History of the First Council of Nice/Chapter 8

←

Chapter 7

History of the First Council of Nice
by Dean Dudley

The First Œcumenical Council of Nice

Chapter 9

→

3738227History of the First Council of Nice — The First Œcumenical Council of NiceDean Dudley

CHAPTER VIII.

MEETING OF THE COUNCIL IN THE IMPERIAL PALACE.—PRESENCE OF CONSTANTINE.—HIS SPLENDID APPEARANCE AND SPEECHES.

Another day appointed for the Council, and upon which the disputes were to be terminated,^[1] when every one of whom the Synod consisted would, of course, be in attendance, a large number of seats were placed in the middle hall, itself, of the palace, this apartment being apparently more spacious than any other. The seats having been arranged in a row on either side, all who had been summoned coming in, sat down together, each in his own place. Then the whole Council, with dignified modesty, becoming calm, all for the first time preserved silence, awaiting the approach of the emperor. Presently one of his most intimate friends entered, then another and another. He himself was preceded not by soldiers and a number of guards, according to the common custom, but by some of his friends only, who professed the faith of Christ. A certain signal, by which the arrival of the emperor was to be announced, being given, that all might rise, at last he came advancing along midway, as if some celestial messenger of God, by the glittering of the purple robe verily dazzling the eyes of all, and flaming, as it were, gleaming in the sunbeams, being adorned by the utmost splendor of gold and precious stones.

And the elegance of his person was, indeed, equally conspicuous.

As he has true regard for the soul, it appeared natural that he should be adorned with the fear of God and with religion. And this his downcast eyes, the flush upon his countenance, and the motion of his body, as well as his step, all indicated. But, as the other appearance of his person, so, also, his height evidently surpassed that of all who were around him. And yet, his stature was not the only superior excellence of his aspect, for the symmetry of his form, and its elegance, so to speak,—the majestic mien, and, finally, the robustness, being unequalled. To which personal superiority, truly wonderful in itself, all modesty being added, tempered, as it was, by imperial lenity, proclaimed the excellence of his mind worthy of, and even above, all praise.

The emperor, coming to the head of the seats, at first stood. And a low chair, made of gold, was placed before him; but he did not incline to sit down till the bishops nodded assent to him.^[2] After the emperor, all the rest seated themselves. Then that bishop, who occupied the first scat on the emperor's right,^[3] arose and delivered an oration in honor of the emperor, rendering thanks to God on account of him; at the conclusion of which, he rehearsed a hymn, which he had composed to the glory of God. When he had ceased speaking, and silence was again restored,^[4] the emperor rose and delivered himself in the following words:

OPENING ADDRESS OF THE EMPEROR.

"It was once my chief desire, dearest friends, to enjoy the spectacle of your united presence; and now that this desire is fulfilled, I feel myself bound to render thanks to God, the universal King, because, in addition to all His other benefits, he has granted me a blessing higher than all the rest, in permitting me to see you not only all assembled together, but all united in a common harmony of sentiment. I pray therefore that no malignant adversary may henceforth interfere to mar our happy state; I pray that, now the impious hostility of the tyrants has been forever removed by the power of God our Saviour, that spirit who delights in evil may devise no other means for exposing the divine records to blasphemous calumny; for, in my judgment, intestine strife within the Church of God is far more evil and dangerous than any kind of war or conflict; and these our differences appear to me more grievous than any outward trouble. Accordingly, when, by the will and with the co-operation of God, I had been victorious over my enemies, and thought that nothing more remained but to render thanks to Him, and sympathize in the joy of those whom he had restored to freedom through my instrumentality; as soon as I heard that intelligence which I had least expected to receive, I mean the news of your dissensions, I judged it to be of no secondary importance, but with the earnest desire that a remedy for this evil also might be found through my means, I immediately sent to require your presence. And now I rejoice in beholding your assembly; but I feel that my desires will be most completely fulfilled when I can see you all united in one judgment, and that common spirit of peace and concord prevailing amongst you all, which it becomes you, as consecrated to the service of God, to commend to others. Delay not, then, dear friends; delay not, ye ministers of God, and faithful servants of Him who is our common Lord and Saviour: begin from this moment to discard the causes of that disunion which has existed among you, and remove the perplexities of controversy by embracing the principles of peace. For by such conduct you will at the same time be acting in a manner most pleasing to the supreme God, and you will confer an exceeding favor on me, who am your fellow-servant."^[5]

After closing his speech and some conversational remarks, he gave strict attention to the debaters among the members of the Synod present, who spoke by turns.

"Then indeed," continues Eusebius Pamphilus, "some began to impeach their nearest associates, while others, in reply, preferred complaints against the accusers themselves.^[6]

"Many topics were introduced by each party, and much controversy was excited from the very commencement, the emperor listening patiently, and, with deliberate impartiality, considering whatever was advanced. He in part supported the statements which were made on both sides, and gradually softened the asperity of those who contentiously opposed each other, conciliating each by his mildness and affability. Addressing them in the Greek language, with which he was, by no means, unacquainted, in a manner at once interesting and persuasive, he wrought conviction on the minds of some, and prevailed on others by entreaty. Those who spoke well, he applauded, and incited all to unanimity; until, at length, he brought about a similarity of judgment of all, and conformity of opinion on all the controverted points; so that there was not only unity in the confession of faith, but also a general agreement as to the time for the celebration of the salutary feast of Easter. Moreover the doctrines, which had thus the common consent, were confirmed by the signature of each individual."

↑ This is the account given by Eusebius Pamphilus, bishop of Cæsarea, in his life of Constantine, from which I translate. Eusebius, being an eye-witness of what he describes, as well as "the most learned of the Christian prelates," as Gibbon declares, his report is worthy of credit and high regard.—See Life of Con., book iii. chaps. 10–16, inclusive.

Some critical remarks of Socrates are worthy of notice here. That historian says,—"Eusebius, surnamed Pamphilus, has composed a history of the church in ten books, brought down to the time of the Emperor Constantine, when the persecution ceased which Diocletian had commenced against the Christians [A. D. 309]. But, in writing the life of Constantine, this author has very slightly treated of the Arian controversy, being evidently more intent on a highly wrought eulogium of the emperor, than an accurate statement of facts." Eusebius gives no description of the Nicene Council in his ecclesiastical history.

Nevertheless, I consider Eusebius more accurate and conscientious than Socrates. Eusebius seems to have had a feeble judgment in respect to human character. His ability to judge of divine character, as he plainly acknowledges, was inferior to that of the hardy old soldier, Constantine.
↑ Sozomen says the emperor motioned to the members to be seated, after seating himself. He says, also, the palace was a large and beautiful edifice.
↑ It would seem probable, that he, who is here referred to, was the first in authority at the Council, after the emperor. If it was not the writer, himself, why does he withhold the name of so prominent a man? Theodoret says,—"The great Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, who, upon the death of Philogonius, had been appointed his successor by the unanimous suffrages of the priests and of the people, and of believers, was the first to speak." Now this is doubted, for two reasons—first, because Sozomen says it was Eusebius Pamphilus; and if it had not been Eusebius, himself, he would not have withheld the orator's name, where he says, he, who had the first seat on the emperor's right, spoke first; secondly, because another error is apparent in the statement of Theodoret, namely, there was a bishop Paulinus between Philogonius and Eustathius, the latter of whom had previously been bishop of Berea in Syria; and he, who errs in the one part, may in the other. Gelasius says [book ii. chap. 5],—"Hosius occupied the first seat next to Constantine" [probably on the left] "in the name of Pope Silvester." Finally, to quote the opinion of Dr. Anthony Pagi, editor of Baronius [edition of Lucca, 1739], in his own language, as nearly as I can translate it,—"If there were any question as to the esteem and authority in which any one was held, by the emperor, at this Synod, verily Eusebius of Cæsarea, either surpassed Osius [that is, Hosius], or fully equalled him." However, by this statement, he perhaps does not intend to deny the former assertion of Baronius, that Hosius was presiding in the place of the pope, Silvester. If he was sole president, it is unaccountable that he should not have had the most honorable seat on the right of the emperor, which certainly was not the fact. Gregory, of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, in an oration upon the fathers of the Nicene Synod, declares that it was neither Eusebius nor Eustathius who delivered the first speech (this is found in the writings of Theodore, of Mopsuestia), but Alexander of Alexandria.—Baron, iv. 105.

Constantine, himself, was chief President, certainly, on this great occasion, when he occupied the golden chair. Probably on one side of the emperor sat his Western favorite, Hosius, and on the other side his Eastern favorite, Eusebius, as the latter has several times told us. The chair might have been partially of wood, but it was "wrought with gold."
↑ Stanley says,—"All eyes were fixed on Constantine. He cast round one of those bright glances of which he was master; and then, after a momentary self-recollection, addressed them in a short speech," &c. This suggestion about the "bright glance" might be a little improved by adding that he slightly winked one eye to Pamphilus, his future historian. Stanley further records that the emperor spoke in Latin, because that was the court language; but very few of the hearers could understand him, as they were mostly Greeks.
↑ "The emperor thus spoke in Latin," says Sozomen, "and a bystander supplied the interpretation—for the emperor was almost ignorant of the Greek." However, Socrates declares "he was well acquainted with Greek." See the similar statement of Eusebius. But he spoke in Latin, it being, perhaps, most familiar to him. This speech is copied from Eusebius' Life of Constantine.
↑ Theodoret says,—"This recriminating was stopped by the emperor, who, seeing it assuming a violent character, after listening awhile, interposed, and fixed another day for the discussion of their differenees of this nature." See the manner in which the emperor settled these personal quarrels at the great feast, to which he invited all the bishops of the Council, during the Vicennalia, in chap. xiv.

[1] This is the account given by Eusebius Pamphilus, bishop of Cæsarea, in his life of Constantine, from which I translate. Eusebius, being an eye-witness of what he describes, as well as "the most learned of the Christian prelates," as Gibbon declares, his report is worthy of credit and high regard.—See Life of Con., book iii. chaps. 10–16, inclusive.

Some critical remarks of Socrates are worthy of notice here. That historian says,—"Eusebius, surnamed Pamphilus, has composed a history of the church in ten books, brought down to the time of the Emperor Constantine, when the persecution ceased which Diocletian had commenced against the Christians [A. D. 309]. But, in writing the life of Constantine, this author has very slightly treated of the Arian controversy, being evidently more intent on a highly wrought eulogium of the emperor, than an accurate statement of facts." Eusebius gives no description of the Nicene Council in his ecclesiastical history.

Nevertheless, I consider Eusebius more accurate and conscientious than Socrates. Eusebius seems to have had a feeble judgment in respect to human character. His ability to judge of divine character, as he plainly acknowledges, was inferior to that of the hardy old soldier, Constantine.

[2] Sozomen says the emperor motioned to the members to be seated, after seating himself. He says, also, the palace was a large and beautiful edifice.

[3] It would seem probable, that he, who is here referred to, was the first in authority at the Council, after the emperor. If it was not the writer, himself, why does he withhold the name of so prominent a man? Theodoret says,—"The great Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, who, upon the death of Philogonius, had been appointed his successor by the unanimous suffrages of the priests and of the people, and of believers, was the first to speak." Now this is doubted, for two reasons—first, because Sozomen says it was Eusebius Pamphilus; and if it had not been Eusebius, himself, he would not have withheld the orator's name, where he says, he, who had the first seat on the emperor's right, spoke first; secondly, because another error is apparent in the statement of Theodoret, namely, there was a bishop Paulinus between Philogonius and Eustathius, the latter of whom had previously been bishop of Berea in Syria; and he, who errs in the one part, may in the other. Gelasius says [book ii. chap. 5],—"Hosius occupied the first seat next to Constantine" [probably on the left] "in the name of Pope Silvester." Finally, to quote the opinion of Dr. Anthony Pagi, editor of Baronius [edition of Lucca, 1739], in his own language, as nearly as I can translate it,—"If there were any question as to the esteem and authority in which any one was held, by the emperor, at this Synod, verily Eusebius of Cæsarea, either surpassed Osius [that is, Hosius], or fully equalled him." However, by this statement, he perhaps does not intend to deny the former assertion of Baronius, that Hosius was presiding in the place of the pope, Silvester. If he was sole president, it is unaccountable that he should not have had the most honorable seat on the right of the emperor, which certainly was not the fact. Gregory, of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, in an oration upon the fathers of the Nicene Synod, declares that it was neither Eusebius nor Eustathius who delivered the first speech (this is found in the writings of Theodore, of Mopsuestia), but Alexander of Alexandria.—Baron, iv. 105.

Constantine, himself, was chief President, certainly, on this great occasion, when he occupied the golden chair. Probably on one side of the emperor sat his Western favorite, Hosius, and on the other side his Eastern favorite, Eusebius, as the latter has several times told us. The chair might have been partially of wood, but it was "wrought with gold."

[4] Stanley says,—"All eyes were fixed on Constantine. He cast round one of those bright glances of which he was master; and then, after a momentary self-recollection, addressed them in a short speech," &c. This suggestion about the "bright glance" might be a little improved by adding that he slightly winked one eye to Pamphilus, his future historian. Stanley further records that the emperor spoke in Latin, because that was the court language; but very few of the hearers could understand him, as they were mostly Greeks.

[5] "The emperor thus spoke in Latin," says Sozomen, "and a bystander supplied the interpretation—for the emperor was almost ignorant of the Greek." However, Socrates declares "he was well acquainted with Greek." See the similar statement of Eusebius. But he spoke in Latin, it being, perhaps, most familiar to him. This speech is copied from Eusebius' Life of Constantine.

[6] Theodoret says,—"This recriminating was stopped by the emperor, who, seeing it assuming a violent character, after listening awhile, interposed, and fixed another day for the discussion of their differenees of this nature." See the manner in which the emperor settled these personal quarrels at the great feast, to which he invited all the bishops of the Council, during the Vicennalia, in chap. xiv.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]