Church History of the Government of Bishops and Their Councils, Chapter 3

Church History of the Government of Bishops and Their Councils · Chapter 3

p. 45CHAP. III.

The Council of Nice, and some following it.

§. 1. XXX. WE come now to the first General Council: General only as to the Roman World or Empire, as the History and Subscriptions prove, and not as to the Whole World, as the Papists with notorious impudence affirm: which I have elsewhere fully proved. This Council was called, as is probably gathered, Anno 325▪ in the 20th year of Constantine (though others assign other years.) That they were congregate about the Arian Heresie and the Eastern Controversie is commonly known: As also what wisdom and diligence Constantine used to keep the Bishops in peace: Who presently brought in their Libels of accusations against each other; which he took and burnt without reading them, earnestly exhorting them to peace, and by his presence and prudent speech repressing their heats and contentions; whereby the Synod was brought to a happy end as to both the controverted Causes: And Eusebius Nicomed▪ and Arius were brought to counterfeit repentance and consent to the Nicene Faith; which Constantine perceiving, being set upon the healing of the divided Bishops and Churches, he commanded that Arius should (as reformed) be received to Communion; which Athanasius refusing caused much calamity afterward.

§. 2. Because the Case of the Meletians is brought in by this Council, I think it useful (for our warning in these times) to recite the sum of their story out of Epiphanius, p. 717, &c. Haer. 63.

Meletius (saith he) was a Bishop in Th…bais in Egypt, of sincere Faith even to the death. In Diocletians Persecution, Peter Bishop of Alexandria, and he, were the chief of the Bishops that were laid in Prison, as designed to Martyrdom; while they were there long together with many fellow-prisoners, many called to Tryal before them were put to death, and many for fear subscribed to Idolatry, or denyed Christ: And when they had done, professed repentance and craved peace of the Church: As it had been in Novatus his Schismes, so it fell out here; Peter Bishop of Alexan. was for peace and pardon; Meletius and most of the other suffering prisoners were against it, and said, If they may thus revolt to save themselves, and be presently pardoned, it will tempt others to revolt: Peter seeing his opinion was rejected, rashly took his Cloak and hang'd it like a Curtain over the midst of the prison-room, and said, Those that are for me, come to me on this side, and those that are for Meletius go on that side to him: Whereupon far most of the Bishops, Priests, Monks, and people that were in prison went to Meletius, and but few to Peter. (A …ouler Rupture p. 46than that of the English Fugitives at Frankford.) This unhappy word and hour began the misery, among good men, expecting death: From that hour they keep all their meetings separate. Shortly after Peter was Martyred, and Meletius was judged to the Mines: As he went thither through the Country, he every where made new Bishops and gathered new Churches, so that there were two in the several Cities: ☞Those old ones that followed Peter called their Meeting, The Catholick Church; The other called theirs, The Martyrs Church: But yet they held a Unity of Faith. Even the sufferers that laboured in the Mines divided,☞ and did not pray together. At last Meletius and the rest were restored unto peace, and at Alexandria, Alexander and he lived in familiarity, and Meletius was he that detected Arius and brought him to Alexander to be tryed. But when Meletius was dead,☞ Alexander grew impatient at the private separate Meetings of his followers, and troubled them, and vexed them, and began to use violence against them, and would not have them depart from his Church: They refused still, and this bred stirs and Tumults. Alexander persecuting them, and following them yet more sharply, they sent some men, eminent for piety and parts, to the Emperours Court, to Petition for Liberty for their private Meetings, without impediment. Of these Paphnutius and Iohn their Bishop, and Callinitus Bishop of Pellusium were chief: who when they came to Court, being named Meletians, the Courtiers rejected them and drove them away, and they could not get access to the Emperour. On this occasion being put to wait long at Constantinople and Nicomedia, they fell into acquaintance with Euschius, Bishop of Nicomedia, the Head of the Arians, who pretending repentance was become great with the Emperour, who was all for the Clergies peace and concord. To Eusebius they open all the matter: He craftily took the advantage of their suffering and long waiting, and promised his help, on condition they would but Communicate with Arius, ☞who seigned repentance. The temptation over came them, and they yield; They that had gathered separate Churches, because they would not Communicate with the repenting Lapsed (to Idolatry;) yet yielded to Communicate with Arius, that they might be delivered from the persecution of a Godly Bishop, and keep their Meetings. They are brought to Constantine, who being all for peace, though against Schism, grants them the freedom of their Meetings; And thus joyning with the Arians for the liberty of their Assemblies, this became the greatest support to the Arians, without which (saith Epiphanius) they could not have stood. (So much doth Bishops tyranny or severity cross its own ends, and destroy the concord which they think by such tearing means to force; And so hard is it for men that could suffer Martyrdome from Heathens, innocently to bear the persecution of their Brethren, and so greatly doth it tempt them to use unwarrantable means for their preservation: Just as if the Non-conformists at this time should seek, by the favour of the Papists, to be delivered from the silencing and destroying Prelates, upon condition of a common liberty: The Cases are not much unlike.) Neque enim (saith Epiphanius) consistere p. 47Arius, dut fiduciam ullam habere potuisset, nisi eam esset occasioncm nactus, quae pessimam inter illos ad hodiernum usque diem concordiam devinxit. (But O, Father Epiphanius, why took you not warning by this, when you un-Bishoplike and un-Canonically set your self against holy Chrysostome?)

Alexander being dead, and Athanasius shortly succeeding him, he could not bear the Meletian Churches in his City: And after fair means he used foul: And going himself to look after such Meetings, with his Retinue, one of his Deacons in the Meletian Meetings broke a certain Vessel, which occasioned some chiding and fighting, which occasioned Accusations of the Meletians, and Calumniations of the Arians against Athanasius as a Man of Violence and Tyranny; which Constantine abhorring in a Bishop, and Euseb. Nicomed. representing the Matter as worse than it was, the Emperour (having granted the Meletians liberty for their Meetings, which Athanasius violently denyed them) in great anger commanded a Synod to be held at Tyre to examine the Matter, and Eusebius Caesariens. with some others to preside or order it: Where Potamo Bishop of Heraclea seeing Fus…bius Caes. sit as Judge and Athanasius stand, with Passion and Tears inveyed against Eusebius, ☜saying, Who can endure to see thee, Eusebius, sit and judge innocent Athanasius? Were not thou and I in Prison together in time of Persecution, and when I lost an Eye for the Truth, thou camest out unmaimed? And how came that to pass, if thou didst not promise some wicked deed or other to the Persecutors, or do some? Eusebius hearing this, suddenly rose and dismissed the Council, saying, If you dare carry it thus here, your Adversaries Accusations are to be believed: For if you play the Tyrants here, you do it much more in your own Country. Hereupon two Arian Bishops Vrsalius and Valens are sent into Egypt to enquire after the Truth of the Matter, who coming back with Calumnies against Athanasius, he fled from the Council by Night to the Court to the Emperour to give him information; who taking Athanasius for false and Tyrannical would not believe him, but upon Letters from the Council, and upon the provocation of Athanasius, who told him God would judge him for believing his Accusers, banished him, where he remained (in Italy) twelve or thirteen years, even till after Constantins Death. And when Constans had compelled his Brother Constantius to restore him, he was again banished; For George that had been made Bishop by the Arians (and by Constantius) was killed by the Heathen People in Iulians time, and his Corps burnt, and the Ashes scattered into the Wind, which increased the suspicion of Tyranny against Athanasius: But in Iovians Reign he was again restored; And after his Death, he conflicted with Infamies again: And when Athanasius was Dead, the Emperour Valens set Lucius over them, who afflicted the People that had followed Athanasius, and Peter whom they had chosen for their Bishop, and by Banishment, Death and Torments, made them know what Church-Tyranny was indeed.

Thus far Epiphanius giveth us the History of the Meletian Schism, and the effects of good Bishops impatience with Dissenters.

p. 48§. 3. But I must not conceal from the Reader that Baronius and Dion. Petavius say, that Epiphanius is deceived in all this History, and maketh the case of the Meletians better than it was; and that some Meletian knave beguiled him: But, 1. They give us no proof of any such knaves beguiling him at all: 2. And he that was so apt to over-do in suspecting and aggravating Heresies, (as in Origen's and Chrysostome's Case,) was not likely to make the Case here so much better than it was: 3. And how much nearer was Epiphanius in time and place, than Baronius and Petavius? and how easie was it then for him to have true notice of such publick things? 4. And if they make Epiphanius so fallacious in such a story as this, so near him, what a shake doth it give to the Credit of his copious History of the many other Heresies, which he had less opportunity to know: and consequently to the Credit of much of Church-History? Yet I confess, that the man seemeth not to be very accurate in his Disputes, nor all his Narratives; But rather by far to be suspected of making things worse than they were, than better. And I believe that some passages in this History are mistaken by him (as that the Meletians joyned with the Arians before the death of Alexander:) but that maketh their Case the better. Petavius saith also, p. 286. Animad. in Epiph. Multum in Historiâ Meletii lapsum esse suprà vidimus; Largiùs in Arianae Haeresis descriptione peccavit vir alioqui diligentissimus. And in his instance of the time of Arius death it's undeniable. But if in such famous Histories, we must read him with such suspicion and allowance, how much more in the many little ones that were more obscure?

§. 4. As to the Arians Heresie, the two Epistles of Arius recorded by Epiphanius tell us much of the truth of his mistake: And the Arians Arguments by him are at large recorded and answered. He that denyeth the Deity of Christ, denyeth his Essence: And he that denyeth his Essence, denyeth Christ, and is no Christian. But the Samosatenians, the Photinians, and our late Socinians, are far more perniciously Heretical than the Arians. For the Arians maintained, that Tres sunt hypostases, Pater, Filius & Spiritus Sanctus; and that God did ante sempiterna tempora unigenitum filium gignere, per quem & saecula & reliqua procreavit omnia; viz, subsistentem illum suapte voluntate condidisse, ejusmodi ut neque converti neque mutari possit, perfectam Dei creaturam, sed non tanquam rerum creatarum aliquam; foetum itidem, sed non tanquam unum è caeteris. They thought that before God made the rest of the creatures, he made one super-angelical perfect Spirit, by which he made all the rest, and that this is Christ; and that he received no other soul but a body only at his Incarnation, and this super-angelical spirit was his soul. This was the dangerous heresie of Arius.

§. 5. Dion. Petavius truly telleth us, that his great advantage was, that many of the Fathers of that Church had spoken in such kind of words before him, the Controversie being not then well considered: p. 285. ad Haeres. 69. having spoken of Lucian, the Martyr's giving advantage to A…ius, he addeth, Quod idem plerisque veterum Patrum cùm in hoc negatio, tùm in aliis fidei Christianae capitibus usu venit, ut ante errorum atque haereseon, quibus p. 49ea singillatim oppugnabantur, originem, nondum satis illustratà ac patefactâ rei veritate, quaedam suis scriptis asperserint, quae cum orthodoxae sidei regulâ minimè consentiant. (And yet the Papists swear, not to expound Scripture, but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.) Nè ab hoc Trinitatis mysterio ac quaestione discedam, observavimus jamdudum Justinum Mart. Dialogo cum Tryph. de filio Dei idem propemodum cum Arians sentire. And in his Books, De Trinit. he at large citeth the very words of him and many other Fathers. But he here giveth them this gentle excuse, Sed ab omni culpâ tam hic quam Lucianus aliique liberandi sunt, qui nondum agitatâ controversiâ, panem de eâ commodè pronunciâsse videntur. Simile quiddam de Dionys. Alex. tradit. Basilius, Ep. 41, &c. But it is enough to think charitably, that they were saved, without going so far as to say, they were without all fault. For Christianity is the same thing before such Controversies and after: And it's hard to think how he can be a Christian, that denyeth Christs Essence: But God is merciful, and requireth not knowledge alike in all, that have not equal means of knowledge. Which charity must be extended to others as well as to these Fathers. Yet the same Petavius cannot endure Camerarius, for saying, that Athanasius, though a valiant Champion of the truth, did sometime indulge his own desires, and mix some ill with sacred things: But if he were not at all to be blamed, Constantine was much the more to be blamed for banishing him; And why should not his honour be of some regard? The truth is, the Alexandrian Bishops and People were long more violent and troublesome than others, as not only Socrates, but many other Historians note: And as it was noted with dishonour in Theophilus and Cyril, and Dioscorus, &c. so it can hardly be believed by them that read the History throughout, that Alexander and Athanasius wanted not something of the humble patience, meekness, and healing tenderness and skill that their Case required: For who is perfect? And how apt are great Bishops to be too violent against Dissenters, instead of healing them with Love and clear convincing Evidence?

§. 5. Happy had it been if Prudence had silenced this Heresie betimes, for never any one did so great mischief to the Church. The badness of it, was the honour of the Niccne Council that suppressed it, as far as in them lay. But alas, the Remedy seemed quickly conquered by the Disease: As Constantine had work enough to keep Peace among the Bishops in the Council, by his presence and reproofs; so when the Arians profess'd repentance, his peaceableness caused him too far to indulge them; by which some of them got such interest in his Court, as proved the following Calamity of the Church. And it is the sadder to think on, that the two great Emperours, Constantius and Valens, that were deceived by them, and drawn into violent Persecution, are noted to be otherwise none of the worst men. Epiphanius saith, p. 737. Accessit & Imp…ratorum favor cujus initium à Constantio Imperatore profectum est: Qui cùm caeteris in rebus perhumanus ac bonus esset,—& alioquinpius …c multis probitatis ornamentis praeditus, hâc unâre a… e…ravit, quod non impressa à parente fidei vestigia seq…utus est: Quod ipsum tamen p. 50non illius culpâ factum, sed nonnullorum fraude, qui in die Iudicii rationem reddituri sunt; qui specie & nomine tenùs Episcopi, sinceram Dei fidem labefactarunt. —Et beati Constantii in errorem ab illis inducti, qui rectae fidei regulam ignoravit, eâdemque ignorantiâ ad illorum se utpote sacerdotum Authoritatem accommodavit, quod ipsum error illorum, ac caecitas, dep … ataque fides & ex diaboli profect a consilio, lateret. Accessit & alia causa quae huic serpentum officinae plurimum adjecit virium, Eusebius scilicet, qui callidè se insinuans, Valentis aures pii ac religiosi Imperatoris, ac Divini numinis amantissimi, corrupit. Qui quòd ab illo baptismo sit initiatus, ea causa fuit cur haec factio stabilis ac firma consisteret. If Epiphanius say true, we see what men these Persecuting Emperours were.

§. 6. As to the other part of the Councils work, the fixing of Easter-day, had not the Bishops been sinfully fierce about it, against each other, it had never been taken for a Heresie to mistake the time, nor had it been a work so necessary and great to determine it: seeing as Socrates, Sozomen, &c. tell us, many Churches differed in this, and matters as great as this, without condemning or separating from each other: And the Asians erred by the Motive of Tradition, and Irenaeus had long before censured the Roman Bishop for his violence in condemning them. And many good Christians even after the Councils determination, durst not forsake their old Tradition, nor obey them: Among whom, how long our Britains and the Scots stood out, Beda telleth us. And though the Audians, that also disobeyed, were called Hereticks, I would all Adversaries to Hereticks were no worse men.

§. 7. And because these Audians rose about that time, I think it worth the labour to add the sum of their History out of Epiphanius, that the World may better perceive what spirit the Hereticating Prelates were then of, and how some called Hereticks were made such, or defamed as such, and who they were that did divide the Churches and break their peace.

Epiph. l. 3. Tom. 1. p. 811. Of the Schism of the Audians, which is the 50th or 70th Heresie: The Audians live in Monasteries, in Solitudes, &c. Audius their Founder arose in Mesopotamia, famous for his integrity of life, and ardent zeal of Divine Faith. Who oft seeing things ill carried in the Churches, feared not to their faces to reprove and admonish the Bishops and Priests, and say, These things should not be so done: You should not thus Administer: As a Lover of Truth, he used to do such things as these, which are familiar with men of exquisite honesty, who through their excellent study of Godliness, use this great liberty of Speech: Therefore when he saw things ill carried in the Churches, he sometimes spake his thoughts, and could not forbear blaming them. As if he saw any of the Clergy over covetous of Money, be it Bishop or Priest, he would reprehend them: or if any abounded in luxury and pleasures; or if they corrupted any part of the Doctrine or Discipline of the Church, he would not bear with them, but blame them. Which was troublesome to p. 51men of a dissolute life: And therefore he underwent the greatest contumelies, being exagitated by the hatred and malicious words of them all. But he being thus tossed about, and beaten and reproached, did bear it all with an equal mind; and thus long continued in the Communion of the Church; Till some that were more vehemently offended with him for these Causes, cast him out: But yet he patiently bore all this, but being more earnestly intent for the promoting of the Truth, he still studied not to be drawn away from the Conjunction and Society of the Catholick Church. But when he and his friends were still beaten, and suffered unworthy usage, groaning under these evils, he took Counsel of the violence of these calamities and contumelies: And so he separated himself from the Church, and many falling away with him, a new Divorce was hereby made. For he did not in any thing depart from the right faith, but he with his partakers held in all things sincere Religion. Though in one small matter they are too stiff. About the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost they judg excellently, and as the Catholick Church, and swerve not a jot: and the rest of the order of their Lives is truly most excellent and admirable; so that not only He himself, but even the Bishops, Priests, and all the rest of them, live by the labour of their hands.

Indeed they had a conceit that the Body did partake of the Image of God, and they thought that to please Constantine, the Nicene Council had altered the Custom and Tradition of the Church about Easter: But these were not the causes of their departure from the Church, but the violence of dissolut… Bishops, that cast them out, as being impatient of their strictness and opposition to their sin.

§. 8. About Easter, saith Epiphanius, p. 821. Neque …ruditis ignotum est, quàm saepe diversis temporibus de illius festi celebritate varii Ecclesiasticae disciplinae tumultus ac contentiones obortae sint: praesertim Polycarpi ac Victoris aetate, cùm Orientales ab Occidentalibus divulsi, …acificas à se invicem literas nullas acciperent. Quod idem & aliis temporibus accidit: velut Alexandri Episcopi Alexandrini & Crescentii; quemadmodum contra se mutuò scripserint & acerrimè pugnaverint. Quae animorum opinionumque distractio, ex quo semel post Episcopos illos qui ex circumcisione ac Iudaeorum sectâ ad Christum se converterant, agitari coepit, ad nostra usque tempora eodem est tenore perducta. By which we see, 1. With what caution Tradition must be trusted: 2. How early Bishops began to divide the Church about things indifferent.

§. 9. That men that all, in the main, fear God, should thus contend, abuse, and persecute one another, is sad, and hath even been a hardening of Infidels: But, alas, the remnant of corruption in the best will somewhat corrupt their conversations. It is a sad note of Epiphanius, ib. p. 816. [I have known some of the Confessours, who delivered up Body and Soul for their Lord, and persevering in confession and chastity, obtained greatest sincerity of faith, and excelled in piety, humanity, and Religion, and were continual in fastings, and in a word, did flourish in all honesty and virtue: yet the same men were blemished with some vice; as either they p. 52were prone to reproach men, or would swear by the name of God, or were over talkative, or prone to anger, or got gold and silver, or were defiled with some such filth, which yet detract nothing from the just measure of virtue.]

§. 10. But as God made a good use of the falling out of Paul and Barnabas, so he did of Audius his unhappy case. Being cast out of the Church, he took it to be his d…ty to Communicate with his own party, and a Bishop that suffered for the like made him a Bishop, and the Bishops accused him to the Emperour, that he drew many people from the obedience of the Church, and hereupon the Emperour banished him into Scythia. Dwelling there, he went into the inner parts of Gothia, and there instructed many of the barbarous in the principles of Christianity, and gathered many Monasteries of them, w…o lived in great religious strictness, p. 827. But it is hard to stop short of extreams, when men are alienated by scandal and violence: They ca…e to so great a dislike of the Bishops of the common Churches, that they would not pray with any man, how blameless soever, that did but hold Communion with the Church. Vranius a Bishop and some others joyning with them, made Bishops of the Goths. (Note out of Epiphanius, p. 827, 828. what Country was called Gothia in those times.)

§. 11. It is not to be past over that at the Nicene Council, the first speaker, and one of the chief against the Arians, was Eustathius Bishop of Antioch; And when Eusebius Nicomed. was made Bishop of Consta…tinople, he pretended a desire to see Ierusalem, and passing through Antioch secretly hired a Whore to swear, that Eustathius was the Father of her child: and getting some Bishops of his Faction together, they judged Eustathius to be deposed, as an Adulterer; and got the Emperour to consent and banish him: And after, the Woman in misery, confessed all, and said, that it was one Eustathius a Smith, that was the father of her child.

§. 12. In Pisanus's Con…il. Nic. Bin. p. 332. this Eustathius is made the first Disputer against a Philosopher: And whereas the great cause of the Arians Errour was, that they could not conceive how the Son could be of one substance with the Father, without a partition of that substance, Eustathius tells the Philosopher that took their part and urged, Faciamus hominem ad Imaginem, &c. that The Image of God is simple, and without all composition, being of the nature of fire: but he meaneth sure but analogically:

§. 13. In the same Pisanus, lib. 3. p. 345. Bin. the description of the Church is, There is one Church in Heaven and Earth; in this the Holy Ghost resteth; But Heresies that are without it—are of Satan.—Therefore the Pope was not then taken for the Head of the Catholick Church; For he pretendeth not to be the Head of them that are in Heaven. See what the Catholick Church then was!

§. 14. Note that, 1. the Council of Nice nameth none Patriarchs. 2.☞ They nullifie the Ordination of scandalous and uncapable men. Can. 9. and 10. Which will justifie Pope Nicholas forbidding any to take the Mass of a Fornicating Priest. 3. That Rural Bishops were then in use, p. 53and allowed by the Council, Can. 8. 4. That no Bishop was to remove from one Church to another, Can. 15. (which Euseb. Nicom. soon broke.) 5. Even in the Arabick Canons the 4th. si populo placebit, is a Condition of every Bishops Election. 6. The 5th Arab. Canon, in case of discord among the people, who shall be their Bishop or Priest, it is referred to the people to consider which is most blameless: And no Bishop or Priest must be taken into anothers place, if the former was blameless. (So that if Pastors be wrongfully cast out, the people must not forsake them, nor receive the obtruded.) 7. Those Ordained by Meletius were to be received into the Ministry where others dyed, If by the suffrage of the people they were judged fit, and the Bishop of Alex. designed them. Sozom. l. 1. c. 23.

§. 15. XXXI. The next Council in Binnius (and in Crabs Order) is said to be at Rome under Sylvester, with 275. Bishops: But this is confessed to be partly false, if not all: And is the same that is before mentioned; which ordered that no Bishop should ordain any Clerk nisi cum omni adunatâ Ecclesiâ, ☜But with all the Church united, or gathered into one: (Which Canon seemeth made when a Church was no more than could meet together, and when the People had a Negative Voice.)

But the Concil. Gangrense is Binnius's next (though Crab put afterward some of the forementioned also) said to be in Sylvesters days; (and yet Sozomen and some others, say that the Council of Nice was in Iulius days, though most say otherwise.) Here were sixteen Bishops, who condemned some Errours of Eustathius of Armenia, or rather one Eutactus, as Bin. thinks, who was too severe against Marriage, as if it were sinful, and against eating Flesh, and against receiving the Sacrament at the Hands of a married Priest; he made Servants equal with their Masters, he set light by Church-Assemblies, he drew Wives to leave their Husbands for Continency, and on pretence of Virginity despised married Persons; These superstitions they here condemned.

§. 16. XXXII. An. 335. The Council at Tyre was held for the Tryal of Athanasius, where he was unjustly condemned, and thereupon by Constantine banished, though his innocency was after cleared: Had not his severity against the Meletians driven them to joyn with the Arians against him, Epiphanius saith, they had not been able to make head thus against him.

Constantines Epistle to the Alexandrians, lamenting and chiding them for their Discords, is well worth the translating, but that I must not be so tedious: See it Bin. p. 391.

§. 17. XXXIII. The next is a Council at Ierusalem, An. 335. where Arius Faith was tryed, approved, and he restored to Alexandria and the favour of Constantine: The Creed which he gave in, was this.

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, and in the Lord Iesus Christ his Son, begotten of him before all Ages, God, the Word, by whom all things were made which are in Heaven and in Earth: Who came down, and was Incarnat…; p. 54and Suffered, and Rose again, and Ascended to the Heavens, and shall come again to Iudge the Living and the Dead: And in the Holy Ghost: The Resurrection of the Flesh: The Life of the World to come, and the Kingdom of Heaven: In one Catholick Church of God, extending it self from one end of the Earth unto the other.

Arius with this, protesting against vain Subtilties and Controversies, desireth the Emperour to accept of this as the Evangelical Faith; and the Council and the Emperour receive him, as for the joyful restoration of Unity and Peace, and so would undo what was done at Nice. The Emperour was so greatly troubled at the continued divisions of the Bishops, that he was glad of any hope of Unity and Peace: But this proved not the way.

§. 18. XXXIV. An. 336. A Council was called at Constantinople; in which they accused, condemned, and banished Marcellus Ancyranus, an Adversary to the Arians, as if he had denyed the Godhead of Christ, (upon some wrested word) though it was their denying it that offended him: Here also Arius was justified and Athanasius condemned: But Arius dyed shortly after.

§. 19. XXXV. The next is a Council of 116 Bishops at Rome, in or about An. 337. under Iulius; in which the Nicene Creed was owned, and the Arians condemned, and nothing else down that is recorded.

§. 20. XXXVI. The next was a Council at Alexandria which vindicated Athanasius from his Accusations, when Constantinus junior sent him home from his Banishment.

§. 21. XXXVII. The next was a Council at Antioch of near 100 Bishops (of which 36 were Arians) the most Orthodox (and the holy Iames of Nisibis one:) yet they deposed Athanasius, and the Arians (it's like by the Emperours favour) carryed it; In his place they put George a Cappadocian suspected to be an Arian, whom, (as I said before) the People murdered, burnt, and scattered his Ashes in the Wind, and he was one of the Arians Martyrs. (Unless England had ever been Arian, I cannot believe them that say that this is the St. George, that the English have so much honoured.)

§. 23. This Arian Council finding that the Emperours favour gave them the Power,☞ made many Canons against Non-Conformists. The first Can. is against them that keep not Easter at the due time. The second against them that come to the hearing of the Word, but communicate not publickly in the Lords Supper and Prayers, and against them that keep private Meetings, and that communicate with them. Can. 4. Was to make their Case hopeless that exercise the Ministry after they are Silenced, or Deposed, be they Bishops, Priests, or Deacons. Can. 5. Was that if any Priest or Deacon gathered Churches or Assemblies against the Bishops Will, and took not warning, he was to be Deposed: And if he go on, to be oppressed by the exteriour Power as Seditious. (There is their Strength.)

p. 55Can. 6, and 7. None suspended by his own Bishop was to be received by another, nor any Stranger without Certificates. Can. 8. Country-Priests may not write Canonical Epistles, but Rural Bishops may. Can. 9. No Bishop must do any thing without the Metropolitane, save what belongeth (by Ordination and Guidance) to his own Church. Can. 10. Though the rural Bishops are consecrated as true Bishops, yet they shall only govern their own Churches, and Ordain such lower Orders as they need, but not Ordain Presbyters or Deacons without the City-Bishops, to whom they are subject. Can. 11. Casteth out all Bishops or other Clergy-men, that go to the Prince without the Metropolitane's Counsel or Letters. Can. 12. Deposed or silenced Ministers must not go to Princes for relief, but appeal to a Synod. Can. 13. Bishops must not go or ordain in other Diocess, unless sent for by the Metropolitane; else their Ordinations there to be null. Can. 15. A Bishop condemned of all may not appeal. Can. 16. A vacant Bishop leaping into a vacant Bishoprick without a Council (the Metropolitane present) is to be ejected, though all the people chuse him. Can. 17. If any Bishop be ordained to a Church, and refuse or neglect the Office, let him be excommunicate till he receive it. Can. 18. If any Bishop ordained to a Parish neglect it, because the people will not receive him, let him enjoy the honour, and be heard in a full Synod. Can. 19. The Ordination of a Bishop is null, which is done without a Synod, and the Metropolitane. &c.

§. 24. XXXVIII. Another Council at Rome under Iulius undid what this former did, and acquitted Athanasius, Marcellus, and other injured Bishops: (perhaps Eustathius, saith Bin.)

§. 25. XXXIX. Athanasius being sent back when Gregory was put in his place, the City being ready to be in an uproar, Athanasius retired to Rome (or hid himself) foreseeing it; till fire and blood had proclaimed the Calamity of this Episcopal strife. And Pope Iulius called another Council at Rome, to answer the Letters of the Oriental Synod, which charged him with usurpation and despised him.

§. 26. XL. Anno 344. Another Council was held at Antioch, by those called Arians by some, Reconcilers by others, and Orthodox and Catholicks by themselves; in which they renounce Arius and his sayings, but yet leave out the word foreign [of one substance.] This they did in a new-made Creed; fitted purposely, as they said, to reconcile; as others, to deceive: To which end four had been made before, and not availed.

§. 27. XLI. A Council at Milan examined this Creed, and rejected it, for leaving out [of the same substance] and because the Nicene Creed was sufficient.

§. 28. XLII. The next is called an Universal Council, of 376 Bishops at Sardica, which cleared Athanasius, Marcellus, and others. And yet Augustine, and many others, reject this Council. It hath divers good Canons, but one among them for Appeals to Rome; which three Popes p. 56urged to Aurelius, Augustine and the other Africans, as a Canon of the Council of Nice: And whenas neither any of these Popes, nor the African Bishops once took notice that those words were in the Council of Sardica; the Papists answer, 1. That the Africans knew not of this Councils Canons, but had lost them, (though Gratus Bishop of Carthage was one.) 2. And that the Popes took the Canons of Sardica to be but Explications of the Nicene, and fo… they were but as one. (But why did they give no such answer?)

Bishops are here condemned that remove to any other Church; and they that are above three days non-resident; and especially they that go ad Comitatum, to the Palaces of Princes or great Prelates; but if they have just business they are ordered to send it by a Deacon.

§. 29. XLIII. The Oriental Bishops departing from Sardica came to Philippopolis, and gathered a Council by themselves, and condemned those whom the other had absolved, and others for Communicating with them.☞ Yet they renounced Arius, but also cast out the word [foreign, of the same substance] as not Scriptural; and are called Semi-Arians.

The Persons excommunicated by them were Athanasius, Osius, Marcellus, Protogenes, Asclepas, Gaudentius, Maximinus, Paulus Const. and Pope Iulius. They write a circular Epistle, specially sent to Donatus Carthag. in which they so vehemently speak for peace and piety, and lay such Crimes to the charge of Athanasius, Paulus, and Marcellus, as would astonish the Reader, and confound his judgment, whom to believe. Cruel Persecution, bloudy Murders, Profaneness, burning a Church, and such like they charge on Athanasius; and say that they offered the Western Bishops of Sardica to send five of their Bishops with six of theirs to the place where these things were done, and if they prove not true they yield to be condemned. On Marcellus they charge written Heresie (which Basil, Chrysostom, and others believed.) On Paulus Const. they charge that he was guilty of flames and Wars, and that he caused Priests to be drag'd naked into the Market-place, with the Body of Christ tyed about their necks; and that before a concourse of people he caused the consecrated Virgins to be stript naked in the open Streets, unto horrid shame. And for such Reasons they require all good Christians to abhor their Communion. Thus the Reader is called to grief and shame to hear Bishops thus odiously reviling each other, and tempting Infidels to take them all for wicked and utterly unpeaceable men.

§. 30. XLIV. An. 348 or 349. was a Council at Carthage (called the first:) It was gathered against the Donatists, whose Bishops pretended to be the only Catholicks; and their Circumcellions being violent Reformers, taking from the rich that they thought had wronged any, and righting the injured, and unjustly doing justice; and resisting the Emperour Constans his Officers, so that they were fain by Souldiers to suppress them, and cast out Donatus Carth. and by gifts reconciled the people that followed them.

p. 57Many good Canons for Church Order were made by this and most of the African Councils, no Bishops being faithfuller than they. Several passages in their Canons shew that their numerous Bishops had Churches of no more people than our larger Parishes. And Can. 12. of this Council ordereth that where the Bishops by Contract divide their several People, one take not from the other.

§. 31. XLV. Anno 350. A Council at Milan received the repentance of Vrsatius and Valens that had accused Athanasius, and gave them Letters of reconciliation.

§. 32. XLVI. Constans constrained Constantius to recall Athanasius, but was himself murdered by Magnentius before he came thither: But at Ierusalem a Council was held in the way, which judged his reception, and wrote to Alexandria to that end.

§. 33. XLVII. Among the friends of Athanasius, Euphratas Bishop of Collen was one, that was sent on a Message into the East; where Stephen an Arian Bishop of Ant. got a Whore to go in to him: When she saw an old man, instead of a young one, which she expected, she immediately confessed all, and Bishop Stephen was cast out for it. But Euphrata…t after all, turned Photinian and denyed Christ to be God, and a Council at Colen deposed him.

§. 34. XLVIII. They talk of 3 Concilia Vasensia, or Vasatensia, and that they ordered [As it was in the beginning] to be added to the doxologie: But there is nothing of moment certain of them.

§. 35. XLIX. Anno 352. Liberius had a Council at Rome about Athanasius, and sending a Message to Constantius.

§. 36. L. Anno 353. At a Council at Arles, Athanasius is condemned, and the Popes Legate forced to subscribe it, with other Bishops, and some banished that refused it.

§. 37. LI. Pope Liberius desired a General Council, which the Emperour granteth, and it's held at Milan. Above 300 Western Bishops were there, most of the East (where the Arians reigned) could not come (an. 355.) Athanasius his Condemnation (Vrsatius and Valens revolting, and again accusing him) and Communion with the Arians, were the things there urged by the Emperour: Lucifer Calaritanus (after called a Heretick) and E… sebi…s Vercellensis, and a few more, refused to subscribe, and were banished; as Liberius after was; and Foelix made Pope: But most of the Bishops for fear, and desire of peace, subscribed. The Emperour himself wrote to Euseb. V…rcel. to be there (who had refused) with great profession of zealous piety, and desire of the Churches peace. But this scandal and miscarriage of the Bishops, and success of the Arians, was the effect of this General Council.

§. 38. LII. The Semi-Arians pretending to Universal Concord, thus prevailing by the Emperour and a General Council, Hilary Pictav. (a Marryed Citizen made Bishop) drew some Orthodox Bishops of France to separate from the Arian Bishops, and renounce their Communion; The Arians p. 58(or Semi-Arians) taking these for separatists, and injurious to them, (especially Saturninus) procured a Council … Byterris, to condemn them as Schismaticks; where Hilary was condemned and banished, an. 356.

§. 39. LIII. The General Council at Sirmium I out of order began with. Anno 357. Constantius resolving by all means to bring all the Bishops to one Communion, was present himself; There were above 300 Bishops out of the West, besides all the Eastern Bishops: The confusion was so great, that men knew not who were or were not Hereticks. Photinus denying the Godhead of Christ, the Bishops called Arian, desired this Council to accuse and condemn him, as they did: They drew up two or three Confessions themselves: The first was not Heretical directly, save by the Omission of the☞ [foreign:] which some perswaded the Emperour, being new and no ancient Scriptural or Symbolical word, was the Cause of all the divisions of the Bishops, and were that left out, all would be healed. This Council called Arian, passed 27 Anathema's against the Arians and Photinians: Pope Liberius subscribed to it and approved it, as the forcited words of his Epistle in Hilary shew. (And yet many Papists call it a Reprobate Council:) Old Osius, that presided at Nice, was forced by stripes, to subscribe to it, and to the condemnation of Athanasius. [That the Son was in all things like the Father,] was the substitute Form here used. In their second Form they say, that [Quia multos commovet vox, substantia, vel foreign, hoc est, ut diligentius cognoscatur illud quod foreign dicitur, aut foreign, nullam earum vocum mentionem debere fieri neque de iis sermocinandum in Ecclesiâ censemus, quod de iis nihil scriptum sit in sacris literis, & quod illa hominum intellectum & mentem transcendant, & quod nemo posset generationem filii enarrare, ut scriptum, Generationem ejus quis enarrabit? solum enim Patrem scire quomodo filium suum genuerit, certum est—& nemo ignorat duas esse personas Patris & Filii, ac proinde Patrem majorem, Filium ex Patre genitum, Deum ex Deo, Lumen de Lumine—] Many thought this a necessary reconciling way: The words [Person] and [Substance] stumbled the Arians: For they knew not how to conceive of three persons that were not three substances; nor how the Son could be of the same substance with the Father, unless that substance were divided: And at last wearied with contending, they thought thus to end all, by leaving out the name [substance,] and professing the Generation of the Son unsearchable.

The third Sirmian Creed had, [in unigenitum filium Dei, ante omnia secula & initia & ante omne tempus quod in intellectum cadere potest existentem; & ante omnem comprehensibilem substantiam, natum i…passibiliter ex Deo, solum ex solo Patre, Deum de Deo, similem Patri suo qui ipsum genuit, cujus generationem nemo novit nisi solus qui eum genuit, Pater. Vocabulum verò substantiae quia simplicius à Patribus positum est, & à populis ignor atur, & scandalum affert, eò quod in scripturis non contineatur, placuit ut de medio tolleretur, & nullam posthàc de Dei substantia mentionem esse faciendam.

p. 59§. 40. LIII. The Oriental Bishops offended at the second Confession at Sirmium, for leaving out the word substance, gathered in Council at Ancyra, an. 358. and rejecting the Arians, were called Semi-Arians, because yet they were not for [foreign] but the [foreign;] Not [the same substance,] but [Like substance.] These after turning Macedonians (for Macedonius was one of them) deny the Holy Ghost to be God.

§. 41. LIV. Constantius finding that all his endeavours missed their end, and that instead of bringing all the Bishops to Concord and one Communion, the very Arians, and the Semi-Arians, divided and subdivided among themselves, did summon another General Council at Nicomedia: But the City suddenly perishing, he called the Western part to Ariminum, and the Eastern to Scleucia, taking them yet but as one Council. Above 400 Bishops met at Ariminum, who were to determine first Doctrinal and then Personal Controversies, and then send ten Legates of each part to the Emperor, with the results: The most were Orthodox, but the Arian Legates were better speakers, and prevailed; so that the Emperour delayed them because of an Expedition that he had in hand against the Barbarians; In the mean time some Assembled at Nice, and drew up Another Confession: And when the Legates returned to Ariminum, the Arian Party of Bishops, by the Emperours countenance, so far prevailed, as that almost all the Orthodox subscribed to them. (Gaudentius Bishop of Ariminum was murdered by the Souldiers.) Binnius and some others, would have this Council at Ariminum to be two; the first Orthodox, the second Arian: Bellarmine and others called it but one: which was Orthodox in the beginning, but for fear and complyance fell off at the last.

§. 42. LV. Whether the Council at Seleucia shall be taken for one of it self, or but for part of that at Ariminum, though far distant, I leave to the Reader. But here the Heterodox Bishops carried all, but so as to divide among themselves; One party called Acacians were for forbearing the word [substance.] The Semiarians condemned both them and the Arians, and were for [Like substances.] They excommunicated and deposed many Arians, who appealed to the Emperour, and craved yet another Synod. So that the further he went for concord, the further he was from it, the Bishops dividing and subdividing more and more; and the Emperours and Bishops, by diversity of Judgment, and by Heresie, became now to the Church what Heathen Persecutors had been heretofore.

Sulpitius Severus tells us, that one thing that drew many to subscribe to the Arian and Semiarian Creeds, was a certain liberty of their own Additions or Interpretations, which was granted the Orthodox to draw them in. [Subscribe in your own sence. q. d.] And so conditional subscriptions quieted their Consciences, and when the Arians thought they had the Victory,☜ and had made the rest Conformists, it proved otherwise, for they did not in sence and with approbation subscribe.

p. 60But though the Filth of the Arian Heresie justifie all just care and endeavours to keep it out, the multitudes of new Creeds, then made by one and the other Party became such a snare and shame to the Church, that Hilary, among others, greatly lamented it, even in these sad expressions.

Post Nicenam Synodum nihil aliud quàm Fidem scribimus; dum in Verbis pugna est; dum de novitatibus quaestio est; dum de ambiguis, dum de authoribus querela est; dum de studiis certamen est; dum in consensu difficultas est; dum que alter alteri Anathema esse coepit, propè jam Nemo est Christi. Proximi anni fides quid immutationis habet? Primum decretum Homousion decernit taceri: sequens rursùs Homousion decernit & praedicit: Tertium usiam simplicitèr à Patribus praesumptam per indulgentiam excusat; Postremum quartumque non excusat sed condemnat: Tandem eò processum est ut ne que penes nos, ne que penes quenquam ante nos sanctum exinde aliquid at que inviolabile perseveret. Annuas at que Menstruas de Deo Fides decernimus: decretis poenitemus; poenitentes defendimus: defensos Anathematizamus; aut in nostris aliena, aut in alienis nostra damnamus, & mordentes invicem jam absumpti sumus ab invicem.

Is not this a doleful description of the Bishops so soon after their wonderful deliverance and exaltation?

The cause of all he tells us was partly forsaking the simple Form of Baptismal Faith as not sufficient, and partly following Votes and worldly Powers. Dum à quibus ea requiritur sua scribunt & non quae Dei sunt praedicant, orbem aeternum erroris & redeuntis in se semper certaminis circumtulerunt. Oportuerat humanae infirmitatis modestia omne cogitationis divinae sacramentum illis tantùm conscientiae suae finibus contineri quibus credidit: Neque post confessam & juratam in baptismo fidem in nomine Patris, Filii & Sp. sancti, quicquam aliud vel ambigere vel innovare. And speaking of mens perverting the sence, he addeth. Scribendae & innovandae fidei exinde usus inolevit: Qui postquam nova potius coepit condere, quam accepta retinere, nec vetera defendit, nec innovata firmavit, & facta est Fides temporum potiùs qùam Evangeliorum: dum & secundùm annos scribitur, & secundùm confessionem baptismi non tenetur. Periculosum admodùm nobis & miserabile est tot nunc Fides existere, quot voluntates: & tot nobis doctrinas esse quot mores, & tot causas blasphemiarum pullulare, quot vitia sunt; dum aut ita fides scribuntur, ut volumus, aut ita ut volumus intelliguntur. Et cum secundùm unum Deum, & unum Dominum & unum baptisma fides una sit, excidimus ab eâ fide quae sola est; & dum plures siunt, ad id coeperunt esse nè ulla sit: (referring to Nice.)

Fides enim quaeritur quasi fides nulla sit: Fides scribenda est quasi in corde non sit:☞ Regenerati per fidem nunc ad fidem docemur; quasi regeneratio illa sine fide sit: Christum post baptisma discimus, quasi baptisma aliquid esse possit sine Christi fide: Emendamus; quasi in spiritum sanctum peccâsse sit venia. Sed impietatis ipisus hinc vel praecipue causa perpetua est, quod fidem Apostolicam septuplo proferentes, ipsitamen fidem Evangelicam volumus confiteri; dum impietates nostras nobis in populis multiloquis defendimus magniloquentiae vanitate aures simplicium verbis fallentibus illudimus, dum evitamus de Domino Christo ea credere, quae de p. 61se docuit credenda; & per speciosum pacis nomen in unitatem perfidiae subrepimus, & sub rejiciendis novitatibus rursum ipsi novis ad Deum vocibus rebellamus & sub scripturarum vocabulo non scripta mentimur. Tutissimum nobis est primam & solam Evangelicam fidem confessam in baptismate, intellectam que , retinere ☜nec demutare quod solum acceptum at que auditum habeo bene credere: Non ut ea qua synodo Patrum nostrorum (the Nicene) continentur, tanquam irreligiosè & impiè scripta damnanda sint; sed quia per temeritatem humanam usurpantur ad contradictionem; quod ob hoc sub nomine novitatis, Evangelium negaretur impericulose, tanquam sub emendatione innovetur. Quod emendatum est, semper proficit; & dum omnis emendatio displicet, emendationem omnem emendatio consequuta condemnet, ac si jam, quicquid illud est, non emendatio aliqua sit emendationis, sed coeperit esse condemnatio.

And as to the second Cause, he saith, Ac primum misereri licet nostrae …tatis laborem & praesentium temporum stultas opiniones congemiscere; quibus patrocinari Deo humana creduntur, & ad tuendam Christi Ecclesiam ambitione saculari laboratur. Oro vos, Episcopi, qui hoc vos esse creditis: quibusnam suffragiis ad praedicandum Evangelium Apostoli usi sunt?☜ Quibus adjuti potestatibus Christum praedicaverunt, gentes que ferè omnes ex idolis ad Deum transtulerunt? Anne aliquam sibi assumebant è palatio dignitatem, hymnum Deo in carcere inter catenas & post flagella cantantes?—At nunc proh dolor! divinam fidem suffragia terrena commendant; inops que virtutis sua Christus, dum ambitio nomini suo conciliatur, arguitur.

Add what he saith of the Causes of Errour, Lib. 10. de Trin. initio. Non est amiguum omnem humani eloquii sermonem contradictioni obnoxium semper fuisse, quia dissentientibus voluntatum motibus, dissentiens quo que fit sensus animorum: Cum adversantium judiciorum affectione compugnans, assertionibus his quibus offenditur, contradicit. Quamvis enim omne dictum veri ratione perfectum sit, tamen dum aliud aliis aut videtur aut complacet, patet veritatis sermo adversantium responsioni: quia contra veritatem aut non intellectam aut offendentem vel stultae vel vitiosae volun…tis error obnitetur. Immoderata enim est omnis susceptarum voluntatum pertinacia, & indeflexo … adversandi studium persistit, ubi non rationi voluntas subjicitur, nee studium doctrinae impenditur, sed his quae volumus rationem conquirimus, & his quae studemus doctrinam coaptamus. Iam…; nominis potius quam naturae erit doctrina quae fingitur, & jam non veri manebit ratio, sed placiti. Caetera ibi videat Lector.

But having been long in this Citation of Hilary, I return to the History, of what followed these Councils and Creeds aforesaid.

§. 43. LVI. In the mean time Constantius calleth a Council of 50 Bishops to Constantinople, where Aetius was condemned, and a ninth Creed since the Nicene formed, which excluded both the word substance and hypostasis or subsistence. The Semi-Arians detesting this, condemned and banished the Authors. But another Form sent from Ariminum was preferred, and imposed to be subscribed on all the Bishops of East and West.

§. 44. LVII. An. 360. Meletius Bishop of Antioch being put in by the Acacians proved Orthodox contrary to their expectation: And being p. 62preaching for the Trinity his Archdeacon stopt his Mouth, and he preached by his Fingers, holding forth One and Three: And for this was ejected, contrary to some former Covenants. Wherefore they were fain to call a Council at Antioch to justifie his ejection. Here they made yet another Creed… the worst of all before it.

§. 45. LVIII. Constantius being dead, Iulian the Apostate is made Emperour (would not this end the Quarrel of Christian Bishops?) Athanastus returneth to Alexandria after the third … years hiding, an. 362. Gregory the Bishop being … by the Heathen, and burnt to Ashes. He calls … Here besides the receiving of those that unwillingly … to the Arians, divers new Controversies are judged. 1. Eunemius, Macedonius, and the Semiarians denyed the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, which was here asserted. 2. Apollinaris thought that Christ took but a Body at his Incarnation, his Divine Nature being instead of a Soul, which was here condemned. 3. The Orthodox Greek: and Latines could not agree by what name to distinguish the Trinity: The Greeks said there were three hypostases, which the Latines rejected, as signifying three substances: Hierome himself could not away with the word Hypostasis. The Latines used the word [Person.] The Greeks rejected that as signifying no real distinction, (and are the Schoolmen for a real distinction yet?) For they thought Persona signified but the relation of one in Authority or Office. And thus while as Ierome said, Tota Gr…corum prophanorum Schola discrimen inter hypostasin & usiam ignorabat (Ep. 57.) and the sense of the word [Person] was not well determined, the danger was so great of further dissention among the Orthodox Bishops themselves, that as Greg. Naz. saith (de laud. Athanas.) The matter came to that pass, that there was present danger, that together with these syllables the ends of the World (East and West) should have been torn from each other, and broken into parts. But the Synod agreed that the Greek hypostasis and the Latine Persona should henceforth be taken as of the same signification. (But what that signification is, it was not so easie to tell.) Yet (saith Binnius) Augustine de Trinit. l. 5. c. 8, 9. and the Latines afterwards, were displeased with this reconciliation, and Hierome himself, who yet obtain'd of Damasus, Ep. 57. that the conciliation being but of a Controversie de nomine, might be admitted.

§. 46. LIX. An. 362. Iulian reigning (several French Councils besides) one then at Paris, were employed in receiving the repentance of the Bishops that under Constantius had subscribed to the Arians.

§. 47. LX. At Iulians death Athanasius calleth some Bishops to Alexandria, betimes to send to the Emperour Iovianus their Confession, to prevent the Arians, and other Hereticks.

§ 48. LXI. A Council also was called at Antioch on this occasion. The Semiarians petitioned Iovianus that the Acacians, as Hereticks, might be put out, and they put in their places: The Emperour gave them no other Answer, but that he hated contention, but would love and honour those p. 63that were for concord: They feeling his pulse, got Meletius to call a Council at Antioch, where they seemed very sound, and twenty seven Arian Bishops without any stop subscribed the Nicene Creed: So basely did these Bishops follow the stronger side; and, saith Binnius, of so great consequence with Bishops is the Emperours mind.

§. 49. LXII. An. 364. Valentinian being Emperour left the Bishops to meet when and where they would themselves▪ And a Council was held at Lampsacus, where the Semiarians condemned the Arians▪ And though some call it Orthodox (Busil, and some good men being there) Binnius saith, that the Macedonians here vented their denyal of the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, and that the Hereticks pretending to own the Nicene Faith were recieved by Liberius.

§. 50. LXIII. A Council in Sicily owned the Nicene Creed.

§. 51. LXIV. Some Bishops at Illyricum restored the Nicene Creed, the Emperour being now for it. And Valentinian and Valens wrote to the Asian Bishops to charge them to cease Persecuting any of Christs labourers.☜

§. 52. LXV. An. 365. At a Synod in Tyana Cappadoc. Eustathius Sebast. by Pope Liberius Letters was restored to his Bishoprick; and after cursed the Homousion, (the Nicene Creed and denyed the Godhead of the Holy Ghost: By their means Basil returned from his Wilderness to Caesarea, whence he fled to avoid the enmity of Eusebius the Bishop; who received him upon his professed resolution for Peace, which he would buy at any rates.

§. 53. LXVI. The Emperour Valens (unhappily taken in to Valentinian) after the conquest of Procopius, desired Baptisme, and having an Arian Wife, was baptized by Eudoxius Constant. an Arian Bishop; who engaged him to promote the Arian Cause; which he did with a blind religious zeal, persecuting not only the Orthodox and Novatians, but also the Semiarians and Macedonians. And a Council of Bishops in Caria, rejected [Consubstantial,] and restored the Antiochian and Seleucian Creed as the best.

§. 54. LXVII. An. 366. Some Arian Bishops at Singedim in Mysia, restored the Ariminum Creed [of Like substance] and solicited Geminius the Semiarian Bishop to consent, but prevailed not.

§. 55. LXVIII. Two Councils were held at Rome by Damasus; one to condemn Valens and Vrsatius, old Arian Bishops: Another to condemn Auxentius Bishop of Milan, and Sisinius as a Schismatical Competitor with himself: For when Damasus was chosen, the people were divided, and Damasus his Party being the more valiant Warriors, they fought it out in the Church, and left one day an hundred thirty seven dead Bodies behind them, to shew that they had no Communion with them. And because Sisinius and his Party still kept Conventicles, he was banished, and many with him, and now again condemned.

p. 64§. 56. LXIX. Another Council at Rome he had to condemn Vitalis and the Apollinarians (that took Christs Godhead to be instead of a Soul to his Body) and the Millenaries.

§. 57. LXX. A Council was called at Antioch to end a Schism, there being three Bishops, two Orthodox, Meletius and Paulinus; and one Arian, Euzoius: They ended the Schism, by agreeing that Meletius and Paulinus should both continue, till one dyed, and then the other alone should succeed him; the Presbyters being sworn not to accept it while one of them lived. But Meletius dying first, Flavianus a Presbyter was said to break his Oath, and was chosen in his stead, while Paulinus (an excellent person) lived: And so the Schism was continued.