77.  Turn now I beg you from this figurative description to the unhappy reality.  Did it not at one time i.e. after the condemnation of Arius at Nicæa. appear that the Arian schism, after its separation into a sect opposed to the Church of God, stood itself alone in hostile array?  But when the attitude of our foes against us was changed from one of long standing and bitter strife to one of open warfare, then, as is well known, the war was split up in more ways than I can tell into many subdivisions, so that all men were stirred to a state of inveterate hatred alike by common party spirit and individual suspicion. In Ep. ccxlii. written in 376, St. Basil says:  “This is the thirteenth year since the outbreak of the war of heretics against us.”  363 is the date of the Acacian Council of Antioch; 364 of the accession of Valens and Valentian, of the Semi-Arian Synod of Lampsacus, and of St. Basil’s ordination to the priesthood and book against Eunomius.  On the propagation by scission and innumerable subdivisions of Arianism Cannon Bright writes: The extraordinary versatility, the argumentative subtlety, and the too frequent profanity of Arianism are matters of which a few lines can give no idea.  But it is necessary, in even the briefest notice of this long-lived heresy, to remark on the contrast between its changeable inventiveness and the simple steadfastness of Catholic doctrine.  On the one side, some twenty different creeds (of which several, however, were rather negatively than positively heterodox) and three main sects, the Semi-Arians, with their formula of Homoiousion, i.e. the Son is like in essence to the Father; the Acacians, vaguely calling Him like (Homoion); the Aetians, boldly calling Him unlike, as much as to say He is in no sense Divine.  On the other side, the Church with the Nicene Creed, confessing Him as Homoousion, ‘of one essence with the Father,’ meaning thereby, as her great champion repeatedly bore witness, to secure belief in the reality of the Divine Sonship, and therefore in the real Deity, as distinguished from the titular deity which was so freely conceded to Him by the Arians.”  Cannon Bright, St. Leo on the Incarnation, p. 140 Socrates (ii. 41), pausing at 360, enumerates, after Nicæa: 1.  1st of Antioch (omitted the ὁμοούσιον, a.d. 341). 2.  2d of Antioch (omitted the ὁμοούσιον, a.d. 341). 3.  The Creed brought to Constans in Gaul by Narcissus and other Arians in 342. 4.  The Creed “sent by Eudoxius of Germanicia into Italy,” i.e. the “Macrostich,” or “Lengthy Creed,” rejected at Milan in 346. 5.  The 1st Creed of Sirmium; i.e. the Macrostich with 26 additional clauses, 351. 6.  The 2d Sirmian Creed.  The “manifesto;” called by Athanasius (De Synod. 28) “the blasphemy,” 357. 7.  The 3d Sirmian, or “dated Creed,” in the consulship of Flavius Eusebius and Hypatius, May 22d, 359. 8.  The Acacian Creed of Seleucia, 359. 9.  The Creed of Ariminum adopted at Constantinople, as revised at Nike.  But what storm at sea was ever so fierce and wild as this tempest of the Churches?  In it every landmark of the Fathers has been moved; every foundation, every bulwark of opinion has been shaken:  everything buoyed up on the unsound is dashed about and shaken down.  We attack one another.  We are overthrown by one another.  If our enemy is not the first to strike us, we are wounded by the comrade at our side.  If a foeman is stricken and falls, his fellow soldier tramples him down.  There is at least this bond of union between us that we hate our common foes, but no sooner have the enemy gone by than we find enemies in one another.  And who could make a complete list of all the wrecks?  Some have gone to the bottom on the attack of the enemy, some through the unsuspected treachery of their allies, some from the blundering of their own officers.  We see, as it were, whole churches, crews and all, dashed and shattered upon the sunken reefs of disingenuous heresy, while others of the enemies of the Spirit On the authority of the ms. of the tenth century at Paris, called by the Ben. Editors Regius Secundus, they read for πνεύματος πάθους, denying πνευματος to be consistent with the style and practice of Basil, who they say, never uses the epithet σωτήοιος of the Spirit.  Mr. C.F.H. Johnston notes that St. Basil “always attributes the saving efficacy of Baptism to the presence of the Spirit, and here applies the word to Him.”  In § 35, we have τὸ σωτήριον βάπτισυα. of Salvation have seized the helm and made shipwreck of the faith. 1 Tim. i. 19.  And then the disturbances wrought by the princes of the world 1 Cor. ii. 6. have caused the downfall of the people with a violence unmatched by that of hurricane or whirlwind.  The luminaries of the world, which God set to give light to the souls of the people, have been driven from their homes, and a darkness verily gloomy and disheartening has settled on the Churches. Among the bishops exiled during the persecution of Valens were Meletius of Antioch, Eusebius of Samosata, Pelagius of Laodicea, and Barses of Edessa.  cf. Theodoret, Hist. Ecc. iv. 12 sq.  cf. Ep. 195.  The terror of universal ruin is already imminent, and yet their mutual rivalry is so unbounded as to blunt all sense of danger.  Individual hatred is of more importance than the general and common warfare, for men by whom the immediate gratification of ambition is esteemed more highly than the rewards that await us in a time to come, prefer the glory of getting the better of their opponents to securing the common welfare of mankind.  So all men alike, each as best he can, lift the hand of murder against one another.  Harsh rises the cry of the combatants encountering one another in dispute; already all the Church is almost full of the inarticulate screams, the unintelligible noises, rising from the ceaseless agitations that divert the right rule of the doctrine of true religion, now in the direction of excess, now in that of defect.  On the one hand are they who confound the Persons and are carried away into Judaism; The identification of an unsound Monarchianism with Judaism is illustrated in the 1st Apology of Justin Martyr, e.g. in § lxxxiii. (Reeves’ Trans.).  “The Jews, therefore, for maintaining that it was the Father of the Universe who had the conference with Moses, when it was the very Son of God who had it, and who is styled both Angel and Apostle, are justly accused by the prophetic spirit and Christ Himself, for knowing neither the Father nor the Son; for they who affirm the Son to be the Father are guilty of not knowing the Father, and likewise of being ignorant that the Father of the Universe has a Son, who, being the Logos and First-begotten of God, is God.” on the other hand are they that, through the opposition of the natures, pass into heathenism. i.e. the Arians, whose various ramifications all originated in a probably well-meant attempt to reconcile the principles of Christianity with what was best in the old philosophy, and a failure to see that the ditheism of Arianism was of a piece with polytheism.  Between these opposite parties inspired Scripture is powerless to mediate; the traditions of the apostles cannot suggest terms of arbitration.  Plain speaking is fatal to friendship, and disagreement in opinion all the ground that is wanted for a quarrel.  No oaths of confederacy are so efficacious in keeping men true to sedition as their likeness in error.  Every one is a theologue though he have his soul branded with more spots than can be counted.  The result is that innovators find a plentiful supply of men ripe for faction, while self-appointed scions of the house of place-hunters The word σπουδαρχίδης is a comic patronymic of σπουδάρχης, a place-hunter, occurring in the Acharnians of Aristophanes, 595. reject the government οἰκονομία. of the Holy Spirit and divide the chief dignities of the Churches.  The institutions of the Gospel have now everywhere been thrown into confusion by want of discipline; there is an indescribable pushing for the chief places while every self-advertiser tries to force himself into high office.  The result of this lust for ordering is that our people are in a state of wild confusion for lack of being ordered; ἀναρχία ἀπὸ φιλαρχίας. the exhortations of those in authority are rendered wholly purposeless and void, because there is not a man but, out of his ignorant impudence, thinks that it is just as much his duty to give orders to other people, as it is to obey any one else.