RIVINGTONS
WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON
Oxford, and Cambridge
MDCCCLXXVII
[New Edition]
This Volume offers to the reader a short and condensed account of the
origin, growth, and condition of the Church in all parts of the world,
from the time of our Lord down to the end of the fifteenth century, the
narrative being compressed into as small a compass as is consistent
with a readable form.
In such a work the reader will not, of course, expect to find any full
and detailed account of so vast a subject as Pre-Reformation Church
History. Its object is rather to sketch out the historical truth about
each Church, and to indicate the general principles on which further
inquiry may be conducted by those who have the opportunity of making it.
It is hoped that those whose circumstances do not admit of an extended
study of the subject will find in the following pages a clear, though
condensed, view of the periods and Churches treated of; and that those
whose reading is of a less limited range will be put in possession of
certain definite lines of thought, by which they may be guided in
reading the statements of more elaborate histories.
It may be added, that the writer's stand-point throughout has been that
of a loyal attachment to the Church of England, as the authorized
exponent and upholder of Catholic doctrine for English people.
M. F. B. P.
July, 1869.
Before entering upon an account of the Foundation
and After-History of the Christian Church,
it may be well to consider what that Church really is.
Twofold nature of the Church.
The Church may be regarded in a twofold aspect, as
an external Corporation, and as a spiritual Body.
1. An external Kingdom.
In the first light it is a Kingdom, in the world, though
not of the world, extending through
different and widely-separated countries,
often seemingly divided by outward circumstances, but,
in reality, having all its parts subject to the same
Invisible King, governed by laws which He has given,
and by means of those whom He has appointed to be
His representatives on earth.
2. A spiritual Body.
In its spiritual sense the Church is the One Mystical
Body of Christ, of which men are made
members by Holy Baptism, and in which
they are nourished and built up by the Holy Eucharist,
and the other means of grace. These means of grace
are dispensed by Priests, who receive authority and
power to execute their ministerial functions from
Bishops, successors of the Apostles, and are
assisted in their ministry by the inferior order of
Deacons.
Future destiny of the Church.
The members of this Mystical Body, after passing
through their appointed probation in this
world, and being built up more and more,
if they continue faithful, into Christ their Head, are
removed to join the Church at rest in Paradise.
There they await the Resurrection and Final
Judgment, after which the "Church Militant here on
earth" will become the Church Triumphant in Heaven.
The Church exists through and by the Incarnation, applied to each individual in Holy Baptism, and the Holy Eucharist.
The existence of the Church is the consequence and
fruit of the Incarnation and Death of her
Divine Head; the spiritual life of all her
members being derived from their union
with our Blessed Lord's Sacred Humanity, whereby
they are also made "partakers of the
Divine Nature[1]," their birth-sin being at
the same time washed away by the Virtue
of His Cleansing Blood. This Life, once begun, is
kept up in faithful Christians by believing
and persevering use of the Mystical Food
provided for its sustenance in their souls—the Blessed
Body and Precious Blood thus given to them being a
continual extension of the Incarnation; whilst their
actual sins are forgiven by the absolving Word of the
Priest, and the Pleading of the One Sacrifice,
unceasingly presented in Heaven, and constantly shown forth
and mystically offered on the Altars of the Church on
earth.
Foreshadowings of the Church and the Redeemer's sacrifice under the Patriarchal
From the time of the Fall and the merciful Promise
of a Redeemer, "the Seed of the woman,"
there is also a foreshadowing of the Church
as the appointed way by which mankind
should lay hold on the salvation thus
provided for them.
The Patriarchs were priests in their
own tribes, for which they continually
offered up sacrifices to Almighty God; and
to this patriarchal system succeeded the Mosaical
Dispensation with an elaborate ceremonial, each minute
detail of which was laid down by direct revelation from
God Himself.
and Mosaic dispensations.
In this system of Divine Worship given to Moses,
sacrifices of animals still held the most
prominent place, typifying as they did the
great Oblation to come, and perhaps conveying a
certain Sacramental grace to the devout offerers and
partakers of them. To these perpetual sacrifices, offered
morning by morning and evening by evening, there
was also joined a continual round of praise and
thanksgiving.
Much of the Jewish ritual absorbed in the Christian Church.
When our Blessed Lord came "to fulfil the
Law," this Jewish ritual was in a great
measure engrafted into the worship of the
Christian Church. The Passover feast,
as well as animal sacrifices and the feeding
on them, were done away, and replaced by the
"Unbloody Sacrifice" and Sacramental Communion of the
Gospel covenant, whilst circumcision and ceremonial
purifications disappeared to make room for the "true
Circumcision of the Spirit," and the regenerating
streams of Holy Baptism. But the "Hours of Prayer"
and Praise were still retained, "the singers arrayed in
white" became the white-robed choirs of the Christian
Church, and the threefold order of the Christian
ministry represented the High Priest, Priests, and
Levites of the old dispensation.
Jewish Worship a preparation for Christian Worship.
We must not be led to think that the Jewish Worship
was contrary to the Mind of God,
for He Himself appointed it. It was,
without doubt, a part of the great Scheme
of Redemption—a preparation for the
Gospel, the means ordained by the Divine Wisdom for
keeping up in men's minds the future Coming of the
Messiah. But when the Great Deliverer was indeed
come, there was no further need for the types and
shadows of the Law, and they disappeared to make
way for the "substance" of the Gospel.
The Church Militant a preparation for the Church Triumphant.
So when the
number of the elect shall be accomplished,
and the Church Militant changed into the
Church Triumphant, her Worship and
her Sacraments will have their full fruition
in the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, and the
unceasing adoration of the redeemed in the Heavenly
Temple.
Our Lord prepared for the Foundation of His Church by instituting Holy Baptism and the Holy Eucharist, and by appointing the twelve Apostles.
Our Blessed Lord's Ministry was spent in making
preparations for the foundation of His
Church. At His first entrance on that
Ministry, He "sanctified Water to the
mystical washing away of sin;" at the
close of it, He blessed the elements of
Bread and Wine, and made them the
channels of His constant Presence with His Church,
"a perpetual memory of His Precious
Death" before God.
He also appointed
human instruments, who, in His Name
and by His Authority, should carry out
this mighty work, and be the foundation-stones of the
new spiritual building, bonded together and firmly
established in Him the "Chief Corner Stone." "The
wall of the City had twelve foundations, and in them
the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb[2]."
The Apostles taught and trained by our Lord's Example and Teaching.
The Apostles were solemnly set apart by our Lord
after a night of watching and prayer[3], and
from that time became His constant
companions, witnessing His mighty works,
listening to the words of Heavenly
Wisdom which fell from His Sacred Lips,
and thus experiencing, under the guidance of the Head
of the Church Himself, such a training as might best
fit them for their superhuman labours[4].
Special instructions given them, and not understood until after the Day of Pentecost.
A large portion of what is now stored up in the Holy
Gospel for the instruction of the whole
body of Christians,
was in the first instance
spoken to the Apostles with a special view to their
Apostolic vocation; to them it was "given to know
the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven." Doubtless
much of what they were thus taught
remained unexplained "Mysteries" to them
until the Coming of the Holy Ghost on
the Day of Pentecost to "guide them into
all Truth," and especially to instruct them in the real
meaning of what had before seemed to be "hard
sayings" in their Master's Teaching.
This Teaching continued after the Resurrection.
Again, after our Blessed Lord's Passion and
Resurrection, we read that He was "seen of
them forty days, speaking of the things
pertaining to the Kingdom of God[5]," i.e. to
the Church, the Kingdom which, by
the agency of the Twelve Apostles, He was about to
establish in this world. No record is left us as to what
these "things" were of which He spake to them; but
we cannot doubt that the Words of Divine Wisdom
would remain deeply engraven on their hearts, and be
a treasure of strength and counsel in the trials and
perplexities of the untried path which lay before them,
the Holy Spirit "bringing to their remembrance" any
sayings of the Saviour which human frailty might
have hindered them from remembering[6].
A commission given to the Apostles for all their official acts,
The Apostles received from the Great High Priest
before His Ascension, a commission to
execute the various functions of the priestly
office, to baptize[7], to teach[8], to consecrate
and offer the Holy Eucharist[9], and to
absolve[10]; besides a general and comprehensive promise
that all their official acts should be confirmed by Him,
in the words, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto
the end of the world[11]."
but not exerted till after Pentecost.
We do not, however, find that
this commission was acted on by the
Apostles before the day of Pentecost; the
Saviour's will was, that it should, so to
speak, lie dormant until the seal of the Holy Spirit
was impressed upon it. During the days of expectation
which followed our Lord's Ascension, we read that the
holy company who were gathered together in the
"upper room," "continued with one accord in prayer
and supplication[12];" but we have no mention of any
celebration of the Holy Eucharist, whilst immediately
after the Descent of the Holy Ghost we are told of
their daily continuance in "the Breaking of the Bread[13]."
A.D. 33. Participation of the Blessed Trinity in the works of Creation, the Incarnation, and the Foundation of the Church.
As the Three Holy Persons of the Ever-blessed Trinity
had shared in the work of the First
Creation of the world, the Father speaking by
the Eternal Word, and the Holy Spirit
brooding over what before was lifeless:
and as in the work of the Incarnation the
Father had sent the Son to take upon Him our human
nature through the operation of the
Holy Ghost: so, in the Foundation of the Church,
the Power of the Holy Spirit co-operated
no less than the Will of the Father and the Life-giving
Grace of the Son.
The waiting at Jerusalem.
The Apostles had received from their ascending
Lord a command to await in the City of
Jerusalem this "Power from on High,"
which was to be sent upon them[14]. We can easily see
the fitness of this injunction, when we remember that
they were about to become the founders of the New
Jerusalem, the true "City of God" in which the many
"glorious things spoken[15]" by the Old Testament
Prophets were to have their performance to a certain
extent even in this life, but fully and perfectly in the
Life to come.
St. Matthias chosen.
Immediately after our Lord's Ascension the Apostles,
under the immediate guidance of Almighty
God, made choice by lot of St. Matthias
to fill up the vacancy in the Apostolic Body caused by
the apostasy of Judas, and then awaited in prayer and
worship the promised Coming of the
Comforter.
The coming of the Holy Ghost.
After ten days of expectation, on
the morning of the Jewish Feast of
Pentecost, the Promise was fulfilled: with the sound "of a
rushing mighty Wind," with the brightness of "cloven
tongues like as of fire," the Holy Spirit descended
"and sat upon each of" the Apostles[16]. Thus they were
inspired and enlightened with Power and Knowledge,
and all the other sevenfold gifts of the Paraclete[17] in
fuller measure than had ever been vouchsafed to the
Prophets and Teachers of old, as well as with
miraculous endowments, that so they might be enabled to
carry out the Commission entrusted to them by their
Master.
The gift of Tongues.
One effect of this wonderful Visitation was
immediately and strikingly apparent to all who stood by, for
on these twelve unlearned men of lowly
birth was bestowed the power of speaking
fluently and intelligibly in languages of which, before,
they had been altogether ignorant.
The people come together.
The fame of this
great wonder soon spread amongst the
multitude of foreign Jews who were then
gathered together at Jerusalem to keep the Feast of
Pentecost; many of them were probably at that very
time in the Temple, of which the "upper room" is
thought to have formed a part, and they quickly came
around the Apostles, anxious to judge for themselves of
the truth of what had been told them.
Their amazement.
Very great was their astonishment at what
they heard. It seems as if words are multiplied in the
Sacred Narrative to impress us with a sense of their
awe and wonder. It is said that they "were
confounded" or "troubled in mind," that "they were all
amazed and marvelled;" and again, that "they were
all amazed, and were in doubt" at this startling
exhibition of the "Power" of God[18].
Though some refused to believe.
Some indeed "mocked,"
despising the work of the Spirit, as they
had before despised the work of the Son;
but many opened their hearts to the softening
influence, and of them it may truly be said that
"the fear of the Lord" was "the beginning of wisdom."
A.D. 33. Conversion of the 3000.
And now at once the converting power of the Church
was exercised. St. Peter, the chief of the
Apostles, took the lead, as he had
already done in the election of St. Matthias,
and preached to the impressed and eager
multitude that first Christian sermon, which was
followed by the conversion and baptism of "about 3000
souls[19]."
The promise of St. Peter fulfilled.
Thus was fulfilled, in one sense at least, the promise
of Christ to St. Peter: "Upon this rock
I will build My Church[20];" and he, who
first of the Twelve had faith to confess
the Godhead of our Blessed Lord, was rewarded by
being the first to whom it was given to draw men
into that Church, which in His Human Nature Christ
had purchased for Himself.
Further results of St. Peter's sermon.
In estimating the importance of the results which
were brought about by St. Peter's sermon,
we must not only take into account the
actual number of those who were at once
added to the disciples, large as that number was, but
we must also remember that many of these converts
came from far distant countries, whither, on their
departure from Jerusalem, they would carry the tidings
of the Faith which they had embraced. Hence they
in their turn became forerunners of our Lord and of
His Church, preparing the hearts of those amongst
whom they dwelt to listen to the proclamation of the
Gospel, when, in God's appointed season, it should be
preached to them.
A.D. 33. Growth of the Church.
The Church now steadily grew in influence and
numbers; "The Lord added to the
Church daily such as should be" [or
"were being"] "saved[21];" and on the
occasion of a second sermon, preached by St. Peter
after the healing of the lame man "at the Beautiful
Gate of the Temple," "about five thousand" were
converted[22].
Beginnings of persecution.
The opposition of the Jewish rulers was
powerless to check the ever-advancing
tide; and this first beginning of persecution,
by calling forth from the whole Church an earnest
act of worship and supplication, was the occasion of
"great power" and "great grace" being given to
enable her to do and bear all for the sake of her Lord[23].
Conversion of St. Barnabas.
Immediately afterwards we read of the conversion
of St. Barnabas, the first convert
mentioned by name, a Levite, and apparently
a man of wealth and position[24]; and then we are told
of the awe and reverence produced in the minds of
the people of Jerusalem, and the neighbouring country,
by the abundant exercise of the Apostolic
power of working miracles[25].
The gift of working miracles.
This great working
gift of the Holy Ghost, bestowed, like the
Gift of Tongues, on the Day of Pentecost, had similar
results. Fear was followed by faith, and
"multitudes both of men and women" were added to the
Church.
Persecution once more followed, this time with greater
severity; the Apostles were imprisoned through the
influence of the sect of the Sadducees, and, being set
free by a miracle, were called before the Sanhedrim
and scourged, only escaping death by the wise and
merciful interposition of the Pharisee Gamaliel.
A.D. 33.
Before going farther into the History of the Church,
we may pause to consider the account
given us in Holy Scripture of Christian
Worship and Discipline in the time immediately
following the Day of Pentecost. The same chapter
which contains the narrative of the Descent of the
Holy Ghost, has also a short epitome of the daily life
of the Apostles and their converts, during that brief
interval of undisturbed peace which preceded the
beginning of the bitter conflict between the Church
and the world.
Holy Baptism. Apostolic Doctrine.
First we read of Holy Baptism as the source of the
Christian Life[26], and then of steadfast
continuance in the one Faith as taught
by the Apostles, who were, so to speak, a
kind of living Gospel to their converts.
Oral teaching.
None of the Books of the New Testament were as yet
written, so that all instruction being oral,
faithful must most fully have sought
"the Law" of the Saviour at the "mouth" of His
twelve chosen servants, who had listened to His
gracious words, and had been themselves taught by
Him Who is Wisdom.
Value of tradition.
The Apostles' Creed is a
mighty instance of this traditional
teaching, which has come down even to our
own days; and many points of Church government,
and discipline, and ritual, merely hinted at, or not
even referred to in the writings of the New Testament,
were preserved to the Church by means of spoken
tradition. St. Paul several times mentions these
oral traditions, and in one instance speaks of them
to his converts as equally binding with the written
words contained in his Epistles[27]. The substance of
such important traditions became ingrained into the
system and belief of the Church, and it was thus of
comparatively little importance that their exact words
were forgotten.
Apostolic fellowship. Faith and love towards God
To oneness of "doctrine" belonged also oneness of
"fellowship." There was as yet "no
schism in the Body;" and this inward
Faith and Love found their outward
expression both towards God and towards
man. Towards God in "the Breaking of the Bread,"
the Daily Sacrifice and Thank-offering of the Holy
Eucharist "at home[28]," i.e. in their own upper room,
the first Christian Church, as well as in their constant
attendance on the daily "Prayers" and praises still
offered up in the Temple. Of the conduct of the
first Christians towards each other we are told twice
over, immediately after the Outpouring of the Day
of Pentecost, and again after that increase of
"boldness," which was granted to the earnest cry of the
Church on the approach of persecution[29].
and towards man.
Both these accounts speak to us of their full
realization of the doctrine of the Communion
of Saints. They "were together;" they
"were of one heart and of one soul:" the need of one
was the need of all; each felt his brother's wants, as
if he himself suffered; and so great was the liberality
of those who had "possessions and goods," that there
was not "any among them that lacked." "They had
all things common," as to the daily use of God's
worldly gifts.
The Holy Eucharist as a Sacrifice
The Holy Eucharist was to the Church then, as it
is still, the chief act and centre of Divine
worship. In this new Sacrifice the
Apostles showed forth and pleaded before God,
the One Sufficient Sacrifice, which they themselves
had seen "once offered," with unspeakable sufferings,
and all-prevailing Blood-shedding upon the Cross of
Calvary.
and a means of union with Christ.
In it they adored Him, Whom they now
acknowledged with every faculty of their souls to be
indeed their "Lord" and their "God;"
in it they found again the Real and
continual, though invisible, Presence of
the Master and Friend for Whose sake they had
forsaken all earthly ties; and by it they were brought
into closer union with Him, than when of old they had
walked and talked with Him beside the Galilean Sea,
or beneath the olive-trees of Gethsemane; for now,
they were indeed "nourished and cherished" by Him
and made more and more "members of His Body,
of His flesh, and of His bones[30]."
Thankfulness of the first converts.
What wonder, then, that we read of the
"gladness and singleness of heart" of the
Apostles and their converts thus living in the constant
joy and presence of their Lord, and that "praising
God" is mentioned as one of their distinguishing
marks:—
"By 'Deo gratias,' as they pass'd,
The faithful folk were surest known;
That watchword for the daily strife
Might well their thoughts and tongues employ,
Who made the Church transform their life,
And the great Offering crown their joy[31]."
Continued attendance of the Apostles on the Temple Services.
We may here remark the many indications which
are given us throughout the Book of Acts,
that the Apostles, who were themselves
Jews, did not, even after the Foundation
of the Christian Church, oppose or neglect
Jewish ordinances and worship, so long and so far as
the union of the two dispensations was practicable.
In this they followed the example of their Divine
Master, Who, from His Circumcision upwards, paid
obedience to that Law which He came to fulfil, and
Who was a constant attendant at the services of the
Temple and of the Synagogues. There was no violent
rending away from the old Faith, until God, in His
wisdom and justice, saw fit to ordain the destruction
of the guilty city Jerusalem, and the overthrow of the
Jewish Temple, and Altar, and Priesthood, none of
which had then any further purpose to serve in the
Divine plan for the redemption of mankind.
In the cases of St. Peter and St. John,
Thus we read of St. Peter and St. John going up to
the Temple to worship at the ninth hour
of prayer[32], and of their afterwards preaching
to the people in that part of the
Temple called Solomon's porch[33], of the daily
preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles in the Temple[34],
and of their constant resort to the Jewish Synagogues
during their stay in such places as possessed them[35].
and of St. Paul.
Even five and twenty years after the day
of Pentecost we find that the very tumult
which resulted in St. Paul's apprehension and
consequent journey as a prisoner to Rome, was
immediately excited by his having "entered into the
Temple[36]," in performance of one of the ceremonies of the
Mosaic Law.
Section 7. The First Schism and the Appointment of the
Diaconate.
A. D. 33. The first deadly sin in the Church.
Great and deadly sin had already made its way into
Christ's fold, and been cast out from the
midst of it by a fearful judgment. Ananias
and Sapphira had "lied unto God,"
and been struck dead for their impiety; and the
"great fear" excited by this first display of the judicial
powers of the Church had been followed by another
influx of conversions; for "multitudes were added to
the Lord[37]."
A.D. 34. The first schism.
And now came the first
division in the body, "a murmuring of
the Grecians against the Hebrews[38]."
Distinction between "Grecians" (or Hellenists) and "Hebrews."
By the "Grecians" are meant those Jews of foreign
birth and education who had adopted
Greek customs and the Greek language
so entirely, that some even of their most
learned men did not understand Hebrew
but read the Scriptures of the Old Testament in the
Septuagint Version. They were much despised by
the stricter and more narrow-minded "Hebrews," the
natives of Palestine, or Syro-Chaldaic Jews; and the
rivalries of these two Jewish sects were carried even
into the bosom of Christ's Church.
Complaint of the "Grecians."
The Grecians, or "Hellenists" complained
that their widows were neglected in the
daily distribution of alms; perhaps grounding their
complaint on the fact that the Twelve were all
Hebrews.
Deacons ordained.
And the Apostles commanded that "seven
men of honest report" should be chosen from the body
of believers, and presented to them, that
they might be ordained by Imposition of
Hands to minister to the bodily wants of the poor
and aged. This was the first institution of the Order
of Deacons[39], the lowest of the three holy offices which
were to be continually handed down and
perpetuated in the Church. Thus did the Apostles begin
to impart to others such a portion of the
ministerial grace, of which they themselves had been at
first the sole recipients, as might enable those whom
they ordained to aid them, in a subordinate degree,
in the work of building up the mystical Body of Christ.
Increasing conversions.
This fresh proof of the vitality of the Church through
the active, living Presence of her Divine Head, was
followed by a new feature in the still
increasing conversions to her fold. It
was no longer the poor and the unlearned only, or
chiefly, who listened to the teaching of the Apostles,
"a great company of the Priests were obedient to the
Faith[40]," while, on the other hand, a
growing and more bitter spirit of persecution
was soon to develope itself.
A.D. 34. The Seven Deacons.
St. Stephen, the foremost and saintliest of the Seven
Deacons, and St. Philip, the second in
order, are the only two of whom we have
any further mention in the Book of Acts;
but it is believed that the last named, Nicolas of
Antioch, was the author of the heresy of the
Nicolaitanes, which our Blessed Lord twice over tells us
that He hates[41]. Nicolas seems in this way to be
a sad reflection of the awful example set by the traitor
Judas, the last reckoned Apostle.
Their functions.
It is clear that the ministrations of the first Deacons
were not of necessity confined to the
"serving of tables," which was the primary
occasion of their appointment. St. Philip both preached
and baptized[42]; and St. Stephen brought down upon
himself the hatred and malice of the Jews by the
boldness and power of his preaching. Both preaching and
baptizing do still, under certain restrictions, "appertain
to the office of a Deacon[43]."
Probably all Hellenists.
Judging from the names of the Seven Deacons, there
seems good reason for supposing that
they were all or most of them Grecians or
Hellenists. St. Stephen was undoubtedly a Hellenist,
and his early training made him a ready instrument
for the work to which the Holy Ghost had called him.
Freed by education from many of the associations and
feelings which bound his Hebrew brethren to the Holy
City and the Temple, he could realize more plainly
than they could do, the future of the Christian Church
apart from both these, and boldly
proclaimed his convictions.
St. Stephen's preaching rouses Hebrew prejudices.
By this conduct
he aroused all the deeply-rooted
prejudices and exclusive pride of the Jewish
mind, even amongst those who, like himself, were
Hellenists, and to whom he seems more particularly to
have addressed himself. Up to this time, what
opposition there was to the teaching of the Apostles, seems to
have come chiefly from the unbelieving sect of the
Sadducees[44]; for the people had espoused the cause of the
Christian teachers[45], and the Pharisees had
advocated lenient conduct towards those
who confessed, as they themselves did, a
belief in the Resurrection[46].
The Pharisees join with the Saducees in opposition to the Church.
But now all
was altered; priests and people, Sadducees and
Pharisees, were alike vehement against those who ventured
to assert that the "Holy Place and the Law" should
ever give way to a Holier than they; and foremost
amongst the persecutors was the fiery, earnest,
intellectual man who was afterwards the holy Apostle
Paul[47].
St. Stephen's speech a direct Inspiration.
The defence of the heavenly-minded Deacon before
his malicious and bloodthirsty enemies must be looked
upon as a direct Inspiration of the Holy
Ghost, a fulfilment of our Blessed Lord's
promise to His Church[48],
and a Divine
commentary on Old Testament History, showing that
God's mercies were not restrained to any particular
place or country, and upbraiding the Jews with their
abuse of their many privileges and their rejection of
the Saviour. But the words of this first Christian
"Apology against Judaism" fell for the time on
unheeding ears; and its only present apparent result
was the violent and yet triumphant death
of him who had been chosen to utter it.
His blessed martyrdom.
Beneath the stoning of the enraged multitude, the
First Martyr "fell asleep," blessed in his last moments
with a foretaste of the Beatific Vision[49].
A.D. 34. Good brought out of evil for the Church.
We may here pause to recollect how God had all along
been bringing forth good out of seeming
evil, in what concerned His Church. The
first dawnings of persecution drew down
increased "boldness" in answer to thankful
prayer; the first great necessity for exercising the
judicial office of the Church was followed by "great
fear" and multiplied conversions, as well as by the first
miracles of healing wrought in the Church; the first
schism was the occasion of the origin of the Order of
Deacons, directly after which event we hear of "a great
company of the priests being obedient to the Faith,"
the first martyrdom helped to bring about the
conversion of the chief persecutor; and now the first general
persecution which came upon the Church was to have
for its result a far more widely-spread diffusion of the
knowledge of the Kingdom of God than had before
taken place.
Extension of the Church according to our Lord's promise.
This extension of the Church was in exact accordance
with our Lord's words to His Apostles
just before His Ascension, that they should
be witnesses unto Him "in Jerusalem, and
in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the
uttermost parts of the earth." Jerusalem was already
"filled with" their "doctrine," and now the disciples
were "scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea
and Samaria," and "went every where preaching the
Word[50]."
Still confined to Jews, and Samaritans, or to proselytes.
Still it would seem that they confined their
preaching to such as were either Hebrews,
or Grecians, i.e. foreigners more or less
professing Judaism[51]; or, as in the case of
the Samaritans, to such as were of mixed
Jewish descent, and clung to the Law of Moses, though
with manifold corruptions; or, again, to proselytes like
the Ethiopian eunuch. The Apostles, we read,
continued at Jerusalem, doubtless by God's command and
under His special protection.
Conversion of Samaria.
The conversion of the despised city of Samaria was
effected by the instrumentality of the
Deacon St. Philip[52], whose preaching and
miracles were followed by the baptism of large
numbers of the people, and, amongst them, of one Simon
of Gittum, better known as Simon Magus (i.e. the
magician, or sorcerer), who had claimed supernatural
powers, and given himself out to be an emanation from
the Deity, or even God Himself.
St. Peter and St. John sent to confirm.
St. Philip, as a
Deacon, could not complete the gift begun in Holy
Baptism, and St. Peter and St. John were
sent down by the Apostles from Jerusalem,
that they might confirm the Samaritan
converts by prayer and the Imposition of Hands.
Confirmation in those early days of the Church was wont
to be accompanied by a bestowal of miraculous gifts of
the Holy Ghost; and the wondrous signs following
upon this, the first Confirmation mentioned in God's
history of His Church, led the still
unbelieving Simon to long for the ability to
confer similar powers.
The unbelief of Simon Magus.
He dared to offer
money to the Apostles with this view, and drew from
St. Peter such a reproof as for a time pierced through
even the heart which had hardened by an abuse of
holy things. But this penitence was of short duration.
He became the author in the Church of a deadly heresy
called Gnosticism, mixing up what he had learnt of the
doctrines of Christianity with heathen philosophy and
sinful living, and making pretence of being endowed
with miraculous gifts.
His end.
This first heretic
is said to have perished miserably whilst
endeavouring to fly through the air at Rome[53], St. Peter
praying at the same time that he might no longer be
suffered to hinder the salvation of souls.
The Gospel preached in Antioch.
Another important result of the Sauline persecution
was the preaching of the Gospel in the
important city of Antioch by the
Greek-speaking Jews who sought refuge there[54],
and who addressed themselves to their Hellenist
countrymen. It was in this city, the third in rank in the
Roman Empire, and afterwards the mother of Gentile
Christendom, that the first branch of the Church
speaking Greek as its original tongue, was now
beginning to have its foundation; and it was also here
that the disciples were first called by the honourable
name of Christians[55].
A.D. 34.
It has been said "that, to combine the ceremonial
shortcoming of the eunuch with the
imperfect faith of the Samaritan, is to arrive
at the admission of the Gentiles[56]." Preparation had been
made in both these instances for the carrying out of
the Divine scheme by means of St. Philip, whose
fellow-Deacon had gladly laid down his life in witnessing to
the truth of it; and now God's great instrument for the
conversion of the gentile world was to appear.
Conversion of Saul.
The furious persecutor Saul was struck to the earth
by the sight and voice of the Lord, whose
disciples at Damascus he was bent upon
ill-using; and his miraculous conversion was followed
by his baptism and the devotion of all his powers
to the promulgation of that "Faith which once he
destroyed."
His fitness for his mission.
It is not hard to perceive in St. Paul a peculiar
fitness for the work to which God called him.
His zeal and self-devotion, deep affections,
and warm sympathies, were joined to clearness of
judgment and great intellectual powers; whilst, from the
circumstances of his birth and education, he had much
in common with both Hebrew and Hellenist Jews.
Though born in the Greek city of Tarsus, where he
came in contact with the classical ideas and learning
of which traces appear in his writings, his father was a
Hebrew, and sent him to finish his education at
Jerusalem under the care of the learned Pharisee Gamaliel.
Thus he became zealous in the Law; and hence his
deep tenderness for his brethren of the seed of Israel,
and his thorough insight into their feelings and
prejudices, were united to an acquaintance with gentile ways
of life, classic learning, and foreign modes of thought.
With St. Paul's conversion came a time of peace
and increase to the Church, during which
St. Peter's first Apostolic journey took
place, undertaken with the especial view of strengthening,
by the Laying on of Hands and by Apostolic
preaching and counsel, those who, throughout Judea
and Samaria, had been regenerated and made "saints"
by Holy Baptism[57].
A.D. 38
During St. Peter's journey, the course of God's
good Providence led him to the sea-port town of
Joppa, on the borders of Samaria and Judaea, and there
we read that "he tarried many days," a
measure of time which is supposed to be
equivalent to three years. At the expiration of this
time an event occurred which had a deep and lasting
influence on the life of the Church of Christ.
Further fulfilment of the promise to St. Peter.
Hitherto
no Gentiles had been admitted into her fold; but now
it was to be given to St. Peter first to
unlock to them the door of union with
Christ through His Human Nature; for to
him had first been committed the Power
of the Keys, as a reward for his adoring confession of
Christ's Divinity[1].
A Roman soldier quartered at the great stronghold of
Caesarea was honoured by being the occasion of the
gathering in of the first heathen converts.
A.D. 41. Conversion of the gentile Cornelius.
This centurion was not a proselyte, but a Gentile,
one however who feared and served God
according to the light given him through
reason and natural religion. He was
commanded by an angel from God to send to Joppa
for St. Peter to show him the way of salvation, whilst
another express revelation prepared the holy Apostle
for a step so contrary to all his most cherished habits
and prejudices.
Descent of the Holy Ghost on gentile converts.
Taught by God Himself no longer to
consider or treat the Gentiles as "common or unclean,"
St. Peter obeyed the summons of Cornelius; and, even
whilst he was preaching to him and the many gentile
friends he had gathered, the Holy Ghost
descended visibly upon them as upon the
Apostles on the Day of Pentecost. The
Gift of Tongues accompanied what we
may almost call a second Foundation of the Church;
and we may readily believe that those Christianized
Jews who had accompanied the Apostle from Joppa
were "astonished" at this indication of what was in
store for the Gentiles in the Kingdom of God.
Holy Baptism not superseded.
It is worthy of remark, that notwithstanding this
direct and extraordinary outpouring of the Holy
Ghost—but once before, and never since, vouchsafed to any
child of Adam—yet it was not considered
by St. Peter to do away with the
necessity for Holy Baptism. "He commanded
them to be baptized[2]."
A.D. 41. Jerusalem still the centre of the Church.
Up to this time, and for long afterwards, Jerusalem
continued to be the centre of the Church
of Christ. Within her walls was the home
of the Apostles during the intervals between
their missions to the Christian converts in
the neighbouring towns; and, as a natural consequence,
it was here that the first Councils or Synods of the
Church were held.
The Hebrews wish to impose circumcision.
Here, too, were the head-quarters
of those disciples who not only clung to the Mosaic
law themselves, but wished to impose
circumcision and the other precepts of the
Old Dispensation on gentile converts.
They yielded indeed to St. Peter's plea of special and
Divine direction, when summoned to Jerusalem to
answer for having eaten with men uncircumcised; nay,
they even rejoiced in the prospect of the gathering in
of the Gentiles; but they had yet to learn the temporary
nature of the Ceremonial Law, and to realize that in
Christ circumcision and uncircumcision were equally
valueless.
St. James the Less, Bishop of Jerusalem.
The government of the Church in Jerusalem was
conferred on St. James the Less, perhaps
on account of his being "the Lord's
brother;" and he remained in the Holy
City as its Bishop, when, about twelve years after the
Day of Pentecost, the other Apostles were for the first
time dispersed beyond the borders of Palestine, over
the face of the known world. The immediate occasion
of this dispersion was the persecution by Herod
Agrippa, which resulted in the martyrdom of St. James
the Great[3] and the temporary imprisonment and
miraculous deliverance of St. Peter (A.D. 44), a deliverance
granted to the earnest prayers of the Church.
A.D. 42. St. Barnabas at Antioch.
We have no account in the Book of Acts of the
Foundation (in the strict sense of the word) of
the Church in Antioch. We read of
St. Barnabas being sent thither from
Jerusalem to visit and teach the converts amongst the
Greek-speaking Jews, he being all the more fitted for
this office by his connexion with Cyprus, whence came
some of those who had first spread the knowledge of
the Gospel in Antioch. But St. Barnabas was not yet
of the number of the Apostles, the Foundations of the
Church (as neither was St. Paul, whom he lovingly
sought out and brought from Tarsus to aid in his
work); and consequently we do not read that the
"laying on of hands" formed any part of their
ministrations.
St. Peter believed to be the founder of the Church in Antioch.
There is, however, a very ancient tradition
which tells us that St. Peter visited
Antioch and founded the Church in that
distant city whilst on his way to the still
more distant Rome, after his miraculous
escape from Herod's prison (A.D. 44); and in the
ancient Church of England Feb. 22 was observed in
commemoration of "St. Peter's Throne at Antioch," that
is, of his episcopal rule there.
Obstacles to the conversion of the gentiles.
It was some years before the conversion of Cornelius
and his gentile household was followed by any
extended proclamation of the good tidings of the Gospel
to the heathen world. It was not God's
Will that all obstacles should be at once
cleared away from the onward path of the
Church; and the question of the relation in which the
heathen were to stand to the Law of Moses after their
conversion to Christianity, presented many difficulties.
St. Peter and the other Apostles seem to have waited
patiently until God should vouchsafe to show them how
these difficulties might best be overcome; and on the
Church in the large gentile city of Antioch it first
devolved to send forth missionaries to the heathen.
A.D. 45.
St. Paul and St. Barnabas sent to preach to the heathen.
It would seem that in the special Eucharistic
offerings and Lenten discipline mentioned by St. Luke[1],
the Church in Antioch was seeking guidance of her
Divine Head as to her duties with respect
to the gentile world in the midst of which
she was placed; and that the command of the Holy
Ghost to consecrate St. Paul and St. Barnabas
as Apostles to the heathen was an
answer to her cry.
We are not told whose "hands" were "laid" on the
two newly-made Apostles in the solemn Consecration
Service which followed, but it is likely that St. Peter
was at that time at Antioch, and also that the Church
in that city was already governed by a Bishop of its own.
They complete the Apostolic number.
It may here be remarked that the
number of the Apostles was now
completed. Those whom they ordained to be
Bishops or Overseers in the Church of God, as
St. Timothy at Ephesus, and St. Titus at
Crete, though they received in the "laying
on of hands" power to execute such of the
highest offices of the Apostolic function as were to be
perpetually continued to the Church, yet were not fully
Apostles.
Difference between Bishops and Apostles.
They had grace given to them to confirm,
to ordain, and to communicate the power of ordaining
to others, but they were not endowed with the
extraordinary and supernatural gifts bestowed by the Holy
Ghost for the Foundation of the Church; nor did they
receive the same direct and outward call as was
vouchsafed to the Twelve by our Lord Himself, and to
St. Paul and St. Barnabas by the special appointment of
the Holy Spirit. They were not to found the Church,
but to build up on its Apostolic foundations.
Mission to Cyprus.
The first missionary journey of St. Paul and
St. Barnabas was to Cyprus, the native
country of the latter. Here the preaching of
the Gospel, begun in the Jewish synagogue[2], was
continued before the heathen proconsul Sergius Paulus;
and through it and the judicial blindness inflicted by
St. Paul on the false prophet Elymas, the gentile ruler
was won to Christ.
St. Paul, the chief Apostle of the Gentiles.
St. Paul had now
begun to take the lead as the chief Apostle
of the Gentiles; it was he who, at Antioch
in Pisidia, preached that sermon to the
Jews which they would not heed, but which
found acceptance with the heathen whom
they despised.
Missionary journey through Asia Minor.
The Jews persecuted and blasphemed,
but the Gentiles believed; and, in the account given
us of the labours of the Apostles here and at Iconium,
we are reminded of the multitude of conversions and
of the gladness of heart of the converted in the first
days after the great Day of Pentecost[3].
A.D. 46.
At Lystra the Apostles found themselves for the first
time in the midst of a thoroughly heathen
population, without any admixture of Jews;
but here also they did not hesitate to preach the first
Christian "Apology against Heathenism," and to
display the miraculous powers with which the Holy Ghost
had gifted them.
The Apostles confirm and ordain.
Their Jewish persecutors followed
them and drove them to Derbe, the farthest limit of
their journey; and from thence they retraced their
steps, visiting each place where they had
preached the Gospel, "confirming" their
numerous converts, and "ordaining"
Elders or Presbyters to have the care of those who were
thus admitted to the full communion of the Church.
A.D. 46. Ordination of priests.
This[4] is the first mention we have of the ordination of
Elders, or Presbyters (or Priests[5], as we are
most in the habit of calling them), though
the fact of the existence of such officers
has already been hinted at[6] as well-known and recognized.
Thus we see that, as when at first "the number
of the disciples was multiplied," the Apostles delegated
part of their work to the Order of Deacons, so
afterwards, when the Church continued to grow and
increase, they provided for her needs by instituting the
Order of the Priesthood, conferring on others, in God's
Name and by His Authority, a larger portion of the
ministerial grace they had themselves received from Him.
Functions of the Priesthood.
The distinguishing Grace given to those who
were called to the Office of Elder or
Presbyter by the "laying on of hands," was,
as it still is, the power of consecrating and
offering the Holy Eucharist, that so, according to
St. Paul's words to the Elders of Ephesus, they may
"feed the Church of God[7]," not as in the case of the
Deacons, with "the meat that perisheth," but with "the
Bread of God, which cometh down from Heaven."
Consecration of Bishops
Of the Ordination of Bishops[8], apart from the
Apostolate, we have no mention in the Book of
the Acts; but that the Apostles did ordain
successors to themselves, so far as their office was to
be perpetual in the Church, we have ample proofs in
the Epistles of St. Paul to St. Timothy and St. Titus.
Their functions.
To both these holy men, Bishops or Overseers of the
Church in Ephesus and Crete respectively, St. Paul
gives injunctions as to their duties,
particularly in ordaining Elders or Priests,
the distinguishing work of a Bishop[9].
A.D. 46-51.
For a "long time" after the return of St. Paul and
St. Barnabas to Antioch, with the news
that God had, through their
instrumentality, "opened the Door of Faith to the Gentiles,"
the Church in that city seems to have continued to
flourish in peace and prosperity.
Difficulties as to the observance of Jewish rites.
But difficulties
with regard to the observance or
non-observance by the Gentile converts
of the rite of circumcision and other
precepts of the Mosaic law, arose to disturb this quiet.
A.D. 52. Hebrew Jews go to Antioch.
The Hellenist clergy in Antioch, less wedded to
Judaism, had apparently received into communion,
without doubt or question, those amongst the heathen
around the city who had been added to the number of
the faithful by Holy Baptism; but when tidings of this
freedom of communion reached the more severely
Hebrew Christians at Jerusalem, certain
Hebrew Jews of them hurried to Antioch, anxious to
bring the converts there under the yoke
of the law. Though unauthorized in this mission by
the rulers of the Church in Jerusalem[10], they urged with
such persistency the necessity of circumcision for the
salvation of all, that the opposition of St. Paul and
St. Barnabas only raised "no small dissension and
disputation," and it was agreed that the advice of the
Apostles and Presbyters at Jerusalem should be sought
on this important question.
St. Paul and St. Barnabas go to Jerusalem.
St. Paul and St. Barnabas then, "and certain others
with them" (amongst whom was Titus, an
uncircumcised Gentile convert[11]), went up
to Jerusalem, where at this time happened to be
St. Peter and St. John, as well as St. James, the Bishop of
that Church[12].
The First Council.
The Apostles and Elders, under the presidency of
St. James[13], met together in the First
Council of the Church, a large body of
the laity being also present, not indeed to take part in
the discussion, but to hear it, and to receive and
acknowledge the decision arrived at[14].
St. Peter, who had first been commissioned to carry
the tidings of the Gospel to the Gentiles, boldly
proclaimed the sufficiency of "the Grace of the Lord
Jesus Christ" for their salvation[15], and St. James, who
was probably himself a very strict observer of the
Jewish law, yet did not hesitate to declare that it had
no binding force on those who were not Jews by birth.
St. James presides as Bishop of Jerusalem. Decree of the Council.
He, as President of the Council, proposed
the decree to which the rest agreed, and
which was in substance, that the Gentile
Christians should be commanded so far to respect
Jewish prejudices as to "abstain from
meats offered to idols, and from blood,
and from things strangled," whilst they were also
enjoined to keep themselves from the sin of "fornication,"
into which the Gentile world was so deeply sunk.
The decrees of the Council did not enter into or
provide any solution of the minor difficulties connected
with the intercourse between Jews and Gentiles in the
Church of Christ. Doubtless "it seemed good to the
Holy Ghost" that these questions should be left to be
solved by time and experience and the general
exercise of His Gift of Wisdom.
Claim for Divine Authority. Guidance of the Holy Spirit vouchsafed to General Councils.
We can hardly fail to be struck by the confident
language in which the First Council of the
Church claims for its decisions the full
weight of Divine Authority; and though
it differed from later Catholic Councils in that it was
presided over by inspired men, yet we may well believe
that to those General Councils which really deserved
the name, the Holy Spirit vouchsafed such
a special measure of His guiding Power,
as might suffice to preserve their decisions
from error, and enable them to hand down
unblemished the deposit of Truth which Christ left
with His Church.
A.D. 53. St. Peter's probable visit to Antioch.
St. Paul and St. Barnabas bore back to the Church
in Antioch the decree of the Council at
Jerusalem, and it was probably about this
time that St. Peter paid to Antioch the
visit of which we read in the Epistle to
the Galatians[16], when his fear of "them
which were of the circumcision," led him to shrink
from continuing to eat and drink with the Gentiles, and
drew down St. Paul's stern rebuke.
Separation of St. Paul and St. Barnabas.
The difference of
opinion about St. Mark soon after
separated the two Apostles, whose labours
amongst the heathen had been till now
carried on together, and St. Paul began his missionary
travels without an Apostolic companion[17]. He went
first through Syria and his native country Cilicia,
"confirming" the baptized, and then to the scene of
his first contact with actual heathendom at Derbe and
Lystra. St. Paul's course of conduct with regard to
the circumcision of St. Timothy, a native of Lystra,
shows us clearly how fully his mind had grasped all
the bearings of the question between Jews and Gentiles[18].
St. Paul's indifference to circumcision in itself.
Circumcision and uncircumcision were
alike matters of indifference to him, in no
way affecting salvation, excepting so far
as they might tend to the edification of
others. He did not blame those converted Jews who
still thought it needful to observe the Mosaic law, but
he resisted to the uttermost all attempts to make that
law binding on the Gentiles, and would not sanction
any thing which might seem to imply that the
Life-giving ordinances of the Gospel were not sufficient for
every need. St. Timothy, uncircumcised, would have
obtained no hearing from Jews for the Gospel he
preached, and therefore he was circumcised as a
measure of Christian expediency.
St. Paul crosses over to Europe. St. Luke joins him.
After founding Churches in the semi-barbarous
regions of Phrygia and Galatia, St. Paul was led by the
express direction of the Holy Spirit to an
altogether new field of labour, and it is
here, just on the eve of St. Paul's departure
from Asia for the continent of Europe, that
St. Luke joins the Apostolic company.
Jewish influences give way to Greece and Rome.
The Church was now spreading far westward
and coming into closer contact with the philosophy of
Greece and the power of Rome, whilst
Jewish influences shrank into insignificance.
There was no synagogue in the large
and important Roman colony of Philippi,
and only women seem to have resorted to the place of
prayer outside the walls of the city, whilst at
Thessalonica, where the one synagogue for the whole district
was situated, the accusation of the Jews against the
preachers of the Gospel was no longer of a religious,
but of a political nature.
Opposition to the Gospel political.
"These all do
contrary to the decrees of Caesar[19]." In
same way the malice of the rulers of
the Jews against the Divine Head of the Church had
found vent in assertions of His plotting to destroy the
Temple, or to make Himself a King, according as the
Jewish populace or the Roman governor was to be
stirred up against Him[20].
But if Jewish prejudices no longer offered the same
formidable opposition to the soldiers of the Cross, as
before in Palestine and the neighbouring countries, the
Apostle and his fellow-labourers had now to encounter
fresh enemies not less deadly.
Vice and superstition mixed with intellectual unbelief.
In the highly civilized
cities of Greece they encountered on the
one hand the full tide of heathenism with
all its degrading vices and superstitions,
and on the other, Pagan philosophy with
its hard sceptical temper and intellectual pride.
Influences such as these may account for the comparatively
small results which seem to have followed the preaching
of St. Paul at Philippi, Thessalonica[21], and Berea, and
the prominence given to women as being more easily
touched by the good tidings of the Gospel.
Open conflict with Satan.
At Philippi is noticeable the conflict between the
visible power of Satan and the Power of
One stronger than he, in the casting out by St. Paul of
the evil spirit of Python from the soothsaying woman.
This was an earnest of the final issue of that great
contest between the kingdom of Satan and the
Kingdom of God, which was now beginning in the very
strongholds of darkness, and is to continue to the end
of time.
We may also remark the first mention of the title
and rights of a Roman citizen claimed by St. Paul
for himself and St. Silas after their illegal imprisonment.
A.D. 54. Athenians little inclined to believe.
At Athens St. Paul came in contact with the most
intellectual and philosophical minds of
heathendom; but heathen philosophy
made the Athenians very little inclined to
accept the supernatural mysteries of the
Christian Faith. They listened indeed with eager
curiosity to the "new thing" which the great Apostle
proclaimed "in the midst of Mars' Hill;" and yet when
their intellectual pride was required to bow itself down,
to acknowledge something more than a Neology, and
to believe in the supernaturalism of the Resurrection,
they only "mocked" the teacher. St. Paul, therefore,
departed from the city where his cultivated mind had
been stirred at the sight of so many great intellects
"wholly given to idolatry[22]."
Athens afterwards a Bishopric.
But yet his visit was not
without its fruits; and Dionysius, a member of the
great Council of the Areopagus, is
believed to have been the first Bishop of the
Church in Athens[23].
Corinth the centre of the Church in Greece.
From Athens St. Paul went to Corinth, and it was
in this luxurious and profligate city that
he founded a Church which became the
centre of Christianity in Greece.
St. Paul turns from the Jews.
The obstinate unbelief and blasphemous opposition of
the Corinthian Jews caused St. Paul, for the first
time, to withdraw himself entirely from
the services of the synagogue; but he
continued at Corinth a year and six months, being
protected, according to God's special promise to him,
from all the machinations of his Jewish enemies.
Opposes the errors of Greek philosophy.
This lengthened stay was probably occasioned not only by
the presence of "much people" who were to be
converted to Christ, but also by the necessity of
strengthening the Corinthian converts against the subtleties of
the heathen philosophy by which they
were surrounded, and with which St. Paul
was well fitted to cope by his early education.
The errors of Gnosticism seem also to have
penetrated at this time as far as Corinth.
A.D. 55. A.D. 56.
After leaving Corinth, St. Paul paid a hasty visit to
Ephesus, and then, for the last time,
returned to Antioch.
A.D. 56.
Ephesus the centre of the Church in Asia Minor.
The next journey of the great Apostle of the Gentiles
led him first through Galatia and Phrygia,
"strengthening" the Churches he had
already founded, and then brought him to the rich and
important maritime city of Ephesus,
destined to be a third great centre of the
Gentile Church, and to hold in Asia Minor
the same position as did Corinth in Greece
and Antioch in Syria. Here again St. Paul was forced
to withdraw altogether from the Jewish synagogue, after
three months of earnest preaching and teaching.
Ephesus was the great seat of the worship of the
heathen goddess Diana, or Artemis, and was also full
of those who practised "magical arts" or sorceries, so
that its inhabitants were doubly enslaved by the Evil
One. But the kingdom of darkness could not stand
against the Kingdom of Light.
Great power given to the Church. A.D. 57. A.D. 58.
Great as was the power
of Satan, still more mighty was the Power
which the Lord Jesus gave to His Church.
"Special miracles" were wrought in the
place of "lying wonders;" the Jewish
exorcists were confounded, and the sincerity of the
Christian converts was proved by the costly sacrifice
of their once-prized books of magic. "So mightily
grew the Word of God and prevailed[24]."
St. Paul passed between two and three years at
Ephesus, during which time he is supposed to have founded
the Church in Crete, leaving St. Titus as its
Bishop, whilst Ephesus was placed under
the episcopal charge of St. Timothy. But
eventually the riot excited by Demetrius drove the
Apostle from that city.
A.D. 59. A.D. 60.
His visitation charge to the Elders of Ephesus.
On his return to
the neighbouring city of Miletus, after his
journey through Greece and Macedonia, we read of
his sending to Ephesus for the clergy of
that place, and delivering to them a solemn
charge respecting their duties to the flock
which God had entrusted to their care[25].
It is during St. Paul's long sojourn at Ephesus that
we have the first indication of his intention to visit the
remoter regions of the West, and more particularly its
capital, imperial Rome[26]. He probably at that time
expected to see its wonders under different
circumstances than those of a prisoner, though before he
finished his homeward journey to Jerusalem, he had
supernatural warnings of what was coming upon him[27]
from the malice of his Jewish enemies.
A.D. 60.
The anxiety which St. Paul ever felt to avoid giving
unnecessary offence to his fellow-countrymen,
and his readiness to follow the
precepts of Judaism when they did not interfere with the
liberty of Christianity, were, in God's good Providence,
the indirect means of his being sent to
preach the glad tidings of salvation, not in
Rome only, but in still more distant countries.
St. Paul goes to Rome. A.D. 63-65.
It will
not be necessary to enter into the particulars which drew
upon St. Paul the unjust indignation of the Jews, and
induced him to appeal from their persecutions and the
popularity-seeking of Festus to the justice of the
emperor: we need only remember that the conclusion of
the Book of the Acts shows him to us a prisoner "in
his own hired house" at Rome, and there
preaching and teaching "with all confidence,"
first, as ever, to the Jews, and afterwards to
the Gentiles.
Section 7. Extent of the Labours of the Apostles.
We are told but little in Holy Scripture as to the
particulars of the Apostles' work in founding the Church
of God, except in the case of St. Paul, and we are not
allowed to trace even his labours to their end.
Preaching of the Apostles in all known countries.
From other sources we learn that the twelve
visited almost every known country of the
world, so as to give to each separate race
of men then existing an opportunity of
refusing or accepting the offer of the salvation of which
they were the ministers and stewards. We are also
told that all, except St. John and perhaps St. Matthew,
crowned their life of toil in the service of their Lord by
a martyr's death. St. Peter and St. Paul both suffered
at Rome in the First Persecution under Nero, and
most likely on the same day, A.D. 67.
The following Table[28] will show the probable field of
the labours of each Apostle, so far as the record of it
has come down to us:—
Supposed Fields of Apostolic Labour.
Name of Churches. By whom Founded.
Palestine and Syria All the Apostles.
Mesopotamia (Turkey in Asia) St. Peter and St. Jude.
Persia St. Bartholomew and St. Jude
India St. Bartholomew and St. Thomas.
Thrace (Turkey in Europe) St. Andrew. The flourishing
Church of Constantinople
afterwards sprang up on this
field of his labours.
Scythia (Russia) St. Andrew.
North Africa (Egypt and St. Simon Zelotes. St. Mark
Algeria) specially connected with
Alexandria.
Ethiopia (Central Africa). St. Matthew.
Arabia. St. Paul.
Asia Minor (Turkey in Asia) St. Paul and St. John.
Macedonia (Turkey in Europe) St. Paul
Greece St. Paul.
Italy St. Peter and St. Paul.
Spain St. Paul.
Gaul (France) and Britain St. Paul and St. Joseph of
Arimathea.
It seems probable that most of the Apostles had
entered into rest before the Destruction of
Jerusalem, A.D. 70, and that St. John the Divine was the
only one of the Apostolic body who long survived that
event.
St. Peter began to found the Church, St. John completed its foundation.
To St. Peter, one of the "pillars" of the Church, it
had been given to begin the great work
of laying the foundation of the Mystical
Temple of God; to St. John, the other of
the two, was allotted the task of perfecting
what had been begun, so that a
sure and steady basis should not be wanting on
which the New Jerusalem might rise through time to
eternity[1].
A.D. 67.
Purposes of the Second Council.
There is good reason for believing[2] that after the
martyrdoms of St. Peter, St. Paul, and
St. James, the first Bishop of Jerusalem,
and about the time of the invasion of the Holy City by
Vespasian, a Second Council of such of
the Apostles as still survived was held for
the purpose of electing a successor to the
See of Jerusalem, and definitely settling the future
government of the Church.
Bishops only rarely appointed at first,
Bishops had already been
consecrated in certain cases, as at Ephesus, Crete, and
Rome; but during the time that the Apostles
were still engaged in founding and
governing the different branches of the
great Christian community, the appointment of Bishops
(in the sense of heads of the Church) seems to have
been the exception rather than the rule.
but now everywhere to replace the Apostles.
A new era
was, however, now coming upon the Church; her
Founders were gradually being withdrawn from her,
and it was necessary that she should receive such a
complete and permanent organization as would enable
her to transmit to succeeding ages the
saving grace of which the Apostles had
been the first channels, that so what had
been founded through their instrumentality
might be continued and extended through the
ministry of others.
The establishment of the Apostolical Succession the special work of St. John,
This work of organization was fitly entrusted to
St. John, who for so many years was left
upon earth to "tarry" for the Lord, on
Whose Breast he had leaned, and Whose
teaching had filled his soul with adoring
love, and with those depths of spiritual
knowledge which are stored up for us in the
"Theological Gospel."
and the necessary consequence of his teaching.
It seems natural that he to whom
it was given most fully to "enlighten" the Church
respecting the Blessed Mysteries of the
Incarnation and of the Two Holy Sacraments,
should also be charged with the
care of providing for the continual transmission
of the sacramental grace of the Incarnation
through the "laying on of hands," and that he who
saw and recorded the glorious ritual belonging to the
Heavenly Altar, should organize that system by which
Priests might be perpetually raised up to show forth
the same Offering in the Church below.
Thus, though up to the time of St. Paul's martyrdom
(A.D. 67) Episcopal rule, as distinct from Apostolic,
would seem to have been exceptional, before the death
of St. John (A.D. 100), government by the Bishops had
undoubtedly become the recognized rule and system of
the Church.
Before entering into any details respecting the final
settlement by St. John of the Order, Discipline, and
Worship of the Church, it may be well to remind
ourselves that the Mystical Body of Christ only gradually
attained her full shape and constitution, following, like
God's other works, His law of growth and
development, and adapting herself, according to her Lord's
designs for her, to the needs of her members.
Development in the minds of the Apostles as to the work of the Church.
There is no reason to suppose that the Apostles,
even after the Day of Pentecost, had clear
ideas of the destiny which was in store on
earth for the Church which they were
engaged in founding. The gathering in of
the Gentiles, the existence of the Church entirely apart
from the Temple and its services, the place she was to
occupy in the long reach of years before the Day of
Judgment[3], all these were only made known to them
by the course of events and the teaching of experience,
conjointly with, as well as subordinate to, the general
guidance of the Holy Spirit. So, too, as regards doctrine.
As to doctrine.
We cannot for a moment doubt
that the Apostles, who had been taught
by the Incarnate Truth Himself, and inspired by the
Holy Ghost, held firmly "all the Articles of the
Christian Faith;" but we may also believe that their insight
into these verities would be deepened, and their
expression of them become clearer, as adoring meditation
and the Teaching of the Comforter brought more and
more to their remembrance the Words and Works of
their Lord, and unbelieving cavils forced them more
and more fully "to give a reason of the Hope that"
was in them[4]. The same thing may be noticed
respecting the Faith of the Church.
Development of the teaching of the Church.
Held firmly in
its fulness from the beginning, it was
yet only gradually set forth in Creeds,
Liturgies, and Definitions of Faith,
according as the love and belief of Christians required
expression, or the errors of heretics drew forth clearer
teaching on the truths they attacked.
Reserve in the teaching of the Church.
To this we may
add, that the early Church was very careful to keep
the knowledge of the deep mysteries of
the Faith from those who were not Christians.
It was only after their initiation by
Holy Baptism that those who had, as Catechumens,
been instructed in the rudiments of Christian doctrine,
were admitted to a full knowledge of the belief and
practice of the Church, especially as regarded the Holy
Eucharist, which was very commonly spoken of under
the name of the Holy Mysteries.
St. John's work at Ephesus.
About the time that Jerusalem was besieged by the
armies of Vespasian (A.D. 67), St. John
withdrew to Ephesus (whence for a while
he was banished to Patmos by the Emperor Domitian[6]);
and from this city he travelled about through
the neighbouring country, organizing, amongst others,
those Seven Churches of Asia Minor, to whose Angels
or Bishops he was bidden to write the Seven Epistles
contained in the Apocalypse.
Fitness of Ephesus as a centre of organization,
Here in Ephesus, the eye of Asia, the great
mercantile seaport of the then known world,
his influence could most easily make
itself felt amongst the far-off members of
the Christian body, which by this time
had extended throughout the whole Roman empire.
All the civilized world was then subject to the sway
of Rome, except India and China; and it may be that
even these two latter countries were not excluded from
the influence of the Gospel. It is not, of course, meant
that Christianity was the recognized religion of all or
any of the Roman provinces; but that in each of
them the Church had a corporate existence, and was
a living power, drawing into herself here one, and
there another of the souls who were brought into
contact with her, and really, though gradually,
spreading through and leavening the earth.
and of orthodox teaching.
Again, at Ephesus St. John could best combat and
confute, both by his words and writings,
the subtle and deadly heresies which were
especially rife there. "False Christs," such as Simon
Magus, the first heretic, Menander, Dositheus, and
others, no longer troubled the Infant Church with
their blasphemous impostures, but in their stead false
teachers had arisen, seeking to "draw away disciples
after them" into the more subtle error of misbelief
about our Lord and His Incarnation.
Errors of the Corinthians.
The Docetae, and other variations of Gnosticism.
Thus the Jew
Corinthus taught that Christ was a mere
man, born like other men, though united
to Divinity from His Baptism to His Crucifixion;
whilst to the errors of the Corinthians
the Docetae added that the Body in
which our Blessed Saviour suffered, was only a
phantom, and a body but in appearance; both these heresies,
and others of a similar nature,
appear to have been
variations of that Gnosticism to which
St. Paul refers in his Epistles, as "science"
(or gnosis) "falsely so called[7]," and which
was long a source of danger and trouble to the
Church. Gnosticism may be traced back to that
Simon Magus, with whom St. John first came in
contact at Samaria, and in all its varied distortions of the
great Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation, through an
admixture of Jewish and heathen error, there was
always an unvarying denial of our Lord's Divinity.
St. John's universal patriarchate.
For about a third of a century St. John continued
to exercise a kind of universal patriarchate
over the Church, being regarded, we
cannot doubt, with almost unbounded
reverence and affection by all its members, and perhaps
first presenting that idea of one visible earthly head of
the Church, which afterwards found its expression in
the popedom.
St. John's writings close the Canon.
The Gospel, Epistles, and Revelation of St. John,
written as they were at a long interval
after the rest of the New Testament, and
closing the Canon of Sacred Scripture,
may be usefully referred to, as giving us some idea of
the appearance of the Church when its government
and theology were finally settled.
How his Gospel differs from the other three.
St. John's Gospel differs from those of the other
three Evangelists in having been written
for men who from their infancy had
grown up in the Faith of Christ, and who
were thus more ready to enter into and profit by
deep sacramental doctrine; whilst at the same time
the dangerous heresies which were beguiling souls
from the truth, called for more detailed and dogmatic
teaching than had at first been needed.
Dwells on our Lord's Divinity,
Hence in place of an account of our
Lord's Human Birth, St. John sets forth His Eternal
Godhead and wonderful Incarnation, leaving no space
for unbelief or cavil, when he proclaims for the
instruction of the Church, that "the Word was God,"
and yet that He also "was made Flesh."
and on the two Sacraments.
Again, the
last Gospel does not bring before us the
Institution of the two great Sacraments
of the Christian Covenant; though it, and
it alone, does record the teaching of our Blessed Lord
Himself with regard to the New Birth in Holy
Baptism, and the constant Nourishment of the renewed
life in the Holy Eucharist.
The Epistles correct heresies.
Having established the Faith in His Gospel, St. John
in his Epistles sternly censures heresy and
schism, thus witnessing to the end of time
that the charity of the Church must never
lead her to countenance false doctrine.
The Apocalypse sets forth Discipline and Worship.
We may look to the Book of the Revelation for some
light as to the discipline and worship of
the Church of St. John's days. We have
there in the mention of the Seven Angels
or Bishops, each ruling over his own
Church and answerable for its growth in holiness, a
confirmation of the fact that episcopacy was now fully
organized as the one form of Church government which
had replaced the extinct hierarchy of the former
dispensation. Nor does it seem unreasonable to
believe that St. John's vision of the Worship of Heaven
was intended to supply to the Christian Church a
model to be copied so far as circumstances should
permit in the courts of the Lord's House on earth,
much as the elaborate system of Temple Worship,
which was entirely swept away with the destruction of
Jerusalem, had been in all things ordered "according
to the pattern" which the Lord had "showed" first to
Moses and afterwards to David. That the Primitive
Church did thus consider the Heavenly Ritual set
forth in the Apocalypse as the ideal of worship on
earth, is proved by the accounts which have come
down to us of the arrangement of Churches and the
manner of celebrating the Holy Eucharist in early times.
Arrangement of Churches in primitive times.
"The form and arrangement of Churches in primitive
times was derived, in its main features,
from the Temple at Jerusalem. Beyond
the porch was the narthex, answering to
the court of the Gentiles, and appropriated to the
unbaptized and to penitents. Beyond the narthex was
the nave, answering to the court of the Jews, and
appropriated to the body of worshippers. At the upper
end of the nave was the choir, answering to the Holy
Place, for all who were ministerially engaged in Divine
Service. Beyond the choir was the Berna or Chancel,
answering to the Holy of Holies, used only for the
celebration of the Holy Eucharist, and separated from
the choir by a closed screen, resembling the organ
screen of our cathedrals, which was called the
Iconostasis. As early as the time of Gregory Nazianzen, in
the fourth century, this screen is compared to the
division between the present and the eternal world,
and the sanctuary behind it was ever regarded with
the greatest possible reverence as the most sacred
place to which man could have access while in the
body; the veiled door, which formed the only direct
exit from it into the choir and nave, being only opened
at the time when the Blessed Sacrament was
administered to the people there assembled[3]. The
opening of this door, then, brought into view the Altar
and the Divine Mysteries which were being celebrated there.
Its resemblance to what the Apocalypse tells us of Heaven.
And when St. John looked through the door
that had been opened in Heaven, what he
saw is thus described: 'And behold a
Throne was set in Heaven … and round
about the Throne were four and twenty
seats; and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders
sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on
their heads crowns of gold … and there were seven
lamps of fire burning before the Throne … and
before the Throne there was a sea of glass like unto
crystal.' Here is exactly represented an arrangement
of the altar familiar to the whole Eastern Church and
to the early Church of England, in which it occupies
the centre of an apse in front of the seats of the Bishop
and Clergy, which are placed in the curved part of the
wall. And, although there is no reason to think that
the font ever stood near the altar, yet nothing appears
more likely than that the 'sea of glass like unto
crystal' mystically represents that laver of regeneration
through which alone the altar can be spiritually
approached. Another striking characteristic of the
ancient Church was the extreme reverence which was
shown to the Book of the Gospels, which was always
placed upon the altar and surmounted by a cross. So
'in the midst of the Throne, and round about the
Throne,' St. John saw those four living creatures which
have been universally interpreted to represent the four
Evangelists or the four Gospels, their position seeming
to signify that the Gospel is ever attendant upon the
altar, penetrating, pervading, and embracing the highest
mystery of Divine Worship, giving 'glory and honour
and thanks to Him that sat on the Throne, who liveth
for ever and ever.' In the succeeding chapter St. John
beholds Him for whom this altar is prepared. 'I
beheld, and lo, in the midst of the Throne, and of the
four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders,
stood a Lamb as It had been slain, having seven horns
and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent
forth into all the earth.' It cannot be doubted that
this is our Blessed Lord in that Human Nature on
which the septiformis gratia was poured without
measure; and that His appearance in the form of 'the
Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and
wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and
blessing,' represents the mystery of His prevailing
Sacrifice and continual Intercession. But around this
living Sacrifice there is gathered all the homage of an
elaborate ritual. They who worship Him have 'every
one of them harps' to offer Him the praise of
instrumental music; they have 'golden vials full of incense,
which are the prayers of saints,' even as the angel
afterwards had 'given unto him much incense, that he
should offer it with the prayers of the saints upon the
golden altar which was before the Throne;' they sing
a new song, mingling the praises of 'the best member
that they have' with that of their instrumental music;
and they fall down before the Lamb with the lowliest
gesture of their bodies in humble adoration. Let it
also be remembered that one of the Anthems here sung
by the Choirs of Heaven is that sacred song, 'Holy,
Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is,
and is to come;' the Eucharistic use of which is
traceable in every age of the Church[9]."
The ritual of the early Church naturally gathered
round the Holy Eucharist as the central act of worship
in which the Lord was most especially present, and
therefore to be most especially honoured. From the
first days of the Church this had been the one
distinctively Christian service; and now that the Temple
services had ceased, it became more apparently even
than before, the fulfilment and continuation of the
sacrifices of the elder dispensations[10]: whilst it was also
the Memorial of the Sacrifice of the Cross and the
Representation on earth of the continual offering-up
of "the Lamb as It had been slain," before the Throne
of God in Heaven.
Persecution increases round the Church.
We have already had occasion to notice the
beginnings of the persecution which the Church was
to undergo for the sake of her Head and
Spouse, not only those of a local and
unorganized character, which are spoken of
in the Book of Acts, but also some of a more cruel
and systematic nature under the Roman Emperors
Nero and Domitian. From the death of the last of
the Apostles to the conversion of the Emperor
Constantine, A.D. 312, the Church passed through a
succession of fierce trials, in which her members were
called to undergo similar sufferings to those which had
been borne by the holy Apostles St. Peter, St. Paul,
and St. John, and their fellow-martyrs[1].
In considering the causes which led to the
persecution of the Church by the heathen around her, we
must, of course, place first as the root and ground of
all, the malice of Satan, and his hatred of
God, and of the means appointed by God
for saving souls.
Satan's enmity the great cause of persecution.
The Kingdom of God
and the kingdom of Satan must ever be at war, and
the fierce and varied sufferings inflicted by the cruel
heathen on all who bore the name of Christ were so
many assaults of the great adversary seeking to
overthrow the Church in an open and deadly struggle. But
the life-giving Presence of her Incarnate Lord, and
"the patience and the faith of the Saints," were
mightier weapons than "all the fiery darts of the
Wicked," and "the gates of Hell" were not suffered to
"prevail against her."
Other minor causes.
There were, however, other and secondary causes
which led to the persecution of the Church.
The Romans were not usually intolerant
of religions which they did not themselves profess;
their worship of their own false gods had come to be
a form, as far as the educated classes were concerned,
and what belief they had was given to philosophy
rather than religion. Hence they were not unwilling
that the nations they conquered should keep to their
own respective creeds and religious ceremonies, so long
as they did not interfere with Roman authority. But the
religion of Christ required more than this. It could
not be confined to any one country, nor be content
with bare toleration, nor rank itself with the many
forms of Pagan misbelief. It claimed to be the only
True Religion, the only Way of Salvation, before which
the superstitions of the ignorant, and the philosophy
of the learned must alike give way. It made its way
even into "Caesar's household." Besides this,
Christians, owing to the nationality of the First Founders
of the Church, were often confounded with, and called
by the same name as the Jews, who had a bad repute
under the empire for rebellious and seditious conduct,
and we know how, even in the days of St. Paul, the
charge of sedition had begun to be most unjustly
fastened upon the followers of the Meek and Lowly
Jesus. This charge of disaffection to the powers of the
state received an additional and plausible colouring
from the fact that the consciences of the faithful
members of the Church would not suffer them to pay, what
they and the heathen around them considered to be
Divine honour, to the emperor or the heathen deities, by
sacrificing a few grains of incense when required thus
to show their loyalty to their ruler and his faith. Over
and over again was this burning of incense made a
test by which to discover Christians or to try their
steadfastness, and over and over again was its rejection
followed by agonizing tortures and a cruel death.
Nero's persecution.
The persecution in the reign of Nero is immediately
traceable to the accusation brought against
the Christians by the emperor, that they
had caused the terrible fire at Rome, which there seems
little doubt was in reality the result of his own wanton
wickedness, whilst that under Domitian appears to have
been connected with the conversion of some of the
members of his own family, his cousin Flavius Clemens
being the first martyr sacrificed in it.
The following table[2] will show how the early days of
the Church were divided between times of persecution
and intervals of rest.
Chronological Table of Persecutions and Intervals of Rest.
A.D.
64-68. Persecution under Nero. Martyrdom of
St. Peter and St. Paul.
68-95. Time of peace.
95-96. Persecution under Domitian. Banishment of
St. John.
96-104. Time of peace.
104-117. Persecution under Trajan. Martyrdom of
St. Ignatius.
117-161. Time of peace. Apologies of Aristides,
Quadratus, and Justin Martyr.
161-180. Persecution under Marcus Aurelius. Martyrdom
of St. Polycarp, and the martyrs of Lyons.
180-200. Time of peace.
200-211. Persecution under Severus. Martyrdom of
St. Perpetua and others in Africa.
211-250. Time of peace, excepting--
235-237. Partial persecution under Maximinus.
250-253. Persecution under Decius. Martyrdom of
St. Fabian.
253-257 Time of peace. Disputes concerning the lapsed.
257-260. Persecution under Valerian. Martyrdom of
St. Cyprian.
260-303. Time of peace, excepting--
262. Persecution in the East under Macrianus.
275. Persecution threatened by Aurelian.
303-313. Persecution under Dioclesian, Galerius, and
Maximinus.
Terrors of persecution.
Words can hardly be found strong enough to express
the many and varied tortures which were
inflicted on the Christians of the Primitive
Church by their heathen countrymen. Death itself
seemed too slight a punishment in the eyes of these
cruel persecutors, unless it was preceded and
accompanied by the most painful and trying circumstances.
It was by crucifixion, and devouring beasts, and
lingering fiery torments that the great multitude of those
early martyrs received their crown. Racked and
scorched, lacerated and torn limb from limb, agonized
in body, mocked at and insulted, they were objects of
pity even to the heathen themselves. Persecuting
malice spared neither sex nor age, station nor
character; the old man and the tender child, the patrician
and the slave, the bishop and his flock, all shed their
blood for Him Who had died for them, rather than
deny their Lord.
We have no possible means of estimating the number
of this vast "cloud of witnesses," but authentic
accounts have come down to us which prove that some
places were almost depopulated by the multitude of
martyrdoms; and when we remember the length of
time over which the persecutions extended, the
blood-thirsty rage of the persecutors, and the firm
perseverance with which the immensely large majority of
Christians kept the Faith to the end, we may form some
idea as to the "multitude" of this noble army of
martyrs "which no man could number."
Persecution did not check the growth of the Church,
So widely did the Church spread during the age
of persecution, in the face of all the fierce opposition
of her enemies, that it was found at times
to be impossible to carry out in their
fulness the cruel laws against Christians,
on account of the numbers of those who were ready to
brave all for the sake of Christ. As has been often
said, "The blood of the martyrs was the seed of the Church."
nor revive decaying heathenism,
Paganism was gradually dying away in the Roman
world, notwithstanding all the craft and
power of Satan, whilst no number of
martyrdoms seemed to check the growth of
the Body of Christ. Vain and short-sighted, indeed,
was the boast of the Emperor Dioclesian during the
last and most bitter of all the persecutions, that he
had blotted out the very name of Christian. No
sooner had the conversion of Constantine brought rest
to the Church, than she rose again from her seeming
ruins, ready and able to spread more and more through
"the kingdoms of this world," that they might
"become the kingdoms of Christ."
and thus helped to prove the Divine origin of the Church.
We may well believe that no institution of human
appointment could have stood firm against
such terrible and reiterated shocks.
Nothing less than a Divine Foundation, and
a strength not of this world could have borne the
Church through the ages of persecution, not only
without loss of all vital principle, but even with actual
invigoration and extension of it.
The fierce trials of the age of persecution were not
without their influence on the inner life of the Church,
both as regarded Worship and Discipline.
The cruel oppressions to which they were constantly
liable, drove Christians to conceal their Faith from the
eyes of the heathen world whenever such concealment
did not involve any denial of their Lord, or any
faithless compliance with idolatrous customs.
Seeking martyrdom forbidden.
Indeed, it was a law of the Church that
martyrdom was not to be unnecessarily
sought after, and the wisdom of this provision was
more than once shown by the failure under torture of
those who had presumptuously brought upon
themselves the sufferings they had not strength to bear, and
which did not come to them in the course of God's
Providence.
Holy Rites and Books kept hidden.
The strictest secrecy was enjoined upon Christians
as to the religious Rites and sacred Books
of the Church, and we read of many
martyrs who suffered for refusing to satisfy the
curiosity of their Pagan judges respecting Christian
worship, or for persisting in withholding from them
the Christian writings.
Church ritual temporarily checked.
Another natural effect of persecution was to check
for a time the development of the ritual
of the Church, and to render necessary
the use of the simplest and most essential
forms even in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist.
The immense subterranean excavations at Rome,
known by the name of the Catacombs, are an abiding
proof to us of the straits to which the primitive
martyrs and their companions were reduced, when these
sand-galleries were at once their Church and their
burying-place, and in some instances the scene of their
martyrdom also.
Church discipline very severe
The discipline of the Church was made extremely
strict by the lengthened continuance of
severe persecution. In those days when
so many gave proof of the strength and
reality of their Faith by their persevering endurance
of unspeakable agonies, any shrinking back was looked
upon as very unworthy cowardice, and as an almost
hopeless fall, to be hindered if possible by the merciful
severity of the Church as shown in warnings and
punishments. Even those who had so far succumbed
to trial as to give up the Sacred Books were called
"Traditores," and considered as very criminal; those
who had consented to pay Divine honours to the
emperors or to the heathen gods, fell under still more
severe censure, whilst such Christians as led sinful and
immoral lives were considered most worthy of blame
and punishment. Very heavy penances were laid upon
all who thus fell away, in proportion to their guilt, before
they were again admitted to the Communion of the
Church; and in some extreme cases the punishment
was life-long, and only allowed to be relaxed when the
penitent was actually in danger of death.
for a time.
But this very severe discipline was temporary in
its nature, as was the danger to the Church
which called it forth, and was somewhat modified by
the Letters of Peace which martyrs and confessors were
allowed to give to excommunicated persons, authorizing
their readmission to Church privileges.
Church government modified also for a time.
A temporary modification in the government of the
Church was also brought about by these times of
suffering. Bishops, under the pressure of
persecution, were sometimes forced to leave
their flocks, or were first tortured and
then banished, and their places had to be
filled as far as they could be by the presbyters, with
the advice of the distant Bishop; whilst at Rome, in
the middle of the third century, there was a year's
vacancy in the see after the martyrdom of Fabian, on
account of the impossibility of bringing neighbouring
Bishops into the midst of a storm which was raging
with especial fury against the rulers of the Church.
Persecution arrested by conversion of Constantine.
Outward triumph of the Church.
The conversion of the Emperor Constantine to the
Faith worked a great change in the condition of
the Christian Church. Even so early as the year 312,
when the appearance to him of the
luminous Cross in the sky was followed by
victory over his enemies, Constantine
began to issue edicts of toleration in
favour of the Christians; and from the time of his sole
supremacy, A.D. 324, Christianity and not
Paganism became the acknowledged
religion of the Roman empire.
Consequent change in discipline and ritual.
Such a change in the outward circumstances of the
Church could not but produce a
corresponding alteration in its discipline and
mode of worship. The Kingdom of God
on earth became a great power visible to
the eyes of men, no longer hid like the leaven, but
overshadowing the earth like the mustard-tree; and the
power and influence of Imperial Rome were employed
in spreading the Faith instead of seeking to exterminate
it. Christians were not now forced to shun the notice
of their fellow-men; banished Priests and Bishops
came back to their flocks; heathen temples were
converted into Churches, and new Churches were built
with great splendour. The vast resources of Roman
wealth and refinement were employed to render the
Worship of Almighty God costly and magnificent, and
the ritual of the Church was probably more fully
developed and brought more into harmony with the
prophetic vision of St. John than circumstances had ever
before allowed.
The first Christian city.
In Constantinople, built by the Emperor Constantine
on the ruins of Byzantium, we have the
first instance of a city which, from the
time of its foundation, was entirely Christian.
Endowment of the Church.
The Church was now no longer dependent on the
alms of private Christians; the revenues
which had formerly been devoted by the
state to the maintenance of the heathen temples and
their ministers, were transferred to the support of
Christian Churches and their Clergy, and to the relief
of the poor. Christian schools were also founded and
endowed by the emperors; and learning, as well as
wealth, was thus brought in contact with the Faith.
Church honoured by the world.
Christian Rome soon became a great instrument in
God's hands for extending the influence of the Church
even amongst little-known and uncivilized nations; and
as persecution ceased to try the earnestness of those
who embraced the religion of Christ, and the name of
Christian came to be treated with respect instead of
with scorn, the Church began to assume a
position somewhat like that which she
holds in our own day.
Discipline relaxed.
The profession of
Christianity under these circumstances was naturally
more of a matter of course with many of those who
had grown up under its shadow, than when, in earlier
times, such a profession was likely to involve loss and
suffering, and even death itself, and
discipline was gradually and necessarily
relaxed from the severity needful in the days of
persecution.
Heresy gathers strength in prosperity,
The Church being thus firmly settled and delivered
from outer enemies, was now to find
troubles within. Even from the days of
St. John the Divine heresies respecting
the Person of our Blessed Lord had been rife; but these
open denials of the Divinity of the Great Head of the
Church had been successfully opposed without their
leaving behind them any very lasting trace.
and is of a more dangerous nature.
Errors of
a more subtle class followed, amounting
in reality to unbelief in our Saviour's
Godhead, but expressing that unbelief by
assailing the teaching of the Church respecting His
nature as Very God or as Very Man.
Arianism.
This species of error culminated in the heresy of
Arius, who denied that the Second Person
of the Holy Trinity was co-equal,
co-eternal, and of One Substance with the Father, and
whose false teaching was more widely listened to and
followed than that of any of his predecessors in misbelief.
Arianism, and various forms of error consequent upon
it, long afflicted the Church, especially in the East,
and the Emperor Constantine himself seems at one
time to have had a leaning towards the theories of Arius.
The remedy provided for heresy.
The full tide of the Arian heresy was, however, not
suffered to come upon the Church without
a barrier being raised up by God to stem
the torrent. The Emperor Constantine
was providentially guided to call together a Council of
Bishops from every part of the world, to decide what
was and always had been the Faith of the Church
respecting the Nature of our Blessed Lord. This is the
first instance of what are known by the name of General
Councils of the Church. Other councils, called
provincial synods, had indeed been frequently held from
the earliest times; but they were of a much more
limited and partial character, and their decrees were
binding only on the province in which they were held,
and not on the Church at large.
Nature of General Councils.
General Councils were called together by the Christian
emperors, and, from the nature of their
constitution, were not possible until all or
nearly all the Christian world was governed
by a ruler professing the Faith of Christ; nor has such
a general synod been held since the breaking up of the
universal empire of Rome helped to overthrow the
external unity of the Church[1].
Their number.
Four General Councils are officially
acknowledged by the Church of England as binding on her
members, and to these are commonly added two, held
somewhat later at Constantinople.
I. Council.
I. The First General Council was called together by
Constantine the Great, A.D. 325. It was
held at Nicaea in Bithynia, and was
attended by 318 Bishops. The great work of this Council
was the positive and explicit assertion of what the Church
had always implicitly believed concerning the Nature
of our Divine Lord, and His Oneness with the Father.
It was at this Nicene Council that the great St. Athanasius,
then only a deacon, first distinguished himself
by his opposition to the heresies of Arius. The teaching
of the Council was embodied in the creed which is
known to us as the Nicene Creed[2], and which was
signed by all the assembled Bishops with only two
exceptions, these being probably personal friends of
Arius. Besides the condemnation of Arius, the Council
settled the time of keeping Easter, and passed twenty
Canons which were confirmed by the Emperor.
II. Council.
II. The Second General Council was held at
Constantinople, A.D. 381, in the reign of
Theodosius the Great. It was summoned
principally to condemn the heresy of Macedonius, who
had been Patriarch of Constantinople, and who had
added to the Arian heresy a denial of the Divinity of
God the Holy Ghost. At this Council 150 Bishops
were present, and it is especially remarkable for having
completed the Creed of Nicaea[3], which is hence also
called the Creed of Constantinople.
III. Council.
III. The Third General Council was summoned by
the Emperor Theodosius the Younger,
A.D. 431, and met at Ephesus. It was
held to consider the heresy of Nestorius, Patriarch of
Constantinople, who taught that the Blessed Virgin
was the Mother of our Lord's Human Nature only, and
that, therefore, the title of Theotokos, or "Mother of
God," ought not to be given her. This assertion was,
in fact, only a refinement of Arianism, implying as it
did that our Saviour had not always been God as well
as Man, and it was accordingly condemned by the
Council, Nestorius being at the same time deposed
from his see.
IV. Council.
IV. The Fourth General Council met at Chalcedon
during the reign of the Emperor Marcian,
A.D. 451. Six hundred and thirty Bishops
assembled at it and condemned the false teaching of
Eutyches, who asserted that our Blessed Lord was God
only, and not Man also.
V. Council.
V. The Fifth General Council was summoned at
Constantinople by the Emperor Justinian,
A.D. 533, and was attended by 165
Bishops. In it the decisions of the Four First Councils
were confirmed, especially against the Nestorians.
VI. Council.
VI. The Sixth General Council was also held at
Constantinople, A.D. 680, by command of
the Emperor Constantine Pogonatus, and
condemned a development of Eutychianism.
Table of Councils.
Where held. Date. Emperor. Object.
I. Nicaea 325 Constantine Against the Arians.
the Great
II. Constantinople 38l Theodosius Against the
the Great Macedonians.
III. Ephesus 431 Theodosius Against the
the Younger Nestorians.
IV. Chalcedon 451 Marcian Against the
Eutychians.
V. Constantinople 553 Justinian Against a
development of
Nestorianism.
VI. Constantinople 680 Constantine Against a
Pogonatus development
of Eutychianism.
Christian learning developed in peace.
This portion of the History of the Church, comprising
as it does the first period in which the master-minds
within her fold were left free by the cessation of
outward persecution to resist the increasing
attacks of heresy, may be looked upon as
offering to our view the greatest intellectual
development which the Church has
experienced since the times of the Apostles.
The Fathers.
Learned and
eloquent men abounded, "mighty in the
Scriptures" and "steadfast in the Faith,"
and their commentaries and sermons have come down
to us as an abiding heritage and a continual witness to
the teaching of the Church in early times. St. Athanasius,
St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, and St. Augustine,
are but a few out of many whose writings are still held
in honour by our own as well as by every other branch
of the Catholic Church.
St. Paul's visit to England.
The CHURCH OF ENGLAND is believed, with good
reason, to owe its foundation to the Apostle
St. Paul, who probably came to this country
after his first imprisonment at Rome. The writings of
Tertullian, and others in the second and third centuries
speak of Christianity as having spread as far as the
islands of Britain, and a British king named Lucius is
known to have embraced the Faith about the middle
of the second century.
Martyrdom of St. Alban.
The Diocletian persecution
made itself felt amongst the British Christians, the
conversion of the proto-martyr St. Alban
(A.D. 303) being followed by that of a large
number of his countrymen, many of whom also suffered
for their faith.
The persecution ceased (A.D. 305) under the influence
of Constantius, who, before his accession to the
imperial dignity, had been viceroy in Britain. His son
and successor Constantine was, if not born in England,
at any rate of English parentage on the side of his
mother Helen, better known as the Saint and Empress
Helena.
English bishops at Councils.
Three English Bishops, those of York,
Lincoln, and London, attended the Council
summoned by Constantine at Arles, A.D. 314,
a proof that at this time the Church
of England was thoroughly organized and settled.
English Bishops were also present at the Councils of
Sardica, A.D. 347, and of Ariminium, A.D. 359.
English Church depressed by Saxon invasion.
When the Romans abandoned Britain early in the
fifth century, the Saxons took advantage of the defenceless
state of the inhabitants to settle in the island, at
first as colonists and afterwards as conquerors. The
intermingling of these fierce heathens with
the Christian population had a depressing
influence on the Church; and the Bishops
and Clergy, belonging as they did to the weaker and
conquered portion of the community, seem to have
been unable to do much towards the conversion of the
invaders.
Diminution and retreat of Clergy.
Gradually, as the Saxons became more and
more powerful in the island, the number of Bishops
and Clergy in the accessible portions of
of England grew smaller and smaller; and
such as remained were at last compelled
to take refuge with their brethren, who had retired to
the mountain fastnesses, rather than live in slavery.
Hence the records of the Church of England in the
sixth century are chiefly confined to those dioceses
which were situated in what we call Wales, or in other
mountainous districts.
The CHURCH OF IRELAND is said by some to have
been first founded in the Apostolic age, but this seems
doubtful. The first certain information which we have
respecting the presence of Christianity in the island, is
that in A.D. 431, a Bishop named Palladius was sent
thither on a mission by Pope Celestine. He appears,
however, not to have met with much success, and he
soon left the country and died, probably in Scotland.
St. Patrick the Apostle of Ireland.
A few years later, about A.D. 440, the
celebrated St. Patrick began his mission in
Ireland. He is generally considered to
have been a native of North Britain, who, at the age of
sixteen, was taken prisoner by pirates, and carried as a
slave to Ireland. On regaining his liberty, he resolved
to devote his life to the conversion of the country of
his captivity; and having been consecrated Bishop, he
returned to Ireland, and spent fifty years as a missionary
in that hitherto heathen land. At the time of his death,
A.D. 493, the Church was firmly rooted in Ireland, and
possessed a native priesthood and a native Episcopate.
Late development of dioceses and parishes in Ireland.
It may, however, be mentioned, that neither the
diocesan nor the parochial systems were
developed in Ireland until a very late
period, whilst, from the very large number
of Bishops existing there in early times,
we are led to infer that in Ireland, as before in the
earliest ages of the Church, each missionary was
invested with episcopal powers, and that the office of
priest, separate from that of Bishop, was at first almost
unknown. Gradually there sprang up Cathedral
chapters, whose members acted as curates to the Bishop,
and to this succeeded the parochial system.
The CHURCH OF SCOTLAND may, perhaps, like the
Church of England, trace its foundation to the labours
of St. Paul, and seems to be included in Tertullian's
mention of the far-off limits to which Christianity had
reached in his days.
St. Ninian the first authenticated missionary in Scotland.
Little is, however, known of very
early Church history in Scotland until the beginning of
the fifth century, when St. Ninian, who is
said to have been the son of a British
chief, preached to the Southern Picts,
A.D. 412-A.D. 432. We have already
seen that St. Patrick, the Apostle of Ireland, was a
Scotchman, and the fruits of the benefits thus conferred
on the one country were reaped by the other in the
next century, when St. Columba went from Ireland
and founded the celebrated monastery of Iona in one of
the isles of the Hebrides.
Intercourse between Irish and Scotch Churches.
Iona, like the Irish
monasteries of the same period, sent out many
missionaries, and the monks of the two
countries appear to have kept up friendly
communications with each other.
The CHURCH OF ITALY, as we have already seen
(pp. 42, 43), was founded by the joint labours of St. Peter
and St. Paul, but the circumstances of its foundation
were very different from those of the Churches of our
own islands.
Difficulties encountered by the Church in Italy from high civilization
Christianity in Italy had to
make its way amongst a highly civilized
people, a nation of deep thinkers and
philosophers, whose opposition to the
truths of the Gospel was a far more subtle thing than
the rude ignorance of barbarians.
and political power.
Besides this, the
infant Church in Italy was brought face to face with
the might of the Roman emperors who
were at that time the rulers of the known
world; and though their persecution of their Christian
subjects extended more or less to all parts of the
empire, yet Italy was the chief battle-field on which the
first great contest between the Church and the world
was fought. Hence the history of the early Church of
Italy is a history of alternating persecutions and times
of peace[1], during which Christianity was constantly
taking deeper root and spreading more widely through
the country, until the conversion of Constantine, A.D. 312,
led to the establishment and endowment of the Church.
Decay of the Roman empire.
As the Church was growing stronger and
taking deeper root, the worn-out Roman
empire was gradually decaying and fading away, and,
practically, it came to an end with the division of East
and West, A.D. 395.
Resistance to the inroads of the barbarians was no
longer possible. Rome was sacked successively by
different nations of Central Europe, and at length the
kingdom of the Goths in Italy was established under
Theodoric, A.D. 493.
Arianism of barbarian conquerors.
These rude nations, though
professing Christianity, had received with it
the heretical doctrines of Anus, owing to
their teachers having belonged to those
eastern portions of Europe, which, from their nearness
to Asia, were most infected with this heresy.
The CHURCH OF FRANCE was probably founded by
St. Paul, but we have no certain account of its early
history.
Asiatic origin of Early French Bishops,
"Trophimus the Ephesian" is
believed to have been the first Bishop of
Arles, and Pothinus, another Greek Asiatic,
occupied the see of Lyons at the time of
the persecution under Marcus Aurelius, A.D. 161-A.D. 180,
during which he suffered martyrdom. His
successor was St. Irenaeus, a native, probably, of Smyrna,
who was martyred under Severus, A.D. 202. This
long-continued connexion with the Churches of Asia Minor
left its traces on the liturgy and customs of the Church
of France, and through it of Britain and Ireland, these
latter Churches adhering to the Eastern mode of
computing Easter even after the Western reckoning
had been adopted in France.
and of French Liturgy.
The liturgy used in
France, as well as in Britain and Spain,
is known to have been founded on that
used in Ephesus and in the other Asiatic cities, which
was almost certainly that used by St. John himself.
Intercourse between English and French Churches.
A Council was summoned by Constantine, A.D. 314,
at the French city of Arles, and one French Bishop at
least was present at the great Nicaean Council, A.D. 323.
About a century later (A.D. 429), St. Germanus,
Bishop of Auxerre, and St. Lupus,
Bishop of Troyes, were sent over to Britain
to assist in combating the errors of
Pelagius, the neighbour Churches of England and France
maintaining apparently very friendly relations. Many
of the barbarian tribes who overran France in the
beginning of the fifth century, though professing
Christianity, were deeply infected with the Arian heresy.
The Franks, however, who were heathens at their first
entrance into the country, embraced the orthodox
faith, and eventually became masters of the kingdom
under Clovis, A.D. 486.
St. Paul and St. James in Spain.
The CHURCH OF SPAIN AND PORTUGAL traces its
foundation to St. Paul, who speaks of his
intended visit to Spain, Rom. xv. 24; and
there is also a tradition that St. James the
Great preached the Gospel here. This Church, too,
is spoken of by St. Irenaeus, and again by Tertullian.
Its first known martyr was St. Fructuosus, A.D. 259,
and its first Council that of Elvira, about A.D. 300. The
names of nineteen Spanish Bishops are mentioned as
present at it. The Council of Nice, A.D. 325, was under
the presidency of Hosius, the Bishop of the Spanish
diocese of Cordova.
Arianism of Visigoths.
About A.D. 470, the
Visigoths, who were Arians, passed over
from France into Spain, and were only gradually
converted to the Catholic Faith.
We must look to a later period (see Chapter XI.) for
the foundation of other Churches of the West in
Northern and Central Europe, that is to say, the
SCANDINAVIAN CHURCHES, including NORWAY,
SWEDEN, and DENMARK, as well as those contained
in the large extent of country to which we often give
the comprehensive name of Germany.
The Churches now comprehended in EUROPEAN
TURKEY and GREECE were, as we have already seen
(pp. 37 to 40), the fruits of the labours of St. Paul,
and, like the Church of Rome, had wealth and
learning to encounter instead of poverty and ignorance.
The Book of Acts records very fully the earliest
history of these Churches, and a large proportion of
St. Paul's Epistles are addressed to them.
Liability of the Greeks to heresy.
The theorizing and philosophical tendencies
of the Greeks made them very liable
be led away by heretical teachers, and we
find that the Church in Greece, from St. Paul's time
downwards, was continually disturbed by the presence
of those who taught or listened to "some new thing." Hence
all the General Councils, summoned for the
authoritative settlement of the faith of the Church, were
held either in Greece, or in that part of Asia which
had been colonized by Greeks. Arianism in particular,
for a long period, caused the most violent dissensions
throughout the Eastern world, and these were the
occasion of that first Great Council of Nicaea which, though
not actually held in Greece, was only separated from
it by the narrow strait of the Bosphorus.
Origin of jealousies between Rome and Constantinople.
The building
of Constantinople, A.D. 330, gave a Christian
capital to Greece, and, indeed, to the
whole of the Eastern Roman empire; and
from this time may be dated the jealousies
and struggles for supremacy which took place between
the Church in Italy and the Church in Greece, and
resulted eventually in the Great schism between East
and West[2].
St. Andrew in Russia.
The CHURCH OF RUSSIA is believed to have been
founded by the Apostle St. Andrew,
who extended his labours northwards from
Thrace (which now forms part of Turkey in Europe), to
that portion of Scythia lying north of the Black Sea,
and now constituting the southern part of European
Russia. The bulk of the present Russian empire was,
however, converted at a much later period.
St. Simon Zelotes and St. Mark in Africa.
The first evangelizing of North Africa, including what
we now know as Egypt, Algeria, and
Morocco, is ascribed to St. Simon
Zelotes and St. Mark, the latter of whom
founded the CHURCH OF ALEXANDRIA, of which he
became the first Bishop. Christianity appears to have
made very rapid progress in Africa, since, in the fifth
century, the Church numbered more than four hundred
African Bishops.
Patriarchate of Alexandria.
Alexandria, from its
wealth and importance, as well as from its
reputation for learning, was looked up to by the other
African Churches, and its Bishops were acknowledged
as patriarchs throughout the Christianized portion of
the continent.
Its school.
The Alexandrian school
of philosophy was very famous, and was
at one time presided over by the Christian philosopher
Clement of Alexandria, who died about A.D. 216. His
pupil Origen was, for a while, at the head of the same
college, and employed his vast learning both before
and after his ordination, in comparing the extant
copies of the Old Testament Scriptures, in order to
bring the text of the original languages to a state
of the greatest possible correctness. He died A.D. 253.
Heresies at Alexandria.
The Church of Alexandria was much distracted by
inward troubles. In A.D. 306, the schism
of Meletius led many astray, and amongst
them the too notorious Arius, who began to publish
in Alexandria the heresy since known by his name,
about the year A.D. 320.
St. Athanasius and Arius.
St. Athanasius,
who became Patriarch of Alexandria,
A.D. 326, was the chief instrument raised up by God
for combating the errors of Arius, a work which he
carried on unflinchingly both before and after his
elevation to the episcopal throne, though his defence
of the orthodox faith brought upon him long and severe
persecution, including an exile of twenty years from his
diocese. The Arian heresy, though checked, was
however not exterminated, and long remained a source
of trouble and weakness to the whole Church.
St. Cyril and Nestorius.
St. Cyril,
who afterwards succeeded to the patriarchate of
Alexandria, A.D. 412, was also called upon
to defend Catholic truth against the errors
of Nestorius, whilst his successor, Dioscorus, openly
embraced the false teaching of Eutyches, and denied
the Manhood, as Arius and Nestorius had before denied
the Divinity, of our Blessed Lord. The evil example
of the patriarch was followed by a large proportion of
African Christians, who refused to receive the decrees
of the Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 431, or to submit to
Catholic Bishops.
St. Cyprian. St. Augustine.
Two other well-known names which adorn the
records of the Church in North Africa may be mentioned:
St. Cyprian, a native of Carthage, and
afterwards Bishop of that city, who
suffered martyrdom, A.D. 258, and St. Augustine,
a native of Numidia (or what we now
call Algeria), who was educated at Carthage, was
consecrated Bishop of Hippo, A.D. 393, and died A.D. 430. He
left behind him a great number of writings, the influence
of which has been largely felt by the Church of England.
St. Matthew in Ethiopia.
The CHURCH OF ETHIOPIA, now represented by
Abyssinia, was planted by St. Matthew,
the way having, perhaps, been prepared
by that "man of Ethiopia," the eunuch "under Candace,
queen of the Ethiopians," of whom we read in Acts
viii. 27-39. Little is clearly known of the early Christian
history of this region; but the Ethiopian Church
appears to have come under the patriarchal rule of the
Bishop of Alexandria towards the beginning of the
fourth century. Though keeping clear of Arianism,
the Ethiopian Christians became deeply tinged with
the Eutychian heresy, by which Dioscorus and his
successors were unhappily led away.
Of the Churches now comprehended in Turkey in
Asia, the foundation and early history of PALESTINE,
as represented by the CHURCH IN JERUSALEM, and of
SYRIA, as represented by the CHURCH IN ANTIOCH,
have been already related (Chapters I. and II.).
Death of St. James.
St. James the Less, first Bishop of Jerusalem, was
martyred A.D. 63, and succeeded by Simeon,
the son of Cleopas, in whose episcopate
the destruction of Jerusalem took place, A.D. 70.
Flight to Pella.
The Christians, in obedience to the prophetic teaching
of their Divine Master, had already fled for safety to
Pella, whence they afterwards returned to
take up their abode amongst the ruins of
the Holy City. In A.D. 132, a rebellious outbreak of
the Jews, under the leadership of Barchochebas, drew
down on them a severe chastisement from the Emperor
Hadrian, and the Jewish Christians suffered much from
being confounded with their rebellious countrymen.
The ruins of the ancient city were completely destroyed,
whilst no Jew was allowed to enter the new city of
Aelia Capitolina, which was built on its site.
Extinction of Judaism in Church of Jerusalem.
The Jewish Christians now entirely gave up
all profession of Judaism, and the first Judaism in
Gentile Bishop of Jerusalem was appointed
A.D. 135.
Julian the Apostate (A.D. 361-A.D. 363) presumptuously
attempted to rebuild Jerusalem, but his attempt
was frustrated by a miraculous interposition, a failure
which had already been predicted by St. Cyril, the then
Bishop of Jerusalem.
Double Episcopate at Antioch.
The CHURCH IN ANTIOCH having been probably
founded by St. Peter, that Apostle is believed to have
left behind him two Bishops in the city,
the one Evodius, having the episcopal
care of the Jewish converts, whilst Ignatius
was placed in charge of the Gentile Christians; but,
on the death of Evodius, A.D. 70, Ignatius
became sole Bishop.
St. Ignatius.
This holy man is
said to have been the child whom our Lord took in His
arms and set in the midst of His disciples. He was
intimate with some or all of the Apostles, especially
with St. John, and was martyred by being thrown to
wild beasts at Rome, A.D. 107. The synods held at
Antioch were very numerous, and far larger than any
others, approaching almost in size and importance to
General Councils.
St. John Chrysostom.
It was at Antioch that the
celebrated and eloquent St. John Chrysostom
was born about A.D. 347: he became
Bishop of Constantinople, and died A.D. 407, after
undergoing persecutions which almost amounted to a
martyrdom.
St. Paul and St. John in Asia Minor.
We have already seen (pp. 31, 32) that the
CHURCHES OF ASIA MINOR owe their
foundation chiefly to St. Paul, whilst their
perfect organization and development was
entrusted to St. John the Divine (pp. 49 to 51).
The Seven Churches of the Apocalypse seem to have
been in a special manner the charge of the latter
Apostle, Ephesus, the chief of them, being the home of
his later earthly years, and the scene of his decease
and burial.
The "Angels" of the Seven Churches.
St. Timothy, the first Bishop of Ephesus,
had been succeeded probably by Onesimus;
St. Polycarp (martyred A.D. 167)
had the episcopal charge of Smyrna;
Archippus, it is believed, had followed Epaphras at
Laodicea. The names of the other "Angels" spoken
of in the Apocalypse have not come down to us, but
there is no doubt that at the time when the seven
inspired Epistles were addressed to these Churches, there
was in each of them a firmly established episcopacy,
and that this form of government was followed by all
other Churches throughout the world. There is little
that needs recording of the history of these Churches
of Asia Minor, unless we except the Great Council of
Ephesus, held in that city, A.D. 431, to condemn the
heresy of Nestorius (p. 71).
St. Bartholomew in Armenia.
The CHURCH OF ARMENIA, now included in Asiatic
Turkey, is believed to have been first
founded by St. Bartholomew. The country
is said to have been further evangelized
by a mission sent by St. Gregory the Illuminator in the
third century. It is known that, in the following
century, a flourishing Church existed there.
Several Apostles in Parthia.
The CHURCH OF PARTHIA, or PERSIA, embraced
the country lying between the Tigris and the Indus,
with Mesopotamia and Chaldea; what we now call
Persia, Cabul, and Belochistan; as well as part of Arabia
and Turkey; and is said to have been planted by
St. Peter, St. Bartholomew, St. Jude,
St. Matthew, and St. Thomas. The inhabitants
of this region were of different races: Greek
colonists; many Jews, the residue of the Babylonish
Captivity; Arabs, and ancient Persians. Till the fourth
century the Parthian Church appears to have flourished
in peace. It was beyond the jurisdiction of the
persecuting emperors of Rome, and the Parthian monarchs,
though not Christians themselves, protected or tolerated
their Christian subjects.
Persecution there.
Two Bishops were sent from
Parthia to the Council of Nicaea, A.D. 323, but shortly
afterwards, A.D. 330, persecution broke
out, occasioned apparently by the jealousy
felt by the king towards the now Christian emperors
of Rome, and the intercourse kept up between the
fellow Christians of the two empires. Sixteen thousand
martyrs are said to have shed their blood for their
Faith, and amongst them was St. Simeon, the Patriarch
of the Church, and Bishop of Seleucia. Another
persecution took place in the beginning of the fifth century,
and shortly afterwards Persian Christianity became
strongly infected with the errors of Nestorius, the
Shahs apparently favouring the heresy on account
of its having been discouraged by the Roman emperors.
Uncertainty as to the first conversion of Arabia.
There is no record of the actual founding of the
CHURCH IN ARABIA. We know, from Gal. i. 17, that
St. Paul "went into Arabia" soon after his conversion,
but there is no mention of his having preached the
Gospel there at that time, when indeed he
was not yet called to be an Apostle; and
the Arabia to which he went was probably
the northern portion stretching up to the
east of Syria, almost to Damascus itself. The Apostle
of the Gentiles may probably have revisited this
country at a later period; but, at any rate, we know that
Christianity was firmly established there early in the
third century, and that Origen made two several
journeys thither between A.D. 220 and A.D. 248, to combat
heresies which troubled the Arabian Church. The
Bishop of Bostra, or Bozrah, was present at the Council
of Antioch, A.D. 269.
Nestorianism and Eutychianism in Arabia.
In the fifth century
the errors of Nestorius, and, a little later,
of Eutyches, made great inroads amongst
the Christians of Arabia, several even of the Bishops
being led away by them.
St. Thomas and St. Bartholomew in India.
There is an ancient tradition that St. Thomas and
St. Bartholomew laid the foundations of
the CHURCH IN INDIA, but very little is
known of its early history. Pantaenus is
said to have been sent as a missionary
from Alexandria to India towards the end of the second
century, though it is a matter in dispute whether by
India in this case we are to understand the country
now known under that name, or Ethiopia, or Arabia Felix.
There are still Christians in India who reverence
St. Thomas as their founder, and use a liturgy which
goes by his name. Nestorianism spread to India in
the fifth century.
The Church is believed to have been planted in
CHINA by St. Thomas and St. Bartholomew, and the
Chinese are mentioned by Arnobius in the fourth
century amongst those nations which had received the
Gospel. It does not seem, however, that Christianity
existed for any length of time in this country.
Arianism prepares the way for Mahometanism.
The various heresies, and especially the heresy of
Arius, which had so widely troubled the peace of
the Eastern Church, though they were not suffered by
God's Mercy to cause a lasting schism, yet left behind
them a certain weakness resulting in the decay of many
of the Churches of the East, and finally in
their overthrow by the false faith of the
impostor Mahomet. The present state of
the Churches of Ephesus, Sardis, and
Laodicea, if viewed in the light shed upon it by the
prophetic Epistles of St. John the Divine, may serve to
show us how God withdraws His Blessing from a
Church no less surely than from an individual Christian,
when His Grace is obstinately rejected and despised.
Mahomet's birth,
The false prophet Mahomet was born A.D. 569, of the
chief family in the Arabian tribe of the
Koreish; but it was not till after he had
amassed a large fortune, partly by diligence in trade
and partly by a wealthy marriage, that, at the age of
forty, A.D. 609, he declared himself to be a
prophet.
and claim to be a prophet and reformer.
This announcement was at first
confined to the members of his own immediate family,
till, at the end of four years, Mahomet proclaimed that
he had a mission from God to reform the
state of religion in his native city, Mecca,
and to put down the idolatry which prevailed there.
Flight to Medina.
The opposition which the false prophet encountered
from his fellow-citizens did not hinder him from making
many converts to the religion he was beginning to
invent for himself and for them, until at length (A.D. 622)
an insurrection, caused by the preaching and success
of Mahomet, obliged him to fly for his life
from Mecca, and take refuge at Yatreb or Medina[1].
Founds a new religion.
Here he was gladly received both by Jews and Arabs,
rival races, who divided the city between them. The
Jews were ready to welcome him as their expected
Messiah, whilst the Arabs had heard of his fame from
their brethren at Mecca; and Mahomet seems from
this time to have entirely laid aside the character of
a mere reformer, for that of the founder of
a new revelation. The Koran and the
Sword were now called in to aid in their respective
ways in extending the power of the ambitious adventurer.
Cruelty.
Violence and bloodshed enforced
the pretended inspiration by which Mahomet
claimed to be acknowledged as the Prophet of God,
and the civil and religious head of the nation; and the
last ten years of his life present an almost unbroken
course of warfare, which too often degenerated into
simple robbery and murder.
and conquests of Mahomet.
He made himself master of the whole of Arabia,
including the city of Mecca, where he destroyed the idols
against which he had in earlier days protested, and
then made an ineffectual attempt to take possession of
Palestine.
His death.
Mahomet died on June 8th,
A.D. 632, partly from the effects of poison,
which had been given to him some years before, and
partly from the consequences of a life of excess and
self-indulgence.
The false faith of which Mahomet was at once the
prophet and the founder, seems to have taken for its
basis the traditionary religion then prevalent amongst
the Arab tribes. These traditions were probably
compounded of dim remnants of the Truth which had been
revealed to Abraham and handed down through his
son Ishmael, and of a very corrupt form of Sabaeanism,
which included the worship of the heavenly bodies, as
well as of idols, and which had been the religion of
Terah and his fellow-countrymen.
Mixture of truth and error in Mahometanism.
Upon this
foundation was engrafted a mixture of Persian
philosophy, and of such perversions of
Christianity and of Scriptural doctrine as
Mahomet could gather from a Persian
Jew and a Nestorian monk.
Opposition of the Koran to Christianity.
The Koran, which
Mahomet pretended to have received from heaven by the
mouth of the archangel Gabriel, makes mention of
our Blessed Lord and of many of the facts of Old
Testament History, but its teaching is essentially
anti-Christian and blasphemous, inasmuch as it denies the
Divinity of Christ, and represents Him
as a Teacher and Prophet far inferior to
Mahomet himself. An intended contradiction
of the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity
is also conveyed in its opening sentence, which is the
Mahometan confession of faith,—"There is but one
God, and Mahomet is His prophet."
Mahomet's Iconoclastic tendencies.
Mahomet's energetic opposition to idolatry was,
no doubt, a good feature in his religious
system, though, like that of the Iconoclasts[2],
it was carried to an extravagant
extent, and this agreement, with their undue fears and
prejudices on this head, seems to have been a sufficient
inducement to many unstable Christians to deny the
Lord, for Whose Honour they professed such deep
concern, and to give themselves up to an impostor who
was perhaps the nearest approach to Anti-Christ which
the world has yet seen.
Christian people are found even in these days who
do not hesitate to speak with some degree of favour of
the great apostasy of which Mahomet was the founder,
because of its opposition to idolatry, its recognition of
our Blessed Lord as a Prophet, the certain admixture
of truth contained in its grievous error, and the alleged
moral teaching and beauty of language of particular
passages in the Koran.
Moral effects of Mahometanism.
Any such favour or tenderness
is, however, altogether out of place in
professed worshippers of Him Whom
Mahomet so grievously blasphemed, whilst the
grossly sensual and immoral lives led by the false
prophet and the large proportion of his followers down to
the present time, serve to show us that wrong belief
and wrong practice go hand in hand, and that whatever
show of morality there may be in some few of the
precepts of the Koran, it has no influence on the conduct
of those who profess to be guided by it.
Mahometan conquests
The work of conquest which Mahomet had begun was
continued by his successors. Abu Bekr,
the father of Mahomet's favourite wife,
was the first of the four Caliphs who pushed the power
of the Mahometan arms beyond the confines of Arabia,
and laid the foundations of the future
empire.
of the Holy Land,
Jerusalem was taken by Omar, the
next Caliph, in A.D. 637, and, with the exception of a
short interval during the Crusades, the Holy City has
ever since remained in the hands of the unbelievers.
Egypt,
Omar made himself master of Egypt as
well as of Syria, and showed his savage
contempt for learning by burning the famous and
valuable collection of MSS. contained in the
Alexandrian library.
Persia, and North Africa.
Under Othman, Persia
and the North of Africa were added to the
empire, and after the death of Ali, son-in-law to
Mahomet and fourth Caliph, the seat of government was
removed to Damascus.
Other portions of Asia and part of Europe.
The Caliphs of Damascus carried on the same system
of warfare and bloodshed, took possession
of Asia Minor, of the Northern parts of
India, of Spain, and overran the South of
France, where, however, A.D. 732, the Mahometan troops
received such a check at Tours from the hands of
Charles Martel, as hindered them from extending their
conquests any farther in Western Europe.
Present extent of Mahometanism.
At the present day Mahometanism is the professed
faith of the inhabitants of the Northern
half of Africa, of Turkey in Europe, of
Arabia, Persia, the Holy Land, Asia Minor,
and some parts of India, and its adherents number
ninety-six millions. We shall perhaps realize still more
strongly the havoc which this soul-destroying apostasy
has been suffered to work, if we remember that some
of the countries where it now reigns unchecked were
formerly the seats of flourishing Christian Churches,
the Church in Africa boasting of such great Saints as
St. Cyprian and St. Augustine, whilst Palestine and
Asia Minor witnessed the first foundation of the Church,
as well as its earliest settlement in the form it was
permanently to retain.
Outward unity of the Church broken
So far we have contemplated the Church of Christ
as one in external communion, no less than by
the inner bonds of charity and of sacramental life; but
we now come to a period in which this
external unity began to be to a certain
extent dissolved, and that in great measure
by the same outward influences which had at first
secured its cohesion.
with the breaking up of the Roman Empire.
Heresies and schisms, especially
the great heresy of Arius, had indeed troubled the
Church and threatened to break the visible
union existing between its branches in
different countries; but it was not until
after the dissolution of the Roman empire
that the breach really came.
Reasons for Roman ascendancy.
During the flourishing days of the empire the city of
Rome had naturally been looked up to
with great reverence by all the other
Churches of the world. Its political
importance as the centre of government, the vast number
of its martyrs, its comparative freedom from heresy,
and its connexion with the lives and deaths of St. Peter
and St. Paul, all tended to give it a moral ascendancy
which was gradually claimed as a right. This,
however, did not take place without protests on the part of
other Bishops, nor even without very definite
disclaimers of any wish for or right to supreme authority
on the part of the Bishops of Rome themselves.
Ambition of an Eastern Patriarch.
Constantinople, as being the new Rome and capital
of the Eastern empire, was especially jealous of the
claims of the mother city, and one of her Patriarchs,
John the Faster, in the sixth century, first set the evil
example of assuming the title of
"Universal Bishop," a title which the Roman
Pontiffs have since taken and retained.
In proportion as the political division between East
and West became more complete, so also did the
tendency towards separation in ecclesiastical matters
increase.
Beginnings of disunion.
Western dioceses, now peopled by the
barbarian nations who had overrun Europe,
still looked up to Rome as their centre
and head; whilst the Eastern Bishops, under the sway
of the decaying empire, clung to Constantinople.
Its crisis.
The controversy respecting the use of Images, and that
about the Procession of the Holy Ghost
from the Son as well as from the Father,
were, however, the means of actually bringing about
the cessation of all outward communion between East
and West.
Dislike of images
There had been from very early times an extensive
though not universal feeling in the Church,
against the use of painting or sculpture in
Divine Worship. This feeling was occasioned partly
by dread of the idolatry still prevalent amongst the
heathen, and partly, especially in the East, where it
was strongest, by the remains of Judaism still lingering
in the Church of Christ.
lost in the West, but retained in the East.
As heathenism
died out, it was gradually felt in the West
that the strong reasons formerly existing against the
adornment of Churches with pictures and images had
passed away; but the Eastern Church,
with that dread of change which distinguishes
it to this day, clung as before to the old sentiment.
Image-breaking legislation
In the eighth century, Leo III., "the Isaurian," then
reigning at Constantinople, passed a decree
for the removal of all images and paintings
from Churches, and his violent conduct in the matter
occasioned such discontent in the West,
that Italy withdrew altogether from the
nominal allegiance she had hitherto paid
to the emperors, about A.D. 730.
dissolved the link between Eastern and Western Empires.
Other emperors were as fanatical in their Iconoclastic (or
image-breaking) prejudices as Leo, and their
extravagance excited a reaction in the other extreme in the
Western empire.
Reactionary decrees in the West.
In A.D. 786, a Council,
which was held at Nicaea, not only
protested against the violent fanaticism of
the East, but sanctioned the veneration of images and
pictures to an extent which we find it hard to justify,
and which was, in fact, deemed unjustifiable by many
in the West, who yet wished for their retention as
decorations and aids to devotional feeling.
Charlemagne, under the influence of our English Alcuin,
opposed the decision of the Council, and held
provincial synods (especially one at Frankfort, A.D. 794)
to condemn what was, at any rate, very like image-worship.
Charitable supposition regarding them.
Probably dread of Judaism and Mahometanism, with
their hatred of our Blessed Lord and of
His Image, as well as of all sculpture, had
some influence on the decisions of the
council of A.D. 786, and we may reasonably hope
that it was not really intended to encourage any
worship or veneration contrary to the express law of God.
At any rate, the Iconoclast controversy aided very
strongly to put an end to all political union, and
with it to all public ecclesiastical intercourse, between
East and West; though the bonds of external
communion were not yet broken, and they were still one
both in faith and practice.
Western addition to the Nicene creed.
We have seen[1] that the summary of Christian belief,
known to us as the Nicene Creed, was completed at
the Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381; but with this
exception, that the article defining the faith of the
Church concerning the Third Person of the
Ever-Blessed Trinity, asserted only that "the
Holy Ghost … proceedeth from the
Father," without the addition of the words
"and the Son;" and it was the controversy as to the
admission or non-admission of these words into the
Creed which caused the formal division between
Eastern and Western Christendom.
The question is said to have first arisen in the fifth
century; and gradually the words in dispute came to
be sung in the West during Divine Service.
Decrees against it.
In the ninth century an appeal was made
on the subject to Pope Leo III., who decided in a
provincial Council that no such addition could lawfully be
made to the Creed, and ordered it to be engraved on
silver plates exactly as the Council of Constantinople
had left it. Towards the end of the same century
another Council was held at Constantinople, which also
decreed the disuse of the addition, and then the matter
dropped for about a hundred and fifty years.
Dispute stirred up again for political purposes.
Its revival seems to have been chiefly owing to
political jealousies and to the struggle for
supremacy which was continually going
on between Rome and Constantinople.
We may be allowed to believe that the dispute was, in
reality, a question of mere words, and that the two
branches of the One Church did, and still do, hold the
"One Faith," although differing in their mode of
expressing it.
Actual schism in consequence.
Still the ultra-conservatism which has
always distinguished the Eastern Church, and the
unyielding temper which has been no less conspicuous in
the Church of Rome, did in time bring about a formal
schism; and in A.D. 1053, the Pope
Leo IX. issued a sentence of excommunication
against the Patriarch of Constantinople
and all who adhered to him. In the following
year the Patriarch Michael Cerularius summoned a
synod at Constantinople, and retorted the excommunication
upon the Latins. Two attempts at reconciliation
were afterwards made, one in A.D. 1274, following the
close of the last Crusade, and another which, after
lengthened negotiations, came to an equally unsuccessful
termination at the Council of Florence, A.D. 1430.
Outward union never since restored.
Since that time the two great Branches of the One
Vine, whilst still drawing Life and Nourishment
from the same Divine Root of Jesse
by means of the same Holy Sacraments,
have yet abstained from all acts of outward
communion, and have failed to recognize in each other those
essential marks of Catholicity which God's Mercy
and Providence has preserved to them even in the
midst of all their respective defects of Charity, or their
errors in theory and practice.
Foundation of the temporal power of the Popedom.
The temporal power of the Popes gradually
increased after the ninth century, when part
of the territory since known as the States of the
Church was bestowed on them by Pepin,
whose son, the famous Emperor
Charlemagne, confirmed the donation. The
change thus wrought in the position of
the Popes, who to their spiritual office of Bishop now
added the temporal one of sovereign, was productive of
a corresponding change in the claims they made upon
the submission of the rest of Christendom, and these
altered claims first assumed a definite form in the
eleventh century.
Papal claims to spiritual supremacy.
The Bishops of Rome had at first limited their ideas
of universal supremacy to spiritual things:
it was as Universal Bishop that they
desired to be honoured and obeyed, and
we have seen in the preceding chapter that a certain
priority seemed to accrue to them by force of
circumstances. Rome had come to be regarded as the
Mother of the Churches, much as Jerusalem was in the
first ages of Christianity, and appeals for advice and
help were at first voluntarily made to the learning and
piety of the Bishops of Rome.
Further claims to temporal authority.
Later, instead of
advisers they claimed to be absolute judges in
ecclesiastical matters, and when the temporal possessions
of the Popedom made the chair of
St. Peter an object of ambition to covetous,
designing men, the character of Bishop
was too often merged in that of Prince, and spiritual
power ceased to satisfy those who thought it their duty
or their interest to enforce what was in fact an
Universal Sovereignty.
Plausibleness and actual advantages of Papal supremacy.
It is not difficult to understand that the idea of one
Visible Head and Centre of Christendom
would appear to have much to recommend
it; nor even that the power of the Popes
was in reality the source of many blessings
in the lawless state in which European
society found itself for many centuries after the fall of
the Roman empire. An authority which could reduce
rebellious subjects to obedience, overawe refractory
nobles, or check the tyranny of an irresponsible
sovereign, could hardly fail to be productive of some good
effects when wielded by disinterested men, and with
singleness of purpose.
Its corruptions and dangers.
But in the hands of worldly-minded
and ambitious prelates, such as
too many of the Popes undoubtedly were,
this usurped prerogative of interference in
the affairs of foreign states became an engine of
mighty evil, and in the course of time it was felt to be
such an intolerable yoke by the people of Europe that
continued submission to it became impossible.
What the Reformation really was.
The Reformation was in fact a casting off of an
unjustifiable usurpation in temporal as
well as in spiritual things, and a violent
reaction against that course of events
which, from the eighth century downwards, had been
tending to reduce the different sovereigns of Western
Christendom to the rank of vassals of the Roman See.
A clearer view of the rise and results of papal
supremacy may perhaps be gained by entering into a
somewhat more detailed account of such Popes as from
various causes occupy conspicuous places in the history
of the Roman Church.
St. Leo the Great, and the first "papal aggression."
In order to do this effectually,
it will be necessary to go back a little farther than the
date at the head of the chapter, to the
time of St. Leo the Great (A.D. 440-A.D. 461),
whose claim to interfere between
St. Hilary, Bishop of Arles, and
Chelidonius, Bishop of Besançon, may be looked upon as
the first "papal aggression" of which history gives us
an example. Chelidonius had been deposed by a
General Council of the Church of France under the
presidency of Hilary, and so deeply did the French
Bishops resent the unjust attempts of Leo to set aside
their decision, that the Bishop of Rome found an
appeal to the secular power necessary for the purpose
of enforcing his claim to exercise jurisdiction over a
foreign Church. But even the authority of
Valentinian III., Emperor of the West, did not succeed in
obliging Hilary to cede the liberties of the Church of
France, and it is a significant fact that the Bishop of
Arles is reverenced as a saint by the whole Western
Church, although his sense of what was due to his
position as a member of the French episcopate would not
suffer him to yield his just rights, in order to obtain a
reconciliation with one so personally worthy of esteem
and honour as St. Leo.
Papal claims strengthened and extended by St. Gregory
The good and wise St. Gregory the Great
(A.D. 590-A.D. 604), though he strenuously
disclaimed for himself, and denied to others,
the right of assuming the title of "Universal
Bishop," appears to have had very strong
ideas respecting the authority which he conceived
to belong to the successors of St. Peter, whilst his
talents and holiness gave him an extensive influence
over his contemporaries.
and Hadrian I.
Succeeding Popes laid claim
to more extended powers, especially
Hadrian I. (A.D. 772-A.D. 793), who first
advanced the doctrine that the whole Christian Church
was subject to the see of Rome.
Rise of the temporal power of the Popes under Leo III.
His successor, Leo
III. (A.D. 795-A.D. 816), having crowned
Charlemagne Emperor of the West, A.D. 800,
received from that monarch the
sovereignty of Rome, and thus became
a temporal prince as well as a Bishop, and about the
same time there began to appear certain forged canons
(or Church laws), professing to be ancient decrees
collected by St. Isidore of Seville, in the seventh
century, and having for their object to give primitive
sanction to Roman Supremacy.
"Pseudo-Isidore" Decretals
These "Pseudo-Isidore" Decretals, as they were
afterwards called, were frequently appealed
to, apparently in good faith, by subsequent Popes; and
their genuineness was generally believed in, almost
without question, until the time of the Reformation in
the sixteenth century. By about the middle of the
ninth century these decretals were made use of to
settle ecclesiastical questions, and Nicholas
I. (A.D. 858-A.D. 867) laid great stress upon them when the
liberties of the French Church were again defended by
Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, in a
very similar case to that in which
St. Hilary had offered opposition to St. Leo.
Hincmar's opposition to papal claims.
Hincmar's zeal in opposing the usurpations of
the Roman see had some little success during the
episcopate of Hadrian II. (A.D. 867-A.D. 872), but its
effects passed away when John VIII. (A.D. 872-A.D. 882)
espoused the cause of Charles the Bald, and thus
enlisted the interests of the crown on his side.
The troubles and disorders consequent on the
breaking up of the great empire of Charlemagne, had had a
very injurious effect on morals and religion; and
unworthy persons, to whom the temporal possessions of
the Popes had by this time become an object of
ambition, took advantage of the depressed state of the
Church to seize upon the bishopric of
Rome either for themselves or for others
in whom they had an interest.
Unspirituality caused by temporal power.
Hence the
history of the papacy during the next century and a
half is full of dreary records of corruption and
wickedness. The elevation of John XII. to the papal throne
at the age of eighteen (A.D. 955), and his evil life, called
forth the interference of the Emperor Otho the Great,
who deposed him and elected Leo VIII. (A.D. 963-A.D. 965)
in his stead.
Interference of Emperors of the West.
From this time the emperors
frequently interfered to check the
continual disputes between Popes and
anti-Popes, which often ended in the murder
of one of the rivals. Silvester II. (Gerbert)
(A.D. 999-A.D. 1003),
who was made Pope through the influence
of Otho III., was prevented by death from carrying out
the reforms he meditated, and at length, in A.D. 1046,
the Emperor Henry III. was called upon to decide
between three claimants to the papal throne. He
settled the question by appointing a German, Clement
II. (A.D. 1046-A.D. 1047), after the synod of Sutri
had put aside the claims of the original disputants.
Henry thus took the election of the Popes entirely out
of the hands of the Clergy of Rome, with whom it had
hitherto nominally rested, and appropriated it to
himself.
This interference unjustifiable.
This was an undoubted usurpation
on the part of the secular power, though
Henry seems to have been in earnest in
his endeavours to check the simony which had been
so disgracefully prevalent in the papal elections, and
to appoint Bishops who might be worthy of their
position.
Hildebrand's influence.
Overthrow of secular interference.
Leo IX. (A.D. 1048-A.D. 1054) and his
successor, Victor II. (A.D. 1055-A.D. 1057),
aided and influenced by the famous
Hildebrand (afterwards Gregory VII.), succeeded in
effecting considerable reforms in religion and morals,
and were very zealous in discouraging simoniacal
appointments to offices in the Church, but a gradual
and increasing resistance was growing up against the
imperial encroachments, and after the
death of Henry, Pope Nicholas II. (A.D. 1059-A.D. 1061)
was enabled to obtain a
decree that the election of the Popes should, for
the future, rest with the Roman Cardinals,
subject to the consent of the Roman Clergy and people,
and with some vague reference to the emperor's wishes.
Hildebrand Pope.
At length Hildebrand, the counsellor and support of
several preceding Popes, was himself called to the see
of Rome under the title of Gregory VII. (A.D. 1073-A.D. 1083),
and at once
devoted the energies of his powerful mind to the work
of reforming the Church.
His reforms
The two means on which he
chiefly relied for accomplishing his object
were the enforcing of celibacy on the
Clergy, and the abolition of simony, under which head
he included every species of lay investiture.
and their consequences.
The prosecution of his plans soon brought him
into a violent dispute with the weak and
wicked Emperor Henry IV., who was as eager to
secure the right of bestowing upon Bishops the ring
and pastoral staff, as well as of their sole appointment,
and thus reduce them to the state of mere secular vassals,
as Gregory was by the same means to secure their
ecclesiastical obedience to the see of Rome, and their
total independence of any civil power.
Result of the contest.
The contest
lasted till the death of Gregory in exile,
and was carried on by his successors, until
during the popedom of Calixtus II. (A.D. 1119-1124) a
compromise was agreed upon by which the emperor left
to each Church the free election of its Bishops, who
were to receive the ring and staff from the altar, and
the temporalties of their sees from the crown.
Wars between Rome and Germany.
This arrangement did not, however, bring peace
between the Popes and the emperors, the
Popes siding with the Guelphs in the long
civil wars of the next two centuries, in
opposition to the Ghibelline emperors. Hadrian
IV. (A.D. 1154-A.D. 1159), or Nicholas Breakspear, the
only English Pope, found it expedient to seek the
assistance of the Emperor Frederic Barbarossa, to aid
him in quelling the insurrection headed by Arnold of
Brescia; but Alexander III. (A.D. 1159-A.D. 1181) came
into fresh collision with Frederic, who was at length
obliged to submit and beg for peace.
Climax of the papal power under Innocent III.
The minority of Frederic II. was favourable
to the ambitious schemes of Pope Innocent
III. (A.D. 1198-A.D. 1216), and under him
the power of the popedom reached its greatest height.
He laid both England and France under an interdict,
placed on the imperial throne, and then deposed, Otho
IV., and took measures for the suppression of the
Albigenses, which eventually resolved themselves into
the dreaded Inquisition. The old strife was continued
by Gregory IX. (A.D. 1227-A.D. 1241), who excommunicated
Frederic II., and the sentence was renewed by
Innocent IV. (A.D. 1243-A.D. 1254). The treatment
of the emperor by these successive Popes was
something akin to a persecution, and was apparently
occasioned by a feeling of opposition to any authority
which conflicted with the claims of Rome, and by a
hatred of the Ghibelline race.
Decline of the temporal power of the Popes.
From the death of Innocent IV. the excessive power
of the Popes may be said to decrease.
Gregory X. (A.D. 1271-A.D. 1276) and
the Emperor Rudolf of Hapsburg were
good, earnest-minded men, who put an end to the
long-standing feud between Rome and the empire, and
after a succession of short pontificates, Boniface
VIII. (A.D. 1294-A.D. 1303) usurped the papal throne in the
place of the "hermit Pope," Celestine V.
Interference of the King of France in papal affairs.
Boniface
was a thoroughly bad and unscrupulous man, and at
last died in a fit of disappointed rage at being taken
prisoner by the troops of his equally
unscrupulous enemy, Philip IV. of France,
who had refused to acknowledge the
authority of the papal legate. Philip caused the
death of Benedict XI. (A.D. 1303-A.D. 1304), whose
honest goodness he feared, and then used his
influence to procure the election of Clement
V. (A.D. 1303-A.D. 1314), on condition of his pledging
himself to aid in the French king's schemes to plunder
and oppress the Church. Clement, having thus sold
himself, was not allowed to leave France, and the papal
court was fixed at Avignon. The Pope was now
completely at the mercy of Philip, who robbed the Church
at his will, and plundered and murdered the Knights
Templars with the connivance of Clement.
The Popes at Avignon.
The sojourn of the Popes at Avignon
(A.D. 1305-A.D. 1376) was a great blow to the
temporal power of the papacy, and was often called by
the Italians the Seventy Years' Captivity. Meanwhile
the Popes were again plunged into contests with the
German emperors: Louis of Bavaria was
excommunicated, and his empire laid under an interdict, on
account of his refusal to accept his dominions from
John XXII. (A.D. 1316-A.D. 1334). The papal
authority in Italy had become almost nominal except
in Rome itself, and even there it was much weakened
by the rebellion under Rienzi, A.D. 1352. Pope
Innocent VI. (A.D. 1333-A.D. 1362), soon after his election,
sent a legate to Rome, with orders to reduce not only the
city itself to obedience, but all that was then included in
the States of the Church; and this having been
successfully accomplished, the Popes began to think of
returning to Rome.
The return to Rome.
The court at Avignon had become
fearfully corrupt, and some of those who composed it,
and loved its evils, were ready to oppose any change;
but Urban V. (A.D. 1362-A.D. 1370), a really upright
man, spent some of his episcopate at Rome, and his
successor, Gregory XI. (A.D. 1370-A.D. 1378) removed
thither with his court two years before his
death. The Cardinals however still clung
to Avignon, and though, in compliance with the earnest
wishes of the Roman people, they elected an Italian
to be Pope under the name of Urban VI. (A.D. 1378-A.D. 1389),
yet they were so offended at his zealous but
indiscreet endeavours to reform the evils around him,
that they declared him deposed, and set up an
anti-Pope at Avignon.
The consequent schism.
The schism thus begun
lasted nearly forty years (A.D. 1378-A.D. 1417),
England, Germany, North Italy, Poland, and
the Scandinavian kingdoms siding with the true Popes,
while France, Scotland, Spain, and South Italy held
with the anti-Popes.
Its results.
The troubles and corruptions of
the Church now multiplied, Popes and
anti-Popes alike made the acquisition of power and
revenue their great object, and wickedness was left
unrebuked both in Clergy and laity. A great impulse
was given to the sale of indulgences or pardons, an
evil practice which brought in large sums of money to
the papal exchequer, and at the same time led to such
abuses as probably to become a principal proximate
cause of the Reformation.
Council of Pisa.
At length there was an universal longing for the
cessation of the great schism in the
Western Church, and a Council was held
at Pisa, A.D. 1409, where it was agreed by the
Cardinals belonging to the two parties to depose both Pope and
anti-Pope, and to elect another who took the name of
Alexander V., with an understanding that he was at
once to reform and pacify the Church. But neither Pope
nor anti-Pope would resign, so that there were three
claimants instead of two, and very soon after his
election Alexander V. died. John XXIII. (A.D. 1410-A.D. 1415)
was elected in his place, but he proved to be
thoroughly devoid of principle, and the Council of Pisa
having proved unsuccessful in promoting unity or
reformation, another was convoked at Constance,
A.D. 1414, under the presidency of the Emperor
Sigismund I.
Council of Constance.
This Council was attended
by the representatives of all the monarchs of the West,
as well as by a very large number of Bishops and Clergy,
and it was decreed that the three claimants to the papal
throne should be deposed. John XXIII. was thrown
into prison, and, after considerable delay, Martin
V. (A.D. 1417-A.D. 1431) was chosen to succeed him.
The Council shortly after broke up, without having
done any thing towards the much desired reformation
of the Church, although the English, French, and
German deputies had been very earnest in their
endeavours to advance some scheme of reform.
Council of Basle.
Another Council met at Basle, A.D. 1431,
whence it was transferred by Pope
Eugenius IV. (A.D. 1431-A.D. 1447) first to Ferrara, and
afterwards (A.D. 1439) to Florence. This opportunity
was also lost in a dispute between the Council and the
Pope, and there seemed to be nothing more to hope
for from Councils as a means of reformation.
State of the papacy at the end of the fifteen century.
Nor were the personal characters of the Popes who
filled the see of Rome during the
remainder of the century, such as to
encourage any expectation that their
influence would be employed to revive
religion, or to encourage holy living. Worldliness
and ambition, revenge and immorality, cast a deep
shadow over the records of the papacy at this time, until
the century closes with the reign of Alexander VI., or
Roderigo Borgia (A.D. 1492-A.D. 1503), who was
elected by bribery, and whose shameless vice and
cruelty brought greater scandals upon the Church than
any of his predecessors had done.
Monastic orders, though not by any means an invention
of the Middle Ages, may yet fairly be said to have
attained their height, both of prosperity and of
usefulness, during this period of Church History.
Early rise of monasticism.
We may trace the origin of Christian monastic
life to very early times, when persecution
drove many Christians to a life of loneliness and
privation in desert places. The mode of life thus begun
from necessity was afterwards continued from choice,
and in the hope of more complete self-devotion to
God's service; and the solitary hermits and anchorites
of primitive ages became the forerunners of an elaborate
system of religious communities of men and women.
Later influences brought to bear on it.
St. Basil, in the fourth century, brought monasticism
into a more definite form, and St. Athanasius
during the same century introduced
it into Europe from the East. In the
West the religious life spread and flourished under the
fostering care of such men as St. Augustine and
St. Gregory the Great, whilst by St. Benedict in the sixth
century it was developed into the famous Benedictine
rule, to which, with few exceptions, all the European
monasteries conformed, and which was the parent of
various minor orders or subdivisions[1].
Beneficial results of monasticism.
It is not easy to estimate the vast amount of good
which the labours of the Benedictine
monks conferred on the Church of the
Middle Ages, good which has left many
traces to the present day. Not only did they provide
in a vast number of instances for the spiritual wants
of the parishes in and near which they lived, as
well as for the education of the young, both rich and
poor, but they were also the philosophers, the
authors, the artists, and the physicians, nay, even the
farmers and the mechanics of Mediaeval times. They
built cathedrals and churches, made roads and bridges,
copied books when writing stood in the place of
printing, and were in general the props and pioneers of
civilization. Amongst the very large number of men
who embraced the monastic life, it is no marvel that
some were not all they professed to be, or that
occasional causes for scandal arose, but the popular
idea of the universal corruption of the inhabitants of
the monasteries is unsupported by facts, and much
of what helped to give rise to this false notion is
traceable to the doings of the mendicant or preaching friars.
These begging orders were offshoots from the regulars,
and were but too often very unworthy representatives
of the parent stock[2].
Amongst the events which stand out most distinctly
in the history of the Church in the Middle Ages, the
long series of warlike expeditions known as the
Crusades bear a prominent part, stretching out as
they do from the end of the eleventh to nearly the end
of the thirteenth centuries.
The empire of the Arabs had died out, but they had
been succeeded in their schemes of conquest as well as
in their adherence to the false faith of Mahomet, by the
savage Turks, whose ferocity and hatred of Christianity
were especially displayed in the ill-treatment of those
Christians whose piety led them to visit the scenes of
our Blessed Lord's Life and Death.
Cause of the Crusades.
The indignation
excited in Europe by the stories of
outrage and desecration which were from
time to time brought back by pilgrims to the Holy
Land, at length found an outlet and expression in the
First Crusade, which was preached, A.D. 1095, by Peter
the Hermit, with the sanction both of the Pope and the
Patriarch of Constantinople. This expedition resulted
in the taking of the Holy City by the armies of the
Cross (A.D. 1099), and the establishment in it of a
Christian sovereignty.
Their transient results.
The First Crusade was the only one which had any
real success, and even this was a transient
one, for less than ninety years afterwards
(A.D. 1187) Jerusalem was again taken by the Saracens,
and has never since been a Christian power. But though
the deliverance of the Holy Land from the yoke of the
infidels was not accomplished by the Crusades, and
though they caused much misery and bloodshed, and
were stained by much lawlessness and plunder, yet the
advance of the barbarous and anti-Christian influences
of Mahometanism was checked, the Churches of Europe
were saved from the soul-destroying apostasy which
had over-run so large a portion of Asia, and the Crescent
waned before the Cross.
Reasons for their ill-success.
Much of the ill success with which the Crusaders
met during several of these expeditions,
may be traced to jealousies and
heart-burnings between the different princes and
nobles who took part in them, whilst disagreements
on a larger scale were amongst the evil fruits of the
unhappy division between Eastern and Western
Christendom. Latin Christians appear in too many instances
to have made use of the opportunities afforded them to
injure and oppress their weaker brethren of the Greek
Church, even whilst marching against the common foe
of both, and the Fourth Crusade (A.D. 1203) was
actually diverted from its legitimate purpose in order
to conquer Constantinople, and establish a Latin
Emperor, as well as a Latin Patriarch within its walls.
Good directly brought about by them.
Still, whatever may have been the want of
single-mindedness on the part of many of the
professed soldiers of the Cross, whatever
the amount of failure with regard to the
immediate objects of the Crusades, it is clear that
much good was brought about through them by God's
Providence, not only in the check given to the
encroachments of the unbelievers, but also more indirectly
in the quenching of rising heresies, in the greater
purity of life which in many cases accompanied the
taking of the Cross, the weakening of the feudal
system, the impulse given to learning and civilization.
Earnestness and self-devotion such as were shown by
Godfrey de Bouillon, St. Louis of France, and no doubt
by many more amongst the Crusaders, were rewarded
and blessed, though not in what might have seemed at
first sight the only way of success.
Popular idea of the Middle Ages,
There is a wide-spread notion that the Middle Ages
were also "Dark Ages," full of ignorance
and superstition, with hardly a ray of
knowledge or true religion to enlighten
the gloom, and also that the Church was the great
encourager of this state of things; indeed, that it was
mainly due to the influence of the monks and of the
Clergy generally.
not founded in history.
This belief is however quite unhistorical. No
doubt there was abundance of ignorance
as well as of superstition, its natural
consequence, but there are ample means of accounting for
both in the political condition of Europe at that time,
nor is it needful to blame the Church for what was in
fact due to the sins and errors of the world.
Real causes of ignorance and vice in the Middle Ages.
The confusion incident to the breaking up of the old
Roman empire, and the occupation of its
different provinces by less highly-civilized
nations, had been followed by other
disorders after the death of Charlemagne and
the partition of his dominions; and the constant state
of warfare and aggression in which most of the princes
of that time lived, was not calculated to leave their
subjects much leisure for intellectual culture. Besides
this, we must take into account the crushing influence
of the feudal system, which gave the nobles almost
absolute power over their serfs or dependants, thus
encouraging lawlessness on the one hand, and causing
degradation on the other. The scarcity and costliness
of books before the invention of printing was another
formidable obstacle to any universal spread of
education, all which causes tended to bring learning into
contempt amongst the restless barons and their
followers, restricting it chiefly to the Clergy and the
monks. Thus not only theology, but secular knowledge
besides, found a home in the Church, which was at
once the guardian and the channel of literature.
No scarcity of the means of grace in Mediaeval times.
There are also good grounds for believing that the
provision made by the Church for the
spiritual necessities of the people was not,
at any rate, less abundant than is the case
at the present day. Indeed, there is no
doubt that both Churches and Clergy, and
consequently opportunities for worship and instruction, were
far more in proportion to the number and needs of the
population than they can be said to be now in our own
country, even after the persevering and liberal efforts
of late years.
Difficulties respecting Services and Bibles on the vernacular,
If it is objected that the want of free
access to the Holy Scriptures, and the use
of the Latin tongue in the public services
of the Church, were calculated largely to
outweigh any advantages which the people
of those days might possess, we may remember that
those comparatively few who could read were just those
who would have access to the necessarily rare copies
then existing of the Word of God, and that to them
also the Latin version would be more comprehensible
than any other. Again, with regard to Latin services,
it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to
translate the devotions of the Church into any of the
slowly-forming dialects of the different European nations;
whilst Latin was more universally spoken and
understood than French is now, and was probably
intelligible to a larger number of men and women during a
considerable portion of the Middle Ages than any one
of the other languages used.
but the wish for them not wholly disregarded.
As the various languages of Europe became gradually
developed, a desire naturally arose amongst
those who spoke them for services in the
vernacular; and this desire was not left
altogether ungratified even long before
the Reformation. Thus, in England, the Epistles and
Gospels and the Litany were translated into the native
language in the Services of the Church, and interlinear
translations were made of many portions of the
Mediaeval Prayer Books[3]. Neither must we imagine that
the translations of Holy Scripture put forth by the
Reformers, or even that earlier version to which Wickliffe
gave his name, were by any means the first efforts
made to produce the Holy Bible in the vernacular.
From Anglo-Saxon times downwards, we have traces
of Bibles translated for the use of those who preferred
such versions; and to the truth of this statement may
be quoted the testimony of John Foxe, the "martyrologist,"
who says, "If histories be well examined, we
shall find, both before the Conquest and after, as well
before John Wickliffe was born as since, the whole
body of the Scriptures by sundry men translated into
this our country tongue[4]."
State of learning in the Middle Ages.
The Mediaeval Church was, in reality, a great
supporter of learning. Our two great
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge were
not less flourishing during the Middle
Ages than at present; and nearly all of the colleges and
halls at both Universities were founded in those days
of supposed darkness. Nor was this care for literature
confined to the Church in England; Universities of
equal note were to be found abroad at Paris, Pavia,
Bologna, Salamanca, and other places, whilst the
Schoolmen, or professors, who taught in these seats of
learning, and who numbered amongst themselves the
most acute thinkers and reasoners of the time, such as
St. Anselm, Peter Lombard, Albertus Magnus, and
St. Thomas Aquinas, were all attached to some Religious
Order. Enough of the results of their labours have
come down to our days to show us that it is neither
wise nor just to despise the mental work which they
accomplished, even though their conclusions may not
always be in accordance with our own.
It is not meant by what has been said above to infer
that the Mediaeval Church was altogether free from
blemishes, or to deny that these blemishes did, as time
went on, increase to an extent which rendered
reformation not only expedient but necessary.
The effects of Roman influence.
We have already seen that the supremacy claimed
by the Popes over the whole Church was
productive of great, though, by God's good
Providence, not unmitigated, evil in a political point of
view; and much of the error in faith or practice on the
part of Christians of those days, seems traceable to the
tendency on the part of Rome to crystallize opinions
into dogmas, and then to impose those dogmas on
the Church. Thus the "Romish doctrine concerning
purgatory," and the mechanism of "pardons," or
indulgences, grew out of the floating belief held by such
holy men as St. Augustine, that the souls of the faithful
would undergo some more perfect purification after
death than is attainable in this world; while the elaborate
system of invocations of, and devotions to, the Blessed
Virgin Mary and the saints, were built up out of a not
only harmless but justifiable faith in the intercessions
of the Saints for the Church on earth, and the wish to
obtain a share in their prayers. So again, the denial
of the cup to the laity, which was justly felt by many
to be such a grievous privation, was the natural
consequence of the over-refinements of the Roman Church
respecting the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist[5].
The right spirit in which to regard the Mediaeval Church.
But whatever imperfections may have clung to the
Visible Church in the Middle Ages,
whether owing to external hindrances, or to
the human frailties of her members, we
have no right to doubt that she was still
the one great instrument in God's Hands for the
salvation of souls. Neither should we dwell so exclusively
on what is often an exaggerated estimate of the extent
and duration of these blemishes, as to ignore the zeal
and self-devotion which grudged neither expense nor
labour in the service of God and the adornment of His
House and Worship, the charity which truly "cared
for the poor," the faith and holiness which shone forth
in the public and private lives of such men as
St. Ferdinand of Spain, St. Louis of France, and Rudolf of
Hapsburg, Emperor of Germany, and were, doubtless,
not wanting in the case of countless numbers of their
fellow-Christians, whose names, little known and soon
forgotten on earth, are for ever written in God's Book
of Remembrance.
No Mediaeval Church history in Asia or Africa.
Before proceeding to the consideration of the
different European Churches in Mediaeval times,
it may be well to remark that from the year 500
the Christian history of Asia and Africa is
almost a blank. Arianism, partly
imported into Africa by the Vandals, who
crossed thither from Spain, and partly of
native growth, as well as the opposite error,
Eutychianism, took from the African Church all spiritual
life and vigour, so that the apostasy of Mahomet met
with no formidable obstacles when in the seventh
century it swept like a flood over what had been
Christian Africa. It is true that the Copts in Egypt
and the native Christians of Abyssinia appear to have
preserved the Apostolic Succession, but both these
Churches are in a state of great depression, and the
Faith they profess is mingled with much ignorance and
superstition, as well as with positive error.
A similar process took place in Asia. Arianism,
chiefly in its later development of Nestorianism, with
Eutychianism and other errors, ate out the heart of the
Church, faith grew weak, and love grew cold, and
Mahometanism once more triumphed almost
unchecked. Although the Churches of Asia are not
all utterly extinct, yet they share more or less in the
state of ignorance, superstition, and depression which
is a natural consequence of the serious errors with
which their profession of Christianity is intermixed,
as well as of the way in which the few despised
Christians are mingled with their richer and more
numerous Mahometan neighbours.
Lombard kingdom in Italy.
The kingdom of the Goths in Italy was not of long
duration, and their successors and fellow-Arians, the
Lombards, only obtained possession of the
northern portion of the Peninsula, whilst
Rome and Southern Italy became once more
subject to the emperors of the East. Gregory the Great
(A.D. 390-A.D. 604) began the work of
converting the Lombards to the Catholic Faith, and in the
middle of the seventh century Arianism had
disappeared from Italy.
Renewal of the tie between East and West.
The renewal of the connexion
between the Eastern and Western Empires,
and the attempt of the Emperor Justinian
to subject the see of Rome to that of
Constantinople, placed Gregory under the necessity
of vindicating the independence of the Church of Italy,
and of denying the right of any one Patriarch to
assume authority over another. St. Gregory's holiness
and learning, and the wisdom of his endeavours to
reform corruptions, were most beneficial to the Church
over which he ruled.
Its rupture.
The Image-breaking
Controversy put an end to the nominal tie
between the Eastern emperors and the
Church of Italy (about A.D. 730), and almost the whole
of the peninsula soon after became part of the dominions
of Charlemagne. This great Emperor's influence was
used in Italy, as elsewhere, to foster the work of the
Church, which however suffered severely from the state
of lawlessness and confusion incident on the breaking
up of Charlemagne's empire after his death, A.D. 814.
Depression of the Church in Italy.
The Church of Italy in the ninth century had also to
undergo the inroads of the Mahometans
in the South, and of the heathen Magyars
(or Hungarians) on the North, as well as
of the Northmen, who ravaged and pillaged the
churches and monasteries on the coasts. Other
depressing influences were to be found in the secularization
of the Bishops of Rome through the increase of their
temporal power, and the usurpation by the German
emperors of the right of election to the popedom, which
properly belonged to the Clergy of Rome.
Gregory VII.'s reforms.
The corruptions which from these and other causes had
crept into the Church of Italy, drew towards them the
attention of the famous Hildebrand,
afterwards Pope Gregory VII. (A.D. 1073-A.D. 1085),
and his efforts at reformation were not
without a beneficial effect.
Heresies of the Albigenses
Early in the twelfth century
the heretical sect of the Albigenses, whose
doctrines resembled those of the ancient
Manicheans, spread from the South of France into
Italy, where they received the name of Paterini.
and Waldenses.
Both they and the kindred sect of the Waldenses
came under the notice of Innocent III. (A.D. 1198-A.D. 1216).
The Albigenses were exterminated
with circumstances of great cruelty[1], but the
Waldenses survive to the present day in the valleys of
Piedmont.
Evil effects of the residence at Avignon on the Italian Church.
The seventy years' residence
of the Bishops of Rome at Avignon (A.D. 1305-A.D. 1376)
was felt by the Church
of Italy to be an injury and a great evil,
and in the forty years' schism which followed the
return of the chief pastor of the Italians to his own
episcopal city (A.D. 1378-A.D. 1417), only the kingdom
of the Two Sicilies sided with the anti-Popes.
Other depressing influences.
Meanwhile the constant warfare between the
Guelphs and the Ghibellines in Italy, the
feuds between the different republics, the worldliness
and evil lives of too many of the Popes, and the luxury
and immorality which increased riches, consequent on
increased commerce, brought with them, had all tended
to a state of things in which the purifying influences of
the Church as "the salt of the earth" were sorely needed.
Desires for reformation.
Longings for a reformation of men's lives
and morals were smouldering in many
breasts, and in the city of Florence these hidden
wishes were kindled into a flame by the zeal and
eloquence of the monk Girolamo Savonarola, who
however fell a victim to his zeal, A.D. 1498.
Liturgy of the Italian Church.
The ancient Liturgy of the Church of Italy was
derived from one bearing the name of
St. Peter, and revised by St. Gregory, A.D. 590.
This Roman or Gregorian Liturgy, though with
certain later additions, is still in use throughout Italy,
the only exception to this rule being the cathedral and
diocese of Milan, which still preserve a Liturgy known
as that of St. Ambrose, who was Bishop of Milan from
A.D. 374 to A.D. 397.
Orthodoxy of the Franks.
The Franks alone of all the barbarians who swept
over Europe at the time of the decay of
the Western Empire, were Catholic from
their first conversion to Christianity; and to this
circumstance the French kings owed their title of Eldest
Sons of the Church. It was by the influence of a French
princess, Bertha, the Christian wife of Ethelbert, king
of Kent, that St. Augustine and his companions were
favourably received in England; whilst another
princess of the same race, Ingunda, who married the
son of the Visigoth king of Spain, is said to have
brought about the conversion of her husband from
Arianism to the Catholic faith, by her own constancy
under persecution.
The Church under Charlemagne.
During the reign of the Emperor
Charlemagne (A.D. 768-A.D. 814), the
French monasteries became seats of
learning, and amongst the learned men
who assisted the Emperor in his efforts for the religious
and intellectual improvement of his people, may be
mentioned the English Alcuin, who held an honourable
position at the French court as the instructor and
adviser of the monarch and his sons.
The French Liturgy.
The Gallican Liturgy, a branch of the Primitive Liturgy
of Ephesus, was entirely disused by order
of Charlemagne, and the Roman service used in its
stead.
Conversion of the Northmen.
From about A.D. 870 the Northmen, who had
long been a scourge to France, began to
settle down in that country, and were
gradually converted to the Christian Faith, their chief,
Rollo, marrying a Christian princess, A.D. 911, and
being baptized in the following year.
The Crusades.
A French
hermit, Peter of Auvergne, was the instigator of the
First Crusade, which was preached by
him at Clermont, and joined by a large
number of French nobles, the command of the
expedition being given to Godfrey de Bouillon, Duke of
Lorraine. The system of Crusades thus inaugurated
for the defence of Christian pilgrims in the Holy
Land, and the winning back of the Holy Places
from the hands of the Mahometans, was turned to
a cruel and unjustifiable use in the thirteenth
century, when Innocent III. proclaimed a Crusade against
the Albigenses in the South of France, in which
multitudes of these unhappy and misguided men were
slaughtered.
Rupture between France and the Pope.
During the reign of Philip IV. (A.D. 1285-A.D. 1314)
a collision took place for the first
time, between the Church and Kingdom
of France and the authority of the Pope.
Hitherto the disputes between the Popes and the
French monarchs had been on personal rather than on
political grounds, and had given no opportunity for
defining the exact limits of papal authority in France.
Comparative independence of French Church.
But meanwhile the French Clergy had not lost their
feeling of nationality, and the kings of
France had been able to use much more
independent action in the appointment of
Bishops than was the case in other countries. Hence
the Bishops and Clergy joined with the king in
resisting the sentence of excommunication pronounced by
the Pope on Philip and his kingdom. Neither King
nor Pope appear to have been influenced by any
religious feeling in their contest, and after the miserable
death of Boniface VIII. (A.D. 1303), and the murder of
his successor, Philip's unprincipled interference in the
election of Clement V. was productive of great evils.
Evil results of the conduct of Philip IV.
The cruel massacre of the Knights
Templars, the corruptions of the Papal Court
in France, and more indirectly the Great
Schism in which the Church of France espoused the
cause of the anti-Popes, may all be traced to the
conduct of Philip IV.
Conquest of Spain by the Moors.
Before the end of the sixth century, the Visigoths,
who had settled in what is now Spain and Portugal,
had been converted from Arianism to the Catholic
Faith. In A.D. 711 the Mahometan Moors
crossed over from Africa to the South of
Spain, and in A.D. 713 all the Peninsula,
except the small mountain district of Asturias, had
fallen into their hands. The more independent and
hardy amongst the Spanish Christians took refuge in
this inaccessible portion of the country, whilst others
dwelt amongst the Moors, and appear for a time to have
been allowed the exercise of their religion unmolested
by any systematic persecution.
Persecution of the Spanish Church.
About A.D. 830, however,
the policy of the Moorish conquerors
underwent a change, and during the next
hundred years multitudes of Christians
in Spain suffered martyrdom for their faith.
The re-conquest of Spain by the Spaniards.
After the
death of Hachem, the last Caliph of Cordova (A.D. 1031),
and the subdivision of his dominions,
the Christians of Asturias succeeded in
making head against their oppressors, and
gradually won back from them district after district,
until Ferdinand III. (A.D. 1214-A.D. 1252) succeeded in
reducing the Moorish possessions to the single province
of Grenada. This last remnant of Mahometan
dominion was wrested from the Moors A.D. 1492, and
Spain, as well as the separate kingdom of Portugal,
was once more entirely Christian.
Effect of national circumstances on Spanish Christianity.
It is perhaps hardly
to be wondered at, that the continual
state of religious warfare in which Spain
was so long plunged should have given
a somewhat stern character to Spanish
Christianity. The Inquisition, when
introduced into Spain by the mistaken zeal of the good
Queen Isabella towards the end of the fifteenth century,
found a readier welcome than elsewhere, and gained
an additional tinge of severity in a country which had
been brought into such close contact with one of the
deadliest forms of unbelief.
The Spanish Liturgy.
The original Liturgy of Spain was, like the ancient
Liturgy of France, a form of that used
at Ephesus. It received the name of
Mozarabic, from having been in use by Christians
living in the midst of Arabs, or Moors, and was not
discontinued in the Church of Spain until A.D. 1080,
when after much resistance on the part of the Spaniards
it was abolished by order of Alphonso VI., King of
Castille and Leon, under the influence of Pope Gregory
VII., and the Roman rite substituted throughout the
country.
Conversion of Germany by French
The large tract of country which is now comprehended
under the name of Germany was won to the Church
by a long series of missionary labours. In the
beginning of the seventh century Frankish
missionaries laid the foundations of a
Church in Bavaria and on the banks of
the Danube, thus paving the way for the conversion of
Southern Germany.
and British missionaries,
Central Germany, then called
Franconia, was the scene of the labours
of Kilian, an Irish missionary (A.D. 630-A.D. 689),
whilst the English Bishops Wilfrith (A.D. 677)
and Willebrord (A.D. 692-A.D. 741), preached
with much success to the Frieslanders in the
Northwest of Germany, now included in Holland.
Labours of St. Boniface
It is,
however, to a Devonshire clergyman, Winfrith, better
known as St. Boniface (A.D. 715-A.D. 755),
that the title of Apostle of Germany is
generally given, not only on account of his unwearied
missionary labours in still heathen districts, but also
on account of his success in organizing and
consolidating the different branches of the German Church.
He became Archbishop of Mentz, and Metropolitan,
and at last suffered martyrdom at the hands of some
heathen Frieslanders at the age of seventy-five.
The Emperor Charlemagne endeavoured to compel
the rude Saxons in the neighbourhood of the Baltic to
embrace the Christian faith; but eventually he was
induced to trust less to the force of arms for their
conversion, and more to the missionary work of the Church.
and of Willehad.
Amongst the prominent members of this Saxon
mission, we find another English priest,
Willehad, a native of Northumbria, afterwards
Bishop of Bremen, who died A.D. 789.
The first attempts to plant the Church in Moravia
were made by German missionaries in the ninth
century.
Eastern missionaries in Moravia
These do not appear, however, to have been very
successful, and about A.D. 860, two Greek
monks, Cyril and Methodius, entered
upon the same sphere of labour. Methodius
was afterwards consecrated Metropolitan of Pannonia
and Moravia by the Pope; but there was
considerable jealousy on the part of the Latinized Germans
towards their Eastern fellow-labourers, and eventually
the Moravian Church was subjected to the Bishops of
Bohemia.
and Bohemia.
The first Christian Duke of Bohemia was converted
about A.D. 871, whilst staying at the
Moravian court, probably by Methodius; but
the Church made very slow progress in Bohemia until
after the conquest of that country by Otho the Great
(A.D. 950), and the foundation of the Bishopric of
Prague by King Boleslav the Pious (A.D. 967-A.D. 999).
In Bohemia, as well as in Moravia, the influence of the
Greek missionaries made itself felt in the impress it
left upon the ritual and usages of the two Churches,
especially in the fact that the native Sclavonic language
was used in Divine Worship; but in the end German
influences prevailed in both countries, and the national
"use" gradually made way for the Latinized ritual
common in Germany.
Conversion of North Prussia,
Until towards the middle of the tenth century, the
Church made but very small progress in the northern
portion of what is now the kingdom of
Prussia. These regions were then
occupied by a Sclavonic race called Wends, who yielded
an unwilling submission to the Western emperors, and
disliked Christianity as being the religion of their
conquerors. Between A.D. 964 and A.D. 968, several
bishoprics were founded in this country by Otho the
Great, and amongst them the metropolitan see of
Magdeburg. A revolt of the Wends frustrated for the
time the success of the emperor's plans, but in the next
century Gottschalk, who became king of the Wends
A.D. 1047, and was himself a Christian, did all in his
power to aid the missionary work of the Church among
his people. He was martyred by his subjects, A.D. 1066,
and heathenism triumphed once more. During the
twelfth century, the Wendish kingdom was dissolved,
and its territories divided amongst different German
princes, after which the Church gradually regained
and extended its hold on the country. The northern
Wends, who obstinately adhered to their Pagan superstitions,
were at last converted chiefly by the labours of
St. Vicelin, who became Bishop of Oldenburg, A.D. 1148.
of Pomerania,
The conversion of Pomerania was first attempted by
the Poles, who, on obtaining possession of
the country at the end of the tenth century,
founded a bishopric at Colberg, A.D. 1000. It was not,
however, until their more complete subjection to Poland
about a hundred years later, that any marked result
was obtained. Otho, Bishop of Bamberg, who placed
himself at the head of the Pomeranian mission A.D. 1124,
was at last enabled to overcome the fierce opposition
which the heathen natives offered to the work of
the Church, and by A.D. 1128 Christianity had gained
a firm footing amongst them.
of Prussia Proper.
From Pomerania the Church extended itself
eastward to Prussia Proper, about A.D. 1210.
Here, too, Christianity was very distasteful
to the natives, partly as being the religion of their
enemies the Poles. About A.D. 1230, the "Order of
Teutonic Knights" was instituted for the purpose of
subjugating Prussia; and, after a depopulating warfare
of fifty years' duration, the remaining inhabitants
embraced Christianity. Before the end of the thirteenth
century, the German element had quite superseded the
Sclavonic in Prussia, as well as in Pomerania, and in
what had formerly been the kingdom of the Wends.
Extent of Roman influence in Germany.
The Church in Germany, taken as a whole, was very
much under Roman influence, partly,
perhaps, on account of the early connexion
between the emperors of the West and the
see of Rome, and partly from the constant
state of civil warfare into which Germany was plunged
from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries. In these
contests the near neighbourhood of the Popes to the
Italian possessions of the Western Empire gave them a
hold on the affairs of Germany which they were not
slow to use, and the turbulent German nobles were
disinclined to resent an interference which was so often
exerted in their behalf against an unpopular sovereign.
The temporal power of the Popes was, however, much
weakened by the great Schism; and though the Church
of Germany acknowledged the true Pope, there was,
amongst its members, a very widespread sense of the
urgent need of some searching reformation. To this
feeling may be traced, not only the unhappily
disappointed expectations with which so many persons
looked to the Councils of Constance and Basle, but
also the unsound and exaggerated teaching of such
men as John Huss and Jerome of Prague.
Conversion of Hungary.
The Hungarians or Magyars were descended from a
Tartar or Finnish tribe, who settled in Pannonia
towards the close of the ninth century, and thence
made fierce inroads on Italy and Germany. In
A.D. 948, two Hungarian chiefs were baptized
at Constantinople, and the daughter of
one of them afterwards marrying Geisa, Duke of
Hungary (A.D. 972-A.D. 997), Christian influences were,
by degrees, brought to bear upon the Hungarian people.
About the same time German missionaries began to
labour in Hungary, but it was not until the reign of
St. Stephen, the first King of Hungary (A.D. 997-A.D. 1038),
that the country was completely evangelized.
Hungary Latinized.
Stephen did all in his power to aid the work of the
German missionaries; Hungary was divided into
dioceses, and the originally eastern origin
of the Hungarian Church, as well as the
Sclavonic origin of the people, forgotten under the
desire felt by the king to keep on a friendly footing with
the German emperors and the Popes.
Attacks of the Turks.
The Church of Hungary suffered severely from the
invasion of the Mongul Tartars, A.D. 1241,
and when, about a century later, some of
these Tartars returned from Asia and settled in Europe
under the name of Turks, Hungary, owing to its
frontier situation, was constantly liable to their attacks.
During the fifteenth century, Hungarian bravery was
the great barrier that opposed the spread of
Mahometanism over Western Europe. Even after the fall
of Constantinople, the Turks vainly endeavoured to
make themselves masters of their Christian neighbours,
and found themselves obliged to retreat discomfited
from the siege of Belgrade, A.D. 1456.
Conversion of Poland.
The Church of Poland was founded about A.D. 966,
when a daughter of the Christian Duke of
Bohemia married Miecislav, Duke of
Poland, and introduced Christianity into her adopted
country.
Romanizing the church of Poland.
The Polish Church at first bore traces of its Eastern
origin in its liturgy and ritual, but these
traces were removed by Casimir I. (A.D. 1040-A.D. 1058),
who, previous to his
accession, had been a monk in a French or German
monastery, and who made a point of bringing the
Church of his own country into uniformity with the
other Churches of the West.
Conversion of Denmark
About A.D. 822, a mission was sent from France to
Denmark under Ebbo, Archbishop of
Rheims, which resulted in the conversion
of Harold, King of Jutland, who was baptized at
Mayence, A.D. 826. At the request of Harold, a fresh
mission to Denmark was organized and headed by Anskar,
a monk of Corbey, near Amiens, who is often known
as the "Apostle of the North."
and Sweden.
From Denmark Anskar
made his way to Sweden, A.D. 831, where
he was favourably received by the king,
and a year or two later was consecrated Archbishop of
Hamburg, with jurisdiction over the whole northern
mission.
Slow advance and vicissitudes of the Church.
At first the progress of the
Church, both in Denmark and Sweden,
was very slow and fluctuating, and the
ravages of the northern pirates, or Vikings, caused
great loss and suffering; but after some years, Anskar
was enabled to disarm the opposition of Eric the
heathen King of Denmark, and to make a favourable
impression upon the Swedish nobles. After his death
in A.D. 865, the Church in Denmark went through
many vicissitudes owing to irruptions of the Northmen
and other invaders, as well as to native opposition.
Svend, who reigned over Denmark A.D. 991-A.D. 1014,
though brought up a Christian, persecuted the Church
until his re-conversion during a victorious sojourn in
England.
English missionaries in Denmark
Svend's son and successor, Canute the
Great (A.D. 1014-A.D. 1033), was very zealous in his
endeavours to undo the evil effects of his father's
violence, and sent missionaries from
England, by whom the bulk of the Danish
nation were converted to Christianity.
and Sweden.
In Sweden, too, the Church made but slow progress
after the death of Anskar, until, in the beginning of the
eleventh century, the King Olaf Skötkonung, having
been himself baptized about A.D. 1008, invited to
Sweden certain English clergymen, who laboured there
with great success. The first bishopric
in Sweden was placed at Skara in West
Gothland, and filled by Turgot, an Englishman.
Conversion of Norway, by English missionaries.
The knowledge of the Gospel was first brought, in
the tenth century, into Norway from
England by Hacon, who is said to have been
educated at the court of Athelstan, and who
endeavoured, with the aid of English priests, to
bring about the conversion of his subjects.
Hacon was, however, induced, by the bitter opposition
of his countrymen, to yield a weak compliance to their
idolatrous practices, and the Church languished and
almost died out until the reign of Olaf Trygovasön
(A.D. 993-A.D. 1000), who had been baptized in the
Scilly Isles during a piratical expedition. The labours
of the English missionaries were finally successful in
the reign of Olaf the Holy (A.D. 1017-A.D. 1033), who
was earnest in his efforts to further the work of the
Church. It may be remarked that Norwegian Bishops
were usually consecrated either in England or France,
though all the Scandinavian Churches were still
professedly dependent on the Archbishopric of Hamburg.
Conversion of Iceland,
In Iceland some traces of early Christianity,
probably the result of the labours of
Irish missionaries, were still remaining
when it was colonized by Norwegian settlers in the
ninth century; and towards the end of the tenth
century successive attempts were made by a Saxon
Bishop and by missionaries from Norway, to revive and
deepen these impressions. The opposition of the
heathen colonists was, however, of so determined a
character, that it was only by the gradual conversion of
the mother country, and the labours of new bands of
missionaries, chiefly English and Irish, that Paganism
was by degrees overcome.
Greenland,
From Iceland the Church made its way to Greenland,
another Norwegian colony, which was
converted mainly by the instrumentality
of an Icelandic missionary, in the first half of the
eleventh century; but this ancient Church died out in
the fifteenth century. About the same time Christianity
spread through the Norwegians to the Orkney,
Shetland, and Faroe Islands.
and Lapland.
The Church was first planted amongst the Lapps by
Swedish missionaries in the thirteenth
century, but it was not until the sixteenth
and two following centuries that Christianity became
the religion of the country.
We look in vain in the history of the Church in
Eastern Europe for the missionary activity which
bears so prominent a place in the annals of Western
Christendom.
Lack of missionary zeal in the East.
The minds of Eastern
Christians were still much occupied
by continued contests between the Catholic Faith and
developments of already condemned heresies, and to
these succeeded the scarcely less absorbing controversy
about Image-breaking. Nor was there in the East
the same pressing contact with Paganism, which made
it in the West a political necessity no less than a
religious duty at once to christianize and civilize the
ever advancing hordes of heathen barbarians.
Conversion of Bulgaria.
The evangelization of Bulgaria was, however,
begun early in the ninth century, by the
carrying off of the Bishop of Adrianople and many of his
flock, in a victorious inroad of the Bulgarians, A.D. 811.
Half a century later the Bulgarian King Bogoris,
influenced by his sister, who had been brought up a
Christian at Constantinople, put himself and his
country under the tuition of the Greek patriarch
Photius. Soon after, becoming weary of his Eastern
instructors, he applied for aid to the Western Church,
and, in A.D. 867, the Pope Nicholas I. despatched two
Italian Bishops and other missionaries to Bulgaria.
Collision between Greek and Roman missionaries.
This interference of the Roman
Church, in an already occupied field of
missionary labour, added considerably to
the jealousy between East and West, and helped to
bring about the eventual and lamentable schism.
Bogoris soon after returned to his allegiance to
Photius, insisted on the withdrawal of the Roman
Mission, and obtained a Greek Archbishop of Bulgaria
from Constantinople.
Peculiar position of the Eastern Church.
The state of external isolation in which the
Church of the Eastern Empire was placed by the
Schism of A.D. 1054, had a tendency to increase its
exaggerated spirit of conservatism, which
was also encouraged by the indolent
unenterprizing temper of the Greeks of the
later empire, whose blood had not been quickened by
the same admixture of races as had given new life
to the worn out nations of the West.
Effects of the Crusades.
Under these circumstances the crusades were hardly
less a cause of terror to the Greeks than
were the advances of the Turks themselves, and tended
to widen rather than to heal the unhappy breach
between the Latin and Greek Churches.
Unjustifiable proceedings of the Latins.
The foundation of a Latin Patriarchate at Jerusalem,
after the taking of that city in A.D. 1099,
could not but be accounted an usurpation
on the part of the Pope, which was, however, far
surpassed in injustice by the erection of a Latin empire
and a Latin Patriarchate in Constantinople itself,
A.D. 1204. During the time that this oppressive arrangement
lasted (i.e. till A.D. 1261) the rightful Patriarch
took refuge at the court which the Eastern emperors
held at Nicaea in Asia Minor, and the fugitives there
clung to their national Church, and her rightful
independence.
Attempts at reunion.
The Emperor Michael Palaeologus, after
driving out the Latins from Constantinople,
endeavoured once more to effect a
reunion between East and West, partly from political
and partly from personal motives, and a formal act of
union was signed, A.D. 1274. Neither the Greek
Clergy nor the Greek people would, however, consent
to give up their own national religious customs, nor
to acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope; and this
shadow of union died out with the death of the
Emperor, its originator.
Invasion of the Turks.
In the fourteenth century
the Turks were treacherously invited over to Europe as
allies of the usurper, John Cantacuzenus (A.D. 1347-A.D. 1353),
and so firm a
footing did they gain, that the rightful Emperor, John
Palaeologus (A.D. 1341-A.D. 1391), found himself
obliged to appeal to Rome for aid, promising in return
to reconcile the Greek Church to the Roman
communion. The affairs of Western Europe, were, however
too unsettled to admit of such aid being afforded, and
the Emperor was obliged to give up all his possessions
to the Turks, except Constantinople, Thessalonica,
part of the Morea, and a few islands. Another appeal
was made, with the same results, by his son, Manuel
Palaeologus (A.D. 1391-A.D. 1425).
New attempts at reunion.
John VII. (A.D. 1425-A.D. 1448) opened fresh negociations
with the West, and he and the
Patriarch of Constantinople, together with twenty-one
other Eastern Bishops, appeared (A.D. 1438) at the
Council of Ferrara (afterwards transferred to Florence).
At this council a decree of union was once more signed
by the Greeks, on condition of their receiving aid
against the Turks (A.D. 1439). This fresh attempt
at union was repudiated by the Eastern Church at
large, but a troop of French and Italian crusaders
started for the East. Constantinople was, however,
doomed, and the good and brave Constantine Palaeologus
(A.D. 1448-A.D. 1433) was the last, as he was one
of the best, of the Greek emperors.
Fall of Constantinople
The city fell, after an
obstinate defence, on the 29th May, A.D. 1453,
and Constantine was among the
slain. The Turks pillaged and slaughtered
indiscriminately, and turned into a mosque the beautiful
Church of St. Sophia, built by the Emperor Justinian
in honour of the "Holy Wisdom" of God.
and the Greek Empire.
All the Greek Empire had now fallen into the hands
of the Turks, except the small
mountainous district of Albania, which held
out until the death of George Castriota (dreaded by the
Turks under the name of Scanderbeg), A.D. 1467. The
rocky strip of land known as Montenegro has been
enabled to maintain an unbroken independence.
State of the Church of Greece under Turkish rule.
The Church of Greece was now no longer the
dominant and recognized religion of the
country, but it was not extinguished. The
numerous mountain monasteries, inaccessible
from their construction and position,
were the chief strongholds of the Christian Faith; and
so, "cast down, but not destroyed," the Church in
Greece struggled on, until, after nearly three centuries
of Turkish rule, Greece itself once more became a
Christian kingdom.
Decay of the Church after its first planting in Russia.
The Church, founded in the South of Russia by
St. Andrew, appears not to have spread to the other
parts of this vast country, and to have
died out, perhaps under the influence
the hordes of barbarians who poured
westward from Asia to Europe.
Foundation of the present Church.
The Church of Russia, as it now exists, owes its
foundation chiefly to Greek Missionaries,
who began their labours about A.D. 866,
amongst the tribes bordering on
the dominions of the Eastern Empire. Before the
middle of the next century Christianity had gained
a footing in the ancient capital of Kiev, and about
A.D. 933 the Princess Olga was baptized at
Constantinople.
It flourishes under Vladimir.
In the reign of her grandson, Vladimir
(A.D. 986-A.D. 1014), the Church made
great progress in Russia. Vladimir made
a public recognition of Christianity, and
by his marriage with the sister of the Greek Emperor
strengthened the links which bound Russia to
Constantinople. The Greek missionaries were aided in
their labours, churches and bishoprics were founded,
and the Holy Scriptures and Service Books translated
into the native Sclavonic language; the Greek monks,
Cyril and Methodius, who have been already mentioned
as instrumental in the conversion of Bohemia and
Moravia, taking also an active share in the
Christianizing of Russia.
Independence of the Russian Church,
In the reigns of Yaroslav and his
successor (A.D. 1019-A.D. 1077), the empire became
completely Christian, and the Church of
Russia was placed on an independent
footing, with a native primate at its head.
Innocent III. (A.D. 1198-A.D. 1216) attempted to win
over Russia to the Roman communion, by offering to
confer the title of King on Prince Roman, but his
offer was at once rejected.
which it has steadily refused to give up,
Russia suffered severely
from the ravages of the Mongul Tartars, A.D. 1223, and
Pope Innocent IV. took advantage of
the distressed condition of the Russian
church and the removal of the Greek
Patriarchate from Constantinople to
Nicaea, to make another attempt at detaching Russia
from communion with the Greeks. David, Prince of
Galicia, professed himself willing to receive the crown
and title of king from Rome, but this arrangement was
not of long duration, and about A.D. 1230 a Metropolitan
of the Russian Church was consecrated by the Greek
Patriarch, to fill up the vacancy which had taken place
ten years before during the Tartar invasion. Kiev,
the original seat of the Russian Patriarchate, was burnt
and pillaged by the Tartars, and the see was transferred
to Vladimir, A.D. 1299, and thence during the early
part of the next century (A.D. 1320) to Moscow, where
it has since remained.
and has preserved unbroken.
For more than two centuries, until A.D. 1462, Russia
was oppressed by the yoke of the
unbelieving Tartars, but the Church still
maintained her independence, and steadily
resisted the various attempts which were made to bring
about a reunion between East and West, by the
subjugation of the former to the unjust claims of the latter.
Trials of the English Church under the Saxons.
We have seen (p. 74) that the native Church of
England had not succeeded in converting the
Anglo-Saxon invaders who gradually took possession of the
country, and that such as remained of the
Bishops and Clergy had been compelled for
the most part to take refuge in mountainous,
and therefore inaccessible, districts.
It was, however, only in A.D. 587, that Theonas, Bishop
of London, and Thadiocus, Bishop of York, retreated
from their sees, and they were both living in exile in
Wales, when, ten years later, St. Augustine was sent
by Pope Gregory to found a mission in England.
Roman usurpation.
It seems uncertain whether St. Gregory was aware
of the previous existence of a Church in
these islands; at any rate, he acted as if
ignorant of the fact, by bestowing on St. Augustine a
spiritual supremacy over the whole country; and the
good Italian missionary, when brought into actual
contact with the living representatives of a national Church
already five hundred years old, appears to have
considered himself justified in endeavouring to bring its
Liturgy and usages into agreement with the Roman
pattern.
Consequent disputes.
All this was not unnatural, especially under
the circumstances of weakness and depression in which
the Church of England was then placed; but it was
equally natural that such interference should be felt to
be an usurpation, and resented accordingly,
and that much misunderstanding
and bitterness should be the consequence. There
probably was a recognition of the claims of the elder race
of English Bishops in the fact, that St. Augustine was
consecrated to the see of Canterbury rather than to
that of London, of which the rightful occupant was still
living, and that neither the latter diocese, nor that of
York, appear to have been filled up until after the deaths
of Theonas and Thadiocus.
English independence partially recognized.
It was also eventually
found expedient to leave to the English
Church its own national Liturgy and
ritual (originally derived through a Gallican
channel from that of Ephesus), instead of
insisting upon an exact conformity to Roman rites.
Some account of the English Liturgy.
This ancient English Liturgy, revised in
the seventh century by St. Augustine,
underwent a second revision at the hands of
Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury, about A.D. 1083; and,
though certain variations existed in some dioceses, the
"Use of Sarum," as it was called, became the general
"use" throughout the southern portion of England, and
was even at length considered to be the Liturgy of the
country. It is from this Sarum Use that our present
Post-Reformation Liturgy is derived.
A very considerable amount of new life and energy
was infused into the Church of England by the mission
of St. Augustine. Though the native Bishops and Clergy
could not bring themselves to look cordially on those
whose religious zeal was not always tempered with
justice or courtesy towards their predecessors in the
field of their missionary labours, still both
foreigners and natives worked for the same
cause, each in their own way, and a new
evangelization of the freshly-heathenized
population ensued[1].
Amalgamation of English and Roman successions.
By degrees the two lines of
Bishops became blended in one succession, which has
continued unbroken until the present day.
English missionary zeal.
The Church of England, thus strengthened and
quickened, soon began to give abundant
proofs of its vitality by sending out
missionaries to convert the heathen in other lands. A
large part of Germany and the Netherlands owes its
Christianity to English Bishops and Clergy, such as
Winfrith or Boniface, Willebrord, and a host of other
less well-known or altogether forgotten names. The
eighth century was especially distinguished by these
missionary labours abroad, whilst, at home, were to be
found such good and learned men as the Venerable
Bede (A.D. 672 or '3-A.D. 735), an early translator of
the Holy Scriptures, and his friend Egbert (A.D. about
678-A.D. 776), Archbishop of York, and founder of a
famous school in that city, where the illustrious Alcuin
(about A.D. 723-A.D. 804) was a scholar.
Invasion, and conversion of the Danes.
In A.D. 787, the Church of England began to suffer
severely from the ravages of the heathen
Danes or Northmen; but, by the wisdom
and valour of the good King Alfred (A.D. 871-A.D. 901),
they were for a while subdued, and numbers of
them settled as peaceable colonists in
England, where they gradually embraced
Christianity.
King Alfred.
Alfred was very zealous in his endeavours to repair
the spiritual and intellectual losses which
the Church of England had undergone
during the contest with the Danes, whose ravages had
almost entirely swept away all native scholarship. The
king was especially eager to secure a literature in the
vernacular for his subjects, and himself translated
into "simple English" parts of the Holy Bible, and
other religious books. In these labours he was assisted
by a small body of learned men, including the two
Aelfrics, Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and
Wulfstan, supposed to have been Bishop of Worcester.
The conversion of the Danes who had first settled in
England to Christianity prepared the way for the
evangelizing of later colonists; and when, through the
crimes and weakness of the later Anglo-Saxon princes,
the country fell altogether into the hands of Danish
invaders, Canute the Great (A.D. 1016-A.D. 1033) not
only embraced Christianity himself, but secured for
his native country the services of English
missionaries.
Evangelization of Scandinavia.
In fact, at this time
Scandinavia seems to have been the chief
mission-field of the English Church.
Roman influence comparatively small under the Saxons.
We can hardly be wrong in gathering from all this,
that Roman influence had only to a
certain limited extent been introduced into
the Church of England by St. Augustine's
mission, and that, as time passed on, the
foreign element had become absorbed in the national
one. With the Norman conquest of A.D. 1066, the
case was, however, altered.
Much increased under the Normans.
The claims of the Popes to
temporal as well as to spiritual authority
were by that time definite and authoritative;
the Conquest itself had been undertaken
by the permission of Alexander II., and the
authority of the foreign conquerors, (as the Norman
and early Plantagenet kings continued to be,) required
foreign support. Hence the Bishops of Rome gained
an amount of political influence in England which was
thoroughly unconstitutional, and which could probably
never have been attained by any foreign power, had
the English sovereigns immediately after the Conquest
felt themselves more firmly fixed upon the throne they
had seized.
Denationalizing of the Episcopate.
The appointment of foreigners to the highest
ecclesiastical offices in England, was one means
by which the Norman sovereigns sought
to secure themselves against disaffection
amongst their new subjects; but the real result of this
policy was to foster the claims of the Popes to religious
and secular supremacy in this country; for these foreign
ecclesiastics, though English Bishops, were not loyal
subjects of the English crown, nor were their interests
identical with those of their flocks.
Lanfranc.
Thus
the Italian Lanfranc, when appointed
Archbishop of Canterbury by William the Conqueror
(A.D. 1070), did not hesitate to obey the summons of
the Pope to Rome for the purpose of receiving the pall,
and thus acknowledging that he held his Bishopric
from the Papal see.
St. Anselm.
His successor, St. Anselm (A.D. 1093), also an Italian, and a
man of great learning and holiness, was prepared to
carry out a similar line of conduct; but the covetous
and irreligious tyrant, William Rufus, was seeking at
the same time to reduce Bishops to the state of mere
nominees and vassals of the crown, and a long contest
ensued[2]. The dispute was carried on into the next
reign; and at length, in A.D. 1107, a compromise was
agreed upon, by which it was arranged that Bishops
should receive investiture from the Pope, and, at the
same time, take an oath of allegiance to the king.
St. Thomas of Canterbury.
Anselm's unflinching advocacy of Papal claims cost him
years of exile from his diocese, and much suffering;
but, in the following century, similar conduct involved
still more serious consequences to
St. Thomas à Becket, the then Archbishop of
Canterbury. The new question in dispute was the
right of clerical offenders to be tried in the spiritual
courts, instead of coming under the jurisdiction of the
civil power; but, in reality, it was only another form of
the constant endeavours of the English monarchs to
free themselves from the foreign bondage which was,
to some extent at least, self-imposed. Becket fell a
martyr to his own sense of duty and the king's
displeasure, A.D. 1170.
Roman influence strongest in England.
Papal usurpation in England reached its height
when, in A.D. 1208, Innocent III placed
the kingdom under an Interdict, for
refusing to receive as Archbishop of
Canterbury his nominee, Stephen Langton, who was
unacceptable both to king and people; and soon after
proceeded to excommunicate John, and depose him
from his throne. The king's cowardly and
unconstitutional conduct in resigning his kingdom into the
hands of the Pope's legate (A.D. 1213), and receiving it
again at the end of three days as a tributary vassal of
the Roman see, caused England to be looked upon for
some years as only a fief of Rome.
Kept up by the Friars;
In the reign of Henry III. (A.D. 1216-A.D. 1272),
Roman influence in England was greatly
sustained by the introduction of the
Preaching Orders of Franciscan and Dominican
Friars, who, being many of them foreigners, and
all of them independent of any episcopal control,
and subject to Papal jurisdiction only, were very
energetic in their endeavours to maintain and extend
the authority of the popedom.
by the habit of appeals;
By this time, too, appeals to Rome against the
decisions of English courts had come to be
a great bar to national independence.
Such appeals had been altogether unrecognized in
England until the days of Stephen, and the practice
was again forbidden in Henry II.'s reign by the
Constitutions of Clarendon (A.D. 1164); but, after Becket's
death, the prohibition was once more repealed. It is
easy to see how seriously this system of appeals must
have delayed and interfered with the regular course of
justice in this country, and how capable it was of being
made a political engine in the hands of the Pope, or of
those who held with him. The exemption of most of
the monasteries from the supervision of the Bishops
was also a serious evil, interfering as it did with the
Divinely-appointed functions of the episcopacy, and
opening the door to disorders which the distant and usurped
authority of the Popes had not power to remedy.
by large money payments.
In the fourteenth century another means was resorted
to of increasing the power of the Popes at
expense of the monarch and people of
England, by the payment of annates, or first-fruits, on
the appointment of each Bishop; and so heavy did
this burden become, that between A.D. 1486 and A.D. 1531,
160,000 pounds (or about 45,000 pounds a year of our money)
was paid to Rome under the head of annates.
All these evils borne under protest.
It is not to be supposed that these encroachments of
a foreign power were accepted without a
murmur or remonstrance on the part of
the people of England; on the contrary,
there was a constant undercurrent of discontent, which
found occasional expression in some official or popular
protest. Such, on the one hand, was the statute of
praemunire, passed in the reign of Richard II. (A.D. 1389),
to prohibit Papal interference with Church
patronage and decisions in ecclesiastical causes; and,
on the other, the irregular proceedings of Wickliffe and
the Lollards, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,
which, though they eventually degenerated into seditious
agitation, had their rise in a feeling of opposition
to Romish abuses and usurpations. This feeling was
increased by the fearful state of profligacy into which
Rome, and indeed all Italy, was plunged during the
fifteenth century, which effectually destroyed the
character formerly enjoyed by the Roman Church, whilst
it could not but affect the spiritual health of the other
Churches over which Rome exercised so wide an
influence. Wiser and calmer men than Wickliffe saw the
need of some reformation, though they questioned, and,
as the event showed, rightly, the wisdom and the justice
of the steps he took towards his object. Wickliffe's
teaching in the fourteenth century had, in fact, little or
nothing to do with the real Reformation of two hundred
years later, except that some of his dangerous theories
on political matters took deeper root than did his
religious peculiarities, and bore fruit in much of the
unprincipled licence which was an unhappy, though by
no means an essential, feature of the Reformation era.
English longings for reformation.
England, in common with the other nations of
Europe, was willing to hope for great
benefit from the councils of the Church
held in the fifteenth century; and, at each
of them, we find English Clergy making grave and
urgent protests against the abuses which they saw
around them, and pleading for a return to purer and
better ways. Thus, at the Council of Pisa, A.D. 1400,
one of the English Bishops who attended it presented
a memorial which complained of the evils resulting
from the want of episcopal control over the monasteries,
from the practice of appeals to Rome, and from the
ease with which dispensations for non-residence and
pluralities were obtained[3]. Again, at the Council of
Constance (A.D. 1415) a sermon was preached by
Dr. Abendon, an Oxford professor, which painted in
very strong language the worldliness and covetousness
of the non-resident Bishops and Clergy; and these
protests were followed up by an official appeal to the
Pope for a reformation, on the part of the Kings of
France and England, A.D. 1425, as well as by official
instructions given to the English deputation despatched
to the Council of Basle (A.D. 1431), to use their
influence for the same end.
The Church of Ireland was not, like the Church of
Great Britain, to which it owes its foundation, a prey
to the depressing influences of the heathen Saxons;
and, at the time of the mission of St. Augustine, the
daughter was in some measure enabled to repay to the
mother the benefits which the British St. Patrick had
conferred on the scene of his missionary labours. A
constant intercourse was kept up between the numerous
monasteries of Ireland and those of Wales and
Scotland, some of the abbeys in the latter countries being
founded and frequented by Irishmen.
Early reputation of Ireland.
Ireland, in the sixth and seventh centuries,
had a great reputation for learning and missionary zeal,
both of which were called into play to help in the
reconversion of a large portion of England, as well as to
encourage the efforts of English Churchmen in retaining
in the National Church the national characteristics, with
the loss of which it was threatened from the large
admixture of foreign elements introduced by
St. Augustine.
Irish missionary work in England and elsewhere.
Nor were their missionary
labours confined to England: they shared
in the toils and honours of the conversion
of Germany, and are believed to have penetrated as far
as Iceland and Greenland.
Unjustifiable conduct of England.
The aid given by Irish
ecclesiastics in preserving the religious liberty of the
Church of England was ill requited in the twelfth
century, when the English, having taken
possession of Ireland, forced the Irish Church
to abandon her distinctive Liturgy by a
decree passed at the synod of Cashel, A.D. 1173. The
state of anarchy and restless discontent into which
Ireland was thrown by the presence of English invaders,
had a very unfavourable effect on the Church of the
country, as had also the appointment of Englishmen to
Irish bishoprics, and the consequent non-residence of
the Bishops. It is curious that the influence of English
conquerors should have tended to extend Roman
authority in Ireland, much as the policy of Norman
conquerors produced the same effect in England.
Before the Reformation, the state of the Irish Church had
become thoroughly unsatisfactory, and was felt to be
so by many of the Irish themselves.
St. Columba.
The country of the Southern Picts, christianized by
St. Ninian (see p. 76), having fallen into the hands
of the heathen Anglo-Saxons, something like a fresh
evangelization became necessary; and this was
accomplished by the labours of St. Columba and
his successors, who, having crossed over
from Ireland (first about A.D. 560) for the purpose of
preaching to the Northern tribes of Scotland, extended
their mission southward.
Irish or Scotch missionaries in England.
The monastery of Iona, or
Icolmkill, was for some time inhabited by Irish
missionaries, and became the chief source of missionary
labour not only in Scotland, but also in
the North of England, the Scotch or Irish
missionaries using all the weight of their
influence to uphold the independence of the National
Church against the Roman tendencies of St. Augustine
and his successors. St. Aidan (died A.D. 651), Bishop
of Lindisfarne, or Holy Island, and the head of the
mission for the conversion of the Saxon kingdom of
Mercia, was a monk of Iona. His diocese included
Yorkshire, and extended to Scotland; and, in
consequence of this, the Archbishops of York long laid claim
to exercise metropolitan authority over the whole of
North Britain.
Roman influence gradually made itself felt in
Scotland, in great measure through the monastic system,
which received a great impetus under David
I. (A.D. 1124-A.D. 1153).
Longings for reformation.
The constant wars with England,
and the confusion and bloodshed they entailed, had a
very unfavourable effect on the prosperity and spiritual
activity of the Church of Scotland, so that from
Scotland, no less than from England and
Ireland, there arose that cry for a
return to older and purer ways, which ended in the
Reformation.
Abendon, Dr., at Constance, 150
Abyssinia, Church of, 82
Africa, Church in, its early history, 80
———, Church in, its mediaeval history, 120
Aidan, St., 144, 152
Alban, St., his martyrdom, 73
Albigenses, 122
Alexandria, Church of, 80
———, School of, 81
Altar, its arrangements in Eastern and Early English Churches, 54
Ambrosian Liturgy, 123
"Angels" or Bishops, The Seven, 49, 52, 85
Annates, Payment of, 149
Anselm, St., 146
Anti-Popes, 109
Antioch, Church of, 23, 28, 84
———, St. Paul and St. Barnabas at, 28
"——— St. Peter's Throne at," 28
——— first sends Missionaries to heathen, 29
Antioch disturbed by disputes about circumcision, 34
Antioch, Probable visit of St. Peter to, 36
Apocalypse, The, 52
"Apology against Heathenism," The first Christian, 32
"——— Judaism," The first Christian, 20
Apostle, St. Matthias chosen to be, 8
Apostles, extent of their labours, 43
——— trained by our Lord, 5
——— taught by the Holy Ghost, 5, 6, 48
———, Commission given to the, 6
——— a living Gospel, 12
——— Creed, an instance of traditional teaching, 13
——— St. Paul and St. Barnabas complete the number of, 30
———, how they differ from Bishops, 31
———, their deaths, 43
Apostolic office, Nature of, 5 n.
——— Doctrine, 12
——— Fellowship, 18
Apostolical Succession in England, 144
Appeals from England to Rome, 148
Arabia, Church of, 86
Arianism, 68, 81
——— in Greece, 79
——— in France, 78
——— of the Goths, 77
——— prepares for Mahometanism, 88
Arles, Council of, 78
Armenia, Church of, 85
Athanasius, St., 70, 72, 81
Athens, its intellectual pride, 39
———, St. Paul at, 39
Augustine, St., 82
———, and Church of England, 142
Authority of the Jerusalem Council, 36
Avignon, The Popes at, 108, 123
Baptism, Nature of, 2, 3, 4
———, its necessity, 26
——— of St. John different from that of our Lord, 7 n.
——— of the Three Thousand, 10
Barchochebas, 83
Barnabas, St., Conversion of, 11
———, ordained Apostle, 30
Basil, St., 111
Basle, Council of, 110
Becket, St. Thomas à, 147
Benedictine rule, The, 111
Bible, The, in Middle Ages, 117
Bishop, Meaning of the word, 33 n.
——— and Priest originally one office, 5 n.
Bishops, Consecration of, by the Apostles, 33
——— rarely appointed at first, 46, 47
——— especially subject to persecution, 65
Bohemia, Church of, 129
Boniface, St., in Germany, 128
Books, Christian, kept hidden, 63
Bread, The Breaking of the, 7, 13
Breakspear, Nicholas, 106
Bulgaria, Conversion of, 136
Canute, Conversion of, 145
Cashel, Synod of, 151
Catacombs, Use of the, 63
Corinthians, Heresy of the, 50
Chalcedon, Fourth Council of, 71
Charlemagne, 122, 124, 128
China, Church of, 87
Chrysostom, St., 84
Church, Definition of, 1
———, a Kingdom, 1
———, the fruit of the Incarnation, 2
——— the New Jerusalem, 8
———, its gradual development, 47, 48
———, its Divine Foundation proved by persecution, 62
Church, Growth of, unchecked by persecution, 62
Church Militant, a preparation for Church Triumphant, 4
———, Outward recognition of the, 66
——— Government modified by persecution, 65
Churches, Primitive, their arrangement, 53
Circumcision, Apostolic Decision respecting 35
———, Wish to impose it on Converts, 27, 34
Columba, St., 76, 152
Confirmation by the Apostles, 22, 24, 32, 37, 40
Continental Churches, their early history, 76-80
——— in Middle Ages, 120
Constance, Council of, 110
Constantine, his English parentage, 73
———, Conversion of, 66
———, Council summoned by, 69
Constantinople, Creed of, 70
———, Building of, 67, 80
———, Second Council of, 70
———, Fifth Council of, 71
———, Sixth Council of, 71
———, Fall of, 138
Conversion of the Three Thousand, 10
——— Five Thousand, 11
——— of Gentiles, Obstacles to, 29
Conversions after appointment of Diaconate, 17
Corinth, its luxury and unbelief, 40
———, St. Paul at, 40
Cornelius, Conversion of, 25, 26
Council of the Church, First, 35
———, Second, at Jerusalem, 46
Councils, General, their nature, 69 n.
——— guided by the Holy Ghost, 36
Creed, Apostles', 13
Crusades, 113, 125
———, Effect of, in the East, 137
Cyprian, St., 82
Cyril, St., 81
Danes, Conversion of, 145
——— and Church of England, 144
Deacon, Meaning of the word, 17 n.
Deacons, their work, 18
Decretals, The false Papal, 103
Denial of Cup to Laity, 119
Denmark, Church of, 133
Development, Intellectual, in the Church, 72
Diocesan system, its late development in Ireland, 75
Dioclesian, his false boasting, 62
Discipline, its strictness increased by persecution, 64
——— relaxed, 68
Division between East and West, 95
Docetae, Heresy of the, 50
Domitian's persecution, 49, 59
Eastern Church, 83
———, its want of missionary zeal, 136
East and West, Division of, 94
Elders.
Endowment of Church, 67
England, Church of, its early history, 73
———, in Middle Ages, 142
———, its Liturgy, 143
English Bishops at early Councils, 74
Ephesus, St. John at, 49
———, Heresies at, 50
———, Council of, 85
———, Liturgy of, 124
———, Third Council of, 71
Episcopacy, its permanent organization, 46
Ethiopia, Church of, 82
Eucharist, Daily, 7, 13
———, the chief act of worship, 14, 56
Eucharistic Sacrifice, 2, 3, 13, 14, 56
Eutyches, his heresy, 71
Expectation, Days of, 7
Fathers, value of their writings, 72
Ferrara, Council of, 110
Florence, Council of, 110
Forty Days, The teaching of the, 6
Foundation of Church, its Divine Origin, 4, 7
France, Church of, its early history, 77
———, its mediaeval history, 124
———, its Liturgy, 78
French Bishops from Asia, 77
French interference in Papal affairs, 107
Friars, Franciscan and Dominican, in England, 112, 148
Gallican Liturgy, 124
General Councils, 69-71
Gentiles called into the Church, 26
Germany, Church of, 127
Gnosticism, Simon Magus the author of, 22, 51
——— at Corinth, 40
——— at Ephesus, 51
Gospels, Holy, great reverence shown to them, 54
"Grecians," Who meant by, 16
Greek Church, What meant by, 80 n.
———, its early history, 79
———, its mediaeval history, 135
——— under Turkish rule, 139
——— Empire, End of, 139
Greeks, their liability to heresy, 79
Greenland, Conversion of, 135
Gregory, St., 103
———, and Church of England, 142
——— VII., 106
"Hebrews," Definition of, 17
——— and Grecians, Dispute between, 17
Hegira, the Mahometan Era, 89 n.
"Hellenists" or "Grecians," Definition of, 16
Heresy, how opposed, 69
Hilary, St., 102
Hildebrand, 105
Hincmar, 104
Hungary, Church of, 131
Iceland, Church of, 133
Iconoclast controversy, 95, 121
Ignatius, St., 84
Ignorance, Causes of, in Middle Ages, 115
Incense, its burning made a test, 59
———, its use in heaven, 55
India, Church of, 87
Indulgences, 109, 118
Innocent III., 107
Inquisition, Origin of, 107
Interdict, England placed under, 147
Investiture, Disputes about, 106, 147
Iona, Monastery of, 76
Ireland, Church of, its early history, 74
———, its Liturgy and customs, 78, 151
———, its mediaeval history, 151
———, English influence in, 152
Irenaeus, St., 78
Irish missionary labours, 151
Italy, Church of, its early history, 76
———, its mediaeval history, 121
———, its Liturgy, 123
James, St., the Great, his martyrdom, 27
——— the Less, first Bishop of Jerusalem, 27, 35, 83
——— presides at the First Council, 35
Jerusalem, The Apostolic Church in, 27, 83
———, First Council at, 35
———, Second Council at, 46
——— taken by Saracens, 113
Jewish Worship, and scheme of Redemption, 4, 56
John, St., his special work in the Church, 45, 47, 49
———, his sacramental teaching, 47, 52
———, his universal patriarchate, 51
———, his writings, 51
———, his Epistles, 52
———, his Revelation, 52
———, his martyrdom in will, 57 n.
———, King, Unconstitutional conduct of, 147
Judicial powers first exerted in the Church, 16
Julian the Apostate, 83
Koran, The, 90
Labours, Apostolic, Extent of, 43
Lanfranc, 146
Langton, Stephen, 147
Lapland, Conversion of, 135
Latin, Use of, in Middle Ages, 116
Law, Christ's obedience to the, 15
Lay investiture, Disputes about, 106
Letters of Peace, 64
Lollards, The, 149
Love of the First Christians, 13
Luke, St., joins St. Paul, 37
Macedonius, his heresy, 70
Mahometanism, 88
——— in Spain, 127
Martyrdom, seeking it forbidden, 63
Martyrs, Immense number of the, 61
Matthias, St., chosen to be Apostle, 8
Mediaeval Church, its true state, 119
Meletian schism, 81
Middle Ages, Learning in, 117
———, Religion in, 116
Ministry, Christian, Three-fold nature of, 2, 5 n.
———, Jewish, replaced by Christian, 4
Miracles, Gift of, 11
Monastic Orders, The, 111
Monasticism, its good results, 112
Moors in Spain, 126
Moravia, Church of, 128
Mozarabic Liturgy, 127
Music, its use in heaven, 55
Nero's persecution, 49 n., 59
Nestorius, his heresy, 71, 82
Nicaea, Council and Creed of, 70
Nicolas of Antioch, 18
Ninian, St., his mission in Scotland, 76
Norman influence on English Church, 146
Northmen, Conversion of, 124
Norway, Church of, 134
Ordinances or traditions, 13 n.
Paganism not revived by persecution, 62
Papal supremacy, its dangers, 101
——— Supremacy in France, 125
——— aggression, The first, 102
Parochial system, its late development in Ireland, 75
Parthia, Church of, 85
Passover replaced by Eucharist, 3
Patrick, St., his mission to Ireland, 75
Paul, St., Conversion of, 23.
———, his fitness for the Apostolate, 24
Paul, St., ordained Apostle, 30
———, the Chief Apostle of the Gentiles, 31
———, his first Apostolic journey, 31
———, his second Apostolic journey, 36
———, his third Apostolic journey, 40
———, a prisoner, 42
———, in England, 73
———, Martyrdom of, 43
Pelagianism, 78
Pella, Flight to, 83
Penances, their severity, 64
Pentecost, The Day of, 8
———, The effects of, 9
Persecution, Causes of, 57
——— under Herod Agrippa, 27
———, Progress of, 11, 57
Persecutions, Nature and extent of, 61
———, Table of, 60
———, Effect of, on the Church, 63
——— cease under Constantine, 66
Persia, Church of, 85
Peter, St., results of his first Sermon, 10
———, his special work in the Church, 45
———, his first Apostolic journey, 24
———, his imprisonment and deliverance, 28
———, Martyrdom of, 43
Peter the hermit, 125
Pharisees, their opposition to the Gospel, 19
Philip, St., the Deacon, 21
Pisa, Council of, 109
———, English Bishops at, 150
Poland, Church of, 132
Pomerania, 130
Popes of the Middle Ages, 102-111
———, Worldliness of the later, 110
——— and anti-Popes, Disputes between, 109
Portugal, Church of, its early history, 78
———, Church of, its mediaeval history, 126
Pothinus, Bishop of Lyons, 77
Praemunire, Statute of, 149
Presbyters.
Priest, Meaning of the word, 32 n.
Priests, First ordination of, 32
———, their functions, 33
Prussia, Church of, 129
Purgatory, 118
Reformation, what it was, 102
———, Longings for, 123, 131, 150
Reunion between East and West attempted, 137
Ritual, Early Christian, 53
——— checked by persecution, 63
———, Heavenly, as shown in the Apocalypse, 53
——— developed in prosperity, 67
Roman Empire, its decay, 77
Roman influence in Middle Ages, 118
——— influence in Germany, 131
Rome, St. Paul at, 42
———, its influence in extending the Faith, 67
Russia, Church of, its foundation, 80, 139
———, Church of, its independence, 140
Sacrifice, The Christian, 2, 3, 13, 14, 56
Sacrifices under the patriarchal dispensation, 3
——— under the Mosaic dispensation, 3
Sadducees, their opposition to the Gospel, 12, 19
Samaria, Conversion of, 21
Sarum Use, 143
Satan, his enmity against the Church, 58, 62
Saul of Tarsus, 19
Saxon and English Church, 74, 142
Scandinavian Churches, 133
Schism, The first, in the Church, 16
——— between East and West, 98
———, The forty years', 109
Scotland, Church of, its early history, 75
———, its mediaeval history, 152, 153
———, Saxon influence in, 152
———, Roman influence in, 153
Seven Churches, The, 84
Simon Magus, his unbelief and end, 21, 22
Sin, First deadly, in the Church, 16
Spain, Church of, its early history, 78
———, Church of, its mediaeval history, 126
———, Church of, its Liturgy, 127
Stephen, St., ordained Deacon, 18
———, his preaching and inspiration, 19
———, results of his Martyrdom, 21
Supremacy, Papal claims to, 100
Sweden, Church of, 133
Table of "Fields of Apostolic Labour," 44
——— Persecutions, 60
——— Councils, 72
Teaching of the Church, Reserve in, 49, 63
——— its gradual development, 49
Temple Services, Attendance of the Apostles on, 13, 15
Temporal power of the Popes, its rise, 100
"Theological Gospel," The, 47
Theotokos, 71
Timothy, St., his circumcision, 37
———, Bishop of Ephesus, 33, 41
Titus, St., Bishop of Crete, 33, 41
Tongues, The gift of, 9, 11
Tradition, its value, 13
"Traditores," 64
Turkey, European Church in, its early history, 79
——— in Europe, Church in, its medieval history, 135
Turks, their inroads in the East, 138
"Universal Bishop," Title of, 95
Universities in Middle Ages, 117
Vernacular Bibles in Middle Ages, 116
Visigoths, Arianism of, 79
Waldenses, 122
Wales the refuge of British Clergy, 74
Wickliffe, 149
Worship, Jewish and Christian, 3