of non-canonical books in church, which had previously been
customary (§ 36, 3), was now forbidden. The _Lectio continua_,
_i.e._ the reading of entire biblical books was the common
practice down to the 5th century. In the Latin church at each
service there were usually two readings, one from the Gospels,
the other from the Epistles or the Prophets. The _Apostolic
Constitutions_ (§ 43, 4) have three, the Prophets, Epistles,
and Gospels; so too the Gallican and Spanish churches; while
the Syrian had four, the additional one being from Acts. As
the idea of the Christian Year was carried out, however, the
_Lectio continua_ gave place to the _Lectio propria_, _i.e._
a selection of passages which correspond to the character
of the particular festival. In the West this selection was
fixed by the _Lectionaries_ among which the so-called _Liber
comitis_, which tradition assigned to Jerome, in various
forms and modifications, found acceptance generally throughout
the West. In the East where the _Lectio continua_ continued
much more prevalent, lectionaries came into use first in the
8th century. The lesson was read by a reader from a reading desk;
as a mark of distinction, however, the gospel was often read by
the deacon. For the same purpose, too, lights were often kindled
during this reading.--The =Sermon= was generally by the bishop,
who might, however, transfer the duty to a presbyter or deacon.
Monks were forbidden to preach in the church. They were not
hindered from doing so in the streets and markets, from roofs,
pillars and trees. The bishop preached from his episcopal throne,
but often, in order to be better heard, stood at the railing of
the choir (_Cancelli_). Augustine and Chrysostom often preached
from the reading desk. In the East preaching came very much to
the front, lasted often for an hour, and aimed at theatrical
effects. Very distracting was the practice, specially common
in Greece of giving loud applause with waving of handkerchiefs
and clapping of hands (κρότος, _Acclamatio_). In the West the
sermon consisted generally of short simple addresses (_Sermones_).
Extempore discourses (ὁμιλίαι σχεδιασθεῖσαι) were greatly
appreciated, more so than those repeated from memory; reading
was quite an exceptional occurrence. Even the emperors after
Constantine’s example gave sometimes sermonic lectures in
extra-ecclesiastical assemblies. Among the Syrians sermons in
verse and strophically arranged, with equal number of syllables
in the lines but unrhymed, were very popular.
§ 59.4. =Hymnology.=[177]--Ephraëm [Ephraim] the Syrian
(† A.D. 378) introduced melodious orthodox hymns in place
of the heterodox hymns of the Syrian Gnostics Bardesanes and
Harmonius (§ 27, 5). On the later Syrian hymn writers, see
§ 48, 7. The introduction of their hymns into the public service
caused no trouble. For the Greeks orthodox hymns were composed
by Gregory Nazianzen and Synesius of Ptolemais. The want of
popularity and the ban of the Laodicean Council hindered their
introduction into the services of the church; but this ban was
removed as early as the 5th century. Under the name of Troparies,
from τρόπος=art of music, shorter, and soon also longer, poems
of their own composition were introduced alongside of the church
service of Psalms (§ 70, 2). But unquestionably the palm for
church hymn composition belongs to the Latin church. With Hilary
of Poitiers († A.D. 368) begins a series of poets (Ambrose,
Damasus, Augustine, Sedulius, Eunodius, Prudentius, Fortunatus,
Gregory the Great) who bequeathed to their church a precious
legacy of spiritual songs of great beauty, spirituality, depth,
power, grandeur and simplicity.
§ 59.5. =Psalmody and Hymn Music.=[178]--From the time when
clerical _cantores_ (§ 34, 3) were appointed the symphonic
singing of psalms by the congregation seems to have been on
the wane. The Council of Laodicea forbade it altogether, without,
however, being able quite to accomplish that. Antiphonal or
responsive singing was much enjoyed. Hypophonic singing of the
congregation in the responses with which the people answered the
clerical intonings, readings and prayers, and in the beating of
time with which they answered the clerical singing of psalms, was
long persisted in in spite of clerical exclusiveness. The singing
of prayers, readings and consecrations was first introduced
in the 6th century. At first church music was simple, artless,
recitative. But the rivalry of heretics forced the orthodox
church to pay greater attention to the requirements of art.
Chrysostom had to declaim against the secularisation of Church
music. More lasting was the opposition of the church to the
introduction of instrumental accompaniments. Even part singing
was at this time excluded from the church. In the West psalmody
took a high flight with a true ecclesiastical character. Even in
A.D. 330, bishop Sylvester erected a school at Rome for training
singers for the churches. Ambrose of Milan was the author of a
new kind of church music full of melodious flow, with rhythmical
accent and rich modulation, nobly popular and grandly simple
(_Cantus Ambrosianus_). Augustine speaks with enthusiasm of the
powerful impression made on him by this lively style of singing,
but expresses also the fear that the senses might be spellbound
by the pleasant sound of the tune, and thus the effect of
the words on the mind be weakened. And in fact the Ambrosian
chant was in danger during the 6th century through increasing
secularisation of losing its ecclesiastical character. Then
appeared Gregory the Great as reformer and founder of a new
style of music (_Cantus Romanus, ferinus, choralis_) for which
at the same time, in order that he might fix it in a tune book
(_Antiphonarium_), he invented a special notation, the so-called
_Neumæ_, either from πνεῦμα as characterizing the music, or from
νεῦμα as characterizing the musical notes, a wonderful mixture
of points, strokes and hooks. The Gregorian music is in unison,
slow, measured and uniform without rhythm and beat, so that
it approaches again the old recitative mode of psalm singing,
while still at the same time its elaboration of the art with
much richer modulation marks an important step in advance. The
Ambrosian briskness, freshness and popular style were indeed
lost, but all the more certainly the earnestness, dignity and
solemnity of Church music were preserved. But it was a very great
defect that the Gregorian music was assigned exclusively to well
equipped choirs of clerical singers, hence _Cantus choralis_, for
the training of which Gregory founded a school of music in Rome.
The congregation was thus deprived of that lively participation
in the public service which up to that time it had enjoyed.
§ 59.6. =The Liturgy.=--The numerous liturgies that had sprung
up since the 4th century were reared on the basis of one common
type which we find in the liturgy of the Apostolic Constitutions
(§ 43, 4). The most important orthodox liturgies are: the
Jerusalem liturgy which is ascribed to the Apostle James, the
Alexandrian which claims as its author Mark, disciple of the
Apostles (§ 16, 4), the Byzantine which professes to have been
composed by Basil and abbreviated by Chrysostom, which ultimately
dislodged all others from the orthodox church of the East.
Among Western liturgies the following are distinguished for
antiquity, reputation and significance: the Gallican Masses
of the 5th century, the Milan liturgy, professedly by Barnabas,
probably by Ambrose, and the Roman or that of St. Peter, to the
successive revisions of which are attached the names of the great
popes Leo the Great, † A.D. 461, Gelasius I., † A.D. 496, and
Gregory the Great, † A.D. 604. It gradually obtained universal
ascendancy in the West. Its components are: The _sacramentarium_,
prayers for the service of the Mass, the _antiphonarium_, the
_lectionarium_, and the _Ordo Romanus_, guide to the dispensation
of the Mass. The uniting of these several writings to the _Missale
Romanum_ belongs to a later period.--=The Greek Liturgy= in the
combining of the vesper, matins and principal service of worship
represents a threefold religious drama in which the whole course
of the sacred history from the creation of the world to the
ascension of our Lord is brought to view. In the lighting and
extinguishing of candles, in opening and closing of doors,
in the figured cloth covering the altar space, (§ 60, 1), in
burning of incense and presentations, in the successive putting
on of various liturgical vestments, in the processions and
genuflections of the inferior clergy, in the handling of the
sacramental elements, etc., the chief points of the gospel
history are symbolically set forth. The word accompanying the
ceremonies (intonations, responses, prayers, readings, singing)
has a subordinate significance and forms only a running commentary
on the drama.--=The Latin Church= changed the dramatic character
of the liturgy into a dogmatic one. It is no longer the objective
history of salvation which is here represented, but the subjective
appropriation of salvation. The sinner in need of redemption
comes to the altar of the Lord, seeks and finds quickening and
instruction, forgiveness and grace. The real pillar of the whole
service is therefore the word, and to the symbol is assigned only
the subordinate part of accompanying the word with a pictorial
representation. The components of the liturgy are partly such
as invariably are repeated in every Mass, partly such as change
with the calendar and the requirements of particular festivals.
Among the former the canon of the Mass forms the real centre of
the whole Mass. It embraces the eucharistic forms of consecration
with the prayer offered up in connection with the offering of it
up.--Among the liturgical writings are specially to be named the
=Diptychs= (δὶς ἀπτύσσω, to fold twice), writing tablets which
were covered on the inside with wax. They were the official lists
of persons of the ancient church, and were of importance for the
liturgy inasmuch as the names written upon them were the subject
of special liturgical intercession. We have to distinguish,
δίπτυχα ἐπισκόπων, in which are written the names of the foreign
bishops with whom church fellowship is maintained, and δίπτυχα
ζώντων or lists of their own church members as the offerers, and
δίπτυχα νεκρῶν.[179]
§ 59.7. =Liturgical Vestments.=--A special clerical costume which
made the clergy recognisable even in civil life arose from their
scorning to submit to the whims of fashion. The transition from
this to a compulsory liturgical style of dress was probably
owing to the fact that the clergy in discharging their official
functions wore not their every-day attire, but a better suit
reserved for the purpose. If in this way the idea of sacred
vestments was arrived at it was an easy step to associate
them with the official costume of the Old Testament priesthood,
attributing to them, as to the dress of the Jewish priests, a
symbolico-mystical significance, to be diversified according to
their patterns as well as according to the needs of the worship
and their hierarchical rank. In the West the proper dress for
Mass was and continued the so-called _Alba_, among the Greeks
στοιχάριον or στιχάριον, a white linen shirt reaching down
to the feet after the pattern of the old Roman _Tunica_ and
corresponding to the long coat of the Old Testament priest,
with a girdle (_Cingulum_). The shorter _Casula_ or _Pineta_,
among the Greeks φελώνιον, over the Alba took the place of the
_Toga_. It was originally without sleeves, simply a coloured
garment of costly material furnished with an opening for the
head, but in later times made more convenient by being slit half
way down on both sides. The _Orarium_, ὀράριον, afterwards called
_Stola_, is a long wide strip of costly cloth which the deacon
threw over his left shoulder and on his right thigh, but the
priest and the bishop wore it over both shoulders and at the
sacrifice of the Mass in the form of the cross over the breast.
Over these priestly vestments the bishop wore as representing
the high priest’s ephod the so-called _Dalmatica_, among the
Greeks σάκκος, a costly sleeved robe; and the archbishop also
the _Pallium_, ὠμοφόριον. This last was originally a complete
robe, but in order not to conceal the episcopal and priestly
ornaments it was reduced to a small white woollen cape with two
strips hanging down on the breast and the back. To episcopal
ornaments of the Greeks besides belonged the ἐπιγονάτιον, a
square-shaped piece of cloth, hanging down from the σάκκος on
the left side, ornamented with a picture of Christ sewed on
stiff pasteboard; and to correspond to the high priest’s Urim
and Thummim, the πανάγιον, a painting in enamel of a saint,
hung to the breast by a golden chain. Among the Latins the place
of the latter is taken by the golden cross for the breast or
_Pectorale_. As covering of the head the priest had the Barretta
(_birretum_), the bishop the mitre, _mitra_ (§ 84, 1). The ring
and staff (marriage ring and shepherd’s staff) were in very early
times made the insignia of the episcopal office. The settling of
the various liturgical colours for the successive festivals of
the Christian year was first made during the 12th century.[180]
§ 59.8. =Symbolical Acts in Worship.=--The fraternal kiss
was a general custom throughout the whole period. On entering,
the church door or threshold was kissed; during the liturgical
service the priest kissed the altar, the reader the Gospel. Even
relics and images were kissed. When one confessed sin he beat
upon his breast. The sign of the cross was made during every
ecclesiastical action and even in private life was frequently
used. The custom of washing the hands on entering God’s house
and lighting candles in it, was very ancient. No quite certain
trace of sprinkling with holy water is found before the 9th
century. The burning of incense (_thurificari_) is first found
late in the 4th century. In earlier times it was supposed to draw
on and feed the demons; afterwards it was regarded as the surest
means of driving them away. The consecration of churches and the
annual commemoration thereof are referred to even by Eusebius
(ἐγκαινίων ἑορταί). Even so early as the times of Ambrose the
possession of relics was regarded as an indispensable condition
to such services.
§ 59.9. =Processions= are of early date and had their
prototypes in the heathen worship in the solemn marches
at the high festivals of Dionysos, Athene, etc., etc. First at
burials and weddings, they were practised since the 4th century
at the reception of bishops or relics, at thanksgivings for
victories, especially at seasons of public distress and calamity
(_Rogationes_, _Supplicationes_). Bishop Mamertus of Vienna about
A.D. 450 and Gregory the Great developed them into regularly
recurring institutions whose celebration was rendered more solemn
by carrying the gospels in front, costly crosses and banners,
blazing torches and wax candles, relics, images of Mary and the
saints, by psalm and hymn singing. The prayers arranged for the
purpose with invocation of saints, and angels and the popular
refrain, _Ora pro nobis!_ were called _Litanies_.
§ 60. PLACES OF PUBLIC WORSHIP, BUILDINGS
AND WORKS OF ART.[181]
Church architecture made rapid advance as a science in the times
of Constantine the Great. The earliest architectural style thus
developed is found in the Christian _Basilicas_. Whether this was
a purely original kind of building called forth by the requirements
of congregational worship, or whether and how far it was based upon
previously existing styles, is still a subject of discussion. In later,
and especially oriental, church buildings the flat roof of the basilica
was often changed into a cupola. Of the plastic arts painting was the
next to be represented.
§ 60.1. =The Basilica.=--The original form of the Christian
basilica was that of an oblong four-sided building running from
west to east. It was divided lengthwise by rows of pillars, into
three parts or aisles, in such a way as to leave the middle aisle
at least double the breadth of each of the other two. The middle
aisle led up to a semicircular recess (κόγχη, ἀψίς, _Concha_,
_Absida_), curved out of the eastern side wall, which was
separated from the middle aisle proper by a railing (κιγκλίδες,
_Cancelli_) and a curtain (καταπέτασμα, _Velum_), and, because
raised a few steps, was called βῆμα (from βαίνω). From the 5th
century the pillars running down the length of the house were
not carried on to the eastern gable, and thus a cross passage
or transept was formed, which was raised to the level of the
Bema and added to it. This transept now in connection with the
middle aisle and the recess imprints upon the ground plan of the
church the significant form of the cross. At the entrance at the
western end there was a porch which occupied the whole breadth
of the house. Thus then the whole fell into three divisions.
The =Bema= was reserved for the clergy. The elevated seat of
the bishop (θρόνος, _Cathedra_) stood in the middle of the
round wall forming the recess, lower seats for the presbyters
on both sides (σύνθρονοι), the altar in the centre or in front
of the recess. As a place reserved for the altar and the clergy
the βῆμα had also the names ἅγιον, ἄδυτον, ἱερατεῖον, _Sacrarium_,
_Sanctuarium_, the name “Handbook of Painting: Italian Schools.
Based on Kügler’s Handbook.” by Eastlake; new ed. by Layard,
2 vols., Lond., 1886.] of Choir being first given it in the Middle
Ages. Under the Apse or Bema there was usually a subterranean
chamber, κρυπτή, _Memoria_, _Confessio_, containing the bones of
martyrs. The altar space in later times in the Eastern churches
instead of being marked off by railings or curtains was separated
by a wooden partition which because adorned with sacred pictures
painted often on a golden ground and inlaid with most precious
stones, was called the picture screen (εἰκονόστασις). It had
usually three doors of which the middle one, the largest of the
three, the so-called “Royal” door, was reserved for the bishop
and for the emperor when he communicated. The =Nave= or main
part of the building, consisting of three, less frequently of
five, aisles (νάος, ναῦς, _Navis_, so called partly from its
oblong form, partly and chiefly on account of the symbolical
significance of the ship as a figure of the means of salvation,
Gen. vii. 23), was the place where the baptized laity met, and
were arranged in the different aisles according to sex, age
and rank. In the Eastern churches galleries (ὑπερῶα) were often
introduced along the sides for the women. The =Porch= (πρόναος,
_Vestibulum_) which from its great width was also called νάρθηξ
or _Ferula_, properly the hollow stalk of an umbelliferous plant,
was the place occupied by the catechumens and penitents. In front
of it, in earlier times unroofed, afterwards covered, was the
enclosure (αἴθριον, αὐλή, _Atrium_, _Area_) where a basin of
water stood for washing the hands. Here too the penitents during
the first stage of their discipline, as well as the _energumeni_,
had to stand. That the Atrium was also called _Paradisus_, as
Athanasius tells us, is best explained by supposing that here
for the warning of penitents there was a picture of Adam and
Eve being driven out of Paradise. The porch and the side aisles
just to the height of the pillars, were shut in with tesselated
rafters and covered with a one-sided slanting roof. But middle
aisle and transept were heightened by side walls resting on the
pillars and rising high above the side roofs and covered with a
two-sided slanting roof. In order that the pillars might be able
to bear this burden, they were bound one to another by an arched
binding. The walls of the middle aisle and transepts rising above
the side roofs were supplied with windows, which were usually
wanting in the lower walls.--Utility was the main consideration
in the development of the plan of the basilicas, but nevertheless
at the same time the idea of symbolical significance was also
in many ways very fully carried out, such as the form of the
cross in the ground plan, and the threefold division into middle
and side aisles. In the bow-shaped binding of the pillars the
idea of pressing forward (Phil. iii. 13, 14) was represented,
for there the eye was carried on from one pillar to the other
and led uninterruptedly forward to the recess at the east end,
where stood the altar, where the Sun of righteousness had risen
(Mal. iv. 2). The semicircle of the recess to which the eye was
carried forward reminded of the horizon from which the sun rose
in his beauty; and the bold rising of the walls of the middle
aisle, which rested on the arched pillars, pointed the eye
upwards and gave the liturgical _sursum corda_ which the bishop
called out to the congregation a corresponding expression in
architectural form. This significance was further intensified
by the light falling down from above into the sacred place.
§ 60.2. =Secular Basilicas.=--All spaces adorned with pillared
courts were called among the ancient Romans basilicas. In
the private houses of distinguished Romans the name _Basilica
domestica_ was given to the so-called Oëcus, _i.e._ the chamber
reserved for solemn occasions with the peristyle in front,
the inner open court surrounded by covered pillared halls;
while public markets and courts of justice were called _Basilicæ
forenses_. The latter were oblong in shape; at the end opposite
the entrance the dividing wall was broken through and in the
opening a semicircular recess was carved out with an elevated
platform, and in this were the tribunal of the prætor and seats
for the assessors and the jury. In the covered pillared courts
along the two sides were the wares exposed for sale and in the
usually uncovered large middle space the buyers and lookers-on
moved about. Outside of the enclosing wall before the entrance
was often a pillared porch standing by itself for a lobby.--From
having the same name and many correspondences in construction
the later Christian basilica was supposed to have been copied
from the forensic basilica. Zestermann was the first to contest
this theory and in this found hearty support especially on
the Catholic side. According to him the Christian basilica
had nothing in common with the forensic, but was called forth
quite independently of any earlier style of building by the
requirements of Christian worship. Now certainly on the one
side the similarity had been quite unduly over-estimated.
For almost everything that gave its symbolically significant
character to the ecclesiastical basilica,--the transept and
the form of the cross brought out by it, the bow-shaped binding
of the pillars, the walls of the middle aisle resting on the
pillars rising sheer into the heights, as well as the entirely
new arrangement of the whole house, are the essential and
independent product of the Christian spirit. But on the other
hand, differences have been greatly exaggerated and features
which the ecclesiastical basilica had in common with the forensic,
which were demonstrably copied from the latter, have been ignored.
On both sides, too, the importance for our question of the
_basilicæ domesticæ_ used for worship before regular churches
were built, has been overlooked. Here the peristyle with its
pillared courts with the oëcus attached supplied the divisions
needed for the different classes attending divine service (clergy,
congregation, penitents, catechumens). What was more natural
than that this form of building, brought indeed into more perfect
accord with the Christian idea and congregational requirements,
should be adopted in church building and with it also the name
with a new application to Christ the heavenly King? But one
and indeed a very essential feature in the later basilica style
is wanting generally in the oëcus of private houses, viz. the
Apse. One would naturally suppose that it was borrowed from the
forensic basilica in consideration of its purpose there, scruples
against such procedure being lessened as the heathen state passed
over to Christianity. Thus too it is easily explained how the
earliest basilicas, like that of Tyre consecrated in A.D. 313,
of which Eusebius’ description gives us full information, have
as yet no Apse.
§ 60.3. =The Cupola Style.=--We meet with the first example of
the cupola style among Christian buildings in the form of Roman
mausoleums in chapels or churches raised over martyrs’ graves.
This style, however, was in many ways unsuitable for regular
parish churches. The necessarily limited inner space embraced
within the circular or polygonal walls would not admit of
the significant shape of the nave being preserved; it could
not be proportionally partitioned among clergy, congregation,
catechumens and penitents. In an ideal point of view only
the centre of the whole space was suitable for the bema with
the altar, bishop’s throne, etc. In that case, however, the
half of the congregation present would have to stand behind
the officiating clergy and so this arrangement was not to be
thought of. In the later ecclesiastical buildings, therefore,
of the cupola style the ground plan of the basilica was adopted,
with atrium and narthex at the west end and bema and apse at
the east end. The old basilica style, though capable of so
much artistic adornment, passed now indeed more and more into
desuetude before the overpowering impression made upon one
entering the building by the cupola (θόλος, _Cuppula_) like
a cloud of heaven overspanning at a giddy height the middle
space, pierced by many windows and resting on four pillars
bound by arches one to another. Besides this main and complete
cupola there were often a number of semi- and secondary cupolas,
which gave to the whole building from without the appearance
of a rich well ordered organism. The greatest masterpiece
in this style, which Byzantine love of art and beauty valued
far more than the simple basilica, is the church of Sophia at
Constantinople (Σοφία=Λόγος), at the completion of which in
A.D. 587 Justinian I. cried out: Νενίκηκά σε Σαλομών.
§ 60.4. =Accessory and Special Buildings.=--Alongside of the main
building there generally were additional buildings for special
purposes (ἐξέδραι), surrounded by an enclosing wall. Among these
isolated extra buildings _Baptistries_ (βαπτιστήρια, φωτιστήρια)
held the first rank. They were built in rotunda form after the
pattern of the Roman baths. The baptismal basin (κολυμβήθρα,
_Piscina_) in the middle of the inner space was surrounded by
a series of pillars. In front there was frequently a roomy porch
used for the instruction of catechumens. When infant baptism
became general, separate baptistries were no longer needed. Their
place was taken by the baptismal font in the church itself on the
north side of the main entrance. For the custody of church jewels,
ornaments, robes, books, archives, etc. in the larger churches
there were special buildings provided. The spirit of brotherhood,
the _Philadelphia_, expressed itself in the πτωχοτροφεῖα,
ὀρφανοτροφεῖα, γηροκομεῖα, βρεφοτροφεῖα (Foundling Hospitals),
νοσοκομεῖα, ξενοδοχεῖα. The burying ground (κοιμητήριον,
_Cimeterium_, _Dormitorium_, _Area_) was also usually within
the wall enclosing the church property. The privilege of burial
within the church was granted only to emperors and bishops. When
clocks came into vogue towers were introduced, but these were at
first simply attached to the churches, occasionally even standing
quite apart.
§ 60.5. =Church furniture.=--The centre of the whole house of
God was the _Altar_ (ἁγία τράπεζα, θυσιαστήριον, _Ara_, _Altare_),
since the 5th century commonly of stone, often overlaid with gold
and silver. The altar stood out at the east end, the officiating
priest behind it facing the congregation. The introduction of
the _Missæ solitariæ_ (§ 58, 3) made it necessary in the West to
have a large number of altars. In the Greek church the rule was
to have one altar. Moveable altars, for missionaries, crusaders,
etc., were necessary since the consecration of the altar had
been pronounced indispensable. The Latins used for this purpose
a consecrated stone plate with a cover (_Palla_); the Greeks
only a consecrated altar cloth (ἀντιμήνσιον). The altar cloth
was regarded as essential, a _denudatio alteris_ as impious
desecration; according to liturgical rule, however, the altar
was bared on Friday and Saturday of Passion Week. From the
altar cloth was distinguished the _Corporale_, εἰλητόν, for
covering the oblations. On the altar stood the _Ciborium_, a
canopy supported by four feet, to which by a golden chain was
attached a dove-shaped vessel (περιστήριον) with the consecrated
sacramental elements for the communion of the sick. The
_Thuribulum_ was for the burning of incense, cross for marches
and processions (_Cruces stationales_) and banners (_Vexilla_).
In the nave were seats for the congregation; in the narthex
there were none. The pulpit or reading desk (_Pulpitum_) at
first movable, afterwards permanently fixed to the railings
in the middle of the bema in the basilica was called the _Ambo_
from ἀναβαίνω, or _Lectorium_, our English Lectern. In many
churches two ambos were erected, on the north or left side for
the gospel, and on the south or right side for the epistle. In
larger churches, however, the ambo was often brought forward into
the nave. Our chancel had its origin late in the Middle Ages by
a separate preaching Ambo being erected beside the lectern, and
raised aloft in order that the preacher might be better seen and
heard.--The introduction of church clocks (_Nolæ_, _Campanulæ_,
because commonly made of Campanian brass which was regarded as
the best) is sometimes ascribed to bishop Paulinus of Nola in
Campania, who died in A.D. 431, sometimes to Pope Sabinianus,
who died in A.D. 606. In the East they were first introduced
in the 9th century. In early times the hours of service were
announced by _Cursores_, ἀνάδρομοι, afterwards by trumpets or
beating of gongs.
§ 60.6. =The Graphic and Plastic Arts= (§ 38, 3; § 57, 4).--The
Greek church forbade all nudity; only face, hands and feet
could be left uncovered. This narrowness was overcome in the
West. Brilliancy of colour, costliness of material and showy
overloading of costume made up for artistic deficiencies.
The εἰκόνες ἀχειροποίητοι afforded stereotyped forms for the
countenances of images of Christ, Mary and the Apostles. The
_Nimbus_, originally a soft mist or transparent cloud, with which
pagan poets and painters surrounded the persons or heads of the
gods, in later times also those of the Roman emperors, made its
appearance during the 5th century in Christian painting as the
_halo_, in the form of rays, of a diadem or of a circle, first
of all in figures of Christ. Images of the Saviour bound to the
cross were first introduced about the end of the 6th century.
The symbol was previously restricted to the representation of
a lamb at the foot of the cross, a bust of Christ at the top or
in the middle of the cross, or the full figure of Christ holding
His cross before Him. _Anastasius Sinaita_ in the 7th century,
to show his opposition to the monophysite doctrine that only the
body had been crucified, painted a figure of the crucified which
straightway came to be regarded in the Eastern church as the
pattern figure, without the crown of thorns, with nimbus, the
wound of the spear with blood streaming forth, the cross with an
inscription on both sides--JC. XC.--and a sloping peg as support
for the feet, and under the cross the skull of Adam. The Western
crucifix figures, on the other hand, though likewise governed
by a special type, show greater freedom in artistic development.
Wall or fresco painting was most extensively carried on in
the Catacombs during the 4th-6th centuries. Mosaic painting,
_Musivum_, λιθοστράτια, with its imperishable beauty of colouring,
was used to decorate the long flat walls of the basilicas,
the vaulted ceilings of the cupolas and the curving sides of
the apse (glass-mosaic on a gold ground). Liturgical books were
adorned with miniature figures. Sublimity came more and more
to characterize ecclesiastical art; it became more majestic,
dignified and dispassionate, but also stiffer and less natural.
Statues seemed to the ancient church heathenish, sensuous and
realistic. The Greek church at last prohibited them entirely
and would not suffer even a single crucifix, but only simple
crosses with a sloping transverse beam at the foot. The West
had more liberal views, yet even there Christian statues were
only quite isolated phenomena. There was less scruple in regard
to bas-reliefs and alto-reliefs (ἀναγλυφαί) especially on
sarcophagi and ecclesiastical furniture.
§ 61. LIFE, DISCIPLINE AND MORALS.[182]
When whole crowds of worldly-minded men, who only sought worldly
advantages from professing Christ, were drawn into the church after
the State had become Christian, the Christian life lost much of the
earnestness, power and purity, by which it had conquered the old
world of heathenism. More and more the church became assimilated
and conformed to the world, church discipline grew more lax, and moral
decay made rapid progress. Passionate contentions, quarrels and schisms
among bishops and clergy filled also public life with party strife,
animosity and bitterness. The immorality of the court poisoned by its
example the capital and the provinces. Savagery and licentiousness
grew rampant amid the devastating raids of the barbarians. Hypocrisy
and bigotry speedily took the place of piety among those who strove
after something higher, while the masses consoled themselves with
the reflection that every man could not be a monk. But in spite of
all Christianity still continued to act as a leaven. In public and
civil life, in the administration of justice and the habits of the
people, the Christian spirit, theoretically at least, and often also
practically, was still everywhere present. The requirements of humanity
and the rights of man were recognised; slavery was more and more
restricted; gladiatorial shows and immoral exhibitions were abolished;
the limits of proud exclusive nationality were broken through; polygamy
was never tolerated, and the sanctity of marriage was insisted upon,
the female sex obtained its long unacknowledged rights; benevolent
institutions (§ 60, 4) flourished; and the inveterate vices of ancient
paganism could at least be no longer regarded as the sound, legitimate
and natural conditions and expressions of civil and social life. Even
the pagan, who, adopting the profession of Christianity, remained
pagan at heart, was obliged at least to submit himself to the forms
and requirements of the church, to its discipline and morals. The shady
side of this period is glaring enough, but a bright side and noble
personages of deep piety, moral earnestness, resolute denial of self
and the world, are certainly not wanting.
§ 61.1. =Church Discipline.=--The Penitential Discipline of
the 3rd century (§ 39, 2) dealt only with public offences which
had become common scandal. But even those who were burdened in
conscience with heavy but hidden sins and thereby felt themselves
excluded from church fellowship, were advised to seek deliverance
from this secret excommunication by public confession of sin
before the church in the form of _exomologesis_ and to submit to
whatever humiliation the church should lay upon them. In presence
of this hard and unreasonable demand the need must have soon
become apparent of a secret and private tribunal in place of
this public one, which when once introduced would soon drive
the earlier out of the field. The first step in this direction
was taken in the end of the 3rd and beginning of the 4th century
in the Eastern church by the appointment of a special penitential
presbytery (πρεσβ. ἐπὶ τῆς μετανοίας), who under an oath of
secresy heard the confession of such sinners and laid upon them
the proper penances. But when in A.D. 391, a female penitent, a
married lady of good family in Constantinople, having committed
adultery in the church with a deacon during her time of penance,
confessed this sin also to a priestly confessor and so brought
about the excommunication of the guilty deacon, the Patriarch
Nectarius was obliged on account of the popular feeling excited
to again abolish the whole institution and to leave to the
consciences of such sinners themselves the question of partaking
in the sacraments. But it was evident that this could not
exclude pastoral advice and guidance by the clergy. In the
West, notwithstanding the confident assertions of Socrates,
we never meet with a penitential priest expressly appointed
to such duties. Jerome on Matt. xvi. 19 calls it pharisaic
pride in a bishop or presbyter to arrogate the judicial function
of forgiving sins, “_cum apud Deum non sententia sacerdotum, sed
reorum vita quæratur_.” Augustine distinguishes three kinds of
penance corresponding to the three classes in the congregation.
1. The penance of catechumens; all their previous sins are
atoned for by baptism.
2. The penance of believers whose venial sins (_peccata
venialia_) occasioned by the universal sinfulness of human
nature obtain forgiveness in daily prayer.
3. The penance of those who on account of serious actual
breaches of the decalogue (_peccata gravia s. mortalia_)
are punished with ecclesiastical excommunication.
In estimating the church discipline to be exacted of this last
class of offenders he lays down the principle that the degree
of its publicity is to be measured in accordance with the degree
of publicity of the offence committed, and according to the
magnitude of the scandal which it has occasioned. And when
some Italian bishops demanded “_in pœnitentia, quæ a fidelibus
postulatur_” the reading before the congregation of a written
confession of their sin, Leo the Great forbade this extreme
practice, as unevangelical as it was unreasonable, declaring
that it was quite enough to confess the sin first to God and
then in secret confession to the priest. But when Leo added the
assertion: _divina bonitate ordinatum esse, ut indulgentia Dei
nisi supplicationibus sacerdotum nequeat obtineri; et salvatorem
ipsum, qui hane præpositis ecclesiæ tradidit potestatem, ut
et confidentibus actionem pœnitentiæ durent, et eosdem salubri
satisfactione purgatos ad communionem sacramentorum per januam
reconciliationis admitterent, huic utique operi incessabiliter
intervenire_,--we have here the first foundation laid of the
present Roman Catholic doctrine of penance. But this _confessio
secreta_ is still something very different from the later
so-called Auricular Confession. Leo’s ordinance treats only of
the confession of grave offences, which, if openly committed or
proclaimed, would have called forth punishment from the judicial
tribunal; _quibus_, says Leo, _possint legum constitutione
percelli_. But still more important is the distinction that even
Leo does not confer upon the priest absolute power of forgiving
sin as God’s vicegerent, but only allows him to officiate as
“_peccator pro delictis pœnitentium_.” Besides Leo’s view of
the unconditional necessity of confession in order to obtain
divine forgiveness of heinous sins by no means gained universal
acceptance in the church. The opinion that it was enough to
confess sins to God alone, and that confession to a priest,
while helpful and wholesome, was not absolutely necessary, was
universally prevalent in the East, where Chrysostom especially
maintained it, and even in the West down to the time of Gratian,
A.D. 1150, and Petrus [Peter] Lombardus [Lombard], † A.D. 1164,
had numerous and important representatives among the teachers
of the church (§ 104, 4). An important step onwards on the path
opened up by Leo was taken soon after him in the West when not
merely actual sins but even sinful dispositions and desires,
ambition, anger, pride, lust, etc., of which Joh. Cassianus
enumerates eight as _vitia principalia_, as well as the sinful
thoughts springing from them, were included in the province
of secret confession. A system of confession as a regular
and necessary preparation for observing the sacrament did
not as yet exist.--The so-called Penitential books from the
6th century afforded a guide to determine the penances to
be imposed upon the penitents in the form of fasts, prayers,
almsgiving, etc., according to the degree of their guilt. The
first Penitential book for the Greek church is ascribed to
the Patriarch of Constantinople, Joh. the Faster or Jejunator,
† A.D. 595, and is entitled: Ἀκολουθία καὶ τάξις ἐπὶ τῶν
ἐξομολογουμένων.[183]--Continuation § 89, 6.
§ 61.2. =Christian Marriage.=--The ecclesiastical consecration
of the marriage tie (§ 39, 1) performed after, as well as before,
civil marriage by mutual consent before two secular witnesses,
was made more solemn by being separated from the ordinary
worship and celebrated at a special week-day service (_missa
pro sponsis_), and a rich ritual grew up which gradually
developed itself into an independent liturgy. Into this many
bridal customs hitherto despised as heathenish were introduced,
the wedding ring, veiling the bride, the crowning both betrothed
parties with wreaths, bridal sashes, bridal torches, bridesmaids
or παράνυμφοι. The granting of the wedding ceremony was regarded
as an honour which would be refused in the case of marriages not
approved by the church. But neither the refusal nor the neglect
of the ceremony on the part of those newly married interfered
with the validity of the marriage. Charlemagne was the first
in the West and Leo VI. (§ 70, 2) was the first in the East,
to make the church ceremony obligatory. Marriage between free
and bond, which was regarded by the state as concubinage, was
regarded by the church as perfectly valid. Blood relationship by
consanguinity and affinity was regarded as hindrance to marriage;
artificial relationship by adoption and spiritual relationship
by baptismal and confirmational sponsorship (§ 58, 1) were also
hindrances. Marriage between brothers’ or sisters’ children was
pronounced unbecoming by Augustine. Gregory the Great forbade
it on physiological grounds, and permitted marriage only in the
third or fourth degree of relationship. With gradually increasing
strictness the prohibition was extended even to the seventh
degree, but finally was fixed at the fourth by Innocent III.
in A.D. 1215. In direct opposition to the Roman law of hereditary
claims which established the degree of relationship according
to the number of actual descendants, so that father and son were
counted as related in the first degree to one another, brothers
and sisters as in the second degree, uncle and niece or nephew
as in the third, brothers’ or sisters’ children as in the fourth
degree, the canon law on hindrances to marriage begins this
reckoning after the withdrawal of the common parents, so that
brother and sister are related in the first degree, uncle and
niece in the second, etc. Several Councils of the 4th century
wished to make the contracting of a second marriage occasion
of church discipline; subsequently this demand was abandoned.
Many canonists, however, contest even yet the legitimacy of a
third marriage, and a fourth was almost universally admitted to
be sinful and unallowable (§ 67, 2). The contracting of mixed
marriages, with heathens, Jews or heretics, demanded penance,
and was strictly forbidden by the second Trullan Council in
A.D. 692. Only adultery was usually admitted as affording ground
for divorce; and also for the most part, unnatural vice, murder
and apostasy. The Council at Mileve in Africa in A.D. 416 for
the first time forbade divorced persons marrying again, even
the innocent party, and Pope Innocent I. † A.D. 417, made this
prohibition applicable universally.--Continuation § 89, 4.
§ 61.3. =Sickness, Death and Burial.=--The anointing the sick
with oil (Mk. vi. 13; Jas. v. 14) as means of charismatic bodily
healing is met with down to the 5th century. Innocent I. put
it in a decretal of A.D. 416, for the first time as a sacrament
for the dispensation of spiritual blessing to the sick. But many
centuries passed before the anointing of the sick was generally
observed as the sacrament of Extreme Unction (§ 70, 2; 104, 5).
On the other hand, the Areopagite (§ 47, 11) reckoned the
anointing of the dead a sacrament. The closing of the eyes
implied that death was a sleep with the hope of an awakening
in the resurrection. The fraternal kiss sealed the communion
of Christians even beyond the grave. The putting garlands on
the corpse as expressive of victory still met with opposition.
Several Synods found it necessary to forbid the absurdity of
squeezing the consecrated elements into the lips of the dead
or laying them in the coffin. Passionate lamentation, rending
of garments, wearing sackcloth and ashes, hired mourners, cypress
branches, etc., were regarded as despairing, heathenish customs.
So too festivals of the dead by night were condemned, while on
the contrary funeral processions by day, with torches, lamps,
palm and olive branches, were in high repute. Julian and the
Vandals prohibited them. In the 4th century the celebration of
the Agape and Supper at the grave was still frequent. In their
place afterwards we find mourning feasts, but these, on account
of their being abused, were disallowed by the church.
§ 61.4. =Purgatory and Masses for Souls.=--The connection of the
custom already referred to by Tertullian of not only praying in
family worship for members of the family that had fallen asleep,
but also by oblations of sacramental elements on the memorial
days of the dead (_Oblationes pro defunctis_) of giving to the
intercessions at the Supper in public worship a special direction
to them, with the doctrine of =Purgatory= (_Ignis purgatorius_)
which had developed itself in the West since the 5th century,
gave rise to the institution of masses for souls (§ 58, 3). The
idea of a place of punishment between death and the resurrection,
in which the venial sins (_peccata venialia_) of believers must
be atoned for, was quite unknown to the whole ancient church down
to the age of Augustine and to the Greek church till even after
his day (§ 67, 6). Mention is made indeed even by Origen of a
future πῦρ καθάρσιον or καθαρτικόν; but he means by it a mere
spiritual burning, from which even a Paul and a Peter were not
exempted. In the West it was first Augustine who deduced from
Matt. xii. 32, that even in the hereafter forgiveness of sins
is possible, holding in accordance with 1 Cor. iii. 13-15 that
it is not incredible, but yet always questionable, that many
believers who took over with them into the hereafter a sinful
connection with their earthly past life, might there he purified
by an “_ignis purgatorius_” of longer or shorter duration
as the continuation and completion of the earthly “_ignis
tribulationis_,” fiery trial, from the earthly dross still
adhering to them, and so might be saved. With greater confidence
_Cæsarius of Arles_ teaches that believers who during their
earthly life had neglected to atone for their minor offences
by almsgiving and other good works, must be purified by a
lingering fire in the next world, in order to win admission
into eternal blessedness. Finally, Gregory the Great raised
this idea into an established dogma of the Western church, while
he, at the same time, taught that by the intercession of the
living for the dead, and especially by the sacrifices of the
mass offered for them their purgatorial pains would be moderated
and curtailed. He too referred to Matt. xii. and 1 Cor. iii.
The reference to 2 Maccabees xii. 41-46 belongs to a later
period.--Continuation, § 106, 2, 3.
§ 62. HERETICAL REFORMERS.
During the 4th century a spirit of opposition to the dominant
ecclesiastical system was awakened, but as it manifested itself in
isolated forms, it had no abiding result and was soon stamped out.
This spirit showed itself in various attempts which passed beyond what
evangelical principles could vindicate. It directed its attacks partly
against the secularization of the church, branching out often into
wild fanaticism and rigorism, and partly against superstition and
externalism. Disgusted with the interminable theological controversies
and heresy huntings of that age, many came to regard the distinction
between orthodoxy and heresy as a matter of indifference so far
as religion is concerned, and to look for the core and essence of
Christianity not so much in doctrine as in morals.
§ 62.1. =Audians and Apostolics.=--As fanatical opponents of the
secularizing of the church, besides the Montanists (§ 40, 1) and
the Novatians (§ 41, 3) still surviving as isolated communities
down to the 5th century, we meet during the 4th century with the
Donatists (§ 63, 1), the Audians and the Apostolics. The sect
of the =Audians= was founded about A.D. 340 by a layman, a monk,
Audius or Udo from Mesopotamia. Having been challenged for his
crude anthropomorphic views, in support of which he referred to
Gen. i. 26 and other passages, he allowed himself to be chosen
and ordained bishop over his adherents. Placed thus in a directly
hostile relation to the Catholic church, they accused the church
of most arrant worldliness and degeneracy, called for a return
to apostolic poverty and avoided all communion with its members.
They also rejected the Nicene canon on the observance of Easter
and adopted the quartodeciman practice (§ 56, 3). On the motion
of several Catholic bishops the emperor banished the founder
of the sect to Scythia, where he laboured earnestly for the
conversion of the Goths, founded also some bishoprics and
monasteries with strict rules, and died in A.D. 372. The
persecution of the Christians under Athanaric, in A.D. 370
(§ 76, 1), pressed sorely upon the Audians. Still remnants of
them continued to exist down to the end of the 5th century.--The
so-called =Apostolics= of Asia Minor in the 4th century went
even further than the Audians. Of their origin nothing certain
is known. They declared that the holding of private property and
marriage are sinful, and unconditionally refused readmission to
all excommunicated persons.
§ 62.2. =Protests against Superstition and External
Observances.=--About the end of the 4th century lively protests
were made against the superstitions and shallow externalism of
the church. They were directed first of all to the worship of
Mary, especially the now wide-spread belief in her _perpetua
virginitas_ as mother of Jesus (§ 57, 2). The first protesters
against this doctrine that we meet with are the so-called
=Antidicomarianites= in Arabia, whom Epiphanius sought to turn
from their heresy by a doctrinal epistle incorporated in his
history of heresies. In the West too there sprang up several
opponents of this dogma of the church. One of the most prominent
of these was a layman =Helvidius= in Rome in A.D. 380, a scholar
of Auxentius, the Arian bishop of Milan. Then about A.D. 388 the
Roman monk =Jovinian= opposed on substantial doctrinal grounds
the prevailing notions about the merit of works and external
observances, especially monasticism, asceticism, celibacy
and fasting. And finally, =Bonosus=, bishop of Sardica, about
A.D. 390, wrought in the same direction, though at a later period
he seems to have given his adhesion to the Ebionite error that
Jesus had been an ordinary man whom God adopted as His Son on
account of His merit (_Filius Dei adoptivus_). At least his
younger contemporary Marius Mercator describes him as an advocate
of these views alongside of Paul of Samosata and Photinus. We
also find many allusions during the 7th century to a sect of
Bonosians teaching similar doctrines in Spain and Gaul, who are
frequently associated with the Photinians. Even before Jovinian,
=Aërius=, a presbyter of Sebaste in Armenia, about A.D. 360,
entered his protest against the doctrine of the merit of external
observances. He objected to prayer and oblations for the dead,
would have no compulsory fasting, and no distinction of rank
between bishops and presbyters. In this way he was brought into
collision with his bishop Eustathius (§ 44, 3). Persecuted on all
sides, his adherents betook themselves to the caves and forests.
The two monks of Milan, Sarmatio and Barbatianus, about A.D. 396,
were perhaps scholars of Jovinian, were at least of the same
mind with him. Finally, =Vigilantius=, presbyter at Barcelona
about A.D. 400, with passionate violence opposed the veneration
of relics, the invocation of saints, the prevailing love of
miracles, the vigil services, the celibacy of the clergy and the
merit of outward observances.--The counterblast of the church was
hot and violent. Epiphanius wrote against the Audians and Aërians;
Ambrose against Bonosus and the followers of Jovinian; Jerome
with unparalleled bitterness and passion against Helvidius,
Jovinian and Vigilantius; Augustine with greater moderation
discussed the views of Jovinian which in their starting point
were related to his own soteriological views.[184]
§ 62.3. =Protests against the Over-Estimation of Doctrine.=--Even
in the times of Athanasius a certain Rhetorius made his appearance
with the assertion that all heretics had a right to their opinion,
and Philastrius [Philaster] speaks of a sect of =Rhetorians= in
Egypt who, perhaps with a reference to Phil. i. 18, set aside
altogether the idea of heresy and placed the essence of orthodoxy
in fidelity to convictions. The =Gnosimachians= were related to
them in the depreciation of dogma, but went beyond them by wholly
withdrawing themselves from the domain of dogmatics and occupying
themselves exclusively with morals. They are put in the list of
heretics by Joh. Damascenus. This sect had sprung up during the
monophysite and monothelite controversies, and maintained that
since God requires of a Christian nothing more than a righteous
life (πράξεις καλάς), all striving after theoretical knowledge
is useless and fruitless.
§ 63. SCHISMS.
The Novatian and the Alexandrian Meletian Schisms (§ 41, 3, 4)
continued to rage down into our period. Then in consequence of the
Arian controversy there arose among the orthodox three new schisms
(§ 50, 8). Among them was a Roman schism, followed later by several
others that grew out of double elections (§ 46, 4, 6, 8, 11). The
most threatening of all the schisms of this period was the Donatist in
North Africa. On the Johannite schism in Constantinople, see § 51, 3.
Owing to various diversities in the development of doctrine (§ 50, 7),
constitution (§ 46), worship (§ 56 ff.), and discipline (§ 61, 1),
material was accumulating for the grand explosion that was to burst
up the connection of East and West (§ 67). The imperial union attempts
during the Monophysite controversy caused a thirty-five years’ schism
between the two halves of the Christian world (§ 52, 5), and want of
character in the Roman bishop Vigilius split off the West for half a
century (§ 52, 6). The split between the East and West over the union
with the Monothelite party (§ 52, 8) was soon indeed overcome. But
soon thereafter the second Trullan Council at Constantinople, A.D. 692,
which, as the continuation of the 5th and 6th œcumenical Councils
(σύνοδος πενθέκτη, _Concilium quinisextum_), occupied itself exclusively
with questions of constitution, worship, and discipline, which had
not there been discussed, gave occasion to the later incurable and
disastrous schism.
§ 63.1. =The Donatist Schism, A.D. 311-415.=--In North Africa,
where echoes of the Montanist enthusiasm were still heard, many
voluntarily and needlessly gave themselves up to martyrdom during
the Diocletian persecution. The sensible bishop of Carthage
Mensurius and his archdeacon Cæcilian [Cæcilius] opposed this
fanaticism. Both had given up heretical books instead of the
sacred books demanded of them. This was sufficient to make the
opposite party denounce them as _traditores_. Mensurius died
in A.D. 311, and his followers chose Cæcilian [Cæcilius] as
his successor, and had him hastily ordained by bishop Felix
of Aptunga, being sorely pressed by the machinations of the
other party. The opposition, with a bigoted rich widow Lucilla
at its head, denounced Felix as a traditor, and so treated his
ordination as invalid. It put up a rival bishop in the person of
the reader Majorinus, who soon got, in A.D. 313, a more powerful
successor in Donatus, called by his own followers the Great. The
schism spread from Carthage over all North Africa. The peasants,
sorely oppressed by exorbitant taxes and heavy villeinage,
took the side of the Donatists (_Pars Donati_). Constantine
the Great at the very first declared himself against them. When
they complained of this, the emperor convened for the purpose of
special investigation a clerical commission at Rome in A.D. 313,
under the presidency of the Roman bishop Melchiades, and then a
great Western Synod at Arles in A.D. 314. Both decided against
the Donatists. They appealed to the immediate decision of the
emperor, who also heard the two parties at Milan, but decided
in accordance with previous judgments in A.D. 316. Now followed
severe measures, taking churches from them and banishing
their bishops which powerfully excited and increased their
fanaticism. Constantine resorted therefore to milder and
more tolerant procedure, but in their fanatical zeal they
repudiated all compromises. Under Constans the matter became
still more formidable. Ascetics mad with enthusiasm, drawn from
the very dregs of the people, who called themselves _Milites
Christi_, _Agonistici_, swarmed as beggars through the country,
_Circumcelliones_, roused the oppressed peasants to revolt,
preached freedom and fraternity, forced masters to do the work
of slaves, robbed, murdered, and burned. Political revolution
was carried on under the cover of a religious movement. An
imperial army put down the revolt, and an attempt was made
in A.D. 348 to pacify the needy Donatists by imperial gold.
But Donatus flung back the money with indignation, and the
rebellion was renewed. A severe sentence was now passed upon
the heads of the party, and all Donatist churches were closed
or taken from them. Julian restored the churches and recalled
the exiled bishops. He allowed the Donatists with impunity to
take violent revenge upon the Catholics. Julian’s successor
however again issued strict laws against the sectaries, and
schisms arose among themselves. Toward the end of the 4th
century bishop Optatus of Mileve opposed them in his treatise
_De Schismate Donatistarum Ll. VII._ In A.D. 400 Augustine,
bishop of Hippo Regius, began his unwearied attacks upon this
sect. The mildest terms were offered to induce the Donatists to
return to the church. Many of the more moderate took advantage
of the opportunity; but this only made the others all the
more bitter. They refused repeated invitations to a discussion,
fearing Augustine’s masterly dialectic. Augustine, who at first
maintained that force should not be used in matters of faith, was
moved by the persistent stiffneckedness and senseless fanaticism
of his opponents to change his opinion, and to confess that
in order to restore such heretics to the church, to salvation,
recourse must be had to violent compulsion (_coge intrare_,
Lk. xiv. 23). A synod at Carthage in A.D. 405 called upon the
Emperor Honorius to take proceedings against this stiffnecked
sect. He did so by imposing fines, banishing their clergy,
and taking their churches. Augustine renewed the challenge to
a public disputation. The Donatists were at last compelled by
the emperor to enter the lists. Thus came about the three days’
_Collatio cum Donatistis_ of A.D. 411 at Carthage. There appeared
279 Donatist and 286 Catholic bishops. Petilian and Primian were
the chief speakers on the side of the Donatists, Augustine and
Aurelian of Carthage on the other. The imperial commissioner
assigned the victory to the Catholics. In vain the Donatists
appealed. In A.D. 414 the Emperor declared that they had
forfeited all civil rights, and in A.D. 415 he threatened
all who attended their meetings with death. The Vandals, who
conquered Africa in A.D. 429, persecuted Catholics and Donatists
alike, and a common need furthered their reconciliation and
secured a good mutual understanding.--The Donatists started from
the principle that no one who is excommunicated or deserves to
be excommunicated is fit for the performance of any sacramental
action. With the Novatians they demanded the absolute purity
of the church, but admitted that repentance was a means for
regaining church fellowship. They maintained that they were
the pure and the Catholics were schismatics, who had nothing
in common with Christ, whose administration of the sacraments
was therefore invalid and useless, so that they even rebaptized
those who had Catholic baptism. The partiality of the state for
their opponents and confused blending of the ideas of the visible
and invisible church led them to adopt the view that church
and state, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the world, had
nothing in common with one another, and that the state should not
interfere in religious matters.
§ 63.2. =The _Concilium Quinisextum_, A.D. 692.=--This Council
claimed to be regarded as œcumenical and was recognised as such
even by Pope Sergius I. The Greeks had not yet got over their
vexation at the triumph which Rome had won at the last œcumenical
Council (§ 52, 8). It thus happened that among the multitude of
harmless decrees the following six were smuggled in which were
in flat contradiction to the Roman practice.
1. In enumerating the sources of the canon law alone valid
almost all the Latin Councils and Papal Decretals were
omitted, and the whole 85 _Canones Apostt._ (§ 43, 4)
included, whereas Rome had pronounced only the first
50 valid.
2. The Roman custom of enforcing celibacy on presbyters and
bishops is condemned as unjustifiable and inhuman (§ 45, 2).
3. Fasting on the Saturdays of the Quadragesima is forbidden
(§ 56, 4).
4. The 28th Canon of the Council of Chalcedon which makes the
patriarch of Constantinople equal to the bishop of Rome is
repeated and anew enforced (§ 46, 1, 7).
5. The Levitical prohibition against blood and things strangled
is sanctioned as still binding upon Christians, although it
had never been enforced by the Roman church.
6. Images of Christ in the shape of a lamb, which were very
common in the West, were forbidden. The papal legates
subscribed the decrees of the Council; but the Pope forbade
their publication in all the churches of the West. Compare
further § 46, 11.