§ 120, THE COUNCIL OF MC^EA. 629
Lary of the synod. It is in substance the well-known Nicene creed, with some additions and omissions of which we are to Bpeak below. It is somewhat abrupt ; tlie council not caring to do more than meet the immediate exigency. The direct concern was only to establish the doctrine of the true deity of the Son. The deity of the Holy Spirit, though inevitably involved, did not then come up as a subject of special discussion, and therefore the synod contented itself on this point with the sentence: "And (we believe) in the Holy Ghost." ' The council of Constantinople enlarged the last article concerning the Holy Ghost. To the positive part of the IlTicene confession is added a condemnation of the Arian heresy, which dropped out of the formula afterwards received.
Almost all the bishops subscribed the creed, Hosius at the liead, and next him the two Roman presbyters in the name of their bishop. This is the first instance of such signing of a document in the Christian church. Eusebius of Csesarea also signed his name after a day's deliberation, and vindicated this act in a letter to his diocese. Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea subscribed the creed without the condemnatory formula, and for this they were deposed and for a time banished, but finally consented to all the decrees of the council. The Arian historian Philostorgius, who however deserves little credit," accuses them of insincerity in having substituted, by the advice of the emperor, for 6fio-ov<no<; (of the same essence), the semi-Arian word 6jjboi-ovaio<i (of like essence). Only two Egyptian bishops, Theonas and Secundus, persistently refused to sign, and were banished with Arius to Illyria. The
' Dr. Shedd, therefore, is plainly incorrect in saying, Hist, of Chr. Doctrine, voL i. p. 308 : " The problem to be solved by the Nicene council was to exhibit the doctrine of the ti'inity in its completeness ; to bring into the creed statement the total data of Scripture upon both the side of unity and trinity." This was not done till the council of Constantinople in 381, and strictly not till the still later Symbolunj A.thanasianum.
^ Even Gibbon (ch. xxi.) places very little dependence on this historian : '* The credibility of Philostorgius is lessened, in the eyes of the orthodox, by his Arianism 5 and in those of rational critics [as if the orthodox were necessaiily irrational and Bncritical !) by his passion, his prejudice, and his ignorance."
C)30 THIRD PERIOD. A.D. 311-590.
l)ooks of Arius were burned and his followers branded as ene niies of Christianity.*
This is the first example of the civil punishment of lieresy ; and it is the beginning of a long succession of civil persecutions for all departures from the Catholic faith. Before the union of church and state ecclesiastical excommunication was the extreme penalty. Now banishment and afterwards even death were added, because all offences against the church were regarded as at the same time crimes asrainst the state and civil society.
The two other points on which the council of Nicsea decided, the Easter question and the Meletian schism, have been already spoken of in their place. The council issued twenty canons in reference to discipline. The creed and the canons were written in a book, and again signed by the bishops. The council issued a letter to the Egyptian and Libyan bishops as to the decision of the three main points ; the emperor also sent several edicts to the churches, in which he ascribed the decrees to divine inspiration, and set them forth as laws of the realm. On the twenty-ninth of July, the twentieth anniversary of his accession, he gave the members of the council a splendid banquet in his palace, which Eusebius (quite too susceptible to worldly splendor) describes as a figure of the reign of Christ on earth ; he remunerated the bishops lavishly, and dismissed them with a suitable valedictory, and with letters of commentlation to the authorities of all the provinces on their homeward way.
Thus ended the council of ISTicasa. It is the first and most renerable of the ecumenical synods, and next to the apostolic council at Jerusalem the most important and the most illustrious of all the councils of Christendom. Athanasius calls it '^ a time monument and token of victory against every heresy ; "
' Jerome (Adv. Lucifer, c. 20; Opera, ed. Vallars. torn. ii. p. 192 aqq.) asserts, on tlie authority of aged witnesses then still living, that Arius and his adherent* were pardoned even before the close of the council. Socrates also says (H. E. i. c. 14) that Arius was recalled from banishment before Eusebius and Theognis, bu' dndcr prohibition of return to Alexandria. This isolated statement, however, ciinnot well be harmonized with the subsequent recalling, and probably arose frocv Bonic confu.-ion.