PART II. THE INTERNAL HISTORY OF THE CHURCH. CHAPTER I. THE HISTORY OF LITERATURE AND PHILOSOPHY. § 1. State of literature - § 2. Progress of the Platonic philosophy — § 3. Its fate§ 4. State of learning among Christians-§ 5. Many illiterate Christians. § 1. THOSE of this century, whether Greeks or Romans, who sought a character for scholarship, gave their attention to polite literature, eloquence in every branch, and history, Nor is it a few that can be named of either nation, who from these studies gained applause. But all fell very short of the highest excellence. The best of these poets, as Ausonius, if compared with those of the Augustan age, appear harsh and inelegant. The rhetoricians, abandoning wholly the noble simplicity and majesty of the ancients, taught youth the art of deceiving people, by using tragic pomp on every occasion. Most of the historians, too, thought less of order, perspicuity, and truth, than of empty and tawdry ornaments. § 2. Nearly all who attempted philosophy in this century were of the sect called Junior Platonists. It is not strange, therefore, that Platonic notions constantly occur in the works of Christians, as they do in those of others. Yet there were fewer of these philosophers in the West than in the East. In Syria, Jamblichus of Chalcis expounded Plato, or rather made that philosopher's opinions bend to his own estimate of them.2 His writings show that he was supersti 1 [Decius, or Decimus Magnus, Ausonius, was a Latin poet, well born and educated at Bourdeaux, who flourished in the last half of this century. He was probably a nominal Christian, and much caressed and advanced to high honours by those in authority. His poems were chiefly short pieces, eulogies, epigrams, &c., and not devoid of merit. Yet the style attests the declining age of Roman literature. Edited by Tollius, Lugd. B. 1671, 4to; and Lat. and Fr. by Jaubert, Paris, 1769, 4 vols. 12mo. Tr.] 2 [Jamblichus. There were three of this name; the first lived early in the second century; his works are now lost: the second probably died about 333, and wrote largely; the third was contemporary with Julian, and wrote the life of Alypius the musician. The second is the one intended by Mosheim. He was a pagan, an enthusiast, and a great pretender to superior talents and learning. Of his works there remain, a Life of Pythagoras, published Gr. and Lat. with notes by Kuster, Amstelod. 1707, 4to; Exhortation to the study of Philosophy; three books on mathematical learning; Commentary on Nicomachus; Institutes of Arithmetic; and a Treatise on the mysteries of the Egyptians and Chaldeans of Assyria, published Gr. and Lat. with notes, by Tho. Gale, Oxon. 5 6 tious, cloudy, credulous, and without sound sense. He was succeeded by Edesius,' Maximus,2 and others; of whose absurdities Eunapius gives us an account. In Egypt, Hypatia, a distinguished lady, Isidorus, Olympiodorus, Synesius, a semi-Christian, and others. of less fame, propagated this kind of wisdom: why not call it folly? § 3. The emperor Julian being wonderfully fond of this philosophy, as his writings prove, a great many were led into vying with each other to dress it out with every art within their power. But when Julian died, a dreadful storm burst upon the Platonists, during the reign of Valentinian; and several of them were arraigned and tried for their lives on the charge of practising magic and other crimes. In these commotions, Maximus, the preceptor of Julian, among others, suffered death.8 But it was rather the intimacy of these men with Julian, whose counsellors they had been, than the philosophy to which they were addicted, that proved their ruin. Hence the remainder of their body, having had no connexion with the court, underwent very little danger or loss in this persecution of the philosophers. §4. The Christians, from the time of Constantine the Great, devoted much more attention to the study of philosophy and the liberal arts, than they had done before; and the emperors omitted no means which might awaken and cherish a thirst for learning. Schools were established in many of the towns; libraries were formed, and literary men were encouraged by stipends, by privileges, and by honours." 1678, fol. See Brucker, Hist. Crit. Philos. ii. 260-270. Fabricius, Biblioth. Gr. iv. 282, &c., and Lardner's Works, vol. viii. Tr.] [Edesius of Cappadocia, a disciple of Jamblichus, and, like his master, a devotee of theurgia. See Brucker, Hist. Crit. Philos. ii. 270, &c. Tr.] 2 [Maximus of Ephesus, called the Cynic, another pretender to superhuman knowledge. He is said to have persuaded Julian to apostatise; and he certainly had great influence over that emperor. He was put to death, for practising magic, in the reign of Valens. See Brucker, Hist. Crit. Philos. ii. 281, &c. Eunapius (de Vitis Sophistarum) gives account of Jamblichus, Ædesius, and Maximus. Tr.] [Hypatia of Alexandria, a lady who excelled all the philosophers of her age, and who publicly taught philosophy with great applause, flourished in the close of this century, and the first part of the next. She was murdered in a tumult, A. D. 415. See Socrates, H. E. vii. 15. Suidas, art. Hypatia, iii. 533. Tillemont, Mémoires, &c. xiv. 274. Menage, Hist. Mulier. Philosoph. $49, &c. p. 494, &c.; and Brucker, Hist. Crit. Philos. ii. 351. Tr.] * [Isidorus Gazæus, from Gaza in Palestine, the place of his birth. See Brucker, Hist. Crit. Philos. ii. 341, &c. Schl.] [Olympiodorus, author of a Commen tary upon Plato, still preserved in MS. at Paris; and a life of Plato, of which a Latin version has been published. There were several persons of this name. Brucker, Hist. Crit. Philos. ii. 490. Tr.] See [Synesius, of Cyrene in Africa, studied under Hypatia; resided at Constantinople from A. D. 397-400, as deputy from his native city; was made bishop of Ptolemais A. D. 410. He wrote well for that age; though he was too much infected with the reigning philosophy. His works, as edited by Petavius, Gr. and Lat. Paris, 1612 and 1631, fol., are — De Regno, ad Arcadium Imperatorem; Dio, vel de ipsius vitæ instituto; Calvitii encomium; Egyptius, sive de Providentia; de Insomniis; Epistolæ clv.; and several Discourses and Hymns. Tr.] See Ez. Spanheim, Præfatio ad Opp. Juliani, et ad versionem Gallicam Cæsarum Juliani, p. iii. et Adnotat. p. 234. Bletterie, Vie de l'Empereur Julien, liv. i. p. 26, &c. • Ammianus Marcellin. Histor. xxix. 1, p. 556, ed. Valesii; and Bletterie, Vie de Julien, p. 30, &c. 155, 159, &c.; and Vie de Jovien, t. i. 194. See Ja. Godefroi, ad Codicis Theodos. titulos de Professoribus et Artibus liberalibus; Fran. Balduin, Constantinus Magn. p. 122, &c. Herm. Conringius, Diss. de studiis Rome et Constantinop. subjoined to his Antiquitatt. Academica. All this was required by the design which they had formed of gradually abolishing pagan idolatry; for the old heathen system derived its chief support from the learning of its advocates: and moreover, if Christian youths could not find instructors of their own belief, it must be feared that they would seek an education from pagan philosophers and rhetoricians, which might cause injury to religious truth. § 5. It must not be supposed, however, that the Christian church was full of literary, erudite, and philosophic men. For no law as yet kept an ignorant and uneducated person from sacred offices; and it appears, by unquestionable testimonies, that many, both bishops and presbyters, were entirely destitute of all science and learning. Besides, the party was both numerous and powerful, which considered all learning, but especially philosophical learning, as injurious nay, even destructive to true piety and religion. All the ascetics, monks, and eremites, were inclined towards this party; which was also highly favoured, not by women only, but by all besides who measured piety by gravity of countenance, sordidness of dress, and love of solitude, that is, by the many. CHAPTER II. HISTORY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH, AND OF ITS TEACHERS. § 1, 2. Form of the Christian church-§ 3. Conformed to the civil establishment§ 4. Administration, internal and external, of the church-§ 5. Rank of the bishop of Rome § 6. Limits of his jurisdiction-§ 7. The bishop of Constantinople§ 8. Vices of the clergy-§ 9. Distinguished writers in the Greek church-§ 10. Principal writers in the Latin church. § 1. CONSTANTINE the Great left the old form of the Christian community untouched; yet, in some respects, he improved and extended it. While, therefore, he suffered the church to continue, as heretofore, a sort of distinct republic within the political body, he nevertheless assumed a supreme power over this sacred community, with such liberty of modelling and controlling it as public good should need. Nor did any bishop call in question this power of the emperor. The people, therefore, in the same manner as before, freely chose their own bishops and teachers; and the bishops severally, in their respective districts or cities, directed and regulated all ecclesiastical affairs, using the presbyters as a council, and calling on the people for assent. The bishops also met together in conventions or councils, to deliberate on subjects in which the churches of a whole province were interested, on points of religious controversy, on the arrangement of divine worship, and other things. To these minor councils of one or more provinces there were now added assemblies or councils of the whole church. These, called acumenical or general councils, met by authority from the emperor; who summoned the first of them at Nice. For he thought it just (and in this he was most likely guided by the judgment of the bishops), that causes of great moment, and affecting the church universally or the general principles of Christianity, should be examined and decided in conventions of the whole church. There were never, indeed, any councils held, which could strictly and properly be called universal; those, however, whose decrees and enactments were received and approved by the whole church, or by the greatest part of it, are commonly called œcumenical. § 2. Upon established rights, however, great encroachments were gradually made from the time when various disturbances and quarrels and horrid contests everywhere arose, either on account of religious affairs or doctrines, or of episcopal elections. For appeals from the weaker parties to the court gave the emperors an excellent opportunity of imposing various restrictions on the power of the bishops, the people's liberty, and the ancient customs. The bishops, too, themselves, whose wealth and influence were not a little augmented from the times of Constantine, gradually subverted and changed the ancient principles of church government. For they first excluded the people altogether from a voice in ecclesiastical affairs, and next gradually deprived even the presbyters of their former authority, in order that they might do everything at their discretion, and especially either draw the ecclesiastical property to themselves, or distribute it as they pleased. Hence, at the close of this century, only a slight shadow of the ancient, church-government remained; that share of it, formerly vested in the presbyters and people, having passed chiefly to the bishops, the whole church's many shares to the emperors, or to their provincial governors and magistrates. §3. Constantine, to render his throne secure and prevent civil wars, not only changed the system of Roman laws, but likewise, in many respects, the disposition of the commonwealth. And as he wished, for various reasons, the church to have a constitution like that now given to the state, it became necessary that new grades of honour should be introduced among the bishops. The chiefs of their body were those who had heretofore stood foremost in the prelacy, namely, the bishops of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria; with whom the bishop of Constantinople was joined, after the imperial residence was transferred to that city. These four prelates answered to the four prætorian præfects, created by Constantine, and, perhaps even in this century, bore the Jewish title of Patriarchs. Next to these were the exarchs, corresponding with the civil exarchs, and presiding each over several provinces. The metropolitans came next, who governed only single provinces. After them ranked the archbishops, who had the inspection only of certain districts. The bishops brought up the rear; whose limits were not universally of the same extent, but in some provinces wider, in others narrower. To these I should add the chorepiscopi, or superintendents of country 'See Bos, Hist. de la Monarchie Françoise, i. 64. Giannone, Hist. de Naples, i. 94, 152. churches, did I not know that the bishops, eager to increase their own power, had caused this order to be suppressed in most places.' This is shown by Ludov. Thomasinus, Disciplina Eccles. vet. et nova circa beneficia, tom. i. various passages. [The fourth century was the most flourishing period of the Chorepiscopi: their position excited the jealousy of the bishops, and an attempt was made in a council of Laodicea, cir. 363, to suppress them. They appear, however, as delegates of other bishops in the council of Chalcedon in 451, and the title subsisted in the West until the ninth century. Robertson, i. 281. Gieseler, i. 417. Ed.] [Though the ecclesiastical divisions of the Roman empire did not coincide exactly with the civil divisions, yet a knowledge of the latter will help us to form a better idea of the former. Accordingly, we annex the following account of the civil distribution copied from an ancient Notitia Imperii, said to have been written before the reign of Arcadius and Honorius, or before 395. See Pagi, Critica in Baronii Annal. ad ann. 37, t. i. p. 29, &c. I. Præfectus Prætorio Orientis: et sub eo Dioceses quinque, ss. 1. Diœcesis orientis, in qua Provinciæ XV. nempe, Palæstina, Phoenice, Syria, Cilicia, Cyprus, Arabia, Isauria, Palæstina Salutaris, Palæstina II. Phoenice Libani, Euphratensis, Syria Salutaris, Osrhoëna, Mesopotamia, et Cilicia II. 2. Diocesis Ægypti, in qua Provinciæ vi. nempe, Libya superior, Libya inferior, Thebais, Ægyptus, Arcadia, et Augustamnica. 3. Diœcesis Asiæ, in qua Provinciæ x. nempe, Pamphylia, Hellespontus, Lydia, Pisidia, Lycaonia, Phrygia Pacatiana, Phrygia Salutaris, Lycia, Caria, et Insula (Cyclades). 4. Diœcesis Ponti, in qua Provinciæ x. nempe, Galatia, Bithynia, Honorias, Cappadocia I. Paphlagonia, Pontus Polemoniacus, Helenopontus, Armenia I. Armenia II. et Galatia Salutaris. 5. Diœcesis Thraciæ, in qua Provinciae vi. nempe, Europa, Thracia, Hæmiomontis, Rhodope, Mosia II. et Scythia. II. Præfectus Prætorio Illyrici: et sub eo Dioceses duæ, ss. 1. Diœcesis Macedoniæ, in qua Provinciæ vi. nempe, Achaia, Macedonia, Creta, Thessalia, Epirus vetus, et Epirus nova. 2. Diocesis Daciæ, in qua Provinciæ v. nempe, Dacia Mediterranea, Dacia Ripensis, Masia prima, Dardania Prævalitiana, et l'ars Macedoniæ Salutaris. III. Præfectus Prætorio Italiæ: et sub eo Dioceses tres, ss. 1. Diœcesis Italiæ, in qua Provinciæ xvii. nempe, Venetiæ, Emilia, Liguria, Flaminia et Picenum Annonarium, Tuscia et Umbria, Picenum Suburbicarium, Campania, Sicilia, Apulia et Calabria, Lucania et Brutii, Alpes 2. Dioecesis Illyrici, in qua Provinciæ vi. nempe, Pannonia secunda, Savia, Dalmatia, Pannonia prima, Noricum Mediterraneum, et Noricum Ripense. 3. Diœcesis Africæ, in qua Provinciæ vii. nempe, Byzacium, Numidia, Mauritania Sitifensis, Mauritania Cæsariensis, Tripolis, et Africa Proconsularis. IV. Præfectus Prætorio Galliarum: et sub eo Dioceses tres, ss. 1. Dioecesis Hispaniæ, in qua Provincie vii. nempe, Bætica, Lusitania, Gallæcia, Tarraconensis, Carthaginensis, Tingitania, et Baleares. 2. Diocesis Galliarum, in qua Provincie xvii. nempe, Viennensis, Lugdunensis I. Germania I. Germania II. Belgica I. Belgica II. Alpes Maritimæ, Alpes Pennine et Graiæ, Maxima Sequanorum, Aquitanis I. Aquitania II. Novempopuli, Narbonensis L Narbonensis II. Lugdunensis II. Lugdunensis III. et Lugdunensis Senonia. 3. Diocesis Britanniarum, in qua Provinciæ v. nempe, Maxima Cæsariensis, Valentia, Britannia I. Britannia II. et Flavia Cæsariensis. Thus the civil division of the Roman empire was, in this century, divided into 4 Prefectures, containing 13 Dioceses, which embraced 116 Provinces. The ecclesiastical division of the empire, though founded upon the civil division, was by no means so complete and so regular. [The presiding bishop of the province was the metropolitan, the presiding metropolitan of the dicecese was the exarch. Ed.] The civil provinces were generally ecclesiastical pro vinces, and under the inspection severally of the metropolitans, or archbishops of thos provinces. Yet there were many bishops who were exempt from the inspection or jurisdiction of the metropolitans, and were therefore called αὐτοκέφαλοι, independent, They also bore the titles of archbishops and of metropolitans, although they had no suffragans, or bishops depending on them. Above the rank of metropolitans, there were properly none other than the patriarchs. For the exarchs of Asia, Cappadocia, and Pontus, were only the first metropolitans of those civil dioceses, while they belonged to no patriarchate. And the primates of certain countries, in after-ages, were only the metropolitans that ranked first, or had precedence, among the metropolitans of their respective countries. [The title of archbishop, which was first given to the bishop of Alexandria (Gieseler, i. 427), and afterwards to the other patriarchs, was |