dia his residence, having built a palace in that city a short time before the reign of Diocletian. Many of the bishops, therefore, were subservient to the wishes of Eusebius. He was continually writing, sometimes to Alexander, to induce him to abandon the dispute with Arius, and receive him into communion, and sometimes to the bishops of the different cities, in order to persuade them not to join that prelate. The churches were thus filled with tumult and disorder. Nor was the war of words confined to the pastors of the church, but the people also were divided, inclining to one or the other of the two parties. The matter proceeded, at length, to such a shameful extremity, that the Christian religion was publicly ridiculed, and afforded a subject of profane merriment to the pagans, even in their theatrical exhibitions. The people of Alexandria contended with childish petulance respecting the most sublime mysteries of our faith. Each party sent messengers to the bishops of every province, and succeeded in gaining individuals to their respective opinions. But the Meletians, who had recently been separated from the Church, espoused the cause of the Arians. They were so denominated from Meletius, one of the bishops of Egypt, who had been deposed by Peter of Alexandria, for several reasons, but especially for having offered sacrifice, in time of persecution, to the heathen divinities. His partizans were numerous; and, although he had no sufficient cause for deserting the church, he complained that he had been treated with injustice by Peter, whom he attacked with reproaches and calumny. After the death of that prelate, who suffered martyrdom under Diocletian, he transferred his abuse to Achillas, who was next to Peter in the episcopate, and then to Alexander, his successor. In this state of things, the controversy respecting our Lord's divinity taking place, Meletius, with his followers, favored the party of Arius, and supported him against the bishop. They who thought that the notions of Arius were absurd, approved of the sentence against him; and considered those who agreed with him in opinion as justly condemned. Eu

sebius of Nicomedia, however, and such as had embraced the views of Arius, wrote to Alexander, praying that the excommunication might be removed, on the ground that his opinions were orthodox.

On receiving intelligence of these transactions, the emperor was greatly afflicted; and, regarding the affair as his own private calamity, spared no pains to suppress the growing evil. Accordingly he sent a letter* to Alexander and Arius, exhorting them to be reconciled, by Hosius, bishop of Corduba, a city of Spain, who was a man of approved fidelity, and greatly beloved by the emperor. He had reached the age of seventy, had been a bishop thirty years, was a confessor in the persecution of Maximian, and celebrated throughout the Church. This letter, however well intended, produced but little effect. The disorder indeed, had acquired such a degree of virulence, that neither the endeavors of the emperor, nor the influence and authority of his messenger, were of any avail. Both Alexander and Arius remained inflexible, the people disputed with still greater acrimony, and tumults became more frequent.

But there was another subject which occasioned considerable uneasiness in the Church, viz. the difference which arose among the orientals with respect to the proper day of keeping Easter, some celebrating that festival in the manner of the Jews, and others following the custom of Christians throughout the rest of the world. This diversity of practice, however, with regard to the day of observing that important solemnity, did not hinder religious fellowship, although it might cast a shade of gloom over the joyful anniversary of our Saviour's resurrection. The emperor, therefore, finding that the quiet of the Church was not a little disturbed by these two evils, assembled (by the advice of some of the prelates, according to Rufinus,) a general council, inviting, by letter, all the bishops to meet at Nice, in Bithynia, and furnishing them with the means of conveyance. In consequence, a great number of them, not less than three

* Documents, B.

hundred and eighteen,* arrived from various cities and territories, attended by a vast concourse of the inferior clergy. Daily and ample provision was made by Constantine for the support and accommodation of this numerous body. It is mentioned by Sozomen, that several persons were also present, well instructed in the dialectic art, for the purpose of assisting the bishops.

So great a synod was without previous example; for the Church was not at liberty to convoke such numerous assemblies under the pagan emperors. The pastors of three churches founded by the apostles, were present, Macarius, bishop of Jerusalem, Eustathius, of Antioch, and Alexander, of Alexandria. Of this memorable council, Eusebius Pamphilus speaks in the following terms. "The most distinguished ministers of God met together from every part of Europe, Asia, and Africa. The sacred edifice, as if enlarged by the pleasure of God, inclosed at the same time within its walls, both Syrians and Cilicians, Phenicians, Arabians, and inhabitants of Palestine; Egyptians, Thebeans, and Lybians, with others arriving from Mesopotamia. A bishop from Persia was also present. Nor was the Scythian absent from this assembly. Pontus, also, and Galatia, Pamphylia and Cappadocia, Asia and Phrygia furnished representatives from their most able divines. Thracians too, Macedonians, Achaians and Epirotes, and those who resided at a vast distance beyond them, were convened. That illustrious Span

* The early historians of the church differ considerably as to the number of bishops assembled on this occasion. Athanasius mentions about three hundred; and in one passage of his works expressly says that there were three hundred and eighteen. Eusebius speaks of more than two hundred and fifty. Eustathius, of Antioch, who was present, as well as the two already named, and was an active member of the synod, declares that there were about two hundred and seventy, but that he cannot give the exact number, on account of the great multitude who attended; nor indeed does he profess to have been very solicitous to ascertain it. Sozomen reckons about three hundred and twenty. The number mentioned in the text was at length generally admitted as the correct one. See Cave, Hist. Eccles. Lit. p. 223.

† Vit. Const. L. III. c. 7.

iard, who is so highly spoken of, took his seat with the others. The prelate of the imperial city, indeed, was absent on account of his advanced years, but his place was supplied by presbyters. Constantine, alone, of all the princes who ever lived, wove so brilliant a crown as this, joined together by the bond of peace, as a suitable acknowledgment of gratitude to Heaven for the victories vouchsafed him over his enemies, and dedicated it to God his Saviour, in bringing together so great a convention; an image, as it were, of the apostolic assembly. For it is related that in the times of the apostles, religious men were gathered together from every nation under heaven. Among them were Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia and Pamphylia, Egypt, and the parts of Lybia, which is near Cyrene; strangers also of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians. In that congregation, however, there was this circumstance of inferiority, that all who were collected together were not ministers of God, while the present assembly included more than two hundred and fifty bishops; but such a multitude of presbyters, deacons and acolothists accompanied them, that it was difficult to determine their number. Among these holy ministers, some excelled by the wisdom and eloquence of their discourse, others by the gravity of their deportment and patience of labor; and others, again, by their humility, and the gentleness of their manners. Some of them were honored on account of their grey hairs, while others were recommended by their youthful vigor and activity, both of body and mind. Several of them had but recently begun to exercise the functions of their ministry."

This account of Eusebius may sufficiently refute the disparaging language of Sabinus,* bishop of Heraclea in Thrace, who derides the fathers of Nice as ordinary and ignorant men, It is very probable that in so large an assembly, collected from

* He was of the sect of Macedonius, who considered the Holy Ghost as a di̟vine energy, and not a distinct person.

various quarters, such a character might be applicable to some individuals; but there is no reason to doubt that there was a fair proportion of men of talents, learning and piety, in this convocation. Some were confessedly eminent for knowledge and abilities; and several of them, according to Theodoret, had exercised miraculous powers, which, though less common, it is likely, in the third and fourth centuries, than in the preceding ages of the Church, were yet to be found, in the opinion of some respectable writers, within its communion. Others were esteemed on account of their past sufferings in the cause of our holy religion, still bearing in their bodies, like the great apostle of the Gentiles, "the marks of the Lord Jesus."

Before the opening of the council, some who were experienced in the practice of disputation, began to agitate questions of theology. A layman of good sense, who had the courage to confess the name of Christ, in a time of persecution, perceiving that many were attracted by the force and elegance of their discourses, undertook to rebuke them by remarking, that neither our Lord nor his apostles had taught us the rules of logic, or idle subtleties, but the truth, which is preserved by faith and good works. All who were present listened to him with admiration, and approved of what he had said. The speakers themselves became more moderate in consequence; and the noise and clamor excited by their animated declamation were no longer heard.

It is also related* that certain heathen philosophers were anxious to take a part in the dispute, some of them wishing to be made acquainted with the doctrines of the gospel, and others, to whom the Christians were obnoxious, on account of the decaying credit of their own religion, desiring to create a misunderstanding, and to foment divisions among them. One of these "seekers after wisdom," in the vain confidence of his imagined eloquence, assuming an insolent manner, endeavored to

Sozomen, I.8.