THE CHURCH OF ALEXANDRIA AND ITS TEACHERS. BY THE REV. JOHN GIBB. PART GECOND. "Moses, when he saw the Israelite and the Egyptian fight, did not say, Why strive you? but drew his sword, and slew the Egyptian; but when he saw the two Israelites fight, he said, You are brethren; why strive you? If the point of doctrine be an Egyptian, it must be slain by the sword of the Spirit, and not reconciled; but if it be an Israelite, though in the wrong, then why strive you?"-BACON, HERE was an interval of about ninety years, between the departure of Origen from Alexandria and the appearance of another and perhaps greater character amid the struggles and councils of the Egyptian Church. The interval which thus elapsed between the exile of Origen and the appearance of Athanasius upon the stage, although here we must pass lightly over it, was by no means barren in the Church of Alexandria in important events and solemn lessons. The Church was repeatedly visited during this period by heathen persecutions of more than common severity; and were we to tell the story at length we should have to describe torments of the most savage and refined cruelty, inflicted by their rulers and fellow-citizens, on Christian men and women, and even upon children of tender years, because of their faith. From such recitals we turn in these days with sickening horror, feeling it difficult to realize that even in the depths of heathendom men could be found capable of such malignant cruelty. And feeling it no less difficult, we fear, in realizing that high world-overcoming faith which enabled even the young and tender to suffer untold agony rather than speak an unfaithful word or do an unfaithful action towards the unseen Master. Nor were the troubles of the Alexandrian Church during this period altogether from without. There were also strifes and troubles within the sacred enclosure. There were certain debates about Church authority, baptism, and the like, some of which led to actual schisms. There were also debates about doctrine; foremost in importance among the latter was a great debate about what was termed in Alexandria a "theological" question. This did not mean at that time what it would mean among us, any question regarding God, or man's relation to God, but specially a question relating to the nature of God; for it was only such a question that was reckoned "theological" by the theologians of Alexandria. This theological debate, which agitated for a time the Church of Alexandria, is known in Church history as the Sabellian heresy. A certain teacher, named Sabellius, having brought forward the opinion that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are but different names for the same person, who, under the different dispensations revealed Himself in different modes, some were captivated with a doctrine which appeared to do away with all difficulty in the mystery of the Trinity, and to render the work of the Christian | apologist more easy. It was, however, strenuously opposed, and the Church of Alexandria as a whole remained true to the teachings of the Bible and the traditions of the Church. During the period of which we are speaking, the Alexandrian Church produced not a few names whose saintly memories were long cherished in their own Church, and some of whom deserve far more than a passing mention. Foremost we would mention Dionysius, who was Bishop of Alexandria from 247 to 264—a man of singular wisdom and holiness. He has been called by a modern poet a "ruler sage," and he appears to have fully deserved the title. Firm and courageous in persecution, calm and gentle in controversy, he had not a few of the best qualities of his great master, Origen, whose pupil and disciple Dionysius had been ere the former was expelled from the Catechetical School. The manner in which Dionysius dealt with the millenarians is worth recording, as an instance as beautiful as it is unfortunately rare in ecclesiastical history, of a controversy being stayed by charity and forbearance on the one side and candour on the other. The story is this,-There was a certain Bishop of Arsinoë, named Nepos, a godly and faithful man, much beloved by his clergy and flock. This man had, however, adopted millenarian opinions, which he boldly preached in his churches, and embodied in certain hymns which he had composed for the people. Nepos died, but his opinions spread rapidly both among the presbyters and flocks of the district. When this came to the ears of Dionysius he journeyed to Arsinoë, and having called together the presbyters of the city and neighbourhood, he invited them to lay their views before him. The conference lasted for three days, Dionysius presiding, and listening patiently to all that was said, and meeting what he considered erroneous. At the conclusion of the conference the presbyters who had adopted the opinions of Nepos declared themselves convinced by the arguments of Dionysius of their errors, and abandoned the views which had occasioned the trouble. Another bishop worthy of mention, who presided over the Church of Alexandria during this century, was Bishop Theonas. The following extract from one of his letters to Lucian, chief of the gentlemen of the bedchamber of Diocletian, gives an interesting idea of the sort of advice a Christian teacher in those times was in the habit of giving to men high in place at heathen courts. "The peace," writes Theonas, "which the Churches now enjoy is granted to this end, that the good works of Christians may shine out before infidels, and that thence our Father, which is in heaven, may be glorified. This should be our chief end and aim if we would be Christians in deed and not in word only. For if we seek our own glory, we desire a vain and perishable thing; but the glory of the Father, and of the Son, who for us was nailed to the cross, saves us with an everlasting redemption-that great expectation of Christians. I neither think, therefore, nor wish, Lucian, that you should boast because many in the court have come by your means to the knowledge of the truth; you should rather give thanks to God, who hath chosen you as a good instrument to a good result, and hath given you favour in the sight of the prince, to the end that you should spread abroad the savour of the Christian name, to his glory and to the salvation of many......God forbid that you should sell to any the entry of the palace, or receive a bribe to suggest what is unseemly to the emperor's ear. Put away from you all avarice, which worketh idolatry rather than the Christian religion. Unworthy gain and duplicity is much unbefitting him who embraces Christ, the Poor, and the Simple. Let there be no evil-speaking nor immodest language among you. Let all things be done with kindness, courtesy, and justice; that in all things the name of our God and Lord Jesus Christ may be magnified. Fulfil the duties to which you are severally appointed with fear towards God, and love towards the emperor, and exactness and diligence. Account that all commands of the prince, which offend not against those of God, proceed from God himself. Put on patience as a robe; be filled with virtue and the hope of Christ." To Theonas succeeded Peter, commonly called the martyr, as he was the one Bishop of Alexandria who was called to seal his testimony to the faith with blood. It was during the great Diocletian persecution, the last of the great persecutions, that Peter suffered for the faith. On the 24th of February 303 an edict was issued from the palace of Diocletian in Nicomedia, by which it was enacted that all Christian churches in all the provinces of the empire should be immediately destroyed, that all bishops and presbyters should deliver their sacred books to the magistrates, and the punishment of death was threatened against all who should hold secret assemblies for divine worship. This edict was carried out with terrible severity in many of the provinces; and the martyrs of Alexandria were distinguished for the severity of their sufferings and the constancy with which they were endured. The conduct of the Alexandrian martyrs is thus described by an eye-witness :"The martyrs, fixing the eye of their soul simply and entirely on the God that is over all, and welcoming death for piety's sake, held fast their calling; for they knew that our Lord Jesus Christ became man for us, to the end that he might utterly destroy all iniquity, and might lay up for us a provision for our entrance into eternal life: wherefore, desiring the greater grace, these martyrs, filled with Christ, endured every labour, and all devices of insult, not once only, but some have already done so twice; and setting at nought all the threats, not in words only, but in deeds also, of the soldiers that emulously exerted themselves in actions of cruelty, they flinched not from their resolution." It was a persecution, this of Diocletian, which recalls the striking words of St. John : "The devil is come down, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time." It was the last great persecution with which the Church was visited, and it was in many respects the most terrible. One of the last of the sufferers for the faith in Alexandria was the Bishop Peter, whose conduct during the whole of the time had been marked by much wisdom and faithful courage Soon after his death events took place which finally put an end to these bloody persecutions for the faith by which the Church of the first three centuries had been tried. In 312 the edict of Milan was published, by which free liberty was granted to every dweller in the Roman empire to follow whatever religion he chose. About twelve years later Christians read, with delighted but half incredulous eyes, a letter from the great Emperor Constantine, now sole master of the Roman world, in which he declared his own faith in Christ, and urged upon his subjects the duty of submitting themselves to the faith which he had become convinced was divine. It need occasion no surprise that hopes, which the event proved to be exaggerated, were excited by such an announcement. It was a great victory of the faith, this conversion of the empire, as we may term it; but, nevertheless, the Church had not yet passed into the haven of perfect peace and blessedness. If any were disposed to think so, and some were, they were soon undeceived. For a storm of another kind presently burst upon the Church, which perhaps more seriously endangered its existence, and filled the hearts of the faithful with more poignant sorrow than the most terrific of the heathen persecutions. Alexandria was the cradle of this great heresy which so shook the Catholic Church. A certain presbyter named Arius was minister of the Church of Baucalis, which was the oldest and most opulent of the nine parishes into which the city was divided. This Arius was a man of grave and dignified deportment, much respected by many; and he was an able and persuasive speaker. His ministry was largely attended, especially by the ladies of Alexandria. At first, in private conversations, and afterwards in a more public manner, Arius began to broach opinions regarding the nature of the Saviour which, while they attracted some, filled others with apprehension, and were by them regarded as a serious departure from the faith once delivered to the saints. If the Father, said Arius, had begotten a Son, there must have been a period when the Son was begotten, and, consequently, there must have been a period when he had no being. It followed from this that the Saviour was but a creature, highly exalted it might be, but still as a creature removed by a vast distance from the infinite Creator. It could not but be a matter of importance to the faith of the Church whether he, who was at once its founder and foundation, was to be looked upon as a created being or as the infinite Jehovah. Some of the presbyters of Alexandria warmly espoused the cause and advocated the views of Arius, many among the laity did the same, but chiefly were they adopted by his female admirers. Such a view appeared to some advantageous, as removing the doctrine of the Trinity, which appeared to be so great a stumbling-block in the way of many. No doubt the rapidity of the spread of Arian opinions in Alexandria is partly to be ascribed to the ability of Arius himself. He was not, as many heretics had been, a mere philosopher. He was a preacher of rare gifts and great influence; he was also a poet; and both these gifts he made use of in order to spread his opinions. At a later period he wrote a long poem called "Thalia," and he also composed hymns which became so popular as to be often sung upon the streets of Alexandria. A heresy led by such a man, and originating in the centre of the second city of the empire, was evidently likely to spread, and to occasion treuble in the Church; but the altogether amazing rapidity with which it did spread must probably be attributed to a preparedness on the part of many Christians to receive some such teaching. An historian thus writes of the spread of Arianism. After mentioning some circumstances which help to explain it, he goes on to say: "But, after all, these considerations, though full weight be granted them, are far toc confined to account for the instantaneous stride of Arianism from the weakness of infancy to the strength of a giant. Alexander and Arius are not to be regarded as simply the heads of two contending factions, but as the embodiment of two principles, which had from the beginning conflicted in the Church, but had never encountered each other on the same scale as now. That the tradition of the Church, from apostolic times, was sanctioned by the Council of Nicæa, and asserted the true and proper divinity of the Saviour, is a point that has been triumphantly proved. But it is not less true that a tradition disavowed by the Church, but still existing in it, an under-current to the recognized course of the stream, had also existed from primitive times, and taught the opposite doctrine. It was this principle which, assuming different appearances, but still acting to the same end, had in the first century broken forth in the heresies of Cerinthus and Ebion, in the third, in that of Paul of Samosata; and now, finding the Church free from external tribulations, made Arius its mouthpiece. It was but necessary to strike the chord, and in every country hearts were found to respond; the train had long since been laid, and the weakest hand could fire it. The creed of Arius was not heard by his disciples as something new and unknown; they recognized it as the true and boldly developed expression of what they had previously held by implication, but had shrunk from acknowledging nakedly." Alexander, the Bishop of Alexandria, offered a firm opposition to the opinions of the minister of the Church of Baucalis. Perhaps, for he does not appear to have been a man of much penetration, his firmness was from the beginning supported and guided, as it certainly was at a later period, by the young deacon, whom men were afterwards to know as Athanasius the Great. After endeavouring by other means to persuade Arius to abandon his opinions, Alexander convened a council of the whole province over which he presided; and by this council, after debate and deliberation, an anathema was pronounced against Arius and his followers, and they were declared separate from the communion of the Catholic Church until such time as they should repent and recant. This was in the year 321. Arius then left Alexandria and went to Palestine, and from thence to other places; and tidings soon reached Alexander that the heretic was finding many friends and sympathizers, and that his own conduct was regarded in many quarters as harsh and unjustifiable. He then wrote a general letter justifying his conduct, and warning his Christian brethren everywhere against the spreading error. "Since the body of the Catholic Church," be wrote, "is one, and there is a command in the divine Scriptures that we should keep the bond of like-mindedness and peace, it follows that we by letter should signify to each other that which happens to each; that whether one member suffer, all the members may suffer with it, or whether it joy, all may rejoice with it. Wherefore, in our diocese, certain men have gone forth, workers of iniquity and the enemies of Christ, teaching an apostasy which may well be thought and called the forerunner of Antichrist. I would fain have consigned a matter of this sort to silence, that if it might be so, the evil might have an end in the apostates alone, lest, getting abroad into other places, it should defile the ears of the simple. But since Eusebius, now Bishop of Nicomedia, thinking that the affairs of the Church depend upon him, takes the lead of these apostates, and hath taken in hand to write to all quarters, commending them, if perchance he may secretly draw the ignorant into the worst heresy-that which fights against Christ-I have thought it necessary to break silence." Then, after giving a narrative of the facts of the case, and pleading the cause of the truth, he adds:-" But we do not think it strange. The case was the same with Hymenæus and Philetus, and before them with Judas, who, when he had been a follower of the Lord, afterwards became a traitor and an apostate. And concerning these men themselves, we have not left them untaught. But the Lord hath said before, 'Take heed that no man deceive you; for many shall conie in my name, saying, I am Christ, and the time draweth near, and shall deceive many go not after them.'" The efforts of Alexander were altogether ineffectual to stay the spread of Arianism; so rapidly and widely did it spread that it became a question for some time whether it would not soon become the creed of the uni versal Church. Eusebius of Nicomedia, to whom Alexander alludes in his letter, the wily and ambitious pre-❘ late of a town where the emperor often resided, worked in behalf of the cause which he had adopted with restless zeal. The Emperor Constantine was vexed to find that the Christian bishops were quarrelling among one another. A soldier and Roman, and very ill instructed as a Christian, the question regarding which Alexander and Arius had debated appeared to him of very trifling importance; but as a Roman and a soldier he saw very clearly the evil of the disorder and scandal which the debate had introduced into the Church. He wrote, accordingly, a remarkable letter to Alexander and Arius, in which he expressed his sorrow on account of the strifes, and told them that they ought to be able to discuss such questions without violating charity and unity, as even heathen philosophers had done. He then begged them to be reconciled, saying, "Restore to me quiet days and nights devoid of care; that henceforth I may have the joy of pure light and the gladness of a quiet life. This, if I gain not, I must needs lament, and be dissolved in tears, and go heavily for the remainder of my days. For when the people, my fellow-servants, are divided by unjust and harmful contention, how can I be of unmoved soul?" words proposed, but in a sense different from that designed by the framers. It was, however, discovered that the followers of Arius objected to saying that the Son was of the same substance as the Father, as this expression appeared to exclude their view of his nature. The other party insisted it was necessary to insert in the creed a declaration that Christ was of the same substance with the Father. At length, after much debate, it was agreed that this should be done. The following creed was then agreed upon:-"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things, visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father..... And for them that say, concerning the Son of God, there was a time when he was not, and he was not before he was produced, and he is of another substance or essence, or created, or subject to conversion or mutation, the Catholic and Apostolic Church saith, Let them be anathema." As this Council took place not in Alexandria but in Nicæa, it scarcely falls within our province to dwell upon its details. It has been often described; and no Council of the Church is so widely regarded with reverConstantine also sent to Alexandria a venerable ence by Christians as the Council of Nicæa. One of the bishop named Hosius, to endeavour to compose the dif- most remarkable features in the assembly was the presidferences. But it was not found possible to hush up the ing Emperor. The master of the Roman world, by the matter in the manner which would have been agreeable request of the bishops, presided over their deliberations. to the emperor. The Alexandrian Christians remained In calling them together to decide a question which was firm in their resolve to uphold as vital truth the posi- disturbing the peace not only of the Church but of the tions they had laid down, and to look upon Arius, until empire, he only exercised a prerogative which, as the he recanted his opinions, as an excommunicated heretic. Westminster Confession says, belongs to princes. But But soon the public confusion and scandal became de- in presiding over their deliberations, and taking a part plorable. Not only Christians but heathens became in their discussions, neophyte as he was in the faith, he interested in the discussion. It was brought upon the appears to us to have committed a grave error, for which stage for the purpose of ridicule, and those who did not the fathers were more responsible than himself. A love Christianity rejoiced to see the most sacred mys- writer, never friendly to the Church, but a truthful teries of the faith bandied about as themes of idle debate historian, has thus described the manner in which Conin the inn, in the bath, in the shop, and every place of stantine acted in relation to the Church, and in which public resort. Constantine hesitated no longer. He he was, indeed, encouraged to act by his spiritual adwould, he resolved, convene a General Council of the visers:-"The severe rules of discipline which the Church, and have the question authoritatively decided prudence of the bishops had instituted were relaxed by by the assembled ministers of the Church. From all the same prudence in favour of an imperial proselyte, parts of the Roman world, bishops and presbyters came whom it was so important to allure by every gentle at his summons to Nicæa, to deliberate upon this great condescension into the pale of the Church; and Conquestion as well as upon some other matters which re- stantine was permitted, at least by that dispensation, quired attention. The Council was opened on the 19th to enjoy most of the privileges before he had contracted of June 325. In the absence of the emperor, Arius was any of the obligations of a Christian. Instead of retirasked to declare his sentiments. And from his declara-ing from the congregation, when the voice of the deacon tions, which appear to have been fearless and honest cnough, most of the fathers inferred that he, without doubt, designed to teach that the Son of God had been created from nothing, and was a creature and a work of the Father. But as some of the followers of Arius were less outspoken than himself, it became needful to frame their confession of faith with care; for some of the Arians showed a disposition to accept the dismissed the profane multitude, he prayed with the faithful, disputed with the bishops, preached on the most sublime and intricate subjects of theology, celebrated with sacred rites the vigil of Easter, and publicly declared himself not only apartaker but, in some measure, a priest and hierophant of the Christian mysteries." That there is much to regret in the sort of homage which Constantine and the early Christian emperors received at the hands of the teachers and rulers of the Church, cannot be denied. And the position of honour and authority in which they were prematurely placed, led to serious evils to the cause of Christianity in Europe, which have been felt for centuries. It would be unjust, however, to ascribe these evils to the connection then begun between Church and State. We can fully allow the great benefits which accrued to European society by the legal establishment of Christianity, while we lament that the churchmen of the time did, in some matters, depart from divine precepts and divine sanctions in order to gratify the ruling emperor. It became absolutely necessary that when the ruling powers of the State became Christian, some alliance or compact should be made between Church and empire; but more than ever did it become necessary that those who were appointed to rule the Church should stand upon their divine right, and rule in the Church, looking in this matter, as in every matter, not to the will of an earthly emperor, but to Him that accepteth not the person of princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor." Fortunately, the history of the Church is by no means without examples which show that it is possible for churchinen to have near relations with carthly monarchs and secular powers, and yet to remain faithful to their divine Lord and the claims of his Church. St. Ambrose debarring the bloodstained emperor from the table of the Lord is but one example among many of the faithfulness which Christ's ministers have shown in their dealings with the bearers of earthly authority. All the bishops in the Council of Nicæa subscribed the Creed agreed upon by the assembly with the exception of five; three of these, however, finally gave a reluctant consent. As for the two who refused, they, along with Arius himself, were by decree of the emperor banished to the province of Illyria. Five months after the Council, Alexander the bishop, having returned to Alexandria, was seized with mortal disease. He died on the 26th of February 326, but not until he had signified his wish, or perhaps we should say rather predicted, that he would be succeeded by Athanasius. Athanasius was not present. Athanasius," exclaimed the dying bishop, “you think to save yourself by flight, but flight will not avail you." After the death of Alexander the people of Alexandria loudly demanded the appointment of Athanasius to the vacant see. "Give us Athanasius; we will have none but Athanasius," was the cry. Athanasius, according to a popular Church legend, had been in the service of the Church since his boyhood. It was a custom observed by the Church in Alexandria to hold a yearly festival of thanksgiving unto God on the day on which their Bishop Peter suffered martyrdom. On one of these annual festivals Bishop Alexander, after completing the public services, went to a certain house where he was to dine with the elders and chief men. While waiting until the company came together, he looked out from one of the windows, which looked towards the sea-side. He there saw a company of boys playing on the shore. These boys had been present at the congregation, and were now, he could see, in sport imitating the rites which they had witnessed. One was baptising the others. They were sent for; and it is a curious trait of the times that the bishop and his presbyters, after solemn consultation, came to the conclusion that the baptism thus conferred must be held valid, and that there was no need of rebaptizing those on whom the sacrament had been thus sportively bestowed. The boy bishop who had baptized on the sea-side of Alexandria was Athanasius. His parents were sent for, and were urged to educate him for the Church; and it would appear that Alexander aided them, and kept his eye upon the boy. He became at an early age eminent alike for his learning and his piety. At the Council of Nice, as the theologian of Alexander, to use a modern term, he was the real leader of the orthodox party; and now he became the Christian ruler of the great city in which Arianism had its origin, and where some of the most important events of its history were yet to take place. But the story of the labours and sufferings of Athanasius in his new position we must reserve for our next paper. A MAKING THE IRON SWIM. BY REV. THEODORE L. CUYLER. LAS, master, for it was borrowed!" exclaimed one of the sons of the prophets beside the river Jordan, when his axe - head flew off, and sunk in the turbid stream. And Elisha said to him, "Where fell it?" The young student showed him the spot. Whereupon the man of God broke off a stick and cast it into the stream, and, lo, “the iron did swim!" The student put forth his hand and took it up, and went on with his work to hew down timber for a log college to be occupied by the sons of the prophets. Here was a direct interposition of the divine power. The honour of a company of good men was at stake; a loss had been met with; God repaired the loss in a miraculous manner. God, who is the author of all law in nature, acted directly on that bit of iron, and made it rise up |