the commencement of the sixth century it was triumphant in many parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe: but it sunk almost at once, when the Vandals were driven out of Africa, and the Goths out of Italy, by the arms of Justinian. However, it revived again in Italy, under the protection of the Lombards, in the seventh century, and was not extinguished till about the end of the eighth. Arianism was again revived in the west by Servetus, in 1531, for which he suffered death. After this the doctrine got foot ing in Geneva and in Poland; but at length degenerated, in a great measure, into Socinianism.

If the reader wish to enter at length into the history of Arianism from its rise to the period of the Reformation, he will find ample information in "Maimbourg's History of Arianism, showing its influence upon civil affairs, and the causes of the dissolution of the Roman Empire, translated into English by Webster, London, 1728, 2 vols. 4to.; only it is not always to be depended upon for its accuracy. History of the Arians and the Council of Nice, translated from the French of Sebastian de Tillemont, by Deacon, London, 1721, 2 vols. 8vo., is chiefly a compilation by the original authors, but throws considerable light on many of the circumstances in the period of about seventy years, which it embraces. Whitaker's Origin of Arianism. ARIANISM, progress of, in England, and controversy respecting.-Although references are frequently made by our ecclesiastical writers to Arian sentiments, as held and propagated by various individuals in England after the Reformation, there is so much vagueness and inaccuracy in the way in which they speak about them, that little dependence can be placed on most of the allegations. They were probably held by individuals from time to time, and had made an incipient progress before they were much noticed or avowed; but nothing of importance took place till the beginning of the last century, when they were openly brought forward and defended by William Whiston, Professor of Mathematics in the University of Cambridge. This he did in his Primitive Christianity Revived, London, 1711, 4 vols. 8vo., the last volume of which contains an account of what he considered the primitive faith in the person of Christ, and the doctrine of the Trinity, and the first volume an historical account of the proceedings of

the University and Convocation against him. His sentiments were declared he retical, and he was ejected from his chair at Cambridge. He still, however, went on to write, and produced a fifth volume of his Primitive Christianity Revived, in 1712; his Council of Nice Vindicated from the Athanasian Heresy, in 1713; his Letter to the Earl of Nottingham on the Eternity of the Son of God and the Holy Ghost, 1719,-to this Lord Nottingham replied, in 1720, with considerable ability, and for which he received the thanks of the universities, Whiston rejoined in a preface to his subsequent editions of this Letter. Whiston went on to the end of his life occasionally publishing on the subject; but in the meantime it was taken up by a man of more eminence, though not of more honesty, in the church, Dr. Samuel Clarke, who published, in 1712, The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, in which he endeavours to show, in a commentary on forty texts of scripture, the subordination of the Son to the Father. This created a great flame. Clarke was replied to by Robert Nelson, in The Doctrine of the Trinity Vindicated; by Bishop Gastrel, in Some Considerations on Dr. Clarke's Doctrine of the Trinity; and by various others. The convocation fell upon Dr. Clarke, also, who shuffled and retained his living. He published, on the same side, a reply to Nelson and to Gastrel, who wrote anonymously; besides some other things without his name.

The grand opponent of Dr. Clarke was Waterland, who published, at different times, A Vindication of Christ's Divinity,-A Second Vindication, A Defence of the Divinity of Christ, in Eight Sermons,-The Case of Arian Subscription considered, -A Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, and The Importance of the Doctrine of the Trinity Asserted; making six volumes 8vo., besides smaller pieces. On the other side, and in answer to Waterland, Whitby wrote his Disquisitiones Modestæ, in Latin; his Reply to Dr. Waterland's objections against them, in two parts, with an Appendix, 1720-21. An anonymous country clergyman, produced A Reply to Dr. Waterland's Defence of his Queries, 1722, entering very largely into the controversy. Dr. Sykes wrote several pamphlets on the subject. Bishop Hoadly, Sir Isaac Newton, and some other eminent men of that period, it

is well known, leaned to the side of Arianism.

The Arian controversy commenced about the same time among the Dissenters, and raged as fiercely, and more destructively among them, as in the church. It began in the west, with James Peirce, of Exeter, who, with his colleague, Joseph Hallet, were learned Presbyterian ministers in Exeter. Being suspected by some of their congregation, and asked to explain themselves on the doctrine of the Trinity, they refused or evaded; in consequence of which a separation took place. The flame spread to London, and occasioned the celebrated Salter's Hall controversy, and led to the most dismal effects on the Presbyterian body. The books and pamphlets written on the subject are innumerable. The principal, on the Arian side, are the following:-The Case of the Ejected Ministers of Exon; Defence of ditto; The Western Inquisition, by Peirce; The Case of Martin Tombkins, 1719. The writings of Emlyn, a Presbyterian minister in Dublin, contributed to diffuse and carry on the controversy both in Ireland and England. They are all collected together in his works, published by his son, with an account of the author's treatment for his sentiments, which was both unrighteous and cruel; Works, London, 1746, 3 vols. 8vo. On the other side, Dr. Calamy published nineteen sermons concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity, 1722; in which the controversy is discussed with considerable ability and learning. The Doctrine of the Trinity Stated and Defended, by some London Ministers; viz. Long, Robinson, Smith, and Reynolds.

The controversy was revived again in the church by Dr. Clayton, Bishop of Clogher, and for a while carried on with considerable warmth. He published, in 1751, An Essay on Spirit, in which the Doctrine of the Trinity is considered, &c. This pamphlet was not, in reality, the bishop's, but the production of a young clergyman, whose cause and sentiments, however, he identified himself with. It produced more than from twenty to thirty writers, in the way of attack or defence. Among these, besides anonymous writers, were Kirkly, Knowles, Jones, Rudd, Scott, Randolph, M'Donoul, Archdeacon Blackburn. The ablest of the orthodox defenders were William Jones, in his Full Answer to the Essay on Spirit; and afterwards in his Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity; and

the Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, by Dr. Randolph.

At the present day Arianism has almost become extinct in England, having merged into one or other of the various grades of Socinianism; and is only to be found, in anything like a systematic form, among the Presbyterians in the North of Ireland, especially those of the Synod of Munster.

ARISTÆUS, a distinguished officer at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt, whom that monarch is said to have sent to Eliezer, the Jewish high priest, to obtain a copy of the Hebrew scriptures, and whose name is celebrated in connexion with the version of the Septuagint, (which see.)

ARISTOTELIANS, the followers of Aristotle. They believed in the eternity of the world, and represented the Deity as somewhat similar to a principle of power giving motion to a machine; and as happy in the contemplation of himself, but regardless of human affairs. They were uncertain as to the immortality of the soul.-As this was rather a philosophical than a religious sect, we shall not enlarge on it.

ARK, or NOAH'S ARK, a floating vessel built by Noah for the preservation of his family, and the several species of animals, during the deluge. The form of the ark was an oblong, with a flat bottom and a sloped roof, raised to a cubit in the middle; it had neither sails nor rudder; nor was it sharp at the ends for cutting the water. This form was admirably calculated to make it lie steady on the water, without rolling, which might have endangered the lives of the animals within.

The length of this ark was 300 cubits, which, according to Dr. Arbuthnot's calculation, amount to a little more than 547 feet; its breadth, 50 cubits, or 91-2 feet; its height, 30 cubits, or 54-72 feet; and its solid contents 2,730-782 solid feet, sufficient for a carriage of 81,062 ton. It consisted of three stories, each of which, abating the thickness of the floors, might be about 18 feet high, and no doubt was partitioned into a great many rooms or apartments. This vessel was doubtless so contrived as to admit the air and the light on all, though the particular construction of the windows is not mentioned.

ARK OF THE COVENANT, a small chest or coffer, three feet nine inches in length, two feet three inches in breadth,

and two feet three inches in height, in which were contained the golden pot that had manna, Aaron's rod, and the tables of the covenant. The ark was reposited in the holiest place of the tabernacle. It was taken by the Philistines, and detained twenty (some say forty) years at Kirjath-jearim; but, the people being afflicted with emerods on account of it, returned it with divers presents. It was afterwards placed in the temple.

The lid or covering of the ark was called the propitiatory or mercy-seat over which two figures were placed, called cherubims, with expanded wings of a peculiar form. Here the Shechinah rested both in the tabernacle and temple, in a visible cloud : hence were issued the Divine oracles by an audible voice; and the high priest appeared before this mercy-seat once every year on the great day of expiation; and the Jews, whereever they worshipped, turned their faces towards the place where the ark stood.

In the second temple there was also an ark, made of the same shape and dimensions with the first, and put in the same place, but without any of its contents and peculiar honours. It was used as a representative of the former on the day of expiation, and a repository of the original copy of the holy scriptures, collected by Ezra and the men of the great synagogue after the captivity; and, in imitation of this, the Jews, to this day, have a kind of ark in their synagogues, wherein their sacred books are kept.

ARMENIANS, one of the most ancient people of the civilized world, and who have maintained their cultivation amidst all those revolutions which barbarism, despotism, and war have occasioned in Western Asia, from the days of Assyria, Greece, and Rome, down to the period of Mongolian, Turkish, and Persian dominion. During so many ages they have faithfully preserved not only their historical traditions, reaching back to the periods of many parts of Hebrew history, but also their national character, both in a physical and moral point of view. The region around mount Ararat, their original abode, is still the centre of their religious and political union. Commerce has scattered them, like the Jews, among several of the nations of Europe, and through most of those of Asia.

In the beginning of the fourth century they embraced the Christian faith. Their written language owes its cultiva

tion to the translation of the bible, shortly after that event. The most flourishing period of their literature was in the sixth century, at the time of their separation from the Greek church, after the council of Chalcedon.

Since that period Armenia has undergone so many revolutions, that it must appear more remarkable that the Armenians should still persevere in the Christian faith, than that they should now deviate in many particulars from the ori ginal doctrines of their church. Their history is very interesting, and, according to Dr. Buchanan, of all the Christians in Central Asia, they have preserved themselves most free from Mo» hammedan and Papal corruptions.

a

The state of their Church underwent considerable change, early in the seventeenth century, in consequence of the incursions of Abbas the Great, King of Persia, into Armenia. This prince, to prevent the Turks from approaching to his frontier, laid waste that part of Armenia that lay contiguous to his dominions, and ordered the inhabitants to retire into Persia; and, in the general emigration that ensued, the more opulent and better sort of the Armenians removed to Ispahan, the capital of Persia, where the generous monarch granted them a beautiful suburb for their residence, with the free exercise of their religion, and where they have a considerable monastery, the seat of a bishop, at this day. During the whole of his reign, these happy exiles experienced the most liberal treatment, and enjoyed the sweets of liberty and abundance; but after his death the scene changed: his successors were not equally generous; persecution ensued, and the Armenian church declined daily, both in credit and numbers. The storm of persecution that arose upon them, shook their constancy; many of them apostatized to the Mohammedan religion: so that it was justly to be feared that this branch of the Armenian Church would gradually perish. On the other hand, the state of religion in that church derived considerable advantages from the settlement of a vast number of Armenians in different parts of Europe for the purposes of commerce. These merchants, who had fixed their residence, during this century, at London, Amsterdam, Marseilles, and Venice, were not unmindful of the interests of religion in their native country; and their situation furnished them with favourable oppor

tunities of exercising their zeal in this good cause, and particularly of supplying their Asiatic brethren with Armenian translations of the holy Scriptures, and other theological books, from the European presses, especially from those of England and Holland. These pious and instructive productions, being dispersed among the Armenians who lived under the Persian and Turkish governments, contributed, no doubt, to preserve that illiterate and superstitious people from falling into the most consummate and deplorable ignorance.

The Armenian was considered as a branch of the Greek Church, till nearly the middle of the sixth century, when the heresy of the Monophysites spread far and wide through Africa and Asia, comprehending the Armenians also among its votaries. But, though the members of this church still agree with the other Monophysites in the main doctrines of that sect, relating to the unity of the divine and human nature in Christ, they differ from them in so many points of faith, worship and discipline, that they do not hold communion with that branch of the Monophysites who are Jacobites in the more limited sense of that term, nor with either the Copts or the Abys

sinians.

Sir P. Ricaut gives the following statement of the doctrines of their church:

They allow and accept the articles of faith according to the Council of Nice; and are also acquainted with the Apostles` Creed, which they have in use. As to the Trinity, they accord with the Greeks, acknowledging three Persons in one Divine Nature, and that the Holy Ghost proceeds only from the Father. They believe that Christ descended into hell, and that he freed the souls of all the damned from thence, by the grace and favour of his glorious presence; not for ever, or by a plenary pardon or remission, but only as reprieved until the end of the world, at which time they shall again be returned unto eternal flames.

He denies that this church is attached to the Eutychian or Monophysite heresy; and, in support of this opinion, produces a translation of its Tavananh, or creed, containing the sum of the Armenian faith, which they teach their children, and which is repeated by them in the course of divine service, in the same manner as the Apostles' Creed by us. But this instrument is far from being

conclusive, and, on this subject, Sir P. departs from general opinion.

They maintain that the souls and bodies of the prophet Elias and the Virgin Mary, only, are in heaven. Yet, notwithstanding their opinion that no other prophets or saints shall be admitted into heaven until the day of judg ment, by a certain imitation of the Greek and Latin Churches, they invoke them with prayers; reverence and adore their pictures or images, and burn lamps and candles before them.

Their manner of worship is performed after the eastern fashion, by prostrating their bodies and kissing the ground three times, (which the Turks likewise practise in their prayers.) At their first entrance into church, they uncover their heads, and cross themselves three times; but afterwards cover their heads, and sit cross-legged on carpets, after the manner of the Turks. The most part of their public divine service they perform in the morning, before day, which is very commendable; and I have been greatly pleased to meet hundreds of Armenians in a summer morning, about sun-rising, returning from their devotions at the church, wherein, perhaps, they had spent two hours before, not only on festival, but on ordinary days of work. In like manner they are very devout on vigils to feasts, and Saturday evenings, when they all go to church, and returning home, perfume their houses with incense, and adorn their little pictures with lamps. In their monasteries the whole Psalter of David is read over every twenty-four hours; but in the cities and parochial churches it is otherwise observed for the Psalter is divided into eight divisions, and every division into eight parts; at the end of every one of which is said the Gloria Patri, &c.

The Armenian is the language that is still used in the services of this church; and in her rites and ceremonies there is so great a resemblance to those of the Greeks, that a particular detail here might be superfluous. Their liturgies also, are either essentially the same with those of the Greeks, or at least ascribed to the same authors. And the fasts which they observe annually are not only more numerous, but kept with greater rigour and mortification than is usual in any other Christian community.

In addition to these fasts, they fast on Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year, except in the weeks between

Easter and Ascension-day, and in that which follows the feast of the Epiphany. Their seasons of festivity correspond, in general, with those of other churches, except that they commemorate our Lord's nativity not on the 25th of December, but on the 6th of January, thereby celebrating, in one festival, his birth, epiphany, and baptism.

Their most favourite saints, who have each of them a day in the calendar, are Surp Savorich (or St. Gregory,) Surp Chevorich (or St. Demetrius,) Surp Nicolo, and Surp Serchis (or St. George.)

They practise the trine immersion, which they consider to be essential to baptism: and," after baptism, they apply the Myron, or Chrism; anointing the forehead, eyes, ears, breast, palms of the hands, and soles of the feet, with consecrated oil, in form of a cross; and then they administer unto the child the holy eucharist, which they do only by rubbing the lips with it. Surp Usium, as they call the holy eucharist, they celebrate only on Sundays and festivals, though on other days they perform the public services of the church; whereby it appears that they have other morning services besides that of the communion. They put no water into the wine, nor leaven into the bread, as do the Greeks; and their manner of distributing the communion is by sopping the bread into wine, so that the communicant receives both species together, which is different from the form and custom of the Latin, Greek, and Reformed Churches. They differ from the Greeks in that they administer bread unleavened, made like wafer; they differ from the Romans in that they give both species to the laity, which the priest doth by putting his fingers into the chalice out of which he takes the wafer soaked in the wine, and delivers that unto the communicant."

a

When the Armenians withdrew from the communion of the Greek Church, they made no change in their ancient episcopal form of church government : they only claimed the privilege of choosing their own spiritual rulers. The name and office of Patriarch was continued; but three, or, according to Sir P. Ricaut, four prelates shared that dignity. The chief of these resides in the monastery at Etchmiazin, near Erivan, and at the foot of Mount Ararat, in Turcomania: his jurisdiction extends over Turcomania, or Armenia Major; and he is said to number among his suffragans eighteen

bishops, besides those who are priors of monasteries. His opulent revenues of 600,000 crowns are considered as a fund for his numerous charities; for though elevated to the highest rank of ecclesiastical power and preferment, he rejects all the splendid insignia of authority; and in his ordinary dress and mode of living he is on a level with the poorest monastic.

The second patriarch of the Armenians, who is called The Catholic, and at present acknowledges his subordination to the patriarch of Etchmiazin, resides at Cis, a city near Tarsus, in Cilicia; rules over the churches established at Cappadocia, Cilicia, Cyprus, and Syria; and hath twelve archbishops under his jurisdiction.

The third and last in rank, of the Armenian patriarchs, who has no more than eight or nine bishops under his dominion, resides in the island of Aghtamar, or Aghtainan, on the great lake of Van, or Varaspuracan.

Besides these prelates, who are patriarchs in the true sense of that term, the Armenians have other spiritual leaders, who are honoured with the title of Patriarch; but this indeed is no more than an empty title, unattended with the authority and perogatives of the patriarchal dignity.

In the Armenian Church, as in the Greek, a monastery is considered as the only proper seminary for dignified ecclesiastics; for it seems to be a tenet of their church, that abstinence in diet, and austerity of manners, should increase with preferment. Hence, though their priests are permitted to marry once, their patriarchs and mastabets (or martabets,) . e. bishops, must remain in a state of strict celibacy; at least no married priest can be promoted in their Church until he shall have become a widower. It is likewise necessary, that their dignified clergy should have assumed the sanctimonious air of an ascetic.

Their monastic discipline is extremely severe. The religious neither eat flesh nor drink wine; they sometimes continue in prayer from midnight till three o'clock in the afternoon, during which time they are required to read the Psalter through, besides many other spiritual exercises.

The orders or regulations by which they are governed, are those of St. Gregory, St. Basil, and St. Dominic.

Of the Armenian clergy in general, the situation is truly deplorable, as the