Skip to main content

Full text of "A manual of church history."

See other formats


A MANUAL OF CHURCH HISTORY 

VOL. I. 



A MANUAL 

OF 

CHURCH HISTORY 



BY 



Dr. F. X. FUNK 

PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN 



SECOND IMPRESSION OF THE 

AUTHORIZED TRANSLATION 

FROM THE 5TH GERMAN EDITION 

BY 

LUIGI CAPPADELTA 



VOL. I. 



B. HERDER 

17 SOUTH BROADWAY, ST. LOUIS, MO. 

KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD. 

LONDON 

PPUKTEO IK ÖRCAT ©RJTMHv 




JÜL-9 1?33 



Nihil obstat. 

J. P. Arendzen 
Censor Deputatus 

Imprimatur. 

Edmundus Canonicus Surmont 
Vicarius generalis 

Westmonasterii, die 16 Mail, 191 o 



{The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved.) 



FOREWORD 

In composing this Manual our aim was to cast into handy form 
those main facts of Church History with which every well- 
trained theological student should be familiar. To attain this 
end it was necessary, whilst neglecting nothing of importance, 
to eliminate everything irrelevant or of minor interest, to be 
content with the briefest possible descriptions, and to arrange 
our matter in such wise as to make our studious youth thoroughly 
at home in the vast region of the History of the Church. 
In the hope of giving an impulse to deeper study, we have been 
at pains to name the best and most recent works on each 
subject, and to refer at some length to the more famous points 
of controversy. In what concerns antiquity, in order to culti- 
vate the spirit of research, we deemed it well, so far as 
considerations of space permitted, to refer in the footnotes to 
the original works. To have attempted more would have 
enlarged this work beyond all reasonable proportions, an(J 
increased correspondingly the labour of the student. Every 
teacher knows by experience how much depends on due measure, 
and several historians (e.g. Alzog), who, in beginning, were 
unmindful of this need, were ultimately compelled to abridge 
their more ponderous works to suit the convenience of colleges. 

The desire of being, before all else, brief, explains why we 
have allowed the facts to speak for themselves, and have, so 
far as possible, refrained from comment. A philosophy of 
history presupposes a full knowledge of the facts, and where 
brevity is needed, it is best to confine oneself to the facts. 

The first edition of this work was published in 1886. On 



vi Foreword 

mature consideration we were, however, convinced that the 
desire to be brief had led us to omit too much, and that some 
sections might with advantage be enlarged, without detriment 
to our principles ; that such enlargement would make some 
parts of our work clearer, and that it would still be possible 
to show the relative importance of different paragraphs by the 
use of different type. We accordingly made such alterations 
as seemed called for in the three subsequent editions (1890, 
1898, 1902), on the second of which was made a French 
translation, which has been several times republished 
(6th ed. Paris, 1904), whilst the fourth was also rendered 
into Italian (Rome, 1903-04). 

This present (fifth) edition, although it has been abbreviated 
here and there, is, on the whole, larger than its predecessors. 
It has been entirely recast and variously improved. There 
were also a few recent events to chronicle, and some account 
had to be given of the latest research. 

Simultaneously with the appearance of the third edition 
of this work, we began to publish a series of special Studies 
[Abhandlungen und Untersuchungen) , of which, so far, two 
volumes have been issued, whilst a third is in the press. These 
Studies have for their object the elucidation of a certain num- 
ber of points which are only touched on in the present Manual. 
They are also designed to furnish students with an object- 
lesson in scientific research. Owing to the third volume of 
the Studies not being as yet out of the press, our references 
will be given to the sections and not to the pages. 



TRANSLATOR'S NOTE 

No alterations, save a few of small importance (e.g. 
the explanation in brackets Vol. I, p. 373) have been 
made in the body of the text. The Translator is, 
however, responsible for the references to English trans- 
lations scattered among the footnotes. The Index 
at the end of Vol. II has been greatly enlarged so as 
to include the authors mentioned in the notes, and, 
when necessary, initials have been added to facilitate 
identification. 



sax 



vll 



CONTENTS 



PAGE 

Foreword .......... v 

Translator's Note ........ vii 

Abbreviations and Symbols ...... xv 

Introduction ......... i 

i. The Meaning of Church History ..... i 

2. Division of Church History ..... 3 

3. The Sources of Church History ..... 4 

4. Sciences Auxiliary to Church History .... 8 

5. The Literature of Church History .... 10 



I.— CHRISTIAN ANTIQUITY 

Chapter I. The Founding of the Church — Her Develop- 
ment and Persecutions . . . . 17 

6. The Preparation of the Olden World for the Coming 

of the Redeemer ....... 17 

7. Christ, Saviour of the World and Founder of the Church 20 

8. The First Whitsuntide, the Birth of the Church, the 

Death of James the Greater . . . . .22 

9. The Apostle Paul ....... 24 

10. The Apostle Peter ....... 27 

1 1 . The Council of Jerusalem and the Dispute at Antioch . 29 

12. John, James the Less, and the other Apostles . . 31 

13. The Spread of Christianity . . . . «33 

14. The Reasons of the Rapid Spread of Christianity . . 35 

15. Obstacles encountered by Christianity, the Causes of 

the Persecutions . . . . . . «37 

16. The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire . 39 

17. The Struggle against Christianity with the Weapons 

of the Mind ••%•••-• 50 

LX 



Contents 



Chapter II. The Constitution of the Church . • 

18. The Clergy 

19. The Preparation, Selection, and Means of Subsistence 

of the Clergy ...... 

20. Dioceses and Provinces ..... 

21. The Oneness of the Church and the Roman Primacy 

Chapter III. Worship, Discipline, and Morals . 

22. Baptism, the Apostles' Creed, Rebaptism 

23. The Eucharist, the Agape, the Disciplina Arcani . 

24. The Penitential Discipline ..... 

25. Festivals and Fast-days ; the Paschal Quarrel 

26. The Christian Morals . . 

Chapter IV. Heresies and Schisms .... 

27. The Meaning of Heresy and Schism — Simon Magus 

and Menander ...... 

28. The Judaising Christians — The Ebionites, Cerinthus 

the Elkasaites ...... 

29. Gnosticism, its Origin and General Characteristics 

30. Individual Gnostics ...... 

31. Manichaeism ....... 

32. The Monarchians ...... 

33. Millenarianism or Chiliasm .... 

34. Montanism ....... 

35. The Schisms of Novatian, Felicissimus, and Meletius 

Chapter V. Ecclesiastical Literature 

36. The Growth of Ecclesiastical Literature 

37. The Apostolic Fathers ..... 

38. The Apologists and other Writers of the Second Century 

39. Greek Writers of the Third Century 

40. The Latin Literature ..... 



FA.GB 

52 

56 
58 

59 

62 

62 

65 
68 

7 1 
74 

78 

78 

80 
82 
84 
90 
92 

95 

96 

97 

100 
100 
101 
106 
109 
114 



IL— CHRISTIAN ANTIQUITY 

Chapter I. The Spread of Christianity and the Rise of 
Islam ......... 

41. The Spread of Christianity and the Decline of Paganism 
in the Roman Empire 
Christianity in Asia and Africa . 
Christianity among the Germans 
The British Isles • 

The Islam . 



42. 

43- 
44. 

45- 



Chapter II. Development of the Church's Doctrine — 
Theological Dissensions, Heresies, and Schisms 

46. Summary of the Matters in Dispute .... 

47. The Beginning of the Arian Controversy ; the First 

General Council ....... 

48. The Further History and End of Arianism . 



117 

117 
123 

125 
129 

131 



134 
J 34 

135 
138 



Contents 



XI 



Chapter II. — continued. 

49. The Pneumatomachic Quarrel and the Second General 

Council ........ 

50. Disputes connected with, or contemporaneous with, the 

Arian Quarrel ...... 

51. Origenism . . 

52. The Donatist Schism ..... 

53. The Beginning of the Christological Controversy — 

Apollinaris of Laodicea ..... 

54. Nestorianism — the Third General Council, 431 

55. Monophysitism and the Fourth General Council, 451 

56. The Three Chapters and the Fifth General Council, 553 

57. Monothelism and the Sixth General Council, 680-81 

58. The Anthropological Controversy 

Chapter III. The Constitution of the Church 

59. Church Offices 

60. Concerning the Education, Election, Maintenance, and 

Duties of the Clergy ..... 

61. The Legal Situation of the Clergy, the Clerical Privilege 

62. The Rise of Parishes ..... 

63. New Patriarchates ...... 

64. The Roman Church and its Primacy . 

65. The Councils ....... 

Chapter IV. Worship, Discipline, and Morals . 

66. Baptism and the Catechumenate 

67. Liturgy, Communion, and Eulogies 

68. Penance ........ 

69. Festivals and Fast-days ..... 

70. Saint and Image Worship ; Pilgrimages 

71. Sacred Buildings, Vessels, and Vestments 

72. Monasticism ....... 

73. Christian Influence in the Social and Moral Life 

Chapter V. Ecclesiastical Literature 

74. General Character of the Literature of the Period 

75. Eastern Writings of the Fourth and Fifth Century 

76. The Latins of the Fourth and Fifth Century 

77. Greek Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century . 

78. Latin Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century . 



142 

145 
148 

151 

153 

154 

157 
161 

163 

166 

173 
173 

174 
177 

179 

181 

182 

186 

189 
189 
192 
196 

197 
202 
205 
209 
214 

218 

218 
219 
225 
229 
231 



I.— THE MIDDLE AGES 

Chapter I. Progress and Vicissitudes of Christianity 

79. The Alemanni, Bavarians, Thuringians, and Frisians 

80. St. Boniface, the Apostle of the Germans 

81. The Saxons ..... 

82. The Scandinavian Races 

83. The Slavs and Hungarians 

84. The Mohammedans in Spain and Sicily 



234 

234 

237 
240 

241 

243 
247 



Xll 



Contents 



Chapter II. The Papacy and the Empire .... 

8$. The Beginning of the Papal States and the Re-establish- 
ment of the Empire of the West — The Popes of the 
Eighth Century ....... 

86. The Popes of the Carlovingian Period .... 

87. The Tenth Century — the Ottonians and Crescentians 

88. The Eleventh Century — Tusculan and German Popes . 

Chapter III. Early Mediaeval Heresies and Controversies 

89. The Paulicians and Bogomiles .... 

90. The Image-breakers and the Seventh General Council 

91. Controversies concerning the Filioque and Adoptionism 

92. Gottschalk and the Predestinarian Controversy 

93. The Eucharistie Controversy .... 

94. Photius — Legality of Fourth Marriages — Eighth General 

Council, 869-70 .... 

95. The Greek Schism . . 

Chapter IV. The Organisation of the Church 

96. Archdeacons, Deans, Lay Patronage, Testes Synodales 

and Canons 

97. Legal Status of the Clergy — Princely Nominations to 

Church Offices ...... 

98. The Church's Property and Revenues — Tithes- 

Ecclesiastical Advocates .... 

99. The False Decretals and Later Collections of Canons 

Chapter V. Worship, Discipline, and Morals . 

100. Liturgy, Communion, Preaching, and Chant 



101. 
102. 
103. 
104, 
105. 



The Penitential Discipline — Church Penalties 
Feast-days and Fasts 
Saint and Relic Worship . 
Monasticism .... 
Religion and Morals 



Chapter VI. Literature and Education 

106. Greek Literature 

107. Latin Literature 

108. Formation of the Clergy . 



PAGE 

249 



249 
254 
257 

261 

265 
265 

267 
271 
272 

273 

275 
279 

281 
281 

283 

285 
287 

290 
290 

293 

295 
297 

298 

300 

303 

303 
304 
307 



IL— THE MIDDLE AGES 

Chapter I. The Papacy and the Empire . 

109. The Quarrel about Investiture — Ninth General Council 

1123 

no. The Schism of Anacletus — Tenth General Council, 1139 

— The Roman Republic .... 
in. The Schism of Barbarossa — Eleventh General Council 

1 1 79 — Thomas Bccket and Henry II of England 
112. Innocent III — Twelfth General Council, 12 15 



309 
309 
317 

319 
325 



Contents 



Xlll 



Chapter I. — continued. 

113. The Papacy under the Last Members of the Staufen 

House — Thirteenth General Council, 1245 . . 328 

114. The Last Popes of the Thirteenth Century — Reunion 

with the Easterns — Fourteenth General Council, 1274 332 

Chapter II. The Spread of Christianity and Conflict with 

the Islam ........ 336 

115. Conversion of North-Eastern Europe — Missions to the 

East ......... 336 



116. The Crusades .... 

117. Conflict with the Islam in Europe 

Chapter III. Sects and Heresies 

118. Cathari and Albigenses 

119. The Waldensians 

120. Smaller Sects 
12 z. The Inquisition 



Chapter IV. The Organisation of the Church . 

122. The Roman See ..... 

123. The College of Cardinals .... 

124. Cathedral Chapters and Episcopal Elections- 

General and Titular Bishops . 

125. The Corpus Iuris Canonici 

126. Sacerdotal Celibacy .... 

127. Monas ticism ...... 

Chapter V. Worship, Morals, and Christian Art 

128. Prayer and Worship .... 

129. Church Festivals ..... 

130. Ethico-Religious Status of the Period 

131. Architecture: the Romanesque Style 



Chapter VI Church Literature 

132. Scholasticism and Mysticism — Realism and 

133. The Universities .... 

134. The First of the Scholastics 

135. The Heydey of Scholasticism 

136. The Mystics ..... 



Vicars 



339 

348 

35° 

35° 
35 2 
354 
357 

359 

359 

362 

364 
365 
366 

368 

379 

379 
382 

384 
385 



. 388 

Nominalism 388 

- 389 

• 391 

• 393 

• 395 



ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 



A. Archiv. 

Abh. Abhandlungen. 

Abh. Göttingen, Leipzig, München = Abhandlungen der kgl. Ges. der Wissen- 
schaften zu Göttingen, der kgl. sächsischen Ges. d t W, zu 
Leipzig, der Akademie d t W, in München, hist. Kl, 

Abp. Archbishop. 

An. Boll. Analecta Bollandiana. 

Antv. Antwerp. 

Acta SS. Acta Sanctorum, ed. Bollandus. 

A . T. A Ites Testament. 

Aug. Vind. Augsburg. 

A. u. U. Abhandlungen und Untersuchungen. 

Bp. Bishop. 

Bg, Biography, 

CG. Konziliengeschichte. 

Col. Cologne. 

c« chapter, canon, circa. 

d. deutsch or German article. 

Flor. Florence. 

/. für. 

G. Geschichte. 

H.E, Historia ecclesiastic a . 

H.F, Hist. Franc. 

H. Historia or Haereses. 

Hist. Historisch. 

J. Jahrbuch. 

J. Th. St. Journal of Theological Studies, 

K. Kirche, König, Kaiser, King. 

k. kirchlich katholisch. 

Kath t Katholik (published at Mainz), 

KG. Kirchengeschichte. 

KL. Kirchenlexikon by Wetzer and Weite, 2nd ed, 

KR. Kirchenrecht, 

Lips. Leipzig. 

Lon. London. 

Ludg. Lyons. 

MA. Mittelalter, Middle Ages; 

Med. Milan. 

Mg. Monography. 

MG. Monumenta Germaniae. 

MICE, Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung. 

Nachr, Nachrichten. 

N.A< Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskuni: 

N.F. New series. 

N.T, Neues Testament, New Testament« 



xv 



xvi Abbreviations and Symbols 

O.T. Old Testament. 

Par. Paris. 

P.G» Patrologiae cursus computus, ed. Migne, series graeca. 

P.L» item, series latin a. 

P, Pope, part. 

R. Royal. 

RE. derchr. A . = Real-Encyklopädie der christlichen Altertümer, ed. Kraus, 

RE. f. pr. Th. = Real-Encyklopädie für protestantische Theologie, 

R. Qu. Römische Quartalschrift. 

RHE. Rev. d'histoire ecclisiastique. 

Rquh. Rev. des questions historiques. 

SB. Berlin, Wien, München = Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften 

zu Berlin, Wien, München, philos. hist. Kl. 

St. a. ML. Stimmen aus Maria-Laach. 

St. Bened. Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benediktiner- und Cisterzien- 

orden. 

St. u. Kr. Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 

Th. Theologie. 

Th. Qu. Theologische Quartalschrift. 

T. u. U, Texte und Untersuchungen, ed. O, v, Gebhardt and A. Harnack. 

u. und. 

Ven. Venice. 

Vind. Vienna. 

W. Wissenschaft. 

W.G. Weltgeschichte, 

WW. Werke. 

Z. Zeitschrift. 

* Works published, or in course of publication, in the Vienna Corpus 
Scriptorum Eccl. Lat. t or by the Prussian Academy of Sciences, 
•f Date of death. 
J Acts published by Ruinart. 



A MANUAL 

OF 



CHURCH HISTORY 



INTRODUCTION 1 

§1 
The Meaning of Church History 

On the Church, as a society instituted by our Redeemer for 
the salvation of the world, there devolved the duty of preach- 
ing to all nations the religion proclaimed by Christ. To 
accomplish this task she had to undergo a certain develop- 
ment in both space and time, a development which might 
appropriately be called the outward History of the Church. 
This history tells us how Christianity grew, was fostered 
here, and set back there ; it tells us of her varying fortunes, 
of her persecutions, and of her ever-changing relations to 
the State ; for the Church at her very inception encountered 
opposition, and was withstood by a notable portion of that 
world to which she brought her good news, whilst the nations 
and princes, even after their conversion, by no means con- 
tinued to regard her with feelings of unalterable esteem. 

But, like the grain of mustard seed, which was to become 
a great tree {Matt. xiii. 31), the Church has a deeper history. 
The tree does not merely spread its boughs over the earth ; 
it is m itself a structure of mighty complexity, which, never- 
theless, however different it may seem, remains fundamentally 

1 De Smedt, Introductio generalis ad historiam eccl. critice tractandam, 
1876 ; Principes de la critique historique, 1883 ; Nirschl, Propädeutik der 
KG. 1888; Moeller, Traitd des itudes historiques, 1888; E. Bernheim, 
Lehrbuch d. hist. Methode, 4th ed. 1903 : H. Kihn, Enzyklopädie u. Methodo- 
logie d. TA.1892. 

VOL. I B 



2 A Manual of Church History 

identical with the seed from which it sprang. So is it with the 
Church, who is at once the harbinger of a definite body of 
doctrine, and an institution with a well-defined constitution, 
worship, and discipline. Her Founder laid, indeed, the ground- 
work of all this whilst He tarried on earth, but the fuller 
construction was to be the work of time, and it is in the 
description of this gradual achievement that the true inward 
History of the Church consists. Though the Gospel is indeed 
God's Word, and as such is substantially unchangeable, this 
does not exclude a certain mutability in the Church. Thus by 
each succeeding heresy she was forced to give a clearer meaning 
to her teaching, that the truth might be disengaged from error. 
With the increase of her power and with the successive changes 
in the secular government, she was herself called upon to 
modify her organisation. Ecclesiastical functionaries called 
into being in one period, disappeared in the next, or changed 
circumstances rendered their duties more, or less, comprehensive. 
So was it also with worship and discipline, so likewise with 
philosophy, all of which cling so closely to doctrine. Institu- 
tions which suited the Church in her infancy were, later on, 
allowed to grow obsolete, or else were transformed, their 
substance alone remaining under a different shape. Bearing 
in mind the twofold movement which is characteristic of the 
life of the Church, we may therefore define her History as the 
scientific exposition of the outward and inward development of 
the society established by Christ. 



The word ' Church ' (German, Kirche) seems to have come 
from the Greek KvpiaKov (seil. oUelov), which was already in use at 
the beginning of the fourth century to denote the Church as the 
House of God. It is found among the Goths (kureiko), from whom 
it passed into all Germanic languages, and even into those of 
the Slavonic branch. The derivation of the word from the Celtic 
cyrch, cylch—z. circle or place of assembly, or from yet other roots, 
has little to commend it ; cp. Kluge, Wörterbuch d. deutschen 
Sprache, 6th ed. 1898, p. 206 ; E. Glaser, Woher kommt d. 
Wort ' Kirche ' ? 1901. The equivalent expression in use among 
the Romance nations (eglise, iglesia, chiesa) is likewise derived from 
a Greek word (ex/cA^o-ia) .1 

1 As Duchesne {Hist. anc. de V Eglise, I, p. 52) points out, ecclesia is 
practically a synonym of synagoga. Trans. 



Division of Church History 3 

§2 
Division of Church History 

To obtain a clear view of the eventful history of the 
Church during the nineteen centuries of her existence, we 
must needs divide up its contents, combining like with like, 
and finally reuniting the different series thus formed, as 
constituent parts of a whole. Now, seeing that the Church 
is not only very ancient, but is also a highly complex 
organism, it follows that this division may be made equally 
well on the basis of the sequence of the events in time, or on 
that of their logical connection. The first method will result 
in chronological sections or periods. 

The importance of these chronological sections varies 
according to the moment of the events comprised in each. It 
is customary to split Church History into three portions — into 
Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and Modern times — each section 
being subdivided into shorter periods. As to the limits of 
these divisions, historians do not agree ; on the whole, it 
seems to us most reasonable to bring Antiquity to a close with 
the Sixth General Council, of which the Council in Trullo (692) 
was the natural complement. In this period, during which 
the Church's constitution received the form which it was to 
preserve, it is among the Greeks and Romans, who were also 
the first to assimilate the Gospel, that we find the principal 
confessors of the Faith. The Middle Ages, during which the 
neo-Latin and Germanic nations play the greatest part, 
extends to the time of the Great Schism of the West. Among 
its outstanding features may be mentioned the schism between 
East and West, and the political supremacy of the Popes. 
Modern times, which have witnessed the dissolution of Western 
Christendom into a plurality of sects, and the gradual restric- 
tion of the political power of the Papacy, comprise the Church's 
history from the beginning of the sixteenth century to the present 
day. As to the subdivision of these periods, both Antiquity 
and Modern times fall naturally into two portions, the former 
being halved by the Edict of Milan (313), whilst the latter is 
divided into unequal parts by the French Revolution (1789). 
Lastly, the Middle Ages form three sub-periods, the first ending 

B 2 



4 A Manual of Church History 

with the death of Alexander II (1073), the second beginning 
with Gregory VII and ending with Celestine V (1294), and 
the third beginning with the pontificate of Boniface VIII and 
closing with the end of the Great Schism of the West. 

In special sections or chapters, which we shall devote 
to considering the materials bearing on particular points 
within each period, we shall discuss the different aspects of 
ecclesiastical life, the spread of the Gospel, the Church's 
constitution, &c. 

It is customary, especially in bulkier works, to call the first 
century the Apostolic Period, and to deal with it apart. Some 
bring Antiquity to a close with the death of Gregory the Great in 
604 (Kraus), others. prolong it until the year 800, when the Empire ol 
the West was re-established (Hase) . There is the utmost divergence 
of opinion as to the limits of the mediaeval periods. By many the 
first modern period is halved by the year of the Peace of Westphalia. 
One author (Kraus) proposed to consider the fall of Constantinople 
(1453) as marking the commencement of Modern times. 



§3 

The Sources of Church History 

The sources of Church History are those writings which 
give us information concerning the Christian past. Of these, 
some are original — written documents, giving narratives of 
eye-witnesses, or contemporary accounts written on hearsay, 
inscriptions, monuments, .and other like testimonies dating 
from the time when the events in question occurred. Others 
are derivative ; such are ancient accounts based on documents, 
now altogether or partially lost. Some sources are official, 
emanating from public men writing in that quality ; others 
are private, given by private individuals, or by public men 
in their private capacity. Of all the kinds of sources, the 
official, being by their nature original, are to be deemed 
the weightiest. So far as Church History is concerned, the 
documents which have the first claim to consideration are 
Conciliar Acts and Decrees; Papal enactments, Bulls and Briefs; 
Episcopal Charges and Pastoral Letters; Civil laws dealing 
with the Church, compromises and Concordats made between 
Church and State ; likewise Liturgies and other documents 



The Sources of Church History 5 

dealing with Divine Worship, Confessions of Faith, and Rules 
of Religious Orders, as well as some of the more trustworthy 
of the Acts of the Martyrs and Lives of the Saints. But even 
all these would not suffice, and they must consequently be 
supplemented by a judicious use of piivate sources, — in the 
first instance of those which are original ; in their default, of 
derivative accounts. 

Documents of this description have, in order to facilitate 
reference and research, been collected, and the same has been 
done for the ecclesiastical literature, both of ancient and 
mediaeval times. A third category of collections comprises 
the sources of the History of the Church in particular regions. 

The most noteworthy collections are the following : — 

I. Inscriptions and Monuments. — De Rossi, Inscriptions 
Christianae Urbis Romae, septimo saeculo antiquiores, I— II, 1857-88. 
Le Blant, Inscriptions chretiennes de la Gaule, 3 vol. 1856-92. 
HÜBNER, Inscriptions Hispaniae Christianae, 1871, Supplementum 
1900 ; Inscr. Britanniae Christ. 1876. F. X. Kraus, Die christ- 
lichen Inschriften der Rheinlande, 2 vol. 1890-94. F. Piper, 
Einleitung in die monumentale Theologie, 1867. 

II. Conciliar Decrees. — Labbe and Cossart, Sacrosancta 
Concilia, 17 fol. Par. 1674; ed. Coleti, 23 fol. Ven. 1728-34; 
Suppl. 6 fol. (down to 1720) ed. Mansi, Luccae, 1748-52. 
J. Harduin, Acta conciliorum et epistolae decretales ac constitutiones 
summorum pontificum, ab an. Christi 34 usque ad an. 1714, 11 fol. 
Par. 1715. J- D. Mansi, Sacr. concil. nova et amplissima collectio, 
31 fol. (down to 1439) Flor, et Ven. 1759-98 ; Par. 1901 ff. (cp. 
Quentin, /. D. Mansi et les grandes collections conciliaires , 1900) ; 
Collectio Lacensis, Acta et decreta S. conciliorum recentiorum, 
7 vol. 1870-90. J. B. Martin et L. Petit, Collectio conciliorum 
recentiorum ecclesiae universae, I (1723-35), 1905. Sirmond-La 
Lande, Concilia antiqua Galliae, 4 fol. 1629-66. Odespun, 
Concilia novissima Galliae, 1646. Aguirre, Collectio max. 
conciliorum Hispaniae, 4 fol. 1693. Wilkins, Concilia Magnae 
Britanniae, 4 fol. 1734. Haddan-Stubbs, Councils and Eccl. 
Documents rel. to Great Britain, I— III, 1869-78. Hartzheim, 
Concilia Germaniae, n fol. 1749-90. C. J. v. Hefele, Konzilien- 
geschichte, 7 vol. 1855-71, vol. I-VI, second ed. (vol. V-VI by 
Knöpfler) 1873-90. Vol. VIII-IX by Hergenrgther, 1887-90. 
[English Trans. A History of the Christian Councils by Clark and 
Oxenham, 5 vol. Edinb. 1871-96.] 

III. Papal Documents. — Bullarium Romanum, several editions, 
none of which is either complete or trustworthy ; the least 
unsatisfactory is that of Coquelines, 19 fol. Rom. 1739-44 (down 



6 A Manual of Church History 

to 1740, or even down to Pius VIII, if we reckon its continuation, 
15 vol. 4to, Prato, 1843 ff.). The Turin edition is a reprint of 
Coquelines' with a short appendix added (23 vol. 4to, 1857-72). 
Pontif. Rom. a S. demente I usque ad S. Leonem M. epistolae 
genuinae, ed. Coustant, 1721 (Schoenemann, 1796) ; a S. Hilaro 
usque ad S. Hormisdam, ed. A. Thiel, 1868. Regesta pontif. 
Rom. ab condita ecclesia ad an. 1198, ed. Jaffe, 1851 ; ed. 2a cur. 
Loewenfeld, Kaltenbrunner, Ewald, 1885-88 ; inde ab an. 
1198 ad an. 1304, ed. A. Potthast, 1874-75. Corpus iuris canonici, 
ed. Richter, 1833 ; Friedberg, 1879-81. K. Mirbt, Quellen 
zur Geschichte des Papsttums, 2nd ed. 1901. A. Galante, Fontes 
iuris canonici selecti, 1906. The Registers of several Pontiffs of 
the latter portion of the Middle Ages have been recently published, 
or are now in course of publication. Such are those of Honorius 
III-IV, Gregory IX-X, John XXI, Innocent IV, Alexander IV, 
Urban IV, Clement IV-V, Nicholas III-IV, Martin IV, Boniface 
VIII, Benedict XI, Leo X. 

IV. Civil Laws and Concordats.. — Codex Theodosianus cum 
perpet. commentariis Jac. Gothofredi, ed. I. D. Ritter, 6 fol. Lips. 
1739-43, ed. Haenal, 1842. Corpus iuris civilis, ed. Dion 
Gothofredus, 6 fol. Lugd. 1589 ; ed. Mommsen and Krüger, 2 vol. 
1877. Monumenta Germaniae histor., ed. Pertz, Leges, I-V, 
1835-89. E. v. Munch, Vollständige Sammlung aller älteren u. 
neueren Konkordate, 2 vol. 1830-31. Walter, Fontes iuris eccl. 
antiqui et hodierni, 1862. Nussi, Conventiones, 1870. 

V. Liturgies. — E. Renaudot, Liturg. orient, coll. 2 vol.' Par. 
1716. Muratori, Liturgia Rom. vetus, 2 vol. Ven. 1748. . I. A. 
Assemani, Codex liturgicus eccles. univ. 13 vol. Rom. 1749. Daniel, 
Codex liturgicus eccl. univ. 4 vol. Lips. 1847-53. Denzinger, Ritus 
orientalium, 2 vol. 1863-64. Swainson, The Greek Liturgies, 1884. 
Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, I, 1896. F. Cabrol 
and H. Leclercq, Monumenta ecclesiae liturgica, I, 1902. 
F. Cabrol, Dictionnaire d'archeologie chretienne et de liturgie, 
1903 ff. 

VI. Confessions of Faith. — H. Denzinger, Enchiridion sym- 
bolorum et defmitionum quae de rebus fidei et morum a conciliis cecum, 
et summis pontificibus emanarunt, 1854; e< ^- 9 a cur - Stahl, 1905 ; 10a 
ed. Bannwart, 1908. A. Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole u. Glau- 
bensregeln d. alten K. 1842 ; 3rd ed. (L. Hahn) 1897. P. Schaff, 
Bibliotheca symbolica eccl. universalis : The Creeds of Christendom 
with a History and Critical Notes, 3 vol. 4th ed. 1884. J. 
Michalcescu, Die Bekenntnisse u. d. wichtigsten Glaubenszeugnisse 
der griechisch-orient. K. 1904. 

VII. Rules of Religious Orders. — Luc. Holstenius, Codex 
regularum monast. et canon. 4 fol. Rom. 1661 ; auctus a Mar. 
Brockie, 6 fol. Aug. Vind. 1759. 

VIII. Acts of the Martyrs and Lives of the Saints. — Surius, 
De probatis SS. vitis, 6 fol. Col. 1570-75, and often since. T. 



The Sources of Church History 7 

Ruinart, Acta primor urn martyr urn, Par. 1689 ; ed. Galura, 3 vol. 
Aug. Vind. 1802 ; ed. Ratisbon, 1859. Bollandus, &c, Acta 
Sanctorum, Antv. 1643 ff. \ the saints being dealt with in the order 
in which they stand in the Roman calendar ; the last vol. (LXIII), 
so far published, appeared in 1894, and carries the work to Nov. 
4th. Analecta Bollandiana, 1882 ff. Mabillon, Acta SS. 0. 
Bened. 9 fol. (500-1100) 1668-1701. 

IX. Collected Works of the Fathers. — Maxima Bibliotheca veterum 
Patrum, &c. 27 fol. Lugd. 1677-1707. This collection extends down 
to the sixteenth century, but it is incomplete so far as the writers 
from the thirteenth century downwards are concerned ; another 
defect is that it gives the Greek works only in a Latin translation. 

Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, Sec, ed. Gallandi, 14 fol. Ven. 
1765-81, reaching to 1200. 

Patrologiae cursus computus, ed. Migne, Patr. latina, 221 torn. 
usque ad Innocentium I'll, Par. 1844-55; Patr. graeca, 162 torn. 
usque ad saec. XV, 1857-66. Horoy continued the Latin series 
under the title Medii Aevi Bibliotheca fatristica, but only suc- 
ceeded in publishing five vol. (1879-83). 

Corpus scriptorum eccl. tat., Vindob. 1866 ff. In this Manual 
an asterisk (*) will be put against the names of those Fathers whose 
works have been or are being published in this series. The Greek 
Christian writers of the first three centuries who have had their 
works edited by the Patristic Commission of the R. Prussian 
Academy of Sciences (1897 ff.) will likewise be indicated by an 
asterisk. 

X. Local Histories. — Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, ed. L. 
Muratori, 25 fol. Med., 1723-51 ; Suppl. 3 fol. new ed. 1900 ff. 

Rerum Gallicarum et Francicarum scriptores, in the French, 
Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. Bouquet, 
&c, 23 fol. Par. 1738-1876 ; 19 fol. 1869-80, new series, 1899 ff. 

Monumenta Germaniae historica, ed. G. H. Pertz, &c. Amongst 
other divisions this work comprises : Scriptores, 30 fol. 1826 ff., 
continued in 4to 1903 ff. ; Auctores antiquissimi, 14 torn. 1878-1905 ; 
Scriptores rerum Merovingiarum I-IV, 1884 ff- » Leges, 5 fol. 
1835-89 ; Leg. IV, sectio I-V, 1892 ff. ; Diplomata regum et 
imper. I— III, 1879 ff. ; Concilia I— II, 1893 ff. We must also 
mention : Archiv d. Gesellschaft /. ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde , 
12 vol. 1820-74 ; Neues Archiv, d. G. f. ä. d. G. 1876 ff. ; For- 
schungen zur deutschen Geschichte, 26 vol. 1862-86. 

Fontes rerum Austriacarum : Scriptores 8 vol. 1855-75. Diplo- 
mataria et acta, I-VH, 1849-1904. Archiv für Kunde österreichischer 
Geschichtsquellen, 1848 ff. 

Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, Lond. 1858-93, 
ninety-eight different works, some in several vol. 

Corpus scriptorum historiae Byzantinae, ed. Niebuhr, &c. 50 vol. 
Bonn, 1829-97. 

For the purpose of ascertaining the sources, the following will 



8 A Manual of Church History 

be found useful : A. Potthast, Bibliotheca hist. med. aevi, 1867-68 ; 
ed. 2a 1896. W. Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im 
MA. bis zur Mitte des 13 Jahrh. 1858 ; 7th ed. 2 vol. ed. E. Dümmler 
and Holder-Egger, 1904 ff. O. Lorenz, Deutschlands Geschichts- 
quellen im MA . von der Mitte des 13 Jahrh. bis zum Ende des 14 Jahrh. 
1870 ; 3rd ed. 2 vol. 1886-87. F. C. Dahlmann, Quellenkunde der 
d. Gesch. 7th ed. cur. Steindorff, 1905-6. U. Chevalier, 
Repertoire des sources historiques du moyen-äge ; Bio-Bibliographie, 
1877-86 ; Suppl. 1888, 2nd ed. I, 1905 ; Topo-Bibliographie, 
1894-1903. A. Mulinier, Les sources de Vhistoire de France 
jusqu'en 1789, I-V, 1901-5. C. Cross, The Sources and Literature 
of English History to about 1485, 1900. 



§ 4 
Sciences Auxiliary to Church History 

The sources of Church History furnish us with our 
materials, the auxiliary sciences enable us to understand aright 
the sources. 

I. Diplomatics enables us to test the value of ancient 
documents. 

Mabillon, De re diplomatica, Par. 1681 ; 2nd ed. 1709. 
(Toustain et Tassin) Nouveau traite de diplomatique, 6 vol. 
Par. 1750-65. Schönemann, Vollst. System der allg. Dipl. 1818. 
H. Bresslau, Hdb. d. Urkundenlehre f. Deutschland u. Italien, I. 
1888. Giry, Manuel de diplomatique, 1894. Wattenbach, Das 
Schriftwesen im MA. ; 3rd ed. 1896. 

II. Palaeography tells us how to read old MSS. and how to 
determine their date. 

B. Montfaucon, Palaeographia Graeca, 1708. Zangemeister 
et Wattenbach, Exempla cod. lat. litt, maiusc. script. 1876. 
Wattenbach et Velsen, Exempla cod. graec. litt. min. script. 1878. 
Gardthausen, Griech. P. 1879. Thompson, Handbook of Greek 
and Latin Palaeogr. 1893. Reusens, Elements de Pal. 1898. 
Capelli, "Lexicon Abbreviatur arum, 1901. Chroust, Monumenta 
Palaeogr aphica, 1900 ff. 

III. Epigraphies aids us to understand and interpret inscrip- 
tions. 

J. B. de Rossi, Inscript. Christ, t. 1. pp. xli-cxxiii. R. Cagnat, 
Cours d'epigraphie lat. ; 3rd ed. 1898. S. Ricci, Epigrafia latina, 
1898. 

IV. Numismatics deals with coins and medals, and informs 
us of their bearing on history. 

Eckiiel, Doctrina nummorum veterum, 8 vol. 1792-99. 
Blanciiet, Numismatique du moyen-age et moderne, 3 vol. 1890. 



Sciences Auxiliary to Church History g 

V. Philology furnishes the key for understanding old texts, 
in that it explains the language in which they are written. 

Du Fresne (Du Cange), Glossarium ad scriptores mediae 
et infimae latinitatis, Par. 1678. This work has been frequently 
reissued with additions, for instance by Henschel, 7 vol. 1840-50 ; 
by Favre, 10 vol. 1882-87 ; Gloss, ad script, med. et infimae 
graecitatis, 2 fol. Lugd. 1688 ; 1. C. Suicer, Thesaurus eccl. e 
pair, graecis, 2 fol. Amst. 1682 ; 2nd ed. 1728. 

VI. Geography affords information concerning the theatre of 
the events narrated by history. 

Neuer, Kirchl. Geogr. u. Statistik, 3 vol. 1864-68. Spruner- 
Menke, Handatlas f. d. Gesch. d. MA. u. d. neueren Zeit, 1880 ; 
ed. SiEGLiN, 1893 ff. O. Werner, Kath. Missionsatlas, 2nd ed. 
1885 ; Kath. Kirchenatlas, 1888. Droysen, Allg. hist. Handatlas, 
1886. Heussi and Mulert, Atlas zur KG. 1905. 

VII. Chronology helps us to learn the different fashions in 
which facts are dated in the sources, and the various reckonings 
adopted in different countries. 

Scaliger, De emendatione temporum, 1583. Petavius, Opus 
de doctrina temporum, 1627; L'art de verifier les dates, &c, 
5 vol. Par. 1750, 1818-44. L. Ideler, Hdb. d. math. u. techn. 
Chronologie, 2 vol. 1825-26 ; Lehrb. 1831. Grotefend, Zeitrech- 
nung des deutschen Mittelalters u. d. Neuzeit, 2 vol. 1891-98. 
Brinckmeier, Hdb. d. hist. Chr. 2nd ed. 1882. Mas Latrie, 
Tresor de chronol. et d'hist. et de geogr. pour V etude et Vemploi des 
documents du moyen-äge, 1889. Rühl, Chronologie des MA. u. d. 
Neuzeit, 1897. Lersch, Einleitung in d. Chron. 2nd ed. 1899. 

The best known methods of reckoning time are : — 

(a) The reckoning from the year of the building of Rome, 
Anno Urbis Conditae, a.u.c. (753 b.c.), or by the Roman consulate 
and post-consulate years. A list of the Roman Consuls will be 
found in Brinckmeier, pp. 380-409 ; Schräm in his Hilfstabellen 
(1883) gives the same, but in alphabetical order. 

(b) The Era of the Seleucidae, which began with the battle 
of Gaza (312, or 311, b.c.), and is still in use for ecclesiastical 
purposes among the Christians of Syria. 

(c) The Spanish Era, beginning 38 b.c., which was used in the 
Hiberian Peninsula until the fourteenth century. 

(d) The Aera Diocletiana, or Era of the Martyrs, commencing 
with the beginning of Diocletian's reign, August 29, 284. 

(e) The Cyclus Indictionum, a recurring cycle of fifteen years, in 
use from the time of Constantine down to the sixteenth century. 

(/) The Armenian Era, which begins on July n, 552 a.d. 

(g) The World Era, calculated from the time of Creation, 
in use in several forms. For instance, the Byzantines considered 
Creation to have taken place 5509 b.c. ; their reckoning was used 
by the Russians until the time of Peter the Great (1700), and by 
the Greeks, Serbs, and Rumanians until the nineteenth century. 



io A Manual of Church History 

The Alexandrians differed, dating Creation in 5492, whilst the 
Jews placed it yet later, viz. 3761 b.c. 

(h) The Christian Era begins with the birth of Christ. It 
was introduced by Dionysius Exiguus in the sixth century, for 
which reason it is sometimes called the Dionysian Era. It gradually 
ousted all other eras in the West. According to this reckoning, 
Christ was born in the year 753 A.u.c, and the year 754 is thus 
the first year of the Christian Era. But as Christ was born in 
Herod's reign, and as that monarch died at Easter, 750 A.u.c, 
we must set back the date of our Saviour's birth, probably 
to 749. 

Not only were different eras in vogue in former times, there 
was even a divergency of view as to when the Year should begin. 
According to the localities the year commenced either on January 1, 
or on March 1 (Russia), or on September 1 (Constantinople), or 
at Christmas, or at Easter, or on Lady-Day, and in the latter 
case, some took the feast previous (Calculus Pisanus), others that 
subsequent (Calculus Florentinus), to January 1. 

It was only in the sixteenth century that January 1 came to be 
generally adopted as the beginning of the year. 

Finally, with regard to the length of the year ; until the 
sixteenth century, the calendar of Julius Caesar was everywhere 
used. But the Julian year exceeded the true solar year by 11/ 12 ". 
Hence, in 1582, Gregory XIII readjusted the calendar, by strik- 
ing out ten days from that year and enacting that October 5 
should be reckoned as the 15th. To provide against a recur- 
rence of the same error, he also ordained the suppression, in 
every four hundred years, of three leap-years. The Gregorian 
calendar was adopted by the Protestants only in the eighteenth 
century, whilst the Greeks and Russians still retain, even now, the 
Julian calendar, the ' Old-style ' (O.S.), as it is called, to distinguish 
it from the Gregorian, or ' New-style ' (N.S.). 



§5 

The Literature of Church History 1 

I. In the last quarter of the second century, under P. 
Eleutherus, Hegesippus either wrote or published a book 
of memorable events (TTro/xv^fiara) f but this work, of which 
a few fragments remain, 2 can only have been a collection of 

1 F. Overbeck, Über die Anfänge der Kirchengeschichtschreibung, 1892; 
Stang, Historiographia eccl. 1897; for the Bibliography of the question, 
see A. Potthast, Bibliotheca, and Chevalier, Repertoire, as above, p. 8. 

2 They will be found in Grabe, Spicilegium, 1700, II, 203-214 ; Routh, 
Reliquiae sacrae, ed. 2a, 1846-48, t. 1 ; P. G. t. V; Z. f, wiss. Th. 1876, pp. 
177-229 ; Zahn, Forschungen, VI (1900), pp. 228-49. 



The Literature of Church History n 

memorable local traditions. The real father of Church 
History was Fusehii is, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine. 
Not only did he compile a Chronicle} which has been 
preserved in an Armenian version and in the Latin translation 
of Jerome — though the latter confines itself to the second 
book, which it supplements by carrying it down to 378 — he 
also composed a regular Church History 2 in ten books, 
dealing with the whole period down to 324. This History, 
on account of the documents which it quotes, and the plentiful 
extracts it gives from lost works, is of priceless worth. In 
the fifth century the undertaking was pursued further by 
two lawyers of Constantinople, Sozomen (to a.d. 423) and 
Socrates (to a.d. 439) , 3 and also by Theodoret of Cyrus 
in Syria (to A.D. 428). 

The work of these writers was proceeded with and brought 
down to the end of the sixth century by another lawyer, 
Evagrius of Antioch. Before this, the Constantinopolitan 
Lector Theodore had already continued the history to the 
times of the emperor Justin I, in the form of an abstract from 
the works of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret ; unfortunately 
the work of Theodore — apart from two books of the Historia 
tripartita, which have not yet been printed, and some other 
fragments — has been lost. A like misfortune overtook the 
Church History of Philip Sidetes, which in thirty-six books 
described the story of the world from the beginning to the 
writer's own time (440), and that of the Eunomian 
Philostorgius, which dealt with the period 300-423. Of 
the last, however, a considerable part has been preserved 
in the abstract made by Photius. The writings of these 
different worthies were published by Robert Stephen (1544) 
and by H. Valesius (3 fol. 1659-73) . 4 

The Latin Church counts two ancient historians. Rufinus 

1 The most recent edition of the Chronicle is that of Schöne, 2 vol. 1866- 
1875. See also A. Schöne, Die Weltchronik des Eusebius, 1900, in which it is 
shown that Eusebius prepared two recensions of his work. 

2 Recent editions are those of Lämmer, 1862; Heinichen, 1868-70; 
E. Schwartz, 1903 ff. (Engl. Trans. 1890 ff.). The fourth-century Syriac 
translation has been edited by Bedjan, 1897, and by Wright and McLean, 
1898; the Armenian translation was published at Venice, 1877. 

3 English Trans. Sozomen and Socrates: 1890. 

4 Theodoreti H. E. ed. Gaisford, 1854 (Engl. Trans. 1892); Evagrii 
H. E. ed. Bidez et Parmentier, 1899 (Engl. Trans, of Philostorgius 
and Evagrius: Bohn, 1851 ff.). 



12 A Manual of Church History 

translated Eusebius's Church History, 1 and, by the addition 
of two more books, carried it seventy years further. 
Sulpicius Severus compiled two books of Chronicles, reaching 
from the beginning oi the world to the end of the fourth 
century (Engl. Trans. 1895). To these ancient Latin historians 
we must add the later writer Cassiodorus, who, in his 
Historia tripartita, gives a series of excerpts from the works 
of the three followers of Eusebius — Socrates, Sozomen, and 
Theodoret — and carries the work of Rufinus still further. 

II. In the Middle Ages very few works dealing with 
universal Church History saw the light, the older histories 
being esteemed sufficient. Among the Greeks we find only one 
important and representative ecclesiastical historian, namely, 
Nicephorus Callisti (f 1341), whose work brings us down to 
the year 610. In the West, Haymo of Halberstadt (f 853) 
compiled a Breviarium Historiae eccl., dealing with the first 
four centuries, but almost all his material is drawn from 
Rufmus. Among others who brought the history down to 
their own times must be mentioned the Roman Librarian, 
Anastasius (f 886, Historia eccl., also called Chronographia 
tripartita, because it was composed of extracts from the three 
Byzantine historians, Nicephorus, George Syncellus, and 
Theophanes) ; Orderic Vitalis, abbot of St. Evroult in 
Normandy (f c. 1142, Hist, eccl.) ; the Dominican Bartholomäus 
(better known as Tolomeo) of Lucca ( f 1327, Hist, eccl.) ; and 
the archbishop Antoninus of Florence (f 1459, Summa 
historialis, beginning with the Creation). In most of the 
historical works of this period we find merely the history of 
particular Churches, and, as a rule, even this is largely inter- 
mingled with the history of concomitant political events. 

III. A great change in the manner of writing Church 
History is noticeable when we reach the end of the fifteenth 
century. With the new birth of science, historical criticism, 
which in the Middle Ages had almost been swamped, again 
made its appearance, and, in consequence of the Reformation, 
soon assumed a position of importance. It is true that during 
the ensuing period confessional and party preoccupations 
often led to history being falsified, but in spite of all the mistakes 

1 His translation has been edited by Mommsen, 1903 ff., in conjunction 
with Schwartz's edition of Eusebius. 



The Literature of Church History 13 

then made, the net result was that many historical truths 
came to light, and as, with the lapse of time, religious prejudice 
began to dwindle, historical science was able to make great 
strides. 

The earliest work belonging to this time is the Ecclesiastica 
historic/, congesta per aliquot studiosos et ftios viros in urbe 
Magdeburgica (13 fol. Basil. 1559-74), a work covering thirteen 
centuries, one folio being devoted to each, and composed by a 
learned society of the city of Magdeburg, headed by the Illyrian 
M. Flacius. The work is now usually known as the Magdeburg 
Centuries. The manifest animus of the Centuriators against the 
Catholic Church soon called forth a number of refutations. 
Of these, the most important by far was the Annates 
ecclesiastici of the Oratorian Cardinal, Caesar Baronius, which 
is valuable mainly for the mine of precious documents which 
it contains (12 fol. Rom. 1588-1607). The original work 
extended to n 98. It was frequently reprinted, and was soon 
taken in hand by other workers, who continued it to the 
sixteenth and seventeenth century ; for instance by Spon- 
danus, bishop of Pamiers (2 fol. 1647, down to 1646), by the 
Dominican Bzovius (9 fol. 1629-72, down to 1572), but best of 
all by Baronius's own associates, the Oratorians Raynald (9 fol. 
1646-77, down to 1565), Laderchi (3 fol. 1728-38, down to 
1571), and Aug. Theiner (3 fol. 1856, down to 1585). A critique, 
partly correcting, partly supplementing the work of Baronius, 
was composed by the French Franciscans (Antoine and 
Francois) Pagi (4 fol. 1689-1705). This work was incorporated 
in the edition of Baronius and Raynald, brought out by Mansi 
(38 fol. Luce. I738-59)- 

The energy manifested in the historical field during the 
sixteenth century was followed by a period of comparative 
idleness, during which it was thought sufficient to popularise 
the works of the Centuriators and of Baronius, by republishing 
them in a more compendious form. It is in France, where, 
towards the end of the seventeenth century, science took a 
new lease of life, that we next meet with original work of 
importance. Natalis Alexander produced a Historia ecclesiastica 
dealing with sixteen centuries of the Church's life, which was 
remarkable for its critical acumen, and was supplemented by 
special dissertations on all the more debatable points (26 vol. 



14 A Manual of Church History 

1676-88). This great work has been often reprinted, and in 
Roncaglia's edition (9 fol. Luce. 1743) was provided with notes 
to counteract the Gallican tendencies of its author. Tillemont 
wrote his Memoir es pour servir ä V histoire ecclesiastique, a Church 
History in the shape of a series of monographs (16 vol. 1693- 
1712), dealing with events prior to 513, which is to some extent 
also supplemented by the same author's Histoire des empereurs 
(6 vol. 1690 ff.). Another important work is the Histoire 
ecclesiastique of Fleury (20 vol. 1691-1720, down to 1414 ; 
continued by Claude Fabre in 16 vols., down to 1595, and in 
the Latin translation, down to 1768 [Engl. Trans, by New- 
man and Kay, 3 vol. a.d. 381-456, Oxf. 1842 ff.]). Nor must 
we forget to mention the Histoire de Veglise of Berault- 
Bercastel (24 vol. 1778-90, down to 1721, and continued by 
others). At about the same time, in Italy, the Dominican 
Cardinal Orsi acquired a certain fame by his Storia ecclesiastica 
(20 vol. 1746-61), a history of the first six centuries of the 
Christian era ; his work was continued down to 1378 by his 
religious associate Becchetti (17 vol. 1770 ff.), who also added 
to the original his own Istoria degli ultimi quatro seculi delta 
chiesa (9 vol. 1788 ff.), bringing the history down to the 
Council of Trent. 

In the seventeenth century the Reformed Churches of 
Switzerland and the Netherlands produced a few works of note. 
I. Casaubon published a detailed criticism of Baronius's Annals 
(1615) ; somewhat later, J. H. Hottinger wrote an extensive 
Historia eccl. N.T. (9 vol. 1651-67) ; he was followed by Fr. 
Spanheim, with his Summa hist. eccl. (1689) ; by Basnage, 
with his Histoire de Veglise (2 vol. 1699), and S. Spanheim, 
with the Annates politico-eccl. annorum 645 a Caesar e Augusto 
ad Phocam usque (3 fol. 1706). 

Considerable commotion was caused in Protestant Germany 
by the publication of G. Arnold's Impartial History of the 
Churches and Heretics (1699), in which orthodox Luther- 
anism was sharply taken to task. For works of a more 
permanent value we have to wait till the second half of the 
eighteenth century, when we find Mosheim's Institutiones 
historiae ecclesiasticae (1755) ; this was translated into German, 
and proceeded with, by J. A. C. von Einem (7 vol. 1769-78), 
and by Schlegel-Fraas (7 vol. 1770-96 [Engl. Trans, by Murdock, 



The Literature of Church History 15 

Institutes of Eccl. Hist., Boston, 1892]), and J. M. Schröckh's 
comprehensive Church History in 45 volumes (1788-1812). 
To the nineteenth century there belongs the General History of 
the Christian Religion and Church, of A. Neander (5 vol. 
1825-45, down to 1294 ; in later editions down to 1431 [Engl. 
Trans., Edinburgh, 9 vols. 2nd ed. 1851]), the Church Histories 
of J. K. L. Gieseler, which abounds in extracts from original 
sources (5 vol. 1823-55), an d of F. Chr. Baur, the head of the 
critical school of Tübingen (5 vol. 1853-63, Engl. Trans. 
1873 ff.) ; F. Böhringer's Church of Christ and its Witnesses, 
or a Church History in Biographies (2 vol. 1842-58 ; 12 vol. 
2nd ed. 1873-79) ; and the Manuals of K. Hase (1834; Iltri 
ed. 1886, Engl. Trans. New York, 1855), of J. H. Kurtz (1849 ; 
13th ed. by Bonwetsch and Tschakert, 1899, Engl. Trans. 
3 vols. 1886), of J.J. Herzog (3 vol. 1876-82 ; 2nd ed. by 
Koffmane, 2 vol. 1890-92), of Zöckler (3rd ed. 1889), of Moller- 
Kawerau (I— III, 1889-94; Engl. Trans. 3 vol. 1892-1900), 
and of K. Müller (I-II, 1892-1902). 

The closing years of the eighteenth century witnessed the 
advent of a number of German workers in the Catholic field. 
As, however, their work was more or less superficial, and lacked 
that quality of stability which only research can give, it had 
no lasting influence. F. L. zu Stolberg was the first to give 
an impulse to critical studies by his History of the Religion 
of Jesus Christ , a work reaching to 430 (15 vol. 1806-18), 
which, after the author's death, was continued by F. von Kerz 
(30 vol. 1825-48), and afterwards by J. N. Brischar (8 vol. 
1850-64, down to 1245). The good example thus set was soon 
followed by Th. Katerkamp, though he, too, was obliged to 
leave his work unfinished (5 vol. 1819-34, down to 1253) . Among 
the best-known manuals we may allude to those of Hortig 
(2 vol. 1826-28), J. J. Ritter (3 vol. 1826-35, 6th ed. by Ennen, 
2 vol. 1862), J. Alzog (1840; 10th ed. by Kraus, 2 vol. 
1882 [Engl. Trans. Man. of Univ. Church History, Dublin, 4 
vol. 2nd ed. 1885]), J. A. Möhler (3 vol. 1867-68; ed. by 
Gams), J. Hergenrb'ther (3 vol. 1876 ; 4th ed. by J. P. Kirsch, 
1902 ff.), J. J. Döllinger (2 vol. 2nd ed. 1843, down to 1517 
[Engl. Trans, by Cox, 1840 ff.]), H. Brück (1874 ; 9Ü1 ed. by 
J. Schmitt, 1906 [Engl. Trans. Hist, of the Cath. Church, 2 vol. 
New York, 1884]), F. X. Kraus (1875 ; 4th ed. 1896), A. 



1 6 A Manual of Church History 

Knöpfler (1895 ; 4th ed. 1906), J. Marx (1903 ; 3rd ed. 1906). 
This is also the place to mention B. Jungmann 's Dissertationes 
selectae in historiam ecclesiastic am (7 vol. 1880-87). 

In France Rohrbacher composed a bulky Histoire 
universelle de Veglise catholique (29 vol. 1842-49), a work which 
was translated into German, and partially recast by Hülskamp. 
Rump, and others. A more pretentious work is the Histoire 
de Veglise of Darras, continued by Bareille and Fevre (44 vol. 
1861-88) ; compared with the excellent work done by France 
in the past, this last History marks a notable retrogression. 
As we write, Duchesne is engaged in publishing his Histoire 
ancienne de Veglise (I, 1906 [Engl. Trans. Early History of the 
Christian Church, 1909] ; II, 1907). Of late the Eastern 
Church has also contributed two Histories, the 'laropia 
6KK\r](TLaaTLKr)0i Diomedes Kyriakos (3 vol. 1898, down to 1872), 
and that of Philaretos Bapheides (2 vol. 1884-86, down to 1453). 1 

1 For a fuller list of modern Greek historians, see KTPIAKOS I<r innX. 
Vol. I, p. 20. Trans. 



I. CHRISTIAN ANTIQUITY 

FIRST PERIOD 
From the Institution of the Church to the Edict of Milan 

CHAPTER I 

THE FOUNDING OF THE CHURCH — HER DEVELOPMENT 
AND PERSECUTIONS 

§6 

The Preparation of the Olden World for the Coming of 

the Redeemer l 

Christianity did not come into the world unexpectedly. 
Christ, according to the words of Holy Writ (Gal. iv. 4 ; 
Eph. i. 10), came in the fulness of time, i.e. when mankind 
had, by God's Providence, been disposed for the advent of its 
Saviour. God's judgments being incomprehensible and His 
ways unsearchable (Rom. xi. 33), the working of His Provi- 
dence must remain, to some extent, shrouded in darkness, 
albeit that it does not altogether escape the notice of an 
attentive observer, for, in truth, God reveals Himself in history 
not less than in Creation. 

By manifold inducements, by the mission of the Prophets, 
by various visitations and trials, the chosen nation of the 
Hebrews was confirmed in its belief in God and reclaimed from 
the evil ways into which the example of the surrounding 
heathen occasionally led it. When at length the appointed 
time for the arrival of the Redeemer drew nigh, there came, 
in the person of John the Baptist, that last and greatest of the 

1 DÖLLINGER, Heidentum u. Judentum. Vorhalle zur Gesch. des Christen- 
tums, 1857 (Engl. Trans. Gentile and Jew in the Courts of the Temple of Christ, 
1862) ; E. Schürer, Gesch. d. jüd. Volkes z. Zeit J. Chr. 3rd ed. 1898- 
1901 (Engl. Trans. History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christy 
5 vol. 189 1) ; W, Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im neutest. Zeitalter , 
1903. 

VOL. I. C 



1 8 A Manual oj Ch'trch History 

Prophets, who was to make straight the way of the Messias. 
This long preparation was not in vain. With the lapse of time, 
the expectation of the Messias grew keener and more definite, 
and though it included much which was of a merely political 
character — the nation's hope being set on the restoration of its 
independence, and on its liberation from the Roman yoke, 
under which it had been groaning since 37 b.c. — nevertheless 
it still had for its object the long-promised Saviour. 

The Jewish people had already long ago been scattered 
far beyond its national frontiers. The Assyrian and Baby- 
lonian captivities had begun this dispersal, and, little by little, 
the Jew had invaded nearly the whole known world. Some 
of the Jews of the Dispersion, like Philo of Alexandria (f c. 60), 
felt, indeed, the influence of the surroundings amidst which they 
lived, and did not hesitate to supplement Revealed doctrine 
by adding to it new elements derived from elsewhere, especially 
from the then prevalent Platonic philosophy. But it is not less 
true that the heathen world, too, felt the presence of the Jews 
in its midst, and that many of the best pagan minds were drawn 
to them. Owing to the scorn in which the Hebrews were 
generally held, very few pagans dared to become complete 
converts by submitting to be circumcised ; but many were 
brought at least to esteem the worship of Jahve, to believe 
in God, and to observe some of the Jewish commandments. 
Pagans such as these are, in the New Testament, called 
creßofievot or ^oßovfievov rbv ©ebv, and among them Christian 
missionaries were to find a rich field, for whilst the Gospel 
brought to them what they desired, it also dispensed them from 
those very laws to which they took exception. 

Besides its changed attitude towards Judaism, the heathen 
world had another reason to hail the advent of Christianity. 
Its religion, which, so long as it retained its force and vitality, 
was able in some measure, and through the elements of truth 
which it contained, to still the cravings of the human heart, 
had been perceived to be wanting, and had already lost all its 
credit among the better minds. Philosophy might, indeed, 
have taken the place of religion, though at its best it could only 
have done so among the cultured classes, but philosophy, too, 
was in a state of bankruptcy. The ideas of Plato (f 348 B.c.) and 
Aristotle (f322), the two great leaders of philosophic thought, 



The Preparation 19 

were still upheld by some ; but the adherents of Epicure (f 271) 
and Zeno (f 260) — of whom the former had placed man's 
highest good in pleasure, whilst the latter, the founder of the 
Stoics, had taught that the world was subject to the blind and 
unalterable rule of destiny — were by far the more numerous 
Many others, owing allegiance to the Sceptics, professed to have 
abandoned all hope of ever attaining to the truth. Finally, 
the political and civic life of the ancient world, which formerly 
had held so large a place in the minds of its citizens, was now 
on the wane. The charming Greek Republics with their 
fervent patriots had disappeared. The Roman Empire itself 
had come to the end of its career of conquest. There was 
nothing left to attract men's hearts. They were now disengaged, 
and truth could enter freely, sure beforehand of a welcome 
from those to whom her search had cost so much vain 
toil. 

There were, moreover, certain points of contact between 
Christianity and Paganism. Paganism was an evil thing, 
without being wholly evil. Its philosophy, amidst much' 
falsehood, contained many elements of truth, and thus provided 
many of the pagans with a bridge over which they could pass 
to Christianity. Plato's doctrine, for instance, was in several 
ways in harmony with the Christian conception of the world, 
whilst the ethics of the last of the Stoics, of Seneca, Epictetus, 
and Marcus Aurelius agreed in much with the ethical code 
established by Christ. These were doubtless the points which 
Clement of Alexandria had in his mind when he said : ' As 
the Law was given to the Jews, so philosophy was given 
to the heathen to lead them to Christ ' {Strom. I, 5, i ; 
VI, 6, i). 

Certain other things, too, have to be taken into consideration. 
By the expansion of the Roman Empire a large part of the world 
had been brought under a single rule, and thereby the wall of 
partition dividing nation from nation had been removed, whilst 
the all but universal use of the Greek language set aside 
another barrier which had hindered free intercourse. There 
was then in existence a world-empire and a world-language, 
and these were, both of them, as Origen acknowledged with 
respect to the first of them, willed by God to subserve the new 
world-religion. 

c 2 



20 A Manual of Church History 

§7 

Christ, Saviour of the World and Founder of the Church 

' When the fulness of the time was come, God sent his 
son, made of a woman, made under the law ; that he might 
redeem them who were under the law ; that we might receive 
the adoption of sons.' In these few words the Apostle Paul 
(Gal. iv. 4-5) admirably, albeit briefly, sums up the reason and 
end of the Redeemer's mission. The Son of God came to 
make an end of the old Covenant, and to lay the foundation 
of a new,, to establish a covenant of mercy in the stead of a 
covenant of Law. To effect this object, thirty years after 
being miraculously born of the Virgin Mary, He began to teach, 
travelling throughout Palestine with twelve chosen disciples, 
preaching everywhere the new doctrine and confirming it with 
signs and wonders. ' He came unto his own, and his own 
received him not ' (John i. n). The two powerful Jewish 
parties, the fanatic Pharisees and the rationalist and epicurean 
Sadducees, both came into conflict with Him, and, after a short 
public ministry (whether of one year or of three years, it is 
difficult to say), He ended His life on the Cross. But even 
His death was a witness to His mission from on high, for it too 
was accompanied by wonders. The veil of the Temple was 
torn asunder, to signify that the olden Covenant made by God 
with the Jews had reached its term, and that a new dispensation 
had begun, in which all men were called upon to share. Christ, 
as He had foretold, rose again from the grave after three days, 
and consorted with His chosen ones for yet a space of forty days 
before finally ascending to the Father. 

The Gospels form the principal source of our knowledge of 
Christ's life. The latest Catholic writers who have dealt with 
the life of Christ are: J. Sepp (7 vol. 1843-46; 4th ed. 1899 ff.), 
Grimm (7 vol. 1876-99 ; 3rd ed. recast by J. Zahn, 1906 ff.), 
Le Camus (Engl. Trans. New York, 1906 ff.), Friedlieb (1887), H. 
Schell (1903 [Engl. Trans. Ideals of the Gospel, 1909]), Fouard 
(Engl. Trans. 2nd ed. 1908), Didon (Engl. Trans. 1891, 1908). 

The most ancient non-Christian witnesses to Christ are the 
Latin writers (see below, § 16), Tacitus (54-119), Suetonius 
(75-160), and Pliirv (c. 112). Two other writers must also be 
named : the Syrian Mara, in his epistle to his son Serapion, 



The Earliest Witnesses 21 

speaks of the ' wise King of the Jews/ after whose death the 
Jews lost their kingdom, but who still lives in His laws. The 
date of the epistle is uncertain. Cureton, who edited it (Spici- 
legium Syriacum, 1855, pp. xiii-xv, 70-76), ascribed it to the 
time of Marcus Aurelius ; others, though without justification, 
date it as far back as 73. The Jew Josephus Flavius alludes 
to Christ in two passages. In the Antiquities of the Jews (XX, 
9, I, § 200, ed. Niese), a work written c. 94, he mentions James 
as the ä8e\<f>ov 'Irjo-ov rov Xtyofievov XpKTTov (the brother of Jesus 
who is called the Christ). In an earlier passage (Ant. XVIII, 3, iii, 
§§ 63-64) we read as follows : ' Now there was about this time, 
Jesus a wise man [if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was] 
a doer of wonderful works [a teacher of such men as receive the 
truth with pleasure]. He drew over to him many both of the 
Jews and of the Gentiles. He was (i.e. was considered, looked upon 
as) the Messias, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal 
men amongst us, had condemned him to the Cross, those that 
loved him at the first did not forsake him [for he appeared to them 
alive again the third day, as the Divine prophets had foretold 
these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him]. 
And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, are not extinct 
to this day/ The words which, in the above, we have put in 
square brackets would appear to be interpolations made by a 
Christian hand. They were read by Eusebius (H. E. I, 11 ; Demonst. 
evang. Ill, 5), but do not seem to have been in the MS. used by 
Origen. Cp. G. A. Müller, Christus bei Josephus, 1890 ; 2nd ed. 
1895. Gutschmid, Kleine Schriften, IV (1893), 352 ; Rein ach, 
in Rev. des etudes juives, 1897, pp. 1-18. Some consider the whole 
passage to be spurious, for instance Niese, in Indices Lectionum 
Acad. Marpurg. 1893-94, and Zahn, Forschungen, VI, 302. Others 
(F. Bole, 1896 ; St. a. ML. 1897) contend for the genuineness 
of the whole. 

In Eusebius (H. E. I, 13) and in the Doctrine of Addai, ed. 
Philipps (Lond. 1876, p. 4), we find a letter of K. Abgar of 
Edessa to Christ. In the latter Christ's reply is reported to have 
been made by word of mouth ; in the former the reply also is 
given in epistolary form. This correspondence (cp. Z. f. wiss. Th. 
1900, pp. 422-86) has found defenders in the Th. Qu. 1842 ; Z. 
f. hist. Th. 1843 ; Kath. 1896, II ; but its spuriousness scarcely 
admits of doubt. With regard to Pilate's report to Tiberius 
(Thilo, Cod. apocr. N. T. 1832, p. 803 ff.), and the epistle of 
Lentulus to the Roman Senate (Dobschütz, Christusbilder, 1899), 
there is no doubt whatever as to their apocryphal character. 

The Essenes, a third party among the Jews, are not alluded to 
in the story of our Lord. They were governed by a rule very 
like that of a religious order ; they renounced marriage and the 
possession of private property ; they lodged and took their meals 
in common, and were rigorous in their preliminary ablutions. 



22 A Manual of Church History 

Some dwelt in colonies in the desert of Engedi near the Dead 
Sea, others lived in towns or villages. All of them refrained 
from consorting with the other Jews, refusing to associate with 
them even in the Temple services and sacrifices. Cp. Regeffe, 
La secte des Esseniens, 1898 ; Rquh. 1906, pp. 11-56. 

Another sect which has recently been the subject of much 
discussion, that of the Therapeutae, had its headquarters on 
Lake Mareotis, near Alexandria ; its members renounced their 
possessions and devoted themselves to the worship of God in 
common ; in other respects their sect differed entirely from 
that of the Essenes. They are known to us through Philo's work, 
De Vita Contemplativa, of which the authenticity has been ques- 
tioned, though, most probably, wrongly. Cp. Conybeare, 
Philo about the Contemplative Life, 1895 ; P. Wendland, Die 
Therapeuten, 1896 (/. /. klass. Philologie, 22 Suppl. vol. pp. 
695-77°) • 

§8 

The First Whitsuntide, the Birth of the Church, the Death of 

James the Greater 1 

Before taking His departure, Christ had promised His 
disciples to send them the spirit of truth, the Comforter, who 
should abide with them and teach them all truth (John 
xiv. 16 ; xvi. 13). Ten days after His Ascension, when 
the Apostles had already chosen Matthias to fill the place 
left empty by the traitor Judas, the Holy Ghost descended 
on them all, making its presence felt by the signs which 
followed. The disciples began to speak in divers tongues, 
and by a single sermon of St. Peter's, 3,000 Jews were 
brought over to Christianity (Acts i-ii). 

Other conversions soon followed those of Pentecost, and the 
spread of the new religion next demanded the establishment of 
some sort of organisation. Those among the Faithful who were 
in needy circumstances had been helped so generously by 
their brethren, that, in the words of Acts, all things were held in 
common. The distribution of the gifts and the direction of all 
the works of charity was in the hands of the Apostles, but as 

1 Döllinger, Christentum u. Kirche in der Zeit der Grundlegung, 2nd 
ed. 1868 (Engl. Trans. The First Age of Christianity and the Church, 3rd cd. 
1877) ; Neander, Gesch. der Pflanzung u. Leitung der chrisil. K. durch die 
Apostel, 2 vol. 4th ed. 1847 (Engl. Trans. History of the Planting . . . of 
the Christian Church, Bohn, 1846) ; Weizsäcker, Das apost. Zeitalter, 3rd 
ed. 1902 (English Trans.). 



Pentecost 23 

the community increased their task grew out of all proportion 
to their strength. The business of waiting at table, Sia/covetv 
TpaTre^cLLs, proved especially irksome, and when the Hellenists, 
or foreign-born and Greek-speaking Jews, began to complain 
that their widows were relegated to the lowest places at table, 
the Apostles willingly relinquished their ungrateful task, and 
selected seven men, amongst whom were Stephen and Philip, to 
whom they entrusted this part of their ministry (Acts vi). 

Though the Faithful, by continuing to worship in the 
Temple, had preserved a certain affinity with Judaism, yet the 
chiefs of the Jews were by no means inclined to view with 
equanimity an increase in their numbers. On two occasions 
the Apostles were imprisoned, scourged, and forbidden to 
preach. Out of fear for the common people, or in consequence 
of Gamaliel's warning to avoid precipitation, no further steps 
were taken against the Christians. When, however, Stephen 
began to proclaim the abrogation of the Old Law, a new out- 
burst of rage was the result, and he paid for his rashness with 
his life, whilst the remaining Christians, with the exception 
of the Apostles, were compelled to quit the city (Acts iii-viii). 

The dispersal of the Faithful helped to spread the Faith. 

The Gospel had already been preached beyond the borders of 

Judaea. The deacon Philip now went as missioner into 

Samaria, whose inhabitants, though sharing the monotheistic 

belief of the Jews and the Jewish hope in a coming Messias, 

were estranged from their countrymen in worship, and were 

considered by the more orthodox Jews as but little better than 

the heathen. As soon as the news of Philip's success reached 

the city, Peter and John betook themselves in his company 

to impose hands on his converts that they might receive the 

Holy Ghost. Not long after this Peter succeeded in effecting 

the conversion of a real pagan, the Centurion Cornelius of 

Caesarea, whom he received into the Church without further 

formality, as soon as he had been convinced by a vision that it 

was unnecessary for the heathen to enter Christianity by the 

gateway of Judaism (Acts x, xi). In Antioch, the capital of 

Syria, there soon arose a Church wholly composed of former 

pagans. This Church was put under the authority of Barnabas, 

and it was here that the followers of Christ first became known 

as Christians (Acts xi. 26) ; hitherto they had been called by 



24 A Manual of Church History 

outsiders Galileans orNazarenes (i. II. ; xxiv. 5), whilst, among 
themselves, ' Brethren/ ' Saints,' or ' Disciples of the Lord/ 
were the appellations in common use (Acts i. 15, vi. I, 2, 7; 
Rom. i. 7). 

Blood again began to flow at Jerusalem, when, to please 
the Jews, Herod Agrippa sentenced to death James the Greater, 
the brother of John. Peter, who was to have undergone a 
like penalty, escaped it only by a miracle. Acts describes this 
event as taking place at Easter ; it must have been in the year 
43, since Herod died soon after, and we know that his death 
occurred in 44 (Acts xii). 

§9 

The Apostle Paul 1 

It was about this time that one who had been the most 
bitter foe of the Christian name, but who at a later date 
was able to say that he had done more for it than any 
other Apostle (1 Cor. xv. 10), began to labour openly 
in the cause of the Gospel. This was Saul, a native of 
Tarsus in Cilicia, and a scion of the house of Benjamin, more 
commonly known by the name of Paul, which is bestowed on 
him by the compiler of Acts, in that portion of the history 
dealing with the events subsequent to the conversion of 
Sergius Paulus. Being on his way to Damascus with the object 
of harassing the Christians there (c. A.D. 33, but, according 
to Gal. i. 18, ii. 1, seventeen years before the Council of Jeru- 
salem), he was suddenly won over to the Faith by a miracle, 
and after having received baptism at the hands of Ananias, 
was of a mind to preach forthwith the new doctrine, but was 
compelled by the machinations of his former brethren to seek a 
refuge in the deserts of Arabia. Three years later he returned 
to Jerusalem, passing through Damascus on the way, and after 
a brief colloquy with Peter and James the Less, the only 
Apostles he could find, he returned to his home. Eventually 

1 Mg. by F. Chr. Baur, 1845 ; 2nd ed. by Zeller, 1866 (Engl. Trans. 1873); 
Conybeare and Hovvson, 2 vol. 3rd ed. 1864; Renan, 1869 (Engl. 
Trans.); Botalla, 1869; Fouard, 2nd ed. 1894 (Engl. Trans. 1901) ; 
Stosch, 2nd ed. 1896 ; Sabatier, 1896 (Engl. Trans. 1901) ; Ramsay, 
3rd ed. 1897; Frette, 1898; Abbott, 1899; C.Clemen, 2 vol. 1904; 
F. X. Pölzl, 1905 ; J. Belser, Einleitung in das N. T. 2nd ed. 190^. 



St. Paul 25 

he accepted Barnabas's invitation to proceed to Antioch, 
where his labours in the Lord's vineyard may be said to have 
begun. His activity was, however, so great as to forbid his 
remaining long in any one place, and, hearkening to the 
call of his Master, who enjoined him to carry His name 
before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel (Acts 
ix. 15), he travelled repeatedly through the world, his preaching 
being everywhere productive of great results. His mission was 
more especially to the heathen world, and his plan was to 
emphasise the doctrine of Salvation by Faith in Christ and the 
uselessness of the works of the Law. 

Three of his missionary journeys are known to us in detail. 

I. The first, extending over the years 46-49, conducted him 
to Cyprus — where he converted the proconsul Sergius Paulus — 
and over a portion of Asia Minor ; here he preached in Perge, 
Pamphylia, Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, and 
Lycaonia. He was assisted by Barnabas, and, for a time, by 
John Mark (Acts xiii, xiv). 

II. Soon after his return, there occurred the events we 
shall speak of in § 11. Paul next undertook another journey, 
which must have occupied the years 50-53 ; he was accom- 
panied by Silas, and was afterwards joined by Timothy and 
Luke, whilst Barnabas, for the sake of his nephew John Mark, 
deserted him and departed to Cyprus. The Apostle first paid 
a visit to the Churches of Lycaonia, and then journeyed through 
Phrygia, Galatia, and Mysia. From Troas he went on through 
Macedonia and Greece to Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, and 
Athens, where he converted Dionysius the Areopagite. From 
Corinth, where he stayed a year and a half, he returned via 
Ephesus and Jerusalem to Antioch (Acts xv. 36-xviii. 22). 

III. On a third journey, which must have followed closely 
on the second, and may have extended over the years 53-58, 
he first called on the Churches of Galatia and Phrygia, and 
then settled down for two and a quarter years at Ephesus. 
When the disturbance created by Demetrius the silversmith — 
who foresaw the evil effect which the forsaking of the idols would 
have on his business — at length forced Paul to leave, he 
travelled onwards through Macedonia and Greece, probably 
preaching in Illyricum on his way (Rom. xv. 19), whilst, all the 
while, he was unceasingly labouring for the Gospel with his pen. 



20 A Manual of Church History 

It is to this time, in effect, that the greater epistles — Romans, 
Corinthians, and Galatians — belong (Acts xviii. 23-xxi. 15). 
Returning to Jerusalem, he found a term set to his activity. 
So bitter were the Jews against one whom they deemed an 
apostate, that the tribune Lysias had to intervene on Paul's 
behalf, and send him under escort to the procurator Felix at 
Caesarea. On Paul making use of his right as a Roman 
citizen to appeal to Caesar, it became necessary to send him to 
Rome (60 A.D.) . His imprisonment did not, however, mean that 
he was entirely cut off from intercourse with his friends. He 
was now able to do by word of mouth what he had already done 
with his pen, and preach the Gospel in the capital of the Roman 
Empire (Acts xxi-xxviii). Many opine that he remained a 
captive to the end of his days, and perished in the persecution 
of Nero ; but it is more probable that his cause was tried, and 
that he was set at liberty before this persecution began. At any 
rate, the Muratorian fragment speaks of a profectio Pauli ab 
urbe ad Spaniam proficiscentis ; whilst the statement of 
Clement of Rome (V, 7) that the Apostle had travelled eVl to 
repfia r?}? Bvaecos (to the limit of the West), seems to refer 
to Spain. If Paul did actually undertake such a journey, then, 
as Acts says nothing about it, he must have enjoyed a spell of 
freedom after the last captivity alluded to in the History. 
However this may be, the Apostle certainly died in Rome, for, 
according to the statement of the Roman presbyter Caius {200), 
he was beheaded on the Ostian Way ; this event probably 
occurred in 67, and was afterwards commemorated by the 
abbey Alle Tre Fontane, erected on this spot. 

The year of the Apostle's death is doubtful, and so is the 
chronology of his whole life, there being no date given on which to 
establish it. The terminus a quo from which we set out to deter- 
mine the principal dates of his career is furnished by that of his 
departure from Caesarea for Rome, this coinciding with the arrival 
of Festus as procurator in Palestine in the stead of Felix (Acts 
xxiv. 27). This change in the government is, for reasons which 
seem unanswerable, set by most modern scholars in the year 60 
(cp. Wieseler, Chronologie des apost. Zeitalters, 1848, pp. 66-99 '> 
Hist. J. 1887, pp. 199-222 l ). Others, however, prefer to date the 
change in 55 (56), and believe in consequence that St. Paul's captivity 
began in 53 (54), he having been apprehended two years previously. 

1 Cp. Duchesne, Hist. anc. I, p. 27. 



St, Peter 27 

Adopting this basis, we should have to antedate all the events in 
the Apostle's life by some five years (cp. Patritius, De Evan- 
fteliis, 1853, I, c. 3, n. 13 ; Jungmann, Diss, in H. E. I, 96 ff. ; 
KL. IV, 131 1 ff. ; O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgesch. 1895 ; 
Blass, Acta Apost. 1895; Harnack, Gesch. d. altchr. Literatur, 
II, I, 1897). Some authors consider the dispute among the 
Apostles at Antioch to have taken place only after St. Paul's 
second journey. Cp. Neander, Pflanzung, 4th ed. I, 351 ff. ; 
Renan, St. Paul, pp. 118 f., 278 f. All writers differ to some extent 
on the lesser points. Cp. G. Hönnicke, Die Chron. des Lebens 
des Apostel Paulus, 1902 ; Bibl. Z. 1905. 



§ 10 

The Apostle Peter 1 

Of Peter, whom Christ had chosen as the chief of his 
Apostles [Matt. xvi. 17-19 ; John xxi. 15 f.), we know less than 
of Paul. Acts (i-xi) speaks of his work in Jerusalem and 
Palestine in the early years after the Ascension, of his sermon 
at Pentecost, of the healing at the portal of the Temple of 
the man born lame, of his twofold imprisonment, and of his 
doings in Samaria and Judaea ; beyond this it gives us no 
information, nor even a hint of the locality to which he 
betook himself after his miraculous deliverance from prison, 
merely observing that koX itje\6cov eiropevSif] et? erepov tottov 
(and going out he went into another place, xii. 17). As 
Peter is held by tradition to have been the first bishop of 
Antioch, we must suppose that he went on to northern Syria. 
At any rate, as his dispute with Paul shows, he was at Antioch 
at a later date. We find very little concerning Peter elsewhere 
in the New Testament. From the address in his first Epistle 
(i. 1) the Fathers gathered that he had preached in the Asiatic 
provinces there enumerated ; others, seemingly with better 
grounds, argue that he must have visited Corinth, seeing that 
Paul speaks of the partisans of Cephas living in that city 
(1 Cor. i. 12) ; 2 from the conclusion of the first epistle of St. 
Peter (v. 13) we gather that the writer had reached Rome, therein 

1 Mg. by Cuccagni, 3 vol. 1777 f. ; J. Schmid (Petrus in Rom.), 1892; 
Fouard, 3rd ed. 1897 (Engl. Trans. 1892) ; Taylor, 1894 ; J. Essef (Des 
hl. P. Aufenthalt, Episkopat u. Tod in Rom), 3rd ed. 1897 ; A. B<run, 1905. 

2 The inference is at least doubtful, as the text refers also to Christ in the 
same words. Trans. 



28 A Manual of Church History 

designated by the mystical name of Bab3/lon ; 1 the fourth 
Gospel (John xxi. 19) contains an allusion to his martyrdom. 

The Fathers have little to say concerning Peter's life, and 
only speak of the manner of his death. From the testimony of 
Caius it seems clear that he died at Rome, and not far from the 
foot of the Vatican Hill, where later a basilica was erected 
in his honour; according to Origen (Eus. Ill, 1) he was, at his 
own request, crucified head downwards. A similar account is 
given by the (Gnostic ?) Acts of St. Peter. 

As to the length of St. Peter's sojourn at Rome, tradition 
fixes it at twenty-five years (42-67 ), though it does not actually 
claim that he resided in Rome the whole of the time, but merely 
tells us the date of his arrival and that of his martyrdom. 
Whatever we may think of the length of his stay, we must take 
it as a fact that the Chief of the Apostles spent a considerable 
time in the chief city of the Empire, and that he ended his days 
there during Nero's persecution of the Christians ; all this is 
attested, not only by the authorities just alluded to, and by 
the universal tradition of both East and West, but also by a 
series of eminently ancient and respectable writers. 

1. Even before the close of the first century, Clement of 
Rome (c. 5, 6) speaks of Peter and Paul as having both fallen 
victims to envy and jealousy. As he seems, moreover, to 
associate them with those who died in the Roman persecution, 
we may safely infer that he believed them both to have been 
put to death at Rome. 

2. Ignatius of Antioch, at the beginning of the next 
century, seems to presuppose that the two Apostles had once 
been present in Rome, when, writing to the Romans, he says 
(4» 3) • Ov% a>? Herpo? /cat UavXos Btardcrcro/jiaL vfuv (I do not 
enjoin you as did Peter and Paul) ; for, seeing that we have no 
reason to surmise that St. Peter ever wrote to the Romans, 
these words can only indicate that he had preached to them by 
word of mouth. 

3. The testimony of Clement of Alexandria 3 to the 
composition of St. Mark's Gospel also alludes to Peter's 
presence at Rome. This testimony is all the more important, 

1 Though some have argued that the locality designated may have been 
the Egyptian Babylon, of which remains exist near Cairo. Trans. 

2 Eus. II, 15 ; VI, 14. 



Council of Jerusalem and the Dispute at Antioch 29 

seeing that it agrees so well with the saying of Papias, the hearer 
of the Apostles, 1 about the same Gospel ; hence both the data 
would appear to belong to an already ancient tradition. 

The later testimonies to Peter's sojourn at Rome, though of 
less value, are nevertheless important. 

1. Dionysius of Corinth, writing to the Romans (c. 170), says that 
Peter and Paul were put to death together in their city (Eus. II, 25). 

2. Irenasus (c. 180) ascribes the foundation of the Church of 
Rome to the glorious Apostles Peter and Paul (Adv. Haer. Ill, 3, 2). 

3. The Roman presbyter Caius (c. 200) mentions the tombs 
(rpoVata) at Rome of the two Apostles (Eus. II, 25 ; cp. Th. 
Qu. 1892, pp. 121-32). 

4. Belonging to the same period, we have the witness of Ter- 
tullian, who speaks of Peter's preaching and martyrdom at Rome 
(De praescr. 32 ; Scorp. 15). 

In favour of the twenty-five years' stay or episcopate of St. 
Peter in Rome, it is usual to advance the authority of the Liber ian 
Catalogue of the Popes (354), and that of St. Jerome (Chron.; 
Catal. c. I) ; it is possible that the original work of Eusebius also 
gave the number, but the statement regarding the coming to 
Rome of the Apostle, as made in the Eusebian H. E. (II, 15) is 
far from clear, whilst the figure and the original wording of the 
Hieronymian Chronicle is doubtful, the Armenian version giving 
twenty as the number of years of Peter's Roman sojourn. Even 
were it proved that the words of the Chronicle belong to Eusebius 
rather than to Jerome, we might still ask whether the number 
was a traditional datum, and was not merely due to the chrono- 
logical reckoning of Eusebius himself. 

§11 

The Council of Jerusalem and the Dispute at Antioch 2 

By the reception into the Church of the centurion 
Cornelius, the independence of Christianity with respect to 
Judaism had been settled on one important point. This inde- 
pendence was to be yet further vindicated. Even if the heathen 
could be lawfully received into the Church without having 
previously to become Jews, there still remained the question 
whether they were bound to observe the Law subsequently 
to their reception into the Church. There came to Antioch 

1 Eus. Ill, 39, Patr. apost. ed. Funk i 2 (1901), 358. 

2 Schenz, Das erste allg. Konzil in Jerusalem, 1869 ; Z. f. k. Th. 1883 ; K. 
BÖCKENHOFF, Das apost. Speisegesetz in den ersten fünf Jahrh. 1903,; 
G. Resch, Das Aposteldekret nach seiner ausser kanonischen Textgestalt 
untersucht, 1905 {T. u. U. N, F, XIII, 3). 



30 A Manual of Church History 

certain brethren from Palestine, who taught that converts from 
paganism should be circumcised and compelled to observe the 
Old Testament Law. This view caused a commotion amongst 
the converts whose spiritual freedom it endangered, and a 
resolution was taken to send Paul and Barnabas to consult 
the Church in Jerusalem. The Apostles and the presbyters 
assembled (a.D. 50), and the Council of Jerusalem, as this 
assembly came to be called, decided in the main against the 
necessity of observing the Jewish Law. It simply ordained, 
and this in order to facilitate intercourse between Hebrews 
and pagans in the Church, that converts from paganism 
should abstain from certain deeds which were especially 
obnoxious to the Jews, from partaking of meats sacrificed 
to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from fornica- 
tion {iropveia : i.e. not necessarily from concubinage, or from 
illegal marriage in the Jewish sense. Acts xv). 

By the decision of the Council converts from paganism 
were freed from the yoke of the Law. It was now the turn of 
the Jewish converts. In Antioch, the metropolis of Gentile 
Christianity, where there was no public opinion as in Palestine 
to enforce the observance of the Jewish Law, the convert 
Jews soon shook themselves free ; even Peter lived there 
edviKO)^ on his return from the Council at Jerusalem, dwelling 
and eating with the Gentile brethren, regardless of the ancient 
Law. His conduct was, no doubt, counselled more by con- 
descendence than by a clear insight into the circumstances, 
for, when it was made a matter of animadversion by the 
brethren from Judaea, he immediately reverted to the Jewish 
usage. But this step on his part, the disparagement of the 
Gentiles, and tacit invitation to them to adopt the Jewish 
mode of life which it seemed to involve, brought about a crisis. 
Paul withstood Peter to the face {Gal. ii. 11), and his action 
doubtless drew from Peter a declaration of the entire freedom 
of the Gentiles. At any rate we find, in the New Testament, 
no more trace of any effort on the part of Peter to interfere in 
defence of the old Law. 

Of late an attempt has been made to place the dispute at 
Antioch at a date previous to that of the Council of Jerusalem. 
Neue kirchl. Z. 1894, pp. 435-48 ; Belser, Einleitung, 2nd ed. 
1905, pp. 401-27, 



John, James the Less, and the other Apostles 31 

§12 
John, James the Less, and the other Apostles l 

We have had reason to regret the lack of information 

regarding St. Peter ; of the remaining Apostles, however, we 

know still less. Of most of them, all that Acts records is their 

name. We gather, nevertheless, that after the death of James 

the Greater, the rest of the Apostles, who until then seem to 

have remained in Palestine, betook themselves to- foreign lands. 

Of two of them history tells us something. John, the son of 

Zebedee and brother of James the Greater, is first mentioned in 

connection with St. Peter, whom he accompanied at the healing 

of the man born lame, and, later on, to prison, and, still later, on 

the mission to Samaria. He must have returned afterwards to 

Jerusalem, and have tarried there until the death of our Lady, 

who had been committed to his charge by Christ when dying 

on the Cross. We find him at a later date at Ephesus, where 

he superintends the Churches of Asia Minor. Statements to 

this effect made by ancient writers are, by some moderns, 

though quite wrongly, put down to a confusion of two persons ; 

it being argued that Papias's testimony not only involves, 

as Eusebius admits (III, 39), the existence of two Johns, the 

Apostle and the Presbyter, but that the latter alone dwelt at 

Ephesus. According to the Apostle's own account (Apoc. I, 9), 

he had been banished (probably under Domitian) to Patmos. 

According to a tradition of later date, he had first been cast 

into a cauldron of burning oil, either at Ephesus 2 or at Rome. 3 

The Chronicon Paschale gives 101 as the date of his death. 

James the Less, son of Alphaeus (Matt. x. 3), is apparently 
one and the same with James the ' Brother of the Lord ' (Gal. i. 
19), whose father was called Clopas or Cleophas, and whose 
mother was a sister of the Blessed Virgin, and was likewise 
called Mary (Mark xv. 40 ; John xix. 25) ; the names Alphaeus 
and Clopas may be traced back to the Hebrew *a^n. On 

1 Acta apost. apocr. ed. Tischendorf, 1851; ed. Lipsius and Bonnet, 
1891-1903. Lipsius, Die apocryphen Apostelgeschichten, 3 vol. 1882-90 ; 
Th. Zahn, Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutest. Kanons u. d. altkirchl. 
Literatur, VI {Apostel u. Apostelschüler in d. Provinz Asien), 1900. 

2 Abdias, De hist, apost. cert. (in Cod. apocr \ N. T. ed. Fabricius, 1703); 
Cp. Zahn, Acta Ioannis, 1880, p. cxx, 

3 Tert. De praesc. 36. 



32 A Manual of Church History 

account of his relationship with Christ, James was held in high 
consideration among the Apostles ; he it was who proposed 
the new decree adopted at the Council of Jerusalem ; Paul 
reckons him (Gal. ii. 9) as one of the ' Pillars ' of the Church ; 
his holiness earned him the surname of the Just. 1 According to 
Hegesippus he was bishop of Jerusalem, a city which he seems 
never to have quitted. 2 In 62 or 63 he was stoned by order 
of the high-priest Ananias the Younger. 3 Should, however, 
the hypothesis which identifies the two disciples named James 
be wrong, then we know nothing of the Apostle beyond his 
name, all the data mentioned referring to the ' Brother of the 
Lord/ 



The history of the remaining Apostles is quite unknown. The 
Acts which deal with their doings are from a Gnostic source, and 
their contents are legendary rather than traditional. Origen, 
or, more correctly, Eusebius who appeals to him for confirmation 
(III, 1), tells us that Thomas evangelised Parthia, and Andrew 
Scythia, whilst Bartholomew preached the Gospel even as far 
as India — by which, probably, we must understand^Southern 
Arabia (Eus. V, 10) — Matthew first sought to convert the Jews, 
and then turned to the Gentiles (Eus. Ill, 24). The pioneer of 
Church historians has nothing to say of the other Apostles. 
Philip, Simon the Zealot, Judas Thaddaeus or Lebbseus, and 
Matthias. Of the last mentioned he merely repeats a saying 
regarding the mortification of the flesh. Polycrates of Ephesus, 
indeed states that the Apostle Philip and two of his maiden 
daughters lay buried at Hierapolis in Phrygia, but Eusebius, 
who reports this story (III, 31), considers Philip of Hierapolis 
to have been one of the seven deacons, and the fact that we 
are told of this Philip (Acts xxi. 8, 9) that he had four 
daughters ' who did prophesy ' inclines us to accept Eusebius's 
surmise as correct .* 

With regard to those of the Evangelists who were not of the 
Twelve, Mark is believed to have founded the Church of 
Alexandria, whilst the local traditions of Venice and Aquileia 
ascribe to him the foundation of these Churches also. Of 
Luke we only know that he was for a long time the com- 
panion of St. Paul. Cp. Col. iv. 14 ; 2 Tim. iv. n ; Philem. 24. 



1 Eus. II, 1. 

2 Ibid. II, 23. 

3 Josephus, Ant. XX, 8. A slightfy different version Is given by Hege- 
sippus in Eus. II, 23. 

4 Duchesne, Hist. anc. de l'£gl. I, 135, 



The Spread of Christianity 33 

§ 13 

The Spread of Christianity 1 

The long missionary journeys undertaken by St. Paul 
justify the supposition that even in Apostolic times the 
Gospel had established itself in most of the provinces of the 
Roman Empire. Subsequently it found its way also into 
the other provinces. Before long every large town in the 
Empire possessed its Christian community. 

The most important testimonies to this rapid spread are the 
following : — 

1. The growth of Christianity in Rome is attested by Tacitus 
(Anna!. XV, 44), who states that under Nero there perished an 
ingens multitudo of Christians ; by Pope Cornelius (f 253) , who 
speaks of an innumerable host of Roman Christians tended by 
forty-six priests and about one hundred clerics (Eus. VI, 43, 11). 
A proof of the spread of the Faith in the rest of Italy is furnished 
by the sixty bishops assembled by Cornelius in a synod at Rome 
to take steps against the Novatian schism (Eus. VI, 43, 2). 

2. In Gaul, as early as the middle of the second century, we 
find Churches flourishing in Lyons and Vienne (Eus. V, 1-4). 
A century later, according to the perhaps not altogether trust- 
worthy report of Gregory of Tours (H. F. I, 28), seven missionaries 
were sent thither from Rome, among them Dionysius, the first 
bishop of Paris. The belief that St. Paul sent his disciple Crescens 
to Gaul receives no confirmation from 2 Tim. iv. 10, even if 
we read, as in some MSS., TaWta instead of TaXaria, for both 
words were used indiscriminately to designate both Galatia and 
Gaul. Cp. Duchesne, Fastes episcopaux, I— II, 1894-1900 ; 
Bellet, Les origines des eglises de France, 1898 ; A. Houtin, 
La controverse de V apostolicite des eglises de France au XIXe Steele, 
3rd ed. 1903 ; L. Launay, Hist, de Veglise gauloise depuis les 
origines jusqu'ä la conquete franque (511), 2 vol. 1906. 

3. In Spain the Gospel may first have been preached by St. 
Paul. Irenaeus (I, 10, 2) and Tertullian (Adv. lud. 7) speak of 
Churches already existing there. We have also the letter (Ep. 67) 
sent by Cyprian in the middle of the third century to the Churches 
of Leon-Astorga and Merida. At the synod of Elvira (a.d. 300 or 
306), where it is scarcely credible that the whole of the episcopate 
could have been assembled, there were, nevertheless, present 

1 Mamachi, Origines et antiquitates Christianae, 1749-55 ; 1 841-51. 
A. Harnack, Mission u. Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei 
Jahrh. 2nd ed. 2 vol. 1906 (Engl. Trans, Expansion of Christianity in the First 
Three Centuries, 2nd ed. 1908), 

VOL, I, D 



34 A Manual of Church History 

nineteen bishops and twenty-four presbyters. Cp. Gams, KG. 
von Spanien, I ; H. Leclercq, UEspagne chretienne, 1906. 

4. That the Gospel, even at this period, had already found 
adherents in Germany, or more correctly on the left bank of the 
Rhine, may be seen from the words of Irenaeus (I, 10, 2), who 
speaks of the Churches in Germaniis (sc. Prima and Secunda), 
and from the attendance at the synod of Aries (314) of bishop 
Maternus of Cologne, and of Agricius, bishop of Treves. Testi- 
monies to the introduction of Christianity into the lands bordering 
on the Danube are to be found in the martyrdom of the two 
bishops, Victorinus of Pettau in Styria, and Quirinus of Sissek (309) , 
in the Passio IV Coronatorum, four Christian quarrymen of Pan- 
nonia, put to death under Diocletian (ed. Wattenbach, 1870 ; cp. 
SB. Berlin, 1896, pp. 1281-1302), and in the martyrdom of St. Afra 
in Augsburg at about the same time. 

5. So far as Britain is concerned, Tertullian is first in the 
field to allude to the inaccessa Romanis loca, Christo vero subdita. 
At the synod of Aries (314) there attended the bishops of York, 
London, and Lincoln. The Liber Pontificalis and Venerable 
Bede (H.E. I, 4) even state that the British King Lucius requested 
Pope Eleutherus (175-89) to send missionaries, and that he himself, 
with a part of his people, were converted. Harnack (SB. Berlin, 
1904, pp. 909 ff.) considers this statement to be based on a confusion 
with the old tradition that Abgar of Edessa corresponded with 
Eleutherus. 

6. Into Western Africa Christianity seems to have been brought 
from Rome. That it had taken vigorous root in its new soil is 
evident — whatever allowances we may feel disposed to make for 
exaggeration — from the words used by Tertullian (Ad Scap. 2), 
who says that the population of the towns was in large part com- 
posed of Christians ; it is also shown by the great number of 
African bishops. Cyprian speaks (Ep. 59, c. 10) of a heretic 
having been condemned, long before, by no less than ninety bishops. 
The synod of Carthage under Agrippinus (c. 220 A.D.) counted 
seventy, and the third synod held in that city (in 256) actually 
brought together eighty-seven bishops (Leclercq, L'Afrique ehre- 
tienne, 2 vol. 1904). 

7. In Egypt the first place to attract our attention is 
naturally Alexandria. From the end of the second century it 
was the seat of a famous school of catechetics. Before the fourth 
century the number of dioceses in Egypt had risen to about one 
hundred, as we see from the synod of Alexandria (in 324 or 321). 

8. Christianity made even more rapid progress in Asia, especially 
in Asia Minor. In Bithynia, Pliny (Ep. X, 97) found Christians 
of every age and class. In Phrygia, the Montanist movement 
led to synods being held as early as 170-80 (Eus. V, 16). Of 
Pontus, Lucian makes the magician Alexander to complain (Pseudo- 
mart. 25) that it is full of Atheists and Christians. The whole 



The Reasons of the Rapid Spread of Christianity 35 

region seems to have been in much the same case. To attest the 
presence of Christianity in Roman Armenia, we have the instruc- 
tion on penance sent to the brethren of that country when dis- 
tracted by the Novatian schism by Dionysius of Alexandria (Eus. 

VI, 46). 

9. We have no means of discovering the number of Christians 
in Syria, but they must have been almost as numerous as in Asia 
Minor, seeing that Antioch was in a sense the Christian metropolis 
of the whole of Asia. 

10. We know that the Faith made its way very early into the 
countries bordering on Syria. It had invaded the kingdom of 
Osrhoene, or, at least, its chief city Edessa, before the end of 
the second century ; K. Abgar IX (179-216) was a Christian. 
The legend as it existed, even in the time of Eusebius (I, 13), 
and which is contained in its entirety in the Doctrine of Addai, 
a work belonging to the beginning of the fifth century (ed. Philipps, 
1876), describes the country as having been evangelised in Apostolic 
times. According to this account, K. Abgar Ukkama, or the Black, 
requested of Christ to be healed, a service which our Lord promised 
to perform by a deputy, and which was actually undertaken, 
after His Ascension, by Addai, one of the seventy. Cp. Tixeront, 
Les origines de f Veglise d'Edesse, 1888 ; J. P. Martin, 1889 ; 
Duval, Hist. d'Edesse, 1892. 

11. In Palestine the Jews were probably able to set many 
obstacles in the way of the new Faith, but even here it made some 
progress and contrived to spread its sway into the neighbouring 
portion of Arabia, as we see from the synod of Bostra (244). 

12. India, according to tradition, was first evangelised by the 
Apostle Thomas ; hence the title of Christians of St. Thomas borne 
by the Faithful of that region. We are told by Eusebius (V, 10) 
that the catechist Pantaenus (c. 200) visited it from Alexandria, 
though it is on the whole more likely that his mission was only 
to Southern Arabia. However this may be, Cosmas Indicopleustes 
(§ 77) testifies to the existence of Indian Churches in the sixth 
century. Cp. German, Die Kirche der Thomaschristen, 1877. 



§ 14 

The Reasons of the Rapid Spread of Christianity 

Should the reader feel inclined to wonder at the wide and 
rapid spread of Christianity, he must recall to mind how 
thoroughly the world had been prepared for its advent (§ 6). 
Nor must we be unmindful of the inner force of the 
truth. Christianity imported a doctrine which was at once 
more comprehensive and more comprehensible than any 

D 2 



36 A Manual of Church History 

wisdom of this world, and which likewise afforded a better 
answer to those questions which are ever pressing themselves 
on man's mind, concerning God, the immortality of the soul, 
and the future life. We know that the Gospel claimed many 
converts among those who, like Justin, and Dionysius of 
Alexandria, had vainly sought in philosophy for an answer to 
these questionings. We must also take into account the 
numerous signs and wonders which gave testimony to the 
truth of the new teaching. 1 

The zeal of the Christians for their new faith also explains 
to some extent its success. Men and women, free men and 
slaves, ignorant men and scholars, all did their best to advance 
the Christian cause. 2 Their very life was in itself a sermon 
to the heathen who surrounded them. Their purity and their 
mutual charity in the midst of a world filled with vice and 
hatred, 3 their heroism in shedding their blood for their 
convictions, all this was a fashion of proclaiming to the pagans 
the superiority of the Faith. We occasionally even obtain 
glimpses of the impression then produced on outsiders ; Justin 
ascribes many conversions to the good example set by the 
Christians. Tertullian records the exclamation to which the 
pagans gave vent on seeing the extent of the Christians' 
charity. ' See how they love one another, and how they are 
ready to die one for the other ! ' Julian the Apostate ascribes 
the success of the Christian propaganda mainly to the charity 
of the Faithful, to their care for the dead, and to their sanctity, 
albeit he suspects the latter to be mere hypocrisy. 4 The depth 
of the impression produced by the constancy of the martyrs is 
witnessed to by Justin, 5 who observes that it was this that 
finally convinced him of the untruth of the calumnies laid at 
the door of the Christians ; nor was Justin by any means the 
only one who was led by the example of the martyrs into the 
bosom of the Church. It was Tertullian who said : Semen est 



1 Just. Apol. II, 6; Dial. 121. Iren. Adv. Haer. II, 32, 4. Tert. 
Apol. 23 ; De anima, 47. Orig. Contr. Cels. I, 46 ; III, 28. Cypr. Ad 
Donat. &c. 

2 Orig. Contr. Cels. Ill, 55. 

3 Just. Apol. I, 16; Tert. Apol. 39; Min. Fel. Oct. 9, 31; Cypr. 
De mortal. 

4 Just. Apol. I, 16 ; Tert. Apol. 39; Jul. Ep. 49. 

5 Apol. II, 12. 



Obstacles encountered by Christianity 37 

sanguis Christianorum, 1 and we find a similar view expressed 
by Origen and Lactantius. 3 



§15 

Obstacles encountered by Christianity, the Causes of 
the Persecutions 3 

In antiquity Religion was considered a purely political 
matter. The Roman State was especially rigorous in up- 
holding the national worship. Vanquished nations were 
permitted to worship according to their wont, but an ex- 
ception was made so far as Christians were concerned, for to 
tell the truth they did not form a nation, but rather a religi- 
ous association drawing its members from many nations. 
Their convictions, moreover, prevented them from doing as 
the heathen, and worshipping side by side with their God the 
deities of the Romans. Their avowed design of converting 
the whole world seemed to threaten danger to the established 
religion, and as religion was considered part and parcel of the 
State, their efforts seemed to be directed against the State 
itself. This suspicion was strengthened by the Christians 
refusing Divine honours to the Emperor, and by the action 
of some few of them who denounced military service and 
declined to illuminate and decorate their houses on occasions 
of public festivities. Though they performed their other 
duties as citizens most conscientiously and faithfully, there 
was sufficient ground in their abstentions to make them suspect 
of being enemies to the Emperor and to the Empire. 

In addition to this, at an early date the wildest and most 
damaging tales got abroad concerning the Christians. Their 
belief in one only God appeared to the pagans mere Atheism. 4 
Their Eucharist and Agape were thought to consist in impure 

1 Apol. 50. 

2 Orig. Cont.Cels. VII, 26 ; Lact. Inst. X, 9, 9. 

3 Maassen, Über die Gründe des Kampfes zw. dem heidnisch-röm. Staat 
u. dem Christentum, 1882 ; Th. Mommsen, Der Religionsfrevel nach röm. 
Recht, Hist. Z. 64 (1890), 389-429; Konrat, Die Christenverfolgungen, 1897; 
J. E. Weis, Christenv., Gesch. ihrer Ursachen in Römerreiche, 1899; A. 
Harnack, Der Vorwurf des Atheismus in den ersten drei Jahrh. 1905 (T. u. U. 
N. F. XIII, 4) ; F. Augar, Die Frau im röm. Christenprozess, 1905 ; 
Allard, Ten Lectures on the Martyrs (Engl. Trans. Lond. 1907). 

4 Cp. Just. Apol. 1, 6, 13 ; Athenag. Leg. 3 ff. ; Polyc. Mart. 3, 



38 A Manual of Church History 

and cannibalistic orgies, equalling in . depravity those of 
CEdipus and Thyestes ; l to their want of respect to the 
gods all public calamities were ascribed. 2 To those of the 
pagans whose profession depended on the old religion — priests, 
artists, poets, &c. — Christianity was particularly obnoxious, 
threatening as it did to cut off the source of their income. It 
was doubtless men such as these who accused Christians of 
being an unproductive class, infructuosi in negotiis.' 6 

The evil repute of the Christians soon occasioned outbreaks 
among the populace. Not unfrequently it was the governors 
who were responsible for the measures taken against them. 
With the advent of the third century the emperors themselves 
began to inaugurate the persecutions. The true grounds of 
the earlier persecutions are involved in much obscurity, and 
several explanations have been offered. Some maintain 
that the Christians were punished in virtue of the common law 
against illegal assemblies and against sacrilege, especially by 
the application of the Lex Iulia maiestatis, which awarded the 
death-penalty and confiscation of goods to all who should 
endanger the Roman State and its security, and to which the 
Christians rendered themselves liable by their abstention 
from the civic sacrifices then considered a part of every good 
citizen's duty. Others, like Mommsen, believe that the trial 
of the Christians was not a criminal one, but that the 
' coercionary ' power of a magistrate entitled him to convict 
summarily all who fell away from the national religion. A 
still more recent theory falls back on the Institutum Tiberianum, 
or Institutum trium accusationum, the so-called accusatio 
sumptuaria (against excessive household expense and suspicious 
manner of life), sacrilegii and laesae maiestatis, and considers 
that, as early as the time of Nero, this law was put into force 
against the Christians (Profumo, cp. § 16, I). There can be 
little doubt that some such law was appealed to, for Tertullian in 
his Apologeticum (10) writes : Sacrilegii et maiestatis rei conveni- 
mur. It is also possible that the practice of Christianity was, 
at an early date, expressly forbidden, or that the laws referred 

1 Cp. Just. Apol. I, 26; Dial. 10; Athenag. Leg. 31-36; Theoph, 
Ad Autol. Ill, 4 ff. ; Min. Fel. Oct. 30 f. ; Tert. Apol. 7, 9. 

2 Cp. Tert. Apol. 40; Cypr. Ad Demetr. 2, 3; Arnob. Adv, nat. I, 13, 
26 ; Aug. De civ. Dei. II, 3, 

3 Tert. Apol. 42, 43. 



The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 39 

to above were interpreted as forbidding it, for the same 
Tertullian (Apol. 4) inveighs against a law which enacted 
Non licet esse Christianos, whilst even Justin (Apol. I, 4) 
complains that Christians are condemned merely on the score 
of their title. Hence Christianity must have been forbidden 
as such almost from the beginning, for even under Nero its 
adherents were persecuted simply on account of their con- 
nection with it. 

But though the Christians were constantly and rigorously 
punished, yet their Faith could not be uprooted. A few, and 
at times many, indeed, fell away before the fear of martyrdom 
and death, but as a body they showed themselves stronger 
in enduring suffering and death than their adversaries in 
inflicting these punishments, so much so, that ultimately it 
became impossible not to perceive in this power transcending 
all nature a testimony to the Divine origin of the new religion. 

It is usual to reckon ten persecutions within the Roman Empire. 
This number, which is first found in Orosius (Hist. adv. pag. VII, 27), 
is, however, not quite correct historically, and seems to have 
been adopted chiefly for a symbolic reason, viz. to form a counter- 
part to the ten Plagues of Egypt. 



§ 16 

The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 1 

I. According to Suetonius, 2 the Emperor Claudius, about the 
year 50, expelled from Rome Iudaeos impulsore Chresto assidue 
tumultuantes ; there can be no doubt but that the Christians, 
equally with the Jews, fell under this sentence, seeing that the 
former were looked upon as a mere sect of the latter, and that 
the agitation which led up to this decree of banishment had 
been occasioned by the advent of Christianity. Nero (54-68) 
was, however, the first to start a persecution directed solely 

1 Lact. De mort. pers.; Allard, Hist, des pers'ec. 5 vol. 1885-90 ; 3rd ed. 
1903 ff. ; Le christianisme et V Empire romain, 1897 ; 6th ed. 1905 ; K. J. 
Neumann, Der röm. Staat u. die allg. K. bis auf Diokletian, I, 1889; Le 
Blant, Les persicuteurs et les martyrs, 1897; A. Linsenmayer, Die 
Bekämpfung des Christentums durch den röm. Staat bis Julian (363), 1905. 
We have appended the sign $ to the names of all those martyrs whose Acts 
are to be found in Ruinart's collection. 

2 Claud. 25 (Cp. Acts xviii. 2. Trans.). 



40 A Manual of Church History 

against the Christians. A fire — concerning which it is impos- 
sible to say, now, whether it was the emperor's doing or simply 
the result of an accident — having broken out (July 19, 64) and 
consumed the greater portion of the city of Rome, Nero pro- 
ceeded to throw the blame on the Christians, and, as their guilt 
could not be proved, they were summarily put to death in 
crowds amidst frightful tortures as guilty of misanthropy : 
propter odium generis humani. 1 No doubt the example of the 
capital was soon followed in the provinces. Among the 
victims of this persecution were the Apostles Peter and Paul, 
and if it be true that they died as late as 67, then the massacres 
must have been prolonged until Nero's death. 

II. Under Vespasian and Titus the Christians were left 
in relative peace, but in the latter years of Domitian's reign 
(81-96) they had again to suffer. The emperor's own cousin, 
the senator Flavius Clemens, was executed for äOeorr)*;, and his 
wife Domitilla was banished to the island of Pandataria. 2 It 
would appear that the consul Acilius Glabrio, another victim 
of Domitian's cruelty, must also be reckoned as a martyr. 
To safeguard his sovereignty, the distrustful monarch even 
caused our Lord's surviving relatives to be brought all the way 
to Rome. 3 Compared with the first persecution, this one 
was, however, of little importance ; Domitian, according to 
Tertullian, 4 was only a portio Neronis de crudelitate. This 
persecution, nevertheless, must have resulted in a certain 
number of martyrdoms, for Dio Cassius and others speak of 
many victims. 

III. Nerva (96-98) restored peace to the Christians ; he 
even forbade proceedings to be taken for lese majeste, and 
enacted that no one should be hindered from living according 
to the Jewish (i.e. Christian) manner of life. 5 A new persecu- 
tion was started under Trajan (98-117), in which there perished 
our Lord's relative, the 120-year-old bishop Simeon of 
Jerusalem, and also Ignatius of Antioch. We have some 

1 Tacitus, Annal. XV, 44; Clem, i Cor. 5, 6; Arnold, Die neron. 
Christenv. 1888; A. Profumo, Le fonti ed % tempi dello incendio Neroniano, 
1905; Archivio della R. Societä Romana, 1905, pp. 355-93. 

2 Dio Cass. Hist. Rom. 67, 14; Suet. Domit. 15; Funk, A t u, U. I, 
308-29. 

3 Heges. ap. Eus. Ill, 19, 20. 

4 Apol. 5. 

6 Dio Cass. Hist. Rom. 68, 1. 



The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 41 

details of the happenings in Asia Minor. The proconsul of 
Bithynia, Pliny the Younger, after having executed many 
Christians, and brought yet many more, through torture, 
to apostasy, astonished at their numbers, appealed (c. 112) x to 
the emperor for instructions how to deal with them. The 
reply was that they were not to be sought out, but that when 
denounced, they were to be punished, unless indeed they 
consented to relinquish their superstitions (Conquirendi non 
sunt; si defer antur et arguantur, puniendi sunt, &c.). As it 
was also laid down that no attention was to be paid to anony- 
mous denunciations, the result of the rescript was to make 
matters rather more tolerable for the Christians. But their 
position remained bad enough, for it was also made clear that 
their Faith was a religio illicita. 

The two following emperors were more kindly disposed. 
Their edicts, two of which have survived, show that they took 
under their protection the Christians of Greece and Asia Minor, 
who were constantly threatened by mob-law. Adrian, in his 
rescript to Minucius Fundanus, 3 forbade under threat of punish- 
ment any false charge. Antoninus Pius, 3 in his much discussed 
and probably apocryphal edict to the Council of Asia, 4 dis- 
allowed any accusation of Atheism against the Christians. But, 
even then, there was much suffering. Under Adrian the revolt 
of Barkochbas (132-35) led to the Christians being much 
mishandled by the Jews. 5 It was in the reign of Antoninus 
that there occurred at Rome the martyrdom of the three 
Christians, which induced Justin to write his second Apology, 
and also, at least according to the more modern reckoning,' 5 
the death at Smyrna of Poly carp and eleven other Christians J. 
Hence, though the edicts may have hindered the excessive 
fanaticism of the Greeks, they certainly did not legalise 
Christianity. 

IV. The fourth persecution took place under Marcus 
Aurelius (161-80). 7 His reign had been ushered in by many 

1 Ep. x, 97, 98. 

2 Just. Apol. I, 68 ; Eus. IV, 9; Funk, A.u. U. I, 330-45 ; Callewaert, 
Le rescrit d'Hadrien, 1903. 

3 Mg. by Lacour-Gayet, 1888; E. Briant, 1896. 

4 Eus. IV, 13 ; T. u. U. XIII, 4; N. J.f. d. Th. II, 131-46. 
* Just. Apol. I, 31. 6 KL. X, 145-54- 

7 Eus. IV, 16-V, 5 ; Renan, Marc. Aur. et la fin du monde antique, 4th 
ed. 1884 (Engl. Trans.). 



42 A Manual of Church History 

misfortunes. Famine and plague were raging over the Empire, 
powerful enemies were threatening the borders, and in many 
localities the people rose against the Christians as the cause of 
all these miseries. In Rome there died (c. 165) Justin {, with 
his six companions ; in Lyons there fell about fifty victims, 
among whom the aged Bishop Pothinus (178) {. Blood also 
flowed in the East, but no general edict of persecution was 
issued. The emperor, indeed, wrote to the proconsul of Gaul 
that all who professed Christianity were to be executed, but 
this was merely in answer to a request for advice in a particular 
case. In other localities the governors would seem to have 
acted on their own. Nor is there anything credible in the tale 
that Marcus Aurelius, after his expedition against the Quadi 
(174), forbade any further persecution, for he himself ascribed 
his unexpected victory to Jupiter Pluvius, and not to the 
prayers of the Christians, as the legend of the Legio fulminea 
does. 1 With the advent of Commodus (180-92) peace was 
again restored to the followers of Christ, thanks to the 
influence over the emperor of Marcia, his concubine. There 
were, nevertheless, some martyrs : at Carthage the Scillitan 
martyrs % were put to death (July 17, 180), 2 and in Rome 
Apollonius J, 3 whilst in Asia Minor a persecution raged for a 
time under the proconsul Arrius Antoninus. 4 

V. Septimius Severus (193-211), to begin with, continued 
his predecessor's policy, 5 but his conduct soon changed, and 
he forbade (201) not only conversion to Judaism — or rather 
the reception of circumcision — but also the profession of Chris- 
tianity. This enactment was followed by the fifth great 
persecution, in connection with which we have some informa- 
tion concerning two localities. At Alexandria, Leonides % with 
several disciples of his son Origen, and at Carthage, Perpetua 
and Felicitas J, together with three others, died for their 
Faith.? 

1 Cp. SB. Berlin, 1894, pp. 835-82; Hermes, 1895; Civiltä catt. 1895; 
N. J.f. d. klass. Altertum, 1899, pp. 253 ff. 

2 Cp. Neumann, pp. 72-76, 284-86 ; Texts and Studies, I, 2. 

3 Eus. V, 21 ; Jerom. Cat. 42 ; Max, Prince of Saxony, Der hl. M. 
Apollonius von Rom, 1903; Nachr. Göttingen, 1904, pp. 262-84. 

4 Tert. Ad Scap. 5. 

5 Reville-Krüger, Die Religion zu Rom unter den Severern, 1888. 

6 Spart. Sept. Sev. 17. 

7 Franchi De' Cavalieri, La Passio SS. Perpetuae et Felicitatis, 1896. 
(J. Armitage Robinson, item.) 



The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 43 

Peace was again established for a time by the death of 
Septimius, though it was at about this time that the jurist Domi- 
tius Ulpianus drew up his collection of the imperial rescripts 
against Christianity. 1 Antoninus Severus Caracalla (211-17) 
probably spared them on account of the favourable impression 
they had made upon him in his youth. Elagabalus (218-22) 
cherished the ambition of fusing all religions, Christianity 
included, in the Syrian Sun-worship, to which he was himself 
addicted. Alexander Severus (222-35), a religious eclectic, 
doubtless influenced by his mother, Julia Mammsea, who was 
kindly disposed to the Christians, regarded Christianity as a 
legitimate mode of worshipping God. Among his Lares there 
stood a picture of Christ, side by side with those of Apollonius 
of Tyana, Abraham, and Orpheus, whilst on the walls of his 
palace and on certain monuments he caused the words of 
Luke vi. 31 (fn the form in which they are found in the Didache, 
I, 2) to be inscribed. The emperor even went so far as to ex- 
press a wish to erect a temple to Christ ; in spite of the opposi- 
tion of the Roman stallsmen who claimed the right to occupy 
it, he declared the Christians free to use a certain open space 
in the city for their worship. The emperor's own kindliness 
did not, however, prevent deeds of violence by his officials. 
According to tradition, it was in his reign that the much 
debated martyrdom of St. Csecilia occurred, 3 at least it must 
have taken place then if the bishop Urban, to whom allusion 
is made, was really the Pope of that name (222-30). 

VI. Under Maximinus Thrax (235-38) the position of the 
Christians again became difficult. This emperor persecuted 
indiscriminately the partisans of his predecessor and the 
Christians who had been protected by him. In consequence 
of an edict which he directed against the clergy in par- 
ticular, P. Pontian and the anti-pope Hippolytus were both 
deported to Sardinia, where the climate soon occasioned their 
death. 3 It does not seem, however, that much, if indeed any, 
blood was shed, save in the provinces of Cappadocia and 
Pontus, where disastrous earthquakes excited the populace to 

1 Lact. Inst. V, n. 

2 ^rpu/j-oLTiou apxaio\oyiKoit ', Mitteilungen zum. zweiten intern. Kong. /. 
Zhristl. Archäol, 1900; Th. Qu t 1902-05* 

3 Catal. Liberi anus. 



44 A Manual of Church History 

rise against the Christians ; l this latter persecution did not 
last long, and it is probable that Maximin had nothing 
to do with it. Under Gordian (238-44) and Philip the Arab 
(244-49) the times continued to be peaceful ; the latter was 
even reported to have become a Christian, 2 a rumour which 
doubtless had no better base than the emperor's friendliness to 
Christians, for it is certain that, whatever may have been his 
private convictions, he showed himself outwardly a thorough 
pagan. 

VII. Apart from the unimportant persecution under 
Maximin, the Church enjoyed at this time a period of quiet 
extending over forty years, a period sufficiently long to notably 
increase her numbers. Unfortunately her inward growth was 
not proportioned to her outward development ; many of her 
members grew tepid, and, to try them again, God sent — 
the remark is Cyprian's 3 — a new persecution, which was com- 
menced by Decius (249-5 1). 4 Determined to restore its 
ancient splendour to the now visibly decaying Empire, he 
judged it well to start by reclaiming the Christians to heathen- 
dom, and this he proceeded to do in so methodical a manner 
and with such energy that his persecution exceeded all previous 
ones in cruelty. Christians were bidden to put aside their 
religion, and when brought face to face with the most horrible 
tortures, they did in fact fall away in crowds. 5 Some consented 
to sacrifice (sacrificati) , others to burn incense before the idols 
(thurificati) , others sought certificates attesting that they had 
complied with the emperor's demands (libellatici, acta facientes) . 
Yet the race of Christian heroes still lived ; many, like Fabian, 
or the priest Pionius J at Smyrna, chose to retain their faith at 
the cost of their lives. At the beginning of 251 Decius, per- 
ceiving the utter uselessness of his cruelty, began to desist, and 
died soon after, when engaged in a war against the Goths. 
With his death peace was restored, and, as his successor Gallus 
(251-53) at first took no measures against Christianity, there 
seemed some prospect of the Christians being left unmolested. 
But as soon as a plague began to lay waste the Empire, the 

1 Ep. Firmilian. inter Cypr. ep. 75, 10; Orig. In Matth % horn. 39. 

2 Eus. VI, 34; VII, 10, 3. 
8 De lap sis, 4. 

4 Gregg, The Decian Persecution, 1898, 

5 Cypr. De lapsis, 7-9; Eus. VI, 41. 



The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 45 

emperor decreed that intercessory sacrifices should be every- 
where offered to Apollo, and, on the Christians refusing, their 
troubles began anew. But they were now better prepared for 
the trial than they had been under Decius, and many of those 
who had previously fallen now made amends for their former 
cowardice. Among the then martyrs must be reckoned Pope 
Cornelius, who died in exile. 

VIII. On Valerian l (253-60) ascending the throne, peace- 
ful days again dawned ; the new emperor was said to have 
Christians even in his own household. But not much time 
had elapsed before he too was led by the intrigues of his 
favourite Macrianus to harsh dealings. 3 By the edict of 257, 
bishops, priests, and deacons were threatened with banishment 
should they refuse to sacrifice, whilst the faithful were forbidden 
under penalty of death to visit the cemeteries or assemble for 
worship. A later edict (258) 3 ordained that the higher clergy 
should be executed forthwith, and that the more eminent 
members of the laity should be dealt with likewise, unless 
indeed the loss of both fortune and status had brought them to 
their senses. Ladies of rank were to lose their possessions 
and be banished ; members of the imperial household were to 
be deprived of their goods, put in irons, and made to serve as 
penal slaves on the emperor's farms. The persecution caused 
much bloodshed, especially in the East, where it was pushed 
forward by the usurper Macrianus ; in the West, however, it 
came to an end with the capture of the emperor by the Persians. 
Gallienus, Valerian's son, 4 not only allowed the Christians to 
live in peace, he also restored to them their cemeteries and the 
places of worship, which, in spite of their religion being for- 
bidden, they had been able to establish, either in virtue of the 
law of Septimius Severus concerning Collegia funer aticia, 5 or in 
consequence of the tolerance shown to them by several of the 
emperors, 6 but which had been confiscated during the previous 
persecution. A like restitution of goods and dignities was 
probably made to the private persons who had been deprived 

1 P. J. Healy, The Valerian Persecution, 1903, 

2 Eus. VII, 10-12. 

3 Cypr. Ep. 80, 1. 

4 Eus. VII, 13. 

5 De Rossi, Roma sotteranea, I, 101-10 ; II, pp. VI-IX. 

6 Duchesne, Congrös scient. Ill des catholiques, V, 488. 



46 A Manual of Church History 

of them. The best-known martyrs of Valerian's period were, 
in Rome, Pope Sixtus II and his deacon Lawrence J ; in Africa, 
the Massa Candida, a large company of martyrs put to death 
at Utica ; at Carthage, Cyprian { ; and in Spain the bishop 
Fructuosus of Tarragona and his deacons Augurius and 
Eulogius J. 

IX. It would seem that Gallienus not only found a modus 
vivendi agreeable to both State and Church, but that, under 
him, Christianity was recognised as a religio licita. But the 
time was not as yet ripe for such a revolution ; according to 
quite a number of Acts, blood again flowed in Italy and in Rome 
itself during the reign of Claudius II. However this may be, 
in Aurelian (270-75) l a new foe to the Christians came on the 
scene. Though ever an earnest devotee of the gods, in the 
early years of his reign this emperor observed the edicts of 
Gallienus ; thus it was he who gave judgment in the case of 
the Christians of Antioch against the deposed bishop Paul 
of Samosata, and in favour of the rightful bishop Domnus. 
Nevertheless, in 275 he issued an edict of persecution, though, 
to tell the truth, it was of no effect, as he died soon after and 
his successors failed to act on it. 

X. Diocletian 3 (284-305) and the co- Augustus Maximian 
(286-305), likewise their two Caesars, Galerius and Constantius 
(from a.D. 292), for some time left the Christians to their 
own devices, a fact which led to a great spread of the Gospel. 
In the more important towns large churches were being erected, 
and everything seemed to point to the new religion soon obtain- 
ing the better of paganism. At a later date (313) Maximin 
was able to say, though no doubt he was guilty of exaggeration, 
that nearly everybody had gone over to Christianity. 3 But 
the victory was not to be gained so easily. Galerius, backed 
by other like-minded pagans, persuaded Diocletian to change 
his religious policy, with the result that there followed the 
tenth persecution, the most bloody of all, which was to decide 
finally the issue between Christianity and paganism. It 
began with the purification of the army, Christian officers being 

1 Eus. VII, 30; Lact. De mort. pers. 6. 

2 Violet, Die paläst. Märtyrer des Eusebius v. C. 1896 (T. u. U. XIV, 4) ; 
Belser, Zur dioklet. Christenv. 1891; O. Seeck, Gesch. des Untergangs der 
antiken Welt, I, 2nd ed. 1897. 

3 Eus. IX, 9. 



The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 47 

bidden to apostatise or lose their rank ; l some were, even then, 
put to death. The persecution commenced in earnest in 303 ; 
within a brief space of time four edicts were published which 
threw into mourning the whole of Christendom. The first 
ordained 3 that the churches should be razed and the sacred 
books burnt, that all Christians should be accounted outlaws 
and lose their offices and dignities, and that those who were 
attached to the emperor's household should lose their freedom. 
The carrying out of this edict led to some bloodshed, and in 
Nicomedia there were even many martyrs. A fire which 
broke out in the emperor's palace there was set down to the 
Christians, and on this charge all who refused to sacrifice 
were executed. Popular upheavals in Syria and Cappadocia 
were also made a pretext for further persecutions. A second 
edict 3 commanded all clerics to be imprisoned, a third * com- 
pelled them all to offer sacrifice under threat of torture ; 
lastly, after a brief respite granted for Diocletian's vicennalia, 
a fourth edict 5 (304) was published, making sacrifice obligatory 
on Christians of every class. Blood was now poured out every- 
where save only in the prefecture of Gaul ; Constantius, who 
ruled over this portion of the empire, confined himself to 
executing the first edict, and, on his death (306), his son 
Constantine continued his policy of clemency. In Italy and 
Africa the Christians obtained a breathing space ander 
Maxentius (306-12), whilst in Pannonia, Dalmatia, and Noricum 
peace was secured by the arrival of Licinius (307), but in the 
East the persecution was pushed forward with unabated fury 
until 311. Diocletian was succeeded by Galerius, who was the 
real cause of all the evil, but who was himself surpassed in 
brutality by the new Caesar, Maximin Daza. Yet all was in 
vain, as even Galerius was at last forced to acknowledge, 
when, in 311, he issued his edict ß granting toleration to 
the Christians. Constantine was soon to go much further ; 
already favourable to Christianity before his campaign with 
Maxentius, no sooner had he vanquished his enemy at the 
Milvian Bridge (312), than he made haste to issue at Milan, in 
conjunction with his son-in-law Licinius, his famous edict of 

1 Eus. VIII, 1. 2 Ibid. VIII, 2 ; Lact. De mort. pers. 13. 

3 Ibid. VIII, 6. 4 Ibid. 

5 Ibid. De mart. Palaest. 3. 

6 Lact. De mort. pers. 34 ; Eus. VIII, 17. 



48 A Manual of Church History 

toleration (313). 1 That granted by Galerius had been 
conditional, but here we find the freedom of religious worship 
made absolute ; each one is henceforward free to worship 
according to his will, and ecclesiastical goods and buildings 
confiscated during the religious troubles are to revert to 
the Churches, which are at the same time recognised as 
lawful associations. The new order of things had still one 
opponent in Maximin, who, in spite of the peace of 311, had 
recommenced hostilities ; his power came, however, to an end 
with the decisive battle of Adrianople (314), when Licinius, 
the victor, became ruler of the East and introduced into his 
dominions the observance of the Edict of Milan, 

The conversion of Constantine to Christianity was a matter 
of such vast importance in the history of the Roman Empire and 
to the world at large, that we cannot be surprised if it soon came 
to be looked upon as the result of a miracle. In his Church History 
(IX, 9) Eusebius merely tells us that during the battle against 
Maxentius, the emperor had implored the help of the God of 
heaven and of Christ the Redeemer, and that his prayer having 
been heard, he commanded that the statue which was erected in 
his honour in Rome should bear in its right hand the sign of the 
Redemption, and have at its base an inscription telling how by 
means of this salutary sign he had freed the city from tyranny. 
The second contemporary writer, Lactantius (De mortibus perse- 
cutorum, 44) , simply observes : Commonitus est in quiete Con- 
stantinus, ut caeleste signum Dei notaret in scutis atque ita praelium 
committeret, Sec. In his Vita Constantini (I, 28-31) Eusebius, on 
the authority of a statement made to him by Constantine, gives 
a much more circumstantial story, to the effect that on a certain 
afternoon the emperor, together with his whole army, had beheld 
a fiery cross standing over the sun and inscribed with the words 
tovtw v Ua ; that during the following night Christ had appeared 
to Constantine with this same sign, and had commanded him to 
make a standard after this pattern, a kind of banner adorned 
with Christ's monogram, and which was afterwards called the 
Labarum. In this form, however, the narrative is open to suspicion, 
seeing that the apparition of the Cross, which we are told was 
witnessed by the whole host, is not even mentioned in the earlier 
version ; but it does not follow that the tale is wholly fictitious, 
nor should we be justified in denying that Constantine may have 
discerned in the sky some sign resembling a cross. We have pro- 
bably to deal with some real phenomenon, though it may have 
been enlarged upon and explained in the light of subsequent 

1 Eus. X, 5 j Lact, 48. 



The Ten Great Persecutions in the Roman Empire 49 

events. Cp. Heinichen's Meletema, xxiv, to Eus. V. C. I, 28, 29; 
L. Ranke, WG. IV, 2, 255-63 ; Desroches, Le Labarum, 1894 ; 
Funk, A.u. U. II, 1-23 ; De Combes, Finding of the Cross, Engl. 
Trans. London, 1907, pp. 125 ff. 

It is to Diocletian's persecution that we must refer the 
martyrdom of the Thebaian Legion, which is first spoken of by 
St. Eucherius of Lyons in 450. According to his statement, this 
entirely Christian legion, which was quartered at Agaunum (St. 
Maurice, Canton Valais, Switzerland), after it had refused to a 
man to take any part in the persecution of the Faithful, was twice 
decimated and finally wholly destroyed by Maximian. The 
names of some of the martyred legionaries have been preserved, 
those namely of Maurice, Exsuperius, and Candidus. Later 
accounts of the same story state that detachments of this legion 
were put to death in other cities, notably along the Rhine. There 
is doubtless some truth underlying the story, though the accounts 
which embody it may rightly be suspected of having embellished 
the real facts. Allard (V, 335-64) locates it at the time of the revolt 
of the Bagaudae (286), and instead of a legion substitutes a cohort 
of some few hundred men. The latest writers who have dealt 
with the question are Stolle, 1891 ; J. Schmid, 1893 « R. Berg, 
1895. Cp. Th. Qu. 1891, p. 702 ; 1893, p. 176 ; 1895, p. 171. 

Another martyrdom which deserves to be mentioned here is 
that of St. Ursula and the eleven thousand Virgins. Being on 
their way back to Britain from a pilgrimage to Rome, they are 
said to have been put to death at Cologne by the Huns. That 
the story is very ancient is seen from the old Clematius inscription 
(which cannot be later than the fifth century) in the choir of the 
Church of St. Ursula at Cologne, which testifies that certain virgin- 
martyrs were venerated in the city. Beyond this inscription we 
have no historical witnesses to the fact, for the legendary accounts 
are not worth any consideration. The oldest documents which 
give a figure speak of eleven virgins, and, possibly, the huge figure 
of the later legends may be explained by the error of a scribe, who 
finding mention made of XL M. Virgines, mistook the letter M, 
which really stood for Martyres, for the Roman numeral denotirg 
a thousand. Cp. Friedrich, KG. Deutschlands, I, 141, 166 ; 
G. Morin, L' inscription de Clematius et la legende des onze mille 
vierges, in the Melanges Paul-Fabre, 1902, pp. 51-64. 



VOL. I. 2 



5o A Manual of Church History 



§17 

The Struggle against Christianity with the Weapons 

of the Mind l 

Not only did paganism seek the aid of the secular arm 
to support it against the encroachments of its new rival, 
it also strove to gain its end with weapons of a different 
character. Quite a number of writings made their appear- 
ance, in which Christianity was attacked either openly or 
indirectly. Amongst these must be reckoned, besides two 
similar works of which scarcely anything is known, 2 the 
'A\7)6r)$ X070? of the philosopher Celsus (written 170-85), 
the fifteen books against the Christians by the neo-Platonist 
Porphyrius (270-75), and the Aoyoi faXdXrfdeis of Hierocles, 
a governor of Bithynia in 303. These writings, partly on 
account of an imperial edict (a.D. 448) which condemned to the 
flames the books of Porphyrius and possibly all other works of a 
like stamp, partly because they failed to interest later readers, 
soon fell into oblivion, so that at present they are known to us 
only through the works of the Christian Apologists. The work 
of Porphyrius has not come down to us even in this form, as 
the polemical tracts which dealt with it have likewise perished, 
with the possible partial exception of one (cp. § 75). The 
most important of all these attacks seems to have been that of 
Celsus, which it is possible to reconstitute almost in its entirety 
from the exhaustive refutation penned by Origen. 3 His 
philosophical objections against Christianity, especially against 
the doctrines of the Incarnation of the Son of God and the 
Redemption, were accounted so able that later opponents of 
Christianity did little more than refurbish the arguments 
used by Celsus. On the other hand, the historical side of his 
work is of a much weaker character, whilst his statements 
concerning Christ's life are wholly fabulous. 

1 H. Kellner, Hellenismus u. Christentum, 1864; Aube, Hist, des 
persSc. de l'eglise, vol. II : La polimique pa'ienne ä la fin du II e stiele, 1878; 
Kleffner, Porphyrius, 1896 (Lectures at Paderborn, 1896-97). 

2 One being that of Fronto (cp. Min. Fel. Oct. IX, 31). 

3 Keim, Celsus' Wahres Wort, 1873; Aube, op. cit. pp. 275-389; J. F. 
Muth, Der Kampf des Phil. Celsus gegen das Christentum, 1899; Funk, 
A.u. U. II, 152-61 (for the date of Celsus' s work). 



Pagan Polemics 51 

The work mentioned above did not constitute Porphyrius's 
only effort against Christianity. He argues against it in 
several passages of his Philosophy derived from the Oracles. 1 
This latter work has also an indirectly polemical character, for 
its whole object is to furnish the pagans with a teaching which 
shall depend on God's authority, in other words with a counter- 
feit of Holy Writ, which might satisfy the pagans' longing for 
an Absolute, and so retain them for the old* religion. It was 
probably a like object which the neo-Pythagorean Flavius 
Philostratus had in view when, in obedience to the demand 
of Julia Domna, Caracalla's mother, he undertook to write the 
life of Apollonius of Tyana, 2 a biography which is palpably 
modelled on that of Christ. It was again a like reason which, 
in the third century, led to the unearthing of the Orphic and 
Hermetic writings. 

Lastly, we may reckon among the ancient literary foes of Christi- 
anity the friend of Celsus, the Rhetor Lucian of Samosata, at least 
inasmuch as his work De morte Peregrini casts ridicule on the 
Christians' fraternal love and contempt of death. The work itself 
is, however, really directed against the Cynics. Cp. Bernays, 
Lucian u. die Cyniker, 1879 ; Deeleman, Lucianus' Geschrift 
De morte Peregrini, 1902. 

1 Wolff, Porphyrii de philosophia ex oraculis haurienda librorum reliquiae, 
1856. 

2 F. Whittaker, Apollonius of Tyana, 1906, 



CHAPTER II 

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH J 

§ 18 

The Clergy 3 

At the very beginning, the direction of the Church was 
naturally left in the hands of the Apostles, who were 
aided by the two categories of * prophets ' and ' doctors.' 3 
The latter seem to have undertaken the further instruction of 
the new Christians, whereas on the Apostles there devolved 
the duty of making converts. The title of Apostle was not 
reserved to the Twelve, it was also bestowed on all their com- 
panions and helpers, such as Barnabas, and in fact on all the 
earlier heralds of the Gospel, 4 who, by the way, were also known 
as ' Evangelists/ 5 From the earliest times we also find mention 
made of bishops, presbyters, and deacons. 6 The latter offices 
were destined to remain, whereas the former either disappeared 
with the end of the Apostolic Age (such being the case with 
the Evangelists) or, like those of the ' prophets ' and ' doctors,' 
were merged in the permanent offices of bishop and presbyter. 

1 Bingham, Origines sive antiquitates eccles. ; A. Ritschl, Entstehung der 
altkath. K. 2nd ed. 1857; Döllinger, Christentum u. K. 2nd ed. 1868 
(Engl. Trans. First Age of Christianity and the Church, 2 vol. 3rd ed. 1877),, 

2 Rquh. 1888, II, 329-84 ; 1891, II, 397-429 (Th. Qu. 1889, p. 698 ; 1892, 
p. 700) ; Sobkowski, Episkopat u. Presbyterat in d. ersten christl. Jahrh. 
1893; Reville, Les origines de l'dpiscopat, 1894; Revue biblique, 1895, 
pp. 473-500; Michiels, L'origine de V episcopate 1900; Dunin-Borkowski, 
Die neueren Forschungen über die Anfänge des Episkopats, 1900 ; Revue Binid. 
1901, pp. 26-43 ; H. Bruders, Die Verfassung d. K. 1902. 

3 1 Cor. xii. 28, 29 ; Acts xiii. 1 ; Eph. iv. 11 ; Doct. Ap. 11-15. 

4 Doct. Ap. XI, 3-6. 

6 Eph. iv. 11 ; Acts xxl. 8 ; Eus. III, 37 ; V, 10. 

6 Acts xx. 17-28 ; Phil. i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 2, 8, 12 ; v. 1, 17, 19 ; Tit. 1. 5, 7 ; 
Doct. Ap. XV, 1. 



The Clergy 53 

Of bishops, Acts xx. 28 tells us that they were placed over 
the Church of God to rule it ; hence, even in those times, 
Christians fell into two classes, that of the rulers and that of 
the simple Faithful, or, to use the expressions employed even 
in the remotest Christian antiquity, that of the clergy and 
that of the laity. 

The rulers of the Church are, in Scripture, always mentioned 
in the plural, sometimes under the names of 7r peer ß vre poi, 
sometimes under that of iiriG-Koirot. 1 We must, accordingly, 
conceive them to have formed a kind of college or priesthood 
(1 Tim. iv. 14), after the pattern adopted by the Jews, whose 
synagogues were governed by a Council of Elders (D'JßQ. 
The college had a president, and, as the direction of the Church 
was left more and more in his hands, his authority extended, 
until finally the title of iiricncoTros, which at first had an entirely 
general meaning, came to be applied to him alone. This 
change, of which we find the first indications in the letters of 
Ignatius M., at the beginning of the second century, testifies to 
the growth of the monarchical idea in the constitution of the 
Church. From this it does not, however, follow that the 
episcopate in its present meaning was a late introduction ; 
were this the case, and had the Church been originally wholly 
presbyterian in its constitution, it would be difficult to under- 
stand how its episcopal form came to prevail so early in every 
part of Christendom, especially as the Mother and Mistress of 
the Churches did not then, as yet, possess sufficient influence to 
introduce so great a change throughout the world. Nor are 
traces wanting of bishops, even in the earliest times ; Timothy 
and Titus in the Pastoral epistles of St. Paul, and the ' Angels ' 
of the seven Churches of Asia, in the Apocalypse (I, 20 ff.) — 
though some consider the latter to be simply personifications 
of the Churches — seem to hold a rank identical with that of 
bishops. James the ' Lord's brother ' is distinctly called by 
Hegesippus bishop of Jerusalem, and what Holy Writ says of 
him entirely bears out this statement. The opinion of St. 
Jerome, 3 that originally there were only priests, and that 

1 For instance, in Acts xx. Paul summons the ancients (presbyteri) , and 
in the course of his address bids them ' take heed to the whole flock wherein 
the Holy Ghost' had placed them bishops (episcopi).' Trans. 

2 Comm. in Tit. I ; ep. 69 ad Ocean. I ; ep. 146 ad Evang. I. 



54 A Manual of Church History 

bishops made their appearance later, when, as a measure of 
precaution against schisms and other like dangers, one priest 
was made supreme over his colleagues, is based on an erroneous 
inference from the older fashion of speech. At any rate, ever 
since the bishop attained to power, it is he who is the true 
president of each Church, its leader and pastor, directing its 
worship and administering its sacraments, forming at once the 
connecting link between the different members of the com- 
munity he rules, and their spokesman in their dealings with 
other Churches. 

The priests 1 originally formed the council of the bishop, 
whom they assisted in the Liturgy and in the office of preaching; 
in his absence they would officiate in his place. 3 Except in the 
larger Churches, their office does not appear to have been very 
onerous, and their title was often one of honour merely. It is 
noticeable that the Didascalia leaves it to the Faithful to 
decide whether any portion of the offertories shall be set apart 
for the priests, whereas it attributes to the bishop and his 
deacon a strict right to the same. It was only when parishes 
came into being that the priesthood became a position of any 
importance. 

The Diaconate, 3 or third class of clerics, either came into 
existence by the election at Jerusalem of the seven who were 
to serve at table (§ 8), or it was a development of this earlier 
service. The deacon's office was, generally speaking, to assist 
the bishop in his work, and, in practice, their duties seem to 
have been very extensive. The deacon had to act as the 
bishop's deputy in caring for the poor, he had to assist the bishop 
in the Liturgy, principally by administering the Holy Eucharist, 
and, when necessary, also by baptising. So long as deacons 
remained the bishop's only ministers, many other duties also 
fell to their lot. They thus occupied a far more important 

1 ' Presbyteri.' Clement of Rome is the first to use the term lepe7s : ' Sacer- 
dotes ' of Christian priests. Trans. 

2 In certain Churches the college of priests had the power vacante sede of 
consecrating their candidate to the episcopal office. Duchesne I, p. 94. 
Trans. 

3 Mg. by J. N. Seidl, 1884; Zöckler (Diakonen u. Evangelisten), 1893; 
P. A. Leder (Die Diakonen der Bischöfe u. Presbyter u. ihre urchristlichen 
Vorläufer), 1905, 



The Clergy 55 

position than the priests, though they stood lower in the 
hierarchy. 1 

Other Orders of clerics were introduced after the time of 
the Apostles. As the Churches increased in size with a 
corresponding increase of work for the clergy, whereas, if we 
may accept the statement of the Council of Neo-Caesarea 
(c. 15), it was thought unseemly to increase the college of 
deacons beyond the sevenfold number fixed by the Apostles, 
a decision was taken to create new Orders for the relief of 
the overworked deacons : sub-deacons (vTroScd/covot) , who 
should be at the service of the deacons; lectors (dvayvcoarai) , 
for the public reading of the Scriptures ; acolyths, whose duty 
seems to have been to assist the sub-deacons and perform 
various subordinate services ; exorcists {iTropKtorrai) , who 
assumed the charge of those possessed of evil spirits 
(evep<yovfi€voL, ^etfza^ofievot) ; and porters {irvXcopoi) , who were 
entrusted with the supervision of the church doors. All these 
Orders are mentioned by Pope Cornelius (251-53). 2 They had 
been instituted, some in the third, and some even in the 
second century. In the larger Churches the instruction of 
catechumens devolved on the catechists, or, as they were 
sometimes called, the doctores audientium, whilst for the 
performance of certain services to the female sex, which could 
not easily be undertaken by men, especially those connected 
with the administration of Baptism, another Order, that of 
the deaconesses, was instituted. This Order was already in 
existence in the time of St. Paul {Rom. xvi. 1). Yet another 
Order, which came into existence at about the same time, was 
that of the widows. St. Paul lays down the rules for their 
life (1 Tim. v. 3-13) ; their principal duty appears to have 
been that of prayer. The division between the two Orders 
is not always quite clear, and, particularly at the beginning, 
the office of deaconess was entrusted only to widows. 3 

1 Ignatius M., in his ep. to the Trallians, compares the bishop to God the 
Father, the deacons to Jesus Christ, and the presbyters to the Apostles. Trans. 

2 Ep. ad Fab. ap. Eus. VI, 43 ; H. Reuter, Das Subdiakonat, 1890 ; F. 
Wieland, Die genetische Entwicklung der sog. Ordines minores, 1897 (R. Qu. 
Suppl. fasc. 7). 

3 Cp. Pankowsky, De diaconissis, 1866 ; Seesemann, Das Amt der Diako- 
nissen, 1891 ; Zscharnack, Der Dienst der Frau in den ersten Jahrh. der ehr. 
K. 1902. 



5t> A Manual of Church History 

§ 19 

The Preparation, Selection, and Means of Subsistence of the 

Clergy l 

I. The Apostles prepared their disciples as they them- 
selves had been prepared by their Master, that is, they 
taught them by keeping them always in their company. The 
followers of the Apostles acted likewise, and this system of 
training was helped on, as new Orders gradually came into 
being, by the rule forbidding anyone to be promoted to a 
higher rank who had not given good promise in a lower Order. 
The catechetical schools, which are known to have been in 
existence before the end of the second century — in spite of 
their primary object being different — must also have con- 
tributed to train the clergy, whilst in the very earliest period 
there were the extraordinary charismata bestowed to help 
the preachers of the Gospel and the rulers of the Church (i Cor, 
xii. 28 ff.). 

II. Owing to the exceptional authority of the Apostles, the 
selection of the clergy in the beginning was left almost entirely 
in their hands, though even then the Church's wishes were 
first ascertained. Later on, the choice of bishops was left to 
the Churches and to the other bishops of the province ; accord- 
ing to Cyprian, the individual Churches exercised the right 
of election (suffragium), whilst the bishops of the province 
claimed the right of giving their ratification (consensus, indicium) 
to the election. The Councils of Aries (c. 20) and Nicaea (c. 4) 
decreed that at least three bishops should be present at the 
consecration, the Nicene Council also laying it down that the 
metropolitan should be consulted in the choice of a new bishop. 
Members of the lower clergy were selected by the bishop, 
information being previously sought as to the Church's feelings. 
It stands to reason that, under these circumstances, offices 
were not seldom obtained by underhand means. 

III. According to Holy Writ (Matt. x. 10 ; 1 Cor. ix. 13) 
the ministers of the altar have the right to live by the altar. 
The Faithful fulfilled this duty to their pastors by presenting 

1 Funk, A. u. U. I, 23-39 (on their election) ; 121-55 ( on their celibacy) ; 
II, 60-77 '> m> § 8 (on commerce and trade in Christian antiquity). 



The Clergy 57 

offerings (oblationes) at the services. The Didache (c. 13) directs 
the Faithful to offer to God their first-fruits, whilst the Dida- 
scalia (Const. Apost. II, 25), by applying to the Christians the 
injunction of the Book of Numbers (c. xviii), seems to enjoin 
the paying of tithes. Soon, thanks to the Roman law regard- 
ing associations (see above, § 16, viii), the Church began to 
grow wealthy; as yet, however, the communities were not able 
to provide completely for their pastors ; many of the clergy 
supported themselves on their patrimony, or followed the 
example of St. Paul (Acts xx. 34) in working for their living, 
either in the fields, or at a trade or otherwise. Some bishops, 
indeed, gave so much time to their worldly business that 
Cyprian (De lapsis, 4) was led to complain, and the Council of 
Elvira (circa 300, can. 19) to decree a prohibition. 

IV. Every Christian was not esteemed fit to enter the 
ministry. As the latter's duty is to rule the Church of God, 
the Apostle Paul had demanded of the candidate to the clergy 
certain mental and moral qualifications (1 Tim. iii. 2-13 ; 
Tit. i. 5-9) ; amongst other things, the bishop and deacon was 
to be the husband of one wife, i.e. to have been married once 
only. Not only twice-married men, or digami, but also 
neophytes, were excluded from the ministry, lest ' being puffed 
up with pride they should fall into the judgment of the devil.' 
Besides these, other categories of persons were held incapable 
of receiving Orders, to wit, those who had performed ecclesi- 
astical penance, those who on account of sickness had been 
baptised by infusion or aspersion (Baptismus clinicorum) , l and 
those who had made themselves eunuchs. 2 Of candidates to 
the episcopate, it was usually required that they should have 
attained the age of fifty, but for the priesthood the age of 
thirty was considered sufficient. 3 

V. Celibacy was not considered essential to the cleric of 
any rank. A married man entering the ecclesiastical state 
could continue his previous relations with his wife ; but this 
freedom was only allowed to such as had contracted marriage 
before taking Orders. Once ordained, bishops, priests, and 
deacons were no longer free to marry, except when they elected 

1 Eus. VI, 43 ; Cone. Neocaesar. c. 12. 

2 Cone. Nie. c. 1. 

8 Didase. et Cons. Apost. II, 1 ; Cone. Neocaesar. c. 11. 



58 A Manual of Church History 

to retire from office. One exception only was made, in 314, by 
the Council of Ancyra (c. 10), in favour of the deacon who at 
his ordination had expressly reserved his right to contract 
marriage. As, moreover, according to the clear statements 
of Christ (Matt. xix. 12) and of Paul the Apostle (1 Cor. vii. 7, 
32-34), celibacy is the higher state, and the best in which to 
serve God, many Christians, of their own accord, consented to 
remain continent, and, naturally enough, it was from among 
these that the ministers were chosen by preference. Hence, 
even in quite early times, the practice of celibacy was common 
among bishops and priests, being accounted more consistent 
with their sacred duties, though it was only in the last year 
of the fourth century that the Council of Elvira in Spain (c. 33) 
made it the object of a law, by absolutely prohibiting ministers 
of the altar to hold any carnal intercourse with women. 



§ 20 
Dioceses and Provinces 1 

I. The earliest Christian communities were to be found 
in the towns ; such communities went by the name of 
TrapoLKiai ; at the head of each was a bishop. In 
the course of time it was found convenient to split the 
communities in the larger towns into several churches, or, 
as they were called at Rome, Tituli. Churches soon began 
to make their appearance in the country districts ; we hear of 
the presence of priests and catechists in villages, 3 of a diaconus 
regens ftlebent? of eirla-Koiroi twv äypöyv. 4 ' These developments 
did not, however, affect the position of the bishop, who 
remained the ruler, not only of the different churches in the 
episcopal city, but also of all the churches founded in the 
territories belonging to the city. 

II. Just as by the union within a single city of several 
churches there resulted a irapoiKia, so by the union of many 

1 Thomassin, Vet. et nov. eccl. discipl. par. I, lib. I-II ; K. Lübeck 
Reichseinteilung u. kirchl. Hierarchie des Orients bis zum Ausgang des 4 Jahrh. 
1901. 

a Eus. VII, 24. 

:< Cone. Hl ib. c. 77. 

4 Eus. VII, 30. 



The Roman Primacy 59 

of the ' parishes ' (which we should now call 'dioceses'), ecclesi- 
astical provinces, or lirapx ial * came into being. As a rule 
these provinces coincided with the civil provinces of the 
Empire ; at the head of each province stood a metropolitan, 
who was usually the bishop of the civil capital. An exception 
to this latter rule was to be found in the provinces of Numidia 
and Mauritania, in which the metropolitan was always the 
senior bishop. As early as the third century the bishops of 
each province began to meet in annual synods. 1 This organi- 
sation of the hierarchy was already perfect in the East by the 
end of the third century ; into the West it was introduced 
somewhat later. 

III. The metropolitans were not, however, supreme. The 
Council of Nicaea (c. 6) 2 speaks of yet higher dignitaries as 
already of long standing, namely the oecumenical patriarchs 
of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, whose respective jurisdic- 
tion extended over the West, Egypt and the neighbouring pro- 
vinces, and the East. The Council also alludes to other bishops 
of the same order, probably intending those of Ephesus, Caesarea 
in Cappadocia, and Heraclea, who controlled the dioceses of 
Asia (Asia proconsular is), Pontus, and Thrace respectively. 
The importance of these last-named bishoprics becomes 
more apparent in the next period. 3 



§ 21 

The Oneness of the Church and the Roman Primacy* 

The unifying tendency which we have just seen at work 
in the organisation of the metropolitan system had its com- 
plement in the union of the whole Church. The latter union 
was not, however, merely a result of this tendency, for it 
had been established from the beginning. Christ had preached 
one God and one Faith. He also founded one only Church, and 
by constituting St. Peter chief of the Apostles He made him 
to be the outward and visible centre of His Church. Nor 
can it be argued that this disposition was only for the time 

1 Ep. Firmil. inter ep. Cypr. 75, 4, 

2 Cp. Hefele, CG. I, 388-403. 

3 Cone. Constant. 381, c. 2. 

4 Möhler, Die Einheit in d. K. 1825; Funk, A. u. U. I, 1-23. 



6o A Manual of Church History 

of the Apostles, for it was equally necessary in later times ; 
hence, Peter's prerogatives and duties must perforce have 
been transmitted to his successors. 

And so indeed we find the Bishop of Rome standing at 
the head of the whole Church. His primacy was implicitly 
acknowledged by the eagerness of heretics and schismatics to 
win the approval of the Roman Church ; with St. Cyprian, 1 they 
evidently considered that to be in communion with Rome 
was to be in communion with the whole Church. Another 
proof of the Roman supremacy is to be found in the fact 
of St. Dionysius of Alexandria being accused of heretical 
leanings before his namesake Dionysius of Rome. The tone of 
authority with which the Roman Church (c. a.d. 96) enjoined 
that of Corinth to keep the peace 2 testifies likewise to its 
consciousness of being the chief Church. 

Explicit witness to the pre-eminence of the Roman Church 
was borne by Ignatius of Antioch, 3 according to whom this 
Church is 7rpoKa0r)fu,evrj t?}? a^air^, i.e. the president of the 
Society of Love, or, in other words, of all the Faithful. Even 
if we take these words as referring to the inexhaustible charity 
of the Romans — though, as a matter of fact, irpoKa9rja6ai is 
never used in the sense of ' excelling ' — there remain the words 
rjTis Kai 7rpoKa0r]Tac kt\., which seem equally to indicate a 
kind of primacy. The same Church of Rome is called ' the 
Queen ' by Abercius of Hieropolis (c. 200) in his epitaph. 
Irenaeus allows it, on the ground of its having been founded 
by the Apostles Peter and Paul, a potentior principalitas, and 
also declares that for this same reason all other Churches must 
submit to its ruling ; he says : 4 Ad hanc enirn ecclesiam (sc. 
Romanam) propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est 
omnem ecclesiam convenire, hoc est eos qui sunt undique fideles, 
in qua semper ab his, qui sunt undique, conservata est ea quae 
est ab apostolis traditio. Another writer, Cyprian, calls this 
Church the ecclesia principalis, unde unitas sacerdotalis orta est, 5 
and, even more clearly than Irenaeus, ascribes her chief rank 
to her having been established by St. Peter. The opinion 
which found favour in the East after the founding of Constan- 

1 Ep. 48, 3 ; 55, 1. 2 1 Clem. c. 56-65. 

3 Rom. insc. 4 Adv. haer. Ill, 3, 2. 

5 Ep. 59, 14; cp. De eccl. cath. unitate, 4; Epp. 43, 5 ; 55, 8. 



The Roman Primacy 61 

tinople, that the Roman primacy was merely the outcome of 
the political rank of the city of Rome, 1 was quite unknown 
in the earlier period. 

Hence, even in the first centuries, the primacy of the 
Church of Rome was looked upon as something settled, though 
it was then far from possessing that extent which it afterwards 
acquired. Its importance consisted in maintaining intact the 
oneness of the Church ; so long as this was not threatened by any 
departure from the true faith or from correct discipline, or by 
any other danger, the other Churches were free to act inde- 
pendently. Cyprian, after ascribing the Church's unity to her 
having been founded on Peter, adds that our Lord had given 
equal authority to each of the Apostles, so that whatever was 
possessed by Peter was likewise shared by the other Apostles ; 2 
and in the same passage in which he speaks of the Roman 
Church as chief of all, and the source of priestly oneness, he 
maintains that the bishops, so far as the government of their 
dioceses is concerned, are answerable to God (alone). 3 This 
explains why in early times the title of Pope was borne by all 
bishops. 

1 Cone. Const. 381, c. 3; Cone. Chalced. c. 28; Theodoret, ep. 113. 

2 De eccl. cath. unitate, 4. 

3 Ep. 59, 14 ; cp. Epp. 55, 21 ; 72, 3 ; 73, 26. 



CHAPTER III 

WORSHIP, DISCIPLINE, AND MORALS 

§ 22 

Baptism, the Apostles' Creed, Rebaptism l 

I. Baptism, by which a man becomes a Christian, was, in 
Apostolic times, bestowed forthwith on every one who confessed 
Christ. We find many traces of this practice in Acts (ii. 41 ; 
viii. 36-38 ; x. 47 ; xvi. 15, 33). In the course of time, in fact as 
early as the second century, a more prolonged course of instruc- 
tion and trial came to be insisted on ; according to the Council 
of Elvira, this course was to last two years (c. 42), or even three 
years, when a lengthier instruction seemed advisable (c. 4). 
Candidates for Baptism were known as Karrj^ov/jLevot, audientes, 
because it was their duty to listen to the instructions given on 
the truths of salvation. The name is first found in Tertullian, 
but Justin was already acquainted with the practice. 2 Apart 
from exceptional cases, Baptism was administered twice only 
in the year, on the vigils of Easter and Whitsun. At first 
the candidates were baptised in rivers or ponds, or in the 
sea ; later on the Church buildings began to serve for this pur- 
pose. The act was performed by the bishop, or by a priest 
or deacon in his stead ; in cases of necessity it could even be 
administered by laymen. 3 Baptism was administered by a 
triple immersion ; for the sick (baptismus clinicorum), or in 
cases where an immersion was not practicable, an infusion or 

1 J. Mayer, Gesch. d. Katechumenats in den ersten 6 Jahrh. 1868 ; A. G. 
Weiss, Die altkirchl. Pädagogik, 1869 ; Probst, Sakramente u. Sakramentalien, 
1870, pp. 97-194 ; Gesch. d, kath. Katechese, 1886 ; D, Stone, Holy Baptism, 
1899. 

2 Apol. I, 61. 

3 Tert, De bapt. 17. 



Baptism 63 

sprinkling was considered sufficient (see, however, § 19, iv). 
Holy Writ and the Didache (7) speak only of water, but as 
early as the year 200 we hear of divers ceremonies which 
accompany the bestowal of Baptism, such as marking the 
catechumen with the sign of the cross, the offering of salt, the 
renouncing of Satan, various exorcisms, the recitation of the 
Creed, and the profession of fidelity to Christ. Baptism was 
immediately followed by Confirmation, after which the new 
Christian partook of the Eucharist. On this occasion the neo- 
phyte received, besides the sacred species, a little milk and 
honey. The baptismal festivities lasted a week, during which 
the newly baptised wore white garments. From the fact of 
these garments being discarded on the Sunday after Easter 
arose the name by which this Sunday is now designated in the 
West, Dominica in albis (sc. depositis) ; l in the Eastern Church 
it was known as New Sunday. God-parents are first mentioned 
by Tertullian. 3 Martyrdom undergone by a catechumen was 
accounted a substitute for Baptism ; this was the Baptism 
of blood. In 1 Cor. (xv. 29) mention is made of a baptism for 
the dead ; this practice remained in honour among many of 
the sects, especially among the Marcionites, though it was 
reprobated by ecclesiastical writers from Tertullian down- 
wards. 

II. The Creed 3 which was recited at Baptism enumerated 
the chief articles of the Christian Faith. This symbol in early 
times admitted some slight variations ; a settled and fixed creed 
is first heard of in Rome towards the end of the second century. 
This formulary is the Apostles' Creed in its original form : no 
doubt this famous symbol was already old at that time, but 
it is difficult to determine exactly when it was composed. 
Some believe it to be a result of the controversy with Marcion 
(150-80), but the more common opinion is that it was put 
together at the beginning of the second century, or even earlier. 

III. With the outbreak of heresies and schisms a question 
was bound to arise concerning the validity of baptisms 

1 The English equivalent for Pentecost, Whitsun (White Sunday), arose 
in the same manner. Trans. 

2 De bapt. 18. 

3 Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, 3rd ed. 1897; F. Kattenbusch, Das 
apost. Symbol, 2 vol. 1894-1900; B. Dörholt, Das Taufsymbolum der alten K, 
I, 1898; Z. f. d. neutest. Wissenschaft, 1905, pp. 72-79, 



64 A Manual of Church History 

administered by heretics, 1 or generally by those outside the fold. 
Tertullian strenuously denied all worth to such Baptisms, and 
it is his work, De baptismo (which also appeared in Greek), 
which must probably be made accountable for the fact that 
shortly after its appearance no less than three Councils, that 
of Carthage (c. 220) and those of Synnada and Iconium in 
Asia Minor (c. 230), decided the question in the same sense. 
This view, which had a far-reaching practical effect, did not 
attract general notice until it received the sanction of the 
synod of Carthage, presided over by St. Cyprian (255-56), when 
it gave rise to a controversy destined to become famous. No 
sooner was the decision of the Council of Carthage reported to 
Pope Stephen, than he forbade the Africans to introduce any 
such novelty, threatening them with excommunication should 
they venture to rebaptise. A similar notification was dis- 
patched to the prelates of Asia Minor as soon as it was known 
that they, notably Firmilian of Caesarea and Helenus of Tarsus, 
were consenting parties to the innovations of the Africans. 
In the Council held by the Africans in the autumn of 256 the 
decision formerly arrived at was maintained, and, as a conse- 
quence, intercourse with them was broken off by Rome. The 
efforts of Dionysius of Alexandria to make peace or to secure 
toleration for the Anabaptists, and a new persecution of the 
Christians started soon after by Valerian, helped to quiet 
the storm ; Stephen's successor, Sixtus II, resumed relations 
with the Africans, though the latter seem to have persisted in 
their practice for some time after. As late as 314 the Council 
of Aries (c. 8) witnesses concerning them : quod propria lege 
sua utuntur, ut rebaptizent. 

Cyprian gives the following as Pope Stephen's opinion : Si qui 
ergo a quacunque haeresi venient ad vos, nihil innovetur, nisi quod 
traditum est, ut manus Ulis imponatur in paenitentiam, cum ipsi 
haeretici proprie alterutrum ad se venientes non baptizent, sed com- 
municent tantum (Ep. 74, 1). Firmilian (Ep. inter Cypr. 75, 7) makes 
him to say in addition : haereticos quoque ipsos in baptismo con- 
venire. If Stephen really believed that the heretics of his time 
were in agreement with the Church concerning Baptism, there 
is no ground for questioning the further opinion attributed to him 
by Cyprian. 

1 J. Ernst, Papst Stephan I u. der Ketzertauf streit, 1905 ; Z. f. k. Th. 
1906, pp. 38-56 (showing the position with regard to this matter of Dionysius 
of Alexandria), 



The Eucharist 65 

§ 23 
The Eucharist, the Agape, the Disciplina Arcani 1 

I. Conformably with its institution at the Last Supper, the 
Eucharist was originally celebrated in the evening at the con- 
clusion of the Agape. At a very early date the celebration 
was transferred to the morning ; possibly, having regard to 
the abuses already prevalent in the time of St. Paul (1 Cor. xi. 
20 ff.), this change may have occurred towards the end of the 
Apostolic period ; possibly it may have been a result of 
Trajan's decree against the Hetaeriae, or illicit nocturnal 
gatherings. We learn from Acts (ii. 42) that the early Christian 
meeting comprised the * doctrine of the Apostles/ i.e. the 
expounding of Holy Writ, the breaking of bread, and prayers. 
According to the fuller account left by Justin, 2 the ceremony 
began with a lesson from Scripture, followed by a sermon by 
the bishop and prayers recited in common. The Faithful 
having exchanged the kiss of peace, bread and wine (the latter 
mixed with water) were offered to the bishop, who pronounced 
over them several prayers and gave thanks (evxapio-Tia, cp. 
Matt. xxvi. 27), whereupon the elements were administered by 
the deacons, as the Body and Blood of Christ, to the Faithful 
present at the gathering, or carried to those who were absent. 
One detail, viz. the singing of hymns, seems to have been 
omitted from the above account. At least it is certain that 
the singing of psalms had its place side by side with prayer, 
the lesson of Scripture and the homily, in the synagogue ser- 
vice of the Jews of the Dispersion, and the Christians can 
scarcely have failed to follow suit. 

The celebration seems generally to have taken place on 
Sunday. 3 Tertullian 4 alludes to one being held on the days on 



1 Cabrol and Leclercq, Monumenta ecclesiae liturgica, I, 1902 ; Probst, 
Liturgie der 3 ersten ehr. Jahrh. 1870; Sakramente, 1872, pp. 194-244 ; Bickell, 
Messe u. Pascha, 1872 ; Warren, The Liturgy and Ritual of t the Ante-Nicene 
Church, 1897; RE- d. ehr. A. II, 309-26; P. Batiffol, Etudes d'histoire, 
3rd ed. 1904 ; Rauschen, Eucharistie u. Busssakrament in d. ersten 6 Jahrh. 
1908. 

2 Apol. I, 65-67. 

3 Doct. Ap. 14; Plin. Ep. X, 97; Just. Apol. I, 67 {Acts xx. 7), 

4 De orat. 19, 

vol. 1. f 



ob A Manual of Church History 

which stations (see below, § 25, I) were made. Cyprian 1 even 
speaks of a daily offering. The daily ' breaking of bread ' 
spoken of in Acts (ii. 46) seems to have been a practice peculiar 
to the Church of Jerusalem ; it may possibly have resulted 
from the fusion of the Agape with the Eucharist. 

The celebrant at such meetings was the bishop, assisted by 
the priests and other ministers. Though a priest could, under 
given circumstances, take the bishop's place, yet he was not 
allowed to do so without the latter's authorisation. Where 
there were several churches, the Eucharist was consecrated 
only in the bishop's own, whence it was carried to the other 
churches by acolyths. In Rome this continued to be the 
practice even long after the period of which we are speaking, 
and it was looked upon as a symbol of ecclesiastical unity, and 
as a means of preserving it. 2 

II. It was customary to receive Communion under both 
elements, and, as it clearly appears from Justin's description, 
the rule was to receive it at every service in which the Eucharist 
was consecrated ; hence the frequency of its reception was 
governed solely by the frequency of the Eucharistie celebrations. 
The consecrated Bread was, moreover, given to the Faithful 
for them to take home and partake of daily, in which custom 
we first meet with Communion under one species. The prac- 
tice of fasting-Communion is mentioned even by Tertullian, 
and doubtless it goes back to the time when the Eucharist began 
to be celebrated in the morning. With regard to the manner 
of reception, the Bread was simply placed in the hands of the 
receiver. 

III. Only the Faithful, that is, the baptised, could receive 
Communion ; catechumens were debarred ; not only were the 
latter forbidden to receive the Eucharist, they were not even 
allowed to assist at the principal portion of the celebration, 
being compelled to leave at the Offertory. They had to be 
content with assisting at the didactic part of the service ; as 
soon as this was over, they, in company with the demoniacs 
and the public penitents, had to retire. The Eucharist was 
accounted a thing beyond their comprehension, and a similar 

1 De orat. dorn. 18; Ep. 57, c. 3. 

2 Liber pont. Vita Miltiadis, and Vita Siricii, Innoc. I, Ep. 1 ad Decent. 
c. 5. 



The Eucharist 67 

reservation was made with regard to Baptism. In other words, 
to use the modern expression, there existed a disciplina arcani, 
or ' discipline of the secret.' l This discipline may be traced 
back to the second century, Justin being a witness in its favour 
rather than against it. The Fathers generally justify it by 
quoting Matt. vii. 6, but most probably the practice was 
encouraged for pedagogical reasons, the object being to 
lead the proselytes step by step into the fulness of the 
religion of Christ. The disciplina arcani was flourishing 
in the fourth century, but, with the decay of paganism 
in the Roman Empire, and the consequent deficiency of 
catechumens, it began to fall into disuse in the fifth 
century. 

IV. As already remarked, the Eucharist was originally 
preceded by the Agape, 2 and even after the celebration of the 
Eucharist had been separated from the Agape, the latter 
continued to be held as a charity meal for the poor. The food 
was provided by the Faithful, and the meal was accompanied 
by prayers and hymns, and also, no doubt, by a sermon ; 
its object was the support of the poor and the maintenance 
of brotherly love among the Christians. But the meal soon 
degenerated, and on account of the excesses to which it gave 
rise, 3 its being held in the Church was repeatedly forbidden, 
last of all by the Council in Trullo. Banished from the Church, 
the practice was discontinued, though, but a short time since, 
it still survived in Abyssinia and among the Christians of St. 
Thomas in India, and probably it yet lingers on in these 
remot. 

V. In the earliest times the Faithful met for Divine 
worship in private houses; but, from the third century, 
buildings were set apart for church services. At Rome 
the anniversaries of the martyrs were solemnised at their 
tombs in the catacombs — the long underground galleries 
in which most of the Christians of early times were buried. 
Cp. Kraus, Roma sott. (Northcote and Brownlow, 
Rom. sott.) 

1 H. Gravel, Die Arkandisziplin, I, 1902 ; Funk, A. u. U. Ill, 2. 

2 Keating, The Agape and the Eucharist, 1901 ; Funk, A. u. U, 
III, 1. 

3 Can. Hippol. ed. Achelis, 105-11; cp. 2 Peter 11, 13, 

f 2 



68 A Manual of Church History 

§ 24 

The Penitential Discipline 1 

Claiming to be a society of saints, the ancient Church could 
not endure the presence of evil-doers in her midst. The three 
capital sins of adultery or fornication, of idolatry, and of murder 
were rewarded with expulsion. Yet at no time was it believed 
that such excommunicates were lost for all eternity : the 
general conviction was that such people, by sincere penance, 
could obtain pardon of God. Hermas, who is a witness to this 
belief (Mand. IV. 3), speaks expressly of penance and forgive- 
ness ; and though he evidently considers it in the light of an 
extraordinary dispensation granted by God for a time, and 
thinks that Christians who shall again fall into sin after this 
new revelation will have no claim on God's mercy, yet later 
writers, such as Dionysius of Corinth, Tertullian, in his work 
De paenitentia, and Clement of Alexandria, all of them speak, 
without any such reservation, of penance as the second means 
of salvation. Whenever a confessor or martyr chose to 
intercede for one of the fallen, or to countersign a Libelliis 
pacts, as the written plea was then called, reconciliation nearly 
always followed as a matter of course, that is, the penitent was 
readmitted to Communion as soon as the martyr had given 
effect to his intercession by his death. It is difficult to secure 
any accurate information concerning the then practice until we 
reach the third century. Cyprian (Ep. 55, c. 21) witnesses to 
a twofold custom having prevailed in Africa, some of the 
bishops (though not the majority) refusing absolutely to re- 
admit adulterers into the Church. It is possible that in some 
cases absolution was granted to the sinner on his death-bed. 
Rome was the first to pave the way to a milder practice ; 
Callistus (217-22) decided that, due penance having been per- 
formed, those guilty of unchaste acts could be reconciled to the 
Church, whilst Cornelius (251-53) extended this dispensation 
to those also who had fallen into idolatry ; those only were 

1 Morinus, Comment, hist, de disciplina in admin, sacr. paenitentiae, 1682 ; 
Funk, A. u. U. I, 155-209 ; KL. II, 1561 ff. ; P. Batiffol, Etudes d'histoire, 
1904; Journal of Theol. Studies, IV. (1903), 321-37; F. Pignataro, De 
disciplina paenit. priorum eccl. saeculorum, 1904; G. Esser, Die Bussschriften 
Tertullians u. d. Indulgenzedikt d. Papstes Kallistus, 1905 ; Rauschen 1 , 
Euch. u. Busssakr. 1908, 



Penitential Discipline 69 

excluded who delayed their repentance until the hour of 
death. The need of some change was already apparent, for if 
perpetual exclusion from the society of the Faithful was in 
some cases productive of good, in that it roused the sinner to 
repentance, in other cases it led to results which were anything 
but desirable. In spite of this, the innovations called 
forth protests, and each of them, in combination with other 
circumstances, gave rise to a schism (cp. §§ 32, 35). Outside 
of Rome the reform likewise found opponents : Origen, in his 
work De oratione (c. 28, written about 233-34), declares bluntly 
that to readmit those who had fallen into idolatry and 
incontinence is to outstep the powers of the priesthood and to 
transgress the disciplinary laws of the Church ; in Spain the 
Council of Elvira pronounced the sentence of perpetual 
excommunication against all who should render themselves 
guilty of idolatry (c. 1, 2), of maleiices or sorcery (6), of 
prostitution (12), or of marrying a Christian daughter to a 
heathen priest (17) ; but the Spanish Church of the period was 
quite exceptional in the severity of its laws. 

The discipline of the Roman Church was adopted generally, 
but it remained what it was : that is, one extra chance, and 
one only, was given to the sinner ; just as there was only one 
Baptism, so there was only one Penance. Accordingly, those 
who were guilty of a second backsliding could expect no more 
mercy from the Church. 

To be readmitted into the Church the repentant sinner had 
to confess his sin and make amends for it by penance in 
sackcloth and ashes, by fasting and prayer for a determined 
period, often until the very end of his life. The confession, 
when the sin was a matter of public knowledge, was usually, 
so at least it would seem, made publicly in the presence of the 
assembled Church. When, however, the sin was private, then 
the confession was made privately to a priest ; the rule was, 
however, to repeat such confessions before the Church, except, 
of course, when the sin was of a nature to scandalise the 
Faithful. 1 The importance attributed to this confession is 
clear from the word igo/jboXoyrjo-is being used to designate the 
whole work of penance, and this not only in the Latin, but also 
in the Greek Church. Permission to receive Communion was 

1 Oiug. Horn. II, in psalm 37, c. 6. 



yo A Manual of Church History 

granted only after complete performance of the penance, the 
sole exception made being in favour of those dangerously ill ; 
even the latter, if restored to health, were expected to complete 
their penance as soon as they recovered their strength. The 
act of reconciling the penitent was performed by imposition 
?>f the bishop's hands, the bishop's place, in his absence, being 
taken by a priest, or even by a deacon. 

The single protracted penance of which we have been speak- 
ing was reserved for capital sins ; lesser sins could be remitted 
more frequently, and for their remission other means than 
penance could be utilised, namely, the so-called works of mercy. 

The general direction of the penitents was in the hands of 
the bishop, and it was he who, usually, declared the sinner 
reconciled, but in the larger Churches he was, naturally, 
assisted in his work by the priests. According to the Liber 
pontificalis, Pope Marcellus (308) was the first thus to disburden 
himself. At a later date we hear of priests in the East called 
penitentiaries ; their duty was to welcome the penitents, to fix 
an equivalent penance for the sin committed, and to see that 
this penance was duly performed. 

An Eastern practice was the dividing of the penitents into 
classes, those namely of the Hearers, the Prostrates, and the As- 
sistants ; of these the first two are alluded to in the Epistula 
canonica of Gregory Thaumaturgus, whilst the last is mentioned 
by the Council of Ancyra (314, c. 25) . A fourth and lowest class 
of all, that of the Weepers, is of somewhat later origin. These 
classes were quite unknown in the West, nor were they in vogue 
everywhere in the East ; in fact they seem to have been peculiar to 
Asia Minor, and even there they differed according to the regions. 

I. The Weepers (-rrpoo-KXaiovTes) were altogether excluded from 
the sacred edifice. Their place was in the courtyard, near the 
entrance, where they had to implore with many tears the inter- 
cession of the Faithful as they passed on their way to church. 
They are first mentioned by St. Basil. The x«A«*£o/xa/oi mentioned 
by the Council of Ancyra, in 314 (c. 17), who were formerly identified 
with the Weepers, can in reality only have been energumeni, possessed 
of evil spirits. Nowhere do we find the word (x«/'.a£ovrcs) used in 
Antiquity to denote an ecclesiastical situation. 

II. The Hearers (aicpowfievoi) were assimilated to the catechumens, 
and were consequently allowed to attend the exhortatory part 
of the services ; hence their name. 






Festivals and Fast-days yt 

III. The Prostrates (viroiriTTTovr^) were allowed to remain in the 
church after the departure of the Hearers, on the condition, however, 
of lying prostrate, or at least kneeling during the rest of the service. 

IV. The Assistants (o-uorravTe?, crwecrruJTcg, crwKxra/xei/oi) COtlld, 

like the Faithful, remain standing ; but they were not permitted 
to receive Communion. 

In the West all penitents seem to have had the privileges 
of the two latter classes ; at any rate, there is no proof of penitents 
ever having been required to leave the church before the Offertory. 
Sozomen (H. E. VII, 16) seems to say that in the Roman Church 
they remained for the whole service, without, however, partaking 
of the Eucharist. Cp. Th. Qu. 1900, pp. 481-534 ; 1903, pp. 
254-70 ; RHE. 1906, pp. 16-26. 



§ 25 
Festivals and Fast-days ; the Paschal Quarrel l 

Under the old Covenant there was a weekly day of worship, 
and, in addition, certain feast-days occurring at fixed seasons 
during the year. Among the more rigorous Jews it was cus- 
tomary also to fast twice in the week (Luke xviii. 12), on 
the Monday and the Thursday. These customs told on the 
discipline of the Christian Church. 

I. The Christians devoted one day in the week to the special 
worship of the Almighty, but for this purpose they chose, 
not the Sabbath or seventh day, which was kept by the Jews, 
but the first day of the week, as being the day on which 
our Lord rose from the dead. For this reason the Sunday 
came to be called, in the language of the Church, the Lord's 
day, icvpiaicr), dies dominica, and, as a sign of rejoicing, the 
prayers on that day were said standing. We may trace back 
the observation of the Sunday to the very earliest times 
(Apoc. i. 10). The Judaeo-Christians, in addition, kept also 
the Sabbath. 

At an early date Wednesdays and Fridays became fast- 
days; as such they are mentioned, together with the corre- 
sponding Jewish fasts, by the Didache (8, 1), whilst in the West 
they were called dies stationis, i.e. Vigils or Watch-days. The 

1 Probst, Kirchl. Disziplin, 1873 ; A. Linsenmayer, Entw. d. kirchl. 
Fastendisziplin bis zum Konzil von Nicäa, 1877; Funk, A. u. U. I, 241-58; 
H. Kellner, Heortologie, 1901 (English Trans. 1908) ; D. Z. f. KR. XVI 
(1906), 100-13. 



72 A Manual of Church History 

fast only lasted half the day, until the nones or ninth hour 
(3 p.m.). On such days it was customary to hold a service; 
in Alexandria only the didactic portion of the Liturgy was read, 
in Western Africa the whole service was performed (see above, 
§ 23). The Council of Elvira (c. 26) mentions also a fast on the 
Saturday, and it is probable that even at this period a similar 
fast was observed in Rome. 

II. Two of the annual festivals of the Jews continued to 
be kept by the Christians, because of the events by which 
these days had been signalised at the beginning of the Christian 
era. The first of these feasts was Easter, the Pasch or Pass- 
over, the commemoration of the sparing of the first-born of 
the Jews when among the Egyptians, and of Israel's deliver- 
ance from the Egyptian bondage ; this the Christians kept in 
memory of the death and Resurrection of Christ. The other was 
the Feast of Weeks or harvest festival, also known as Pentecost, 
TLevT€KoaT7], kept in recollection of the Descent of the Holy 
Ghost. As these feasts were no longer consecrated to their 
original objects, their meaning was altered, but their Jewish 
parentage was apparent both in their names and in the fashion 
in which they were calculated, which depended, not on the 
solar, but on the lunar year. These feasts, which were derived 
directly from the Old Testament, reach back to the very 
beginning of the Church, and for some time they remained 
her only annual festivals. In the East, however, another 
feast soon made its appearance, that of the Epiphany ; this, 
in the first instance, commemorated the revelation of Christ's 
Divinity at His Baptism in the Jordan and at the wedding- 
feast at Cana (hence its other name : the Theophany) ; at a 
later period it came to commemorate the birth of Christ. 
Lastly, each Church kept with solemn celebrations the anniver- 
sary days of its martyrs' deaths, such a day being called his 
dies natalis, having been his birthday to a higher life. 

III. Easter was not kept everywhere on the same day. 
The larger portion of the Church kept it on the Sunday, which 
fell on, or next followed, the fourteenth Nisan (i.e. the first full 
moon after the vernal equinox) , choosing the Sunday because 
Christ rose on that day. On the other hand, the Christians of 
the province of Asia, who, by the way, appealed for support 
tc the practice of the Apostle John, invariably, and without 



Festivals and Fast-days 73 

any regard for the day of the week, kept the feast on the four- 
teenth Nisan — in other words, on the day on which, according 
to the Synoptists, Christ's death occurred ; nor do they appear 
to have found anything unseemly in keeping Easter on this 
day, probably because they considered the feast as a memorial 
day of the whole work of salvation rather than of the Resurrec- 
tion merely. Hence, in Asia Minor, the feast of Easter almost 
always fell on a different date from that kept in the rest of 
Christendom, and the divergency was all the more noticeable 
from the solemnity of the feast in question. Efforts were 
repeatedly made to secure uniformity. We hear of negotia- 
tions between Pope Anicetus (155-65) and St. Polycarp of 
Smyrna, but neither of these saintly bishops was able to induce 
the other to relinquish the practice of his predecessors. 1 Nor 
was Pope Victor (189-98) one whit more successful, though 
he caused the matter to be debated at a number of Councils. 
Led by Poly crates of Ephesus, the Asiatics remained obstinately 
attached to their old Quartodecimanism. 3 In the course of 
the third century they must, however, have dropped their 
practice, for when we next hear of them, at the Council of 
Nicaea, they are among the supporters of the common custom. 3 
But uniformity had not yet been attained. In early times the 
Jewish calculations as to the Paschal full moon had been 
accepted without question, but soon, especially in the greater 
Churches, the Christians began to reckon the date indepen- 
dently, probably because they had remarked that the Jewish 
reckonings were carelessly made and that Easter was often 
antedated, or possibly because they objected to being made 
dependent on the Jews. In other places the Jewish reckoning 
was adhered to, the Sunday after the Jews' Passover being 
kept as Easter, which, by the way, is the method prescribed by 
the Didascalia. As we learn from the Council of Nicaea, this 
practice — which later on obtained for its followers the nick- 
name of Protopaschites, because it so often led to Easter being 
kept too early — was especially prevalent in Syria, Cilicia, 
and Mesopotamia. There were yet other divergencies owing 
to differences in reckoning the equinox itself ; hence the matter 
was to crop up repeatedly for discussion (see below, § 69). 

1 Eus. V, 24, 16-18. 2 Ibid. V, 24, 1-15. 

8 Eus. Vit. Constant. Ill, 17-20. 



74 A Manual of Church History 

Easter was preceded by a fast. The latter it was customary 
to support by the words of Christ {Matt. ix. 15), and, as Ter- 
tullian puts it, it lasted as long as the days in quibus ablatus 
est sponsus (De ieiun. 2). But its duration was different 
according to the locality ; according to Irenaeus (Eusebius, 
V. 24) , some fasted one day, others two, and yet others many 
days, whilst some simply observed a fast of forty hours. It 
would seem to follow from this that the early fasts were very 
short ; their shortness was, however, compensated for by their 
severity : such fasts might not be broken for the whole day, 
some even fasted for several days without a break. Thus 
the Didascalia prescribes in set words an unbroken fast for the 
Friday and Saturday of Holy Week; the same work also 
ordains a previous fast of four days on bread, salt, and water ; 
hence the practice for which it vouches is really a six-days' fast. 
This was also the practice known to Dionysius of Alexandria. 

The word Pasch is from the Hebrew piDQ, Pesah, or rather 
from the Aramaic ariDS = Passover (i.e. of the Lord, when the 
first-born of the Egyptians were slain). Those of the Fathers 
who derived it from the Greek ird(Tx €iV were misled by the 
verbal similarity. The English word ' Easter ' is from the Anglo- 
Saxon Eostre ; the German ' Ostern ' from Ostära, the goddess of 
dawn, whose feast occurred at Easter. Cp. Hefele, Beiträge, 
II, 285 f. 

Zahn, in his Forschungen (IV, 1891, 283-303 ; VI, 1900, 106, 
note 1), seeks to show that the point at issue between Polycarp 
and Anicetus concerned, not the celebration of Easter, but the 
fast which preceded it ; that whereas Polycarp was acquainted 
with such a fast, Anicetus was not, and that such a fast was not 
introduced into the Roman Church until after the time of Pope 
Soter ; see, however, Kath. 1902, I, 314-27. 



§ 26 

The Christian Morals 1 

As the writer of the Letter to Diognetus (5, 1-4) remarks, 
1 Christians differ from the rest of men neither in their 

1 Neander, Denkwürdigkeiten, I (Engl. Trans. Memorials of Christian Life 
in the Early and Middle Ages, Bonn's Libr.) ; Funk, Gesch. des kirchl. Zinsver- 
bots, 1876; A. u. U. II, 45-60; E. v. Dobschütz, Die urchrisll. Gemeinden ; 
sitten- geschichtl. Bilder, 1902; A. Bigelmair, Die Beteiligung der Christen am 
öffentl. Leben in vorkonstantinischer Zeit, 1902; H. Achei is, Virgines subin- 
troductae, 1902; Bibl. Z. Ill (1905), 44-69; Harnack, Militia Christi, 1905. 



Christian Morals 75 

food, nor in their manner of dress and lodging ; in such- 
like matters they follow the customs of their respective 
countries/ ' We Christians,' says Tertullian to the heathen 
in his Apologeticum (42), ' do not live in your world with- 
out sharing your forum, your baths, your workshops and 
markets, and all your business ; like you, we are seamen or 
soldiers, farmers or merchants, and like you we offer for sale 
the produce of our art or toil.' Sayings such as these were 
true, for the natural necessities of life were not changed by 
the advent of Christianity. But where it became a question of 
religious or moral matters, then the difference between Chris- 
tians and pagans was at once apparent. As the Letter already 
quoted sa3^s : ' Christians live in the flesh, but not according to 
the flesh ; they dwell indeed on earth, but their conversation is 
in Heaven.' This ' otherworldliness ' of theirs was all the more 
noticeable, surrounded as they were by pagan sensuality. 
The shows, gladiatorial sports, combats with wild beasts, and 
similar heathen amusements were shunned by the Christians, 
on account of the immorality or cruelty which they involved. 1 
Some of them even refused to be present at executions. 2 
Anxious only to lay up treasure in heaven, they cared but little 
for the goods of this world, freely spending their belongings 
for the benefit of their neighbours. ' We who once devoted 
all our energies to the pursuit of wealth/ writes Justin, 3 ' now 
distribute our possessions to others, giving alms to all the 
needy.' Money given as a loan was never to enrich the 
lender ; the taking of interest was held in abhorrence ; by 
the Council of Elvira (c. 20) the practice was forbidden under 
sentence of excommunication, though the Council of Nicsea 
(c. 17) and the other ancient synods held this punishment 
to apply to clerics only. The Christians were also wont to 
cut down their expenses to the lowest possible limit ; all 
finery and ornaments, all pomp and display were banished, 
among the practices at which they looked askance being the 
wearing of ear-rings, the painting of the e3^es and cheeks, 
dyeing, the wearing of false hair, and shaving. 4 All these 

1 Tert. De spectaculis ; Theoph. Ad Autol. Ill, 15 ; Lact. Inst. VI, 20. 

2 Athen ag. Leg. 15. 

3 Apol. I, 14. 
* Clem. Alex. Paed. II, 8, 12 ; III, 2, 11 ; Tert. De -ultu fern. ; Commod, 

Inst. II, 19. 



76 A Manual of Church History 

things were held to be mere wantonness, when, indeed, they 
were not incentives to sin ; to decorate oneself was as bad 
as to reproach the Creator with not having made man as 
beautiful as he should be, to pierce the ears was to sin against 
the order of things as established by God. The reaction against 
paganism even led the Christians to taboo certain deeds more 
trivial than those just spoken of. Thus they esteemed flowers, 
in common with all other natural products, as gifts of the 
Almighty, yet many of the Christians deemed it sinful to use 
them for the adornment of the head or for wreaths with which 
to decorate the tombs, arguing that such practices were 
unnatural and contrary to reason, or that they involved 
something of paganism. 1 But, however strong the feeling 
of the Christians may have been concerning such matters, they 
also felt that differences of social status had to be taken into 
account ; zealous as he was against anything approaching 
luxury, Clement of Alexandria takes care to let us see that his 
crusade is, not so much against the wearing of jewellery and 
fine clothes, as against the inordinate love of such things. 3 

Another point is worthy of separate mention. Second 
marriages were not absolutely reprobated ; the Apostle Paul 
had even counselled young widows to seek new husbands 
(1 Tim. v. 14) ; they were, however, regarded unfavourably 
by the early Church. We already know that a second 
marriage disabled a man from receiving Orders ; at a later date 
it was even punished by ecclesiastical penance, and in view 
of this the clergy were forbidden to take any part in such 
weddings. 3 Athenagoras, 4 very bluntly, calls such marriages 
a decorous means of committing adultery : evirpeirrj^ jxoixda. 
Many Christians, mindful of the counsel of Scripture, volun- 
tarily forbore to marry (see above, § 19), whilst others con- 
tracted a spiritual marriage. The maid or widow who 
entered into such a contract came to be known as a-vveiaaKro^, 
subintroducta. A little later, the initiative of such marriages 
was often taken by the female, rich ladies bringing into their 
houses, for the protection of their persons and for the adminis- 
tration of their property, a man, usually a monk. This practice 

1 Clem. Alex. Paed. II, 8 ; Tert. De corona militis ; Minuc. Fel. 12, 38, 

2 Clem. Paed. II, 11. 

3 Cone. Neocaesar. c. 7 ; Laodic. c. I. 4 Leg. 33. 



Christian Morals yj 

may in certain instances have proved dangerous, or it may 
simply have aroused suspicion ; at any rate, from the middle 
of the third century we hear complaints, and the Councils of 
the next period, beginning with that of Ancyra, 314 (c. 19), 
laid it under a ban. It did not, however, completely disappear 
till much later (cp. § 60). 

We have already seen that the pagans were not unaware 
of the Christians' good morals (§ 14). Perhaps the most 
striking testimonial in their favour was that given by the 
physician Galen (f 200), who praises their scorn for death, 
their purity and their continence, and for their self-control 
and their honour likens some of them to the ideal philosopher. 



CHAPTER IV 

HERESIES AND SCHISMS 1 

§27 

The Meaning of Heresy and Schism — Simon 
Magus and Menander 

I. Those to whom the Gospel was preached did not, all 
of them, receive it as the very word of God, to which nothing 
may be added, and from which nothing must be taken. 
Some imagined that they might season it with other elements, 
and it was this mistaken notion which gave rise to the 
heresies. The elements in question were either of Jewish or 
of pagan origin. Many of the converts from Judaism found 
it difficult to believe that the olden dispensation had been 
abolished by the new ; to them it seemed that the old Law 
had not lost its binding force, and, through excessive esteem 
of the Law, they came to form too low an idea of the new 
dispensation, and of the nature of its Founder. On the other 
hand, the pagans found it difficult to enter into the Christian 
doctrine concerning Creation and the nature of evil, and, as 
Creation out of nothing appeared to them unthinkable, they 
proceeded to oppose to the Christian monism a dualistic 
system of philosophy. Consistently with its twofold origin, 
heresy (atpea^) assumed two forms, according as it mingled 
Christianity with Judaism or with paganism, though in the 

1 Iren. Adv. haereses ; Hipp. Refut. omnium haer. ; Epiph. Panarium ; 
Theod. Fabul. haer. compendium', Philastr. De haeresibus; Aug. De haer., 
Praedestinatus, De haer.; Ps. Tert. Adv. omn. haer. ( = Tert. De praescr. c. 
45-53) ; Ch. W. F. 'NValch, Historie d. Ketzereien usw. 11 vol. 1762-85; Hil- 
genfeld, Ketzergesch. des Urchristentums, 1884 ; Harnack, Dogmengesch. 
3 vol. 3rd ed. 1894-97 (Engl. Trans. History 0/ Dogma, 1894-99); Z.f. w. Th. 
1890, pp. 1-63. 



Meaning of Heresy and Schism 79 

event the distinction was not always qyiite clear, some heretics 
being equally influenced by both Jewish doctrine and pagan 
speculation. 

II. Whilst heresy involves a deviation from the Church's 
doctrine, Schism (ax^^a, aylfeiv) consists in a departure from 
the Church's discipline, or more correctly in a separation from 
the body of the Church, brought about by circumstances of 
discipline. In the earliest period of the Church, it was chiefly 
the question of penance which gave rise to such divisions. 

III. According to the Fathers, the patriarch of heretics 
was that Simon Magus of Giddon in Samaria who is spoken of 
in Acts (viii. 9 ff.), their motive for thus considering him being 
the fact that he was the first known opponent of Christianity. 
It is not, however, easy to find any Christian element whatever 
in his teaching ; he seems to have given himself out as the 
manifestation of a Godhead previously unknown, and his 
doctrine of Creation was one of emanation pure and simple. 
His countryman, Menander, who succeeded him, taught a like 
doctrine of Creation, and, if he did not actually represent 
himself as God, yet he allowed it to be known that he was 
the redeemer sent from the higher world for the salvation of 
mankind. 

Simon Magus (whom Baur, KG. 2nd ed. I, 190, wrongly con- 
siders to have been a mere personification of the so-called Gnosis), 
or rather his school, seems to have taught that from the highest 
God there proceeds, in the first instance, Ennoia, from whom, in 
their turn, other spirits emanate. The latter it was who formed 
the world, and who, in order to conceal their parentage, imprisoned 
Ennoia, the Mother of all, in matter. She, the lost sheep of the 
Gospel (Matt, xviii. 12), after wandering through body after body, 
entered finally into that of Helena of Tyre, Simon's companion. 
To effect her deliverance and to redeem men, Simon, God's own 
mighty power, took the form of man and descended to earth ; 
coming to the Jews — among whom he suffered in appearance 
only — as the Son, to the Samaritans as the Father, and to the 
Nations as the Holy Ghost. All that is required for salvation 
is belief in Simon and Helena ; he who has this faith need trouble 
about naught else, and may behave as he pleases ; for it is God's 
mercy which saves, and not works of righteousness. The fact 
is — in spite of all that the demiurges have taught, in their desire 
of bringing men into bondage — there are no such things as good 
works. In practice, this teaching had lamentable results. Follow- 
ing the master's example, the adherents of this sect, which survived 



8o A Manual of Church History 

as late as the fourth century, cultivated the arts of magic and 
sorcery (Iren. I, 23 ; Schenkel, Bibellexikon, V, 301-21 ; 
Präfke, Leben u. Lehre Simons fl,. M. nach den pseudoklem, 
Homilien, 1895). 



§28 

The Judaising Christians — The Ebionites, Cerinthus, 

the Elkasaites 

I. The heresy of the Judaisers was a result of the 
convert Jews clinging to the Law in which they had been 
educated. From the very beginning the Jewish converts 
seem to have been split into two factions, some holding that 
the Law was binding on all Christians, whatever religion they 
had professed before their conversion, others holding that it 
continued to bind only converts from Judaism. It was not 
long before the rigorist party severed its connection with 
Christianity. After having received a first blow at the Council 
of Jerusalem, it appears to have officially seceded from the 
Church, in 63, after the death of the Apostle James, by electing 
a rival bishop, Thebutis, in opposition to Simeon of Jerusalem. 1 
With the progress of time it was felt that the practices even 
of the milder party, which did not seek to impose on all the 
observance of the Mosaic Law, were scarcely compatible with 
the profession of Christianity. Even in Justin's time they 
were shunned by many of the Christians, though Justin him- 
self allows that they still have some hope of salvation. 2 After 
Justin no Church writer speaks even of the latter class as 
forming part of the Catholic Church. Moreover, the grounds 
of the distinction between the two factions were slowly altering ; 
formerly it was the stress laid on the observance of the Law, 
now it is the difference in their beliefs concerning Christ, 
which serves to distinguish them one from the other. 3 The 
rigorist Judaeo-Christians accounted Christ to be a mere man ; 
whilst the other party believed at least in the Virgin birth. 
The former party emerges into history under a definite name 
only at the end of the second century. Irenrzus bestows on 



» Eus. IV, 22. 2 Dial. 47. 

8 Orig. Cont. Cels. V, 61 ; ]£us. Ill, 27, 



The Judaistng Christians 81 

these heretics the appellation of Ebionites, and informs us that 
they would not acknowledge the authority of St. Paul. Ac- 
cording to their own account, their name was adopted to 
denote their poverty ; it must therefore be derived from 
the Hebrew 0^*?^, though many of the Fathers speak of 
a certain Ebion as their founder. The more orthodox 
Judaisers are, by St. Epiphanius, called Nazarenes. This 
name was known also to Jerome, though he makes no clear 
distinction between Ebionite and Nazarene, and uses both 
names almost indiscriminately. The sect had a Syro-Chaldaic, 
or Aramaic Gospel, which, on account of the language in which 
it was written and of the nationality of those who used it, was 
called the Gospel according to the Hebrews (Ev. secundum 
Hebraeos). Their headquarters — owing to the Christians 
having evacuated Jerusalem at the outbreak of the Jewish 
war with Titus and Vespasian, and departed to Pella — were 
in Peraea, whence they spread into some parts of Syria. 1 

II. Cerinthus, a late contemporary of the Apostle John — who, 
according to Irenaeus, wrote his Gospel in confutation of this 
heretic — associated with Christianity not only Jewish, but also 
Gnostic teachings. The Creator of the world was not God, but an 
angel. Jesus was originally an ordinary man, but at his baptism 
Christ descended on him, and through him manifested to men the 
unknown Father ; at the beginning of the Passion Christ again 
forsook Jesus. At the end of time, after the resurrection, a king- 
dom, teeming with earthly joys, will be established on this earth 
(Iren. I, 26, 1 ; III, 3, 4 ; III, n, 1). Th. Qu. 1904, pp. 20-38. 

III. The Elkasaites, who by Epiphanius (H. 53) are called 
Sampsaeans, traced their parentage to a certain Elkasai. They 
owed allegiance to the Law of Moses, though they discarded sacri- 
fice ; they also practised magic and astrology. They had a 
baptism of their own and many ritual purifications ; Christ they 
regarded as a superior Mon, whom they believed to have several 
times become incarnate, first of all in Adam (Philos. X, 13-17). 
According to Chwolson (Die Ssabier, 1, 114 ff.), they have survived 
to the present day under the name of Sabaeans (i.e. ' washers ') or 
Mendaitae (i.e. ' Penitents ') in the southern regions of Mesopotamia. 

IV. According to the Clementine Homilies (ed. Dressel, 
1853 ; Lagarde, 1865), the original Revelation made at the 
Creation was eclipsed by sin, but, again and again, made visible 
by the true Prophet who became manifest in Adam, Moses, and 
Christ. Hence the true law of Moses — not that distorted version 

1 KL. IV, 82 ff. 

VOL. I. C 



82 A Manual of Church History 

of it which is found in the Old Testament — were it known, 
would be identical with Christianity. Creation is explained as 
a kind of emanation ; vegetarianism, early marriage, and poverty 
are recommended as the best restraints for concupiscence. All 
this teaching is put forward in the garb of a kind of romance, which 
details the adventures of Clement of Rome in his search for truth. 
A like material has been used in another work, the so-called 
Clementine Recognitions, which have been preserved in the Latin 
translation of Rufinus ; in the latter, however, the Jewish element 
has been to some extent ousted by the Christian. The two writings 
seem to be based on some document going back to 200, though 
other materials have been utilised. The problem of their origin is 
one of the riddles of history, at which countless scholars have 
laboured (cp. H. U. Meyboom, De Clemens-Roman, 2 vol. 
1902-04; H. Waitz, Die Pseudoklementinen, 1904 [Chapman, 
Journal of Theol. Studies, 1901-02, pp. 436-41] ; Z. f. w. Th. 1906, 
pp. 66-133. 



§29 

Gnosticism, its Origin and General Characteristics 1 

It was the persistent problem of the origin of evil which 
provoked the rise of Gnosticism. 3 The existence of evil in the 
world being manifest, the question : irodev to kcikov ; — ' Whence 
is evil ? ' was bound to suggest itself, and was also bound to 
lead to the further question as to whether God could be con- 
ceived of as the originator of an evil world. A negative answer 
being given to this question, yet another arose as to the manner 
in which the world came into being. Lastly there obtruded 
itself the practical question : ' How can we overcome the evil 
which is against God's Will, and which has no right to be ? ' 
To many the answers given by Christianity seemed insufficient, 
and accordingly they sought, by drawing in new elements — 
derived, some of them from the Greek philosophy, others from 
the pagan religions of the East, especially from Parseeism — 
a more consistent solution to their questionings. To the 
Church's Faith, or ttigtis, they opposed their knowledge, or 

1 Mg. by Möhler (Collected Works, I, 403-35) ; E. Neander, 1818 ; 
F. Ch. Baur, 1835 ; Lipsius, i860; Amelineau {Essai sur le Gn. igyptien), 
1887; Kunze {De historiae gnosticismi fontibus), 1894; T. u. U. XV, 4 
(for the origin of Gnosticism) ; E. Faye, Introduction ä Vitude du gnosticisme 
au II e et au III e siicle, 1903. 

1 Clem. Alex. Strom. VI, 12, 96, p. 788 ; Tert. De praescr. 7; Eus. V, 
27 ; Epiph. H. 24, 6, 




Gnosticism, its Origin and General Characteristics 83 



<yvü)aL?, which — because, unlike the Church's own yvwo-Ls, it 
failed to take its stand on Faith, but transcended Faith and 
replaced it to all purposes by a different doctrine — was termed 
by the Fathers yjrevSoovv/jLos yvtoo-is (or ' knowledge falsely so- 
called,' 1 Tim. vi. 20), and afterwards received the name of 
Gnosticism. 

The new doctrine was essentially dualistic. All Gnostic 
systems have this much in common, that they posit an opposi- 
tion between God and uncreated matter, whether they conceive 
of this matter after Plato's fashion, as devoid of substance 
and form { = /*}) 6v), or whether, following their Parsee teachers, 
they look upon it as animated by a principle of evil. It was 
also the common teaching of the Gnostics that from the hidden 
God there proceeded by emanation (TrpoßoXij) a series of JEons 
or spirits, whose goodness diminished in proportion to their 
distance from their source. In the course of this process of 
degradation, elements of the kingdom of Light {ir\r)p(o[xa\ had 
come to be mingled with Matter (v\r]), and it is from these 
mingled elements that the world has since been made. The 
actual building of the world was the work of the lowest 7Eon, 
the so-called Demiurge, who was also the Legislator of the 
Old Testament. The aim of Creation was the freeing of the 
elements of Light imprisoned in matter. Hence Creation was 
a beginning of the Redemption, though merely a beginning ; 
to complete the work a higher ^Eon had to come, preaching the 
true and highest God and the existence of a world above, and 
teaching men how to overcome matter and effect their deliver- 
ance. The Redeemer assumed the appearance of a man (hence 
the name of Docetism) , some believing that his body was merely 
a phantasm, others that he descended on Jesus, the Messias sent 
by the Demiurge, at his baptism, and remained in him until the 
Passion. In the Redemption thus effected only the Pneutnatists, 
that is the Gnostics, can share. Hylists or material-minded 
men, i.e. the great mass of mankind, are, like matter itself, 
doomed to perdition. Some of the Gnostics reckoned another 
category, that of the simple Faithful or Psychists, to whom 
they attributed a middle place in the next world. Of the 
Redeemer's work, the end and object is the air o kclt dai aaw 
irdvToov, the restoring of all things to the place which befits 
their nature. 

G 2 



84 A Manual of Church History 

Hence salvation, according to the Gnostics, is a cosmic 
process, and the Redemption — the only element which 
Gnosticism borrowed from Christianity, and which accounts 
for the system being accounted a Christian rather than a 
pagan heresy — is merely a part of the evolution of the world. 
Consistently enough, the Gnostic ethics was of a physical 
character, and, agreeably to the doctrine that all matter is evil, 
it began by being exceedingly, in fact unnaturally, rigorous, 
though afterwards it not unfrequently ran to the opposite 
extreme, and this all the more easily because the identification 
of the Legislator of the Old Testament with the Demiurge 
conduced to a spirit of hopeless lawlessness. The claim to a 
higher knowledge also led to outward actions being discounted ; 
Gnostics considered it allowable to join in pagan rites, nor could 
they be brought to see the need of confessing the Faith before 
the persecutor, holding as they did that the true Confession, or 
martvrdom, consisted in the Gnosis. 

A species of Gnosticism may be traced back to Simon 
Magus and Cerinthus, but it was in the second century, under 
the leadership of a series of clever men, that it attained its 
majority and assumed an aspect so threatening as to compel 
the Fathers of the period to come into conflict with it. The 
character of the system being syncretic, its invention cannot 
be ascribed to any one heresiarch ; the only information we 
obtain from history relates to certain of the Gnostic factions 
and the founders of some of the Gnostic schools of thought. 



§ 30 
Individual Gnostics 

I. According to Irenaeus (I, 24), the real heads of the Gnostics 
were Saturnilus and Basilides. The former, who lived at Antioch, 
divided mankind into two classes. The wicked, with the assistance 
of the demons, would have prevailed against the good, had not 
Christ, in the appearance of human flesh, come to the rescue of his 
own. This sect accounted marriage as an institution of the devil, 
and many of its members practised abstinence from flesh-meat. 

II. The teaching of Basilides, who dwelt at Alexandria in 
the time of Adrian, has come down to us in two notably diverse 
descriptions. Both accounts concur, however, as to the ground- 
work of Basilides's system. Hippolytus really agrees with Irenaeus 



Individual Gnostics 85 

in describing it as a species of dualism rather than of pantheism, 
though some authors have not been willing to admit this (cp. 
Funk, A. u. U. I, 358-72), and it is the Philosophumena of Hip- 
polytus which in all probability has preserved the original form 
of the system, whilst the account left by Irenaeus merely gives 
the teaching of the heresiarch's disciples. 1 According to the 
account embodied in the Philosophumena (VII, 14-27), God, when 
as yet He was not, without either knowledge or will, created from 
nothing a world which also was not. The explanation of these 
enigmatic words seems to be that in the beginning the kingdom 
of God and the kingdom of matter, in the course of their respective 
developments, came into collision, with the consequence that 
elements of the one were mingled with elements of the other, to form 
the primitive chaos or world-seed. This seed contained all within 
itself as the acorn contains the oak, but as the elements were in 
a state of chaos, it was as yet a ' world which was not/ but of which 
the world was to be. The first thing to come into existence was 
the supernatural or over- world ; some of the substance of Light, 
the first and second Sonships, rose straightway to the Father, 
though the second, owing to its grosser nature, remained suspended 
on the Holy Ghost, which is set as a barrier on the confines of 
the higher world. With regard to the sub-lunar world, it is three- 
fold : there is the Ogdoas, reaching to the moon, and composed of 
a celestial and ethereal substance ; there is the Hebdomas, of which 
the nature is lower and merely psychic ; and, lastly, there is the 
earthly world. After the production of the last, the third Sonship, 
which had so far been imprisoned in the world-seed until the 
accomplishment of its purification, was at last delivered and enabled 
to make its way to the kingdom of the Father. This happened 
— after the long-drawn silence of the reign of Ogdoas, and after 
the reign of Hebdomas, who had revealed himself instead of the 
Father to Moses — in the third and last period, by means of the 
Gospel which made manifest the over-world and preached the 
duty of delivering the captive elements. In Jesus the deliverance 
was effected by His death, and thus also must the whole Sonship 
be delivered from its connection with foreign matter. Once 
above the barrier-spirit (the Holy Ghost), the Sonship attains 
to immortality, and God, by involving the whole world in ignorance, 
will effectually prevent anything more from rising superior to 
its nature. According to Irenaeus's account (I, 24, 3-7), from the 
unbegotten Father there proceeded, by way of emanation, a number 
of iEons ; these angels created 365 heavens, each of which is inferior 
to its predecessor. It was the inhabitants of the lowest heaven 
who built the visible world, their chief being the God of the Jews. 
To make an end of their sovereignty, the JEon Nous, or Jesus, 

1 Duchesne, Hist. anc. de I'Jiglise, I, p. 170, adopts the opposite view. 
Trans. 



86 A Manual of Church History 

came (though in appearance only) to earth ; it was not, however, 
he, but Simon of Cyrene, who suffered. Redemption consists 
in being aware of the advent of the Saviour ; hence, though the 
Basilideans confessed Jesus, they deemed it fit and right to deny the 
Crucified. They held that meat sacrificed to idols might lawfully 
be eaten, and generally they attached little importance to externals, 
though the chiefs of the school, Basilides and his son Isidore, 
professed a rigorous system of morals. The sect would appear to 
have survived down to A.D. 400. 

III. Others are known simply by the name of Gnostics, or are 
designated by some peculiarity in their teaching : such were 
the Barbelo-Gnostics and the Ophites. The former associated 
with the Father, at the head of the kingdom of Light, an 
ever-young female spirit, whom they called Barbelo (mStf wn&o, ' in 
the four is God '), and held that the product of each new emanation 
was a fourfold being or Tetras, of which the members were styled 
Syzygies, a feminine Tetras being invariably succeeded by one of 
the masculine gender. According to the Ophites, the Demiurge 
(called by this sect Jaldabaoth, i.e. * Son of the desert ') was intent 
on withholding from men the knowledge of the highest God. His 
great opponent was the Serpent (o<£is), to whom they ascribed a 
place of importance, though whether this was because it had been 
the first to reveal the Gnosis, or for some other reason, does not 
clearly transpire (Iren. I, 29, 30). The Ophitic Gnosis gave rise 
to several schools. Thus we hear of the Naasseni, who looked 
on the Serpent (pro) as the primeval being ; of the Cainites, 
who considered all the persons who are reprobated in the Old 
Testament, from Cain downwards, as real Pneumatists and martyrs 
for the truth ; of the Sethites, who held that just as Cain and 
Abel were the founders of the Hylist and Psychist tribes, so Seth 
was the father of the Pneumatists, and that he had again manifested 
himself in Christ (Iren. I, 28, 31); of the Peratae, who pretended 
that they alone could cross (-Trepav) the instable sea (of death) ; 
lastly, we are told of a certain Justin, who contrived so to combine 
Christian and Old Testament ideas with the pagan myths, that 
even Hercules became a prophet (Philos. V, 12-18, 21-28). Mg. 
on the Ophites, by Giraud, 1884 ; Honig, 1889 ; Theol. Tijds. 
1904, pp. 136-62 ; C. Schmidt, Koptisch-gnostische Schriften, I, 
1905. 

IV. It was to the Ophites that Valentinus belonged, who, 
according to Irenseus (III, 4, 2), betook himself in the time of 
Hyginus (c. 135) from Alexandria to Rome, where he remained 
until the -episcopate of Anicetus (c. 160), and who, according to 
Epiphanius (H. 31, 7), died in Cyprus. If we may trust Irenaeus 
(I, 11, 1), he cast the Ophite doctrine into a new shape, and thus 
became the founder of a new system, in which the iEon theory 
is enlarged considerably, though the older dualism, in consequence 
of Platonic influences, becomes less conspicuous. The Pleroma 






Individual Gnostics 87 

comprises thirty /Eons — one Ogdoas, Decas, and Dodecas — 
together, fifteen pairs of iEons, all the iEons emanating in 
Syzygies. At their head stands nemjp or Bv06s and %tyrj or Silence, 
whilst the last and least of the ^Eons is 2o$ta. Sophia falls 
through her inordinate desire for knowledge and union with the 
Father, and is, in consequence, expelled from the Pleroma. when, 
in recollection of the higher world, she first brings forth Christ, 
and then — after that Christ has sprung back to the kingdom 
of Light, leaving her destitute of all pneumatic substance — she 
gives birth to the right Demiurge Pantocrator and to the left 
Archon Cosmocrator. Out of this ' right ' and ' left/ i.e. out of 
the psychic and the hylic, our lower world is composed. The 
system, of which the details cannot be determined with any 
degree of accuracy, was taught and remodelled by Secundus, 
Colarbasus, Ptolemaeus (Iren. I, 1-7), Mark (Iren. I, 13-21), 
Heracleon, and by Axionicus, who represented at Antioch the 
Eastern form of the system ; the gnosis assuming different forms, 
according as it was taught in Italy or in the Levant ; the Italic 
school forsaking the master's doctrine, and accepting the existence 
of a twofold Sophia, the higher of whom had been reincorporated 
into the Pleroma after having been purified, whereas the lower, 
the Karco %ocf>La or Achamoth (niD^nn, Proverbs ix. 1), the offspring 
of the former, was the source of all later cosmic develop- 
ments. Of the adherents of this school, two are known to us 
through Irenseus, namely, Ptolemaeus (I, 1-7) and Mark (I, 13-21), 
and the teaching of the former on the fall of the thirtieth JEon and 
the formation of the world may serve to complete our idea of 
the whole system. The result of Sophia's inordinate desires 
was the premature birth of an offspring, whose arrival spoilt the 
concert of the Pleroma. Order was re-established by its banish- 
ment from the higher realm and the appearance of two new iEons, 
Christ and the Holy Ghost, who explained to the other .ZEons the 
Syzygy and the unsearchableness of the Father's being. There- 
upon, to prove their oneness and contentment, all the Mons together 
gave birth to a common offspring, the iEon Soter, or Jesus, on whom 
devolved the task of reclaiming the Karw So^ia, the fallen offspring 
of the higher Sophia. First of all, she received from Christ and 
the Holy Ghost a perfect figure ; but no sooner had they left her 
again to her own devices than she contracted all manner of diseases, 
wherefore she had to be healed by Christ, and her diseases becoming 
materialised, furnished the elements of which the world was after- 
wards made. Achamoth accomplished this work by first fashioning 
out of the psychic substance the Demiurge who is supreme over 
all psychic natures ; the government of everything hylic falls 
to Satan, whilst Achamoth retains the control of the Pneumatists. 
To effect the Redemption, Soter unites himself to the Messias 
sent by the Demiurge, whom he inhabits from the time of 
the Baptism until the Passion. Soter's office was to teach the 



88 A Manual of Church History 

Pneumatists concerning their higher origin, and to convert the 
Psychists to good ; only the Hylists were incapable of Redemption. 
When the Pneumatists have arrived at the perfection of the gnosis, 
Achamoth will lead them back to the Pleroma, where she will 
be wedded to Soter, whilst the Pneumatists will select their partners 
from among the angels. The place which they had occupied, 
the middle place, will be assigned to the Demiurge, to the 
Psychists, and to the just generally; as for the Hylists, they will 
perish in the conflagration in which the world will be involved. 
(Cp. KL. art. Valentin.) 

V. Carpocrates of Alexandria, another Platonist, also taught 
that the world had been shaped by inferior iEons, but, in addition, 
he proclaimed the doctrine of the transmigration of souls. This 
is the punishment with which souls are rewarded for having fallen 
away from God, to whose orbit they originally belonged, and 
which will last until they have completed the cycle of all possible 
human stations, and so regained their liberty. Jesus, the son 
of Joseph, through the purity of his soul, through his ever-present 
recollection of the world above, and with the help of the Father, 
was enabled to put the Demiurge to flight, and ascend to the 
Pleroma. Every man who despises the Demiurge can do likewise. 
The Redemption is a result of faith and charity, everything else 
is without worth ; good and evil are merely human inventions. 
The sect made itself notorious by its loose morals ; its members 
kept images of Christ and worshipped them, as likewise they 
did with those of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, and other philo- 
sophers (Iren. I, 25). Epiphanes, the master's son, who died at 
the early age of seventeen, and who was worshipped as a god in 
his mother's birthplace, Cephalonia, had urged the practice of 
keeping wives in common (Clem. Strom. Ill, 2). Cp. KL. art 
Karpokr cites. 

VI. The lawlessness of another faction, that of the Anti- 
tactae, was as notorious as that of the Carpocratians, their 
ground-principle being resistance to the Law, avTirao-o-zo-Qai (Clem. 
Strom. Ill, 4) ; with them we may reckon the Nicolaitae, who claimed 
descent from the deacon Nicolas, mentioned in Acts (vi. 5), and 
whose watchword was the killing of concupiscence by abuse of 
the body (cp. Apoc. II, 6, 15 ; Iren. I, 26, 3 ; Clem. Strom. II, 20 ; 
III, 4; St. u. Kr. 1893, pp. 47-82; iV. k. Z. 1895, pp. 923-61) ; 
and the Prodicians, taking their name from a certain Prodicus, who, 
deeming themselves a royal tribe, refused to be bound by a law 
intended for slaves (Clem. Strom. Ill, 4). 

VII. The very name of the Encratites is synonymous with 
seventy and continence. They rejected marriage, the use of 
flesh-meat and wine ; even in celebrating the Last Supper they 
made use of water instead of wine, for which reason they were 
dubbed Hydroparastatae or Aquarii. Among other tenets they 
believed in Adam's dannation. If it be true that Tatian, the 



Individual Gnostics 89 

Christian apologist, did not merely join this sect, after his secession 
from the Church, but was actually its founder, then it is to him 
that must be ascribed the invention of the iEon doctrine, not un- 
like that of the Valentinians, which formed a part of the Encratite 
belief. Soon after Tatian's time a certain Severus entered the sect, 
founding the school of the Severians (Iren. I, 28, 1 ; Eus. IV, 29). 

VIII. The Syrian Bardesanes of Edessa (f 222) also professed 
a doctrine concerning the ^Eons similar to that of Valentinus ; 
he likewise held the common Gnostic views as to the imperfection 
of the Creator of the world, and as to the merely phantasmal 
character of Christ's body. He and his son Harmonius, by em- 
bodying their teaching in hymns, succeeded in winning many 
disciples. As late as the middle of the fourth century we find 
St. Ephraem in conflict with this error, and composing Catholic 
hymns to counteract the evil influence of the Gnostics (cp. 
Hilgenfeld, Bardesanes, 1864). 

IX. This seems the right place to mention Marcion, though 
he was not a Gnostic in the strict sense of the word, neither acknow- 
ledging the existence of ^Eons, nor making use of the allegorical 
imagery so much in favour with the Gnostic school. He was 
born at Sinope in Pontus, and came (c. 140) to Rome. His views 
having been reprobated by the Church, he founded, in connection 
with the Gnostic Cerdo, a new sect. Basing himself on a one- 
sided interpretation of the Pauline doctrine of Grace through 
Christ, he inferred that there is an absolute opposition between 
the two Testaments, that they are not different revelations of 
one and the same God, but rather manifestations of two different 
beings, of a righteous God and of a good God ; of the angry God 
of the Jews, who is identical with the Creator, and of the loving 
God of the Gospels. The apparent discrepancies between the 
Old and the New Testaments were dealt with in a treatise, now 
lost, entitled 'AvrifleW?. The good God, formerly all-unknown, 
first revealed himself in Jesus. The latter descended from heaven 
in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, and having assumed an immaterial 
body, he entered on the scene in the Synagogue of Capharnaum, 
and was ultimately crucified, though in appearance only, by the 
subjects of the Demiurge, whose kingdom he came to destroy. 
To his peculiar doctrines Marcion added an austere system of 
morals ; marriage, flesh-meat, and wine were forbidden luxuries. 
Such doctrines involved not only the rejection of the Old Testament, 
but also the rejection of a large portion of the New Testament. 
As a matter of fact, the heresiarch accepted only the first nine 
epistles of St. Paul and the Gospel according to St. Luke, the two 
first chapters of which were also set aside, because they deal with 
the birth and youth of Christ. The school soon spread far and 
wide, and in both size and importance surpassed all other Gnostic 
sects. In the fifth century it was still in existence in many 
countries. Among thfl better known disciples of the founder 



90 A Manual of Church History 

were Lucanus and Apelles ; the latter, however, by acknowledging 
one only God, was unfaithful to one of the main elements of the 
master's teaching. (For an account of Marcion's Bible, see Th. 
Zahn, Gesch. des neutestamentl. Kanons, I, (1888), 585-718.) 

X. The painter Hermogenes (c. 200), to whom both Theo- 
philus (Eus. IV, 24) and Tertullian (Adv. Hermog.) devoted special 
refutations, was likewise no real Gnostic ; but by postulating 
an eternal matter out of which the world might be produced, he 
approached the Gnostic systems, though in other respects his 
doctrine was entirely different (Mg. by E. Heintzel, 1902). 



§ 31 

Manichaeism l 

In Manichaeism, as the Persian Gnosis was called, 
Christianity retires even further to the background than in 
the Gnostic systems enumerated above. The substance of 
this doctrine was derived from the ancient religion of Baby- 
lonia and Chaldaea, though it comprised also some Parsee 
elements, whilst its morality and asceticism was mainly Bud- 
dhist. To Christianity it owed only the use of certain names 
and some superficial analogies. Its founder was Mani (216-76), 
called by the Greeks Manes, and by the Latins Manichaeus. 
The accounts of his life do not agree. According to the F ihr ist 
al-ulum (or ' catalogue of knowledge ') of the Arab Mohammed- 
an-Nadim — who wrote at the end of the tenth century, and 
whose account purports to be based on Mani's own story — he 
was born at Babylon of Persian parents, and brought up in 
the religion of the Mughtasila, i.e. of the Mendaitae or Sabaeans 
(Elkasaites). On receiving his mission to promulgate a new 
religion, he was compelled by the disfavour of the Persian 
king Shapur I (241-72) to preach it first of all in the surrounding 
countries ; at a later date he managed to introduce it into 
Persia also, though in so doing he found his death (276). His 
supporters were energetically prosecuted by the authorities, 
not only at home, but also in the Roman Empire. In spite of 
these hindrances the sect spread over both East and West, and 
made its influence felt even late in the Middle Ages. 

1 F. Ch. Baur, Das manich. Religionssystem, 1831 ; G. Flügel, Mani, s. 
Lehre u. s. Schriften, 1862 (a German trans, of the Fihrisf) y K. Kessler,. 
Mani, I, 1889,.. 



Manichceism 91 

According to Mani's teaching, in the beginning there existed 
two sharply opposed principles, the one being good and the other 
evil : Darkness and Light. Both consisted of a number of elements, 
termed members, and both, by emanation, gave rise to a kingdom 
of iEons. But when Satan, the ancient Devil, who was a product 
of the elements of Darkness, succeeded in making his way to the 
upper regions, and overcame the first man, whom God had created 
for His own defence, fragments of Light became mingled with 
fragments of Darkness, and an angel, out of the confused mass, 
constructed the present world. The end of Creation is to deliver 
the imprisoned fragments of Light, the Iesus patibilis, to use the 
expression of the Western Manichaeans, from the fragments of 
Darkness in which they are involved. The first man still plays a 
part in this redemption, for the Sun and Moon, in which he dwells, 
have for their task the collecting of the scattered light, and the 
transmitting of it to the regions above. The Archon of darkness in 
his turn created men, first Adam and then Eve, hoping that through 
the constant breaking up of the elements occasioned by the genera- 
tion of offspring, the separation of the particles of Light might be 
prevented and his booty preserved. In the meantime Adam was 
warned (by the Mon Jesus) to abstain from any sexual intercourse 
with Eve ; he nevertheless allowed himself to be led astray, where- 
upon, in due season, Jesus came to earth clothed in an ethereal 
body, and taught mankind the distinction of the kingdoms. His 
teaching having been, however, misunderstood and falsified, Mani 
himself, the promised Paraclete, came preaching the three seals by 
which the separation of the elements of Light may be effected : the 
signaculum oris, forbidding evil speech and unclean food, more 
especially blasphemy and the use of meat and wine, the sign, manus 
(manuum), forbidding the performance of ordinary work as an 
interference in the world of Light, and the sign, sinus, prohibiting 
marriage. As soon as the elements are completely separated, the 
world will perish in a 1468-year-long conflagration, after which the 
two kingdoms will never again come into contact. 

But only the select (eledi), i.e. members of the high class, 
also known as Catharistae (Aug. H. 46), could profit by the use of 
these seals. The far more numerous category of the hearers 
(auditor es) or catechumens was not obliged to observe them. The 
fasts were also less severe for this latter class ; only on Sunday 
were they bound to fast. Manichaean worship consisted chiefly in 
prayer, though Baptism and the Supper were retained as esoteric 
rites by the upper class. Only one of their feasts is known, that 
of the Bema (ßrjfxa = pulpit), a commemoration of the execution 
of Mani. Their hierarchy seems to have consisted, apart from the 
head, i.e. the successor of Mani, of twelve magistri, seventy-two 
episcopi, besides presbyteri. They also had deacons, though, as 
they merely served as adjutants to the bishops, their position seems 
to have been of little importance (Aug. H. 46). In accordance with 



92 A Manual of Church History 

the doctrine that Ligfrt consists of five elements, the membership 
of the sect was sometimes divided into five classes, corresponding 
to the three hierarchic divisions just mentioned, together with the 
elect and the hearers. The whole of the O. T. and a portion of the 
N. T. was set aside, but, on the other hand, the Gnostic Apocrypha, 
and still more the writings of Mani, were held in high esteem. 
According to Socrates (I, 22), among the latter were : the Book 
of Mysteries, the Book of the Principal Articles, the (Living) Gospel, 
and the Treasure (of Life). 



§ 32 
The Monarchians l 

There is a certain, indefiniteness about the earliest Chris- 
tian utterances regarding the Redeemer. He was believed 
to be God, or the Son of God, but no attempt was made 
to understand His nature, or to determine the relations 
in which He stood to the Father. It was only in the 
second century that the matter became a subject of serious 
reflection. The then problem was to seek how belief in the 
Divinity of the Son could be reconciled with belief in the unity 
of God. The most ancient Fathers followed in the steps ol 
Philo the Jew, 2 and distinguished between the \6yos ivhcdöeros 
and the X0709 irpofyopacbs, and, whilst they looked on the Logos 
or Word as eternal in its essence, they considered that it 
depended for its hypostatisation on the Creation of the world. 
In other words, they considered the Logos to have been 
originally the wisdom of the Father, which, for the purpose of 
Creation, was emitted or begotten by the Father, and thus 
became a distinct person. 3 

This view made the Son subordinate to the Father, and 
led to His generation being looked upon less as an eternal 
and vital act than as a free and temporal act of God's will. 
Yet, as this conception safeguarded both God's oneness and 
the Divinity of the Son, it gave no offence to the Christian 

1 Kuhn, Kath. Dogmatik, II, 1857 ; Schwane, Dogmengesch. der vomicän- 
ischen Zeit, 2nd ed. 1892 ; Hagemann, Die röm. K. u. ihr Einfluss auf 
Disziplin u. Dogma in d. ersten 3 Jahrh. 1864. 

2 Döllinger, Heidentum u. Judentum, p. 843 ff. 

3 This is the view of Athen agoras, Leg. 10, and even more manifestly of 
Theophilus, Ad Autol. II, 10-22. It was also held by Hippolytus, Philos. X, 
33; by Tertullian, Adv. Prax. 6, 7; and likewise by Origen, De princ. 
I, 3> 5 > Cont. Cels. Ill, 34 ; VIII, 15 ; In loan. t. II, c. 2. 



The Monarchians 93 

consciousness, however unsatisfactory the theory may now 
seem to us. 

But at about this same time a new theory arose which 
seemed to threaten danger to the Faith. Some few Christians, 
laying excessive stress on the oneness of God, declared that the 
Redeemer must have been a mere man, though miraculously 
born of a virgin and the Holy Ghost ; others solved the diffi- 
culty by identifying the Son with the Father Himself. By the 
former the Divinity of the Son, by the latter the distinction 
between the Father and Son, was called into question. These 
heretics came to be known, on account of their rallying-cry, 
Monarchiam tenemus, as Monarchians, and, according to the 
answer they gave to the problem, were divided into two groups, 
respectively named Dynamistic or Ebionist Monarchians, and 
Modalists or Patripassians. 

I. It was usual formerly to reckon, as the earliest exponents 
of the Ebionist theory, those Christians of Asia Minor (c. 170) 
to whom Epiphanius (H. 51) applies the nickname of Alogi ; 
whether they really were is a moot point. All that we know is 
that the Alogi were opposed to the Montanists and rejected 
the Johannine writings ; quite possibly it was merely their 
rejection of these writings which led Epiphanius to infer that 
they should be classed with the Ebionites and Theodotians, 
and that they really denied the Word. 1 However this may be, 
not long after, Theodotus, a tanner of Byzantium, 2 imported 
this doctrine to Rome, whereupon he was promptly excommuni- 
cated by Pope Victor (189-98). His disciples, Asclepiodotus 
and Theodotus Junior, a money-changer by profession, made 
an attempt to institute a new Church, over which they placed 
Natalis as bishop. The attempt was, however, a failure, 
Natalis eventually returning to the Faith. At a yet later date 
the same doctrine was professed, probably in Rome, by a 
certain Artemas. Towards the end of the third century it was 
again advocated by Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, who 
opined that Jesus was a mere man, though he likewise admitted 
that He was inspired by the (impersonal) Logos which dwelt in 
Him. The Council of Antioch in 268 excommunicated Paul, 
and chose Domnus as his successor ; Paul, however, in his 

1 Kath. 1889, II, 187-202 ; RE./, pr. Th. y art. Aloger and Monarchianer, 

2 Philos, VII, 35 ; X, 23 ; Eus. V, 28 ; Epiph. H. 54. 



94 A Manual of Church History 

quality of agent to Queen Zenobia of Palmyra, retained his 
position until the reduction of Antioch by Aurelian (272). The 
seed which he had sown bore fruit, and it is doubtless his evil 
influence which accounts for the subordinatist doctrines on the 
Logos of the presbyter and martyr, Lucian of Antioch (f 312). 

The Council of Antioch refused to admit that the Son or Logos 
was ofxoovcrtos t(3 7rar/)t. Whether this was, as Äthan asius (De 
syn. 45) and Basil the Great (Ep. 52, c. 1) have it, to answer Paul's 
argument — if Christ is not essentially man, then he is 6/xoovo-ios tw 
TrarpL, and there are three natures, and as the natures of the 
Father and the Son are set over against that of God, it follows that 
the Father is no longer the source of all Godhead — or as Hilary (De 
syn. 8r, 86) says, because Paul looked on both God and the imper- 
sonal Logos as ofxoovo-Los (eiusdem or unius substantiae) , or because, 
as Epiphanius puts it more clearly, he would not allow to the Logos 
any independent subsistence. The remaining fragments of the 
Council, which deal with the discussion between Paul and his 
presbyter Malchion, will be found in Routh, Reliquiae sacr. t. Ill ; 
cp. Eus. V, 27-30. 

II. The first known representative of modalistic Monarchi- 
anism was Noetus of Smyrna. 1 Under Pope Victor the heresy 
was carried by Praxeas to Rome. On being refused acknow- 
ledgment by Rome, Praxeas proceeded to Carthage, where 
he came into conflict with Tertullian. 2 A little later another 
disciple of Noetus, Epigonus, contrived to form a Patripassian 
party in Rome itself ; this party was headed by Cleomenes and 
Sabellius. The novelty caused great commotion in the Roman 
Church, and was opposed chiefly by the presbyter Hippolytus, 
Pope Zephyrinus confining himself to an endeavour to smooth 
matters. The policy of Zephyrinus was, to begin with, pursued 
also by his counsellor and successor Callistus (217-22), though, 
as there seemed little hope of otherwise establishing peace, the 
latter finally excommunicated both Hippolytus and Sabellius. 
It is, however, quite possible that Hippolytus brought about 
his excommunication by his too stringent views regarding 
certain matters of discipline (§ 24). At any rate, he forthwith 
assumed the position of bishop at the head of his own adherents. 
The schism was not of long duration, and, no doubt, Hippolytus 
returned of his own accord to the Church (f c. 237 § 39). 3 

1 Hipp. Cont. Haer. Noeti. Philos. IX, 7-10 ; X, 27. Epiph. H. 57. 

2 Adv. Praxeam, 1 ; cp. Th. Qu. 1866, pp. 349-405. 

8 Philos. IX, 12 ; DÖLLINGER, Hipp. u. Kail. 1852 (Engl. Trans, 



Millenarianism or Chiliasm 95 

Patripassianism also gained a footing in Arabia and Libya. 
In the former region Beryllus, bishop of Bostra, who had 
shared the error, afterwards being persuaded of his mistake by 
Origen, retracted at the Council of Bostra (244). l In the latter 
country Dionysius of Alexandria entered the lists against the 
innovators, and, the better to combat the Patripassian identifi- 
cation of the Divine Persons, laid such excessive emphasis on 
the distinction between Father and Son that the essential 
oneness of the Divine nature seemed in danger ; his arguments, 
being reported to Dionysius of Rome (259-68), brought, on him 
a reprimand. 2 

In Egypt the controversy entered a new phase, the question 
of the Holy Ghost coming in for discussion, whereas previously 
the dispute had centred on the relations of the Father and the 
Son. This does not, however, mean that the Holy Ghost had, 
so far, been ignored. Sabellius 3 had given the matter his 
consideration, teaching that God had revealed Himself thrice : 
as Father in the Creation and in the giving of the Mosaic Law, 
as Son in the Redemption, and as Holy Ghost in the sanctifica- 
tion of the Church. The fact that he gave to these revelations 
the name of irpocrwira, or ' persons,' explains how he was able 
to deceive many as to the real character of his doctrine, which 
afterwards came to be known as Sabellianism. 



§33 

Millenarianism or Chiliasm 4 

The common expectation of the Jews, that the Messias 
would establish on earth a kingdom of his own, was adopted 
by many of those who believed in the Redeemer who was bom 
in a stable and who died on the cross. The only difference was 
that, according to the latter, this was to take place at the second 
coming of Christ, which in the Apocalypse (xx, xxi) seemed to be 
represented as near at hand : yet a little while and Satan would 
be bound for a thousand years (%t\t<z eV^), and the just would 

Hippolytus and Callistus, or the Church of Rome in the first half of the third 
century, 1876). 

1 Eus. VI, 20-23 ; Hieron. Catal. 60 ; Th. Qu. 1848. 

2 Äthan. De sententia Dionysii. 8 Philos. IX, 11, 12 ; Epiph. H. 62, 
4 J. N. Schneider, Die chiliastische Doktrin, 1859 ; Atzberger, Gesch. der 

christl. Eschatologie, 1896 ; L. Gry, Le millenarisme, 1904. 



96 A Manual of Church History 

rise and reign with Christ ; afterwards, when the devil shall have 
been delivered for a while and again vanquished, the world 
will come to an end with the general Resurrection, the Judgment, 
and the fashioning anew of both heaven and earth. No doubt 
the misfortunes of the Christians contributed to the formation 
of such earthly hopes, just as, formerly, Roman oppression had 
led the Jews to similar dreams. However this may be, Millen- 
arianism was rampant not only in the Judaising schools of 
Cerinthus and the Ebionites, but also in the Church itself. Here 
the idea was first broached by the writer of the Epistle of 
Barnabas, and Papias of Hierapolis (§ 37). Later on it was 
taken up by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Commodian, Victorinus, 
and by Lactantius ; it was also adopted by the Montanists — 
to whose fanaticism it was well suited — and, naturally, also by 
Tertullian. Originally it had its headquarters in Asia Minor, 
but in the middle of the third century its influence was felt, 
more especially in Egypt. Nepos, bishop of Arsinoe, even 
defended it in his Confutatio Allegoristarum against the 
attacks of the Alexandrians. After the death of this bishop 
the Chiliasts of Egypt actually seceded from the Church, though 
Dionysius of Alexandria, in a discussion which lasted three days, 
succeeded in demonstrating to Korakion, the then leader of 
the party, the error of their way of thinking. Not long after 
this the sect disappeared, vanquished by the force of circum- 
stances rather than by argument. 

§ 34 

Montanism l 

In the second half of the second century a certain 
Montanus arose at Ardaban, on the boundaries of Mysia and 
Phrygia, with the mission to declare that he was the mouth- 
piece of the promised Paraclete [John xiv. 16, 26), and to 
inaugurate the reign of the Holy Ghost. The prophecies of 
Montanus were delivered in ecstasy, and related to the near 
advent of Christ, and of the end of all. The millenium was 
to begin in the two Phrygian towns of Pepuza' and Tymium, 

1 Mg. by Bonwetsch, 1881 ; Belck, 1883 ; KL. VIII, 1828-42 ; Zahn, 
For schuft gen, V, 3-57 ; Z. f. KG. XVI (1896), 664-71 ; Harnack, Gesch. d t 
altchristl. Literatur, II, I (1897), 363-81. 



Schisms of Novatian, Felicissimus, and Meletius qy 

Pepuza being the seat of the heavenly Jerusalem. As a 
preparation for all this, a stricter life was enjoined, and an 
attempt was made to bring the Church to perfection by a more 
rigorous system of morality. Second marriages were absolutely 
discountenanced, and fasting was made more severe ; the 
Station-fasts were made obligatory and were occasionally 
prolonged till the evening, whilst two whole weeks, saving 
the Saturday and Sunday, were Xerophagies, on which nothing 
moistened might be eaten. Another point peculiar to the sect 
was that they forbade flight in time of persecution. Grievous 
sinners were excluded for ever from the Church, and maidens 
were obliged to conform to the custom of married women, in 
always being veiled when attending service. The prophecies 
found credence, and soon two women, Prisca (Priscilla) and 
Maximilla, attached themselves to Montanus as prophetesses. 
The neighbouring bishops fruitlessly endeavoured to put a stop 
to the movement, a schism being the only result. The Phry- 
gians, as the Montanists were usually called, after their country 
— though among themselves they preferred the title of Pneu- 
matists, by which they might be more readily distinguished from 
the common Catholic herd of Psychists— were first excom- 
municated in Asia Minor, and then, in consequence of certain 
revelations of Praxeas, also at Rome, where to begin with they 
had received some encouragement. All the efforts of the 
authorities were to no purpose, nor was it long before Tertullian 
of Carthage professed his belief in the new prophecy, and became 
its foremost advocate, writing special works in defence of the 
ecstasies, of the form in which the revelations had been made, 
and of the Montanist precepts. At the time of the Council in 
Trullo, 692 (can. 95), and even as late as Leo the Isaurian (722), 
the sect was still a public danger. One portion of the Mon- 
tanists, the party of a certain iEschines, took a part in the 
Monarchian controversy, and defended Patripassianism. 



§ 35 

The Schisms of Novatian, Felicissimus, and Meletius 

I. The question of penance, which, as we have already seen, 
had caused a dissension in the Roman Church under Callistus 

VOL. I. h 



98 A Manual of Church History 

(§§ 2 4> 3 2 )> was nex t made the pretext of a schism which lasted 
several centuries. At the end of the Decian persecution, after 
the See of Rome had been vacant for fourteen months, the 
presbyter Cornelius (251-53) was elected by the majority of 
the Church, whilst another presbyter, Novatian, was put forward 
by the minority. The conflict had for its origin personal 
motives, Novatian having counted on his election owing to the 
important position he already occupied in the Church, and the 
promise he had received of support. It was not long, however, 
before the dispute assumed a different character : Cornelius was 
disposed to grant absolution to the Christians who had fallen ; 
Novatian refused to do so, and pushed his severity so far as 
to withhold forgiveness even from the dying when it could 
be shown that they were backsliders. Later on, the same 
rigorous measures were extended to all grievous sinners. It 
was the boast of the Novatians that their Church was composed 
only of the pure and holy, for which reason they came to be 
known as KadapoL With this object in view they even 
subjected to rebaptism such of the adherents of the older 
Church as came over to them. The sect spread, especially 
in the East, where it kept up its existence well into the seventh 
century. It made its converts not only among the members 
of the Church, but also among the Montanists. One faction, 
that of the Sabbatians, founded towards the end of the fourth 
century by Sabbatius, a convert Jew, also followed the 
Protopaschite system of reckoning Easter (§ 25). 

II. Whilst dissension was rampant at Rome, a similar quarrel 
was dividing the Church of Carthage. St. Cyprian, taking his stand 
on the Church's practice regarding penance, refused to absolve 
forthwith those who had fallen in the time of persecution, even 
when they had taken the precaution of providing themselves with 
libelli pads. His principal adversary seems to have been the 
presbyter Novatus, whilst the bishop elected by the opposition was 
Fortunatus, though the party was ultimately named after Felicis- 
simus, a deacon, who had headed the movement at the beginning. 
The schism did not, however, endure. Z.f. KG. XVI (1896), 1-41. 

III. Towards the end of the period there broke out in Egypt 
yet another schism, of which the author was Meletius 
(Melitius), bishop of Lycopolis in the Thebais, but of which the 
motive is difficult to determine, owing to the discrepancies in 



Schisms of Novatian, Felicissimus, and Meletius 99 

the sources. Epiphanius connects it with the question of 
penance, and opines that Meletius opposed the mildness shown 
by the metropolitan Peter of Alexandria. In three documents 
dating from the beginning of the quarrel, among which is a 
letter from some Egyptian bishops to Meletius, the only griev- 
ance spoken of has reference to certain unauthorised ordina- 
tions held by Meletius in dioceses other than his own. On 
the other hand, Athanasius and Socrates accuse Meletius of 
having denied the Faith ; no doubt their assumption was 
based on a false report. The former testimonies may be 
reconciled by supposing that, by his irregular ordinations, 
Meletius sought to extend his power and disseminate his 
views. This schism did not die out before the fifth century. 1 

IV. During the Diocletian persecution the Roman Church was 
again troubled by the matter of penance. Pope Marcellus (308-09) 
had to take measures against those of the fallen who insisted on being 
admitted to communion without having performed penance. His 
successor Eusebius had, on the other hand, to withstand a certain 
Heraclius, who denied that the fallen could be reinstated even when 
repentant. The disturbances, of which we owe all our information 
to inscriptions of Pope Damasus, led to some violence, and 
induced the emperor Maxentius to banish both the Popes, together 
with Heraclius ; with this the trouble appears, however, to have 
ended. Cp. Liber pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, I, 164-67. 

1 Epiph. H. 68 ; Ath. Cont. Avian. 59 ; Socr. I, 6 ; Hefele, CG. I, 
343 - 56 ; Z. f. KG. XVII, 62-67 J Nachr. Göttingen, 1905, pp. 164-87. 



H 2 




CHAPTER V 

ECCLESIASTICAL LITERATURE 1 



§36 
The Growth of Ecclesiastical Literature 

In the beginning the Christians were too much taken up 
with the spread of the Gospel to have any great leisure to in- 
dulge in writing. As a general rule, moreover, literature is not 
to be expected from a society as yet in its infancy. Neverthe- 
less, several written works stand to the credit of earliest Chris- 
tianity. Their authors, on account of their close connection 
with the Apostles, received the name of Apostolic Fathers. 
The character and style of these writings being akin to those of 
Scripture, they might readily be considered as an appendix to 
the Bible. We may thus explain how several of them were 
read at Divine service, and even found their way into MSS. of 
the Bible. In the Codex Sinaiticus are included the Epistle 
of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas ; in the Codex 
Alexandrinus we find the two epistles of St. Clement, and in a 
Syriac MS. the pseudo-Clementine epistle Ad Virgines. 

The first of a new class of work, the Apologies, saw the light 

1 Texte u. Untersuchungen zur Gesch. der altchristl. Literatur, ed. Gebhardt 
and Harnack, 1882 ff. ; Dupin, Nouvelle bibl. des auteurs eccl. 2nd ed. 19 
vol. 1693-1715 ; Remi Ceillier, Hist. gen. des. auteurs . . . eccl. 23 vol. 1729- 
63, 1858-68; Mühler, Patrologie (of the first three centuries), 1840; 
I. Fessler, Institutiones Patrologiae, 2 vol. 1850-51; ed. Jungmann, 1890- 
96 ; O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie, 2nd ed. 1901 (Engl. Trans. Patrology, 
1909); Gesch. d. altk. Literatur, I-II, 1902-03; G. Krüger, Gesch. d. altchr. 
Lit. in d. 3 ersten Jahrh. 1895 (Engl. Trans. Hist, of Early Christian Literature 
in the first 3 centuries , New York, 1897) ; A. Harnack, Gesch. d. altchr. Lit. 
bis Eusebius, I-II, 1893-1904 ; Cruttwell, A Literary History of Early 
Christianity, 2 vol. 1899 ; Batiffol, Anciennes UtUratures chrit. I, La litt, 
grecque, 4th ed. 1905 ; A. Ehrhard, Die altchristl. Lit. u. ihre Erforschung 
von 1 884-1 900 ; G. Rauschen, Grundriss der Patrologie, 1903 (French Trans. 
1907) ; H. Kihn, Patrologie, 1904. 



The Apostolic Fathers 101 

about the year 125. The aim of such books was, in the 
beginning, to justify Christianity when reviled by pagans 
and Jews, and, at a later date, to defend the Church when 
attacked by heretics and schismatics. 

Finally, about the year 200, theological works, properly 
so-called, began to appear, i.e. books which were not called 
forth by attacks from without, but of which the aim was to 
expose and expound the facts of Christian Faith, or to declare 
the sense of the Scriptures. 

But the birth of theology as a distinct science did not 
interfere with the development of the earlier science of apolo- 
getics. The latter continued to flourish, and so long as 
Christianity had to fight for its existence, Apologists were 
needed to assist it in its struggle. Indeed, the Latin Apologists 
only made their appearance with the beginning of the third 
century ; previous to this any language other than Greek had 
been only very sparingly used. 



§37 

The Apostolic Fathers 1 

The works of the Apostolic Fathers belong, some of them 
to the end of the first, and the rest to the beginning of the 
second century. It was formerly believed that some of them 
were of yet earlier date ; such an opinion would now find but 
few to defend it. 

I. The oldest work is certainly the recently found Didache 
^thaxn ro)v ScJo&efca ciitogtoKwv. Its discoverer and first 
editor assigned the work to a date between 120 and 160, 
holding that the document is dependent on the Epistle of 
Barnabas and on the Shepherd of Hermas. But there can be 
no doubt that in point of fact it is the opposite which is true. 
The primitive form of the dissertation on the Two Ways, by 
which alone the question of date can be settled, is found in the 
Didache, rather than in the Epistle of Barnabas. The general 

1 Pair, apost. opp., ed. J. B. Cotelerius, 2 fol. 1672 (ed. Clericus, 1698, 
1724) ; edd. Gebhardt, Harnack, Zahn, 3 fasc. 1875-77 (fasc. I, ed. 2a, 
1876-78) ; ed. Funk, 2 vol. 1878-81, 2nd ed. 1901 ; ed. Lightfoot (The 
Apostolic Fathers, 5 vol. 1885-90, containing Clement, Ignatius, and Poly- 
carp) ; D. VÖLTER, Die Apost. Väter neu untersucht, I, 1904. 



102 A Manual of Church History 

character of the work is also manifestly ancient, and it cannot 
have been written much after the period 80-90. 

The first portion comprises, besides the discourse to the cate- 
chumens, or description of the Two Ways of Life and Death, 
instructions on the administration of Baptism, on fasting, orisons, 
and the Eucharist, and on the prayers to be said before and after. The 
second lays down rules for the conduct and treatment of Apostles, 
i.e. of wandering preachers, of prophets, and of Christian wayfarers ; 
also on the due observance of Sunday, on the election of bishops 
and deacons, and on the administration of fraternal correction. The 
work concludes by recommending watchfulness and perseverance 
in view of the nearness of the end of all things. The Editio princeps 
was published by Ph. Bryennius at Constantinople in 1883. For 
an account of its many subsequent editions, and of the works to 
which it has given rise, see Funk, Doctrina duodecim Apostolorum, 
1887 ; A. u. U. II, 108-41 ; Th. Qu. 1900, pp. 161-79. 

II. The Epistle of Barnabas, which in parts reproduces the 
matter of the Didache, is, by both the MSS. and the Fathers, 
ascribed to St. Barnabas. This can, however, scarcely be true, 
seeing that the author's judgment on the 0. T. differs entirely 
from that of the Apostles. It belongs, moreover, to a more recent 
date than Barnabas's death, which cannot have occurred much 
later than 60. It is, however, a highly difficult matter to 
determine accurately the date to which the epistle belongs, 
and critics are still divided. If, as is very probable, we must 
see a reference to contemporary events in the prophecy of the 
ten kings, who were followed by a lesser one who humbled 
three of them together (4, 4, 5), then the work must belong, at 
the earliest, to the reign of Nerva. Some recent scholars have 
seen in the allusion to the construction of a temple (16, 4), 
which occurs after mention has been made of the destruction 
of the Temple of the Jews, a reference to the building of the 
temple of Jupiter by Adrian, and in consequence they assign 
the epistle to the year 130-31. 

The first and lengthiest portion of the epistle (c. 1-17) has' for 
its object to show that Christians must not observe the Law of 
the O. T. The O. T. legislation regarding fasts, sacrifices, meats, 
circumcision, the Sabbath, and the Temple is allegorised and 
interpreted purely spiritually, the old Covenant being entirely 
divested of the historical character attributed to it by the Jews. 
The second part contains the discourse on the Two Ways of Light 



The Apostolic Fathers 



'.) 



and Darkness. Cp. Funk, A. u. U. II, 77-108 ; RIIE. I (1900), 
no. 1-2. 

III. Belonging to the same period as the epistle last 
mentioned — though, were the more recent theory as to the date 
of the former proved, it would be some thirty years older — 
we have the Epistle of Clement of Rome, written in the name 
of the Church of Rome to that of Corinth, with a view 
to re-establish the harmony that had been threatened by 
the insubordination of some of its members. Though this 
epistle may not belong, as was formerly believed, to the years 
immediately subsequent to Nero, yet it must have been com- 
posed very soon after the Domitian persecution. Being 
the earliest patristic work the contributory circumstances of 
which are known for certain, it has a great value of its own, 
especially since the discovery and publication of the Jerusalem 
MS. (1875), which supplied some portions, previously missing, 
in particular a fine prayer (57, 7-63). 

The MSS. also ascribe to Clement another work written to the 
Corinthians which, by the ancients, is likewise described as an 
epistle. Now, however, since the discovery of the second portion 
(12, 5-20), which formerly was lacking, it is beyond a doubt that 
the so-called second epistle is in reality a homily, most probably 
delivered at Corinth — in fact, the oldest sermon we now possess. The 
mistake committed by the ancients with respect to the character of 
this writing makes us wonder whether a similar error has not been 
made as to the authorship. The language and contents of the 
second epistle would point to a later date. Harnack (Gesch. d. 
altchristl. Lit. II, i, 438-50), though without showing sufficient 
reason, considers the ' epistle ' to have been the work sent by Pope 
Soter, c. 170, to the Corinthians (Eus. IV, 23, n). Cp. Funk, 
A. u. U. Ill, no. 12. So far as the two epistles Ad Virgines are 
concerned, which are extant only in the Syriac version, they 
certainly do not belong to Clement, even though they bear his name. 
The use made of Scripture, the idiom, the contents, and especially 
the intense repugnance for mulieres subintroductae, attest a later 
origin. It may have been composed in the first half of the third 
century. For an account of the other works bearing Clement's 
name, the Clementines and the Apostolic Constitutions, see § 28 
and § 75. 

IV. To the time of Trajan, i.e. to the beginning of the 
second century, belong the seven epistles written by Ignatius, 
bishop of Antioch. when on his way to Rome to be thrown to the 



104 A Manual of Church History 

beasts. Four of them, composed at Smyrna, are addressed 
to the Churches of Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralles, and Rome ; 
three, written at Troas, were destined for the Churches of 
Philadelphia and Smyrna, and for Polycarp the latter's 
bishop. The letters convey the saint's thanks for the thought- 
fulness of the Churches of Asia Minor in sending their greetings 
to him at Smyrna ; they also contain warnings against the 
heresy of the Judaising Docetae, an invitation to all to rally 
round their bishops, together with repeated expressions of the 
saint's desire for martyrdom. The main interest of these 
epistles — which also accounts for their authenticity having 
been made the subject of so much debate — lies in the fact that 
they are our earliest witness to the monarchical constitution 
of the Church, and to the division of the clergy into bishops, 
priests, and deacons. 

At about the year 400, these epistles were interpolated by an 
Apollinarist, who also increased their number by five, or even 
by six, if we reckon the letter of Mary of Cassobola to Ignatius 
which stands at the head of this longer recension. In the Middle 
Ages four more Ignatian letters, written in Latin, were put into 
circulation, two to the Apostle John, and one to the Blessed Virgin, 
together with her reply. In 1845 Cureton published a Syriac 
version of the Ignatian epistles to Polycarp, Ephesians and Romans. 
The extra epistles of the longer recension are now universally 
held to be spurious ; on the other hand, of late years, the number 
of the opponents of the shorter Greek recension has steadily 
diminished ; considering that these epistles are vouched for by 
Polycarp, Irenaeus, Origen, and Eusebius, their authenticity may 
be reckoned as certain (cp. Funk, Die Echtheit d. Ignatiusbriefe, 
1883). Amongst the several Acts of St. Ignatius, one only, that 
of the Colbert MS., known as the Martyrium Colbertinurn, has any 
claim whatever to be considered as genuine. But, as it was unknown 
to Eusebius, besides contradicting the epistles in many details and 
presenting other difficulties, it can scarcely be what it purports, 
namely, an account written by certain companions of the saint and 
witnesses of his martyrdom. More probably it belongs to a later 
date (Funk, A. u. U. II, 338-47; Th. Qu. 1903, p. 159). 

V. Of very slightly later origin is the epistle sent by 
Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (f 155-56), l a disciple of the Apostle 
John, to the Church of Philippi, which had requested of him 

1 For the year of his death, 156 (until recently the usual date given having 
been 155), cp. E. Schwartz, Christi, u. jüd. Ostevtafeln, in Abh. Göttinnen, 
N. F. VIII (1904-05), 6, pp. 125-38. 



The Apostolic Fathers 105 

the letters of Ignatius Martyr. As this is the most ancient 
witness for the Ignatian epistles, the opponents of the former 
look on it as spurious, or at least as interpolated. Both sup- 
positions are, however, baseless, seeing that the existence 
of the epistle is attested by Irenaeus, one of its author's 
disciples, and that it was publicly read at the services — a 
fact which would effectually prevent any corruption of the 
text (KL. art. Polykarp). 

VI. Another disciple of John the Apostle's (and not, as 
Eusebius believed, of a certain presbyter John, whose existence 
is merely conjectural, being based on an allusion which, most 
probably, refers to the Apostle himself), Papias, bishop of 
Hierapolis, in Phrygia, composed a work explanatory of the 
words of the Lord, Xoytcov KvpiaKwv i^rjyqat^, in five books, 
the whole of which, apart from some fragments of slight 
importance, has been lost. 

To the above we may add two works, which, though they 
probably do not proceed from immediate disciples of the 
Apostles, are usually reckoned among the productions of the 
Apostolic Fathers, chiefly because their writers were long held 
to belong to the category, and because, in any case, the docu- 
ments were written not long after the time of the Apostles. 
These works are the Shepherd and the Letter to Diognettis. 

VII. The Shepherd of Hermas is an exhortation to pen- 
ance and good works, cast in apocalyptic form. The Easterns 
generally, and formerly even some moderns, were inclined 
to see in its author that same Hermas who is spoken of in 
Romans (xvi. 14), and in consequence the work was held to 
be extremely ancient, in fact by some to have been composed 
prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. The Muratorian Frag- 
ment designates, however, as its author the brother of Pope 
Pius I (140-54), an ascription which is borne out by other 
Western testimonies, and by the internal criticism of the 
document. It is true that the author represents himself as a 
contemporary of Clement the Roman (Vis. ii. 4, 3), and on 
this ground some moderns have seen fit to refer the work to 
c. 100 ; but the author's own testimony is of doubtful value, 
seeing that the visions detailed in the book can scarcely be 
real revelations, but a mere literary device. 

VIII. The Letter to Diognetus is an apology for the Faith, 



io6 A Manual of Church History 

consisting of a brief refutation of paganism and Judaism, 
together with an explanation of the late arrival of Christianity. 
This pearl of ancient Christian literature has been preserved 
among the works of Justin Martyr, though it neither belongs 
to him nor to the first century, in which it was commonly 
supposed to have been written. On the other hand, it is cer- 
tainly not a forgery posterior to Constantine, nor a merely 
humanitarian essay, but is undoubtedly a product of the 
second century ; beyond this we cannot venture. 



§38 

The Apologists and other Writers of the Second Century l 

Besides the unknown author of the Letter to Diognetus, 
there are other Apologists whose works are still extant. 

I. The Apology of Marcianus Aristides of Athens 3 was 
written to prove that pagan pluralism is incompatible with a 
true conception of God, besides being hurtful to good morals ; 
that Jewish worship was mere angel worship; and that truth 
and morality belong to Christianity. Most of its contents were 
incorporated by John, a monk of Mar Saba near Jerusalem 
(c. 630), in the legend of Barlaam and Joasaph, though this fact 
was brought to light only recently, when the work was dis- 
covered in a Syriac translation. According to the Syriac text, 
the Apology was addressed to Antoninus Pius; according 
to Eusebius, and a recently unearthed Armenian fragment, 
it was destined for Adrian. It is difficult to say which of 
the two statements is correct. 

II. Justin the philosopher 3 was born at Sichern in Samaria, 
and was martyred at Rome under Marcus Aurelius (163-67). 
We have two Apologies of his. The first and longer, addressed 
to Antoninus Pius, was written soon after the middle of the 
second century. Its aim is to dispose of the current reproaches 

1 S. Justini opp. necnon Tatiani adv. Graec. oratio, &c, ed.PRUD.MARANUs, 
1742 ; Corpus Apologetarum christ. saecul. sec. ed. Otto, 9 vol. 1842-72 ; 
3rd ed. vol. I-V {Iustini opp.), 1875-81. 

2 Ed. by Rendel Harris and J. A. Robinson, in Texts and 
Studies, I, 1891 ; Seeberg, Zahns Forschungen, V, 1893 ; Der Apologet 
Arist. 1894 ; T. u. U. IX, i ; XII, 2. 

a Mg. by Semisch, 2 vol. 1840-42; Aube, 1875; Engelhardt, 1878; 
Stählin, 1880 ; KL. VI, 2060-73. 



Apologists and Writers of the Second Century 107 

of atheism, immorality, and cannibalism made against the 
Christians ; it also furnishes some interesting information 
regarding the Christian worship at the time. The shorter and 
later treatise supplements the former — though it is more 
than a mere appendix — and explains why the Christians do 
not take their lives in order to reach God the sooner, and why 
God, who protects them, allows them to be slain. Lastly, in 
the Dialogus cum Tryphone Iadaeo, Justin has left us a defence 
of Christianity against Judaism. 

III. Tatian came from Assyria, was one of Justin's 
disciples, and afterwards chief of the Encratites. He wrote 
(c. 170) an Oratio adv. Graecos, which is rather an attack on 
paganism than a defence of Christianity. The author also 
labours to show, by means of the Old Testament, that 
Christianity is far from being really a new religion. 1 

IV. The Legatio pro Christianis of Athenagoras (177-80) 
is also devoted to refuting the three chief calumnies against 
the Christians. The work is remarkable for the beauty of its 
descriptions, and for the manner, at once ingenious and 
dignified, with which it treats its subject. In another book, the 
De resurr ectione, an effort is made to overcome the pagan 
misapprehension of the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection. 

V. Of Theophilus of Antioch we have the three books Ad 
Autolycum, written under Commodus. Of these the first book 
excels by its lucid explanation of the means of attaining to a 
knowledge of God. 

VI. Hermias in his Irrisio philo sophor um, gentiliam, adopting 
a suggestion thrown out by Tatian (c. 25), attacks, or rather ridi- 
cules, the ancient psychology and metaphysics, by setting side by 
side the different opinions of philosophers, and allowing them 
to refute each other. The work, which is usually classed among 
those of the second century, belongs really to the third. Diels 
(Doxographi graeci, 1879, pp. 259-63), though on insufficient 
grounds, even holds it to be of still later origin and to belong to 
the fifth or sixth century. 

VII. This is also the place to mention the Testamentum XII 
Patriarcharum, if indeed it be true that the writer's prophecies 
respecting Christ were meant to bring about the conversion of 
the Jews. The work is, however, probably a Jewish one, touched 

1 Funk, A. u. U. II, 142-52 ; A. Puech, Recherches sur le Discours aux 
Grecs de Tatien, 1903. 



io8 A Manual oj Church History 

up by a Christian hand (cp. Harnack, II, i, 566 ; Z. f. neutest. 
Wiss. u. Kunde des Urchristentums, I (1900), 106-75, 187-209). 

Of the remaining authors of the second century only one 
great work of importance has survived in its entirety, and even 
this one is only extant in a Latin translation ; this is the 
Adv. Haereses of St. Irenaeus. The author was a native of 
Asia Minor, where he had been a pupil of St. Polycarp. In 
later life he became a presbyter, and bishop of the Church of 
Lyons. As Justin's Syntagmas have been lost, the work of 
Irenaeus, which was written under Pope Eleutherus (174-89), 
is the oldest refutation of heresy which we possess. It is also 
important on account of the clear way in which it lays down 
the Faith of the Church as opposed to that of the Gnostics. 1 

Another writing of a different character, of which a part, 
and probably the larger part, has been recovered, has an 
importance out of all proportion to its length. This is a cata- 
logue of the books of the N. T., drawn up (c. 180) either at Rome 
or in the neighbourhood. It is not certain whether the list 
was originally in Greek or in Latin. It is called, after L. 
Muratori its discoverer, the Muratorian Fragment. 2 

Two smaller works give us a glimpse of the sufferings of the 
early Christians. One is the Martyrium Polycarpi, an account 
of the death of its great bishop written by the Church of Smyrna 
in 155-56 ; it is the most ancient of the Acts of the Martyrs. The 
other is the letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne to those 
of Asia and Phrygia, dealing with the former's misfortunes under 
Marcus Aurelius ; the larger portion of the letter has been pre- 
served by Eusebius (V, 1, 2). 

Among the works which have been entirely lost, or of which 
only small fragments are to hand, must be mentioned the Apology 
of Quadratus, a pupil of the Apostles, presented by the author 
to Adrian during the latter's sojourn in Asia (125 or 129) ; the 
Apologies of Ap ollinar is, bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, of Meli to - 
bishop of Sardis, of a certain scarcely known Miltiades, who wrote 
in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and the Alter catio Tasonis et Papisci, 
written in defence of Christianity by Aristo of Pella during the 
Jewish interregnum. For a time it was believed that Melito's 

1 Ed. by Massuet, 1712 ; Stieren, 1873 ; Harvey, 1857. Mg. by H. 
Ziegler, 1 871 ; J. Werner [Der Paulinismus des Ir., T. u. U. VI, 2) ; Ei 
Klebba, 1894 {Die Anthropologie des hl. Ir., Kirchenhist. Studien, II, 3). 

2 Muratori, Antiquitates medii aevi, III (1740), 851 f. Mg. by Hesse, 
1873 ; G. Kuhn, 1892 ; Zahn, Gesch. des neutest. Kanons, II, 1-143 ; G. 
Kauschen, Florilegium pair. Ill (1905), 24-35. 



Greek Writers of the Third Century 109 

Apology had been brought to light in the recently discovered Syriac 
version of the Oratio Melitonis philosophi quae habila est coram 
Antonino Caesare (cp. Spicilegium Syriacum, ed. Cureton, 1835 > 
Spicilegium Solesmense, ed. Pitra, t. II ; Th. Qu, 1862, pp. 392-409 ; 
Thomas, Melito v. Sardes, 1893). 

Non-apologetical literature fared even worse than the Apologies. 
Among the more noteworthy losses must be reckoned that of the 
Memorabilia of Hegesippus (cp. § 5). Concerning his list of the 
Popes, see Funk, A. u.U. I, 373-90 ; Zahn, Forschungen, VI (1900), 
245 f. Other well-known authors of the time were Dionysius, 
bishop of Corinth, writer of numerous letters to various Churches 
(Eus. IV, 23) ; Rhodon, a pupil of Tatian, opponent of Marcion, 
and writer of a commentary on the work of the seven days of 
Creation (Eus. V, 13) ; Apollonius, an adversary of the Montanists 
(Eus. V, 18) ; the presbyter Caius of Rome, who opposed the 
Montanist Proclus in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (Eus. VI, 20) ; 
the anonymous writer of a work against the Monarchians (Eus. 
V, 28), which is, by Theodoret (Haer. II, 5), entitled the Little 
Labyrinth. The opinion of some critics, that its writer was Hippo- 
lytus, is by no means certain. Some other productions of the 
above-mentioned Apologists were for a time believed to be still 
extant in translations, but the pretended Gospel-commentary 
of Theophilus of Antioch, for which Zahn recently contended 
(1883), is now known to be a compilation dating from the period 
470-650 ; the same is true of the Clavis, which Pitra (Spicilegium 
Solesm. t. II, III ; Analecta Sacra, t. II) brought to light and declared 
to be Melito's KAei? (Th. Qu. 1896, pp. 614-29). On the other 
hand, so far as Tatian's Diatessaron — a harmony of the Gospels 
used in Syria until the sixth century — is concerned, it has quite 
possibly been substantially preserved in the Arabic translation 
published by Ciasca in 1888. In this Version some parts have, 
however, been displaced, and the greater portion of the text has 
been brought into conformity with the traditional reading (cp. 
Zahn, Forschungen zur Gesch. des neutest. Kanons, I, 1881 ; VII, I, 
I0 >03 ; Gesch. d. neutest. Kanons, II, 530-56). 



§ 39 
Greek Writers of the Third Century 

The headquarters of literary life during the third century 
were Alexandria, Palestine, and Syria, though Rome also 
could lay claim to one scholar of fame. 

I. At an early date there existed at Alexandria a 
nourishing catechetical school, and in the then state of 
affairs, when catechists were called upon to instruct not so 



no A Manual of Church History 

much children as adults, who were frequently men of culture, 
the existence of such a school was bound to promote the growth 
of theology. The first master of the school of whom we have 
any knowledge was Pantaenus, who must, however, have 
busied himself exclusively with oral instruction, for no written 
works of his are known. The next leader of the school was 
Clement (*) (t before 216). l He was the first to attempt to 
found a science of Faith, and his three principal works, which 
form really a single whole, are devoted to a comprehensive 
examination of Christianity, both as a doctrine and as a life. 
These works are : the Protrepticus or Cohort atio ad gent es, an 
Apology ; the Paedagogus, an introduction to the Christian 
life ; the (unfinished) Stromata, a more advanced instruction 
on Faith, or introduction of the believer to the Christian 
gnosis. By some recent critics this work is held to be, not the 
last member of the trilogy, but a mere introduction to the 
third work, or Didascalos, as they call it. Besides these 
there has survived another work of Clement's, Quis dives 
salvetur, in which, taking for his theme the parable of the rich 
young man (Mark x. 17-31), he refutes the notion that the mere 
possession of riches excludes a man from heaven, and explains 
what are the duties of the rich man. Among his lost works are 
the Hy 'polyposes, Commentaries on certain passages from Holy 
Writ and the Apocrypha. 

Even more famous is the name of his pupil and successor, 
Origen (*), 2 though, in consequence of a quarrel with his bishop, 
he left Alexandria as early as 231 for Caesarea in Palestine, and 
died in 254 at Tyre. He was far and away the most prolific 
writer of the ante-Nicene period, and for his consuming love of 
work was called 'XaXtcevrepo^, or Adamantius, by his con- 
temporaries. By many he has been held as an incomparable 
master, though his frequent errors, even in his lifetime, and 
still more after his death, found many opponents (cp. § 51). 
Origen's literary activity left no field unexplored, but his 
principal work was exegetical, consisting of running Com- 
mentaries (to/jlol) of short notes on obscure and difficult 

1 Ed. Potter, 1715 ; Klotz, 1831-34 ; Dindorf, 1869 ; P. G. VIII, IX. 
Mg. byTh. Zahn, 1884 {Forschungen, III); E. deFAYE, 1898; Hitchcock, 1899. 

2 Ed. by De la Rue, 4 fol., 1733-59 ; Lommatzsch, 25 vol. 1831-48 ; 
P. G. XI-XVII. Mg. by Redepenning, 2 vol. 1841-46 ; Bohringer, KG. 
1,2, 1. 



Greek Writers of the Third Century in 

passages, and of Homilies or lectures on given portions 
of Scripture. The larger part of these works has been lost, 
though a great deal of them, especially of the Homilies, has 
come down to us in the translations of Jerome and Rufinus. 
We have also numerous fragments of his works on Biblical 
criticism, the Hexapla and Tetrapla. Origen also left behind 
him some important works of an apologetic and dogmatic 
character, the eight books Contra Celsum, a confutation of the 
philosopher Celsus's attack on Christianity, and the work 
De Principiis, in which he carries out the plan of his master 
Clement, the construction of a manual of Christian dog- 
matics ; this work now exists only in the Latin translation of 
Rufinus. Dealing with practical morals and asceticism, we have 
Origen's De oratione, an explanation of the Our Father, with 
reflections on the nature, quality, time and place of prayer, 
and the Cohortatio ad Martyrium. 

Origen's speculative errors belong to the domain of exegesis, 
cosmology, and eschatology, his views on the Trinity being neither 
better nor worse than those of his contemporaries. Most of his 
mistakes were a result of his efforts to oppose gnosticism ; thus, 
to cut the ground from under his opponents, who professed to 
be scandalised at certain passages in Scripture, he, as Philo had 
done before, pushed allegorism to the extreme, interpreting a vast 
amount of Scripture mystically and morally instead of literally and 
historically. Moreover, the better to dispose of the objection 
that the Creator is unjust because He is the cause of the inequality 
of His creatures, Origen taught that the present world had been 
preceded by another, which included only equal spirits (naturae 
rationabiles), embodied, as all created spirits are, in a species of 
ethereal matter. The present world with its diversity of gifts is 
the outcome of the different uses which those earlier beings made 
of their freedom : those who persevered in the right, afterwards 
went to form the hierarchy of the angels, all of which are provided 
with ethereal bodies of a spherical shape ; those who had strayed 
a little from God were banished into human bodies ; whilst those 
who had deserted Him altogether became demons, and received 
bodies of frightful ugliness, which, fortunately for us, are invisible. 
Creation is considered by Origen as an eternal act, for God's creative 
activity belongs to His very essence, and any passage from a 
non-creative to a creative state would involve an alteration of 
essence which in God's case it is impossible to allow. The object 
of the external world is the curbing and purifying of the spirits, 
all of whom, Satan not excepted, will ultimately be cleansed, and 
revert to God. When this occurs the world will come to an end, 



112 A Manual of Church History 

and the bodies will rise with a new and ethereal nature, the end 
of all things being like unto their beginning (a7roKarao-rao-t5 7ravrü>v). 

Another of the famous Alexandrian masters was Diony- 
sius, 1 a pupil of Origen's, who later on became bishop of 
the city, but who is better known as a man of action than as 
a writer. Of his writings only a few fragments remain. 

Another who came under the great Alexandrian's influence 
at Caesarea was Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of Neo- 
Caesarea in Pontus. Of his works there remains a panegyric 
of his master, an Epistala canonica, a Metaphrasis on Ecclesi- 
astes, a Confession of Faith, and a Syriac translation of a book 
on God's impassibility and passibility. His authorship of 
the letter to Philagrius on the unity of nature, which has been 
preserved in Greek under the title of Ep. ad Evagrium de 
dvcinitate as a work of Gregory of Xazianzen and of the two 
other great Cappadocians, is attested by the Syriac translation, 
and confirmed by internal evidence. 

II. The only Roman writer to be mentioned is Hippolytus 
(*), 2 famous as an exegetist and opponent of heresies. Under 
Callistus he acted as bishop of the opposition, but seems to 
have been reconciled with the Church before his death. His 
followers erected a statue to his memory, which was recovered 
in 1551, and on which his Paschal tables and a list of his 
writings is engraved. Of these the larger portion has been lost, 
though we have still his Demonstratio de Christo et Antichristo, 
his Commentary on Daniel, his Contra haeresin Xoeti — a 
fragment of a larger work, being probably the conclusion 
of his Memoria haeresium. In the anti-heretical work 
falsely ascribed to Tertullian {De praescr. c. 45-53) we have, 
in the main, Hippolytus's Syntagma against all the heresies, 
which forms the basis of the similar works of Epiphanius and 
Philastrius. A more important work is the Refutatio omn. 
haeresium, which, though it does not bear his name, probably 
belongs to him : at least to him alone can it be ascribed with any 
show of reason. After the contents of the first book — which 

1 Ed. Feltoe, 1904. Mg. by Dittrich, 1S67 ; Z.f. hist. Th. 1S71. 

- Refutatio omn. haer. ed. Miller, 1851 ; Duncker and Schneidewix, 
1859; Cruice, i860. Cp. Funk, A. u. U. II, 161-97; Ficker, Studien 
zur Hippohtfrage, 1S93. T. u. U. X. F. I, 2, 4 ; XI, I a . A. Bauer, Die 
Chronik des Hipp. 1905 (T. u. U. A\ F. XIV, 1). 



Greek Writers of the Third Century 113 

had been preserved among the works of Origcn, whereas the 
last seven (IV-X) were recovered only in 1842 — it is known as 
the Philosophumena. 

III. The remaining writers belong to Palestine and Syria. 
The first of them, who was indeed born in Libya, but who 
lived at Nicopolis (Emmaus), Sextus Iulius Africanus, 1 wrote 
a y^povoy pallet, in five books, reaching from Creation down to 
221, the earliest Christian chronicle, and one which long after- 
wards formed the foundation of similar works, and the Kearoi, 
a collection of wonderful tales from every department of life. 
A few fragments are all that remain of these works. He also 
concerned himself with exegesis, and we still have his letter to 
Origen dealing with the story of Susanna in the Book of Daniel, 
and another to Aristides concerning the harmonising of the 
genealogies of Christ in the gospels according to Matthew and 
Luke. 

Another important work of unknown origin is the Didascalia 
of the Apostles, 2 which may be described as a handbook of 
Christianity, comprising directions for the due observance of 
Church discipline. It was probably compiled in the second 
half of the third century, in Syria ; it has been substantially 
preserved in a Syriac translation, whilst about two-fifths of it 
has recently been recovered in an old Latin version. It has 
also been embodied, with alterations, in the Greek Apostolic 
Constitutions (§ 75). 

The period is brought to a close by two writers, both of whom 
were martyred under Maximin Daza, but the trend of whose 
respective works was curiously different. One was Methodius, 3 
bishop of Olympus in Lycia. Until recently his only entire 
work known was the Symposium, in praise of virginity : of his 
books on Free-will and the Resurrection a few fragments only 
were thought to survive ; the former has, however, been 
recovered complete in a Slavonic translation, together with 
large portions of the latter and of three other works. The 
other was the presbyter Pamphilus of Caesarea (*)* 309) . In 
conjunction with Eusebius, he strove to dispose of the objec- 
tions which Methodius, in his work on the Resurrection, had 

H. Gelzer, 5. /. Afrikanus u. die byzant. Chronographie, 2 vol. 1888-98. 

2 Didascalia et Constitutiones apost. ed. Funk, 1905. 

3 Bonwetsch, Methodius von. Olym. I, 1891 ; Abh. Göttingen, 1903, N, F. 
VII, 1, 

VOL. I. I 



114 A Manual of Church History 

brought against Origen's doctrine on this matter and on 
Creation. Of the six books of which this defence consisted, one 
only has been preserved in a Latin translation by Rufinus. 

Lastly, a word must be said of the Sibylline Oracles (*), of 
which we have twelve books ; they consist of poems in hexa- 
meters. Their contents are varied, and they hail from divers 
sources. The ground work is Jewish, and belongs partly (bk. Ill) 
to the second century b.c., partly to the first three centuries 
of our era ; some of the books have (I-II ; VIII), however, been 
manipulated by a Christian hand towards the end of the second 
or beginning of the third century, whilst bk. VI is evidently the 
work of an heretical Christian, just as bk. VII is the work of some 
Judaiser. The Oracles were edited by Friedlieb, 1852 ; Geffcken, 
1902. J. Geffcken, Komposition u. Entstehungszeit der O.S. 1902 
(r. u. U. N. F. VIII, 1). 



§ 40 

The Latin Literature 1 

Most of the Latin writers of the period were Africans. 
The first place, in importance as in time, must be assigned 
toQu.Sept.FlorensTertullianus (*) of Carthage, 2 a clever man, 
endowed with much wit and fancy, an energetic character, 
of fiery temper, as harsh in his ways of thinking as in his 
manner of life. His excessive severit}^ led him (c. 205) to 
embrace Montanism, in which he persisted until his death 
(c. 240) . His writings are very numerous : some are apologies 
for Christianity against Judaism and paganism, others are 
refutations of heresy, whilst others, again, were written to 
defend Christian — or rather Montanist — morality and 
asceticism. Among the apologetical works the first place 
must be given to his Ad nationcs and Apologeticum. Amongst 
his dogmatic and polemical works the principal were : De 
praescriptionibus adv. Haereticos, Adv. Marcionem, and Adv. 
Praxeam. 

Among those of the third class we may mention : De fuga in 

1 A. Ebert, Allg. Gesch. d. Lit. des MA. im Abendland, 3 vol. 1874-87 ; 
M. Schanz, Gesch. d. vom. Liter. Ill, 2nd ed. 1905 ; P. Monceaux, Hist. 
UtUvaire de V Afrique chritienne, I-III, 1901-05. 

2 Mg. by A. Hauck, 1877 ; Noldechen, 1890 ; H. Hoppe (Syntax u. 
Stil), 1903 ; Adhemar D'Ales (La thdologie), 1905 ; T. u. U. XII, 2. 



Latin Literature in the Third Century 115 

persecutione, De pudicitia, De velandis virginibus, De monogamia, 
De ieiuniis, De cultu feminarum, De corona militis. 

Another writer who may well dispute the first place with 
Tertullian is Minucius Felix (*), 1 some even holding that there 
are internal reasons for surmising that Tertullian drew on the 
Octavius in composing his Apologeticum, for which reason they 
reckon the Octavius as the earliest specimen of Latin literature. 
It seems, however, that the contrary is the case, and at any 
rate external testimonies attest Tertullian's priority. Not 
only does Jerome, in his Catalogus, of which the order is usually 
chronological, place Tertullian first and Minucius second (c. 53, 
58), but he expressly speaks of the former as primus latinorum. 
However this may be, the dialogue called Octavius excels all 
other Apologies of its time in skill of composition and in beauty 
of diction. 

The third Latin writer in point of time, and the second 
master of the African school, was Caecilius Cyprianus (*)', 
bishop of Carthage (248-58). 2 Before his conversion a rhetor, 
well read in Tertullian's works, though devoid of the latter's 
peculiarities and harshness, he was a good pastor of his 
flock, and an earnest defender of the Faith, for which finally he 
laid down his life. His best known works are the treatises De 
catholicae ecclesiae unitate and De lapsis, one being a defence of 
the Church's oneness against the schism of Felicissimus, and the 
other a reply to those of the fallen who desired to be restored 
to the Church's communion forthwith and without due penance. 
His epistles 3 are also of great importance, and form the best 
source of the history of his times. His Life was written by 
the deacon Pontius, and has been preserved together with 
the Acts of his martyrdom. 

At about this same period a Roman presbyter, later on 
anti-Pope, Novatian, 4, was displaying considerable literary 
activity. Of his writings we have one, or possibly two epistles, 
preserved amongst those ascribed to St. Cyprian (30, 36), and 
the two tracts De cibis iudaicis and De Trinitate. 

1 Hermes, 1905, pp. 373-86 (Minucius F. und Cäcilius Natalis). 

2 Mg. by Peters, 1877 ; Fechtrup (incomplete), 1878 ; Benson, 1897. 

3 L. Nelke, Die Chronologie der Korrespondenz C. 1902 ; H. v. Soden, Die 
Cyprianische Brief Sammlung, 1904 (T. u. U. N. F. X, 3). 

4 Mg. (in Danish) by J. O. Andersen, 1901, 

1 3 



n6 A Manual of Church History 

A Christian poet of possibly slightly later date is Commo- 
dian (*) ; he was, however, not only a Chiliast, but also a 
Patripassian. His rhythmic hexameters are written with 
small regard for either prosody or metre. Among his remaining 
works are the Instructiones adv. gentium deos — instructing Jews 
and pagans to accept the Faith, and Christians to lead a holy 
life, each in their own sphere — and his Carmen apologeticum. 

Victorinus, bishop of Pettau in Styria, and martyr 
under Diocletian (*j* 303), is the Latin Church's oldest exegetist. 
Apart from a few fragments, all that remains of his expositions 
of Scripture is a Commentary on the Apocalypse. The last of 
the Latin writers of the period are two African Apologists. 

Arnobius (*), a rhetor of Sicca, wrote (c. 300) his Adv. 
nationes, a work pugnacious rather than defensive. His pupil, 
Cselius Firmianus Lactantius (*), who was noted for the classic 
purity of his Latin, has left us, besides two short tracts {De 
opificio Dei and De ira Dei), his great work Divinae Institu- 
tion's, consisting of an apologetically contrived exposition of 
the Christian Faith, which was later on published by the 
author in abbreviated form as an epitome. Probably the 
De mortibus persecutorum, of which the importance is great 
for the history of the persecutions, is also from his pen. 

Several writings belonging to this period have been preserved 
among the works of St. Cyprian, but, in the absence of any tradition, 
it is impossible to say to whom they really belong. The treatises 
De bono pudicitiae, De spectaculis, and De laude martyrii have, 
for internal reasons, been recently attributed to Novatian ; in 
point of fact this ascription is by no means certain, especially with 
regard to the work mentioned last. Harnack has proposed to 
ascribe to Pope Victor I the tract Adv. Aleatores (T. u. U. V, 1), 
and to Pope Sixtus II the AdNovatianum (T. u. U. XIII, 3). Grounds 
are wanting for the latter attribution, and the former is certainly in- 
correct. Cp. Funk, A.m. U. II, 209-36 ; Th. Qu. 1900, pp. 546-6or. 
Weyman and others have suggested that Novatian might well be 
the author of the recently discovered collection of tracts or homilies 
edited by Batiffol (Tractatus Origenis de libris ss. scripturarum, 
1900) ; this opinion is surely wrong, for there are many signs to 
show that the works in question did not see the light before the 
fourth century. Cp. Funk, A. u. U. Ill, no. 14 ; Bulletin de litter ature 
eccles. publie par V Institut cath. de Toulouse, rgoo, no. 9. 



IL CHRISTIAN ANTIQUITY 

SECOND PERIOD 
From the Edict of Milan to the Council in Trullo, 313-692 

CHAPTER I 

THE SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE RISE OF ISLAM 

§41 

The Spread of Christianity and the Decline of Paganism in the 

Roman Empire 1 

I. By the edict of Milan, Christianity had at last secured 
legal recognition within the Roman Empire. By the favour 
and goodwill of the same emperor to whom it owed its 
freedom, it was soon to be accorded all the privileges possessed 
by the old religion of the State. It was not long before 
Constantine 3 granted to the clergy immunity from all public 
duties (313), empowered the Church to receive legacies, and 
made of the Sunday a public festival (321) (cp. §§ 63-71). 
Besides this the Churches and clergy were overwhelmed with 
material gifts. The advancement of the new religion sounded 
the knell of paganism, but, as by far the greater portion of the 
population was still true to its ancient gods, it was found neces- 
sary to proceed cautiously. In 320 the private sacrifices of 
the Aruspices were prohibited, but Constantine still continued 
to bear the title and perform the duties of Pontifex Maximus, 

1 Cod. Theod. XVI, tit. 10 (a collection of laws bearing on the subject) ; 
V. Schultze, Gesch. des Untergangs des griechisch-röm. Heidentums, 2 vol. 
1887-92 ; G. Boissier, La fin du paganisme, 2 vol. 2nd ed. 1898 ; Seeck, 
Gesch. des Untergangs der antiken Welt, 2 vol. 1895-1901 ; Allard, Le 
christianisme et V Empire romain de N&ron ä Theodose, 1897 ; 5th ed. 
1903. 

2 Eus. Vita Constantini ; De laudibus Constant. ; J. Burckhardt, Die 
Zeit Kons. d. Gr. 2nd ed. 1880 ; Flasch, Kons. d. Gr. als erster christl. Kaiser, 
1891 ; Funk, A. u. U. II, 1-23 ; J. B. Firth, Constantine the Great, 1905. 



n8 A Manual of Church History 

whilst coins continued to be struck on which he appeared 
surrounded by the customary pagan symbols. 

Whilst, however, the Western emperor openly espoused 
the Christians' cause, the ruler of the East had adopted a 
different policy. It is true that Licinius 1 never formally 
revoked the edict of 313. Nevertheless he found means to 
oppress the Christians : they were expelled from the army 
and dismissed from the court, whilst many lost their rank and 
fortune ; Councils were forbidden, Divine worship was ren- 
dered difficult, whilst in some quarters his governors actually 
caused blood to be shed. But this situation soon came to an 
end. The jealousy of the two emperors issued in a conflict, 
which was embittered by the intrusion of the religious question. 
The outcome of the struggle was that Licinius, in 323, lost his 
dominions, and, in 324, his life. 

Constantine's victory not only re-established the unity of 
the Empire, it also contributed to the advantage of the Chris- 
tian cause. The emperor now began to give indubitable signs 
of his preference. Christians were chosen to fill the highest 
offices in the State, splendid buildings were erected for Chris- 
tian worship, whilst the pagan temples were left to fall into 
ruins, some, especially those which had been used for im- 
moral purposes, being forthwith levelled to the ground. In 
Byzantium or Constantinople, which had been chosen in 330 
as the imperial residence, an entirely Christian city was erected, 
to adorn which the pagan temples were robbed of their trea- 
sures, the idols of gold and silver being melted down. In his 
manifesto to the East, Constantine expresses his wish that all 
should co-operate with him in spreading the true religion, but he 
also directs that no one shall be molested for his conscientious 
beliefs. In the West it was necessary to be even more careful 
in sparing the feelings of the adherents of- the old order. After 
the death of Constantine, which occurred in 337 at the castle of 
Achyron near Nicomedia, soon after his Baptism by Eusebius, 
bishop of the city, his sons proceeded to carry on his work, 
though with far less consideration. In 341 Const antius 
(337-61) issued an edict, in which reference is made to a law 
of his father's (doubtless to that of 320, against worship in 

1 Eus. H. E. X, 8-9; Vit. Cons. I, 49-56 ; II, 1-18; F. Görres, KriU 

Untersuchung über die Licinianische Christenverfolgung, 1875. 



The Spread of Christianity 119 

private houses), forbidding generally all sacrifices ; this 
prohibition was soon after followed by another, issued in 
conjunction with Constans (337-50), enforcing it with the death 
penalty, and ordering the closing of all temples. After the 
overthrow of the usurper Magnentius, the same law was again 
twice re-enacted (353-56). This repetition shows how eager 
Constantius was to uproot paganism ; it also shows that the 
law had not been put into force everywhere. With the advent 
of his successor it was repealed. 

The legend of Constantine's Baptism by Pope Silvester is 
utterly unhistorical. Cp. Döllinger, Papstfabeln, 1863, pp. 52-61 
(Engl. Trans. Fables respecting the Popes in the Middle Ages, New 
York, 1872) ; Duchesne, Liber pontificalis, I, pp. cix-cxx. (L. de 
Combes, The Finding of the Cross, Engl. Trans. 1907, p. 122.) 

II. Julian (361-63) l had long been secretly attached to 
paganism, and as soon as he ascended the imperial throne, 
in succession to his cousin Constantius, he lost no time in 
decreeing its re-establishment. The Church lost all the rights 
she had acquired, and the Galileans, as Julian contemptuously 
called the Christians, were dismissed from all official posts 
and forbidden to lecture on the classics in the high schools, 
ostensibly because it was not fitting that unbelievers in the 
gods should explain the works in which their deeds are recorded, 
but really in order to force the Christians either to attend the 
pagan schools or abandon all hopes of a liberal education. 
Apparently in order to falsify the words of Christ (Matt. xxiv. 
2), an attempt was made to rebuild Jerusalem and its Temple. 
Even the pen was seized on as a weapon. Julian composed, 
among other works, three books Adv. Christianos, which are, 
however, only known to us through the refutation devoted to 
them by Cyril of Alexandria, of which again a part only has 
been preserved. The excessive zeal of some of the magistrates 
and the fanaticism of the mob even led to the shedding of some 
blood. On the other hand the emperor, who was personally 
attracted to Neo-Platonism, sought to reform the ancient 
religion. Almshouses and hostels for the reception of strangers 

1 Iuliani imp. libr. c. Christ, quae supersunt, ed. C. I. Neumann, 1880. 
Mg. by Auer, 1835 ; Mücke, 1869 ; Rode, 1877 ; Gardner, 1895 ; Jewish 
Quarterly Rev. 1893, pp. 591-651 ; Vollert, 1899 ; W. Koch, 1899 ; G. 
Negri, 1901 ; P. Allard, 3 vol. 1900-03 ; C. Parsons, 1903. 



120 A Manual of Church History 

were erected, provision was made for the proper instruction 
of the people in their religion, the priests were compelled to 
set a good example, and a kind of pagan ecclesiastical rule of life 
was introduced, &c. This attempt at reformation, which, 
in so far as it imitated Christian models, was an indirect testi- 
mony to Christianity, had no far-reaching result, paganism 
being already too decayed to be open to such a renewal. 
Scarcely was the work begun than the emperor perished, and 
the attempt was at an end. 

III. Though, after Julian's repressive measures, a re- 
action against the old religion might have been expected, 
the emperors who immediately succeeded him showed them- 
selves averse to any such policy of reprisals. Jovian restored 
to the Christians all that they had been deprived of by his 
predecessor, assigning to paganism the position it had occupied 
before the reign of Julian. This same policy was, to begin 
with, pursued by Valentinian I (364-75) and his brother the 
Arian Valens (364-78), of whom the former ruled the West 
and the latter the East. Their first prohibitions were directed 
only against nocturnal sacrifices, and later on, when a decree 
was issued forbidding all sacrifices, an exception was still 
made for the thurifications. The emperors who followed 
were more severe. 

Gratian (375-83) was the first to lay aside the title and 
insignia of the Pontifex Maximus. He also suppressed the sub- 
ventions to heathen worship, and confiscated the revenues of 
the priests and vestal virgins, together with the landed 
property of the temples, reduced the immunities of the priests, 
and removed the altar of the goddess of victory from the 
hall of the Senate. These alterations, especially the last, 
occasioned great commotion among the pagans, and a deputa- 
tion, headed by the senator Symmachus, visited the emperor's 
camp at Milan to request greater leniency. Shortly after this 
the emperor lost his life at the hand of the usurper Maximus, 
and a similar petition, this time couched in writing, seems 
to have been more successful. Gratian had refused even to 
receive the pagan deputation ; his brother and successor, the 
thirteen-year-old Valentinian II (383-92), was, on the other 
hand, advised by his ministers to yield. He too, however, 
ended by adopting his predecessor's policy, and with still 



The Spread of Christianity 121 

better reason, the majority in the Senate being now Christian. 
The adoption of this stronger policy was due to the influence 
of the great bishop of Milan, St. Ambrose, the power of whose 
persuasion was greater than that of all the other imperial 
counsellors. 

In the meantime similar events were being enacted in the 
East. Theodosius I (379-95), whom Gratian had appointed 
successor to his uncle Valens, displayed some hesitation in the 
beginning of his reign, but, after a few years, he too gave 
orders for the closing of many temples, and on the pagans in 
certain localities manifesting their displeasure, they were made 
to suffer yet more severely. Thus, when in a popular up- 
heaval at Alexandria all the pagan objects of veneration, 
including the famous Serapeion, had been burnt, no measures 
were taken against the disturbers of the peace. Much the 
same happened in other places through the zeal of the Chris- 
tian population, and especially of the monks, the temples, 
when they were not destroyed, being seized for Christian 
worship. This it was which induced the rhetor Libanius to 
address to the emperor his Oratio pro templis. His efforts 
were, however, in vain, for paganism was already in its death- 
throes. 

A little later (391) an enactment of both emperors forbade, 
under heavy fines, all public heathen worship : not sacrifices 
alone, but also the visiting of temples and the cultus of idols. 
A momentary pause followed the assassination of Valentinian 
by the Frank Arbogast, and the accession of the usurper 
Eugenius (392-94) ; at least the practice of the older religion 
was again permitted in the city of Rome, but the victory 
of Theodosius at Aquileia finally blasted the hopes of the 
pagans. 

IV. Paganism being now illicit in all its manifestations, 
it was only necessary to put in force the laws already in exist- 
ence. This was not, however, considered sufficient, and yet 
new enactments followed. In the East, Arcadius (395-408) 
withdrew from the pagan priests whatever privileges and 
revenues they still retained, and razed the rural temples. 
Theodosius II (408-50) excluded pagans from public offices 
(416), and commanded all works inimical to Christianity to 
be burnt (448) . In one of his laws (423) his expressions would 



122 A Manual of Church History 

almost lead us to suppose that there were no pagans left, and, 
at the least, they prove that paganism had dwindled down 
to almost nothing. That some pagans still existed is, however, 
clear from the measures which Justinian I (527-65) had to take 
against them. He ordained that pagans should be incapable 
of acquiring money, and closed the schools of philosophy at 
Athens, of which the chairs had, almost without exception, been 
retained by pagan Neo-Platonists. 

In the West the temples lost the remainder of their 
revenues through an edict of Honorius (395-423), whilst 
by Stilicho, the emperor's relative and principal minister, the 
ancient Sibylline books were burnt. Yet, on the other hand, 
the authorities were careful to preserve the decorations of the 
public buildings and the statues of the gods with which they 
were adorned, and to prevent the temples from being 
destroyed when once they had been deprived of pagan 
tokens. Here also, in the West, paganism still lingered on, 
and in out-of-the-way places it actually lasted longer than in 
the East. Even Gregory the Great was moved to devise 
means to extirpate it in Sardinia, Corsica, and other 
regions. 

V. Whilst the State was thus engaged in stamping out 
the old religion, the Church was not idle. Her task was to 
supplement the work of the legislature, b}' making real 
Christians of the many who became converts in outward 
appearance only. She also continued to preach the Gospel in 
heathen circles, and among those of her members who devoted 
themselves to this task two names are conspicuous : that of 
Philastrius, bishop of Brescia, and that of John Chrysostom. 
Little record was, however, kept of the Church's work. 

After the middle of the fourth century the heathen are commonly 
designated by the name of fiagani ; we find it in a law of 368 or 370 
(Cod. Theod. XVI, 18, 2), and the term is commonly alleged as a 
proof of the straits into which heathenism had fallen, and rightly, 
for though it had been used before (Tert. De corona mil. c. n) to 
denote a civilian in contradistinction to a soldier, it seems to 
have had, at the date when it was adopted as an appellation for 
the heathen, the meaning of a villager or peasant, and it was 
chosen because most of the remaining adherents of paganism were 
country people. For different views, see Zahn, N. kirchl. Z. 
X (1899), I S-43 '> Harnack, Militia Christi, 1905, pp. 68 f., 122. 



Christianity %n Asia and Africa 123 

§42 
Christianity in Asia and Africa * 

I. Christianity had already contrived to obtain a footing 
in Persia 3 in the previous period. By this time it was already 
in a flourishing condition, but it was soon to be tried by fierce 
persecutions. The first broke out, c. 345, under king Shapur II 
(310-80), and greatly increased in violence when war was pro- 
claimed between this king and Constantius. Sozomen 3 actually 
states that as many as 16,000 martyrs were known by name. 
The next Persian kings were less unkindly disposed. Yezded- 
sherd I (400-21) for a time even favoured the Christians. The 
destruction of a temple of the fire-worshippers by Abdas, bishop 
of Susa, in 418 was made the pretext of a renewal of the perse- 
cution, which then continued, increasing greatly in violence 
under Bahram IV (421-38) , 4 until 450. Nestorianism also, at 
about this time, fixed on Persia as its headquarters, and at the 
beginning of the sixth century whatever possessions remained 
in the hands of the Catholic Church were forcibly appropriated 
by the heretics. 

II. Into Armenia 5 Christianity had made its way at an 
early date (§ 13, 8), whilst towards the end of the previous 
period, in consequence of the conversion of king Tiridates by 
Gregory the Illuminator, all traces of the olden heathenism 
were destroyed and Christianity was made the religion of the 
State. The king's example was immediately followed by the 
nobility, the conversion of the other classes being effected in 
the course of the fourth century. When, in 428, the country 
became a Persian province, an attempt was made to intro- 
duce Parseeism, but it was frustrated by the constancy 
of the Armenians. Yet the population as a whole went 
over to Monophysitism by receiving the Henoticon at the 

1 Duchesne, Autonomies ecclesiastiques , eglises si payees, 2nd ed. 1905. 
[Engl. Trans. Churches separated from Rome, 1907.] 

2 Z. f. wiss. Th. 1888, pp. 449-68 ; 1896, pp. 443-59. J. Labourt, Le 
christianisme dans V empire perse (224-632), 1904. 

3 H. E. II, 9-14. 

4 Socr. VII, 8, 18 ; Theodor. V, 38. 

5 St. Clair-Tisdall, The Conversion of Armenia to the Christian Faith, 
1896 ; S. Weber, Die hath. Kirche in Armenien, ihre Begründung u. Entwick- 
lung vor der Trennung, 1903. 



124 ^ Manual of Church History 

Council of Valarshapat in 491, and rejecting the Council of 
Chalcedon. 

III. Iberia or Georgia, tying north of Armenia, to the south of 
the Caucasus, was won over to the Faith through the wonderful 
cures wrought by a prisoner of war named Nino (c. 325). With this 
district as its starting-point, Christianity was carried eastwards into 
Albania, and, at the beginning of the sixth century, also westwards 
to the Lasi (Colchis), and to the Abasges. These countries all 
passed over to Monophysitism with Armenia. Cp. Ruf. I, 10 ; 
Socr. II, 20 ; Soz. II, 7 ; Studia bibl. et eccl. V, 1, 1900 (Life of 
Nino) ; Oriens christ. II (1902), 130-50. 

IV. Theophilus, a bishop sent by Constantius, laboured with 
good sesults among the Homerites or Sabaeans of South Arabia. 
The population survived the persecution which it had to experience 
from a Jewish king at the beginning of the sixth century, but 
in the next century it was wiped out by the Persians and Moham- 
medans. Cp. Philost. II, 6 ; III, 4 ; Z. d. d. morgenl. Ges. 1881, 

vol. 35, PP. 1-75- 

V. Christianity was carried to China in 636 by Nestorian mis- 
sionaries, as is shown by an inscription of the year 781, which 
was discovered by the Jesuits at Si-Gan-Fu in 1625. Cp. Lamy and 
Gueluy, Le monument chretien de Si-Ngan-Fou, 1897 {Memoires de 
V Academic r. des sciences, des teures et des beaux-arts de Belgique, 
t- 53). 

VI. In Africa the Gospel reached Abyssinia l as early as the 
time of Constantine, by the advent at the court of two young 
slaves from Tyre, Frumentius and Edesius, who acquired 
great influence and used it in favour of Christianity. Edesius 
ultimately returned home, but Frumentius was consecrated, 
by Athanasius of Alexandria, bishop of Axuma, and the new 
religion made great progress throughout the country. Owing 
to its dependence on Alexandria, Abyssinia also went over 
to Monophysitism. 

In the sixth century the Nubians who dwelt to the north of 
Abyssinia were converted to Christianity, or rather to Mono- 
physitism. At about the same time, under Justinian I, the 
presbyter Julian of Alexandria, and a little later the bishop 
Longinus, preached the Faith among the Nabadaeans ; the latter 
was also the apostle of the Alodaeans. Cp. John of Ephesus, 
H. E. IV. 

1 Ruf. I, 9 ; Socr. I, 19; Soz. II, 24 ; Theodor. I, 23 ; Neue kirchl. Z. 
X (1899), 736-69. 



Christianity among the Germans 125 

§ 43 

Christianity among the Germans l 

I. The Germans became acquainted with Christianity by 
coming into contact with Christian nations as they pushed 
southwards. The first tribe to be converted was that of the 
Goths who had taken up their residence in the third century 
on the northern side of the lower Danube, or, to speak more 
correctly, that of the West-Goths, 2 or Visigoths, the nation being 
divided into two portions, according to their dwelling-place. 
A Gothic bishop, Theophilus, was present even at the Council 
of Nicsea. The work of conversion was greatly hastened by 
Ulfilas 3 (Wulfila = ' a little wolf '), who devoted himself to the 
task, and translated Holy Writ into the Gothic tongue. His 
efforts had, however, also the result of popularising among the 
Germans his own Arian doctrines. The Arian Valens, who 
had made an alliance with the chief Fridigern against Athana- 
ric, a foe of the Christians, by sending Arian bishops and 
priests to the West-Goths, and by providing the tribes with 
settlements in Thrace where they would be sheltered from the 
Huns (376), enabled the heresy to gain so strong a footing 
among the Goths that it clung to them even after they had 
continued their wanderings through Greece and Italy, and 
found a new home in Gaul and Spain (419). A change came 
only at the end of the sixth century. King Leovigild (569-86) 
had indeed dealt severely, and even cruelly, with his Catholic 
subjects, but his sons openly espoused the Church's cause. 
The step taken by Hermenegild, in heading the revolt of 
the Suevians and Greeks of the Spanish seaports, was indeed 
useless, for, being attacked and defeated, he was captured and 
put to death (585) by his father. On the contrary, the con- 
version of Reccared (586-601) was of great importance. His 
example was followed by a large part of his people, and in the 
following century, as we may see from the frequent national 

1 F. Dahn, Die Könige der Germanen, I-IX, 1861-1905 ; Pallmann, 
Gesch. d. Völkerwanderung, 2 vol. 1863-64. 

2 Iordanes, De rebus Geticis ; Isid. Hispalensis, De reg. Gothorum ; J. 
Aschbach, Gesch. d. W. 1827; Gams, KG. von Spanien, II, I (1864), 180 ff.; 
St. u. Kr. 1893-94 5 Z- /• w - Th. 1899, pp. 270-322 (Reccared). 

3 Mg. by G. Waitz, 1840; W. Bessell, i860; F. Kauffmann, 1899 
(Texte u. Unt. zur altgerman. Religionsgesch. I). 



126 A Manual of Church History 

synods held at Toledo, the Church's activity in the kingdom 
of the West-Goths must have been very great. 

II. At the time when the Suevians settled in Gallaecia in the north- 
west of Spain (409), they were still, most of them, heathens. Their 
conversion was effected towards the middle of the fifth century. 
The influence of their king Rechiar was sufficient to lead them 
to embrace Catholicity, just as that of Remismund sufficed to make 
them espouse the cause of the Arians. At a later date, however, 
king Chararic (550-59) returned to the fold of the Church. Their 
subsequent history is that of the West-Goths, whose sovereignty 
they were forced to acknowledge by Leovigild (585). Cp. Isid., 
De rege Goth., &c, c. 85-92 ; Z. f. wiss. Th. 1893, II, 542-78. 

III. In consequence of their intercourse with the Visigoths, 
the Ostrogoths or East-Goths, 1 in the course of the fourth 
century, passed over to Arianism, to which they remained 
attached until the fall of their kingdom. Towards the end of 
the fifth century their dwelling-place was in Pannonia, from 
which they invaded Italy as soon as their king Theodoric 
had vanquished Odo vaker (493) , who himself had in 476 given 
the death-blow to the Roman Empire of the West. Though 
an Arian, Theodoric allowed freedom of worship to all 
Catholics within his kingdom ; that the Church appreciated 
his fairness is evident from his having been called upon to 
arbitrate in the case of the double papal election (496) of 
Symmachus and Lawrence (cp. § 64, II). His kingdom, 
however, did not long survive his death (526). After twenty 
years of warfare, the Ostrogoths were compelled in 555 to 
yield to the Byzantines. 

IV. The Eastern Empire was not to enjoy the fruits of its 
victory. In 568 the Lombards 2 advanced from Pannonia, 
under the leadership of Alboin, on the Apennine peninsula, 
which they conquered with the exception of the Exarchate of 
Ravenna, the dukedom of Rome, and some other possessions 
to the south, which remained in the hands of the Byzantines. 
At this time the Lombards professed Arianism, which they had 
doubtless learnt to know through intercourse with others of 
their race, but, by the marriage of their king Authari with 
Theodelinde (589), they received a Catholic queen who was 

1 Manso, Gesch. des ostgot. Reiches in Italien, 1824 ; Pfeilschifter, 
Theoderich d. Gr. u. d. kath. K. 1896 (Kirchcngesch. Studien, III, 1-2). 

- Paul. Diac. De gest. Langobard. libb. VI; A.f. k. KR. 1903, pp. 577-619. 



Christianity among the Germans 127 

able to make her influence felt long after. At Authari's 
death (590) she, with the consent of the nation, chose as her 
consort Agilulf , duke of Turin, after whose demise she governed 
as regent during the minority of her son Adelwald. Arianism 
was, however, still rampant, and, after her death (c. 623) 
and the dethronement of Adelwald, the country was again 
ruled by Arian kings. It was only under Grimoald (t68i) 
that the conversion of the population was completed. 

V. The Rugians also, like the other Germanic tribes, were 
infected with Arianism, though it is difficult to say how it obtained 
a footing among them. On the destruction of the empire of the 
Huns, subsequent to Attila's death (453), they settled in Noricum 
or Lower Austria, where just then St. Severinus (^482), the consoler 
and protector of the oppressed Romans, was living, and whose 
wonderful life was committed to writing by his disciple Eugippius. 
There can be little doubt that the same Arian belief was also shared 
by the Skires and Turkelings, who were united by many ties with 
the Rugians. 

VI. The Burgundians, 1 who, at the beginning of the fifth 
century, had settled, some of them between the Main and 
Neckar, and others on the left bank of the Rhine, appear in 
the first instance as Catholics. When we next hear of them, 
in the country which they had newly conquered between the 
Jura, Rhone, and Vosges, they had most of them passed over to 
Arianism. On the death of Gundobad, and the accession of 
his Catholic son Sigismund (516), the population began again 
to return to Catholicism, Arianism disappearing as soon as 
the Burgundians fell under the domination of the Franks. 

VII. The Vandals 2 were Arians at the time when, in 
concert with the Suevians and Alans, they made their way in 
devastating hordes through Gaul, and settled (409) in Spain. 
They carried their belief with them when, in 429, they passed 
over to Africa. They even went so far as to harass the Catho- 
lics in their new home, and, especially under the kings Geiseric 
and Huneric, there occurred a series of persecutions in which 
bishops and nobility suffered severely. This lasted until, in 
533, Justinian made an end of the Vandal rule. 

1 Mg. by O. Jahn, 1874 ; KL. II, 1568 ff. 

2 Isid. Hisp. Hist. Vand. et Suevorutn; Vict. Vitensis, Hist, persec. Vand.; 
Diehl, L'A/rique byzantine (533~7 9), 1896 ; L. Schmidt, Gesch. der Vandalen, 
1901, 



128 A Manual of Church History 

The Vandal invasion itself involved much suffering among the 
inhabitants, nor was it long before Geiseric (437) began to attack 
the Catholic religion as such. On taking possession of Carthage 
(439) he forthwith banished the bishop with a large body of his 
clergy • the exiles were shipped on crazy vessels, and left to the 
mercy of the waves. Other acts of violence followed, and, with 
a three years' interval (454-57), the persecution endured until 
475, when Catholic worship again received toleration. The 
next few years were peaceful, but after having, to begin with, 
granted them toleration, Huneric (477-84), in 481, commenced 
treating the Catholics even more harshly than his father. The 
meeting which had been called at Carthage to discuss religious affairs 
having broken up without coming to a decision, all churches were 
handed over to the Arians, whilst the laws enacted by the Roman 
emperors against heretics were put into force against the Catholics, 
who were forbidden to worship publicly. A short pause ensued 
on the accession of Guntamund, but Thrasamund (496-523) again 
caused the Catholic churches to be closed. After another interval, 
caused by the' advent to the throne of Hilderic (523-30), the 
reins of power were assumed by Gelimer, an embittered Arian, 
who would probably have vented his spite on the Catholics had 
not his kingdom been destroyed shortly after. 

VIII. The Franks, 1 who of all the Germanic tribes were to 
play the most important part in history, became acquainted 
with the Gospel by settling in a country which was already 
Christian. They began their migration from the delta of the 
Rhine in the latter half of the fifth century, and, after having 
vanquished the Roman governor Syagrius at Soissons (486), 
they established themselves in northern Gaul as far as the 
Seine. Pushing the Visigoths farther and farther south, they 
finally compelled them to cross the Pyrenees, whereupon the 
Franks found themselves in possession of the whole of Gaul. It 
was not long before the nation adopted Christianity. Chlodwig 
(481-511), who already was acquainted with Christianity 
through his wife Chlotilde, a Burgundian princess, in the 
battle of Tolbiacum (Ziilpich) in 496, when hard pressed by the 
Alemanni, made a vow that, should the victory remain with 
him, he would embrace Christianity. The following Christmas 
he was baptised by Remigius, bishop of Rheims, more than 

1 Greg. Tur. Hist. Franc. ; Bornhak, Gesch. d. Fr. u. d. Merovingem, 
1863; Friedrich, KG. Deutschlands, II (1869), 1 ff. ; Loebell, Gregor v. 
T. u. s. Zeit, 2nd ed. 1869 ; Th. Qu. 1895, 351 f. ; G. Kurth, Clovis, 2 vol. 
2nd ed. 1902. 



The British Isles 129 

3,000 of his head-men imitating his example. The common 
people were not long in following suit, for, as it had happened 
among the other Germanic tribes, the conversion of the ruler 
invariably brought about the conversion of his people. In 
this case Chlodwig's example seems to have worked even out- 
side of his own dominions, for king Chararic and his son also 
appear in the guise of Christians. Nor was it long before 
Chlodwig seized the territories of the other Frankish kinglets 
and united the whole country under his sway. The conversion 
of this nation was a matter of supreme importance. Now that 
a powerful Germanic nation had adopted the Catholicism 
professed by the Graeco-Roman world, the doom of Arianism 
was sealed. That in the course of the sixth century three 
Germanic tribes forsook Arianism is a fact which can only be 
explained by the influential position of the Franks. Yet 
their adoption of the Faith did not mean that they were 
forthwith reclaimed from barbarism. Their ethical conversion 
was a gradual work which it took ages to accomplish. 



§ 44 

The British Isles 

Christianity had obtained a footing even in the previous 
period among the Britons 1 who then inhabited England (§ 13, 5); 
by the fourth century it had been adopted generally, and had 
penetrated northwards as far as the Firth of Clyde in Scotland. 
Unfortunately Christianity was not strong enough to retain the 
positions it had taken. On being evacuated by the Romans 
the country became the scene of the savage inroads of the Picts 
and Scots, i.e. inhabitants of Scotland and Ireland. The plan of 
Vortigern, the British king (449), to invite the assistance of the 
Angles and Saxons under Hengist and Horsa, issued in yet worse 
calamities. The Saxons, who had come as allies, remained in 
the island as conquerors, and soon every trace of Christianity 
was swept away. The only districts in which the Britons 
were able to maintain their independence and their religion 

1 Bed. H. E. I, 8-22 ; Williams, Some Aspects of the Christian Church in 
Wales, 1895 ; Funk, A. u. U. I, 421-59. 

vol. 1. k 



130 A Manual of Church History 

were the mountainous tracts of Cambria (Wales) and the 
south-west extremity of Cornwall. 

But whilst Christianity was being set back in Britain, it 
was beginning its conquest of the neighbouring countries. 
In Ireland (Hibernia, Scotia) l it had been preached even earlier, 
Palladius having been sent by Pope Celestine, in 431, as the first 
bishop ad Scotos in Christum credent es. The real conversion 
of the country began, however, in the following year, when 
St. Patrick, who had passed some years of his youth in Ireland 
as a captive and slave, came forward as a missionary, and with 
the help of his many disciples worked to such good purpose, 
during the remaining sixty years of his life, that the island was 
entirely converted. 

In the south of Caledonia or Scotland {Scotia),' 2 ' that is, in 
the land of the Picts, the Gospel was preached, c. 412, by the 
Briton Ninian. In the north of the peninsula the work of 
evangelisation proceeded with even better success, thanks to 
the missionary activity displayed during thirty-four years by 
the Irish abbot Columba, who was the true apostle of the 
country (t 597)- The headquarters of this mission was the 
monastery founded by Columba on the island of Hy, or Iona 
(I-Kolum-kil) . The new Church formed by these monastic 
missionaries retained long after a quasi-monastic character ; 
all the clergy were monks, and down to the eighth century 
they continued to owe obedience to the abbot of Iona, though 
these abbots, like their founder, were simple priests. In 
this region secular priests do not make their appearance 
before the eighth century, whilst dioceses came into existence 
only in the twelfth century. 

Towards the end of the sixth century Christianity reappeared 
in England. 3 In 596, in obedience to a command of Gregory 

1 Libri S. Patricii, ed. Newport T. D. White, 1905 {Proceedings of the 
R. Irish Acad. C. vol. 25) ; Greith, Gesch. d. altir. Kirche , 1867 ; Bellesheim, 
Gesch. d. kath. Kirche in Irland, 3 vol. 1890-91 ; J. B. Bury, The Life of 
St. Patrick, 1905. 

2 Adamnan. Vita S. Columbae, ed. Fowler, 1894 ; Bed. H. E. Ill, 4 ; 
Bellesheim, Gesch. d. kath. K. in Schottland, 2 vol. 1883 ; (Engl. Trans. 
History of the Catholic Church of Scotland from the introduction of Christianity 
to the present day, 4 vol. 1887 fL). 

3 Beda Vener. Hist. Eccl. gent. Anglorum (ed. Holder, 1882 ; Plummer, 
1896) ; E. Winkelmann, Gesch. d. Angelsachsen bis sum Tode K. Alfreds, 
1883 ; Spence, The Church of England, I, 1897 ; Brou (Engl. Trans. St. 
Augustine of Canterbury and his Companions, 1897); Holtheuer, Die Gründling 
d. angelsächsischen K. 1897; O, Jensen, Der englische Peterspfennig, 1903, 



The Islam 131 

the Great, the abbot Augustine, with some forty monks, set 
out to convert the Anglo-Saxons. King Ethelbert of Kent, 
who was then Bretwalda or head of the Heptarchy, and who 
was favourably predisposed to the Gospel owing to his wife 
Bertha being a Frank, granted them leave to preach, and soon 
after presented himself with a large number of his people for 
Baptism. As soon as the news of Augustine's success had 
been carried to Rome, the Pope dispatched additional 
missionaries, and directed that two ecclesiastical provinces, 
each with twelve suffragan bishops, should be established 
in England. The two metropolitans were to be the bishops 
of London and York, though, in the event, Canterbury, 
which was the capital of Kent, and had been the scene of the 
missioners' first efforts, was chosen instead of London. Within 
fifty years five new kingdoms were marshalled under the Cross, 
the principal being Essex, with its capital London (seat of a 
bishop since 604), and Northumberland, which had been 
Christianised from Iona, but which, in 664, agreed to conform 
to the Roman practices, especially to the Roman Easter 
reckoning. The last to enter the fold was Sussex, under king 
Ceadwalla (685-88). The close connection of the country 
with Rome soon after found its expression in a yearly tax ; 
at least it is certain that king Offa of Mercia (f 796) made a 
promise of Peter's Pence. 



§ 45 

The Islam 1 

Whilst the Gospel was engaged in its conquest of 
the West, a new religious power had made its appearance 
in the East. To Mohammed (570-632), its moving spirit, 
due credit must be allowed for his success in expelling 
idolatry from his country, and in bringing the Arabs to the 
belief in one God. It is beyond doubt that his knowledge of 
Monotheism was acquired through his intercourse with Jews 
and Christians, whose tenets he had many opportunities of 

1 A. Müller, Der Islam im Morgen- und Abendland, 2 vol. 1885-87 
(Oncken, Allg. Gesch. II, 4). Mg. on Mohammed by H. Grimme, 2 vol. 
1892-95 ; Lamairesse and Dujarric, 2 vol. 1898 ; O, Pautz (on his doctrine 
of Revelation), 1898, 

K 2 



132 A Manual of Church History 

studying at home, and still more during his travels. In the 
same manner he came to know other elements of Jewish and 
Christian doctrine ; Moses and Christ he acknowledged as 
prophets, and he likewise admitted the Resurrection and the 
Last Judgment. Relying, however, on certain revelations of 
which he thought himself the recipient, he proclaimed that he 
himself was God's messenger, and, in fact, the greatest of the 
prophets. It was this conviction which ultimately made of 
him a foe of Judaism and Christianity, to both of which he had, 
in earlier days, been disposed to be friendly. His quarrel with 
the Chiistians dates from the year (622) of his flight, or Hedjrah, 
when, on account of the animosity of the Meccans, he migrated 
to Yathrib or Medina, and its reason was the sanction he gave 
to the polygamy practised by the Arabs. Mohammed con- 
tinued, however, to maintain the identity of the revelations, 
arguing that the Christians had corrupted the sacred books by 
their Trinitarian doctrines. In the following year he broke 
away from the Jews also. Jewish practices which had been 
adopted were again set aside, and, in particular, the direction 
of prayer (Kibla) was altered from Jerusalem to Mecca, where 
there was the sacred object of the Kaaba. At this time he was 
impelled by his revelations to declare that it was part of the 
Faithful's duty to wage the Holy War, i.e. to fight unceasingly 
all unbelievers, and to set the example he undertook, with his 
followers, the conquest of Arabia. Mecca was taken in 629, 
and the Kaaba, after the idols had been destroyed, was made 
the centre of the new religion, which now came to be known as 
the Islam, on account of the abandonment of self into God's hands 
which it involved. Soon practically the whole country was in 
the Prophet's grip, and his plans for subjugating the neigh- 
bouring lands were carried out by his successors, the Caliphs. 
The first two, Abu Bekr (632-34) and Omar (634-44), effected 
the conquest of Persia, Palestine, Syria, and Egypt. Under 
Othman (644-56) an attack was made on the territories 
of Carthage, and, though the outbreak of civil war at home 
caused the attempt to be foiled, yet towards the end of the 
century the Carthaginians were safely gathered under the 
standard of the Prophet, and the conquerors were free to con- 
tinue their victorious march on the Barbary States and the 
West of Africa, the many divisions and enmities to which the 



The Islam 133 

Christological disputes had given rise among the Eastern 
Christians greatly facilitating their task. 

As a general rule, toleration was extended to the Christians 
of the conquered lands, though an exception was made for 
Arabia, from which both Jews and Christians were expelled. 
Christianity had, nevertheless, much to suffer : owing to the 
long-drawn ecclesiastical dissensions the Faith had grown cold, 
whilst the Mohammedans were naturally anxious to make 
converts among their new subjects, seeking to gain this end 
sometimes by petty vexations, sometimes by real acts of 
oppression. Laws were passed to induce the Christians to 
apostatise ; such as did so were declared free from the capita- 
tion tax, whilst slaves and bondsmen of the Christians could 
recover their liberty by embracing the Islam. Under such 
circumstances it is not to be wondered at if many fell away ; 
with the course of time Christianity died out altogether in the 
north-west of Africa. The Church of Carthage, which survived 
the longest, disappeared in the year 1160. On the other hand, 
any attempt to convert the Moslems was frustrated by the law, 
which condemned to death anyone who should forsake the 
Prophet. 



The principal religious book of the Mohammedans is the Koran, 
or collection of Mohammed's revelations [Engl. Trans, by Sale]. 
It was compiled under Abu Bekr, at the suggestion of Omar, for 
the private use of the Caliphs. A second and official redaction, 
intended for Moslems generally, was published under Othman. 
The work comprises 114 chapters or Suras. As a commentary 
on the Koran we have the Sunnat, a compilation of sayings of 
the Prophet and anecdotes regarding him, which were transmitted 
orally until a century after Mohammed's time. This collection of 
traditions is, however, acknowledged as authoritative by only one- 
half of the Moslem world, namely by the Sunnites ; the Shiites, 
on the other hand, reject it almost in its entirety. The three 
ground-dogmas of the Islam are the belief in one invisible God, in 
Mohammed his prophet, and in an everlasting life, of which the 
joy is, however, grossly sensual. The five commandments, or 
pillars, of Mohammedanism are : I. Purifications, or washings. 
2. Prayers recited five times a day at the call of the Muezzin 
from the minaret. 3. A daily fast in the month of Ramadan, 
from dawn until sunset. 4. The Pilgrimage to Mecca to be under- 
taken by each Moslem at least once in his life. 5. The giving of 
alms of the value of 2 J per cent, of one's fortune. 



CHAPTER II 

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH'S DOCTRINE — THEOLOGICAL 
DISSENSIONS, HERESIES, AND SCHISMS 1 



§ 46 

Summary of the Matters in Dispute 

Though the Church, as a whole, agreed in one Faith, yet 
when it became a question of determining the precise mean- 
ing of the articles of this Faith, opinions were prone to differ, 
and this difference of opinion continued to be a source of 
constant quarrel ; in fact, the theological controversies of 
this period were of far greater moment than those of the 
previous, for not only did they persist throughout the period, 
but they touched on the most essential points of the Faith, 
whilst the manner in which they were resolved is also of 
great interest. When the attitude of the Roman State had 
been altered from one of hostility to one of patronage, it 
became customary to summon Councils of the whole Church 
in which the points at issue might be debated and definitively 
settled. According to the subject-matter, we may distinguish 
three great disputes. 

I. The first to crop up was the Trinitarian question, which 
had already presented itself in the previous age. In the 
beginning the dispute concerned the relations of the Son to 
the Father, i.e. a purely theological question agitated between 
the orthodox, the Arians, and semi-Arians; later on, the advent of 
the Pneumatomachi made a discussion of the nature of the 
Holy Ghost also necessary. Both these questions were authori- 
tatively settled by the first two oecumenical Councils. 

1 Schwane, Dogmengesch. d. patnst. Zeit (325-787), 1866; 2nd ed. 1895. 
Hefele, CG. I— III. [Duchesne, Churches separated from Rome, Engl. 
Trans. 1907.] 



T7te Beginning of the Avian Controversy 135 

II. The Trinitarian dispute gave rise to the Christological. 
It had first to be shown that Apollinaris and the Arians were 
an the wrong in maintaining that the Logos had not assumed 
the whole of human nature, then it became necessary to deter- 
mine the relations of the two natures in Christ ; this was done 
at the Third and Fourth General Councils, which condemned 
the mistaken disruptive and confusing tendencies of Nestorian- 
ism and of Monophysitism respectively. Lastly, there arose 
the question as to our Saviour's will, which was decided against 
the Monothelites by the Sixth General Council. 

III. Simultaneously with the Christological quarrel, there 
broke out the Anthropological or Soteriological controversy 
concerning the original state of man, the consequences of the 
Fall, and the relation of freedom and grace, the innovators 
in this case being the Pelagians and semi-Pelagians. This 
last controversy exercised minds more especially in Western 
or Latin Christendom, the Eastern Church concerning itself 
almost exclusively with the others. Side by side with these 
disputes many smaller ones were proceeding ; of these, some 
were connected with those just mentioned, whilst others had 
a separate origin. Though their real importance was small, 
yet some of them caused no little disturbance in the religious 
world, as for instance the rise of Donatism, and the question 
of the Three Chapters, to settle which the Fifth General 
Council was summoned. 



§47 

The Beginning of the Arian Controversy ; the First 
General Council 1 

The Church, by excommunicating both categories of the 
anti-Trinitarian Monarchians, had implicitly acknowledged 
Christ's person to be Divine, and yet distinct from that of the 

1 Gelasius Cyzicenus, Acta cone. Nicaeni ; G. Löschke, Das Syntagma 
des Gelasius C. 1906 {Rhein. Museum, vol. 60-61) ; Kuhn, Kath. Dogmalik, 
JI, 1857 '< Dorner, Die Lehre v. d. Person Christi, 2 vol. 2nd ed. 1845-53 
• (Engl. Trans. Hist, of the development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, 
^1859 ff.) ; Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, 2nd ed. 1900 ; Snellman, Der Anfang 
.des arian. Streites, 1904; Nachr. Göttingen, 1905, pp. 257-99; Revillout, Le 
'Concile de Nicee, 1899 ; O. Braun, De s. Nicaena synodo, 1898 ; Z. f. k. Th* 
1906, pp. 172-78 (for the number of the bishops present at the Counc 1). 






136 A Manual of Church History 

Father. But the relation in which the Divinity of the Son stood 
with respect to that of the Father remained undecided, several 
opinions being in the field, most of which had this in 
common, that, though they did not deny the Son's Divinity, 
they inclined to subordinate the Son to the Father, either by 
connecting His begetting with the Creation of the world — thus 
endangering either His eternity or at least the eternity of His 
personal existence — or even by conceiving of His Divinity 
as inferior to, and derivative from, the Divinity of the 
Father. Yet at the same time we also meet, especially in the 
Roman Church, the persuasion that the Father and the Son are 
really coequal. It was this conviction which was to prevail 
ultimately, and the occasion was to be furnished by the Ariani 
controversy. 

Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria, was no mere subordinatist 
in the sense of the older Fathers. He not only subordinated 
the Son's nature to the Father's, he actually denied to the 
former the possession of a Divine nature and of Divine attri- 
butes, calling into question particularly His eternity, as we 
may see from his words : rjv irore, ore ovk rjv, and e'f ovk ovtcov 
early. 1 According to Arius, Christ the Word was a creature, 
though He was indeed head of all creatures, He alone having 
been produced directly by the Father, whereas all other things 
were created through the Word. Though he allows to Christ 
the title of God, yet he expressly reminds us that His Divinity 
must not be understood in the strict sense of the term, but only 
in a moral sense (fieroxß)* This doctrine Arius would seem to 
have imbibed from the presbyter Lucian of Antioch (§ 32) . As 
soon as he ventured (c. 320) to give public utterance to his 
views, the quarrel began. A few of the clergy declared 
themselves on his side, whilst the bishop Alexander, who 
considered the system to be merely an Ebionite form of 
Monarchianism, after fruitlessly labouring to reclaim Arius 
from his error, excommunicated him together with all his 
adherents at the Synod of 323 (321). 3 

This action caused the controversy to become general. 
Arius began to cast about for new supporters, and he found 

1 i.e. 'Sprang from nothing.' Arii ep. ad Eus. Nicom. ap. Theod. I, 4. 

2 Arii Thalia, ap. Ath. Orat. c. Avian. I, 9. 
s Socr. I, 5, 6 ; Soz. I, 15 ; Theod. I, 3. 



The Beginning of the Arian Controversy 137 

them, not only in the camp of the Meletians, but also in the 
Catholic episcopate. Eusebius of Nicomedia openly espoused 
his cause : in fact, not only the clergy, but also the laity 
took an interest in the struggle. Hence Constantine, as soon 
as he had brought the war with Licinius to a successful 
close, bethought himself of a means of allaying this new 
strife, and after having sought in vain to arbitrate between 
Alexander and Arius, and seeing that there were other 
questions also to debate, especially that of Easter, he took 
the course of convening an oecumenical Council at Nicsea 
in Bithynia (325). Some 300 bishops (318) attended, among 
the most ardent advocates of the Faith being Eustathius of 
Antioch, Marcellus of Ancyra, and the deacon Athanasius 
of Alexandria. The assembled bishops holding various views, 
the debates were occasionally somewhat acrimonious, and the 
emperor was several times compelled to intervene and exhort 
the bishops to peace and unity. To begin with, the Fathers 
were inclined to define in simple Bible language the truth 
which had been called into question, and to set against the 
Arian ef ovk ovtcov its own etc tov ®eov. But as the Arians 
were prepared to interpret these words agreeably to theii 
own tenets, that there might be no room for such dis- 
sembling, it was finally decided to declare that the Son is i/c T779 
ovaias rod irarpos and ofioovaios ro) irarpi?- The Creed which was 
drawn up by the Council, besides making use of the above 
words, also explicitly acknowledges, in its first part, the Son 
as true God (®eo? aXrjöivos), begotten and not made, and con- 
substantial with the Father, whilst, in the second portion, 
it condemns under anathema Arius's main contentions, viz. 
that the Son had been made in time and out of nothing, that 
His hypostasis or ousia is different from the Father's, and 
that He is subject to change (rpeirrb^ rj aWoicorbs). This 
Creed was accepted by almost all who were present : only 
Secundus, bishop of Ptolemais, and Theonas of Marmorica, 
who had all along been on the side of Arius, refused to sign. 
They accordingly, like Arius himself, were banished. The 
same punishment, soon after, overtook Eusebius of Nicomedia, 
Theognis of Nicaea, and, possibly, also Maris of Chalcedon, 

* Äthan. De decreL Nie. syn. 19, 20. 



138 A Manual of Church History 

who refused to give their sanction to the excommunication of 
Arius. The Council also decreed that the writings of Arius 
and of his friends should be burnt. 1 



§48 
The Further History and End of Arianism 2 

It was not long before Constantine wearied of the task of enforcing 
the decrees of the Nicene Council. The exiles, Arius, Eusebius, and 
Theognis, soon received permission to return to their homes, 
and the latter two were again restored to their Sees. This encour- 
aged them to commence a campaign against the Faith of Nicaea and 
its defenders. In 330, Eustathius of Antioch, on the suspicion 
of Sabellianism, and for disrespect to the empress-mother Helena, 
was deposed and banished. Against Athanasius, who, since 328, 
was bishop of Alexandria, complaints of the most varied nature 
were lodged : it was said that he had commissioned his presbyter 
Macarius to overthrow the altar of a Meletian priest named Ischyras, 
and had murdered the bishop Arsenius of Hypsele. Athanasius 
was indeed able — at the Council of Tyre (335), where the matter 
came up for decision — to dispose effectually of the charge of murder, 
by bringing forward the murdered man himself as a witness. He 
was, nevertheless, deposed for his action in the case of Ischyras, 
and for other alleged offences. On seeking of the emperor at 
Constantinople a revision of this sentence, a new charge was launched 
against him, viz. of having attempted to hinder the yearly export 
of wheat from Alexandria to Constantinople, and on this ground 
he was exiled to Treves. To this sentence Constantine gave his 
sanction, either because he believed the truth of the charge, or 
because he saw no other means of restoring peace to the Church. 
But the efforts of the Eusebians did not cease with the banishment 
of their arch-enemy ; the Council of Constantinople also pro- 
nounced the deposition of Marcellus of Ancyra. On the other 
hand, their efforts to have Arius readmitted to the fold were less 
successful. The emperor indeed gave instructions to this effect 
to Alexander, bishop of Constantinople, but Arius had already 
departed this world before they could be put into execution (336) .3 

It is thought that Arius's death determined Constantine to 
recall Athanasius, but as the emperor died soon after (337), it was 
left to his sons to carry this out in the following year. But the 
Eusebians could not endure the presence of the great defender of 

1 Socr. I, 9 ; Theod. I, 19. 

2 Äthan. Hist. Arianorum ad monachos; J. Gummerus, Die homousianische 
Partei bis zum Tode des Konstantins (356-61), 1900. 

3 Socr. I, 25-38; Soz. II, 16-30; Theod. I, 13-29; Äthan. Apol. c t 
Avian. 1-19; De morte Arii. 



Progress of the Arian Controversy 139 

the Faith of Nicaea, and as Constantius was inclined to hearken to 
them, it came about that Athanasius was again deposed at the 
Council of Antioch, and the Cappadocian Gregory consecrated 
in his stead. A Roman Council (340), indeed, pronounced null 
and void the sentences on both Athanasius and Marcellus, but the 
Eusebians, nothing daunted, held a synod of their own {in encaeniis) 
on the occasion of the consecration of the so-called golden church 
at Antioch, in 341, in which they drew up three rules of faith, 
asserting against Marcellus the eternity of the kingdom of Christ, 
and anathematising all who shared his view. These same bishops, 
nevertheless, in a fourth formula which was decided on in a new 
synod — or possibly a continuation of the previous — held in the 
same year, condemned also those very propositions of Arius which 
had been condemned by the Council of Nicaea.i 

These dissensions were deeply deplored, especially in the West, 
and at the instigation of Pope Julius and other bishops, the 
emperor Constans urged his brother Constantius to convoke 
another representative Council. 

This Council assembled in the autumn of 342 (343) 2 at Sardica 
(Sofia) in Mcesia, on the border of the two empires, but it failed to 
re-establish ecclesiastical unity ; in fact, the two parties found it 
impossible even to discuss the matters in dispute ; on the orthodox 
party forthwith admitting Athanasius and Marcellus into com- 
munion, the Eusebians seceded from the Council and betook them- 
selves to Philippopolis. Here they proceeded to anathematise, 
not only the two principal objects of their hate, but also Pope Julius 
and all the other bishops of the Council. As the Fathers of the 
Council of Sardica retorted by fulminating a like anathema against 
the dissenters, the division merely grew deeper. Constans succeeded, 
nevertheless, in obtaining that the upholders of the Nicene doctrine 
should be left in peace, and Athanasius was able to return to his 
diocese (346). 3 

Peace lasted for some time, but on the death of Constans (350) 
the quarrel recommenced. At the Council of Sirmium (Agram) 
in Pannonia (351) the 6/aoovo-ios was practically abandoned, the 
word finding no admission into the first creed there drawn up. 
Simultaneously Athanasius, whose fortune seemed to be bound 
up with that of the Nicene Faith, again became the butt of new 
outrages. The Councils of Aries (353) and of Milan (355) both 
declared him deposed, and the bishops who refused to concur in 
this judgment were banished, among them being Paulinus of 
Treves, Eusebius of Vercelli, Lucifer of Calaris, Dionysius of 
Milan, Liberius of Rome, Osius of Corduba, and Hilary of Poitiers. 

1 Socr. II, 1-17 ; Soz. Ill, 1-10 ; Theod. I, 30-II, 3 ; Äthan. Apol. 
c. Avian. 20-35 ; De synod. 22-26. 

2 On the date, see Nach. Göttingen, 1904, p. 341. 

3 Socr. II, 20-24; Soz. Ill, 11-20; Theod. II, 6-9; Äthan. Apol. c. 
Arian, 36-50, 



140 A Manual of Church History 

Athanasius himself was compelled to flee to the desert in order to save 
his life (356), and his place was taken by the Cappadocian George.i 
The anti-Nicene party was now victorious. Their success 
they owed to the secular power, and to their own tactics in uniting 
to level at the Homoousians the charge of Sabellianism. Their 
agreement was, however, now nearing its end. Several factions 
had now been formed, the great subject of contention being whether 
the Son was like (o/xoios) or unlike (avofioios) the Father, and, 
according to the answer given to the question, the party was 
divided into the strict Arians or Anomoians, and the Homoians, 
or followers of the old Eusebians. The former had for their leaders 
the deacon Aetius of Antioch, and the two bishops Eunomius of 
Cyzicus and Acacius of Caesarea. The Homoians were also split 
into two factions, some holding that the likeness was confined 
to the will and operations, whilst the others who believed the 
Son to be like to the Father in His essence (6/x.oiovo-ios) were called 
Homoiousians, or semi- Arians. In reality the parties were not 
new, for, from the beginning, there had existed among the opponents 
of Nicaea an extremist and a moderate party, and a conflict was 
inevitable as soon as the partisans of either opinion began to strive 
for supremacy. This quarrel within the camp was the beginning 
of the end. Led by Valens of Mursa (Essek) in Pannonia, and 
Ursacius of Singidunum (Belgrad) in Mcesia, the stricter Arians 
put forward at the Council of Sirmium (357) a formulary, known as 
the second of Sirmium, in which the terms 6/xooucrtos and 6/aoiowios 
are both rejected as unbiblical and likely to arouse dissent, and 
in which the Son is distinctly made subordinate to the Father. 
Not to be outdone, the semi-Arians forthwith assembled, under 
the leadership of the two bishops Basil of Ancyra and George 
of Laodicea, in Council at Ancyra (358), and affirmed the perfect 
likeness of the Father and the Son ; and as the emperor took the 
latter's side, semi-Arianism was for the moment victorious. A 
new Council was convoked at Sirmium (358) and a new creed 
composed, whilst some seventy Anomoians were sent into exile. 
This creed, the third Sirmian formulary, was a combination of 
previous conciliar decisions, among which was the decree of 
the Council of Antioch against Paul of Samosata (§ 32, I), 
denying the consubstantiality of the Son. According to the clear 
statement of Sozomen (IV, 15), which, in the main, is confirmed 
by other witnesses, this formula was signed by Liberius, who — 
if we may credit, as it seems we must, the epistle Pro deifico 
timore preserved among the works of Hilary — had already, 
when in exile, subscribed to the first formulary, adding, however, 
a saving clause in which he declared excommunicate whosoever 
should refuse to acknowledge that the Father and the Son resemble 
each other in all, even in their essence. 

1 Socr. II, 26-36; Soz. IV, i-ii; Theod. II, 10-14; Sulp. Sev, II, 
39 ; Äthan. Defuga sva. 



Progress of the Arian Controversy 141 

The stricter Arians did not, however, consider themselves 
vanquished, nor indeed was it long before fortune began again 
to shine on them. On a General Council being proposed by Con- 
stantius (359) for the purpose of restoring peace, they persuaded 
him to divide the bishops, and to hold a Council of the West at 
Ariminum (Rimini) and a similar one of the East at Seleucia in 
Isauria. The reason of this plan was to prevent a possible alliance 
between the orthodox Western bishops and the semi-Arians of the 
East. As a further precaution, the two Arian factions met at the 
imperial camp at Sirmium, and drew up the fourth formulary of 
Sirmium, which set aside the very term of ova-ta, and merely declared 
that, according to the Scriptures, the Father and the Son are in all 
things like. The emperor gave his sanction to this formula, and 
promised to secure its adoption by the Fathers at Ariminum. In the 
event the latter, by a large majority, declared their conviction in the 
Faith of Nicaea, and excommunicated all Arians. Constantius was, 
however, not discouraged, but was induced to proceed even further. 
At Nicaea in Thrace 1 the words Kara rravra were erased from 
the fifth formula of Sirmium, with the consequence that the 
new Creed merely spoke of the likeness taught by Scripture. This 
was the profession of Faith which the Fathers of Rimini by decep- 
tion, threats, and force were induced to sign. Some of them did 
so without further ado, others salved their consciences by 
launching an anathema against Arius and his teaching, and by 
declaring that the Son is coequal with the Father, has no beginning, 
and is not a creature like other creatures.2 

The same formula was also imposed throughout the East. 
Though, on account of the dissensions between its members, the 
Council of Seleucia came to no definite result, the emissaries whom 
it dispatched to the emperor were obliged to subscribe to the 
Creed, and as soon as it had received the approbation of a Council 
held at Constantinople (360), all the bishops were called upon to 
sign it under threat of exile ; the bishops who had the courage 
to refuse, among whom we must reckon Liberius, were very few, 
and Jerome is right in his exclamation : Ingemuit totus orbis et 
Arianum se esse miratus est. The victorious party was that of 
the Homoians, the Council of Constantinople having been the 
work of Acacius and his friends, whilst that of Seleucia, by rejecting 
the term dvo/xoios, had cut itself loose from the Anomoians. 
Deposition was also pronounced on Aetius, as well as on the 
leaders of the semi-Arians.3 

The triumph of the Arians was not of long duration. On the 

1 ' Une station postale . , , pr£s d'Andrinople,' Duchesne, Hist. anc. de 
l'Egiise, vol. II, p. 299. 

2 Socr. II, 37 ; Soz. IV, 16-19 ', Theod. II, 15, 16 ; Sulp. Sev. Chron. 
II, 41-44 ; Äthan. De syn. 8-1 1. 

* Socr. II, 39-41 ; Soz. IV, 22-24 ; Theod. II, 22-25 > Äthan. De syn, 
la ; Hier. Dial, ad Lucif. 19. 



142 A Manual of Church History 

death of Constantius in the following year, the West immediately 
reverted to the Faith of Nicaea. In the East the stricter Arian 
party found, indeed, a supporter in the emperor Valens (364-78), 
and orthodox and semi-Arians had to undergo a violent persecution. 
The latter having held a synod at Lampsacus on the Hellespont 
(364), in which they denounced the Council of Constantinople, they 
were all of them banished, a measure which induced fifty-nine of 
them to accept the 6/xoovcrtos and to re-enter into communion with 
Liberius (366), though their attitude changed as soon as the perse- 
cution reached its end. On the death of Valens the Creed of 
Nicaea soon found universal acceptance in the East also, its prin- 
cipal champions, after the death of Athanasius (373), being the 
three Cappadocians, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory Nazianzen, and 
Gregory of Nyssa, whilst its greatest protector wasValens's successor, 
Theodosius the Great. The latter, not long after ascending the 
throne, made the Nicene Creed obligatory on all the inhabitants of 
his empire,! and restored the churches of Constantinople to the 
Catholics (380) .2 In the year 381 a new Council, being the second 
General Council, was held at Constantinople, to settle definitively 
the question of faith, and the Arians were forbidden to worship 
publicly either there or elsewhere.3 The error was, however, not 
yet expelled from the world ; on the contrary, as we already know, 
it was at this juncture that the Germanic tribes were won over 
to it : but its force having been broken in the Roman Empire, its 
final disappearance was only a matter of time. 



§ 49 

The Pneumatomachic Quarrel and the Second General Council 4 

Since Arius considered the Son as the Father's creature, 
by whom all other things are created, he necessarily looked 
on the Holy Ghost as a creature of the Son. This consequence 
was self-evident ; and though in the beginning, when attention 
was wholly centred on the Son, it aroused no misgivings, yet, in 
the middle of the fourth century, a change became apparent. 
Not the Anomoians only, but also the semi-Arians, who believed 
the Son to be substantially like to the Father, and who did 
not reckon Him as a creature, held the doctrine that the Holy 
Ghost is a ministering spirit, differing from the angels only in 

1 Cod. Theod. lib. XVI, tit. 1 ; De fide cath. I, 2, 
* Socr. V, 7 ; Soz. VII, 5. 

3 Cod. Theod. I, 6 ; De haeret. 

4 Th. Schermann, Die Gottheit des Hl. Geistes nach den griechischen Vätern 
des 4 Jahrh. 1901. 



The Holy Ghost 143 

degree. It was against this view that Athanasius wrote his 
epistle to Serapion (c. 358) in defence of the Divinity of the 
Holy Ghost, and that the Council of Alexandria (362) defined 
the third Person of the Trinity to be of the same substance 
and Divinity as the others. The then chief defender of the 
opposite doctrine was Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople 
(*(• 362) . It was afterwards advocated also by Marathonius of 
Nicomedia ; for this reason the Pneumatomachi were sometimes 
called Macedonians or Marathonians. 

The error was condemned by the Councils of Alexandria 
(363), Rome (374), Illyricum (375), Iconium and Cappadocia 
(c. 376). But the most important condemnation was that 
pronounced by the Council of Constantinople in 381, in which 
the 150 Fathers there assembled adopted, with a few modifi- 
cations, the baptismal Creed which had been put forward by 
Epiphanius (c. 374) in his Ancoratus. In this Creed the first 
article of the Nicene Creed is given word for word, the second 
is retained with a few alterations of slight importance, whilst 
the third, the better to confound the Pneumatomachi, adds 
to the original ' And in the Holy Ghost ' the following words : 
' Lord and Giver of life ; who proceeds from the Father 
(John xv. 26), is adored and glorified with the Father and the 
Son, who spoke through the prophets.' This profession of 
Faith, as soon as the Council had been acknowledged as a 
general one — in the East by the Council of Chalcedon (451), 
and in the West about a century later — received oecumenical 
authority and became known as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan 
Creed. 

By the definition of the procession of the Holy Ghost from 
the Father, the Arian theory stood condemned, but the 
position of the Holy Ghost was not as yet clearly determined. 
The relationship of the Holy Ghost to the Son was still a 
matter of debate, and the question received, in the East and 
in the West, answers which in appearance were different. 
The Greek Church taught a procession from the Father through 
the Son ; the Latin, a procession from the Father and the Son. 
In Spain the Filioque was soon incorporated in the Creed, 
whence it found its way into the profession of Faith drawn up 
by Pastor of Palentia (c. 450), and into official use (cp. § 50, 
VIII), and was embodied in the Niceno-Constantinopolitan 



144 A Manual of Church History 

Creed by the Council of Toledo in 589. The same word also 
found its way into the Quicunque, which, from the seventh 
century, was universally ascribed to Athanasius, and was 
in consequence called the Athanasian Creed, though it was 
certainly composed after his time, most likely in the first 
half of the fifth century, in Gaul or Spain, probably in the 
latter during the conflict with the Priscillianists. 1 

The Constantinopolitan Creed agrees with the Nicene sub- 
stantially, though not verbally, in the article descriptive of the 
Son. The alterations may be accounted for by the use of this 
profession as a baptismal Creed ; thus the Nicene clause : rbv vlbv 

tov 6€Ov, yevvrjOevTa £k tov 7rarpo<s fxovoycvrj, tovt£0~tlv £k ttj<s ovcrias tov 
irarpos was rendered : tov vlov tov Oeov tov fJLOvoycvrj, tov £k tov 7raTpbs 
yevvqOzvTa irpb iravTuv rdv aiuvuv. Epiphanius (Ancoratus, C Il8, II9) 

assigns the baptismal Creed to an earlier date than his own writing, 
without, however, stating that this date was comparatively recent. 
Hence it would be difficult to show that the passage in question was 
an addition made after the Council of 381, as Franzelin [Tract, de 
Deo trino, p. 556) and Jungmann (II, 114) would have us believe. 
On the other hand, there is likewise no foundation for the view of 
Hort (Two Dissertations, 1876) and Harnack (RE. f. pr. Th. XI, 
12-28 ; Dogmengesch. II, 266-68 [Engl. Trans. History of Dogma, 
1894-99]), which is also in part that of Kattenbusch (Vergleichende 
Konfessionskunde, I, 1892, pp. 252-63), that the Council neither 
composed nor sanctioned the Creed called after it, and that its 
name is based on a misunderstanding.2 Still more unlikely is 
Vincenzi's supposition (De processione Spiritus S. a Patre Filioque 
adv. Graecos, 1878) that the Constantinopolitan Creed was a 
seventh-century forgery in support of the Greek teaching. 
That Socrates (V, 8), Sozomen (VII, 7, 9), and Theodoret (V. 8) 
should be silent, or speak only of a confirmation of the Nicene 
Creed by the Council, is not remarkable, considering how scanty 
are the details furnished by these historians, especially as Theodoret 
took part in the Council of Chalcedon, in which the Creed was 
read twice (Sess. II, V). Still less is Gregory Nazianzen a witness 
against this Creed ; it is true that he mentions explicitly (Ep. 102 
ad Cledon.) only the Nicene Creed, but as he goes on to say that 
the third article which concerns the Holy Ghost received a fuller 
explanation, he manifestly has the Constantinopolitan Creed in 
mind ; possibly his silence may be explained by the grudge he 
owed the Council of 381. Cp. RE. d. chr.A. II, 810-13 ; Neue k. Z. 

x (1899), 935-85. 

1 A. Künstle, Antipriscilliana, 1905 ; Das Comma Joanneum, 1905. 

2 On the other hand, Duchesne has it that ' Nothing authorises us to 
believe that this Creed was promulgated by the Council of 381.' See his 
Churches separated from Rome, Engl. Trans. 1907, p. 53. 



Schisms and Heresies 145 



§50 

Disputes connected with, or contemporaneous with, the 

Arian Quarrel 

Arianism, by giving rise within the Church to two hostile 
camps, led to many lesser dissensions and schisms. Of the 
latter, the more noteworthy were those of Antioch, of 
Rome under Liberius and Damasus, and that of Lucifer in 
Sardinia and Spain. Of the heresies connected with Arianism, 
the best known were those of Marcellus of Ancyra, and of 
Photinus, bishop of Sirmium. The other contemporaneous 
heresies were those of the Audians, Massalians, and Priscilli- 
anists. 

I. The Schism of Antioch. When Eustathius was deposed 
(330), a small portion of his Church remained true to him, whilst 
the larger part went over to the new Arian bishop. On Eudoxius 
being transferred to the see of Constantinople (360) and replaced 
at Antioch by Meletius, bishop of Sebaste in Armenia (361), there 
arose a new orthodox party distinct from the Eustathians, for the 
new bishop proved to be in favour of Nicaea, and was consequently 
soon abandoned by the Arians, though the Eustathians, owing to 
his having been consecrated by the Arians, refused also to acknow- 
ledge him as bishop. New grounds for dissension were soon found 
in the change which, about that time, occurred in the meaning 
of the term woo-rao-i?, which formerly, for instance at the Nicene 
Council, had been taken as identical with ovcrta, but which was 
now beginning to be used as a synonym of ' person.' The Eusta- 
thians held fast to the older meaning, the Meletians preferred the 
new. The later bishops of the Eustathians were Paulinus (362-88) 
and Evagrius (f 394) ; they were recognised as legitimate by the 
West, whereas in the East Meletius and his successors were con- 
sidered the rightful bishops. On the death of their last bishop 
the Eustathians soon lost their importance ; most of the remaining 
schismatics were reconciled in 415, and the rest in 482. Cp. F. 
Cavallera, Le schisme d'Antioche, 1905 ; Bulletin de litt. eccl. 
publ. par I Inst. cath. de Toulouse, 1906, 120-25. 

II. The Roman Schism. On the banishment of Liberius 
(355) the deacon Felix was consecrated bishop of Rome. Though 
the clergy oi the city had professed themselves devoted to Liberius, 
they nevertheless went over to the new bishop's side, to whom 
they remained true even after the return of the rightful Pope 
(358)- With the death of Felix (365) the schism seemed to have 
reached its term ; unfortunately Liberius also died soon after (366), 

vol. 1. l 



146 A Manual of Church History 

and the strife was renewed. The party of Felix elected Damasus, 
and that of Liberius, Ursinus. In the struggle for supremacy 
which followed, much blood was shed, and though Ursinus was 
defeated and banished to Gaul (367), the schism continued for 
yet fifteen years. 

At an early date, i.e. before the composition of the Liber 
pontificalis, the real history of this schism was distorted in such 
wise as to reverse the parts played by the different characters. 
Liberius 's mistakes were exaggerated, and his better qualities were 
kept out of sight, the Pope being made to appear in the light of a 
rabid heretic, whereas Felix, who was really an anti-Pope, was 
made into the orthodox and rightful bishop, and, probably through 
some confusion with the martyr Felix on the Via Portuensis, actually 
came to be considered as a saint. Cp. Döllinger, Papstfabeln, 
1863 (2nd ed. 1890), pp. 106-23 ; Duchesne, Liber pontificalis, I, 
pp. cxx. f. 

III. The Luciferian Schism. Lucifer, bishop of Calaris, fell 
away from communion with his fellow-bishops owing to a twofold 
misunderstanding : first, he was displeased with the mildness shown 
by Athanasius towards repentant semi-Arians at the Council of 
Alexandria in 362 ; secondly, in his turn, he had offended Eusebius, 
bishop of Vercelli, by too nastily consecrating Paulinus, bishop of 
Antioch. The acceptance of the Nicene formula (see p. 141) pro- 
vided new fuel for the schism, which spread over Sardinia and Spain, 
but which nevertheless soon died out. Its principal supporter, 
after Lucifer, was Gregory, bishop of Elvira. Cp. G. Krüger, 
Lucifer v. C. u. d. Schisma der Luciferianer, 1886. 

IV. Marcellus of Ancyra was the origin of another dispute. 
He had earned himself a name at Nicsea and elsewhere by his 
zeal against the Arians. By reverting to the older theory of the 
Aoyo? evStdOtTos and the \6yos 7rpocf)opLKo<s he came, however, 
to something very like Sabellianism, reducing the personal dis- 
tinction between the Father and the Son to one of reason only. 
This accounts for his having been accused of heresy not only 
by the Arians, but also by the orthodox. According to Marcellus, 
the Logos is the very mind of the Father, and is therefore unbe- 
gotten. For the purpose of creating and redeeming the world, He 
however, thanks to a certain S/aao-ri/o) ivipyeta, became distinct 
from the Father, and by His Incarnation was made the Son. At 
the end of time He will be reincorporated in the Father, and 
will again be part of Him as in the beginning. Hence the Sonship, 
and even the very individuality of the Logos, is transitory. The 
same must also be said of the Kingdom of Christ. When the work 
of redemption shall be accomplished, after the Last Judgment, 
when every foe shall have been defeated, Christ will again be 
subject to the Father (1 Cor. xv. 28). It was this error which 
led to the words of Luke i. 33, ' And of his kingdom there shall be 
no end,' being adopted in the Creed. Mg. by Th. Zahn, 1867 ; 



Schisms and Heresies 147 

F. Loops (Die Trinitätslehre Marcells v. A. u. ihr Verhältnis zur 
älteren Tradition) , 1902. 

V. Photinus of Sirmium, a disciple of Marcellus, returned to 
the views of the Ebionites. He taught that Christ was a mere 
man, though, if Epiphanius be right (H. 71, 1), he allowed Him 
to have been miraculously born of Mary through the action of 
the Holy Ghost. At any rate, Christ was godlike only in His 
power, and it was His miracles and virtues which led to His being 
adopted by God as His Son. After having been several times 
condemned, Photinus was finally deposed by the Council of 
Sirmium (351) and banished. He continued, however, to abide 
by his opinions, which survived among his own disciples even after 
his death (379). The same opinions were also advocated by the 
Bonosians, though the founder of this sect, Bonosus, bishop of 
Sardica, had at first confined himself to denying the virginity of 
Mary (§ 70). 

VI. The Audians. Audius, a Mesopotamian, whose denuncia- 
tions of the crimes of the clergy and of certain bishops had 
brought on him a persecution, quitted the Church (c. 325) with 
others who shared his views, and on being banished by Con- 
stantine to Scythia, founded some religious communities, of 
which the distinguishing characteristics were an attachment to 
the Protopaschite method of reckoning Easter, and an anthropo- 
morphical conception of the Deity. The sect came to its end 
in the fifth century. Cp. Epiph. H. 70 ; /. /. pr. Th. 1890, 
pp. 298-305. 

VII. The Massalians or Euchites, i.e. Men of Prayer, were 
a set of fanatics in Mesopotamia and Syria who made their appear- 
ance in the middle of the fourth century. They claimed that 
the evil spirit which is innate in man can only be overcome by 
uninterrupted prayer ; all other means of grace they held in con- 
tempt ; labour and property they eschewed as sinful, and preferred 
to gain a livelihood by begging. The name of the sect is derived 
from the Svro-Chaldaic fcO^, to pray. Cp. Epiph. H. 80 ; Z. 
f. KG. IX. (1888), 507-22. 

VIII. The Priscillianists. In the latter half of the fourth 
century, a certain Mark from Memphis began to advocate in 
Spain a doctrine akin to Gnosticism and Manichaeism. Through 
his first disciples, the matron Agape and the rhetor Elpidius, a 
rich and learned layman, Priscillian by name, was partially won 
over to the cause, or at least to its Gnostic leanings, though, as 
his writings show, he was by no means a strict Manichaean ; the 
latter, in his turn, effected the conversion of others, notably of the 
bishops Salvian and Instantius, and of several women. The whole 
party was excommunicated by the Council of Saragossa in 380, 

I and the usurper Maximus went so far as to put to death, at Treves, 
Priscillian, together with some of his associates (385). To this 
deed of blood the emperor had been urged by bishops such as 

l 2 



148 A Manual of Church History 

Ithacius of Sossuba, whilst Martin of Tours had tried in vain to 
dissuade him. Others who protested when it was already too 
late were Ambrose of Milan and Pope Siricius. Nor did these 
repressive measures secure their end. On the contrary, their result 
was a large increase in the number of the Priscillianists. They 
soon effected the conquest of Gallaecia, the bishops of the province 
joining them in a body. A little later, when the Germanic tribes 
seized possession of the Spanish peninsula, new advantages were 
secured by the heretics. It was only in the sixth century, subse- 
quently to the Council of Braga (563), that they began to disappear. 
According to a profession of Faith drawn up against them (Harduin, 
I, 993), they held a modalistic Trinitarian doctrine and a Docetic 
Christology, made use of apocryphal works and practised astrology, 
ascribed to the soul a Divine nature, denied that God had created 
the world, and that the God of the Old Testament was one 
with the God of the New Testament, besides rejecting the resurrec- 
tion of the body. They also forbade marriage and the use of flesh- 
meat. This profession of Faith, which has been preserved among 
the acts of the Council of Toledo (400) , was ascribed by the Council 
of Braga (563) to a Council held under Pope Leo I, and has in 
consequence been frequently attributed to a Council of Toledo, 
held in 447, of which nothing is, however, known. According 
to the most recent research it was probably drawn up by Pastor, 
bishop of Palentia (c. 453). Cp. Revue Bened. 1893, p. 389 ; 
Künstle, Eine Bibliothek der Symbole, 1900 ; Antipriscilliana, 
1905. 



§ 51 

Origenism 

In the Trinitarian dispute the name of Origen recurs 
frequently. The Arians claimed the great scholar as a witness 
to their doctrine. Generally speaking, the orthodox party 
were inclined to dispute this claim, continuing to hold in honour 
the Alexandrian teacher, though ready to grant that he had 
been misled by his speculations (§39). But to this rule there 
were exceptions. Not a few forsook Origen entirely, and even 
attempted to hinder the circulation of his writings, because 
they believed him to be the real father of Arianism, and also 
because of his teaching concerning the pre-existence of souls 
and his other errors. The question furnished matter for new 
controversies. Amongst Origen's principal opponents we may 
reckon Epiphanius, Theophilus of Alexandria, and Justinian I. 



Origenism 149 

In his edict of 543 the emperor condemned nine proposi- 
tions, and the very person of the famous Alexandrian, placing 
his name on the list of heresiarchs to be anathematised 
by every bishop and abbot on assuming office. Origen was 
thus placed on the same footing with Sabellius and Arius. 
Happily, a later age was to do better justice to Origen's 
name. 

I. Epiphanius, following in the wake o. Methodius of Olympus 
(§ 39), not only gave to Origen a place in his history of heresies 
(H. 64), but even assailed him by word of mouth, preaching against 
him (c. 392) in the Church of the Resurrection at Jerusalem. The 
result of this was a conflict of several years' duration, in which 
Epiphanius and Jerome found themselves pitted against John, 
bishop of Jerusalem, and Rufinus of Aquileia, who took up the 
cudgels for Origen. Jerome himself had formerly been an admirer 
of the Alexandrian, but had, a few years previous, and owing to 
the tactics of a certain Aterbius, changed his opinion. On the 
return of Rufinus to Europe, means were found to effect a reconcilia- 
tion, but on his translating Origen's work De principiis, in the 
preface to which he represented Jerome as a panegyrist of Origen, 
the quarrel broke out anew, nor was Jerome's wrath soothed even 
by the news of Ruhnus's death. Cp. Zöckler, Hieronymus, 
pp. 238-66 ; Rauschen, /. d. ehr. K. unter Theodosius d. Gr. 1897, 
pp. 552-55 ; J. Brocket, Jerome et ses ennemis, 1906. 

II. In the meantime a worse conflict had broken out in Egypt, 
and was to bring about the downfall of one of the best known 
of the Greek Fathers. Theophilus of Alexandria having in his 
Easter letter (399) attacked the doctrine that God has a body — 
an opinion then prevalent among the monks of the Sketic desert 
and elsewhere — the anthropomorphite party demanded that 
he should withdraw his words, and that he should pronounce 
the condemnation of Origen. The bishop, a man of evil repute, 
assented all the more readily to these demands, seeing that there 
were among the Origenists several men whom he disliked, especially 
Isidore the presbyter and the ' tall brothers,' who were as remarkable 
for their learning and piety as for their fine presence, and of whom 
one, Dioscorus, was bishop of Hermopolis. Effect was soon given 
to the adverse judgment. The Origenists were summoned to 
desist from reading the master's works, and on their replying that 
it was open to each one to discriminate between the true and the 
lalse, they were forcibly ejected from their preferments (401). They 
thereupon migrated in a body, some three hundred in number, to 
Palestine, and being unkindly received, some of them pushed on 
to Constantinople, hoping to secure protection there. In effect 
John Chysostom, who was then bishop, interested himself on their 
behalf, though it came about that his intervention turned to his 



150 A Manual of Church History 

own prejudice. Being cited before the emperor Arcadius, Theo- 
philus first caused a quarrel between Epiphanius and Chrysostom 
by representing the latter as a devotee of Origen's, and finally 
obeyed the summons only when he learnt that Chrysostom, by 
an untimely sermon on feminine failings, had offended the empress 
Eudoxia and endangered his situation. When Theophilus came 
to Constantinople, it was not as a culprit, but as a judge. The 
Council of Drys near Chalcedon (synodus ad quercum) in 403 
pronounced the deposition of Chrysostom, and though he continued 
to hold his ground for some little time, the authorities having found 
it necessary, in view of the threats of the populace, to recall him 
from exile, yet in the very next year, on account of a new conflict 
with the empress, he was forced to relinquish his bishopric for 
ever. His followers remained, however, true to him, and refused 
to acknowledge his successors, Arsacius and Atticus. It was 
only when his mortal remains were brought back in triumph to 
Constantinople under the bishop Proclus that the Johannine 
Schism, as it was called, came to an end (438). Cp. Socr. VI, 
7-18 ; VII, 45 ; Soz. VIII, 11-20 ; Theod. V, 34-36 ; Sulp. 
Sev. Dial. I, 6, 7. 

III. In the sixth century Origen was the occasion of yet another 
quarrel. This dispute, which to begin with was confined to the 
monasteries of Palestine, came to a close with the utter collapse 
of the Origenist party. True, the action of the abbot Agapetus 
in expelling from the new Lavra four monks who were tainted 
with Origenism, had but little effect, for his successor Mamas allowed 
them to return, and for a time Origenism throve. All the efforts 
of St. Sabas, the president of the monks of Palestine, to compel 
the emperor to take action against the Alexandrian were made 
in vain (531). On the death of Sabas (532) the feeling in favour 
of the weaker party became so strong that Justinian even elevated 
two of its adherents, the learned monks Domitian and Theodore 
Ascidas, to the bishoprics of Ancyra and Caesarea in Cappadocia 
(537). Soon after this events took a different turn. The abbot 
Gelasius having expelled nearly forty Origenists from the old 
Lavra, the Origenists contemplated reprisals, and both sides began 
to cast about for outward support. About the year 542, Ephraem, 
patriarch of Antioch, condemned the erroneous teaching of Origen. 
A petition directed against the Alexandrian and presented to the 
emperor led to the edict of 543 (Harduin, III, 243-82). As the 
debate still continued, Justinian procured from the Fifth General 
Council (and not, as was formerly believed, from some other 
Council connected with the edict issued in 543) a new condemna- 
tion comprising fifteen anathemas. The Origenists were then 
banished from the new Lavra (554) and their places filled with 
orthodox monks (555), with the result that peace was again 
restored. Cp. Diekamp, Die origenistischen Streitigkeiten im 6 Jahrh. 
1899. 



Donatism 151 

§ 52 
The Donatist Schism * 

On the death of Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, in 311, a 
double election occurred. Most of the votes were given to the 
deacon Caecilian. A portion of the Church was, however, 
opposed to the choice, owing to his having taken the part of the 
deceased bishop in the Diocletian persecution, by seeking to 
prevent undue enthusiasm for martyrdom, and any exaggerated 
regard for the martyrs lying in prison. Some also bore a 
personal grudge against him ; for instance, the rich and influen- 
tial widow Lucilla, whom he had publicly rebuked for her 
practice of kissing, before receiving Communion, the relics of 
an unacknowledged martyr ; also the presbyters Botrus and 
Celestius, who had set their hearts on the bishopric ; likewise two 
elders who had hoped to be able to retain the treasures which 
Mensurius had committed to their safe keeping before his death. 
There was also abroad a report that Felix the bishop of Aptunga, 
who had consecrated Caecilian, had proved a traitor during the 
Diocletian persecution. To crown all, the bishops of Numidia, 
who were offended because they had not been invited to the 
election, took the side of his opponents, and deposed him at 
the Council of Carthage, consecrating in his stead the lector 
Majorinus (312) . On the latter's death three years later, he was 
followed by Donatus, from whom the schism takes its name. 

The trouble soon spread. Owing to the importance of the 
Church of Carthage, it was not long before the schismatic 
movement had involved the whole of Africa. Less than 
twenty years later the Donatists were able to hold (c. 330) a 
Council at which 270 bishops were present. Their growth 
testifies to their activity ; their obstinacy was even greater. 
All the means of reconciliation suggested by the Donatists 
themselves were essayed in vain ; they remained obdurate. 
They were unable to establish their charges against Caecilian 
at the court of Italian and Gallic bishops convened at Constan- 
tine's command in Rome (313) ; the proconsul of Africa had 

1 M. Deutsch, Drei Aktenstücke z. G. des Donatismus, 1875 *, Völter, 
Der Ursprung des D. 1883; Th. Qu. 1884, p. 500 ff.; Z.f. KG. X (1889), 505-68; 
Melanges d'archSologie et d' hist. 1890, pp. 589-650; Thümmel, Zur Beurteilung 
des D. 1893. 



152 A Manual of Church History 

no difficulty in showing that Felix of Aptunga had not delivered 
to the pagans the Scriptures, as his enemies had alleged 
(Gesta purgationis Felicis episc.) ; lastly, the Council of Aries, 
in 314 (c. 13), declared that the consecration would have been 
valid even had it been conferred by a • traditor.' It turned 
out that the Donatists themselves were open to the charge 
they had brought against Felix ; that one of them, Silvanus 
of Cirta, and, according to the Acts of the Council of Cirta (305) , 
others of their number, too, had delivered the sacred books 
at the demand of the pagan authorities. Having fruitlessly 
essayed all ecclesiastical means, the schismatics at last appealed 
to the emperor, who in his turn gave an adverse decision (316). 
On their refusal to submit, Constantine had recourse to 
sterner methods, and decreed the banishment of their leaders 
and the seizure of their churches. Even this failed. The 
edicts only made matters worse, and after a time they were 
accordingly revoked, and the movement was left to work 
itself out. 

It was now the turn of the opposite party to make use of 
violence. Bands of fanatics, who called themselves Agonistici 
or milites Christi, but who by the Catholics were termed 
Circumcelliones from their habit of roaming about the neigh- 
bourhood of the peasants' hovels, kept the population in a 
state of turmoil, whilst the crowds who joined them committed 
many outrages. The emperor Constans was therefore induced 
to make a new attempt to appease the conflict. He first of 
all tried kindness, and then severity, and finally, on meeting 
with armed resistance, he proceeded to extremities and again 
banished the leading schismatics and closed their churches. 
But as Julian allowed the exiles to return, the attempt to force 
a union was ineffectual. Nor were those more successful who 
endeavoured to convince the Donatists of their error by word 
and pen, though by this means a few individual conversions 
were effected. Optatus of Mileve gave an account of the origin 
of the schism and an exposure of its history in his De schismate 
Donatistarum ; Augustine published a number of writings 
against it, but all in vain. Not even the great conference at 
Carthage in 411, in which 565 bishops of both sides took part, 
was able to bring about the wished-for union. The schism 
came to an end only with the^ conquest of Africa by the 



A pollinarianism 153 

Saracens, though it had been steadily losing ground ever 
since the Vandal invasion. 

So far as the doctrine of the Donatists is concerned, they not 
only taught that the sacraments depend for their validity on the state 
of grace of the dispenser, but they also remained firmly attached 
to the ancient custom of the African Church, and rejected every 
Baptism bestowed by one outside their fold, and therefore re- 
baptised all converts. This twofold practice led them to a Novatian 
view of the Church. To them, in spite of the Parable of the wheat 
and the tares, it seemed that the true Church could only be that 
one which endured, at the very least, no public sinners among 
its members. 



§53 

The Beginning of the Christological Controversy— Apollinaris 

of Laodicea 1 

The Arians did not confine themselves to denying the 
Godhead of the Son ; they also mutilated Christ's manhood, 
and denied to Him a human soul, being led to this, either by 
the difficulty of otherwise conceiving of Christ's oneness, or by 
the need of supporting their theology. They argued that the 
psychic manifestations of Christ really belong to the Logos, 
to whose created nature they testify. For long no great impor- 
tance was attached to the error, and when finally it came to 
be condemned, first by the Council of Alexandria (362), and 
later by the Council of Constantinople (381), it was not against 
the Arians that the condemnation was directed. Apollinaris 
of Laodicea, who had been one of the principal defenders of 
the Nicene Faith, had come on this point to the same 
conclusions as the Arians. On the theory being proved, con- 
trary to Scripture, he consented indeed to teach that in Christ 
there existed an inferior or animal soul (^rvxv aXoyos). 
But the existence in Him of a human and reasonable soul tyvxv 
\oyiK7]) or spirit (irvevjia) he strenuously denied. This lessening 
of Christ's human nature seemed to him necessary, both for His 
sinlessness and oneness. Wherever there is a perfect man, so 
he opined, there we have sin, and as according to him sin and 

1 Socr. II, 46 ; Soz. VI, 25 ; Theod. V, 3, 10 ; Äthan. (?) Adv. Apollin. ; 
Greg. Nyss. Antirrheticus ; Epiph. H. 77; Funk, A. u. U. II, 354-56; 
Voisin, L'ApalUnar.isme, 1900. 



\ 

154 A Manual of Church History 

freedom of choice are both of them properties of the soul, he 
considered it necessary to say that the Redeemer was devoid of 
a human soul. Two perfect beings, he explains, cannot become 
one (Bvo reXeca ev yeveaOai ou hvvarat). To say that Christ 
has a perfect human nature means that He has really two 
natures, which in turn involve two persons and two Sons 
of God, one begotten and the other adopted. He also appealed 
to John i. 14, taking the word ' Flesh,' which is there used as 
a pars pro toto, in its literal meaning. As, with him, nature is 
equivalent to person, two natures being equivalent to two 
persons, he accordingly confessed only one nature (/xla (pva^ 
tov Oeov \6yov o-eaapKWfitvrj)^ as we read in his epistle to 
the emperor Jovian, which his disciples afterwards fathered 
on St. Athanasius. 

This doctrine found not a few adherents, and in Antioch, 
under Vitalis, they were numerous enough to constitute a 
Church by themselves. They indeed returned (c. 420) to the 
fold, but not all of them relinquished their error, and with the 
rise of Monophysitism they again came to the front. 

§54 

Nestorianism— The Third General Council, 431 l 

It was not enough to maintain Christ's perfect manhood 
against the Arians and Apollinarists : it was also necessary to 
define its relation with His Divine nature. The contemporaries 
of Apollinaris mostly expressed themselves rather faultily on 
the subject, or at least their expressions were ambiguous. It 
was customary to speak of the mingling (avyrcpao-tf) of the 
two natures. By ascribing to Athanasius the Apollinarian 
document spoken of in the previous section (De incarnatione 
Dei verbi), the great Doctor was made to express his faith in 
jxla (frvais rod 6eov Xoyov aeaapKco/jbevrj instead of in Bvo eiferet?. 
As this seemed to impair the integrity of Christ's twofold 
nature, the school of Antioch did its utmost to insist 
on the distinction. Theodore of Mopsuestia, to whom the 

1 Largent, Etudes d'histoire ecclesiastique, 1892 ; W. Kraatz, Kopt. Akten 
zum ephes. Konzil 431, 1904 (T. u. U. N. F. XI, 2) ; F. Loofs, Nestoriana : 
Die Fragmente des Nestorius, 1905 ; A. Rehrmann, Die Christologie des hL 
Cyrill v. A. 1902. 



Nestorianism 155 

Incarnation of the Word seemed to imply a metamorphosis 
of the Logos into man, preferred to speak of the Word's 
inhabitation {ivoUrjan^) in man. His view that no nature is 
perfect without personality would lead to the further sup- 
position that in Christ there are two persons, and though he 
speaks expressly of only one person, yet, in his eyes, the oneness 
was not real (evcocns) but only moral (eveoais cr^eTi/ci], awäfeia) , 
like to that which exists between man and wife, or between a 
temple and its idol. It was a oneness which depended on the 
two being considered simultaneously : taken separately, each 
was a person. He refused, in consequence, to admit that the 
Son of God had been born : he who was born was a man in 
whom God dwelt, and Mary was therefore not the Mother of 
God (OeoTo/cos) , but merely the Mother of Christ (Xpio-Toro/cos). 

To begin with, these views were confined to the Antiochene 
school, but on Nestorius, a disciple of Theodore's, being named 
bishop of Constantinople (428), they began to be preached 
publicly. The presbyter Anastasius, who followed Nestorius 
from Antioch to his new see, found the opportunity in his 
sermons to censure the custom of addressing the Blessed 
Virgin as Oeorofcos. The scandal caused by this pro- 
nouncement became yet more intense when Nestorius inter- 
vened on his friend's behalf and criticised other expressions 
founded on the Communicatio Idiomatum. Contradictions 
were soon forthcoming even from a distance. Cyril of 
Alexandria attacked the teaching of Nestorius in his Easter 
sermon of 430. Pope Celestine condemned it in the same 
year at a Roman Council, and, in his name, Cyril now 
called on Nestorius to retract, summing up in twelve chapters 
or anathemas the true teaching of the Church. The only result 
of all this was that Nestorius drew up a list of twelve anathemas 
directed against his adversaries. At the same time other 
dignitaries took the field on his side, being displeased with 
Cyril's teaching, among them being John of Antioch and 
Theodoret of Cyrus. Nor is it to be denied that Cyril's choice of 
words had not been of the best. Following the Alexandrian 
custom, and the example of St. Athanasius, he had in his 
third chapter opposed a evaxris ^vacicr) to the Antiochene 
avvdfata, thereby denoting that the union of the two 
natures is real and true. Yet, though his thought was right, 



156 A Manual of Church History 

the word was ill-chosen, and by the Antiochenes it was under- 
stood as a ev(D(Ti<z eh fiiav fyvaiv. 

The controversy grew in intensity as it lengthened, and even 
the General Council which was summoned to meet at Ephesus 
at Whitsun 431 was not able to mend matters : on the con- 
trary the dissension increased. The beginning of the Council 
did not promise well : John of Antioch having, probably on 
purpose, delayed his arrival, the assembly was opened by Cyril, 
who refused to listen to the proposal of the emperor's agent, 
that the bishops of the province of Antioch should be allowed 
four days' grace. After having, in the first session, proved 
from tradition that Mary is truly 6eor6tco<;, and that there are 
really two natures in Christ, and after the deposition of Nestorius 
had been pronounced, John at last arrived at Ephesus, and 
proceeded to hold with his bishops, who numbered forty-three, 
a Council of his own, in which Cyril and Memnon of Ephesus 
were deposed. The Fathers of the greater Council retorted 
by a sentence of excommunication. The emperor, Theodosius 
II, began by approving the decrees of both Councils ; he then 
suggested that both parties should send delegates to Chalcedon 
to treat for peace. On his offer being refused he assumed a 
stronger attitude : Nestorius was abandoned to his fate, the 
choice of his successor being left to his enemies, the Council 
was dissolved, and the decree against Cyril and Memnon was 
declared void. Dissensions continued to be rife among the 
episcopate ; dissatisfied with Nestorius's treatment, the 
Antiochenes accused Cyril of Arianism and Apollinarism, and 
on arriving at their home they again excommunicated him 
with all his supporters. Peace was only established when, 
in 433, Cyril consented to accept the Creed which John had 
presented at the Council of Ephesus, and which is therefore 
called Symbolum Ephesinum, whilst John on his side undertook 
to ratify the sentence against Nestorius. But even the 
acceptance of this Creed did not bring universal contentment, 
for as in it the human nature of the Redeemer is termed the 
temple of the Logos, Cyril was accused of having subscribed to 
an expression savouring of Nestorianism. On the other hand, 
many of the friends of John refused to acquiesce in the excom- 
munication of Nestorius. Most of them submitted only when 
the emperor threatened to remove them from their preferments* 



Monophysitism 157 

In consequence of still further measures Nestorianism soon 
died out within the Roman Empire. As the study of the works 
of Nestorius was forbidden, the Nestorians turned to those of 
Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodorus of Tarsus. A campaign 
was accordingly started against these works too, especially by 
Rabulas, bishop of Edessa, who obtained the closing of the school 
of Edessa, the headquarters of Nestorianism. On the other 
hand, the error survived in Persia, whither many of its adherents 
were driven by the Roman persecution, and where they received 
much help from Barsumas, bishop of Nisibis (450-90). Under 
the metropolitan Babaeus of Seleucia-Ctesiphon (497-503), the Nes- 
torians formally seceded from the national Church, and erected 
themselves into a separate Church, at the head of which was a 
Catholicos or Patriarch. This Church grew in importance in the 
following centuries, and spread its boundaries over a considerable 
portion of Asia. The Christians of St. Thomas in the East Indies 
belonged to this sect. Since the fourteenth century it has, however, 
been steadily decaying. 



§55 
Monophysitism and the Fourth General Council, 451 x 

Whereas the Nestorians, by separating the natures, 
seemed to threaten danger to the oneness of the Redeemer, 
many of their adversaries, going to the other extreme, mingled 
these two natures, or held that the human nature had been 
transformed into the Divine. They admitted that two natures 
had gone to form Christ, but they considered that one only of 
these natures had persisted after the Incarnation. Hence to 
them the doctrine of the two natures — Dyophysitism — 
appeared in the light of a return to Nestorianism. The 
quarrel broke out on Eutyches, an archimandrite or abbot of 
Constantinople, raising a persecution against Eusebius, bishop 
of Dorylaeum in Phrygia, for his supposed heresy of Dyophy- 
sitism. The immediate result was, however, that Eutyches 
was deposed by a Council of Constantinople (avvo&os ivBrjfiovo-a) 
in 448, which met under the presidency of the patriarch 
Flavian. 

This was, however, only a prelude. Flavian proceeded to 
acquaint his brethren with his decision ; in particular he sent 
an account of it to Pope Leo I, who thereupon replied with his 

1 See Perry, The Second Synod of Ephesus, 1877. 



158 A Manual of Church History 

famous Epistula dogmatica ad Flavianum, which comprises an 
excellent summary of the Church's teaching on the two natures. 
On the other hand Eutyches, having complained that he had 
been unjustly treated, and having won over the court to his 
cause, was soon able to improve his position. The emperor 
summoned a Council to meet at Ephesus (449), giving it as a 
president the patriarch Dioscorus of Alexandria, who was him- 
self a Monophysite. It was easy to foresee the result: Eutyches, 
having professed his belief in the Councils of Nicaea and 
Ephesus, and anathematised all heresies such as those of 
Nestorius and Apollinaris, was declared orthodox. On the 
other hand, Flavian and Eusebius were deposed for having 
dared to venture beyond the doctrines defined by Nicaea and 
Ephesus. The same penalty was pronounced against other 
prelates who had opposed Eutyches, or who were suspected of 
Nestorianism, amongst others against Theodoret of Cyrus and 
Ibas of Edessa. The bishop of Constantinople was handled 
so roughly that he died three days later. The triumph did not 
last. The Robber-Synod, Latrocinium Ephesinum, avvoBo? 
XyarptKTjy as the Council came to be called, was rejected on 
all sides, and a new assembly was demanded. Marcian, the 
husband of Pulcheria, the sister of Theodosius II, who ascended 
the throne in the following year, determined to hearken to the 
appeal. 

The new Council, the Fourth General, was held in the autumn 
of 451 at Chalcedon. It was the largest of antiquity, its 
members numbering 630. The Council rejected the decisions 
of the Robber-Synod, deposed Dioscorus, and composed a 
Profession of Faith, in which, as a set-off against Nestorianism 
and Monophysitism, it asserted the one Lord in two natures, 
without confusion or conversion, without division or 
separation (ä<Tvy%vTcos, aTpeTrrw, ähtaipeTw^, d^copLarcos:) ', the 
distinction between the two natures being in no wise 
abolished by their union; on the contrary, the properties 
peculiar to each being retained, and both being united in a 
single person or hypostasis. 

Marcian also took the step of banishing Dioscorus and Eutyches, 
and issued severe enactments against their adherents. In spite of 
this, Monophysitism continued to thrive, and its partisans even 
contrived to take possession of the Eastern patriarchates. Jerusalem 




Monophysitism 159 

fell to the monk Theodosius (452-53) ; under the emperor Leo 
(457-74) Timothy Ailurus (457-60) was elected to the see of Alex- 
andria and Peter the Fuller to that of Antioch (c. 470). Though 
none of these succeeded in retaining their position, nevertheless 
their passing success had far-reaching results, especially in Egypt, 
where the patriarch Proterius, Dioscorus's successor, was murdered, 
and where all the sees fell into the hands of Monophysites. Timothy 
and Peter were, moreover, reinstated in their sees on the emperor's 
death. His successor, the usurper Basiliscus (476-77), to whom 
they owed their restoration, even pronounced an anathema on 
the Council of Chalcedon, in doing which he had the approval of 
some five hundred bishops. Nor did the emperor Zeno's success 
over his rival portend any good to the cause of Chalcedon. 

Peter Mongus, on being promoted to the patriarchate of 
Alexandria (481), published a Creed in conjunction with Acacius, 
bishop of Constantinople, in which not only Nestorius and 
Eutyches, but also, indirectly, the Council of Chalcedon were anathe- 
matised, and in which it was explained that the Creed should consist 
exclusively of the formula of Nicsea together with the Constantino- 
politan addition, of the twelve chapters ot Cyril, and of the decisions 
of Ephesus. This new Creed was published by Zeno (482) and 
made a law under the name of the Henoticon. It was intended to 
produce harmony ; as a matter of fact it accentuated the discord. 
Not only many of the Catholics, but also the stricter Monophysites 
rejected this half-measure. At Alexandria the latter party obtained 
the nickname of Acephali, because, being in schism with their own 
patriarch, they were without a head. Soon after it came to a break 
between East and West, Pope Felix II (III) excommunicating 
and deposing the patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria 
as promoters of the Henoticon (484). The schism lasted thirty- 
five years. The general Vitalian succeeded, indeed, in wringing 
from Anastasius, Zeno's successor, a promise to reinstate the 
adherents of Chalcedon and to summon a Council at Heraclea (515). 
The emperor found, however, means of preventing the negotiations 
with Rome from coming to any good issue. It was Justin I who 
restored the Eastern Church to communion with Rome (519). 
Pope Hormisdas dispatched his Libellus fidei, in which it is argued 
from the words of our Lord, 'Thou art Peter,' &c. (Matt. xvi. 18), 
that in the Apostolic See the Faith will always be kept undefiled, 
and in which Nestorius, Eutyches, and all their partisans were 
put under the ban. To this formula (Formula Hormisdae) the 
Eastern bishops were forced to subscribe. 

At this time so-called Theopaschitism was also causing a 
difficulty. Peter the Fuller had added to the Trisagion the words 
6 a-Tavpoidzh Si' 17/xas (who was crucified for us), and the emperor 
Anastasius had ordered them to be embodied in the Liturgy. 
On the other hand, certain Catholic Scythian monks who 
were then in Constantinople advocated the adoption of the 



l6o A Manual of Church History 

cognate statement, ' One of the Trinity was crucified.' The 
formula was not assailable, being based on the communicatio 
idiomatum. However, because it had originated among the 
Monophysites, and because of the novelty of the expression, it 
caused some commotion. The Roman legates at Constanti- 
nople condemned it as dangerous, and Pope Hormisdas, to whom 
the monks had recourse, put them off with evasive answers. In 
course of time 'the formula proved itself more acceptable, and 
as it seemed likely to facilitate a union with the Severians, with 
a view to which a conference had been held in Constantinople 
in 533, it received the approbation of Justinian I, and, soon after, 
that of Pope John II. 

Monophysitism now rallied. Justinian's wife, Theodora, favoured 
it, and at her instigation Anthimus, a secret Monophysite, was 
promoted to be bishop of the capital (535) . As the latter was soon 
deposed, mainly owing to the action of Pope Agapetus (536), the 
empress sought to transplant the heresy to Roman soil, in the hope 
of making it supreme in the East with the help of Rome. Her plans 
were, however, foiled. The ambitious deacon Vigilius was willing 
enough to accept the papacy, but, having once received it, he was 
not to be induced to make any pronouncement in favour of the 
heresy. 

In spite of all the efforts which were afterwards made to 
convert the Monophysites, it was not found possible to overcome 
the error completely. It continued to hold its own in Armenia, in 
Syria, and the neighbouring countries, Egypt and Abyssinia. In 
Egypt its followers called themselves Copts, or ' Old Egyptians,' 
whereas they named the orthodox, Melchites or Imperialists. 
In Syria and Mesopotamia they were called Jacobites, after 
Jacobus Baradai (541-78), who, after he had been established as 
metropolitan of the sect, laboured with great success to spread and 
strengthen his party in all these regions, and who fixed on Antioch 
as its headquarters. At the present day the Syrian and Armenian 
Monophysites have patriarchs at the Zapharan monastery near 
Bagdad, and at Etchmiadzin in the Russian Caucasus. 

Since the sixth century the Monophysites have split into several 
factions, especially in Egypt. The most important are those of the 
Severians and the Julianists. They owe their origin to two bishops, 
Severus of Antioch and Julian of Halicarnassus, who both lived at 
Alexandria under Justin I. The former held Christ's body to be 
corruptible, the latter believed it to be incorruptible ; the former 
were accordingly called Phthartolatrse, the latter Aphthartodocetae. 
As, at the death of the Monophysite patriarch Timothy of Alexandria 
( c - 537) > they had elected Theodosius and Gajanas, they were also 
sometimes called Theodosians and Gajanites. 

Both these sects separated into yet smaller parties. The 
Aphthartodocetae divided over the question whether Christ's body 
was created, some, the Ctistolatrae (xTto-ToAarpat), affirming, and 






The Three Chapters 161 

others, the Actistetae {aKTicrr^rai ) , denying. Some of the Phthar- 
tolatrae, the Agnoetae (ayvor^rai) or Themistians, as they were 
called, after the deacon Themistius who first embraced this view, 
were inclined to admit that in some things Christ was ignorant. 
Among yet other factions must be numbered the Tritheites or 
followers of the philosopher John Ascusnages in Constantinople, 
who ascribed to each person of the Trinity a distinct nature ; the 
best known among them were John Philoponus and Stephen Gobarus. 
Contrariwise the Tetradites, or Quaternitarians, ascribed an exist- 
ence of its own to the godhead dwelling in each of the persons ; 
they were termed Damianites, from their leader Damian, a patriarch 
of Alexandria. Lastly, the Niobites, founded by Stephen Niobes in 
Alexandria, discarded the prevailing Monophysitism, contending 
that by its confession of one only nature in Christ it made impossible 
in Him the distinction between the human and the Divine. They 
were excluded from the communion of the other Monophysites, and 
later on mostly returned to the Catholic Church. 



§ 56 
The Three Chapters and the Fifth General Council, 553 1 

To divert the attention of Origen's persecutors, the 
Origenist bishop Theodore Ascidas of Caesarea in Cappadocia 
proposed a new object to Justinian's zeal. He suggested that 
the Monophysites would willingly return to the fold were only 
the following condemned as savouring of Nest onanism, viz. : 

(i) Theodore of Mopsuestia and his works. 

(2) The writings of Theodoret of Cyrus against Cyril and the 
Council of Ephesus. 

(3) The epistle of Ibas of Edessa to the Persian Maris. 
This proposal suited the inclinations of an emperor who 

dearly loved to play the amateur theologian, and in 544 an 
edict was published, in which, whilst any attack on the Council 
of Chalcedon was disclaimed, it was enacted that the Three 
Chapters, as the above writings came to be called, and their 
writers, should be considered anathema. 

This manner of proceeding was not arbitrary, for the writ- 
ings in question were really infected with Nestorianism, and 

1 J. Punkes, P. Vigilius u. d. Dreikapitelstreit, 1865 ; Leveque, £.tude 
sur le pape Vigile, 1887 ; A. Knecht, Religionspolitik Justinians I, 1896 ; 
W. H. Hutton, The Church of the Sixth Century, 1897 ; Ch. Diehl, Justinien et la 
civilisation byzantine au VI e stiele, 1901. 

LVOL. I M 



1 62 A Manual of Church History 

Theodore was the spiritual father of Nestorius. Moreover, 
at the conference held at Constantinople in 533, the Severians 
had complained of the action of the Council of Chalcedon 
in rehabilitating Theodoret and Ibas. But this very com- 
plaint led the Catholics to see in the condemnation of the 
Three Chapters a covert attack on Chalcedon. Yet more, it 
also appeared beyond the province of a human agency to pro- 
nounce a personal condemnation on a man who had died at 
peace with the Church and who had already been judged by 
God. It was also commonly believed, though unfoundedly, 
in the West that the epistle of Ibas had been formally 
approved by Chalcedon. Hence the edict was received with 
protests. Though the attempt to impose it could not but 
lead to strife, the emperor determined to carry out his design. 
The Eastern bishops, headed by the patriarch Mennas of Con- 
stantinople, bowed to his will with as good grace as possible. 
It was now the turn of the Westerns to follow suit. Pope 
Vigilius had already opened the way, for, summoned to Con- 
stantinople, he, in the spring of 548, fourteen and a half months 
after his arrival, pronounced, in his Judicature,, 1 an anathema 
on the Three Chapters. 

This step caused great excitement m the West ; the Africans 
went so far as to excommunicate the Pope until he should 
have done due penance (550). To allay the trouble, it was 
settled that a General Council should be held, and that until 
then nothing should be done in the matter. One party, 
however, failed to keep to this engagement. At the instigation 
of Theodore Ascidas, Justinian published in 551 a new edict 
against the Three Chapters, 2 and thereby the negotiations 
already in progress were broken off. To secure his safety 
the Pope had to take refuge in the Church of St. Peter at 
Constantinople, from which he afterwards fled to that of St. 
Euphemia at Chalcedon. In the meantime he pronounced the 
Church's censures against Theodore Ascidas, Mennas, and the 
other bishops. On the Council assembling, there again seemed 
some chance of peace, but as it was not found possible to come 
to any settlement, the deliberations were conducted without 
the Pope. This Council was held at Constantinople in 553, and, 

1 See the fragments in Harduin, III, 45-57 ; cp. Hefele, II, 820 ff. 

2 Harduin, III, 287-322. 



Monothelism 163 

as was to be expected, it condemned the Chapters and all their 
defenders, lay and clerical, threatening the latter with excom- 
munication and deposition. 

In the meantime Vigilius was drawing up a memorandum, 
the Constitutum, 1 in which the opposite doctrine was laid down. 
The grounds which he there gave for his opinions are the same 
on which the Westerns had relied from the beginning. But 
Justinian was not the man to brook such contradiction, and 
though he hesitated to break with the Apostolic See, he prevailed 
on the Council to have the Pope's name erased from all the 
diptychs, alleging, contrary to all reason, that the Pope shared 
the impious opinions of Nestorius and Theodore of Mopsuestia. 
The Pope, with his companions, was compelled to retire 
into exile. It was only at the request of the Roman clergy, 
and on his consenting to ratify the decision of the Council, 2 
that he was allowed to return. He died, however, on the way 
back to Rome. 

In this wise the Roman Church had made peace with the 
emperor. The following Popes also gave their sanction to the 
Council of Constantinople, the Fifth General. The other Latin 
Churches were, however, in no great hurry to follow suit. Most of 
the African bishops waited several years, whilst the provinces of 
Milan and Aquileia delayed their submission even longer. They 
found herein a pretext for separating from the Roman Church, and 
the Lombard invasion (568), by rendering impossible any interference 
of the emperor, facilitated their revolt. The schism only died out 
completely under Sergius I, towards the end of the seventh century, 
but it had already long been confined within narrow limits, for the 
Milanese had begun to return to the Church in 570, whilst that 
portion of Aquileia which was under Byzantine rule was reunited 
in 607. 



§ 57 

Monothelism and the Sixth General Council, 680-81 3 

Scarcely had the last been heard of the Three Chapters, 
when a new question presented itself : Had our Saviour 
a twofold energy (two principles of action) and a twofold 

1 Harduin, III, 10-47 ; Corpus script, eccl. lat. Vindob. vol. 35, 230-329. 

2 Harduin, III, 214 ff. 

3 Owsepian, Zur Entstehungsgesch. des Monotheletismus, 1898; Ud-Dwayhi 
L'Ihdini, Hist, des Maronites, publiie par Al-Chartouni, 1890. 

M 2 



164 A Manual of Church History 

will ? The Church's doctrine of the twofold nature in Christ 
required an affirmative answer to the question, for each of 
these natures is a principle of activity. Sergius, patriarch 
of Constantinople (610-38), came, however, to the conclusion 
that, owing to the hypostatic union, there could be in Christ 
but one only will and one only energy, at once Divine and 
human. Not improbably he was influenced by a wish 
to discover an irenicon, at any rate this was the aim of the 
emperor Heraclius (610-41), who soon took the side of his 
patriarch. Amidst the dangers of the Roman Empire, which 
was threatened alternately by the Persians and the Arabs, 
a reconciliation of the Monophysites was much to be desired, 
whilst there was some hope that the new doctrine would 
facilitate this issue. In effect Cyrus, pope of Alexandria, 
succeeded in 633 by this means in making peace with the 
party of the Theodosians. 

But at the same time this doctrine met with determined 
resistance. The Palestinian monk Sophronius condemned it 
as a resuscitation of Monophysitism, and on becoming bishop 
of Jerusalem, in 634, in his first circular letter he gave his 
unqualified adhesion to the doctrine that there are in Christ 
two w.lls and two energies. This reply induced Sergius to 
abandon the expression pia ivepyeia ; so far as the other matter 
was concerned he kept to his own opinion, in which manner 
of acting he was confirmed by the action of Pope Honorius, 
who, though not himself a Monothelite, gave his approval to 
the written justification sent to him by Sergius. In conse- 
quence of this further steps were soon taken at Constanti- 
nople. Heraclius issued his Ecthesis, a Monothelite profession 
of Faith (638). This was revoked by his grandson Constans 
II (641-68), on account of the ill-will which it caused; yet 
this same emperor issued the Typus (648), a similar edict, 
which did not serve the cause of peace any better than the 
previous. It omitted all reference to either Dyothelism or 
Monothelism, and merely ordained that the old Creeds 
should be retained. The emperor soon had occasion to show 
that his threats of punishment against contraveners of the 
edict were far from idle : Pope Martin I, having at a great 
Council held at the Lateran in 649 pronounced in favour of the 
duae naturales voluntates et operationcs, and sent a decree of 



Pope Honorius 165 

excommunication after the originator of the new doctrine, 
was maltreated and banished; a like penalty was incurred by 
other Dyothelites ; the abbot Maximus (f 662) and his disciples 
had their tongues torn out and their right hands amputated 
for a similar reason. 

It was left to the emperor Constantine Pogonatus (668-85) 
to inaugurate a new policy. Desirous of putting a term to 
the conflict, after having concluded a treaty of peace with the 
Persians (678), he determined to convoke another General 
Council. Pope Agatho (678-81), delighted with the suggestion, 
immediately called together a great council in Rome (680) to 
ascertain the feelings of the West. Deputies were sent by this 
synod to the East, and the Council, which was held at Constan- 
tinople (680-81), and which is reckoned as the Sixth General, 
succeeded in restoring peace to the Church. Those who 
persisted in defending Monothelism — Macarius, patriarch of 
Antioch, his disciple the abbot Stephen, and others — were 
penalised, being deposed and banished, whilst the originators 
of the new doctrine were anathematised and their writings 
condemned to be burnt, among them being Honorius, because 
in his epistle to Sergius he had acquiesced in and approved the 
latter's impieties. The Council also drew up a new profession 
of Faith, in which the Creed of Chalcedon was supplemented 
by the following addition : We confess, according to the 
teaching of the holy Fathers, two natural wills and two 
natural energies, without division or change, without separa- 
tion or confusion, two wills, not meaning thereby that they are 
opposed, but that the human follows the Divine, to which it 
is subordinate. The emperor Philippicus Bardanes (711-13) 
again brought the error to the fore, and the Sixth General 
Council was rejected by a new council held in 712. His 
attempt to reintroduce the heresy came to an end with his 
fall. After this Monothelism survived only among the 
Maronites of the Lebanon, until they too, beginning in the 
twelfth century at the time of the crusades, were gradually 
united to the Western Church. The opinion which has found 
favour among them of recent years, that, as a whole, they 
never professed Monothelism, is not historically defensible. 

The following considerations may serve to show that Honorius 
was not at heart a Monothelite : (1) Though in his arguments he 




1 66 A Manual of Church History 

constantly, like Sergius, starts with the hypostatic union as his 
premise, yet he never goes as far as the latter, never inferring from 
this premise the oneness of will or of energy. (2) The expression 
una voluntas, which he once uses with approval, is, as the context 
shows, not to be taken physically, but only morally — it does not 
mean that Christ has only one will-faculty, but that the will of His 
untainted human nature agrees (and in this sense is one) with His 
Divine will : it should therefore be taken as a testimony to 
Honorius's belief in a twofold will. Neither was he at all inclined 
to accept the doctrine of a single energy, as we may see from the 
fragments which remain of his second epistle to Sergius. After 
having therein again condemned as novel, and likely to cause dissent, 
the doctrines of a single or of a double will, he makes his own the 
words of the Epistula dogmatica of Leo I, and declares that in 
Christ's person the two natures work without division and without 
confusion, each in its proper sphere. Hence the judgment pro- 
nounced by the Council of Constantinople was too severe. A more 
measured condemnation was that uttered by Leo II, Agatho's 
successor. In his letter to Constantine Pogonatus he remarks : 
Qui (Honorius) hanc apostolicam ecclesiam non apostolicae traditionis 
doctrina lustravit, sed prof ana proditione immaculatam fidem subver- 
tere conatus est (=permisit, the Greek word being Trap^pw^) » 
in his epistle to the Spanish bishops he says likewise : Qui flammam 
haeretici dogmatis non, ut decuit apostolicam auctoritatem, incipienlem 
extinxit, sed neglegendo confovit (Harduin, III, 1475, 1730). In a 
profession of Faith which the Popes of the Middle Ages were once 
accustomed to recite on assuming office, Honorius is put at the tail 
of a list, after the Auctores novi haeretici dogmatis, Sergium, Pyrrhum, 
Paulum, Petrum Constantinopolitanos, and is described as one : 
Qui pravis eorum adsertionibus /omentum impendit. Nevertheless, 
so strongly was his negligence reprobated at Rome that in the same 
Creed he is condemned with the heretics. Cp. Liber diurnus Rom. 
Pont. ed. Sickel, 1889, pp. 100-102. The case of Honorius gave 
rise to many controversies. Some, like Baronius (Ann. 680, 19-34 ; 
682, 3-9 ; 683, 2-22), have even expressed their disbelief in any 
condemnation of him by the Council of Constantinople, and have 
argued that the acts must have been falsified (the name of Honorius 
being substituted for that of Theodore, patriarch of Constantinople). 
Cp. Hefele, III, 145 ff., 289 ff. 



§ 58 

The Anthropological Controversy 1 

Whilst the East especially was engaged in the more 
speculative Christological discussion, the West was being torn 

1 Noris, Historia Pelagiana, 1673, 



Pelagianism 167 

by the anthropological and soteriological controversies. 
The dispute began at the commencement of the fifth century, 
and falls into two periods, in the earlier of which the false 
opinions on their very first appearance were condemned, and 
the idea of grace insisted on, whilst in the second the doctrine 
of grace was maintained inviolate against certain attempts 
to enfeeble it, though it was found advisable also to modify 
somewhat the rigour of the Augustinian teaching. 

I. Pelagianism 1 

The two monks Pelagius and Celestius, probably out of a 
mistaken moral zeal, saw fit to deny original sin and to contend 
that, even after the Fall, man retained the fullest power of 
doing right. On the doctrine migrating from Rome to Car- 
thage, in 410, it began to meet with opposition. Celestius, 
who remained there awaiting ordination, whilst Pelagius 
continued his journey to Palestine, was accused of error by 
Paulinus, a deacon of Milan, and as he refused to recant, he 
was excommunicated by the Carthaginian Council of 411 (or 
412). The errors charged against Celestius were comprised 
in seven articles, of which the first and fifth are the most 
important, the rest being merely explanatory. 

(1) Adam was created mortal, and would have died even had he 
never sinned. 

(2) Adam's sin injured himself alone, and not the human race. 

(3) Infants at their birth are in the condition of Adam before 
his sin. 

(4) Adam's sin is no more the cause of man's mortality than 
Christ's resurrection is that of his resurrection. (To this Marius 
Mercator, in his first Commonitorium or Liber Subnot. [c. 5], adds 
that children attain to everlasting life whether they have been 
baptised or not.) 

(5) It is possible for man to be sinless, and to observe God's 
commandments with ease. 

(6) Even before the coming of Christ there had been men 
without sin. 

1 Wiggers, Versuch einer pragmat. Dar st. d. Augustinismus u. Pelagia- 
nismuSy 1821 ; Wörter, Der Pelagianismus nach s. Ursprünge u. s. Lehre, 
1866 ; Klasen, Die innere Entwicklung des Pelagianismus, 1882 ; A. Bruckner, 
Julian v. E. 1897 (T. u. U. XV, 3). The documents which relate to the 
controversy will be found in the appendix to St. Augustine's works edited by 
the congregation of St. Maur ; they are also to hand in an abbreviated form 
in A. Bruckner's Quellen zur Gesch. des pelag. Streites, 1906, 




1 68 A Manual of Church History 

(7) The Law as well as the Gospel leads to the Kingdom of 
Heaven. 

Soon after this condemnation, refutations began to make 
their appearance. St. Augustine, the great bishop of Hippo 
Regius, composed against it the work, De peccatorum mentis 
et remissione et de baptismo parvulorum (412), in which he 
mainly deals with the supposition that Adam's sin corrupts his 
posterity only by its bad example {imitattone) , and not because 
it is truly transmitted to his children {propagatione). Though 
man with the help of God's grace and of his own free-will 
might refrain from sin, yet in actual deed and according to 
Scripture all men, with the exception of our Saviour, are 
sinners, none succeeding in performing all the commandments. 
In De spiritu et littera, another work of the same year, the 
second idea is worked out, and grace is shown to consist not in 
the Law, as the Pelagians had contended, but in the sanctifi- 
cation of our will. In yet another work, De natura et gratia 
(415), which is directed against Pelagius's work De natura, it 
is argued that man needs grace to accomplish his justification, 
having lost, through the sin of his first father, his earlier power 
and innocence, and that grace depends not on our merit but on 
God's good pleasure {non mentis, sed gratis) . 

In Africa, Pelagius had been unfortunate enough to stumble 
on an adversary whose authority was as great as his ability to 
detect heresy ; elsewhere, partly by dint of dissimulation, he 
succeeded in concealing the weak side of his doctrine, and even 
in gaining his case against his accusers. A council held at 
Jerusalem in 415 under the bishop John, and at which the 
Spaniard Orosius was present to prosecute Pelagius, withheld its 
decision; whilst the Council of Diospolis (Lydda), which was 
assembled in the same year in consequence of a complaint 
of the Gallic bishops Heros and Lazarus, actually declared his 
teaching to be free from error. Deceived by the terms of the 
creeds and explanations which were circulated by the heretics, 
Pope Zosimus (417-18) announced that both Celestius and 
Pelagius were innocent, seeing that they admitted the need of 
grace. Simultaneously, Heros and Lazarus were deposed for 
having lodged a false accusation, whilst the Africans were 
publicly blamed for having, on receiving news of the happen- 
ings at Diospolis, assembled Councils at Carthage and Mileve 



Semi-Pelagians 169 

(416), and there condemned the two heretics and all who 
followed them, though this had been done with the sanction of 
Pope Innocent. Despite Rome's intervention, the Africans 
again returned to the charge at the plenary council of 
Carthage (418). In the same year Augustine, in his work 
De gratia Christi, showed how indefinite and imperfect was the 
Pelagian idea of grace, for when admitting that grace was 
required for every action, Pelagius by the term ' grace ' meant 
either the Law, or the teaching or the example of Christ ; in 
other words, to him grace was an illumination of the mind 
showing the commandment [gratia externa), not an inpouring 
of chanty, nor a moving of the will to fulfil the commandment 
{gratia interna) . By these proceedings Zosimus was induced to 
adopt stronger measures. In his Epistula tractoria he called on 
all bishops to submit to the ruling of the Africans. This 
epistle was accepted almost everywhere, the eighteen bishops 
who refused to sign it being sent into banishment by order of 
the emperor. With this the contest seemed closed, but the 
exiles having directed their steps to the East, the question 
again came up for discussion at the Council of Ephesus (431). 
Written works dealing with the matter also continued to 
circulate. Thus Julian, bishop of Eclanum in Apulia, one of 
the opponents of the Epistula tractoria, accused Augustine of 
dishonouring marriage and dissolving all morals by his teaching 
on original sin. This led Augustine to devote his attention 
exclusively to the latter matter. In 419 he published his De 
nuptiis et concupiscentia, and he continued occupied with the 
subject until the end of his life. His last and greatest work 
against Julian was never finished, for which reason it is styled 
the Opus imperfectum. 



II. Semi-Pelagianism * 

In the course of his dispute with the Pelagians, St. 
Augustine's doctrine underwent some changes. Of these, 

1 Wiggers, Vers, einer pragmat. Darst. des Semipel. in s. Kampfe gegen 
den Augustinismus, 1833 ; Baltzer, Augustins Lehre über Prädestination u. 
Reprobation, 1871 (Oest. Vierteljahrsschrift f. k. Th. 1870) ; Rottmanner, 
Der Augustinismus, 1892; A. Hoch, Lehre des Joh. Cassianus von Natur w, 
Gnade, 1895 \ A. Koch, Der hl. Faustus, 1895 ; Wörter, Beiträge zur Dogmen- 
gesch. des Semipel, 1898-99 ; H, v, Schubert, Der sog. Prädestinaius, 1903, 



170 A Manual of Church History 

the most remarkable concerns his teaching on predestination, 
i.e. on the extent of God's will to save men, and of the power of 
grace. To begin with, the great doctor had ascribed to God 
the will to save all men, and had explained the fact that some 
believed whilst others disbelieved to man's will, or rather 
to his refusing to make use of his will. But in the course of 
time, becoming more and more convinced of the omnipotence 
of the Divine will, he came to be persuaded that God's will to 
save is a particular one. He accordingly refers back to the 
Divine will the difference between the faithful and unbelievers, 
between the good and the wicked, between the saints and 
the damned. According to his matured doctrine, the whole 
human race has become, through sin, a massa perditionis. 
God had, however, from all eternity willed to be merciful to a 
portion of the race and had elected it for salvation, with 
regard to the other portion He leaves it to its own ruin ; as this 
ruin was merited, and as no man has any claim to grace, God's 
manner of proceeding is not open to any charge of injustice. 
The elect, aided by the irresistible power of grace, attain 
unfailingly to blessedness, whilst the reprobate, i.e. those who 
are not numbered among the elect, are hopelessly condemned 
to loss. That God has no general will to save men is evident, 
for were this the case, then, owing to His omnipotence, the salva- 
tion of all men would be assured. Nor can this be shown from 
the words of the Apostle Paul (1 Tim. ii. 4), speaking of God, 
1 Who will have all men to be saved/ for they only imply 
that all who are saved are saved only through God's will ; or 
else the omnes homines of the text must be taken as omnes 
praedestinati, the Apostle using the general term to indicate 
that the predestinate belong to all classes ; or, lastly, they may 
mean : may God make us to desire the blessedness of all 
men. 1 

This theory encountered contradiction not only among 
the Pelagians, but among their very enemies, owing to the 
danger it seemed to threaten to the freedom of the will. The 
first to revolt was the monastery of Adrumetum in Africa, where 
some of the monks, in order to safeguard the freedom of the 
will, saw fit to fall back on the Pelagian dictum : gratiam 

1 The threefold interpretation will be found in De corr. et gratia, c. 14, 15, 
n. 44, 47 ; epist. 217, c. 6, n. 19, 



Semi-Pelagians 171 

secundum merita dart. Others, denying all freedom, maintained 
that God's judgment on men was not according to their 
works. One even went so far as to argue that it was useless 
to preach repentance to sinners : seeing that it is impossible to 
do good without God's grace, all that we can do is to pray for 
sinners that they may receive grace. To enlighten these monks 
Augustine penned his De gratia et libero arbitrio and his De 
correptione et gratia (426-27). The result of these last works 
was a new controversy in another locality. 

The extremity to which St. Augustine here proceeded with 
his doctrine of predestination moved the monks at Marseilles 
and the neighbourhood, headed by John Cassian, to pronounce 
against him. The theory seemed to them contrary to the 
Gospel, and its fatalism dangerous to good morals. Cassian l 
went so far as to term it an ingens sacrilegium. For their part 
they explained that predestination depends not merely on God's 
pleasure, but on His prescience, God electing those whom He 
foresees will render themselves worthy of election ; hence God's 
choice is conditional, not absolute, and the help He affords 
is general. Again they held, and a like view was favoured by a 
certain Vitalis of Carthage, 2 that faith and the will to be good 
arise in man himself, though they cannot be brought to perfec- 
tion save by God's grace. Lastly, man's will precedes not only 
grace in general, but also the special gift of perseverance, which 
he can accept or refuse, seeing that Augustine was wrong in 
teaching that it is incapable of being lost. 3 Against these 
attacks Augustine defended himself in his De praedestinatione 
sanctorum and his De dono perseverantiae. After his death (430) 
Prosper of Aquitaine and Hilary, who had been instrumental 
in bringing to his knowledge the occurrences in southern Gaul, 
continued the conflict with the semi-Pelagians, as their 
adversaries came to be styled, and it was at their request that 
Pope Celestine spoke the praises of the bishop of Hippo (431). 
Semi-Pelagianism nevertheless struggled on long after in Gaul ; 
even the Council of Aries (473 or 475) favoured it. On the 
other hand, the Councils of Valence and Orange (529) pro- 
nounced for the opposite side, and the latter (Arausicana II), 

1 Coll. XIII, 7. 

2 August. Ep. 217. 

8 Prosp. et Hilar. Epp, ad Aug. inter Aug. epp. 225-226. 



172 A Manual of Church History 

headed by Caesarius, bishop of Aries, and confirmed by Pope 
Boniface II, succeeded in reaffirming the Augustinian doctrine. 

One polemic against Augustine, which bears the title Praedes- 
tinatus, consists of a presentment of his predestinarian doctrine 
from the worst point of view, together with a refutation, and a 
history of heresies based on Augustine's work. The real leader of 
the semi-Pelagians was Faustus, bishop of Riez. He entered into 
conflict with the presbyter Lucidus, whose Augustinianism passed 
the boundaries of moderation. At the Council of Aries the latter 
was called upon to recant, whilst to the former was committed the 
charge of giving further expression to the feelings prevalent in Gaul. 
This he did in his work De gratia. It was against him also that the 
anger of Augustine's disciples vented itself. The Scythian monks 
of Constantinople, headed by John Maxen tius, laboured at Rome 
for his condemnation, and on Hormisdas refusing to satisfy com- 
pletely their desires, they turned to the bishops of Africa. In a 
synodal letter the latter denounced (523) the teaching of Faustus. 
Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspe, who probably drew up this letter, 
undertook a yet fuller work on the same subject: De veritate 
praedestinationis et gratiae Dei. Another of his works, the Contra 
Faustum, in seven books, has been lost. 

The defenders of the Augustinian doctrine did not, all of 
them, consider it necessary to retain it in all its original severity. 
To obviate scandal, Prosper had distinctly confined predestina- 
tion to election, and made reprobation to depend on God's 
foreknowledge, while the unknown author of the De vocatione 
omnium gentium even went so far as to teach that God really 
wills the salvation of all men. 



CHAPTER III 

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH 

§ 59 

Church Offices 1 

The spread of Christianity and the growth of the Churches 
during this period resulted in several changes in the 
ministry. In the first instance the oldest, or, to speak more 
correctly, the principal presbyters and deacons, obtained the 
titles, respectively, of Archpriest and Archdeacon ; the former 
performed the bishop's priestly functions in his absence, whilst 
the latter acted as the bishop's right-hand man in matters of 
administration and jurisdiction, and thus came to be vested with 
no small authority ; nor is it at all remarkable that, especially 
at Rome, the archdeacon was often appointed to succeed his 
bishop. 

New ecclesiastical functionaries were also called into 
being : for instance, the Hermeneutae or interpreters, charged 
with translating into the vernacular the lessons and homilies 
of the sacred offices ; the Cantors (yfrdXrai, yfraXraBol, cantores, 
confessor es), to whom fell the task of performing the choral 
portions of the service ; the Parabolani, who looked after the 
sick; the Copiatae (K07rcdracy fossores) , who had charge of the 
funerals ; the Mansionarii (or custodes), who were deputed to 
act as watchmen in the Churches ; the Syncelli, the companions 
and counsellors of the bishop, whose conduct they supervised ; 
the Administrators (oIkovoixol), in the West called vice- 
domini, concerning whom the Council of Chalcedon directs 
that one should be appointed in every diocese to attend to the 
possessions of the Church; the Defensores (etc&iKOL), who had 

1 Thomassin, Vet. et nov. eccl. discipl. P. I, 1. ii, c. 97-108. 



174 A Manual of Church History 

the conduct of cases at law; the Notaries (ogvypdfoi), who 
committed to writing the Church acts, and the Archivists 
(xapro(pv\afC€<;) , who saw to their preservation ; the Apocri- 
siarii, who acted as representatives of the patriarchs at the 
court of Constantinople, &c. 

Most of the above offices were peculiar to the East, and, in one 
part of the Eastern Church, at least the Cantors formed a special 
Order ; the other offices were filled by clerics of various degrees, 
or even by laymen. But with the rise of a new Order in the 
East several of the older ones disappeared, for it was about this 
time, or soon after, that the last is heard there of Exorcists and 
Porters. As to Acolyths, they never had any existence in the East. 

In the West the Orders differed. In the tract De septem ordini- 
bus ecclesiae, preserved under the name of Jerome, the lowest 
Order is that of the Fossors, whilst Exorcists and Acolyths are not 
mentioned {P.L. XXX, 148-62). 

With the rise of infant baptism the Order of deaconesses 
lapsed. In Gaul it was formally abolished by conciliar decrees 
(Orange, 441, c. 26 ; Epaon, 517, c. 21 ; Orleans, 533, c. 18) ; in 
other places it was destined to expire in the following period. 



§60 

Concerning the Education, Election, Maintenance, and Duties 

of the Clergy l 

I. Though the older method of training the clergy continued 
to be followed, yet we find it under new forms. Eusebius of 
Vercelli, and Augustine, may be said to have instituted semi- 
naries when they compelled the clergy of their respective 
dioceses to dwell in community at the episcopal residence, and 
entrusted the education of the younger members to those who 
were more advanced. Similar institutions were founded in 
Spain for the benefit of those who had been consecrated to the 
ecclesiastical state in their childhood. In Italy the country 
clergy received into their homes young clerics, in order to 
train them to act as their successors, and this practice soon 
spread. The Council of Vaison (529, c. 1) directed its adoption 

1 Thomassin, Vet. et nov. eccl. discipl. P. 1, 1. iii, c. 2-5 ; Phillips, KR. VII, i, 
88, 99 ; Funk, A. u. U. I, 121-55 J ģ. d. chr. A. I, 304-307; Th. Qu. 1900, 
pp. 157-60. 



The Clergy 175 

in the province of Aries. Lastly, many monasteries undertook 
to train the clergy ; many indeed were the bishops who had 
been pupils of the monks, or had, at least, stayed with them. 

II. Bishops continued to be appointed as formerly. The 
inclination shown here and there by certain bishops to nomi- 
nate their successors was condemned by several Councils, 
which insisted that the custom of consulting the wishes of the 
Church and of the bishops of the province should be main- 
tained. In the East, however, it was not long before the rights 
of the people were curtailed. Justinian I allowed a voice 
only to the clergy and notables of the diocese, and even these 
had only the right of presenting three names, from which the 
metropolitan was to choose the most worthy. At a still later 
date the clergy of the widowed Church lost even this semblance 
of power, and the right of election was vested in the bishops 
of the province. In the West, in the Frankish kingdom, the 
custom soon prevailed of seeking the royal approval ; this is 
vouched for by the Council of Orleans (549, c. 10). The 
Ostrogoths and Byzantines, following the example of Theodoric 
the Great, who, on the death of John I (526), had taken it on 
himself to nominate Felix III as successor, claimed the right of 
confirming the election of the bishops of Rome. Nevertheless, 
in order not to keep the See vacant unduly long, this con- 
firmation, from the time of Constantine Pogonatus and 
Benedict II, was no longer sought from the emperor, but from 
the imperial exarch at Ravenna. 

III. The poorer clergy mostly continued to earn their living 
by manual labour. In the Statuta ecclesiae antiqua, a collection 
of canons which purports to have been drawn up by the Fourth 
Council of Carthage (398), but which was really composed in 
the fifth century in Gaul or Spain, 1 home-work or agriculture 
is actually made obligatory on the clergy (c. 51-53). On the 
other hand, commercial undertakings which Constantine had 
promoted by abolishing the duties to be paid, were forbidden 
the clergy by Valentinian III, under pain of the loss of clerical 
privileges. In spite of this, the wealth of the Church grew 
steadily, especially on account of the right to receive legacies 
which had been granted her by Constantine. According to 

1 Malnory, 5. Cesaire, 1894, PP- 5° - 62 ; Congris scient. internal, des 
catholiques, 1894, II (1895), 220-31 ; Th. Qu. 1896, p. 693. 



176 A Manual of Church History 

Roman practice, the revenues were divided into four portions, 
of which one went to the bishop, another to the rest of the 
clergy, whilst the other two were devoted to the maintenance 
of ecclesiastical buildings and the relief of the poor. In Spain 
three portions only were made, there being no special pro- 
vision for the poor, and an identical custom probably pre- 
vailed in Gaul. It was not long before the country churches 
obtained possessions of their own, of which the revenues be- 
longed to them, though the bishop was considered as the real 
proprietor, and possibly laid claim to a certain percentage of the 
income. At any rate, the country churches were bound to remit 
to the bishop one-third of the oblations made by the Faithful. 

IV. It now came to be required that the clerical candidate 
should be a freeman. For a slave to be ordained, not only 
was the consent of his master required, but he had first to be 
set at liberty ; this was deemed necessary to prevent the 
Church's ministers from being placed in a false position. The 
Apostle's injunction not to lay hands on a neophyte was 
rendered more comprehensive by the Council of Sardica (c. 10) , 
which directed that no layman should be promoted to the 
episcopate before having been tried in the lower Orders. The 
vocation to the ecclesiastical state also came to be considered 
as something perpetual, and the return of a cleric to the lay 
state or the acceptance of public office was forbidden under 
pain of deposition, or even of excommunication. Bishops, 
priests, and deacons were also compelled to remain in the 
Church for which they had been ordained, and their transla- 
tion to other Churches was forbidden by the Councils of Aries 
(314, c. 14), Nicaea (c. 15), Chalcedon (c. 5), and others. Such 
a removal from one diocese to another was considered justifiable 
only when demanded by the Church's well-being. 

V. It was during this period that East and West began to 
disagree respecting marriage contracted by clerics. In the 
West, following the lead of the Council of Elvira, which had 
forbidden the higher clergy to contract marriage, Pope Leo I 
extended the prohibition even to subdeacons. As was to be 
expected, this reform was not carried immediately into practice; 
even in Spain, where it had originated, many of the clergy, 
according to the statement of Pope Siricius, were still leading 
married lives at the ena of the fourth century. St. Ambrose 



The Clergy 177 

allows us to conjecture that this was the case generally in rural 
districts and in the smaller towns. But seeing the marked 
preference of Holy Writ for virginity, and that all the best 
minds were in favour of the reform, clerical celibacy could not 
fail ultimately to become the rule. 

The Greek Church contrariwise retained the older custom, 
according to which higher clerics, though prohibited from 
contracting marriage after ordination, were allowed to con- 
tinue their relations with the wife they had married previously. 
It is true that an attempt was made at the Council of Nicaea 
to introduce into the East the law of celibacy, but it was 
frustrated owing to the opposition of the Egyptian bishop 
Paphnutius. It was, moreover, the custom with many of 
the Eastern clergy to remain voluntarily celibate ; thus the 
bishops were mostly unmarried, and Justinian I and the 
Synod in Trullo (692, c. 48), which is sometimes styled HevOe/crr), 
or Qtiinisexta, because its canons were passed as a comple- 
ment to the two preceding General Councils, even went so far 
as to make continence obligatory on bishops. Only among the 
Nestorians did a laxer discipline come to prevail ; conciliar 
decrees were issued permitting priests (486) and bishops (497) 
to marry ; at a later date, however, celibacy was again enjoined 
on the bishops (544). l 

VI. Though the Nicene Council refused to prohibit priestly 
marriage, yet it issued a decree to govern the conduct of the 
unmarried clergy. To obviate the possibility of a fall, or the 
suspicion of the Faithful, it forbade (c. 3) any of the clergy 
to retain at home a woman {aweiaaicTos, mutier introducta, 
extranea), save mother, sister or aunt, or other person above 
suspicion. This canon was repeatedly re-enacted by later 
Councils (cp. § 26). 

§61 

The Legal Situation of the Clergy, the Clerical Privilege 3 

That they might experience no hindrance in the perform- 
ance of their duties, Constantine had dispensed the clergy 

1 Assemani, Bibl. orient. Ill, i, 429; III, ii, 872. Synodicon Orientale, ed, 
I. B. Chabot, 1902 (Notices et extr. de la Bibl. nat. t. 37). 

3 Riffel, Verhältnis zw. Kirche u. Staat, 1836, pp. 153 ff., 180 ff. ; Löning, 
Gesch. d. d. KR. I ; Nissl, Gerichtsstand des Klerus im Frankenreich, 1886. 
vol. 1. n 



178 A Manual of Church History 

from the ordinary municipal offices, 1 whilst Constantius had 
freed them and their dependants from all save the common 
taxes. 2 As it was seen that this favour would induce some 
to seek ordination merely in order to escape the burdens of 
citizenship, Constantine forbade Decurions or the wealthy to 
enter the ecclesiastical state, 3 and this law continued to be 
enforced by succeeding emperors, though Theodosius I allowed 
Decurions to receive ordination on condition that they ful- 
filled their obligations to the State by renouncing their posses- 
sions in favour either of the Curia or of some of its members. 4 
In France, where the clergy were exempt from many taxes and 
from compulsory military service, it was necessary to obtain 
the King's permission before ordination. An exception was, 
however, made for the children of the clergy. 5 

It was not long before the clergy of the Roman Empire 
acquired, besides the Privilegium immunitatis, also the 
Privilegium fori. The Third Council of Carthage (397) directs 
the clergy to make their complaints before the ecclesiastical 
judges, whilst the Council of Chalcedon (c. 9) hints that this 
should at least be done when both the parties are clerics. 
According to other councils, 6 clerics could appeal to the secular 
law only after having obtained the bishop's permission. 
In the beginning lay folk were not forced to seek redress 
against the clergy at ecclesiastical courts, but Justinian 7 
enacted that they too should be thus obliged, thereby placing 
the clergy in a privileged position. In future it is the bishops 
who have to judge between clerics, while metropolitans and 
patriarchs act as judges in matters where bishops are at 
variance. In criminal cases, clerics, after having been found 
guilty by their superiors, were to be degraded and handed over 
to the secular power to be duly punished. In the West, 
especially in the Frankish kingdom, proceedings were some- 
what different : here the secular judges had to crave the 
bishop's permission before taking action against a cleric ; 
quarrels between clerk and layman were to be settled in the 
presence of the ecclesiastical superiors, and the bishop was 

1 Cod. Theod. XVI, 2, 1, 2 ; Eus. X, 7. 

2 Cod. Theod. XVI, 2, 8. 3 Ibid. L, 3, 6. 

4 Ibid. XII, i, 104. 6 Cone. Aurel. 511, c. 5, 

• Counc. of Angers, 453, c. 1 ; Vannes, 465, c. 9. 
> Nov. 79 ; 83 ; 123, c. 8, 21, 22. 



The Clergy 179 

allowed to intervene in every case in which a cleric was charged 
with a crime. 1 Bishops, from the sixth century onwards, 
were generally indicted before councils, and, instead of incurring 
the punishment ordained by the laws of the State, were made 
to perform an equivalent ecclesiastical penance. 

Nor was the bishop's intervention confined to cases in 
which the clergy were concerned ; mindful of the warning of 
St. Paul (1 Cor. vi. 1 ff.) to his converts, not to carry their 
complaints before the heathen, but to judge them among 
the saints, it soon became a custom of the Christians to appeal 
to the bishop to act as arbitrator even in purely civil cases. 
Constantine, by decreeing (318-33) that any cause which one of 
the parties wished to be tried before the bishop could be decided 
thus in spite of any objections raised by the other party, 
practically allowed the bishops to exercise judiciary power in 
competition with the secular judges. This privilege was, 
indeed, revoked by the emperors Arcadius (398) and Honorius 
(408), but civil cases continued long after to be submitted to 
the arbitration of the bishop. 

The landed possessions of the Church, save during a portion 
of Constantine's reign, were liable to the ordinary taxes. They 
were, however, early exempted from enforced labour and from 
special levies (Cod. Theod. XVI, 2, 34, 40), though an end was 
made to this exemption by Valentinian III (441), when all landed 
proprietors had their special privileges withdrawn (Cod. Theod. 
XV, 3, 3). 

§ 62 

The Rise of Parishes 3 

As early as the third century we hear of country churches, 
and in the next, with the rapid disappearance of paganism, 
they became yet more numerous, so that it was found necessary 
to appoint bishops for their government, as we may see from 
the frequent allusions in this period to country bishops or 
X^peiriaKoiroi. The rise of these bishops seems to have been 

1 C. of Orleans (541), c. 20 ; Macon (581), c. 7 ; Chlotarii II capit. 614, 

2 Thomassin, Vet. et nov. eccles. discipl. P. I, 1. II, c. 21-23 ; Hinschius, 
KR. § 90; Loning, Gesch. d. d. KR. II, 346 ff. ; Th. Qu. 1892, p. 700; Imbart 
de la Tour, Les paroisses rurales dans I'ancienne France, 1900 ; S. Zorell, 
Die Entwicklung des Parochialsy stems, 1901 ; F. Gillmann, Das Institut der 
Chorbischö/e im Orient, 1903 ; H. Bergere, Etude hist, sur les choreveques, 1905. 

N 2 



180 A Manual of Church History 

attended by certain inconveniences. The Council of Ancyra in 
314 (c. 13), and one of Antioch (c. 10 ; the twenty-five canons 
in question are usually ascribed to the Councils held at Antioch 
between 330 and 341, especially to the last), were compelled 
to prohibit the country bishops to ordain priests or deacons 
without leave from the bishop of the city. The Council of 
Sardica (c. 6) even forbids the stationing of bishops in villages 
and small towns, lest the episcopal dignity and authority 
should suffer. The Council of Laodicea, about 380 (c. 57). 
expresses its wish that the country bishops should be replaced 
by Periodeutae {Trepiohevrai) , i.e. by priests sent as mis- 
sionaries from the cities. In consequence of these measures 
the country bishops came to be considered as of a lower caste 
than the city bishops, with whom they had formerly been equal. 
They gradually lost episcopal rank, and with the eighth cen- 
tury (Nicene Council of 787, c. 14) they disappear from the 
orthodox Church of the East, whilst the sects which retained 
them came ultimately to consider them as simple priests. 
Under the new circumstances it was necessary to commit the 
charge of the village churches to priests, who, to begin with, 
were not appointed permanently nor furnished with any ample 
powers ; it was not, however, long before their status was 
changed, and they acquired both fixity of tenure and enlarged 
faculties. It thus came about that the country districts 
were divided into parishes, in each of which there was a church 
where Divine worship was carried out by a priest ; whereas 
in the cities the bishops continued to perform all the services, 
the priests merely serving as assistants ; whilst in greater towns, 
as in Rome, where there were many churches, the consecration 
of the elements could take place only in the cathedral church 
(§ 23). Though history is silent concerning it, the new 
institution must have made rapid progress. For the East this 
is attested by the sixth canon of the Council of Chalcedon, 
which lays down that no one be ordained save when a position 
has been found for him beforehand. The frequent allusions in 
the sixth century to rural churches prove the existence of 
parishes in the West. Most of these churches were founda- 
tions of rich landed proprietors, who, in return for their 
donation, -claimed the right to nominate the incumbents 
(§ 96). As a general rule, however, it was the bishop who 



New Patriarchates 181 

appointed the parish priest, and who sanctioned new founda- 
tions ; on him there also devolved the duty of annually visiting 
them and of advising for their improvement. 

Frequently other churches were erected within the limits 
of a parish, either as chapels of ease for the convenience of the 
Faithful living at a distance, or out of devotion to certain saints. 
The priests who ruled the greater parishes, where they were 
assisted by other clerics, received after the sixth century the 
title borne by the head priest of the cathedral, being styled 
archpriests. 



§63 

New Patriarchates 

I. The Nicene Council had enacted (c. 6) that the rights 
of the bishops of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, and of the 
other chief metropolitans, should be maintained. A few 
years later, however, the foundation of Constantinople, or New 
Rome, made inevitable a change in the Church's hierarchy. 
As the metropolitan constitution of the Church was closely 
bound up with the political divisions of the Roman Empire, 
it became necessary to assign to the bishop of the new capital 
a corresponding rank. A beginning was made by the Council 
of Constantinople in 381, which (c. 3) gave to the bishop of 
New Rome a position inferior only to that of the bishop of 
Old Rome ; the Council of Chalcedon further enacted that the 
bishop of Constantinople should have the right of consecrating 
the metropolitans of the dioceses of Pontus, Asia, and Thrace. 
In this wise the Church of Constantinople took rank with 
the Churches of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, her bishops 
being likewise styled patriarchs, and the exarchates of 
Caesarea, Ephesus, and Heraclea passing under their domina- 
tion. Leo I, in the name of the Roman See, immediately raised 
his voice in protest, though in vain ; the bishops of Constanti- 
nople retained their new rank, and, from the sixth century, 
were accordingly described as oecumenical patriarchs. In one 
of his statutes 1 Justinian even terms the Church of Constanti- 
nople the head of all the Churches. Gregory I opposed the 

1 Cod. lust. 1, 2, 24. 



■■ 



182 A Manual of Church History 

usurpation of this title by John the Faster, but in spite of all 
it remained, and whereas to begin with it had been given to 
the patriarch only by others, it was now assumed by the 
patriarchs themselves. 1 

II. At about the same time the see of Jerusalem also re- 
ceived a promotion, but in this case the motive was sentimental 
rather than political. So far the bishop of the holy city had been 
subject to the see of Caesarea, though his situation was con- 
sidered a privileged one by the other bishops of the province. 
The Nicene Council, without, however, determining his posi- 
tion relatively to the metropolitan, decided (c. 7) that on him 
the same honour should continue to be bestowed which ancient 
custom had assigned to the bishop of 7E\m. This honorary 
position was not enough for later bishops, who were anxious 
to attain patriarchal rank, and Juvenal finally obtained of the 
Council of Chalcedon at least jurisdiction over the three Pales- 
tinian provinces, after having already secured from Theodosius 
II, by means of a trick, the control of Phoenicia and Arabia. 2 

III. Two new patriarchates, which, however, were never more 
than titular, arose as a result of the quarrel regarding the Three 
Chapters. In the beginning of the seventh century the province 
of Aquileia separated into two portions on the metropolitan of 
Grado, or Aquileia-Grado, becoming reconciled with Rome, where- 
upon the metropolitan of Aquileia proper assumed the title of 
Patriarch as a sign of his independence. That the bishop of Grado 
might not be inferior in rank to his schismatic colleague, the title 
of Patriarch had accordingly to be conferred on him by the Apostolic 
See. The patriarchate of Grado was transferred in 145 1 to Venice, 
and the other, after the destruction of Aquileia, was removed to 
Udine, and abolished in 1751. Cp. Hefele, II, 922 ff. ; W. Meyer, 
Spaltung des Patr. Aquileja, 1898 (Abh. Göttingen, N. F., II. 6). 



§ 64 

The Roman Church and its Primacy 8 

Many testimonies were given to the primacy of the Church 
of Rome. The Councils of Constantinople in 381 (c. 3) and of 

1 Th. Qu. 1889, pp. 346-48. 

2 Cp. Le Quien, Oriens christianus (1700), III, 133 ff. ; Hefele, II, 213, 
477, 502 ; Rev. de l'Orient chrdtien, 1899, pp. 44-57. 

3 H. Grisar, Gesch. Roms. u. der Päpste im MA. 1, 1901 [Engl. Trans. 
History of Rome and the Popes in the Middle Ages (in the press)]; Funk, 
A.u. U. Ill, No. 9 (on the genuineness of the canon of Sardica), 



The Roman Primacy 183 

Chalcedon (c. 28) presuppose it in their decrees concerning the 
rank to be taken by the bishop of Constantinople. It was 
also the Roman Church which took the first place in the 
Councils of the period (cp. § 65). The right of appeal to Rome 
was acknowledged by the Council of Sardica, which decreed 
(c. 3-5) that a bishop, when deposed by a provincial Council, 
could appeal to the Pope, when, if the latter disapproved 
of the judgment, a new trial was to take place before the 
bishops of a neighbouring province {Indices in partibus) under 
the presidency of the papal legates. This decree, which is 
definite enough as to the primacy of Rome, could not easily be 
applied in practice in distant provinces. In the East, which 
was far removed from Rome, little attention was paid to it. 
The same may be said of Western Africa, where the canons 
of Sardica were only received later, together with those of 
Nicsea, to which Council an attempt was made to ascribe them ; 
this circumstance, coupled with the fact that the canon as 
read by the Africans applied to priests as well as bishops, 
excited resentment. Apiarius, a presbyter of Sicca, having 
been deposed by his bishop, lodged an appeal with Pope 
Zosimus, who insisted on his reinstatement. This measure, 
no doubt, proved displeasing to the Africans, on account of 
the disadvantages which they foresaw would be the result of a 
further extension of the right of appeal. However this may 
be, in the great Council of 418 they forbade priests, deacons, 
or other lower clerics to appeal to any tribunal beyond the 
seas ; and as Zosimus attempted to uphold his decision, it 
came to a quarrel which endured for several years. The Coun- 
cil of Carthage in 424 roundly declared that Rome's claim 
to try cases in Africa was an infringement of the rights of the 
African Church. Yet, in spite of all this, appeals were made 
to Rome from Africa, nor was it long before the canons of 
Sardica were accepted by the whole Church as binding. In 
these canons the primacy of the Roman Church is attributed 
to her foundation by Peter, the privilege in question being 
granted in honour of that Apostle. It is true that the Council 
of Chalcedon (c. 28) ascribes the primacy to the political 
position of Rome, but this is only because the Council was 
seeking for a pretext to make the see of Constantinople 
superior to the Eastern patriarchates. Even in the East 



184 A Manual of Church History 

Rome's primacy was thought to be the outcome of Peter's 
episcopate ; let it suffice to mention in this connection 
the declaration of the Eastern bishops to Pope Sym- 
machus, of the emperors Anastasius and Justinian to Pope 
Hormisdas, 1 of the emperor Constantine Pogonatus to 
Leo II, and of the bishops Stephen of Larissa and Stephen 
of Dor.2 

As yet there was no special title assigned to the occupant 
of the Roman See. The expressions papa, apostolicus, vicarius 
Christi, summus sacerdos, summus pontifex, sanctus, &c, were 
also used by other bishops. Yet as early as the sixth 
century Ennodius, bishop of Pavia, and Cassiodorus had 
attempted to reserve the use of the title Papa for the 
bishop of Rome, and their example was gradually followed 
everywhere. The title Servus servorum Dei was first used by 
Gregory I. 

Most ot the points of interest connected with the papacy 
during this period have already been dealt with in our general 
description of events, but there remain a few more. The number 
of the Popes, owing to the shortness of their pontificates, was 
very considerable (53). Those to reign the longest were Silvester 
(314-35) and Leo I (440-61). The latter, owing to his famous 
encounter with Attila, occupies a place even in secular history, 
nor was he less remarkable in his government of the Church. 
Convinced that, as successor ot St. Peter, he was called on to lead 
the whole Church, he laboured to make his counsel prevail every- 
where where it was needed, whether in the East during the Euty- 
chian controversy, or in the West when Hilary of Aries was 
disposed to stretch his metropolitan rights. In the latter cause 
Leo was aided by Valentinian III, who issued an edict (445), 
according to which nothing might be undertaken without the 
leave of the Holy See : ne quid praeter auctoritatem sedis 
istius inlicitum praesumtio attentare nitatur. Cp. Leon. Epp. 
io-n. 

Yet four more double elections and subsequent schisms occurred 
after the time of Liberius and Damasus (§ 50). 

I. On the death of Pope Zosimus (418) the archdeacon Eulalius 
and, a day later, the presbyter Boniface were elected, and the 
split occasioned many troubles. A Council of Italian bishops was 
summoned by the emperor Honorius, but was able to effect nothing, 
and a yet larger council was proposed. In the meantime, however, 

1 Epp. Rom. pont. ed. Thiel, pp. 710, 742, 875 f. 

2 Harduin, II, 1116; III, 711, 1462. 



Schisms at Rome 185 

Eulalius having dared to infringe a decree of this council by coming 
to Rome to take part in the Paschal ceremonies of 419, he was dis- 
carded by the emperor, and Boniface thus became acknowledged 
as sole bishop. Cp. Baron. Ann. 418-19; Corpus script, eccl. 
lat. Vindob. XXXV, 59-84 ; Liber pont. ed. Duchesne, I, 
228. 

II. At the death of Anastasius II (488) there were elected the 
deacon Symmachus and the archpriest Lawrence, the latter being 
the nominee of the senator Festus, who hoped to make an end 
of the Acacian schism by inducing this Pope to accept the Henoticon. 
Both parties having appealed to king Theodoric, the latter decided 
in favour of Symmachus (499), who generously assigned to his 
rival the see of Nuceria. In 501 complaints were, however, 
made against Symmachus by the senators Festus and Probinus, 
and at their request Theodoric appointed Peter, bishop of Altinum, 
administrator or ' Visitor ' of the Roman Church. This measure 
turned out to be ill-advised, as Peter openly espoused the Laurentian 
cause. The King now directed that the charges should be examined, 
whereupon the Roman Council of 502 decided that Symmachus 
was innocent. In spite of this the opposition continued, and as 
Lawrence soon after returned to Rome, the schism became yet 
more pronounced. It was only when Theodoric ordered (506) the 
Laurentians to hand over to Symmachus all the churches which 
they retained, that unity, though not indeed peace, was restored. 
Lawrence spent the rest of his life (he died before 514) in retirement 
on the estate of his protector Festus. Cp. Pfeilschifter, Theoderich 
d. G. 1896, pp. 55-125. 

III. Felix III (IV), who owed his elevation to the king of the 
Ostrogoths (§ 60) , fearing doubtless that there would be a quarrel 
over the succession, appointed on his death-bed the archdeacon 
Boniface (530-32) as his successor. The choice of the majority 
of the Church fell, however, on Dioscorus. This schism soon 
came to an end, for Dioscorus died within a few weeks, and Boniface 
II was then acclaimed by all. The proceeding of Felix in nomi- 
nating his own successor was admittedly incorrect, nevertheless 
Boniface too appointed the deacon Vigilius to succeed him, though 
he afterwards revoked his choice as contrary to the canons. Cp. 
Holder, Die Designation der Nachfolger durch die Päpste, 1892 ; 
A. f. k.KR. 1894, II, 409-33. 

IV. Yet new dissensions occurred towards the end of the 
period. A schism, already threatened at the death of John V 
(686), broke out on the demise of Conon (687). One portion of 
the Church elected the archpriest Theodore and the other the 
archdeacon Paschal. After some time the majority of the Church 
fixed on Sergius, though his selection did not bring about unity, 
for Paschal, seconded by the exarch of Ravenna, continued 
to maintain an opposition. Cp. Liber pont. ed. Duchesne, 
I, 37 1 - 



1 86 A Manual of Church History 

§ 65 
The Councils 1 

One result of the many controversies of the age was the 
holding of frequent Councils. The very beginning of the period 
was signalised by a General or (Ecumenical Council, which 
was followed by yet five others. Two of these, the first and 
second of Constantinople (381 and 553), were in reality only 
General Councils of the East, since Eastern bishops only had 
been summoned to the former, whilst the Roman See had of 
set purpose held itself aloof from the latter ; both these Councils 
obtained, however, oecumenical authority through being 
afterwards ratified by the West. The remainder were Councils 
of the Roman Empire, being attended in general only by 
Roman subjects ; they were, nevertheless, considered oecumeni- 
cal, because as yet Christianity had scarcely passed the frontiers 
of the empire, and where it had done so the power was chiefly 
in the hands of the Arians. Some Councils, those of Sardica 
(343) and Ephesus (449), which were originally intended as 
general, failed to be afterwards considered as such, one 
not succeeding in the appointed task, and the other actually 
teaching a false doctrine. 

The right of summoning a General Council belonged to the 
emperor, the Councils being really synods of the empire. 
Invitations were addressed to the metropolitans, who were 
expected to bring with them a number of their suffragans. 
Above all, the presence of the patriarchs or of their representa- 
tives was considered necessary. The West, on account of the 
distance, was almost invariably represented merely by Apos- 
tolic legates or by delegates of a Roman Council. Not only 
did the emperor summon the Council, he also saw, either 
personally or by his agents, to the preservation of outward 
order, and, owing to the excitement which often accompanied 
the Councils, the presence of his police was not only desirable 
but often absolutely necessary. Finally, it was the emperor 
who confirmed the decrees of the Council by giving them the 
force of a law. The actual deliberations were, however, left 

1 Hefele, CG. I, 1 ff. Funk, A. u. U. I, 59-121 ; 498-508; III> No. 7. 
RE. det chr. A. I,. 317-325. 



The Councils 187 

to the assembled Fathers. Among the latter we may single 
out the Popes, or rather — seeing that no one of them was 
present personally at any Council of the period — their legates. 
These took precedence of all those present, taking the first 
seats and usually being also the first to append their signatures. 
Through his legates the Pope signified his assent to the decrees 
of the Council, nor was any subsequent ratification judged 
necessary. This is apparent from the fact that the emperor 
gave his confirmation as soon as the canons were passed, 
or at the close of the Council, i.e. before the papal ratification 
could possibly have been secured. ' 

Besides the Councils in which the whole Church was 
represented, there were others, such as those of Constantinople 
in 381 and of Rome in 680, which were attended only by the 
Western or Eastern branch of the Church ; there were also 
patriarchal, national, provincial, and diocesan Councils or 
synods, at which the bishops or clergy gathered under the 
presidency of their superior. Mention must also be made of 
the Plenary Councils (concilia plenaria), as the general assem- 
blies of the western provinces of Africa were called. According 
to the directions given by the Councils of Nicsea (c. 5) and 
Chalcedon (c. 17), provincial synods were to be held twice 
yearly ; according to the Council of Orleans (533, c. 2) and others 
of the sixth century, it was sufficient to hold them once 
annually. The Councils of Auxerre (585, c. 7), Huesca (598, 
c. 1), Toledo (693, c. 7), also order the holding of a yearly 
diocesan synod. 

The so-called o-vvoSo? ivSrj/iovcra of Constantinople de- 
serves a special record. It was an assembly of the bishops 
who happened to be present ( iv&rjfjLovvTes ) in the capital, 
summoned by the patriarch to assist in the solution of difficul- 
ties and disputes which had been referred to him. The custom 
afterwards was to appoint a certain number of bishops as 
consultors, who thereupon took up for a time their residence 
at the capital. 

The right of taking part in the synods belonged only to the 
episcopate and clergy. In Spain, however, the secular grandees 
after the middle of the seventh century were in the habit of 
attending the Councils and of apposing their signatures to the 
acts after the bishops and abbots. At a later date similar 



i88 A Manual of Church History 

Concilia mixta make their appearance in the Frankish 
kingdom. 1 

Various matters were discussed at the synods, their 
object being to solve all the difficulties which arose in the 
Church, whether they affected a personal form or concerned 
the Faith or discipline. In the latter instances the replies of 
the Council were couched in the form of canons. For the sake 
of convenience these canons were early codified, the most 
noteworthy collections being, for the Greek Church, (a) that of 
John the Scholastic (c. 550), a native of Antioch who afterwards 
became patriarch of Constantinople ; for the Latin Church, (b) 
that of the Council of Carthage in 419 (Codex canonum ecclesiae 
Africanae); (c) that of Dionysius Exiguus (c. 500), which 
contains not only the conciliar decrees, but also those of the 
Popes from Siricius (384)^0 Anastasius II (498) ; 3 and (d) the 
Spanish collection which was compiled in the seventh century 
and was long ascribed to Isidore of Sevilla. 3 In a and c we 
find also the Apostolic Canons. They are really the conclusion 
of the Apostolic Constitutions (§75), and belong without a doubt 
to the redactor of the latter work. Altogether they number 
eighty-five, though Dionysius retains only the first fifty. 

The signatures of the members of the General Councils will 
be found in Harduin, I, 312, 1527 ; II, 627 ; III, 1423. At 
the Councils of Nicaea and Ephesus the signatures of Osius of 
Corduba and Cyril of Alexandria precede those of the papal legates, 
but the latter, and possibly also the former, acted on behalf of 
the Pope ; and if in other instances certain bishops take precedence 
of the legates of the Church of Rome, we must recollect that the 
latter was never represented by her bishop in person. The Acts 
of the Council of Chalcedon were not signed by the legates because 
of their opposition to Canon 28, though their precedence is 
attested by the accounts of the several sessions. Cp. Harduin, 
II, 366, 383, 446, 458, 467, 502, &c. The Second and Fifth Councils 
are exceptions to the rule, but the Seventh and Eighth again show 
us the legates occupying the highest rank. Harduin, IV, 455 ; 
V, 922. 

» Cp. LÖNiNG, Gesch. d. d. KR. II, 138 ff. 
2 P.L. LXVII. 
8 Ibid. LXXXIV. 



CHAPTER IV 

WORSHIP, DISCIPLINE, AND MORALS l 

§66 

Baptism and the Catechumenate 2 

To begin with, no change was made in the administration 
of Baptism. So long as pagans remained to be converted, 
there were numerous adults to baptise. Nor was it the 
custom to baptise the children of Christian parents until 
they were advanced in age, Baptism being frequently delayed 
until the hour of death. Infant Baptism became the general 
practice only in the fifth century, and the new custom was 
largely a reaction against Pelagianism. 

Hence the Catechumenate continued to be preserved as an 
institution for some time yet, and we likewise come across a 
practice which, though not indeed new, is met with for the first 
time under a definite name. Those of the catechumens who 
decided to receive Baptism and whom the Church found fit to 
enter into her society, during the Lenten or other season previous 
to their Baptism, were specially prepared for the reception of 
the sacrament. They were called cfxoTi£6/*evoi, ßairrc^o/jLevoi, 
competentes (sc. baptismum), electi. The instructions bore 
mainly on the Faith, the Creed being given to them to learn by 
heart ; when this was done they had to return it, or to show 
their knowledge of it by reciting it in the Church : this was the 
Traditio and Redditio symboli. The Lord's Prayer was treated 
in the same manner. The instructions were accompanied by 

1 Duchesne, Origines du culte chrit. 1889 ; 3rd ed. 1902 (Eng. Trans. 
Christian Worship, 2nd ed. 1904). Cabrol, Etude sur la Peregrinatio Silviae, 
1895. 

2 Bibl. § 22, F. Probst, Katechese u. Predigt vom Anfang des 4 bis z. Ende 
des 6 Jahrh. 1884; Studien zur Gesch. der Theol. u. K. IV, 2 (1899). J. 
Ernst, Die Ketzertaufangelegenheit in der altchr. K. nach. Cyprian, 1901. 



190 A Manual of Church History 

exorcisms, confession of sins, fasts, and other practices, the 
object being both to prepare and to make trial of the candidates. 
Both at Rome and in Africa these proceedings were called 
the scrutinia. The reception of Baptism was followed by 
instructions on the sacraments, delayed until then owing to 
the Discipline of the Secret, according to which only the 
baptised could be admitted into the mysteries. This latter 
course of instruction was called by the Greeks the mystagogical 
catechesis. It is true that the Creed and the Our Father were 
also reckoned as mysteries, and for this reason, in some 
Churches, only the baptised were made acquainted with the 
latter ; but the matter was of a nature to require a breach in 
the rule, a further excuse being that the newly baptised 
were admitted with but little delay to full communion with the 
Faithful. The spread of infant Baptism naturally led to a 
change in this discipline, though most of the old ceremonies 
were retained in the later rite of Baptism. 

Baptism was administered in baptisteries — i.e. chapels 
constructed for the purpose in the neighbourhood of the church 
— and consisted in a triple immersion. A single immersion 
was customary only in Spain and among the Eunomians and 
Aetians, in one case out of opposition to the Arians, and in the 
other through heretical motives. In the East the Epiphany 
began to be reckoned among the days on which Baptism might 
be administered, whilst in Spain any feast could serve for the 
purpose ; Rome preferred to keep to the older order. On 
the other hand, in Thessaly and some Churches of Gaul it was 
customary to baptise only at Easter. This was the practice 
even in baptising infants, save, of course, in cases of necessity. 
Towards the end of the period a change occurred in the Visi- 
gothic kingdom, the Councils of Toledo (693 and 694, c. 2) 
enacting that children should be baptised within thirty days 
of birth, though not in the Lenten season. 

Whilst in the Latin Church Ambrose and Augustine l acknow- 
ledged that baptism of desire could replace the true Baptism, 
we find elsewhere the belief prevalent that only martyrdom 
or the baptism of blood could thus serve. 3 In the Greek 
Church this latter became the common teaching. 

1 Ambr. Consol. de obitu Valentiniani, c. 30; Aug. De Bapt. IV, 22, !No. 29. 
* Gennad. De eccl. dogmat. c. 41 ; Lib. dogmat. c. 74 (Migne, P, L. 83, 1242) ; 



Baptism 191 

Baptism conferred by heretics was not again made the 
pretext of a quarrel, though the question continued to be 
solved differently in different localities. The milder practice 
recommended itself to the greater portion of the Latin Church, 
the contrary practice of the Africans being reprobated by the 
Council of Aries (314, c. 8), which decreed that those who had 
been baptised by heretics in the name of the Trinity should 
be merely admitted to receiving the Holy Ghost by the im- 
position of hands. It was at this juncture that the advocates 
of the stricter practice, the African Donatists, broke with the 
Church. On the other hand, in a large part of the East a 
different view was taken of the matter. In the Procatechesis 
of Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 7), in the canonical epistles of Basil the 
Great (c. i, 47), in the Apostolic Constitutions (vi, 15) and 
Canons (46, 47), heretical baptisms are declared invalid, whilst 
the Nicene Council (c. 19) rejected the Baptisms conferred by 
the Paulinists or followers of Paul of Samosata. The spurious 
seventh canon of the Second General Council is the first sign 
we have that a distinction was made between Baptism validly 
and invalidly conferred by heretics ; it acknowledges the 
validity of the Baptism administered by Arians, Macedonians, 
Novatians, Quartodecimans, and Apollinarists, but rejects 
that of the Eunomians, Montanists, and Sabellians. This 
canon testifies to the practice in the fifth century, for it 
agrees with a letter sent by the Church of Constantinople to 
Martyrius, bishop of Antioch (460-70), and besides was 
adopted with some additions by the Council in Trullo (692 
c 95). 

The opinion, at one time very common, that there were several 
classes of catechumens, is now known to be unfounded. Candi- 
dates for Baptism were not considered as a category of catechumens, 
but as occupying a position intermediate between the Faithful and 
the catechumens. The assumption that there existed three 
classes — (1) aKpoco/ntvot, audientes ; (2) yow kXivovtgs, genu flectentes ; 
(3) (faxjTL&nevoL, competentes — is based on a misapprehension of the 
fifth canon of the Council of Neo-Caesarea (314-25) In the passage 
in question the words aKpoufxwos and yow kXlvw are used of penitents, 
not of catechumens. Cp. Funk, A. u. U. I, 209-41 ; III, No. 3. 

Cyr. Hier. Cat. Ill, 3 ; Greg. Nyss. Orat. adv. eos qui differunt bapt. ; Ioann. 
Dam. De fide orth. IV, 9. 



192 A Manual of Church History 

§ 67 
Liturgy, Communion, and Eulogies l 

I. The Liturgy remained essentially what it had been before, 
though some small changes were inevitable. As infant 
baptism grew common and the penitential discipline was 
relaxed, the dismissal of the catechumens and penitents in the 
middle of the Mass either was discontinued or lost its earlier 
meaning. A fragment of the De traditione divinae liturgiae 
(by Proclus ?) tells us of Basil the Great and John Chrysostom, 
that they abridged the liturgy owing to the impatience mani- 
fested by those compelled to be present at the lengthy services. 
Like reforms were undertaken in the West by Popes Damasus, 
Gelasius (492-96), and Gregory I, and also by Ambrose, bishop 
of Milan ; and as, after the time of Damasus, variations suitable 
to the different seasons of the year came to be admitted into 
the Liturgy, definite lessons from Scripture were assigned to 
each day, whilst the prayers, the preface, and even certain 
portions of the Canon were altered to suit the feasts. In the 
East, on the other hand, the Liturgy made no account of the 
feasts. The reforms led to a great variety of Liturgies, though 
it is probable that divergencies existed even before ; we thus 
find that each of the greater Churches had its own particular 
Liturgy. 

In Jerusalem and Antioch the prevailing Liturgy was that 
called after St. James ; in Alexandria it was that of St. Mark ; 
in Constantinople there were two, bearing, one the name of 
St. Basil and the other that of St. Chrysostom. The latter 
was the one in common use, whilst the former served for the 
feast of St. Basil, for the Sundays in Lent (Palm Sunday 
excepted), Maundy Thursday, and the Vigils of Christmas, 
Epiphany, and Easter. A Liturgy older than all these is the 
Clementine, found in the Apostolic Constitutions ; having been 
incorporated in an important literary work and preserved 

1 C P- §§3,5I Binterim, Denkwürdigkeiten, IV, 2, 3 ; Probst, Liturgie des 
4 Jahrh. u. deren Reform, 1893 ; Die abendländ. Messe vom 5 bis 8 Jahrh. 
1896 ; A. Baumstark, Liturgia Romana e Liturgia delV Esarchato, 1904 ; 
Funk, A. u. U. I, 293-301 (for the rite of Communion) ; III, No. 5 (for the 
Canon) ; Revue B6ne"d. 1890-91 (for the Eulogies). 



The Liturgy 193 

together with it, it has escaped the alterations to which other 
Liturgies were exposed. 

The Latin Liturgies bore the names of the Churches or of 
the countries in which they were used. Chief among them 
were the Roman, Milanese, Gallican, Spanish, British, and Irish, 
the Roman being in use in the whole of Southern Italy and in 
Latin Africa, the Milanese or Ambrosian being employed in 
upper Italy, and the others prevailing in the countries from 
which they derive their denomination. 

No doubt in the beginning the Roman Liturgy was in 
general agreement with the others, just as these generally 
agreed among themselves, but owing to the reforms made in 
this period, it acquired many peculiarities. The Epiclesis 
following the words of consecration, in which the Holy Ghost 
was invoked to come down on the oblation and transform the 
bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, that they 
may be productive ot salvation to the faithful, disappeared 
from the Roman Liturgy ; or if it has been preserved in the 
Supplices te rogamus, at any rate the characteristic invocation 
of the Holy Ghost is wanting. The intercessory prayers which 
all of them followed the Consecration (though in the Alexand- 
rian, Gallican, and Spanish rites they come before the Preface) 
were divided in the Roman Liturgy, the prayers for the living 
coming before, and those for the dead after the Consecration. 
The Pax, which at Rome was given just before the Communion, 
preceded the Consecration in the East, whilst it immediately 
followed in the Western non-Roman Liturgies. The latter 
peculiarity may, however, go back to the previous period, see- 
ing that it was known to Innocent I and to Augustine. The 
origin of most of these reforms is very obscure; the extant 
Sacramentaries, having been supplemented in later times, do 
not bear witness to the state of the Liturgy when their originals 
were composed. The Gelasian Sacrament ary corresponds with 
the year 700, the Gregorian with the time of Adrian I (772- 
95), and though the prayer for Pope Simplicius (f483) shows 
that the Leonine goes back further, yet its want of order points 
to this book having been merely a private compilation. 1 

* The Sacramentaries were reprinted in Migne, the Leonine in P.L. LV, 
the Gelasian in P.L. LXXIV, the Gregorian in P.L. LXXVIII. The Gelasian 
was re-edited by Wilson, 1894, and the Leonine by Feltoe, 1896. 

VOL. I. O 



194 A Manual of Church History 

The Eucharist in some localities continued to be celebrated 1 
only on Sunday, in other places also on the ' stations.' In the 
East (§ 69) it came to be celebrated also on Saturdays, whilst 
here and there it began to be offered daily. 

We first meet with the word Mass applied to the Eucharist 
at the end of the fourth century, the earliest witnesses being 
Ambrose (Ep. 20, 4) and the so-called Peregrinatio Silviae (§ 76, 9), 
and without a doubt it arose from the Ite missa est, or dismissal 
formula ; that the formula should have come to denote the whole 
Liturgy is not to be wondered at, seeing that in antiquity there 
were two dismissals, that of the catechumens and that of the 
Faithful. The other derivations are very doubtful. In the Middle 
Ages the expressions missa catechumenorum and missa fidelium 
were taken as meaning a Mass of the catechumens and a Mass 
of the Faithful ; in reality, the missa only refers to the dismissal. 
As the same formula was used at the end of the other services 
also, we come across such expressions as Missae matutinae (Matins), 
and Missae vespertinae (Vespers). Cp. Counc. of Agde, 506, c. 30 ; 
Hefele, Beiträge, II, 273-76 ; Funk, A. u. U. Ill, No. 6. 

II. Communion was still received very frequently. Augus- 
tine (Ep. 54) speaks of the practice of communicating 
weekly or even daily ; when, however, Constantine's conversion 
had brought many merely nominal Christians into the Church, 
this practice soon ceased to be the general rule. Many of the 
Fathers, Chrysostom for instance, complained of the paucity 
of Communions. The Council of Agde in 506 (c. 18) confined 
itself to directing that the Faithful should approach the sacra- 
ment thrice yearly. The practice remained of putting the 
consecrated Bread into the hands of the communicant, though 
in Gaul the custom arose, in the case of women, of placing it, 
not in their bare hand, but on a linen cloth. 

III. As Communion became less frequent, a kind of sub- 
stitute was found for it. Those who had not communicated 
were, at the end of the service, presented with a morsel of 
blessed bread. The loaves used for this purpose were termed 
the Eulogies, or, to denote that they were a substitute for the 
Bcbpov, they were called the avrlBcopov ; they were taken from 
the oblation after a portion of it had been set aside for 
consecration. The custom is retained to the present day among 
the Greeks, and it also continues to exist in some parts of the 

1 Aug. Ep. 54 ; Epiph. Expos, c. 21, 



The Liturgy 195 

West, for instance in France. In the course of time it lost, 
however, its primitive character, the Eulogies being no longer 
consumed in Church, but carried away by the Faithful, whilst 
they came to be given even to those who had communicated. 
IV. The pre-eminence granted to the Church by Constan- 
tine enabled her to carry out her ceremonial with greater 
pomp than heretofore. Great attention was now paid to 
ecclesiastical chant. 1 Pope Silvester (c. 330) established a 
special choral school in Rome, and, somewhat later, St. Ambrose 
of Milan introduced a chant (Cantus Ambrosianus) combining 
rich melody with a good rhythmic movement ; lastly, Gregory 
the Great was the creator of Plain Chant (Cantus Gregorianus, 
Romanus, firmus, choralis) and the inventor of a new mode of 
writing it, namely by means of neumes. 

V. Besides the Eucharistie service, the so-called canonical 
Hours, consisting in the singing of psalms, the reading of Scripture, 
and prayers, began to take a prominent place in the Church's 
life. In the previous period mention is often made of three hours 
of prayer, but when Christianity had been victorious the practice 
assumed much more importance. We now find that the times 
of prayer are sunrise, the third, sixth, and ninth hours, evening 
and midnight. It was not, however, long before Compline was 
separated from Vespers and became the real evening prayer. The 
monks, following the example of the ancient Roman night-watches, 
divided the night, or at least certain nights, into four periods 
of prayer, the three Nocturns and the Matins ; but the four 
portions of the nocturnal office soon came to be recited at dawn. 
As the time from dawn to Terce seemed too long to remain un- 
occupied, the hour of Prime was introduced. It was not merely 
the monks and clergy who took part in these offices ; until the 
sixth century it was customary to consider them as part of the 
public service, the laity attending at least Matins and Vespers, 
as we may see from the Peregrinatio Silviae and the Council of 
Agde (506, c. 30). As late as 666 we find the Council of Merida 
(c. 2) obliging the Faithful to be present at Vespers. We may 
understand this if we bear in mind that as yet there was, in many 
churches, no Eucharistie celebration on week-days, and that Matins 
and Vespers were made to serve in its stead. Cp. Batiffol, 
Histoire du Breviaire Romain, 1894 (Engl. Trans. 1898) ; Bäumer, 
Gesch. des Breviers, 1895. 

1 Murin, L'Origine du chant grigorien, 1892 ; Dreves, Aur. Ambrosius 
'der Vater des Kirchengesanges,' 1893 ; P. Wagner, Einführung in die Gregor. 
Melodien, 1895 ; 2nd ed. 1901 ; Caspari, Unters, zum Kirchengesang im 
Altertum, Z.f. KG. 1905-06. 

o 2 



196 A Manual of Church History 

§ 68 
Penance * 

I. As we may see from the penitential canons of the 
Councils of Ancyra (314), Neo-Caesarea, and Nicaea, and from 
the canonical epistles of Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa, 
public penance was still in full swing in the Eastern Church 
during the fourth century. The category of penitents was 
even enlarged, a new and lowest class, that of the Weepers, 
7rpocr/c\aiovT€<;, now making its appearance. The third class 
of capital sins now began to be considered pardonable, the 
Council of Ancyra (c. 22) allowing murderers to receive Com- 
munion on their death-bed, and Basil the Great deciding (c. 56) 
that they might be readmitted after twenty years' penance. 
But towards the end of the same century a change occurred. 
Nectarius, patriarch of Constantinople, was induced by the 
presbyter Eudaemon, in view of the evil consequences of 
public confession, to abolish (391) the office of penitentiary, 
and to leave it to each of the Faithful to approach the sacred 
mysteries when so moved. The example of the capital proved 
infectious, though both here and elsewhere notorious crimes 
still continued to be subject to the old ecclesiastical discipline ; 
for all other sins the penitent was left free to choose his own 
penance, Socrates (V, 19) even complaining, probably with 
good reason, of the remissness which ensued. 

II. Alterations were also made in the West. The old view 
that there was only one penance still held the field, and in 
Spain, where it had become customary to readmit back- 
sliders, the old rule was again stringently laid down by the 
Council of Toledo (589, c. 11). Yet milder counsels began to 
prevail, and those who had fallen a second time, though not 
readmissible among the penitents, were nevertheless allowed 
to attend the services, and on having shown due signs of 
repentance were admitted to Communion on their death-bed. 
Those who had been guilty of capital sins, and who repented 
only when in danger of death, were now held to be capable 

1 Cp. § 24; G. Rauschen, Jahrbücher der christl. K. unter Theodosius d. Gr. 
1897, PP- 537 _ 44 '> H. Kellner, Das Buss- und Strafverfahren gegen Kleriker 
in den 6 ersten Jahrh. 1863. 



Festivals and Fast-days 197 

of penance and pardon, whereas formerly they had been 
merely admitted to penance. Among some of the newly 
converted nations, e.g. among the Anglo-Saxons, public 
penance was never introduced. Finally, by an enactment of 
Leo I, the practice was entirely abrogated. 

III. Penance was imposed by a laying on of hands by a priest 
and by the bestowal of a hair shirt. The penitent had hence- 
forth to lead a life of mortification, to shave his hair, and to 
wear monastic or mourning garments, besides being obliged 
to refrain from all business, from practising in the courts, and 
from military service. He was also obliged to observe con- 
tinence, for which reason no married person was admitted to 
penance save with the consent of his consort. Penitents were 
forbidden to contract a new marriage or to resume their former 
conjugal relations, even at the conclusion of their penance, 
though an exception was made for young men who accepted 
penance when in danger of death, but who afterwards regained 
their health. The reconciliation took place at Rome on 
Maundy Thursday, and in other places on one of the follow- 
ing three days. 

IV. In the previous period clerics had been subject to the 
same penitential discipline as the laity. In the fourth century 
arose the custom of deposing without excommunicating them, 
thus merely reducing them to the position of laymen 
without imposing any obligation of penance, this exception 
being made that clerics might not be doubly punished 
(cp. Apostolic Canons, c. 25). In the Roman Church they 
were even forbidden to undertake voluntary penance, doubt- 
less through fear of scandal; in Gaul such a prohibition did 
not exist. 

§69 

Festivals and Fast-days 1 

I. So far the feasts of the Church had been almost of a 
private character ; they now assumed greater publicity 

1 Augusti, Denkwürdigkeiten, I-III ; Nilles, Kalendarium manuale, 
2 vol. 2nd ed. 1896-97 ; Usener, Religionsgesch. Untersuchungen, I, 1889 ; 
Rhein. Museum f. Philol. 1905, pp. 465-91; Funk, A. u. U. I, 258-66; 
RE. d. chr. A. I, 486 fif. ; Th. Qu. 1891, p. 528; 1906, p. 158; Bonaccorsi, 
Noel, 1903. 



198 A Manual of Church History 

Constantine decreed the closing of the law-courts and the 
cessation of all public work on Sundays, 1 and soon after shows 
and public games were also prohibited. 3 This prohibition 
was, by Theodosius II, made to cover all the greater feasts 
and the period between Easter and Whitsun, 3 then called 
Pentecost or Quinquagesima. Agricultural labour, which 
Constantine had allowed on Sundays, was afterwards for- 
bidden by several Councils. The number of the feasts was 
also notably increased. 

II. In the East during the fourth century the Saturday 
came to be treated as a Sunday, service being held on it and 
fasting being forbidden. The latter prohibition was even 
enforced by the Apostolic Canons (c. 64) with a threat of 
excommunication, and with deposition in the case of clerics. 

III. The feast of the Epiphany, which had existed fairly 
generally in the Greek Church even in the third century, 
is now found in the Latin Church also. In migrating, the feast 
acquired, however, a new meaning. Whilst in the East it 
commemorated more especially Christ's Baptism, in the West 
it came to be a festival in honour of His manifestation to the 
Gentiles. The other meanings of the feast gradually passed 
into the background, one of them, that of Christ's birth, 
becoming the object of an entirely new festival, Christmas. 
The origin of the latter is by no means clear : the Armenian 
Ananias the ' Computer,' writing at the beginning of the 
seventh century, tells us that it was kept at the imperial 
court under Constantius (337-61) ; we have also an allusion of 
the so-called Chronographer of A.D. 354. If his notice at the 
head of the Depositio Martyrum is to be taken as indicating 
that December 25 was merely reckoned as Christ's birth- 
day, then the feast may have arisen subsequently to 354, 
but if it refers, as quite possibly it may, to a festival, then 
Christmas must have been kept as a feast not only in 354, 
but, as is clear from a comparison with the Chronographer's 
Depositio Episcoporum, as far back as 336. However this 
may be, the feast certainly existed in Rome before 360, and 
from thence it spread throughout the Church ; Justin I 

1 Cod. Theod. VIII, 8, 1, 3 ; Eus. Vit. Cons. IV, 18 ; Soz. I, 8. 

2 Cod. Theod. XV, 5, 2 ; Cod. Eccl. Afric. c, 60 ; Cone. Carth. IV. c. 64, 88, 

3 Cod. Theod. XV, 5, 5. 



Festivals and Fast-days 199 

(518-27) was, nevertheless, obliged to issue decrees making 
its observation compulsory throughout the empire. Armenia 
alone refused to accept it, and there Christ's birth is still 
commemorated on the Epiphany. December 25 seems to 
have been chosen on account of the Roman custom of keeping 
this day as the festival of Sol Invictus — i.e. of the re-birth 
of the sun ; it was judged fitting to substitute for the pagan 
feast a Christian one commemorating the birth of the true 
Sun of the world and Redeemer of mankind. In preparation 
for the coming festival it was customary in Gaul from the 
fifth century to fast three days in each of the previous six 
weeks (Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays). In the Roman 
Church the season of Advent was kept even before the time 
of Gregory I, and consisted of four weeks, or rather of a period 
comprising four Sundays. The day after Christmas was kept, 
even at the end of the fourth century, as the feast of St. 
Stephen the Protomartyr, and the Octave of Christmas (as 
we learn from the Council of Tours, 567, c. 17) was devoted 
to commemorating the Circumcision of Christ, this being the 
lastcomer among the Christmas solemnities. 

In the fourth century two new feasts were brought into 
connection with Easter, Palm Sunday, and Ascension Day, 
of which the latter had formerly been commemorated with the 
Descent of the Holy Ghost on Whit-Sunday. In a sense every 
day in Holy Week (Hebdomas magna) and Easter Week was 
reckoned a holy day, being all of them days of rest on which 
Divine service took place ; Maundy Thursday and Good 
Friday were, nevertheless, days of special devotion. Mamertus, 
bishop of Vienne (c. 470), introduced the custom of keeping 
three Rogation Days in preparation for the Ascension, and 
this custom was prescribed by the first Council of Orleans 
(511) for the whole of Gaul (c. 27) ; at a later date (c. 800) 
it was also adopted at Rome. A similar feast on St. Mark's Day 
had, however, been long kept at Rome, as St. Gregory testifies, 
being a Christian equivalent of the old pagan Robigalia. 

IV. In connection with Saints' feasts it is to be noticed 
that some martyrs now came to be honoured universally who 
formerly had received a cultus only in the place of their 
martyrdom. Such was the case with St. Stephen, and the 
Apostles Peter and Paul ; in the Greek Church we now find 



200 A Manual of Church History 

also the feast of All the Martyrs (Octave of Pentecost). It 
also became the custom to celebrate not only the Dies natalis 
of the martyrs, but also the day on which other saints went 
to their reward ; this was early the case in Gaul for St. Martin 
of Tours. On the other hand, St. John the Baptist, having 
been sanctified in his mother's womb, had two feasts, that of 
his martyrdom and that of his birth. Customs, however, 
differed in different Churches : Perpetuus, bishop of Tours, in 
475 ordained that the feasts of ten saints should have vigils. 

V. Lastly, we must mention the Feasts of our Lady. Of 
these the most ancient are the Purification and the Annuncia- 
tion, and the reason of their greater antiquity is, no doubt, 
that the events they commemorate bear on the history of the 
Redeemer. In a sense they may be called feasts of Christ 
Himself : the first of these feasts has by the Greeks always 
been considered as the remembrance of the meeting of Christ with 
Simeon, and been called in consequence 'Tttclvtt) or "TTrairavT^. 
According to the Peregrinatio Silviae it existed in Jerusalem 
in the fourth century, and was kept on the Quadragesima de 
Epiphania, i.e. on February 14. The introduction of the 
feast of Christmas rendered it necessary to transfer the Pre- 
sentation or Purification to February 2. The feast of the 
Annunciation is first mentioned in the homilies of Proclus, 
bishop of Constantinople (c. 440). That of the Assumption 
(/eo^o-£9 = Dorrnitio) seems to have been first kept in Palestine 
at the beginning of the sixth century ; it was imposed on the 
whole Church by an edict of the emperor Mauritius (582-602) . 
If the poet Romanus (§ 77) really lived in Justinian's time, 
then the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin must have 
originated at about the same time as the previous feast ; at any 
rate it existed in the seventh century. These feasts were all 
of them first observed in the East, though, on account of the 
union between the two portions of the Church, they soon were 
adopted in the West. The Life of Sergius in the Liber pontificalis 
proves that all four of them existed at Rome at the end of the 
period. They were introduced into the other Churches as 
the use of the Roman rite began to spread. Some Western 
countries already kept certain feasts of the Blessed Virgin, 
though on days different from those usual elsewhere : in Gaul, 
for instance, the feast of the Assumption began to be observed 



Festivals and Fast-days 201 

in the sixth century (January 18), and in Spain the Council 
of Toledo (656, c. 1) decreed that special solemnities should 
accompany the feast of the Annunciation (December 18). 

VI. The Council of Aries in 314 (c. 1) had issued a decree 
to the effect that Easter l should be kept everywhere on the 
same day, and that the bishop of Rome, according to custom, 
should fix the date for the other Churches. This decree was 
not acted on, and, as the question was one which interested 
the Eastern as well as the Western Church, the matter was 
again dealt with at the Nicene Council, this time with better 
results. The Orientals, so runs the new decree (i.e. the 
Christians of Cilicia, Syria, and Mesopotamia), who formerly 
' observed the Passover with the Jews,' shall now keep it with 
the Romans and other Christians ; after some hesitation 
this decree was adopted everywhere, and subsequent to the 
Council of Antioch, in 341, which pronounced censures on all 
who should refuse to accept it (c. 1), we hear no more of any 
opposition in the East. The Nicene Council had also resolved 
that the Church of Alexandria should each year reckon the 
date of Easter, and that the bishop of Rome should make 
known this date to the whole Church. This enactment was 
slow in securing obedience. True, agreements were frequently 
made respecting the date of the feast, and at Sardica it was 
even settled beforehand for the period of fifty years, but it 
was only in the sixth century that unity was secured, Rome 
consenting to relinquish her calculation (the eighty-four- 
year cycle, the spring equinox reckoned for March 18, and 
Easter falling, according to the lunar calendar, between Luna 
xvi-xxii) and following the advice of Dionysius Exiguus (525) 
by adopting the Alexandrian calculation (cycle 19, March 
21, Luna xv-xxi) ; the example of Rome was soon followed 
by the remaining Latin Churches. 

The Irish and Scots adopted the new reckoning in the seventh 
century, after having so far agreed with the Britons in keeping 
the eighty-four -year cycle, with March 25 as equinox, and 
Luna xiv-xx as the Paschal limits. Gaul followed suit in the 
eighth century ; here the 532-year Paschal calculation of Victurius 

1 Hefele, CG. I, 325 ff. ; J. Schmid, Die Osterfestberechnung auf den 
britischen Inseln, 1904 ; Die Osterfestfrage auf dem Konzil von Nicäa, 1905 ; 
E. Schwartz, Christi, u. jüdische Ostertafeln, in Abh. Göttingen N. F. VIII 
(1904-05), 6. 



202 A Manual of Church History 

of Aquitania had been in use since the fifth century and had received 
the approval of the Council of Orleans (541, c. 1). This calculation 
was built on the cycle of nineteen years, but agreed with the Roman 
usage in taking March 18 as the equinox, and Luna xvi as the 
earliest day on which Easter could fall. A like change was made 
in that part of Spain which had not yet acquiesced in the Roman 
reckoning. The same custom was imposed on the Britons at the 
conquest of Wales by the Saxons in the beginning of the ninth 
century. A usage peculiar to some parts of Gaul in the fifth 
and sixth centuries, was the commemorating of Christ's death on 
March 25, and of His resurrection on March 27. (Greg. Tur. 
H. F. XI, 31 ; Martyrolog. Hieron. ; Martin. Bracar. De Pascha, 1.) 
A similar dependence on the solar year prevailed in certain sects ; 
thus the Montanists identified the 14 Nisan with April 6 and invari- 
ably kept Easter on the following Sunday, whilst others kept it on 
the Sunday following March 25. (Soz. VII, 18 ; Epiph. H. 50, c. 1.) 

VII. From the very beginning of the period the fast previ- 
ous to Easter was known as Quadrages {reo-aapaKOG-rr}) , as we see 
from the Council of Nicaea (c. 5). The Lenten period com- 
prised in the West six weeks, and in the East seven weeks, i.e. 
the six weeks preceding Palm Sunday ; in some Churches 
(Antioch and Constantinople) Holy Week was not held as part 
of Lent, but everywhere the number of fast-days was thirty-six. 
The divergence just mentioned made no difference in the 
number, seeing that, in the East, Saturdays, with the exception 
of Holy Saturday, were never kept as fast-days. 

As Lent grew lengthier, the Station-Fasts fell into disuse. 
On the other hand, in the Roman Church, during the pontificate 
of Leo the Great, a three-day fast was prescribed for the 
Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday of Whit week and of two 
other weeks, one in the seventh and the other in the tenth month 
(September and December). Cp. Rev. Bened. 1897, pp. 337-46. 



§ 70 

Saint and Image Worship ; Pilgrimages l 

I. The love and reverence which the Christians of the 
previous period had lavished on those of the brethren who 

1 Lehner, Die Marienverehrung in den ersten Jahrh. 2nd ed. 1886 ; Liell, 
Darstellungen der allersei. Jungfrau M. in den Katakomben, 1887 ; E. v. Dob- 
schdtz, Christusbilder, 1899 ; E. Lucius, Die Anfänge des Heiligenkults in 
d. ehr. K. 1904 ; H. Delehaye, Legends of the Saints (Engl. Trans.), 1905 ; 
J. E. Weis-Liebersdorf, Christus- und Apostelbilder, 1902 ; H. Günter, 
Legenden- Studien, 1906. 



Saint and Image Worship 203 

had testified to their faith with their blood, continued now to 
be shown to their earthly remains. It became the custom to visit 
their tombs and to erect churches and chapels in their honour 
\memoriae, jxaprvpia) ; the feast-day of some of the martyrs 
was even observed far from the scene of their martyrdom. 
Such practices, deeply ingrafted in human nature as they are, 
when restrained within due limits are permissible and praise- 
worthy. The Christians were, moreover, fully conscious of 
the difference between adoration given to God and worship 
bestowed on saints, nor did the Fathers fail to appeal to the 
distinction when rebutting the insinuations of the adversaries 
of the practice. 1 

With the passing of the persecutions, besides the olden 
martyrs new saints came to be venerated — men who had not, 
indeed, attained the martyr's crown, but who had been dis- 
tinguished for their virtue and piety — more especially hermits, 
monks, and bishops. But the greatest veneration was bestowed 
on her who, in her lifetime, had stood closest to Christ, 
namely, on Mary, the Mother of God. It is true that both 
her virginity after our Saviour's birth, and her right to be 
styled the Mother of God, were called into question — the former 
by the Antidicomarianites, an Arabian sect, by the monks 
Helvidius and Jovinian at Rome, by the Spanish presbyter 
Vigilantius, and by Bonosus, bishop of Sardica ; and the latter by 
the Nestorians. But these attacks were successfully warded 
off by Epiphanius, Jerome, and other Fathers, 3 with the result 
that the views of these sectarians never prevailed in the 
Church. In Arabia women went so far as to offer, pagan- 
wise, cakes to the Blessed Virgin ; their practice was, how- 
ever, condemned by Epiphanius, who nicknamed them 
Collyridians. 3 

II. Owing to the stern disapproval of images inculcated by the 
Old Testament, and so long as the Christians were surrounded 
by pagans, religious pictures could not fail to encounter enemies 

1 Epiph. H. 79, 7, 9 ; Aug. Contra Faust. XX, 21 ; De Civ. Dei, X, 1 ; 
Cyril. Alex. Contra Iulian. VI, p. 203 ; Theodor. Graec. aff. cur. II, 
VIII, ed. Schulze, IV, 754, 921 ; Isid. De eccles. off. I, 35. 

2 Epiph. H. 78 ; Hieron. De perpet. virgin. B. M. adv. Helvidium ; Adv. 
Iovinianum ; contra Vigilantium. Against Bonosus see Ambr. De instit. 
virg. 5 ; SiRic. Ep. ad. Anys. ; W. Haller, Jovinianus, 1897 (T. u. U. N. F, 
II, 2). 

■ H. 79, 



204 A Manual of Church History 

among the Christians. Among the canons of the Council of 
Elvira we read (c. 36) : Placnit picturas in ecclesia non esse 
debere, ne quod colitur et adoratur in parietibus depingatur. 1 
Eusebius, 3 Epiphanius, 3 and, as late as c. 600, Serenus of 
Marseilles 4, denounced the use of pictures. But with the fall 
of paganism the main objection against the practice fell to 
the ground, and the use of paintings gradually became general. 
In some localities — for instance, at Rome in the catacombs — 
the innovation had been introduced earlier. Pictures were 
early appreciated as a means of beautifying churches, and 
of instructing and edifying the Faithful. We even hear of 
such pictures being made the object of adoration (for which 
we must probably read 'worship'), 5 — an abuse which was 
reprobated by some, such as Gregory the Great, who were far 
from unfriendly to the legitimate use of pictorial representa- 
tions. When, however, it was made clear that the object of 
such worship was not so much the pictures themselves as 
the saint depicted, the practice was allowed to spread, and 
soon loomed very large, especially in the East. Pictures 
were kissed, candles were lighted in front of them, and 
incense offered, &c. This rapid development may be partly 
accounted for by the miraculous origin ascribed to certain 
pictures which made their first appearance in the sixth century : 
that of Camuliana in Cappadocia, that of Abgar, and the other 
so-called el/coves axeipoiroir^roL of our Saviour, of His Mother, 
and of some other saints. 

III. The places which had been sanctified by the earthly 
conversation of Christ were the object of even more frequent 
pilgrimages than the tombs of the martyrs. We still possess 
a couple of descriptions of pilgrimages undertaken in the fourth 
century, the Itiner avium, Burdigalense (a.D. 333), and the Pete- 
grinatio Silviae (§ 76, 9). So exaggerated was the account made 
of this pilgrimage that several of the Fathers were compelled to 
write against it. Jerome, for instance, remarks (Ep. 58 ad Paultn. 
c. 2) : Non Ierosolymis fuisse, sed Ierosolymis bene vixisse lau- 
dandum est. 



1 Cp. Funk, A. u. U. I, 346-52. 

2 Pitra, Spicil. Solesm. I, 383-86. 

3 Inter Hieron. Ep. 51, c. 9. 

4 Greg. M. Ep. IX, 105 ; XI, 13. 

6 Aug. De morib. eccl. cath. I, c. 34, No. 75 ; Greg. M. Ep. XI, 13, cp. IX, 52. 



Church Buildings 205 

§71 
Sacred Buildings, Vessels, and Vestments l 

The churches which had been constructed in the course of 
the third century having been destroyed during the Diocletian 
persecution, more commodious and finer buildings now made 
their appearance everywhere. According to their shape they 
belong to two classes : that of the Basilica and that of the 
Rotunda. 

I. The ground plan of the Basilica is an elongated 
rectangle. Not unfrequently a transept was added, giving 
the whole the shape of a T or cross. At the end occupied by 
the altar, the building usually terminated in a semicircular 
Apse (äyjrfc, concha, tribuna). At the opposite end of the 
Church, i.e. at the entrance, there was a vestibule (vdpOrji;), 
and in front of this a court or Atrium, which was usually 
surrounded by a colonnade, but was left uncovered. The 
Didascalia and the Constitutions of the Apostles (II, 57) mention 
that the altar is at the east end of the church ; we must there- 
fore infer that the orientation of churches was usual from the 
beginning. In Rome, however, until the commencement of 
the fifth century, the churches were sometimes built to face 
the opposite direction, whilst there are numerous instances in 
which they deviated from the line due east and west. The 
church was divided longitudinally, by two or four rows of 
columns, into two or four aisles and a central nave (or ship). 
The nave, which was the highest, was covered with a pent roof, 
whereas the aisles were provided with lean-to roofs. The 
windows were placed in the space immediately below the 
roof of the great nave, which afterwards was known as the 
clerestory. Where the church contained a double aisle on 
both sides it was necessary to make windows in the outer walls 
also. Within, there was usually a ceiling, though sometimes 
there was none, the beams of the roof being left visible. The 

1 W. Lübke, Vorschule z. St. d. k. Kunst, 6th ed. 1873 (Engl. Trans. 
Introd. to a Hist, of Church Architecture, 1855) ; H. Holtzinger, Die altchr. 
Architektur, 2nd ed. 1899; Kirsch, Die christl. Kultusgebäude im Altertum, 
1893 ; Kraus, Gesch. der. christl. Kunst. I— II, 1895-1900 ; F. Witting, Die 
Anfänge christl. Architektur, 1902 : K. M, Kaufmann, Hdb. d, christl, 
Archäologie, 1905. 



2o6 A Manual of Church History 

apse was vaulted ; the inner walls of the building, where cost 
was no object, were coated with a veneer of marble, whilst the 
apse and the walls of the great nave were adorned with 
pictures, usually in mosaic. 

II. The Rotunda, or circular form, was used chiefly for 
baptisteries and mortuary chapels. In the East this shape soon 
came, however, to be preferred even for the greater churches, 
and, though such churches continued to be frequently built 
in a rectangular shape, means were found to make their upper 
works resemble a rotunda, and to cover them with a dome, 
or, rather, with a cluster of cupolas. This system came to be 
known as the Byzantine style. Amongst its other peculiarities 
is the shape of the capitals and that of the apse, which is round 
only on the inside, whilst without it is polygonal in shape. 
The most remarkable example of this style of architecture is 
the Church of St. Sophia in Constantinople, an erection of 
Justinian I. 

III. The inner arrangement of the church was as follows. 
In the middle of the apse was the bishop's throne (Opovos, 
cathedra), on either side of which were placed the stalls 
of the presbyters. The altar stood in the centre of the 
transept, or at the end of the nave ; the whole of this space 
was called the Presbyterium (also leparelov, ahvrov, altar tum). 
Originally it was shut off from the rest of the church only 
by low railings (/ciy/cXiSes, cancellt, whence ' chancel'). In the 
course of time, the better to secure privacy, columns came to 
be erected, between which veils were hung. In the East, 
later still, the same end was obtained by interposing a light 
screen, which, on account of the pictures with which it was 
adorned, was called the Iconostasis. The lower clergy took 
their place in front of the altar or in that portion of the nave 
nearest to it. This portion also was inclosed by a balustrade, 
at the edge of which there was an elevated position occupied by 
the reader when giving forth the lessons or the psalms. This 
was called the Ambo (gradus), and soon came to be used by the 
bishop as a pulpit ; previous to 400 the latter had been wont to 
address the congregation either from his throne or from the 
altar. In many churches there was an ambo for the Epistle 
and another for the Gospel, one on each side of the lower choir. 
The laity sat or stood, divided off according to sex and age, in 



Vessels and Vestments 207 

the room left vacant. Among the Greeks the women were 
placed in galleries over the side aisles (vrrepwa, yvvcuieeia). 
Lastly, a place at the back of the nave was set aside for the 
catechumens and the second class of penitents or hearers } 
the weepers remained without in the atrium. 

IV. As a rule the Baptistery was built in the neighbour- 
hood of the church, with which it was connected by a covered 
way. The bath (piscina, fons, Ko\vixßrj6pa) was in the 
middle and was provided with steps leading down to it. For 
the sake of modesty curtains were spread over the surrounding 
railings. When infant baptism grew common, the font took 
the form of a small upstanding vessel such as is used at the 
present day. In many places the need of a separate edifice 
for baptism being now no longer felt, the font was transferred 
to the church ; a large number of ancient churches retained, 
nevertheless, their baptisteries down to the Middle Ages. 

V. The Altar 1 was originally in the shape of a table. One 
result, however, of the use of the catacombs for the celebrations 
of the sacred mysteries was the introduction of a new form 
in the shape of a sarcophagus or rectangular chest. The 
material used was at first wood, and later, stone. The 
upper portion or mensa was covered with a linen cloth, whilst 
the sides were often encased with precious metal, this being 
the case especially with the front, of which the decoration 
went by the name of antependium. Above the altar rose a 
baldachin, the so-called ciborium (/cißcopiov, umbr acutum), 
which was supported by pillars ; from the ciborium, veils 
(tetraveta) were hung to hide the altar, and within the enclosure 
a vessel in the form of a dove was suspended (irepcar^pLov) in 
which the Eucharist was reserved. Originally there was only 
one altar in each church, a system which is still respected by 
the Greeks ; the multiplying of altars was a result of the later 
Western practice of private masses. 

VI. The principal sacred vessels used in the Liturgy were 
the chalice and paten (patina, Uo-kos ; a plate), 2 which were to 
receive the elements to be consecrated, viz. the bread and the 
wine. They were composed of a variety of substances ; we 
hear of the chalice being made of wood, clay, glass, gold, silver, 

1 Mg. by Laib and Schwarz, 1857 ; A. Schmid, 1871. 

2 Hefele, Beiträge z. KG. II, 322-30. 



2o8 A Manual of Church History 

tin, &c. In the Middle Ages the use of metal was, however, 
made obligatory. Besides the calix offertorius or sacrificatorius 
used by the priest, so long as Communion continued to be ad- 
ministered under both kinds, there was another chalice for the 
laity — the so-called scyphus or calix ministerialis, sometimes 
also named the calix ansatus on account of the handles with 
which it was usually provided. 

VII. In Christian antiquity there were no specifically 
ecclesiastical vestments. 1 The ministers of the altar performed 
the services clad in their ordinary best clothes, or sometimes in 
the dress usually assumed by public functionaries. This dress 
consisted in the fifth century of the tunic, a long white under- 
garment, with or without sleeves, and the penula, a sleeveless 
garment with a hole in the middle, usually either brown or 
violet in colour, which was worn above. It, however, became 
early the rule not to wear outside the churches such garments 
as had been used for the service. 2 Time brought other altera- 
tions ; the tunic was transformed into the alb, and the penula 
into the chasuble (casula, planeta). Both these vestments 
are mentioned as distinctive clerical garments by the Fourth 
Council of Toledo (633, c. 28), when it enacts that a wrongly 
degraded cleric must again assume before the altar the Orders 
of which he had been deprived, the priest putting on the orarium 
and planeta, and the deacon the orarium and alb. The 
orarium, which is here mentioned as a piece of dress common to 
both priest and deacon, is what we now know as the stole ; 
it had been already alluded to by the Council of Laodicea, 
which had forbidden its use by subdeacons (c. 22), lectors, and 
cantors (c. 23) ; in other words, had reserved it to the higher 
clerics. In the Liber pontificalis^ we hear of a pallium lino- 
stimum, which afterwards became the maniple. Among the 
episcopal insignia mentioned by the Council of Toledo, we 
find, besides the orarium, the ring and crozier. Besides the 
latter, the pallium — the lorum of the imperial officials — was 

1 Mg. by Hefele {Beiträge, II, 150-244) ; Bock, 3 vol. 1851-71 ; Marriot, 
1868 ; J. Braun {Die priesterl. Gewänder des Abendlandes , 1897 ; Die bischöf- 
lichen Gewänder, 1898) ; Wilpert, 1898 {Die Gewandung der Christen in den 
ersten Jahrh.) ; Duchesne, Origines, pp. 365-84 ; Festschrift z. Jub. d. d. 
Campo santo in Rom. 1897, pp. 83-1 14 ; St. a. ML. 1898, I, 396-413. 

- Liber pontif. Stephanus I ; Can. Apost. 73. 

3 Vita Silvesiri et Zosimi. 



Monasticism 209 

frequently considered as part of the episcopal dress, especially 
in the East, where it was called the a>fio(f)6piov. In the West 
this article was later on restricted to metropolitans, and was 
obtained from the Holy See. Lastly, the Pope and his deacons 
wore, besides the tunic, another sleeved under-garment called 
the dalmatic. It early became customary to allow bishops 
and priests of other Churches to wear this garment as a token 
of honour, and gradually this vestment came to be used 
generally by bishops and deacons, the latter wearing it as 
an outer garment. Hence we may say that the liturgical 
dress was invented almost in its entirety in the second period 
of the History of the Church. In the succeeding ages further 
developments followed, affecting principally the bishop's vest- 
ments ; they took place under Old Testament influences, 
mediaeval liturgists labouring to establish an analogy between 
the Jewish high-priest and the Christian bishop. It was in 
the Middle Ages also that different coloured vestments came 
into use ; in earlier times the prevailing colour had been 
white; the earliest witness to the present use of colours is 
Innocent III. 



§72 

Monasticism l 

Monasticism is a new form of the Christian life which we 
meet in this period, or, to be more exact, which then began to 
flourish, for to tell the truth it may be traced much farther 
back. Certain sayings of Christ and of His Apostles regarding 
perfection induced many Christians, even in the first centuries, 
to observe continence and to practise other mortifications, 
without however quitting their homes. Such people were 
called Ascetics (ä<Ttcr]TaL, continentes) , and they were the 
real forerunners of the monks. Information concerning 

1 Alteserra, Asceticon s. Orig. rei monasticae, 1674 ; Montalembert, 
Hist, des moines en Occident, 7 vol. 1860-77 (Engl. Trans. 1861-79); Allies, 
The Monastic Life, 1893 '> Heimbucher, Die Orden u. Kongregationen der hath. 
K. 2 vol. 1896-97 ; Zöckler, Aszese u. Mönchtum, 1897 ; Ladeuze, Etude 
sur le cenobitisme pakhomien, 1898 ; Besse, Les moines d' Orient anterieurs 
au conciie de Chalcddoine, 1900 ; S. Schiwietz, Das morgenländische Mönchtum, 
I, 1904 ; Kath. 1905 (Neuere Forsch, z. Gesch. d. alten Mönchtums) ; J, de 
Decker, Contribution d V etude des Vies de Paul de Th. 1905, 
vol. 1. 



2io A Manual of Church History 

them is forthcoming in the pseudo-Clementine epistle Ad 
Virgines. 

A higher form of asceticism was practised by those Chris- 
tians, who, having sought peace in the time of persecution, by 
escaping into the desert, grew to like their new life so well that 
they continued it even when the persecutions had come to an 
end. Of these solitaries or Anchorites the most famous were 
the hermit Paul of Thebes (f 341) and St. Anthony (f356). 
The latter, after having lived in utter solitude for some twenty 
years, was induced to take some pupils, who, by erecting their 
cells in the neighbourhood of his, came to form a kind of settle- 
ment of anchorites under the saint's direction. Hence St. 
Anthony has been described as the Father of hermits and the 
patriarch of monasticism. 

Lastly, the same period witnessed the institution of the 
coenobitic life (koivos ßios). St. Pachomius (f 346) founded 
in the hamlet of Tabennisi (Tabenna) , in the Thebais near the 
Nile, a monastery, and by composing for it a rule, he established 
it on a firmer footing than the community of St. Anthony, 
which depended wholly on the personality of its founder, and 
of which the members were all hermits. 

The growth of monasticism was truly prodigious. To house 
the pupils who flocked to him, Pachomius had soon to build 
new monasteries, and as certain other institutions put them- 
selves under his direction, it was not long before nine houses 
with several thousand inmates were subject to him. The 
headquarters of the community was the monastery of Peboou, 
to which the founder transferred his domicile. The same rule 
was introduced into the Nitrian Mountains by Ammonius, into 
the Sketic Desert by Macarius the Elder, also known as the 
Egyptian, and into Palestine by Hilarion. In Asia Minor it 
found a strong supporter in Basil the Great (f 379), who drew up 
two new Rules, the Great and the Little. In some localities, 
however, the hermit life again came into favour, the monks 
dwelling in cells under the direction of an abbot ; such a 
settlement was called a Lavra. 

The West soon became acquainted with the new mode 
of life mainly through St. Athanasius's descriptions [Vita S. 
Antonii), and monasteries sprang up in several places. St. 
Martin (t c. 397) founded many in Gaul, among them being that 



Monasticism 211 

of Marmoutier (Monasterium maim) near Tours. St. Honoratus, 
who afterwards became bishop of Aries, established (c. 410) a 
monastery on the isle of Lerinum, near Nice, from which many 
bishops came forth. A few years later the monastery of St. 
Victor near Marseilles was founded by John Cassian. 

The then monks were almost all laymen. They occupied 
their time with manual labour and prayer ; in Egypt they 
were chiefly engaged on the fabrication of chairs, coverlets, 
mats, and baskets ; these they sold, and the proceeds went to 
support the monastery and help the poor. As a rule the 
number of clerics in a monastery was only barely sufficient for 
the carrying out of the services, this of course depending 
on the size of the community. Pachomius went so far as 
to exclude clerics altogether from his communities, that his 
monks might not hanker after honours and dignities. In 
his houses the services were performed by the neighbouring 
clergy. 

The monastic life was found to appeal strongly to the weaker 
sex also, who had been prepared by the practice, already 
prevalent in the third century, of Christian virgins consecrating 
themselves by vow to lead an ascetic life. 1 Convents for 
women were not seldom erected near the monasteries for men, 
partly that the monks might perform the necessary services 
in the convent, partly because in those troubled times it was 
well to have male assistance at call. The neighbourhood of 
the establishments was, however, a constant source of moral 
danger ; the Council of Agde (506, c. 28) and the emperor 
Justinian were therefore induced to forbid double monasteries, 
while the Council of Nicaea {ySy, c. 20) forbade the founding of 
new houses of this kind, and drew up rules for the regulation 
of those already in existence. 

It was not long before it became a custom for parents to 
dedicate irrevocably their children to the monastic life, and 
to hand them over to the monks. Such children were called 
Oblates (or Donati), whereas the monks who entered the 
monastery later in life were called Conversi. The practice 
was condemned by Gregory the Great, who desired that none 
should be admitted to the religious life before the age of 
eighteen (Ep. I, 51) ; the Council in Trullo (692, c. 40) simply 

1 Cone. 1Mb. 300, c, 13 ; Ancyr. 314, c, 19 ; Z.f. k. Th. 1889, pp. 302-30, 

p 2 



212 A Manual of Church History 

ruled that the lowest age for admission should be ten years. 
These orders were, however, never observed everywhere ; the 
Council of Toledo (633, c. 49) has it that ' Monachum aut 
paterna devotio aut propria professio facit,' and this expresses 
the general mind of the West during the whole of the Middle 
Ages. 

In the case of adults it was very necessary to find means 
to oblige them to remain true to the life they had vowed. 
The Council of Chalcedon forbade, under pain of excommunica- 
tion, any monk to return to the world (c. 7) or to contract 
marriage (c. 16). The Council also strove to regularise the 
position of the monasteries, and therefore enacted further 
(c. 4) that each house should be subject to the bishop's inspec- 
tion, that no new monastery should be erected without his 
leave, and that no monk should quit his community save with 
his permission, also that slaves should not be professed without 
the prior consent of their masters. 

St. Benedict of Nursia (490-543) l was instrumental in 
introducing a great reform into the West. After having dwelt 
a solitary life at Subiaco, whence he directed the neighbouring 
monastery of Vicovaro, he erected for his many disciples 
twelve small houses, and finally the great monastery of Monte 
Cassino near San Germano (529). He also composed a new 
rule, which, being recommended by both popes and kings, was 
soon adopted over the whole of the West. A remarkable 
element of the rule is the vow of stability which it imposed 
on the monks, requiring each one to remain until his death 
in the house into which he had first sought admission. This 
arrangement not only made an end of any lurking designs of 
returning to the world, it also prevented the constant change 
of abode and the monkish habit of tramping about the 
country. 

At about the same time Cassiodorus, after having resigned 
the office which he had held in the Ostrogothic kingdom, 
made other important reforms in the monastery of Vivarium, 
which he founded near Squillacium in Lower Italy (538) ; he 
obliged his monks to undertake literary work and to act as 

1 Mabillon, Annales O.S. B.,6fol. (down to 1 157) 1703-19; Grützmacher, 
Bedeutung Benedikts v. N. u. s. Regel, 1892 ; Clausse, Les origines binidictines, 
1899 ; L'Huillier, Le patriarche Saint Benoit, 1905, 



Monasticism 213 

copyists. The Benedictines followed his example, and their 
Order became the prime educatory factor of the Middle Ages. 
Not only did it turn the wilderness into cultivated fields, but 
by its literary activity it was the means of transmitting to later 
ages the treasures of antiquity. 

The Irish monastic rule of Columban subsequently earned 
a great name. Columban himself introduced it towards the 
end of the sixth century into Burgundy, where, during his 
sojourn of twenty years (590-610), he founded three monasteries, 
at Anegray, Luxeuil, and Fontaines ; and into Italy, where he 
called into existence the monastery of Bobbio, not far from 
Piacenza (614). His rule was not, however, destined to endure, 
and with the end of the seventh century it was gradually 
exchanged for that of St. Benedict, with which it had been 
already for some time past combined and to a certain extent 
confounded. 

Monastic life also assumed other forms besides the above. 
Side by side with the coenobites and anchorites there existed Sara- 
baitae or Remoboth who dwelt in cells, two or three together without 
a superior, usually in towns and hamlets ; Gyrovagi, who travelled 
from one monastery to another, staying as guests not more than 
three or four days at each house. There were also several classes 
of anchorites ; for instance, Recluses, who shut or even immured 
themselves in a cell ; Stylites, who lived on the top of pillars, 
the manner of life being the invention of Simeon the Stylite (near 
Antioch, j 459, cp. Rauh. 1895, 1) ; Grazers (B00W), of Syria and 
the neighbouring lands, so called because they had no dwellings, 
and subsisted on the herbs of the fields. Among the coenobites 
likewise we find the sect of the Accemeti (Akol^tol, ' sleepless '), 
who, divided into choirs, kept up a ceaseless round of prayer. 
They were founded by St. Alexander (f c. 430), and their best- 
known house was the Studium at Constantinople, a foundation of 
the Consular Studius (460). There were also other differences, 
too numerous to mention, which all arose from the fact that for 
long there was no uniform rule in use everywhere, nearly every 
monastery being governed by its own peculiar laws (Cass. De 
instit. II, 2). 

Christian monasticism is shown by its history to be a thoroughly 
Christian growth. It is fanciful to argue that it was derived 
from the monks of Serapis in Egypt (Weingarten, Ursprung d. M. 
1877), or from Buddhism (Z. /. w. Th. 1878, p. 149), or from 
Neo-Platonism (Keim, Aus dem Urchristentum, I, 215 ff.). Cp. E. 
Preuschen, Mönchtum u. Serapiskult, 2nd ed. 1903 ; D. Völter, 
Der Ursprung des Mönchtums, 1900. 



214 A Manual of Church History 

§ 73 
Christian Influence in the Social and Moral Life 1 

In the previous period the Church's influence had been 
confined to a limited circle, but, when Christianity had been 
established on the throne, a wider field was opened. It is 
true that, owing to the political influences brought to bear 
on the people, many of the new converts were Christians only in 
name, but the spirit of charity and self-denial, which in former 
times had made so great an impression on the pagans, still 
remained. We hear of many and great works of charity : 
a portion of the Church's revenues was set aside for the poor ; 
bishops were compelled to provide clothing and food for the 
indigent ; the Council of Tours (567, c. 5) made it obligatory 
on each town to assist the poor according to its means ; finally 
there arose a multitude of institutions for the help of the 
sufferers and needy : hospitals, almshouses, orphanages, hostels 
for foundlings and travellers, &c.; all of them institutions quite 
unknown in the ancient world, but to the influence of which 
even Julian bore a grudging testimony when he attempted 
to introduce them among the pagans. Especially famous was 
the hospital which was founded by Basil the Great at Caesarea, 
which was called after him the Basilias, and which furnished 
a model for other similar establishments in Cappadocia and 
elsewhere. 2 

Slavery was not, indeed, abolished. 3 The Church recognised 
it, on the contrary, as a legal institution, and she herself retained 
slaves on her properties. But a change soon became apparent. 
The freeing of slaves was recommended as a work of mercy, a 
recommendation which was followed by many and which was 

1 L. Friedländer, Sittengesch. Roms. 3 vol. 1862; 6th ed. 1888-90; 
7th ed. 2 vol. 1901. Lecky, Hist, of European Morals, 2 vol. 1869 ; Brin 
et Laveille, La civilisation chretienne, 2 vol. 1895 ; H. Kurth, Les origines 
de la civilisation moderne, 2 vol. 4th ed. 1902 ; L. Lallemand, Hist, de la chante, 
2 vol. 1900 ; G. Grupp, Kulturgesch. derröm. Kaiserzeit, 2 vol. 1903-04. 

2 Ratzinger, Gesch. der kirchlichen Armenpflege, 2nd ed. 1884 ; Uhlhorn, 
Die christliche Liebestätigkeit in der alten K. 2nd ed. 1882 (Engl. Trans. 
Christian Charity in the Ancient Church, 1883). 

3 Mohler, Ges. Sehr. II, 54-140; Hefele, Beitr. z. KG. I, 212-26; 
Overbeck, Studien z. Gesch. d. alten K. 1875, I, 158-230; Allard, Les 
esclaves chrdtiens, 3rd ed. 1900 ; Th. Zahn. Ski. u. Christent. 1879 ; Wallon, 
Hist,, de. Vescl. dans V antiquiU, 3 vol. 1879. 



Christianity in Society 215 

facilitated by new civil laws. Constantine enacted that the 
reception of a slave into the Church should be the equivalent 
of a formal manumission ; clerics were also to be allowed to 
set free their slaves without any formalities. The Church 
also strove to soften the relations between master and slave 
by the Christian idea of the equality of all men, and thus to 
turn a merely legal bond into something moral. In purely 
ecclesiastical matters no class distinctions were allowed ; 
slaves had at their disposal the same means of grace as their 
masters, and a born slave was, to begin with; equally eligible for 
ecclesiastical preferment ; again, in the case of a fall, the same 
penance was imposed on the master as on the slave. State 
legislation, which had been growing gradually milder from 
the very beginning of the empire, and, especially under the 
humanitarian emperors of the second century, had much 
improved the condition of the slaves, now, under Christian 
influences, proceeded still further. Especially praiseworthy 
were the efforts of Constantine, who decreed that the wilful 
slaying of a slave should be considered as equivalent to murder ; 
and of Justinian, who abolished all legal formalities for setting 
free a bondsman, did away with the intermediate class of 
freedmen, gave to the emancipated slave all the rights of a 
citizen, and allowed a slave to marry a free woman with the 
consent of his master. 

Another direction l in which Christian influences were felt 
was in the abolition of several cruel proceedings which had been 
tolerated in the administration of justice. The custom of 
branding the forehead was formally abrogated : crucifixion, 
even if it was not abolished by Constantine himself/ 3 fell into 
disuse in the fourth century ; the same emperor was also 
instrumental in securing to prisoners a kinder treatment than 
heretofore. A later law (409) commissioned the bishops 
to visit regularly the prisons, inspect the prisoners, and pre- 
vent any cases of unjust detention. The Council of Orleans 
(549, c. 20) gave directions for the material support of the 
prisoners. The bishops were thus fully empowered to remedy 
any undue harshness in the laws, and their influence was still 

1 Riffel, Verh. zw. Kirche u. Staat, 1836, pp. 91 ff.; K. Krauss, Im Kerker 
vor u. nach Christus, 1895. 

2 Zestermann. Die Kreuzigung bei den Alten, 1868, pp. 17 ff. 



2i6 A Manual of Church History 

further increased by the right of sanctuary granted to ecclesi- 
astical edifices. 

Even more salutary were the innovations made with 
respect to the value of human life. Suicide had, it is true, been 
denounced by many of the olden philosophers, but others, 
such as the Stoics, looked on it as not only permissible but as 
a real duty under certain circumstances, and the general feeling 
was decidedly in favour of this doctrine. The practice was, 
however, effectually vetoed by Christianity : St. Augustine, 
in his City of God (I, 22-27), proved its utter sinfulness ; the 
Council of Braga (563, c. 16) excluded suicides from the com- 
memoration of the Mass and refused them Christian burial. 
Even more determined, if possible, was the Church's opposition 
to abortion and to the exposal or killing of infants. In this 
matter her efforts reach back to the very beginning of Chris- 
tianity, the Didache (II, 2) and the Epistle of Barnabas (XIX, 5) 
already condemning such practices. The civil law now came 
to the Church's help in making provisions for the protection 
of children. The right of life and death which the father had 
possessed, according to ancient Roman law, over his child had 
practically fallen into desuetude before the commencement of the 
period; it was, however, formally abolished only by Constantine, 
who decreed the punishment of a parricide against the father 
who should dare to stretch his right so far as to slay his child. 1 
The same emperor also endeavoured to prevent the exposal 
of children, first by granting their foster-parents parental rights, 
and then expressly forbidding such exposals by law. 2 Needless 
to say, the law did not succeed in putting an end to the evil, 
but so far as was possible the practice stood condemned. The 
gladiatorial games were also an object of the Church's anim- 
adversions, and, as the matter was a public one, legislation in 
this case sufficed to bring about their cessation. These games, 
which had been denounced from the beginning by the best 
of the Christians, were, though not exactly forbidden by 
Constantine, at least blamed and greatly hindered by his 
prohibiting the use of criminals in the arena. 3 After the 
monk Telemachus had paid with his life at Rome for his 

1 Cod. Theod. IX, 15, 1. 

2 Ibid. VIII, 51, 2. 

3 Ibid. XV, 12, 1 ; Eus. Vit. Cons, IV, 25 ; Socr. I, 18 ; Soz. I, 8. 






Christianity in Society 217 

zeal against the sanguinary display (404), the combats were 
suppressed entirely by Honorius. 1 

With regard, finally, to the moral life. It must not be 
supposed that the olden world was utterly devoid of any sense 
of decency; nevertheless, at the time when Christianity first 
appeared, the pagans whose lives were pure were decidedly 
in a minority. Generally speaking, laxity prevailed both in 
theory and in practice. Unnatural intercourse of men with 
boys was a widespread vice, especially in the Grecian world ; 
adultery alone was judged severely, and even this not always. 
So long as the pagan mythology was predominant nothing else 
could be expected. The gods themselves were accredited with 
sins against nature ; many temples were mere houses of 
infamy ; some of the festivals were open orgies ; nor can we 
exaggerate the demoralising influence of the shows. Chris- 
tianity at its coming brought with it a conviction of the need 
of a higher moral conscience. The Church was not content 
with attacking adultery : she condemned all illicit unions. 
With respect to the grosser forms of vice, they were proceeded 
against by the first Christian emperors. 2 

1 Theod. V, 26 ; cp. Prud. Clem. Contra Symmach. I, 1124 flf. 

2 Cod. Theod. IX, 24, 1-3 ; XV, 7, 4, 10. 



CHAPTER V 

ECCLESIASTICAL LITERATURE l 

§ 74 

General Character of the Literature of the Period 

With the conquest of the Roman Empire by Christianity 
in the fourth century Patristic literature reached its prime. 
The great theological controversies sharpened men's wits, 
and many who flung themselves into the contest were not only 
highly gifted by nature, but had also received by way of 
education the very best that the time could afford. As their 
efforts were mainly devoted to protecting Christian belief against 
attempts to modify it, the literature of the period is princi- 
pally of a dogmatic or polemical character, though the other 
branches of theology were far from being entirely unrepresented. 
This great forward movement in the theological world held 
on till the Council of Chalcedon, beginning to fail only with the 
middle of the fifth century ; a few productions of importance 
belong, nevertheless, to a somewhat later date. 

The headquarters of literary life in the East were Alex- 
andria and Antioch, from which the two most important 
theological schools of the time took their names. These 
two schools differed chiefly on the point of exegesis, the Alex- 
andrians having an especial fondness for that allegorical 
interpretation of which Origen had been in former times the 
most determined and also the most scholarly exponent, whilst 
the Antiochenes preferred to seek the grammatical and his- 
torical sense of the Scriptures. The latter school, which had 

1 For bibliography, see §§36-40. Krumbacher, Gesch. der byzantinischen 
Literatur, 527-1453, 2nd ed. 1897; R. Duval, Anciennes UtUratures chrdtiennes, 
II, La litt, syriaque, 2nd ed. 1900. 






Greek Writers of the Fourth and Fifth Century 219 

been founded by Lucian and Dorotheus at the end of the 
previous period, now reached its full development, the false 
interpretations of the Arians making the more thorough 
exploration of the Scriptures a matter of necessity. At 
Antioch Holy Writ was studied scientifically, whereas the 
efforts of the Alexandrians, in spite of all their talents and 
perspicacity, were prevented by their one-sided tendency from 
bearing any fruit. 1 Another point on which the two schools 
were divided concerned the Christological question. The 
Antiochenes, who held a more matter-of-fact view of Chris- 
tianity, carefully strove to keep apart in Christ the human 
and the Divine, some, indeed, going so far as to endanger 
our Saviour's oneness ; on the other hand, the Alexandrians 
laid stress especially on the union in Christ of the Divine 
and human nature — a tendency which ultimately issued in 
Monophysitism. 

Literary progress was not, however, confined to these two 
schools : the whole Church was more or less involved in it, and 
great doctors arose throughout Christendom, even Syria and 
Armenia contributing their quota to Christian literature. 



§ 75 

Eastern Writings of the Fourth and Fifth Century 

I. The series of the Greek writers of the period is opened 
by the father of Church History, Eusebius Pamphili (*), 
bishop of Caesarea in Palestine (f c. 340), 3 who earned a name 
not only in the field of history, but also in that of apologetics. 
He published refutations of the antichristian libels of 
Porphyrius and Hierocles ; in his Praeparatio evangelica 
he proved the error of heathenism, cdid in his Demonstratio 
evangelica the superiority of Christianity. In theology he — 
like his friend and protector Pamphilus, who was a devoted 
supporter of Origen — was not altogether devoid of subordinatist 
leanings. Though, after much hesitation, he did finally 
accept the Nicene Creed, his opinions made him a confederate 

1 Mg. on the Antiochene School, by Kihn, 1866; Ph s Hergenröther, 
1866. 

2 Opp. ed, Dindorf, 4 vol, 1867-71, P t G t 19-24« 



220 A Manual of Church History 

and friend of Arius and an opponent of the Nicene Fathers, 
especially of Marcellus of Ancyra, whom he assailed in two 
works {Contra Marcellum ; De eccles. theologia). 1 

Whereas Eusebius was a secret foe of the Nicene Faith, 
his younger contemporary, Athanasius (f 373) , 2 was the greatest 
of its supporters. His life's task was to battle against the 
Arian heresy. As a mere deacon he had attacked it at the 
Council of Nicaea, and having been elected to the See of 
Alexandria (328) he continued the struggle with still greater 
energy, conscious of his greater responsibility. No suffering 
or oppression, not even his being five times banished, could 
withdraw him from the controversy. His writings, too, were 
mostly devoted to the same object. Among his chief works 
must be mentioned his Orationes IV contra Arianos, the 
fourth oration being, however, of doubtful authenticity ; of 
his other works we have already spoken in dealing with the 
history of Arianism. 

The life of the three great Cappadocians was also spent 
in the struggle with Arianism and Pneumatomachism, though 
their literary work is not so wholly circumscribed by the 
heresies. Basil the Great, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia 
(370-79) , 3 also earned a name as a writer on exegesis and 
asceticism. Passing mention must be made of his works 
Adv. Eunomium and De Spiritu S., of his homilies on the 
Hexaemeron, his Monastic Rule, and of his many epistles. 
Gregory of Nazianzus (t c. 390), 4 a friend of Basil's, by whom he 
had been consecrated bishop of Sasima, was famed as an orator 
and poet. Of his orations the most important are the five 
which, during the short period of his administration of the 
Church of Constantinople (379-81), he wrote in defence of the 
divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. It is to them that 
he owes his name of the Theologian. Two of his epistles, 
addressed to Cledonius, are of great dogmatic interest. 

1 For their authenticity, see Th. St. VI (1905), 512-21; Z. f. mutest. W, 
1906, pp. 39-76. 

2 Ed. Montfaucon, 3 fol. 1698 ; Justiniani, 4 fol. 1777 ; P.G. XXV- 
XXVIII. Mg. by Möhler, 2nd ed. 1844; F. Lauchert (Lehre des hl. A.), 
1895; K. Hoss (Schrifttum u. Theologie), 1899; Stülcken, 1899 (T.u. U. N. 
F. IV, 4). 

3 Ed. Garnier, 3 fol. 1721-30; P,G. XXIX-XXXII. Mg. by Klose, 

1835. 

4 Ed. Clemencet and Caillou, 2 fol. 1778-1842; P.G. XXXV-XXXVIII. 
Mg, by Ullmann, 1825 ; 2nd ed. 1867 ; A. Beno!t, 2 vol* 2nd ed. 1884. 



Greek Writers of the Fourth and Fifth Century 221 

Lastly, St. Basil's brother, Gregory of Nyssa (t c. 395), l left 
behind him, not only many homilies, epistles, and writings 
both exegetical and ascetical, but also two larger works 
against Eunomius and Apollinaris, an Oratio catechetica 
magna forming an excellent treatise on dogma, besides an 
interesting dialogue with his sister Macrina dealing with the 
soul and the Resurrection. His preference was for speculative 
thought. To Origen he was especially devoted, and borrowed 
from him at least the idea of the äirofcardo-Tacns iravTwv. 

The renown of another great doctor of the Church, John 
Chrysostom of Antioch, 3 was founded on his power as an 
orator. By far the larger portion of his many writings consists 
of homilies, some of which are explanatory of Scripture, 
while others deal with matters moral, dogmatic, or polemical, 
and yet others are discourses pronounced on memorable 
occasions (such as his oration on statues) or sermons preached 
on special feasts. After having been for twelve years a priest 
at Antioch, he was promoted to the see of Constantinople 
(398). On account of his interference in the matter of 
Theophilus of Alexandria, and of his subsequent quarrel with 
the empress Eudoxia (§ 51), he was banished to Cumana in 
Pontus, where he died in 407. 

Other scarcely less well-known Fathers of the fourth 
century are Cyril of Jerusalem (t 386), of whose works we have 
the catecheses preached by him when he was yet a simple 
priest at Jerusalem. They range over all the objects of the 
Christian Faith, dealing also with Baptism and the Eucharist. 3 
Of Didymus the Blind (f 395), 4 who, though he lost his sight 
at the age of four, became master at the catechetical school of 
Alexandria, and one of the most learned men of his time, 
we have a De Trinitate (incomplete) and (in St. Jerome's 
translation) a De Spiritu Sancto, also certain other works, it 
being probable that Books IV-V of Basil's work against 

1 Ed. Fronto Ducaeus, 1618; P.G. XLIV-XLVI. Mg. by Rupp, 1834 ; 

DlEKAMP, 1896. 

2 Ed. Montfaucon, 13 fol. 1718-38 ; P.G. XLVII-LXIV. Mg. by 
Neander, 2 vol. 3rd ed. 1848 (Engl. Trans. 1836) ; Puech, 1891, 1900 ; 
Marchal, 1898; Nagle, 1900. 

3 Ed. Reischl et Rupp, 2 vol. 1848-60 ; P.G. XXXIII. Mg. by Mader, 
1892. 

4 Mg. by J. Leipoldx, 1905 ; cp. Funk, A t u. U. II, 291-329 ; III, 
No, 16, 



222 A Manual of Church History 

Eunomius is an abstract from Didymus's De Dogmatibus or De 
Sectis. As Didymus adopted from Origen the ideas of the pre- 
existence of the soul and of the Apocatastasis, he too was later 
on anathematised (553). To Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis 
in Cyprus (f 403), we owe the Panarium, the fullest of the older 
refutations of the heresies ; though the work may be wanting 
in critical acumen, the abundance of its details gives it a great 
worth. Another of the same writer's works is the Ancoratus, 
an exposition of the Trinitarian doctrine. 1 

Other writers were Macarius of Magnesia, who published 
his Apocritica 2 against a heathen opponent, who was probably 
Porphyrius ; Diodorus, bishop of Tarsus (t c. 394), who had 
formerly been a monk and presbyter at Antioch, and his 
disciple Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia (f 428) , who were the 
first to make a name for the exegetical school of Antioch. 3 As 
these writers were held responsible for the Nestorian heresy, 
they subsequently fell into such disrepute that practically all 
their works have perished. Of Theodore there only remains 
his commentaries on the lesser prophets, on the fourth Gospel 
(preserved in a Syriac translation, published by Chabot, 1897), 
and on the Pauline Epistles (in a Latin translation). 

About the year 400 there was published in Syria the 
so-called Apostolic Constitutions, a recension of yet earlier 
writings. 4 In effect the first six books are based on the 
Didascalia of the Apostles, and the seventh on the Didache. 
The eighth book consists principally of the Liturgy and Canons 
of the Apostles. The whole forms a breviary of Church 
discipline, of which the redactor, or rather the publisher, is 
said to have been Clement of Rome. Its real compiler is, 
however, probably identical with the author of the lengthier 
recension of the Ignatian epistles — who certainly lived at the 
same time and in the same country — and whose work shows 
many points of resemblance with the Apostolic Constitutions 
(§ 37). If this be so, then pseudo-Clement belonged to the 
party of the Apollinarists, the influence of that sect's 

1 Opp. ed. Dindorf, 1859-62 ; Panar. ed. Oehler, 1859-61 ; P.G. XLI- 
XLIII. 

2 Ed. Blondel, 1876. Mg. by Duchesne, 1877. 

3 Kihn, Theodor v. M. und Junilius Afr. als Exegelen, 1880 ; cp. Funk, 
A. w. U. Ill, No. 17. 

4 Mg. and ed. by Funk, 1891-1905 ; cp. above p. 113, note 2, 



Greek Writers of the Fourth and Fifth Century 223 

theology being unmistakable in the pseudo-Ignatian works. 
Because the work was thought to have been interpolated 
by heretics, the Council in Trullo (692, c. 2) decreed that 
it should not be used in the Church. It continued, neverthe- 
less, in high esteem ; the Trullan Council itself admitted that 
parts of the work were truly apostolical, and gave its formal 
sanction to the Apostolic Canons which form the conclusion 
of the Apostolic Constitutions. 

A modification of the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions, 
of which we still have an abstract, forms the basis of the 
Egyptian Canons, extant in Coptic, Arabic, Ethiopic, and, 
partially, in Latin. The new recension in its turn gave rise to the 
recently discovered Syriac Testamentum Domini nostri (ed. Rahmani, 
1899) and to the Canones Hippolyti, of which only the Arabic 
translation has been published, but which also exists in Ethiopic. 
H. Achelis {Die ältesten Quellen des orientalischen Kirchenrechts, 
1891, T. u. U. VI, 4) came to the conclusion that the last-mentioned 
work, at least in the form in which he had re-established the text, 
was really genuine, in consequence of which he proposed to reverse 
the order in which these works are believed to have been produced, 
taking as the earliest the Canons of Hippolytus, then the Egyptian 
Canons, then the parallel text to the eighth book of the Apost. 
Constit., and finally the eighth book itself. Though other critics 
have followed him, there is little doubt but that Achelis was mis- 
taken. Cp. Funk, Testament unseres Herrn und, die verwandten 
Schriften, 1901 ; A. u. U. Ill, No. 18-19; G. Horner, Statutes 
of the Apostles, 1904 ; Th. Qu. 1906, pp. 1-27. 

Another similar work, the Canones ecclesiastici apostolorum (ed. 
Funk, in Doctrina xii Apostolorum, 1887, pp. 50-73), in its present 
form probably belongs at the earliest to the fourth century, though 
it may well be based on older works, the commencement, e.g., being 
an adaptation of the Didache, 1-4, 8. Cp. Funk, A . u. U. II, 236-51. 
^«^ Amphilochius of Iconium (f 394-403), who takes rank with the 
three great Cappadocians, was, so far as we know, the first to make 
use of the expression rpoiros rrjs vTrdpgews with reference to the 
Trinity ; until recently this author had received scarcely any 
attention, owing to the doubts which existed as to the authenticity 
of the homilies preserved under his name. Mg. by K. Holl, 
1904 ; G. Ficker, Amphilochiana, I, 1906. 
. y Apollinaris the Younger, of Laodicea, was another noteworthy 
Contemporary of the Cappadocians, who in his earlier days not only 
earned a name as an apologist and opponent of Arianism, but 
also composed many exegetical works, besides recasting the Bible 
in classical form, that the Christian youth might not suffer from 
Julian's enactment which closed to them the classical schools. At a 
later date, however, his teaching on the human nature of Christ 



1^ 



<f 






224 A Manual of Church History 

brought him into conflict with the Church — a fact which accounts 
for the almost total disappearance of his works. A few of the 
writings belonging to the second period of his life have, nevertheless, 
been preserved, owing to his disciples having fathered them on 
more orthodox ancient writers. Among these works we may mention 
the KaTa pepos ttio-tis, ascribed to Gregory Thaumaturgus. H. 
Lietzmann, Apollinaris v. L. u. s. Schule, 1904. 

Evagrius Ponticus first served the Church of Constantinople 
under Nectarius, and then became a monk in Egypt (f c. 399). 
Long after his death (553) he was condemned as an Origenist, 
though so long as he lived he had been highly esteemed as an 
ascetic and writer. Very few of his works remain. P. G. XL ; mg. 
by Zöckler, 1893. 

The best-known fifth-century writers are two bishops 
representing two antagonistic schools. One of these was 
Cyril of Alexandria (t 444), l the great opponent of Nestorius, 
whose teachings he confuted in numerous writings. He also 
entered the lists as an apologist with his work against Julian 
the Apostate, and was known as an exegetist and defender of 
the Trinitarian doctrine. The other was Theodoret of Cyrus 
(f c. 458) , 2 equally renowned as an historian, apologist, 
polemic and exegetist. His Compendium fabularum haereti- 
carum is the last of the ancient histories of the heresies ; the 
fifth book comprises a short treatise on dogma. His com- 
mentaries on the Bible, in point of method, depth, and precision, 
are greatly superior to those of his contemporaries. 

Synesius of Cyrene (f c. 414) was one of the queerest characters 
of the later Christian antiquity. By birth he was a pagan, and 
for a time belonged to the school of the ill-fated Hypatia. Later 
on he became a Christian and was made bishop of Ptolemais in 
Pentapolis, without, however, abandoning entirely the Neo-Platonic 
philosophy which he had professed all along. The story of his 
life emerges clearly enough from his discourses, hymns, and epistles. 
P. G. LXVIII ; mg. by A. J. Kleffner, 1901 ; Hist. J. 1902, pp. 
751-74 ; C. Vellay, Etudes sur les hymnes de S. 1904. 

Palladius, a pupil of Evagrius Ponticus, and bishop in Asia 
Minor, composed (c. 420) a series of popular lives of monks, which, 
from their having been originally addressed to Lausus, came to 
be known as the Historia Lausiaca. The writer is probably identical 
with the biographer of St. John Chrysostom. P.G. LXV ; mg. by 
Preuschen, 1897, ed. by Butler, 1904 (Texts and Studies, VI). 

1 Ed. Aubert, 7 fol. 1638 ; P.G. LXVIII-LXXVII. Mg. by Kopallik, 
1881. 

2 Ed. Schulze, 5 vol. 1769-74; P.G. LXXX-LXXXIV ; Graeca affec- 
tionum cur. ed. J. Raeder, 1904 ; J. Schulte, Th. als Apologet, 1904. 



Latin Writers of the Fourth and Fifth Century 225 

Isidore Pelusiota, a monk living on a mountain near Pelusium 
f(f c. 440) , was the writer of a huge number of epistles, mostly dealing 
with questions of exegesis, and of which more than 2,000 have been 
preserved. P.G. LXXVIII. 

Nilus the Elder, a pupil of Chrysostom's, for some time prefect 
of the city of Constantinople, and lastly hermit on Sinai (f c. 440), 
was a prolific writer on matters ascetical. P.G. LXXIX. 

II. The oldest Syrian Christian writer was Aphraat, bishop of 
Mar Mattai (near Mosul), and otherwise known as Mar Jacob or 
James, and as the wise man of Persia. Until quite recently this 
writer was persistently confused with an elder contemporary 
of his, James, bishop of Nisibis, who died in 338. Cp. Bert (a 
translation of Aphraat's homilies), 1888; Graffin, Patrologia syriaca, 
I, 1894. The most renowned teacher of the Syrian Church was, 
however, Ephraem, a disciple of James of Nisibis, and, later, deacon 
of Edessa. By turn a poet, an exegetist, and an orator, he was 
known sometimes as the Prophet of the Syrians, sometimes as 
the Harp of the Holy Ghost (t 373 or 378) . Opp. ed. Assemani, 
6 fol. 1732-46. Carmina Nisibena, ed. Bickell, 1866. Hymni et 
sertn. ed. Lamy, 4 torn. 1882-1902. Mg. by Eirainer, 1889. 
L'Universite Cath. 1890. Other Syrian poets and homilists of 
repute were the presbyter Isaac the Great of Antioch (f c. 460 ; 
ed. G. Bickell, 2 vol. 1873-76) and James of Sarug, bishop of 
Batnae (f 521). 

III. The founder of Armenian literature was St. Mesrop (f 441), 
who, as soon as he had fixed the Armenian characters, translated 
the Holy Scriptures into that language and also composed a number 
of homilies. Two other names of literary importance are those of 
Eznic (or Esnac), bishop of Bagrevand, and of Moses of Khoren 
(t c. 487). It is, however, doubtful whether the famous History 
of Greater Armenia, said to be the work of the latter, is not really a 
production of the eighth century. Cp. Carrie re, Nouvelles sources 
de Moise de Khoren, 1893-94 ; Byz. Z. X, 489-504. 



§ 76 

The Latins of the Fourth and Fifth Century 1 

The life of the most famous of the Latin writers of the 
period, Hilary of Poitiers * (f 366), 3 was, like that of the great 
doctor of Alexandria, taken up with the Arian dispute. He 
had to undergo four years' exile in the East on account of his 



1 M. Schanz, Gesch. der röm. Literatur, IV, i, 1904. 

2 P.L. IX-X. Mg. by Reinkens, 1864; Baltzer, 1879-89; A. Beck, 
1903 ; M. Schiktanz (Die Hilarius-Fragmente), 1905. 

VOL. I. Q 



226 A Manual of Church History 

belief, and his long and successful fight with the error pro- 
cured him the name of the Western Athanasius. Most of his 
writings are controversial, though he also composed some 
commentaries and hymns. His opus magnum was the work 
De Trinitate in twelve books. He was the first to introduce 
Grecian speculation into the West. 

One who was still more dependent on Grecian influence 
was Ambrose, another great doctor of the West (f 397). x 
Having been unexpectedly torn from his civil governorship 
and acclaimed bishop of Milan (374), he busied himself in 
acquiring the necessary theological knowledge by studying the 
Greek Fathers. The result of this course of study is notice- 
able in several of his many controversial, ascetic, and exegetical 
works. His was one of the most striking characters of Christian 
antiquity. Unbending in his defence of the Church's rights 
against paganism and Arianism, indefatigable in fulfilling the 
duties of his pastoral office, he was also a staunch defender of 
ecclesiastical discipline, as Theodosius I found to his cost ; the 
latter having caused a barbarous massacre of the inhabitants of 
Thessalonica, Ambrose, in the emperor's own words, proved 
himself the only bishop worth the name, i.e. had sufficient 
courage to protest against a wanton act of cruelty. 

The two greatest of the Latin doctors belong to a date 
only slightly later. Of these the first is Jerome, 2 who was born 
at Stridon on the borders of Dalmatia and Pannonia, but most 
of whose life was passed in the East. He successively chose as 
his residence the Desert of Chalcis, Antioch, and Constantinople ; 
then, after a three-year sojourn in Rome, he spent the remain- 
ing thirty-four years of his life at Bethlehem (386-420), where 
he died. His principal works are his commentaries and his 
translation of the Bible, the Latin Vulgate. He also wrote 
a number of controversial works against the Luciferians, 
against Helvidius, Vigilantius, and others, a Liber de viris 
illustribus (the first Christian literary history), a Latin trans- 
lation of Eusebius's Chronicle, which he also continued down 
to the year 378, &c. His whole life was given up to study 
and mortification. He possessed considerable ability as a 

1 P.L. XIV-XVII. Mg. by Baunard ; A. de Broglie, 1897. 

2 Ed. Vallarsi, 11 fol. 1734-42; ed. II, 1766-72; P.L. XXII-XXX ; 
T. u. U. XIV, 1 (De viris illustr .) . Mg. by Zöckler, 1865 ; von Sychowski, 
1894 ; Bernoulli, 1895 ; Grützmacher, I-II, 1901-06. 



Latin Writers of the Fourth and Fifth Century 227 

writer and exponent, but in controversy he was far too inclined 
to be bitter and contentious. 

The second is Augustine (*).* He was born at Tagaste in 
Numidia, and after many years of doubt was received into 
the Church by St. Ambrose of Milan (386) ; returning to his 
country, he became a priest, and afterwards bishop of Hippo 
Regius (396-430). He was as remarkable for his mental power 
as for his ability as a dialectician. Most of his writings are 
devoted to refuting the Manichaeans — among whom he 
had spent nine years — the Donatists, Pelagianism, semi- 
Pelagianism, and other errors of the period. So powerful was 
his refutation of the error of Pelagius that he is rightly con- 
sidered to have vanquished it by force of argument (§ 58). 
Among his non-controversial works two especially deserve 
some allusion : they are the De Civitate Dei, a. kind of philosophy 
of history, and his Confessions, a sketch of his life, of his mis- 
takes and many struggles until his conversion. 

A Spaniard who gained a name as a Christian poet was 
Prudentius Clemens 2 (t after 405). Among his works are the 
Cathemerinon, a collection of hymns for daily use, and the 
Peristephanon or poems in praise of the martyrs, and besides 
these several other poems of a controversial or apologetic 
nature. 

The best-known secondary writers and works of the period are : 

1. The Spaniard Juvencus (*), who composed a Historia 
evangelica in hexameters (c. 330). Cp. Z. f. w. Th. 1890. 

2. Firmicus Maternus (*), who wrote the apologetical work De 
errore profanarum religionum (c. 347) . 

3. Lucifer of Calaris (*) (f 371), a great opponent of the Arians 
and especially of the emperor Constantius, to whom all his writings 
were dedicated. Cp. § 50, III. 

4. Ambrosiaster, as the author is called, who wrote at Rome 
during the pontificate of Damasus (366-84) a commentary on St. 
Paul, which in the Middle Ages was commonly ascribed to St. 
Ambrose. The author has been identified with several writers 
of the period, though at the present date it is impossible to 
decide with certainty who he really was. P.L. XVII, 45-508. 
Cp. Rev. Bened. 1903, pp. 113-31 ; Texts and Studies, VII, 4 ; 

1 Ed. Bened. (Blampin et Coustant), ii fol. 1679-1700; P.L. XXXII- 
XLVI. Ms:, by Bindemann, 3 vol. 1844-69 ; Wörter, 1892 ; Wolfs- 
gruber, 1898 ; McCabe, 1902. 

2 Ed. Obbarius, 1845 ; Dressel, 1860, Mg. by Rosler, 1886. Th. Qu. 
1894, PP. 77-125. 

Q 2 



228 A Manual of Church History 

J. Wittig, Der Ambrosiaster ' Hilarius,' 1906 {Kircheng. Abh. ed. 
Sdralek, IV). 

5. Optatus of Mileve (*) (f after 384), who wrote a history 
of the Donatist schism. Cp. § 52. 

6. Zeno, bishop of Verona (f c. 370), a homilist. P.L. XI, ed. 
Giuliari, 1900 ; mg. by A. Bigelmair, 1904. 

7. Philastrius, bishop of Brescia (*), who wrote the Diversarum 
haereseon liber (383-84). 

8. Priscillian (*) (f 385), the writer of many recently discovered 
treatises, of which some are in defence of his tenets. Cp. § 50. 

9. The Peregrinatio Silviae (*), a description of a pilgrimage 
to the Holy Places undertaken at the end of the fourth century 
(381-88). The work is incomplete, and Gamurrini, who discovered 
and first published (1887) it, ascribed it to Silvia, the sister of 
the politician Rufinus ; as a matter of fact it is more likely to be 
the work of the Spanish maiden Etheria. Rquh. 1903, II, 387-97 • 
Kath. 1905. 

10. Pacian of Barcelona (f c. 391), to whom belongs the saying : 
' Christianus mihi nomen, catholicus cognomen ' (Ep. ad Sempron. 
c. 4). P.L. XIII ; A. Gruber, Studien zu P. 1901. 

11. Sulpicius Severus (*) (f after 406), a Church historian and 
the biographer of St. Martin of Tours. 

12. Rufinus of Aquileia (f c. 410), the writer of a Church His- 
tory, of a commentary on the Apostles' Creed, and the translator of 
several Greek works (for instance, of the De Principiis of Origen, 
and of the Recognitiones dementis). P.L: XXI. 

13. Orosius (*), a Spanish presbyter (f after 417) who opposed 
the Priscillianists and Pelagius, and produced a sort of general 
history of Christianity in his Historiae adv. paganos. 

14. Niceta, bishop of Remesiana (Romatiana) in Dacia (Bela 
Palanka in Servia), who died c. 410, a friend of St. Paulinus and 
compiler of a course of instruction for the use of catechumens, of 
which the fifth book, the Explanatio Symboli, has been preserved ; 
he was also the author of certain other writings, among them being 
probably the Te Deum. Mg. and ed. by A. E. Burn, 1905. 

15. Paulinus of Nola (*) (f 431), a great admirer of the martyr 
Felix of Nola, in whose honour he composed several poems. Mg. by 
Buse, 1856 ; Lagrange, 1877, 2nd ed. 1882 ; P. Reinelt, Studien 
über die Briefe des hl. P. 1904. 

16. Marius Mercator (f c. 450), a native of the West who lived 
at Constantinople ; he was an opponent of the Pelagians and 
Nestorians. P.L. XXXIII. 

17. John Cassian (*), abbot of St. Victor at Marseilles 
(t c - 435) » did much to introduce monasticism into the West 
(Instituta coenobiorum ; Collationes patrum). 

18. Prosper of Aquitaine (f c. 455), a supporter and defender 
of the Augustinian doctrine of Grace; he continued Jerome's 
Chronicle to the year 455. P.L. LI. 



Greek Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century 229 

19. Vincent of Lerins (f c. 450), whose Commonitorium adv. 
haereses comprises an investigation into the criteria of the Catholic 
Faith, and comes to the conclusion that such a criterion is found in 
the ' quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est ' 
(c. 3). P.L. L ; G. Rauschen, Florilegium, V, 1906 ; Th. Qu. 1899, 

PP- 396-434- 

20. Eucherius (*), bishop of Lyons, whose Formulae spiritalis 

intelligentiae, and Instructiones, or aids to the understanding of 
sacred Scripture, were highly appreciated in the Middle Ages 

(t c 450). 

21. Peter Chrysologus, bishop of Ravenna (f c. 450), was famed 
as an ecclesiastical orator. P.L. LII ; mg. by Dapper, 1867 ; 
Stablewski, 1871. 

22. Maximus of Turin (f after 465) is known as a homilist. 
P.L. LVII. 

23. Leo I of Rome (f 461), who composed many epistles and 
orations. Ed. Ballerini, 3 fol. 1753-57 ; P.L. LIV-LVI ; mg. by 
Arendt, 1835 ; Perthel, 1843. 

24. Salvian (*), a presbyter of Marseilles (f after 480) who 
penned a defence of Divine Providence, De gubernatione Dei, and 
who, on account of his woeful description of the decadence of the 
empire, was known as the Jeremias of his period. Mg. by Zschimmer, 

1875. 

25. Faustus (*), abbot of Lerins and bishop of Riez (f 490), a 
homilist and opponent of Predestinarianism in its more absolute 
form (§ 58), of Arianism, and of the Pneumatomachi. Mg. by 
W. Bergmann, Dogmatische Schriften u. Briefe, 1898 ; Handschriftl. 
bezeugte Nachlass, 1898. 

26. Gennadius, a presbyter of Marseilles (f c. 485), whose Liber 
de viris illustribus supplements the like-named work of Jerome ; 
we have also his De dogmatibus ecclesiasticis, which may be a different 
name for his Epistula de fide addressed to Pope Gelasius, or, more 
probably, is the concluding portion of his work, Adver sus omnes 
haereses. P.L. LVIII. 

27. Vigilius, bishop of Tapsus, in Africa, a confuter of the 
heresies of the period. P.L. LXII ; mg. by G. Ficker, 1897. 

28. Victor (*), bishop of Vita, who composed a Historia 
persecutions Africanae provinciae. A. Schönfelder, De Victore 
Vitensi episcopo, 1899. 



§77 

Greek Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century 

It is in the sixth century, or, tobe more exact, in 533, when 
the Severians appealed to it at the conference held at Con- 
stantinople, that we first hear of a certain group of mystical 



230 A Manual of Church History 

writings, consisting of dissertations and epistles, which attained 
to great celebrity both in the East and in the West, and which, 
as the translations and commentaries show, was studied even 
among the Syrians, Arabs, and Armenians. The whole is the 
work of a Neo-Platonist philosopher, who seeks to serve the 
cause of Christianity by combining it with his own peculiar 
philosophy. The author gives himself out to be Dionysius 
the Areopagite, 1 the disciple of St. Paul, and, though this state- 
ment was questioned by some, it was generally accepted as 
true until comparatively recent times. The contents and the 
history of the work show, however, that it was composed at a 
much later date, in fact not long before its publication. Though 
the ancients were wrong in admitting that the work really 
dated from apostolic times, yet they were perfectly right 
in surmising that the author wished to be taken for the 
Areopagite ; that the work is pseudonymous cannot now be 
contested, and there is really nothing to be said for the modern 
hypothesis 2 which ascribes the writings to the abbot Dionysius 
of Rhinocolura in Egypt towards the end of the fourth century. 

Another writer of the time is Leontius of Byzantium 
(t c. 543), 3 one of the defenders of the Theopaschite formula 
(§ 55)> a monk of the New Lavra, and, by his work Adv. 
Nestorianos et Eutychianos, one of the great opponents of Nes- 
torianism, which he had professed in his youth, and of 
Eutychianism, the two principal heresies of his time. 

To the first half of the sixth century also belong, accord- 
ing to tradition and some other indications, the recently found 
works of Romanus, 4 the greatest of the poets of the Greek 
Church, though his hymn for the feast of our Lady's Nativity, 
which can only be traced back to the end of the seventh 
century, may be alleged in favour of the view that the author 
lived at a later date, and that Anastasius, under whose reign he 
came from Berytus to Constantinople, was really the second 

1 Ed. Corderius, 2 fol. 1634 : emend. 1755-56 ; P,G. III-IV. 

2 Hipler, Dionysius d. A. 1861 ; KL. Ill, 1789 ft. For the contrary, see 
Stiglmayr, Programm von Feldkirch, 1895 > Hist. J. 1895. H. Koch, 
Pseudo- Dionysius Areopagita in seinen Beziehungen zum Neuplatonismus u. 
Mvsterienwesen, 1900. 

' * P.G. LXXXVI. Mg. by Loofs, 1887; Rügamer, 1894; Ermoni, 

1895. 

4 Pitra, Analecta sacra, I, 1876; RE. f. pr. Th. XVII 3 , 124-31; Byz. 
Z. XV (1906), 1-44, 337-40. 



Latin Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century 231 

emperor of that name (713-16). We shall probably learn more 
of the date when he lived when the promised new edition of 
his works sees the light. 

Other noteworthy writers were : 

1. John Philoponus, an Alexandrian grammarian (c. 550) who 
attempted to do for the Aristotelian philosophy what pseudo- 
Dionysius did for Neo-Platonism ; he was an opponent of the 
Neo-Platonist, Proclus. 

2. Cosmas Indicopleustes, or the Indian traveller, as he was called 
on account of his journeys to Arabia and other remote countries, 
was originally a merchant at Alexandria ; he afterwards became a 
monk and hermit. Many of his works have been lost, among them 
his Cosmography, but we still possess his Topographia Christiana, 
composed c. 547 {P.G. LXXXVIII). 

3. John Climacus, a monk of Mount Sinai (f c. 649), wrote on 
asceticism (KAi/xa£, Scala paradisi). P.G. LXXXVIII; Byz. Z. XI, 

35-37- 

4. Sophronius, a monk who became patriarch of Jerusalem 

(f c. 638), is known as an opponent of Monothelism, as a homilist, 
and poet. His principal work is the Pratum spirituale, a collection 
of anecdotes relating to monks and recluses. The work has been 
frequently ascribed to his friend, John Moschus (f 619), who may 
have helped in its composition. P.G. LXXXVII ; Rev. de l'Orient 
ehret. 1902. 

5. Maximus Confessor (f 662), the author of Mystagogia, an 
advocate of orthodoxy against the Monothelites and a commentator 
on the Dionysian writings. P.G. XC-XCI. 

6. Anastasius Sinaita (f after 700), opposed the Monophysite 
sects, against whom one of his many works, the Via Dux (OSrjyos), 
is directed. P.G. LXXXIX. 

7. Finally, we have the Chronicon paschale, one of the most 
valuable of Christian chronicles, composed under Heraclius (610-41) 
and reaching down to 629. P.G. XCII ; cp. H. Gelzer, Sextus 
Julius Afrikanus u. die byzan. Chronographie, 2 vol. 1880-98 ; 
Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Enzyklopädie, III, 2460-77. 



§ 78 

Latin Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century 

The two most important Latin writers of the age were, first, 
Fulgentius, bishop of Ruspe (f 533), l an earnest adversary of 
Arianism and defender of the Augustinian doctrine of grace. 
He was the mouthpiece of the Africans at the commencement 

1 P,L t LXV ; Z. /. KG. XXI (1901), 9-42, 



232 A Manual of Church Histofy 

of the sixth century, and was, perhaps, the best theologian of his 
time. Besides being the author of many controversial tracts, 
he composed, under the title De fide, sive de regula verae fidei, a 
variable compendium of dogmatic theology. 

The other was Pope Gregory I (föo^. 1 With Ambrose, 
Augustine, and Jerome he is reckoned as one of the greatest 
doctors of the West. Apart from his epistles, his works deal 
with questions of exegesis, morals, and liturgy. Deserving 
of special mention is his Regula pastoralis, a rule of conduct for 
the clergy, which was translated into Greek in the author's 
lifetime, was done into English at the command of King 
Alfred, and which during the whole of the Middle Ages was 
highly esteemed as a text-book of pastoral theology. He also 
wrote an Expositio in B. Job, seu Moralia, a summary of morals 
cast in the form of a commentary on Job, and a Sacramentarium 
comprising the prayers of the Mass and the blessings according 
to his revised edition of the Liturgy ; this work is extant only 
in an enlarged form (§ 67) . 

Among other important writers in Italy may be mentioned : 

1. Ennodius (*), bishop of Pavia (f 521), who composed many 
epistles, orations, and poems, and also some historical and liturgical 
works. 

2. Boethius the senator, who fell a victim to the political cir- 
cumstances of the time, for, having been accused of sympathies for 
Constantinople and of having betrayed his country, he was by 
command of the Ostrogoth Theodoric imprisoned, arraigned before 
the senate, and condemned to death (524) . He translated and wrote 
comments on Aristotle and other philosophers, was the author of 
several theological treatises, and during his imprisonment, just 
before his death, wrote his De consolatione philosophiae, which has 
in recent times led to his being unjustly suspected of not being a 
Christian at all. P.L. LXIII-LXIV. 

3. Cassiodorus, first an officer in the Ostrogothic kingdom 
(f c. 565), and then a monk; an earnest worker, he did much to 
promote culture in his monastery. PL. LXIX-LXX; MG. And. 
ant. t. XII, 1894 (Variae) ; mg. by A. Franz, 1872 ; Minasi, 
1895. 

4. This is the place to speak of the Liber Pontificalis. It 
originated (c. 530) in the work of an unknown writer who enlarged 
the already existing Liberian Catalogue and brought it down to 
Felix III (IV), who was Pope from 526 to 530. The work has been 

1 P.L. LXXV-LXXIX ; Regist. epist. Greg. edd. Ewald et Hartmann» 
1887-90; MG. epist. torn. I— II. Mg. by Lau, 1845 ; Wolfsgruber, 1890 ; 
Clausier, 1891 ; Snow, 1892; F. H. Dudden, 1905. 



Latin Writers of the Sixth and Seventh Century 233 

preserved in the Catalogues of Felix and Conon, in the latter the 
history of the Popes being continued down to P. Conon ^687). 
The complete work brings us to Stephen V (891). Duchesne's 
edition also comprises the lives of the Popes until Martin V (1431). 
In consequence of an error of Onofrio Panvinio (note to the Vitae 
font. Rom. ed. by Platina, Colon. 1610, p. 139) the work until 
recently was ascribed to the Roman Librarian Anastasius in the 
ninth century (§ 107). Ed. Duchesne, 2 torn. 1886-92 ; Mommsen, 
I, 1898 (MG. Gest. Pontif. Rom. torn. I) ; Rosenfeld, über die 
Komposition des L. P. 1896. 

The remaining writers of note belong to Africa, Gaul, and Spain : 

1. Fulgentius Ferrandus, a deacon of Carthage, biographer of Ful- 
gentiusof Ruspe and composer of a Breviatio canonum. P.L. LXVII. 

2. Facundus, bishop of Hermiane, who defended the Three 
Chapters in his Defensio trium capitulorum. P.L. LXVII. 

3. Liberatus, archdeacon of Carthage, who wrote the Breviarium 
causae Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum. P.L. LXVIII. 

4. Primasius, bishop of Adrumetum, one of the Africans who 
were called to the negotiations at Constantinople in connection 
with the Three Chapters. He wrote a commentary on the Apo- 
calypse. P.L. LXVIII; Haussleiter, in Zahn's Forschungen, 
vol. IV, 1891. 

5. Junilius, by birth an African, held high office at Constanti- 
nople, and composed, on the model of the Isagogic of Paul of Nisibis, 
a work which was highly esteemed in the Middle Ages, the In- 
stihita regularia divinae legis. Ed. and mg. {Theodor von Mopsuestia 
u. Jun. Afric.) by Kihn, 1880. 

6. Csesarius, bishop of Aries (f 542), a homilist whose sermons 
were afterwards frequently ascribed to St. Augustine. Mg. by C. F. 
Arnold, 1894 ; Malnory, 1895 ; P. Lejay, 1906 (Le role theo- 
logique) ; Rev. Bened. 1906. 

7. Gregory of Tours, who wrote a history of the Franks and 
an account of the wonders of the Saints (1594). Latest edition 
of the Hist. Francorum in MG. Script, rer. Merov. 1. 1, 1884. Mg. by 
Löbell, 2nd ed. 1869. 

8. Venantius Fortunatus, bishop of Poitiers (f 603), a poet. 
Latest edition in MG. Auct. ant. t. IV, 1881. Mg. by Leroux, 1885 ; 
Nisard, 1890 ; Abh. Göttingen, 1901, N.F. VI, 2. 

9. Isidore, bishop of Sevilla (f 636), the most famous writer of 
the seventh century, among whose many works the foremost 
are the Origines seu Etymologiae, a brief encyclopaedia of knowledge, 
and the book De ecclesiasticis officiis, describing the ceremonies in 
use in the Church. P.L. LXXXI-LXXXIV. 




I. THE MIDDLE AGES 

FIRST PERIOD 

From the End of the Seventh Century to Alexander II, 

692-1073 

CHAPTER I 

PROGRESS AND VICISSITUDES OF CHRISTIANITY 

§ 79 

The Alemanni, Bavarians, Thuringians, and Frisians 1 

I. The battle of Zülpich (496), which marked the turning-point 
in the religious history of the Franks, had its influence also 
on that of the Alemanni or Swabians 2 settled in that portion 
of south-western Germany bounded by the river Lech, the 
Alps, the Vosges, and the Frankish frontier. Being subject 
to a nation of which the conversion had been so rapid that 
it was now almost entirely Christian, a like change among 
the Alemanni was rendered easy. The latter were not, 
however, so eager as their conquerors to embrace the new 
Faith, and even subsequently to the middle of the sixth 
century the greater part of the people seems to have been 
heathen. The Greek Agathias, to whom we owe this informa- 
tion, alludes nevertheless to the powerful influence for good 
exercised by the Franks over those with whom they came 
in contact. Doubtless the bishops of Augst and Windisch or 
Vindonissa (bishoprics which in the course of the sixth century 

1 KG. Deutschlands, by Rettberg, 2 vol. 1846-48 ; J. Friedrich, 2 vol. 
1867-69 ; A. Hauck, I-IV, 2 ed. 1898-1903 ; I-III, 3-4 ed. 1904-6. 

2 Hefele, Gesch. d. Einführung des Christent. im südwestl. Deutscht. 1837 ; 
P. F. Stalin, Gesch. Württembergs, I, 1882-87; F. L. Baumann, Gesch. des 
AllgäuSy 3 vol. 1882-95 '» Egli, KG. der Schweiz bis auf Karl d. Gr. 1893 (see 
also Kath.' Schweizer Blätter, 1896, pp. 211-23); Württembergische KG. Calw 
and Stuttgart, 1893 I F. Dahn, Könige der Germanen, IX, 1902, 



Christianity among the Germans 235 

were transferred respectively to Basel and Constance), together 
with those of Strasburg and Augsburg, took measures to help 
on conversions. From the end of the sixth century these 
sees were all regularly filled, and it is quite possible that they 
were occupied by an unbroken series of bishops even from 
Roman times. Lastly, numerous missionaries laboured among 
the people, whilst the monasteries which some of them founded 
carried on the work of evangelisation still further. The Lex 
Alemannorum, which belongs to the beginning of the eighth 
century, testifies to the existence of a complete religious 
organisation. In the second quarter of the eighth century 
Christianity became supreme even in the Allgäu, or south- 
eastern corner of the country. 

At the commencement of the seventh century Columban, an 
Irish missionary, after having sojourned a long while among 
the Burgundians (§ 72), proceeded to preach the Gospel at 
Tuggen on the Lake of Zürich, and then, at the invitation 
of the priest Willimar of Arbon, passed over to Bregenz, 
where he restored to Christian worship the desecrated Church of 
St. Aurelia. On his departure to Italy, Gallus, one of his twelve 
companions, established, in the forest of Arbon, a cell which became 
the nucleus of the famous monastery of St. Gall. (N.A. 1896, 
PP- 359-7 1 )- St. Trudpert (1643) founded the monastery in 
Breisgau which bears his name, whilst St. Pirminius (724) estab- 
lished that of Reichenau. In Allgäu the labour was shared by 
two monks of St. Gall, Magnus (f 750) and Theodore, about whose 
cells there arose the monasteries of Füssen and Kempten. Until 
quite recently these two missionaries had been confounded with 
two companions of Gallus, Maginold and Theodore, who lived 
fully a century earlier (Steichele, Das Bistum Augsburg, IV 
(1883), 338-89). In the district of the higher Rhine the monastery 
of Säckingen is undoubtedly an ancient foundation, but of its 
origin little is known, for Balther's Vita S. Fridolini is open to 
grave suspicion of being based on Peter Damian's Homilia de 
Translatione S. Hilarii, or on the source of the latter work, whilst, 
moreover, Fridolin, according to the account in question, is sent 
to found a monastery, not on the Rhine, but in the island of 
Gallinaria near Sardinia. Cp. /. /. Schweiz. Gesch. XVIII (1893), 
I 34~5 2 '> Kath. Schweiz. Blätter, 1896, pp. 410-37. 

II. Among the Alemanni's eastern neighbours, the Bava- 
rians, 1 who had settled in an already partly evangelised district 

1 Gesch. Bayerns by Riezler, I (to 1180), 1878; W. Schreiber, 2 vol. 
1889-91 ; A. Huber, Gesch. d. Einführung u. Verbreitung d. Christent. in 
Südostdeutschland, 4 vol. 1874-75; Ratzinger, Forschungen z. Bayrischen Gesch, 
1898, pp. 401-45 ; N.A. 1903, pp. 285-321, 



236 A Manual of Church History 

lying between the Lech, the Inn, and Italy, and compris- 
ing to the north some territory beyond the Danube, we find 
individual conversions at a comparatively early date. Garibald 
and his daughter Theodelinde, the Lombard queen, witness 
to the fact that Christianity had found its way into the reign- 
ing family by the latter half of the sixth century. Among 
the more noteworthy missioners were Eustasius, abbot of 
Luxeuil at the beginning of the seventh century ; the founder 
of the monastery of St. Peter's at Salzburg, Ruprecht, bishop 
of Worms, a contemporary of the Frankish king Childebert 
III (695-711) — not of Childebert II (575-96), as the Salzburg 
tradition has it, still less of Childebert I (511-58), as some recent 
scholars have maintained ; the chorepiscopus Emmeram of 
Poitiers, who established the monastery named after him at 
Ratisbon (f 715) ; and Corbinian, the founder of the church 
at Freising (f 725). Ultimately, at the request of the duke 
Odilo, St. Boniface (739) divided the country between four 
episcopal sees — those of Ratisbon, Passau, Freising, and 
Salzburg. 

III. At about the same time the neighbouring Thuringians, 1 
who inhabited eastern Franconia, were brought to the knowledge 
of the Gospel. In 685 Kilian, an Irish or Scotch missioner, 
came with the presbyter Colonat (Coloman) and the deacon 
Totnan (or Totman) to Würzburg, and the duke Gosbert 
having accepted the Christian tenets, the whole people followed 
his example and forsook their gods. But the missioners soon 
after, probably in 689, met a violent death, and great disturb- 
ances ensuing, a new mission was required to complete 
the work of conversion. This was undertaken by Boniface, 
who, in 742, consecrated St. Burkhardt as first bishop of 
Würzburg. 

IV. It was the Anglo-Saxon Willibrord 2 who first estab- 
lished Christianity on a secure footing among the Frisians, 
who occupied a stretch of land between the Ems and Ostend. 
Like his predecessors, St. Amandus (630-50), Eligius, bishop of 
Noyon (c. 650), and the banished bishop Wilfrid (or Wilfrith) 
of York (678), he had to face many difficulties. Contending 

1 Stamminger, Franconia sancta, I, 1881 ; Emmerich, Der hl. Kilian, 
1896; N.A. 1902, pp. 232-34. 

2 A. Thijm, Der hl. Willebrord, 1863; Moll-Zuppke, Vorreform. KG, d. 
Niederlande^ 1895. 



St. Boniface 237 

as they were with the Franks for their own national existence, 
the Frisians had a political reason for standing alouf from 
the religion of their enemies, whilst their then king, Radbod, 
was a firm adherent to the old beliefs. As, however, Willibrord 
was, with a few interruptions, able to labour at their conversion 
for over forty years (690-739), his success was very considerable. 
The Frankish portion of the country was won over almost 
entirely to Christianity. The headquarters of his mission was 
Utrecht, which, as soon as he had been consecrated bishop 
at Rome (695), was assigned to him as his episcopal city. 
Willibrord having gone to his reward, St. Boniface, who had 
already worked in this mission under Willibrord's direction 
(719-22), again made his appearance among the Frisians. The 
very next year his life and work was brought to a sudden end 
by his martyrdom at the hands of the enemies of the Faith 
(754), but his death served the cause of Christianity, for it 
brought about the destruction of whatever there remained 
of heathenism in the region. 



§80 

St. Boniface, the Apostle of the Germans 1 

The greatest merit in the conversion of the Germans 
belongs by right to a man whose name has already several 
times been mentioned, the Anglo-Saxon Wynfreth, born 
(c. 680) at Crediton in the county of Devonshire, and better 
known by his other name of Boniface, by which indeed during 
his missionary career, or at least subsequently to receiving his 
mission from Pope Gregory II in 719, he is usually designated. 
Not only did he help to spread the Gospel ever more widely, 
he also strove to purify it wherever he found it already in 
existence but disfigured by foreign importations. Lastly, 
by wise administrative measures, he succeeded in putting 

1 Boniface's letters and Vitae (those by Willibald, c. 780, and Othlon in the 
eleventh century) will be found in Jaffe's Monumenta Moguntina, 1866 
(Bibl. verum German. Ill) ; his letters are in the MG. Epist. Ill, 1892. The 
Vitae have been edited by W. Levison, 1905 ; that of Willibald by Nürn- 
berger, 1895. There are later biographies by Seiters, 1845; Pfahler, 1880; 
Buss-Scherer, 1880; Fischer, 1881; G. Kurth, 4th Led. 1903 (in French); 
and by J. M. Williamson, 1904. Cp. Hahn, Bonifaz u. Lul. Ihre angelsächs. 
Korrespondenten ; EB. Luis Leben, 1883 ; Z.f. KG. XXV (1904), 197-232, 



238 A Manual of Church History 

Christianity in a position to preserve for the future the Faith 
in all its purity. 

Success attended his efforts among the Ober-Hessians 
(722) when, after working for three years among the Frisians, 
he turned his attention to the province which had been specially 
assigned to him by the earthly head of the Church. In 
Amöneburg (Amanaburch) he effected the conversion of many, 
among them Detdik and Dierolf, the village chieftains, who, 
though baptised Christians, as Willibald remarks in his Life, 
remained attached to idolatrous practices. On his return 
from his second journey to Rome, where he had been conse- 
crated bishop (722-23), his success was even more conspicuous. 
He now began to preach in Nieder-Hessen and in Thuringia, 
and here he overthrew the sacred oak of Thor or Thunar, 
out of the wood of which he erected a church in honour of 
St. Peter. In Thuringia he thwarted the opposition of the 
pagan priests and founded the monastery of Ohrdruf. But 
with the increase in the size of his mission the need was felt for 
more missionaries, who, at his call, came in troops of men and 
women from his own country. Other disciples chosen from 
among the German natives enabled him to establish yet other 
monasteries, first that of Fritzlar (with Wigbert as abbot), 
that of Tauberbischofsheim (under Lioba as abbess), and those 
of Kitzingen and Ochsenfurth ruled by the abbess Thecla ; later 
on, with the help of the Bavarian Sturm, a monastery was 
founded at Fulda (744), and with that of Wunnibald and his 
sister Walpurgis another was erected at Heidenheim near 
Eichstätt. 

Boniface's administrative capacities came into action 
more especially after his third visit to Rome (737-38). On 
his way back he set in order the Church of Bavaria. Soon 
after he established, for the benefit of the Thuringians and 
Hessians, the bishoprics of Buraburg, Erfurt, and Würzburg 
(741), and not long after, that of Eichstätt, of which only the 
latter two were destined to survive. The first bishop of Eich- 
stätt was Willibald, Wunnibald's brother. Nor did Boniface 
forget the other German and Frankish nations, the political 
changes then occurring among the latter contributing much to 
favour his work. Carlman and Pipin the Short, sons of Charles 
Martel (1741), were more sympathetic to Boniface's attempts 



S£. Boniface 239 

at reform than had been their warlike father, and a number of 
Councils were summoned by means of which Boniface intro- 
duced most salutary measures. Clerics were bidden to observe 
the Church's canons in their manner of life, pagan practices 
were prohibited, and a system of metropolitans was established. 
In Neustria archbishops were nominated to the sees of Rheims, 
Sens, and Rouen (743), whilst a general Council of the Franks, 
held in 745, determined that Cologne should be the metropoli- 
tan see of Austrasia, and Boniface its first occupant. This 
decision does not, however, seem to have been carried into 
effect, for Boniface eventually took up his abode at Mainz, 
which was then vacant through the deposition of the former 
bishop, Gewilieb. 

Having by many years of ceaseless work established order 
in Germany, Boniface felt a call to resume his labours where 
they had begun. Desirous of devoting the closing days of 
his life to the conversion of the Frisians, he resigned the see 
of Mainz in favour of his disciple Lullus, and, accompanied 
by a large party of fellow- workers, descended the course of 
the Rhine. His toil was not in vain, and many thousands pre- 
sented themselves for baptism, but a year later his work was 
brought to a sudden close. On June 5, 754 (755), instead of the 
company of neophytes who had been expected for confirma- 
tion, there appeared on the scene a band of well-armed pagans, 
at whose hands Boniface, together with his fifty-two associ- 
ates, met their death near where stands the modern town 
of Dockum. Boniface has been rightly styled the Apostle 
of Germany. Of recent years an attempt has indeed been 
made to rob him of this title on account of his connection with 
Rome; such attempts can only rest on a failure to perceive 
that by means of Rome's support alone was his work rendered 
possible. 

The Councils conducted by Boniface, besides the General 
Council of 745 already mentioned — which, by the way, also took 
measures against the Frank Adelbert and a certain Scot named 
Clemens, two heretics of the period — were the following : The 
Concilium Germanicum, held in 742 in a place which is now not 
possible to identify ; the Concilium Liftinense of 743 (not of 745 ; 
cp. Th. Qu. 1879 ; Hist. J. 1901-2), held at Liftinae (Lestines), a 
royal villa in Hainaut — the baptismal formula decided on in this 
Council has given it a certain importance, the catechumen being 



240 A Manual of Chtirch History 

called upon to renounce not only Satan, but the old gods, Thor, 
Wotan, and Saxnote. Lastly, there was the Council of Soissons 
in 744, and the Frankish General Council of 747. For the year 
of Boniface's death, see M. Tangl, in the Z. d. Vereins /. hess. 
Gesch. vol. 37 (1903), pp. 223-50. 



§ 81 
The Saxons 1 

The Saxons, whose settlements stretched across northern 
Germany from the Elbe and Saale to the neighbourhood of the 
Rhine, and, at the south and west, touched the domains of the 
Franks, became early acquainted with Christianity through 
contact with the latter. As, however, their relations with the 
Franks were usually of a hostile nature, Christianity made but 
small headway among them. Missions which were sent to 
them at the beginning of the eighth century remained fruitless, 
two Anglo-Saxon missionaries, Ewald the Black and Ewald the 
White, receiving the martyr's crown. Only with difficulty did 
the Briton Livinus escape a like fate, and so matters stood 
until Charles the Great determined to compel the Saxon nation 
to accept at once his yoke and that of the Gospel. Both objects 
appeared to him to be necessary in the interests of his own 
country, for, so long as the Saxons retained their independence, 
they were a standing menace to the Frankish Empire, whilst, 
short of their conversion, there was little hope of their remain- 
ing his subjects for long. 

From the beginning, success attended Charles's enter- 
prise. His first expedition (772) resulted in the capture of the 
stronghold of Eresburg, and the destruction of the Saxon 
Irminsul, a pillar held sacred by the natives. But no sooner 
had the victor left the country than the Saxons rose again, 
continuing this policy for a number of years. The most 
remarkable upheaval was that of 782, when, disregarding the 
treaties, the Saxons put to death every Frankish warrior or 
priest on whom they could lay hands. Charles punished this 
act of treachery by beheading 4,500 Saxons at Verden on the 

1 Hauck, KG. D. II, 360-412 ; Strunck, Westfalia sancta, ed. Giefers, 
1855 ; H. Böttger, Einführung des Christentums in Sachsen von 775-86, 
1859. 



The Scandinavian Races 241 

Aller. His severity was the cause of a renewal of hostilities, 
which issued in the indecisive battle of Detmold (783), and in 
a second battle, this time on the Hase (783), which brought 
about the destruction of the Saxon power. Whatever embers 
of insubordination smouldered in the nation were finally 
stamped out in 804. The conversion of the Saxons was 
effected simultaneously with the conquest of their country, 
priests accompanying the military on each of their expeditions. 
A large number of neophytes were baptised at the first 
parliament held at Paderborn in yyy, and at the second, held 
in 785, Christianity was imposed under pain of death. Then, 
and then only, did the chiefs of the nation, Widukind and 
Albion, agree to receive baptism. Bishoprics were established 
for the Westphalians at Münster and Osnabrück, for the 
Engrians at Minden, Paderborn, Bremen, and Verden, and at 
Halberstadt and Hildesheim for the Eastphalians. 1 

The number of those executed at Verden has lately been called 
in question. Cp. Deutsche Z. f. Gesch. 1889, I, 73-95 ; Dieck, 
Progr. von Verden, 1894 ; Z. des hist. Vereins für Niedersachsen, 
1894, pp. 367-86. On the other side, see Hauck, II, 348 ; Hist, 
Z. 78 (1896), 18-38. 



§82 

The Scandinavian Races 3 

I. Through the conquest of Saxony, Christianity found a 
way opened to the nations of the north. Charles the Great 
extended his sovereignty over the country lying between the 
Eider and the mouth of the Elbe, then known as Transalbingia, 
and his plan of evangelising this district, and even the regions 
lying beyond, was realised shortly after his death. Denmark 3 
was the first to enter the fold. King Harald, who, for dynastic 
reasons, had been frequently compelled to seek the help of the 
Franks, was baptised at Ingelheim in 826, and returned home 
in company with Ansgar, 4 a monk of the monastery of Corbie, 

1 H. Böttger, Diözesan- und Gaugrenzen Norddeutschlands, 4 vol. 1875-76. 

2 K. Maurer, Bekehrung d. norwegischen Stammes, 2 vol. 1855-56; 
Gfrörer, Gregor VII u. sein Zeitalter, II-III, 1859. 

3 Jensen-Michelsen, Schleswig-Holsteinische KG. 4 vol. 1873-79. 

4 Bg. by Tappehorn, 1863 ; Drewes, 1864. 

vol, 1. R 



242 A Manual of Church History 

who prosecuted his missionary labours so well, even after the 
banishment of his protector, that he came to be styled the 
Apostle of the country. 

Certain Swedish envoys at the imperial court having spoken 
of the inclination of the Swedes to hear the Gospel, Ansgar, 
nothing loath, pushed yet farther north (829), and worked 
with such success that, soon after, Lewis the Pious was able 
to establish at Hamburg an archbishopric of the north (831), 
one of Ansgar's companions, Gauzbert, becoming bishop of 
Sweden. The new Churches had, however, soon to pass 
through an ordeal. Hamburg was destroyed by the Normans 
in 845, and Gauzbert was expelled from Sweden. But no 
sooner had the bishopric of Bremen been merged into that of 
Hamburg, than Ansgar resumed his missionary labours in 
both countries. His example was followed by his successors 
in the see of Bremen, especially by his biographer Rimbert 
(865-88) . A century later, under archbishop Adaldag (937-88) , 
yet further conquests were achieved by the Gospel. Bishoprics 
were established in Jutland at Schleswig, Ripen, and Aarhus. 
Harald Blue-Tooth, the king, was baptised about the year 960, 
and though the old religion put forth a last effort under his 
son Sven (988-1014), Christianity soon after became supreme, 
Sven himself came to view it with more favour when his life 
was drawing to its close, whilst his son, Canute the Great, was 
even more kindly disposed to it ; by the conquest of England, 
moreover, the pagans in his kingdom had been reduced to a 
minority. On Denmark becoming detached from the Province 
of Hamburg-Bremen, the bishop of Lund was proclaimed 
metropolitan of the Danes (1103). On account of its transient 
connection with England, Denmark adopted the English 
custom of an annual offering of Peter's Pence, as likewise did 
Sweden and Norway. 

II. In Sweden the progress of Christianity, even subse- 
quently to the baptism of King Olaf (c. 1002), was less rapid 
than in Denmark. A bishopric was nevertheless established 
soon after at Skara in West Gothland, and slowly but surely 
paganism gave way before its adversary. In 1162 Upsala was 
made into an archbishopric. 

III. The conversion of Norway began with the accession 
of Hakon the Good, who had been brought up in England 



The Slavs and Hungarians 243 

(938-61). As the nation remained firmly rooted in heathen- 
ism, the efforts of the king met with no great success, though 
Christianity had come to stay. Under Olaf Tryggvascn 
(995-1000) paganism was wiped out in the lowlands, and the 
king was able to turn his attention to the Norwegian settlements 
in the Faroe, Orkney, and Shetland Islands, in the Hebrides, 
Iceland, and Greenland. Olaf Haraldsen (1014-30), surnamed 
the Fat, or the Saint, finally secured the conversion of the 
highlands, Throndhjem becoming the metropolitan city. 

IV. Among the piratical Northmen (or Normans) who were 
converted in the course of their raids, the first place must be 
given to Rollo. After having, for thirty-six years, been the 
terror of France, he, in 912, assumed the name of Robert and 
became a Christian, in return for which he received from 
Charles the Simple the hand of his daughter Gisela and that 
portion of the kingdom which then became known as Normandy. 
Many of his subjects followed their leader's example, and were 
baptised, and Rollo soon turned into a thriving country the 
region he had once so sorely harassed. 

V. Several missioners proceeded to Iceland towards the end of 
the tenth century, and the expulsion which one of them, Dankbrand, 
drew upon himself by his want of tact (999) helped indirectly the 
cause of Christianity. To allay the mortification of Olaf Tryggvasen 
at the poor success of his missioners, two natives of the country 
offered in 1000 to undertake a new mission, and worked so well 
that Christianity soon became the religion of the State. The 
concessions which it was judged advisable to make to paganism 
regarding the exposal of children, the eating of horse-flesh, and 
secret sacrifices to the gods, were ultimately withdrawn by Olaf 
the Saint. 

VI. Christianity, in the same year (1000), also made its way into 
Greenland, in the extreme north-west. Here, however, it was 
destined soon to disappear, most of the Norman population dying, 
probably of the plague, in the fourteenth century, and the rest 
being exterminated by the Skraellings or Eskimos. Rquh. 1902, 
I, 538-83. 

§83 

The Slavs and Hungarians 

The Franks were instrumental in carrying the Gospel, not 
only to the people of the north, but also to the Slavs. The 

R 2 



244 A Manual of Church History 

Greeks also helping in the work of conversion, the greater 
portion of the Slavonic race forsook their idols in the course 
of this period. 

I. The Croats,i who had settled in Dalmatia (c. 640), were 
mostly baptised thirty years later, under their prince. Porga, 
by priests sent from Rome. The remainder were converted at the 
beginning of the ninth century. 

II. The Carantanians (or Carinthians),2 who, between 612 and 
630, had invaded Carinthia, Carniola, and Styria (or Steiermark), 
there, more especially at Salzburg, came into contact with the 
Bavarians, from whom they accepted Christianity in the course of 
the following century. 

III. As soon as the Moravians,3 whose possessions then stretched 
as far as the Ballaton Lake in Hungary, had been forced to pay 
tribute to the Franks (803), missioners were sent them from Passau 
and Salzburg. Their conversion was soon effected. At the invi- 
tation of the prince Rastislav, the Greek missioners, Cyril and 
Methodius, aided in the work of evangelisation (863). Of these, 
the former, the inventor of the Slavonic alphabet, or Glagolitza, 
was only a short time engaged on the mission, for he died at Rome, 
whither he had been summoned. Methodius, on the other band, 
lived to return, and worked as archbishop of Moravia and Pannonia 
for nearly twenty years (f 885). His success was very great, and 
must be partly explained by his having adopted the vernacular 
in the celebration of the Liturgy. Dissensions among the sons 
of Swatopluk (f 894), and the inroads of the Hungarians (c. 906), 
caused Moravia to disappear for a time from history. On its 
reappearance a century later it was, what it still remains, a mere 
province of Bohemia. 

IV. Christianity found its way to the Bohemians * as soon as a 
portion of that nation was compelled to acknowledge the overlord- 
ship of the Franks (805). Fourteen Bohemian chieftains, together 
with their tribes, were baptised at Ratisbon in 845, and when, some 
thirty years later, their duke Borziwoi followed their example, 
the bulk of the nation was already Christian. The troubles which 
broke out after the death of this duke's sons — Ludmilla his wife 
being murdered at the instigation of her daughter-in-law Drahomira 
(927), and his grandson Wenzel dying at the hand of his own 

^' Hergenröther, Photius, II, 604 fl. 

2 Rettberg, KG. D. II, 556 ff. 

8 Dudik, Mährens allg. Gesch. 12 vol. 1860-88 ; Ginzel, Die Slavenapostel 
Cyrill u. Method, 1867 ; Lapotre, L'Europe et le Saint-Siege, I, 1895 ; L. K. 
Götz, Gesch. d. Slavenapostel Konstantinus (Cyrillus) u. Methodius, 1896. 

4 Palacky, Gesch. v. B. 5 vol. 1844-67 ; Frind, Gesch. Böhmens, I, 1864 ; 
Hauck, KG. D. Ill,« 186-202 ; H. G. Voigt, Adalbert v. Prag, 1898 ; Mitteil. 
d. V. f. Gesch. d. Deutschen in Böhmen, 1900, pp. 1-10; Hist, J, 1900, pp. 757-75 
(on the foundation of the bishopric of Prague). 






The Slavs and Hungarians 245 

brother (935) — hindered for a time the good work. But as soon 
as Boleslav I felt his power secure, he too did something to 
help on the cause, though it was only under his son Boleslav II 
that the Church was definitively established, and a bishopric 
erected at Prague (975). 

V. It was through Bohemia that Christianity reached the Poles.* 
In 965 their duke Miecislav married Dubravka the daughter of 
Boleslav I, who, in the following year, persuaded her husband to 
renounce paganism. A number of his subjects were baptised 
with him, and, a generation later, the country was wholly Christian. 
A bishopric was first established in Posen, and soon after, Gnesen, 
where Adelbert (f 997), the second bishop of Prague, lay buried, 
was erected into the archiepiscopal see (1000). Here, too, the 
custom of paying Peter's Pence prevailed. 

VI. The numerous tribes of Wends,2 living between the Elbe 
and Oder, after having been partially subdued by Charles the 
Great, were finally, by the Saxon emperors, made to acknowledge 
the German supremacy ; with this the conversion of the people 
began. Under Henry I, Adalward bishop of Verden preached 
the Gospel to the Abodrites. Otto the Great took up the matter 
with yet greater energy. One bishopric for the Redarians was 
established at Havelberg (946?), another for the Hevellians and 
Lusatians in Brandenburg (948), and yet another for the Abodrites 
and Wagrians at Oldenburg or Stargard (later on, c. 1160, 
transferred to Lübeck) . The plan of making Magdeburg into an arch- 
bishopric, which had been mooted in 955, was realised by the Councils 
of Ravenna in 967-68. At the same time it was decided to create 
new sees at Merseburg, Zeitz (afterwards transferred to Naumburg) , 
and Meissen. In spite of all that was done paganism stood strong, 
and Henry II was compelled to recognise it so far as the tribe of 
the Leuticians were concerned. Gottschalk, a prince who in 1047 
succeeded in effecting the union of the Wend tribes, and brought 
over a large portion of them to Christianity, was, in 1066, 
overthrown by the pagan faction, and his fall was the ruin of 
the native Church. 

VII. The Servians, who in the reign of Heraclius had settled 
to the south-east of the Croats, were compelled by the same emperor 
to receive baptism. Their conversion had, however, so little 
depth that no sooner were they out of the power of the Eastern 
Empire (827) than they relapsed into paganism. On being re- 
incorporated in the Empire in 868, they returned to the profession 
of Christianity.3 

VIII. The Khazars, who dwelt in the region between the 
Chersonesus and the Caspian, were converted by missioners from 

1 Röpell-Caro, Gesch. Polens, 4 vol. 1840-86. 

2 L. Giesebrecht, Wendische Geschichten, 3 vol. 1843; Hauck, III; 
Nottrott, A us der Wendenmission, 1897. 

3 Hergenröther. Photius, II. 604. 



246 A Manual of Church History 

the Greek Empire. The apostle of the Slavs, Constantine or Cyril, 
worked for a time among them (c. 858). 

IX. At about the same time, the Bulgarians 1 changed their 
religion. Prince Bogoris, who took the name of Michael at his 
baptism, was, in 864, persuaded by his sister to become a Christian, 
and compelled his people to do likewise. Here the Gospel was first 
preached by Greek priests, and though, in 866, Latin missioners 
came at the invitation of the prince — it is to this period that the 
famous Responsa ad consulta Bulgarorum, written by P. Nicholas I, 
belongs — the Bulgarians in 869 returned to the Eastern Church, to 
which they afterwards continued faithful, in spite of the action 
of Basil the Macedonian in making over the country to P. John 
VIII (cp. § 94). In 1019 the Bulgarians lost their independence, 
and became a Greek province. 

X. Soon after the foundation of their State, by the Scandinavian 
Ruric, of the Variag tribe called Russ (862), the Russians 2 became 
acquainted with Christianity. But until the baptism of the Grand 
Princess Olga in 955, and of her grandson Vladimir in 987 (her 
son Swaetoslav remained a pagan to the end), progress was slow. 
Vladimir, however, soon made Christianity obligatory on his 
subjects ; idols were everywhere destroyed, the Russians were 
baptised troop-wise in the rivers, and Kief became the metropolis 
of the country. 

XI. The Avars, who had fixed their settlements in Pannonia 
after the departure of the Lombards, became Christians as a result 
of their defeat at the hands of Charles the Great. But the Avars 
disappeared from history in the ninth century, and their country 
was occupied by the pagan Hungarians.3 The new-comers were 
a terror to their Christian neighbours by reason of their raids, till 
their power was broken by Otto the Great at the battle of the 
Lechfeld in 955. The time had now come for their conversion. 
Soon after the beginning of the reign of the duke Geysa (972-97) 
we find the Swabian monk Wolfgang, and missionaries sent by 
Piligrim bishop of Passau, preaching in the country. The ruler 
himself eventually sought baptism, his son, King Stephen the Saint 
(997-1038), doing much to second the spread of the Gospel. He 
founded several bishoprics and monasteries, Gran becoming 
the metropolis. At his death, which was followed by a period 
of unrest, the pagans again became supreme, and caused much 
bloodshed among the Faithful, but Andrew I (1046-61), as soon 
as he felt his position sufficiently secure, issued a law forbidding 

1 Jirecek, Gesch. der Bulgaren, 1875 ; Lapötre, /. c. I, 47-90. 

2 Strahl, Gesch. d. russ. K. 1830; Philaret, Gesch. d. K. Russlands; 
German by Blumenthal, 1872; Golubinskij, Gesch. d. russ. K. I, 1881-82; 
Pelesz, Gesch. d. Union d. ruthen. K. mit Rom, 2 vol. 1878-80; Revue 
de l'hist. des religions, 1901, pp. 223-34; L. K. Götz, Kirchenrechtl. u. 
kulturgesch. Denkmäler Altrusslands, 1905. 

3 Fessler, Gesch. von Ungarn, 2nd ed. by E. Klein, I, 1867 Bod, Hist. 
Hung. eccl. 1890. 



The Moors 247 

under penalty of death all pagan practices, and when this measure 
caused a revolt, the rebels were crushed by the strong hand of 
Bela I (1061-63) and paganism was at an end. 



§84 

The Mohammedans in Spain and Sicily 1 

During this period the Mohammedans carried fire and sword 
into the heart of Europe. In 711, by their victory over the 
Visigothic king Roderic, at Xeres de la Frontera — when the 
sons of the dethroned king Witiza joined their country's foes — 
the whole of Spain with the exception of the mountainous north- 
west fell into their hands. Even then they were not satisfied, 
and, passing the Pyrenees, they seized on Narbonne, Carcassonne, 
and Nimes. Their onward march was checked by the victory 
gained over them near Poitiers by Charles Martel in 732, and soon 
after they were forced to recross the Pyrenees, even a portion of 
Spain being wrested from their grasp. Alfonso I established and 
extended the kingdom of the Asturias, and Charles the Great 
effected the conquest of the ' Spanish Mark ' in north-eastern Spain 
(778-812). The time was not yet when the Christians could do 
more, the Moors being then at the height of their power. When 
the Ommiades of Damascus had been overthrown by the Abbasides 
(752), Abderrahman I, one of the Ommiades, fled to Spain, and 
founded the Caliphate of Cordova. A period of great prosperity 
in the arts and sciences ensued as soon as the Saracens were firmly 
established in the country. This was especially the case under 
Abderrahman III (912-61), Hakem II (961-76), and under the 
Grand Vizier Al Mansor who, for a long while, under Hisham II, 
held the reins of government. 

In the ninth century the Saracens took possession of Sicily, 
occupying Palermo in 831, and making the island the base of their 
expeditions against Italy. They even established themselves for 
a time in Lower Italy (at the mouth of the Garigliano, 880-916), 
and on the southern coast of France (at Fraxinetum in Provence, 
889-975). 

As elsewhere, so also in Spain, the Moorish domination led to 
wholesale apostasy. Nominal religious toleration was indeed 
extended to the former owners of the country (soon to be known 
as Mozarabians) , but, owing to the promises held out to those 
who should embrace the Islamic tenets, many were led to forsake 
Christianity, those who remained steadfast having many hardships 
to endure. A long and violent persecution broke out in 850. To 
tell the truth, the Christians had brought it on themselves, many 

1 Lembke-Schäfer-Schirrmacher, Gesch. v. Sp. 7 vol. 1830-1902 ; 
Gams, KG. v. Sp. II ; Dozy, Hist, des Musulmans d'Espagne, 4 vol. 1861 ; 
Baudissin, Eulogius u. Alvar, 1873. 



248 A Manual of Church History 

of them having publicly outraged the Prophet, a crime which 
was punishable by death. Some of them even persisted in seeking 
after martyrdom, and this in spite of the Council of Cordova, which, 
in 852, had issued a decree forbidding anyone to confess the Faith 
unbidden before a secular judge In this false zeal they were 
encouraged by Eulogius of Cordova (afterwards archbishop of 
Toledo) and his friend Alvarus. The religious excitement was 
not quelled till Eulogius himself died at the hands of the Moers 
in 859. 



CHAPTER II 

THE PAPACY AND THE EMPIRE 1 

§85 

The Beginning of the Papal States and the Re-establishment of 
the Empire of the West — The Popes of the Eighth Century 2 

With the fall of the kingdom of the East Goths, Rome reverted 
to the old Empire. But it was now no longer the capital, nor 
even the residential city, of the imperial agent for Italy. 
Though the inhabitants of the Italian peninsula had, to begin 
with, hailed with delight their reincorporation in the Roman 
Empire, their feelings soon changed. The fiscal extortions 
practised by the Byzantine emperors excited discontent, nor 
did the Italians take at all kindly the imperial measures 

1 Liber Pontificalis]{cp. § 78, IV) ; Pontif. Rom. Vitae, ed. Watterich, 2 vol. 
1862 (from John VIII to Celestine III). Regesta Pontif. Rom. ed. Jaffe, 1851 ; 
ed. 2a cur. Loewenfeld, Kaltenbrunner, Ewald, 1885-88. Regesta Imperii, 
ed. Böhmer ; re-ed. Mühlbacher and Ficker, 1899 ff. ; Damberger, Syn- 
chron. Gesch. d. Kirche u. Welt im MA. 15 vol. 1850-60; Niehues, Kaisert. 
u. Papstt. im MA. I-II, 1877-87; Reumont, Gesch. d. St. Rom. 3 vol. 
1867-70; Hefele, CG. III-IV. Gregorovius, Gesch. d. St. Rom. in MA. 
8 vol. 4th ed. 1886-96 ; 5th ed. 1903 ff. (Engl. Trans. Hist, of the City of Rome 
in the Middle Ages, 1894) ; J. Langen, Gesch. d. röm. K. I-IV (to Innocent 
III), 1881-93. Giesebrecht, Gesch. d. d. Kaiser zeit, 6 vol. 5th ed. 1885 ff. 
(to Frederick I, vol. 6 ed. by Simson, 1895) '> Duchesne, Les premiers temps 
de l'etat pontifical (754-1073), 2nd ed. 1904 (Engl. Trans. The Beginnings of the 
Temporal Power, 1908) ; W. Barry, The Papal Monarchy from St. Gregory the 
Great to Boniface VIII (590-1303), 1902. 

2 Cenni, Monum. dominationis pontificiae, 1766 ; reprinted in P.L. 98. 
Theiner, Codex diplom. dorn. temp. S. Sedis, 1881 ff.; Jahrbücher d. d. Gesch. : 
Hahn-Oelsner, Pippin, 1863-71 ; Abel-Simson, Karl d. Gr. i 2 , 1888 ; 
II, 1883. J. Ficker, Forschungen z. Reichs- und Rechtsgesch. Italiens, 4 vol. 
1869-74 ; Fabre, De patrimoniis Rom. eccl. usque ad aetatem Carolinorum, 
1892; G. Schnürer, Entstehung d. Kirchenstaates, 1894; Lindner, Die 
sog. Schenkungen Pippins, Karls d. Gr. u. Ottos I, 1896 ; Martens, Beleuch- 
tung d. neuesten Kontroversen d. röm. Frage unter Pippin u. Karl d. Gr. 1897 ; 
Hubert, Etude sur la formation des Etats de VEglise (726-57), 1899 ; W. 
Gundlach, Entstehung d. Kirchenstaates, 1899 ; J. A. Ketterer, Karl d. 
Gr. u. die Kirche, 1898 ; Wells, The Age of Charlemagne, 1898 ; Schnürer- 
Ulivi, Das Fragmentum Fantuzzianum, 1906 {Freib t hist. Studien II), 



250 A Manual of Church History 

directed against image- worship ; nor, again, did the Empire 
afford adequate protection, and when the Lombards, in the 
eighth century, prepared for further conquests, it did nothing 
for the defence of its Roman subjects. Under these circum- 
stances it is no marvel that the Byzantine rule soon came to 
an end in Italy ; to a large extent its heritage passed into 
the hands of the bishops of Rome. 

The Popes had already long enjoyed a position of high 
political influence, a position which, they owed partly to their 
pastoral office, partly to the extensive properties — consti- 
tuting Peter's Patrimony — which had come into their hands 
as gifts or capitulations. Gregory II and Gregory III, in the 
quarrels which ensued when the emperor Leo III took the side 
of the image-breakers, and, again, on the Lombard invasion, 
stand forth as the recognised heads of Rome and of the surround- 
ing territories, viz. the Campagna, the Maritima, and suburbi- 
can Tuscany. Pope Zachary (741-52) practically proclaimed 
himself the ruler of the Roman dukedom, by concluding peace 
on its behalf with the Lombard king Liutprand (712-44). It 
was under this same pontificate that a beginning was made of 
certain relations, thanks to which the Church's civil sovereignty 
was to be both enlarged and strengthened. After Carlman had 
forsaken public life, to atone for the excesses he had com- 
mitted at Cannstatt against the rebel Alemanni (746), Pipin 
the Short, mayor of the palace, was left with the whole power of 
the Frankish kingdom in his hands. The time seemed now 
come to put an end to the long-standing abuse by which one 
man bore the name of king whilst another governed the people — 
an abuse which had its danger, in that every rebel could claim 
to be acting on the king's behalf. Pipin accordingly dismissed 
the incapable Merovingian Childeric III, and assumed the 
crown, after having first obtained Pope Zachary's consent (752). 
The new king soon found an opportunity of showing his 
gratitude for the support given him by Rome. The Lombard 
throne, which had been vacated by the peaceful Rachis, who 
had retired to a monk's cell at Monte Cassino, was now occu- 
pied by Aistulf (749-56), a man who shared fully the love of 
adventure and conquest natural to his race. Having captured 
Ravenna, he led an army on Rome (752). As the Ityzantine 
emperor refused to intervene, the Pope was compelled to appeal 



Beginning of the Papal States 251 

to the Franks. Pipin responded to the call, and in two ex- 
peditions (754 and 756) crushed the Lombards, and bestowed on 
the Roman See that portion of the Exarchate which they had 
occupied, i.e. Ravenna itself, twenty-one other towns, and all 
the territories belonging thereto — in other words, the whole 
district from Comacchio southwards to Jesi and Gubbio, or as 
the stretch of land came to be called afterwards, the Exarchate 
and the Pentapolis. The town of Narni, which had been seized 
by the duke of Spoleto, was also restored to its former owner. 
These events happened under Stephen II (752-57), reckoned 
by some as Stephen III. After the death of Zachary, a 
successor was elected in the person of a different Stephen, who, 
however, died before he could be consecrated, and who was 
accordingly refused a place in the old lists of popes. 

The dissensions which shortly after tore asunder the 
Lombard kingdom also contributed to the aggrandisement of 
the States of the Church. On the death of Aistulf, Rachis 
was of a mind to reascend the throne ; to frustrate this design 
and to secure himself allies, Desiderius (757-74) bribed the 
Romans with a promise of the portion of the Exarchate of 
Ravenna which still remained under Lombard rule. This 
promise was, indeed, only partially fulfilled, possibly because 
just then a change occurred in the occupant of the papal throne, 
but it was to furnish the Romans with a claim against the 
Lombards for further grants of land. 

It is true that for some time the popes were scarcely in a 
position to enforce this claim. On the death of Paul I (757-67) 
there was great trouble in Rome itself. Toto, duke of Nepi, 
obtained by violence the election of his brother, a layman 
named Constantine. After thirteen months the intruder was 
ousted with the help of the Lombards, whose selection of 
a monk named Philip was, however, equally vitiated by 
violence. Only with the advent of Stephen III (768-72) did 
the papal election revert to its normal course. The Council oi 
the Lateran in 769 adopted a measure to obviate the recurrence 
of such disorders, and decreed that in future the laity should 
have no right of electing the Pope, but merely of acclaiming him 
when elected. Even yet no steps could be taken against the 
Lombards, especially as Pipin, the protector of the Holy See, 
had just died, and his sons were engaged in the customary 



252 A Manual of Church History 

family quarrels. Matters seemed to be coming to a yet 
worse pass when Charles the Great espoused Desiderata, the 
daughter of Desiderius (770). But the wind soon changed. 
Charles returned Desiderata to her father (771) ; Carlman 
departed this life, and was followed the next year by Stephen 
III. Adrian I (772-95), his successor, by labouring to counter- 
act the influence which Desiderius had obtained in Rome, 
provoked the Lombard king to invade that portion of the 
Exarchate still under Roman rule. At the Pope's appeal a 
Frankish army now appeared in Italy (773). Pavia, the 
Lombard capital, fell in 774, and Lombardy was annexed by 
the Franks. Pipin's donation was secured to the Pope, and 
the promised towns of Imola, Bologna, and Ferrara were added 
to it. According to the Vita Hadriani in the Liber Pontificalis 
(c. 41-43) — the only document giving details of the transaction — 
the donation comprised other countries also, and there are some 
who believe that this was actually the case. It is, however, 
more probable that only certain extra-territorial townships, 
certain revenues, &c, which had formerly belonged to the 
Pope, and had been purloined by the Lombards, are really 
meant. At any rate, this is all that was restored by Charles. 
The carrying out of the promises occupied a considerable time, 
as the claims had to be made good in each instance, and, as 
Adrian was inclined to make the most of his rights, we find him 
several times complaining of unfair treatment. Charles was, 
however, able, on his visit to Rome in 781, to come to an 
understanding with the Pope. 

By the annexation of Lombardy, Charles was now in pos- 
session of a large tract of Italy, and was accordingly anxious to 
secure greater influence at Rome. His constant use of the 
title Patricius Romanorum, which had been bestowed both 
on his father and himself by Stephen II (754), betrays his 
desire, which was to be fulfilled under Adrian's successor, 
Leo III (795-816). Soon after his election the latter offered 
Charles, on behalf of the Roman people, the oath of fealty and 
obedience. The need of a protector, not long after, forced the 
Pope to confer yet another privilege on the king of the Franks. 
During the procession on St. Mark's Day in 799, an attack was 
made on Leo by the kinsmen of his predecessor, the Pope being 
severely mauled. In consequence of this he crossed the Alps, 



Beginning of the Papal States 253 

and proceeded to Paderborn to solicit help. Charles reached 
Rome in the following year, and in reward for his intervention 
was crowned Roman Emperor on Christmas Day, 800. 

Charles's coronation was a great event in history, his 
sovereignty over Rome being thereby solemnly acknowledged. 
According to the settlement afterwards made by Lothar I 
in his constitution of 824, the emperor was sovereign lawgiver, 
whilst the Pope, as ruler of the country, had charge of the 
executive. The emperor also secured a right of intervening 
in the papal election, similar to that formerly possessed by 
Constantinople. This power, at first dormant, was afterwards 
usually exercised through an imperial ratification of the 
electors' choice. According to the oath (which some, on 
in sufficient grounds, have called into question) taken by the 
Romans subsequently to the election of Eugene II, the Pope- 
elect was not to be consecrated before having sworn fealty 
to the emperor in the presence of one of his ambassadors. 
Corresponding to this right of the emperor's there was the 
obligation on the Pope's side to crown the emperor. It is 
true that Charles's immediate successors, Lewis the Pious 
(813) and Lothar (817), received the crown in the first instance 
from the hand of their father ; but they were afterwards 
formally crowned by the Pope, and throughout the Middle Ages 
it continued to be implicitly believed that the imperial crown 
could be granted only by the Pope. Pope and emperor, one 
being the head of the Christian Church and the other the chief 
of Christian princes, stood united by the closest bonds, the 
Papacy and the Empire forming in a sense the hinges on which 
the whole history of the Middle Ages turns. 

According to the so-called Donation of Constantine, Con- 
stantine the Great, in thanksgiving for his baptism and cure from 
leprosy, bestowed on Pope Silvester the city of Rome and all the 
provinces of Italy and of the western regions (omnes Italiae seu 
occidenlahum regionum provincias) . This spurious document, 
which is found in its complete form for the first time in the pseudo- 
Isidorean Decretals, was, till well into the fifteenth century, almost 
universally regarded as genuine. It was doubtless fabricated 
at Rome, probably in the latter half of the eighth century. Cp. 
DÖLLINGER, Papsifabeln, pp. 61-106 ; Hist. J. 1883 ; and the 
studies of Brunner and Zeumer, 1888 ; Martens, 1889 ; E. 
Mayer [Schenkungen Konstantins u. Pippins), 1904. 

The sources have nothing to say of the wherefore of the 



254 A Manual of Church History 

restoration of the Empire of the West. Eginhard (Vit. Kar. M. 28) 
merely reports the saying of Charles, that, had he known beforehand 
of the Pope's intention, he would not have entered the church 
on the memorable Christmas Day. Many attempts have been 
made to supplement by research the little that we know of the con- 
catenation of events. In the later Middle Ages the prevalent view 
was that the Empire had been withdrawn from the Greeks in 
favour of the Franks, the image- breaking zeal of the Byzantine 
emperors being alleged as justifying the measure adopted by the 
Holy See. Cp. W. Ohr, Kaiserkrönung Karls d. Gr. 1904. 



§86 

The Popes of the Carlovingian Period 1 

Leo III continued throughout his life on the most friendly 
terms with the great Frankish emperor. In S04 he again crossed 
the Alps to visit him, and the reality of the protection afforded 
by the sovereign became evident on Charles's death, which was 
immediately followed by a rebellion against Leo. Stephen IV 
(816-17) continued the same policy with regard to Lewis the Pious 
(814-40). He, too, journeyed to the north, and crowned the emperor 
at Rheims. Paschal I (817-24), who crowned Lothar I as co- 
emperor (823), and who, like Leo III, had to withstand great 
trouble at home, received from Lewis the Privilegium, dated 817, 
which is the earliest trustworthy witness to the temporal power 
of the Popes. The elevation of Eugene II (824-27) led to a quarrel 
concerning the manner of election, and was the occasion which 
called forth the Constitution of Lothar, to which allusion has been 
already made. 

Valentine, who was Pope for one month only, was followed by 
Gregory IV (827-44). It was during the latter pontificate that 
the unhappy dissensions between Lewis and his sons broke out, and 
the Pope, true to his position as Christ's regent, sought to act as 
peacemaker. His efforts were, however, in vain, partly because 
he was suspected of being prejudiced in favour of Lothar. After 
their father's death, the sons proceeded to quarrel among themselves, 
until their haggling was brought to an end by the treaty of Verdun 
(843), which partitioned the Empire among them. 

Gregory's demise was followed by a double election, Sergius II 
(844-47) succeeding, however, in gaining the day over his adversary 
John. In the meanwhile the Saracens were ravaging the neigh- 
bourhood of Rome, not sparing even the tombs of the Apostles 

1 /. d. d. Gesch. : Simson, Ludwig d. Fr. 1 vol. 1874-76 ; E. Dümmler, 
Gesch. d. ostfränkischen Reiches, 2 ed. 3 vol. 1887-88 ; M. Heimbucher, 
Papstwahlen unter den Karolingern, 1889 ; H. Dopffel, Kaisertum u. Papst- 
wechsel unter d. Karolingern, 188g ; Lapötre, U Europe et le Saint-Süge ä 
l'dpoque Carolingienne, I : Le pape Jean VIII, 1895. 



Popes of the Ninth Century 255 

(846). To prevent a renewal of this act of desecration the next 
Pope, Leo IV (847-55), surrounded the Vatican with a wall, thereby 
creating the Urbs Lconina or Transtiberine quarter (Trastevere) . 
The same Pope also lived to see the Saracens routed at the sea- 
fight near Ostia (849). After another dispute as to the succession 
(the anti-Pope in this case being Anastasius the Librarian, cp. 
§ 107), Leo was followed by Benedict III (855-58), whose pontificate 
was quite uneventful. According to an idle tale, he had been 
preceded in the Chair of Peter by Joan, a girl from Mainz, who, 
after playing the pontiff for two and a half years, brought forth 
a child during a procession, thus disclosing her sex and the imposi- 
tion she had practised. This story is first heard of in the thirteenth 
century, but it spread rapidly and found universal credence until 
the sixteenth century.i 

Benedict was succeeded by Nicholas I (858-67), 2 a man deeply 
conscious of the responsibilities of his position, unbending in his 
defence of orthodoxy and of the Roman primacy, and unquestion- 
ably the greatest Pope between Gregory I and Gregory VII. Three 
events lend especial interest to his pontificate. In the first instance 
he had to withstand John, the tyrannical and unruly archbishop 
of Ravenna. Next, the Eastern Church was thrown into con- 
fusion by the action of Photius, which had for its consequence a 
bitter conflict between East and West (§ 94). Lastly, the Christian 
marriage law had to be upheld against Lothar II of Lorraine.3 
The latter was desirous of dismissing his wife Theutberga that 
he might marry his concubine Waldrada, and to obtain his object, 
accused his wife of having misconducted herself with her brother 
Hukbert, a crime which, according to Frankish law, rendered a 
marriage invalid. With the connivance of his bishops, especially 
of Günther of Cologne and Thietgaud of Treves, it was comparatively 
easy to control the business. A Council held at Aachen in 
860, in spite of a prearranged reference to the Judgment of God 
turning out favourably to the queen, decided against her, and 
(862) allowed the king to contract a new marriage. Lothar indeed 
gave way on the Pope threatening to ban him if he did not again 
receive Theutberga (865) ; but even then the matter was not at an 
end. The next Pope, Adrian II (867-72), absolved Waldrada from 
the excommunication she had incurred, after havine received 
assurances of her innocence, and admitted Lothar to communion 
at Monte Cassino. As the king continued, however, to cherish 
the design of having Waldrada as his consort, the quarrel would 
probably have begun anew had not death prevented him from 
accomplishing his plan. Lothar died at Piacenza (869), on his way 

1 DÖLLiNGER, Papstfabeln, pp. 1-45 ; KL. VI, 1519-24 ; E. Rhoides, P, 
Johanna ; trans, from the Greek by P. Friedrich, 1904. 

2 Mg. by H. Lämmer, 1857 ; J. Richterich, 1903. 

3 Sdralek, Hinkmars v. Reims kanonist. Gutachten über die Ehescheidung 
des Königs Lothar II, 1881 ; Schrörs, Hinkmar v. R. 1884, pp. 175 ff. 



256 A Manual of Church History 

home from Rome, and his kingdom was seized by his uncles Lewis 
the German and Charles the Bald, in spite of Adrian's intervention 
on behalf of the emperor Lewis II (855-75) ; the treaty of 
Mersen (870) carried yet further the division between the two 
halves, German and French, of the old Empire of the Franks, 
already decided on at Verdun (843). 

To John VIII (872-82) it fell to crown two emperors. At 
Christmas 875 he bestowed the Empire on Charles II, nicknamed the 
Bald. His hope that the emperor would help him out of the 
Italian trouble was not destined to be fulfilled. Charles may 
have been a braver man than his name implies, but he was able 
to do very little, being carried off by death before he had occupied 
the throne two years. The Pope's choice also gave great offence 
to Charles's brother, Lewis the German (1876), who, being the 
eldest surviving son of Lewis the Pious, had reckoned his succession 
secure. Hence the disturbances proceeded apace. In Italy the 
Saracens continued their incursions, and at Rome a conspiracy 
was hatched under the leadership of Formosus, bishop of Porto 
(876). The conspirators were, indeed, compelled to flee from the 
city, but its gates were again opened to them when they returned, 
accompanied by Lambert duke of Spoleto and Adelbert margrave 
of Tuscany, who had espoused their cause (878). It was now the 
turn of John VIII to flee, and as he could not find help in France, 
he finally crowned Charles III, commonly known as the Fat 
(881-87), the youngest son of Lewis the German. This emperor, 
who united under his rule the whole Carlovingian Empire, proved 
even more incapable than his predecessor, and was eventually 
dethroned by Arnulf, duke of Carinthia, a natural son of Charles's 
brother Carlman. 

The change in the supreme civil power did not produce any 
change for the better at Rome, where in the meantime Marinus I 
(882-84), Adrian III, and Stephen V (885-91) had successively 
been elected to the papacy. In Italy Berengar margrave of 
Friuli, and Guido duke of Spoleto, were fighting for the upper 
hand. Success attending the efforts of the latter, Stephen V 
raised him to the imperial throne (891), and his successor Formosus 
(891-96) did the same for Guido's son Lambert (892). But, as 
the Spoletan dynasty did not promise well, the Pope soon summoned 
to Rome the German king Arnulf, and anointed him emperor (896). 
The new emperor spent, however, only a fortnight in the Eternal 
City, nor was he able to make his power felt in the Italian peninsula, 
so that his visit ultimately produced more harm than good. The 
shortness of the following pontificates, and the small heed paid 
to the papal enactments, show the sad state of anarchy then 
prevailing at Rome. 

Formosus died soon after Arnulfs departure. His successor, 
Boniface VI, was Pope only for two weeks. Stephen VI (896-97), a 
puppet of the Spoletans, was induced to desecrate the remains of 



Popes of the Tenth Century 257 

Formosus, and to declare that his pontificate having been contrary 
to law, all his ordinations were null and void. Canon XV of the 
Council of Nicaea, alleged as a justification of this barbarous action, 
had so far (save in the case of Marinus I) been strictly observed 
at Rome, though everywhere else in the West it was almost a 
dead letter. Stephen's harshness cost him his life, and he was 
followed by Romanus, who, after reigning not quite four months, 
was in his turn followed by Theodore II, who restored to office 
all the clergy who had been ordained by Formosus. His pontificate 
lasted twenty days, and a tumultuous election resulted in the 
choice of Sergius. On the refusal of the emperor Lambert to 
recognise the election, and at his demand, a new Pope was found 
in the person of John IX (898-900), a man well fitted for his post, 
who for the second time annulled the decision of Stephen VI, and 
also strove with all his might to prevent the crimes then so frequent. 
He summoned a Council (898) to debate on the means of preserving 
order in the papal election, and, in conjunction with it, he issued a 
decree (c. 10, afterwards to be associated with the name of a certain 
Pope Stephen 1) that the consecration of the new Pope should take 
place only in the presence of the imperial envoys. His pontificate 
being so brief, he was not able to effect very much, especially as, 
on the death of Lambert, the political horizon was again darkened. 
Whilst Berengar was fighting for the mastery in Italy, Benedict IV 
(900-903) placed the imperial crown on the head of Lewis of 
Provence (901), a son of Count Boso, who shortly before (879) had 
severed Provence and southern Burgundy from the rest of France, 
and founded the new kingdom of Lower Burgundy -or Arelate. The 
new emperor, Lewis III, was, however, no match against Berengar 
in Italy. The experience of the next two Popes was equally 
unfortunate. Leo V, after reigning thirty days, was ejected by 
Pope Christopher, who, in his turn, had soon to vacate the See. 



§ 87 

The Tenth Century — the Ottomans and Crescentians 2 

Sergius III (904-11) had for several years been scheming 
to obtain the Papacy, but only on his second election (904) did 
he succeed in retaining it. His cause was championed by the 
powerful party of noblemen headed by the senator Theophylactus, 
or, rather, by his ambitious wife Theodora and his daughters Marozia 

1 Funk, A. u. U. I, 460-78. 

2 /. d. d. Gesch. : G. Waitz, Heinrich 7, 3rd ed. 1885 ; Dummler, Otto 7, 
1876; Giesebrecht, Otto II, 1840 ; Wilmans, Otto 777, 1840 ; K. Uhlirz, 
Otto II u. III (973-83), 1902 ; Congris IV des Cath. V, 158-67 (for the 
practice of changing names) ; MICE. XXIII (1902), 50-126 (Alberich II 
u. d. Kirchenstaat). 

vol. 1. s 



258 A Manual of Church History 

and Theodora the younger, a party which, during the next few 
decades, was to wield an overwhelming and disastrous influence 
over the history of Rome, that is if we may trust the information 
of Liutprand, bishop of Cremona, whose Antapodosis and history 
of Otto the Great constitute the main source of the history of the 
time. His account cannot, however, be wholly devoid of foundation, 
whatever we may think of his predilection for scandalous tales, 
and though certain of his statements are palpably false. 

After the short and uneventful pontificates of Anastasius III 
(911-13) and Lando, John, archbishop of Ravenna, became Pope 
under the title of John X (914-28). According to Liutprand he 
owed his elevation to Theodora. He was a good ruler. In 916 
he crowned Berengar emperor, and organised a league against 
the Saracens, who were defeated on the Garigliano (916). His 
home government was also energetic, but he was finally overthrown 
by Guido of Tuscany, Marozia's second husband. The next Popes 
were Leo VI (928-29) and Stephen VII (929-31). 

On the latter's death, Marozia appointed her own son, John XI 
(931-36), Pope, that she might rule through him. Her ambition 
was, however, not at an end, and on again becoming a widow 
she married Hugh, king of Provence and Italy, apparently in the 
hope of receiving the title of empress. Her plan was foiled by 
her own action, and she lost for ever her influence at Rome. Her 
second son Alberic, on the very day of the marriage, headed a revolt 
and assumed the title of Senator et princeps omnium Romanorum, 
thus seizing the whole civil power in the Roman States. Pope 
John was consequently obliged to confine himself to a purely 
spiritual rule. The position of affairs remained the same under 
the next four pontiffs, Leo VII (936-39), Stephen VIII, Marinus II 
(942-46), and Agapetus II. The fifth, however, Octavian, the 
eighteen-year-old son of Alberic, again united the two rules. On his 
father's death in 954 he succeeded to his position, and, on a vacancy 
occurring the following year in the Papacy, he seized upon that 
office also, and now changed his name to John XII. This latter 
innovation was not imitated by his immediate successors, but, with 
the next century, it became a general rule for the Pope to change 
his name on election. 

In the meantime a strong hand had made itself felt in Upper 
Italy, and was soon to perform a like office at Rome itself. At 
the death of Hugh's son, king Lothar (950), Berengar, margrave 
of Ivrea, seized the crown of Italy, and to strengthen his shaky 
throne sought to marry his son Adelbert to Lothar's widow. On 
Adelheid's refusal, she was mishandled by Berengar and com- 
pelled to call for the help of the German king. Otto I (936-73) 
crossed the Alps, and took her as his wife (951). In the following 
year he restored Italy as a fief to Berengar and Adelbert, with- 
holding only the dukedom of Friuli. On his second expedition 
to Italy (961) he entirely withdrew their authority. The motive 



Popes of the Tenth Century 25g 

of this second expedition was furnished by John XII. A worldly 
prince rather than a bishop, he was bent on enlarging the Papal 
States, or, at least, on restoring to them the territories of which 
they had been deprived during the time of trouble. His designs 
were to be fulfilled otherwise than he had expected. Berengar, 
against whom principally they were directed — seeing that Hugh 
had merged the Exarchate in the kingdom of Italy — threatened 
an advance on Rome. At the urgent request of the Pope, Otto 
made his appearance, and was rewarded by receiving, at the feast 
of Candlemas (962), the imperial crown. Eleven days later he 
granted a charter confirming and enlarging the donations of Pipin 
and Charles. This charter, though no longer extant in the original» 
is still preserved in a contemporary duplicate in the Vatican 
archives. 1 

The understanding between Pope and emperor was not to last 
long. No sooner had Otto taken his departure than John joined 
hands with his enemies. The emperor, on receiving news of John's 
duplicity and of the shamelessness of his life, hurried back to Rome, 
and assembled a Council at St. Peter's which deposed the youthful 
pontiff on the charge of murder, perjury, sacrilege, and unchastity, 
and chose as his successor Leo VIII (963-65). The words which 
serve as a preface to the judgment, ' An unheard-of ulcer must 
needs be extirpated by unheard-of means,' sufficiently indicate 
the wish of the Council ; the proceedings were not legal according 
to the accepted notions of canon law, but seemed called for by 
the circumstances. But the charges having been brought 
against John by people who were notoriously unfriendly, many 
refused to bow to the sentence of the Council, and the emperor 
had to intervene a second time to secure respect for its 
decision. 

As soon as Otto was at a safe distance, John returned to Rome 
(964) and summoned another Council to meet at St. Peter's. The 
Fathers present were mostly the same who had taken part in the 
previous Council, but the conclusions at which they now arrived 
were diametrically opposed to those they had previously issued ; 
the former Council was now declared null and void, and Leo was 
proclaimed a usurper. John died shortly after this, and Benedict V 
was elected by the Romans. To this action Otto took grievous 
exception, all the more so since the Romans had sworn only the 
previous year to elect no Pope for the future without first seeking 
his will. Hence he turned his steps to Rome yet a third time, and 
there reinstated Leo. It is said that, on this occasion, at a Council 
held at the Lateran, the Pope bestowed on Otto and his heirs 
the right to nominate their own successors, and of appointing 
bishops to all the sees of Christendom, including that of Rome. 

1 Th. Sickel. Das Privilegium Ottos I für die rom. K. v. J. 962, 1883 ; 
Forsch* z f d a G. 1884, pp. 567-81 ; N.A. (1900), 409-24. 

s 2 



260 A Manual of Church History 

The Bull i which exists in a longer and a shorter recension is a 
forgery dating from the time of the investiture quarrel. 

By Otto's coronation the imperial throne had been filled after 
a protracted vacancy. The Roman factions were, however, too 
strong not to continue their unholy work. John XIII (965-72) 
gave such offence to the nobles by the severity with which he 
upheld his temporal power that in the very year of his election 
he was carried off a prisoner and had to spend eleven months in a 
dungeon. The end of his pontificate was more peaceable, the 
emperor cruelly punishing the rebels, and then remaining for the 
next six years at Rome or in Italy (966-72). Trouble began 
anew with the advent of Benedict VI (972-74), and persisted, 
with a few intervals, till the end of the century. At the head of 
the opposition party we now find the family of the Crescentians, a 
family which emerges into history in the life of John XIII, a 
certain Crescentius, a caballo marmoreo, having agitated for his 
deliverance. In the next decades this family seems to have had 
almost entire control of Rome. Scarcely was the emperor dead 
when a revolution headed by Crescentius de Theodora [i.e. Theodora's 
son) broke out. The Pope was thrown into prison, and soon after 
put to death, and Franco, a deacon, became Pope under the name 
of Boniface VII. Otto II (973-83) soon emended the situation, 
the creature of the Crescentians fleeing to Constantinople at Otto's 
approach. The pontificate of Benedict VII (974-83) was peaceable, 
but on the death of Otto II passions were again let loose at Rome. 
John XIV (983-84), a former bishop of Pavia, who succeeded 
Benedict, was starved to death in the Castle of St. Angelo, and 
Boniface VII ascended a second time the throne of St. Peter, and, 
after a reign of eleven months, perished in a tumult. 

Under John XV (985-96) the civil power at Rome seems to 
have passed into the hands of Crescentius Numentanus, who 
reigned as Patrician. He made, however, no attempt against the 
imperial overlord, nor did any difficulty arise when the dowager- 
empress Theophano demanded imperial honours during her stay 
at the Eternal City (989-90). The Pope made the best of the 
situation, until it became unbearable (995) and recourse had to be 
had to Otto III (983-1002). At John's death the Romans even 
left the emperor free to provide him a successor, the result being 
that there followed one another in the Papacy the first German 
and the first Frenchman to attain the highest ecclesiastical honour, 
the former being the emperor's cousin and chaplain, Bruno, and 
the second Gerbert, Bruno's tutor. Both of them were worthy 
men, but their pontificates were too short to produce much good. 
Gregory V for a time had to face a schism, Crescentius Numentanus, 

* C. 23 Dist. LXIII ; Floss, Die Papstwahl unter den Ottonen, 1858; 
Leonis VIII Privilegium de investituris ; cp. Forsch, z. d. Gesch. 1875, p. 618 ff.; 
Hefele, IV, 620-26. 






Popes of the Eleventh Century 261 

after the emperor's departure, having again usurped the govern- 
ment and set up an anti-Pope in the person of John, bishop of 
Piacenza, commonly known as John XVI (997-98). This revolt 
cost Crescentius his life. Silvester II (999-1003) 1 was mainly 
remarkable for his extensive learning. His exceptional knowledge 
gained him, even during his lifetime, and still more in the later 
Middle Ages, the reputation of being a sorcerer. He was followed 
by John XVII, John XVIII (1003-09), and Peter, bishop of Albano, 
who took the name of Sergius IV (1009-12). During the whole 
of this time the temporal power was in the hands of John 
Crescentius. 

At an early date an imaginary Donus II was associated with Benedict VI 
(972-74), either as his predecessor or his successor. Another error led to a 
John XVI being included immediately after John XV. The list of Popes 
was thereby unduly lengthened. On the other hand, the names of Leo VIII 
and Boniface VII are wanting in many modern lists, whilst other Popes follow 
each other in a different order. Thelistin St. Paul's Basilicaat Rome mentions 
four Popes whose names will not be found in the list given at the end of the 
present work. On the other hand, the Gerarchia cattolica, as revised in 1904, 
omits two names contained in our list (cp. KL, IX, 1424-42). 



$ 88 

The Eleventh Century — Tusculan and German Popes 2 

With the downfall of the Crescentians a new party came into 
power at Rome. On the death of Sergius IV, whilst the former 
were engaged in securing the succession of a certain Gregory, Alberic, 
count of Tusculum, a descendant of Theophylactus and Theodora, 
broke into the city, took control of the proceedings, and succeeded 
in placing successively on the papal throne three members of his 
family, two of them being his brothers and the other his son, all 
of whom had heretofore been laymen. His first election resulted 
in the choice of Theophylactus, who assumed the name of Benedict 
VIII (1012-24). As there were thus two claimants, Gregory 
and Benedict agreed to refer their case to the German king. Henry 
II (1002-24) gave judgment in Benedict's favour, who accordingly 
bestowed on him and his consort Kunigunda the imperial crown 
(1014) . Though a worldly man and chiefly solicitous for the political 
welfare of the Papacy, Benedict did not altogether neglect his 
spiritual duties. Not only did he successfully engage the Saracens, 
who at the beginning of the century had settled on the coast of 
Sardinia, whence they were threatening Tuscany, but he also strove 

1 Mg. by C.F. Hock, 1837. K.Werner, 1873; 2nd ed. 1881. K. Schulthess, 
1891 ; Lux, 1898. 

2 /. d. d. G.: Hirsch-Bresslau, Heinrich II, 3 vol. 1862-75 ; Bresslau, 
Konrad II, 2 vol. 1879-84 ; Steindorff, Heinrich III, 2 vol. 1874-81 ; 
P. G. Wappler, Papst Benedikt VIII, 1897 ; Giovagnoli, Benedetto IX, 
1900 ; H. Günter, K. Heinrich II, 1904. 



262 A Manual of Church History 

for the better observance of the Church's canons. He was succeeded 
by his brother Romanus, as John XIX (1024-33), who crowned 
Conrad II (1027), the third of the line being their nephew Theophy- 
lactus, or Benedict IX. Though only twelve years of age, he excelled 
in the viciousness of his life even John XII, who, like him, had 
been the son of an Alberic and had been promoted to the Papacy 
when not yet of canonical age. His evil life produced a general 
revolt in 1044, but the new Pope, Silvester III, was compelled 
to evacuate the See after having occupied it only seven weeks. In 
ihe following spring Benedict was, however, induced to resign the 
tiara in favour of the archpriest, John Gratian, now to be known 
as Gregory VI. The new pontiff was a man of sterling worth, 
and, though he obtained his promotion by payment, this may 
be excused on the score that corruption then prevailed universally. 
But his election did not remove the difficulties, and it was soon 
necessary to supplant him. This was done in 1046 with the help 
of Henry III (1039-56) : Silvester and Gregory were deposed by 
a Council held at Sutri; the same was done for Benedict by a 
Council held at Rome, and Henry's nominee, Suidger, bishop 
of Bamberg, was acclaimed Pope. 

Clement II (1046-47) ,1 as the new Pope styled himself, reigned 
for ten months, but his pontificate marked the beginning of a new 
era in the Papacy. He it was who began war in earnest against 
the twin evils of simony and clerical concubinage, then prevalent 
throughout wide sections of the clergy, and his work was ener- 
getically taken up by his successors. The four next Popes, being 
all of them nominees of the emperor, were likewise Germans. 
Damasus II, in private life Boppo, a former bishop of Brixen, died 
very shortly after his election, and as Benedict IX caused some 
disturbance by an attempt to regain the Papacy — he scarcely even 
succeeded in taking possession of his See. On the other hand, 
Bruno, bishop of Toul, elected as Leo IX (1048-54) ,2 enjoyed a 
rather longer pontificate. In his reforming zeal he journeyed from 
place to place everywhere convening Councils. One of his greatest 
supports was Hildebrand, whom he had, on his accession, ordained 
sub-deacon and set over the monastery of St. Paul, and who soon 
became the very embodiment of the movement of reform. The 
most important event of the pontificate was the beginning of the 
struggle between East and West brought about by the machinations 
of Michael Cerularius (cp. § 95). Leo acquired Benevento — over 
which the emperor renounced his rights in exchange for those of 
the Pope over Bamberg and Fulda (1051) — thereby involved him- 
self in hostilities with the Normans, and died soon after his defeat 
at their hands at Civitate (1053). There followed him in the Papacy 

1 C. Höfler, Die deutschen Päpste, 1839 ; C. Will, Die Anfänge der 
Restauration der K. im 11 Jahrh. 1859-64. 

2 Mg. by Hunkler, 1856 ; Delarc, 1876 ; Brucker {U Alsace et Vfcglise 
au temps du Pape S. Lion IX), 2 vol. 1889. 



Popes of the Eleventh Century 263 

Gebhard, bishop of Eichstätt, elected as Victor II, and Cardinal 
Frederick of Lorraine, abbot of Monte Cassino, who chose to be 
called Stephen IX (1057-58). Of these, the former owed his 
election to Henry — who shortly afterwards breathed his last in 
the Pope's hands, recommending to him his six-year-old son and his 
empire — whilst the latter was elected canonically, though recog- 
nition of the choice was obtained from the German court. His 
zeal for reform was evinced by his appointment of Peter Damian, 
abbot of Fonte Avellana, to be cardinal bishop of Ostia. 

On Stephen's death the Tusculan faction again came into 
evidence, and succeeded in tumultuously electing John Mincius, 
bishop of Velletri, known as Benedict X (1058-59). This action 
was all the more shameless in that it constituted an act of dis- 
obedience against the orders issued by Stephen just before his death, 
to await the return of Hildebrand from the imperial court before 
proceeding to the election of a successor. A new election accord- 
ingly took place, and the tiara was offered at Siena to Gebhard 
bishop of Florence, who took the name of Nicholas II (1058-61). 
The introduction of some order into the papal election now seemed 
the most pressing need, the problem being to devise a mean? by 
which it might be freed from the influence of the Roman nobility, 
and also from that of the emperor, who had latterly enjoyed com- 
plete control over it. The somewhat irregular election of Nicholas II 
also required to be approved. These matters were settled at the 
Lateran Council of 1059. According to the decree then issued, 
the right of election was to belong to the cardinals (cardinal 
bishops alone having the right of proposing the names ; this item 
of the decree was never of any effect), whilst the remainder of the 
clergy, and the laity, were to have merely the right of acclaiming 
the cardinals' choice. To the emperor a right of confirmation or 
recognition was conceded, but this honorary privilege was with- 
drawn as soon as the Papacy became estranged from the Empire. 
The election was in future to take place in Rome, and the elect 
was to be a member of the Roman clergy. But if a worthy candidate 
could not be found in the Roman Church, or if, for one reason or 
another, a free election could not take place in the city, then the 
election might take place elsewhere, and a candidate might be 
chosen from a foreign diocese. Lastly, if by war or other circum- 
stance it should be impossible to solemnly enthrone the new 
Pope in St. Peter's Chair, the elect was nevertheless to exercise 
full apostolic authority. The decree caused great dissatisfaction 
beyond the Alps, in consequence of which Nicholas sought for 
support among the Normans established in Lower Italy. In 
consideration of a tax and a promise to defend the Roman Church 
against all her enemies, he pawned to Duke Robert Guiscard, 
by the treaty of Melfi (1059), Apulia, Calabria, and Sicily, and 
then, feeling his position secure, reissued at the Lateran Council of 
1060 the decrees concerning papal elections. The result was a 



264 A Manual of Church History 

breach between Rome and the imperial court. The decrees of 
the Pope were, in Germany (in the summer of 1060), declared 
to be null and void, only to be reiterated by Rome at the Lateran 
Council, of 1061. 

On the death of the Pope the situation became distinctly dan- 
gerous. The imperial party at Rome dispatched an embassy to 
Germany to request the appointment of a new Pope, but Hildebrand 
was too quick for them, and secured the election of Anselm, bishop 
of Lucca, as Alexander II (1061-73). In Germany this election 
did not win approval, and, at a Council held at Basel, Henry IV 
nominated the bishop of Parma, Cadalous, or Honorius II. Germany, 
however, soon lost interest in her favourite. In the early part of 
1062 Anno, archbishop of Cologne, kidnapped the young king 
from his mother Agnes and assumed the government. A change 
was immediately apparent. Alexander's election was confirmed 
by an envoy, and on Cadalous making a fresh attempt to obtain 
possession of Rome, a Council was assembled at Mantua (1064) 
and gave judgment against him. The worst of the schism was 
now over, though, as Cadalous continued to pose as Pope and had 
supporters in Upper Italy, his cause only came to an end with his 
death (1071-72). 

We find the decree concerning papal election (1059) in c. 1, Dist. XXIII. 
Outside of the text given in the Corpus iuris canonici there is another, the 
decree, according to Cardinal Deusdedit, having been corrupted either by 
Wibert of Ravenna or by one of his party, during the quarrel between Gregory 
VII and Henry IV. The existence of the two versions, the so-called papal 
and the imperial recensions, gave rise to many difficulties, nor was there 
ever any agreement as to the exact purport of the decree. Cp. Scheffer- 
Boichorst, Die Neuordnung der Papstwahl durch Nikolaus II, 1879; Grauert, 
in Hist. J. 1880, pp. 501-602 ; Martens, Die Besetzung des päpstl. Stuhles 
unter Heinrich III u. Heinrich IV, 1887; Hist. J. 1892, pp. 186-91 ; MICE. 
1906, pp. 11-53, where an attempt Is made to show that both recensions have 
been corrupted by the clerical party. 






CHAPTER III 

EARLY MEDIAEVAL HERESIES AND CONTROVERSIES 1 

§89 

The Paulicians and Bogomiles 2 

I. Though its origin dates further back, the later history of 
the Paulicians 3 belongs to the period now under consideration. 
According to outside information the sect was a Manichsean 
one, and had its origin in the teaching of a certain woman 
named Kallinike and her two sons, Paul and John, the name 
of Paulicians either being derived from that of the former 
of the two men, or being a compound from those of both. 
On the other hand, the Paulicians who styled themselves 
simply Christians, or the Catholic Church, and designated the 
Catholics as Romans, preferred to trace their parentage to a 
certain Constantine, a native of Mananalis near Samosata, who, 
in the reign of Constantine Pogonatus (668-85), established a 
Church of his own at Cibossa in Armenia. Paul the Apostle 
they held in great veneration, and, to mark this, the leaders 
of the sect and their Churches adopted names connected with 
the history of St. Paul, Constantine being known as Silvanus, 
his first Church as Macedonia, &c. They several times 
separated into smaller sects, the most remarkable split of this 
kind occurring at the beginning of the ninth century, when 
Baanes and Sergius (f 835) founded the factions of the Baanites 
and Sergiotes. 

Steps were taken from time to time against the sect by the 
Byzantine emperors. At first only the leaders were persecuted, 

1 Hefele, CG. vol. III-IV; J. Bach, Dogmengesch. d. MA. 2 vol. 1873-75. 

2 DÖLLINGER, Sektengesch. d. MA. 1890, I, 1-51. 

3 Karapet, Ter-Mkrttschian, Die Paulicianer, 1893; SB. Munch. 1896, p>. 
67-1 11 ; Conybeare, The Key of Truth, 1898. 



266 A Manual of Church History 

but under Leo the Armenian and Theodora, in the ninth 
century, orders were issued to execute all who remained 
obdurate to persuasion. This severity, however, only excited 
bitterness. A number of the Paulicians fled to the Saracens, 
and afterwards revenged themselves by acts of brigandage 
against the Empire. Others continued to profess their error, 
heedless of the persecution. The emperor Zimisces (969-76) 
transported many of them to Philippopolis in Thracia, there to 
act as frontier guards. 

II. The Bogomiles make their first appearance in the tenth 
century. They represent a fusion of Gnostic and Massalian 
elements, and probably owed their existence to the fact that 
the Euchites or Massalians who migrated to Thracia there 
adopted Gnostic doctrines. At the beginning of the twelfth 
century their increase caused some anxiety at Constantinople, 
and the emperor Alexius Comnenus ordered their leader, the 
physician Basil, to be burnt and his followers to be imprisoned. 
In spite of these measures the sect continued. 

According to their teaching God has two sons. The first-born, 
Satanael, was appointed by the Father ruler over all things. But 
Satanael's head was turned by his promotion, he proclaimed war 
on God, and was, in consequence, banished from heaven together 
with all his angelic associates. He thereupon created a new heaven 
and formed the earth. Having shaped man, he was not, however, 
able to animate him, and, at his request, the Father consented 
to give him a spark of life from the Pleroma, on condition that 
man should belong to both. The bargain was not fairly kept by 
Satanael, who preferred to lord it alone over man. Hence, in the 
year 5500, God gave issue to the Logos as son. The latter, who is 
sometimes called the archangel Michael, assumed the appearance 
of a man, vanquished Satanael, or Satan, as he is henceforth called, 
and took from him his former place at the right hand of the Father. 
Finally, before reverting to the substance of God, the Logos 
begot the Holy Ghost to carry on his work. The Holy Ghost 
dwells in the true believers (viz. in the Bogomiles), and gives them 
the power of entering heaven forthwith on the dissolution of the 
body. Ultimately the Holy Ghost also will be reabsorbed in 
the Father. As for other men, they are inhabited by the demons, 
who dominate the lower world. Candidates were admitted into 
the sect by a spiritual baptism ; prayer, more especially the Lord's 
Prayer, took the place of the Eucharist ; the Old Testament was 
rejected with the exception of the Psalms and the Prophets ; 
marriage and the use of flesh-meat were forbidden ; worship given 
to images was reckoned idolatry, and the churches of the Catholics 



The Iconoclasts 267 

were looked upon as dwelling-places of the evil spirits. In spite 
ot this, the Bogomiles had no scruples about taking part in 
Catholic worship, and justified themselves by appealing to Matt. 
xxiii. 3 : ' All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, 
observe and do,' to which text their version added the word ' out- 
wardly/ According to the main Greek source of information con- 
cerning them, the Panoplia of Euthymius Zigabenus (P.G. CXXX), 
their name comes from their frequent use of the Slavonic words 
Bog mikii (' God, have mercy ') ; according to recent Slavic research 
(cp. Jirecek, Gesch. der Bulgaren, 1875, pp. 174-84), it came rather 
from a certain piiest Bogomil (corresponding to the Greek 
Theophilus, cp. Echos d } Orient, 1909, p. 258), who introduced the 
sect into Bulgaria during the reign of the czar Peter (927-68). 



§90 

The Image-breakers and the Seventh General Council l 

As soon as Paganism was extirpated the possible dangers 
of image worship to weakly Christians were at an end, and, 
even in the previous period, the practice had taken deep root 
in the Eastern Church. It continued, however, to arouse 
misgivings in certain quarters, and as soon as some of the 
emperors entered the lists against the images the smouldering 
fire of opposition burst into a blaze. The war was opened by 
Leo III, the Isaurian, who, in 726, in the tenth year of his 
reign, unexpectedly issued an edict condemning images as 
incompatible with Holy Scripture. To this action he may 
have been moved either by the superstitions to which image 
worship had possibly given rise in certain localities, or by some 
other motive. Individual bishops, Constantine of Nacolia in 
Phrygia, Thomas of Claudiopolis, and Theodosius of Ephesus, 
gave the emperor their support. Germanus, patriarch of 
Constantinople, was, however, against the edict, whilst the 
learned John of Damascus eagerly took up the cause of the 
images. The bulk of the people was also on the latter side, 
and the edict was the occasion of many riots. But Leo was 

1 Mg. by J. Marx, 1839; K. Schwarzlose, 1890; L. Brehier, 1904 ; 
Pargoire, Vkglise Byzantine de 527 a 841, 1904 ; A. Lombard, Constantin 
V, 1902. On the letters of Gregory II, see Hefele, III, 393-404 ; 
Duchesne, Liber Pont. I, 413 ; Melanges d'arch. et d'hist. X (1890), 44-60; 
N.A. XXI (1896), 83-120 (Libri Carolini) ; Byz. Z. V (1896), 257-301 
(Leo III). 



2 68 A Manual of Church History 

not the man to be thus balked. Cosmas, a pretender to the 
throne put up in Greece, was overthrown, and in 730 Germanus 
had to vacate his see in favour of a more pliant patriarch, 
Anastasius. With the encouragement of this new head of the 
Eastern Church there is little doubt that many other bishops 
now embraced the cause of the Iconoclasts. The same year 
another edict appeared, this time ordering the destruction of 
all images. 

In the West the emperor encountered more serious opposi- 
tion. Gregory II (715-31) warned him to desist, though the 
two epistles dealing with the matter, and which have come 
down to us under Gregory's patronage, are probably spurious. 
Gregory III (731-41), soon after his election, threatened to 
excommunicate all who should insult or break images. Even 
the elements fought against Leo, the fleet which he had fitted 
out (732) to reduce Italy being shipwrecked. 

No alteration occurred on the emperor's death. Artabasdus, 
his son-in-law, and the people's favourite, who usurped the 
crown, revoked indeed the edicts of Leo, but as soon as he had 
been overthrown (743), Leo's son, Constantine V Copronymus 
(741-75), continued the work begun by his father. The image 
breakers now sought a conciliar sanction, and the Council of 
Constantinople (754), which styled itself the Seventh General 
Council, actually proclaimed that the worship of images was 
a work of the devil and a new kind of idolatry. The destruction 
of the images now began in earnest ; what could be removed 
was taken from the churches, whilst the mural paintings 
were whitewashed, or replaced by pastoral scenes. Few had 
the courage to oppose the tyrant ; the monks alone stood firm, 
and were in consequence subjected to a cruel persecution, 
which began in 761. The best-known martyr of the cause 
was the abbot Stephen ^767). 

The rest of Christendom did not keep silence whilst such 
deeds were being perpetrated. The eastern patriarchs outside 
the Empire gave their approval to the images, and the Council 
of the Lateran (769) anathematised the Constantinopolitan 
Council of 754. Even so the situation was but slightly 
improved. The emperor Leo IV (775-80) indeed showed him- 
self less severe than his predecessor, and allowed the monks 
who had been driven away to return to their homes, but his 



Image Worship 269 

father's law remained in force, and a denunciation sufficed to 
set it in motion. 

Under the following ruler, however, a different policy was 
to prevail. The empress-mother Irene, on assuming the regency 
on behalf of her young son Constantine VI, immediately made 
known her approval of image worship. To restore more 
effectually peace to the Church she resolved to summon a 
General Council, being strongly urged thereto by Tarasius, 
the patriarch of Constantinople. The Council — after a first 
attempt to hold it at Constantinople had been frustrated by 
the soldiery, who were in sympathy with the image breakers 
(786) — actually came to meet in 787 at Nicaea (Second Council 
of Nicaea), and decided in favour of the traditional reverence 
for images. This reverence was defined, as it had been 
previously, as tc/jltjtlktj Trpo<rKvvr)<n<$, i.e. veneration, in contra- 
distinction to the akr)9ivr) \arpeua, or true adoration which 
is given to God alone, and it was justified on the ground that 
the honour shown to the representation was reflected on the 
prototype. The judgment of this Council was obeyed in the 
Eastern Empire during the next decade, the two following 
emperors, Nicephorus (802-11) and Michael I Rhangabe 
(811-13), being friendly to the practice involved. 

Pope Adrian I strove to secure recognition of the Council 
in the West also, but, partly owing to faulty translations of 
the acts, encountered the outspoken opposition of the Franks. 
Charles the Great, in one of his own works, the formerly much 
debated Libri Carolini, submitted to severe strictures the acts 
of the Council and the whole attitude of the Greeks. In this 
work both the Seventh General Council and the Council of 
754 are reproached with having perverted the teaching of the 
Fathers, one by declaring images to be idols, and the other by 
allowing adoration and reverence to be given to things which 
are intended merely for the decoration of the churches, and 
as memorials of former events ; according to the Church's 
tradition, such respect must be shown only to the saints and 
their relics, to the Holy Cross, to Holy Scripture, and to the 
sacred vessels. The Council of Frankfort (794, c. 2) likewise 
rejected the Second Nicene Council, and forbade anything 
in the way of either adoration (irpoa-Kvv^a^) or servitus (corre- 
sponding with the Graeco-Latin ' dulia ') to be bestowed on 



270 A Manual of Church History 

images. The action of the Council was, of course, due to a 
misapprehension, the Nicene Council having clearly declared 
that true adoration or ' latria ' was to be given to God alone. 
An extract from Charles's work or, more probably, a synopsis 
of it, comprising eighty-five chapters, was sent to Rome. The 
trace of this misunderstanding soon vanished, though there is 
extant a treatise in which Adrian took up the defence of the 
Seventh General Council (P.L. XCVIII). 

The Franks were not alone in opposing the Council, for its 
decision was soon called into question in the East also. Fancy- 
ing that image worship was the cause of his predecessor's ill 
success in the wars against the infidel, Leo the Armenian, 
in 815, again raised the standard of the image breakers. The 
persecution which thereupon ensued, and in the course of 
which the abbot Theodore Studita 1 was the acknowledged 
champion of the images, continued for nearly thirty years, 
b^'ng renewed by the emperors Michael II the Stammerer 
(820-29) an d Theophilus (829-42). But as soon as Theodora, 
the latter's wife, became regent during the minority of her 
son Michael III, she imitated the example of Irene, and 
restored the images to their former place. The iconoclast 
patriarch John had to make room for Methodius, and the feast 
of ' Orthodoxy ' (First Sunday in Lent) was instituted to 
commemorate the restoration of the images. 

The renewal of the conflict in the East led to new discussions 
in the West. As Michael II notified both Paschal I and Lewis 
the Pious of his measures, it came about that the latter summoned 
a Council to meet at Paris (825) to discuss the matter. The Franks 
persisted in their previous attitude, and Agobard, bishop of Lyons, 
set down their opinion in a written work (P.L. CIV). One only, 
Claudius of Turin, ventured to go further, and reject altogether 
the practice of using images in churches ; he was assailed by Jonas, 
bishop of Orleans (De cultu imag. adv. Claud. Taurin. apolog. P.L. 
CVI), and by Dungal, a monk of St. Denis (Respon. c. pervers. Claud. 
Taur. episc. sententias, P.L. CV). Mg. on Claudius by Comba, 1895 ; 
SB. Berlin, 1895, pp. 425-43 ; on Agobard, in the Z. f. w. Th. 
1898, pp. 526-88. 

1 Mg. by G. A. Schneider, 1900 ; A. Gardner, 1905 ; Marin, 1906. 




The Filioque ; Adoptionism 271 

§ 91 

Controversies concerning the Filioque and Adoptionism 1 

The Filioque, after having been early embodied in the 
Creed of the Spanish Church (§ 49), came to the knowledge 
of the Franks in the course of the eighth century. At the 
Council of Friuli in 796 it was defended by Paulinus, bishop of 
Aquileia. Charles the Great ordered the Creed to be sung 
with this addition in the court chapel, and it was likewise 
adopted by the monks of the Mount of Olives at Jerusalem, 
though in the latter locality, where it found itself side by side 
with the untouched Niceno-Constantinopolitan version, it 
excited remark and led the Greeks to accuse the Latins of 
heresy. At the request of the monks the matter was handled 
in the West, and Theodulf, bishop of Orleans, at Charles's 
command wrote a defence of it in the work De Spiritu 
Sancto. The Council of Aachen in 809 also declared for the 
Filioque. In consideration for the feelings of the Greeks, 
Pope Leo III endeavoured to prevent the incorporation of 
the word in the Creed, and, though he agreed with the doctrine 
expressed by the word, he advised the Franks to abstain 
from innovations. He also erected in St. Peter's at Rome 
two large silver tablets on which the Creed was engraved 
without the Filioque. The Franks, however, refused to 
hearken to him, and, in the event, the Roman Church 
herself conformed to the Frankish custom, probably adopt- 
ing the Filioque very shortly after the discussion just spoken 
of, for at a later date we hear no more of any disagreement 
concerning the matter within the Western Church. 

About the year 780, a certain Migetius in the neighbourhood of 
Sevilla, having explained the Trinity after a Sabellian fashion, 
as a threefold manifestation — of God the Father in David, of God 
the Son in Christ, and of God the Holy Ghost in Paul — was opposed 
by Elipandus, archbishop of Toledo, who maintained that the 
Logos is in truth a Divine Person distinct from the Father, but 
that Christ in His human nature could only be called the Son of 
God by adoption. The view of Elipandus came to be known as 
the error of Adoptionism. Felix, bishop of Urgelis in the Spanish 
mark, immediately ranged himself on the same side. On the other 

1 E, H, Limborgh, Alcuinus als bestrijder van het Adoptianismus, 1901, 



272 A Manual of Church History 

hand Beatus, abbot of Libana, and Etherius, bishop of Osma, 
took up the cudgels against this new form of Nestorianism. As 
some of the disputants belonged to his Empire, Charles the Great 
claimed the right to have the matter referred to himself, and at 
his command several Councils (Ratisbon, 792 ; Frankfort, 794), 
and certain individual scholars such as Alcuin busied themselves 
with it. At the Council of Aachen in 799 Felix abjured his 
error, and as most of his followers now imitated his example, 
the worst of the controversy was at an end. With the death 
of Elipandus, Adoptionism disappears from history. 



§ 92 

Gottschalk and the Predestinarian Controversy 1 

Predestination, which already in the previous period had set 
minds at variance, was again to be the subject of more discussion. 
The occasion for the new controversy was furnished by Gottschalk, 
son of the Saxon count Berno, and an oblate of the monastery of 
Fulda, but who — at a date later than 829, and in consequence 
of a quarrel with his abbot, Rhabanus Maurus, as to the engage- 
ments incurred by the reception of the tonsure — was transferred 
to the monastery of Orbais in the diocese of Soissons. Adopting 
the strict Augustinian views, and holding that Predestination 
is the eternal and unchanging decree of God, he came to believe 
that God's will for man's salvation is merely particular, and was 
wont to speak of a twofold predestination, the one to Death and 
the other to Life, though he denied that there is any predetermina- 
tion to evil or sin, and based the predestination to Death on the 
Divine foreknowledge of man's sin. It is scarcely just to speak of 
this as heresy, but as, on the one hand, he failed to make suffi- 
ciently clear the distinction between the two forms of predestination, 
whilst, on the other, he laboured through thick and thin to impose 
his view on the common people who were still less capable of 
understanding it aright, it is no matter for wonder if his proceedings 
excited suspicion. Rhabanus Maurus, now archbishop of Mainz, 
immediately denounced as unbearable the assertion that there 
was such a thing as a predestination to Death, and condemnation 
was pronounced on Gottschalk by the Council of Mainz in 
848, and by that of Quiercy in 849, the latter ordering him to 
be kept in custody at the monastery of Hautvilliers. 

So far Gottschalk had encountered only foes, but now men just 
as devout and learned were to espouse his cause. The manner in 
which Predestination to Death was attacked by Hinkmar of Rheims 

1 Mauguin, Veterum auctorum, qui IX saec. de praedestinatione et gratia 
scripserunt, opera et fragmenta, 1 vol. 1640; Z. f. KG. X (1890), 258-309 
(Hinkmar's work, Ad reclusos) ; XVIII (The Life and Doctrine of Gottsch.) ; 
Schorrs, Hinkmar, 1884 ; Revue d'hist. et de litt, relig. X (1905)» 47 _6 9- 



The Eucharistie Controversy 273 

in his recently discovered work Ad reclusos et simplices, elicited an 
answer from Ratramnus, a monk of Corbie. When questioned 
by Hinkmar, others such as Servatus Lupus, abbot of Ferneres, 
Prudentius, Wenilo, and Remigius, bishops of Troyes, Sens, and 
Lyons respectively, also declared themselves for the twofold 
predestination, opining that God willed only certain to be saved, 
and that the Redemption was not universal. Both sides soon 
secured conciliar sanction, Hinkmar formulating his thesis at 
the Council of Quiercy (853), and that of his adversaries being 
approved by the Councils of Valence (855) and Langres (859). 
The controversy increased in bitterness as it spread more widely, 
and at the French national Council of Savonieres near Toul (859) 
there even seemed a danger of the two views occasioning a schism. 
At the suggestion of Remigius of Lyons the discussion was. however, 
postponed till the next assembly, and finally at the Council of 
Tousi (860), after much debate, the matter was settled and peace 
restored by mutual compromise. The question of predestination 
was left unsolved, though the view of the metropolitan of Rheims 
secured the majority of votes, whilst in the synodal letter which 
he indited it is distinctly stated that God wills the salvation of all 
men, and that the Redemption was universal. 



5 93 

The Eucharistie Controversy 1 

I. Our Lord's promise that He would give His flesh to eat 
and His blood to drink, had, so far, been taken by the Christians 
with simple faith. In the ninth century the mystery was made 
the matter of learned inquiry. Paschasius Radbertus, a monk of 
Corbie, composed a work, De cor fore et sanguine Domini (831), 
which, when he had become abbot of his monastery, he again 
published (944), dedicating it to Charles the Bald. His main 
thesis is that in the Eucharist, though indeed under the figure of 
bread and wine, there is in truth the Flesh and Blood of Christ, the 
actual body born of Mary which suffered and rose again, non alia 
plane caro, quam quae nata est de Maria et passa in cruce et resurrexit 
de sepulcro (c. 1). In this he voiced the Church's own feelings, 
though he aroused opposition by insisting too strongly on the 
identity of the historic and Eucharistie Christ whilst laying in- 
sufficient stress on the distinction of appearances, besides making 
use of novel expressions, which, taken in connection with the 
miracles adduced, were calculated to promote the grossly carnal 
assumption of the Capharnaites of old. Rhabanus Maurus, in a 

1 Mg. on Paschasius R. by Hausherr, 1862 ; J. Ernst, 1896; J. Schnit- 
zer, Berengar von Tours, 1890; A. Nagle, Ratramnus «, die Eucharistie, 
1903 ; Rev. de Vhist. de Relig. 1903 (Berengar), 

vol. I. T 



274 A Manual of Church History 

letter to Egil, abbot of Prüm, urged strongly that the actual 
and Eucharistie body of Christ are one only naturaliter, or in 
essence, and not specialiter, or in appearance. Ratramnus too, 
who had been requested by Charles the Bald to give his opinion, 
urged the same distinction yet more forcibly in his work De corpore 
et sanguine Domini, so much so, indeed, that some moderns even 
came to think that he believed Christ to be present in the Eucharist 
merely spiritually. According to all seeming, the inference is, 
however, unjustified. The case may be otherwise with the philo- 
sopher Scotus Eriugena, who, according to the testimony of Hinkmar 
of Rheims, spoke of the Eucharist as a mere memorial, memoria 
veri corporis et sanguinis Christi. The statement must, however, 
have been made not in a special work on the mystery, but in a 
passage of some other work. Others again, as is apparent from 
Radbert's letter to Frudigar, and also from his commentary on 
St. Matthew, saw in the Eucharist, instead of vera caro et verus 
sanguis, merely quaedam virtus carnis et sanguinis. On the other 
hand, failing to perceive what is phenomenal in the Sacrament, 
some went so far as to allow it to be believed that the Eucharist was 
liable to the consequences of digestion like other food. In the 
eleventh century this opinion came to be designated as Stercoranism. 
II. The same mystery continued to afford matter for con- 
troversy. In the tenth century moderate views prevailed, but 
in the eleventh a reaction took place in favour of the grosser 
theory. Excess in one direction soon led to excess in the other. 
Berengar of Tours took the view of Scotus Eriugena, as opposed 
to that of Radbert, and, against the advice of his friends, especially 
of Adelmann of Liege, went so far as to blame his adversaries' 
opinion, embodying his critique in a letter to Lanfranc, abbot of 
Bee. The controversy which had been, so far, courteously con- 
ducted, now developed into a violent conflict. Berengar's views 
were condemned by Councils held in Rome and Vercelli (1050), 
the Council of Paris (1051) threatened both him and his associates 
with death, though another Council at Tours (1054), meeting under 
the presidency of Hildebrand, declared itself satisfied with Berengar's 
admission, that after the consecration the bread and wine are 
the body and blood of Christ. Finally, the Lateran Council of 
1059 required his subscription of the formula : verum corpus 
Domini sensualiter, non solum in sacramento, sed in veritate manibus 
sacerdotum tractari, frangi et fidelium dentibus atteri. This formula, 
in spite of its crudity, Berengar consented to sign under compulsion. 
Ten years later, however, he ventured to assail this Council, and 
also Cardinal Humbert, who had drafted the formula, and when 
Lanfranc replied by the work De corpore et sanguine Domini adv. 
Bereng. he rejoined by publishing his De sacra coena (a work 
discovered b}' Lessing in 1770, and made public by Vischer in 
1834), the quarrel lasting altogether some thirty years. 



Photius 275 

§ 94 

Photius — Legality of Fourth Marriages — Eighth General 

Council, 869-70 l 

I. Scarcely had the question of the images been settled 
than new troubles began to brew in the Eastern Church. 
On the death of Methodius, patriarch of Constantinople, the 
monk Ignatius, a son of the emperor Michael Rhangabe, was 
chosen to succeed him (846). He was a man of great virtue 
and piety, but his position was one of great difficulty, as he 
had to withstand unruly bishops and monks, and, what was 
far worse, a court party noted for its viciousness and intrigues. 
After having fruitlessly endeavoured to dissuade Bardas, the 
empress Theodora's brother — who was regent of the Empire 
since the previous year, when Michael III, the Drunkard, 
had assumed the crown — from his sinful intercourse with 
his step-daughter, Ignatius was obliged to deny him Com- 
munion at the Epiphany (857). His courage cost him his 
situation. A few months later Bardas advised the emperor 
to transfer his mother and sisters to a convent, that he might 
be no longer disturbed by their reproaches, and to Ignatius 
was assigned the duty of imposing on them the veil. As the 
patriarch refused, he was charged with being an accomplice 
of the monk Gebon — who, giving himself out as one of Theo- 
dora's sons by a previous marriage, was then engaged in stirring 
up rebellion — and was, in consequence, relegated to the 
island of Terebinthus. To facilitate the appointment of a 
successor, every effort was also made to induce the patriarch 
to resign his see in due form. 

Although Ignatius obstinately refused to hand in the 
required resignation, an election took place, and resulted in 
the choice of Photius (857), the greatest scholar of the century 
(§ 106). The new patriarch did not succeed in bringing all 
over to his side. Several bishops refused to deal with him, 
the lead being taken by Metrophanes of Smyrna, and, though 
they gradually abandoned their attitude of opposition on 
receiving assurances from Photius that he looked on his 
predecessor as guiltless and would tolerate no proceedings 

1 Hergenr other, Photius, Patriarch v. Konstantinopel, 3 vol. 1867-69, 

t 2 



276 A Manual of Church History 

against him, they again broke off relations as soon as Photius 
withdrew his former promises and declared Ignatius deposed. 
Metrophanes and his friends assembled in Council at the Church 
of St. Irene and anathematised the unfaithful occupant of 
the see, whilst the latter, nothing daunted, held his own Council 
in the Church of the Apostles and there excommunicated and 
deposed his gainsayers. 

The expulsion of Ignatius not only led to a split within the 
Eastern Church, it also affected the relations between East 
and West. Rome was all the less disposed to acknowledge 
Photius, seeing that many things besides — which the Greeks 
had apparently not adverted to — militated against his election. 
The laws of the Church were not to be set aside so lightly. 
Photius having been a layman at the time of his nomination, 
his election was contrary to Canon 10 of Sardica. He had, 
moreover, received consecration at the hand of a bishop — 
Gregory Asbesta of Syracusa — who had been deposed by Igna- 
tius, and though this bishop had appealed to Rome against 
the judgment, he had no right to undertake a consecration, 
as his appeal had not yet been heard. The papal legates who 
were sent to the East at the invitation of the emperor — 
who, when informing the Pope of the election of Photius, 
spoke also of new troubles occasioned by the image breakers 
(859) — were won over by Photius, and, though they were papal 
plenipotentiaries, actually ratified the deposal of Ignatius 
at the great Council held at Constantinople in 861. On the 
other hand, the Pope himself, Nicholas I, gave judgment 
against the intruder, pronouncing the deposition of Photius 
and all his abettors, who, did they persist in retaining their 
sees, were to be permanently excommunicated (863). The 
decree was, however, not heeded, and on the Pope summoning 
both factions for a new trial at Rome (865) he received from 
Michael III an ungracious refusal. The next year oil was 
thrown on the flame by the Bulgarians transferring their 
obedience from Constantinople to Rome, and to Photius the 
time seemed come to proclaim open war. In an epistle full of 
most bitter complaints against the discipline and beliefs of 
the Western Church, against the Saturday fast, the permission 
for the use of milk and cheese in the first week of Lent, against 
clerical celibacy, the non-recognition of Confirmation as 



Photius 277 

administered by the Greeks (i.e. by simple priests), and 
against the Filioque, the patriarchs of the East were sum- 
moned to assemble at a Council to be held in Constanti- 
nople. The Council met in 867, and pronounced the deposition 
of Nicholas. 

II. Photius may now have fancied that he had vanquished 
all his opponents. His victory was, however, of short dura- 
tion, for that same year Basil the Macedonian, who had 
replaced Bardas as regent a year previously, usurped the 
throne of Michael III and the civil revolution was speedily 
followed by a change of ecclesiastical policy. A few days 
after his coronation the emperor banished Photius to a monas- 
tery and restored Ignatius to his former dignity, leaving 
Rome to settle the outstanding difficulties. Adrian II, who 
had succeeded Nicholas that same year at the Roman Council 
of 869, issued a decree which placed the Constantinopolitan 
Council of 867 on the same footing as the Robber-Council 
of Ephesus, ordered its acts to be burnt, Photius, the new 
Dioscorus, to be excommunicated, and the rest of his associates 
to be deposed, and, in the event of their proving contumacious, 
to be also expelled from the Church. Legates were sent to 
the East to secure the carrying out of the sentence, and the 
Eighth General Council, which met at Constantinople (869-70), 
performed everything according to their injunctions. But 
peace was far from having thereby been restored to the Byzan- 
tine Church. Photius and his followers refused to submit, 
with the result that matters remained where they were before, 
with this difference, however, that the parties had now ex- 
changed positions. To make matters worse, the Council, 
in an after-session, succeeded in embroiling itself with Rome 
by hearkening to the petition of the Bulgarians, and deciding 
that they should again be affiliated to the Church of Constanti- 
nople. Against this decree the papal legates protested, and, 
later on, John VIII called on Ignatius to restore the province 
under pain of excommunication and deposition. 

By the time this summons had arrived at Constantinople, 
a new alteration had occurred, Photius being again in possession 
of the patriarchate. For some time past the emperor had 
treated him with growing consideration, and had entrusted 
to him the education of his sons, and as soon as Ignatius had 



278 A Manual of Church History 

departed this life {8yy) Photius was appointed to succeed him, 
the emperor hoping thereby to restore peace within his realm. 
This appointment traversed the decision of the Eighth General 
Council, though, now that the rightful occupant of the see was 
dead, it was no longer open to the same objections, and, as a 
matter of fact, Photius was now acknowledged very generally, 
even in the West. John VIII accordingly judged it politic 
to take into account the change of circumstances, and pro- 
mised Photius his support on condition that the latter should 
crave pardon in public synod for his former conduct, renounce 
his claims on Bulgaria, and be reconciled with the followers of 
Ignatius. Legates bearing these instructions proceeded to 
Constantinople, and the Council met in 879-80. It was 
decided to refer the Bulgarian question to the emperor, and as 
for the rest, Photius's submission did not meet the Pope's 
expectations. He persisted in asserting that his first election 
was regular, and that he had been wrongfully removed. 
The synod accordingly assumed an attitude totally opposed to 
that of the Eighth General Council, of which the decrees 
from this time ceased to be reckoned as binding in the East. 
In its supplementary sessions (VI and VII) it ventured even to 
censure the Filioque, in that it renewed the Niceno-Constantino- 
politan Creed and condemned any addition which might be 
made to it. Hence the attempt of John VIII to secure 
reparation from Photius issued in complete failure. The 
next Pope, Marinus I, again excommunicated Photius, who 
retorted by stating anew his grievances against the Western 
Church. His power was, however, soon to cease. Leo IV, the 
Wise (886-912), shortly after his accession relegated him to a 
monastery, and Stephen, the emperor's brother, was appointed 

patriarch in his room. 

• 

III. Scarcely had an end been made of the dissensions between 
the parties of Photius and Ignatius, than Leo himself, by contracting 
a fourth marriage (906), occasioned a new quarrel. As his action 
was contrary to the discipline of the Eastern Church, and to the 
civil law of the Byzantine Empire, the patriarch Nicholas Mysticus 
pronounced his excommunication, the result being the fall of the 
patriarch, who was replaced by Euthymius. A part of the clergy 
and people remained attached to the deposed patriarch, just as, 
soon afterwards, when Nicholas was restored to his see (911), 
a faction continued to favour Euthymius. The schism thus 



The Greek Schism 279 

called forth on the question of Tetragamy continued till after the 
middle of the tenth century, when the patriarch Polyeuctus 
restored the name of Euthymius to its place in the diptychs. 



§ 95 

The Greek Schism 1 

It was Photius who laid the foundation of the schism 
between East and West, by unduly insisting during his conflict 
with Rome on the differences existing between the two Churches. 
All that was now needed to consummate a rupture was a new 
outbreak of the spirit of narrow-mindedness and intolerance 
ready to denounce the peculiarities of the Roman Church as 
departures from the purity of Apostolic tradition. This came 
about towards the end of the tenth century, under the patri- 
archs Sisinnius and Sergius, after a period during which 
comparatively friendly relations had been maintained with 
Rome. Under Eustathius (1019-25) a peace was indeed 
patched up with Rome, though his efforts to make the patriarch 
of Constantinople an oecumenical bishop with power over the 
Churches of the East, equivalent to that exercised by the bishop 
of Rome throughout Christendom were freely and severely 
criticised in other parts of the West. Michael Cerularius, who 
followed him after an interval, was very differently disposed 
to Rome. In 1053, by his doing, the Latin Churches at 
Constantinople were suddenly closed, the monasteries were 
ordered to conform to the Greek rite, and on their refusal their 
inmates were dubbed Azymites and declared excommunicate. 
Nicephorus the Sacellar, in carrying out his instructions, went 
so far as to trample on the hosts of the Latins, simply because 
they were made of unleavened bread. Simultaneously Leo, 
bishop of Achrida in Bulgaria, attacked the Latins in writing. In 
a circular letter addressed to John, bishop of Trani in Apulia, 
he describes them as half Hebrew and half pagan, inasmuch 

1 Acta et scripta quae de controversiis ecclesiae graecae et lat. saec. XI 
composita extant, ed. C. Will, 1861 ; Hergenröther, Photius, III, 710 ff. ; 
Pawloff, Krit. Versuche zur Gesch. der ältesten griechisch-russischen Polemik 
gegen die Lateiner, St. Petersburg, 1878; Halfmann, Kard. Humbert, 1882; 
Duchesne, Autonomies ecclesiastiques (Engl. Tr. Churches separated, from 
Rome, Lon. 1907); Brehier, Le schisme oriental du XI e siicle, 1899; F. X. 
Seppelt, Das Papsttum und Byzanz in the Kirchengesch. Abhandlungen, ed. 
by Sdralek, II, 1904. 



280 A Manual of Church History 

as they observe the law of unleavened bread and of the Sabbath, 
partake without scruple of things strangled, and from which 
the blood has not been withdrawn, and omit the alleluia in 
Lent. Nicetas, a monk of the monastery of the Studium, for 
his part raised the question of clerical celibacy and other points 
on which the practice of the two Churches diverged. 

This hail of objections was more than the Latins could 
patiently endure, and Cardinal Humbert, of Silva Candida, 
undertook to answer them, which he did with considerable 
spirit and some learning. His defence was indeed good, but 
the attack which . he ventured on the Greek positions was 
less well advised. Thus he assailed priestly marriage as the 
Nicolaite ' heresy/ accused the Greeks of having expunged 
the Filioque from the Creed, and of being infected with 
Macedonianism, &c. With such feelings animating either side 
it was no easy task to arrive at an understanding. Leo IX 
sent, indeed, his legates to Constantinople, but on account of 
the hindrances put in their way by Michael Cerularius they 
could not obtain a hearing. The legates accordingly, in the 
summer of 1054, excommunicated him, together with Leo of 
Achrida, Nicephorus, and all their adherents. They doubtless 
had a hope that their adversary would either relent or fall. 
Their hope was never to be realised, though the emperor 
Constantine Monomachus, who had been all along on the side 
of peace, did his best to promote an understanding. The 
patriarch was obdurate, and by stirring up the people to embrace 
his cause, he succeeded finally in gaining the day. A Council 
which he assembled reissued with approval the manifesto 
of Photius to the bishops of the West, and laid the whole Latin 
Church under an anathema. Peter, patriarch of Antioch, 
besought Michael to contrive a reconciliation, but his request 
was not heeded, and as it was part of Peter's plan that the 
Latins should abandon all practices objected to by the East, 
his mediation was foredoomed to fail. The breach once made 
was never mended, and the example of Constantinople was 
soon followed by the other Eastern Churches. Even the fall 
of Michael (1059) brought no change. Wholly taken up 
with their supposed Orthodoxy, the Greeks seem to have lost 
all desire of re-entering into communion with the Latins. 



CHAPTER IV 

THE ORGANISATION OF THE CHURCH 1 

§96 

Archdeacons, Deans, Lay Patronage, Testes 
Synodales, and Canons 

I. Among the Franks and in the other newly converted 
countries the dioceses were enormously larger than those of 
the older Roman Empire. The bishops accordingly stood in 
need of assistants, and for a time made use of chorepiscopi. 
On these there fell the duty of visiting the parishes and 
fulfilling whatever obligations this entailed, such as instructing 
the clergy, restoring discipline, &c. About the middle of the 
ninth century, as we can see from the Council of Paris in 849 
and from the writings of Pseudo-Isidore, public opinion began 
to turn against these minor bishops, and soon after they quit 
the scene of history, the extra-episcopal functions which they 
had performed being now undertaken by archdeacons, 2 some- 
times also styled chorepiscopi, an institution not entirely new, 
having originated at a somewhat earlier date in France and 
thence passed to Germany, but which now assumed greater 
importance than heretofore. The documents which refer this 
institution to Heddo, bishop of Strasburg (774), are spurious. 3 
Archdeaconries, of which the limits were usually those of the 
civil districts termed ' gaus/ were soon subdivided into circuits, 
of which the head was sometimes an archpriest, sometimes a 
dean. 4 

1 Rettberg, KG. Deutschlands, II, 582-668 ; Löning, Gesch. d. d. 
Kirchenrechts, II ; A. Werminghoff, Gesch. d. Kirchenverfassung Deutsch- 
lands im MA. I, 1905. 

2 A. Schröder, Entwicklung des Archid. bis zum 11 Jahrh. 1890. 

3 Cp. Rettberg, II, 60; Waitz, Deutsche Verf. -Gesch. 2nd ed. III, 431 ff. 

4 Sägmüli.er, Die Entwicklung des Archipresbyterats u. Dekanats bis zum 
JEndedes Karolinger.re.ichs, .1898. 



282 A Manual of Church History 

II. According to Germanic law the churches erected by 
landed proprietors on their property fell under their ownership ; 
this was the case throughout the Empire of the Franks. 1 The 
founder could dispose of them at will, and appoint or dismiss 
the incumbents as he pleased. On the death of an incumbent 
the donors claimed the right in course of time of appropriating 
either the whole or a portion of his heritage (later on known 
as ius spolii), and, so long as the post was vacant, of receiving 
the surplus revenue which remained after the payment of 
the locum tenens. Similar treatment was experienced by the 
churches which were pledged or enfeoffed to secular noblemen 
(§ 98) . The Church strove in numerous Councils to ameliorate 
the position of the clergy attached to such parishes, and suc- 
ceeded in making their appointment or dismissal to depend 
on the consent of the bishop, thereby transforming the preten- 
sions of the laity into a mere right of Patronage. In the 
subsequent period, after the outbreak of the quarrel about 
investiture, this right also was curtailed. 

III. It had been the custom even previously for the bishop 
to perform an annual visitation of his diocese ; this custom 
now became the rule. 3 Charles the Great also directed that, 
for the bishop's support and protection, and, if necessary, to 
report any remissness, he should be accompanied on his 
journeys by the count of the ' gau.' In the ninth century 
commoners also were invited to assist the bishop, and in each 
parish men of good repute, as a rule seven in number, were to 
be chosen, on whom it devolved to bring to the bishop's notice 
the evils existing in their district. These men were styled 
synodal witnesses {testes synodales), and the institution went by 
the name of synod. 3 

IV. In the eighth century clerics again began to dwell in 
common — in other words, what is now known as the Vita 
canonica was re-established 4 (cp. § 60) . A special rule, based on 
that of St. Benedict, was drawn up (c. 760) for the clergy of his 
city by Chrodegang, bishop of Metz. The canonical mode of 

1 U. Stutz, Gesch. des. k. Benefizialwesens, I, 1895 ; art. Kirchenrecht in 
Holtzendorff-Kohler, Enzyklopädie der Rechtswissenschaft, II, pp. 829-31. 
' 2 Capitularies issued in 742, 769, 813 ; C. of Aries, 813. 

3 Z.f. KR. 1864, pp. 1-45 ; 1865, pp. 1-42. 

4 Thomassin, Vet. et nov. eccl. discipl. P. I, lib. Ill, c. 7 ; Hefele. IV, 
9-24 ; Chrodegangi regula can. ed. W. Schmitz, 1889 ; II. Schäfer, Pfarr- 
kirche u. Stift im deutschen MA. 1903- 



Legal Status of the Clergy 283 

life soon began to be observed not only at the bishops' houses, 
but also in the presbyteries of the larger parishes, and in 
consequence of this we find two kinds of canons, those of the 
cathedrals 1 and those of the collegiate churches, as they 
came to be called. The Council of Aachen (817) laid down 
new prescriptions, 2 some of which are embodied in the longer 
recension of Chrodegang's rule, which also includes yet other 
regulations. So excellent a means of infusing new intellectual 
and moral life into the clergy was soon adopted widely, yet the 
institution was destined to be short-lived. The common life of 
the canons may have proved impracticable owing to inequality 
of fortune, each canon, unlike a monk, being permitted to 
retain his private property, and the difficulties of independent 
community life were probably increased by the political 
upheavals which followed. The dissolution of the chapters 
seems to have begun at Cologne when Günther, the archbishop, 
issued directions to the canons of the cathedral and other 
foundations of the city, permitting them to resume the ad- 
ministration of the properties destined for their sustenance. 
A like right was soon after granted to other chapters, and 
gradually the canons ceased to dwell in common, or to share 
their income. In most places the institution had reached 
its end before the beginning of the eleventh century. 



§97 

Legal Status of the Clergy — Princely Nominations to 

Church Offices 

I. For a time the clergy of the West continued to be 
amenable to secular law, though they were afterwards released 
from this disability. The alteration was justified by the 
Germanic legal principle that each one may live according to 
his law, and by the claim so repeatedly urged by Pseudo- 
Isidore, that a clergyman may be judged only by his peers ; 
even so, the adoption of the system was a matter of ages, 
and the Privilegium fori, or privilege of clergy, was not 

1 German, Dom; Italian, duomo; from [ecclesia in) domo (sc. episcopi). 

2 Harduin, IV, 1055-1147; Hefele, IV, 9-13. 



284 A Manual of Church History 

universally or fully acknowledged till subsequently to the 
period now under review. 

II. This privilege was one in which all the clergy shared, 
but among the Franks the higher clergy were granted certain 
political privileges over and above. 1 There we find the 
bishops, from the middle of the seventh century onwards, 
acting in the capacity of counsellors to the king, just like secular 
noblemen; they owed this privilege equally to their posi- 
tion in the Church, and to the immense landed possessions 
which in the course of time had come into their hands. Certain 
Churches and monasteries were granted immunity by the 
Merovingian kings, i.e. were freed from taxes and enforced 
labour, and themselves became the recipients of the taxes and 
tithes due from the inhabitants of the freehold. In the ninth 
century this immunity was granted to nearly all the monasteries 
and Churches, and now began to carry with it jurisdiction, 
or the so-called Ban. Those dwelling on such exempted 
estates were to hold their right from the bailiff of the bishop 
or abbot. Prelates also obtained at an early date the right of 
imposing duties and of coining money. Finally, they acquired 
the rank and rights of earls. This right was granted in 
the first instance to the bishops of Langres (887) and Toul (927). 
Similar promotions became frequent in Germany under Otto 
III, and an increase took place not only in the number of 
ecclesiastical lords, but also in the extent of their possessions. 
Prelates gradually became civil princes, and what we may call, 
for want of a better word, clerical States grew numerous. 
The development was finally brought to its term by the letters 
of privilege of Frederick II (April 26, 1220) and Henry VII 
(May 1, 1231). 

III. The greater the political importance of the higher 
ecclesiastical posts became, the more secular princes strove to 
win control over them. 3 Election, which even in the previous 
period had, among the Franks, been frequently a mere for- 
mality, was now replaced by the royal nomination. Since the 
tenth century it had been the rule to notify the royal will by 
investing the candidate with the ring and staff, which insignia, 

1 Waitz, Deutsche Verfassungsgesch. VII ; Hauck, KG. Deutschlands, III, 
56-68. 

2 Imbart de la Tour, Les Elections dpisc. dans 1'F.glise de France du IX e 
au XI e sücle, 1891, 



Church Property 285 

on the death of their bearer, were regularly handed back to the 
prince who had bestowed them. John X speaks of the royal 
nomination as a prisca consuetudo (921). It was only occa- 
sionally that a Church received the right of electing its own 
bishop ; Lewis the Pious gave a general permission to this 
effect (817), and certain other rulers allowed it to take place 
exceptionally. The practice of leaving the decision to the 
secular ruler was not without its dangers. Some princes, 
heedless of the Church's prescriptions, bestowed ecclesiastical 
dignities on their own relatives and favourites. Many of the 
men promoted by Charles Martel to bishoprics were laymen, 
some of whom refused afterwards to be consecrated. We also 
hear of simony, but even canonical election was not safe from 
it, whilst, in the majority of cases, princes exercised their 
privilege of nomination to the Church's good. 

IV. As among the German nations military service was 
attached to all landed possessions, whether secular or ecclesias- 
tical, the Churches were under the necessity of furnishing 
military levies. This obligation frequently led to the clergy 
themselves accompanying their people to the wars, and 
occasionally fighting side by side with them, and this in spite 
of the canons which forbade a cleric to carry weapons ; new 
prohibitions which were launched against this abuse, owing to 
the savagery of the time and the warlike spirit of the people, 
remained without effect. 



§ 98 

The Church's Property and Revenues — Tithes — Ecclesiastical 

Advocates l 

I. Ecclesiastical property which in the course of time, 
through donations and legacies, had grown to huge proportions, 
was greatly curtailed at the beginning of this period in the 
kingdom of the Franks. With the many wars which he had to 
wage, Charles Martel was unable to make the revenues of the 
lands belonging to the State meet the demands of his soldiers. 

1 A. Bondroit, De capacitate possidendi Ecclesiae . , . aetate Merovingia, 
1900 ; E. Perels, Die kirchl. Zehnten im karol. Reiche, 1904 ; G. Blondel, 
De advocatis ecclesiasticis, 1892. 



286 A Manual of Church History 

He accordingly bestowed the incomes of the Church establish- 
ments on laymen, in some cases transferring the properties 
bodily into lay hands. Under his successors, however, resti- 
tution was made, and though it may not have been total, we 
nevertheless find, soon after, the Churches and monasteries 
in possession of very considerable tracts of land. 1 

II. A new and important source of revenue which the 
Church tapped in this period was the tithes. Their payment 
had indeed been made obligatory even earlier, the Council 
of Macon (585, c. 5) having ordered it under threat of censure. 
This enactment does not appear to have secured obedience, 
but after the practice had been insisted on by Pipin (765) 
and Charles the Great (779) and enforced by several synods 
(Frankfort, 794 ; Mainz, 813) it became the general rule, first 
of all among the Franks, and then in the rest of the Church also. 
To begin with, only the products of the field were tithed, but 
soon, as we may see from the synod of Pavia (850, c. 17), all 
income, from whatever source, had to pay its dime. The new 
revenue at first went in its entirety to the parish church, but 
subsequently to the tenth century we find the Councils decreeing 
that a part of it shall be set aside for the bishop ; this part is 
defined by the synod of Auch in Gascony (1068) as one-fourth. 

III. With all its wealth the Church was often compelled 
to have recourse to law, and as according to Germanic notions 
a cleric could not sue in court, not being allowed to carry 
weapons, to say nothing of the unseemliness of a clergyman 
taking part in proceedings in which cases were decided by 
battle and other means equally trustworthy, it became neces- 
sary to appoint a Church representative or Advocatus to 
attend the court. Charles the Great directed all Churches 
to secure for themselves an agent of this kind. 2 His command 
may have been called forth by certain Churches which were 
ready to forgo the somewhat dubious advantage of a legal 
defender, deeming that to accept such would be to put them- 
selves in a position of inferiority, or because they more than 
suspected the advocates of replenishing their purses at the 
expense of the establishments they professed to serve. This, 

1 Waitz, D. Verf. -Gesch. 2nd ed. Ill, 13 fi. ; K. Ribbeck, Die sog. divisio 
des fränk. Kirchengutes in ihrem Verlaufe unter Karl M. u. s. Söhnen, 1883. 

2 Capit. 783, c. 3 ; 802, 1, 13 ; C. of Mainz, 813, c. 50, 



The False Decretals 287 

the evil side of an institution meant for the Church's good, 
became later on more manifest, when the advocates began 
to tyrannise the Church instead of affording her protection. 



§ 99 
The False Decretals and Later Collections of Canons 1 

I. During this period the Dionysian and Spanish collections 
of conciliar decrees (§ 65) continued to hold their own in the 
West, the former being mainly known in the form in which 
it existed in a codex presented to Charles the Great by Adrian I 
(774). But about the middle of the ninth century a new 
work made its appearance in western Gaul ; its unknown author 
describes himself as Isidorus Mercator. The first witnesses 
to the existence of the work are the Councils of Soissons 
(853) and Quiercy (857) , which both make use of it ; they point 
to its having been composed among the Franks, and the same 
conclusion will be arrived at if the MSS. and the sources 
drawn upon in the collection be taken into consideration. 
The Decretals in question are found in two recensions, a shorter 
and a longer, of which only the latter is of interest to us at 
present, having, at an early date, completely ousted the other. 
Apart from the preface and the appendices, it falls into three 
parts, of which the first contains the fifty Apostolic Canons 
acknowledged in the West, fifty-nine Decretals or Papal Bulls 
and Briefs dating from Clement I to Miltiades, and the charter 
by which Constantine's Donation was made, whilst the second 
gives the Canons of the ancient Councils, which here are 
copied from the Spanish collection ; the third part contains the 
Papal Decretals from Silvester I to Gregory II (314-731). 

As for the object of the collection, the writer himselt 
tells us that he wished canonum sententias colligere et uno in 
volumine redigere et de multis unum facer e — in other words, that 
his intention was merely to compose a handy reference book 

1 Decretales Pseudoisid. et capitula Angilrammi, ed. P. Hinschius, 1863 ; 
R. v. Scherer, KR. I, 1885-86 ; Sägmcller, KR. I, 1900 (where a 
careful statement of the literature connected with the subject will be found) ; 
G. Lurz, Über die Heimat Pseudoisidors, 1898 ; W. Sommer, Inhalt, Tendenz 
u. kirchenrechtl. Erfolg der ps. D. 1903 ; P. Fournier, Etudes sur les Fausses 
DicrStales, in the RHE. 1906. 



288 A Manual of Church History 

of Canon Law. His intention is, however, no excuse for his 
wholesale fabrications. The papal briefs of the first part of his 
work are, every one of them, forgeries, and the same is true 
of many contained in the last portion of the work ; nor can the 
author crave forgiveness on the score that much of the material 
he uses is really taken from early documents. More likely 
his real intention was to strengthen the hand of the bishops 
against both the metropolitans and the secular power. To 
this intention corresponds his eagerness to magnify the office 
of the primates and to convince the reader that causae maiores 
(by which he means causae episcopates) can be decided only 
by Rome. It may also have been his desire to heal to some 
extent the wounds produced in the Church by the civil wars 
under Lewis the Pious and his sons, and to better the Church's 
position. His effort may have been to second those of the 
Councils of Paris (829, 846), Aachen (836), and Meaux (845), 
but whether this be the case or not, Möhler was certainly 
wrong in taking this as the primary object of the work. 

Since the work, in the main, is devoted to justifying 
customs which were already in possession, it -would be an 
overstatement to say that Pseudo-Isidore founded an entirely 
new system of Canon Law. But his importance must not be 
under-estimated. By reserving to the Holy See the decision 
of the causae maiores, which had formerly been a privilege of 
the provincial synods, he helped mightily to forward the cause 
of the Roman primacy. 

The decretals were made use of at Rome first by Nicholas I, 
who appeals to them when quashing the decision of the bishops 
of Gaul, who in 864 had deposed Rothadius, bishop of Soissons 
(N.A. XXV, 1900, pp. 652-63 ; according to the Hist. /. 1904, 
pp. 1-33, he was acquainted with only a few passages of the Decretals, 
and did not found his pretension on them at all), and throughout 
the Middle Ages they were generally held to be genuine. It was 
only their binding force which was questioned at first, for instance 
by Hinkmar of Rheims in the case of his nephew and namesake 
of Laon. The first real doubts as to their credibility were expressed 
in the fifteenth century by Nicholas of Cusa and Juan de Torque- 
mada, and though their strictures did not then succeed in shaking 
the deep-rooted general persuasion, yet in the next century, as 
soon as the collection had been widely circulated by means of the 
press (it was first printed by Merlin in his Collectio Conciliorum, 
1523), the fraudulent nature of the composition was borne in on all. 



The False Decretals 289 

The arguments adduced by the Jesuit Torres for their authenticity 
against the Magdeburg Centuriators were triumphantly confuted 
by the Protestant theologian Blondel (Pseudo-Isidorus et Turrianus 
vapulantes, 1622). 

II. The gradual accumulation of decrees and other canonical 
matter, and the diversity of needs, continued after the time of 
Pseudo-Isidore to call for the formation of new collections. The 
age immediately subsequent to his was exceedingly prolific in 
these productions. No less than thirty-six are known to have 
existed prior to the twelfth century. Most of these have, however, 
never been printed ; the more important are : 

1. Libellus de synodalibus causis et disciplines, by Regino of 
Prüm (f 915), a handbook for episcopal visitations. P.L. 132; 
Wasserschleben, 1840. 

2. Collectarium or Decretum by Burkhard, bishop of Worms 
(f 1025), a collection intended for the instruction of the younger 
clergy. P.L. 140. Mg. by A. M. König, 1905. 

3. Collectio canonum by Cardinal Deusdedit, composed at the 
end of the eleventh century; ed. Martinucci, 1869. V. Wolf v. 
Glanvell, 1905. 

4. Panormia by Ivo, bishop of Chartres (f 1116) P.L. 161. 



vol. t. 



CHAPTER V 

WORSHIP, DISCIPLINE, AND MORALS 

§ 100 

Liturgy, Communion, Preaching, and Chant 

I. Whereas in antiquity considerable divergencies had been 
tolerated in the Liturgy, 1 with the advent of the Middle Ages 
a certain oneness of ceremonial was secured. In the ortho- 
dox East the Liturgy of Constantinople gradually became 
supreme, whilst in the West the Roman rite spread farther 
and farther. The Council of Cloveshove (747, c. 13) pre- 
scribed its use in the whole of England, whilst through the 
action of Pipin and Charles the Great it soon prevailed over the 
whole Frankish Empire, save at Lyons, where the old Gallican 
Liturgy remained in force, though even here certain details were 
adopted from the Roman rite. Alexander II and Gregory 
VII succeeded in introducing it into Spain in the eleventh 
century, and the old Spanish, or Mozarabic, Liturgy was soon 
banished from all the Churches of the country, save from a 
few, such as Toledo. The same rite was adopted for Scotland 
by Queen Margarite (f 1093) and for Ireland by Malachy, 
archbishop of Armagh, in the twelfth century. Attempts 
were also made by Charles the Great, Nicholas II, and others 
to impose the Roman usage on the Milanese, but so strong was 
the attachment of the people to the old Ambrosian rite, that 
the attempts were doomed to failure. Whilst older Liturgies 
were being thus displaced in most regions of the West, a new 
one had come into being in the middle of the ninth century 
among the Slavs of Moravia and Illyria ; it was the work 

1 Krieg, Die liturg. Bestrebungen im karol. Zeitalter, 1888 ; Binterim, 
Denkwürdigkeiten, IV, 3, 



Public Worship 291 

of Methodius (§ 83), and, owing to its language, was known as 
the Slavonic rite. 

So far the general practice had been to celebrate the Liturgy 
in conjunction with, and in the presence of, the community. 
The clergy were accordingly wont to receive Communion with 
the laity from the hand of the bishop or priest who acted as 
celebrant, just as is still done now on Maundy Thursday. 
Subsequently to the seventh century a change occurred, and 
the public celebration began to be supplemented by the 
private Mass, which a priest could read with the assistance 
of a single server, and at which he administered Communion 
to himself. There were some who went so far as to 
dispense even with the server, but this abuse was soon for- 
bidden as repugnant to the Liturgy, and the presence of at 
least one person to represent the absent community was 
prescribed. It was also the custom in places for one and the 
same priest to celebrate several Masses on the same day ; 
some Councils (Dingolfing, 932 ; Mainz, 950-54) even insisted 
on three Masses being said during Lent and on other fast-days. 
It would seem that some of the clergy were not satisfied 
even with this limit, for the Council of Seligenstadt in 1022 
(c. 5) forbids more than three Masses to be said on the same day. 

II. The increase in the number of Masses was accom- 
panied by a concomitant decrease in lay Communions. 1 The 
Church, indeed, continued to counsel frequent Communion, 
but she was content to insist on the Holy Eucharist being 
received two or three times annually ; many communicated 
once only in the year. 

From the eighth or ninth century it had become the custom 
in the West to use unleavened bread at the altar. To prevent 
accidents, the practice also arose of using small hosts, one 
being reserved for each communicant, instead of the loaves 
which it had been necessary to break. For a like reason the 
consecrated particle was now no longer placed in the hands, 
but on the tongue, of the communicant. In the Eastern 
Church it became the practice to dip the consecrated Bread 
in the wine, and to communicate the Faithful with a spoon. 

1 Sirmond, Disquisitio de Azymo. Opp. t. V. Mabillon, Diss, de pane 
euchar. azymo ac fermentato, 1674 ; Vet. Analecta, ed. 1723, pp. 522-47. Funk, 
A.u. U. I, 298-308; Theol.-pr. Qu.-Schr. 1906, pp. 95-109 (rite of Communion). 

u 2 



292 A Manual of Church History 

This practice soon became general, though at first it was 
only adopted to suit the convenience of the sick and of little 
children ; it was even introduced into Spain, but was there 
forbidden by the Council of Braga, c. 675 (c. 2) . 

III. The sermon 1 continued to hold an important place in 
public worship. The obligation of preaching the Word of God 
was frequently insisted on, and, to help even the unlearned to 
fulfil this duty, sermonaries were compiled. The most popular 
collections were the Homilies of Bede and the Homiliarium 
compiled from the works of the Fathers by Paul Warnefrid 
at the command of Charles the Great. These works were 
written in Latin, but the sermons were to be delivered in the 
vernacular. This was enforced by several Councils (813, 
Mainz, c. 25 ; Rheims, c. 15), whilst others (Tours, 813, 
c. 17 ; Mainz, 847, c. 2) ordered the publication of official 
translations. In most parishes sermons seem to have been 
regularly delivered. 

The Roman Chant found its way among the Franks with 
the Roman rite. Charles the Great obtained a number of Roman 
choristers, and established schools of church music at Metz and 
Soissons. The monastery of St. Gall also was noted for the care 
with which it cultivated the art of chanting. But the Gregorian, 
simple or plain, Chant did not hold its own, and c. 900 it was 
displaced by a chant in several voices, the transition being effected 
by a harmony in two voices. The invention and introduction of 
this chant is ascribed to Hukbald, a monk of St. Amand in Flanders 
(f 93°) • On the invention, by Guido of Arezzo (f 1050), of a 
method of representing notes on two, or four, horizontal lines, a 
great progress was achieved in musical notation. Another impor- 
tant invention, that of the measure, was due to Franko, a priest of 
Cologne, at the beginning of the thirteenth century, who suggested 
that the length of the sounds should be indicated by the shape 
(figura) of the notes. It is to his invention that figured or measured 
music, as distinct from the merely choral, owes its origin. It was 
also in the period under consideration that the organ came into 
use as an accompaniment to the chant. The earliest organs 
were, however, of very rude construction, and it was only at a 
later period that the instrument assumed large proportions. The 
example of the use of such instruments in the churches seems to 
have been set by Pipin the Short and Charles the Great, who 
presented the organs which they had received in gift from Byzantium 
to the Churches of Aachen and Compiegne. 

1 Köllner-Linsenmayer, Gesch. d. Predigt in Deutschland von Karl d, 
Gr. bis zum Ende des 14 Jahrh. 1886 ; Wiegand, Das Homiliarium Karls d, 
Gr t 1897 (Studien zur Gesch. d % Th. u. d. K, I, 2. 



Penitence and Penalties 293 

§101 
The Penitential Discipline ] — Church Penalties 

I. A slight mitigation took place in the penitential discipline 
when, after the ninth century, it ceased to be necessary to 
perform public penance for any save public crimes, private 
sins, or sins known to the priest alone, being atoned for in 
private. In another direction, however, the Church's discipline 
became more severe. The category of public crimes, for 
which public penance had to be performed, was notably 
enlarged : not only murder, manslaughter, adultery and 
fornication, but the abduction of a maiden or widow, usury, 
perjury, false witness, robbery, arson, fortune-telling, witch- 
craft, incest — under which was also comprised marriage within 
the forbidden degrees — now entered the class of public sins. 
Nor was the performance of the penance left any longer to 
the free-will of the sinner. A refusal to perform the allotted 
penance not only entailed ecclesiastical censure, but the sinner 
could be compelled by the secular arm to undertake it. The 
penitential works or penalties consisted principally in fastings, 
in banishment, in enforced pilgrimages, in scourgings, or in 
relegation to the cloister. By the Council of Worms (868, c. 30) 
penitents were, however, declared capable of contracting 
marriage even during the period of their penance. The time 
of Lent seems to have been especially devoted to the perform- 
ance of penance, the imposition generally taking place on 
Ash Wednesday, and absolution being granted on Maundy 
Thursday. 

To determine the quality and quantity of the penance, and 
more especially to direct private penitents, books called 
Penitentials were now put in circulation. Of these the most 
famous is that which bears the name and is based on the 
regulations of Theodore of Canterbury. The number and 
diversity of these works led to confusion, and even to a certain 
laxity, which in the beginning of the ninth century caused 

1 Morinus, Comment, hist, de disciplina in administr. S. Poenitentiae, 
1651 ; Wasserschleben, Die Bussordnungen der abendländ. K. 1857; H. J. 
Schmitz, Bussbücher u. Bussdisziplin, 1883 ; Bussbücher u. Bussverfahren, 
1898 ; KL. II, 1573 ff. Kober, her Kirchenbann, 1863 ; Das Interdikt, in 
the A. f. k. KR. vol. 21, 22. Hinschius, Kirchenrecht, V, 19-32. 



294 A Manual of Church History 

a violent outbreak of opposition. They were already too 
firmly established to be got rid of so easily, but we nevertheless 
find the Councils and Popes of the succeeding age reverting 
to the ancient discipline. As great stress seems to have been 
laid just then on the Greek canons, it is no matter of surprise 
to find that the ancient eastern practice of stations became 
for a time the rule in the West. 

The practice of redeeming penance, which had originated 
in the previous period, now led to an alteration of far-reaching 
consequences in the penitential discipline. Among the 
penalties into which due penance might be commuted was that 
of almsgiving, and it had also, even earlier, been a custom 
among penitents to seek the aid of others in performing the 
penance imposed : thence it was an easy step to the practice 
of buying-off a penance at the price of money. Subsequent 
to the eighth century the Penitentials contain tariffs showing 
the sums which, should he be unable to fast, the penitent must 
devote to pious works. So far as public penance is concerned, 
such buying-off cannot be traced farther back than the ninth 
century, and the Council of Tribur (895, c. 56), which first allows 
it, does so only in certain special cases, and requires a solid 
motive, besides insisting on the performance of a part of the 
penance. It was evidently not the intention of the Council to 
detract from the severity or the reality of the penitential 
practice ; it merely aimed at accommodating as far as possible 
the Church's discipline to the case of the penitent : yet its 
decision opened out a way by which the Church's laws might 
be evaded, besides conducing to the crime of sacerdotal 
avarice. In 1048 the Council of Rouen (c. 18) was obliged 
to forbid the clergy to increase or diminish through such 
motives the penances they imposed on their flock. 

II. Little by little the penitential discipline was losing its old 
severity, but in the meantime the Church's power of punishing 
was steadily increasing. Excommunication gradually came 
to mean exclusion from all intercourse with Christians, 
and as, even in this meaning, it was occasionally insufficient 
to produce obedience, an aggravation of the penalty was 
devised in the form of the Interdict, by which permission was 
withdrawn for the holding of public services in a determined 
region, whether great or small. This punishment may be said 



Feast-days and Fasts 295 

to feach farther back, as individual bishops, to ensure sub- 
mission, or on other grounds, had occasionally directed the 
closing of local churches. But as a recognised means of 
punishment it makes its appearance only in the tenth century. 
At first the interdict was accompanied by excommunication, 
and was directed against all who should unlawfully seize a 
church or diocese, but in the following century it came to be 
used alone. As in the beginning it was pronounced either by 
a bishop or by a Council, it also allowed of considerable diver- 
sity : in some places it involved the entire cessation of Divine 
worship, whereas in others not only might Baptism and the 
last Sacraments be administered, but Divine worship might also 
take place privately, i.e. with closed doors. The latter, indeed, 
soon became the general rule, till little by little the interdict 
was robbed of much of its ancient terror. 



§ 102 

Feast-days and Fasts l 

I. The calendar was during this period enriched by many 
new feasts. In the first instance each Apostle and Evangelist 
was assigned a special celebration. This would seem, indeed, 
to have been the case even from the very beginning of the period, 
seeing that the practice is mentioned in Chrodegang's rule (c. 30) . 
In the tenth century the feasts of Easter and Whitsun assumed 
less importance, in this sense, that their octaves were no longer 
regarded in the light of one prolonged feast, only the earlier 
days within the octave continuing to be reckoned as festivals 
But the decrease in importance is apparent only, as some 
restriction in the number of days was necessary to give the 
event a character of special solemnity. Other feasts which 
then came to be generally kept were those of the Holy Innocents, 
of All-Hallows, and of St. Martin. We must also mention the 
patronal feasts of the Churches, to keep which was a universal 
custom, though the feast was, of course, observed on different 
days in different localities. Other feasts such as those of the 
Finding of the Cross or Holyrood, of St. Lawrence, and of St. 
Michael, were very widely kept. The feast of All-Souls, though 

1 Funk, A.u. U. I, 266-78 (Lenten fast). 



296 A Manual of Church History 

it never obtained the status of a holiday of obligation, was 
a popular festival even from its first establishment. It was 
first introduced into the monastery and congregation of Cluny 
by Abbot Odilo (998), and soon spread over the whole 
Western Church. 

II. The number of fast-days increased with that of the 
feasts. Lent, which, so far, had contained only thirty-six days, 
was prolonged to forty days, its beginning being put back to 
the Wednesday previous to the first Sunday in Quadragesima, 
or Ash Wednesday, as it came to be called from the custom of 
placing ashes on the heads of the Faithful — a custom which had 
been made obligatory on the whole Church by Urban II at the 
Council of Benevento (1091). The forty days' fast, which had 
become the rule at Rome in the seventh century, was soon 
adopted together with the Roman rite throughout the whole 
of the West, except at Milan. At about the same time the 
Sundays in Septuagesima, Sexagesima, and Quinquagesima make 
their appearance, and serve the purpose of a kind of preparation 
for Lent. In the Eastern Church an eighth week was added 
to the original seven, though this week was one merely of 
abstinence from flesh-meat. With this one exception, during 
the whole of Lent, even on Sundays and Saturdays (the latter 
day not being under ordinary circumstances a fast-day in the 
East), meat, eggs, and cheese were forbidden, only one meal 
a day was allowed, and the fast was not to be broken before 
the hour of None; all rejoicing, hunting, weddings, inter- 
course between man and wife, and the holding of courts of 
justice were prohibited. Towards the end of the period it 
became the custom during Lent to conceal the decorations of 
the high altar behind a curtain, symbolical of the mortification 
of the season, and therefore known as the * hunger- veil/ The 
three periodical three-day fasts observed at Rome (§ 69) now 
came to be generally kept elsewhere, and a fourth was added 
and placed in the spring, though, as it fell in Lent, it made but 
little difference ; these so-called Ember Days, 1 on account 
of their occurring four times in the year, came to be styled 
Ieiunium Quatuor Temporum. The practice soon arose of 
conferring ordination on these days. 

. J Ember = (T) empor (um), a corruption possibly connected with [Sept-] 
ember. 



Saint and Relic Worship 297 

An increase also took place in the number of fasting vigils, 
nearly all the feasts obtaining the dignity of a vigil ; especially 
was this the case with the feasts of Apostles. Fasting was 
also enforced on the three Rogation Days. Certain Councils 
enjoined the keeping of a fast of a fortnight or three weeks 
in preparation for Christmas and for the Feast of St. John the 
Baptist ; in this instance, however, custom varied. 1 Every 
Friday in the year was reckoned a day of abstinence, except 
when it coincided with a great feast, 2 and from the eleventh 
century the same rule held widely for the Saturday also. 3 

Among the Greeks the Sunday previous to the eighth week 
before Easter is called KvpLaKrj -n}? airoKpcin (or ' Sunday of Ab- 
stinence ') ; the following Sunday, which marks the beginning of 
the real fast, is termed KvpiaAa) ttJs rvpocfrdyov (or ' Sunday of 
Cheese-eating ') . The two previous Sundays are called after the 
Gospel read on them, the tenth being KvpuaKT] rov rcXwvov /cat rov 
<f>apL<raiov (or ' Sunday of the Publican and Pharisee '), and the 
ninth KvptaKrj tov ao-urov (or ' Sunday of the Prodigal ') , and both 
these weeks form, like the period which in the Latin Church 
begins with Septuagesima, a kind of remote preparation for Easter. 
The whole period of the ten weeks received later on the name of 
T/HwSiov; the period from Easter to the Octave of Whitsun 
was called ILevTTjKoorToipiov, and the rest of the ecclesiastical year, 

Oktw^os. 



§ 103 
Saint and Relic Worship 4 

Whereas the veneration of images was opposed in both East 
and West, that of the saints was everywhere popular. New 
feasts were established in their honour ; their tombs were the 
object of many visits, this being especially the case with the tombs 
of the Apostles at Rome, and those of St. James of Compostella 
and St. Martin of Tours, to which pilgrimages were almost as 
frequent as to the holy places at Jerusalem. Their remains, or 
even fragments of them, were everywhere in great demand, and 
though at first their relics were religiously preserved in the churches, 
it soon became customary to carry them about in procession, to 

1 Nicol. I Resp. ad consulta Bulg. c. 4, 9, 44-48 ; Statutes of the Councils 
of Erfurt, 932; Dingolfing, 932; c. 2, Seligenstadt, 1022, c. I, 

2 Nicol. I Resp. c. 5. 

3 Binterim, Denkwürdigkeiten, V, 2, 165 ff. 

4 Beissel, Verehrung der Heiligen u. Reliquien in Deutschland, 1890-92; 
Melanges G. B. de Rossi, 1892, pp. 73-95 (Suppl. aux Mdlanges d'archeol. et 
d'hist. de V ticole franfaise de Rome y t. XII). 



298 A Manual of Church History 

bear them in battle, and to dispose of them in exchange for alms 
destined for the building of churches. As a protest against spolia- 
tion of church property, or to lend force to an ecclesiastical decree, 
they were occasionally taken down from their normal place on the 
altar and laid on the floor among thorns and thistles. 

Culture being at the time at a very low ebb, it is no wonder 
if the practice issued in abuse. The Council of Chalons (813, c. 45), 
for instance, recalls St. Jerome's severe strictures against pilgrim- 
ages (§ 70, III). The unenlightened zeal of the people also led 
them to ascribe sanctity too easily to those they had revered ; 
this tendency was rebuked by the Council of Frankfort (794, c. 42) 
and forbidden by a capitulary of Charles the Great (805, c. 17). 
Not unfrequently an exaggerated value was set on relics, and in 
consequence many were tempted to obtain them by unlawful 
means ; whilst others, in their avarice, actually brought spurious 
relics into circulation. It is against this latter practice that 
the decree of the Second Council of Lyons (1247, c - x 7) * s directed, 
which speaks of the ' debasement ' of images and relics. 

The capitulary of Charles the Great, of which we spoke above, 
forbids the worship of any new saint save by the bishop's leave. 
Hence the decision of the question as to whether a person was 
to be reckoned as a saint belonged to the bishop in whose diocese 
that person had lived. If it was intended to give a saint public 
worship beyond the limits of the diocese, then the canonisation 
of the saint was required to take place before an assembly of 
several bishops, all the bishops of the province being usually 
convoked for the occasion. Cases of holy men who had passed 
their lives in far-off lands might also be left to the judgment of 
a Roman Council ; the first instance in point is the canonisation 
of Ulrich, bishop of Augsburg, by the Lateran Council of 993. 



§104 

Monasticism 

In consequence of the wealth of some of the monasteries, 
and of the wholesale bestowal of abbacies on laymen by Charles 
Martel, monasticism in the eighth century fell into a state of 
considerable decay. At the beginning of the ninth century, 
in consequence of the labours of Benedict, abbot of Aniane, 1 
and of the reforming Council of Aachen in 817, which 
promulgated new statutes, great improvements were effected, 
but in the political turmoils which ensued, order and discipline 

1 Mg. by Nicolai, 1865; Z. f. KG, XV, 244-60 (Benedict's Rules) ; W. 
Puckert, Aniane u. Gellone, 1899. 



Monasticism 299 

were soon as bad as ever. The abbeys again came into lay 
hands, and if credence can be given to the complaints of the 
Council of Trosle in the diocese of Soissons (909), the cloisters 
were filled with women and children, soldiers and hounds, 
whilst the monks tramped the country or else surrendered 
themselves to a life of pleasure. But at this same time, by 
the establishment of the monastery of Cluny in Burgundy 
(910), duke William of Aquitania and abbot Berno laid the 
foundation of a congregation, which became the starting- 
point of a widespread reform of monasticism, the good spirit 
which ruled that cloister under Berno being maintained by a 
succession of worthy abbots, Odo (924-41), Aymard, Majolus, 
and Odilo (994-1048), till Cluny grew to be the model of all 
other monasteries. The actual Cluniac reform had already 
been adopted in nearly 2,000 monasteries by the beginning of 
the twelfth century. 1 

Early in the eleventh century two Benedictine congrega- 
tions were started in Italy: that of the Camaldolese, which 
originated (c. 1018) in the hermitage at Camaldoli, near Arezzo, 
and at the monastery in the Val de Castro, and of which the 
parent was St. Romwald, a scion of the house of the Honesti 
of Ravenna; and the congregation of the Vallombrosians, 
styled after the monastery of Vallombrosa, and first estab- 
lished by John Gualbert in the neighbourhood of his native 
city, Florence (1038). 

Lastly, the monastery of Hirsau, in Swabia, as soon as it 
had been reorganised on the model of Cluny by William the 
Blessed (1071), 2 also contributed greatly to the better observance 
of the religious life, though this monastery never became the 
mother house of a separate congregation. Whereas Cluny, at 
least from the time of Odilo, retained a sort of sovereignty 
over all the houses which adopted its reform, this was never the 
case with Hirsau. 

Whereas the monks of antiquity had nearly all of them been 
laymen, in the mediaeval monasteries priests were plentiful. 
The latter devoted themselves to the church services, to the 
education of youth, and to study, whilst the manual labour 

1 Mg. by Lorrain (1 858); Pignot (909-1 157) , 2 vol. 1868 ; O. Ringholz (Odilo, 
1885) ; E. Sackur (Die CI. in ihr. kirchl. . . . Wirksamkeit), 2 vol. 1892-94. 

2 Kerker, Wilhelm d. Sei. 1863; Württemb. KG. 1893, PP- 108-27; 
Festschrift z. Jub. d. d. Campo santo in Rom. 1897, pp. 115-29, 



300 A Manual of Church History 

was left to the lay monks, known as fratres conversi, barbati, 
or laid. This division of monks into two distinct classes, 
whenever it may have begun, 1 was achieved by the end of our 
period, and soon became general. 

A privilege which the monasteries obtained was their 
Exemption. 2 The Council of Chalcedon (c. 4) had placed 
every religious house under the bishop of the diocese in which 
it was situate, and this enactment was ratified by later Councils, 
such as that of Aachen in 802 (c. 15). Now, however, 
many monasteries were exempted from the bishops' jurisdiction 
and transferred to the immediate jurisdiction of Rome. There 
are cases of this privilege even in the seventh century, an 
instance being that of Bobbio in 628, but it became frequent 
only after it had been conferred on Cluny in 949, all the 
affiliated monasteries sharing in the privilege of the mother 
house. In the course of time it also became customary to 
interpret as an exemption any brief by which Rome assumed 
the protection of a monastery. Exemption was usually 
granted in return for a tax payable annually to the Holy See. 



§105 

Religion and Morals 3 

I. The conversion of the Germanic tribes, having been 
effected so rapidly, consisted in little more than a mere change 
of belief ; once converted, it was necessary to bring them to 
lead a Christian life. Nor was it at all easy to uproot certain 
pagan habits of mind, and many superstitious notions and 
practices, such as the use of amulets, remained as relics of their 
former paganism. Some of these practices clothed themselves in 

1 Cp. Hoffmann as in § 127, B. II. 

2 A. Blumenstock, Der päpstliche Schutz, 1890 ; K. F. Weiss, Die kirchl. 
Exemtionen der Klöster bis zur gregorianisch-cluniacensischen Zeit, 1893; 
P. Fabre, E.tude sur le Liber censuum de 1'E.glise romaine, 1892 ; A. f. k. KR. 
1906 (Klöst. Exemtion in der abendländ. K.). 

3 Rettberg, KG. D. II, 113-18; Schindler, Der Aberglaube des MA. 
1858 ; Fehr, Staat u. Kirche im fränk. Reiche, 1869 ; Oberle, Überreste 
german. Heidentums im Christentum, 1883; C. Meyer, Der Aberglaube des 
MA. u. der nächstfolg. Jahrh. 1884; Dresdner, Kultur- u. Sittengesch. der 
ital. Geistl. im 10 u. 11 Jahrh. 1890; D ahn, Studien zur Gesch. der germanischen 
Gottesurteile, 1857 ; Patetta, Le Ordalie, 1890 ; Lea, Superstition and Force, 
4th ed, 1892. 



Religion and Morals 301 

a Christian garb : such was the Sortes Sanctorum (sc. Bibliorum), 
which consisted in foretelling the future, or in discerning the 
will of God by opening a Bible haphazard and reading the first 
sentence which caught the eye ; another custom which assumed 
a Christian character was that of the Ordeals. The former 
practice was indeed discountenanced, but the latter, consisting 
in trial by fire, by water, by the Cross or Sacrament, by combat, 
&c, agreed too well with the childlike faith of the times to 
be affected by the occasional protests which it called forth. 
These ordeals fell into disuse only subsequently to their con- 
demnation by Innocent III, who denounced them as a temp- 
tation of God, and forbade the bestowal of the priestly blessing 
on the objects used in such trials. 

II. Robbery and revenge, cruelty, rudeness, and the 
grossest sensuality continued to prevail among the convert 
Germans, whilst blood-feuds and duels led to the com- 
mission of frequent acts of violence. As these evils, in the 
absence of any secular power able to secure respect for the law, 
could not be entirely obviated, the Church made it her business 
to find means to restrain them within due bounds. It was due 
to her efforts that, soon after 1040, for the first time a Treuga 
Dei, or Truce of God, 1 was proclaimed by Councils assembling 
in France. According to a synodal decree issued in 1042, under 
penalty of severe censure no private act of revenge was to 
be perpetrated in Normandy, between Advent and the 
Octave of the Epiphany, between the beginning of Lent and 
the Octave of Easter, between the Rogation Days and the 
Octave of Whitsun, or finally, at any time between Wednesday 
evening and Monday morning. The actual times differed, 
however, according to the locality. The Church also strove, 
by the imposition of penance and by preaching, to diminish 
cases of violence, and here again her action was not in vain. 
Nor must we forget that the history of the period contains 
many a bright page, that we find in it shining examples of true 
repentance, of childlike piety, of self-sacrifice and charity. 
It is not without reason that the Church has been called the 
tutor of the Germanic nations. 

III. As to the clergy in particular, its state was by no means 

1 Mg. by Kluckhon, 1857 » Fehr, 1861 ; Semichon, 1869 ; C, F, 
Küster, 1902. 



302 A Manual of Church History 

the same everywhere during this period. As might be expected, 
its condition under the reign of the warlike Charles Martel was 
less satisfactory than under his grandson Charles the Great, 
who was so concerned that the life of the clergy should be 
in keeping with their office ; similar differences are noticeable 
later. Again, whilst in some countries, for instance in Ger- 
many under the Saxon and early Salian emperors, a good spirit 
animated the clergy, in others the Church appears in a much 
more unfavourable light. Thus Peter Damian in his Liber 
Gomorrhianus , though not without manifest exaggeration, 
depicts the state of the clergy in very dark colours. The law 
of celibacy proved especially irksome among the uneducated 
nations of German descent. In Spain, for instance, it was 
formally abrogated early in the eighth century by King Witiza. 
Elsewhere, indeed, it came to be insisted on more severely than 
ever, especially in the ninth century, but there can be no doubt 
that, in spite of ali this, multitudes of priests were living in 
the married state. The Lombards in particular considered it 
as one of the liberties of the Ambrosian Church. With the 
crime of priestly incontinency, or Nicolaite heresy, as it was 
called from the end of our period (Apoc. ii. 6, 15), was associated 
the other priestly crime of simony. 

These evils encountered many determined adversaries, 
but they were perhaps most effectually opposed by the insti- 
tution of the canonical life. In England they were assailed by 
Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury (f 988) , and in the middle 
of the eleventh century the Roman See also began to have 
recourse to severe measures to secure the observance of the 
Church's laws. At about this time, there was formed at Milan 
a party known as the Pataria, pledged to reintroduce the 
observance of the canons. This party was led by the clerics 
Anselm, Arialdus, and Landulf, and later on by the latter's 
brother, the knight Herlembald. Their efforts were seconded 
by a number of bishops, such as Conrad of Constance (f 934), 
Bruno of Cologne (f 965), Ulrich of Augsburg (f 973), Wolfgang 
of Ratisbon (^994), Willigis of Mainz (fion), Bernward 
(f 1022), and Godehard (f 1075) of Hildesheim, and Anno II 
of Cologne (f 1075). 



CHAPTER VI 

LITERATURE AND EDUCATION l 

§106 

Greek Literature 

Owing to the attack made on images during this period, 
the interest of theologians was naturally directed to their 
defence. Three men are more particularly noted for their 
efforts in this connection. Of these the first is John Damascene 
(f 749), 2 for a time counsellor to the caliph of Damascus, 
and afterwards monk at the lavra of Mar Sabas near Jerusalem ; 
the second is Nicephorus, at first Secretary of State, then a 
monk, and finally patriarch of Constantinople (806-15) > the 
third is Theodore Studita, abbot of the Studium monastery 
(f 826) . John Damascene is also known on account of other 
works : he compiled the Sacra Parallela, a kind of Florilegium ; 
his greatest work is, however, that which bears the title Fons 
Scientiae. It comprises, besides an elementary treatise on 
philosophy and a history of heresy, an exposal of Christian 
doctrine, which, coming after the controversies of the previous 
period, the results of which it embodies, became the first, and 
also the most influential, handbook of the Eastern theologians. 
It is on the strength of this work that John of Damascus is 
included among the Greek doctors, whose list ends with his 
name. 

1 K. Krumbacher, Gesch. der byzant. Literatur (527-1453), 1891; 2nd ed. 
1897. F. A. Specht, Gesch. des Unterrichtswesens in Deutschland v. d. alt. 
Zeiten bis z. Mitte des 13 Jahrh. 1885 ; Denk, Gesch. des gallo- fränkischen 
Unterrichts- u. Bildungswesens , 1892 ; H. Hurter, Nomenciator liter. I, 1903. 

2 Ed. Lequien, 2 fol. 1712; P.G. 94-96. Mg. by Langen, 1879; Lupton, 
1884; K. Holl (the Sacra parallela) 1897 » Avoßovvt&rris, 1903, Ainslee, 3rd 
ed. 1903 ; V. Ermoni, 1904 ; Echos d'Orient, 1906, pp. 28-30 (for the year of 
his death). 



304 A Manual of Church History 

The most noteworthy personage in the subsequent age was 
Photius, patriarch of Constantinople (f 891), l renowned for his 
profound scholarship. He wrote, besides some polemical tracts 
and numerous letters, his great Bibliotheca, a work of immense 
importance for the history of Greek literature, in which over 
280 books of every description, both sacred and profane, 
heathen and Christian, are dealt with. He is also the author of 
Amphilochia, a collection of explanations, theological, exege- 
tical, dogmatical, and even philosophical, given in answer to 
questions asked by Amphilochius, metropolitan of Cyzicus, 
and constituting Photius's most important contribution to 
theology. On the other hand, his authorship of another work 
which bears his name, the Nomocanon, an ordered collection of 
the canons and of the civil laws affecting the Church, which 
is considered an authority by the Easterns, has lately been 
called into question. The next in importance among the Greek 
writers is Simeon Metaphrastes, 2 who lived in the latter half of 
the tenth century. He wrote the lives of many saints and 
martyrs, but his accounts contain too much of the marvellous 
to be of any great historical worth, though they enjoyed great 
popularity in the Middle Ages. Trenching on the next period 
we find Theophylactus, bishop of Achrida in Bulgaria, and 
Euthymius Zigabenus, a monk of Constantinople, both of 
whom were exegetists, though the latter also earned the 
reputation of a theologian and polemic through his Panoplia? 
which was, later on, embodied with additions in the Thesaurus 
Orthodoxae Fidei of Nicetas Acominatus (f 1206). 



. §107 

Latin Literature 4 

It would be unreasonable to expect much from the Germanic 
nations so soon after their conversion to Christianity. It was 

1 P.G. 101-4 ; Hergenröther, Photius, vol. Ill, 1869. 'A6yoi kcu 'Ofiiklai, 
ed. S. Aristarches, 1901. 

2 P.G. 1 1 4-16; Ehrhard, Die Legendensammlung des S. M. in the Fest- 
schrift z. Jub. d. d. Campo santo in Rom, 1897 ; R. Qu. 1897, PP- 67-205. 

3 See Echos d' Orient, Sept. 1909, p. 257 ff. 

4 Quellen u. Untersuchungen zur lot. Philologie des MA. ed. L. Traube, 
1906 ff. A. Ebert, Allg. Gesch. der Lit. im MA. 3 vol. 1874-87; l 2 , 1889. A. 
Hauck, KG. Deutschlands, I-III (cp. § 79), 



Latin Writers from Eighth to Eleventh Century 305 

first of all necessary to cultivate their mental powers, and amidst 
the constant wars of the time this was no easy task. In this 
respect, too, the Church was their tutor. Instruction was 
imparted on the Graeco-Roman system, beginning with the 
seven liberal arts, which were taught in two divisions, the lower, 
that of the Trivium, designed to teach correctness of speech, 
and consisting of Grammar, Rhetoric, and Dialectics, and the 
higher, or Quadrivium, being devoted to the four mathematical 
sciences of Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy, and Music. The 
reading of MSS. was taught under Grammar. Theological 
instruction comprised the interpretation of Scripture, and the 
elements of knowledge necessary for the due performance of 
priestly work. 

The good results of these educationary measures first 
became apparent in England, 1 where Archbishop Theodore of 
Canterbury (f 690), a monk from Tarsus, and the Roman abbot 
Adrian, who accompanied him to his new home, had taken in 
hand the intellectual formation of the Anglo-Saxons. Early 
in the eighth century there flourished Aldhelm, the father of 
Anglo-Latin poetry, and Venerable Bede (t735)> wno > as 
his works show, had at his command the whole learning of his 
time, and who laid the foundation of English history with his 
Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum ; another well-known 
scholar of slightly later date was Alcuin of York. Education 
came indeed to a standstill in the ninth century while the 
raids and conquests of the Danes were in progress, though 
matters again improved a little under Alfred the Great (871- 
goo), the founder of the English kingdom. 

Efforts in a like direction began to be made among the 
Franks under the reign of Charles the Great. That prince, 
who was as much interested in the arts and sciences as in good 
government, not only summoned to his court the best scholars 
of the time, such as Alcuin, the Lombard Paul Warnefrid or 
Paulus Diaconus, the grammarian Peter of Pisa, and the poet 
Theodulf who afterwards became bishop of Orleans, besides 
bestowing special attention on the Palatine School which he 
had established at his court, but he also issued orders (789) 
to all the monasteries and cathedrals to erect schools, and 

1 K. Werner, Beda d. Ehrw. u. s. Zeit, 1875 ; Alkuin u. s. Jakrh. 1876 ; 
Gaskoin, Alcuin, 1904 ; Weis, Alfred d. Gr. 1852, 

vol. 1, x 



3o6 A Manual of Church History 

even urged parish priests to train pupils. The result of all 
these measures was eminently satisfactory, and though the 
learning of those times, owing to its entire dependence on the 
works of the Fathers, was lacking in the merit of originality, 
yet on the whole, and considering the circumstances, it was 
highly creditable. 

The names of others who were in any way prominent for learning 
have already been mentioned when recording the controversies 
of the period. Such were Claudius of Turin, Agobard of Lyons, 
Jonas of Orleans, Dungal of St. Denis (§ 90), Paulinus of Aquileia 
(§ 91), Gottschalk, Rhabanus Maurus (Kath. 1902, II ; J. Hablitzel, 
in Bibl. Studien, XI, 3, 1906), Hinkmar of Rheims, Servatus Lupus, 
Prudentius of Troy es, Remigius of Lyons (§ 92), Paschasius 
Radbertus, Ratramnus, Scotus Eriugena, Berengar, Lanfranc 
(§ 93), Humbert of Silva Candida (§ 95). Others of whom 
we have not yet spoken are the following : Amalarius of Metz, 
author of De ecclesiasticis officiis (P.L. 105) ; Eginhard (fc. 848), 
abbot of Seligenstadt and biographer of Charles the Great (MG. 
SS. 2) ; Walafrid Strabo of Reichenau (f 849), who wrote the 
Glossa ordinaria, the Liber de exordiis et incrementis rerum eccle- 
siae (ed. Knöpfler, 1890), and other works ; Haymo, bishop of 
Halberstadt (1853), a Church historian and exegetist ; iEneas, 
bishop of Paris (1870), author of a Liber adv. decern obiectiones 
Graecorum ; the Librarian Anastasius of Rome (f c. 879), noted 
for his translations from the Greek, among which is that of the 
acts of the Seventh and Eighth General Councils ; Notker Balbulus 
of St. Gall (f 912), a Church poet who composed many hymns 
and sequences (his authorship of the Media vita in morte sumus 
is doubtful). The literary language then used was almost exclu- 
sively Latin, though a few works were even then written in the 
vernacular, for instance, the Heliand (= Heiland = Saviour), a 
Gospel epic composed in the time of Lewis the Pious (ed. by E. 
Sievers, 1878 ; Germ. Tr. by Grein, 1869), and a version of the 
Gospels by the monk Otfrid of Weissenburg in Alsatia (f c. 875, 
ed. by P. Piper, 1878 ; O. Erdmann, 1882 ; mg. by C. Pfeiffer, 
1905), both of which are in Old German. 

Towards the end of the ninth century there began a period 
of comparative inactivity. But though the tenth, compared with 
the previous or with the subsequent century, was indeed a dark 
age, the lamp of knowledge was not extinguished everywhere. 
At the abbey of St. Gall, for example, there lived during this age 
Ekkehard I (f 973) and Ekkehard II (f 990), Notker Physicus 
(t 975), an d Notker Labeo (f 1022), to the latter of whom the 
German language owes much, as he was the first to use it for learned 
purposes (P. Piper, Die Schriften N. u. s. Schule, 3 vol. 1882-83). 
At Rheims we meet the historian Flodoard and the learned Gerbert, 



Clerical Training 307 

who later on became Pope Silvester II (mg. by Schulthess, 1881 ; 
Picavet, 1897). In Saxony there was Roswitha, the nun of 
Gandersheim, who not only set in metre the lives of the saints 
and other stories, but even cast them into dramatic form (ed. by 
Barack, 1858, P. v. Winterfeld, 1902; cp. A. f. d. Stud, d 
neueren Sprachen, 1905, pp. 25-75). Another Saxon writer was 
Widukind of Corvey, whose Res gestae Saxoniae, though somewhat 
too patriotically one-sided, is interesting reading and of great value 
for the history of the country. Even Italy, the most backward 
country of the age, can show writers in the persons of Liutprand 
of Cremona and Atto of Vercelli (f 960; mg.by J. Schultz, 1886). 
The most important and at the same time individual writer of 
the century was the Netherlander Rather (f 974), at one time 
bishop of Verona and Liege (mg. by A. Vogel, 2 vol. 1854 5 H. 
Kurth, 2 vol. 1905). 

In the eleventh century the most reputable centre of studies 
was the abbey school of Bee in Normandy, which owed its pre- 
eminence to the teaching of the abbot Lanfranc (Möhler, Ges. 
Sehr. I, 32 ff. ; Poree, Hist, de V abb aye du Bee, 1901). Several 
chroniclers of note lived in the same century : Rodulfus Glaber 
{Historia Francorum, 900-1040), Hermannus Contractus at 
Reichenau (f 1054), Adam of Bremen (f c. 1068) and especially 
Lambert of Hersfeld, who, in the latter portion of his annals (which 
reach to 1077), becomes a true historian, writing both fully and ably 
of the events of recent years, though his bias against Henry IV 
to some extent spoils his work. Lastly, Peter Damian contributed 
so much to literature that he received the title of Doctor of the 
Church (mg. by Kleinermanns, 1882). 



§108 

Formation of the Clergy 1 

In spite of the traces which we find of intellectual life in 
the ninth century, the education of the clergy generally, and 
especially of the rural clergy, was deplorably deficient. In 
this there is of course nothing wonderful. Higher culture was 
a rare thing in those days, and, so far as it existed at all, it 
was to be found only in clerical abodes. The very difficulty 
of reproducing books made their circulation no easy matter. 
Under these circumstances it would be unreasonable to expect 
too much even from the clergy, especially as the situation in 
which most of them were placed was not of a nature to cause 

1 Th. Qu. 1868, pp. 86-118 ; 1875, pp. 35 ff., 57 ff. Theol.-prakt. Quarta!* 
schrift, 1902, pp. 260-69. 



308 A Manual of Church History 

them to study. By far the greater number were quite content 
to know what was absolutely necessary for the due performance 
of their duties. This was the case not only during this one 
period, but during the whole of the Middle Ages. 

The Council of Cloveshovei in England (747, c. 10) demands 
of the priest, besides the knowledge of the meaning of the Sacra- 
ments and ceremonies of the Church, that he be able to render into 
the vernacular the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Mass, and the 
rite of Baptism. The Council of Aachen (802) requires some- 
what more : besides the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the 
Mass, priests must also know by rote the whole Penitential, be 
able to translate the homilies of the Fathers and the rite of 
Baptism, and render the Liturgy according to the Roman method 
(Hefele, IV, 744 f. ; Specht, 62 f.). As about this time schools 
were being generally established, it is possible that the intellectual 
condition of the clergy was showing a slight improvement. This 
notwithstanding, many of the clergy were in a state of deep ignor- 
ance, though it is quite possible that the complaint of Charles 
the Great (Ep. 25, ed. Jaffe, p. 388), that many could not 
even recite the Creed or the Lord's Prayer, is not directed against 
the clergy (as was usually believed) , but against godparents. The 
Council of Ravenna (131 1, c. 16) merely required that parish priests 
and canons should be able to read and to sing ; with regard to those 
who seek a beneficium rurale et simplex, it directs that it be not 
given them unless they can read a little (aliqualiter) . 

Of the state of the Eastern Church we know less than of that 
of the West. The Nicene Council of 787 (c. 2) passed a canon 
determining the knowledge required of a bishop, which would seem 
to indicate that the state of learning in the East was scarcely 
higher than in the West. It requires of the candidate to a bishopric 
that he know by heart the Book of Psalms, and that he be capable of 
reading and entering into the meaning of the canons, the Gospels, 
the Epistles of the Apostles, and the whole of Holy Scripture ; that 
he live according to the commandments, and teach his people to do 
likewise. 

1 Now Cliffe in Kent.— Trans. 



II. THE MIDDLE AGES 

SECOND PERIOD 
From Gregory VII to Celestine V (1073-129 4) 

CHAPTER I 

THE PAPACY AND THE EMPIRE l 

§ 109 

The Quarrel about Investiture — Ninth General Council, 1123 3 

Hildebrand, from the day of his entrance into the service of 
the Roman Church, had played an important part in her 
government, and, on the death of Alexander II, he was left 
with the direction of affairs entirely in his hands. On being 
elected Pope, he assumed the name of Gregory VII (1073-85), 
and from his new position (in which according to all probability 
he had been confirmed by Henry IV) he continued to direct the 
reforms which his predecessors had left unfinished, namely, the 
war which they had begun against the evils of simony and 
clerical incontinency (cp. § 88). 

But at the same time he also turned his attention to 
another matter, which had indeed been touched upon pre- 
viously by Popes and Councils (Rheims, 1049, c. 1 ; Rome, 1059), 

1 For the literature, see § 85 ; also Potthast, Regesta Pontif. Rom. 2 vol. 
(1198-1304), 1874-75; Hefele-Knöpfler, CG. vol. V-VI, 1886-90; 
J. Loserth, Gesch. des späteren MA. (1 197-1492), 1903. 

2 Registrum Greg. VII (Harduin, VI P.L. 148 ; J äffe, Bibliotheca rer. 
Germ. II), MG. Libelli de lite imper. et pontif. 3 vol. 1891-97. Mg. on Gregory 
VII by J. Voigt, 2nd ed. 1848 ; Gfrörer, 7 vol. 1859-61 ; Delarc, 3 vol. 
1889-90; W. Martens, 2 vol. 1894; D. Z.f. G. XI (1894), 227-41 ; N.A. 
XXXI (1906), 159-79 (on the supposed Jewish descent of Gregory VII) ; 
Mirbt, Die Publizistik im Zeitalter Gregors VII, 1894 ; /. d. d. G. : Meyer, 
Heinrich IV u. Heinrich V, I-V, 1890- 1904 ; E. Höhne, K. Heinrich IV nach 
dem Urteil seiner deutschen Zeiigenossen, 1906 ; A, Hauck, KG s Deutschlands, 
III, 3rd and 4th ed. 



3io A Manual of Church History 

but which had never been pursued farther. The appointment 
to high position in the Church, as it had been practised in 
the previous period, brought the Church into a position of 
too great dependency on the State ; it was also rendered 
the more intolerable by being frequently, especially of late, 
tainted with simony, Church offices being obtained at the 
price of money. Gregory accordingly, at the Lenten Council 
of 1075, made unlawful any conferring of an ecclesiastical 
dignity by a layman, and sanctioned this measure (1078-80) 
by further decrees, threatening censure on all its contraveners, 
i.e. on all who should dare so to confer or receive an office. 
But it was no easy thing to abolish at one stroke the practice 
of lay investiture, which, having prevailed so long, was now 
in possession. Rulers who had endowed the Church with 
crown lands had thereby acquired, as they thought, a right to 
have some part in the nomination of those who were to be set 
over these same lands, and they expected this supposed right 
of theirs to be taken into account. Hence the papal decree 
called forth a storm of opposition, more especially within the 
Empire. 

The German crown was at this time worn by Henry IV. 
Left a mere child at his father's death, and having been brought 
up amid the unfavourable surroundings of a court in which the 
peers, spiritual and temporal, were each striving for the 
mastery ; having been into the bargain spoilt by the kindness 
of Adelbert of Bremen, as soon as he arrived at the age of 
manhood he displayed such want of character and power of 
government, and even of ordinary self-control, that, as early 
as 1072 when he was declared of age, he was already hated 
and despised. 

Scarcely had he been king a year than his deposition was 
mooted in Saxony, which had been the principal scene of his 
disorders. Seeing himself surrounded at home by enemies, 
Henry, whom Gregory was just then endeavouring to win 
over to his plans of reform, was inclined to lend a listening ear, 
and in an epistle full of humility he acknowledged the evil he 
had committed against the Church and promised amendment 
(1073). His contrition was not, however, very deep, and as 
soon as the Saxons had been overthrown at the battle of 
Hohenburg (1075) , he returned to his former manner of life. He 



Lay Investiture Quarrel 311 

again sought the company of the counsellors whom Alexander II 
had been obliged to excommunicate on account of their evil 
influence, and began to distribute the offices of the Church 
precisely as he had done before, appointing Tedald, for instance, 
to the archbishopric of Milan, though the see was not even 
vacant. Gregory indeed, even now, was willing to come to 
terms, but Henry was no longer disposed to meet him. On 
the contrary, when Gregory, beginning to despair of his con- 
version, had by verbal message threatened to excommunicate 
and depose him unless he showed signs of repentance, Henry, 
early in 1076, summoned Councils at Worms and Piacenza 
and proclaimed the deposition of the Pope, the emperor 
insolently notifying the decree to ' Hildebrand . . . the faise 
monk/ 

The step was a far-reaching one : war was now declared and 
blow followed blow. In the following Lent, Henry was ex- 
communicated, all his subjects were released from their oath 
of fealty and forbidden to obey him. The measure was 
intended not so much to secure the king's dismissal as to 
compel him to second the Pope's reforms; but it did much more. 
Many princes forsook Henry, now that they had a pretext, and 
in the autumn of the same year the diet met at Tribur to 
discuss the election of a new king, but decided to allow Henry 
to continue in office, provided his excommunication was 
removed within a year. The king, who in the meantime had 
taken up his quarters at Oppenheim on the other side of the 
Rhine, promised obedience, or rather consented to withdraw 
the decree of Worms and apologise for his rudeness to the 
Pope. Gregory himself was invited to attend the parliament 
to be held at Augsburg on Candlemas Day 1077 and bring the 
dispute to an end. In the interval Henry, however, succeeded 
in making peace with the Church by performing penance at 
Canossa, the stronghold of Mathilda, countess of Tuscany, the 
powerful and zealous protectress of the Pope. The parliament 
which had been planned never met, for, on learning of the king's 
departure for Italy, the nobles refused to give Gregory a safe- 
conduct to Germany, and assembling at Forchheim they 
deposed Henry and chose as king his brother-in-law, Rudolf 
of Swabia (March 15, 1077). 

Gregory was naturally displeased with this issue, and as it 



312 A Manual of Church History 

was no easy thing to undo what had been done, he offered to 
arbitrate between the parties. But, though his intervention was 
accepted, neither side was inclined to rely on it alone, and 
ultimately Henry, his head turned by his victory at Flarch- 
heim (January 1080), imperiously demanded his recognition, 
threatening otherwise to appoint a new Pope, a threat which 
he was soon to carry into effect. At the Lenten Council of 
1080 Gregory bestowed the crown on Rudolf, and again banned 
and deposed Henry, thus finally consummating the breach. 
This measure only increased the violence of the storm, Henry 
retorting at the Council of Brixen, held in the ensuing summer, 
by again deposing Gregory, and by appointing him a successor 
in Wibert, archbishop of Ravenna. That same year Rudolf 
was slain in the battle on the Elster, and Henry now marched 
on Rome to give battle to the Pope and secure the crown of the 
Empire. But his hope of quickly making himself master of 
the city was not so easily fulfilled. The gates of Rome were 
closed against him, and it was not until the spring of 1084 
that he succeeded in making his entry. Nor would the Pope, 
in spite of the entreaties of the Romans, consent to be recon- 
ciled. Henry was accordingly crowned by Wibert, who now 
assumed the name of Clement III. Gregory, whose only 
retreat was the castle of Sant' Angelo, seemed on the point 
of falling into the hands of his enemies, when there appeared 
on the scene the Norman duke Robert Guiscard. 

Gregory was now indeed delivered from the power of his 
foe, but Rome was no longer a secure dwelling. Quarrels 
between the Normans and Romans led to the looting and burn- 
ing of the city and inhuman treatment of its inhabitants, so 
that there soon grew up an intensely bitter feeling against 
him who had called such cruel strangers to his help. Gregory 
had, therefore, to abandon Rome to the anti-Pope and spend 
the remainder of his life at Monte Cassino and Salerno, finding 
his last resting-place in the cathedral of the latter city. His 
words, uttered when at the point of death (May 25, 1085), 
Dilexi iustitiam et odi iniquitatem, propter ea morior in exilio, 
show that even his expulsion from the Chair of Peter had not 
availed to shake his persuasion of having fought for a good 
cause. 

The schism which closed his pontificate was maintained 



Lay Investiture Quarrel 313 

long after his death. The extremity to which matters had 
come is evident by the difficulty which was experienced in 
giving him a successor. It was only after a vacancy of eleven 
months that Desiderius, abbot of Monte Cassino, became Pope 
as Victor III. After the latter had ended his uneventful 
pontificate there was again an interval of six months before 
the cardinal bishop of Ostia, Otto, was elected as Urban II 
(1088-99). l No great alteration in the situation occurred, 
and there seemed even less chance of peace being reached, 
when to the prohibition of lay investiture there was added 
another forbidding the clergy to tender homage to a layman 
(Council of Melfi, 1089, c. 11 ; Clermont, 1095, c. 17). It is 
true that at the beginning of this pontificate Hermann of 
Lützelburg (1081-88), Rudolf's successor, abdicated, and 
Germany was left for a while with a single king, but Rudolf's 
party was still to be reckoned with. Henry IV was, moreover, 
in no mood to abandon the struggle in spite of all his losses. 
His second expedition to Italy (1090) may be accounted a 
failure, as Mathilda, the countess of Tuscany, still remained 
unsubdued even after seven years of warfare. To add to the 
confusion, troubles were now being experienced in England. 
William II (1087-1100) not only insisted, as his father William 
the Conqueror had done before, on nominating, and receiving 
homage from, the bishops and abbots, but openly sold Church 
offices, helped himself to the Church's goods, and, after a short 
period of amendment, treated archbishop Anselm of Canterbury 
so contemptuously that the latter sought refuge at Rome (1098). 
The only country to accept the Church's decisions was France ; 
here the king and other nobles consented to abandon the 
practice of investiture, though they continued to claim the 
right of giving the permit of election, of ratifying the choice, 
and of receiving homage for the temporalities. 

The election of Paschal II (1099-1118) was soon followed 
by the death of the anti-Pope Clement III (1100), after whose 
demise the schism began to near its end. The first two 
anti-Popes elected were soon forced to acknowledge Paschal, 
the second (1102) having actually to do so on the day of his 
election, whilst the third (Silvester IV), though he held his own 
for six years (1105-n), did nothing to render himself specially 
1 L. Paulet, Un pape frangais ; Urbain II, 1903. 



314 A Manual of Church History 

notorious. In England the question of investiture was at last 
settled. 1 Desirous of being just, and full of good will to the 
Church, Henry I (1100-35), soon after his accession, recalled 
home the archbishop of Canterbury. He seems, however, to 
have thought it quite within his right to continue the practice 
of his ancestors, and Anselm on his return was accordingly 
summoned to do homage and receive the archbishopric from 
the king's hands. This summons was the occasion of a new 
quarrel, or, to speak more correctly, was the beginning of the 
real investiture quarrel so far as England was concerned, as 
the point at issue in the time of William II had been, not so 
much his claim to invest, as his oppression of the Church. 
Anselm declined to consent, threw the onus of his refusal on the 
law of the Church, or, rather, on the decree of Urban II, and as 
the negotiations with Rome were fruitless, departed a second 
time into exile (1103). But the dispute soon reached its end. 
To escape a decree of excommunication, Henry gave up his 
claim to invest (1105), on the condition that all prelates should 
do homage, and Paschal, without accepting the condition, 
desisted from any further demands. At the parliament of 
Clarendon (1164, art. 12) it was enacted that elections should 
take place in the royal chapel, and by the king's leave, and that 
the elect should do homage and take the oath of fealty before 
his consecration. 

It was more difficult to come to an understanding with 
the Empire. Henry V (1105-25), who had proved submissive 
enough to the Church so long as his crown was in dispute, 
became on his father's death (1106) as jealous of his rights as 
his sire had been, and, as Paschal was equally determined to 
abolish lay investiture, there seemed scarcely a chance of peace 
being preserved. It is true that an understanding seemed to 
have been reached by the treaty of Sutri (n n), agreed to by 
the king on his first journey to Rome. Henry then promised 
to drop the practice of investiture, provided Paschal would 
direct the prelates to return all fiefs and regalia. In reality the 
treaty only made matters worse, for it touched the German 
bishops more than the Pope, and when these were requested, 
before Henry's coronation, to express their approval they 
flatly refused. Under these circumstances Henry also declined 

1 H. Böhmer, Kirche u. Staat in England im 11 u. 12 Jahrh. 1898. 



Lay Investiture Quarrel 315 

to be held to his part of the agreement, and as the coronation 
was on this account postponed, he sought to obtain his end by 
more forceful means. Paschal was soon a prisoner in his hands, 
whilst in the city German and Roman engaged in fierce 
conflict. In his distress the Pope determined, pro ecclesiae 
liberatione, to assume a different attitude. He accordingly 
crowned the king, and, on condition of his allowing the elections 
to take place freely, gave him the privilege of conferring on all 
prelates the investiture, also promising to bear no malice 
against the king for what had happened. 

Henry had thus gained his object. But the privilege 
which he had been granted was valueless, having been 
obtained by extortion. The Gregorian party assailed this 
so-called ' Pravilegium ' so violently, that Paschal was com- 
pelled indirectly to withdraw it at the Lateran Council of 
1 1 12, by re-enacting the decrees of Gregory and Urban, 
though, owing to the oath with which he had confirmed it, 
he refused to do so directly. The Council of Vienne, in the 
same year, openly denounced lay investiture as a heresy, 
and put the emperor under the ban. Having been likewise 
excommunicated in Germany, Henry determined to reopen 
negotiations, and crossed the Alps a second time (n 16). An 
understanding was again not reached, as Paschal, mindful of 
the treatment he had previously experienced, contrived to evade 
a meeting. Under Gelasius II, his successor, the breach was 
widened. Like his predecessor, he refused to meet the emperor, 
and answered all his requests for a recognition of his privilege 
of 1 in by referring him to a General Council. In consequence 
of this Henry set up Burdinus of Braga, or Gregory VIII, 
as anti-Pope (11 18), a step for which he was excommunicated 
by Gelasius. Soon after the election of Calixtus II (1 119-24), l 
the former archbishop Guido of Vienne, and a member of the 
royal family of Burgundy, new efforts were made for peace, 
with such apparent success that the ratification at Mouzon 
of a new treaty had been already determined on by the Council 
of Rheims (1119). Owing, however, to the emperor's con- 
trariness the negotiations fell through, and his excommunica- 
tion was renewed. But it was now becoming evident that 
the principle of lay investiture could not be condemned in 
1 U, Robert, Bullaire et Histoire de Calixte II , 1891, 



3i6 



A Manual of Church History 



its entirety. The prohibition which had extended to all church 
buildings and church properties was now lightened, so as to 
involve only bishoprics and abbeys (c. 2) ; exception was made 
for inferior benefices, and homage was declared lawful in return 
for the transmission of church properties, the Council making 
its own a distinction which had long been current in the 
pamphlets of the time, viz. that between spiritualities and 
temporalities. The king's right of investing prelates with 
the temporalities of their office being no longer questioned, 
Henry too showed himself more amenable, and an under- 
standing was at last reached. Peace was finally signed (1122) 
at Lobwisen near Lorsch, by the Pactum Calixtinum, or 
Concordat of Worms, as the covenant is variously called, after 
the Pope who concluded it and the place where it was 
published. 1 The emperor hereby promised Calixtus and his 
successors to desist in future from all investiture of bishops 
and abbots with ring and staff, and granted canonical freedom 
of election. In return the Pope granted to Henry, and pre- 
sumably to his successors also, the right of being present at all 
elections to take place in Germany, and, in the case of a division 
of votes, to support that side which, by the metropolitan and 
bishops of the province, was judged to be the better, and to 
confer, with the sceptre, the regalia or fiefs on the newly elect 
before his consecration. In Italy and Burgundy the investi- 
ture was to follow within six months of the consecration. 

A famous dispute was thus settled, after half a century 
of wrangling, by a wise spirit of compromise, and by a 
clearer delimitation of the rights of either side. The schism 
which Henry V had roused at Rome had been extinguished 
already a year previous, the anti-Pope being overthrown soon 
after Calixtus's entry into the city (1121). For the solemn 
ratification of the concordat and for the removal of ecclesias- 
tical abuses a General Council was, in 1123, convoked to meet 
at the Lateran, this being the first ever held in the West. 

1 D. Schäfer, Zur Beurteilung des Wormser Konkordats, in SB. Berlin, 1905, 
pp. 1-95 ; N.A. 1906, p. 482. On the other side, A. Hauck, KG. Deutschlands, 
III 3 - 4 , 1047 ff. ; E. Bernheim, Das W. Konkordat u. s. Vorurkunden, 1906 ; 
H. Rudorff, Zur Erklärung des W. K. 1906 {Quellen u. Studien z. Verfas- 
sungsgesch. des D. Reiches, ed. K. Zeumer, I, 4). 



Affairs at Rome 317 



§ no 

The Schism of Anacletus — Tenth General Council, 1139 — The 

Roman Republic l 

The Pope and the emperor died one soon after the other. 
The former was succeeded, mainly owing to the support of the 
family of the Frangipani, by the cardinal bishop Lambert 
of Ostia, who assumed the name of Honorius II (1124-30). 
It is true that an earlier scrutiny had resulted in the election 
of Cardinal Theobald, but, either of his own free accord or 
otherwise, he declined the proffered honour. The German 
crown came to Lothar II (1125-37), an d the election furnished 
an occasion to the more zealous church party for demanding 
a revision of the Concordat of Worms so as to allow greater 
freedom to the Church in Germany. They contended that 
the king should renounce his right of being present at the 
election, of investing the elect in his temporalities prior to 
the consecration, — which, of course, involved the right under 
certain circumstances of rejecting the elect, — and finally that he 
should be content with the oath of fealty without the act of 
homage. It is hardly likely that Lothar gave the required 
undertaking, for, at any rate, in due course he exercised all 
the rights which had been granted by Calixtus II to the German 
kings. So far as the conferring of the regalia was concerned, 
the privilege was again renewed by Rome in 1133. 

On the death of Honorius, the schism which had been feared 
at his election became a reality. Excusing themselves on the 
score of the intrigues carried on by the opposite party, 
the cardinal bishops hastened to elect Cardinal Gregory as 
Innocent II (1130-43). The remainder of the cardinals, 
that is to say the majority, some three hours later elected 
Cardinal Peter, of the family of the Pierleoni, as Anacletus II, 
and in consideration of a bribe the whole city consented to 
acclaim him. Innocent, who was supported by only the 
Frangipani and the Corsi, was compelled to quit Rome. But 
his flight did not spoil his cause, for, before the year was out, 
France, England, and Germany had declared for him, whilst 

1 /. d. d. Gesch. : W. Bernhardi, Lothar von Supplinburg, 1879; Konrad III 
1882 ; Mühlbacher, Die streitige Papstwahl des J. 1130, 1875. 



318 A Manual of Church History 

Anacletus had to be content with the obedience of Scotland, 
Lower Italy, and Sicily. In the year 1133 Innocent returned 
to Rome escorted by Lothar. An opportunity was then afforded 
of settling a dispute which had arisen concerning the legacy 
of the countess Mathilda of Tuscany (f 1115), Henry V having 
claimed for the Empire even that portion of her property 
which she had left to the Holy See ; this allodial property was 
now conferred by the Pope on Lothar and on his son-in-law, 
Duke Henry the Proud of Bavaria, as a papal fief. 

On his second journey to Rome (1136) the emperor pushed 
still further southwards, even to Bari and Salerno, with the 
object of establishing his own sovereignty and Innocent's 
authority. In this he was, however, only partially successful. 
After his departure, Roger of Sicily, the anti-Pope's protector, 
who had been won over by the promise of the title of king, 
again seized the whole of Lower Italy. From this time the 
anti-Pope took up his quarters in the Leonine city, nor did 
the schism come to an end even with his death (1138). It is 
true that his successor (Victor IV) , after a reign of two months, 
made his submission to Innocent, but Roger persisted in his 
opposition. Not even the excommunication launched against 
him by the Tenth General Council, which met at the Lateran 
in 1139, principally with a view of putting an end to the 
schism, could bring him to submit. The war which was de- 
clared against him issued favourably to him, and Innocent 
was soon a prisoner in his hands. Only when the latter con- 
sented to remove the excommunication and acknowledge 
Roger as king was peace obtained. 

Scarcely was the schism at an end than a new 
difficulty arose. Innocent having refused to allow the 
Romans to destroy Tivoli, they retorted by withdrawing 
their allegiance, and proclaimed a Republic (1143). The 
new government continued to rule after Innocent's death, 
his first two successors reigning too short a time to be 
able to bring about a reversion to the old order of things, 
especially as the German king Conrad III (1138-52) could 
not be prevailed on to cross the Alps. Celestine II died 
five months, Lucius II eleven months, after election, the 
latter from a wound received in a conflict with the rebellious 
Romans. Even the pontificate of Eugene III (1145-53), a 




Barbarossa 319 

pupil of St. Bernard's, was troubled by disturbances at home. 
In spite of a compromise with the Republic having been twice 
arrived at, the Pope had to spend most of his time away from 
Rome. He finally secured a promise of help against the 
Romans from Conrad's successor by the treaty of Constance 
(1153). Eugene, however, did not live to see the promise 
fulfilled, nor, in fact, did his successor, Anastasius IV, who 
reigned for only a year and a half. The promise was, indeed, 
never carried out at all fully, owing to the outbreak of a 
w conflict between Empire and Papacy. 

§ 111 

The Schism of Barbarossa — Eleventh General Council, 1179 l — 
Thomas Becket and Henry II of England 

In the course of the last century the Papacy, which on the 
next election came into the possession of an Englishman, 
Nicholas Breakspear, or Adrian IV (1154-59), had decidedly 
had the upper hand over the secular power. With Frederick 
I Barbarossa (1152-90), a nephew of Conrad III, the German 
throne came into the power of a man whose ideal was Charles 
the Great, and who, being deeply conscious of his authority 
and independence, was not prepared to brook any interference 
with his absolute supremacy. As one side was hopeful of 
reverting to ancient usage, whereas the other was equally 
determined to maintain its newly acquired rights, a conflict 
could not be far off. The difference between their views and 
interests became apparent on the king's first visit to Rome 
(1154-55). At his first meeting with the Pope, Frederick 
refused to hold the stirrup, and was a little later much dis- 
pleased with a picture exhibited in Rome, in which Lothar, 
owing to his having received Mathilda's properties in fief 
from the Pope, was described as homo faftae {i.e. as one owing 
homage to the Pope). Explanations were, however, forth- 
coming, and Frederick received the imperial crown. But a 
more serious conflict was now in preparation. Adrian having 

1 Otton. Fris. Gesta Friderici, ed. Wilmans, 1867 ; MG. SS. 20 ; Raumer, 
Gesch. d. Hohenstaufen, 6 vol. 4th ed. 1871-72 ; O. J. Tatcher, Studies cone. 
Adrian IV, 1903 ; H. Reuter, Gesch. Alexanders III u. d. K. s. Zeit, 3 vol. 
2nd ed. 1860-64 ; H. Prutz, K. Friedrich I, 3 vol. 1871-74 ; J. Ficker, 
Rainald v. Dassel, 1850; Peters, Zur Gesch. des Friedens von Venedig, 1879« 



320 A Manual of Church History 

in 1 156 come to an agreement with King William of Sicily, 
without beforehand taking Frederick into his confidence, the 
latter complained that the treaty of Constance had been 
violated. Adrian also was vexed with the emperor on account 
of his delay in releasing Eskill, the archbishop of Lund, who 
had been captured by German knights at Diedenhofen. In 
the brief in which the Pope brought this matter to the emperor's 
notice, he spoke of the ' conferring ' of the imperial crown, 
and of further ' beneficia ' to be bestowed, which seemed to 
imply that the imperial crown was a fief of the Holy See. 
The Pope's supposed arrogance caused a violent scene at a 
parliament assembled at Besancon in 1157, when, to make 
matters worse, Roland, the papal legate, supported the very 
meaning which gave offence to the German nobility. Accord- 
ing to a letter to Hillin, archbishop of Treves, which is, however, 
not genuine, Barbarossa was so angry as to have meditated the 
foundation of a national Church independent of Rome. 1 Calm 
was restored by Adrian himself giving a satisfactory explana- 
tion of his previous brief. Nevertheless, on the emperor's 
second visit to Italy (1158-62), the rights of the two powers 
again came into conflict, and the peril was increased by the 
death of Adrian. 

The college of cardinals did not remain aloof from the 
quarrel. Whilst the majority were in favour of open war, and 
chose the chancellor Roland as Alexander III (1 159-81), the 
minority who were in favour of compromise elected one of 
their own, Cardinal Octavian, as Victor IV. The rights were 
clearly on the side of the former, but the fact of a double 
election having occurred gave the emperor a pretext for 
interference, and he accordingly, in his character of protector 
of the Church, summoned a Council to meet at Pavia in 1160, 
and decide between the rival claimants. This Council gave 
judgment in favour of Victor, and deposed Alexander with an 
anathema. This decision was, however, followed only where 
the emperor's power extended, and even within the Empire 
it met with opposition, its principal opponent in Germany 
being Eberhard, archbishop of Salzburg. Outside of the Empire 
it was almost universally ignored, and not without reason, 

1 Cp. Hefele, V, 545-59. It is probable that the letters here recorded on 
p. 565 f. are also spurious. Cp. Th. Qu. 1893, p. 524 f. 



Barbarossa 321 

the emperor's dislike of the Pope first elected being notorious. 
At the Council of Toulouse in the autumn of 1160, the kings 
of France and England declared for Alexander, and Spain, 
Hungary, Ireland, and Norway soon followed suit. The result 
was a schism. Lewis VII, indeed, showed some indecision in 
1 162, but the conference between the king and emperor (which 
took place on the bridge over the Saone, near St. Jean de Losne, 
between Dijon and Dole on the frontier of the Empire and 
France) , though it was intended to gain him to the cause of the 
anti-Pope, served rather to confirm him in his obedience to 
Alexander, who now took up his abode in France (1162-65). 
In the meantime, Henry II of England, who had supported 
Alexander for political reasons, being now at variance with 
Thomas Becket, to spite him and his master attended the 
diet held at Würzburg in 11 65, at which the emperor, 
the German bishops and nobility solemnly renounced all 
allegiance to the ' schismatic Roland/ and thence sent envoys 
to tender his obedience to Paschal III (1164-68), who had by 
this time succeeded Victor. But this stroke of Henry's was 
little more than a rude piece of diplomacy, seeing that the 
English bishops, one and all, refused to have any dealings with 
the schismatical Pope. Nor was the cause of the anti-Pope 
safe even in Italy, his headquarters. The Lombard cities, now 
that their liberties were endangered, had proclaimed war 
against Frederick and were beginning to transfer their allegiance 
to Alexander, so much so that the latter was able to return to 
Rome in the autumn of 1165. The city was, indeed, again 
taken by Frederick on his fourth Italian expedition in 1167 ; 
Alexander, abandoned by the Romans, had to flee, disguised 
as a pilgrim, to Benevento, and the emperor, together with his 
consort Beatrix, was again crowned at St. Peter's (August 1). 
But the tide of fortune soon turned. On the very day of the 
coronation a pestilence broke out in the imperial army, and 
caused such havoc that the emperor's power was broken. Even 
his hurried flight from the city did not save his army, the aveng- 
ing angel following it on its retreat. Among those who fell 
victims to the malady was Rainald of Dassel, archbishop of 
Cologne and chancellor of the Empire, to whose advice 
Frederick's policy was mainly due. This misfortune put new 
courage into the emperor's enemies, who in the meantime had 

VOL. I. Y 



322 A Manual of Church History 

greatly increased in numbers. The League of Verona, into 
which several cities of Higher Italy had entered in 1164, was 
now transformed into the Lombard League, and between 
Tortona and Asti a new stronghold was erected, called after 
the Pope Alessandria. Frederick was even now unwilling to 
admit his defeat, and on the death of Paschal he granted the 
requisite ratification of the election of John, abbot of Struma, 
or Calixtus III, the third of the anti- Popes. Soon after this 
Frederick was, however, compelled to resume negotiations with 
Alexander, and on his fifth Italian expedition (1174-78), finding 
himself confronted by overwhelming odds, failing in spite of all 
his efforts to take Alessandria, and finally suffering a disastrous 
defeat at Legnano (1 176), the only course left him was to acknow- 
ledge Alexander III, peace being concluded at Venice in 1177. 

Calixtus III made his submission in 1178, and in the 
following year an oecumenical Council was summoned to the 
Lateran to solemnly confirm the peace. To prevent a recur- 
rence of what had happened in 115 9 it was here enacted (c. 1, 
Licet de vitanda) that in the case where the cardinals' choice 
should fail to be unanimous, he should be considered Pope who 
obtained two-thirds majority. That same year the election 
of yet a fourth anti-Pope (Innocent III) again gave rise to diffi- 
culties, but as the schismatic was soon compelled (1180) to lay 
down his assumed dignity, Alexander lived to see the unity 
of the Church again fully established. He was, however, less 
successful in upholding the temporal power. Soon after the 
Council he had to turn his back on his unruly capital, and 
died shortly after at Civita Castellana, his victory over 
Barbarossa giving him the claim to be considered one of the 
greatest of the mediaeval Popes. 

As the troubles at Rome continued after the death of 
Alexander III, his successors also were obliged to keep away 
from the city. Lucius III (1181-85) stayed at Rome only a 
very short time. Urban III (1185-87) spent his whole pontifi- 
cate in foreign lands, and the same is true of Gregory VIII, 
who, however, only reigned two months. Clement III (1 187-91) 
was again able to take up his residence at Rome. There still 
remained some differences of opinion between the Empire and 
the Papacy. 1 According to the peace of Venice the dispute 

1 Scheffer-Boichorst, K. Friedrichs I letzter Streit mit der Kurie, 1866. 



Barbarossa 323 

concerning the properties of Countess Mathilda was to be 
settled by arbitration. This settlement could, however, not 
be arrived at, and a new difficulty soon cropped up in a double 
election (Rudolf and Folmar) to the archbishopric of Treves 
(1183), Pope and emperor taking different sides; lastly, 
great annoyance was caused at the Roman Curia by the 
marriage of the emperor's son and heir, Henry VI, to Constance, 
the aunt and heir-presumptive of William II of Naples and 
Sicily, this union causing the papal states to be surrounded 
on all sides by the Empire. Frederick's request that his son 
should be crowned emperor during his own lifetime was 
declined by Rome, and Urban even summoned Frederick 
to appear at his court and answer for his action. But as the 
German episcopate stood firm on their ruler's side, the Pope 
had at last to give way in the matter of the bishopric of Treves. 
His successors proved more favourably disposed to Frederick, 
and Clement even promised the crown to Henry, the change of 
policy being accounted for not only by the milder character 
of these two Popes, but also by the bad news brought home 
from Palestine. 

Henry was ultimately crowned only after his father's death, 
the ceremony being performed by Celestine III (1 191-98). It 
was followed by a new quarrel. To secure his right to the 
throne of Naples and Sicily, which on the death of William had 
been usurped by Tancred, count of Lecce, Constance's half- 
brother (1191), Henry VI (1190-97) l hurried from Rome to 
Lower Italy. 

After the death of the new king (1194) he succeeded in 
obtaining possession of his consort's heritage. This action 
was, however, all the more distasteful to Rome in that it had 
been accompanied by much needless cruelty. The emperor 
also gave offence by keeping in prison (till 11 94) Richard 
Lionheart, who had been apprehended on the return journey 
from the Holy Land by Duke Leopold of Austria. Neverthe- 
less, by the zeal which he showed in promoting the cause of 
the crusades, Henry ultimately disarmed suspicion, and died 
at peace with the Pope, who in his turn soon followed him to the 
grave. 

1 /. d. d. Gesch. : Toeche, K. Heinrich VI, 1867; J. Caro, Die Beziehungen 
Heinrichs VI zur röm Kurie, 1902. 

Y 2 



324 A Manual of Church History 

We must now retraoi our steps a little. Whilst the quarrel 
between Alexander and the Empire was still in progress, 
England was distracted by a different matter. 1 The com- 
parative mildness of the ecclesiastical courts, being favourable 
to clerical laxity, furnished Henry II (1154-89) with a pretext 
for restricting the Privilegium fori, thus bringing clerics to some 
extent under the secular jurisdiction, and at the parliament 
of Westminster in 1163 a law was passed that a representa- 
tive of the king should in future sit among the ecclesiastical 
judges. The king, however, now went farther. What he 
wanted was a formal recognition of all the rights to interference 
in church matters which English sovereigns had claimed in the 
past. His wish was granted by the parliament of Clarendon 
(1164). The consuetudines avitae, which had been recognised bv 
the bishops at the Westminster parliament, only with the saving 
clause salvo ordine nostro, were now accepted without demur 
and codified in sixteen articles. The primate, Thomas 
Becket (1162-70), consented indeed only after some hesitation, 
and, on the Pope condemning ten of the sixteen articles, he 
withdrew the consent he had given. The sovereign was so 
incensed at this action that Thomas found it advisable to 
retire to France. On returning home six years later, an 
angry exclamation of the king brought about the murder of 
the archbishop at the hands of four English knights (December 
29). He died for the cause for which he had fought, and his 
martyrdom was not in vain, though it produced no immediate 
alteration in Henry's policy. At his reconciliation in 1172 
the king expressly revoked only that article of Clarendon 
which forbade appeal to the Holy See (art. 8). The other part 
of his promise, viz. not to consider as binding the new customs 
which had been introduced against the Church during his 
reign, is ambiguous, and could perfectly well be understood 
by the king in his own favour. At any rate, his being com- 
pelled two years later, by difficulties of state, to undertake a 
pilgrimage to his opponent's tomb, implied a victory of the 
Church at his expense. 

1 Robertson, Becket, archb. of Cant. 1859 ; Materials for the Hist, of 
Thomas B. 7 vol. 1875-86 (Rer. Brit. med. aevi script. LXVII). Mg. on 
Thomas by Morris, 2nd ed. 1885 ; L'Huillier, 2 vol. 1891-92 ; Radford, 
1894 » R « A « Thompson, 1889. 



Innocent III 325 

§112 
Innocent III— Twelfth General Council, 1215 J 

Whilst the death of Henry VI threw the Empire into 
confusion and involved it in civil war, owing to the double 
election which followed it — one part of the princes choosing 
duke Philip of Swabia, and the remainder the Weif .Otto of 
Brunswick — the Papacy was entering on the most glorious 
epoch of its history. Although only thirty-seven years of age 
at his election, Innocent III (1198-1216) — formerly cardinal 
Lothar of Segni — proved himself wholly worthy of his high 
position. Indeed, judging by tangible results, his pontificate 
must be reckoned the most memorable of all. 

Convinced that the temporal independence of the Roman 
Church was a necessary condition of her ecclesiastical freedom, 
his main efforts were directed to the restoration of the papal 
power at Rome and throughout the papal states, of which 
the Exarchate and the Pentapolis, now known as the 
Romagna and the march of Ancona, had, since the twelfth 
century, been almost entirely annexed to the Empire. Inno- 
cent's aim was to regain the lost provinces, and if possible to 
extend the Church's temporal sway yet farther. The city 
prefect, who ruled in the name of the emperor, and the senator 
who governed in that of the Roman people, were compelled to 
do homage to the Pope. Innocent also obtained possession 
not only of the march of Ancona, but also of the duchy of 
Spoleto, and his right thereto being acknowledged by suc- 
ceeding emperors, these territories henceforth form part of 
the papal states. In the meantime Innocent's attention was 
drawn to Lower Italy. By a brief he invested Constance and 
her son with the kingdom of the two Sicilies, and settled the 
church affairs of those regions. On the death of the empress 
(1198) he assumed the government on behalf of her young son 
Frederick II. Finally, he intervened in the German struggle, 
and, when all hope of compromise had passed away, declared 
for Otto IV (1201). In this instance his intervention was, 

1 Innocentii III Epist. libb. XVI ; P.L. 214-17; F. Hurter, Gesch. P. 
Innocenz III u. seiner Zeitgenossen, 4 vol. 1833-42 (I, 3rd ed. 1841 ; II-TV, 
2nd ed. 1842-44) ; Rohrbacher-Werner, vol. XVIII ; Luchaire, 
Innocent III, 1904. Jahrb. d. d. Gesch. : E. Winkelmann, Philipp v . Schwaben 
u. Otto v. Braunschweig, 2 vol. 1873-78, 



326 A Manual of Church History 

however, miscalculated, as Philip continued to hold his own 
in spite of his rejection, and was on the point of success when 
he fell by the hand of an assassin (1208) . The Welf also proved 
himself utterly unworthy of the confidence reposed in him by 
the Pope. In the spring of 1209, after having been generally 
recognised by the German princes, he indeed repeated his 
promises to the Church to renounce the regalia, i.e. not 
to appropriate the revenues of a Church office during its 
vacancy, and also to forego the right which had been recently 
usurped of seizing at death all the personal estate of the 
prelates. But after his coronation, which took place in the 
autumn of the same year, he cast all his promises to the winds 
under the pretext that he was bound to safeguard the rights 
of the Empire, utterly disregarding the protests of the Pope. 
In 1210 he was put under the ban ; the following year many of 
his princes discovered in his excommunication a reason for 
severing their connection with him ; finally, in 1214, his power 
was broken at the battle of Bouvines, and the road to the 
throne was opened to the St auf en prince Frederick II, the son 
of Henry VI. 

Important events were also being enacted in England. 1 
Occasion for a quarrel was afforded by a double election to the 
see of Canterbury (1205), and King John, nicknamed Lackland 
(1199-1216), having refused to acquiesce in the election of 
cardinal Stephen Langton, the third candidate put forward by 
the Pope, the country was laid under an interdict (1208). 
As John vented his displeasure at the measure by cruelly 
vexing the Churches and clergy, he was excommunicated in 
1209, and finally deposed in 1212. France was directed to 
execute the sentence, but at the last moment, when the armies 
were already prepared for battle, John gave in, being no longer 
able to count on the support of his people (1213). At his 
submission he not merely allowed archbishop Stephen Langton 
and all the other exiles, clerical and lay, toi return to England, 
promising them compensation for the wrong they had suffered, 
but, to ensure the Pope's support, he also promised by an 
annual tax of 1,000 marks to become a vassal and feudatory of 
the Holy See. By these means he was spared the humiliation 

1 Lappenberg-Pauli, Gesch. v. England, III (1853), 318-505. (Lappen- 
berg, Engl. Trans. History of England, 1845.) 



Innocent III 327 

of an invasion. It was now the turn of the bishops and 
barons to protect their rights against the arbitrariness of the 
king, the former in particular having to defend the freedom of 
the episcopal elections ; their united efforts dragged from the 
sovereign his signature to the Magna Charta (12 15). The 
signing, however, led to new troubles. The Pope having con- 
demned the charter, the king sought with his help to withdraw 
the promises he had made therein. The malcontents thereupon 
called on the help of the dauphin of France, Lewis VIII, to 
whom they offered the crown. Only on the death of John and 
the subsequent ratification of the Magna Charta by his son, 
Henry III, was it found possible to re-establish peace within 
the realm. 

England was not the first country to be proclaimed feuda- 
tory to the Pope, for Peter II of Aragon had done the same 
for his kingdom in 1204. His object had been to induce 
Innocent, of whose conspicuous honesty he was not aware, 
to grant him a divorce. Innocent had also to maintain 
the sanctity of the marriage tie against Alfonso IX of Leon 
and Philip Augustus of France. 1 The latter had put away his 
wife, the Danish princess Ingeburga, soon after the wedding 
(1193) and contracted a second union with Agnes of Meran 
(1196). The king was excommunicated and his country placed 
under an interdict (1200), and he was finally forced to promise 
to receive again his lawful consort (1201). The promise was, 
however, only performed after the death of Agnes, and after 
the king had made attempt after attempt to have his marriage 
nullified (12 13). 

The East also occupied Innocent's attention, and his efforts 
here secured a result of great importance, though not indeed 
that which had been awaited : a Latin Empire was founded at 
Constantinople. Cp. § 116, IV. 

A fitting end to a successful pontificate was the General 
Council which Innocent assembled at the Lateran in 1215. It 
busied itself mainly about the Albigensian heresy, the question 
of the Holy Land, and the restoration of church discipline. 

1 R. Davidsohn, Philipp II August v. Fr. u. Ingeborg, 1888, 



328 A Manual of Church History 

§ 113 

The Papacy under the Last Members of the Staufen House — 
Thirteenth General Council, 1245 l 

Cardinal Cencio Savelli, under the name of Honorius III 
(1216-27), was appointed successor to Innocent III. It is 
owing to the fact that he was a man of quite unusual gentleness 
that the relations of Church and State were in the main 
peaceable so long as he reigned. He made no complaint when 
Frederick II settled on his son Henry both the Sicilian and 
the German crown — in spite of the promise made to Innocent 

III that these two crowns should never be conferred on a 
single ruler — and Frederick was, in due course, crowned 
at Rome in 1220. The Pope also consented to accept the 
excuses of the emperor for the constant postponement of the 
promised crusade, and though at the conference of San Germano 
(1225) he showed a disposition to have recourse to stern 
measures, he was called away by death before he had time to 
put any such plan into execution. 

Of an entirely different stamp was Gregory IX (1227-41), 3 
formerly cardinal Ugolino, a nephew of Innocent III, whom, 
in spite of his already advanced age, he greatly resembled 
in determination and force of character. As Frederick still 
delayed the carrying out of his vow, the new Pope put him 
under the ban, and when the emperor, assisted by a revolt 
of the Romans, retorted by seizing that portion of the papal 
states which was reckoned an imperial fief, the Pope allied 
himself to the Lombards and invaded Apulia. The papal 
forces crossed the Volturno, but were repulsed by Frederick 
on his return from Palestine, the success of his arms being 
probably accountable for Gregory's willingness to patch up a 
peace at San Germano in 1230. 

For a few years the Church was not disturbed. The emperor 

1 Huillard-Breholles, Hist, diplom. Friderici II, 6 vol. 1852-61 ; 
Höfler, K. Friedrich II, 1844 ; J. Clausen, Honorius III, 1895. /. d. d. 
Gesch.: E. Winkelmann, K. Friedrich, 2 vol. 1889-97. Rodenberg, Innocenz 

IV u. das Königreich Sizilien (1245-54), 1892 ; E. Berger, St. Louis et 
Innocent IV, 1893 ; Ratzinger, Forsch, zur Bayrischen Gesch. 1898, pp. 
1-321; Rohrbacher-Wurm, KG. vol. XIX (1227-70), 1898; Hist. Z. 83 
(1899), pp. 1-42 {Friedrich II). 

2 J. Felten, Gregor IX, 1886. 



Frederick II and the Papacy 329 

was busy establishing order at home. After having crushed the 
rebellion stirred up by his son Henry (1235), he declared war 
on his allies, the Lombards, and won the battle of Cortenuova. 
But the Lombards were as yet only partly subdued, and though 
willing to accept peace cheaply, they preferred war to the 
unconditional surrender demanded by Frederick ; they, more- 
over, found an ally in the Pope. The tyrant, who of late had 
frequently abused his rights, not sparing even the Church, for 
instance by appointing by his own authority his natural son 
Enzio to the throne of Sardinia, though the island was a papal 
fief, was now again excommunicated. To a man of the em- 
peror's stamp, such a measure at such a moment meant 
nothing less than a declaration of war. It is possible that 
Gregory wished thereby to reclaim the emperor, but he only 
succeeded in impelling him farther on the path on which 
he had entered, and the struggle which now began, and which 
far exceeded in violence and bitterness that which had occurred 
under Barbarossa, was not to end till the fall of the Staufen 
dynasty. Both sides brought charges against each other, 
1 the emperor being accused of having spoken of Moses, Christ, 
and Mohammed as the three great impostors, a charge which, 
though it cannot be established, agrees with what we know 
of Frederick's character. 1 Words soon made room for 
blows, and Frederick broke into the papal states ; Gregory 
retorted by stirring up the Venetians to attack Apulia, and at 
the same time, by means of his legate Albert of Beham, arch- 
deacon of Passau, sought to put up in Germany a pretender 
to the crown. A little later (1241), when the Pope was desirous 
of gathering together a General Council which might decide on 
the questions at issue, the emperor prevented the carrying 
out of the plan. The French bishops on their way to Rome 
to attend it were taken prisoners near Elba, and the war was 
pursued. Frederick was already outside the gates of Rome 
with his army, when Gregory was summoned from this world 
(August 22, 1241). 

His death caused an interval of peace, which was further 
protracted owing to the seventeen-day pontificate of Celes tine 

1 Cp. Reuter, Gesch. der relig. Aufklärung im MA. II, 275 ff. The cvork 
entitled De tribus impostoribus belongs probably to the end of the seventeenth 
century. 



330 A Manual of Church History 

IV being followed by a vacancy of twenty months. After 
the election of cardinal Sinibaldo Fiesco as Innocent IV 
(1243-54) * it even seemed that a reconciliation was nigh ; 
at any rate a treaty of peace was drawn up (1244). But the 
end of the war was as yet far off. Either side was suspicious of 
the other, and active hostilities were recommenced when Inno- 
cent, fearing a trap, answered the emperor's invitation to attend 
a conference by a hurried flight to Lyons, where he was to 
remain six years. In a diplomatic note the emperor charged 
the Pope with a violation of the peace, whilst the latter issued 
briefs to all kings, princes, and bishops summoning a General 
Council to meet at Lyons in 1245, which among other matters 
was to try the cause pending between Pope and emperor. 
The charges against the latter comprised perjury, sacrilege, 
suspicion of heresy, and many acts of injustice committed in 
the kingdom of Sicily. The decision of the Council was that 
the emperor should be deprived of his dignity and that obedi- 
ence to him should be forbidden under penalty of the ban ; 
Germany was to choose a new king, and the Sicilian question 
was to be left to the Pope's own judgment. 

The decision made but little difference in the state of 
affairs. As was to be expected, the emperor refused to submit, 
and declared that the Pope by deposing him had exceeded 
his rights ; before this, his chancellor, Thaddaeus of Suessa, 
who had represented him at the Council, had rejected the 
judgment, and appealed to the future Pope and to a really 
CEcumenical Council. Hence the conflict proceeded, though 
everywhere it was deplored, especially as just then Constanti- 
nople and Palestine were both in sore need of help. Lewis 
IX of France repeatedly offered his mediation, but in vain, 
for the die was now cast. To enlist new soldiers, the war against 
the emperor was assimilated to the war against the infidel, 
and everywhere a crusade was preached against Frederick. A 
portion of the German electorate, in obedience to the Pope's 
instructions, chose as their new king the landgrave Henry 
Raspe of Thuringia (1246), and on his death, Count William 
of Holland (1247-56). Frederick on his side strained every 
nerve to maintain his position, his enemies suffering cruelly 

1 A. Folz, K. Friedrich II u. P. Innocenz IV, 1244-45, 1905 ; Unters, z. 
aesch. des 1 Konzils v. Lyon, 1905. 



The Last of the Staufens 331 

at his hands. On his death at Fiorintino in Apulia (1250) — ■ 
before which he had received absolution from the archbishop of 
Palermo — his son and heir, Conrad (1250-54), continued the 
war, which now became confined to Italy. Even the death 
of the Pope and of the two kings made no alteration. The 
negotiations opened by Alexander IV (1254-61) with Frederick's 
natural son Manfred, who had assumed the regentship on behalf 
of Conrad's youthful son Conradin, were fruitless, and the 
war in Italy proceeded apace. In Germany an election — 
being the first in which the seven prince-electors appear as a 
body, on which alone the choice of the king depends — resulted 
in a division, one party choosing Richard of Cornwall and the 
other Alfonso of Castile ; but as the latter never went near 
his new kingdom, whilst the former only tarried in it a short 
time, the only consequence of the election was an interregnum. 
In the meantime Manfred was fighting with such success 
that in 1258 he was offered the crown by the Sicilian grandees ; 
little by little he subdued nearly the whole of the Italian 
peninsula. It was only when Urban IV (1261-64) l , after 
having vainly offered the Sicilian crown to several other 
princes, promised it to Charles of Anjou, that Manfred met one 
who was more than his match. Under Clement IV (1265-68) 2 
the contest was brought to its close. At Benevento (1266) 
Manfred lost the day, and the battle of Scurcola (1268) was 
equally unfortunate to the cause of his nephew, who had hur- 
ried from Germany on his uncle's death to secure possession 
of the Staufen crown. Conradin was taken and executed at 
Naples. He was the last of the Hohenstaufen family, which 
had indeed added to the prestige of the Empire, but which, 
by exceeding its rights, was in a sense responsible for its own 
downfall. 

1 K. Hampe, Urban IV u. Manfred (1261-64), 1905 ; Gesch. Konradins 
v. Hohenstaufen, 1894. 

2 J. Heidemann, P. Klemens IV t I, 1903. 



Ä 






tj f 8T. MICHAEL' 
^V OOLLEGE 



332 



A Manual of Church History 



§ 114 

The Last Popes of the Thirteenth Century — Reunion with the 
Easterns — Fourteenth General Council, 1274 l 

By the expulsion of the Staufen princes from the two 
Sicilies, the Pope had rid himself of the near presence of an 
enemy, but by bestowing the crown on Charles of Anjou he 
had brought a new and even more formidable rival into the field. 
The Frenchman who now occupied the Neapolitan throne 
soon gained a party in the sacred College, whose power became 
visible on the death of Clement IV. In consequence of the 
difference of opinion between the cardinals it was nearly 
three years before a new head could be given to the Church in 
Gregory X (1271-76), formerly Theobald Visconti, a native of 
Piacenza and archdeacon of Liege. 

Next to the Holy Land, it was Constantinople which gave 
the most concern to this Pope. The city had again fallen into 
the hands of the Greeks in 1261, and Michael Palaeologus, its 
conqueror, now submitted a plan of reunion with the 
Holy See (1263) 2 which might avert a new attack from the 
West. The negotiations were carried on with extreme difficulty 
owing to the aversion of the Greeks for the Latins, which recent 
events had changed into positive hatred. In spite of this the 
Greek emperor succeeded in overcoming the opposition of the 
clergy, and the union was cemented at the General Council 
which Gregory called together directly after his consecration, 
and which was held at Lyons (Lugdunensis II) in 1274. The 
Greeks acknowledged the Filioque, the papal primacy, and the 
right of appeal to Rome. Practical effect was immediately 
given to the decree, and the union lasted for several years, under, 
Gregory's successors, Innocent V, Adrian V, and John XXI 
(1276-77). But as it was merely a political measure it had no 
real life, and was bound to be dissolved as soon as a change 

1 H. Finke, Konzilienstudien z. Gesch. <2. 13 Jahrh. 1891 ; A. Zisterer, 
Gregor X u. Rudolf v. Habsburg, 1891 ; Th. Lindner, Deutsche Gesch. unter 
den Habsburgern u. Luxemburgern (1273-1437), 2 vol. 1890-93 ; Walter, 
Politik der Kurie unter Gregor X, 1894 ; O. Redlich, Rudolf v. Habsburg, 
1903. 

2 Z. f. w. Th. 1891, pp. 325-55 ; W. Norden, Das Papsttum u. Byzanz 
(1054-1453), 1903 ; F. X. Seppelt, item, 1904, in the Kircheng. Abh. ed. by 
Sdralek, II, 



Last Popes of the Thirteenth Century 333 

occurred in the factors. Nicholas III (1277-80), l to the great 
disappointment of the emperor, put new obligations on the 
Greeks. They were now enjoined not only to acknowledge 
the Filioque as they had done at the Council of Lyons, but 
also to incorporate it in their Creed. Martin IV (1281-85), soon 
after entering on his pontificate, even put the emperor under 
the ban as a ' patron of schism and heresy/ having apparently 
been led to surmise that his previous advances had been made 
in bad faith, and no doubt being urged to the step by Charles of 
Anjou, who was just then fitting out an expedition against the 
Greeks. Michael Palaeologus accordingly struck out the Pope's 
name from the diptychs, and his son Andronicus on succeeding 
him (1282) formally re-established the schism. The patriarch 
John Veccus, who was favourable to reunion, was forced to 
yield his place to the irreconcilable Joseph, who had been 
deposed after the Council of Lyons. Nor was there any longer 
a political reason against the consummation of the breach, the 
Greek arms having just proved victorious at Belgrad over the 
Neapolitan forces. 

Even before the reunion of the Greeks had been decided on, 
an occupant had been found in Rudolf of Habsburg (1273-91) 
for the imperial throne of the West. The Empire, however, 
was not again to reach its former splendour ; Rudolf never 
received the crown ; it was indeed offered to him by Gregory X, 
but the latter died before his intention could be carried 
out. Differences afterwards arising hindered its bestowal by 
his successors. Nicholas III demanded the cession to the 
Church of the Romagna, and after much wrangling the country 
was, with the consent of the princes, actually made over to him 
(1278), the papal states being thereby materially enlarged. 
In exchange for this, the Pope handed over to the king the 
Tuscan vicariate, which, during the interregnum, had been 
governed by Charles of Anjou ; he also deprived the latter of 
his office of senator, which he had held for ten years ; by such 
means the Pope doubtless hoped to restrain within due bounds 
the ambitions of the king of Naples. The next Pope being a 
Frenchman reversed his predecessor's policy, and restored to 

1 A. Demski, P. Nikolaus III, 1903 ; Rudolf v. H. u. d. rörn. Kaiserkrone 
unter Nikolaus III, 1906 ; R. Sternfeld, Kard. Johann Gaetan Orsini 
(P. Nikolaus III), 1905. 



334 A Manual of Church History 

Charles the senatorial dignity ; about this time, however, a 
large portion of the latter's realm was withdrawn from his 
authority. The revolution in Sicily, which began with the 
Sicilian Vespers at Palermo on the Monday after Easter, 1282, 
brought the sovereignty of the island into the hands of Peter 
of Aragon, to whom Conradin, when at the point of death, had 
bequeathed his rights over Apulia and Sicily. Pope Martin 
fruitlessly endeavoured, by excommunication and interdict, to 
bring the island again under the authority of the House of Anjou, 
nor were the protests of his successor, Honorius IV (1285-87), l 
one whit more successful. The House of Aragon retained its 
supremacy over the island, and a century and a half later 
came into possession of Naples also, i.e. of the other half of the 
kingdom of the Two Sicilies. 

It was under Nicholas IV (1288-92) 2 that the Westerns 
suffered the defeats which led to the end of their rule in Pales- 
tine. His reign was followed by a vacancy of some duration. 
The Second Council of Lyons, to obviate such delays, had indeed 
ordained (c. 3 in VI de elect. 1, 6) that the cardinals should 
proceed to the election in a single hall (unum conclave, whence 
the name of Conclave by which the institution came to be 
known), that all individual intercourse with the outer world 
should be prevented, and that if the deliberations were unduly 
protracted, the rations of the cardinals should be progressively 
diminished. This decree had, however, been abrogated by John 
XXI and Nicholas IV, and was consequently of no avail. It 
was more than two years before the choice could be made, and 
it resulted in the election of one who was indeed a pious and 
even holy man, but who was manifestly unfit to occupy the 
papal throne ; this was Peter the Hermit from the mountain 
of Murrone in Abruzzi, who took the name of Celestine V. 3 
Conscious of his own incapacity, he, after five months, re- 
nounced the tiara. In the meanwhile his residence had been 
at Naples ; the decree of Gregory X and of the Council of 
Lyons concerning papal elections was re-enacted during his 
pontificate. 

1 Pawlicki, P. Honorius IV, 1896. 

2 O. Schiff, Studien z. Gesch. P. Nikolaus IV, 1897. 

3 Mg. by H. Schulz, 1804; Celidonio, 1896. An. Boll. IX, 147-200; 
X, 385-92 ; XIV (1895), 223-25. Z.f. KG. (1897), 363-97 ; 477-507. 



Last Popes of the Thirteenth Century 335 

John XXI (mg. by R. Stapper, 1899), seeing that the last 
Pope of that name had been John XIX (1024-33), should really 
be John XX. He, however, assumed the number XXI, either 
because he believed in the existence of Pope Joan, the tale of 
whom had been invented in the meantime, or because John XIV 
(983-84) had been erroneously doubled, the statement that he spent 
four months in prison being made to refer to another Pope of the 
same name, a mistake which received credence during the thirteenth 
century. Calixtus II bears a name which is a mere conventional 
rendering of Callistus. Martin IV, who was really the second Pope 
of the name, is reckoned the fourth, the two Popes named Marinus 
being reckoned as his homonyms. 



CHAPTER II 

THE SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY AND CONFLICT WITH THE ISLAM 

§ 115 

Conversion of North-Eastern Europe — Missions to 

the East 

In the previous period Christianity had pushed forward 
even into Scandinavia ; it was now the turn of those of the 
Slavs who had persisted in their paganism, for the Finns and 
Lettish tribes, to follow the example of their neighbours ; with 
their entrance into the Church, the conversion of Europe was 
practically complete. 

I. Among the Wends better days dawned for Christianity 
as soon as Gottschalk's son Henry (1105) succeeded in re- 
establishing his father's kingdom. It did not, however, become 
supreme in the country until the nation was wholly subdued 
by the margrave Albert the Bear and duke Henry the Lion. 
Hartwig, archbishop of Bremen, now intervened, and again 
established the bishoprics which had been destroyed, appoint- 
ing St. Vicelin (1148), the best-known missioner of the time, 
to that of Oldenburg. At the same time steps were also taken 
to Germanise the country, German colonists being imported 
to people the districts which had been devastated by the many 
wars. 

II. The Pomeranians received the Gospel from Otto, 
bishop of Bamberg, 1 shortly after they had been compelled 
to acknowledge the sovereignty of duke Boleslav III of Poland 
(1121). % 

1 Ms^. by J. Looshorn, 1888; G. Juritsch, 1889; Z. f. KG. X, 1-53; 
Wiesener, Gesch. d. christl. K. in Pommern zur Wendenzeit, 1889; Sommerfeld, 
Germanisierung Pommerns , 1896. 



Missionary Enterprise 337 

Otto undertook on two occasions, and with great success, 
a missionary journey through the country (1124-28), and made 
a point of parading in great splendour so as to avoid the 
experience of the Spanish missioner Bernard, who had courted 
failure owing to his poverty-struck appearance. The first 
bishopric was instituted at Julin on the island of Wollin, but 
was soon after transferred to Camin (1188). Here, too, Saxon 
immigrants gradually Germanised the country. 

III. In the thirteenth century heathenism was gradually 
driven out of Prussia, 1 where previous efforts at evangelisation 
had been of no avail, having only resulted in the death of the 
missioners, as happened in the case of St. Adelbert (f 997). In 
the year 1209 Christian, a Cistercian, entered on his missionary 
labours among the Prussians, and though his preaching was 
not remarkably successful, it nevertheless paved the way for 
the full conversion of the nation. As his work was constantly 
foiled by the pagans, he called on the help of the Teutonic 
knights (1226), who, allied with the Brethren of the Sword 
(1237), fought so well that in 1283 the whole country was in 
their hands and the Gospel reigned supreme. Bishoprics 
were erected at Kulm, Pomesanien, Ermeland (1243), and 
Samland (1255). 

IV. Paganism was driven out of the island of Rügen in the 
year 1168, when it was annexed by King Waldemar I of Denmark, 
who forthwith introduced Christianity. 

V. The Livonians received as their first missioner (1186) 
Meinhard, an Augustinian canon, from the monastery of Siegeberg 
in Holstein. Christian merchants had already prepared the way 
for him, but, even so, the work of conversion was a slow one. 
The new converts repeatedly reverted to paganism, and the 
neighbouring tribes made frequent devastating raids. Albert of 
Buxhövden was more successful : in 1200 he founded the town of 
Riga, where he settled down as bishop ; he was also the founder 
of the Brethren of the Sword (1202-04), vv^ith whose help and the 
support of German crusaders he not only asserted his supre- 
macy in Livonia, but also compelled the natives of Esthland 
and Semgallen to accept the Gospel. In the case of Curland the 
inhabitants accepted Christianity of their own free choice (1230). 
Cp. E. Papst, Meinhard, Livlands Apostel, 1847-49 ; Kallmeyer, 

1 J. Voigt, Gesch. Preussens, vol. I-III, 1827 ü. ; Watterich, Gründung 
des Deutsch-Ordenstaates in Pr. 1857 ; H. G. Voigt, Missionsversuch Adelberts 
v. Prag in Preussen, 1901 ; J. Plinski, Probleme hist. Kritik in der Gesch t 
des ersten Preussenbischo/s, in Kircheug. Abh. ed. by Sdralek, I, 1902. 

tVOL. 1. z 



338 A Manual of Church History 

Gründung deutscher Herrschaß u. christl. Glaubens in Kurland, 
1859 > Bunge, Orden der Schwertbrüder, 1875. 

VI. The Lithuanians received in 1252 as their first bishop 
the Dominican Vitus, a year after their grand prince Mindove 
had been compelled by the Teutonic knights to submit to baptism. 
This prince, however, soon sank back into paganism, and the victory 
of the Gospel was delayed until, in 1386, king Jagello married 
queen Hedwig of Poland, received baptism, and at an assembly 
of the nation proclaimed Christianity the religion of the State. 

VII. A way was prepared for the entry of Christianity among 
the Lapps and Finns by the Swedish domination (1 153-1279), but 
it was some time before their conversion could be effected. Paganism 
was extirpated in Finland towards the end of the thirteenth century ; 
into Lapland the Faith was only introduced in 1335. 

VIII. In the far East the Nestorians, who had all along been 
noted for their missionary zeal, and who had worked even in China 
and India, met with one conspicuous success in the eleventh century. 
They converted the ruler of the Tartar tribe of the Keraites, who 
dwelt south of Lake Baikal, and the greater part of his people. 
This prince, who in his quality of vassal of the Chinese Empire 
bore the title of Owang Khan, became, after the destruction of 
his kingdom by Genghis Khan (1202), the hero (under the name 
of Prester John) of an extraordinary legend which found full 
credence in the West. Cp. G. Oppert, Der Presbyter Johannes 
in Sage u. Gesch. Abh. d. k. sächs. Ges. d. Wiss. Phil. -hist. Kl. 1877-78 ; 
V. Bartol'd, Zur Gesch. des Christentums in Mittelasien bis zur 
mongol. Eroberung, German by R. Stube, 1901. 

IX. The Mongol (or Tartar) invasions of the thirteenth century 
caused the Westerns to send missionaries to the East. Innocent IV 
dispatched Franciscans and Dominicans to effect their conversion 
(1245) ; a few years later missioners were also sent by St. Lewis. 
These missions had indeed no success, but after the two famous 
Venetians, Poli, more especially Marco Polo, had brought home 
trustworthy information concerning China, John of Montecorvino, a 
friar minor, journeyed thither and founded what soon became a 
flourishing mission (1291-1330). Churches were erected at Cambalu 
(Peking) and other localities. Clement V appointed the missioner 
archbishop of Cambalu, and sent him associates of his own order 
to help him in his work ; other Popes also interested themselves 
in this mission. With the overthrow of the Mongol supremacy 
by the Ming dynasty the work was, however, brought to a close 
(1368). KuLB, Gesch. d. Missionsreisen n. d. Mongolei während 
den 13 u. 14 Jahrh. 3 vol. i860 ; Hist.-pol. Bl. vol. 36-39, 45 ; 
Festschrift z. Jub. d. d. Campo santo in Rom, 1897, pp. 170-95. 

X. The crusades led many to conceive a hope of converting the 
Mohammedans. To this end, in 1219, Francis of Assisi visited 
the Sultan of Egypt and sent some of his disciples to Tunis and 
Morocco. Several Dominicans too offered their services for this 






The Crusades 339 

same work. Owing, however, to the Mohammedan law which 
punished apostasy with the death penalty, the missioners were 
compelled to restrict their attention to the Christians dwelling 
in the midst of the Moslems. 



§ 116 
The Crusades 1 

From quite early times Jerusalem had been an object of 
pilgrimage, nor did the fact of the conquest of Palestine by 
the caliph Omar in 637 wean the Faithful of their love for the 
Holy Land. Sad as it was to Christian hearts to see the 
Holy Places in the hands of the infidel, yet the consideration 
shown by the new rulers helped to render the situation tolerable. 
The conqueror did, indeed, convert a few churches into mosques, 
and impose a tax on the profession of Christianity, but, for 
the rest, the Christians were left entirely free. 

I. A change, 2 however, occurred when in the tenth century 
Egypt and Palestine came into the possession of the Fatimite 
dynasty. The Christians now began to be tyrannised to such 
an extent that Silvester II issued a call to Christendom to 
deliver the Holy Land. The oppression became even worse 
when Palestine was seized in 1073 by the Seljuks and in 1086 
by the Turkish chieftain Orthok. The plan of snatching the 
Holy Land from the hand of the infidel again became a matter of 
practical politics, and though the appeal of Gregory VII was un- 
successful owing to his conflict with Henry IV, that of Urban II 
at the Councils of Piacenza and Clermont (1095) fell on more 
willing ears. As from one mouth the orator at Clermont was 

1 Gesta Dei per Francos (ed. J. Bongars), 2 fol. 161 1 ; Recueil des historiens 
des Croisades ; Occidentaux, I-V, 1844-95 ; Orientaux, I-V, 1 872-1 906 ; 
Armeniens, I, 1869 ; Lois, I— IT, 1841-43. C. Köhler, Melanges pour servir 
ä Vhist. de VOrient latin et des croisades, I, 1900 ; F. Wilken, Gesch. d. Krzze. 
7 vol. 1807-32; J. Michaud, Hist, des Croisades, 6 vol. 4th ed. 1825-29 
(Engl. Trans. Hist, of the Crusades, 2nd ed. 1881); B. Kugler, Gesch. d. Kr. 
2nd ed. 1891 (Allg. Gesch. in Einzeldarstellungen, ed. by W. Oncken, II, 5) ; 
R. Röhricht, Gesch. d. Kr. 1898 ; E. Heyck, Die Krzze. u. das HI. Land, 

1900 ; Gottlob, Päpstl. Kreuz zugs steuern, 1891. Röhricht, Regesta Regni 
Hierosolymitani, 1 893-1904 ; Gesch. des Königr. Jerusalem, 1898. Schlee, 
Die Päpste u. die Kreuzzüge, 1893 ; Dodu, Hist, des institutions monarch, 
dans le royaume latin de Jerusalem, 1894. 

2 Sybel, Gesch. desersten Kreuzzuges, 1841 ; 2nd ed. 1881 (cp. Engl. Trans. 
History and Literature of the Crusades, last ed. 1905). R. Röhricht, item, 
1901. H. Hagenmeyer, Peter d. E. 1879; Kreuzzugsbriefe, 1088-1100, 

1901 ; Chronologie de la premiere croisade, 1902. 

z 2 



\ 



340 A Manual of Church History 

greeted with the cry, Deus to volt, the war-cry of the crusaders, 
and thousands forthwith stitched the cross on their coats as a 
sign of their resolution. A still larger number was soon 
assembled by a band of preachers, among whom the best known 
was Peter of Amiens, whom popular legend was afterwards to 
make into the real instigator of the crusades, though in reality 
his activity only begins at this juncture. Among most of those 
enrolled the religious motive was doubtless the predominant, 
though here and there, among both poor and wealthy, the hope 
of booty, fortune, or promotion was also a determining factor. 
Urban himself did all in his power to further the undertaking ; 
he bestowed on all the crusaders a plenary indulgence, gave 
them a general in the person of his legate, Adhemar, bishop of 
Puy, and, for the protection of their homes and relatives 
during their absence, proclaimed a truce of God for three years. 
The crusaders were mostly Frenchmen, though there were also 
numerous Normans from southern Italy, and natives of 
Lorraine. They were divided off according to their countries 
or provinces, and each group was under the immediate com- 
mand of one of their own nobles. 

The expedition was to start in the summer of 1096, and the 
various armies were to meet at Constantinople. Some, more 
eager than the rest, set out in the spring ; of these one band 
was destroyed in Hungary and Bulgaria owing to its want of 
discipline, whilst the rest were cut to pieces by the Saracens 
in the neighbourhood of Nicaea. The main army, having on 
its way to Constantinople to traverse countries nearly all of 
them hostile, had to sustain many battles, in which thousands 
of lives were lost. It succeeded, however, in reaching its 
goal. Edessa and Antioch became Western principalities, 
one being bestowed on Baldwin, count of Bouillon, and the 
other on prince Bohemund of Tarentum. In 1099 the crusaders 
at last took Jerusalem, and on the refusal of count Raymond 
of Toulouse to accept the sovereignty of the city, Godfrey of 
Bouillon, duke of Lorraine, became the first king of Jerusalem, 
being succeeded the following year by his brother Baldwin 
of Edessa. Simultaneously Latin patriarchates were estab- 
lished both here and at Antioch. 

The news of these events aroused new enthusiasm in the 
West. At the appeal of Pope Paschal II three huge armies 



The Crusades 341 

proceeded eastwards in 1101. It was their intention to 
effect the conquest of Bagdad, and thus to strike a blow 
at the very heart of the Saracen power. This too ambitious 
plan was, however, soon foiled, and the greater portion of the 
expedition perished in Asia Minor of hunger and the plague, 
and by the swords of the Turks, only a small fraction ever 
reaching Jerusalem. New reinforcements were nevertheless 
sent from Europe, and with their help the kings of Jerusalem, 
Baldwin I (1 100-18) and his nephew, Baldwin II (n 18-31), 
were enabled to strengthen and extend the new kingdom. 

But the tide of fortune soon turned. The abdication of 
Baldwin II marked the beginning of the decay of the crusaders' 
power. His successor Fulco (1 131-43), rhe husband of his 
daughter Melisenda, was indeed a strong ruler, but the diffi- 
culties of the position were daily increasing. On the one 
hand there stood the Greeks, who had all along claimed 
sovereignty over the conquered country which had once 
formed part of the Greek Empire ; on the other, the Saracens 
were a constant menace, whilst the Westerns, instead of 
showing a united front to their common enemies, spent their 
time in fighting among themselves. A number of the crusaders 
had been drawn eastwards, by motives other than the desire 
of defending the Holy Places, and among their children 
born in Palestine — the so-called Pullans — the selfish character 
became still more evident. This new development was all 
the more dangerous as the Westerns, instead of establishing 
one rule throughout the country, had divided it among several 
princes, who, most of them, were more concerned for their 
own advantage than for the common good. Under such 
circumstances it is not remarkable that the conquests were 
soon lost again. Within a year of Fulco's death, whilst 
Melisenda was acting as regent during the minority of her 
son Baldwin III, Edessa was reconquered by Zenki, sultan 
of Mosul (1144). 

II. The fall of Edessa caused great commotion in the West, 
and made it comparatively easy for Pope Eugene III, seconded 
as he was by the mighty word of Bernard of Clairvaux, whom 
he appointed to preach the crusade, to stir up the people to 
undertake a new expedition, now known as the second crusade. 
In 1 147 two armies departed for Palestine, under the command 



342 A Manual of Church History 

of Conrad III of Germany and Lewis VII of France. The 
results were, however, not commensurate with the preparations, 
and the greater portion of the soldiers were slain whilst yet 
on the way through the treachery of the Greeks and the 
onslaughts of the Turks. The attack on Damascus attempted 
in 1 148 also proved abortive, owing to the treachery of the 
Pullans. 

The misfortunes of the crusading armies were well cal- 
culated to put heart into the Saracens. Nureddin, who 
succeeded his father Zenki as ruler of Aleppo and Syria (1146), 
soon took advantage of the Christians' position. Baldwin III 
(1143-62) and his brother Amalric (1162-73) held out only 
with difficulty. The kingdom still had force enough to hold 
together for another decade, whilst the crown again came 
into the possession of a boy (Baldwin IV, 1173-84) and then 
of a mere child (Baldwin V, 1184-86), the successive regent- 
ships giving rise to all manner of dissensions. But no sooner 
had Guy of Lusignan, the husband of Sibylla the daughter 
of Baldwin III, been called to the throne, than the long- 
expected catastrophe occurred. The crusaders were now 
faced by the formidable Saladin, who had extended his 
sovereignty to Egypt (1171), had conquered the sultanate 
of Damascus (1176) and other territories, and to add to their 
troubles, count Raymond of Tripoli, embittered by Guy's 
elevation to the kingship, actually allied himself with the 
enemy. The great battle at Hattin, near Tiberias, was an 
utter defeat for the crusaders (1187), and was followed shortly 
after by the capitulation of Jerusalem and of most of the 
other towns. Only the intervention of the West prevented 
the expulsion of every Latin from the land. 

III. As soon as the dreadful news arrived in Europe, pre- 
parations were made throughout the continent for a third 
general crusade. 1 Three large armies, composed mainly of 
volunteers from Germany, France, and England, each detach- 
ment headed by its own monarch, departed for the East. 
This time again results did not reach expectations. The 
German, some 100,000 strong, set out in the spring of 1189, 
but mostly perished while yet in Asia Minor, those who were 
not slain by the Turks dying of hunger and fatigue. Even 

1 A. Cartellieri, Philipp II August, K. v. Frankreich, vol, II, 1906, 



The Crusades 343 

their leader, the emperor Frederick Barbarossa, met a pre- 
mature death whilst trying to swim the river Calycadnus in 
Cilicia (1190). Of the whole host only 2,000 found their way 
to Acre, where Christians and Saracens had assembled for the 
great trial of strength. The plague which was raging here 
reduced their number still further, and among the others 
who died here was duke Frederick of Swabia (n 91), who had 
assumed the generalship on his father's death. True enough, 
the French and English arrived soon after, and the town fell 
into the hands of the allies in the summer (1191) ; yet its 
reduction and the conquest of Cyprus, which the English 
had effected on the way, were the sole result of the expedition. 
Any further undertaking was prevented by the envy and 
jealousy of the kingly generals, of Guy of Jerusalem and 
Conrad of Montferrat, prince of Tyre, who claimed the 
kingdom of Palestine as his own. Philip Augustus returned 
home forthwith. Duke Leopold VI of Austria, whom the 
haughty king of England had grievously offended by wantonly 
insulting his standard, followed the example of his French 
colleague. Richard Lionheart, indeed, tarried in the Holy 
Land until he too, in the autumn of n 92, was called home 
by the insurrection of his brother John and the intrigues of 
the French king, but he achieved nothing of importance, his 
personal courage being more than matched by his impetuosity, 
inconstancy, and love of adventure. Before quitting Palestine 
he concluded a treaty with Saladin, by which the Christians 
were to retain possession of the coast from Jaffa to Tyre, 
whilst pilgrims were to be allowed free access to Jerusalem, 
and a truce was to be observed for three years. Beyond 
this nothing was obtained by the crusade, in spite of the 
scale on which it had been conceived. Nevertheless, as 
Saladin died in 1193, his kingdom falling to pieces with his 
death, it was found possible to preserve the status quo even 
after the truce had expired ; indeed, the German army, which 
was dispatched to Palestine by Henry VI in the winter of 
1196-97, succeeded in extending the Latin rule farther north 
by the reduction of Berytus (Beyrout). 

IV. The fourth crusade l was due to the energy of Innocent 

1 W. Norden, Der vierte Kreuzzug, 1898 ; N. Jahrb./. d. klass. Altertum, 
1904, I Abt. 13, pp. 505-14, 



344 A Manual of Church History 

III. Soon after ascending the pontifical throne, he proclaimed 
a holy war, and ordered all clerics to assign the fortieth part 
of their revenues to the cause. The crusading army, consisting 
principally of Frenchmen, was to commence the campaign in 
Egypt. As it happened, it never reached its destination, for 
the Venetians, on whose ships the expedition sailed, having at 
their head the blind but crafty doge Dandalo, persuaded the 
crusaders to disregard the papal prohibition and to attack 
the Christian city of Zara in Dalmatia (1202). Thence the 
crusaders set sail for Constantinople, with the object of again 
setting on the throne the emperor Isaac Angelus, who had been 
ousted by his brother, and who had sent his son Alexius to 
the West with a request for help. The immediate object of 
the crusaders was easily secured (1203), but as the Byzantines 
were unable to fulfil their obligations, quarrels soon broke out 
among the allies. To add to the confusion a new revolution 
occurred in Constantinople, the power falling into the hands 
of Alexius Ducas Murzuflus. The dislike of the new emperor 
for the Latins compelled them to storm the city a second time 
(1204) . This time it was not restored to the Greeks, but Baldwin 
of Flanders was chosen emperor, a Latin patriarchate being 
established simultaneously. 

Innocent, though he had striven to hinder the carrying 
out of the plan, could not but recognise the accomplished 
fact. As the conquest of Constantinople had not served the 
cause of the Holy Land, the Pope had to make a further call. 
In the meantime, in both France and Germany, new bands were 
making ready for their departure (1212), but they comprised 
only boys, who in their misguided zeal fancied themselves 
called on to undertake the conquest of Palestine. Accom- 
panied by girls and adults of both sexes, they commenced their 
long journey. It is scarcely necessary to add that none of them 
even reached Jerusalem. Those of the French children who 
were not engulfed in the waves of the Mediterranean were 
carried off into slavery ; the Germans for the most part either 
died on the way or abandoned the senseless project ; the re- 
mainder were persuaded at Brindisi to return to their homes. 

This failure did not dishearten the Pope. At the Fourth 
Lateran Council a new crusade was decided on, and a tax 
equal to one-twentieth of the revenue was laid on all church 



The Crusades 345 

property for the next three years. The undertaking being also 
supported by Honorius III, warlike pilgrims, mainly from 
the districts of the Lower Rhine and Friesland, began again 
to set out in bands for the East. With them went also Andrew 
II, king of Hungary, and duke Leopold VII of Austria, with 
numerous followers (1217). When the king of Hungary, 
after several unsuccessful expeditions, had already started on 
his return journey, the crusaders at last secured the chance for 
which they had been waiting. Under the leadership of John 
of Brienne, then (since 12 10) king of Jerusalem, they marched 
on Egypt and captured the stronghold of Damietta, the key 
of the country (1219). The joy which this conquest called 
forth among the Christians was only equalled by the dismay 
of the Saracens. New warriors now arriving from the West, 
Al-Kamil, sultan of Egypt, made an offer of the whole kingdom 
of Jerusalem in exchange for Damietta. The offer was, 
however, declined, the papal legate demanding the exter- 
mination of the enemy. The Christians accordingly continued 
the war, and were shortly after compelled to evacuate Damietta 
and Egypt (1221). 

V. This terrible blow excited much grief in the West. 
Honorius now pressed Frederick II yet once again to fulfil 
the vow which he had taken at his first coronation at Aachen 
(1215), and which he had renewed when crowned emperor 
(1220). The vow was not, however, to be fulfilled during 
Honorius's lifetime. The emperor was far more concerned 
with home events than with the East, and at this very time 
he was fully occupied in putting into order the kingdom of 
the two Sicilies. He also refused to undertake an expedition 
unless other countries also sent their contingents, a condition 
which was prohibitive, with the lack of enthusiasm then 
prevailing. The crusade had accordingly to be repeatedly 
postponed. Finally, by the treaty of San Germano in 1225 — 
the same year in which the emperor wedded Isabella, king 
John's daughter and heiress, and assumed the title of King of 
Jerusalem — a respite was granted till the summer of 1227, 
excommunication being threatened in the event of further 
delay. Even this was not sufficient. Towards the end of the 
allotted term an army began, indeed, to gather in Brindisi. The 
troops were, however, compelled to await their leader, and in 



346 A Manual of Church History 

the meantime thousands perished from fevers brought on by the 
heat and circumstances of the country. Not a few returned to 
their homes. As for Frederick himself, he ultimately set out, 
only to land again three days after at Otranto on a plea of 
sickness. The consequence of this, seeing that no exceptions 
had been allowed for in the treaty, was Frederick's excom- 
munication. Gregory IX, who in the meantime had succeeded 
the peace-loving Honorius, was all the more inclined to push 
severity to the extreme, because the emperor had of his own 
accord delayed the crusade, and seemed to have been only too 
glad to avail himself of the pretext of sickness. That the 
malady was, however, merely assumed (as it was urged in 1239) 
would be an unjust suspicion; unfortunately, in the course of 
the subsequent quarrel charges of this nature were frequently 
exchanged, and tended not a little to embitter both sides 
(§ 113), and to engender a situation which it is not possible 
to look back upon without sorrow. In 1228 Frederick started 
in earnest for Palestine, this time not with the Church's 
blessing, but with her curse. With his small fleet of forty 
vessels any great undertaking was, of course, out of the question, 
yet by dint of tact and diplomacy he persuaded the sultan of 
Egypt to cede Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Nazareth, together 
with certain other towns and hamlets lying on the Pilgrims' 
Way between Acre and Jerusalem, and also to set free all the 
captive Christians (1229). At Jerusalem only the mosque 
of Omar and the sacred enclosure of the Haräm esh-Sherif in 
which it stands were to remain in the hands of the Moslems. 
On his side, the emperor promised to protect the sultan from 
his foes, and to prevent a league of the nobles in northern Syria 
being concluded against him. The peace was to endure for 
two years and a half. 

Towards the end of the term two new armies arrived in 
the East, a French one under king Thibaut of Navarre and 
duke Hugo of Burgundy (1239), and an English one under 
Richard of Cornwall (1240). Their success was very small, 
and after their departure the situation of the Christians 
left behind became more difficult than ever. They had entered 
on an alliance with the eastern Saracens against their old ally 
Eyub, sultan of Egypt, and the latter retaliated by calling on 
the help of the Turkish tribe of the Khovaresmians, and gained 



The Crusades 347 

a decisive battle in 1244. The Holy Places were now lost for 
ever, the Christian army was cut to pieces at Gaza, and the 
kingdom of Jerusalem was reduced to the limits secured to it 
by the third crusade. 

VI. The news of this misfortune aroused the West to 
further action. The Council of Lyons in 1245 called on all to 
lend their help, and again laid claim to a twentieth of all 
ecclesiastical incomes for the space of three years. The war 
then proceeding between Pope and emperor indeed kept back 
many crusaders, yet a large army was gathered together, 
owing mainly to the exertions of the powerful Lewis IX of 
France. 1 The pilgrim army, consisting almost exclusively of 
Frenchmen, embarked in 1248, and a year later was in pos- 
session of Damietta, the plan being, as before, to conquer 
Palestine through Egypt. The remainder of the expedition 
was, however, unfortunate, Lewis and his army being taken 
prisoners (1250). In return for the restitution of Damietta 
and the payment of a large ransom they indeed recovered 
their liberty, but the crusade was a failure. One part of the 
army, including the king's brother, returned home as soon as 
its captivity was at an end, while Lewis remained in Palestine 
for yet three years, though, as he had been deprived of most of 
his forces, he was unable to accomplish anything worth men- 
tion. A relief army, at his demand, was enrolled in France, 
but on the murder of its leader, the ' Hungarian master/ 
most of the soldiers deserted, and the remainder fell victims 
to their own disorders. The only result of Lewis's stay was to 
prevent the Saracens from securing the fruits of their victory. 

VII. On his withdrawal, new misfortunes awaited the 
kingdom of Jerusalem. 2 The Mamaluke Bibars not long 
after (1260) extended his authority over Egypt and Syria, 
and after some preliminary skirmishes, crowned his achieve- 
ments by the capture of Antioch (1268). By this time Lewis 
was already engaged in the preparation of a new crusade. 3 
The expedition started in 1270, but was even more unfortunate 
than the previous one. Whilst the army was lying before 

1 Mg. by C. H. Schölten, 1850-58; Faure, 1866; Wallon, 1875; 
Lecoy de la Marche, 1905. 

2 MICE. XV (1894), 1-58. 

3 R. Sternfeld, Ludwigs d* Hl. Kreuzzug nach Tunis 1270 u, die Politik 
Karls I v. Sizilien, 1896.. 



348 A Manual of Church History 

Tunis, which it had been decided to capture in the first instance, 
a plague broke out and carried off St. Lewis himself and 
great numbers of the crusaders. A truce was accordingly 
agreed upon, and the undertaking was practically at an end, 
in spite of all the efforts of Gregory X — who had been elected 
Pope during his sojourn in the Holy Land — and in spite of 
the help afforded by the Council of Lyons, which in 1274 
decreed the payment of a special tithe for six years. This 
crusade was the last. Neither the French nor any other 
nation were to be persuaded any more to undertake the risks 
of a new trial of force. The Latins left in Palestine, being 
now thrown on their own resources, were soon deprived even 
of the relics of their kingdom. Tripoli was the first to fall 
(1283), and was followed by Ptolemais or Acre (1291), the 
last bulwark of the West. Great was the dismay when the 
news was received in Europe ; Rome again and again launched 
appeals for help, and a few princes, in obedience to her 
summons, donned the cross, but enthusiasm had been killed 
by failure, and the age of the crusades was over. 

The crusades failed to attain their main object : the 
Holy Places still remained in the hand of the infidel. Yet 
blood and treasure had not been expended in vain. The 
powerful forward movement which now made itself felt in 
the West in almost every department of life, in commerce, art, 
and literature, but more especially in architecture, is attribut- 
able, without a doubt, to the enlargement of ideas due to 
contact with Grecian and Arabic civilisation. 1 



§ 117 

Conflict with the Islam in Europe 2 

Whereas the Saracens were successful in retaining their 
Asiatic conquests, they were to lose all the possessions which 
they had acquired in Europe. Sicily was taken from them 

1 J. C. Hahn, Ursachen u. Folgen der Kreuzzüge, 1859 ; Kampschulte, 
Zur Gesch. d. MA. 1864; Prutz, Kulturgesch. d. Kr. 1887; O. Henne am 
Rhyn, item, 3rd ed. 1903 ; Hirsch-Gereuth, St. z. Gesch. d. Kreuzzugsidet 
nach den Kr. 1897. 

2 Vide § 84. A. F. v. Schack, Gesch. d. Normannen in Sizilien, 2 vol. 1889 ; 
L. v. Heinemann, Gesch. d. Normannen in Unteritalien u. Sizilien, I, 1893 ; 
E. Caspar, Roger II, 1904. 



The Islam in Europe 349 

as early as the eleventh century, the then war being in a sense 
a forerunner of the crusades. The Normans who settled in 
Lower Italy in 1017 first turned their attention to displacing 
what remained of the Greek sovereignty ; they then effected 
the conquest of Apulia and Calabria, where they erected an 
independent kingdom under the suzerainty of the Holy See. 
Having now firmly established themselves on the mainland, 
they invaded Sicily under the leadership of duke Robert 
Guiscard, on whom Pope Nicholas II had bestowed the island 
as a fief (1059). After a war of thirty years (1061-91), Count 
Roger succeeded in wresting the island from the Saracenic 
power, and assumed the rule as a vassal of his brother Robert. 
His son Roger II (1 101-54) united the two portions of the 
kingdom, became king (1130), and extended his realm by the 
conquest of Naples (1139). 

In Spain the Moors, though not indeed entirely expelled 
from the country during this period, were confined within 
much narrower frontiers. After the fall of the Ommiade 
dynasty (1031), the caliphate of Cordova being broken up into 
a number of petty kingdoms or emirates, the Christian princes 
were not slow to avail themselves of the disadvantage in which 
their enemies were placed. Toledo, the capital, was recovered 
by Alfonso VI of Leon and Castile (1085). The Almoravides, 
whom the Moors now summoned from Morocco, and the 
Almohades, who half a century later (1146) usurped their 
power, prevented for the time being any further progress. 
The great battle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212) nevertheless 
gave the day to the Christians, and twenty- five years later nearly 
the whole of Andalusia was in their hands. Only the extreme 
south, where the emir Mohammed Aben Alamar founded the 
kingdom of Granada (1238), continued in the power of the 
Moors till 1492, when Ferdinand the Catholic finally drove 
the Arabs from their last footing in Spain. 



CHAPTER III 

SECTS AND HERESIES 1 

§ 118 

Cathari and Albigenses s 

The period under consideration is remarkable for the 
number of sectarian movements which took place during it. 
Of these, some were entirely new, whilst others were ancient 
errors in a new dress. The tendency of the age to make of 
the religious life something wholly outward, not unnaturally 
caused a reaction in favour of inward religion which frequently 
took an heretical turn. 

The most important of the sects of the period is that of 
the Cathari (or ' Puritans '). Their name comes from their 
boasted asceticism, their abstinence from all defilement, and 
from their incidental claim to constitute the Church undefilexL 
Their origin is far from clear. It would seem that the 
Paulicians and Bogomiles (§ 89) migrated from Bulgaria to 
the West, there joined forces with what remained of the 
Manichaeans, casting the latter's peculiar doctrines into a 
gnostic form. That they came from the East, or were to some 
extent under eastern influence, is proved not only by the name 
of Cathari (Ka&apoi) by which they called themselves, but 
also by the names given to them by their opponents, such as 

Popclican i (=Pa uli: :.: >: ;" . The sect 
first comes on the scene in the eleventh century, and by the 
twelfth century it had groups of adherents throughout the 

1 Ch. U. Hahi :. 4L Ketzer im MA. 3 vol. 1S45-50; Dollixger, 
Beiträge zur . scs MA . I S90. 

2 Ch. Schmidt *Ük. ou AJbig. 2 3; Dot 

-9; J. Guiraud. :s cThistoire, 1906 (for their ethics and 

ConsoS amentum). On their origin see Z. f. KG. 1S94 ; Bquk. 1894, 1, 5c- 



Cathari and Albigenses 351 

principal countries of Europe. Their headquarters were, how- 
ever, in southern France and in northern Italy. They belonged 
to two schools. Those of the one, the majority being in 
France, held the Paulician doctrine of an absolute dualism, 
and believed in the existence of two eternal principles, each of 
which was the creator of a different world. The other school, 
prevalent especially in Italy, agreed with the Bogomiles in 
looking on the evil principle as being merely a fallen spirit, 
Satan, or the God of the Old Testament. Besides this, there 
were other minor differences of view, but in the main the 
various parties were at one. They believed in the migration 
of souls, and accordingly refused to put any animal to death ; 
they refrained from worshipping in churches, rejected the 
sacraments, the veneration of pictures and crosses ; they also 
considered oaths, wars, the death punishment, and civil 
government to be unlawful. They likewise abstained from 
marriage and from flesh-meat (though not from fish), and even 
from eggs and milk (though not from wine), and observed long 
and severe fasts. 

But the Perfect only were bound to keep these injunctions, 
those, namely, who had received the spiritual baptism or 
Consolamentum. This was their only sacrament, and it was 
conferred after a kind of catechumenate, by the bestowal of 
the Lord's Prayer (the only orison they recognised) and the 
imposition of hands and of the book of the Gospels. This 
baptism was held to be necessary for salvation, and had to be 
renewed after a fall into sin. The simple Faithful, forming by 
far the greater number, merely accepted the pledge called the 
Convenenza, by which they undertook to receive the Con- 
solamentum before death. The latter were not only dispensed 
from the stricter code of morality, but, persuaded that they 
had at their disposal the means necessary for salvation, they 
could give full vent to their passions. Under the circumstances 
it was a matter of some difficulty to decide whether those who 
had received the Consolamentum under the impression that 
they were dying, were obliged, on subsequent recovery, to 
observe the mode of life of the Perfect. Converts were there- 
fore frequently compelled to bring about their own death, by 
depriving themselves of food. Others freely accepted tha 
Endura, as this mode of suicide was called. 



35 2 A Manual of Church History 

The Church soon took steps against the heresy, especially 
in southern France, where, as it stood under the protection of 
many of the nobles, it was becoming distinctly dangerous. 
To expel the error the Church made use both of persuasion 
and of stronger measures. As her first efforts met with but 
poor success, Innocent III 1 decided on yet greater severity, 
the murder of his legate Peter of Castelnau (1208) hastening 
the consummation. At the Pope's appeal a large army 
assembled to fight the Albigenses, as the French Cathari were 
called, and to punish their supporters, Roger, viscount of 
Beziers, and Raymond VI, count of Toulouse. The war was 
protracted for some twenty years, partly owing to the self- 
seeking policy of Simon de Montfort, who commanded the 
crusaders (1209-29), but, in the end, the power of the heretics 
was broken. The final extermination of the error was left to 
the Inquisition (cp. § 121). 



§119 

The Waldensians 3 

The founder of the Waldensians was (Peter ?) Waldes, a 
native of Lyons. Having amassed much wealth as a broker, 
he acquired a religious turn by reading certain portions of 
the vScriptures which he had caused two priests to translate 
into the vernacular. On becoming (1173) acquainted with 
the story of St. Alexius, he settled his landed property on his 
wife and gave the remainder of his fortune partly to those from 
whom he had obtained it, partly to the poor, and a few years 
later (1177) began his mission as a preacher of penance. His 
efforts were directed to restoring the manner of life of the 
Apostles, his disciples being pledged to poverty, to the practice of 
wandering about, and to the use of sandals. He soon collected 
a band of like-minded spirits, and, in obedience to our Lord's 
command when sending forth the Apostles, they proceeded in 
pairs preaching throughout the continent. It was not long 

1 A. Luchaire, Innocent III : la croisade des Albigeois, 1905. 

2 Mg. by Dieckhoff, 1851 ; Herzog, 1853 ; K. Müller, 1886 (and in 
Stud. u. Krit. 1886) ; Preger, 1890 (and in the Abh. München) ; Comba, 2nd ed. 
1902 ; Huck, 1897 (Dogmenhist, Beitrag zur Gesch. d. W.) ; Z.f. KG. XV f 
454-60; KL. XII, 1185-95. 



The Waldensians 353 

before the movement made itself felt even in far-off lands, 
especially after the expulsion of the preachers from Lyons. In 
northern Italy particularly it found many adherents, even in 
ithe order of the Humiliati (§ 127). For a time the sect was 
able to work openly, seeing that apart from the measure taken 
against them at Lyons, and the prohibition of preaching decreed 
by the Third Lateran Council, no attention was paid to them. 
They were, however, again obliged to withdraw into secrecy 
when Lucius III formally included (1184), among the heretics 
whom he excommunicated, the Humiliati or Poor Men of 
Lyons (Pauper es de Lugduno). This was the name by which 
the Waldensians were commonly known, though they were also 
called Leonistae, from Lyons, whence they originally came, 
and sometimes Sabatati or Insabalati, from the sandals they 
wore. As to their peculiarities, they were obliged not only 
to relinquish their fortunes, but also to refrain from all manual 
toil. They therefore depended for their living on the alms of 
their friends and admirers, who still remained entangled in the 
life of this world — of the Believers (credentes) , as they were 
called by the Catholics, in contradistinction to the preachers, 
who were styled the Perfect. To the vow of poverty they 
united one of chastity and of obedience to their superiors. 
They rejected purgatory and intercession for the dead, in- 
dulgences, oaths, military service, and the death penalty. 

The sect soon split into two branches. The Lombards 
demanded a certain independence, and the right of electing 
and consecrating lifelong superiors ; in spite of the efforts of 
Waldes, they also insisted on maintaining their guilds of crafts- 
men, and finally severed their connection with the others. 
After the founder's death an attempt was made at the con- 
ference of Bergamo (1218) to re-establish unity, but it was of 
no avail. The division led to certain differences in practical 
conduct, for whereas the French sectarians, in spite of their 
doctrines, continued outwardly in the Church's fold, and 
attended Divine service with the Catholics, the Italians went 
farther, and, believing the worth of the sacraments to depend 
on the personal sanctity of the minister, they rejected the 
sacraments of the Church and conducted their own services. 
But they were not able to continue this practice for long, and 
as early as the end of the thirteenth century they were compelled, 

VOL. I. AA 



354 A Manual of Church History 

in order to avoid persecution, to receive the sacraments of the 
official Church, though they persisted in confessing their sins 
only to their own brethren. This Lombard branch of the sect 
showed very considerable activity, and invaded a large portion 
of Germany, Bohemia, and Poland ; the French branch, on the 
contrary, was soon confined to the mountain valleys of Pied- 
mont. In the sixteenth century the sectarians either went 
over to Protestantism, or at least reorganised themselves on 
a Protestant basis. There is a legend of comparatively early 
invention, that the Waldensians were connected with the 
primitive Church ; that when Constantine the Great had 
heaped power and wealth on Silvester, a band of devoted 
men resolved to preserve inviolate the Apostolic life, and had 
become the parents of the sect. This legend, which received 
general credence among the Protestants until the middle of 
last century, is now everywhere acknowledged to be devoid of 
foundation. 



§ 120 

Smaller Sects 

Besides the two sects just dealt with, our period can show 
numerous others of less notoriety. Of these some, such as the 
Petrobrusians, have something in common with the Cathari, 
whilst others, for instance that of the Apostolic brethren, have 
affinity with the Waldensians, though in neither case would 
there seem to have been any direct relations between the sects. 
As to the remainder, namely the Amalricians and the other 
pantheistically minded heretics, they constitute a new and 
entirely distinct development. 

I. The Petrobrusians. At the beginning of the twelfth century 
a priest named Peter of Bruys preached for nearly twenty years 
in the south of France against infant baptism, the Eucharist and 
Mass, against the veneration of images and the cross, against 
church-building, prayers and offerings for the dead, and against 
the Old Testament. He was burnt to death at St. Gilles in 1137 by 
a mob infuriated by his proceedings. After his death his work 
was taken up by the Cluniac monk Henry. The latter had already, 
twenty years previously, stirred up trouble at Le Mans by his preach- 
ing. He was indicted ultimately (1148) before the Council of Rheims ; 



Petty Mediceval Sects 355 

as to what followed, history is silent. Cp. Döllinger, I, 75-98 ; 
J. v. Walter, Die ersten Wanderprediger Frankreichs, 1906. 

II. Tanchelm, a Dutch layman, violently assailed the clergy 
and pronounced their sacraments invalid on account of their 
sins. He, none the less, led a very wicked life himself, pretended 
to be equal with Christ, stating that he too had received the fulness 
of the Holy Ghost, and publicly betrothed himself to the Blessed 
Virgin. He met his death in n 15 at the hand of a cleric. 

III. Eudo, or Eon de Stella, a Breton, gave himself out as the 
Judge of the world, referring to his own name the words of the 
Church's prayer : ' Per eum qui venturus est iudicare vivos et 
mortuos.' He was sentenced to imprisonment by the Council 
of Rheims in 1148, and some of his more obstinate followers were 
put to death. 

IV. Arnold of Brescia declaimed against the Temporal Power 
and against the Church's possession of landed property. If we 
may believe Otto of Freising (Gesta Frid. II, 20), he held that no 
cleric having property, no bishop holding fiefs, no monk who was 
not truly poor, could hope for salvation. After his condemnation 
by the Lateran Council in 1139 he went to France, and thence to 
Switzerland. Later on (c. 1144) he returned to Italy. His con- 
nection with the revolution at Rome resulted in his execution b} 
Barbarossa in 1155. Hausrath, Die Weltverbesserer, vol. II-III 
1891-95 ; Neue k. Z. 1902, pp. 792-808. 

V. The Pasagians, a small sect of northern Italy, in the twelfth 
century insisted on the observance of the Mosaic Law, and looked 
on Christ as the first of God's creatures. 

VI. The Luciferians worshipped Lucifer, whom they held to 
have been unjustly expelled from heaven, and who they believed 
would, together with his followers, ultimately be restored to his 
rights, whilst Michael and his angels would be relegated to hell. The 
sect had a considerable following, and may possibly be a develop- 
ment of that category of the Cathari which professed a mitigated 
dualism. In Germany they were persecuted by Conrad of Marburg, 
whose excessive cruelty to these heretics brought about his violent 
death in 1233. Cp. Kaltner, Kcnrad v. M. 1882. 

VII. Amalric of Bena, a Paris professor, held it to be an article 
of faith that every Christian must believe himself to be a member 
of Christ ; that unless this was believed in with as deep a faith as 
the birth and death of the Redeemer or any other article of the 
Creed, there was no chance of salvation. This membership of 
Christ he explained as an indwelling of the Son of God, and under- 
stood this in a pantheistic sense. His teaching was condemned 
in 1206. Even then he had made numerous disciples, and in the 
hands of some of these his doctrine soon assumed the form of a 
system. The Amalricians spoke of a threefold incarnation of 
God : of the Father in Abraham, of the Son in Christ, and of the 
Holy Ghost in each Christian. In the present age, which is that 

AA 2 



356 A Manual of Church History 

of the Holy Ghost, every Christian in whom He dwells is as much 
God as Christ was. On the ground of this system they mercilessly 
criticised the Church, whilst, however, claiming for themselves 
complete freedom to commit sins of the flesh. The existence 
of the sect was only discovered in 1209 after the founder's death, 
and its ringleaders, amongst them the goldsmith William of Paris, 
were, some of them, burnt, and others imprisoned. Soon after this 
(1212) a similar doctrine was mooted at Strasburg by a certain 
Ortlieb, who gave his name to the Ortliebarians. In this instance, 
however, . a kind of rationalism is manifest ; the world is without 
a beginning, Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary, and merely 
proclaimed anew the true religion which had long been known, 
and which is identical with that now preached by the Ortliebarians. 
Amalric's true successors would, however, appear to be rather 
the so-called Brethren of the Free Spirit, consisting of both men 
and women, and known accordingly as Beghards and Beghines. 
They make their appearance about the middle of the thirteenth 
century in different towns of Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. 
In their determination to carry their theories into practice, they 
far outstepped their predecessors, and stand forth as the extremest 
partisans of freedom of thought and conduct. Finally, to the 
number of those who were touched by Amalric's spirit, we must 
add the Paris professor David of Dinant. His Quaterni, or Liber de 
tomis sive de divisionibus, which was condemned by the same 
Council of Paris in 1209, at least contained ideas of a pantheistic 
turn. Cp. Reuter, Gesch. d. relig. Aufklärung im MA. II (1877), 
218-49. 

VIII. The Apostolic Brethren. They owed their estab- 
lishment to Gerard Segarelli of Parma (1260). His wish was 
to restore the Apostolic life by practising poverty and preaching 
penance, but his errors brought on him persecution, and he ended 
his life at the stake (1300). His successor Dolcino was even more 
violent against the Church, whose approaching chastisement he 
prophesied. He ultimately took refuge in a stronghold in the 
territory of Novara, and aided by his followers terrorised the 
surrounding districts, until he was slain in 1307 by the crusading 
army led against him by Bishop Rainer of Vercelli. Cp. Krone, 
Fra Dolcino, 1844. 

IX. The Stedingians, a Frisian tribe in the neighbourhood of 
Bremen, declined to pay their tithes to the archbishop of Bremen, 
and on being excommunicated they rose in revolt, and had to be 
repressed by special crusades (1232-34). They were also charged, 
especially at the Council of Bremen in 1230, with many ecclesiastical 
offences, though these seem to have been merely a consequence of 
their quarrel with the bishop. Mg. by Schumacher, 1865, 



The Inquisition 357 

§ 121 



The Inquisition 



1 



The warfare against the errors of the period led to the 
establishment of an institution called the Inquisition, of which 
the task consisted in searching out and punishing heretics. 
The institution dates back to the Council of Verona (n 84), 
where the bishops were directed either personally or with the 
help of their commissioners to search out heretics in suspected 
districts, who were then to be punished as they deserved by 
the secular power. The Councils of Avignon (1209, c. 2) and 
Montpellier (1215, c. 46) ordained further that in each parish 
a cleric and several laymen should be bound under oath to 
denounce heretics, whilst the Council of Narbonne (1227, c. 14) 
gave these officials the right of pursuing their victims manu 
militari. These privileges were renewed by the Council of 
Toulouse in 1229, which practically constituted the Inquisition 
in the form in which it was to become famous. According 
to the decrees of this Council, anyone who knowingly harbours 
a heretic shall lose his property and receive due punishment 
(c. 4) ; the house in which a heretic is found is to be demolished, 
and the ground on which it stood is to be confiscated (c. 6) . Con- 
tumacious heretics and their protectors are to receive the 
Animadversio debita (c. 1), which, as is apparent from another 
decree (c. 11), was to consist in the sentence of death, which 
under ordinary circumstances would be carried out at the 
stake. This latter mode of punishment was just then becom- 
ing the usual one for heretics, as we can see from the enactments 
of Frederick II (1224) and Gregory IX (1231). In Germany 
and the north of France it was in use even in the eleventh 
century, and there are isolated instances of its earlier use 
elsewhere. On the other hand, in southern France and in Italy 
the measures thus far taken against heretics had been confined 

1 Bern. Guidonis, Practica inquisitionis haeret. ed. Douais, 1875 ; Nie. 
Eymericus, Directorium inquisitorum haer. prav. ed. Pegna, 1578 (a record 
of the proceedingsof the Inquisition in 1321 and 1376) ; P. Fredericq. Corpus 
documentorum inquisitionis haer. prav. Neerlandicae, I— III, 1 889-1 906 ; 
Douais, Documents pour servir ä l'hist. de VInquis. dans le Languedoc, 1900 ; 
Lea, Hist, of the Inquis. of the Middle Ages, 3 vol. 1888 ; Henner, Beiträge 
zur Organisation u. Kompetenz der päpstl. Ketzergerichte, 1890; Th. de 
Cauzons, Hist, de VInquis. en France, 1908 ; Vacandard, Engl. Trans. The 
Inquisition, 1908. 



358 A Manual of Church History 

to confiscation of property, imprisonment, branding, or 
banishment ; the Fourth Lateran Council (c. 3), for instance, had 
contemplated nothing more severe than the deprivation of 
goods and the loss of civil rights. Those who relented were to 
have their life spared, though they were to be for ever excluded 
from public offices, and were condemned to bear two crosses 
on their coats (c. 10). Should they retract only out of the fear 
of death or some other such motive, they were to be imprisoned 
for the remainder of their life (c. 11). To prevent miscarriage 
of justice, judgment in such cases was to be left to the bishop 
or to a properly empowered cleric (c. 8). Gregory IX trans- 
ferred the Inquisition into the hands of the Dominicans (1232). 
Innocent IV sanctioned the use of torture by the inquisitors 
as a means of extracting the truth. The condemned man was 
ultimately handed over to the secular arm for the execution 
of the punishment. 

The execution of heretics was not a new custom introduced by 
the Inquisition, having long been the practice in the East as well 
as in the West. The custom also outlasted the Middle Ages, 
and was even adopted for a time in the Protestant world, a fact 
which tends to show that it was not an outcome of mere blood- 
thirstiness. Our ancestors looked on the practice as necessary to 
safeguard the faith and the order of the Church against the attacks 
of heretics ; their opinion may be the better appreciated by 
recollecting that, at the time, heresy seemed to portend danger 
not only to the ecclesiastical, but also to the social fabric. Nor 
must it be forgotten that penalties of old were generally far harsher 
than those in use at the present day. The Inquisition was, more- 
over, not an institution to endure long, and the separation of 
Christendom into a number of confessions soon rendered it obsolete. 






CHAPTER IV 

THE ORGANISATION OF THE CHURCH 

§122 

The Roman See 

The Roman Church had from the beginning the first place 
among the Churches, but her primacy in the course of the ages 
did not always stand forth to the same extent. During the 
period we are considering, the Apostolic See became more and 
more the centre of church government, and whereas formerly 
the Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals had only reserved to it the 
decision of causae maiores, it now became the custom to refer 
to its judgment a number of other questions. It was Gregory 
VII (Reg. VIII, 21) who laid down the principle that to the 
Roman Church, as to the mother and mistress of all other 
Churches, all more important matters must be submitted ; 
that her decision is irreformable and admits of no appeal : in 
fine, that the Papacy stands above both kingdom and Empire. 
These rights are in part contained in the Dictatus papae, a 
collection of twenty-seven short sayings which were incor- 
porated in Gregory's Registrum (II, 55), and which in the main 
represent his views, though from the style of some of the 
dictates, and from the relation in which they stand to the 
collection of Cardinal Deusdedit, they would not seem to be 
Gregory's actual work. The change in the extent of the 
Pope's authority was reflected in a corresponding change of 
language. The opinion ventured on by Baronius that Gregory 
VII by express command reserved the title of Papa to the 
occupant of the Roman See, is by no means sure, seeing that it 
is probably only based on dictate n : Quod hoc unicum est 
nomen in mundo, yet the opinion is true to this extent, that we 



360 A Manual of Church History 

now find for the first time the title of Pope used in the full and 
exclusive meaning which it was henceforth to bear. 

Details which testify to greater concentration of power are 
the following : — 

I. Metropolitans were compelled to promise canonical obedience 
to the Pope. An oath to this effect was demanded by Gregory VII 
in certain special instances and for motives of church policy ; 
Gregory IX made the law general and Martin V extended the 
obligation to bishops also. 

II. Canonisation, which had previously been performed by each 
bishop for his own diocese, was reserved as a special privilege 
of the Holy See by Alexander III (c. 1, X, de reliquiis, 3, 45). 
The Fourth Lateran Council also decreed (c. 62) that no newly found 
relics should be honoured save when approved by the Apostolic 
See. In this its object was to prevent a recurrence of certain 
abuses which had of late crept in, owing to the older practice. 

III. In the twelfth century it became customary to reserve to 
the Pope the absolution from certain grievous sins. 

IV. Appeals to Rome became much more frequent. In many 
instances the appeal was lodged merely to escape punishment, 
and besides this objection there were others, for thereby cases, even 
the most trivial, were indefinitely postponed, with the result that 
justice could no longer take its course. These abuses afforded 
a grievance to Bernard of Clairvaux (De consider atione, c. 2), and 
to many others of his day. 

V. Now that the Popes claimed immediate jurisdiction over 
the whole Church, they appropriated the right of appointing their 
own nominees to foreign dioceses. The beginning of this practice 
may be traced back to Innocent II ; at first it was usual only 
to recommend the candidate, but in the course of time the request 
made way for a command. As the innovation frequently secured 
places to worthy men who could not have otherwise obtained 
promotion, it had at least one good result. But on the other 
hand it also opened a way to place-seeking and to other grave 
abuses, and everywhere excited discontent. At Lyons in 1245 
the English complained bitterly of the number of Italians who 
held high office in the English Church, and their complaint, made 
as it was during the great struggle with Frederick II, was frequently 
re-echoed in subsequent years, especially by Robert Grosseteste, 
bishop of Lincoln. Innocent IV ultimately declared his intention 
of renouncing his right of Provision. Alexander IV promised 
(Execrabilis quorundam, 1255) that no chapter of canons should 
have more than four Mandata de providendo. In spite of these 
promises the practice continued to be indulged in, and was soon 
extended yet farther. Clement IV formally reserved (in the 
Decretal Licet Ecclesiarum, c. 2 de praeb. in VI, 3, 4) to the Holy 
See the right of appointing to all beneficia apud sedem apostolicam 



The Roman See 361 

vacantia, that is, to all benefices whose previous occupants had 
died at the Roman court. At the same time Clement laid down 
the principle that the Pope has the plenaria dispositio of all church 
offices. Cp. Phillips, KR. V, 488-512 ; Felten, R. Grosseteste, 
1897 ; Stevenson, item, 1899. 

VI. Greater stress was now laid on the Pope's fulness of power 
in the matter of doctrinal decisions. In earlier times it had indeed 
been usual to urge that the Roman See had always preserved the 
faith inviolate (Formula of P. Hormisdas, cp. § 55), or that the 
Church of the Apostles had never quitted the path of truth, thanks 
to the prophecy of Christ (Luke xxii. 32, Tu aliquando conversus 
confirma patres tuos), and that it would continue to preserve the 
purity of the faith until the end (Agatho). Now, however, Thomas 
of Aquino (Sum. Th. II, 2, qu. 1, art. 10) expressly laid down 
the doctrine that the Pope, to whom, according to the Decretal 
Maiores of Innocent IV (c. 3, X, de bapt. 3, 42), all matters of 
import must be submitted, has also the right of finally deciding 
all questions pertaining to faith. This doctrine Aquinas bases, 
not only on the verse of St. Luke (xxii. 32), but also on 1 Cor. 
i. 10, because the oneness of faith which St. Paul here demands 
could not otherwise be preserved. 

VII. General Councils had been, in former times, summoned by 
the emperor ; the summons now emanates from the Pope. There 
were several reasons for this alteration. Since the beginning 
of the Eastern Schism all the Councils, with the exception of 
two, comprised only Latin bishops. The new Empire, moreover, 
did not stand in quite the same relation to the Church as the 
ancient. Besides the Empire, there were other Christian States, 
and though the emperor took the highest rank among the princes 
of Europe, the others too were independent sovereigns. Under such 
circumstances the old order was bound to go, and the assembling 
together of the Council was bound to become the task of the ecclesi- 
astical head of the Church, especially as Councils by their very 
nature were purely ecclesiastical gatherings. 

VIII. Church and State had, even in antiquity, been likened 
respectively to the soul and body, or to the sun and moon, and 
thereby the superiority of the spiritual over the temporal had 
been implied. But the comparison was mostly taken ideally rather 
than really. In practice the two powers were really reckoned as 
mutually independent, and if one of them did assert any supremacy 
over the other, it was the secular power ; nor was this the case only 
in the East where the Church was almost wholly under the control 
of the Empire, but also in the West. In our period, however, a 
different idea came to prevail. The superiority of the Church 
power over the State, or, to use the expression then in favour, of 
the sword of the spirit over the secular sword, became a firm per- 
suasion. Gregory VII declared that Peter had been made by 
Christ lord over every earthly kingdom (Reg. I, 63) ; if the Apostolic 



362 A Manual of Church History 

See may exercise its supreme power to judge matters spiritual, 
why should it not also act as judge in matters temporal (Reg. 
IV, 2) ? The Pope has the right under certain circumstances of 
deposing kings and emperors. Nor does he even hesitate to 
state that the spiritual power alone comes from God, whereas the 
secular power has its origin in sin (Reg. IV, 2 ; VIII, 21). Ideas 
such as these were not indeed allowed to pass unchallenged, 
but, on the whole, the new way of looking at things, this hierocratic 
system, as we might term it, swayed men's minds throughout 
the Middle Ages. It also received symbolical expression in the 
practice of kissing the Pope's foot, and in that of holding the Pope's 
stirrup, by which princes signified their respect. The latter custom 
(Officium stratoris), which was not entirely new (according to the 
Donatio Constantini this honour was rendered even to Silvester), 
was now enforced. Previously, to kiss the feet was a mark of 
respect payable to any bishop, but in the Dictatus papae (9) we 
read : Quod solius papae pedes principes deosculantur. Cp. Th. 
Qu. 1893, p. 522 f. ; St. a. ML. 1894, II, 486-88 ; R. Domeier, 
Die Päpste als Richter über die deutschen Könige, 1897. 



§123 

The College of Cardinals l 

The presbyterium of the Roman bishop must primitively 
have consisted of all the priests of the Roman diocese. In the 
course of time the priestly college came to comprise only those 
in charge of the principal churches of the city (tituli), or the 
so-called cardinal priests ; besides these, the Pope's senate 
consisted also of the Roman deacons (cardinal deacons), and 
the neighbouring bishops, i.e. occupants of the suburbican 
sees, who, according to an arrangement of Stephen III (769), 
had to perform in turn for a week at a time the services at the 
Lateran. Even in former ages the cardinals occupied a some- 
what higher position than the rest of the clergy, but the 
importance of their dignity was greatly increased by the power 
of electing the Pope, which was conferred on them by Nicholas 
II, and which subsequently to Alexander III was exercised 
exclusively by them. In their new quality of papal electors 

1 Phillips, KR. vol. VI; J. P. Kirsch, Fin anzv er waltung des Kardinals- 
kollegiums im 13 m. 14 Jahrh. 1895 ; SagmUller, Tätigheit u. Stellung 
der Kardinäle bis Bonifaz VIII, 1896 ; P. M. Baumgarten, Untersuchungen 
u. Urkunden über die Camera Collegii Cardinalium für die Zeit 1295-143 7, 
1898; H. J. Wurm, Die Papstwahl, 1902, 






The College of Cardinals 363 

they shared in the increase of papal power and prestige. 
Important questions which formerly would have been laid 
before Councils were now discussed at the Consistory, or 
cardinals' meeting. Whereas in earlier times cardinals 
took rank according to their order, they gradually, since the 
thirteenth century, came to take precedence of all other 
dignitaries, even of archbishops and patriarchs. As a sign of 
their dignity, Innocent IV empowered all secular cardinals to 
wear the red hat, a privilege which was by Gregory XIII 
extended to cardinals belonging to religious orders. At a 
later period they also received the purple mantle (introduced 
by Paul II ?) and the title of Eminence (from Urban VIII, 
1630). Their incomes grew in proportion. In the thirteenth 
century it was quite regular for cardinals to hold a plurality 
of benefices. The college of cardinals also received one-half of 
many of the revenues of the Roman See, for instance of the 
Servitia communia — which bishops and abbots were compelled 
to pay to the Pope on their nomination or confirmation — 
of the visitation fees — which certain archbishops and abbots 
had to hand over when visiting the Curia, or at the time fixed 
for this visit — and of the census or taxes which were raised 
on the lands of the Roman Church, or which were paid by 
exempted churches and monasteries, or which were due from 
such States as had acknowledged the Pope's suzerainty 
(Naples and Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia, England). They also 
took their portion of Peter's Pence. Nicholas IV, who settled 
the cardinals' rights in this respect, also bestowed on them a 
share in the government, and allowed them a voice in the 
nomination or deprivation of the rectors in the provinces of the 
Papal States, and of the collectors whose duty it was to raise 
those of the taxes in which the cardinals shared. At the 
beginning of the period the number of cardinals was fifty- three 
(seven bishops, twenty-eight priests, eighteen deacons) ; but it 
was, later on, considerably reduced. Sixtus V (1586) finally 
fixed their number at seventy (six bishops, fifty priests, fourteen 
deacons). 

The cardinal bishoprics were those of Ostia, Albano, Porto, 
Silva Candida, or S. Rufina, Sabina, Praeneste (Palestrina), and 
Tusculum or Frascati. S. Rufina, as far back as the time of 
Calixtus II, was merged in the bishopric of Porto. 



364 A Manual of Church History 

§124 

Cathedral Chapters and Episcopal Elections — Vicars General 

and Titular Bishops 

I. After the same manner as the college of cardinals and 
through a like cause, the cathedral chapters l increased their 
importance considerably during this period. At the conclusion 
of the investiture quarrel, when the canonical election of 
bishops had been re-established, the whole city, according to 
ancient custom, performed the election. Gradually, however, 
the laity and common clergy lost this right, which was then 
reserved to the canons. The process seems to have been 
accomplished in the twelfth century, being presupposed by 
the Twelfth General Council (c. 24). In consequence of this 
alteration the canons also became the bishop's sole official coun- 
sellors, and even obtained the distinct right of helping him in 
the government of his diocese. The bishop was now required 
to seek their consent in a number of matters, whereas previously 
he had merely to ask their advice, without being in any way 
bound to follow it. There can be no doubt that the increase 
in their influence was in part due to their high birth, the chapters 
consisting largely of nobles, nobility of birth actually giving a 
claim to admission into some of these foundations. 

II. As the archdeacons had come in the course of time to 
usurp many of the bishop's own rights, especially by claiming 
separate jurisdiction, their office was variously curtailed in 
the twelfth and thirteenth century. At about the middle of the 
thirteenth century, the bishops adopted the custom of appoint- 
ing each a vicar general (Vicarius generalis, Officialis) over 
the diocese, and as the latter was empowered to quash the 
judgments of the archdeacon's court, the importance of the 
archdeacons was considerably diminished. As an institution 
they survived, however, to the time of the Council of Trent, and 
in certain localities, though shorn of most of their ancient 
privileges, they continued to exist as late as the eighteenth 
century. 

III. At the time of the Saracen invasions many bishops 
who had been expelled from their sees sought refuge in the 

1 Ph. Schneider, Diebisch. Domkapitel, 1885. 



Canon Law 365 

dioceses of colleagues more fortunate than themselves. On 
the demise of these bishops, successors were appointed in the 
hope that the dioceses would soon again be rescued from the 
power of the infidel. In this wise there arose the institution 
of titular bishops, that is of bishops consecrated to the title 
of a see held by the Moslem (hence styled bishops in partibus 
infideliurn), and who were consequently without a see of their 
own, but who acted as auxiliaries in episcopal work to the 
diocesan bishop in whose diocese they resided. The institu- 
tion was especially welcome in Germany, where the prince- 
bishops were only too pleased to shift the burden of their 
episcopal duties to other shoulders. 



§ 125 

The Corpus Iuris Canonici 1 

As the older collections of laws fell short of the logical 
requirements of the age, and as the ancient law was in many 
respects in contradiction with more recent legislation, Gratian, 
a monk of Bologna, who had been the first to teach canon law 
as a branch of knowledge distinct from theology, compiled 
(soon after 1140) a new collection which should not be open 
to the same reproach. This work, commonly known as the 
Decretum Gratiani, was received with great applause, was 
frequently glossed, and, by being adopted in the schools and 
courts, obtained legal authority. The legislative activity of 
the Church soon made it necessary, however, to collect and 
codify the decretals of later Popes, and this task, after several 
previous attempts, was imposed by Gregory IX on Raymond 
of Pennaforte (1230-34). His collection comprises five books, 
and received the title of Deer et ales Gregor ii IX. The same 
reason which necessitated this compilation continued to 
demand the production of similar works. The next in order 
of time was the collection made at the direction of Boniface 
VIII (1298), which, coming after the five books of Gregory 
IX, was styled Liber sextus. Another such collection was 
the Liber Clementinarum, called after its contents, which 

1 Phillips, KR. vol. IV, 1851 ; Schulte, Gesch. der Quellen u. Literatur 
des kanon. Rechtes, 3 vol. 1875-80. 



366 A Manual of Church History 

comprised the constitutions of Clement V. The last works 
of this character were the Extravagantes Ioannis XXII and 
the Extravagantes communes, compiled towards the end of the 
Middle Ages by the Frenchman Chappuis. The contents 
of the former are sufficiently indicated by its title ; the latter 
comprises the decretals of later Popes, as well as a few enact- 
ments of John XXII and his immediate successors not found 
in the previous work. All these collections together form the 
Corpus iuris canonici ; they were not, however, assembled 
in a single work until after the invention of the printing- 
press. 

Consisting really of several distinct works, the arrangement of 
the Corpus is not the same throughout. Gratian's Decretum consists 
of three parts, of which the first (and the same applies to the third, 
which is headed De consecratione) is divided into distinctiones and 
capita, whereas the subdivisions of the second are causae, quaestiones, 
and capita. The later collections are all divided up into ' books,' 
1 titles,' and ' chapters.' In referring to these works it is usual 
to indicate the chapter before the distinctive name of the part, 
and then to give the book and title. The symbol used for the 
collection of Gregory IX is X (=Extra) and for that of Boniface VIII 
it is in VI (= sexto), and it is customary to add also the heading of 
the title. Cp. the references given above (§ 122, II, V, VI, &c). 



§126 

Sacerdotal Celibacy 

I. As the attempts of previous Popes to secure obedience 
to the law of celibacy had met with only partial success, 
Gregory VII proceeded to enforce the law with greater 
severity. Not only did he, at the Lenten Council of 1074, 
re-enact the decrees of his predecessors Nicholas II and 
Alexander II, by which married priests had been forbidden to 
exercise their priestly functions and the laity required to 
avoid their ministry, but he also dispatched legates to see that 
these decrees were properly carried out. Whether he was 
impelled thereto by a political motive is very doubtful, and the 
words which are often ascribed to him, Non liber art potest 
ecclesia a Servitute laicorum, nisi clerici libcrentur ab uxoribus, 
are not to be found in his works, nor do we find even a 



Sacerdotal Celibacy 367 

hint of the idea which they express. The truth is rather that he 
looked on marriage as incompatible with the priesthood. The 
measures which he took gave rise to vehement protests. The 
Council of Paris in 1074 characterised the law of celibacy as 
intolerable and unreasonable. In Germany a letter went the 
rounds which purported to have been written by St. Ulrich 
of Augsburg (f 973) to Pope Nicholas (f 867) in commendation 
of priestly marriage. In spite of this, Gregory stood firm. 
Urban II went even farther, and at the Council of Mem (1089, 
c. 12) issued a decree which not only punished in the usual 
way all subdeacons (and consequently all higher clerics) who 
transgressed the law, but laid it down that in case of contumacy 
the wife was to be enslaved by the owner of the land. The 
decree was doubtless only meant as a deterrent, but it marks 
the beginning of a great alteration in practical discipline. 
Thus far, clerics in the higher orders could enter into a valid 
marriage, though they thereby exposed themselves to the loss 
of their office, but the decree of Mem rests on the assumption that 
a subdeacon is not a fit subject for marriage, and in consequence 
that a marriage entered on subsequent to ordination is null 
and void. This same idea was expressed explicitly by the 
Lateran Councils of 1123 (c. 21) and 1139 (c. 7), and by the 
Councils of Pisa (1135, c. 1) and Rheims (1148, c. 7). 

From the nature of the subject it is evident that effect could 
not immediately be given to the decrees in question. There 
were throughout the period frequent individual cases in which 
the law was disregarded, as we gather from constant complaints 
of Councils. Some of these Councils, such as that of Rome in the 
autumn of 1078 (c. n) and the Twelfth General Council (c. 14), 
were even compelled to threaten with punishments those bishops 
who for money or through weakness connived at the life led by 
their clergy. In certain countries the law was not put into complete 
operation till long after. In England the Council of Winchester 
(1076) saw no harm in allowing such of the clergy who lived in 
villages or were attached as chaplains to castles to retain their 
wives. In Hungary the Council of Gran (1114, c. 31), reverting 
to the practice of antiquity, which is that of the Eastern Church, 
and in consideration of human frailty, gave a general permission 
to such of the clergy as had been married before ordination to 
continue to live with their wives. The law was enforced, and then 
only with difficulty, in Poland, Silesia, and Moravia towards the 
end of the twelfth century, in Sweden and Denmark at about the 
middle of the thirteenth century, and in Hungary only after 1267. 



368 A Manual of Church History 

Cp. Hefele, V, 20 ff.. and for further documents, p. 1170. Th. Qu. 
1886, pp. 179-201. 

II. In the Eastern Church a practice diametrically opposed 
to that of the West came into operation, probably during this 
same period. This was to appoint to the cure of souls only 
married men, in other words it became the general rule to 
contract marriage previous to ordination. A consequence 
of this practice was that the bishops, on whom continence 
was imposed by custom, came to be chosen from among the 
monks. 

It is not easy to determine when the practice arose, but the 
Russian Council of 1274 seems to have been acquainted with it. 
Cp. Strahl, Gesch. d. russ. K. 1830, pp. 260-62 ; Schaguna 
(Kompendium des kanon. Rechts, 1868, § 183) wrongly traces it back 
to Canon XIII of the Council in Trullo. 



§ 127 
Monasticism * 

A. General Remarks 

Religious community life looms very large during this period, 
and the number of vocations to the cloister is quite remarkable. 
The phenomenon is, however, quite natural, and was merely 
the outcome of the ascetical spirit which animated those 
ages, and which could nowhere expand itself so well as in the 
monastery. Owing to the growth of monasticism, the institu- 
tion now takes a more important place in the Church than 
heretofore ; the Gregorian reform, for instance, owed its success 
very largely to the support of the Cluniac congregation, and, 
in a later age, similar support was furnished to the Papacy 
by the mendicant Orders. 

Most of the earlier foundations of the period adopted 
the Benedictine rule. It was not, however, long before new 
societies were formed, and as the differences between them 
threatened confusion, the Fourth Lateran Council (c. 13) 
and the Second Council of Lyons (c. 23) were impelled to 

1 Helyot, Hist, des ordres monastiques y 8 vol. 1714-19 ; Henrion-Fehr, 
Allg. Gesch. der Mönchsorden, 2 vol. 1855 ; F. Hurter, Gesch. P. Innocenz III, 
vol. III-V. Cp. § 72. 



Mona$ticism 369 

forbid the foundation of any more new Orders. It was at the 
time of the previous Council that the mendicant Orders came 
into being, which, together with the Orders of Knighthood and 
the so-called Third Orders, form the most noteworthy contribu- 
tions of the period to the conventual life. The characteristics 
of these institutions are the following. 

The mendicant Orders not only bound each individual 
friar to poverty, but also forbade the monastery to possess 
more than was absolutely necessary, leaving the upkeep of the 
house to the charity of the Faithful among whom the friars 
worked as missioners. The Orders of Knighthood or Military 
Orders came into being during the crusades and sought to 
combine the duties of the knight with those of the monk, 
undertaking to protect Christian pilgrims on their way to the 
Holy Places against attacks from the infidel, and generally 
seeking to defend by the sword the Christian cause in the East. 
In the case of both mendicant and military Orders we find 
traces of the period in which they were founded. Both are 
highly centralised and monarchical institutions, having a single 
head, known variously as the General or the Grand Master, 
whereas the Benedictine and allied Orders always consisted of a 
number of independent houses, each enjoying almost equal rights. 
This centralisation soon made a new disposition necessary ; 
each Order was divided into a certain number of provinces or 
tongues, at the head of each of which stood a provincial or 
master. 

The Third Order was the result of a combination of the 
religious with the secular life. Its members continued to live 
in the world, but devoted themselves to penance and asceticism, 
or even adopted in a certain measure the pious practices of 
the Order with which they were associated, for which reason 
they were sometimes called fratres de paenitentia. The founder 
of the institution was Francis of Assisi, who conceived it for 
the benefit of married people, who, being prevented by their 
partner from entering the cloister, were anxious for a rule of 
life which should serve in lieu thereof. Unmarried people 
were, nevertheless, to be found even at an early date among 
the tertiaries, whilst other religious bodies, apart from the 
Franciscans, also founded Third Orders of their own. 

It was also a pious custom of the time to receive the monastic 

VOL. I. BB 



370 A Manual of Church History 

garb when at the point of death, or to be buried in a monastery, 
so as to share, when dead, in the blessings and graces of the 
cloister. 



B. The Carthusians and Cistercians 

I. The Order of the Carthusians l is an outgrowth of the 
community established (in 1084) by St. Bruno of Cologne in 
the desert of the Chartreuse (Carthusium) near Grenoble. In 
the office of scholastic which he had filled at Rheims he had 
been shocked by the unholy life of Manasses, archbishop of the 
city, and, led by his love for retirement, had devised a rule 
similar to that of the Camaldolese, which, combining the 
characteristics of the life of the hermit and of the conventual 
monk, became that of an Order remarkable among all for 
austerity of life. Bruno also established a second settlement 
of his Order at La Torre in Calabria (1091), where he died (1101). 
The main elements of the rule, which was committed to writing 
by Guigo the fifth prior (1137), consist in the observance of 
almost unbroken silence, in entire abstinence from flesh-meat, 
and in the division of the day between prayer and labour, the 
latter being either agricultural or literary. The monks wear a 
white habit, and their cells consist of detached cottages built 
against the wall of enclosure. At its most flourishing period 
the Order reckoned some 180 houses, twelve of which were 
convents of women. 

II. The foundation of the Cistercian 2 Order was laid by 
Robert, abbot of Molesme, who, disgusted with the life led 
by his monks, erected a new monastery at Citeaux (Cisterctum) 
near Dijon (1098). To counteract the relaxation which the 
Cluniac monasteries had begotten of their wealth, he deter- 
mined to apply the rule of St. Benedict in all its purity and 
severity. It was not, however, long before certain alterations 
were made in the mode of life, with this consequence, that the 

1 Annates Ord. Carth. 1 084-1 429, ed. Le Couteulx, 8 vol. 1888-91. Bg. 
of Bruno by Tappert, 1872 ; Löbbel, 1899 ; Gorse, 1902. 

2 Nomasticon Cisterc. ed. Sejalon, 1892 ; Manrique, Annates Cist. 4 fol. 
1643 ; L. Janauschek, Orig. Cisterc. I, 1877 ; E. Hoffmann, Das Konver- 
seninstitut des Cisterzienserordens, 1905 {Freib. Hist. Studien, I). Bg. of 
St. Bernard by Neander, 2nd ed. 1848 (Engl. Trans. Life and Times of St. 
Bernard, 1843) ; Vacandard, 2 vol. 1895 i F. Winter, Cisterzienser des 
nordöstl. Deutschlands, 3 vol. 1868-71, 



Monasticism 371 

foundation assumed the appearance rather of a new Order 
than of a mere branch of the Benedictines. Abbot Alberci 
(1099-1109) exchanged the black for a white habit. His 
successor, Stephen Harding, who compiled the statutes known 
as the Charta caritatis, pushed the observance of poverty to the 
extremest limit, insisting on the greatest simplicity even in 
the adornment of the monastic church. This Order also held 
exemption in contempt. As the Order owes its celebrity 
largely to St. Bernard, the Cistercians are sometimes called 
Bernardines. After the admission of St. Bernard, who brought 
with him thirty friends and relatives (11 12), the reputation of 
the Cistercians became so great that it was soon necessary 
to erect the monasteries of La Ferte, Pontigny, Clairvaux, 
and Morimond. Bernard himself became abbot of Clairvaux. 
In 1300 the number of monasteries of men alone had grown 
to near 700, and the number of convents of women was perhaps 
even greater. The Cistercians were especially successful in 
contributing to the spread of the Gospel among the people of 
the north. 

C. The Canons Regular ; the Premonstratensians x 

The same movement which called into life so many cloistral 
institutions, also made itself manifest in a new development 
of the chapters of canons. The Roman Councils of 1059 and 
1063 (c. 4), considering the possession of private property as 
incompatible with the canonical life, issued an appeal to 
clerics to share all their revenues and to lead an Apostolic life. 
This appeal was not disregarded, and in the twelfth century 
many chapters bound themselves by the ordinary religious 
vows and thus, side by side with the Canonici saeculares, we 
now rind Canonici reguläres. Most of the latter adopted the 
Augustinianrule, which came into prominence about this time, 
and though, to begin with, the chapters of canons regular had 
mostly no connection one with the other, they are found soon 
after grouped in congregations, some of which counted as many 
as a hundred houses. Of these institutes the most important 
was that of the Premonstratensians or Norbertines. They 

1 KL. II, 1829-35; Bernhardi, Lothar v. Supplinburg, 1879, pp. 83-108 ; 
F. Winter, Die Prämonstr. im nordöstl. Deutschland, 1868 ; Madeleine, 
Hist, de S. Norbert, 1894 i "P* A. Zak, Der hl. Norbert, 1900. 

BB 2 



37^ A Manual of Church History 

were founded by St. Norbert, a native of Xanten on the Rhine, 
and their mother-house was the monastery of Premontre or 
Praemonstratum near Laon, established in 1120 ; the founder 
soon after (n 26) became archbishop of Magdeburg, and 
introduced his canons into Germany. They afterwards be- 
came so numerous as to attain the rank and importance of a 
real Order. Their habit is white. 

Other similar societies were : (1) the canons regular of the 
Lateran ; (2) the congregation of St. Rufus near Avignon ; (3) 
the canons regular of the Holy Sepulchre, founded at Jerusalem in 
1 1 14 ; (4) the congregation of St. Victor at Paris (mg. by Fourier 
Bonnard, 1904) ; (5) the Gilbertines, established by Gilbert of 
Sempringham in 1148 (mg. by Graham, 1904) ; (6) the canons of 
the Cross, who wore a red star and who owed their foundation to 
the Blessed Agnes of Bohemia (1236) ; (7) the congregation of 
St. Genevieve at Paris. 

D. The Mendicant Orders 

I. St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) l was the founder of the 
first great mendicant Order, that of the Friars Minor, Fratres 
minores, or Franciscans. 2 After having led a gay life in his 
youth, he resolved to renounce the world, and aft£r he had 
been expelled from his father's house (1207) for having given 
away to the chapel of St. Damian some rolls of cloth belonging 
to his parents, he devoted himself to the service of the poor 
and sick, to the restoration of the above-mentioned chapel, 
and of the church of the Holy Angels, or Portiuncula, near 
Assisi. Two years later, in this same church, happening to 
be struck by the words which had been uttered by Christ 
when sending forth His disciples (Matt. x. 9, 10), he came 
to feel that his task was to preach penance. He was soon 
joined by a few companions, and together they formed a 
community known as the Brethren of Penance (Viri paeniten- 
tiales), living under the so-called first rule (1209-10), which 
bound them to the strict observance of the Gospel precepts. 

1 Bg. by E. Vogt, 1840 ; K. Hase, 1856 ; Sabatier, 1894 ( En g l - Trans. 
1894); Prudenzano, 1896; Little, 1897; Christen, 2nd ed. 1902; 
Doreau, 1903 ; G. Schnürer, 1905. 

2 L. Wadding, Annates Minorum, 8 fol. 1625 ; ed. II (to 1611), 24 fol. 
1771-1864; H. Böhmer, Analekten zur Gesch. des Franziskus v. A. 1904; 
W. Götz, Quellen zur Gesch. d. hl. Fr. 1904 ; RHE. 1906, pp: 410-33 {La 
question franciscaine) ; K. Müller, Die Anfänge des Minor itenordens u. d, 
Bussbruderschaften, 1885 ; Provinciale 0. fr. m. ed. C. Eubel, 1892. 



Mendicant Friars 373 

The community soon reached the status of an Order and was 
formally approved by Honorius III in 1223, who in 1221 had 
already sanctioned a new redaction of the rule drawn up 
with the help of Cardinal Ugolino. The friars, who wore a 
brown (or grey, cp. Grey Friars) habit, became extraordinarily 
popular. Maidens, of whom the most prominent was St. 
Clare of Assisi (1212), widows, and married persons of both 
sexes were moved to join, and thus there arose a second 
Order of St. Francis, intended for women, and known as the 
Poor Clares or Damianists l on account of their mother-house 
being situated near the chapel of St. Damian. Another 
association was also founded for the benefit of those desiring 
to remain in the world, and its members were styled Fratres 
de paenitentia. 2 This association, or Third Order, as it came 
to be designated afterwards, possessed houses of tertiaries for 
both men and women, which owed their existence to the fact 
that members of the Third Order living in the world occa- 
sionally elected to take solemn vows and retire to the cloister. 
In consequence of a decision of Leo X, that all who adopted the 
rule revised by him should belong not to the Third, but to the 
First Order, the congregations of regular tertiaries were after- 
wards merged into the aforesaid First Order. 

Whilst the new institution was spreading widely — a Pro- 
vinciate drawn up c. 1340 speaks of 1,453 houses — it was being 
rent within by great dissensions. The severity of the rule in the 
course of time proved displeasing to some. Elias of Cortona, 3 
Francis's successor in the generalship, introduced some relaxa- 
tions, and though his innovations were vehemently opposed 
by Anthony of Padua 4 and Caesarius of Spires, and twice 
led to his being deposed, they left their mark. Many of his 
brethren sided with him, and as others remained unalterably 
attached to the rule in all its old severity, the Order was 
practically split into two parties, who were in a state of per- 
manent warfare. The only general who succeeded in maintain- 
ing the peace during his period of office was Bonaventure. 

1 On the beginning of the Order, see Rom. Qu. XVI (1902), 93-124; 
Schnürer, pp. 60-68. 

2 Regula antiqua fratrum et sororum de paenitentia, ed. Sabatier, 
1 901 ; P. Mandonnet, Les rögles et le gouvernement de Vordre de paenitentia 
au XIII e siede, 1902. 

3 E. Lempp, Fröre Elie de Cortone, 1901, 

4 Mg. by K. Wilk, 1907, 



374 A Manual of Church History 

Nicholas III attempted in vain to pacify the combatants by 
his Bull Exiit qui seminat (1279), an d Celestine V was ulti- 
mately obliged to sever the stricter party from the rest of the 
Order and incorporate it in the Order of the Celestinian- 
hermits which he himself had founded. 

II. The second great mendicant Order, that of the Friars 
Preachers, Fratres pr dedicator es, or Dominicans, 1 is hardly 
less ancient than the Franciscans. It was founded with the 
object of converting the Albigenses. When St. Dominic (1170- 
1221) 2 first decided to devote himself to this mission, finding 
that many Catholics allowed their children to be educated 
by the heretics, he determined to erect at Prouille, near the 
Pyrenees, a convent of women for the education of girls (1206). 
A little later (1215) he established at Toulouse an association 
of preachers, which received the approval of the Holy See, 
and soon (1220) developed a rule of its own, in lieu of the rule 
of St. Augustine by which it had been previously governed. 
At the commencement of the next century the Order had 
already 562 monasteries scattered through twenty-one pro- 
vinces. The colour of the habit is white ; to the black mantle 
worn outside the Dominicans owe their old name of Black 
Friars. The saint also laid the foundation of a secular 
association for the defence of Church property known as the 
Militia Christi, which developed subsequently into a Third 
Order, the Brethren of Penance of St. Dominic. 3 

III. The Carmelites are an older foundation than the 
Franciscans or Dominicans. Their Order may be said to 
have begun when the crusader Berthold of Calabria took up 
his abode with ten companions (1156) near the cave of Elias 
on Mount Carmel. The Carmelites themselves even claim to 
be the lineal descendants of the school of prophets established 
by Elias. The institution, however, only became a mendicant 
Order when it migrated to Europe in the thirteenth century 
and exchanged the hermit life for life in community. Its first 
general in the West was Simon Stock. In 1247 Innocent IV 
relaxed the rule somewhat to make it suitable to the colder 

1 Mamachi, Annates O. Pr. 5 fol. 1746 ; Monumenta ord. fratrum praedi- 
catorum historica, 10 vol. 1 897-1 901. 

2 Bg. by Lacordaire, 1840 (Eng. Trans. 1883) ; Drane, 1857-67; Pradier, 
1902. 

3 Kleinermanns, Der dr. 0. v. d. Busse des hl. D. 1884. 



The Orders of Knighthood 375 

climate of the Carmelites' new home. The Order increased 
remarkably, its cause being furthered not a little by the 
Scapular which St. Simon Stock was said to have received 
from the Blessed Virgin as a preventative against unprepared 
death. 1 The habit of the Order is brown. From the colour 
of their cloak they were, however, known as White Friars. 

IV. Apart from the canons regular of St. Augustine, 
numerous heremitical congregations obeying the Augustinian 
rule sprang into being during the twelfth and thirteenth 
century. Among these were the Guillielmites, called after 
St. William of Aquitaine (founded c. 1156), and the Jambonites, 
founded by Blessed John Bonus of Mantua (1 168-1249) > these 
produced a fourth great mendicant Order. To prevent quarrels, 
such as had already occurred between Franciscans and Jam- 
bonites on account of the likeness of habit, Innocent IV 
united all the hermits living in Tuscany into a single society, 
that of the Augustinians, or, to use its full title, of the hermits of 
St. Augustine, and the union was enforced throughout Europe 
by Alexander IV (1256). The habit of this Order is black. 

E. The Orders of Knighthood 2 

I. The Order of St. John 3 had its cradle in the Hostel of 
St. John the Baptist at Jerusalem, which had been erected in 
1048 by merchants from Amalfi for the reception and care of 
pilgrims. The conquest of the Holy City* by the crusaders 
greatly increased the importance of the foundation. Gerard 
(t c 1 120) , who was then master of the hostel, gave it a new rule, 
and not long after new houses made their appearance, not only 
in Palestine, but also in the West, principally at the Mediter- 
ranean ports. From its beginning the Order had combined 
military duties with those of the hospitaller, as its task had 
always been both to serve and nurse the pilgrims, and to 
act as their escort. Under Gerard's successor, Raymond du 
Puy, the hospitallers already constituted a military power of 
some importance. The division between fighting brethren 

1 Cp. Launoy, Dissert. V de S. Stockii viso, de Sabbat, bullae privil. et 
Scap. Carmel. sodalitate, Opp. II, II. 

2 Prutz, Kulturgesch. der Kreuzzüge, pp. 233 ff. 

3 Mg. by Winterfeld, 1859 ; Ortenburg, 1866 ; Delaville le Roulx ; 
1904. 



376 A Manual of Church History 

and serving brethren, or between knights and servants, arose, 
however, only later, when the Order had almost lost its 
character of an institution for the care of the sick. At home 
the knights wore a black mantle with a white Maltese cross, 
on the field they wore a red coat-of-mail. 

II. The Order of the Templars, 1 Pauper es commilitones 
de teniplo, came into life c. 1119, when eight French knights, 
headed by Hugo de Payens, took the common religious vows, 
adding another, viz. to defend the Holy Land and all Christian 
pilgrims. The name proceeds from the fact that the knights 
were at first lodged in the king's palace at Jerusalem, which, 
owing to its situation, was known as Solomon's temple. 
Partly through the influence of St. Bernard, who helped to draw 
up its rule at the Council of Troyes in 1128, the Order soon 
became very prominent, and accomplished many deeds of 
valour in Palestine. By boundless ambition, and one-sided 
prosecution of its own interests, it also succeeded in doing great 
damage to the Christian cause in the East. The dress of the 
Order consisted of a white mantle with a red cross. 

III. The foundation of the Teutonic knights 3 was laid with 
the erection of a field hospital near Acre in 1190 by the united 
efforts of the members of the German hostel at Jerusalem, 
of a few merchants from Lübeck and Bremen, and of duke 
Frederick of Swabia. As an Order it dates back, however, only 
to 1 198. These knights, under their worthy Grand Master 
Hermann of Salza, undertook the subjection and conversion 
of the yet heathen Prussians (1226), and after the fall of Acre 
they transferred their headquarters to Marienburg on the Nogat. 
Their distinctive dress was a white mantle with a black cross. 

IV. Owing to the similarity of the conditions then prevailing 
in Palestine and in the Spanish peninsula, some Orders of knight- 
hood came into existence in Spain and Portugal. They originated 
in the latter half of the twelfth century. Their importance was, 
however, merely local. Such were the Orders of Calatrava, of 
Alcantara, of Santiago de Compostella, of Avis, and of the 
Wing (of St. Michael). 

1 Mg. by Wilcke, 2 vol. 2nd ed. i860 ; G. Schnürer, Die ursprüngliche 
Templerregel, 1903; H. Prutz, Die Autonomie des Templerordens, 1905 
(SB. München). 

2 Salles, Annales de Vordre Teutonique, 1887; A. Koch, }i. v. Salza, 
J885. 



Smaller 'Religious Orders $yy 

F. Smaller Orders and Associations 

Besides the Orders already mentioned, numerous smaller 
religious societies came into existence during the period. Such 
were : — 

I. The Order of Grandmont, founded by Stephen of Tigerno, 
who erected the first monastery on Mount Muret near Limoges 
(1076), but which derives its name from the neighbouring Grand- 
mont, whither his disciples betook themselves on the master's 
death (n 24). They obliged themselves to extreme poverty and 
refused to possess landed property. 

II. The Antonines, or hospitallers of St. Anthony, were insti- 
tuted as an association of lay-brothers, at Didier-de-la-Mothe in 
Dauphine, by a French noble Gaston and his son Guerin in thanks- 
giving for the latter's recovery from St. Anthony's Fire (1095). 
The brotherhood was later on erected into an Order (1218), and 
later still into a congregation of canons regular (1297), and thereby 
robbed of its former character. Cp. Advielle, Hist, de Vordre 
hosp. de S. Antoine, 1883. 

III. The Order of Fontevraud (near Angers), founded by Robert 
of Arbrisselles (1100), was noted for its austerity, and was also 
remarkable on account of its double monasteries, in which the 
abbess always had the direction of both houses. J. v. Walter, 
Die ersten Wanderprediger Frankreichs, I., R. Arbrissel, 1903. 

IV. The Humiliati, according to their oldest rule (1201), were a 
brotherhood of artisans (principally workers in wool), some of whom 
even then lived in communities, as monks, nuns, and canons. They 
came into existence at Milan in the twelfth century. Tiraboschi, 
Vetera Humiliat. monumenta, 3 torn. 1766-68. 

V. The Bridge-building Brotherhood (Fratres pontifices), an 
association well known in the south of France, is supposed to have 
been established by a certain Benezet. It undertook the building 
and repair of bridges and roads, as well as the housing and protection 
of travellers. It was approved by Clement III (n89),but on the 
relaxation of its rule was abolished by Pius II. Cp. Gr£goire, 
Recherches hist, sur les congregations hospit. des fr eres pontifes, 1818 ; 
Thurston, St. Benezet and his Biographer (M. A. B. de Saint- 
Venant), Cath. World, Dec. 1907. 

VI. The Trinitarians were an Order founded by St. John of 
Matha and St. Felix of Valois (1198) for the redemption of Christian 
slaves from the Saracens. They had numerous houses in both 
France and Spain. P. Deslandres, Vordre des Trinitaires, 2 vol. 
1903. 

VII. The Order of Our Lady of Mercy {de mercede redemptionis 
captivorum) was a similar foundation due to Peter Nolascus and 
Raymond of Pennaforte (1223). For a whole century it remained 
an Order of knighthood ; in consequence, however, of a decree of 
John XXII ,to the effect .that the general., mu?t ; . needs, be a priest, 



378 A Manual of Church History 

the knights migrated in a body to other Orders. St. a. ML. 
1896, II. 

VIII. The Hospitallers of the Holy Ghost were founded by 
Guido of Montpellier in 11 98, and soon spread to other towns, 
e.g. to Rome (S. Spirito in Sassia). Mg. by Brune, 1892. 

IX. The Servites (Servi B. V. M.) were started in 1233 by a 
few rich merchants of Florence, and devoted themselves to the 
especial worship of the Blessed Virgin. The Order comprised 
convents of women, one branch being known as the Mantellate. 
The Third Order owes its origin to St. Philip Benizi (f 1285), and 
to St. Juliana Falconeria, who was its first member. Cp. Hist, 
de Vordre des S. (1233-1310), 2 vol. 1886; Soulier, Vie de saint 
Philippe Benizi, propagateur de Vordre des S. 1886. 

X. The Beghines and Beghards, the former being an association 
of maidens and widows devoted to education and to the nursing of 
the sick, founded at Liege towards the end of the twelfth century 
by Lambert le Beghe ; the latter, a similar association of men, 
founded somewhat later, but which soon deviated from its object, 
and incurred a persecution to which it succumbed before the end 
of the Middle Ages. Cp. Hallmann, Gesch. des Ursprungs der 
belg. Begh. 1843 ; Z. f. KG. XVII, 279 f. 

XI. Finally, we may mention the Scottish monasteries of 
Germany. They owed their foundation to Marian, an Irishman 
(Scotus), who erected in 1073 the monastery of Weih St. Peter, near 
Ratisbon. The principal monastery was, however, that of St. James, 
founded in 1090, in the same city, and, all told, the congregation 
possessed twelve houses. In the course of the fifteenth century 
several of the monasteries, owing to their relaxation of discipline, 
were handed over to German monks. In the sixteenth century, 
on account of a misunderstanding caused by the name of Scotus, 
some of the houses were appropriated by monks from Scotland, who 
remained in possession at Erfurt till 1820, and at St. James in 
Ratisbon till even more recently. Cp. Z. /. christl. Archäologie u. 
Kunst, ed. Quast and Otte, I (1856), 21-30; 49-58; St. Bened. 
1895, pp. 64-84. 



CHAPTER V 

WORSHIP, MORALS, AND CHRISTIAN ART 1 

§ 128 

Prayer and Worship 

I. As the word Sacrament during both antiquity and the 
earlier Middle Ages had been used in several meanings, a 
certain uncertainty prevailed as to what was a sacrament and 
what was not. As soon, however, as the word obtained a 
settled significance, we find unanimity as to the number of the 
sacraments, the sevenfold number being accepted by the Greek 
as well as by the Latin Church. Its first witnesses are Gregory 
of Bergamo (ti.146), Peter Lombard (ti.164), and the Vita 
Ottonis Bambergensis (fii39). 2 

II. Considerable alterations occurred in the administration 
of the Holy Eucharist. 3 Early in the period, the common 
eastern method, or Communio intincta (§ 100), was adopted in 
certain parts of the West. It was, however, condemned as 
not in agreement with Christ's command, and the separate 
communion under both elements was insisted on. In spite of 
this, it became the practice in the twelfth century to com- 
municate the laity only under the species of bread, and 
communion under both kinds gradually ceased to be the rule. 
For a while, however, in some places wine, into which a few drops 
from the priest's chalice had been poured, continued to be given 
to the Faithful. Communion was henceforth only given to 
those who had attained the use of reason, in consequence of 

1 G. Grupp, Kultur gesch. des MA. 2 vol. 1894. 

2 Krawutzky, Zählung und Ordnung d. hl. S. in ihrer gesch. Entw. 1865. 
Gregory's Tractatus de veritate corporis Christi was first edited by Uccelli, 
1877 ; it was republished by Hurter in his Opuscula selecta, 1879. 

3 J. Smend, Kelchv er sagung u. Kelchspendung, 1898. 



380 A Manual of Church History 

which the old usage of administering communion to infants 
immediately after baptism became obsolete. As a substitute 
for communion, the ablutions of the Mass, or even a sip of 
common wine, continued to be administered to the newly 
baptised. All these changes rested on the desire of avoiding 
any profanation, and, conjointly, of showing the greatest 
possible veneration for the Sacrament. As a protest against 
the teaching of Berengar, it became the practice, subse- 
quent to the eleventh century, to elevate the Host im- 
mediately after the consecration, that it might be adored by 
the Faithful. Gregory X enacted that, as a sign of the respect 
due to the Eucharist, the Faithful should kneel from the 
consecration to the Communion, except indeed at Christmas 
time and during Eastertide. Another custom which then 
arose was that of kneeling — on Sundays and feast-days and 
during Paschal time it was usual only to bow the head — 
when the Blessed Sacrament was being carried to the sick. 
Urban IV finally instituted a special feast in honour of this 
Sacrament. 

As veneration for the Sacrament increased, its reception 
became less frequent, 1 nor was the fear of approaching too often 
confined to the mass of the people, who had already previously 
abandoned the practice of frequent Communion, it affected even 
the more devout folk, who now refrained from communicating 
more than from three to six times in the year. The Fourth 
Lateran Council (c. 21) laid it down that the Eucharist must 
be received at least at Easter. 

Mass also came to be said less frequently. The Fourth 
Lateran Council complains (c. 17) that many priests celebrate 
scarcely four times in the course of the year. On the other 
hand, some priests continued to indulge in the old practice of 
saying more than one Mass daily, until this was forbidden by 
the Councils of the thirteenth century, 2 which made it a rule 
to allow two Masses only in cases of necessity, at burials, on 
Christmas Day and at Easter. One of these Councils (Tarra- 
gona, 1239, c - 6) even restricted the concession to Christmas 
Day, a restriction which gradually came to be applied generally. 

1 Dalgairns, Holy Communion, 1861. 

2 London, 1200, c. 2; Oxford, 1222, c. 6; Treves, 1227, c. 3; Rouen, 
1231, c. 12. 



Prayer and Worship 381 

As for the theology of the mystery, the Church's doctrine 
of the nature of the change wrought in the Mass, as it was laid 
down in opposition to that of Berengar of Tours, received 
adequate expression in the term of Transubstantiation. This 
word, which was not unknown in the twelfth century (it 
is first found in Hildebert, bishop of Le Mans, f H33), was 
chosen as the fittest by the Fourth Lateran Council, and soon 
came into general use. 

III. The custom of redeeming penance had already in the 
previous period adversely affected the Church's penitentiary 
discipline. Still greater alterations were now made by the 
introduction of the doctrine of Indulgences, 1 which offered the 
complete or partial remission of the punishment due to sin, 
in exchange for the performance of some good work. The 
crusades played a very important part in the adoption of 
Indulgences. Urban II began by granting a plenary indul- 
gence to every crusader, and soon this came to be granted 
not only to those who actually took the cross, but to those also 
who equipped a crusader, or gave an equivalent sum of money. 
Lesser indulgences were also available for those who could only 
afford to pay a smaller sum towards the cause of the Holy Land. 
At the same period we also hear of indulgences being granted 
for the building of churches and monasteries, and subsequent 
to the twelfth century they were even bestowed for such 
wholly secular works as the construction of bridges and the 
repair of roads. Under these circumstances public penance 
gradually lost ground. Peter of Poitiers (t 1205) mentions in 
his Book of Sentences (III. 14) that even in his day there were 
many Churches in which it was unknown. The Church had 
accordingly to find other means of keeping alive the spirit of 
penance, and among the dispositions taken to secure this end 
the famous decree of the Fourth Lateran Council (c. 21) holds the 
first place : each one of the Faithful, who has attained to the use 
of reason, must confess his sins at least once a year to his parish 
priest, and fulfil the penance imposed on him to the best of his 
ability. 

IV. To the end of the twelfth century the ordinary prayers 
in use among the Faithful were the Our Father and the Creed. 

1 A. Gottlob, Kreuzablass u. Almosenablass, 1906 (Kirchenrechtl. Ahb. 
ed» by Stutz, 30-31), 



3Ö2 



A Manual of Church History 



We now hear of the Hail Mary. In its earlier form the latter 
comprised only the angel's salutation and that of Elizabeth. A 
little later it is found with the addition : ' Jesus (Christ), Amen'; 
the latter portion of the prayer, beginning ' Holy Mary,' and 
containing the petition for a happy death, is first heard of in the 
fifteenth century. The prayer in its present form has, however, 
been in popular use only since the middle of the seventeenth 
century. Cp. Hist. /. V (1884), 88-116. 

V. The Rosary came into use with the Hail Mary. Its origin 
is very obscure, and it seems to have been the result of a gradual 
development. Only at the end of the Middle Ages was its intro- 
duction ascribed to St. Dominic by Alan de la Roche (Alanus 
de Rupe, f 1475), himself a Dominican, and a great advocate of 
the Rosary. The devotion became general in the sixteenth 
century. Cp. Holzapfel, St. Dominikus u. der Rosenkranz, 1903, 
in the publications of the Kirchenhist. Seminar (of Munich) I, 21. 

VI. The Salve Regina was a common hymn and prayer from 
the end of the eleventh century, the pilgrims and crusaders of the 
first crusade singing it on their march. It was also the daily song 
of the seafaring people on the Spanish coasts, and possibly for 
this reason was ascribed to the bishops Adhemar of Puy and 
Peter of Compostella (1090), though probably both its text and 
the old tune to which it was set belong to Hermannus Contractus 
(§ 107), KL. X, 1580. 



§ 129 

Church Festivals 

I. Far and away the most important feast which originated 
in this period is that of Corpus Christi. 1 The visions of the nun 
Juliana, in which she perceived the moon (symbol of the cycle 
of feasts) in full splendour, save that in one quarter it was dark, 
led to the establishment of the festival in the diocese of Liege 
(1246). Urban IV, previously James of Troyes, and arch- 
deacon of Liege, imposed its observance on the entire Church 
(1264), though, as he died shortly after, the decree was not 
generally obeyed. The feast only came to be universally 
celebrated after the decree had been repeated by Clement V 
and John XXII at the beginning of the fourteenth century. 
It was at this time likewise that the feast obtained its present 
character, and began to be accompanied by the procession, 
which until then had been customary only in a few Churches. 

1 R. Qu. XVI (1902), 170-80. 



Church Festivals 383 

Other general, or at least common, feasts which now make 
their appearance are those of the Exaltation of the Cross, 
of the dedication of the local church, of St. Lawrence, St. 
Nicholas, and St. Michael. Each province and diocese had, 
moreover, its peculiar festivals. Generally speaking, the 
number of feast-days was very considerable, though not 
everywhere the same. The Council of Szaboles in Hungary 
(1092, c. 38) mentions (apart from the Sundays) thirty- 
eight, that of Toulouse (1229, c. 26) forty special feasts. 
The Council of Oxford (1222, c. 8) speaks of fifty-three 
whole holidays, besides the twenty-one half-holidays on 
which work might be performed after the service held at 
the church. The number in Spain cannot have been much 
smaller, seeing that the Council of Tarragona (1239, c. 5), out 
of compassion for the needs of the poor and to prevent idle- 
ness, was moved to decrease the number, notwithstanding 
which the Council still insists on the full observance of no less 
than thirty-nine festivals. The agglomeration of feast-days at 
Easter and Whitsun must have been especially irksome to 
business. We consequently find that, in several calendars of 
the period, the Wednesdays after Easter and Whitsun are set 
down as work-days ; in one (that of Tarragona) even Whit- 
Tuesday is not a holiday. 

II. The Mysteries, 1 which were used in the first instance 
to illustrate the Passion and the Resurrection, were soon 
joined by miracle plays setting forth the events of Christ's life 
and the deeds of several of the saints. From the eleventh 
century these sacred dramas added considerably to the 
solemnity of the feasts on which they were performed. The 
representations were at first given in the churches, and so long 
as actors and audience were animated with the proper spirit, 
they served both to edify and to instruct. At a later date when 
these conditions were no longer present, and when theatricals 
had been gradually banished from the churches (since the 
thirteenth century), these plays still afforded a not unsuitable 
recreation with which to while away the enforced holidays. 

Besides these plays we hear of others of quite a different char- 
acter, of parodies of the church celebrations at the Feast of Fools 

1 Mone, Schausp. d. MA. 2 vol. 1846; L. Wirth, Die Oster- u. Pas- 
sionsspiele bis z. 16 Jahrh. 1889 ; H. Anz, Die lat. Magier spiele, 1905. 



384 A Manual of Church History 

and Feast of Asses, recitations of merry tales and jesting references 
to the clergy at a similar feast held at Easter. Such buffooneries, 
which were completely out of place in church, were early condemned 
by both Councils and Popes. The prohibition remained long 
after a dead letter. The Feast of Fools, which was peculiarly 
French, continued to be observed until the beginning of the seven- 
teenth century, and the Feast of Asses survived even longer. 
Du Tilliot, Mem. pour servir a Vhist. de la fete des fous, 1741 ; 
St. a. ML. 1894, II, 571-87. 



§ 130 

Ethico-Religious Status of the Period 1 

This period, like the previous one, and even more so, 
presents remarkable contrasts. The history of the times is 
replete with manifestations of their rudeness and immorality ; 
in the absence of a strong and settled government, and so long 
as conflict prevailed between Church and State, abuses were 
inevitable. When too much play is given to the individual, 
the result can only be an increase of the selfish spirit. Yet the 
period had its bright as well as its dark side, in fact scarcely 
any other is so rich in great men and good deeds. We here 
meet a whole series of noble personages among the Popes and 
bishops, among the missionaries, crusaders, and writers, and in 
the body of the laity. Characters such as those of Bernard 
of Clairvaux, Francis of Assisi, Dominic, Lewis IX of France, 
Elizabeth of Thuringia (f 1234), to mention but a few, will ever 
excite both wonder and admiration, and their importance is 
all the greater in that they did not stand alone, but left behind 
them whole bands of devoted disciples. As for deeds, we have 
only to think of the number of churches and institutions for 
the relief of suffering mankind which were then established. 
Even to-day there remain countless cathedrals and other 
churches to testify to the intense religious zeal of those ages, 
and even now there are localities which still profit by the funds 
then sunk in the foundation of lazarettos, hospitals, and such- 
like charitable establishments. Towards the end of the period 
a certain falling off in the religious life cannot escape the diligent 

1 Uhlhorn, Christi. Liebestätigkeit im MA. 1884; Ch. Sommer, Deutsche 
Frömmigkeit im 13 Jahrh. 1900. Mg. on St. Elisabeth by Montalembert, 
1883 (Engl. Trans. 1904); Hist. Z. 69 (1892), 209-44 ; E. Horn, 1902. 



Architecture : the Romanesque Style 385 

observer. In the course of the thirteenth century monasticism, 
which had attained so high a level, began to sink, and owing to 
the influence which the Orders exercised throughout the period, 
the decay of monastic discipline could not fail to have an evil 
effect even in other spheres. The secular clergy were the first 
and foremost to suffer thereby, and some light is thrown on 
their morality by the fact that Innocent IV, in the allocution 
with which he opened the Council of Lyons in 1245, mentions 
as the object of his deepest concern, besides the other misfor- 
tunes of the times, the sins of the clergy. 



§ 131 
Architecture : the Romanesque Style l 

The basilica, the style preferred of old in the West, con- 
tinued to hold its own during the earlier Middle Ages. But 
since the eighth century a new style had made its appearance 
in Lombardy, a style which, owing to its having come into 
existence during the period of the formation of the Romance 
languages, is now known as the Romanesque. Adopted 
generally by the monks, it crossed the Alps between the 
eleventh and twelfth century, and soon prevailed all over the 
West. The general plan of the new building was not unlike 
that of the basilica, but for the rest there were differences. 

A new feature in this style is the choir, a rectangular area 
situated between the apse and the transept, or nave, somewhat 
narrower than the latter, but containing sufficient room for the 
high-altar and the clergy. In the case of a church provided 
with a transept, the resulting ground-plan was consequently 
that of a Latin cross. Most frequently Romanesque churches 
were actually provided with two choirs, one at the east and 
the other at the west. Owing to the crypt underneath, the 
choir was usually raised a little above the level of the rest of the 
church. Another peculiarity of the style is the tower. Not 
that the tower was unknown previously, but whereas the 
basilica, if it possessed any, had only one, which stood more- 
over at some distance from the main building, the Romanesque 

1 Literature: § 71, Otte, Handb. der christl. Kunstarchäologie, 2 vol. 5th 
ed. by Wernicke, 1883-85; Borrmann and Neuwirth, Gesch. d. Baukunst, 
II, 1904 ; H. Bergner, Hdb. der kirchl. Kunstaltertümer in Deutschland, 1905. 

vol. 1. cc 



386 A Manual of Church History 

church was provided with several, built into the main edifice. 
The walls were adorned with blind arches and pilasters of 
novel form, friezes and moulded cornices adding to the decora- 
tion. The building was thus beautified even without, instead 
of presenting the even, unbroken surface of the older basilica. 
The former timber ceiling was now replaced by the vaulted 
roof, which first assumed the barrel shape and later on came 
to be groined. Columns now made room for the more solid 
pillars required to support the greater weight. The windows, 
always somewhat small, were invariably crowned with the 
round arch, and the same held good for the portals. The 
round arch also prevailed throughout the vaulting, and has 
even given its name to the whole style. The most remarkable 
monuments of this style are, in Germany the cathedrals of 
Spires, Worms, and Mainz, and the abbey-church of Laach ; 
in France, the cathedrals of Clermont and the church of St. 
Sernin at Toulouse; in Italy, the cathedrals of Modena and 
Parma. 

The style prevailed en this side of the Alps during the 
whole of the eleventh and twelfth century, and though at 
first of the utmost simplicity, it acquired in the course of time 
great splendour and wealth. New features, however, gradually 
found their way into it, in France first and then in Germany. 
The round arch made way for the pointed arch, and the 
circular apse for one of polygonal form. These innovations were 
the forerunners of a new style of architecture, but as they were 
no more, they are usually spoken of as the Transition Style. The 
cathedrals of Limburg and Bamberg are instances in point. 

Among the innovations thus introduced was the rood-screen 
separating the choir from the nave ; this arrangement seems 
to have been adopted only in churches attached to monasteries 
and pious foundations, its object being to protect the choir 
from being distracted by the laity. The result of this addition 
was that the church was divided into two portions, just as it 
is by the Iconostasis of the Greeks. Above the rood-screen 
it soon became the practice to place a loft (Lectorium) from 
which the Biblical lessons were read and sermons preached, 
and which also served to contain the cantors. The screen and 
loft were retained till the end of the Middle Ages, though the 
screen came to be constructed more and more lightly, until 



Architecture: Transition Style 387 

at last it survived only as an iron grating. The loft was now 
supported by pillars, and beneath it was usual to place an altar, 
the loft thus serving as a ciborium or baldachin. 

A new change was not long in following the previous. As 
the loft was by no means a convenient place from which to 
address the congregation, the preacher's desk or Pulpit was 
removed into the body of the church. 

The altar retained its old form during this period, and in 
cer