gentle methods, by wise counsels, and friendly admonition, if by any means he might reduce him to a right mind. But the stubborn heretic was not to be wrought upon by arts of kindness, and was therefore to be cut off by public censures. In order whereunto Alexander summoned a synod of all the bishops under his jurisdiction, who met at Alexandria, and having examined the matter, condemned his doctrine, deprived him of his ministerial station, and expelled him, with nine more of his adherents, out of the church. m SECTION II. HIS ACTS FROM ARIUS'S FIRST CONDEMNATION TILL THE COUNCIL OF NICE. The sum of Alexander's Arius's great endeavours to recommend and support his cause. letter to Alexander of Byzantium, concerning Arius, his principles, abettors, and condemnation. Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, Arius's great patron. Collucianists, who, and why so called. Arius's letter of complaint to Eusebius, who writes letters in his behalf. The intercession of the synod of Bithynia. He is admitted by the Palestine bishops. Condemned a second time at Alexandria. Alexander's encyclical epistle about his proceedings against Arius. The ill effects of the disputes about these matters. Arius's flight into Palestine, and reception there, and at Nicomedia. His attempt to reconcile himself to his own bishop. Constantine's trouble at these divisions of the church his letter to Alexander and Arius. Hosius, sent by him to Alexandria, not employed in these affairs as the pope's legate, shewed against Baronius. A synod holden by him at Alexandria, but without any good effect. : ARIUS, though depressed by the public sentence of the synod, yet m that he pursued it with more life and vigour than before. What he could no longer do by his public ministry in the church, he carried on by clancular and private arts," setting up conventicles for his party, mingling himself with every company, and starting opportunities of discourse, running up and down both in city and country, and filling all places with clamours against Alexander, and the synodical censures. Nay, the very women whom he had inveigled over to his party, immodestly ran up and down the streets and highways, to tell tales for him in every corner, to plead his cause, and promote his interest; some of them taking upon them to solicit the justice of the public tribunals, to take cognizance of his case, and to rescind the sentence of his diocesan, creating the aged and venerable bishop all imaginable trouble and disturbance. By these and such-like artifices he daily increased and got ground at home, himself all the while successfully fishing in the troubled waters. Abroad he supported and advanced his reputation by frequent messages and despatches, by writing to several of the most noted and eminent bishops of the East, to whom he so dressed up his notions, disguised his affairs, put so specious and plausible a colour upon his cause, that some of them openly appeared in his behalf, and most sent to Alexander to mediate a peace and reconciliation, the thing which Arius pretended he most desired. By this means Alexander found it necessary to make public, what he had hitherto suppressed and stifled, the true state of the case, writing to most of the Eastern bishops. His letter to Alexander bishop of Byzantium, (for to him Theodoret expressly says it was written, otherwise I should for some reasons have guessed it to have been Alexander bishop of Thessalonica,) is yet extant,° "Wherein he first complains that Arius and his party had, upon ill designs, and by ill arts, advanced and introduced an impious heresy into the church, a doctrine as destructive to the deity of the Son of God, as that of either Jews or Gentiles, which they securely vented in those dens of thieves to which they had betaken themselves, and wherein they skulked day and night: and not content with this, began to promote an open schism and sedition, making use of the disorderly women, whom they had seduced over to their side, to propagate their faction in every corner, yea, and to prefer indictments against him before the " Alex. Ep. ap. Theod. l. i. c. 4. Epiph. Hæres. lxix. c. 4. • Ap. Theod. ibid. civil magistrates. And though by reason of their clancular actings he had somewhat late discovered them, yet had he synodically condemned, and cast them out of the Catholic church; but so far were they from acquiescing in that sentence, that they dispersed themselves abroad, and by flattery and dissimulation had so far imposed upon foreign bishops, as to procure large letters of commendation from them, which they made use of to great advantage; nay, by some they had been admitted to communion, whose rashness herein was to be blamed. Next, he exposes the impiety of their principles, concerning the divine nature, and eternal existence of the Son of God; and shews at what places of scripture they took sanctuary to defend themselves; all which he refutes at large with admirable clearness and dexterity, and withal states the Catholic doctrine in this matter. Then he proceeds to inquire into the original of these men's principles, which he shews to have been first brooded and hatched by Ebion and Artemas, afterwards nourished by Paul of Samosata, then by Lucian of Antioch, the very dregs of whose opinion had been drank in, and vomited up by Arius, Achillas, and the rest; wherein they had received but too much encouragement from the three Syrian bishops, (he means Eusebius of Cæsarea, Paulinus of Tyre, and Theodotus of Laodicea,) whose case he wished might be canvassed and examined. That for himself, it was no wonder if after so many bold reflections upon the Son of God, and the divesting him of his divinity, they should liberally bestow their scorn, their slanders, and calumnies upon him and his party, and decry them as a company of ignorant and illiterate fellows, boasting that all wisdom dwelt with them, and that they had discovered truths that had been hidden from ages and generations, and which had never so much as entered into the thoughts of any but of themselves alone. This he crys out upon as a most impious arrogance, and an unmensurable madness, a piece of pride kindled by the Devil, which neither the divine demonstration of scripture, nor the unanimous consent of bishops in the doctrine of Christ, was able to restrain; nay, that herein they outdid the impiety of the Devil, who durst not utter one word to blaspheme the Son of God. Hence he goes on to declare his belief in all the great articles of the creed, both concerning God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; the one catholic and apostolic church, the resurrection of the dead, founded in that of our Lord Jesus Christ, who truly, and not in appearance, took our flesh upon him, and was born of Mary the mother of God, (ἐκ τῆς Θεοτόκου Μαρίας,) and in the end of the world came hither for the expiation of sin, who was crucified, and died, (though without any impairing, or disparagement to his godhead,) rose again from the dead, was taken up into heaven, and set down at the right hand of the divine Majesty. This was the doctrine he taught and preached, this the apostolic faith of the church, for which he was ready to lay down his life, little regarding the opposition that was made against it by Arius and his accomplices, enemies of the truth, who were therefore expelled the church, according to St. Paul's sentence in the case, 'that if any one,' yea though pretending himself' an angel from heaven, should preach any other gospel than what they had received, he should be accursed.' In conclusion he advises him, that he would keep a vigilant eye upon them, who, under a pretence of peace and piety, laboured to insinuate themselves in all parts, that he would give them no entertainment, who had been regularly expelled and cast out of the church, but by letters would testify his agreement in the apostolic doctrine, and his approbation of what he had acted against those gainsayers, as great numbers had done in all provinces, as he might see by the account which by Appion his deacon he then sent to him." This is the sum of that very prolix letter, which though particularly directed to the bishop of Byzantium, yet (as is plain from several passages in it) was intended to be of a more general concernment, and that copies of it (as no doubt they were) should be communicated to all the neighbour bishops. To the same effect he wrote to Philogonius," bishop of Antioch, Eustathius of Beræa, and many more, to the number in all from first to last of seventy epistles, which, together with their answers, were carefully collected and kept together; as were also those of Arius and his side, and laid up in the severalrepositories of each party, whence the writers of those times furnished themselves with materials for the transactions of that age. II. Amongst those to whom Arius addressed himself, the chief was Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, the head and champion of the cause. He had sometime been bishop of Berytus in p Theodor. l. i. c. 4. Epiph. Hæres. lxxix. c. 4. Socrat. l. i. c. 6. |