personage, who stands at the head of the next group which we meet--the
prelates of Asia Minor and Greece. This was Leontius of Cæsarea in
Cappadocia. From his hands, it was said, Gregory of Armenia had
received ordination, and from his successors in the see of Cæsarea had
desired that every succeeding bishop of Armenia should receive
ordination likewise. For this reason, it may be, Aristaces and his
company sought them out. They found Leontius already on his journey, and
they overtook him at a critical moment. He was on the point of baptizing
another Gregory, father of a much more celebrated Gregory, the future
bishop of Nazianzen. A light, it was believed, shone from the water,
which was only discerned by the sacred travellers.
Leontius was claimed by the Arians, but still more decidedly by the
orthodox. Others, of the same side, are usually named as from the same
region, among them Hypatius of Gangra, whose end we shall witness at the
close of these events, and Hermogenes the deacon, afterward bishop of
Cæsarea, who acted as secretary of the council.
Eusebius of Nicomedia, afterward of Constantinople, Theognis of Nicæa,
Maris of Chalcedon, and Menophantus of Ephesus, were among the most
resolute defenders of Arius. It is curious to reflect that they
represent the four sees of the four orthodox councils of the Church. The
three last named soon vanish away from history. But Eusebius of
Nicomedia, friend, namesake, perhaps even brother of the bishop of
Cæsarea, was a personage of high importance both then and afterward. As
Athanasius was called "the Great" by the orthodox, so was Eusebius by
the Arians. Even miracles were ascribed to him. Originally bishop of
Beyruth (Berytus), he had been translated to the see of Nicomedia, then
the capital of the Eastern Empire. He had been a favorite of the
Emperor's rival Licinius, and had thus become intimate with Constantia,
the Emperor's sister, the wife, now the widow of Licinius. Through her
and through his own distant relationship with the imperial family he
kept a hold on the court which he never lost, even to the moment when he
stood by the dying bed of the Emperor, years afterward, and received him
into the Church. We must not be too hard on the Christianity of
Eusebius, if we wish to vindicate the baptism of Constantine.
Not far from the great prelate of the capital of the East would be the
representative of what was now a small Greek town, but in five years
from that time would supersede altogether the glories of Nicomedia.
Metrophanes, bishop of Byzantium, was detained by old age and sickness,
but Alexander, his presbyter, himself seventy years of age, was there
with a little secretary of the name of Paul, not more than twelve years
old, one of the readers and collectors of the Byzantine Church.
Alexander had already corresponded with his namesake on the Arian
controversy, and was apparently attached firmly to the orthodox side.
Besides their more regular champions the orthodox party of Greece and
Asia Minor had a few very eccentric allies. One was Acesius, the
Novatian, "the Puritan," summoned by Constantine from Byzantium with
Alexander, from the deep respect entertained by the Emperor for his
ascetic character. He was attended by a boy, Auxanon, who lived to a
great age afterward as a presbyter in the same sect. This child was then
living with a hermit, Eutychianus, on the heights of the neighboring
mountain of the Bithynian Olympus, and he descended from these solitudes
to attend upon Acesius. From him we have obtained some of the most
curious details of the council.
Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyra, was among the bishops, the fiercest
opponent of Arius, and, when the active deacon of Alexandria was not
present, seems to have borne the brunt of the arguments. Yet, if we may
judge from his subsequent history, Athanasius could never have been
quite at ease in leaving the cause in his hands. He was one of those
awkward theologians who never could attack Arianism without falling into
Sabellianism; and in later life he was twice deposed from his see for
heresy, once excommunicated by Athanasius himself; and in the present
form of the Nicene Creed one clause--that which asserts that "the
kingdom of Christ shall have no end"--is said to have been expressly
aimed at his exaggerated language.
And now come two, who in the common pictures of the council always
appear together, of whom the one probably left the deepest impression on
his contemporaries; and the other, if he were present at all, on the
subsequent traditions of the council. From the island of Cyprus there
arrived the simple shepherd Spyridion, a shepherd both before and after
his elevation to the episcopate. Strange stories were told by his
fellow-islanders to the historian Socrates of the thieves who were
miraculously caught in attempting to steal his sheep, and of Spyridion's
good-humored reply when he found them in the morning, and gave them a
ram, that they might not have sat up all night for nothing.
Another tale, exactly similar to the fantastic Mussulman legends which
hand about stories of Jerusalem, told how he had gained an answer from
his dead daughter Irene to tell where a certain deposit was hidden. Two
less marvellous, but more instructive, stories bring out the simplicity
of his character. He rebuked a celebrated preacher at Cyprus for
altering, in a quotation from the gospels, the homely word for "bed"
into "couch." "What! are you better than He who said 'bed,' that you are
ashamed to use his words?" On occasion of a way-worn traveller coming to
him in Lent, finding no other food in the house, he presented him with
salted pork; and when the stranger declined, saying that he could not as
a Christian break his fast: "So much the less reason," he said, "have
you for scruple; to the pure all things are pure."
A characteristic legend attaches to the account of his journey to the
council. It was his usual practice to travel on foot. But on this
occasion the length of the journey, as well as the dignity of his
office, induced him to ride, in company with his deacon, on two mules, a
white and a chestnut. One night at his arrival at a caravansary where a
cavalcade of orthodox bishops were already assembled, the mules were
turned out to pasture, while he retired to his devotions. The bishops
had conceived an alarm lest the cause of orthodoxy should suffer in the
council by the ignorance or awkwardness of the Shepherd of Cyprus when
opposed to the subtleties of the Alexandrian heretic. Accordingly,
taking advantage of his encounter, they determined to throw a decisive
impediment in his way. They cut off the heads of his two mules, and
then, as is the custom in oriental travelling, started on their journey
before sunrise. Spyridion also rose, but was met by his terrified deacon
announcing the unexpected disaster. On arriving at the spot the saint
bade the deacon attach the heads to the dead bodies. He did so, and at a
sign from the bishop the two mules with their restored heads shook
themselves as if from a deep sleep, and started to their feet. Spyridion
and the deacon mounted and soon overtook the travellers. As the day
broke the prelates and the deacon were alike astonished at seeing that
he, performing the annexation in the dark and in haste, had fixed the
heads on the wrong shoulders, so that the white mule had now a chestnut
head, and the chestnut mule had the head of its white companion. Thus
the miracle was doubly attested, the bishops doubly discomfited, and the
simplicity of Spyridion doubly exemplified.
Many more stories might be told of him, but, to use the words of an
ancient writer who has related some of them, "from the claws you can
make out the lion." Of all the Nicene fathers, it may yet be said that
in a certain curious sense he is the only one who has survived the decay
of time. After resting for many years in his native Cyprus his body was
transferred to Constantinople, where it remained till a short time
before the fall of the empire. It was thence conveyed to Corfu, where it
is still preserved. Hence by a strange resuscitation of fame he has
become the patron saint, one might almost say the divinity, of the
Ionian Islands. Twice a year in solemn procession he is carried round
the streets of Corfu. Hundreds of Corfutes bear his name, now abridged
into the familiar diminutive of "Spiro." The superstitious veneration
entertained for the old saint is a constant source of quarrel between
the English residents and the native Ionians. But the historian may be
pardoned for gazing with a momentary interest on the dead hands, now
black and withered, that subscribed the Creed of Nicæa.
Still more famous--and still more apocryphal, at least in his attendance
at Nicæa--is Nicolas, bishop of Myra. Not mentioned by a single ancient
historian, he yet figures in the traditional pictures of the council as
the foremost figure of all. Type as he is of universal benevolence to
sailors, to thieves, to the victims of thieves, to children--known by
his broad red face and flowing white hair--the traditions of the East
always represent him as standing in the midst of the assembly, and
suddenly roused by righteous indignation to assail the heretic Arius
with a tremendous box on the ear.
One more group of deputies closes the arrivals. The Nicene Council was a
council of the Eastern Church, and Eastern seemingly were at least three
hundred and ten of the three hundred and eighteen bishops. But the West
was not entirely unrepresented. Nicasius from France, Marcus from
Calabria, Capito from Sicily, Eustorgius from Milan--where a venerable
church is still dedicated to his memory--Domnus of Stridon in Pannonia
were the less conspicuous deputies of the western provinces.
But there were five men whose presence must have been full of interest
to their Eastern brethren. Corresponding to John the Persian from the
Extreme East was Theophilus the Goth from the extreme North. His light
complexion doubtless made a marked contrast with the tawny hue and dark
hair of almost all the rest. They rejoiced to think that they had a
genuine Scythian among them. From all future generations of his Teutonic
countrymen he may claim attention as the predecessor and teacher of
Ulphilas, the great missionary of the Gothic nation.
Out of the province of Northern Africa, the earliest cradle of the Latin
Church, came Cæcilian, bishop of Carthage. A few years ago he had
himself been convened before the two Western councils of the Lateran and
of Arles, and had there been acquitted of the charges brought against
him by the Donatists.
If any of the distant orientals had hoped to catch a sight of the bishop
of the "Imperial City," they were doomed to disappointment. Doubtless
had he been there his position as prelate of the capital would have
been, if not first, at least among the first. But Sylvester was now far
advanced in years; and in his place came the two presbyters, who,
according to the arrangement laid down by the Emperor, would have
accompanied him had he been able to make the journey. In this simple
deputation later writers have seen--and perhaps by a gradual process the
connection might be traced--the first germ of _legati a latere_. But it
must have been a very far-seeing eye which in Victor and Vincentius, the
two unknown elders, representing their sick old bishop, could have
detected the predecessors of Pandulf or of Wolsey. With them, however,
was a man who, though now long forgotten, was then an object of deeper
interest to Christendom than any bishop of Rome could at that time have
been. It was the world-renowned Spaniard, as he is called by Eusebius;
the magician from Spain, as he is called by Zosimus; Hosius, bishop of
Cordova. He was the representative of the westernmost of European
churches; but, as Eusebius of Cæsarea was the chief counsellor of the
Emperor in the Greek Church, so was Hosius in the Latin, as shown in the
darkest and most mysterious crisis of Constantine's life.
It was probably by degrees that these different arrivals took place, and
the lapse of two or three weeks must be supposed for the preparatory
arrangements before the council was formally opened. This interval was
occupied by eager discussions on the questions likely to be debated. The
first assemblage had been, as we have seen, within the walls of a public
building. But the other preliminary meetings were held, as was natural,
in the streets or colonnades in the open air. The novelty of the
occasion had collected many strangers to the spot. Laymen, philosophers,
heathen as well as Christians, might be seen joining in the arguments on
either side, orthodox as well as heretical. There were also discussions
among the orthodox themselves as to the principle on which the debates
should be conducted. The enumeration of the characters just given shows
that there were two very different elements in the assembly, such indeed
as will always constitute the main difficulty in making any general
statements of theology which shall be satisfactory at once to the few
and to the many. A large number, perhaps the majority, consisted of
rough, simple, almost illiterate men, like Spyridion the shepherd,
Potammon the hermit, Acesius the puritan, who held their faith earnestly
and sincerely, but without conscious knowledge of the grounds on which
they maintained it, incapable of arguing themselves, or of entering into
the arguments of their opponents. These men, when suddenly brought into
collision with the acutest and most learned disputants of the age,
naturally took up the position that the safest course was to hold by
what had been handed down, without any further inquiry or explanation.
A story somewhat variously told is related of an encounter of one of
these simple characters with the more philosophical combatants, which,
in whatever way it be taken, well illustrates the mixed character of the
council, and the choice of the courses open before it. As Socrates
describes the incident, the disputes were running so high, from the mere
pleasure of argument, that there seemed likely to be no end to the
controversy, when suddenly a simple-minded layman, who by his sightless
eye or limping leg bore witness of his zeal for the Christian faith,
stepped among them and abruptly said, "Christ and the apostles left us
not a system of logic nor a vain deceit, but a naked truth to be guided
by faith and good works." "There has," says Bishop Kaye in recording the
story, "been hardly any age of the Church in which its members have not
required to be reminded of this lesson." On the present occasion the
bystanders, at least for the moment, were struck by its happy
application. The disputants, after hearing this plain word of truth,
took their differences more good-humoredly and the hubbub of controversy
subsided.
The tradition grew in later times into the form which it bears in all
the pictures of the council, and which is commemorated in the services
of the Greek Church. Aware of his incapacity of argument he took a brick
and said: "You deny that three can be one. Look at this: it is one, and
yet it is composed of the three elements of fire, earth, and water." As
he spoke the brick resolved itself into its component parts; the fire
flew upward, the clay remained in his hand, and the water fell to the
ground. The philosopher, or, according to some accounts, Arius himself
was so confounded as to declare himself converted on the spot.
These tales represent probably the feeling of a large portion of the
council--the sound, unprofessional, untheological, lay element which lay
at the basis of all their weakness and their strength. The historian
Socrates is very anxious to prove that the assembly was not entirely
composed of men of this kind, and he points triumphantly to the presence
of such men as Eusebius of Cæsarea. No proof was necessary. The
subsequent history of the council itself is a sufficient indication
that, however small a minority might be the dialecticians and
theologians, yet they constitute the life and movement of the whole.
Socrates dwells with evident pleasure on the circumstance that the
ultimate decisions were only made after long inquiry, and that
everything was stirred to the bottom.
We may wish with Bishop Jeremy Taylor and Bishop Kaye that it had been
otherwise. But there is a point of view in which we may fully sympathize
with the course that was taken. All the elements which go to make up the
interest of theology were involved: love of free inquiry, desire of
precision in philosophical statements, research into Christian
antiquity, comparison of the texts of Scripture one with another.
Traditional and episcopal authority was regarded as insufficient for the
establishment of the faith. The well-known clause of the Twenty-first
Article does but express the principle of the Nicene Fathers themselves:
"Things ordained by them as necessary for salvation have neither
strength nor authority unless it may be declared that they are taken out
of Holy Scripture." The battle was fought and won by quotations, not
from tradition, but from the Old and New Testaments. The overruling
sentiment was that even ancient opinions were not to be received without
sifting and inquiry. The chief combatant and champion of the faith was
not the bishop of Antioch or of Rome, nor the pope of Alexandria, but
the deacon Athanasius. The eager discussions of Nicæa present the first
grand precedent for the duty of private judgment, and the free,
unrestrained exercise of biblical and historical criticism.
FOOTNOTES:
[49] Some of the old writers declared that Arius died by the falling out
of his bowels, as if by a miracle. The matter became a subject of much
controversy. Mosheim thinks it most probable that Arius was poisoned by
his enemies. Most recorders of the present day are content to say simply
that "he died suddenly."
FOUNDATION OF CONSTANTINOPLE
A.D. 330
EDWARD GIBBON
On the eastern part of the site of Constantinople stood the ancient
Greek city of Byzantium, said to have been founded in the seventh
century B.C. From its situation on the Bosporus it enjoyed great
advantages as a trading centre, and was especially noted for its
control of the corn supply. There also were fisheries from which
vast wealth was derived. After the battle of Platæa (B.C. 479),
which put an end to the Persian invasion of Greece, Byzantium was
recolonized. In the later Grecian wars it was many times taken,
being besieged in the year B.C. 339 by Philip of Macedon and
relieved by Phocion. Soon after this it formed an alliance with
Alexander the Great; but the city was thenceforth continually
harassed by enemies, and never regained its former prosperity.
About the year B.C. 277 it was menaced by the Gauls, to whom the
Byzantines were forced to pay tribute. When those invaders had been
driven back by the Thracian tribes, these in turn exacted from
Byzantium like payments, and to increase its revenues the city
taxed all vessels entering the Euxine. This led, B.C. 220, to a war
with Rhodes, instigated by aggrieved merchants in different parts
of the world, the result of which was that the Byzantines levied no
more tribute on ships.
By treaty, B.C. 148, Byzantium entered into relations with Rome,
then engaged in eastern wars, and from that time the Byzantines
sought Roman favor, and long maintained an alliance with the
empire. After this, little is told of Byzantium until the war of
the emperor Septimius Severus with his great rival, Niger, governor
of Syria. Byzantium adhered to the cause of Niger. Confident in
their future if he should be victorious, the Byzantines indulged
dreams of becoming the head of an eastern empire. Their city was
strongly fortified, they had a powerful fleet, and for three years
they held out against the Roman besiegers, then, after untold
sufferings and slaughter, yielded under the distress of famine. "At
last they were reduced to chewing leather hides soaked in water,
and finally to the horrible extremity in which the weak become
literally the prey of the strong." The Romans destroyed the
magnificent city walls and deprived Byzantium of municipal and
political liberties.
The fall of Byzantium was accomplished in A.D. 194-196, and when
next its site became the scene of historic events a wholly new
order of things had been inaugurated in the world. After his
successful war with his colleague Licinius, sole ruler of the
East, Constantine had him put to death in A.D. 325. Constantine
then became sole augustus, and in 330 he transferred the capital of
the empire from Rome to Byzantium, which was henceforth called
Constantinople.
The unfortunate Licinius was the last rival who opposed the greatness,
and the last captive who adorned the triumph, of Constantine. After a
tranquil and prosperous reign, the conqueror bequeathed to his family
the inheritance of the Roman Empire; a new capital, a new policy, and a
new religion; and the innovations which he established have been
embraced and consecrated by succeeding generations.
After the defeat and abdication of Licinius, his victorious rival
proceeded to lay the foundations of a city destined to reign in future
times, the mistress of the East, and to survive the empire and religion
of Constantine. The motives, whether of pride or of policy, which first
induced Diocletian to withdraw himself from the ancient seat of
government, had acquired additional weight by the example of his
successors and the habits of forty years. Rome was insensibly confounded
with the dependent kingdoms which had once acknowledged her supremacy;
and the country of the Cæsars was viewed with cold indifference by a
martial prince, born in the neighborhood of the Danube, educated in the
courts and armies of Asia, and invested with the purple by the legions
of Britain. The Italians, who had received Constantine as their
deliverer, submissively obeyed the edicts which he sometimes
condescended to address to the senate and people of Rome; but they were
seldom honored with the presence of their new sovereign.
During the vigor of his age, Constantine, according to the various
exigencies of peace and war, moved with slow dignity, or with active
diligence, along the frontiers of his extensive dominions, and was
always prepared to take the field either against a foreign or a domestic
enemy. But as he gradually reached the summit of prosperity and the
decline of life, he began to meditate the design of fixing in a more
permanent station the strength as well as majesty of the throne. In the
choice of an advantageous situation, he preferred the confines of Europe
and Asia; to curb with a powerful arm the barbarians who dwelt between
the Danube and the Tanais; to watch with an eye of jealousy the conduct
of the Persian monarch, who indignantly supported the yoke of an
ignominious treaty. With these views, Diocletian had selected and
embellished the residence of Nicomedia: but the memory of Diocletian was
justly abhorred by the protector of the Church; and Constantine was not
insensible to the ambition of founding a city which might perpetuate the
glory of his own name. During the late operations of the war against
Licinius, he had sufficient opportunity to contemplate, both as a
soldier and as a statesman, the incomparable position of Byzantium, and
to observe how strongly it was guarded by nature against a hostile
attack, while it was accessible on every side to the benefits of
commercial intercourse.
Many ages before Constantine, one of the most judicious historians of
antiquity had described the advantages of a situation, from whence a
feeble colony of Greeks derived the command of the sea and the honors of
a flourishing and independent republic.[50]