CHAP. LXXI. THE COUNCIL OF NICE. I. -The occasion of the Council. II. Convened by Constantine. III. The number of the bishops present. IV. Were chiefly of the eastern part of the Roman Empire. V. Who presided in the Council, and the place of meeting. VI. Its time and duration. VII. Whether the Bible was placed before them? VIII. The points debated by them, with their Creed, Epistle, and Canons. IX. All the bishops signed the Creed, except a very few. X. The sentence passed upon Arius. XI. The judgments of ancients and moderns upon this Council. XII. The determination of the Council concerning Meletius. XIII. Concerning the time of keeping Easter, with remarks. XIV. Concerning the Arian controversy, with remarks. b I. WHEN Constantine became master of the East, in 323, or 324, after the final defeat of Licinius, a warm controversy was on foot in Egypt and the neighbouring countries, which gave the emperor a great deal of uneasiness. In order to put an end to it, and to restore peace to the churches, he sent, as Eusebius says, a bishop of great note, (Hosius bishop of Corduba, as Socrates informs us,) with a letter addressed to the bishop Alexander, and the presbyter Arius, the two principal contending parties. But notwithstanding the arguments and entreaties of the emperor's letter, and the utmost endeavours of the good man who carried it, the contention, as d Eusebius assures us, grew still warmer, and spread wider: or, as Socrates says, neither Alexander nor Árius were softened thereby, and among the people disturbances increased. II. Whereupon some time in the year 324, Constantine sent letters unto the several provinces of the empire, inviting the bishops to come and assemble themselves at Nice They who are desirous to inform themselves farther about the council of Nice, may consult Tho. Ittigi Hist. Conc. Nic. Tillemont, Mem. Ec. T. vi. Pagi Crit. in Baron. Ann. 325, 327, 340. and Basnag. Ann. &c. &c. De V. C. l. ii. c. 61, &c. d Ib. c. 73. c Socr. l. i. c. 7. in. • Ουτε γαρ Αλεξανδρος, ετε Αρειος ύπο των γραφέντων εμαλασσοντο. Socr. ib. c. 8. in. f in Bithynia: at the same time giving orders also for furnishing them with beasts, or carriages, and for bearing the expenses of their journey. And according to what Eusebius writes, there came thither bishops from Syria, Cilicia, 'Phoenicia, Arabia, Palestine, Egypt, Thebais, Libya, Mesopotamia. There was also at the synod a bishop from Persia. Nor were there wanting some from Scythia. And the most eminent of their bishops came also from Pontus, Galatia, Pamphylia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Phrygia. Likewise from Thrace, Macedonia, Achaia, Epirus. From Spain a bishop of great note. The bishop of Rome ' did not come, because of his great age: but there were presbyters deputed by him.' Their names, in Sozomen, are Vito and Vincentius. h i III. The bishops who met in this council, as Eusebius says, were more than 250, beside presbyters, and deacons, acolythists, and others, whose number could not be easily counted. Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, as cited by Theodoret, says, there were about 270 bishops. Athanasius reckons the numbers differently. In one place, he says, they were 318, in another 1about 300, in other places m 300. Sozomen computes the number at "about 320. Socrates, transcribing the passage of Eusebius, before referred to, puts down above 300. And afterwards he says they were P318. Constantine, in his letter to the people of Alexandria, as exhibited by Socrates, speaks of the synod's consisting of more than 300. Afterwards of 300. Theodoret, who cites the passage of Eustathius above referred to, does himself counts them 318. This is the number which has been generally followed. And divers ancient writers have observed a mystery in it, that the synod should consist exactly of the same number of men, with which Abraham" overcame his enemies. Epiphanius says, the number was 318, as appeared from the subscriptions then in being. And yet Eustathius, in Theodoret, does most expressly say, V De V. C. l. iii. c. 6, 7, 8. Conf. Socr. l. i. c. 8. Sozom. l. i. c. 16. 8 L. i. c. 17. h De V. C. 1. iii. c. 8. i L. i. c. 8. in. 1 * Ad. Afr. Episc. c. 2. p. 892. A. Tpiakoσioi delov n ελartov. Hist. Arian. ad Monach. c. 66. p. 383. D. Oi Twv тρlakoσiv, к. λ. Apol. contr. Arian. n. 23. p. 143. D. Twv TOIAKOO Tnpov. Ib. n. 25. p. 144. F. Vid. et de Synodis, num. 43. Soz. 1. i. c. 17. p. 430. B. p. 757. Socr. 1. i. c. 8. p. 19. D. 1 Socr. l. i. c. 9. p. 30. D. L. i. c. 7. p. 24. B. P Ib. p. 23. A. Ib. p. 31. A. t Vid. Hilar. de Synod. n. 86. et 118. Ambr. de Fid. n. 5. et passim. Liber. ap. Socr. 1. iv. c. 12. p. 223. A. B. u Gen. xiv. 14. V -ων και τα ονοματα εις ετι δευρο σώζεται τριακοσίων δεκα και οκτω επισκόπων. Η. 69. n. 11. W that he did not exactly know the number: which is somewhat strange, if there be any truth in what Epiphanius says. The late Mr. Beausobre, who did not implicitly embrace the prevailing opinions of the times in which he lived, and allowed himself to consider impartially what he met with in antiquity, has some thoughts upon this point, which may be placed here. Eusebius, who made a great figure in the council of Nice, makes it not to consist of more than two hundred and fifty bishops. Eustathius of Antioch, 'who complimented Constantine in an oration, counts them about two hundred and seventy.-Athanasius, who in two places says they were three hundred more or less, and elsewhere three hundred, in his letter to the African bishops 'says at length, they were three hundred and eighteen. I 'suspect, or rather I make no doubt, but this last place has 'been altered. It is not likely that Athanasius, who several ' times expresseth himself loosely, should in one place be so precise.' So that acute author. He afterwards observes several other alterations of numbers in ancient authors, concerning this very matter; and then concludes: If they fact were capable of proof, I could venture to be positive, that 'the number of bishops present in the council of Nice was 'not fixed at three hundred and eighteen, till after the mys'tery of it had been found out.' 6 IV. I hope I may be excused for not giving a particular account of the names and characters of the bishops, known to have been present at the council: whether Homoüsians, or favourers of Arius. For this I would refer to the ancient 2 ecclesiastical historians and their commentators. I would nevertheless observe, that the council consisted chicfly of bishops from the several parts of the East. It does not appear that there were many out of Europe: or that there were any from Africa, exclusive of Egypt and parts adjacent, except Cæcilian, bishop of Carthage. V. I forbear to enquire who presided in the council; whether the legates of the bishop of Rome, or Eustathius of Antioch, or some other: and who complimented the emperor in a short oration upon his coming into the assembly; whether Eustathius before named, or Eusebius of Cæsarea: as also where the council was held; whether in a church, or W Το γαρ σαφες δια τον της πολυανδριας οχλον ουχ ̓ οἷος τε ειμι γράφειν. Ap. Thdrt. 1. i. c. 8. in. x Hist. de Manich. T. i. p. 529. y Ib. p. 531. Soz. 1. i. c. 10, 11. Thdrt. 1. i. c. 11. 2 Vid. Socr. 1. i. c. 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15. Vid. Euseb. de V. C. l. iii. c. 11. et Thdrt. 1. i. c. 7. Soz. 1. i. c. 19. in the emperor's palace. They who have a curiosity to be satisfied upon those heads, may consult the authors referred to in a note at the beginning of this chapter. e C VI. The council was assembled at Nice in Bithynia in the year of Christ 325. How long it sat is not absolutely certain. Some have made it last two or three years; but learned moderns generally contract it within a small space. Basnage thinks it did not continue longer than six weeks, beginning the 19th of June, and ending the 25th of July. But for the most part learned men are of opinion, that it sat somewhat above two months, beginning the 19th of June, and rising the 2h of August. So Cave, and others, following Pagi; with whom Beveridge' likewise agrees. VII. Some have supposed, that the Bible, or the New Testament at least, was placed upon a table in the midst of the council, to intimate what was the rule by which they ought to decide. James Basnage, in his History of the Church, expressly saysh so: which I wonder he should do, without referring to some authority. The passage of Theodoret, alleged by me elsewhere, is no direct or full proof. The gospels were so placed in the council of Chalcedon; which may have been the case likewise in this council; but I do not know of any clear evidence of it. VIII. The three points debated and determined there, as appears from all the ecclesiastical historians, and from the synodical epistle of the council itself, were the Arian controversy before mentioned, the time of keeping Easter, and the affair of Meletius in Egypt. There is nothing remaining of this council, but the creed, the synodical epistle, and twenty canons: in which last m n b Nos sesqui fere mensis spatio circumscriptum esse putamus-cum a Junii xix. quo synodus incepit, ad usque Julii xxv. spatii satis foret absolvendis negotiis omnibus, quorum patres una convenerant. Basn. An. 325. n. 13. Et ita quidem post menses duos, et sex dies, die nempe Augusti xxv. celeberrimæ huic synodo finis imponitur. Cav. H. L. T. i. p. 352. d Vit. Ittig. Hist. Conc. Nic. n. 10. e Vid. A. 325. n. 6, 7. f Bever. Annot. in Can. Conc. Nic. p. 42. f. Did not Constantine the emperor, at the opening of the first general 'council, lay the Bible before them, as the only rule, according to which they were to proceed, and this with the approbation of all those holy fathers that were assembled in that council?' Tillotson's Serm. viii. Vol. 2. p. 64. folio. Enfin la décision-étoit claire, et conforme à l'Evangile qu' on avoit placé au milieu du concile, afin d'être la régle de la foi. Hist. de l'Eglise, T. 494. n. 2. iSee p. 54. i. P προκειμενο εν τῷ μέσῳ τὸ ἁγιωτατε και άχραντε ευαγγελις. Labb. Conc. T. 4. p. 93. C. I Vid. Socrat. l. i. c. 8. p. 22, et 25. Ap. Socr. l. i. c. 9. Thdrt. l. i. c. 9. Soz. l. i. c. 23. in. Epiph. H. 69. n. 11. p. 735. A. n Thdrt. l. i. c. 8. f. • That it made no catalogue of sacred books, see Du Pin. Diss. Prelim. sect. there is no catalogue of the books of scripture. But if the story of Paphnutius, related by P Socrates, and a Sozomen, be true, it may be thence argued, that this council received the epistle to the Hebrews. 6 IX. All the bishops present at the council did at last sign the creed, except Secundus bishop of Ptolemais, and Theonas of Marmarica, both in Egypt. Sozomen's account is,' that at length they all in general decreed, that the Son was consubstantial to the Father. It was said, that there 6 were seventeen who at the first favoured the doctrines of 'Arius: but at length most of these came over to the com'mon opinion.' Socrates seems to say, that there were five who stood out to the last, and would not receive the consubstantial doctrine; namely, the two Egyptian bishops above named, Eusebius of Nicomedia, Theognis of Nice, and Maris of Chalcedon. But the truth is, that though these three last hesitated for a time, all subscribed in the end, except Secundus and Theonas. So Philostorgius says t expressly; and to the like purpose " Theodoret: and it is manifest from the words of the council itself, in ▾ their synodical epistle, to be quoted presently. u X. The synod excommunicated Arius, and those who agreed with him, and forbade his going to Alexandria, as w Sozomen writes. He adds, " The emperor banished Arius, and also published an edict, that Arius and his followers 'should be esteemed impious: that wherever any of his 'writings were found, they should be burned; and that if after this any were detected concealing his books, they 'should be liable to death.' Socrates speaking of the same edict says, one part of it was, that y Arius and his followers should be called Porphyrians, as having deserved the same brand of infamy, that had been affixed on Porphyry for writing against the christian religion. This whole sentence therefore all the adherents of Arius were involved in, equally with himself, except what relates to his writings. And every part of this sentence, I think, had been decreed before the council broke up, and is included in these modest, or artful expressions of the synodical epistle. 'And the things that have been decreed con v. p. 12. Tillem. Concil. de Nicee, art. xvi. fin. Basnage Hist. de l'Eglise, 1. viii. ch. 8. n. 1. P Socr. l. i. c. 11. q Soz. 1. i. c. 23. -συνεβησαν αλληλοις παντες οἱ ιέρεις, και όμοεσιον ειναι τῳ πατρι τον υἱον εψηφισαντο. κ. λ. Soz. 1. i. c. 20. in. Socr. 1. i. c. 8. p. 23. A. B. u Thdrt. 1. i. c. 8. fin. t Vid. Philost. l. i. n. 8, 9. ▾ Ap. Socrat. 1. i. c. 9. Soz. 1. i. c. 21. p. 435. C. D. et 436. A, B. * Soz. ibid. Ap. Socr. ib. p 28. A. B. |