Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

he saw into their tempers, and was no stranger to the haughtiness and pride that influenced some, and the envy and hatred that prevailed in others.*

It requires not the spirit of prophecy to anticipate the effects which must flow from the disgraceful proceedings of this general council, though Constantine himself wrote letters, enjoining universal conformity to its decrees, and urges as a reason for it, that " what they had decreed was the will of God, and that the agreement of so great a number of such bishops was by inspiration of the Holy Ghost." It laid the foundation for a system of persecution of a complexion altogether new-professed Christians tyrannising over the consciences of each other, and, as will be seen in the sequel, inflicting torture and cruelties upon each other far greater than they had ever sustained from their heathen persecutors. The emperor's first letters were mild and gentle, but he was soon persuaded into more violent measures; for out of his great zeal to extinguish heresy, he issued edicts against all such as his favourite bishops persuaded him were the authors or abettors of it, and particularly against the Novatians, Valentinians, Marcionists, and others, whom, after reproaching with being "enemies of truth, destructive counsellors," &c. he deprives of the liberty of meeting for worship, either in public or private places; and gives all their oratories to the orthodox church. And with respect to the discomfited party, he banished Arius himself, commanded that all his followers should be called Porphyrians (from Porphyrius, a heathen, who wrote against Christianity)†—ordained that the books written by

* Eusebius's Life of Constantine, b. iii, ch. 20. Socrates, b. i. ch. 9.

+ The following is a copy of the Edict which Constantine issued on that occasion: it was addressed to the Bishops and People throughout the Em pire.

"Since Arius hath imitated wicked and ungodly men, it is just that he

SECT. II.]

Conclusion of the council of Nice.

241

them should be burnt, that there might remain to posterity no vestiges of their doctrine; and, to complete the climax, enacted that if any should dare to keep in his possession any book written by Arius, and should not immediately burn it, he should be no sooner convicted of the crime, than he should suffer death.* Such were the acts of the last days of CONSTANTINE THE GREAT.

SECTION II.

THE SUBJECT CONTINUED

From the death of Constantine the Great, to the close of the fourth century. A. D. 337-400.

On the decease of Constantine, the government of the Roman empire was distributed between his three sons. To Constantine the II. were assigned the provinces of

should undergo the same infamy with them. As therefore, Porphyrius, an enemy of godliness, for his having composed wicked books against Christianity, hath found a suitable recompense, so as to be infamous for the time to come, and to be loaded with great reproach, and to have all his impious writings quite destroyed: so also it is now my pleasure, that Arius, and those of Arius's sentiment shall be called Porphyrians, so that they may have the appellation of those whose manner they have imitated. Moreover, if any book composed by Arius shall be found, it shall be committed to the flames; that not only his evil doctrine may be destroyed, but that there may not be the least remembrance of it left. This also I enjoin, that if any one shall be found to have concealed any writing composed by Arius, and shall not immediately bring it and consume it in the fire, death shall be his punishment; for as soon as he is taken in this crime, he shall suffer a capital puGOD PRESERVE YOU.. nishment.

Eusebius's Life of Constantine, b. iii. ch. 65. Sozomen, b. i. ch. 21: Socrates, b. i. ch. 9. The reader will also find a very amusing account of the proceedings of this memorable council (provided he can make the necessary allowance for the author's predilection for the Catholic party, it being written More Maimburgiano, as Dr. Jortin would express it) in Maimbourg's History of Arianism, translated by Webster, vol. 1. book 1. 4to edition, 1727.

VOL. I.

ᏞᎥ

[ocr errors]

Britain, Spain, and Gaul, now called France. To his brother Constans, Illyricum, Italy, and Africa; whilst Constantius inherited the east, comprehending Asia, Syria, and Egypt, with the city of Constantinople, to which his father had transferred the imperial residence, and consequently made it the seat of government.

In the year 340, a quarrel arose between the two first mentioned brothers, which ended in a war, and that war in the death of Constantine. Constans now added the dominions of the deceased prince to his own, and thereby became sole master of all the western provinces. He retained possession of this immense territory until the year 350, when Magnentius, one of his own officers, with the view of getting himself declared emperor, contrived to procure the assassination of Constans. The usurper, however, did not long enjoy the fruits of his perfidy; for Constantius, justly incensed by his rebellious conduct, marched an army against him, and repulsing him at the outset, Magnentius, transported with rage and despair at his ill success, and apprehending the most terrible and igno-. minious death from the resentment of the conqueror, put a termination to his own life. Thus Constantius, in the year 353, became sole monarch of the Roman empire, which he governed until the year 361. Marching at the head of his army, in that year, to chastise the presumption of his own kinsman, Julian, whom the forces entrusted to his command in Gaul, had, in an hour of victory saluted with the title of Augustus, he was arrested by the hand of death, and expired at Mopsucrene in Cilicia, leaving the vacant throne to Julian.

.. None of the sons of Constantine the Great, inherited the spirit and genius of their father. They, nevertheless, so far trode in his steps, as to extend their fostering careto the Catholic religion, to accelerate its progress through the empire, and to continue to undermine and abolish the system of paganism.

SECT. 11.]

Constantine favors Arianism. '

243

But the controversy which had arisen between Arius and Alexander, relative to the sonship of Christ, was far from being put to rest by the decision of the council of Nice. The doctrine of Arius, indeed, had been condemned by a very large majority-he himself was banished to Illyricum, and his followers compelled to assent to the confession of faith composed by the synod-his writings also had been proscribed as heretical, and the punishment of death decreed against all who were convicted of the crime of harbouring them in their houses. But persecuting edicts cannot extend their dominion over the thoughts, and it is scarcely less difficult to impose an effectual restraint upon the tongue. Persecution has generally been found favourable to whatever cause it has been directed against; it some how enlists the sensibilities of our nature on the side of the persecuted party; and disposes the mind to a more candid and impartial examination of the question in dipsute, than we should otherwise possess. It is perhaps too much to affirm with Dr. Middleton, that "truth was never known to be on the persecuting side;"* an impartial examination, however, of the opinions and proceedings of both Arians and Athanasians on this occasion serves in some degree to justify the maxim, and convinces me that they were equally remote from the truth, even as they were alike well disposed to persecute each other in proportion as either party obtained the means of doing it. Only, it is due to the orthodox party to say, that they took the lead in punishing heretics with death, and persuaded the emperor to destroy those whom they could

not convert.

When the undivided government of the empire centered in the hands of Constantius, he evinced a strong predilection for the Arian side of the controversy, and Arianism became fashionable at court. The emperor fa

• Preface to his Free Inquiry, p. 8. 4to edit.

voured only the bishops of that party. Paul, the orthodox prelate of the see of Constantinople, was ejected from his office by the emperor's order, and Macedonius substituted in his room. This man adopted a scheme different from either party, and contended that the Son was not consubstantial, but of a like substance with the Father, openly propagating this new theory, after thrusting himself into the bishoprick of Paul; and thus, by the addition of a single letter, affecting to settle the whole dispute. Frivolous as was this distinction, it enraged the orthodox party, who, filled with rage and resentment, rose in a body to oppose Hermogenes, the officer whom Constantius had sent to introduce him unto his episcopal throne, burnt down his house, and drew him round the streets by his heels until they had murdered him.

ATHANASIUS, who had rendered such essential service to Alexander, his bishop, in managing the dispute with Arius at the council of Nice, had, by this time, risen to great popularity, and in reality was become the oracle of the orthodox party. We are supposed to be indebted to him for the creed which bears his name, and which fills so eminent a place in the liturgy of our national church. Even to this day he is extolled by such respectable writers as Milner and Hawies, as a prodigy of evangelical light. But whatever may be said of the soundness of his speculative creed, he was evidently a man of aspiring views and of persecuting principles. In a letter to Epictetus, bishop of Corinth, alluding to some heretical opinions then prevalent, he says, "I wonder that your piety hath borne these things, and that you did not immdiately put those heretics under restraint, and propose the true faith to them, that if they would not forbear to contradict they might be declared heretics, for it is not to be endured that these things should be either said or heard amongst Christians." And upon another occasion," they ought to be held in universal hatred," says he, "for opposing

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »