found the Athanasians and the Arians as on an equal footing in point of piety and morality, when the superiority of the former is too evident to admit of a dispute, so on the other hand it is certain, that the experimental use of the divinity of Christ, by no means employed an equal degree of the zeal of its patrons with the abstract doctrine itself. Hence Athanasius, though always firm and constantly sincere, fails in meekness and charity.

This great man continued an exile at Rome for eighteen months under the protection of Julius the bishop. Thither fled many others whom the Arian tyranny had expelled from their sees. Eusebius of Constantinople died soon after in the fulness of that prosperity, which his iniquity and oppression had procured him. Human depravity under religious appearances had in him attained a rare degree of maturity. And the only lesson which his life affords seems to be this, to warn the clergy to beware of secular ambition and the spirit of the world, which so exceedingly depraved this dignitary, that he at length became one of the most memorable villains in history. A double election followed his death, that of Paul, and that of Macedonius. Hermogenes, master of the militia,* was ordered by the emperor to banish Paul. He did so, and Paul's friends exasperated by a series of persecutions forgot the character of christians and killed Hermogenes. This happened in the year 342. Paul however was then banished the city, and his holy character exempts him from all suspicion of being concerned in the outrage.

At Rome Julius in a council of the western bishops justified Athanasius, and his fellow sufferers. Among these was Marcellus of Ancyra, whose zeal against the Arians had provoked them to charge him with Sabellianism. It is not the design of this history to enlarge on these niceties. But it is easy to conceive, how such a charge might be drawn up with specious appearances.

Fleury, b. xii. 21.

Marcellus explained, and was cleared to the satisfaction of the council; but whether justly or not is not so evident. The progress of error is easy, where the heart is not simply stayed upon God. Athanasius himself was afterwards far from being convinced of his soundness in the faith.

Julius wrote a public letter on this occasion, in which, after doing full justice to the sufferers, he concludes in a manner not unworthy of a christian bishop, not threatening, but advising those of the East not to do the like for the future, lest, says he, we be exposed to the laughter of pagans, and above all to the wrath of God, to whom we must all give an account at the day of judgment.

In the year 347, a council was held at Sardica by the joint order of the two emperors, Constantius and Constans, the latter being as steady in the support of the Nicene faith as the former was in opposition. Sardica was in Illyria, the border of the dominions of the two emperors. The intention was to unite, but it actually separated the two parties more than ever. Prayer, and holy breathings of soul, and judicious and affectionate preaching of practical religion were now at a low ebb. Peaceable spirits were absorbed in superstition, turbulent ones in ecclesiastical contentions. The life of faith was little known. They treated the doctrine of the Trinity as a mere speculation, and the result of their disputes was, that each party retired as they entered upon them. The Easterns finding that it was likely to be a free council, departed from it, leaving the Westerns to settle matters as they pleased. Hosius of Corduba, the venerable president of Nice, presided here also, and the Athanasian cause was decided in the favour of the Alexandrian prelate. They made also some canons, in which they condemned the translation of bishops. The pious and zealous spirit of Hosius was chiefly concerned in these things. Remarkable are the words. "A pernicious custỏm must be rooted out. None have been found to pass from a greater bishopric to a less. Therefore they are induc

ed by avarice and ambition." So reasoned and so ordained this council. But where the religion of the Holy Ghost, the religion of faith, hope, and charity exist not, the canons of councils forbid in vain. There are several canons also against the journeys of bishops to courts, and enjoining their residence. The time also of bishops remaining in another diocese was fixed, in order to prevent the supplanting of their brethren. These things shew the times: rules are not made, except to prevent abuses, which already exist.

The Easterns met at Philippopolis in Thrace, and excommunicated their brethren of the West; and for some time the two parties remained distant in this manner; while in Asia and Egypt the friends of the Nicene faith were treated with great cruelty. Into Europe the subtilties of this contention had not yet entered; men were there more simple, and followed the primitive faith in quietness and peace.*

In Antioch the Arian bishop Stephen was found too corrupt and profligate to be continued in his dignity by his own party. Leontius, who succeeded him, supported the Arian cause. Diodorus an Ascetic, and Flavian, afterwards bishop of Antioch, stirred up the faithful to a zeal for religion, and passed whole nights with them at the tombs of the martyrs. Leontius finding them to have the affection of the people, wished them to do this service in the church. And here I apprehend was a nursery of real godliness, but the account is very imperfect.

In the year 349 died Gregory, the secular bishop of Alexandria, as he 'may be justly called. Then it was that Constantius, intimidated by the threats of his brother Constans, wrote repeatedly to Athanasius to return into the East, and to assure him of his favour and protection. The exiled prelate could not easily credit a man who had persecuted him so unrighteously. At length he complied, and after visiting Julius at Rome, who sent a letter full of tenderness to the church of

* Fleury, c. 43.

Alexandria in favour of Athanasius, he travelled to Antioch, where Constantius then was, by whom he was very graciously received. The emperor ordered him to forget the past, and assured him with oaths, that he would receive no calumnies against him for the future. While Athanasius was at Antioch, he communicated with the Eustathians, who under the direction of Flavian held a convențicle there. This same Flavian was the first who invented the doxology, Glory be to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and in the singing of the Psalms not only those who frequented his meeting made use of it, but in general all who favoured the Nicene faith in the church of Leontius did the same in opposition to the Arian doxology, Glory to the Father, by the Son, in the Holy Ghost. So earnest were the two parties against each other. Leontius was a confirmed Arian, but of a milder temper than the rest of his party. He saw that it was by force only that he was in possession of his church; numbers of people still professing the Nicene faith. He dared not therefore oppose the Trinitarian hymns, and laboured to preserve peace in his own time, but touching his white hair, he said on the occasion, "When this snow shall melt, there will be much dirt," hinting at the dissensions which he imagined would arise after his death.

Constantius observed to Athanasius, that as he now put him into possession of all his Egyptian churches, he ought to leave one for the Arians. The Alexandrian prelate confessed it would be just, on condition also that the same liberty was allowed to the Eustathians at Antioch. The Arian party however, sensible of the superior popularity of their opposers, thought it most prudent to wave the proposal.*

The return of Athanasius to Alexandria was a triumph. Religious zeal and joy appeared in the garb of age, by a number devoting themselves to a monastic life. Acts of mercy and liberality were also abun

the

Socrates, b. iii. c. 20.

dantly performed. Every house seemed to be a church set apart for prayer. Such are the views which Athanasius himself gives us of the effects of his restoration:* a number of his enemies retracted, and justified him in the most honourable manner, and among these the recantation of Ursatius and Valens is remarkable. Asclepas was also restored to Gaza, and Marcellus to Ancyra, though the latter was not unmolested. The suspicion of his unsoundness was perhaps justly increased by the less ambiguous sentiments of Photinus bishop of Sirmium, who was supposed to tread in his steps, and was in a council at that place deposed as a Sabellian by universal consent. Germinius an Arian was elected in his stead, and, then, as well as at this day, the Sabellians and the Arians in opposing each other assaulted the truth, which lay between them: the former removing all distinction between the Father and the Son, the latter establishing a distinction which took away the Trinity of the Godhead. Each desired to remove the mystery from the doctrine, and in the attempt corrupted it. While those who were taught of God, and were content with inadequate ideas, sincerely worshipped the Trinity in Unity, and mourned over the abominations of the times.

A great change in civil affairs having taken place by the death of Constans, and the ruin of the usurper Magnentius, Constantius, now sole master of the empire, revived the persecution. About the year 351, Paul of Constantinople was sent into Mesopotamia, loaded with irons, and at length to Cucusus on the confines of Cappadocia. There, after suffering cruel hardships, he was strangled. Macedonius by an armed force, attended with much effusion of blood, took possession of the see. Paul received the crown of martyrdom, and the Arians seemed ambitious to equal the bloody fame of Galerius.

The weak mind of Constantius was again prejudiced by absurd calumnies against Athanasius, and a council

Athan. ad Solit. See Fleury, b. xii c. 52. † Theodoret, b. xi. c. 5.