tic distinguished from the empire. In the first place-the synods which we have mentioned, local as well as provincial, assumed the office and power to arrange ecclesiastical affairs, and to punish ecclesiastical offences. But neither was their power acknowledged by the civil Government, nor were their awards or censures enforced by it. Again, the Bishop, through an authority which professed to be derived from Scripture, and which may certainly be traced to the earliest age, exerted a kind of mediative interference throughout his diocese, in the civil disputes of the Christians, to which they very frequently appealed, and admitted his decisions as conclusive; but no such jurisdiction was recognised by the Government, nor were any such decisions legally valid. Moreover, some of the Churches had become possessed, as corporate bodies, of considerable property in land or buildings purchased from the common fund, and applied to the purposes of the society; but the Government never formally acknowledged the legality of those acquisitions, and availed itself, as we have already seen, of the first pretext to confiscate them.

It is in this condition of ecclesiastical affairs, that we may discover perhaps the earliest vestige of the distinction, which will hereafter become so familiar to us, between spiritual and temporal power-though in the present indefinite shape and imperfect development of the former, we can scarcely trace any intimation of its future proportions and magnitude. We perceive also, on how strange and irregular a foundation the security of the early Church was established-in fact, to a statesman of those days, before the force of religious union and the intensity of religious attachment were generally known and understood, the society or communion which rested not on a political basis, would naturally appear to possess no principle of stability. To the eye of a Pagan its strength was imperceptible, as the elements which composed it were concealed from him; and it was this circumstance which encouraged Diocletian to an aggression, of which the barbarity indeed shocked him, but of which he never, perhaps, doubted the success, since the power which resisted it was unseen and incomprehensible. In the mean time, the public discipline, which had been made necessary by the neglect of the civil power, was cemented and fortified by its opposition; and the private sincerity of belief, which could not be understood by a Pagan, because Paganism had nothing to do with Truth, was animated into contumacy by the sense of injustice and injury.

It is even probable, that the union of the scattered Churches was facilitated by the increase of the episcopal authority in each; for they thus acquired that decision and steadiness of continuous exertion, which marks individual superintendence, and which would scarcely have been so constant and uniform, had the government of the dioceses retained, in its utmost strictness, its original popular character. The power of the Bishops made them formidable only to the persecutor; their interests demanded their union; and their union was then the only security for that of the whole Church, and thereby (without the direct interposition of Providence) for its actual preservation.

To us, indeed, it seems nearly certain, that these powerful but latent principles of ecclesiastical stability, which repelled the assault of Diocletian, would have preserved the Church through a much severer trial, if the genius of Constantine had not discovered its real strength, and courted its friendship and alliance. It is true, that in becoming acquainted with its strength, he also discovered its virtues; in the excellence of the Christian system, he perceived a great omen of its perpetuity-he saw too, that, as a rule for civilized society, it was more efficient than any human law, because

more powerful in its motives to obedience; and perhaps he remarked also, that the energy of Christians had hitherto been confined to submission and endurance-to unoffending, unresisting perseverance and this outward display of loyalty might lead him to overlook that free spirit, which pervaded both the principles of the religion and the government of the Church, and which in later ages was so commonly found in opposition to despotism.

Constantine admired the morality of the Christians, he loved their submission to arbitrary power, and he respected that internal and advancing vigour, which had triumphed over so many persecutors. These, we doubt not, were the motives which induced him to seek the alliance of the Church, and to confer on it advantages, not more substantial, perhaps, than those which he received from it.

We are disposed to divide the ecclesiastical life of Constantine into three periods. In the first of these he confined himself, at least ostensibly, to the impartial toleration of all religions, though he legally established that of the Christians. This extends from the Edict of Milan to the council of Nice in the year 325. His next occupation was to define the doctrines, and thus to preserve the unity of the Church, which he had established. It was not till the third and latest period of his life, that he attacked the superstition of his forefathers, by edicts directly levelled against Paganism. The Arian controversy and the overthrow of Paganism will form the subjects of separate chapters-at present we shall endeavour to point out the most important alterations introduced during this reign into the constitution of the Church, and their immediate effects upon its ministers and members. Constantine found the Church an independent body, a kind of self-constituted commonwealth, which might sometimes be at peace, and sometimes at variance with the civil government, but which was never acknowledged as any part of the whole body politic; it had a separate administration, separate laws, and frequently (through the perversity of its persecutors) separate interests also. The Christian, as a citizen of the empire, was subject of course to the universal statutes of the empire-as a member of the Church, he owed a distinct allegiance to the spiritual directors of the Church; and though this allegiance was never inconsistent with his civil obedience, except when that obedience would have deprived him of his religion, it was founded on more commanding motives, and was one from which no earthly authority was sufficient to absolve him. Thus far, and thus far only, his ecclesiastical divided him from his civil duties; to this extent they placed him, at all times, in divergency from the State, and, in times of persecution, in actual opposition to it. And so long as the Church which he honoured was disclaimed as a part, or associate, of the State; so long as the space between them was broad and distinguishable, so long the limits of his allegiance to either were very clearly marked. Constantine comprehended the nature, and perceived the inconveniences and the danger, of this disunion; and he therefore employed the earliest exertion of his power and policy to acknowledge the existence, to consolidate the elements, to establish the authority, and to diminish the independence of the Church. To accomplish the three first of these objects, he received that body into strict alliance with the state-to effect the last, he so received it, as to constitute himself its director as well as its guardian, and to combine in his own person the highest ecclesiastical with the highest civil authority. His right to this authority (if he condescended to consider that point) he might derive with some plausibility from the original institutions of Rome. From the earliest ages of its history, the

G

[Chap. VI. chief magistrate of the nation had been entrusted with the superintendence of the national religion; and it seemed fair that he should impose the same, as the condition of the establishment of Christianity. And yet a great distinction is to be observed even in this point. For, according to the principles of Polytheism, the most sacred functions of religion might be performed by the hands of the civil magistrates; but the consecration of a separate order to those purposes by the Christian system excluded the Emperor from the administration of the rites of religion; and the Prince and the Priest became henceforward characters wholly distinct, and independent. It was perhaps by this restriction, that the first avowed and legal limitation was imposed upon the authority of the former; and it was not a trifling triumph to have obtained from a Roman Emperor the acknowledgment of any right in a subject, or any restraint upon himself. Notwithstanding this assumption of ecclesiastical supremacy by the Emperor, the Church retained in many respects its separate existence, or at least the freedom of its autonomous constitution-indeed, had not this been so, the term Alliance, which is used to designate the union of Church and State under Constantine, as it implies a certain degree of independence in both parties, would be unmeaning and out of place. Some immediate advantages were also reaped by the Church; much that it had formerly held by sufferance, it now possessed by law; many privileges, which had hitherto existed through the connivance only, or the ignorance, of the Government, were now converted into rights, and as such confirmed and perpetuated. Constantine divided the administration of the Church into (1.) Internal, and (2.) External.

(1.) The former continued, as heretofore, in the hands of the Prelates, individually and in Council-little or no alteration was introduced into this department; and it comprehended nearly every thing which was really tangible and available in the power of the Church before its associa tion with the State, now confirmed to it by that association. The settlement of religious controversies was recommended to the wisdom of the Hierarchy; the forms of Divine worship, the regulation of customary rites and ceremonies, or the institution of new ones, the ordination and offices of the priesthood, which included the unrestrained right of public preaching, and the formidable weapon of spiritual censure were left to the exclusive direction of the Church. The freedom of episcopal election was not violated; and the Bishops retained their power to convoke legislative synods twice a year in every Diocese, uncontrolled by the civil magistrate. We have already mentioned, that, by the Edict of Milan, the possessions of the Church were restored, and its legal right to them for the first time acknowledged; and this act of justice was followed, in the year 321, by another Edict which permitted all subjects to bequeath property to that Body. Exemption from all civil offices was granted to the whole body of the clergy; and, perhaps, a more important privilege, about the same time conferred on the higher orders, was that of independent jurisdiction, even in capital charges, over their own members: so that the Bishop, alone

A rescript of Constantine to the Provincial Bishops on the disputes between Athanasius and Eusebius of Nicodemia, admits-Vestri est, non mei judicii, de ea re cognoscere. See Baronius ad ann. 329, sect, 8.

Constantine's personal generosity to the Church, as well as his deference to the Episcopal Order, is mentioned by Eusebius, (Vit. Const., lib. i. c. 42., lib. ii., and Hist. Eccles., 1. x.) and was continued throughout his whole reign. The Pagan Zosimus (lib. ii.) mentions the profusion which he wasted upon useless persons.'

Baronius, ad ann. 319. sect. 30.

among the myriads of the subjects of the empire, enjoyed the right of being tried by his Peers. This was not granted, however, with any intention of securing his impunity; for, though degradation was the severest punishment which could be inflicted by a spiritual court, the penalty was liable to increase, after condemnation, by the interference of the secular authority. While we may consider the free trial of the Bishops, in a political light, as another important inroad into the pure despotism of the imperial system, we are also assured that on the Body, thus exclusively possessing it, it conferred no inconsiderable advantages. But another privilege, even more valuable than this, and one which will more constantly be present to us in the history of succeeding ages, is traced with equal certainty to the legislation of Constantine. The arbitration of Bishops in the civil differences referred to them in their diocese was now ratified by law; and their decisions, of which the validity had formerly depended on the consent of the parties, were henceforward enforced by the civil magistrate*. On this foundation was imperceptibly established the vast and durable edifice of ecclesiastical jurisdiction; from this simple legalization of an antient custom, in process of time, the most substantial portion of sacerdotal power proceeded, and the most extravagant pretensions of spiritual ambition. But those consequences convey no reflection on the wisdom of Constantine, since they were produced by circumstances which he could not possibly foresee; and which, besides, never influenced, to any great extent, the eastern division of Christendom.

In the separate view, which we have taken of the internal constitution of the Church, we perceive a powerful, self-regulated body, armed with very ample and extensive authority, and supported, when such support was necessary, by the secular arm. Let us proceed to the second division, or the external administration of the Church.

(2.) Of this department the Emperor assumed the entire control to himself. It comprehended every thing relating to the outward state and discipline of the Church; and was understood to include a certain degree of superintendence over such contests and debates as might arise among the ministers, of whatsoever rank, concerning their possessions, their reputation, their rights and privileges, as well as their political, or other offences against the laws of the Empire. Even the final decision of religious controversies was subjected to the discretion of judges appointed by the Emperor: the same terminated any differences which might arise between the Bishops and people, fixed the limits of the ecclesiastical provinces, took cognizance of the civil causes subsisting between ministers, and lent his power to the execution of the punishment due to their criminal offences. And though the right of convoking local and provincial synods remained with the Church, that of assembling a General Council was exercised only by the Prince.

When we consider in succession these articles of imperial supremacy, we perceive, in the first place, that Constantine did not transfer to himself from the Church any power which had before belonged to it: most of the cases, there provided for, must by necessity have always fallen under civil cognizance for whenever it happened, either that the external encroachments of the Church, or the differences among Christians, or their ministers, pro

Fleury, Hist. Eccl. 1. x. sect. 27. on authority of Sozomen (1. i. c. 8 and 9) and Const. Apostol. (lib. ii. c. 46) Baronius, ad ann. 314. sect. 38, with reference to Cod. Theodos. The authority assumed by the Emperors appears, under various titles, in the 16th book of the Theodosian Code, as also in the Code of Justinian,

Mosheim, Cent, iv. part ii, ch. ii.

ceeded to endanger public tranquillity, such offences fell, of course, under the cognizance of the secular, which was then the only acknowledged, jurisdiction.

There appear, indeed, to be two cases in which the Emperor assumed a power not before belonging to the State-interference for the arrangement of religious controversies by the appointment of judges, and the convocation of General Councils. Respecting the first of these—which proved indeed the least effectual part of his ecclesiastical authority—it was not probable that the Emperor would be anxious to exert it, unless called upon to undertake the office by one or both of the parties in controversy. If invited to enforce the sentence of the Church against a condemned Heretic, he might reasonably plead the interference of Aurelian in the affair of Paul of Samosata; if solicited to decide between two opinions dividing the Body of the Church itself, he would naturally have recourse to the second of the methods entrusted to him, the calling of a General Council. But the authority to do so was not the usurpation of a power before possessed by another, but the creation of a new power. For as a General Council of all the leading ministers of the Church neither had been, nor could have been, assembled in times when the Church, if haply not persecuted, was at least unacknowledged, so the new condition of its establishment gave birth to new circumstances, for the regulation of which a new authority was necessary; and that authority was properly vested in the highest civil magistrate.

In the next place, in comparing the privileges remaining to the Church with those assumed by the Emperor in his connexion with it, and in tracing the consequences to which either might be extended, we cannot fail to observe, that their limits are often vague and indeterminate; and that, when they are not so, the points of contact and intersection are very numerous, offering frequent means and temptations to mutual innovation. We shall see that, in after ages, they led to much aggression and injustice in both parties; but as matters then stood, with so large a portion of the population still unconverted, and even adverse to the Faith, under an Emperor possessed of undivided and seemingly unbounded authority, we should be surprised, perhaps, to find so many privileges confirmed to a distinct religious community, if we were not acquainted with the bold and vigorous character of Constantine, and also persuaded of his attachment to Christianity.

We should not omit to mention some changes at that time introduced into the titles and gradations of the Hierarchy, in order to associate their administration more intimately with that of the civil officers. To the three Prelates of Rome, Antioch and Alexandria, who enjoyed a certain degree of preeminence in the Church, was added the Patriarch of Constantinople-these four corresponded with the four Prætorian Prefects then also created. After these followed the Exarchs,* who had the inspection over several provinces, and answered to the appointment of certain civil officers of the same name. The Metropolitans had the government of one province only, and under them were the Archbishops, whose inspection was confined to certain districts. The Bishops were the lowest in this gradation, but many of them possessed ample extent of authority and jurisdiction. Their number at this time was one thousand eight hundred, of whom a thou sand administered the Eastern, eight hundred the Western Church. In this whole Body, the Bishop of Rome possessed a certain indeterminate

Mosheim, loc. cit.