CHAP. LII. The Banishments and Proscriptions of the Chri∣stians.
ANd because Constantine, who was God's friend, vouchsafed the servants of God admission into his Imperial Pallaces; the Enemy
To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
ANd because Constantine, who was God's friend, vouchsafed the servants of God admission into his Imperial Pallaces; the Enemy
of God Licinius, whose Sentiments were quite contrary hereto, a 1.1 drove all God's Worship∣pers, who lived under his Dominions, from his Imperial Pallaces; and sent into Banishment those persons in his Court that were faithfullest and best-affected to him. And such persons as for their former brave actions had received from him honour and dignities, them he ordered to serve others, and to perform servile Offices. And when he had seized upon the Goods of every one of them, as if they had been some unhop't-for Gain; at last he threatned [to pu∣nish] those with death, who assumed to them∣selves the salutary name [of Christians.] b 1.2 Fur∣ther, whereas he himself possest a mind that was incontinent and lustfull, and committed infinite Adulteries, and the most infamous Acts of ob∣scenity; c 1.3 it was his Sentiment that no man could be chast and continent; * 1.4 and thus, from his own distemper he past an ill judge∣ment upon the Nature of mankind in gene∣rall.
Eusebius in his Chro∣nicon, at the four∣teenth year of Constan∣tine, says thus; Li∣cinius drives the Christians from his own Pal∣lace. Oro∣sius says the same in book 7. but in a disturbed order of affairs and times, in regard he relates that before the Cibalensian War, which War hap∣ned on the eighth year of Constantine's Empire. For there were two Civil Wars between Constantine and Licinius. The first War, wherein Licinius was vanquished at Cibalis in Pannonia, hapned on the year of Christ 314. The reasons of which War are Recorded by no other Writer, that I know of, but the Authour of the Excerpta de Gestis Constantini, which I have long since published at the end of Amm. Marcellinus; see pag. 473. But the latter War was that, wherein Licinius was routed near Hadrianople, and at length compelled to a surrendry of himself on the year of Christ 324. Eusebius has made no men∣tion of the former War; for this reason perhaps, because Licinius as yet had not raised Persecution against the Christians. For Licinius undertook to persecute the Christians long after that first War, to wit, on the fourteenth year of Constantine's Empire, as 'tis Recorded in Scaliger's and Miraeus's Edition of Eusebius's Chronicon, that is on the year of Christ 320. The same year occurs in Cedrenus's Chronicon. But Baronius relates, that Licinius raised Persecution against the Christians on the year of Christ 316. But in Baronius's Annalls, the History of both the Wars against Licinius is very much confused, and must be amended, partly from Idatius's Fasti, and partly from the Gesta Constantini heretofore published by me. 'Tis certain, Sozomen (book 1. chap. 7.) attests in express words, that Licinius undertook to persecute the Christians after the Cibalensian War. Vales.
From these words a new Chapter ought to have been begun. For these words belong to Licinius's second Law. Further, the expression 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which occurs in the Contents of Chap. 53, seems to be faulty, and put instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the Church. And yet 'tis strange, that both in the King's Manuscript, and in the old Sheets, the reading is constantly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Although in the old Sheets 'tis mended in the same hand, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But in the Fuketian Manuscript 'tis excellently written thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, should not meet in the Churches together with the men. Vales.
Or, He despaired of finding the Ornament of Chastity amongst men. Valesius thinks it should be written and pointed thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; He despaired of the na∣ture of men, making use of an ill argument.
Or, He Himself making use of himself as the Brand and Reproach of Nature.