Showing posts with label heathenism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label heathenism. Show all posts

Extension of Christian Territory By Missionaries

EXTENSION OF CHRISTIAN TERRITORY BY MISSIONARIES.

IN the latter part of the sixth century, a great missionary era was inaugurated. Men taking their lives in their hands began to penetrate the encompassing circle of heathenism. One field after another was gained; but it was several centuries before Europe as a whole had passed under the dominion of Christianity. The way of victory was at the same time a way of hardship and martyrdom.

A conspicuous part in this aggressive movement was taken by the Roman bishop and the monks, the one serving as the patron and the others as the agents of the work. A genuine Christian zeal cannot be denied to either party. At the same time, it must have been perfectly evident to the Roman bishop that his patronage of missions mould be a very effectual means of extending his power.

Among the monks the most noted evangelists came from the cloisters of Great Britain and Ireland. The latter country won early the praise of exemplary zeal, both for the cause of learning and of missions. As the night of ignorance was deepening in other quarters, the light of a liberal scholarship shone in the Irish cloisters. "At a time when Pope Gregory the Great was obliged to acknowledge that he was ignorant of Greek, there were ministers in Ireland quite competent to read the New Testament in the original language. In the larger monasteries, the disciples were instructed in mathematics and astronomy, as well as in the ancient classics." 1 W. D. Killen, Ecclesiastical History of Ireland. A striking memorial of the eminent place which Ireland then occupied in the religious world is given in the name, insula sanctorum, with which the land was honored. All this, however, is not to be taken as evidence of any ideal state of society. Alongside of marked exhibitions of learning and piety, there was much of turbulence. Bloody feuds were of frequent occurrence.

The first of the pioneers from this field whose labors me recorded was Columba, or Columbkille. He was of royal birth, commanding presence, and effective address. Possessing the generous impulses native to his countrymen, he possessed also, as it would seem, their hot temper. By some it is supposed that he precipitated a war, and at the instance of the defeated sovereign was excommunicated by an assembly of clergy. The fact of excommunication is quite certain, since it is mentioned by so admiring a biographer as Adamnan. 2 Life of St. Columba, edited by William Reeves. In 568 Columba set out for Scotland. As yet Christianity had gained but a part of this country. Ninian, son of a British prince, had made converts, in the early part of the fifth century, among the southern Picts, who dwelt between the Frith of Forth and the Grampians. There was also a settlement of Soots, who had received Christian teaching, on the west coast. But the northern Picts were still heathen. With the approval of Conall, the King of the Scots, a small island lying off the coast was given to Columba, and made the seat of a cloister destined to stand for centuries as a missionary fortress and training school. This rocky island scarce exceeded three miles in length by one and a half in breadth. In the language of the country it was called Hy. The name Iona, by which it is commonly known, is regarded by Reeves as a corruption of Ioua used as an adjective before insula. By the labors of Columba the Pits were converted, and their king seems to have confirmed the grant which was made by Conall. Though but an abbot in rank, the founder of Iona was really the ecclesiastical sovereign of the adjacent territory. His successors also stood, in point of jurisdiction, above the bishops of the country, --a peculiar feature in church polity, which will again command our attention. As is apparent from this item, the community of Iona, like the early Celtic churches generally, had little notion of any supremacy in the Roman bishop. They did not regard themselves as bound to follow the Roman model.

Columba died while on his knees at the altar, in the year 597. Authentic history records little concerning him; still, we shall not be at fault in concluding from the work that he accomplished, and the impression that he made, that he was a man of unusual force of character. Like Patrick, and Martin of Tours, he was a strong personality, and as such received the inevitable tribute of medieval admiration, a great throng of legends having the one object of glorifying their hero. The life written by Adamnan, the ninth abbot of Iona, a century after the death of Columba, makes him the agent in a constant succession of miracles. Even down to the present century, the virtue of the name of Columba has continued to be celebrated in the Highlands of Scotland. The Roman Catholic Highlander about to set out upon ajourney utters the invocation, "May the servant of Columba of the cell protect, and bring me safe home." A small pebble from Iona, called the stone of Icolmkill, is worn as an amulet. At least, such customs were in vogue in the early part of the century. 1 John Jamieson, An Historical Account of the Ancient Culdees of Iona.

In the ninth century the primacy passed from Iona to Dunkeld. In the next century St. Andrews became the ecclesiastical metropolis of Scotland. For an interval before, as well as after, this transfer, we meet with an order bearing the name of Culdees. They seem to have been quite a conspicuous factor in the Scottish Church till the reign of Malcolm Canmore in the eleventh century, when the marriage of this king with the English princess Margaret prepared the way for the predominance of the English régime. Their name probably signifies "servants of God," the Scottish term Keledei being the equivalent of the Continental Deicolœ. Various theories have been entertained as to their origin and characteristics. "It may reasonably be inferred, that the Culdees were generally the successors of the family of Iona and other monastic communities, under a new name, and with a relaxed discipline." 2 George Grub, Ecclesiastical History of Scotland. In certain points they contradicted the very notion of monasticism. As is remarked by a learned authority, "The particular Keledean laxity appears to have been, that, precisely like their Irish and Welsh congeners, they gradually lapsed into something like impropriators, married, and transmitting their church endowments as if they had been their own to their children, but retaining, at any rate in most cases, their clerical office; although the abbots, as,e. g., at Dunkeld and Abernethy, became in some cases mere lay lords of the church lands thus misappropriated, leaving a prior to be the spiritual superior." 1 Haddan and Stubbs, Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and Ireland, vol. ii, pt, i. pp. 175-182. Compare W. F. Skene, Celtic Scotland. In some quarters the Culdees have been credited with quite a close approximation to primitive Christianity; but it may be doubted whether in the sum total of their beliefs and practices they were much superior to the average Romanism of their time.

While thus the surrounding populations were being instructed in Christianity, the Anglo-Saxons were still in the bonds of their heathenism. The intense national hatred which the Britons cherished toward them stood in the way of missionary effort from that quarter. Indeed, some of the Britons may have thought of getting even with their conquerors, as has been charged against them, by leaving them to the hopeless doom of the unbaptized and the unbelieving. But in another quarter the agency for bringing them the gospel message was being prepared. While yet an abbot, the Roman Gregory was led to cherish a strong interest in the Angle-Saxons. The occasion which first directed his attention to them is thus described by Beda: "It is reported that some merchants, having just arrived at Rome, on a certain day exposed many things for sale in the market-place, and abundance of people resorted thither to buy. Gregory himself went with the rest; and, among other things, some boys were set to sale, their bodies white, their countenances beautiful, and their hair very fine. Having viewed them, he asked, as is said, from what country or nation they were brought; and was told, from the island of Britain, whose inhabitants were of such personal appearance. He again inquired whether those islanders were Christians, or still involved in the errors of paganism; and was informed that they were pagans. Then fetching a deep sigh from the bottom of his heart,'Alas! what pity,' said he, 'that the author of darkness is possessed of men of such fair countenances; and that, being remarkable for such graceful aspects, their minds should be void of inward grace.' He therefore again asked what was the name of that nation, and was answered that they were called Angles. 'Right,' said he; 'for they have an angelic face, and it becomes such to be co-heirs with the angels in heaven.' " 1 Book i. chap. 1.

Once seated upon the papal throne, Gregory improved his opportunity to give the Christian religion to the people who had so effectually enlisted his sympathies. In 596 he sent out the Roman Abbot Augustine, with several companions. Finding that their hearts began to sink within them over the unknown perils of the journey, and of the strange land for which they had started, he revived their courage by his paternal exhortations, and sided them so far as possible by letters of commendation to the princes and nobles of Gaul.

A welcome had been prepared for the missionary party by the marriage of Ethelbert, king of Kent, to the Frankish princess Bertha, who came to the English court as a Christian, and was allowed to take with her, as a religious guardian, the Bishop Luidhard. The king received Augustine and his companions with suitable kindness, though taking the precaution to have the first meeting in the open air, where he would be less exposed to any instrument of magic which the strangers might have brought with them. In response to their representations he said, "Your words and promises are very fair; but as they are new to us, and of uncertain import, I cannot approve of them so far as to forsake that which I have so long followed with the whole English nation. But because you are come from far into my kingdom, and, as I conceive, are desirous to impart to us those things which you believe to be true, and most beneficial, we will not molest you, but give you favorable entertainment, and take care to supply you with your necessary sustenance; nor do we forbid you to preach, and gain as many as you can to your religion." 1 Beda, i 25. Erelong the king added to his courteous reception of the ambassadors of the new faith his personal adhesion to that faith. Great numbers followed his example, insomuch that Augustine is said to have baptized ten thousand on a single occasion. The work of organization kept pace with that of conversion. According to the plan of Gregory, two metropolitan sees were to be constituted, one having its seat at London, and the other at York. But neither the Pope nor the missionary saw this scheme fulfilled. Canterbury took the place of London, and York failed as yet to obtain the metropolitan dignity. Before the death of Augustine, in 605, Christianity had secured a good footing in Kent. There was indeed a reaction to heathenism under the next king, and evidence was given that the number of baptisms was no accurate measure of the genuine conversions. But the lapse was only temporary. The current had set in the direction of the Christian faith.

In Northumberland, as in Kent, a Christian princess served as a forerunner of missionary work. This was Ethelberga, daughter of Ethelbert. On her marriage with King Edwin, she was guaranteed the free use of her religion, and was allowed to retain the Bishop Paulinus. For a time Edwin was proof against all persuasions; but at length he so far yielded as to call a council of his chief men to consider the question of accepting Christianity. The deliberations of the council showed that there mere minds which had become dissatisfied with the old religion. Even Coifi, the chief of the heathen priests, testified against his former faith, alleging that the gods had made manifest their impotence in their failure to aid their most zealous votaries, and advising to try the benefits of the new religion. "Another of the king's chief men, approving of his words and exhortations, presently added, 'The prevent life of man, O king, seems to me, in comparison of that time which is unknown to us, like the swift flight of a sparrow through the room wherein you sit at supper in winter, with commanders and ministers, enjoying the warmth of the fire in the hearth, whilst the storms of rain or snow prevail abroad; the sparrow, I say, flying in at one door, and immediately out at another, whilst be is within, is safe from the wintry storm; but after a short space of fair weather, he immediately vanishes out of your sight into the dark winter from which he had emerged. So this life of man appears for a short space; but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are utterly ignorant. If, therefore, this new doctrine contains something more certain, it seems justly to deserve to be followed.' The other elders and king's counselors, by Divine inspiration, spoke to the same effect." I Beda, ii. 13. Coming to minds thus prepared, the message of Paulinus could not longer fail of acceptance. "King Edwin," as Beda adds, "with all the nobility of the nation, and a large number of the common sort, received the faith and the washing of regeneration, in the eleventh year of his reign, which is the year of the incarnation of our Lord 627." Triumph, however, was soon mixed with defeat. Penda, the heathen king of Mercia, and the Briton Ceadwalla, combining against Edwin, compassed his downfall. For an interval Northumberland fell a prey to anarchy and pillage. The Roman clergy were driven out, and heathenism began to revive. But the valor and wisdom of the good prince Oswald came to the rescue. Anxious to restore the ascendency of Christianity, Oswald appealed to Iona for missionary laborers. Corman, the first who was sent, was lacking in the art of gentle and persuasive address. The Northumbrians answered his austerity with so much indifference, that he concluded that nothing could reclaim them from their obduracy, and left the field in disgust. As he made his report to the fraternity, a voice was heard remarking, "It seems to me, brother, that you have been too severe with your unlearned hearers, in that you did not, conformably to the apostolic discipline, give them the milk of more gentle doctrine, till, having been gradually nourished by the word of God, they should be able to receive more advanced teachings, and to practice God's sublime precepts." 1 Beda, iii. 5. All eyes were turned upon the speaker. With unanimous consent he was fixed upon as the proper agent to gain access to the closed hearts of the Anglo-Saxons. The result justified the wisdom of their choice; for Aidan, as Bishop of Lindisfarne, proved himself a man who was wise to win souls and a faithful shepherd of the sheep. Beda, while he could not forget that Aidan was out of accord with Rome on the time of celebrating Easter, could not at the same time restrain his admiration for the saintly life and character of the man, "his love of peace and charity; his continence and humility; his mind superior to anger and avarice, and despising pride and vain glory; his industry in keeping and teaching the heavenly commandments his diligence in reading and watching; his authority becoming a priest in reproving the haughty and powerful, and at the same time his tenderness in comforting the afflicted and relieving the poor." 2 Book iii, chap. 17. Among the successors of Aidan, Cuthbert, a native of Northumberland, won an enthusiastic esteem. Beda recounts how an angelic brightness was wont to come into his face as he was enforcing the truth of the gospel, and how he delighted in particular to teach the ignorant and barbarous people in remote and inaccessible places seated high up amid craggy and uncouth mountains. 1 Book iv. Chap. 27, 28. Compare his Vita S. Guthberti, cap. ix xvi

From Kent and Northumberland, Christianity spread into the adjacent regions. Before the close of the seventh century it had become well established in all the kingdoms of the Anglo-Saxons. The people of Sussex, owing perhaps to the face that their land was cut off from communication with other sections by downs and marshes, were the last to become evangelized. A principal instrument in their conversion was Wilfrid, the most accomplished of the native English clergy in his time, but who from some cause earned much iii-will from those in power, and led a life in which preferment and persecution were strangely mixed.

The missionaries from Rome brought with them, very naturally, a preference for Roman customs On the other hand, the Scots and Britons-- who in their loose connection with Rome had developed some divergent customs, especially on the time of celebrating Easter, the form of the tonsure, and certain points in the baptismal ceremonial -- cherished quite a stubborn preference for their peculiarities. The differences in themselves were of no vital moment: still, they had quite a decided practical bearing, inasmuch as they involved the question of obligation to conform to the Roman model. As early as the time of Augustine, the Easter question became an occasion of dispute and heart-burnings. The drift was naturally in favor of the Roman custom, since Rome had taken the initiative in planting the mission. In the synod of Whitby in 664, the claims of Rome were effectually championed by Wilfrid. The decision, in fact, was so far adverse to the Scotch practice, that its chief advocate in the synod, Colman, Bishop of Lindisfarne, felt obliged to lay down his office, as he was not willing to surrender the ancestral custom. The vantage-ground thus obtained was well improved by Theodore, who was sent out from Rome as arch-bishop of Canterbury in 668. Administering his office in the Roman interest, he secured the ascendancy of the papal régime in the English Church. By 716 the monks of Ions surrendered so far as the special customs in question were concerned. The churches in Ireland had generally yielded at an earlier date. Theodore, who was of Greek antecedents, was an influential patron of learning. From him came the initial impulse to the culture which in the next century could boast such distinguished representatives as Beda and Alcuin.

The christianizing of Great Britain and Ireland gave to their peoples a catholic outlook. Their thoughts began to transcend their insular position. In return for the tide of heathen barbarism which had swept across the Channel to their shores, they now began to feel it their behoof to send back a tide of gospel light and life to the still unconverted tribes on the Continent.

The first of the missionaries to cross over to the Continental side of the Channel was Columbanus, an Irish monk, who had been educated in the cloister of Banger. About the year 590 he started forth with twelve young men as his companions. His first settlement was in territory nominally Christian, but still sorely in need of example and instruction in pious living. On the borders of Austrasis and Burgundy, in the woody mountains of the Vosges, he gathered the numerous disciples who came to place themselves under his monastic rule. The fame of his sanctity endeared him to the people; but at the same time the austere piety which: he inculcated, his persistent attachment to Irish as opposed to Roman customs, and his fearless rebuke of sill in high places, made him obnoxious to many of the clergy and to the royal family. At length matters were brought to a crisis by his uncompromising opposition to the iniquities of the Burgundian king, Thierry. "The intrepid abbot, like another John the Baptist, denounced the vices of the monarch, and sternly condemned the shameless manner in which he lived in the midst of his mistresses. He refused to bless the king's children, the fruits of his amours; declined to partake of the viands of a royal banquet set before him; and threatened Thierry with excommunication. The prince, under other circumstances, would at once have consigned the man who acted thus to the hands of the executioner; but he was awed by the sanctity of Columbanus, and, irritated as he was, he exclaimed that he was not mad enough to give him the crown of martyrdom. He merely commanded him to be dragged from his convent, and sent back to Ireland. The officers intrusted with the execution of these orders approached the abbot on their knees; and so greatly did the mass of the people venerate him for his piety, that he was conducted in a species of triumph to the borders of Thierry's dominions." 1 Killen, Ecclesiastical History of Ireland.

Columbanus was brought to the coast; but the attempt to ship him to Ireland miscarried, and he was allowed to go the way of his choice. We find him next laboring among the heathen population in the region of Zurich, and a little later at Bregenz. Anticipating an outbreak of violence in the latter place, he crossed over into the Lombard territory in Italy, and founded the celebrated monastery of Bobbie, near Pavia.

Among the writings of Columbanus, his letters to the Roman Bishop are not the least interesting. Notwithstanding the superabundance of complimentary phrases which they contain, their undertone bespeaks a man who would exercise his own discretion in taking commands from Rome.
1 The freedom with which he addressed Boniface IV. may be seen from the following extracts:--
"Vigila itaque, quæso, papa, vigila; et iternm dico: vigila; quia forte non bene vigilavit Vigilius, quem caput acandali isti clamant, qui vobis culpam injiciunt."
"Dolendum enim ac deflendum est, si in sede apostolica fides catholica non tenetur."
"Roma orbis terrarum caput est ecclesiarum, salva loci dominicæ, resurrectionis singulari prærogativa, et ideo sicut magnus honor vester est pro dignitate cathedræ, its magna cura vobis necessaria est, ut non perdatis vestram dignitatem propter aliquam perversitatem. Tandiu enim potestas apud vos erit, quandiu recta ratio permanserit: ille enim certus regni cœlorum clavicularius est, qui dignis per veram scientiam aperit, et indignis claudit. Alioquin, si contraria fecerit, nec aperire, nec claudere poterit."
"Rogo vos, quia multi dubitant de fidei vestræ puritate, ut cito tollatis hunc nævum de sanctæ cathedræ claritate." (Epist. v.)

As Columbanus proceeded to Italy, his most distinguished companion, Gallus (St. Gall), was detained by sickness. Continuing in that region, he founded the monastery which bore his name, and labored for the conversion of the Swiss and the Swabians till his death (640-650). A weird story symbolizes the impression made by his attack upon heathenism. As he was fishing one silent night -- so the legend runs -- on a Swiss lake near his monastery, he heard a voice descending from a neighboring peak. It was the Spirit of the Mountains calling upon the Spirit of the Waters to join in expelling the intruder. The Spirit of the Waters rose from the depths, and responded to the summons; but in a tone of failing confidence, as of one confessing himself baffled by the prevailing Name which the intruder was perpetually invoking.

Others followed the example of these pioneers. The Irish Kilian labored in Franconia soon after the middle of the seventh century. Toward the end of the same century, two natives of England, by the name of Hewald, found the martyr-death while attempting to preach the gospel to the Saxons. Some converts were made among the Frisians in the Netherlands by Wilfrid, who was unexpectedly cast upon their coast by a storm at sea, as, expelled from his bishopric, he was journeying to Rome. He was followed in the field by Willibrord, who was of Anglo-Saxon birth, but had been educated in the cloisters of Ireland. Under the patronage of Pepin, Mayor of the Palace, he was able to achieve a measure of success. 1 From the time of Wilfrid's labors (677-678) to 719 the opposition of the heathen King Radbod was a serious obstacle to tire progress of Christianity in this region. One ground of Radbod's obstinate adherence to heathenism has been given as follows. He had thoughts of baptism, and had already approached the font at the instance of Bishop Wulfram of Sens, when it occurred to him to inquire where his ancestors might be supposed to have gone, whether to the Christian's heaven or to hell. The Bishop answered, that, inasmuch as they had died unbaptized, they had undoubtedly been doomed to hell. At this, Radbod withdrew his foot from the font, saying that he could not dispense with the society of his forefathers for the sake of the Christian's heaven with its beggarly contingent,--"cum parvo numero pauperum." (Rettberg, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, Band ii. § 77.) The story has an air of credibility, but is none too well authenticated. The difficulty involved in the eschatology of Wulfram is said to have been ameliorated by Clemens - an Irish missionary in Germany whom Boniface brought to task--by the supposition that the preaching of Christ in Hades applied to its inhabitants generally. Willibrord even penetrated into Denmark; but he found it an unpromising held, and could make no other gain than the opportunity to educate some youths whom he purchased from slavery. The names of other missionaries, Irish, English, or Continental, might be mentioned. Not a few of them wrought to good effect. But still the field was much broader than the harvest. No extended, well organized church had been founded upon German soil. The apostle of Germany had not yet appeared, but he was already in training in the country which had supplied heroic laborers to this field.

That apostle was Winfrid, or Boniface as he is usually called. He was born in 680, near Crediton, in Devonshire, England. Zeal for the monastic life early drove him to the cloister, notwithstanding the opposition which at first he encountered from his father. Having passed his thirtieth year, received ordination to the priesthood, and been honored with some special marks of confidence by his brethren, he began to turn his thoughts towards the missionary held. His first attempt was in Frisia, in 716. It fell at an unfortunate juncture, the war between Charles Martel and the stubborn heathen King Radbod leaving little opportunity to insinuate Christian teaching. Forsaking this field for the time being, he returned to England.

Boniface now determined upon a new point of departure in his enterprise. Considering that the sanction of the Roman pontiff would add weight to his mission, he proceeded to Rome (719), and presented himself before Gregory II. The Pope gave a hearty welcome to his scheme, and sent him forward with his commendations. Boniface selected Thuringia as the first scene of his labors; not neglecting meanwhile to confer with Charles Martel, and to solicit whatever advantage might be derived from his patronage. Learning that Frisia, on account of the death of Radbod, had become a hopeful held, he proceeded thither, and for three years labored in connection with Willibrord. The latter, anticipating that his labors must soon come to a close, expressed the earnest desire that Boniface should become his successor in the bishopric. The honor, however, was modestly declined. Boniface retraced his course, and labored in Thuringia and Hessia. A report of his successes, which he sent to Rome in 723, was answered by a summons thither to be consecrated to the office of bishop. Returning again to Germany, he continued for a series of years in the successful prosecution of the work of converting the heathen. Among the Hessians, a bold stroke against an object of superstition gained him many converts. Finding that it was difficult to win the people of that region from their idolatrous veneration of an enormous oak-tree which was esteemed sacred to Thor, the god of thunder, Boniface decided to lay the axe to the tree. The awe-struck heathen stood around, expecting that their deity would take vengeance upon the authors of the sacrilege. They only saw the tree come crashing down, and riven into four pieces. Of these Boniface constructed an oratorium and dedicated it in honor of St. Peter. Impressed by such a palpable indication of the impotence of their gods, many of the heathen turned to the Christian faith. 1 Willibaldus, Vita S. Bonifacii, cap. viii. We may judge somewhat respecting the measure of success which attended the missionary, from the report that before the year 739 he had baptized about a hundred thousand converts. Naturally new honors came from Rome to such an efficient propagandist. He received the pallium of an archbishop (some years before 745, when he fixed his metropolitan seat at Metz), and in the latter part of his career exercised extensive powers as the papal vicar.

Converting the Germans to Christianity was only one part of the work of Boniface. He was the organizer of the German Church. In this office he acted as the agent of Rome, suppressing dissenters, and administering with continual reference to the Roman model. Indeed, it must be allowed that his conduct was conformable to the strong terms of the oath which the Pope exacted from him as he was promoted to the episcopal rank. These terms were as follows : "I, Boniface, bishop by the grace of God, promise to thee, O blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, and to thy vicar the blessed Pope Gregory, and his successors, through the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the inseparable Trinity, and this most sacred body of thine, to show the Catholic faith in its purity, and by the help of God to persist in the unity of that faith, and in no may to give consent to anything from any source contrary to the unity of the common and universal Church, but to show in all things my pure faith and my accord with thee and the needs of thy Church, and with thine aforesaid vicar and his successors. And if I shall find prelates who act contrary to the ancient institutes of the holy fathers, I will have no communion or connection with them, but rather, if able, I will prohibit the same; otherwise, I will report faithfully and at once to my apostolical lord." 1 Migne. Patrologia, tom. lxxxix. But while Boniface administered the Church of Germany in the spirit of fidelity to this oath, his allegiance to the Pope did not descend into abjectness. On occasion, he could complain, in very explicit terms, of affairs in Rome that were not to his mind.

In his closing years, Boniface found a useful ally in Pepin, the son of Charles Martel. It has commonly been assumed that it was by his hand that Pepin was anointed king at Soissons in 752; but some of the most careful of recent investigators have declared that this conclusion is without good foundation. " Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, § 373. Compare article on Boniface in Herzog; Rettberg;, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, Band i. § 67.

The last enterprise of Boniface was in the field to which his earliest efforts had been directed. As if in testimony that his ambition was for souls rather than for power, he resigned his place as the primate of Germany, and started upon a fresh attempt to evangelize the Frisians. Great success attended his labors. Thousands, as it is said, gave effectual heed to his message. On an appointed day, the 5th of June, 755, Boniface was to meet a large company of them for administering the rite of confirmation. But instead of his converts, there came a raging crowd of heathen. Boniface, as he saw their approach, surmised their intent, and, stimulating the hearts of his companions with the hope of the heavenly rewards, calmly awaited the stroke which should bring him the crown of martyrdom. The body of the great missionary found repose at the monastery of Fulda, one of the notable institutions which his zeal and tireless activity had given to Germany.

Of all the tribes bordering on Christian territory, the Saxons presented the most unyielding front to Christianity. Their hostile attitude, however, admits of explanation. The fact that their rivals, the Franks, were in their eyes the most conspicuous representatives of Christianity, was not helpful to their prejudices. As a warlike and independent race, they scorned everything that seemed to imply an unworthy subjection. They feared that the Christian yoke would be a yoke of bondage. And, in truth, after the policy of Charlemagne became manifest, they could not help associating the acceptance of Christianity with the double humiliation of bowing to the rule of the Franks, and being compelled to pay tithes to the Church. In the view of Charlemagne, the refractory Saxons, who yielded to his arms only to gain the needed respite in which to prepare for a fresh outbreak, could not be effectually subdued save as they were Christianized. He therefore brought forward the sword as the ally of the preacher. "If Boniface," says Milman, "was the Christian, Charlemagne, was the Mohammedan, apostle of the gospel." Indeed, he gave the Saxons less discretion than oft times was conceded by the devotees of the Koran. They were given to understand that heathenism was abolished, and that in practising its rites they were making themselves liable to the death penalty. Happily, in connection with this rude means of propagandism, there was a manifestation of a better spirit, and the use of better ways of commending the gospel. Alcuin, notwithstanding his intimate relations with Charlemagne, did not hesitate to criticise his methods, and to give strong emphasis to the truth that only by the use of spiritual weapons could heathenism in the hearts of its votaries be effectually vanquished. Moreover, there were noble missionaries, such as the Frisian Liudger and the Northumbrian Willehad, who went among the Saxons, and labored in the spirit of patience and love. The first years of the ninth century may be regarded as the era of the firm establishment of Christianity among the Saxons.

The Scandinavian peoples first made themselves conspicuous in European history as pirates and plunderers. The stormy sea was their favorite element. Wherever the wind and the waves prepared them a way, from the Baltic and the British Isles round to the coasts of Italy, they penetrated. They drove their barks far up the rivers and streams, so that many inland cities fell a prey to their unsparing hands. Towns as far inland as Orleans, Tours, Chartres, and Bourges found no security. Churches and monasteries in particular, as being lease protected and offering most booty, were pillaged and destroyed by these ruthless invaders.

Charlemagne, who foresaw with anguish of spirit these desolating inroads from the North, had it in mind to anticipate them, and to break their force so far as possible by Christianizing the Scandinavians. But he was not able to carry out his purpose. First under his son Louis a beginning was made in that direction. It was only a beginning. Neither in Denmark, Norway, nor Sweden were the people converted in a day. Heathenism was parted with reluctantly. Many who became at length willing to receive Christ as an object of worship were disposed still to retain their old gods alongside of the Christian's Saviour. Only by slow advances, and at the expense of many reactions to paganism, did Christianity at length acquire an undisputed title to these lands.

The most eminent missionary to the Scandinavians, the Apostle of the North as he has been called, was Anschar (also written Ansgar or Anskar). He was preceded, it is true, by Ebbo, Archbishop of Rheims, as respects the work in Denmark; but this prelate, on the whole, appears rather as a patron of the enterprise than as an active and constant participant in the same. Anschar began his labors in Denmark in 826. The seeming preparation for his comings in the conversion of the King Herald, who was baptized at Mentz in the same year, proved delusive. The Christianity of Herald was the reverse of a commendation in the eyes of the people, and he was driven from his kingdom. The missionary, too, was obliged to retire, though not without the satisfaction of having gathered some fruit, as a number of the people had been converted, and youths purchased from slavery had been initiated into the elements of a Christian education. 1 Rembertus, Vita Anscharii, § 14.

Soon after retiring from Denmark, Anschar found an opportunity to plant the cross in Sweden. On his return (about 832) he was raised to the rank of arch-bishop, with Hamburg for his head-quarters. At the same time he visited Rome, and was forwarded in his enterprise by the Pope, who intrusted to him and to Ebbo the missions of the North. Many clouds swept over his chosen field. In both Sweden and Denmark, what had already been accomplished seemed destined at times to be completely undone. But Anschar was a man who could persevere through defeat after defeat. He had an elastic temper, and a faith which triumphed over the most dismal surroundings. As the Northern pirates plundered Hamburg, burning church, cloister, and library, and sending him forth with a destitute and, his comment was, "The Lord has given, and the Lord has taken away: blessed be the name of the Lord." 1 Ibid, § 22. His confidence was nurtured by a peculiarly intimate communion with God. It is recorded that on the eve of great crises in his work, when everything seemed to hang in the balance, he was able to come from the place of wrestling with a serene and joyful countenance, as one who felt that God had given him the inward pledge of a favorable issue. Combining with his steadfastness a certain emotioned warmth and liveliness of imagination, he was well qualified to win and to impress men. At his death, in 865, Christianity in Sweden and Denmark had not, it is true, been placed beyond the reach of serious reverses; nevertheless, it had acquired a hold never thereafter to be relinquished.

In Norway a beginning was made for the Christian Church near the middle of the tenth century, by the King Bacon, who had received a Christian education in England. Apprehending that he could not easily surmount the force of heathen prejudice, he waited for a season before publicly recommending the acceptance of Christianity. Even then he found the current too strong for him. In order to retain his crown, he was obliged to participate in some of the heathen rites. But at heart he was never alienated from the Christian faith, and at his death he bitterly deplored his compliance with the idolatrous demands of his subjects. Among his successors, Olaf Tryggvason and Olaf Haroldson were energetic, not to say violent and tyrannical, supporters of Christianity. In the eleventh century the Christian Church became firmly founded in Norway.

Christianity was introduced into Iceland in the last quarter of the tenth century. The first evangelists were the Saxon prelate Friedrich, and the native Thorwald, who had interested Friedrich in the spiritual welfare of the Icelanders. A number were converted, but the ears of the majority seemed closed to the message of the missionaries. After their departure, new laborers entered the field under the patronage of Olaf Tryggvason. By the year 1000, public opinion had been so far changed that Christianity could be adopted as the public religion, though the practice of heathen rites in private was still condoned.

About the time that Iceland adopted Christianity, it was carried also to Greenland, which had recently been colonized by Eric the Red. Leif, a son of this Eric, brought the first Christian priest to Greenland. References are made in the account of Leif, and several of those who followed him, to a land which has been supposed by some to be identical with Massachusetts and Rhode Island. That the American coast was reached by these voyagers is entirely credible, but the point of visitation is still a subject for inquiry.See Narrative and Critical History of America, edited by Justin Winsor, vol. i.

Among the Slavonian races, the missionary era was the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries. Moravia received the gospel in the latter half of the ninth century, through the Greek missionaries Cyril and Methodius, the latter of whom was awarded the metropolitan dignity from Rome. The movement in Moravia reinforced the beginning which had been made shortly before in Bohemia. From Bohemia, Christianity was carried, after the middle of the tenth century, into Poland.

The Bulgarians, Slavonian in language but not in race, first learned of Christianity from captives taken in the early part of the ninth century, among whom was the Bishop of Adrianople. They generally clung, however, to their old religion till after the middle of the same century. As the agency by which they were finally persuaded to a change of faith came from Constantinople, it was but natural that their allegiance should gravitate thither. However, for a brief interval there was a serious consideration of the question of union with Rome. An embassy was sent thither about 865. The Pope in response dispatched his legates into Bulgaria, and returned answers to a long list of questions which had been propounded respecting worship and life. The answers, on the whole, were very creditable, and such as might have been expected from the sagacious pontiff, Nicolas I., who then occupied the chair of Peter. The Bulgarians, however, were not sufficiently grateful for the paternal offices of the Pope to attach themselves to Rome.

If a statement sent forth in 866 by Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, could be taken in its full breadth, it must be concluded that the Russians had already in large numbers embraced the gospel. But Photius wished to magnify the missionary activity of the East, and so in all probability gave too high a color to his picture. The positive establishment of Christianity in Russia was more than a century later. In 955, as we read, Olga, widow of the Russian King Igor, was baptized in Constantinople under the Christian name Helena. Her grandson Vladimir was baptized in 988. Like a genuine Russian autocrat, he ordered his subjects to follow his example. His son and successor was also a zealous patron of Christianity; and churches, schools, and monasteries were multiplied throughout the country.

The Hungarians, or Magyars, the last and fiercest of the great swarms of invaders which poured through Central Europe, after spreading the terror of their name into Southern Gaul and Italy, were finally confined by the victories of Henry the Fowler and Otho the Great (933, 955) to their present bounds upon the Danube. Very soon thereafter the feeble beginning of Christianity, which had been received through connection with Constantinople, was supplemented by missionaries from the German Empire. At the end of the tenth century, King Stephen, who came to be honored by the Hungarians as a saint, was a zealous patron of the Christian Church among his subjects. His efforts, however, did not secure to it such a place in the affections of the people as to prevent a subsequent reaction to heathenism.

Thus, from the time that the conversion of Constantine inaugurated the open triumph and ascendancy of Christianity in the Roman Empire, seven centuries elapsed before all of the prominent tribes of Europe bad consented to take the Christian name. In obscure quarters, at a still later date, there were professed heathen within European bounds.

The Policy of the Succeeding Emperors Toward Heathenism

III.--THE POLICY OF SUCCEEDING EMPERORS TOWARD HEATHENISM.

The discretion of the emperor who followed Julian saved Christian rule, for the time being, from an unfavorable contrast with heathen rule, as respects tolerance. Jovian earned the hearty encomiums of representative heathens, such as Themistius, by granting full liberty for the exercise of their religion, those obnoxious rites alone excepted for which no one expected a governmental sanction. Valentinian, Emperor of the West from 364 to 375, adhered in general to the same principles; a superstitious zeal in prosecuting those suspected of practising magic being his most serious exhibition of intolerance. Valens (364-378), Emperor of the East, by the grace of his brother Valentinian, acknowledged the same laws in relation to heathenism, and sanctioned a similar severity against all supposed to be guilty of magic and divination. The reputation for intolerance attached to Valens is due rather to the rigor with which, as an Arian, he treated the orthodox party, than to any violent attack upon heathenism, It was during the joint reign of these emperors that the word paganism was first employed officially as a designation of a religion. [Codex Theodos., Lib. XVI., Tit. ii. 18.] Gratian, who followed Valentinian in the rule of the West, while he issued no sweeping prohibition against the practice of heathenism, dealt it a destructive blow by ordering that the revenues of the temples, and the public support which had been given to priests and vestals, should be withdrawn. He also commanded the statue and altar of Victory to be removed from the Senate. A strong effort was made by heathen partisans to have these measures repealed; but the diligence and energy of Ambrose, who was highly influential both with Gratian and his successor, Valentinian II., defeated the attempt.

In 379 Theodosius came to the throne of the East, and in 394 his success in overthrowing the usurper Eugenius gave him also the rule over the West. Reversing the policy of Valens in relation to the doctrinal controversies of the age, he assisted the orthodox party to a final victory. As regards heathenism, his decrees and his practice indicated for a considerable time a wavering between toleration and proscription; but in 391 he entered decidedly upon a policy of total repression, -that is, of heathen rites. The mere belief, or even its advocacy, he did not think of touching, and numbered professed heathen among his friends and officers. By a law of 392, the offering of idolatrous sacrifices was declared a crimen majestatis, and as such might be capitally punished. This penalty, however, had its place in the statute-book, rather than in actual execution. "The ready obedience of the pagans," says Gibbon, "protected them from the pains and the penalties of the Theodosian code." [Chap. xxviii.] But if their persons were spared, their temples in many instances were not. No general edict was issued by Theodosius for their destruction; but the passions of the populace, and the fanatical zeal of the monks, urged on, in various districts, the work of spoliation and ruin. In some cases retaliation was provoked from the heathen. We read of Christian churches being burned in Palestine and Phœnicia. In Alexandria the heathen requited what they deemed an insult to their faith (namely, an ostentatious parading of the indecent symbols found in a temple which had been devoted to the worship of Bacchus) with violence and bloodshed; and, indeed, they so far committed themselves by their sedition, that they finally counted it good fortune that they were allowed to escape with their lives, though obliged to witness the destruction of the magnificent temple of Serapis, as well as of less noted edifices.

A similar course, attended with similar incidents, was pursued by the sons of Theodosius, Arcadius, and Honorius, and by their immediate successors. The episode most disgraceful to the Christian side was the murder at Alexandria, in 415, of the beautiful and talented female philosopher Hypatia. It is to be observed, however, that, while professed Christians were the agents in this brutal and unchristian deed, it was not altogether in the name of religion that it was accomplished. Political motives were prominent. The deed, moreover, was that of a mob, -a mob drawn from a populace noted for its turbulence and ferocity. "The Alexandrians,"says Socrates, who was in middle life at the time of the tragedy, "are more delighted with tumult than any other people; and if they can find a pretext they will break forth into most intolerable excesses." [Hist. Eccl., vii. 13.] The same historian speaks in the highest terms of the character and ability of Hypatia, representing her as gaining universal admiration by her dignified modesty of deportment, as drawing students from a great distance to hear her exposition of the Neo-Platonic philosophy, and as surpassing all the philosophers of her time through her attainments in literature and science. "Yet even she fell a victim," he continues, "to the political jealousy which at that time prevailed. For as she had frequent interviews with Orestes [the prefect], it was calumniously reported among the Christian populace that it was by her influence he was prevented from being reconciled to Cyril. Some of them, therefore, whose ring-leader was a reader named Peter, hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, entered into a conspiracy against her; and observing her as she returned home in her carriage, they dragged her from it, and carried her to a church called Cæsareum, where they completely stripped her, and murdered her with shells. After tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called Cinaron, and there burned them. An act so inhuman could not fail to bring the greatest opprobrium, not only upon Cyril, but also upon the whole Alexandrian Church." [Hist. Eccl., vii. 15.] The judgment which the Christian historian passes upon the deed, it may fairly be presumed, was the judgment of intelligent and sober-minded Christians the Empire over.

As heathenism had very little to contend for, it gradually succumbed. Only a remnant of it was left in the East by the time of Justinian (527-565), and to this the despotic emperor endeavored to give a finishing blow. Heathen worship was declared by him a capital offense, and its last source of intellectual prestige was quenched by the abolition of the philosophical school of Athens. In the West, the incursions of the barbarians left little chance for the exercise of any central and decisive authority on the subject. But as the barbarians themselves had no favor for the old classic heathenism, it found no refuge, save in the hearts of occasional devotees in the cities, and in the rites which might safely be practised in the unfrequented districts.

The Administration of Constantine and His Sons

I.--THE ADMINISTRATION OF CONSTANTINE AND HIS SONS.

CONSTANTINE, a son of Constantius Chlorus, who was a Cæsar, and finally an Augustus, of the West, under the Diocletian régime was about thirty years old st his father's death in 306. He had already distinguished himself by military service under Diocletian, and was well qualified to accept the honor which the dying words of his father, in the pretorium of York, and the voice of the troops, imposed upon him, in calling him to assume the imperial purple. Having ruled over Britain, Gaul, and Spain for several years, Constantine finally, in 312, brought the whole of the West under his sceptre by the overthrow of his colleague and rival Maxentius, whose intended attack upon himself he anticipated with great energy and daring. As already stated, in January, 313, he published from Milan, in conjunction with his Eastern colleague Licinius, the famous edict of toleration.

The motives by which Constantine was actuated in siding with Christianity have been variously defined. Gibbon intimates his belief that he was moved at first almost entirely by considerations of policy, though at a later date his convictions were truly enlisted for the religion which claimed his outward support. "Personal interest," he says, "is often the standard of our belief as well as of our practice; and the same motives of temporal advantage which might influence the public conduct and professions of Constantine would insensibly dispose his mind to embrace a religion so propitious to his fame and fortunes." [Chap. xx.] A more probable conclusion is, that a good measure of conviction was from the first united with policy in determining his course. Even before his campaign against Maxentius, causes were at work that were well calculated to recommend the claims of the Christian faith. His father was no zealot for the common heathenism, and treated the Christians with clemency and consideration. Eusebius speaks of him as "acknowledging the Supreme God alone, and condemning the polytheism of the impious; [Vita Constantini, i. 17.] and the historian Socrates likewise states that Constantius "had renounced the idolatrous worship of the Greeks." [Hist. Eccl., i. 2.] Very likely these statements are overdrawn. The supposition which seems most credible is, that his faith was an eclectic system, which, while accepting the heathen deities (and possibly ranking Christ alongside of them), still acknowledged, much in the sense of Neo-Platonism, a supreme Deity above all these. In any case, Constantius was liberal toward Christianity, and his attitude would not be without its influence upon the mind of his son. A still further incentive in the same direction was supplied by the experience and observation of Constantine himself. As a resident at the court of Diocletian and of Galerius, he saw the outbreak of the great persecution. Its atrocities may have revolted his mind; in any case, its issue taught him that it was no easy task to conquer Christianity. The good fortune of his father, and the miserable end of the champions of heathenism, could hardly fail to incite him to the belief that a powerful Providence was on the side of the Christians. His mind was thus rendered receptive for any new and striking evidence that might appear. In the image of the cross which flamed out of the sky, and the ensuing victory over Maxentius, this evidence was supplied.

Eusebius is our chief voucher for the assumed miracle which published to Constantine and his army the divine truth of Christianity. Lactantius is the only Christian writer beside, among the contemporaries of Constantine, from whom we have a statement bearing upon the events and he remarks simply, that "Constantine was directed in a dream to cause the heavenly sign [That is, the initial letters of the Greek name of Christ, x and P, arranged thus, . ] to be delineated on the shields of his soldiers, and so to proceed to battle." [De Mortibus Persecutorum, xliv.] According to the account of Eusebius, the portent came in answer to the prayer of Constantine. Realizing the extreme hazard of his expedition, he was made deeply conscious of his need of the aid of some higher power, but was somewhat in doubt as to what power he should address. At length it occurred to him that he could most fitly make his appeal to the Supreme Deity, the God who had so prospered his father. "He therefore called on Him," says the historian, "with earnest prayer and supplications that He would reveal to him who He was, and stretch forth His right hand to help him in his present difficulties. And while he was thus praying with fervent entreaty, a most marvellous sign appeared to him from heaven, the account of which it might have been difficult to receive with credit, had it been related by any other person. But since the victorious Emperor himself long afterward declared it to the writer of this history, when he was honored with his acquaintance and society, and confirmed his statement by an oath, who could hesitate to accredit the relation, especially since the testimony of aftertime has established its truth? He said that about mid-day, when the sun was beginning to decline, he saw with his eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and bearing the inscription, By this conquer. At this sight he himself was struck with amazement, and his whole army also, which happened to be following him on some expedition, and witnessed the miracle. He said, moreover, that he doubted within himself what the import of this apparition could be. And while he continued to ponder and reason on its meaning, night imperceptibly drew on; and in his sleep the Christ of God appeared to him with the same sign which he had seen in the heavens, and commanded him to procure a standard made in the likeness of that sign, and to use it as a safeguard in all engagements with his enemies." [Vita Cons., i. 27-29. Compare Socrates, Hist. Eccl., i. 2. Sozomen supplies to the story a special embellishment; namely, an appearance of angels, who directed Constantine to conquer by the holy sign. (Hist. Eccl., i. 3.)] Constantine was careful to follow these directions. A spear, with a transverse piece from which a streamer of purple cloth was suspended, having been overlaid with gold, and surmounted by a crown containing the first two letters of the name of Christ, was, by his order, made the standard of the army; and his confidence was at the same time rewarded and strengthened by the complete victory which followed.

A degree of scepticism may well be entertained with reference to this interesting narrative. Eusebius betrays an exceedingly rhetorical vein in his "Life of Constantine," and may unconsciously have embellished the facts reported to him by the Emperor, and have given too lively a coloring to some items. Constantine himself also, without any intention to deceive, may have failed of strict accuracy. We may suppose, for example, that the "inscription" was originally a factor in the dream of the night, rather than in the open vision of the day. Still, there is no proper ground for denying all basis to the account. That Constantine appealed to the higher powers, that he observed some solar phenomenon which he took to be the cross symbol, that he had a dream in the night of corresponding significance, -- these are things against whose occurrence there is no occasion to urge any objection whatever. The facts are one thing; Constantine's interpretation of them is another thing. It is by no means certain that we have to deal here with a supernatural manifestation. Some of the items described as matter of divine communication are clearly out of harmony with the spirit and principles of Christianity. Who can imagine the Prince of peace commanding the emblem of His passion to be used as a standard of war, and carried at the head of legions devoted to the work of carnage and slaughter?

Constantine, from this time, was an adherent of Christianity, though by no means an adherent of the most intelligent and spiritual type.

[The account of the heathen historian Zosimus, Hist., ii. 29, that Constantine forsook heathenism because its ministers declared that it had no purification for his enormous crimes, and went over to Christianity as offering an easy purgation, needs no comment. The crimes which Zosimus specifies did not occur till long after Constantine had become the patron of Christianity.]

He employed, however, much prudence and caution in his relation to heathenism. A sudden and violent rupture was avoided. The pagan population of Rome was gratified by a restoration of their temples at the hands of the conqueror. The old pagan dignity of Pontifex Maximus was retained (and indeed was not declined by any of the Christian emperors before the accession of Gratian). Professed heathen were still found at court, and were allowed to occupy positions of trust. Still, Constantine did not delay to bestow tokens of his superior favor upon the Christian Church. In the years which preceded his rise to the position of sole ruler over the whole Empire, he issued decrees decidedly favorable to the Christian cause. The clergy were released from the burdensome and unwelcome obligation of serving as municipal magistrates. Full liberty was granted to the bestowing of property, by testament, upon the institutions of the Church. The manumission of slaves was allowed to take place in the churches. Secular business upon Sunday was prohibited in the cities (321); though a heathen rather than a Christian aspect was given to the decree, by styling the day the sacred day of the sun, instead of the Lord's day. The discrimination against the unmarried was removed. Large donations were made to the clergy in North Africa. A Christian education was provided for the Emperor's children; his eldest son, Crispus, was placed under the tuition of Lactantius.

In proportion as Constantine evinced his friendship toward Christianity, Licinius, who was governing the eastern section of the Empire, assumed an attitude of hostility; his feelings of political rivalry naturally alienating him from the party that was so closely associated with his imperial competitor. Persecution, after the violent type of the preceding age, does not appear to have entered into his plan. But he discriminated in a vexatious way against the Christians, withholding all high office from those who mould not sacrifice to the gods, prohibiting the bishops from assembling in synods, closing certain churches, and forbidding the congregations of Nicomedia, where he resided, to assemble within the walls, on the sarcastic plea that the fresh air of the open country would be healthier for their assemblies. [Euseb., Vita Cons., i. 50-54.]

This growing divergence, in respect of religious policy, prophesied war between the two Emperors, -- a war based on religious as well as on political issues. The outbreak came in the year 323. If Eusebius may be trusted, Licinius himself took pains to publish the religious cast of the conflict. After; reminding his soldiers of the obligations which they owed to the religion of their ancestors, and commenting on the wickedness and folly of his adversaries in going after a strange Deity, he stated the issue as follows: "The present occasion shall prove which of us is mistaken in his judgment, and shall decide between our gods and those whom our adversaries profess to honor. Suppose, then, this strange God, whom we now regard with contempt, should really prove victorious; them, indeed, we must acknowledge and give Him honor, and so bid a long farewell to those for whom we light our tapers in vain. But if our gods triumph (and of this there can be no real doubt), then, as soon as we have secured the present victory, let us prosecute the war without delay against these despisers of the gods." [Vita Cons, ii. 5.]

After such an inauguration of the war, the utter defeat of Licinius must have seemed to the heathen themselves a divine judgment against their cause. Multitudes flocked to the churches; the ranks of the catechumens were filled to overflowing. Constantine now felt authorized to assume a more decided position. Compulsion was indeed avoided, but the whole weight of his influence was thrown against heathenism. "Let no one," he wrote, "molest another in this matter, but let every one be free to follow the bias of his own mind. With regard to those who will hold themselves aloof from us, let them have, if they please, their temples of lies: we have the glorious edifice of Thy truth which Thou hast given us as our home. We pray, however, that they may receive the same blessing." [Ibid., ii. 56.] This sounds as if Constantine was resolved to trust wholly to personal influence in his attempts to limit heathenism. But he went beyond this, and applied the force of law to a certain extent. Officials were forbidden to offer sacrifices, such as had formerly been expected of those in their position. Certain temples dedicated to disgraceful rites, such as the temples of Venus at Aphaca and Heliopolis, were commanded to be destroyed. The impure and occult arts of divirirttion were proscribed. Whether Constantine issued any more radical decrees than these is a disputed question. Eusebius [Vita Cons., iv. 23.] and Sozomen [Hist. Eccl., i. 8.] would have us to believe that he finally sent forth a sweeping prohibition of all idolatrous sacrifices; and their statement is supported by the fact that Constantius assumed, in issuing an edict of this nature, that he was only repeating what had already been decreed by his father. On the other hand, the heathen rhetorician, Libanius, indicates that the temples were open for undisturbed worship during the whole reign of Constantine. [See Neander, Kirchengeschichte, vol. iii.] If, therefore, the edict was ever issued by the first Christian Emperor, it would seem that no earnest attempt was made for its execution. The limits of the crusade which he undertook in earnest against heathen sacrifices are, in all likelihood, correctly expressed by the following statement from Milman: "There were two kinds of sacrifices abolished by Constantine: (1) The private sacrifices, connected with unlawful acts of theurgy and magic; those midnight offerings to the powers of darkness, which in themselves were illegal, and led to scenes of unhallowed license. (2) Those which might be considered the State sacrifices, offered by the Emperor himself, or by his representative in his name, either in the cities or in the army." [History of Christianity to the Abolition of Paganism, Book III., chap. iv.]

At the same time Constantine gave continued exhibitions of a zealous patronage of Christianity. The work of building churches was energetically forwarded. The Emperor is said to have made large donations to this end from his personal resources. The unsanctified zeal, which in some instances plundered heathen temples for the materials, was left unpunished. [Gibbon thinks depredations of this kind were not extensive in the reign of Constantine, not noticeably in excess of similar spoliations at the hands of rapacious heathens of previous generations. (Chap. xxii., ad finem.)] Great respect was rendered to the leading representatives of the Church. Distinguished members of the clergy were made the travelling companions of the Emperor. "He added," writes Eusebius, "the sanction of his authority to the decisions of the bishops passed at their synods, and forbade the provincial governors to rescind any of their decrees; for he rated the priests of God at a higher value than any judge whatever." [Vita Cons., iv. 27.] Finally, in founding Constantinople, he provided a great capital dedicated to the Christian religion. Political motives were probably the chief incentive to this step, but his mind may not have been unmoved by the consideration that the ancient Roman capital showed so much of an inveterate preference for heathenism.

It is to be observed, however, that Constantine's favor toward the Church meant simply the befriending of the Catholic Church. The union of Christians seemed to him an important means of conserving the unity of the Empire. Hence, heretics and schismatics enjoyed very little favor at his hands; [In an edict to the Novatians, Valentinians, Marcionites, Paulians, and Cataphrygians, he addresses them as haters of truth, and forbids them to meet, not merely in public, but even in private houses. (EUSEB., Vita Cons., iii. 64.)] hence, also, the attempt to harmonize theological factions, through the great council of Nicæa, and the banishing of bishops who refused to sign the creed of the council, or appeared opposed to the peace measures of the Emperor.

Although openly assuming the position of a Christian emperor, Constantine did not receive baptism till just before hid death in 337. One reason for this long delay may, perhaps, be found in the following remark which he indulged as he was about to submit to the rite: "I had thought to do this in the waters of the Jordan, wherein our Saviour, for our example, is recorded to have been baptized." [Ibid., iv. 62.] But a more influential reason was probably a kind of superstitious estimate of baptism as a means of magical absolution, an absolution that might be received most safely near the end of life, when there was little margin left for defiling the soul with new sins. Eusebius speaks of him as "firmly believing, that, whatever sine he had committed as a mortal man, his soul would be purified from them through the efficacy of the mysterious words and the salutary waters of baptism." [Ibid., iv. 16.] The officiating bishop on the occasion was the Arian, or more properly the semi-Arian, Eusebius of Nicomedia, in the neighborhood of which city the Emperor was baptized. This looks as though Constantine was finally initiated into the Arian instead of the Catholic faith. Still, this conclusion is in no wise warranted. Constantine was never conscious of any defection from the creed of Nicæa. If he patronized some of the Arians during his later years, it was because they succeeded in making him believe that they were in harmony with the standard creed; if he persecuted some of the orthodox, it was not on account of their faith, but because he considered them guilty of mal-administration, or of an unreasonable obstinacy, to the detriment of the peace of the Church. "The credulous monarch," says Gibbon, "unskilled in the stratagems of theological warfare, might be deceived by the modest and specious professions of the heretics, whose sentiments he never perfectly understood; and while he protected Arius, and persecuted Athanasius, he still considered the council of Nicaea as the bulwark of the Christian faith, and the peculiar glory of his own reign." [Chap. xxi.] A similar verdict appears in the writings of historians of the fifth century. "Although this [the Nicene] doctrine," says Sozomen, "was not universally approved, no one, during the life of Constantine, had dared to reject it openly." [Hist. Eccl., iii. 1.] "It ought not," writes Theodoret, "to excite astonishment that Constantine was so far deceived as to send many great men into exile; for he believed the assertion of bishops, who skilfully concealed their malice under the appearance of illustrious qualities." [Hist. Eccl., i. 33.]

Were we to follow the estimate of contemporaries who enjoyed the favor of Constantine, we should be obliged to rank him among the very foremost of illustrious monarchs. The astonishing transition in their estate transported not a few Christians to the point of immoderate adulation. They found themselves the friends and guests of one of the most magnificent of rulers,--a monarch of imposing person, who clothed himself in all the splendor of a Solomon, always wearing in public a jewelled diadem, and a purple or scarlet robe of silk, embroidered with pearls and flowers of gold. The temptation to violate all sober judgment in the estimate of such a benefactor was not easily resisted. We read of a Christian minister, who, at the celebration of the third decennium of the Emperor's reign, pronounced "him blessed, as having been counted worthy to hold absolute and universal empire in this life, and as being destined to share the empire of the Son of God in the world to come." Even Constantine had the good taste to reject such unbounded flattery, "and forbade the speaker to hold such language, exhorting him rather to pray earnestly in his behalf, that whether in this life or that to come he might be found worthy to be a servant of God." [Euseb., Vita Cons., iv. 48.] The historian Eusebius, though he seems to have regarded the above specimen of adulation as being rather beyond the mark, did not fall much short of it himself. He speaks of Constantine as "at once a mighty luminary and a most distinct and powerful herald of genuine piety;" says that his "character shone with all the graces of religion;" and styles him such an emperor as all history records not. The less rhetorical Theodoret designates Constantine "a prince deserving of the highest praise, who, like the divine apostle, was not called by man or through man, but by God." [Hist. Eccl., i. 2.] The Greek Church, in the fifth century, began to reckon him among the saints; and still in the Greek and Russian Church he is honored with the title Isapostolos, the "Equal of the Apostles." From the heathenism also which he helped to conquer, he received high-sounding honors; and the Roman Senate, at his death, did not hesitate to follow custom and to enroll him among the gods.

How strange the contrast between these encomiums and titles, and those dark events whose guise of tyranny is but poorly hid by the obscurity in which history has left them! Licinius, the husband of Constantia, the sister of Constantine, was put to death, in violation of a solemn pledge that his life should be spared. To be sure, there was an accusation of treasonable designs on the part of Licinius; but unproved accusations cannot count for very much under the circumstances. A few years later, Crispus, the eldest son of Constantine, a youth of high promise, amiable, martial, and enterprising, was ordered to be executed by the jealous and suspicious father. At the same time, Licinius, the son of the emperor of the same name, was sacrificed, in spite of the tears and entreaties of his widowed mother. The innocence of both of these accomplished youths is commonly regarded as beyond question. According to very full and confident testimony, the Empress Fausta, the stepmother of the murdered Crispus, was another victim. As the story goes, her machinations, in order that she might advance her own sons, had served as a chief instigation to the execution of the innocent and slandered youths; and Constantine, coming finally to understand the case, was filled with fury, and ordered her to be suffocated in an overheated bath. But Gibbon finds something quite contradictory to this account in the references of two orations belonging to the following period. "The former celebrates the virtues, the beauty, and the fortune of the Empress Fausta, the daughter, wife, sister, and mother of so many princes. The latter asserts, in explicit terms, that the mother of the younger Constantine, who was slain three years after his father's death, survived to weep over the fate of her son. Notwithstanding the positive testimony of several writers of the pagan as well as of the Christian religion, there may still remain some reason to believe, or at least to suspect, that Fausta escaped the blind and suspicious cruelty of her husband." [Chap. xviii.] An astonishing list of deeds, certainly, for a saint and an Isapostolos! As a man, and a professed Christian, Constantine was not, indeed, without his merits. "From his earliest youth to a very advanced season of life, he preserved the vigor of his constitution by a strict adherence to the domestic virtues of chastity and temperance." [Ibid.] But certainly his history makes it plain, on the whole, that the first Christian emperor was quite remote from being a Christian of an enlightened and regenerate type. The stain of the purple is clearly apparent to eyes not blinded by its magnificence.

To Constantine as a general and an administrator, an eminent rank is no doubt to be assigned. "In the field," says Gibbon, "he infused his own intrepid spirit into the troops whom he conducted, with the talents of a consummate general; and to his abilities, rather than to his fortune, we may ascribe the signal victories which he obtained over the foreign and domestic foes of the republic." [Chap. xviii.] In his management of the State, there were, no doubt, defects. During his later years in particular, he was given to a prodigal liberality, which enriched in one direction, only to oppress in another. But, on the other hand, he gave numerous exhibitions of statesmanlike sagacity. Instances may be pointed out in which he cultivated an admirable and politic moderation. Judging him by what he accomplished, a high estimate must be placed upon his abilities; for he made himself the master of an empire in the face of formidable rivals, and carried through one of the most remarkable revolutions of history.

Upon the death of Constantine, the government of the Empire passed to his three sons, -- Constantius, Constantine the Younger, and Constans; the first ruling the eastern, and the last two sharing the western division. In 340 Constantine fell in a war with Constans. This left the latter sole ruler of the West, a position which he maintained till the year 350, when he was slain in a struggle with the usurper Magnentius. The overthrow of the usurper, in 353, made Constantius master of the whole Empire.

Although Eusebius speaks of the sons of Constantine as "a trinity of pious sons, like some new reflectors of his brightness, diffusing everywhere the lustre of their father's character," [So two of his statements read when combined. Vita Cons., i. 1, v. 40.] it is the common verdict of historians that the government suffered a marked deterioration under the successors of the great Emperor. With a moral standard no higher than his, they united less ability and discretion. The first days of the new administration were stained by a cruel massacre within the collateral branches of the Constantinian family; and, though the soldiery was the instrument, there was not a little of suspicion that Constantius had a guilty responsibility in the tragedy. A pretended testament, affirming Constantine's belief that he had been poisoned by his brothers, was the excuse that was pleaded for the bloodshed.

An increase of severity toward heathenism marked the administration of Constantine's sons. In 341 Constantius issued an edict forbidding, in general terms, all heathen sacrifices. Later edicts (in 346 and 356) ordered temples to be closed, and attached the death penalty to the crime of sacrificing to the gods. But of these laws there was certainly no rigorous and universal enforcement. The temples in the city of Rome, for example, were left unassailed; and it is recorded that the prefect of the city did not scruple to sacrifice publicly on occasion of certain calamities. Violence seems to have been expended mainly in the plundering of temples; and, even against this, protest was not wholly wanting from the Christian side. "With the gold of the State," said Hilary, in his criticism of Constantius, "you burden the sanctuary of God; and what is plundered from the temples, or won by confiscrttions, or extorted by punishments, you obtrude upon God." From the statements of the heathen historian Ammianus Marcellinus, it would appear that some of the spoil gained by this plunder and exaction did not find its way to the sanctuary; for we find him complaining that Constantius consumed the marrow of the provinces in the fattening of his favorites. [Lib. XVI.]

The adherence of the heathen to their own religion was marked by too little of courage and steadfastness to give rise to sanguinary persecution, even had the government been disposed to stop short of no severity requisite for the work of thorough repression. Constantius, therefore, was quite as conspicuous for persecuting Christians who dissented from his standard as for making war upon heathenism. Bishops refusing to conform to his semi-Arian scheme had nothing better to expect than deposition and exile.

The policy of Constantius was ill-adapted to advance Christianity to a genuine and complete triumph over the remnants of heathenism in the realm. Though many professed to forsake their idolatries, it was no hearty or enlightened espousal which they made of the Christian faith. External pressure may make hypocrites, but it cannot make believers. It only needed a reversal of policy, on the part of the government, to show the worthlessness of many of the recent conversions. With the death of Constantius in 361, and the accession of Julian, that reversal came.