Page:The Last Judgement and Second Coming of the Lord Illustrated.djvu/253

 but in a variety of forms, and added to the growing embarrassment of the times. Several disputes concerning the doctrines of the Church took place among the bishops of this period: that of Stephen the First of Rome, with Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage; and that occasioned by the heresy of Paul of Samosata, during the pontificate of Dionysius, are well known to those who are acquainted with early ecclesiastical history. But the most remarkable heresy, because the most influential in its consequences, was that defended by Arius, the Bishop of Alexandria. This, whatever might have been its character at first, finally went so far as to reject the Divinity of the Saviour. Arius succeeded in obtaining many followers, but caused much agitation and many divisions in the Church. This state of things checked the activity of charity, and faith suffered amidst the animosities which prevailed. In the time of Pope Melchiades differences were peculiarly rife; during his pontificate Constantine took possession of Rome, and some time after he accepted the teachings of Christianity; but in which of the several forms under which it was then presented, neither Eusebius or the other historians who have written upon the subject inform us. Information upon this point might have been useful, but the want of it is no detriment to the point before us. In all probability his reception of it was vague and general, having no small dash of political considerations.

The Arian disputes at length extended themselves throughout all Christendom: the puerilities which were produced, and the enmities which were created, excited the scorn and satire of disbelievers; and Christians themselves were found to sacrifice charity upon the altars of debate and controversy. On this account Constantine interposed his authority, and caused a council of bishops to assemble