nducted him through the streets in solemn triumph;
and, with his own hand, respectfully placed him on the archiepiscopal
throne of 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. [38] 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 at
least to profess, the doctrine of the council of Nice. His lieutenant,
Sapor, was armed with the ample powers of a general law, a special
commission, and a military force; [39] and this ecclesiastical
revolution was conducted with so much discretion and vigor, 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, [40] 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 firmness 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
by the same common principles of nature and religion: but a very
material circumstance may be discovered, which tended to distinguish
the degrees of their theological faith. Both parties, in the schools, as
well as in the temples, acknowledged and worshipped the