66 COARSE AND CRINGING CREATURES 175 East as well as the West. So much for the political conditions that preceded the church's first efforts at creedmaking. "Now, if I should undertake to tell you in my own language about the factional strife that Constantine found among the Christians themselves, you would perhaps think I was exaggerating it; and so I will give it to you in the language of an authority that can hardly be questioned: "One thing, however, puzzled and annoyed the Emperor very much-the dissensions of the Christians, their perpetual squabbles about doctrines, and the fanatical hatred thereby engendered. In the Roman Empire the most different religions lived peaceably beside each other, and here was a religion which could not live in peace with itself."" "You seem," interrupted Craig, "to have laid aside your purpose to quote Christian authorities." 66 Not at all." "You don't mean to say that you are reading that terrific indictment from a Christian authority?" "That's exactly what I do mean to tell you," replied Granger. "I am reading from the article on Constantine in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge.' You certainly can't take exception to such an authority as that, when you remember that the title page bears the name of the Rev. Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., a professor in Union Theological Seminary. I admit that the language is rather severe, but you will find before we get through with these councils that the facts fully warrant it. Let me read the rest of the passage: "-here was a religion which could not live in peace with itself. For political reasons, however, unity and harmony were necessary; and in 325 the Emperor convened the first great ecumenical council at Nicæa to settle the Arian controversy. It was the first time the Christian church and the Roman State met each other face to face; and the impression was very deep on both sides. When the Emperor stood there among the 318 bishops, tall, clad in purple and jewels, with his peculiarly haughty and somber mien, he felt disgusted at these coarse and cringing creatures who one moment scrambled sportively around him to snatch up a bit of his munificence, and the next flew madly into each other's faces for some incomprehensible mystery. [But he saw that on the sentiment animating these bishops] the throne could be rested more safely than on the success of a court intrigue or the victory of a hired army.' “So you see that it was 'for political reasons' that Constantine assembled these 'coarse and cringing creatures' to make a creed, a formal statement of belief to which all should subscribe and through which harmony was to be brought about among the Christians themselves. "But that was not all. Christianity was the inveterate enemy of the pagan or State religion of the Empire. To weld and rivet together these two conflicting religions-not merely to substitute the Christian for the pagan worship as the State religion—was another of the tasks to which Constantine had set himself. The Christians, so bitter against 'heresy,' readily accepted the pagan observances that promised to bring them into favor with the Emperor. Constantine himself was anything but a devout Christian. Says the historian Leighton: “His religion was a strange mixture between Christianity and Paganism. He worshipped Pagan divinities, consulted the haruspices, and indulged in Pagan superstitions. . . The favor that Constantine bestowed upon the Christians was dictated by policy; for he hoped to secure their support in the contest with his rival.' "Says Dean Stanley: "The retention of the old Pagan name of Dies Solis, or Sunday, for the weekly Christian festival, is in great measure owing to the union of Christian and Pagan sentiment, with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects, Pagan and Christian alike, as the "venerable day of the sun.' His decree regulating its observance ... was his mode of harmonizing the discordant religions of the Empire.” "Venerable day of the sun,'" continued Granger, "is of course one of the earmarks of pagan sun-worship: the Hebrew Sabbath was crowded out of the Christian calendar to make a place for the day of the Sun-god. "Personally Constantine appears to have preferred the pagan religion, of which he, as Emperor, was chief pontiff. He practiced the forms of both religions. Instead of trying to stamp out the new religion, as most of his predecessors had done, he not merely tolerated it and to some extent embraced it, but also strove to adapt it to his own use and make it an instrument to further his designs. the task was not easy. But “Now let us see what it was that divided the Christians themselves, engaged them in fierce dispute, and filled them with religious wrath. The chief cause of the trouble in the THE ARIAN HERESY 177 church was the so-called Arian heresy, 'the first great heresy in the Christian church'. a most monstrous and blasphemous form of religious error', as you will presently see. It began to vex the church at Alexandria about the year 312. Says the Rev. Dr. Schaff: 666 Arianism is one of the most powerful and tenacious Christological heresies in the history of ancient Christianity. It was during a part of the fourth century the ruling creed in the Eastern church, though under constant, vigorous protest of the orthodox party. It was also at first the creed of most of the barbarian Teutonic races, before they were converted to Catholicity.' "Of course, where and while Arianism was the 'ruling creed' it could not be heresy, and if it had continued to be the ruling creed it would to-day be orthodox and the opposing view would be heretical. "And who was Arius? He was curate of a church in Alexandria, and is described as 'a man of very considerable talent, with all the external appearance of excellence.' It is explained that 'jealousy at seeing Alexander promoted to the throne of Alexandria [as bishop] betrayed him into heresy a most plausible theory, truly, in the light of the facts that we are about to consider! The heated stage of the controversy began at Alexandria in 318, and in 321 a council of a hundred Egyptian bishops assembled at that city to deal with it. Arius appeared before the council and defended his teaching. But vain were his arguments; for 'the bishops, having heard his blasphemies from his own mouth, proceeded to anathematize him and twelve of his followers, both priests and deacons.' "And what was this heinous doctrine taught by Arius that brought down upon him and his followers the church curse? Briefly and simply, it was this, that in the very nature of things a father must be older than his son; therefore, if God is the father of Jesus, God must be older than Jesus; therefore there must have been a time when Jesus did not exist; and like all other creatures he must have been made by God out of nothing. And Arius farther maintained that Jesus was capable, of his own free will, of right and wrong. 66 There you have it in a nutshell-that 'blasphemy', that 'powerful and tenacious heresy' that vexed not only the church but the Roman Empire, and that held our benighted Teutonic forefathers in Satanic bondage till 'orthodoxy' got hold of them and pulled them out of the pit. "Well, Arius, having been condemned by the holy bishops for teaching this damnable heresy, thereupon retiredwhere? to Palestine, the home of Jesus, the birthplace of Christianity! Arius had many adherents in the East. The ablest and most influential of his followers was Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, then the capital of the Eastern Empire. This Eusebius, afterwards bishop of Constantinople, was in high favor at court, especially with the Empress Constantia; for you will remember that Licinius was still on the throne. We shall find as we proceed that Palestine and neighboring countries were a favorite resort and nesting place for heresies. 66 Church curses, unless backed up by secular power, were as harmless then as now, and Arius and his disciples kept on preaching and proselyting, to the increasing fury of the other orthodox' party. Both the Arians and the antiArians claimed Origen as authority for their opposing views. At length a reconciliation was effected between Arius and Alexander; but hardly had Arius returned to Alexandria before the strife broke out again, and with still greater violence.' Constantine wrote a letter to Arius and Alexander, but was unable to quiet them; and 'the whole Christian world rang with the contest.' 66 Meantime, Constantine defeated and banished Licinius, and made Constantinople the capital of the reunited Empire. Finally the religious war of words waxed so fierce that Constantine called together the great council of bishops in 325 at Nice, near Constantinople. Both Christian and non-Christian authorities agree that it was political considerations that led him to call the council. As to the council itself, the Schaff-Herzog encyclopedia states the orthodox view when it says that very properly has a worldwide importance been attached to it, both on account of the profound metaphysical question it discussed and the influence of its decision upon the doctrinal system of many after centuries.' It laid down the doctrine of the divinity of Christ as held, with elaborations and 'interpretations,' by orthodox Christians to this day. It is also important in that it marks the beginning of close relations between the Christian church and the Roman State; and the political motives of Constantine are farther seen in the fact that in his letters to the bishops calling the council he made himself chargeable with all their expenses, transportation and other. (( 179 "Over three hundred of the leading bishops of Christendom attended the council of Nice, with some twelve hundred clericals of lower grade-among them Jacob of Nisibis, a noted miracle worker. 'In this magnificent assembly,' say the accounts, some were remarkable for their wisdom and eloquence,' and 'many of them were distinguished by apostolic graces.' This characterization differs somewhat from that which I read you a little while ago from SchaffHerzog; but no matter. The Bishop of Rome-he was only the Bishop of Rome' then, not the mighty Pope of later centuries-sent two delegates, being himself too old to undertake the journey. Constantine was present, but treated the council with great deference, and left it to settle the question at issue without Imperial pressure. And the arch-heretic Arius himself was there, with many of his followers, including the Bishops of Nice, Nicomedia, Chalcedon, Tyre, Laodicea, and Cæsarea in Palestine. It was, you see, from the native land of Jesus and the surrounding district that these most powerful of the heretics came. Bishop Eusebius of Cæsarea, the 'Father of Church History,'-a different person from Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia-attended the council as the special friend of Constantine, delivered the address of welcome to the Emperor, and sat at his right hand. The number of Arian bishops present is said to have been twenty-two. Arius appeared before the council and defended that same heretical teaching which he had been spreading in Palestine ever since he had been driven away from Alexandria four years before. 6 "This, then, was the 'profound metaphysical question' that, three hundred years after Christ, was rending_Christendom, threatening the peace and unity of the Roman Empire, and leading the Emperor to saddle the State with the enormous expenses of a great church council-the question whether a son can be as old as his father. Strange, is it not, that these topmost leaders of Christian thought, these men remarkable for their wisdom' and' distinguished by apostolic graces,' these professed followers of the meek and lowly Jesus, could find nothing worthier or more important to work upon in that age of ignorance, misery, and oppression! And even more strange, is it not, that in this later day enlightened men should still give their best energies to defending the puerile action of those fourth century fanatics! And not less strange is it, Stuart, that until a few |