stantine did not appreciate the importance of the doctrine involved, and so thought the controversy could be healed by mutual concessions. He empowered Hosius, Bishop of Cordova, who was his ecclesiastical adviser, to represent him in an effort at Alexandria to smooth matters over; but when Hosius reported failure, he took more active measures, and called a general Church council at Nica'a, in Bithynia (325), the first Oecumenical Council, at which the point raised by Arius was settled against him. This result was effected by the champion of Christ's divinity who then appeared—Athanasius. a young deacon of Alexandria, and spokesman for his bishop, Alexander. Three hundred and eighteen bishops, besides numerous other clergy of all grades, were present. Four parties were formed—the strict Arians, led by Arius himself (who was present), who contended that Christ was of different essence (hetcrooiisios) from the Father; the strict Athanasians, who contended "that he was of the same essence {homoousios); the party of Eusebius of Nicomedia; and that of Eusebuis of Cæsarea. The creed of the Nicomedian Eusebians was essentially Arian, and was rejected by the Council without debate; in fact, the document containing it was torn to shreds. The creed of the Cæsarean Eusebians, which was designed to be a compromise, was respectfully received, as it was an old Church one; but the steady persistence of the Athanasian party forced the Council to reject it and make a new deliverance, in which Arianism was unequivocally condemned. The upshot was that Arius and his episcopal supporters were banished to Hlyria, and his writings publicly burned and interdicted. This action did not, however, end Arianism; and as for Arius, the great influence of Eusebius of Nicomedia and of Constantia, the sister of Constantine. secured his recall in 331, and in a personal interview with the Emperor, Arius convinced him that his views w-ere in substantial agreement with those of Athanasius.
In the confession of faith which he presented, he declared his belief that the Son was born of the Father before all ages, and that, as the "Word," he had made all things both in heaven and earth. The Emperor was satisfied, and sent orders to Athanasius, now Bishop of Alexandria, to receive Arius into the communion of the Church. This Athanasius refused to do, and a series of tumults was the consequence. Eusebius of Nicomedia was greatly incensed. He called a synod of bishops at Tyre, in 33.5, which proceeded to depose Athanasius. The Emperor was even prevailed on to remove the latter to Gaul, though he alleged as his reason that he wished to deliver him from the machinations of his enemies. In the same year another sj'nod met at Jerusalem, which revoked the sentence of excommunication uttered against Arius and his friends. Still, the majority of the Christians of Alexandria clung to the doctrines of Athanasius, and resolutely resisted every effort to establish the new opinions among them. Disappointed in his expectations. Arius, in 336, proceeded to Constantinople, where he presented the Emperor with another apparently orthodox confession of faith; whereupon orders were issued to Alexander, Bishop of Constantinople, to administer to Arius the holy communion on the Sunday following. This was naturally considered a grand triumph by Eusebius and his friends; but on the Saturday preceding the day appointed for his restoration, Arius suddenly died of hemorrhage of the bowels. Arius was exceedingly handsome; but the harassing cares of a life spent in a continual struggle with his adversaries are said to have given him a worn and haggard look. His manners were graceful and modest; he was noted for even an ascetic abstinence, and the purity of his moral character was never challenged by a single enemy.
After the death of Arius, his followers rallied round Eusebius, now Bishop of Constantinople (338), from whom they were styled Eusebians. The reconciliatory middle party of Eusebius of Cæsarea (d.340 A.D.), who wished to end the great controversy by abstaining from all strict dogmatic assertions on the matter, soon dwindled into insignificance between the two contending parties. Gonstans, who ruled the West after the death of Constantine (337), and Constantius, who ruled the East, made an essay toward reconciliation, but it failed at the Synod of Sardis (347), where the Occidental bishops gathered themselves round Athanasius in support of the homoousian doctrine (identity or sameness of substance), while in a separate council at Philippopolis, the Oriental bishops asserted the homoiousian doctrine (implying merely similarity of substance). Slight as might appear the verbal difference between the two parties, the bitterness of the controversy was intense, and pervaded almost all departments of public and private life. Constantius having, by the death of Constans (350) and his victory over Magnentius (353), gained dominion over the West, the Arian cause, which he favored, triumphed at the Synod of Arelate or Aries (353), and at that of Milan (355), These victories, however, were more apparent than real. The Nicene doctrine had still strong support on its side, and was strictly maintained by the banished Athanasius and his friends, while the Antinicieans, soon after their triumph, were divided into at least three parties. The old Arians, also styled Anomteoi, or Heterousians, asserted, in the boldest style, their doctrine of "distinct substances," The semi-Arians (a large majority in the Eastern Church) maintained the homoiousian doctrine of similar substances. A third party held the same doctrine with some qualification. Morally, the victory was leaning to the side of the Nicæans. Julian the Apostate (361363), in his hatred of the Christian religion, left all parties at liberty to contend as they pleased with one another, so that they did not interfere with his plans. Jovian and his successors in the West, Valentinian I. and Gratian, extended full toleration to both parties. Arianism, at last, was virtually abolished in the Roman Empire, under Theodosius in the East (379-395), and Valentinian II. in the West. Among the German nations, however, it continued to spread through missionary efforts. Bishop Ulfilas, the translator of the Bible into the Mœso-Gothic language, had been the means of converting the West Goths to Arian Christianity as early as 348, and they adhered to it until the Synod of Toledo in 589. The East Goths, Vandals, Burgundians, the Suevi in Spain, and the Longobards also adopted Arianism; but in all these instances the Nicene doc-
