"populace, who wanted to have Paul for their bi

"The Arians, in their council at Antioch, had "made a creed, and left out the pois. After this they proposed a new confession of faith, which was "said to have been the creed of Lucian * the martyr, "who was of the same sentiments which were after"wards held by Arius, as Alexander of Alexandria "and Philostorgius testify.

"In this creed, the Arians, avoiding the word con"substantial, call the Son ärftlór τε καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον τῆς σε θεότητος, ἐσίας τε καὶ βολῆς καὶ δυνάμεως και δόξης ἀπαράλλακτον કે σε εἰκόνα, και πρωτότοκον πάσης κλίσεως. Immutabilem et con"versioni non obnoxium ad divinitatem quod attinet, es"sentiæ vero, consilii, et potentice Patris immutabilem imaginem, primogenitum omnis creaturæ.

66

"Valesius translates άapaλλaxlov, nullatenus discre"pantem; but though the word is often to be found "in that sense, it signifies also immutabilem. This "induces me to think that they had a mind to draw up a creed in expressions which might be approved by both parties †, an expedient often practised in "this controversy.

66

66

"A. D. 347. Constans called a council at Sardica. "Three hundred and seventy bishops were assembled, " and most of them being Homoousians, Athanasius 66 was

Lucian was highly honoured by the Arians; and some of the most celebrated bishops of that party, as Eusebius of Nicomedia, Maris, Theognis, Leontius, &c. are said to have been his disciples. Philostorgius relates, that the body of this martyr was brought to Nicomedia by a dolphin, the very dolphin, I suppose, who carried Arion upon his back, and who had the same affection for saints as for musicians.

+ This Confession of Faith is Catholic, says Du Pin, although the word consubstantial be not in it. B. E. ii. p. 325.

66

"was acquitted. But the Arian prelates withdrawing themselves, met at Philippi, and there made contrary decrees, which also were called Sardicen"sian. Nor would Athanasius have been recalled to "Alexandria, if Constantius, moved by the threatening letter of his brother Constance, and for the sake of peace, had not given his consent to it, two years after the council of Sardica.

66

66

"A. D. 350. * A council was held at Sirmium, in "which Photinus was condemned. The bishops who "met there were almost all of them Arians †, yet were their canons received like those of other coun"cils.

66

"A. D. 357. Many Homoousians were banished, "and amongst them Liberius bishop of Rome, and other bishops. Liberius after having remained two years in banishment, subscribed to the condemna"tion of Athanasius, and published a confession of faith, in which, leaving out the word ucis, he de"clared the Son to be like the Father in all things.

66

"At this time the Arians began to be distinguish"ed and divided. Part of them were Homoiousians, "and part Anomoans. The first said that the Son "was altogether pois, of like substance with the "Father; the second, that he was dvouoos, unlike, or different, or unequal. Such was the difference be"tween the Arians, if we may trust to the accounts "of ancient writers.

66

"In the council of Ancyra, the Anomoans were "condemned, and it was decreed that two councils. "should be called; one for the eastern churches at Seleucia; another for the western at Ariminum. "A. D.

66

* A. D. 351. Cave. See Socr. ii, 29. and the notes. + Cave says, Semiarians.

"A. D. 359. At Seleucia the Homoiousians and "the Anomoans contended; the latter were overpowered.

"Four hundred bishops were assembled at Ariminum, of whom about a fourth part were Arians, where, after much wrangling and many delays, "most of them subscribed to a creed, in which it was only said, that the Son of God was not a creature "like other creatures.

66

"A. D. 360. Macedonius, who was driven away "from Constantinople, is said to have published his "notions concerning the Holy Ghost. With the "rest of the Arians he denied the consubstantiability "of the Son, and only said that he was like the Fa"ther; but he positively affirmed that the Holy "Ghost was xlsiv, created. His successor was Eudoxius, an Anomoan, who had been bishop of

66

66

Antioch, on whose removal, great dissentions arose "at Antioch. Some followed Eustathius who had "been deposed in the year 330. Others joined them"selves to Meletius, who had been ordained by the "favourers of Eudoxius, and who had deserted A"rianism, whilst a third party, who were Arians, "shunned them both, and had Euzoius for their bishop.

"A. D. 363. The Arians, the Semiarians, (so

they called the Homoiousians) and the Consubstan"tialists were quarrelling and contending every where, particularly in the eastern parts and "the Emperor Valens favoured and supported the "Arians.

66

Gregory and Basil, who had led a monastic life, "left their retirement, to oppose the progress of A"rianism." Le Clerc, Compend. Hist.

A. D. 364.

A. D. 364. Apollinaris, bishop of Laodicea, a man much esteemed for learning and piety gave rise to a new sect. He thought, perhaps hat Christ being one, it was impossible that two persos could be so united in him as to make one person. Thence (as some say) he concluded that in Christ tl Ayor supplied the place of an human soul. It is toe supposed that the Arians either were of the same cinion, or came into it and adopted it. Theodoret sas, Simon, Basilides, Valentinus, Bardesanes, &c. cknowleged Jesus Christ to be God, but said that he was mly man in appearance; the Arians held that the word in Christ supplied the place of a soul. Apollinars taught that the word was united to a living body, bu.a body not animated with a reasonable soul: Photins, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Paul of Samosata, said tht Christ was a mere man. Epist. 104.

This may suffice for a summary ccount of the Athanasian and Arian controversy, luring the first forty years.

The Pagans, who were by-stander in the times when this controversy was so warmly agitated, could not be much edified, or much disposed to embrace Christianity, when they saw its professors at such implacable variance. This made Ammianus Marcellinus say, that no wild beast was so cruel an enemy to man as most of the Christians were to each other. Julian, says he, knew their quarrelsome temper, nullas infestas hominibus bestias, ut sunt sibi ferales plerique Christianorum, expertus. xxii.

The Alexandrians, a people naturally satirists †, jesters, and buffoons, and the most quarrelsome and seditious

*

Zaμa quox. Corpus præditum animâ sensitiv â. + The Romans were fond of purchasing Alexandrian boys for

seditious of all ankind, those I mean who were Pagans, were higly entertained with these debates, and made them the sbject of constant ridicule and drollery in their theatre: Euseb. Vit. Const. ii. 61. They were doubtless the same opinion with Shaftsbury and his facetiou disciples, that ridicule is the only test of truth.

For an instare of their national temper and turn of mind, when kig Agrippa came to Alexandria, A. D. 38. the Aleandrians, who hated him because he was a Jew, and envied him because he was a king, contrived to scup a rival against him. They took a poor mad-mar who used to run naked about the streets, and hug a mat over his shoulders by way of robe, and put paper diadem on his head, and a cane in his hand. When they had thus equipped him, they set him up on bench in the most conspicuous place in the city; same with sticks on their shoulders stood round him as is guards, others knelt down before him, bringing nformations or complaints, or begging favours whilst all the populace shouted, and called him Royal Naster. Philo in Flacc. p.-970. Ed.

Par.

Elias Cretensis, in his Commentaries on Gregory Naz. p. 316. says, that the Alexandrians Ethnicum quendam hominem insigniter impudicum, veste detracta, pudendisque nudatis, in Antistitis solio collocarunt, tanquam si Antistes aliquis foret. Ille vero Doctoris larvam præe se ferens, in religionem Christianam inveheba

tur,

slaves, because they were spritely, witty, and extremely impudent. See Statius Silv. ii. i. 72. and v. v. 66. and the Commentators.

The poet Claudian was an Alexandrian, and his works are generally either panegyrics or satires: but he shines most in the latter, as appears from his two books against Eutropius.