Nor must it be forgotten that these ideas of philosophy did not remain

cold speculations. They bore characteristic fruits in humanity of every

kind. The brotherhood was not a sentiment, it was a principle of wide

beneficence. The charities of this gospel attested the presence of a

warm heart in the metropolis of the heathen world. Of this there can no

longer be any doubt. Works like that of Denis' "Histoire des Theories et

des Idees Morales dans l'Antiquite," reveal a condition of becoming in

the Roman Empire that might dispel the fears of the most skeptical in

regard to the continuous moral progress of the race. The immense popular

distributions of corn which from being occasional had become habitual in

Rome, were as a rule prompted by no humane feeling, were not designed to

mitigate suffering or express compassion. They were in the main, devices

for gaining popularity. Caius Gracchus, who, more than a century before

Christ, carried a law making compulsory the sale of corn to the poor at

a nominal price, was perhaps actuated by a worthier motive; but it is

doubtful whether his successors were. Cato of Utica was not. Clodius

Pulcher was not. The emperors were obliged to purchase popularity by

these enormous bribes. It is said that Augustus caused the monthly

distribution to be made to two hundred thousand people. Half a million

claimed the bounty under the Antonines. The addition of a ration of oil

to the corn; the substitution of bread for the corn; the supplementing

of this by an allowance of pork; a subsequent supply of the article of

salt to the poor on similarly easy terms; the distribution of portions

of land; the imperial legacies, donations, gratuities, mentioned as

bestowed on occasion; the public baths provided and thrown open to all

at a trifling expense, were also means of winning or retaining the good

will of a fickle and turbulent populace. They neither expressed a humane

sentiment nor produced a humane result. They were suggested by ambition,

no better sometimes than that of the demagogue, and they begot idleness,

and demoralization. But some part of the beneficence must have sprung

from a more generous motive. The interest manifested by several emperors

in public education, and the appropriation made for the maintenance of

the children of the poor, five thousand of whom are said, by Pliny, to

have been supported by the government, under Trajan, who presume never

heard of Christianity,--cannot fairly be ascribed to political motives.

The private charities of the younger Pliny, who devoted a small

patrimony to the maintenance of poor children in Como, his native place;

of Coelia Macrina, who founded a charity for one hundred at

Terracina; Hadrian's, bounties to poor women; Antonine's loans of money

to the poor at reduced rates of interest; the institutions dedicated to

the support of girls by Antoninus and Marcus Aurelius; the private

infirmaries for slaves; the military hospitals, certainly owed their

existence to a humane feeling. Pliny is responsible for the statement

that both in Greece and Rome the poor had mutual insurance societies

which provided for their sick and infirm members. Tacitus expatiates on

the generosity of the rich, who, on occasion of a catastrophe near Rome,

threw open their houses and taxed their resources to relieve the

suffering.[8]

[Footnote 8: For references, see Lecky's "European Morals," II., p.

79-81.]

Such acts attest a genuine kindness. The protests of the best citizens

against the bloody gladiatorial shows,--a protest so eager and

persistent that the trade of the gladiator was seriously injured--must

have been in the highest degree unpopular, for the populace found in

these shows their favorite amusement. The remonstrances of philanthropic

men against the barbarities of the penal code; the call for the

abolishment of the death penalty; the pity for the woes of neglected

children; the indignation at the crime of infanticide; the earnest

interest taken in the problems of prostitution and the most revolting

aspects of pauperism were such as might have proceeded from nineteenth

century people.[9] Stronger words were never spoken by American

abolitionists than were uttered by pagan lips against the slavery that

was pulling down the Roman State.

[Footnote 9: See Denis, II., p. 55-218.]

That beneficence in the Roman Empire during the latter half of the first

century and the first half of the second was fitful, formal, limited,

and unimpassioned, as compared with the charities of Christians in their

communities, need not be said; of course it was. The Christians

succeeded to the legacies of kindness left by the pagans; they were

comparatively few in number, and were bound to one another by peculiar

ties; they were themselves of the great family of the poor; they were

obliged to help one another in the only way they could, by personal

effort and sacrifice. Their traditions, too, of beneficence were

oriental. The difference in spirit between Roman and Christian charity

cannot be fairly described as a difference between heathen charity and

christian; it is more just to call it a difference between Eastern

charity and Western. The Orientals, including the Jews, made beneficence

in its various forms, an individual duty. Kindness to the sick, the

unfortunate, the poor, compassion with the sorrowful, almsgiving to the

destitute, hospitality to the stranger, are virtues characteristic of

all eastern people. The New Testament chiefly echoes the sentiment of

the Old on this matter, and the Old Testament chimes in with the voices

of eastern teachers. In the West, government undertook responsibilities

which in oriental lands, were assumed by individuals; people were to a

much greater degree massed in orders and classes; the distance was wider

between the governors and the governed, and considerations of state more

gravely affected the actions which elsewhere seemed to concern only the

private conscience and heart. The question of advantage between these

two systems is still an open one. In every generation there have been

some, christians too, who preferred the western method to the eastern,

as being less costly, and more methodical; the debate on the relative

advantages and disadvantages of the personal and the impersonal methods

still goes on in modern communities; neither system prevails exclusively

in any christian land; the Latin races still, as a rule, prefer the

Roman way, France for example, where charity is a matter of public

rather than of private concern.

The mischiefs of the oriental method were apparent before Christianity

appeared, and its zealous adoption of them early awakened misgivings.

The indiscriminate almsgiving, the elevation of poverty to the rank of a

privilege, the glorification of self-impoverishment, the acceptance of

feeling as a divine monitor, and of emotion as a heavenly instinct, the

substitution of the worship of the heart for deference to reason, the

loose compassion, the practical and professed communism--for some of the

fathers maintained that all property was based on usurpation, that all

men had a common right in the earth, and that none was entitled to hold

wealth except as a trust for others--soon disclosed disastrous results.

Against the evils that are fairly chargeable upon the wholesale measures

of the imperial bounty, must be offset the equally grave, and in some

respects, not dissimilar evils incident to the unprincipled practice of

loving kindness on the part of the bishops and their flocks, the

increase of the dependent, the encouragement of pauperism, the waste of

wealth, the worse waste of humanity. National philanthropy in London and

New York finds no more serious obstacle to its advance than the

benevolence that is inculcated in the name of Christ, and by authority

of the New Testament. It is the battle of science against sentiment.

The increased devoutness that showed itself in the empire, about the

beginning of the second century, the pious passion that broke out, is

attributable to natural causes, that have been mentioned by every author

who has written on the subject. It is familiar knowledge that the decay

of institutions, the disintegration of social bonds, the general

decline of positive religious faith, a decline partly due, possibly, to

the tolerance which placed all faiths side by side, was followed, or we

might say accompanied by a longing after divine things that was wild in

the fervor of its impulse. The complacent reign of skepticism was

succeeded by a volcanic outbreak of superstition. What has been called

"a storm of supernaturalism" burst forth, with the usual accompaniments

of frenzy, and took possession of all classes. Only general causes of

this can be assigned. That it was due to any special influence cannot be

alleged. That it was due to any "supernatural" interposition of heaven,

is an unnecessary supposition. The cursory reader of the history of the

empire, as written by intelligent modern scholars, of whatever school,

sees plainly enough the pass that things had come to and how they came

to it. Christianity came in on the wave of this movement, felt its

force, struck into its channel, was borne aloft on its bosom. It is

customary to speak of all this spiritual ferment as a preparation for

Christianity; it was such a preparation as left Christianity little of a

peculiar kind to do. What new element it introduced, it would be hard to

say now, however easy it seemed half a century ago. The desert land of

heathenism has been explored, and the result is a discovery of fertile

plains instead of barrenness. The distinction between the ante-Christian

and the post-christian eras is, if not obliterated, yet so far effaced,

that the transition from one to the other is natural and facile.

The longing for spiritual satisfaction that stirred in the heart of the

empire, found neither its source nor its gratification exclusively in

the religion that afterwards became the professed faith of Rome. It

slaked its thirst at older fountains. Such longings will, at need, open

fountains of living water for their own supply. Passing through the

valley of Baca they create a well, the streams whereof fill the pools.

The smitten rock pours out its torrents. The hungry soul creates its

harvest as it goes along, feeding itself by the way with food that seems

to fall miraculously from the sky. It makes a religion if there be none

at hand. A new heaven peopled with angels; a new earth full of

providences come into being at its call. But in this emergency the

religion was extant in the world, already venerable, already proved. It

was the religion of Israel, with all that was necessary to attract

attention and command reverence; a holy God, an immediate providence, a

solemn history, a glorious prophecy, an inspiring hope, traditions,

institutions, a temple, a priesthood, sacrifices, a code of laws,

ceremonial and moral, poetry, learning, music, mystery, stately forms of

men and women, judges, kings, heroes, martyrs, saints, a superb

literature, legends of virtue, festivals of joy, visions of

resurrection and judgment, precepts of righteousness, promises of

peace, songs of victory and of sorrow, dreams of a heavenly kingdom to

be won by obedience to divine law, tender lessons of charity, stern

lessons of denial, fascinating attractions and yet more fascinating

fears, gentle persuasions and awful menaces, calculated to lay hold on

every mood, to thrill and to satisfy every human emotion. The religion

of Israel lacked little but outward prestige of power and wealth to make

it precisely what the time required; and in times of real earnestness

the prestige of power and wealth is readily dispensed with. The

unfashionable faith is the very one to attract worldly people on their

first awakening to spiritual sensibility. The show of worldliness is

then, to the worldly, particularly offensive. "The lust of the flesh,

the lust of the eyes, the pride of life," delight in abasing themselves

before rags and filth, wishing to reach the opposite extreme. The graces

of the religious character, humility, meekness, self-accusation,

contrition, find in associations with the coarse, the hard, the

repulsive, their fittest expression. Hence it was that Judaism,

heretofore the faith of the despised, became the faith of the despisers.

Its very dogmatism, its proud exclusiveness and intolerance, were in its

favor. Its haughty reserve assisted it; its superb disdain of other

faiths, its boast of antiquity, its claim to a monopoly of the future of

the race, exerted a weird spell over the dazed and decrepit minds of

the superstitious, high and low. Its lofty belief in miracle and sign,

fairly constrained the skeptical to bow the head.

The interest felt in Judaism, and its influence on society in its high

places, have already been alluded to, and need not be further insisted

on. The testimony of Juvenal--the testimony of sarcasm and complaint--is

enough to establish the fact that a curiosity amounting to infatuation

had taken possession especially of the women of Rome.

If it be asked why Judaism, then, was not made the religion of the

empire, instead of Christianity, which it hated with all the fervor of

close relationship, the answer is at hand: _Judaism laid no emphasis on

its cosmopolitan features, and discouraged belief in the historical

fulfilment of its own prophecy_. The charge that it was a _national_

religion, the religion of a race, it was at no pains to repel; on the

contrary, it seems to have exaggerated this claim to distinction,

standing on its dignity, despising the arts of propagandism and

demanding the submission of other creeds. This attitude alone might have

recommended the religion in some quarters, and would not have seriously

embarrassed it in any, supposing it to have been loftily and worthily

sustained. A graver cause of its unpopularity was its failure to lay

stress on its Messianic idea. It would abate nothing of its monotheistic

grandeur. Its God was the everlasting, the infinite, the formless, the

invisible. The command to make of Him no image whatever, either animal

or human, to associate Him with neither place nor time, was obeyed to

the letter. Among a people extremely sensitive to grace of form and

beauty of color, the Jews had no art; they set up no statue; they

painted no picture; they allowed no emblem that could be worshipped.

Their Holy Spirit was an influence; their Messiah was a distant hope;

their kingdom of heaven was a dream. The Christians of both schools--the

conservative and the liberal--thrust into the foreground the conceptions

which their co-religionists kept in the shadow of anticipation. In their

belief, prophecy was fulfilled. The Messiah had come; he had taken on

human shape; he had passed through an earthly career; he had ascended in

visible form to the skies; he sat there at the right hand of the Majesty

on high; he was active in his care for his own, suffering and sorrowing

on earth; he sent the Holy Spirit, the comforter and guide to his

friends in their affliction; he was the immediate God; he heard and

answered prayer; he pardoned sin; he opened the gates of heaven to

believers. They did not scruple to make images of him; to represent him

in emblems; to eke out their own rude art by adopting the art which the

heathen had ceased to venerate, and, where they could, re-dedicating

statues of Apollo and Jupiter to their Christ. They were eager to have

legendary portraits accepted as faithful likenesses of their Lord.

Fables were invented, like that of Veronica's napkin, to give currency

to certain heads as the Christ's own image of himself miraculously

imprinted on a cloth. They claimed to have seen him, in moments of

ecstasy; they ascribed to his prompting, states of feeling, purposes and

courses of action. By every means they created and deepened the

impression that the Divinity they worshipped was a real God, and no

intellectual abstraction.

This was the very thing the pagan world wanted--a _personal_ Deity,

Providence, Saviour. Through their acquiescence in this demand, other

oriental faiths, without a tithe of Israel's grandeur--mythological,

superstitious, sensual even--gained a popularity that Judaism could not

attain. The strange Egyptian divinities drew many to their shrines.

Three emperors--Commodus, Caracalla and Heliogabalus--are said to have

been devoted to the mysteries of Isis and Serapis. Juvenal describes

Roman women as breaking the ice on the frozen Tiber, at the dawn of day,

and plunging thrice into the stream of purification; as painfully

dragging themselves on bleeding knees around the field of Tarquin; as

projecting pilgrimages to Egypt, expeditions in search of the holy water

required at the shrine of the goddess. The Persian Mithras had his

throngs of adoring devotees. The prominence given at this period to the

statues of Mithras, the existence of temples to Isis and Serapis,

attest the power that these divinities exerted over the imagination of

the Italian people. These people demanded deities human in shape and

attributes. So clamorous were they for images, that they would

consecrate them at any cost of decency. The emperor Augustus was

deified. His statue on the public square, his insignia on a banner, his

name on a shield excited veneration. The noblest religion without a

human centre was less prized than the ignoblest with one, and the faith

of Israel was compelled to yield to the degrading fascinations of the

Bona Dea.

The Christian Jews, with their Messiah, took the popular desire at its

best, and satisfied it. The image they presented, though to the mind's

eye only, was so much more gracious than the loveliest that eastern or

western art furnished that its acceptance was assured. Early in the

fourth century the impression made was too deep to be overlooked by the

controllers of public opinion. The politic Constantine, seeking a

spiritual ally, and finding none among the faiths of his own land,

called in the Nazarene to aid him in establishing an empire over the

souls of his subjects. Christ was king in fact before he was formally

crowned.

But the true history of his reign began with the ceremony of his

coronation; the history of Christianity as a distinct religion commences

with the so-called "conversion" of Constantine. Latin Christianity was

the first, some think the consummate, in fact the only, Christianity.

The adoption of the religion as the State Church, was for it a new

creation. From that moment, began the efforts to complete its dogmatical

system by a succession of councils, the first one, that of Nicaea, being

held A. D. 325, about twelve years after the imperial "conversion;" that

of Sardica--ecclesiastically of great importance--in 347, and the

councils of Arles and of Milan in 352.

Once seated on a throne of power, a crown on his head, a sceptre in his

hand, clothed with authority, protected by armies, girded with law,

instigator of policies, chief of ceremonies, the Christ in heaven

rapidly completed the structure whereof Constantine had placed the

corner-stone. The materials he gathered right and left, wherever they

were to be found. Right of supremacy made them his. Judaism gave temple,

and synagogue, the organization of its priesthood, the distinction

between priest and layman, its worship, music, scripture, litany,

sentiment and usage of prayer, its ascetic spirit, its doctrines of

resurrection and judgment, its code of righteousness, its altar forms,

its history, and its prophecy. Paganism was laid under contribution for

its military spirit. The "stations" of the Passion, were copied from

army usage, so were its practical temper, its regard for precedent law

and policy, its rules of obedience, its distrust of speculation, its

horror of schism, its passion for unity, its skill in diplomacy, its

solid respect for authority. Quietly, without leave asked, or apology

offered, the insignia of the old faiths were transferred to the new. The

title of Sovereign Pontifex, or bridgemaker--given originally to the

chief of the guild of mechanics, passed along from the period of the

earliest kings through persons of consular dignity, and finally bestowed

on the Roman emperors; a title given at first, in commemoration of the

_pons Janicularis_, which joined the city to the highest of the

surrounding hills--was conferred on the bishops or popes whose office it

was to bridge over the gulf between the earth and the celestial

mountains. The statues of Jupiter, Apollo, Mercury, Orpheus, did duty

for the Christ. The Thames river god officiates at the baptism of Jesus

in the Jordan. Peter holds the keys of Janus. Moses wears the horns of

Jove. Ceres, Cybele, Demeter, assume new names as "Queen of Heaven,"

"Star of the Sea," "Maria Illuminatrix;" Dionysius is St. Denis; Cosmos

is St. Cosmo; Pluto and Proserpine resign their seats in the hall of

final judgment, to the Christ and his mother. The Parcae depute one of

their number, Lachesis, the disposer of lots, to set the stamp of

destiny upon the deaths of Christian believers. The _aura placida_ of

the poets, the gentle breeze, is personified as Aura and Placida. The

_perpetua felicitas_ of the devotee becomes a lovely presence in the

forms of St. Perpetua and St. Felicitas, guardian angels of the pious

soul. No relic of Paganism was permitted to remain in its casket. The

depositories were all ransacked. The shadowy hands of Egyptian priests

placed the urn of holy water at the porch of the basilica, which stood

ready to be converted into a temple. Priests of the most ancient faiths

of Palestine, Assyria, Babylon, Thebes, Persia, were permitted to erect

the altar at the point where the transverse beam of the cross meets the

main stem. The hands that constructed the temple in cruciform shape had

long become too attenuated to cast the faintest shadow. There Devaki

with the infant Crishna, Maya with the babe Boodha, Juno with the child

Mars, represent Mary with Jesus in her arms. Coarse emblems are not

rejected; the Assyrian dove is a tender symbol of the Holy Ghost. The

rag bags and toy boxes were explored. A bauble which the Roman

school-boy had thrown away was picked up and called an "agnus dei." The

musty wardrobes of forgotten hierarchies furnished costumes for the

officers of the new prince. Alb and chasuble recalled the fashions of

Numa's day. The cast off purple habits and shoes of pagan emperors

beautified the august persons of christian Popes. The cardinal must be

contented with the robes once worn by senators. Zoroaster bound about

the monks the girdle he invented as a protection against evil spirits,

and clothed them in the frocks he had found convenient for his ritual.

The Pope thrust out his foot to be kissed, as Caligula, Heliogabalus,

and Julius Caesar had thrust out theirs. Nothing came amiss to the faith

that was to discharge henceforth the offices of spiritual impression.

Stoles, veils, croziers, were all in requisition without too close

scrutiny of their antecedents. A complete investigation of this subject

will probably reveal the fact that Christianity owes its entire

wardrobe, ecclesiastical, symbolical, dogmatical, to the religions that

preceded it. The point of difficulty to decide is in what respect

Christianity differs from the elder faiths. This is the next task its

apologists have to perform.

But this question does not concern us here. Having indicated the source

whence the religion proceeded, and the process by which the successive

stages in its development were reached, we have done all that was

purposed. We have tried to make it clear that the Messianic conception

from which it started, and from which its life was derived at each

period of its growth, presided over its destiny in the western world,

and introduced it to the place of honor it was afterwards called to

fill.

What that place was and how the Church filled it has been told in a

multitude of historical books. The history of Christianity is not the

story of a developing idea, but a record of the achievements of an idea

developed, organized, instituted. From the date of the established

religion, the writings of the New Testament became the literature of the

earliest period. In the western world the mind of Christendom expanded

to deeper and wider thoughts, a new literature was originated of great

richness, affluence and beauty, and gave expression to ideas which, in

the primitive period could not have been formed. The Greek and Latin

Fathers, the schoolmen, the catholic theologians, Italian, Spanish,

French, the German mystical writers, the Protestant divines and

preachers, have produced writings unsurpassed in intellectual strength

and spiritual discernment. The possibilities of speculation have been

exhausted; the abysses of reflection have been sounded; the heights of

meditation have been scaled. The christian idea of salvation has been

applied to every phase of human experience, and to every problem of

social life. The rudimental conceptions have been distanced; the

original limitations have been overpassed. Rites have been charged with

new significance, symbols loaded with new meanings, doctrines

interpreted in new senses. Christianity as the modern world knows it, is

a new creation. The name of Messiah is spoken, but with feelings unknown

to the Jews of the first and second century. The New Testament is

regarded as a store house of germs, a magazine of texts to be

interpreted by the light of the full orbed spirit, and unfolded to meet

the needs of an older world. The cord which connected the religion with

the mother faith of Israel was broken and the faith entered on an

independent existence. To the cradle succeeds the cathedral.

IX.

JESUS.

The Cradle of the Christ: A Study in Primitive Christianity · 第 10 / 14 段