The works of Nathaniel Lardner - The Christian Researcher - Home

Malchion. a. D. 270. 139
work after Eusebius and Jeroiii : m hat has been the occasion
of so g^reat neglect of this piece I cannot say ; but,
niethinks, it is pity it is not still extant.
4. I would observe, in the fourth pUice, that Malchion
was the principal director of the last council of Antioch
concerned about Paul of Samosata. In the first council
moderate principles prevailed : in the last^ council, when
Firniilian was dead, and several other eminent bishops absented
for some reason or other, very dift'erent measures
were taken : these, as I formerly "^ intimated, may be chiefly
ascribed to Malchion. We have now seen further proof of
that supposition ; Eusebius assures us that Malchion only,
and no other, was able to detect or confute Paul : and Jerom,
besides, informs us that the large epistle written in the name
of that council was composed by 3Ialchion : what better
evidence can be desired of this matter? Nor is this my
thought only. Du Pin, speaking of Malchion, says; ' he^
' had a famous dispute with Paul of Samosata in the second
' council of Antioch, held in 270; and after having detected
' the errors Avhich that heretic endeavoured to conceal, he''
' caused him to be condemned by the council.'
5. I observe, in the fifth place, what Avas Malchion's
opinion concerning the doctrine of the Trinity does not
clearly appear. Eusebius speaks of Malchion as a man of
uncommon soundness in the faith of Christ : but if Eusebius
was an Arian,as some think, and if that character relates to the
doctrine of the Trinity, this testimony, instead of assuring us
of Malchion's orthodoxy upon that head, may rather occa-
sion a suspicion that he Arianised. There is another thing,
which may occasion a doubt whether Malchion held the
Nicene faith. The council of Nice established the homousian,
or consubstantial doctrine : but it is said that the council
of Antioch (in which, as has been shown, Malchion
directed and governed) rejected the word consubstantial as
improper. This has been taken notice of by several ancient
writers of the fovirth century ;
*= Athanasius, '^ Hilary of
Poictiers, and ^ Basil. This therefore, if the council of Nice
be the standard of orthodoxy, casts a suspicion upon that of
y See Vol. viii. ch. xliii. ^ Id. ibid. •* Du
''
il le fit condamner parle Concile, ib.
Pin, as before, p. 193.
"^ Aia THT eucorwQ EvXa^-qQtvTtg ro TOisrov ao