Constantine the Great was succeeded by his three sons, Constantine, Constantius, and Constans. They had been educated in the faith of the gospel, and had been named Caesars by their father, and on his death they divided the empire among them. Constantine obtained Gaul, Spain, and Britain; Constantius, the Asiatic provinces, with the capital, Constantinople; and Constans, held Italy and Africa. The beginning of the new reign was characterized—as was usual in those times—by killing the relatives who might one day prove rivals to the throne; but along with the old and usual political jealousies and hostilities, a new element now appears—that of religious controversy.
The eldest son, Constantine, was favorable to the catholics, and signalized the commencement of his reign by recalling Athanasius, and replacing him in his see at Alexandria. But Constantine was killed in 340, in an invasion of Italy; and Constans took possession of his brother’s dominions, and thus became the sovereign of two-thirds of the empire. He was favorable to the decisions of the Nicene Council, and adhered with firmness to the cause of Athanasius. Constantius, his empress, and court, were partial to Arianism. And thus the religious war began between the two brothers—between the East and the West, and was carried on without either justice or humanity, to say nothing of the peaceful spirit of Christianity. Constantius, like his father, interfered much in the affairs of the Church; he pretended to be a theologian, and throughout his reign the empire was incessantly agitated by religious controversy. The councils became so frequent that the public posting establishments, were constantly employed by the continual traveling of the bishops; on both sides councils were assembled to oppose councils. But as the principal events of the period, as well as the silver line of God’s grace, are connected with Athanasius, we will return to his history.
THE HISTORY OF ATHANASIUS.
After a banishment of two years and four months, Athanasius was restored to his diocese by the younger Constantine, where he was received with a joyful welcome by his flock. But the death of that prince exposed Athanasius to a second persecution. Constantius, who is described as a vain but weak man, soon became the secret accomplice of the Eusebians. In the end of 340 or beginning of 341, a council met at Antioch for the dedication of a splendid church which had been founded by Constantine the elder. The number of bishops is said to have been about ninety-seven, of whom forty were Eusebians. Amongst the number of canons which were passed, it was decided, and with some appearance of equity, that a bishop, deposed by a synod, should not resume his episcopal functions till he had been absolved by the judgment of another synod, equal in authority. This law was evidently passed with a special reference to the case of Athanasius; and the council pronounced, or rather confirmed, his degradation. Gregory, a Cappadocian, a man of a violent character, was appointed to the see, and Philagrius, the prefect of Egypt, was instructed to support the new primate with the civil and military powers of the province. Athanasius being the favorite of the people, they refused to have a bishop thrust upon them by the emperor: scenes of disorder, outrage, and profanation followed. “Violence was found necessary to support iniquity,” says Milner, “and an Arian prince was obliged to tread in the steps of his pagan predecessors, to support what he called the Church.”
Athanasius, oppressed by the Asiatic prelates, withdrew from Alexandria, and passed three years in Rome. The Roman pontiff, Julius, with a synod of fifty Italian bishops, pronounced him innocent, and confirmed to him the communion of the Church. No fewer than five creeds had been drawn up by the Eastern bishops in assemblies convened at Antioch between 341 and 345, with the view of concealing their real opinions; but not one of them was admitted to be free from an Arian element, though the more offensive positions of Arianism were professedly condemned. The two emperors, Constantius and Constans, now became anxious to heal the breach which existed between the Eastern and the Western churches; and accordingly they summoned a council to meet at Sardica in Illyria, A.D. 347, to decide the disputed points. Ninety-four bishops of the West, twenty-one of the East, having assembled, and duly considered the matter on both sides, decided in favor of Athanasius, the orthodox party, restoring the persecuted primate of Alexandria, and condemning all who opposed him as the enemies of the truth. In the meantime the intruder Gregory died, and Athanasius, on his return to Alexandria, after an exile of eight years, was received with universal rejoicing. “The entrance of the archbishop into his capital,” says one, “was a triumphal procession: absence and persecution had endeared him to the Alexandrians; and his fame was diffused from Ethiopia to Britain, over the whole extent of the christian world.”
After the death of Constans, the friend and protector of Athanasius, in 350, the cowardly Constantius felt that the time was now come to avenge his private injuries against Athanasius. He had no longer Constans to defend him. But how to accomplish his object was the difficulty. Had he decreed the death of the most eminent citizen, the cruel order would have been executed without any hesitation: but the condemnation and death of a popular bishop, must be brought about with caution, delay, and some appearance of justice. The Arians set to work; they renewed their machinations; more councils were convened.
THE COUNCILS OF ARLES AND MILAN.
In the year 353 a synod was held at Aries; and in 355 another met at Milan. Upwards of three hundred bishops were present at the latter. The sessions of the council were held in the palace, Constantius and his guards being present. The condemnation of Athanasius was artfully represented as the only measure which could restore the peace and union of the catholic church. But the friends of the primate were true to their leader and the cause of truth. They assured the emperor, in the most manly and christian spirit, that neither the hope of his favor, nor the fear of his displeasure, would prevail on them to join in the condemnation of an absent, an innocent, an honored servant of Christ. The contest was long and obstinate; the interest excited was intense, and the eyes of the whole empire became fixed on a single bishop. But the Arian emperor was impatient, and before the council of Milan was dissolved, the archbishop of Alexandria had been solemnly condemned and deposed. A general persecution was directed against all who favored him; and also for the purpose of enforcing conformity to the emperor’s opinion. And so sharp did this persecution become, that the orthodox party raised the cry, that the days of Nero and of Decius had returned. Athanasius himself found a refuge in the deserts of Egypt.
THE DEATH, AND SUCCESSORS, OF CONSTANTIUS.
In the year 361, Constantius, the patron of the Arians died. Like his father, he delayed his baptism till a short time before his death. The prosperous days of the Arians were now ended.
JULIAN, commonly called the Apostate, succeeded to the throne; and probably to show the utter indifference to the theological question in dispute, he ordered the restoration of the bishops whom Constantius had banished. After a brief reign of twenty-two months, and a vain attempt to revive heathenism, he died suddenly of a wound in the breast from a Persian arrow.
JOVIAN, who immediately succeeded Julian to the throne, professed Christianity. He is the first of the Roman emperors who gave anything like clear evidence that he really loved the truth as it is in Jesus. He seems to have been a sincere Christian before he came to the throne, as he told the apostate Julian that he would rather quit the service than his religion; nevertheless, Julian valued him and kept him near his person until his death. The army declared itself Christian; the Labarum, which had been thrown aside during the reign of Julian, was again displayed at its head. Jovian, however, had learned from the preceding times, that religion could not be advanced by outward force. Hence, he allowed full toleration to his pagan subjects; and, with respect to the divisions among Christians, he declared that he would molest no one on account of religion, but would love all who studied the peace and welfare of the church of God. Athanasius, on hearing of the death of Julian, returned to Alexandria, to the agreeable surprise and joy of his people. Jovian wrote to Athanasius, confirming him in his office, and inviting /dm to his court. The bishop complied; the emperor desired instruction and advice; by personal intercourse he gained an influence over Jovian which his enemies in vain attempted to disturb. But the reign of this christian prince lasted only about eight months. He was found dead in his bed, on February 17th, 364; having been suffocated, as was supposed, by charcoal.
VALENTINIAN and VALENS. Jovian was succeeded by two brothers—Valentinian and Valens; the former governed in the West, the latter in the East. In the affairs of the Church, Valentinian is said to have followed the plan of Jovian. He declined all interference in questions of doctrines, but adhered firmly to the Nicene faith. As a soldier and a statesman, he was possessed of many great abilities. Both brothers are said to have exposed themselves to danger by the profession of Christianity in the reign of Julian; but Valens was afterward won over to Arianism by his wife, who persuaded him to receive baptism from the Arian bishop of Constantinople. It. is said that the bishop exacted of him an oath to persecute the catholics. Be this as it may, it is certain that soon after his baptism he manifested great zeal in favor of the Arians, and bitterly persecuted the ecclesiastics for their adherence to the Nicene faith and the exercise of their influence on its behalf.
Under the edict of Valens, A.D. 367, Athanasius was once more attacked by the Arians—the enemies of christian piety. Tatian, governor of Alexandria, attempted to drive him out of the city; but the feeling of the people was so strong in favor of the venerable bishop, that he dared not for some time to execute his orders. In the meantime, Athanasius, knowing what was near at hand, quietly retired, and remained for four months concealed in his father’s sepulcher. This was the fourth time that he had fled from Alexandria. Valens, however, from the dread he seems to have had of the people, recalled him, and permitted him, without any further hindrance, to prosecute his pastoral labors until, A.D. 373, when he was summoned from his work on earth to his rest in heaven. Valens perished in a battle with the Goths, in the year 378, after having reigned fourteen years.
WHAT SERVICE DID ATHANASIUS RENDER TO THE CHURCH?
We are disposed to believe, that under the blessing of God, he was the means of preserving the Church from the Arian heresy, which threatened to extinguish from Christianity, both the name and the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ. The enemy aimed at nothing short of a Christless system, which might ere long issue in an utter abandonment of Christianity. But the Nicene Council was used of God to overthrow his wicked devices. The assertion of the Godhead of Christ and of the Holy Ghost as equal to God the Father, was greatly blessed of God then, and has been from that day even until now. Though the Church had been unfaithful, and drifted into the world, “even where Satan’s seat is,” the Lord in mercy raised up a great testimony to His holy name, and to the faith of His saints. Historians, both civil and ecclesiastical, bear the most honorable testimony to the ability, activity, constancy, self-denial, and unwearied zeal of Athanasius, in the defense of the great doctrine of the holy Trinity. “Thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith,” are words that refer, we doubt not, to the faithfulness of Athanasius and his friends, as also to the faithful in other times.
The overcomers spoken of in the address were also there, without doubt; but it is not permitted of the Lord that they should be seen or recorded by the historian. They were God’s hidden ones who were nourished on the hidden manna. They will have a place of great nearness to the Lord in the glory. “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.” Rev. 2:1717He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it. (Revelation 2:17).