Read more Read less. Enabled Similar books to Meetings With Paul: Kindle Cloud Reader Read instantly in your browser. Customers who bought this item also bought.
Page 1 of 1 Start over Page 1 of 1. From Folklore to Flying Saucers. Corporate Foundations of Secret Space Programs. The Politics of Our Evolution. Editorial Reviews About the Author Phil Krapf is a journalist and freelance writer who worked as an editor on the metro copy desk of the Los Angeles Times , where he shared in a Pulitzer Prize in He lives in San Ramon, California.
Product details File Size: Origin Press September 1, Publication Date: September 1, Sold by: Share your thoughts with other customers. Write a customer review. Showing of 4 reviews. Top Reviews Most recent Top Reviews. There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later. Interesting book, especially if you have read his others. Kindle Edition Verified Purchase. Origin Press Publish date: Description In this, the third book of Phillip H. Krapf's series, the story of a year-long series of dramatic materializations of a guardian angel named Paul is told.
Often confounded by what he is seeing and hearing, Krapf learns that Paul has journeyed with him for a lifetime, beneficially guiding and protecting him without his knowledge. You may also like: The Contact Has Begun: The Prophet Of Ancient The Life of David Brainerd. Autobiography of a Yogi.
The Every-day Book and Table Book. v. 2 (of 3) by William Hone
Authenticity Shipping Payment Returns Support Authenticity All the books, movies and music discs sold in our store are authentic. Shipping We offer combined postage for additional items at no extra charge.
- Buy for others.
- .
- The Ocoosa County Burden;
- Red Wheel ∕ Weiser Online Bookstore | Spirituality Category.
- Editorial Reviews!
- Romance In Air (Romantic Quotes).
Dispatch of items is arranged by AusReseller. Payment policy Payment is expected within 3 days of the sale. We only accept payments through PayPal. But as the Greek church had no middle age, so it has had no Protestant Reformation.
- Similar Books?
- 1,699 Nonfiction Writing Prompts: Questions galore for generating book, article & blog post ideas.
- La construction de lEurope (Histoire) (French Edition);
- Phillip H. Krapf (Author of Contact Has Begun).
- Students Concerto No. 1 in D Major, First to Seventh Position (Piano Score)?
The prevailing philosophy of the fathers was the Platonic, so far as it was compatible with the Christian spirit. The speculative theologians of the East, especially those of the school of Origen, and in the West, Ambrose and pre-eminently Augustine, were moulded by the Platonic idealism. A remarkable combination of Platonism with Christianity, to the injury of the latter, appears in the system of mystic symbolism in the pseudo-Dionysian books, which cannot have been composed before the fifth century, though they were falsely ascribed to the Areopagite of the book of Acts xvii. The fundamental idea of these Dionysian writings on the celestial hierarchy; on the ecclesiastical hierarchy; on the divine names; on mystic theology; together with ten letters is a double hierarchy, one in heaven and one on earth, each consisting of three triads, which mediates between man and the ineffable, transcendent hyper-essential divinity.
This idea is a remnant of the aristocratic spirit of ancient heathenism, and forms the connecting link with the hierarchical organization of the church, and explains the great importance and popularity which the pseudo-Dionysian system acquired, especially in the mystic theology of the middle ages. In Synesius of Cyrene also the Platonism outweighs the Christianity.
He was an enthusiastic pupil of Hypatia, the famous female philosopher at Alexandria, and in was called to the bishopric of Ptolemais, the capital of Pentapolis. Before taking orders he frankly declared that he could not forsake his philosophical opinions, although he would in public accommodate himself to the popular belief. Theophilus of Alexandria, the same who was one of the chief persecutors of the admirers of Origen, the father of Christian Platonism, accepted this doubtful theory of accommodation.
Synesius was made bishop, but often regretted that he exchanged his favorite studies for the responsible and onerous duties of the bishopric. In his hymns he fuses the Christian doctrine of the Trinity with the Platonic idea of God, and the Saviour with the divine Helios, whose daily setting and rising was to him a type of Christ's descent into Hades and ascension to heaven. The desire of the soul to be freed from the chains of matter, takes the place of the sorrow for sin and the longing after salvation.
As soon as theology assumed a scholastic character and began to deal more in dialectic forms than in living ideas, the philosophy of Aristotle rose to favor and influence, and from John Philoponus, a. It was the philosophy of scholasticism, while mysticism sympathized rather with the Platonic system.
The influence of the two great philosophies upon theology was beneficial or injurious, according as the principle of Christianity was the governing or the governed factor. Both systems are theistic at bottom monotheistic , and favorable to the spirit of earnest and profound speculation. Platonism, with its ideal, poetic views, stimulates, fertilizes, inspires and elevates the reason and imagination, but also easily leads into the errors of gnosticism and the twilight of mysticism.
Aristotelianism, with its sober realism and sharp logical distinctions, is a good discipline for the understanding, a school of dialectic practice, and a help to logical, systematic, methodical treatment, but may also induce a barren formalism. The truth is, Christianity itself is the highest philosophy, as faith is the highest reason; and she makes successive philosophies, as well as the arts and the sciences, tributary to herself, on the Pauline principle that "all things are hers.
The church view respecting the sources of Christian theology and the rule of faith and practice remains as it was in the previous period, except that it is further developed in particulars. Both are vehicles of the same substance: The relation of the two in the mind of the ancient church may be illustrated by the relation between the supreme law of a country such as the Roman law, the Code Napoleon, the common law of England, the Constitution of the United States and the courts which expound the law, and decide between conflicting interpretations. Athanasius, for example, "the father of orthodoxy," always bases his conclusions upon Scripture, and appeals to the authority of tradition only in proof that he rightly understands and expounds the sacred books.
The catholic faith, says he, is that which the Lord gave , the apostles preached , and the fathers have preserved ; upon this the church is founded, and he who departs from this faith can no longer be called a Christian. The sum of doctrinal tradition was contained in what is called the Apostles ' Creed , which at first bore various forms, but after the beginning of the fourth century assumed the Roman form now commonly used.
In the Greek church its place was supplied after the year by the Nicene Creed , which more fully expresses the doctrine of the deity of Christ. Neither of these symbols goes beyond the substance of the teaching of the apostles; neither contains any doctrine specifically Greek or Roman. The old catholic doctrine of Scripture and tradition, therefore, nearly as it approaches the Roman, must not be entirely confounded with it.
It makes the two identical as to substance, while the Roman church rests upon tradition for many doctrines and usages, like the doctrines of the seven sacraments, of the mass, of purgatory, of the papacy, and of the immaculate conception, which have no foundation in Scripture. Against this the evangelical church protests, and asserts the perfection and sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures as the record of divine revelation; while it does not deny the value of tradition, or of the consciousness of the church, in the interpretation of Scripture, and regulates public teaching by symbolical books.
In the Protestant view tradition is not coordinate with Scripture, but subordinate to it, and its value depends on its agreement with the Scriptures. The Scriptures alone are the norma fidei ; the church doctrine is only the norma doctrinae. Protestantism gives much more play to private judgment and free investigation in the interpretation of the Scriptures, than the Roman or even the Nicene church.
In respect to the Holy Scriptures: At the end of the fourth century views still differed in regard to the extent of the canon , or the number of the books which should be acknowledged as divine and authoritative. The Jewish canon, or the Hebrew Bible, was universally received, while the Apocrypha added to the Greek version of the Septuagint were only in a general way accounted as books suitable for church reading, and thus as a middle class between canonical and strictly apocryphal pseudonymous writings.
And justly; for those books, while they have great historical value, and fill the gap between the Old Testament and the New, all originated after the cessation of prophecy, and they cannot therefore be regarded as inspired, nor are they ever cited by Christ or the apostles. Of the New Testament, in the time of Eusebius, the four Gospels, the Acts, thirteen Epistles of Paul, the first Epistle of John, and the first Epistle of Peter, were universally recognized as canonical, while the Epistle to the Hebrews, the second and third Epistles of John, the second Epistle of Peter, the Epistle of James, and the Epistle of Jude were by many disputed as to their apostolic origin, and the book of Revelation was doubted by reason of its contents.
In the Western church the canon of both Testaments was closed at the end of the fourth century through the authority of Jerome who wavered, however, between critical doubts and the principle of tradition , and more especially of Augustine, who firmly followed the Alexandrian canon of the Septuagint, and the preponderant tradition in reference to the disputed Catholic Epistles and the Revelation; though he himself, in some places, inclines to consider the Old Testament Apocrypha as deutero -canonical books, bearing a subordinate authority.
The council of Hippo in , and the third according to another reckoning the sixth council of Carthage in , under the influence of Augustine, who attended both, fixed the catholic canon of the Holy Scriptures, including the Apocrypha of the Old Testament, and prohibited the reading of other books in the churches, excepting the Acts of the Martyrs on their memorial days. These two African councils, with Augustine, give forty-four books as the canonical books of the Old Testament, in the following order: The New Testament canon is the same as ours.
This decision of the transmarine church however, was subject to ratification; and the concurrence of the Roman see it received when Innocent I. This canon remained undisturbed till the sixteenth century, and was sanctioned by the council of Trent at its fourth session. Protestantism retained the New Testament canon of the Roman church, but, in accordance with the orthodox Jewish and the primitive Christian view, excluded the Apocrypha from the Old.
The most eminent of the church fathers speak in the strongest terms of the full inspiration and the infallible authority of the holy Scriptures, and commend the diligent reading of them even to the laity. The want of general education, however, and the enormous cost of books, left the people for the most part dependent on the mere hearing of the word of God in public worship; and the free private study of the Bible was repressed by the prevailing Spirit of the hierarchy.
No prohibition, indeed, was yet laid upon the reading of the Bible; but the presumption that it was a book of the priests and monks already existed. It remained for a much later period, by the invention of printing, the free spirit of Protestantism, and the introduction of popular schools, to make the Bible properly a people's book, as it was originally designed to be; and to disseminate it by Bible societies, which now print and circulate more copies of it in one year, than were made in the whole middle age, or even in the fifteen centuries before the Reformation.
The oldest manuscripts of the Bible now extant date no further back than the fourth century, are very few, and abound in unessential errors and omissions of every kind; and the problem of a critical restoration of the original text is not yet satisfactorily solved, nor can it be more than approximately solved in the absence of the original writings of the apostles.
The oldest and most important manuscripts in uncial letters are the Sinaitic first discovered by Tischendorf in , and published in , the Vatican in Rome, defective , the Alexandrian in London ; then the much mutilated codex of Ephraim Syrus in Paris, and the incomplete codex of Cambridge. From these and a few other uncial codices the oldest attainable text must be mainly gathered. Secondary sources are quotations in the fathers, the earliest versions, Stich as the Syriac Peshito and the Latin Vulgate, and the later manuscripts.
The faith which rests not upon the letter, but upon the living spirit of Christianity, is led into no error by the defects of the manuscripts and ancient and modern versions of the Bible, but only excited to new and deeper study. The spread of the church among all the nations of the Roman empire, and even among the barbarians on its borders, brought with it the necessity of translating the Scriptures into various tongues.
The most important of these versions, and the one most used, is the Latin Vulgate , which was made by the learned Jerome on the basis of the older Itala , and which afterwards, notwithstanding its many errors, was placed by the Roman church on a level with the original itself. The knowledge of Hebrew among the fathers was very rare; the Septuagint was considered sufficient, and even the knowledge of Greek diminished steadily in the Latin church after the invasion of the barbarians and the schism with the East, so that the Bible in its original languages became a sealed book, and remained such until the revival of learning in the fifteenth century.
In the interpretation of the Scriptures the system of allegorical exposition and imposition was in high repute, and often degenerated into the most arbitrary conceits, especially in the Alexandrian school, to which most of the great dogmatic theologians of the Nicene age belonged. Theodore thereby incurred the suspicion and subsequently even the condemnation of the Greek church. Among the Latin fathers a similar difference in the interpretation of Scripture appears between the discerning depth and lively play of Augustine and the grammatical and archaeological scholarship and dogmatical superficiality of Jerome.
The Holy Scriptures were universally accepted as the supreme authority and infallible rule of faith. But as the Scriptures themselves were variously interpreted, and were claimed by the heretics for their views, the fathers of our period, like Irenaeus and Tertullian before them, had recourse at the same time to Tradition , as preserved from the apostles through the unbroken succession of the bishops. With them the Scriptures are the supreme law; the combined wisdom and piety of the catholic church, the organic body of the faithful, is the judge which decides the true sense of the law.
For to be understood the Bible must be explained, either by private judgment or by the universal faith of Christendom. Strictly speaking, the Holy Ghost, who is the author, is also the only infallible interpreter of the Scriptures. But it was held that the Holy Ghost is given only to the orthodox church not to heretical and schismatic sects, and that he expresses himself through assembled orthodox bishops and universal councils in the clearest and most authoritative way.
Even Augustine, who of all the fathers stands nearest to evangelical Protestantism, on this point advocates the catholic principle in the celebrated maxim which he urges against the Manichaeans: But there are different traditions; not to speak of various interpretations of the catholic tradition. Hence the need of a criterion of true and false tradition. We must hold "what has been everywhere , always , and by all believed.
Catholicity of place, of time, and of number; or ubiquity, antiquity, and universal consent; in other words, an article of faith must be traced up to the apostles, and be found in all Christian countries, and among all believers. But this principle can be applied only to a few fundamental articles of revealed religion, not to any of the specifically Romish dogmas, and, to have any reasonable meaning, must be reduced to a mere principle of majority. In regard to the consensus omnium , which properly includes both the others, Vincentius himself makes this limitation, by defining the condition as a concurrence of the majority of the clergy.
In many important doctrines, however, there is not even a consensus patrum , as in the doctrine of free will, of predestination, of the atonement. A certain freedom of divergent private opinions is the indispensable condition of all progress of thought, and precedes the ecclesiastical settlement of every article of faith. Even Vincentius expressly asserts a steady advance of the church in the knowledge of the truth, though of course in harmony with the previous steps, as a man or a tree remains identical through the various stages of growth.
Vincentius is thoroughly Catholic in the spirit and tendency of his work, and has not the most remote conception of the free Protestant study of the Scriptures. But on the other hand he would have as little toleration for new dogmas. He wished to make tradition not an independent source of knowledge and rule of faith by the side of the Holy Scriptures, but only to have it acknowledged as the true interpreter of Scripture, and as a bar to heretical abuse.
The criterion of the antiquity of a doctrine, which he required, involves apostolicity, hence agreement with the spirit and substance of the New Testament. The church, says he, as the solicitous guardian of that which is intrusted to her, changes, diminishes, increases nothing. Her sole effort is to shape, or confirm, or preserve the old. Innovation is the business of heretics not of orthodox believers.
The canon of Scripture is complete in itself, and more than sufficient. In the same spirit says pope Leo I.: The catholic principle of tradition became more and more confirmed, as the authority of the fathers and councils increased and the learned study of the Holy Scriptures declined; and tradition gradually set itself in practice on a level with Scripture, and even above it. It fettered free investigation, and promoted a rigid, stationary and intolerant orthodoxy, which condemned men like Origen and Tertullian as heretics.
Search Results
But on the other hand the principle of tradition unquestionably exerted a wholesome conservative power, and saved the substance of the ancient church doctrine from the obscuring and confusing influence of the pagan barbarism which deluged Christendom. On the orthodox side most of the fathers of the fourth century; especially the dogmatic and polemic works of Athanasius Orationes c.
Arianos; Apologia de fuga sua; Historia Arianorum, etc. On the heretical side: The fragments of the writings of Arius Qavleia, and two Epistolae to Eusebius of Nicomedia and Alexander of Alexandria , preserved in quotations in Athanasius, Epiphanius, Socrates, and Theodoret; comp. Fragmenta Arianorum about in Angelo Mai: Scriptorum veterum nova collect. The fragments of the Church History of the Arian Philostorgius , a. De theologicis dogmatibus, tom. This is still, though incomplete, the most learned work of the Roman church in the History of Doctrines; it first appeared at Paris, '50, in five volumes fol.
Zacharia , and has been last edited by Passaglia and Schrader in Rome, Storia critica della vita di Ario. An Exposition of the Creed in the second article , , 12th ed. George Bull Anglican bishop of St. This classical work endeavors, with great learning, to exhibit the Nicene faith in all the ante -Nicene fathers, and so belongs more properly to the previous period. Vindication of Christ's Divinity, ff. Several acute and learned essays and sermons in defence of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity against the high Arianism of Dr. History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ch.
Athanasius der Grosse u. Mainz ; 2d ed. Newman at the time the learned head of Puseyism, afterwards R. The Arians of the Fourth Century. Lehre von der Dreieinigkeit u. Menschwerdung in ihrer geschichtl. Simon , in Clark's Foreign Theol. Wilberforce at the time archdeacon of East Riding, afterwards R. Athanasius and the council of Nicaea. Albert Prince de Broglie R. Paris, '66, 6 vols. History and Theology of the Three Creeds. Die Lehre des Athanasius von Alexandrien.
Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church.
Seller information
The Arian Controversy down to the Council of Nicaea, The Arian controversy relates primarily to the deity of Christ, but in its course it touches also the deity of the Holy Ghost, and embraces therefore the whole mystery of the Holy Trinity and the incarnation of God, which is the very centre of the Christian revelation.
The dogma of the Trinity came up not by itself in abstract form, but in inseparable connection with the doctrine of the deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost. If this latter doctrine is true, the Trinity follows by logical necessity, the biblical monotheism being presumed; in other words: If God is one, and if Christ and the Holy Ghost are distinct from the Father and yet participate in the divine substance, God must be triune. Though there are in the Holy Scriptures themselves few texts which directly prove the Trinity, and the name Trinity is wholly wanting in them, this doctrine is taught with all the greater force in a living form from Genesis to Revelation by the main facts of the revelation of God as Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, besides being indirectly involved in the deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost.
The church always believed in this Trinity of revelation, and confessed its faith by baptism into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. This carried with it from the first the conviction, that this revelation of God must be grounded in a distinction immanent in the divine essence. But to bring this faith into clear and fixed knowledge, and to form the baptismal confession into doctrine, was the hard and earnest intellectual work of three centuries.
In the Nicene age minds crashed against each other, and fought the decisive battles for and against the doctrines of the true deity of Christ, with which the divinity of Christianity stands or falls. The controversies on this fundamental question agitated the Roman empire and the church of East and West for more than half a century, and gave occasion to the first two ecumenical councils of Nicaea and Constantinople. At last the orthodox doctrine triumphed, and in was brought into the form in which it is to this day substantially held in all orthodox churches. The external history of the Arian controversy, of which we first sketch the main features, falls into three stages: From the outbreak of the controversy to the temporary victory of orthodoxy at the council of Nicaea; a.
The Arian and semi-Arian reaction, and its prevalence to the death of Constantius; a. The final victory, and the completion of the Nicene creed; to the council of Constantinople, a. Arianism proceeded from the bosom of the Catholic church, was condemned as heresy at the council of Nicaea, but afterwards under various forms attained even ascendency for a time in the church, until at the second ecumenical council it was cast out forever. From that time it lost its importance as a politico-theological power, but continued as an uncatholic sect more than two hundred years among the Germanic nations, which were converted to Christianity under the Arian domination.
The roots of the Arian controversy are to be found partly in the contradictory elements of the christology of the great Origen, which reflect the crude condition of the Christian mind in the third century; partly in the antagonism between the Alexandrian and the Antiochian theology.
Origen, on the one hand, attributed to Christ eternity and other divine attributes which logically lead to the orthodox doctrine of the identity of substance; so that he was vindicated even by Athanasius, the two Cappadocian Gregories, and Basil. But, on the other hand, in his zeal for the personal distinctions in the Godhead, he taught with equal clearness a separateness of essence between the Father and the Son and the subordination of the Son, as a second or secondary God beneath the Father, and thus furnished a starting point for the Arian heresy. The eternal generation of the Son from the will of the Father was, with Origen, the communication of a divine but secondary substance, and this idea, in the hands of the less devout and profound Arius, who with his more rigid logic could admit no intermediate being between God and the creature, deteriorated to the notion of the primal creature.
But in general Arianism was much more akin to the spirit of the Antiochian school than to that of the Alexandrian. Arius himself traced his doctrine to Lucian of Antioch, who advocated the heretical views of Paul of Samosata on the Trinity, and was for a time excommunicated, but afterwards rose to great consideration, and died a martyr under Maximinus. Alexander , bishop of Alexandria, made earnest of the Origenistic doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son which was afterwards taught by Athanasius and the Nicene creed, but in a deeper sense, as denoting the generation of a person of the same substance from the substance of the Father, and not of a person of different substance from the will of the Father , and deduced from it the homo-ousia or consubstantiality of the Son with the Father.
Arius , a presbyter of the same city after , who is represented as a tall, thin, learned, adroit, austere, and fascinating man, but proud, artful, restless, and disputatious, pressed and overstated the Origenistic view of the subordination, accused Alexander of Sabellianism, and taught that Christ, while he was indeed the creator of the world, was himself a creature of God, therefore not truly divine.
The contest between these two views broke out about the year or Arius and his followers, for their denial of the true deity of Christ, were deposed and excommunicated by a council of a hundred Egyptian and Libyan bishops at Alexandria in In spite of this he continued to hold religious assemblies of his numerous adherents, and when driven from Alexandria, agitated his doctrine in Palestine and Nicomedia, and diffused it in an entertaining work, half poetry, half prose: The Banquet Qavleia , of which a few fragments are preserved in Athanasius.
Several bishops, especially Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea, who either shared his view or at least considered it innocent, defended him. Alexander issued a number of circular letters to all the bishops against the apostates and Exukontians.
Cheap angel meetings deals
The controversy soon involved, through the importance of the subject and the zeal of the parties, the entire church, and transformed the whole Christian East into a theological battle-field. Constantine, the first emperor who mingled in the religious affairs of Christendom, and who did this from a political, monarchical interest for the unity of the empire and of religion, was at first inclined to consider the contest a futile logomachy, and endeavored to reconcile the parties in diplomatic style by letters and by the personal mission of the aged bishop Hosius of Spain; but without effect.
Questions of theological and religious principle are not to be adjusted, like political measures, by compromise, but must be fought through to their last results, and the truth must either conquer or for the time succumb. Then, in pursuance, as he thought, of a "divine inspiration," and probably also with the advice of bishops who were in friendship with him, he summoned the first universal council, to represent the whole church of the empire, and to give a final decision upon the relation of Christ to God, and upon some minor questions of discipline, the time of Easter, and the Meletian schism in Egypt.
Official minutes of the transactions themselves were not at that time made; only the decrees as adopted were set down in writing and subscribed by all comp. All later accounts of voluminous acts of the council are sheer fabrications Comp. The Church History of Eusebius, which should have closed with the council of Nice, comes down only to the year De decretis Synodi Nic. Gelasius Cyzicenus about Fragments relating to the Council of Nicaea. The Syriac text from am ancient MS. Historia concilii Nicaeni, Lips. Nicaea, the very name of which speaks victory, was the second city of Bithynia, only twenty English miles from the imperial residence of Nicomedia, and easily accessible by sea and land from all parts of the empire.
It is now a miserable Turkish village, Is-nik, where nothing but a rude picture in the solitary church of St. Mary remains to the memory of the event which has given the place a name in the history of the world. Hither, in the year , the twentieth of his reign therefore the festive vicennalia , the emperor summoned the bishops of the empire by a letter of invitation, putting at their service the public conveyances, and liberally defraying from the public treasury the expenses of their residence in Nicaea and of their return.
Each bishop was to bring with him two presbyters and three servants. Many came to bring their private disputes before the emperor, who caused all their papers, without reading them, to be burned, and exhorted the parties to reconciliation and harmony. The whole number of bishops assembled was at most three hundred and eighteen; that is, about one sixth of all the bishops of the empire, who are estimated as at least eighteen hundred one thousand for the Greek provinces, eight hundred for the Latin , and only half as many as were at the council of Chalcedon.
Krapf,Challenge of Contact - Google Search
Including the presbyters and deacons and other attendants the number may, have amounted to between fifteen hundred and two thousand. Most of the Eastern provinces were strongly represented; the Latin church, on the contrary, had only seven delegates: A Persian bishop John, also, and a Gothic bishop, Theophilus, the forerunner and teacher of the Gothic Bible translator Ulfilas, were present. The formal sessions began, after preliminary disputations between Catholics, Arians, and philosophers, probably about Pentecost, or at farthest after the arrival of the emperor on the 14th of June.
They closed on the 25th of July, the anniversary of the accession of Constantine; though the members did not disperse till the 25th of August. The formal opening of the council was made by the stately entrance of the emperor, which Eusebius in his panegyrical flattery thus describes: The court officers entered one after another, though only such as professed faith in Christ. The moment the approach of the emperor was announced by a given signal, they all rose from their seats, and the emperor appeared like a heavenly messenger of God, covered with gold and gems, a glorious presence, very tall and slender, full of beauty, strength, and majesty.
With this external adornment he united the spiritual ornament of the fear of God, modesty, and humility, which could be seen in his downcast eyes, his blushing face, the motion of his body, and his walk. When he reached the golden throne prepared for him, he stopped, and sat not down till the bishops gave him the sign. And after him they all resumed their seats. How great the contrast between this position of the church and the time of her persecution but scarcely passed!
What a revolution of opinion in bishops who had once feared the Roman emperor as the worst enemy of the church, and who now greeted the same emperor in his half barbarous attire as an angel of God from heaven, and gave him, though not yet even baptized, the honorary presidency of the highest assembly of the church! After a brief salutatory address from the bishop on the right of the emperor, by which we are most probably to understand Eusebius of Caesarea, the emperor himself delivered with a gentle voice in the official Latin tongue the opening address, which was immediately after translated into Greek, and runs thus: I must thank God that, in addition to all other blessings, he has shown me this highest one of all: May no malicious enemy rob us of this happiness, and after the tyranny of the enemy of Christ [Licinius and his army] is conquered by the help of the Redeemer, the wicked demon shall not persecute the divine law with new blasphemies.
Discord in the church I consider more fearful and painful than any other war. As soon as I by the help of God had overcome my enemies, I believed that nothing more was now necessary than to give thanks to God in common joy with those whom I had liberated.
But when I heard of your division, I was convinced that this matter should by no means be neglected, and in the desire to assist by my service, I have summoned you without delay. I shall, however, feel my desire fulfilled only when I see the minds of all united in that peaceful harmony which you, as the anointed of God, must preach to others. Delay not therefore, my friends, delay not, servants of God; put away all causes of strife, and loose all knots of discord by the laws of peace. Thus shall you accomplish the work most pleasing to God, and confer upon me, your fellow servant, an exceeding great joy.
After this address he gave way to the ecclesiastical presidents of the council and the business began. The emperor, however, constantly, took an active part, and exercised a considerable influence. Among the fathers of the council, besides a great number of obscure mediocrities, there were several distinguished and venerable men. Eusebius of Caesarea was most eminent for learning; the young archdeacon Athanasius, who accompanied the bishop Alexander of Alexandria, for zeal, intellect, and eloquence.
Some, as confessors, still bore in their body the marks of Christ from the times of persecution: Paphnutius of the Upper Thebaid, Potamon of Heraklea, whose right eye had been put out, and Paul of Neo-Caesarea, who had been tortured with red hot iron under Licinius, and crippled in both his hands. Others were distinguished for extraordinary ascetic holiness, and even for miraculous works; like Jacob of Nisibis, who had spent years as a hermit in forests and eaves, and lived like a wild beast on roots and leaves, and Spyridion or St. Spiro of Cyprus, the patron of the Ionian isles, who even after his ordination remained a simple shepherd.
Of the Eastern bishops, Eusebius of Caesarea, and of the Western, Hosius, or Osius, of Cordova, had the greatest influence with the emperor. These two probably sat by his side, and presided in the deliberations alternately with the bishops of Alexandria and Antioch. In reference to the theological question the council was divided in the beginning into three parties.