This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1904 Excerpt: ...chiefly in an apologetic way, and most of its members were probably nearer to the Arians than to the Athanasians. 4. The Arians and the Nicene Council. The chief object of the Nicene Council was to settle the Arian controversy, which so seriously imperiled the unity of organized Christianity that Constantine had much at heart. In the council were three distinct parties, the Arian, the Semi-Arian or Origenistic, and the Athanasian. At the opening of the council the Arians proposed a creed, signed by eighteen names. This was indignantly rejected and torn in pieces. All the signers, except Arius and two bishops, now abandoned the cause of the Arians. Eusebius of Caesarea then proposed an ancient Palestinian creed, which acknowledged the divine nature of Christ in general biblical terms. The emperor had already expressed a favorable opinion of this creed. The Arians were willing to subscribe to it, but this latter fact made the Athanasian party suspicious. They wanted a creed that no Arian could subscribe, and insisted on in-' serting the term meaning identical in substance (ouodx(-f). The Nicene Creed in nearly its present form was then proposed, and the emperor having decided to support the Athanasian party, subscription to this was required of all the bishops. The Semi-Arian bishops, who maintained that the Son was not identtcal in essence with the Father, but was of a similar essence (6/ioto6-tof), after considerable hesitation signed the document for the sake of peace, explaining, by way of protest, their precise position. Two Egyptian bishops, Theonas and Secundus, persistently refused to sign it, and together with Arius were banished to Illyria. Thus the Athanasian party was for a time victorious, and the Arians were suppressed as far as possib...