stian master.
The church of Lyons, writing to their brethren of Asia, treat the horrid
charge with proper indignation and contempt. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. i.]

[Footnote 21: See Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35. Irenaeus adv. Haeres. i.
24. Clemens. Alexandrin. Stromat. l. iii. p. 438. Euseb. iv. 8. It would
be tedious and disgusting to relate all that the succeeding writers have
imagined, all that Epiphanius has received, and all that Tillemont
has copied. M. de Beausobre (Hist. du Manicheisme, l. ix. c. 8, 9) has
exposed, with great spirit, the disingenuous arts of Augustin and Pope
Leo I.]

[Footnote 22: When Tertullian became a Montanist, he aspersed the morals
of the church which he had so resolutely defended. "Sed majoris est
Agape, quia per hanc adolescentes tui cum sororibus dormiunt, appendices
scilicet gulae lascivia et luxuria." De Jejuniis c. 17. The 85th canon
of the council of Illiberis provides against the scandals which too
often polluted the vigils of the church, and disgraced the Christian
name in the eyes of unbelievers.]

[Footnote 23: Tertullian (Apolog. c. 2) expatiates on the fair and
honorable testimony of Pliny, with much reason and some declamation.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To
Constantine.--Part II.

History, which undertakes to record the transactions of the past, for
the instruction of future ages, would ill deserve that honorable office,
if she condescended to plead the cause of tyrants, or to justify the
maxims of persecution. It must, however, be acknowledged, that the
conduct of the emperors who appeared the least favorable to the
primitive church, is by no means so criminal as that of modern
sovereigns, who have employed the arm of violence and terror against
the religious opinions of any part of their subjects. From their
reflections, or even from their own feelings, a Charles V. or a Lewis
XIV. might have acquired a just knowledge of the rights of conscience,
of the obligation of faith, and of the innocence of error. But the
princes and magistrates of ancient Rome were strangers to those
principles which inspired and authorized the inflexible obstinacy of the
Christians in the cause of truth, nor could they themselves discover in
their own breasts any motive which would have prompted them to refuse a
legal, and as it were a natural, submission to the sacred institutions
of their country. The same reason which contributes to alleviate the
guilt,