tur, cur sese invicem calumniis appetere instituissent.i. 23. et Soz. ii, 18, Socrates was a Consubstantialist, so far as to believe even that miracles were wrought by the monks in favour of that doctrine, and yet upon examining the epistles written on the controversy by bishops of each party, he could not help concluding that they disputed about words of which they had no ideas, and charged one another with consequences and inferences which neither side would own. T४ ~ The council of Antioch, which consisted of Consubstantialists, wrote an epistle to the emperor Jovian, and explain their doctrine in the following manner: ̓Αναφέρομεν τῇ σῇ εὐλαβείᾳ, ὅτι τῆς ἁγίας συνόδω τῆς ἐν Νι καίᾳ πάλαι πρότερον συγκροτηθείσης τὴν πίςιν καὶ ἀποδεχόμεθα, και κατέχομεν. ὁπότε καὶ τὸ δοκῶν ἐν αὐτῇ τισὶ ξένον ὄνομα, τὸ τὰ ὁμοουσία φαμὲν, ἀσφαλῆς τετύχηκε παρὰ τοῖς παράσιν ἑρμηνείας, σημαινούσης ὅτι ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τὸ παρὸς ὁ Υἱὸς ἐγεννήθη, καὶ ὅτι ὅμοιος κατ' ουσίαν τῷ Πατρί. οὔτε δέ ὡς πάθους τινὸς περὶ τὴν ἄῤῥητον γέννησιν ἐπινουμένο, ἔτε κάτα τινα χρῆσιν Ἑλληνικὴν λαμβάνεται τὸ ὄνομα τῆς σίας. εἰς ἀνατροπὴν δὲ τῷ ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων περὶ τῇ γι' ἀσεβῶς τολμηθέν Jos Aper. Religioni tuce significamus, nos fidem eorum qui Nicææ olim congregati sunt, et probare et retinere. Etenim vocabulum in ea Synodo positum, quod quibusdam novum atque insolens videtur, Consubstantialis videlicet, id cautissimam interpretationem a Patribus accepit; ut scilicet Filius ex substantia Patris genitus, et quoad substantiam Patri similis esse intelligatur. Non quo perpessio quædam in illa inenarrabili generatione cogitetur aut nomen substantiæ juxta Gentilium usum et consuetudinem accipiatur: sed ut evertatur id quod Arius ausus erat asserere, Filium ex nihilo extitisse. Apud Sozom, vi. 4. This is interpreting obscurum per obscurius; and if any one can tell what these Lycophrons meant by outía, he must be very sagacious. All that we can learn from their epistle is, that the word ouría, being used by Christian divines, had lost its pagan signification, and had not acquired a new one. Si aurem præbeamus viris, quorum alioquin auctoritatem spernere nequaquam possumus, de Synodis veteribus loquentibus, nobis magnifica oratione describent ἁγίας καὶ οἰκουμενικὰς (υνόδες θεοφόρων πατέρων, συναθροισθείσας ἐπί τῆς βασιλείας το μεγάλο βασιλέως, και ισαποςόλο. Sanctos et æcumenicos cœtus adflatorum divinitus patrum, congregatos in regno magni regis et Apostolis æquiparandi, Quis, auditis his et similibus verbis, religioso quodam horrore et corpore et animo non contremiscat, ac paratus non sit oracula ejusmodi coetus avidis auribus excipere, haud aliter ac si coelo ipso emitterentur ? Verùm hæc est (quis crederet?) Abstracta Notio Synodorum, quæ in inconspicua Idearum Republica coguntur; non imago earum, quæ inter miseros mortales olim congregatæ fuere. Reges ignari (non legent hæc Mohammedani, nec Ethnici, sed ii quorum scire interest, quo fiet ut verum aperte proloquar) Reges, inquam, ignari, nec inter bonos principes numerandi, convocarunt Græculos, qui linguæ acuendæ per totam vitam operam dederant, rerum ipsarum ignaros, contendendi studiosos, perpetuis rixis. inter se divisos; et bardos aliquot homines ex occidente, rudiores quidem illos, sed non meliores; iique post pudendas contentiones, obscurissima quædam dogmata, verbis sæpe parum aptis, auctoritate sua firmant; quæ stupidi populi sine examine adorent, quasi divinitus accepta. Non ficta me loqui norunt qui Synodorum historias legerunt; nec certe vanus erat Gregorius Nazianzenus, qui dixit ; Οὐδέ τί σε συνόδοισιν ὁμόθρονος ἔσσομ ̓ ἔγωγε Ενθ' ἔρις, ἔνθα μόθος τε, καὶ αἴσχεα κρυπτὰ πάροιθεν, Nunquam ego sedebo in Synodis anserum aut gruum temere pugnantium. Illic contentio, illic rixa, et probra antea latentia sævorum hominum in unum locum collecta. Visne aliam Notionem Abstractam? Lege quæ de Ecclesia repræsentativa, ut solet vocari, a plurimis olim et nuper scripta sunt; illa nibil sanctius, nihil doctius, nihil amantius veri excogitari potest. Sed cave ne Abstractæ Notioni similem ullam in rerum natura quæras, nisi frustra esse velis. Si rem in qua reperiri oporteret, quod tantis laudibus ornatur, inspicias, delabêris forte ad opinionem Gasparis Scioppii, insignis Grammatici, qui Ecclesiam repræsentativam definiebat, mandram, sive gregem, aut multitudinem jumentorum, sive asinorum; et benigne atque amice locutum esse judicabis, quod ferarum non dixerit. Nec aliter de iis sensit Josephus Scaliger, cujus est hoc insigne judicium, in Scaligeranis Christianis orientalibus Græcis, Syris, hodie nihil pejus; et olim Episcopi Græci fuerunt nequissimi et superbissimi. Eorum Concilia fuerunt merce conspirationes. Latina Ecclesia longe honestius se gessit, quamvis intus multa et clam pessime fecerint. Clericus Art. Crit. i. p. 430. This description of general councils gave offence to many persons, whose reverence for those assemblies was at least as great as Le Clerc's and Scaliger's disregard. But thus much is certain, that by paying little deference to general councils few inconveniences arise, compared with those which inevitably follow a find monks than reasons; but the former without the latter will be of small service to them. After all, it hath happened sometimes that one council hath contradicted another; and this creates a terrible difficulty, out of which neither Valesius nor Symeon himself can extricate us. We have a more certain rule by which we may judge of councils, a rule given us by our Master, By their fruits ye shall know them. We need only survey their acts and monuments, their behaviour, doctrines, decrees, and censures, and compare them impartially with the morality, the simplicity, the prudence, the charity, and the piety of the gospel. By this method we may form a tolerable idea of them, though amongst the fathers of those centuries there was no Father Paul to do them justice, and to give us an account of their proceedings. "Athanasius was made bishop, and successor to "Alexander, because whilst he was deacon he had strenuously opposed Arius. Philostorgius relates "many things of him not at all to his credit, which perhaps are not more to be received than the reports "of the Homoousians concerning Arius, nor yet more "to be rejected, since prejudice and partiality were very prevalent on both sides, 66 66 "A. D. 330. The Nicene council by its determi "nations A. D. 325. could not appease the dissen"tions. Great were the contests and the quarrels in 66 Egypt between the Arians and the Athanasians, and "the Homoousian writers so represent the affair, as "to favour the latter, and to condemn the former in "all points, "This year a tumult was raised at Antioch on ac count of the controversy. " A. D. "A. D. 335, Athanasius was condemned by a "council held at Tyre, for having obtained the see of "Alexandria by unjustifiable methods, and for other "and worse misdemeanours, if Philostorgius may be "credited, ii. 11. This historian, though a favourer "of the Arian cause, yet freely censures Arius where " he thought him reprehensible, and therefore might "be a fair relater of other points. 66 "In the following year Athanasius was accused again by the same bishops who had condemned him " at Tyre, and who were now assembled at Constantinople, and the emperor Constantine banished him "into Gaul. "About this time died Arius, by a wonderful judgment of God, as his adversaries afterwards said. "But quarrels ran so high in those days, that there " is no confiding in the reports of either party. 66 "A. D. 341. Athanasius, who had been honourably recalled from banishment by Constantine the younger, was condemned and deposed by the coun"cil of Antioch, consisting of about an hundred bishops, of whom a third part were Arians, and Gregory of Cappadocia † was put in his place. "Julius, bishop of Rome, called a council, and ac"quitted Athanasius, and condemned the council of "Antioch. " Athanasius then returned to Alexandria. "Macedonius was appointed bishop of Constantinople, and Hermogenus the præfect endeavoured "to put him in possession, and to drive out Paul; "but Hermogenes was murdered by the Athanasian "populace, See the remarks of Pagi, in Socrates, p. 84. not. a. Who came in like a tyrant,, and committed many outrages, |