OP THE ROMAN EMPIRE. ‘ 326

might be excused if they adhered more strictly chap.and more earnestly to the distinction, than to „***'„„the equality, of the divine persons. But as soonas the heat of controversy had subsided, andthe progress of the Sabellians was no longer anobject of terror to the churches of Rome , ofAfrica, or of Egypt , the tide of theological opi-nion began to flow with a gentle but steadymotion toward the contrary extreme; and themost orthodox doctors allowed themselves theuse of the terms and definitions which had beencensured in the mouth of the sectaries.* Afterthe edict of toleration had restored peace andleisure to the Christians , the trinitarian contro-versy was revived in the ancient seat of plato-nism, the learned, the opulent, the tumultuouscity of Alexandria; and the flame of religiousdiscord was rapidly communicated from theschools to the clergy, the people, the province,and the East. The abstruse question of theeternity of the logos was agitated in ecclesiasti-cal conferences, and popular sermons; and theheterodox opinions of Arius" were soon made Arius .public by his own zeal, and by that of his ad-versaries. His most implacable adversaries

the end of the second century, deceived, for some time, the simpli-city of the bishop, and was confuted by the pen of the angry Ter-tullian.

* Socrates acknowledges, that the heresy of Arius proceeded fromhis strong desire to embrace an opinion the most diametrically oppo-site to that of Sabellius .

u The figure and manners of Arius , the character and numbersof his first proselytes, are painted in very lively colours by Epi-phanius (tom. i, Hseres. Jxix, 3, p. 729); and we cannot bat regretthat he should soon forget the historian, to assume the task of con-troversy.