nformed that they had unanimously
approved the sentence of the council, he acquiesced in their opinion,
and immediately gave orders that Paul should be compelled to relinquish
the temporal possessions belonging to an office, of which, in the
judgment of his brethren, he had been regularly deprived. But while we
applaud the justice, we should not overlook the policy, of Aurelian, who
was desirous of restoring and cementing the dependence of the provinces
on the capital, by every means which could bind the interest or
prejudices of any part of his subjects. [130]
[Footnote 128a: It appears, nevertheless, that the vices and
immoralities of Paul of Samosata had much weight in the sentence
pronounced against him by the bishops. The object of the letter,
addressed by the synod to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, was to
inform them of the change in the faith of Paul, the altercations and
discussions to which it had given rise, as well as of his morals and the
whole of his conduct. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. vii c. xxx--G.]
[Footnote 129: His heresy (like those of Noetus and Sabellius, in the
same century) tended to confound the mysterious distinction of the
divine persons. See Mosheim, p. 702, &c.]
[Footnote 129a: "Her favorite, (Zenobia's,) Paul of Samosata, seems to
have entertained some views of attempting a union between Judaism and
Christianity; both parties rejected the unnatural alliance." Hist.
of Jews, iii. 175, and Jost. Geschichte der Israeliter, iv. 167. The
protection of the severe Zenobia is the only circumstance which may
raise a doubt of the notorious immorality of Paul.--M.]
[Footnote 130: Euseb. Hist. Ecclesiast. l. vii. c. 30. We are entirely
indebted to him for the curious story of Paul of Samosata.]
Amidst the frequent revolutions of the empire, the Christians still
flourished in peace and prosperity; and notwithstanding a celebrated
aera of martyrs has been deduced from the accession of Diocletian, [131]
the new system of policy, introduced and maintained by the wisdom of
that prince, continued, during more than eighteen years, to breathe the
mildest and most liberal spirit of religious toleration. The mind of
Diocletian himself was less adapted indeed to speculative inquiries,
than to the active labors of war and government. His prudence rendered
him averse to any great innovation, and though his temper was not very
susceptible of zeal or enthusiasm, he always maintained an habitual
regard for th
|