Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 3 (1897).djvu/167

 OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 147 Constantinople. But the saint (who had not subdued the imperfections of human virtue) was deeply affected by the mortifying consideration that his entrance into the fold was that of a wolf, rather than of a shepherd ; that the glittering arms, which surrounded his person, were necessary for his safety ; and that he alone was the object of the imprecations of a great party, whom, as men and citizens, it was impossible for him to despise. He beheld the innumerable multitude, of either sex and of every age, who crowded the streets, the windows, and the roofs of the houses ; he heard the tumultuous voice of rage, grief, astonishment, and despair ; and Gregory fairly confesses that, on the memorable day of his installation, the capital of the East wore the appearance of a city taken by storm, and in the hands of a Barbarian conqueror. ^^ About six weeks afterwards, Theodosius declared his resolution of expelling, from all the churches of his dominions, the bishops and their clergy who should obstinately refuse to believe, or in the East. at least to profess, the doctrine of the council of Nice. His january'io heutenant Sapor was armed with the ample powers of a general law, a special commission, and a military force ; ^° and this ecclesiastical revolution was conducted with so much discretion and vigour that the religion of the emperor was established, without tumult or bloodshed, in all the provinces of the East. The writings of the Arians, if they had been permitted to exist, '^^ would perhaps contain the lamentable story of the persecution which afflicted the church under the reign of the impious Theodosius ; and the sufferings of their holy confessors might claim the pity of the disinterested reader. Yet there is reason to imagine that the violence of zeal and revenge was, in some measure, eluded by the want of resistance ; and that, in their adversity, the Arians displayed much less finmiess than had been exerted by the orthodox party under the reigns of Constantius and Valens. The moral character and conduct of the hostile sects appear to have been governed S9 See Gregory Nazianzen, torn. ii. de Vita sua, p. 21, 22 [1. 1331 sgq.]. For the sake of posterity, the bishop of Constantinople records a stupendous prodigy. In the month of November, it was a cloudy morning, but the sun broke forth when the procession entered the church. ■i" Of the three ecclesiastical historians, Theodoret alone (1. v. c. 2) has mentioned this important commission of Sapor, which Tillemont (Hist, des Enipereurs, torn. V. p. 728) judiciously removes from the reign of Gratian to that of Theodosius. •*! 1 do not reckon Philostorgius, though he mentions (1. ix. c. 19) the expulsion of Damophilus. The Eunomian historian has been carefully strained through an orthodox sieve.