him. In the beginning of their reign, a synod was convened in Illyricum, which again decreed the consubstantiality of Father, Son, and Spirit. The emperors issued a circular letter, declaring their assent to this, and ordering that this doctrine should be preached-though they published laws for the toleration of all religious denominations, and even paganism. In the year 375, Valentinian died suddenly in a transport of rage, and Valens being sole emperor, was soon prevailed on by the artifice of Eudoxius, bishop of Constantinople, to take a decided part with the Arians, and to abandon his moderation, by eruelly persecuting the Orthodox. The first thing that fired his resentment was the conduct of these latter, who had solicited and obtained his permission to hold a synod at Lampsacus, for the amendment and settlement of the faith; when, after two month's consultation, they decreed the doctrine of the Son's being like the Father as to his essence, to be the true orthodox faith, and deposed all the bishops of the Arian party. This highly exasperated Valens, who without delay, convened a council of the Arian bishops, and in his turn, commanded the bishops who composed the synod of Lampsacus to embrace the sentiments of Eudoxius the Arian; and, upon their refusal, sent them into exile, transferring their churches to their opponents. After this, he pursued measures still more violent against them; some were commanded to be whipped, others disgraced, not a few imprisoned, and many

fined.

But the most detestable part of his conduct was his treacherous and cruel behaviour towards eighty of them, whom, under the pretence of sending them into banishment-a thing to which they had consented, rather than subscribe what they did not believe he put on board a ship, and caused the vessel to be set on fire as it sailed out of the harbour, through which they all perished either

SECT. II.]

Agelius and the Novatians.

267

by fire or water. These kinds of cruelty continued to the end of his reign, and there is no room to doubt that he was greatly stimulated to them by the bishops of the Arian party. It is a melancholy reflection, that the pity which such merciless treatment as this could not have failed to excite in every feeling mind, the orthodox should have deprived themselves of, by their own imprudence, in commencing the first assault upon the Arians. They ought to have remembered that divine maxim, "whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them;" for on most of those occasions it was only "the measure they meted that was measured to them again."

But the conduct of Valens was not regulated by the strict rules of equity; for in this persecution he included the Novatians, whose churches he commanded to be shut up, and their pastors banished; although, so far as I can perceive, they took no part whatever in the squabbles that existed between the contending factions. Agelius, the pastor of the church in Constantinople, a man of admirable sanctity and virtue, and remarkable for his perfect contempt of money, was exiled. Yet he was restored not long after, and recovered the churches of his communion. Socrates, the historian, who seems to have been intimately acquainted with the affairs of the Novatians, says, that the toleration which this class of Christians at length obtained, they owed under providence to one Marcian, a presbyter of their church in Constantinople, a man of learning and piety, who tutored two daughters of the emperor. This historian particularly mentions the liberality and kindness which the Novatians exercised towards such of the orthodox party as were the subjects of persecution, while they themselves were tolerated, a trait in their history which even Milner is obliged to admit “reflects an amiable lustre on the character of these Dissent

ers"*-and for shewing which benevolence, they actually incurred the displeasure of the reigning party. Agelius presided over that church forty years, and died in the sixth year of the reign of Theodosius. Before his death, some difference of opinion arose in the church relative to a successor. Agelius gave the preference to Sisinnius,+

History of the Church, vol. ii. p. 157.

+ Socrates, the historian, has given us some interesting particulars of Sisinnius, which, as I do not recollect to have seen them quoted by any modern writer, I shall here extract. "He was," says he, " an eloquent person and an excellent philosopher-had diligently cultivated the art of Logic, and was incomparably well versed in the sacred scriptures." He wore a white garment, and regularly bathed himself twice a day in the public baths. He seems to have been remarkable for the readiness of his wit, on all occasions; in illustration of which, Socrates has recorded seve◄ ral anecdotes. Being interrogated by one of his acquaintance, why he who was a bishop chose to bathe twice a day, Sisinnius promptly replied, "Because I cannot bathe thrice!" His good sense led him to treat with levity the practice of clothing the clergy in black. Calling one day to pay a friendly visit at the house of Arsacius, who had succeeded Chrysostom in the see of Constantinople, he was asked, why he dressed in a manner so unsuitable to his character as a bishop. "Tell me," said he, “where it is written that a bishop should wear a black garment?" You, said he, can never shew that a priest ought to wear black-but I will give you my authority for wearing white. Hath not Solomon expressly said, Let thy garments be always white? Eccles. ix. 8. He then referred them to Luke ix. 29. on which occasion both the Lord Jesus, and Moses, and Elias, appeared to the apostles clothed in white. In the province of Galatia, Leontius, the bishop of Ancyra, commenced a persecution against the church of the Novatians, in that city, and took from them their place of worship. Happening soon afterwards to come to Constantinople, Sisinnius waited upon him, for the purpose of entreating him to restore to his friends their chapel. Leontius flew into a passion, and said, "You Novatianists ought not to have churches, for you discard all repentance, and exclude the loving kindness of God," &c. Sisinnius listened patiently to this philippic, and then calmly replied, "But no man can repent more than I do!" How, said Leontius, do you repent? "I repent,” replied Sisinnius, "that I have seen you!" Chrysostom, who was at the head of the Catholic party, and who was a man of excessive arrogance, on one occasion addressed him with great heat, saying, "You are a heretic, and Į will make you leave off preaching." "I'll give you a reward,” said Sisin

SECT. 11.]

Character of Sisinnius.

269

a person of great learning and talents, and consequently ordained him. The church had a great partiality for Marcian, who had been eminently instrumental in enabling them to weather the storm of persecution under Valens. Distressed that any cause of murmuring should exist among them, Agelius immediately ordained Marcian to the episcopal office, and thereby restored harmony and concord.

nins, "if you will free me from the labour of it." "Oh! if the office is laborious," rejoined Chrysostom," you may go on with it."

Socrates closes his account of Sisinnius with the following sketch. "He was very eminent for his learning, on which account all the bishops who succeeded, loved and honoured him. Moreover, all the eminent personages of the Senatorian order had a great affection for him and admired him. He wrote many books, but he is too studious about words in them, and intermixes too many poetic terms; he was more admired for his speaking than for his writings. In his countenance and voice, in his dress and aspect, and in the whole of his action and deportment, there was much gracefulnessby reason of which accomplishments, he was beloved by all sects." Upon another occasion, he remarks that, such was the high estimation in which Sisinnius was held by the Novatian people that "his words were a law." Eccles. Hist. b. vi. ch. 22. and b. vii. ch. 12.

It is quite amusing to witness Mr. Milner's spleen against the characters of Novatian and Sisinnius. He terms the latter a " a facetious gentleman," and only mentions him for the sake of censuring his singularity in not conforming to the catholic church and the clerical garb. Indeed he seems to have regarded him in much the same light as that in which Dr. Johnson regarded Milton, when he said, "He was not of the Church of England, he was not of the Church of Rome-to be of no church is dangerous," But of Erius (concerning whom the reader will meet with some account in the next section) he disdains, so far as I can perceive, even to record his name or his heresy-though on Saint Augustine, a part of whose labours were employed in an attempt to refute him, he has bestowed 172 closely printed pages!-that Augustine, of whom after all, he is constrained to acknow. ledge that he understood not Paul's doctrine of justification-that he perpetually confounds it with sanctification (vol, ii, p. 462, &c.) and that as to the doctrine of particular redemption, it was unknown to him and all the antients, as he [Mr. Milner] wishes it had remained equally unknown to the moderns." p. 467. This was, indeed, fulfilling the pledge Mr. M. had given the public, of writing an ecclesiastical history on a new plan. See his Preface to vol 1. of his history of the Christian Church,

After having reigned fourteen years, Valens lost his life in a battle with the Goths, A. D. 378, and was succeeded in the government of the empire by Gratian, the son of Valentinian. He was of the orthodox party; and after the death of his uncle Valens, he recalled those that had been banished-restored them to their sees, and sent Sapores, one of his captains, to drive the Arians, like wild beasts, out of all their churches. This emperor, soon after his accession to power, united with himself as colleague in the government," the great Theodosius, a name celebrated in history, and dear to the Catholic church."

Immediately on his advancement to the throne of the empire, Theodosius betrayed a warm zeal for the orthodox opinions. Hearing that the city of Constantinople was divided into different religious parties, he wrote a letter to them from Thessalonicai wherein he acquaints them, that "it was his pleasure, that all his subjects should be of the same religious profession with Damasus, bishop of Rome, and Peter, bishop of Alexandria, and that their church alone should be denominated "Catholic," who worshipped the divine Trinity as equal in honour, and that those who were of another opinion should be called heretics, become infamous, and be subject to other punishments."* And on his arrival in the imperial city, he sent for Demophilus, the Arian bishop, demanding to know whether he would subscribe the Nicene confession of faith, adding, " if you refuse to do it, I will drive you from your churches "-and he kept his word, for he turned him and all the Arians out of the city.

The more effectually to extinguish heresy, he in the year 383, summoned a council of bishops of his own persuasion to meet at Constantinople, in order to confirm the Nicene faith; the number of them amounted to an hun

• Sozomen, b. vii. ch. 4-6.