|
AFTER this Synod, the Eastern and the Western churches ceased
to maintain the intercourse which usually exists among people of the
same faith, and refrained from holding communion with each other. The
Christians of the West separated themselves from all as far as
Thrace; those of the East as far as Illyria. This divided state of
the churches was mixed, as might be supposed, with dissentient views
and calumnies. Although they had previously differed on doctrinal
subjects, yet the evil had attained no great height, for they had
still held communion together and were wont to have kindred feelings.
The Church throughout the whole of the West in its entirety regulated
itself by the doctrines of the Fathers, and kept aloof from all
contentions and hair-splitting about dogma. Although Auxentius, who
had become bishop of Milan, and Valens and Ursacius, bishops of
Pannonia, had endeavored to lead that part of the empire into the
Arian doctrines, their efforts had been carefully anticipated by the
president of the Roman see and the other priests, who cut out the
seeds of such a troublesome heresy. As to the Eastern Church,
although it had been racked by dissension since the time of the council
of Antioch, and although it had already openly differed from the
Nicaean form of belief, yet I think it is true that the opinion of
the majority united in the same thought, and confessed the Son to be
of the substance of the Father. There were some, however, who were
fond of wrangling and battled against the term "consubstantial"; for
those who had been opposed to the word at the beginning, thought, as
I infer, and as happens to most people, that it would be a disgrace
to appear as conquered. Others were finally convinced of the truth of
the doctrines concerning God, by the habit of frequent disputation on
these themes, and ever afterwards continued firmly attached to them.
Others again, being aware that contentions ought not to arise,
inclined toward that which was gratifying to each of the sides, on
account of the influence, either of friendship or they were swayed by
the various causes which often induce men to embrace what they ought to
reject, and to act without boldness, in circumstances which require
thorough conviction. Many others, accounting it absurd to consume
their time in altercations about words, quietly adopted the sentiments
inculcated by the council of Nicaea. Paul, bishop of
Constantinople, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, the entire
multitude of monks, Antony the Great, who still survived, his
disciples, and a great number of Egyptians and of other places in the
Roman territory, firmly and openly maintained the doctrines of the
Nicaean council throughout the other regions of the East. As I have
been led to allude to the monks, I shall briefly mention those who
flourished during the reign of Constantius.
|
|