large and populous city, and considered the metropolis, not only of Egypt, but also of the adjacent countries, Thebes and Libya. After Peter, the illustrious champion of the faith, had, during the sway of wicked tyrants, obtained the crown of martyrdom, the Church of Alexandria was ruled, for a short time, by Achillas.[1] He was succeeded by Alexander [in 312], who was the foremost in defending the doctrines of the gospel. Arius,[2]
- ↑ This bishop, who was supplanted by Alexander, is said to have been tinctured with the Meletian heresy.
- ↑ Arius (son of Ammonius), the celebrated originator of the Arian doctrines, was a presbyter of the Alexandrian Church, and presided over an independent parish of that city, by the name of Baucalis, where he had been placed a short time before Alexander became bishop. He was a rigid ascetic, and acquired great respect from all. Socrates thus describes the advent of Arianism:—"After Peter of Alexandria had suffered martyrdom [A. D. 311], Achillas was installed in the episcopal office, whom Alexander succeeded. The latter bishop, in the fearless exercise of his functions for the instruction and government of the Church, attempted one day, in the presence of the presbytery and the rest of his clergy, to explain, with perhaps too philosophical minuteness, that great theological mystery,—the Unity of the Holy Trinity. A certain one of the presbyters under his jurisdiction, whose name was Arius, possessed of no inconsiderable logical acumen, imagining that the bishop entertained the same view of this subject as Sabellius the Libyan [African, who taught, in the third century, that there was but one person in the divine essence], controverted his statement with excessive pertinacity; advancing another error, which was directly opposed, indeed, to that which he supposed himself called upon to refute. 'If,' said he, 'the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence; and, from this, it is evident that there was a time when the Son was not in being. It, therefore, necessarily follows he had his existence from nothing.' Having drawn this inference from this novel train of reasoning, he excited many to a consideration of the question; and thus, from a little spark, a large fire was kindled."
Arius is thus described by the orthodox Epiphanius:—"He was exceedingly tall, with a clouded and serious brow, having the appearance of a man subdued by self-mortification. His dress corresponded with his looks; his tunic was without sleeves, and his vest but half the usual length. His address was agreeable, and adapted to engage and fascinate all who
