"Then indeed," continues Eusebius Pamphilus, "some began to impeach their nearest associates, while others, in reply, preferred complaints against the accusers themselves.[1]
"Many topics were introduced by each party, and much controversy was excited from the very commencement, the emperor listening patiently, and, with deliberate impartiality, considering whatever was advanced. He in part supported the statements which were made on both sides, and gradually softened the asperity of those who contentiously opposed each other, conciliating each by his mildness and affability. Addressing them in the Greek language, with which he was, by no means, unacquainted, in a manner at once interesting and persuasive, he wrought conviction on the minds of some, and prevailed on others by entreaty. Those who spoke well, he applauded, and incited all to unanimity; until, at length, he brought about a similarity of judgment of all, and conformity of opinion on all the controverted points; so that there was not only unity in the confession of faith, but also a general agreement as to the time for the celebration of the salutary feast of Easter. Moreover the doctrines, which had thus the common consent, were confirmed by the signature of each individual."
- ↑ Theodoret says,—"This recriminating was stopped by the emperor, who, seeing it assuming a violent character, after listening awhile, interposed, and fixed another day for the discussion of their differenees of this nature." See the manner in which the emperor settled these personal quarrels at the great feast, to which he invited all the bishops of the Council, during the Vicennalia, in chap. xiv.
