§ 120. THE COUNCIL OF NICuEA. 621
even after Iiis ordination remained a simple shepherd. Of tlie Eastern bisliops, Eusebius of Ctesarea, and of the Western Hosius, or Osius, of Cordova,' had the greatest influence witli the emperor. These two probably sat by his side, and presided in the deliberations alternately with the bishops of Alexandi-ia and Antioch.
In r(!ference to the theological question the council was divided in the beginning into three parties.''
The orthodox party, which held firmly to the deity of Christ, was at first in the minority, but in talent and influence the more weighty. At the head of it stood the bishop (or "pope") Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathins of Antioch, Macarius of Jerusalem, Marcellus of Ancyra, Hosius of Cordova (the court bishop), and above all the Alexandrian archdeacon, Athanasius, who, though small and young, and, according to later practice not admissible to a voice or a seat in a council, evinced more zeal and insight than all, and gave promise already of being the future head of the orthodox party.
The Arians or Eusebians numbered perhaps twenty bishops, under the lead of the influential bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia (afterwards of Constantinople), who was allied with the imperial family, and of the presbyter Arius, who attended at the command of the emperor, and was often called upon to set forth his views.^ To these also belonged Theognis of Nicseu, Maris of Chalcedon, and Menophantus of Ephesus; embracing in this remarkable way the bishops of the several seats of the orthodox ecumenical councils.
The majority, whose organ was the renowned historian
' Athanasius always calls him the Great, o /xfjas.
^ The ancient and the Roman Catholic historians (and A. de Broglie, L c. voL ii. p. 21) generally assume only two parties, an orthodox majority and a heretical minority. But the position of Eusebius of Caesarea, the character of his confession, and the subsequent history of the controversy, prove the existence of a middle, eemi-Arian party. Athanasius, too, who usually puts all shades of opponeuta togetlier, accuses Eusebius of Caesarea and others repeatedly of insincerity in theii Bubscription of the Nicene creed, and yet these were not proper Arians, but semi Arians.
* Rufinus, i. .") : "Evocabatur frequenter Arius in concilium."
628 THIRD PKKIOD. AD. 311-590.
Euselius of Caesarea, took middle ground between the right and the left, but bore nearer the right, and finally went over to that side. Many of them had an orthodox instinct, but little discernment; others were disciples of Origen, or preferred simple biblical expression to a scholastic terminology ; others had no firm convictions, but only uncertain opinions, and were therefore easily swayed by the arguments of the stronger party or by mere external considerations.
The Arians first proposed a creed, which however was rejected with tumultuous disapproval, and torn to pieces ; whereupon all the eighteen signers of it, excepting Theonas and Secundus, both of Egypt, abandoned the cause of Arius.
Then the church historian Eusebius, in the nanie of the middle party, proposed an ancient Palestinian Confession, which was very similar to the Niceuc, and acknowledged the divine nature of Christ in general biblical terms, but avoided the term in question, ofzoovaco^, consubstantialis, of the same essence. The emperor had already seen and approved this confession, and even the Arian minority were ready to accept it.
But this last circumstance itself was very suspicious to the extreme right. They wished a creed which no Arian could honestly subscribe, and especially insisted on inserting thu expression homo-usios^ which the Arians hated and declared to be unscriptural, Sabellian, and materialistic' The emperor saw clearly that the Eusebian formula would not pass ; and, as he had at heart, for the sake of peace, the most nearly unanimous decision which was possible, he gave his voice for the disputed word.
Then Hosius of Cordova appeared and announced that a confession was prepared which would now be read by the deacon (afterwards bishop) Hermogenes of Cassarea, the secro-
' Athanasius h'mself, however, laid little STess on the term, and rarely used it in hia theological ixi)Oditions ; he cared more for the thing than the name. Tho word 6;uooi/jiov, from (5^oj and otiaia, was not an invention of the council of Nice, still less of Constanline, but had previously arisen in theological language, mid occurs even in Origen and among the (inosties, though of course it is no m're to b€ foui>d in the IJible than the word trinity.