e by the
imitation of judicial forms: the synod appointed an episcopal commission
of six delegates to collect evidence on the spot; and this measure which
was vigorously opposed by the Egyptian bishops, opened new scenes
of violence and perjury. [105] After the return of the deputies from
Alexandria, the majority of the council pronounced the final sentence
of degradation and exile against the primate of Egypt. The decree,
expressed in the fiercest language of malice and revenge, was
communicated to the emperor and the Catholic church; and the bishops
immediately resumed a mild and devout aspect, such as became their holy
pilgrimage to the Sepulchre of Christ. [106]

[Footnote 101: At first Constantine threatened in speaking, but
requested in writing. His letters gradually assumed a menacing tone; by
while he required that the entrance of the church should be open to
all, he avoided the odious name of Arius. Athanasius, like a skilful
politician, has accurately marked these distinctions, (tom. i. p. 788.)
which allowed him some scope for excuse and delay]

[Footnote 102: The Meletians in Egypt, like the Donatists in Africa,
were produced by an episcopal quarrel which arose from the persecution.
I have not leisure to pursue the obscure controversy, which seems
to have been misrepresented by the partiality of Athanasius and the
ignorance of Epiphanius. See Mosheim's General History of the Church,
vol. i. p. 201.]

[Footnote 103: The treatment of the six bishops is specified by Sozomen,
(l. ii. c. 25;) but Athanasius himself, so copious on the subject of
Arsenius and the chalice, leaves this grave accusation without a
reply. Note: This grave charge, if made, (and it rests entirely on
the authority of Soz omen,) seems to have been silently dropped by
the parties themselves: it is never alluded to in the subsequent
investigations. From Sozomen himself, who gives the unfavorable report
of the commission of inquiry sent to Egypt concerning the cup. it does
not appear that they noticed this accusation of personal violence.--M]

[Footnote 104: Athanas, tom. i. p. 788. Socrates, l. i.c. 28. Sozomen,
l. ii. c 25. The emperor, in his Epistle of Convocation, (Euseb. in Vit.
Constant. l. iv. c. 42,) seems to prejudge some members of the
clergy and it was more than probable that the synod would apply those
reproaches to Athanasius.]

[Footnote 105: See, in particular, the second Apology of Athanasius,
(tom. i. p. 763-808,) and h