_Flavianus_, being thus at last, in the Seventeenth Year of his Episcopacy, acknowleged by, and united in Communion with, all the Bishops of the Catholic Church, spared no Pains to gain over the _Eustathians_, that, by reuniting them to the rest of his Flock, he might have the Merit and Glory of establishing an intire and lasting Tranquillity in the Church committed to his Care. But his Zeal was not therein attended with the wished for Success. The Glory of completing so great and desirable a Work was, by Providence, reserved for _Alexander_, one of his Successors, who had the Satisfaction of seeing all Party-Names laid aside, and the whole People of _Antioch_ united in one Flock, under one and the same Shepherd. This Union was made with great Solemnity, in the Year 415. Eleven Years after the Death of _Flavianus_, and Eighty-five after the Beginning of the Schism. Thus _Theodoret_, in his Ecclesiastical History[1328]. But _Theodorus_ the Lector assures us, that there still remained some Seeds of that unhappy Division till the Year 482. when the Body of _Eustathius_ being brought back to _Antioch_, the few _Eustathians_, who still continued to assemble apart, joined the rest of the Catholics, and the Name of _Eustathian_ was never more heard of[1329]. [Sidenote: Flavianus _honoured by the Church of_ Rome _as a Saint, tho’ ill used in his Life-time by the Popes_.] _Flavianus_ died in the Year 404. the Ninety-fifth of his Age, and Twenty-third of his Episcopacy, and is now honoured as a Saint; a Distinction which none of his Competitors have deserved, though as much caressed and favoured by the Two Bishops of _Rome_, _Damasus_ and _Syricius_, as he was opposed and ill used. How fallible have the Bishops of that See shewed themselves, from the earliest Times, in their Judgment of things! How rash in taking Parties, and fomenting Discords! How obstinate and inflexible in maintaining the Cause, which they had once undertaken, let it be ever so bad! The only thing that can be alleged against the Character of _Flavianus_, is his having accepted the Bishoprick of _Antioch_, contrary to the Oath he had taken, on Occasion of the Agreement between _Meletius_ and _Paulinus_, as I have related above[1330]. That he took such an Oath, is vouched both by _Socrates_ and _Sozomen_[1331]. But as he was looked upon by all the East, and extolled by _Chrysostom_, even in his Life-time, as a Prelate of an unblemished Character, and never reproached, even by his greater Enemies, with such an Oath, in the many Disputes that arose about his Election, I had rather charge those Two Writers with one Mistake more (for they are guilty of many others), than a Man of _Flavianus_’s Probity with such a scandalous Prevarication. [Sidenote: Syricius _dies_.]