leaving that City, he received from him Letters of Communion. Now, if _Syricius_ did not know, or did not believe, that _Ruffinus_ held those Errors, how unjust is it to blame him for the Kindness he shewed to a Man of _Ruffinus_’s Character! If he did know, and yet gave him Letters of Communion, how will _Baronius_ be able to clear _Syricius_ from the Imputation of holding the same Errors[N40]? ----- Footnote N40: A modern Writer[N40.1], taking the Part of _Syricius_ against _Baronius_, has composed a whole Dissertation, and not a short one, to shew _how undeservedly_ Syricius _has been cashiered in this Review of the Church triumphant, while many others passed Muster for great Saints, whose Virtues_, he might have said, whose very Existence, _may be justly disputed_. I shall not enter into the tedious Detail of his Arguments and Reasons, but only observe, that the Name of _Syricius_ ought not to have been struck out of the Calendar, while the Names of the _Arian_ Pope _Liberius_, and the Antipope _Felix_, his Antagonist, were kept in; though, upon other Accounts, I think him myself very unworthy of the Name of a Saint. Footnote N40.1: Florentinus, in vetus Martyrol. Hieronymi, p. 1001-1010. ----- [Sidenote: _The Misunderstanding between_ Syricius _and_ Paulinus _no Charge against_ Syricius.] As for the Treatment _Paulinus_ of _Nola_ met with from _Syricius_, there was, no doubt, a Misunderstanding between them; but, as I am quite in the Dark as to the Cause of it, I will not take upon me to condemn the one rather than the other. Perhaps they were both to blame; perhaps they both meant well, and neither was to blame. However that be, the Misunderstanding between them was soon removed; for, during the remaining Part of _Syricius_’s Life, _Paulinus_ went constantly to _Rome_ once a Year, as he himself declares, in one of his Letters[1348]. _Syricius_, it is true, did not take _Jerom_ into his Protection, as his Predecessor had done, nor shew him the same Kindness; which is the Third Charge brought by _Baronius_ against him, but of no more Weight than the other Two, that is, of none at all. _Jerom_, prompted by his Zeal, and censorious Temper, could not help inveighing, with great Bitterness, in all his Writings, against the Looseness and Debauchery, which universally prevailed, in his Time, among the _Roman_ Clergy, and the pious Frauds they made use of to extort Legacies and Presents from old Men, from Widows, and from Orphans. _Syricius_ might have been as much offended at the Vices of his Libertine Clergy, as _Jerom_ was, and even studied to reform them; but, at the same time, be glad, without deserving the least Reproach on that score, to get rid of so troublesome a Censor, who thus exposed their Irregularities to the Eyes, and them to the Contempt, of the World[N41]. ----- Footnote N41: