TOO ARIANISM two legates to Milan to investigate the matter. They sustained Arialdus, but did not succeed in putting an end to the prevailing corruption. After the election of Pope Alexander II. the excitement again broke out at Milan, foment- ed by Arialdus and Erlembaldus, the brother of Landulphus. Pope Alexander excommuni- cated the archbishop of Milan, and reproved the other ecclesiastics. But even this did not conquer the abuses; and although Arialdus continued to preach against them, the fickle Milanese became jealous of the attacks from Rome on their clergy. Taking advantage of this divided state of public opinion, his ene- mies had Arialdus assassinated on a desert island in Lake Maggiore. His name was enrolled in the list of martyrs by Alexander II. AKI VMSM, a theological system in the early Christian Church, named after Arius, a presby- ter at Alexandria. In opposition to his bishop Alexander, Arius asserted that there was a time when the Son was not coequal, since the Father who begot must be before the Son who was begotten, and the latter therefore could not be eternal. As many prominent bishops sided with Arius, synods were called on both sides, and the most acute intellects of the church discussed the question. The general council of Nice (325), attended by 300 bishops, condemned Arius and declared the Son to be consubstantial with the Father ; but Arius nevertheless gained the favor of Constantino and won many new adherents. After his death (336) the movement spread more rapidly than before. When Constantino died in 337, the empire was divided among his three sons, two of whom, Constantino and Constans in the West, accepted the Nicene creed, while Constantius in the East was a decided favorer of Arianism. An anti-Nicene council at Anti- och (341), consisting of 90 bishops, issued de- crees on the ground of which Athanasius, who in 338 had returned from exile to his dio- cese, was again deposed. In the West, on the contrary, a synod at Rome in 343 declared Athanasius innocent of the charges preferred against him and the authors of his exile here- tics. In order to put an end to this conflict, Constantius and Constans (Constantino had died in 340) convoked the general synod of Sardica in Lower Mcesia in 343 or 344 (not, as has heretofore been generally assumed, in 347). The Arians, having a minority of the 176 bish- ops present, held a council of their own, at first in the imperial palace in Sardica, and sub- sequently at Philippopolis. Each party anath- ematized the other ; but the Nicnans tri- umphed. Constantius so far yielded to the remonstrances of Constans as to allow the re- turn of Athanasius (349) ; tut when he became oon after sole ruler of the empire, his influence at the synods of Aries (353) u?< Milan (355) secured the condemnation of Atlianasius and the adoption of Arian decrees. Pope Liberius and several bishops, among them Athanasius, were banished, and Arianism was completely successful. The sect now became divided into strict and moderate Arians. Eusebius of Cse- sarea declared the Son to be Jiomoiousios or similar in substance to the Father, and his fol- lowers were called Homoiousians or Semi-Ari- ans. In opposition to him, Eusebius of Nico- media showed himself an uncompromising Arian. When the emperor attempted to en- force the Arian resolutions of Milan in the place of those of Nice, the strict Arians, under the leadership of Aetius, deacon at Antioch, and Eunomius, bishop of Cyzicus in Mysia, attacked the Semi- Arians as well as the Nicene doctrine as illogical, and developed in opposi- tion to it a strict subordinationism. The repu- tation of Eunomius in his party was so great, that their original name of AStians gradually gave way to that of Eunomians. They were also called Anomoeans, Heterousiasts, and Ex- oucontians, as they maintained that the Son was dissimilar to God (av6u.oiog), of different essence (irtpas ovaiaf), and created out of nothing (it- OVK &VTUV). Several synods were held for the purpose of healing these divisions. At the second great synod of Sirmium (357) a confession of faith was adopted, to which not only the strict Arians, but even the Nicene bishops, including their leader Osius of Cor- duba, subscribed. But the confusion became greater than ever. An Arian synod at Antioch (358) condemned, while a Semi- Arian synod at Ancyra (358) approved the expression Jiomoiousios. At the third synod of Sirmium (359) Pope Liberius subscribed to a Semi- Arian declaration in order to obtain permis- sion to return from Constantinople to Rome. The Semi-Arians seemed to bo in the ascen- dancy ; the emperor is said to have exiled no fewer than 70 strict Arians, and Bishop Marcus of Arethusa was instructed to draw up a new confession of faith, the fourth Sirmian formula, which avoided the word ousias and affirmed that the Son was similar in everything to the Father. In order to reunite the whole church on this platform, Constantius wished to call an oecumenical council; but the influence of the Arians caused the convocation of two synods, an eastern one at Seleucia, and a western at Rimini. At the former there were present 105 Semi-Arians, 40 strict Arians, and 10 Nicans; at Rimini the Nicseans had a ma- jority. Both synods condemned the strict Ari- ans, who however succeeded in regaining the favor of the emperor. Threats induced nearly all the bishops of both synods to subscribe to a strict Arian creed, although the most offensive party expressions were studiously avoided, and even a few of the uncompromising leaders of the party, as A&tius, sent into exile. Thus Arianism was looked upon as the official creed of the majority of Christian bishops. But its ascen- dancy was of short duration. On the death of Constantius (361) and the accession of Ju- lian the Apostate, the bishops of all parties were allowed to return to their sees, and soon the Nicene party reestablished themselves in Egypt under Athanasius, and in Gaul, Spain,
