OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

tinned for some time to view, with cool andcareless indifference, the object of the dispute;As lie was yet ignorant of the difficulty of ap-peasing the quarrels of theologians, he addres-sed to the contending parties, to Alexander andto Arius , a moderating epistle ; h which may beascribed, with far greater reason, to the untu-tored sense of a soldier and statesman, than tothe dictates of any of his episcopal counsellors.He attributes the origin of the whole contro-versy to a trifling and subtle question, concern-ing an incomprehensible point of the law, whichwas foolishly asked by the bishop, and impru-dently resolved by the presbyter. He lamentsthat the Christian people, who had the sameGod , the same religion, and the same worship,should be divided by such inconsiderable dis-tinctions; and he seriously recommends to theclergy of Alexandria the example of the Greekphilosophers, who could maintain their argu-ments without losing their temper, and asserttheir freedom without violating their friendship.The indifference and contempt of the sovereignwould have been, perhaps, the most effectualmethod of silencing the dispute, if the popularcurrent had been less rapid and impetuous, andif Constantine himself, in the midst of factionand fanaticism, could have preserved the calmpossession of his own mind. But his ecclesias-tical ministers soon contrived to seduce the im-

h Eusebius , in Vit. Constant. 1. ii, r. 61-72. Tlie principles oftole-ration anti religious indifference, contained in this epistle, have givengreat offence to Baronins, TilJemonT, &c. who supposes that the empe-ror had some evil counsellor, either Satan or Eusebius , at bit elbow.See Jortiu's Remarks, tom. ii, p. 183.

343

CHAP.

XXI.