THE CHURCH AND THE BARBARIANS

 BEING AN OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH FROM A. D. 461 TO A. D. 1003

BY THE REV. 

WILLIAM HOLDEN HUTTON, B. D. 

FELLOW AND TUTOR OF S. JOHN BAPTIST COLLEGE, OXFORD

EXAMINING CHAPLAIN TO THE BISHOP OF ROCHESTER

RIVINGTONS

34 KING STREET, COVENT GARDEN

LONDON

1906

[Transcriber's note: Page numbers in this book are indicated by numbersenclosed in curly braces, e. G. {99}. They have been located where pagebreaks occurred in the original book, in accordance with ProjectGutenberg's FAQ-V-99. For the book's Index, a page number has beenplaced only at the start of that section. ]

[Transcriber's note: Footnotes have been renumbered sequentially andmoved to the end of their respective chapters. The book's Index has anumber of references to footnotes, e. G. The "96 n. " entry under"Assyrians. " In such cases, check the referenced page to see whichfootnote(s) are relevant. ]

[Transcriber's note: The original book had side-notes in its pages'left or right margin areas. Some of these sidenotes were at or nearthe beginning of a paragraph, and in this e-text, are placed to precedetheir host paragraph. Some were placed elsewhere alongside aparagraph, in relation to what the sidenote referred to inside theparagraph. These have been placed into the paragraph near where theywere in the original book. All sidenotes have been enclosed in squarebrackets, and preceded with "Sidenote:". ]

EDITORIAL NOTE

While there is a general agreement among the writers as to principles, the greatest freedom as to treatment is allowed to writers in thisseries. The volumes, for example, will not be of the same length. Volume II. , which deals with the formative period of the Church, is, not unnaturally, longer in proportion than the others. To Volume VI. , which deals with the Reformation, will be allotted a similar extension. The authors, again, use their own discretion in such matters asfootnotes and lists of authorities. But the aim of the series, whicheach writer sets before him, is to tell, clearly and accurately, thestory of the Church, as a divine institution with a continuous life. 

W. H. HUTTON

PREFACE

It has seemed to me impossible to deal with the long period covered bythis volume as briefly as the scheme of the series required withoutleaving out a great many events and concentrating attention chieflyupon a few central facts and a few important personages. I think thatthe main results of the development may thus be seen, though there ismuch which is here omitted that would have been included had the bookbeen written on other lines. 

Some pages find place here which originally appeared in _The Guardian_and _The Treasury_, and a few lines which once formed part of anarticle in _The Church Quarterly Review_. My thanks are due for thecourtesy of the Editors. I have reprinted some passages from my_Church of the Sixth Century_, a book which is now out of print and notlikely to be reissued. 

I have to thank the Rev. L. Pullan for help from his wide knowledge, and Mr. L. Strachan, of Heidelberg, of whose accuracy and learning Ihave had long experience, for reading the proofs and making the index. 

W. H. H. 

S. JOHN'S COLLEGE, OXFORD, _Septuagesima_, 1906. 

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I PAGE THE CHURCH AND ITS PROSPECTS IN THE FIFTH CENTURY . . . . 1

CHAPTER II THE EMPIRE AND THE EASTERN CHURCH, 461-628 . . . . . . . . 6

CHAPTER III THE CHURCH IN ITALY, 461-590 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

CHAPTER IV CHRISTIANITY IN GAUL FROM THE SIXTH TO THE EIGHTH CENTURY 41

CHAPTER V THE PONTIFICATE OF GREGORY THE GREAT . . . . . . . . . . . 60

CHAPTER VI CONTROVERSY AND THE CATHOLICISM OF SPAIN . . . . . . . . . 72

CHAPTER VII THE CHURCH AND THE MONOTHELITE CONTROVERSY . . . . . . . . 83

CHAPTER VIII THE CHURCH IN ASIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

CHAPTER IX THE CHURCH IN AFRICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

CHAPTER X THE CHURCH IN THE WESTERN ISLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

CHAPTER XI THE CONVERSION OF SLAVS AND NORTHMEN . . . . . . . . . . . 123

CHAPTER XII PROGRESS OF THE CHURCH IN GERMANY . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

CHAPTER XIII THE POPES AND THE REVIVAL OF THE EMPIRE . . . . . . . . . 143

CHAPTER XIV THE ICONOCLASTIC CONTROVERSY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

CHAPTER XV LEARNING AND MONASTICISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

CHAPTER XVI SACRAMENTS AND LITURGIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

CHAPTER XVII THE END OF THE DARK AGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 191

APPENDIX I LIST OF EMPERORS AND POPES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205

APPENDIX II A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

{1}

THE CHURCH AND THE BARBARIANS

CHAPTER I

THE CHURCH AND ITS PROSPECTS IN THE FIFTH CENTURY

[Sidenote: The task of the Church]

The year 461 saw the great organisation which had ruled and unitedEurope for so long trembling into decay. The history of the Empire inrelation to Christianity is indeed a remarkable one. The imperialreligion had been the necessary and deadly foe of the religion of JesusChrist; it had fought and had been conquered. Gradually the Empireitself with all its institutions and laws had been transformed, atleast outwardly, into a Christian power. Questions of Christiantheology had become questions of imperial politics. A Roman of thesecond century would have wondered indeed at the transformation whichhad come over the world he knew: it seemed as if the kingdoms of theearth had become the kingdoms of the Lord and of His Christ. But alsoit seemed that the new wine had burst the old bottles. The boundariesof the Roman world had been outstepped: nations had come in from theEast and from the West. The {2} system which had been supreme was notelastic: the new ideas, Christian and barbarian alike, pressed upon ittill it gave way and collapsed. And so it came about that ifChristianity had conquered the old world, it had still to conquer thenew. 

[Sidenote: The decaying Empire. ]

Now before the Church in the fifth century there were set severalpowers, interests, duties, with which she was called upon to deal; andher dealing with them was the work of the next five centuries. Theywere, --the Empire, Christian, but obsolescent; the new nations, stillheathen, which were struggling for territory within the bounds of theEmpire, and for sway over the imperial institutions; the distant tribesuntouched by the message of Christ; and the growth, within the Churchitself, of new and great organisations, which were destined in greatmeasure to guide and direct her work. Politics, theology, organisation, missions, had all their share in the work of the Churchfrom 461 to 1003. In each we shall find her influence: to harmonisethem we must find a principle which runs through her relation to themall. 

[Sidenote: The need of unity. ]

The central idea of the period with which we are to deal is unity. Uptill the fifth century, till the Council of Chalcedon (451) completedthe primary definition of the orthodox Christian faith in the person ofthe Lord Jesus Christ, Christians were striving for conversion, organisation, definition. All these aims still remained, but in lessprominence. The Church's order was completed, the Church's creed waspractically fixed, and the dominant nations in Europe had owned thename of Christ. There remained a new and severe test. Would the {3}Church win the new barbarian conquerors as she had won the old imperialpower? There was to be a great epoch of missionary energy. But of thefirm solidity of the Church there could be no doubt. Heresies had tornfrom her side tribes and even nations who had once belonged to herfold. But still unity was triumphant in idea; and it was into theCatholic unity of the visible Church that the new nations were to beinvited to enter. S. Augustine's grand idea of the City of God hadreally triumphed, before the fifth century was half passed, over theheathen conceptions of political rule. The Church, in spite of thetendency to separate already visible in East and West, was truly one;and that unity was represented also in the Christian Empire. "At theend of the fifth century the only Christian countries outside thelimits of the Empire were Ireland and Armenia, and Armenia, maintaininga precarious existence beside the great Persian monarchy of theSassanid kings, had been for a long time virtually dependent on theRoman power. " [1] Politically, while tyrants rise and fall, andbarbarian hosts, the continuance of the Wandering of the Nations, sweepacross the stage, we are struck above all by the significant fact whichMr. Freeman (_Western Europe in the Fifth Century_) knew so well how tomake emphatic:--"The wonderful thing is how often the Empire cametogether again. What strikes us at every step in the tangled historyof these times is the wonderful life which the Roman name and the RomanPower still kept when it was thus attacked on every side from withoutand torn in pieces in every quarter from within. " And the reason forthis indubitably was that the {4} Empire had now another organisationto support it, based on the same idea of central unity. One Churchstood beside one Empire, and became year by year even more certain, more perfect, as well as more strong. In the West the papal power roseas the imperial decayed, and before long came near to replacing it. Inthe East, where the name and tradition of old Rome was always preservedin the imperial government, the Church remained in that immemorialsteadfastness to the orthodox faith which was a bond of unity such asno other idea could possibly supply. In the educational work which theemperor had to undertake in regard to the tribes which one by oneaccepted their sway, the Christian Church was their greatest support. In East as well as West, the bishops, saints, and missionaries were thetrue leaders of the nations into the unity of the Empire as well as theunity of the Church. [Sidenote: The Church's conquest of barbarism. ]The idea of Christian unity saved the Empire and taught the nations. The idea of Christian unity was the force which conquered barbarism andmade the barbarians children of the Catholic Church and fellow-citizenswith the inheritors of the Roman traditions. 

If the dominant idea of the long period with which this book is to dealis the unity of the Church, seen through the struggles to preserve, toteach, or to attain it, the most important facts are those which belongto the conversion, to Christ and to the full faith of the CatholicChurch, of races new to the Western world. The gradual extinction inItaly of the Goths, the conversion of the Franks, of the English, ofmany races on distant barbarian borderlands of civilisation, theacceptance of Catholicism by the Lombards and {5} the Western Goths, donot complete the historical tale, though they are a large part of it:there was the falling back in Africa and for a long time in Europe ofthe settlements of the Cross before the armies of the Crescent. Therewere also two other important features of this long-extended age, towhich writers have given the name of dark. There was the survival ofancient learning, which lived on through the flood of barbarianimmigration into the lands which had been its old home, yet was verylargely eclipsed by the predominance of theological interests inliterature. And there was the growth of a strong ecclesiastical power, based upon an orthodox faith (though not without hesitations andlapses), and gradually winning a formidable political dominion. Thatpower was the Roman Papacy. 

[1] Bryce, _Holy Roman Empire_, p. 13, ed. 1904. 

{6}

CHAPTER II

THE EMPIRE AND THE EASTERN CHURCH

(461-628)

When the death of Leo the Great in 461 removed from the world ofreligious progress a saintly and dominant figure whose words werelistened to in East and West as were those of no other man of his day, the interest of Church history is seen to turn decisively to the East. 

[Sidenote: Character of the Greek Church. ]

The story of Eastern Christendom is unique. There is the fascinatingtale of the union of Greek metaphysics and Christian theology, and itsresults, so fertile, so vigorous, so intensely interesting as logicalprocesses, so critical as problems of thought. For the historian thereis a story of almost unmatched attraction; the story of how a peoplewas kept together in power, in decay, in failure, in persecution, bythe unifying force of a Creed and a Church. And there is theextraordinary missionary development traceable all through the historyof Eastern Christianity: the wonderful Nestorian missions, the activityof the evangelists, imperial and hierarchical, of the sixth century, the conversion of Russia, the preludes to the remarkable achievementsin modern times of orthodox missions in the Far East. 

Throughout the whole of the long period indeed {7} which begins withthe death of Leo and ends with that of Silvester II. , though the LatinChurch was growing in power and in missionary success, it was probablythe Christianity of the East which was the most secure and the mostprominent. Something of its work may well be told at the beginning ofour task. 

[Sidenote: The Monophysite controversy. ]

The last years of the fifth century were in the main occupied in theEast by the dying down of a controversy which had rent the Church. TheEutychian heresy, condemned at Chalcedon, gave birth to the Monophysiteparty, which spread widely over the East. Attempts were soon made tobridge over the gulf by taking from the decisions of Chalcedon all thatdefinitely repudiated the Monophysite opinions. [Sidenote: TheHenotikon. ] In 482 the patriarch Acacius of Constantinople, under theorders probably of the Emperor Zeno (474-91), drew up the _Henotikon_, an endeavour to secure the peace of the Church by abandoning thedefinitions of the Fourth General Council. No longer was "one and thesame Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, acknowledged _in two natures_, without fusion, without change, without division, without separation. "But it is impossible to ignore a controversy which has been a cause ofwide divergence. Men will not be silent, or forget, when they aretold. Statesmanlike was, no doubt, the policy which sought for unityby ignoring differences; and peace was to some extent secured in theEast so long as Zeno and his successor Anastasius (491-518) reigned. But at Rome it was not accepted. Such a document, which implicitlyrepudiated the language of Leo the Great, which the Fourth GeneralCouncil had adopted, could {8} never be accepted by the whole Church;and those in the East who were theologians and philosophers rather thanstatesmen saw that the question once raised must be finally settled inthe dogmatic decisions of the Church. Had the Lord two Natures, theDivine and Human, or but one? The reality of the Lord's Humanity aswell as of His Divinity was a truth which, at whatever cost of divisionand separation, it was essential that the Church should proclaim andcherish. 

In Constantinople, a city always keen to debate theology in thestreets, the divergence was plainly manifest; and a document which was"subtle to escape subtleties" was not likely to be satisfactory to thesubtlest of controversialists. The Henotikon was accepted at Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, but it was rejected by Rome and by the realsense of Constantinople. In Alexandria the question was only laid fora time, and when a bishop who had been elected was refused recognitionby Acacius the Patriarch of Constantinople and Peter "the Stammerer, "who accepted the Henotikon, preferred to his place, a reference to Romeled to a peremptory letter from Pope Simplicius, to which Acacius paidno heed whatever. Felix II. (483-92), after an ineffectual embassy, actually declared Acacius excommunicate and deposed. The monastery ofthe Akoimetai at Constantinople ("sleepless ones, " who kept upperpetual intercession) threw itself strongly on to the side of theadvocates of Chalcedon. Acacius, then excommunicated by Rome becausehe would not excommunicate the Monophysite patriarch of Alexandria, retorted by striking out the name of Felix from the diptychs of theChurch. 

{9}

[Sidenote: Schism between East and West. ]

It was the first formal beginning of the schism which, --temporarily, and again and again, healed, --was ultimately to separate East and West;and it was due, as so many misfortunes of the Church have been, to theinevitable divergence between those who thought of theology first asstatesmen and those who thought first as inquirers after the truth. The schism spread more widely. In Syria Monophysitism joinedNestorianism in the confusion of thought: in Egypt the Coptic Churcharose which repudiated Chalcedon: Abyssinia and Southern India were tofollow. Arianism had in the East practically died away; Nestorianismwas powerful only in far-away lands, but Monophysitism was for a greatpart of the sixth century strong in the present, and close to thecentre of Church life. The sixth century began, as the fifth hadended, in strife from which there seemed no outway. Nationalism, andthe rival claims of Rome and Constantinople, complicated the issues. 

Under Anastasius, the convinced opponent of the Council of Chalcedonand himself to all intents a Monophysite in opinion, some slightnegotiations were begun with Rome, while the streets of Constantinopleran with blood poured out by the hot advocates of theological dogma. In 515 legates from Pope Hormisdas visited Constantinople; in 516 theemperor sent envoys to Rome; in 517 Hormisdas replied, not onlyinsisting on the condemnation of those who had opposed Chalcedon, butalso claiming from the Caesar the obedience of a spiritual son; and inthat same year Anastasius, "most sweet-tempered of emperors, " died, rejecting the papal demands. 

{10}

The accession of Justin I. (518-27) was a triumph for the orthodoxfaith, to which the people of Constantinople had firmly held. Thepatriarch, John the Cappadocian, declared his adherence to the FourthCouncil: the name of Pope Leo was put on the diptychs together withthat of S. Cyril; and synod after synod acclaimed the orthodox faith. Negotiations for reunion with the West were immediately opened. Thepatriarch and the emperor wrote to Pope Hormisdas, and there wrote alsoa theologian more learned than the patriarch, the Emperor's nephew, Justinian. "As soon, " he wrote, "as the Emperor had received by thewill of God the princely fillet, he gave the bishops to understand thatthe peace of the Church must be restored. This had already in a greatdegree been accomplished. " But the pope's opinion must be taken withregard to the condemnation of Acacius, who was responsible for theHenotikon, and was the real cause of the severance between thechurches. [Sidenote: Reunion, 519. ] The steps towards reunion may betraced in the correspondence between Hormisdas and Justinian. It wasfinally achieved on the 27th of March, 519. The patriarch ofConstantinople declared that he held the Churches of the old and thenew Rome to be one; and with that regard he accepted the four Councilsand condemned the heretics, including Acacius. 

The Church of Alexandria did not accept the reunion; and Severus, patriarch of Antioch, was deposed for his heresy. There was indeed aconsiderable party all over the East which remained Monophysite; andthis party it was the first aim of Justinian (527-65), when he becameemperor, to convince or to subdue. He was the {11} nephew of Justin, and he was already trained in the work of government; but he seemed tobe even more zealous as a theologian than as a lawyer or administrator. The problem of Monophysitism fascinated him. [Sidenote: The EmperorJustinian. ] From the first, he applied himself seriously to the studyof the question in all its bearings. Night after night, saysProcopius, he would study in his library the writings of the Fathersand the Holy Scriptures themselves, with some learned monks or prelateswith whom he might discuss the problems which arose from their perusal. He had all a lawyer's passion for definition, and all a theologian'sdelight in truth. And as year by year he mastered the intricatearguments which had surged round the decisions of the Councils, he cameto consider that a _rapprochement_ was not impossible between theOrthodox Church and those many Eastern monks and prelates who stillhesitated over a repudiation which might mean heresy or schism. Andfrom the first it was his aim to unite not by arms but by arguments. The incessant and wearisome theological discussions which are among themost prominent features of his reign, are a clearly intended part of apolicy which was to reunite Christendom and consolidate the definitionof the Faith by a thorough investigation of controverted matters. Justinian first thought out vexed questions for himself, and thenendeavoured to make others think them out. 

From 527, in the East, Church history may be said to start on newlines. The Catholic definition was completed and the imperial powerwas definitely committed to it. We may now look at the Orthodox Churchas one, united against outside error. 

{12}

A period of critical interest in the history of Europe is that to whichbelongs the difficult and complicated Church history of the East fromthe accession of the Emperor Justinian to the death of S. Methodius. 

The period naturally divides itself into three parts--the first, from527 to 628, dealing with the Church at the height of its authority, upto the overthrow of the Persian power; the second to 725, the period upto the beginning of the iconoclastic controversy; and the third up toits close and the death of S. Methodius in 847. With the first we willdeal in the present chapter. 

[Sidenote: Church and State in the East. ]

But throughout the whole three centuries, from 527 to 847, theessential character of the Church's life in the east is the same. Inthe East the Church was regarded more decisively than in the West asthe complement of the State. Constantine had taught men to look forthe officials of the Church side by side with those of the civil power. At Constantinople was the centre of an official Christianity, whichrecognised the powers that be as ordained of God in a way which wasnever found at Rome. At Rome the bishops came to be political leaders, to plot against governments, to found a political power of their own. At Constantinople the patriarchs, recognised as such by the Emperor andSenate of the New Rome, sought not to intrude themselves into a sphereoutside their religious calling, but developed their claims, in theirown sphere, side by side with those of the State; and their example wasfollowed in the Churches which began to look to Constantinople forguidance. There was a necessary consequence of this. {13} [Sidenote:Nationalism of the Churches. ] It was that when the nationalities of theEast, --in Egypt, Syria, Armenia, or even in Mesopotamia--began toresent the rule of the Empire, and struggled to express a patriotism oftheir own, they sought to express it also on the ecclesiastical side, in revolt from the Church which ruled as a complement to the civilpower. Heresy came to be a sort of patriotism in religion. And whilethere was this of evil, it was not evil that each new barbarian nation, as it accepted the faith, sought to set up beside its own sovereign itspatriarch also. "Imperium, " they said, "sine patriarcha non staret, "an adage which James I. Of England inverted when he said, "No bishop, no king. " Though the Bulgarians agreed with the Church ofConstantinople in dogmas, they would not submit to its jurisdiction. The principle of national Churches, independent of any earthly supremehead, but united in the same faith and baptism, was established by thehistory of the East. Gradually the Church of Constantinople, by thegrowth of new Christian states, and by the defections of nations thathad become heretical, became practically isolated, long before theinfidels hedged in the boundaries of the Empire and hounded theimperial power to its death. Within the boundaries the Churchcontinued to walk hand-in-hand with the State. Together they actedwithin and without. Within, they upheld the Orthodox Faith; without, they gave Cyprus its religious independence, Illyricum a newecclesiastical organisation, the Sinaitic peninsula an autonomoushierarchy. More and more the history of these centuries shows us theGreek Church as the Eastern Empire in its religious aspect. And itshows that the division between East {14} and West, beginning inpolitics, was bound to spread to religion. As Rome had won herecclesiastical primacy through her political position, so withConstantinople; and when the politics became divergent so did thedefinition of faith. Rome, as a church, clung to the obsolete claimswhich the State could no longer enforce: Constantinople witnessed tothe independence which was the heritage of liberty given by theendowment of Jesus Christ. 

Such are the general lines upon which Eastern Church history proceeds. We must now speak in more detail, though briefly, of the theologicalhistory of the years when Justinian was emperor. 

[Sidenote: Early controversy in Justinian's reign. ]

Justinian was a trained theologian, but he was also a trained lawyer;and the combination generally produces a vigorous controversialist. Itwas in controversy that his reign was passed. The first controversy, which began before he was emperor, was that, revived from the end ofthe fifth century, which dealt with the question of the addition to theTrisagion of the words, "Who was crucified for us, " and involved theassertion that One of the Trinity died upon the cross. In 519 therecame from Tomi to Constantinople monks who fancied that they couldreconcile Christendom by adding to the Creed, a delusion as futile asthat of those who think they can advance towards the same end bysubtracting from it. After a debate on the matter in Constantinople, Justinian consulted the pope. Letters passed with no result. In 533, when the matter was revived by the Akoimetai, Justinian published anedict and wrote letters to pope and patriarch to bring the matter to afinal decision. "If One of the Trinity did {15} not suffer in theflesh, neither was He born in the flesh, nor can Mary be said, verilyand truly, to be His Mother. " The emperor himself was accused ofheresy by the Vigilists; and at last Pope John II. Declared the phrase, "One Person of the Trinity was crucified, " to be orthodox. Hisjudgment was confirmed by the Fifth General Council. [1]

The position which the emperor thus assumed was not one which the Eastalone welcomed. Rome, too, recognised that the East had power to makedecrees, so long as they were consonant with apostolic doctrine. 

[Sidenote: The Monophysites. ]

Justinian now gave himself eagerly to the reconciliation of theMonophysites. In 535 Anthimus, bishop of Trebizond, a friend of thedeposed patriarch of Antioch, Severus, who was at leastsemi-Monophysite, was elected to the patriarchal throne of New Rome. In the same year Pope Agapetus (534-6) came to Constantinople as anenvoy of a Gothic king, and he demanded that Anthimus should makeformal profession of orthodoxy. The result was not satisfactory: thenew patriarch was condemned by the emperor with the sanction of thepope and the approval of a synod. Justinian then issued a decreecondemning Monophysitism, which he ordered the new patriarch to send tothe Eastern Churches. Mennas, the successor of Anthimus, in his localsynod, had condemned and deposed the Monophysite bishops. Thecontroversy was at an end. 

More important in its results was the dispute with the so-calledOrigenists. S. Sabas came from {16} Palestine in 531 to lay before theemperor the sad tale of the spread of their evil doctrines, but he diedin the next year, and the Holy Land remained the scene of strifebetween the two famous monasteries of the Old and the New Laura. [Sidenote: The Origenists. ] In 541 or 542 a synod at Antioch condemnedthe doctrines of Origen, but the only result was that Jerusalem refusedcommunion with the other Eastern patriarchate. Justinian himself, --ata time when there was at Constantinople an envoy from Rome, Pelagius, --issued a long declaration condemning Origen. A synod wassummoned, which formally condemned Origen in person--a precedent forthe later anathemas of the Fifth General Council--and fifteenpropositions from his writings, ten of them being those whichJustinian's edict had denounced. The decisions were sent forsubscription to the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, as well as to Rome. This sanction gave something of an universalcondemnation of Origenism; but, since no general council confirmed it, it cannot be asserted that Origen lies under anathema as a heretic. The opinion of the legalists of the age was utterly out of sympathywith one who was rather the cause of heresy in others than himselfheretical. 

[Sidenote: The "Three Chapters. "]

But the most important controversy of the reign was that which wasconcerned with the "Three Chapters. " Justinian, who had himselfwritten against the Monophysites, was led aside by an ingenious monkinto an attack upon the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoretof Cyrrhus, and Ibas of Edessa. The Emperor issued an edict (544) inwhich "Three Chapters" asserted the heresy of the incriminatedwritings. Within a short {17} time the phrase "The Three Chapters" wasapplied to the subjects of the condemnation; and the Fifth GeneralCouncil, followed by later usage, describes as the "Three Chapters" the"impious Theodore of Mopsuestia with his wicked writings, and thosethings which Theodoret impiously wrote, and the impious letter which issaid to be by Ibas. " [2]

Justinian's edict was not favourably received: even the patriarchMennas hesitated, and the papal envoy and some African bishops brokeoff communion. The Latin bishops rejected it; but the patriarchs ofAlexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem gave their adhesion. Justiniansummoned Pope Vigilius; and a pitiable example of irresolution hepresented when he came. He accepted, rejected, censured, wascomplacent and hostile in turns. [Sidenote: The Fifth General Council, 553. ] At last he agreed to the summoning of a General Council, andJustinian ordered it to meet in May, 553. Vigilius, almost at the lastmoment, would have nothing to do with it. The patriarch ofConstantinople presided, and the patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandriaappeared in person, the patriarch of Jerusalem by three bishops. Theacts of the Council were signed by 164 prelates. The Council, like itspredecessors, was predominantly Eastern; but its decisions wereafterwards accepted by the West. The precedents of the earlierCouncils were strictly followed in regard to Rome: no supremacy wasallowed though the honourable primacy was not contested. [3]Justinian's letter, sketching the history of the controversy of theThree Chapters, {18} was read, but he did not interfere with thedeliberations. It was summoned to deal with matters concerning thefaith, and these were always left to the decision of the Episcopate. The discussion was long; and after an exhaustive examination of thewritings of Theodore, the Council proceeded to endorse the first"chapter, " by the condemnation of the Mopsuestian and his writings. The case of Theodoret was less clear: indeed, a very eminent authorityhas regarded the action of the Council in his case as "not quiteequitable. " [4] But the grounds of the condemnation were suchstatements of his as that "God the Word is not incarnate, " "we do notacknowledge an hypostatic union, " and his description of S. Cyril as_impius, impugnator Christi, novus haereticus_, with a denial of the_communicatio idiomatum_, which left little if any doubt as to his ownposition. [5] When the letter of Ibas came to be considered, it wasplainly shown that its statements were directly contrary to theaffirmations of Chalcedon. It denied the Incarnation of the Word, refused the title of Theotokos to the Blessed Virgin, and condemned thedoctrines of Cyril. The Council had no hesitation in saying anathema. 

Here its work was ended. It had safeguarded the faith by definitelyexposing the logical consequences of statements which indirectlyimpugned the Divine and Human Natures of the Incarnate Son. 

[Sidenote: The need for its decisions. ]

So long as human progress is based upon intellectual principles as wellas on material growth, a teaching body which professes to guard andinterpret a Divine Revelation must speak {19} without hesitation whenits "deposit" is attacked. The Church has clung, with an inspiredsagacity, to the reality of the Incarnation: and thus it has preservedto humanity a real Saviour and a real Exemplar. The subtle brainswhich during these centuries searched for one joint in the Catholicarmour wherein to insert a deadly dart, were foiled by a subtlety asacute, and by deductions and definitions that were logical, rational, and necessary. If the Councils had not defined the faith which hadbeen once for all delivered to the saints, it would have been dissolvedlittle by little by sentimental concessions and shallow inconsistenciesof interpretation. It was the work of the Councils to develope andapply the principles furnished by the sacred Scriptures. New questionsarose, and it was necessary to meet them: it was clear, then, thatthere was a real division between those who accepted Christianity inthe full logical meaning of the Scriptures, in the full confidence ofthe Church, and those who doubted, hesitated, denied; and it is clearnow that the whole future of Christendom depended upon the acceptanceby the Christian nations of a single rational and logically tenableCreed. This involved the rejection of the Three Chapters, as itinvolved equally the condemnation of Monophysitism and Monothelitism. From the point of view of theology or philosophy the value of the workof the Church in this age is equally great. The heresies which werecondemned in the sixth century (as in the seventh) were such as wouldhave utterly destroyed the logical and rational conception of thePerson of the Incarnate Son, as the Church had received it by divineinspiration. Some Christian historians may seem for a moment to yielda half {20} assent to the shallow opinions of those who would refuse togo beyond what is sometimes strangely called the "primitive simplicityof the Gospel. " But it is impossible in this obscurantist fashion tocheck the free inquiry of the human intellect. The truths of theGospel must be studied and pondered over, and set in their properrelation to each other. There must be logical inferences from them, and reasonable conclusions. It is this which explains that strugglefor the Catholic Faith of which historians are sometimes impatient, andjustifies a high estimate of the services which the Church ofConstantinople rendered to the Church Universal. 

It is in this light that the work of the Fifth General Council, to betruly estimated, must be regarded. It will be convenient here tosummarise the steps by which the Fifth General Council won recognitionin the Church. 

In the first place, the emperor, according to custom, confirmed whatthe Council had decreed; and throughout the greater part of the Eastthe decision of Church and State alike was accepted. In 553 there wasa formal confirmation by a synod of bishops at Jerusalem; but for themost part there was no need of such pronouncement. African bishops andSyrian monks here and there refused obedience; but the Church as awhole was agreed. 

[Sidenote: Pope Vigilius. ]

Pope Vigilius, it would seem, was in exile for six months on an islandin the Sea of Marmora. On December 8, 553, he formally anathematisedthe Three Chapters. On February 23, 554, in a _Constitution_, heannounced to the Western bishops his adhesion to the decisions {21} ofthe General Council. Before the end of 557 he was succeeded, on hisdeath, by Pelagius, well known in Constantinople. He, like Vigilius, had once refused but now accepted the Council. 

When Rome and Constantinople were agreed, the adhesion of the rest ofthe Catholic world was only a question of time. But the time was long. In North Italy there was for long a practical schism, which was nothealed till Justin II. Issued an explanatory edict, [6] and the genius, spiritual and diplomatic, of Gregory the Great was devoted to the taskof conciliation. Still it was not till the very beginning of theeighth century[7] that the last schismatics returned to union with theChurch: thus a division in the see of Aquileia, by which for a timethere were two rival patriarchates, was closed. Already the rest ofEurope had come to peace. 

[Sidenote: The Aphthartodocetes. ]

The last years of Justinian were disturbed by a new heresy, that ofthose who taught that the Body of the Lord was incorruptible, and itwas asserted that the emperor himself fell into this error. Theevidence is slight and contradictory, and the matter is of noimportance in the general history of the Church. [8] But it is worthremembering that little more than a century after his death his namewas singled out by the Sixth General Council for special honour as of"holy memory. " His work, indeed, had been great, as theologian and asChristian emperor; there was no more important or more accurate writer{22} on theology in the East during the sixth century; and he must everbe remembered side by side with the Fifth General Council which hesummoned. There were many defects in the Eastern theory of therelations between Church and State; but undoubtedly under such anemperor it had its best chances of success. 

[Sidenote: The work of Justinian. ]

Justinian has been declared to have forced upon the Empire which he hadreunited the orthodoxy of S. Cyril and the Council of Chalcedon, andthe attempt has been made to prove that Cyril himself was aMonophysite. [9] The best refutation of this view is the perfectharmony of the decisions of the Fifth General Council with those of theprevious Oecumenical assemblies, and the fact that no novelty could bediscovered to have been added to "the Faith" when the "Three Chapters"were condemned. 

With the close of the Council the definition of Christian doctrinepasses into the background till the rise of the Monothelitecontroversy. When its decisions were accepted, the labours ofJustinian had given peace to the churches. 

[Sidenote: and his successors. ]

From 565, when Justinian died, to 628, when Heraclius freed the Empirefrom the danger of Persian conquest, were years of comparative rest inthe Church. It was a period of missionary extension, of quietassertion of spiritual authority, in the midst of political trouble anddisaster. Gibbon, who asserts that Justinian died a heretic, adds, "The reigns of his four successors, Justin, Tiberius, Maurice, andPhocas, are distinguished by a rare, though fortunate, vacancy in theecclesiastical history {23} of the East"; and the sarcasm, though notwholly accurate, may serve to express the gradual progress of unitywhich marked the years up to the accession of Heraclius. The historyof religion is concerned rather with those outside than those withinthe Church. That history we need not follow, and we may pass over thisperiod with only a brief allusion to the development of independenceoutside the immediate range of the ecclesiastical power of New Rome. [Sidenote: Rise of separated bodies. ] Heresies grew as an expression ofnational independence. The Chaldaean Church, which stretched to Persiaand India, was Nestorian. The Monophysites won the Coptic Church ofEgypt, the Abyssinian Church, the Jacobites in Syria, the Armenians inthe heart of Asia Minor. In the mountains of Lebanon theMonothelites--of whom we have to speak shortly--organised the MaroniteChurch; and in Georgia the Church was aided by geographical conditionsas well as historical development to ignore the overlordship of theChurch of Antioch. So in Europe grew up with the new States, theBulgarian, the Serbian, and the Wallachian Churches. 

[Sidenote: Missions and failures. ]

It was thus that, alike as statesmen and Christians, the emperors weredevoted advocates of missions. Their wars of conquest often--asnotably with the great Emperor Heraclius--assumed the character of holywars. Where the barbarians of the East made havoc there too often theChurch fell without leaving a trace of its work. Without priest andsacrament, the people came to retain only among their superstitions, assometimes in North Africa to-day, usages which showed that once theirancestors belonged to the kingdom of Christ. Much {24} of themissionary work of the period was done by Monophysites; the record ofJohn of Ephesus preserves what he himself did to spread Christianity inAsia. And it would seem that even the most orthodox of emperors waswilling to aid in the work of those who did not accept the Council ofChalcedon so long as they earnestly endeavoured to teach the heathenthe rudiments of the faith and to love the Lord in incorruptness. 

[Sidenote: Organisation of the Church. ]

The Church of the period was divided into five patriarchates, theChurch of Cyprus being understood to stand apart and autocephalous. Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch still retained their oldpower, while Jerusalem was regarded as somewhat inferior. Thepatriarchates were divided into provinces, the capital of each provincehaving its metropolitan bishop. Under him were other bishops, andgradually the title of archbishop was being understood, --as byJustinian in the decree (Novel, xi. ) in which he created his birthplacea metropolitan see, --to imply jurisdiction over a number of suffragansees. Besides this there were still sees autocephalous in the sensethat they owned no superior or metropolitan bishop. It would seem fromthe _Synekdemos_ of Hierocles (c. 535) that in the sixth century thepatriarch of Constantinople had under him about thirty metropolitansand some 450 bishops. But the authority which the patriarch exercisedwas by no means used to minimise that of the bishops. If the influenceof the Imperial Court on the patriarchate was always considerable andsometimes overwhelming, Justinian was careful to preserve theindependence of the Episcopate and {25} to order that the first stepsin the election of bishops should be by the clergy and the chiefcitizens in each diocese. And, as a letter of S. Gregory shows, thebishops were elected for life; neither infirmity nor old age wasregarded as a cause for deposition, and translation from see to see wascondemned by many a Council. All the clergy under the rank of bishopmight marry, but only before ordination to the higher orders. In theEast it would seem that the number of persons connected in some waywith ecclesiastical office was very large. Even excluding themonks, --a numerous and continually increasing body--the hermits, theStylites (who remained for years on a pillar, where they even receivedCommunion, in a special vessel made for the purpose), the differentorders of celibate women--there was still a very considerable number ofpersons attached to all the important churches, in different positionsof ministry. The famous poem of Paul the Silentiary on S. Sophiarevels in a recital of the number of persons employed as well as in thebeauty of the magnificent building itself. 

In architecture, indeed, the Byzantine Church of the sixth century wassupreme. No more glorious edifice has ever been consecrated to theservice of Christ than the Church of the Divine Wisdom atConstantinople; and the arts which enriched it in mosaic, marble, metals, were brought to a perfection which excited the wonder ofsucceeding centuries. Before we end this sketch of the history of agreat age in the life of the Eastern Church, a word must be said aboutits most splendid and enduring memorial. Among the most strikingpassages in the {26} chronicles of the age are the famous descriptionsby Procopius and by Paul the Silentiary of the splendours of the greatchurch of Constantinople in the sixth century after Christ. [Sidenote:S. Sophia at Constantinople. ] In the wonderful art of mosaic, as it maybe seen to-day in some of the churches of the New Rome, in S. Sophia--though much there is still covered--and in the Church of theChora, the West, with all the beauty that we may still see in Ravenna, was never able to equal the East. In solemn grandeur of architecturefitted for open, public, common worship, expressive of the profoundestverities of Christ's Church, it would be difficult to surpass the workof the great age of Byzantine art. Of this S. Sophia, the Church ofthe Divine Wisdom, at Constantinople, built by the architects of theEmperor Justinian in the sixth century, is the most magnificentexample. There the eye travels upward, when the great nave is enteredfrom the narthex, from the arches supporting the gallery to those ofthe gallery itself, from semi-domes larger and larger, up to the greatdome itself, an intricate scheme merging in a central unity. "Thelength and the breadth and the height of it are equal" is theexclamation which seems forced from the beholder: never was there achurch so vast yet so symmetrical, so admirably designed for theparticipation of all worshippers in the great act of worship. And thesplendid pillars, brought from Baalbek of the old heathen days, wroughton the capitals with intricate carvings, with emblems and devices andmonograms, the finely decorated doors, and the gigantic mosaic seraphimon the walls, still in the twentieth century dimly image something ofthe glowing worship of the {27} sixth. Then the "splendour of thelighted space, " glittering with thousands of lights, gave "shine untothe world, " and guided the seafarers as they went forth "by the divinelight of the Church itself. " Traveller after traveller, chroniclerafter chronicler, records impressions of the glory and beauty thatbelonged to the great Mother Church of the Byzantine rite. Historically, perhaps no church in the world has seen, at least in theMiddle Ages, so many scenes that belonged to the deepest crises ofnational life. From the day when the great emperor who built itprostrated himself before God as unworthy to make the offering of somuch beauty, to the day when Muhammad the conqueror (says the legend)rode in over the heaps of Christian dead, it was the centre, and themirror, of the Church's life in the capital of the Empire. And that iswhat the worship of the East has always striven to express. It isimmemorial, conservative beyond anything that the West can tolerate orconceive; but it belongs, in the present as in the past, to the closestthoughts, the most intimate experiences, of men to whom religion isindeed the guide of life. The Church of S. Sophia, the worship of theEast, are the living memorials of the great age of the great Christianemperor and theologian of the sixth century. 

And the fact that this building was due to the genius and power not ofthe Church, but of Justinian, leads us back to the significance of theState authority in the ecclesiastical history of the East. 

As it was said in England that kings were the Church's nursing fathers, so in the Eastern Empire might the same text be used in rather adifferent {28} sense. The Church was in power before the Empire wasChristian; but the Christian Empire was ever urgent to proclaim itsattachment to the Church and to guarantee its protection. The imperiallegislation of the great lawgiver began always in the name of the Lord, and the code emphasised as the foundation of society and civil law theorthodox doctrines of the Trinity and of Christ. And step by step thegreat emperor endeavoured, in matters of morality and of gambling, toenforce the moral laws of the Church. Works of charity and mercy wereundertaken by Church and State, hand in hand, and the noble buildingswhich marked the magnificent period of Byzantine architecture were theworks of a society which, from the highest to the lowest member, waspenetrated by Christian ideals. Thus, very briefly, we may epitomisethe work of the first period we have mentioned. A word must be saidlater of later times. 

[1] Mansi, _Concilia_, ix. 384. The phrase was preserved in the Hymn'_O onogenês_, which was inserted in the Mass, and the composition ofwhich is ascribed to Justinian himself. 

[2] Mansi, ix. 181. 

[3] Cf. Nicaea, Canon vi. ; Constantinople, Canons ii. And iii. ;Ephesus, Canon viii. ; Chalcedon, Canons ix. And xvii. 

[4] Dr. W. Bright, _Waymarks in Church History_, p. 238. 

[5] See Hefele, _History of the Councils_ (Eng. Trans. ), iv. 311. 

[6] Given in Evagrius, v. 4. 

[7] A. D. 700, Mansi, _Concilia_, xii. 115. 

[8] See Gibbon, ed. J. B. Bury, vol. V. Pp. 139, 140, 522, 523; and W. H. Hutton, _The Church of the Sixth Century_, pp. 204-240, 303-309. 

[9] Cf. Harnack, _Dogmengeschichte_, ii. Pp. 396, 396, 399, etc. 

{29}

CHAPTER III

THE CHURCH IN ITALY, 461-590

[Sidenote: The end of the Empire in the West, 476. ]

The death of S. Leo took place but a few years before the Roman Empirein the West became extinguished, and political interests entirelysubmerged those of religion in the years that followed it. Dimly, beneath the noise of the barbarian triumph, we discern the survival inRome of the Church's powers and claims; but it is not till the rise ofanother pope of mighty genius that they claim any consideration asimportant. In 461 died S. Leo; in 476 Romulus Augustulus, the last ofthe continuous line of Western Caesars, surrendered his sceptre to theHerul Odowakar. The barbarian governed with the aid of Romanstatesmen: he fixed his seat of rule at Ravenna rather than at Rome: heshowed consideration to the saintly Epiphanius, Bishop of Pavia:heretic though he was, he desired to keep well with the Catholicbishops of Rome. After him came a greater man, Theodoric the Goth, whose capture of Ravenna, March 5th, 493, was followed by theassassination of Odowakar. [Sidenote: Theodoric the Goth, 493. ]Theodoric, also an Arian, became sole ruler of Italy. He too wasserved by Roman officials, and his administration was modelled on thatof the Caesars. A special interest attaches to his {30} dealings withthe Church. The king, indeed, Arian though he was, looked on theCatholic Church with no unfriendly eye. His great minister, Cassiodorus, was orthodox: and it is in his writings, which enshrinethe policy of his master, that we must search for the relations betweenChurch and State in the days before Belisarius had won back Ravenna andItaly to the allegiance of the Roman Caesar. 

The letters of Cassiodorus supply, if not a complete account, at leastvery valuable illustrations, of the position assumed by the East Gothicpower under Theodoric and his successors in regard to the Church. Thefavour shown by the Ostrogoth sovereign to Cassiodorus, a staunchCatholic, yet senator, consul, patrician, quaestor, and praetorianpraefect, is in itself an illustration of the absence of bitter Arianfeeling. [Sidenote: His relation with the Catholic Church. ] Thisimpression is deepened by a perusal of the letters which Cassiodoruswrote in the name of his sovereign. The subjects in which the Churchis most frequently related to the State are jurisdiction and property. In the latter there seems a clear desire on the part of the kings togive security and to act even with generosity to all religious bodies, Catholic as well as Arian. Church property was frequently, if notalways, freed from taxation. [1] The principle which dictated the wholepolicy of Theodoric is to be seen in a letter to Adila, senator andcomes. [2] "Although we will not that any should suffer any wrong whomit belongs to our religious obligation to protect, since the freetranquillity of the subjects is the glory of the ruler; yet especiallydo we desire that all churches {31} should be free from any injury, since while they are in peace the mercy of God is bestowed on us. "Therefore he orders all protection to be given to the churches: yetanswer is to be made in the law courts to any suit against them. For, as he says in another letter, "if false claims may not be toleratedagainst men, how much less against God. " Again, "If we are willing toenrich the Church by our own liberality, _a fortiori_ will we not allowit to be despoiled of the gifts received from pious princes in thepast. "

It was on such liberality that the material power of the Church wasslowly strengthening itself. Similarly, as in the East, clericalprivilege was beginning to be allowed in the law courts: the Church wasacquiring the right to judge all cases in which her officers wereconcerned. Theodoric's successors bettered his instructions. Athalaric allowed to the Roman pope the jurisdiction over all suitsaffecting the Roman clergy. 

[Sidenote: Weakness of the Church. ]

But this picture of toleration and privilege which we obtain from theofficial letters of Cassiodorus, cannot be regarded as a completedescription of the attitude of the East Gothic rule towards theCatholic Church. Pope after pope was the humble slave of the Gothicruler. They were sent to Constantinople as his envoys, and though theystood firm for the Catholic faith and in rejection of all compromisewith regard to the doctrine of Chalcedon, they were entirely impotentin Italy itself. Catholic Italy was at the feet of the Arian Goth. The cruel imprisonment of Pope John, used as a political tool in 525and flung away when he proved ineffective, gave a new martyr to theRoman calendar; and, in spite of {32} the absence of direct evidence, it is difficult to regard the executions of Symmachus and of Boethiusas entirely unconnected with religions questions. Both were Catholics;both, to use Mr. Hodgkin's words, [3] "have been surrounded by a halo offictitious sanctity as martyrs to the cause of Christian orthodoxy. "The father-in-law, "lest, through grief for the loss of his son-in-law, he should attempt anything against his kingdom, " Theodoric "caused tobe accused and ordered him to be slain. " [4] Boethius, who wrote themost famous work of the Early Middle Age, _The Consolation ofPhilosophy_, a book which became the delight of Christian scholars, ofmonks and kings, was translated by Alfred the West Saxon, and formedthe foundation of very much of the Christian thought of many succeedinggenerations, met a horrible death in 526 on a charge of correspondingwith the orthodox Emperor Justin. No doubt the main reason for thebutchery was political; but it is impossible in this age wholly toseparate religion from politics; especially when we read, in almostimmediate conjunction with the story of the murder of these men, thatTheodoric ordered that on a certain day the Arians should takepossession of all the Catholic basilicas. It was not until the Gothicpower had finally fallen, and Narses had reestablished the imperialpower, that the life and property of Catholics were absolutely safe. 

The death of Theodoric (August 30, 526) was followed by the downfall ofhis power. Within ten years all Italy was won back to the Roman andCatholic Empire ruling from the East. 

{33}

[Sidenote: The imperial restoration, 554. ]

With the restoration of the imperial power the Church came to the frontmore prominently. So long as Justinian reigned the popes were kept insubjection; but ecclesiastics generally were admitted to a large sharein judicial and political power. The emperors looked for theirstrongest political support in the Catholic party. Suppression ofArianism became a political necessity at Ravenna. Justinian gave toAgnellus the churches of the Arians. [Sidenote: The PragmaticSanction. ] In 554 the emperor issued his solemn Pragmatic Sanction forthe government of Italy. Of this, Section XII. Gives a power to thebishops which shows the intimate connection between State and Church. "Moreover we order that fit and proper persons, able to administer thelocal government, be chosen as _iudices_ of the provinces by thebishops and chief persons of each province from the inhabitants of theprovince itself. " This is important, of course, as allowing popularelections, but far more important in its recognition of the position ofthe clerical estate. Justinian's new administration of Italy was to bemilitary; but hardly less was it to be ecclesiastical. Here we have, says Mr. Hodgkin, [5]--whose words I quote because I can find nonebetter to express what seems to me to be the significance of thisact--"a pathetic confession of the emperor's own inability to cope withthe corruption and servility of his civil servants. He seems to haveperceived that in the great quaking bog of servility and dishonesty bywhich he felt himself to be surrounded, his only sure standing-groundwas to be found in the spiritual estate, the order of men who wielded apower {34} not of this world, and who, if true to their sacred mission, had nothing to fear and little to hope from the corrupt minions of thecourt. " This is significant in regard to the rise of the power of thepopes in the Western capital of the Empire and in the whole of Italy. It was by the good deeds of the clergy, and by the need of them, thatthey came forward before long as the masters of the country. 

This rule of the Pragmatic Sanction was not an isolated instance; atevery point the bishop was placed _en rapport_ with the State, with theprovincials, and with the exarch himself. [6] In jurisdiction, inadvice, from the moment when he assisted at a new governor'sinstallation, the bishop was at the side of the lay officer, tocomplain and even, if need be, to control. 

One power still remained to the emperor himself (in the seventh centuryit was transferred to the exarch)--that of confirming the election ofthe pope. Narses seated Pelagius on the papal throne; but when one asmighty as the "eunuch general" arose in Gregory the Great, the power ofthe exarchate passed, slowly but surely, into the hands of the papacy. The changes of rulers in Italy, the policies of the falling Goths andof the rising Roman Empire, found their completion in the effects ofthe Lombard invasion. But before this there were thirty years ofgrowth for the Church, and the growth was due very largely to a newforce, though for a while it remained below the surface. It was thepower of the monastic life, realised anew by the genius and holiness ofS. Benedict of Nursia. {35} [Sidenote: The work of S. Benedict. ] Bornabout 480, of noble parentage, he gave himself from early years toserve God "in the desert. " At about the age of fifteen he is spoken ofby his biographer, the great S. Gregory, in words which might form themotto of his life, as "sapienter indoctus. " First, a solitary atSubiaco; then the unwilling abbat of a neighbouring monastery, whosemonks endeavoured to kill him; then again living "by himself in thesight of Him who seeth all things"; at last, in 529, he founded inCampania the monastery of Monte Cassino, the mother of all the revivedmonasticism of the Middle Age. 

[Sidenote: His rule. ]

The monastery of Monte Cassino became a pattern of the religious life. S. Benedict was a wise and statesmanlike ruler, to whom men came withconfidence from every rank and every race, to be his disciples, or toplace their boys under him for instruction. The rule which he drew upwas as potent in the ecclesiastical world as was the code of Justinianin the civil. It had its bases in the root ideas of obedience, simplicity, and labour. "Never to depart from the governance of God"was his primary maxim to his monks; and a monastery was to be a "schoolof the Lord's service" and a "workshop of the spiritual art. " Thebeginning of all was to be prayer. "Inprimis ut quidquid agenduminchoas bonum, a Deo perfici instantissima oratione deposcas. " Andthough absolute power was left, without appeal, in the hands of theabbat, and the rule of the whole house was to be "nullus in monasterioproprii sequatur cordis voluntatem, " yet great individual liberty wasleft to each monk in the direction of his own religious {36} life. Everyone, he knew, had "his own gift of God"--some could fast more thanothers; some could spend more time in silent prayer and meditation; andnone could do any good, he knew, however strict their outer rule, without daily enlightenment from God. There was place in his schemefor those whose work was chiefly manual, those who reclaimeduncultivated lands and turned the wilderness into a garden of the Lord, and for those who spent long hours in contemplation and prayer. Thepublic solemn singing of offices was no more characteristic of his rulethan was the following of the hermits in pure prayer. 

One who would be admitted to the monastery must take oath before thewhole community that he intended constantly to remain firm in hisprofession, to live a life of conversion to God, and to obey those setover him, but the last only "according to the rule. " True monks werehis followers to count themselves only if they lived by the labours oftheir hands. Idleness, said Benedict, is the enemy of the soul. Thelife of the monks was ascetic, but without the extreme rigour of theearlier "religious"--hermits and coenobites. The rule requiredausterities, and gave strict injunction as to food at all times, andespecially in Lent; but it did not encourage voluntary austeritiesbeyond the rule, and it admitted many relaxations for the old, theinfirm, or those whose labours were especially hard. 

Where all depended so much on a superior it was of especial importancethat he should be wisely chosen and should rule wisely. In threethings he was to be pre-eminent--exhortation, example, and prayer; andprayer, says the saint, is the greatest of these; for {37} althoughthere be much virtue in exhortation and example, yet prayer is thatwhich promotes grace and efficacy alike in deed and word. He was torecognise no difference of social rank. Good deeds and obedience wereto be the only ways to his favour. Only if exceptional merit requiredpromotion was there to be any breach of the proper order in which eachshould hold his place, "since, whether slaves or free, we are all onein Christ, and, under the same Lord, wear all of us the same badge ofservice. "

In a cell hard by the monastery dwelt Benedict's sister, S. Scholastica, whose religious life he directed, but whom he rarely saw, and who became a pattern to nuns as he to monks. 

[Sidenote: Its wide influence. ]

The influence of Benedict was, even in his own lifetime, extraordinary. There were times when it might almost be said that all Italy looked tohim for guidance; and there is no more striking scene in the history ofthe decaying Gothic power than when the cruel Totila, whose end heforesaw, and the secrets of whose heart lay open to his gaze, visitedhim in his monastery and heard the words of truth from his lips. When, fortified by the Body and Blood of the Lord, he passed away with handsstill uplifted in prayer, he had created a power which did more thanany other to make the Church predominant in Italy. The rule, thedefinite organisations, of monasticism came to the world from Italy andfrom Benedict. Though the Benedictines were never actively papalagents, yet indirectly, by their training and by their influence on thewhole nature of medieval religion, they formed a strong support for thegrowing power of the Roman see. 

{38}

But Benedict was not the only leader, though he was the greatest, inthe monastic revival of the sixth century. With another great name hiswork may be placed to some extent in contrast. 

[Sidenote: Scholarship and learning. ]

S. Benedict was no advocate of exclusively ecclesiastical study. Headapted the ancient literatures to the purposes of Christian education. It is true that the main subjects of study for his monks were the HolyScriptures, and the chief object the edification of the individual bymeditation and of the people by preaching; but the monks learnt towrite verse correctly and prose in what had claims to be considered astyle. Yet what he himself did in that direction was little indeed. Perhaps the most that can be said is that he left the way open to hissuccessors. And of these the greatest was Cassiodorus. 

[Sidenote: Cassiodorus. ]

Cassiodorus, the statesman, the orthodox adviser and friend of theArian Theodoric, lived to become a Christian teacher and a monk. Thefriend of Pope Agapetus, he endeavoured with his sanction in 535 to setup a school in Rome which should give to Christians "a liberaleducation. " The pope's death, a year later, prevented the scheme beingcarried out. But a few years later, in the monastery of Vivarium nearSquillace, he set himself to found a religious house which shouldpreserve the ancient culture. Based on a sound knowledge of grammar, on a collation and correction of texts, on a study of ancient models inprose and verse, he would raise an education through "the arts anddisciplines of liberal letters, " for, he said, "by the study of secularliterature our minds are trained to understand the Scriptures {39}themselves. " That was the supreme end at Squillace, as it was at MonteCassino; and though Cassiodorus looked at letters differently fromBenedict, his work, too, was important in founding a tradition forItalian monasticism. 

[Sidenote: Weakness of the papacy under Pelagius, 555-60. ]

While monasticism was transforming Italy and placing Catholicism on afirm basis in the Western lands of the Empire, the power of the papalsee, when Rome was reconquered by the imperial forces fromConstantinople, seemed to sink to the lowest depths. The papacy underVigilius (537-55) and Pelagius (555-60) was the servant of theByzantine Caesars. The history of the controversies in which each popewas engaged, the scandal of their elections, there is no need to relatehere. Suffice it to say that the decisions of the Fifth GeneralCouncil were in no way the work of either, but were eventually acceptedby both. The self-contradictions of Vigilius are pitiable; and theacceptance of Pelagius by the Romans was only won by his rejecting aformal statement of his predecessor. 

Consecrated only by two bishops[7] on Easter Day, 556, he began apontificate which was from the first disputed and even despised. TheArchbishop of Milan and the patriarch of Aquileia would not communicatewith him. In Gaul he was received with suspicion, and he was obligedto write to King Childebert, submitting to him a profession of hisfaith. [8] It is clear that the Gallican Church no more than the Lombardregarded {40} the pope as _ipso facto_ orthodox or the guardian oforthodoxy. Even this letter of Pelagius was not regarded assatisfactory. It was long before the Churches entered into communionwith him; and even to the last, the northern sees of Italy refused. Heruled, unquietly enough, for four years; and died, leaving a memoryfree at least from simony, and honoured as a lover of the poor. 

Under him, as under Vigilius, the papacy had been compelled to submitto the judgment of the East. "The Church of Rome, " says Mgr. Duchesne, "was humiliated. " [9]

The lives of these two popes cover the most important period in theecclesiastical history of the sixth century. After the death ofPelagius I. , and up to the accession of Gregory the Great in 590, theinterest of Italian history is political rather than ecclesiastical. The emperors tried to rule, through their exarchs at Ravenna, fromConstantinople. The papacy grew quietly in power. Then came theLombards and a new era began. 

[1] So _Var. _, i. 26, ed. Mommsen, p. 28. 

[2] ii. 29, p. 63. 

[3] _Italy and her Invaders_, vol. Iii. P. 516. 

[4] _Anonymus Valesii_. 

[5] _Italy and her Invaders_, vol. Vi. P. 528. 

[6] Instances are collected by M. Diehl, _Études sur l'administrationbyzantine dans l'exarchat de Ravenne_, p. 320. 

[7] Et dum nou essent episcopi qui cum ordinarent, inventi sunt duoepiscopi, Johannes de Perusia et Bonus de Ferentino, et Andreaspresbiter de Hostis, et ordinaverunt eum. --_Liber Pontificalis_, i. 303. 

[8] Migne, Patr. Lat. , tom. Lxix. P. 402. 

[9] _Revue des Questions Historiques_, Oct. 1884, p. 439. 

{41}

CHAPTER IV

CHRISTIANITY IN GAUL FROM THE SIXTH TO THE EIGHTH CENTURY

A very special interest belongs to the history of Christianity in Gaul. There is no more striking example of what the Church did to bridge overthe gulf between the old culture and the barbarians. 

[Sidenote: Roman Gaul. ]

Among early Christian martyrs few are more renowned than those who diedin Southern Gaul. Paganism lived on, concealed, in many countrydistricts, but the life and power and thought of the people became bythe time of Constantine, by the fourth century, entirely Christian. Asthe state organised so did the Church. Gaul had seventeen provincialgovernments; it came to have seventeen archbishops, and under thembishops for each great city. On the Roman empire and the ChristianChurch the foundations were laid; and they were laid firm. 

[Sidenote: The barbarian invasions. ]

At the beginning of the fifth century a terrible storm swept over theland. It was the storm of Teutonic invasion. Vandals, Burgundians, Alans, Suevi poured over the land; the Huns followed them, only to bebeaten back by a union of the other tribes. Then, after the Battle ofChâlons (451), there gradually rose out {42} of the Teutonic conquerorsthe conquering power of one tribe, that of the Franks. 

[Sidenote: The Church in Gaul. ]

By the first ten years of the sixth century Gaul was united again, under the rule of Chlodowech (Clovis), King of the Franks. Till wellon in the Middle Ages it was that title which the rulers of Gaul alwaysbore, "Rex Francorum, " King of the Franks. France to-day still datesher existence as a nation from the baptism of Clovis. It was that, hisadmission into the Catholic Christianity of the Gauls over whom heruled, which enlisted on the side of the Frankish power all the cultureand civilisation which had never died out since the Roman days. Underthe fostering care of the Church it had survived. Brotherhood, charity, compassion, unity, all the great ideas which the Churchcherished, were to work in long ages the transformation of the Frankishkingship. And when Chlodowech became king under the blessing of theChurch, which had survived all through these centuries since it wasplanted under the Romans, the fusion of races soon followed. TheFrench nation as we now know it is not merely Celtic, or Gaulish, butRoman too, and lastly Frankish--that is, Teutonic. 

[Sidenote: The baptism of Chlodowech, 496. ]

The history of the baptism of Chlodowech is one of the most dramatic inthe annals of the early Middle Age. His wife, Chrotechild, was theniece of the Burgundian king, and she was a devout Catholic. Slowlyshe won her way to his heart. Never, said the chroniclers, did shecease to persuade him that he should serve the true God; and when inthe crisis of a battle against the Alamanni he called her words tomind, he vowed to {43} be baptised if Christ should give him thevictory. The legend adorns the historic fact that Chlodowech wasbaptised by S. Remigius at Rheims, on Christmas Day, 496, and that somethree thousand of his warriors were baptised with him. "Bow thy neck, O Sigambrian, " said the prelate, "adore that which thou hast burned andburn that which thou hast adored. " Within a generation all races ofthe Franks had followed the Frankish king. 

[Sidenote: The dark days of the Merwings. ]

The years that followed were full of growth. But for long theChristianity which was nominally triumphant was imperfect indeed. Chlodowech died in 511; his race went on ruling, Catholic in name butvery far from obedient to the Church's laws. The tale of theirsuccessors, their wars and their crimes, is one which belongs to socialor political history, not to the history of the Church. The Church'slife was lived underground in the slow progress of Christian ideas. Chlothochar, sole ruler of the Franks, died in 561. How little had thehalf-century accomplished. Then came an age of division, murders, horrors, in which the names of great ladies stand out as at least theequals of their lords in crime. Predegund, who became the wife ofChilperich of Neustria, and Brunichildis, the wife first of Sigebert ofAustrasia, and then of Merovech, Chilperich's son, were rivals inwickedness. The horrors of those days are recorded in the history ofGregory, who ruled over the see of Tours from 573 to 595. It was anage in which, while the rulers were Christian in name, and the land wasmapped out into sees ruled by Christian bishops, and monasteries werespringing up to teach {44} the young and to set an example of religiouslife, the general atmosphere was almost avowedly pagan. Men said, tells Gregory, that "if a man has to pass between pagan altars andGod's church there is no harm in his paying homage to both, " and thelives of such men showed that it is impossible to serve God and Mammon. 

Yet for a century and a half the Merwings, descendants of Chlodowech, had among them strong rulers, great conquerors, men of iron as well asmen of blood. Early in the seventh century, from 628 to 638, thereruled in Gaul Dagobert, the greatest of the Merwing kings. His ruleextended from the Pyrenees to the North Sea, from the ocean to theforests of Thuringia and Bohemia. He was "ruler of all Gaul and thegreater part of Germany, very influential in the affairs of Spain, victorious over Slavs and Bulgarians, and at home a great king, encouraging commerce and putting into better shape the law codes of hissubjects. "

[Sidenote: Break up of their kingdom. ]

That was the culmination of the Merwing power. The seventh century sawits decay, and a new step towards the medieval monarchy of the Franks. Two causes effected the fall of the Merwings--their own vices and thegrowth of feudalism with the creation of great local lords. Thesethreatened to break up the kingdom of Chlodowech into small states, todisintegrate and thus destroy the united nation of the Franks. 

The first cause is one which it is difficult to exaggerate. We read inthe pages of that great historian and great bishop, Gregory of Tours, the terrible tale of their crimes, their brutal luxury, their lust forblood, the {45} unbridled licence of their passions. That was therecord of the days of their decay. There was, however, even at thebest a great change from the times of Roman rule. For civilisation, literary culture, law, we find substituted in the pages of Gregory ofTours savagery, scenes of brutality, drunkenness, robbery. Law andcivilisation seem to sleep. It was in this state of the country, whenevery man's hand was against his neighbour, when law was unheard amidthe strife, that feudalism arose, a natural development of the desirefor self-preservation, which led to associations to supply the mutualprotection which there was no strength behind the law to enforce. Inall these movements the Church had an active part. [Sidenote: Theinfluence of the Church. ] It was her principles of association whichtaught men the idea of unity, of bonds by which personal securityshould be based on new guarantees amid the weakness of government andthe neglect of law. The Church held the tradition of a civilisationthe barbarians had never known, and in her own moral teaching she setforth the way to an ideal state which should combine all the elementsof strength. The growth of the Frankish nation was guided almostentirely by the Church. 

Feudalism, Roman administration and law, Christian faith anddiscipline--these three factors were at work throughout the Dark Agesfrom the fifth to the ninth century: and they were all--the last twomost especially--under the direction of the Church. And first and mostobviously the monarchy of the Merwings was a patent imitation of theRoman Empire. The clergy had maintained the imperial tradition. Itwas they who taught the sovereigns to replace the emperors {46} and toproduce around them the illusion of a Roman rule. They employedofficers with the same titles, centred their administration in theirhousehold, claimed and exercised unlimited power. No power above themdid they recognise, save only, when they would listen to theirteachers, the power of the love--more often the fear--of God. Thebarbarian invasions that had swept over the land had destroyed thelocal, as well as the central administration. At Arles survived therelics of the old Roman functionaries of the prefecture; but in theland of the Franks the whole system had to be reconstructed from thetradition of which the Church was the faithful guardian. 

[Sidenote: Relations with the Eastern Empire. ]

Thus the real aim of Chlodowech and his successors was not to conquerthe Roman Empire, not to substitute a Teutonic power for a Roman one;but to take the place of the empire in Gaul, to succeed to itsheritage, to re-establish its authority, under Frankish kings. Thuswhen the Empire of the West had ceased to be, the Frankish kings soughttitles and alliances from the emperors who still ruled atConstantinople. It is a significant characteristic, indeed, of theMerwing monarchy that it kept up close relations with the distant RomanEmpire in the East, that the Frankish kings professed to be the loyalallies, as they were often the formally adopted sons, of the Romanemperors and the consuls of the republic. 

The Frankish kings, by their Christianity, imperfect though it was, were admitted to fellowship with the central power of the Christianworld, with emperor at Byzantium and pope at Rome. 

"Gaul was really independent of the empire in all {47} respects, " [1]and it is not there that we should seek for ecclesiastical relationswith Constantinople. But there can be no question that the Catholicismof the Franks owed something to Eastern influences. There are pointsin the Gallican ritual which are distinctly Byzantine, and must belongto this period. Chlodowech, as an ally rather than a subject, and notleast, perhaps, because he was a Catholic, received the dignity of theconsulate from Anastasius. [2] And in the reign of the great Justinianthe Merwings looked to the emperor for recognition and support. Theodebert, his "son, " accepted a commission to propagate the Catholicfaith in the imperial name. [3] Bishops, too, who might be in need ofadvice and consolation, applied naturally to Constantinople. Nicetius, Bishop of Trier, that "man of highest sanctity, admirable in preaching, and renowned for good works, " [4] persecuted by Chlothochar and hismen, wrote naturally to the holy and orthodox emperor, "dominus sempersuus. " In the midst of barbarities scarce conceivable, [5] the finestcharacters were trained by the simple verities of the Catholic faith, to which they clung with an extraordinary tenacity. Nor is thisanywhere more strongly shown than in the history of the Franks. Of themeaning of the great struggle of Catholicism against Arianism, and ofits immense personal value, the histories afford many instances. Thereis an eloquent passage in {48} [Sidenote: The strength of the Catholicfaith among the Franks. ] Mr. Hodgkin's _Italy and her Invaders_[6]which I cannot forbear to quote. "In the previous generation bothBrunichildis and Galswintha had easily conformed to the Catholic faithof their affianced husbands. Probably the councillors of Leovigildexpected that a mere child like Ingunthis would without difficulty makethe converse change from Catholicism back into Arianism. This was everthe capital fault of the Arian statesmen, that, with all theirreligious bitterness, they could not comprehend that the profession offaith, which was hardly more than a fashion to most of themselves, wasa matter of life and death to their Catholic rivals. Here, forinstance, was their own princess, Brunichildis, reared in Arianism, converted to the orthodox creed, clinging to it tenaciously through allthe perils and adversities of her own stormy career, and able to imbuethe child-bride, her daughter, with such an unyielding devotion to thefaith of Nicaea, that not one of all the formidable personages whom shemet in her new husband's home could avail to move her by one hair'sbreadth towards 'the Arian pravity. '"

It was the strength of the Catholicism of those who were trained in itand by it, seen in Spain and Gaul as well as in Italy, which drew theFrankish churchmen naturally towards the great witnessing power of theRoman bishop. The pontificate of Gregory the Great affords significantillustrations of this influence. 

From 595 the letters of S. Gregory show a continual interest in Gaul. A good deal of it is personal, concerned with the management of papalestates or with {49} the relations of particular persons towards thepope himself. [Sidenote: Gregory the Great and Gaul. ] But Gregory wascareful to assert a very special connection between Rome and the "landsof the Gauls" in all ecclesiastical matters. The Roman Church was themother to whom they applied in time of need. [7] Gregory gave thepallium to Vergilius, bishop of the ancient city of Arles, and with itthe position of papal vicar within the kingdoms of Burgundy, Austrasia, and Aquitaine. He recognised the terrible laxity of the GallicanChurch: the clergy were negligent, simoniacal, vicious; laymen wereoften consecrated to the episcopate. He gave counsel freely to thekings: Childebert he warmly commended: Brunichild, whose tenaciousadherence to the Catholic faith he knew, while he probably knew butlittle of her personal character, he wrote to with paternal affection, granted the pallium at her request and that of Gallican bishops to S. Syagrius, Bishop of Autun, and appealed to her as one who had the willas well as the power to reform abuses, remove scandals, and destroypaganism. He set himself determinedly to work against the taint ofmoney which hung over the whole Church. He earnestly pleaded for theexpulsion of "these detestable evils, " for the summoning of a synodwhich should reform the whole Church. He pleaded in vain; but his workwas not without lasting results. He founded the alliance between thepapacy and the Frankish kings which was to be so fruitful in laterhistory. And he founded it not with a political but with an entirelyreligious object. Through the court he hoped to reform the Church. Hesaw how closely Church and State were {50} linked together, and hethought that he could make the kings act as rulers who set the Church'sinterest always first. It has been well said that his work, though theChurch long remained corrupt, was not in vain. "He succeeded inestablishing a regular intercourse between himself and the churches ofGaul, especially in the cities of the east and south; he fixed atradition of friendship between the apostolic see and the Frankprinces; he held up an ideal of Christianity before a savage andhalf-pagan people; and he caused the name of bishop to be once morereverenced in a land where it had grown to be almost synonymous withavarice, lawlessness, and corrupt ambition. If Gregory did no morethan this he accomplished enough. Though his work was not rich indefinite results at the moment, yet afterwards, in the reign ofCharlemagne, its effects became manifest. " [8]

[Sidenote: Relations of the Frankish Church with Rome. ]

At the same time the Frankish Church undoubtedly maintained a positiondistinctly independent of Rome. Arles never really became a papalvicariate. Gregory's endeavours were fruitless in practical result. [9]The Gallican churches continued to be governed by their bishops, withevery degree of local variety, not by the pope. Gregory rather setforth an ideal than established a subordination. His influence waspersonal not constitutional, and it was not strong. Yet in the daysbetween Gregory and Charles the Great the links connecting Rome withGaul were not weakened. Later on they were to be strengthened stillmore by the growth of a reformed monasticism, which gave support {51}to the papacy while yet it looked to the popes for guidance. Butmeanwhile the influence of individual ecclesiastics in Gaul must not beforgotten. As was so often the case in medieval Europe, an age ofwickedness presents, in the chronicles and biographies, a very largeproportion of lives which received the praise of sanctity. Bishops, anchorites, monks, often, it would seem, rose far above the standard oftheir day: men noted their lives with awe and remembered them withreverence. They moved in a society of curious complexity. 

[Learning at the court of the Merwings. ]

Venantius Fortunatus, who dedicated his poems to Gregory the Great, andwas "the great man of letters of his age, " was a poet, but a Christianpoet--a writer of letters, but a close friend of holy souls, andnotably of S. Radegund, the exiled princess and saint. [10] We learnfrom him that even in those days of blood there was a literary societyat the Frankish courts, and the savage king Chilperich made pretence tobe a writer, a theologian, and even a poet, though Gregory of Toursassures us that he had not the least notion of prosody. 

Venantius Fortunatus and his literary friends, Chilperich and hisobsequious courtiers, link us to another and more notable name. To onebishop, who achieved canonisation, we owe very much of what we know ofthe history of those times. 

Gregory of Tours wrote memoirs which "are those of a man who has playeda great part in the State. At the same time he has the sense forinteresting {52} things, miracles, and adventures, which is sometimeswanting in historians. " [11]

[Sidenote: Gregory of Tours. ]

We learn from his books that he had been trained in classic learning, and that the bishops of the day did not turn aside from the paganclassics. It is quite clear that his education was not merelytheological or even exclusively Christian. Other writers he refers to, but with Vergil he certainly was familiar. And it is difficult tobelieve that he stood alone, bitterly though he complained of theignorance of his contemporaries. The very fact that Gregory the Greatdenounced the custom of bishops studying and teaching classical grammarand classical fables, shows that the education of those days was notvery closely confined. And of its results, seen also in a goodly listof clerical men of letters, Gregory of Tours is perhaps the bestexample. 

He was before all things a bishop; he wrote indeed, as a French writerhas happily said, "en évêque"; but he was also a statesman and a verykeen observer of life. From his pages we learn how slight had been theimpression that Christianity had yet made on the lives of barbarousmen. We see kings still wondering that God's power could be greaterthan their own, yet when they were awoke to terror by the thought ofdeath flying in craven fear to the feet of the minister of God. Thewhole history is a tale of treacheries and murders, of quarrels and ofsins among men and women pledged to God; and yet it is evident thatbehind the cruelty and crime there was a new spirit at work, slowlytransforming society by the conversion of individuals. It was atransformation {53} which was going on all over Europe; nowhere at thistime, perhaps, more conspicuously than in Gaul and in Ireland. Thereare many parallels between the Celtic "age of saints" and the Merwingage of sinners. It is difficult to learn the full truth about either;but out of the darkness comes the conspicuous witness of individualsaints. Of one or two of these a word may be said. Most notable isone who served both Ireland and Gaul. 

[Sidenote: S. Columban (540-615). ]

The figure of the great Irish monk Columban is a light in the darknessof the gross and cruel Merwing age. Born about 540, he died in 615, after a life of achievement and hardness such as was given to few ofhis time. He died at Bobbio, crowned with the halo of heroism andsanctity; but he was born in distant Ireland, and the main work of hislife had been to introduce into Gaul the monastic movement which wasled in Italy by S. Benedict. During the intellectual and moralweakness which the barbarian invasions brought upon the West the Churchin Ireland appeared to stand forth resplendent in the security of herfaith and virtue and in the cultivation of learning. In the warmCeltic nature the Gospel, so late introduced, had found a natural home. The monasteries which rose all over the land, with the huts of hermitsand the cells of anchorites, were the seed-plots of religion and sacredlore. The community life of Christian religious was naturally graftedon to the old Druid stock. The tribes of the Goidels became themonasteries; the head of the family was the abbat; the country lookedeverywhere to the monks for leadership. Thus Armagh and Emly, Clonard, Ennismore, Clonfert, Clonmacnoise, {54} Bangor, arose to teach andgovern the Church. Their monks lived by severe rule, based, no doubt, upon the customs of the East, of Egypt or Syria, most strict in theabasement of the selfish will, in penitence, in work, in prayer. "Goodis the rule of Bangor, " said the ancient sequence, "strait, austere, holy, and just. " It was this rule, with the enthusiasm which markedall classes for religion and for knowledge, which inspired S. Columbanin his great work. It was a work whose keynote was sacred study andwhich found its harmony in monastic service. S. Columban was the type, the representative _par excellence_, of the Irish monk, in his highidealism, his thirst for self-sacrifice, his adventurous and missionaryspirit. 

[Sidenote: His work in Gaul. ]

He was trained at Bangor, but there he could not stay. He was firedwith the determination to spread the Gospel over sea, among the Gaulswho, under a veneer of Christianity, still often lived a pagan life. There heathen superstitions still flourished, in worship of the oldgods, in veneration of trees and rocks and idols: the heathen moralswere hardly disguised. The Frankish society over which the Merwingsruled, the Gaul of Sigebert and Chilperich and Chlothochar, was stainedwith blood and lust. Apart from it altogether, it would seem, andexercising hardly any influence, were a few holy bishops and very manyisolated monasteries, the homes of prayer and renunciation andpenitence. In the sixth century it is said that some two hundredmonasteries were founded in Gaul; but their protest against the vice oftheir age was for the most part a silent one. Columban, when helanded, was to make a more effective protest against the luxury of thetime, {55} the ineffective, unmeaning faith in the forgiveness of sinsapart from renunciation of them, which marked the semi-Christiansociety into which he came. 

[Sidenote: Luxeuil and its rule. ]

Guntchramn, king of the Burgundians, gave him a settlement at Annegray, and afterwards at Luxeuil, where there grew up, on the site of anearlier Roman township, a monastery of stern and rigid rule. Eventually he added a third foundation at Fontaine; and he presidedover three houses, governing according to a rule which he himself drewup, after the examples of Clonard and Bangor. Its characteristic wasthe completeness of the self-denial aimed at; its motto the thought, "Think not of what thou art, but of what thou shalt be"; its governmentan autocracy depending wholly on the abbat; its scholarship not onlythat of the Bible, but of the Latin classics--of Horace and of Vergil. Its work was twofold. In the first place, it exemplified a strict lifeof obedience, self-sacrifice, and prayer, the home of which was everready to minister to sick souls without; and, secondly, it supplied thereligion of the age with a penitential system--in the penitential basedupon Irish models--which was of great influence in the secular andecclesiastical legislation of the future. Columban was not favourablyreceived by all the episcopate of his new country. They were men ofdifferent ideals, unacquainted with the culture which meant so much tohim; and their acceptance of the general Western custom of observingEaster caused a warm dispute with the Celtic monks. To Gregory theGreat and to the Gaulish bishops Columban alike appealed on behalf ofthe custom he had received; but finally, after more than thirty {56}years' residence in Burgundy, he consented to observe the Celtic customin silence, without endeavour to make converts to it. A more graveenemy at the beginning of the seventh century was the wicked youngBurgundian king, Theodoric, at whose court was his grandmother, Brunichild. His stern denunciations of vice, his refusal to recognisethe king's unlawful children, brought on Columban the fury of theoppressor, and he was ordered away from Luxeuil into a sort ofsemi-captivity at Besançon, and thence into exile. Long he wanderedthrough Gaulish lands, to Nevers, down the Loire to Nantes, whence itwas said that the ship refused to bear him back to Ireland. At last, after a meeting with Chlothochar, King of Neustria, whose rule over allthe Franks he had prophesied, he found refuge at Bregenz, by the lakeof Constance. With him were several of his monks, among them the S. Gall whose settlement in those lands has given the name to a canton ofwhat is now Switzerland. The long journey of the exiled monks, withtheir strange tonsure, their holiness, their alms, their works ofhealing, was a veritable mission. [Sidenote: Bobbio. ] The journeyeventually ended in Italy; the internecine strifes of the Merwingswhich ceased for the time in the union of the whole land of the Franksunder Chlothochar, left Columban without interest in Gaul, and theLombard sovereigns gave him a home at Bobbio, in the Apennines, wherehis monastery, aided by the holiness of Queen Theodelind, was a mightyinfluence in the conversion of Lombardy from Arianism. There, in 615, he died, the prophet of his age, the stern preacher of righteousness, the wise student, the faithful herdsman of souls. {57} Columban is agreat figure, of the chief facts of whose life there is no doubt. Itis not so with many others. 

[Sidenote: S. Wandrille. ]

S. Patrick belongs, we do not doubt, to true history; but there is nodoubt as to the richness of the legendary element in his life. Muchthe same is true of S. Wandrille. Few Englishmen, we suspect, haveheard his name; but he was a great figure in an age which Mabilloncalled golden in its religious aspect, the strange, wild time of theMerwings, the seventh century after Christ. In 648 S. Wandrillefounded the abbey of Fontenelle, in the district of Caux. He livedtill a great age, his death being probably much later than 667, towhich year it has been assigned. His career affords a very vividpicture of the monastic life of the time, standing out amid thedarkness of crime. He rightly emphasises the holiness and wisdom andlearning of the great bishops of the Merwing age. It was their work asleaders, missionaries, statesmen in the highest Christian sense whichthe monasteries were called upon to continue and perfect. Themonasteries were the refuge and the rallying-ground of those who foughtagainst the secularisation of the Church at the hands of theGallo-Roman aristocracy. S. Wandrille, born of the great Karlinghouse, was a leader among leaders, statesman among statesmen, monkamong monks. He was one who passed from a great though barbaric court, where he had been a trusted official, into the strictness of monastictraining, and then into the solitude of secluded communion with God. Such lives as his were the great attractive forces of the seventhcentury; such retreats as the valley of Fontenelle were the centres ofChristian influence of the age. 

{58}

Between these men and Gregory of Tours it might seem that there waslittle in common. But there were others whose lives combined theinterests of the two, the interests of monk and statesman and bishop. 

[Sidenote: S. Didier. ]

Another great clerk of the seventh century who must not be forgotten isS. Didier (Desiderius) of Cahors, at one time treasurer of ChlothocharII, and of Dagobert I. , the friend of saints like Eloi (Eligius), Ouen, and Arnulf. Through him we learn something of the religious life ofSouthern Gaul. He died probably in 655, and thus he represented theearlier part of the seventh century. His biographer gives a long listof the holy bishops who were his contemporaries, and of the churchesand monasteries which were scattered thickly over the land. The wholetone of his writing--earnest, biblical, spiritual, shows how theChurch, in spite of weakness and sloth and failure in some of her chiefmen, yet held up a standard of right and justice, purity and devotion, which penetrated all over the country, into castles and humblehomesteads, and profoundly affected the whole national life. And thiswork was concentrated in the public eye in those good men who at court, amid good and ill report, lived as servants of Him who went about doinggood. 

But while the Church was thus entering into all the national life, as asharer in its interests of every kind, it was the monastic ideal, therecan be little doubt, which ultimately exercised the greatest influenceon the Franks. The saints who won reverence were for the most partmonks. The work of Columban passed into the work of Benedict, and whenLuxeuil accepted {59} the Benedictine rule, and when the Council ofAutun in 670 declared it to be the rule for all monks everywhere, agreat step was taken towards the intimate union of Gaul with the restof Christendom in the things on which they had begun to set most store. 

[1] Bury, _History of the Later Roman Empire_, vol. I. P. 396. 

[2] Greg. Tur. , ii. 38 (Migne, _Patr. Lat. _, p. 236). 

[3] Bouquet, _Recueil_, tom. Iv. P. 59, epist. 15: cf. Gasquet, _L'Empire byzantin et la Monarchie franque_, p. 165. 

[4] Greg. Turon. , _Hist. Franc. _, x. 29 (Migne, p. 560): cf. Also his_Vitae Patrum_, 17. Hontheim, _Historia diplomatica_, i. 47. 

[5] Cf. Greg. Turon. , v. 3, on the frightful cruelty of Rauching. 

[6] Vol. V. P. 262. 

[7] S. Greg. , _Epp. _ v. 58. 

[8] F. H. Dudden, _Gregory the Great_, ii. 69. 

[9] Cf. E. Lavisse, _Hist. De France_, tome ii. P. 219, [10] M. Roger, _L'Enseignement des lettres classiques d'Ausone àAlcuin_, p. 100. 

[11] W. P. Ker, _The Dark Ages_, p. 125. 

{60}

CHAPTER V

THE PONTIFICATE OF GREGORY THE GREAT

[Sidenote: Gregory the Great. ]

About 540 was born in Rome, of a noble family, the great Pope Gregory, whose work was to place the papacy at the head of Italian politics, andto lay the lines on which papal action for many centuries was to bebased. When he was a child it might well have seemed that Italy undera strong Gothic rule would submit to the Arian teaching which the Statesupported. Theodoric endeavoured to make an united Italy; but theChurch knew that there could be no compromise on the doctrine of theperfect Godhead of the Lord Jesus, and her attitude preserved Italyboth for Catholicism and for the Empire. Gregory was taught as aCatholic, but he was taught also in classical grammar, composition, rhetoric, and the writings of the great Romans--pre-Christian, as wellas of later days. He began his life's work as a Roman official, and bythe year 573 he is found as prefect of the city. A year later, itwould seem, he became a monk, giving up all his property, all his signsof rank and wealth, all his power and place. Soon, if not at once, hecame to serve under the rule of S. Benedict, whose life he afterwardswrote, in the monastery dedicated to S. Andrew on the Caelian hill. 

{61}

[Sidenote: The Lombard invasion, 568. ]

It was the time when Italy was again at the feet of the barbarians. The Lombards, the last of the Teutonic nations to settle in the West, established at Pavia a kingdom which lasted for two centuries(568-774), and which again rent away much of the fair Italian landsfrom the unity of the Empire, leaving the Exarchate at Ravenna in astate half isolated and wholly perilous. 

[Sidenote: The effect on Italy. ]

Gradually the onward sweep of the new barbarians, who called themselvesArians, but were not strongly bound by any creed, swept away all powersave their own and the pope's. The destruction of Monte Cassino wastypical of one side of their work--the turning aside from Rome atGregory's intercession of another. The Empire struggled to retain itshold on Italy and to govern the Western world from Ravenna, withinstructions from the New Rome; but it failed. The papacy studied tobe quiet. And the close of the sixth century showed that power wouldreturn in the end to the city which had founded the Empire, and to theChurch which was now claiming to teach and to unite the nations. 

A period of papal insignificance was gradually ended by the progress ofnew ideals for the papacy. This came about in three ways. 

[Sidenote: The popes and the exarchate. ]

1. It was the aim of each pope to set up his power against that of theimperial exarchate, by which Italy was ruled after its reconquest byBelisarius and Narses. Gradually, step by step, the popes claimedcognisance of secular matters, intervened in politics, and stood forthas a leaders in Italian affairs. The imperial administration saw thedanger, and, from time to time, made definite {62} opposition to thepapal pretensions. It endeavoured to restore the unity of the Church, to secure the universal condemnation of the Three Chapters, but undersanction of Ravenna rather than of Rome. Thus the exarch Smaragdus, in587, led Severus, patriarch of Aquileia, before the Ravennate prelatesto make submission;[1] and later the emperor Maurice interfered topresent the pope compelling the patriarch to submission. But theseendeavours were futile; and the great Gregory, statesman andadministrator of the first order, made the papacy the most importantpolitical power in the western provinces of the Empire. In 599 thiswas apparent in Gregory's negotiation with the Lombard king, Agilulf. 

[Sidenote: The Benedictines in South Italy. ]

2. The papal influence was increased, and the Greek power diminished, by the direct replacement of Eastern monks by Benedictines. [2] Themonasteries founded by Greeks during the imperial restoration, nolonger replenished from Constantinople, fell into the hands of thegreat papal force founded by the greatest saint, and marshalled by thegreatest administrator of the century. 

[Sidenote: Missions from Rome. ]

3. And, lastly, the power of the papacy was at once evidenced andincreased by the revival of its missionary energy. What Pelagius II. Had stayed, Gregory the Great accomplished--conversion of England bythe mission of Augustine. Spain, too, was won from Arianism by apersonal friend of Gregory's, though without Roman intervention;[3] andwithin Italy itself the {63} pope began the great work of theconversion of the Lombards to the Catholic faith, with the fullteaching both of the Tome of Leo and of the Fifth General Council. Gregory sent the Acts of the Council to be taught to the little childAdalwald, the Lombard king. 

Thus in each of these three directions the progress of papal power isconnected with the influence of Gregory the Great. It is of his papacytherefore that we must speak as the critical point in the upwardmovement. Between 574 and 590 Gregory gained experience in many ways. To a strict monastic training he added, in 579, the employment of papalapocrisiarius (or envoy) at the imperial court at Constantinople. Herehe became intimate with the chief ecclesiastics, with Anastasius, whohad been deposed from the patriarchal see of Antioch, and who came toregard him as "the very mouth and lantern of the Lord, " with Leander ofSeville, who had come to lay the needs of the Catholic cause in Spainbefore the emperors, [4] and with the imperial family. [Sidenote:Gregory as abbat. ] About 586 he returned to Rome, and became abbat ofthe monastery in which he had formerly served. It was there that hecompleted his commentary, or _moralia_, on the book of Job, which hehad delivered as lectures at Constantinople, an epitome of Christiantheology and morals. It was then that he saw the bright lads fromDeira, who first turned his thoughts to the conversion of England. [5]The controversy of the Three Chapters was still lingering on in Italy, and it was Gregory who was given the task of inducing the Istrian {64}bishops to accept the decisions of the Fifth General Council. [Sidenote: Gregory elected Pope, 590. ] So skilful did he prove himselfas a controversialist, as an administrator, and as an adviser ofPelagius, that he was elected with enthusiasm to succeed that pope in590. 

[Sidenote: The pastoral rule. ]

His ideal of the pastoral office is set forth in that golden book, the_Liber regulae pastoralis_, in which he describes the life of a trueshepherd of the Christian people. A life of absolute purity anddevotion as therein sketched was that which made Gregory's pontificatenotable for its wisdom, its discretion, and its wise governance. Thepastoral office to him was one even more of the cure of souls than ofgovernment, and that idea is shown in all his letters. He wrote tokings, abbats, individual Christians, with the spirit of directencouragement and admonition, as a wise teacher dispensing instruction. In the Lateran he lived, as he had lived on the Caelian hill, a life ofstrict ascetic rule, wearing still his monastic dress, and living incommon with his clerks and monks. [Sidenote: Gregory's life. ] John theDeacon, who wrote his biography nearly two centuries after his death, says that "the Roman Church in Gregory's time was like that Church asit was under the rule of the apostles, or the Church of Alexandria whenS. Mark was its bishop. " Charity was by him developed into a greatscheme of benevolence organised with the minutest care and recorded indetail in books that were a model to later times. The political andecclesiastical cares of the papacy never prevented Gregory from what heconsidered the chiefest duty of his office, that of preaching. Hissermons, which were as famous as those of Chrysostom in Constantinople, were {65} direct in their appeal, vivid in their illustration, terseand epigrammatic in their expression. Paul the Deacon sums up his workby saying that he was entirely engrossed in gaining souls. 

[Sidenote: His statesmanship. ]

At the same time he was a statesman as well as a bishop. He governedthe "patrimony of S. Peter, " lands scattered over Italy and even Gaul, with a careful supervision, entering into minute matters as well asgeneral policy, freeing slaves, caring for the cultivation of land; andthe intimate knowledge which he thus acquired is shown in his_Dialogues_, which throw a flood of light on the life, secular as wellas ecclesiastical, of his age. Outside these districts, in purelyspiritual matters, he showed a constant vigilance. Everywhere what wasneeded seemed to be known to the pope, and everywhere he was planningto remedy evils, to build up the Church, to reform abuses, to convertheretics, to supply new bishops, to encourage the growth ofmonasticism. This activity extended not only to what were called thesuburbicarian provinces but to distant lands, such as Spain, Illyricum, Gaul, Africa, as well as to Northern Italy. Something has been said ofhis relations in Gaul, and remains to be said of his intervention inAfrica. His relations with Constantinople may be most significantlyillustrated by the dispute as to the title of the patriarch of New Rome. 

[Sidenote: The title "Universal Bishop. "]

In 588 the acts of a synod of Constantinople were declared by PelagiusII. To be invalid be-cause the patriarch used the title _oikoumenikos_or _universalis_. Just as at the Council of Chalcedon the Alexandrinerepresentatives styled the pope "oecumenical archbishop and {66}patriarch of the Great Rome, " so the patriarch of Constantinople usedthe style and dignity of "oecumenical patriarch. " It was one that hadbeen employed at least since 518, and it seems to have been commonlyused. From the use of this title came grave controversy. In 588 theacts of a synod of Constantinople were declared by Pelagius II. To beinvalid because the patriarch used the title _oikoumenikos_ or_universalis_: and in 595 Gregory the Great strongly condemned the useof such a phrase, at the same time repudiating its use for his own see. "The Council of Chalcedon, " he wrote, "offered the title of universalto the Roman pontiff, but he refused to accept it, lest he should seemthereby to derogate from the honour of his brother bishops. " [6] Andto the emperor Maurice he said still more distinctly, "I confidentlyaffirm that whosoever calls himself _sacerdos universalis_, or desiresto be so called by others, is in his pride a forerunner of Antichrist. "But the patriarchs continued to use the title, and before a century hadelapsed, the popes followed their example. 

[Sidenote: The province of Illyricum. ]

The relation of Gregory with the Church of Illyricum gives opportunityfor mention of that anomalous patriarchate. Somewhat apart from thegeneral Church history of the early Middle Age stands the province ofIllyricum. Its ecclesiastical status was even more ambiguous than itspolitical. On its borders, or within its limits, the patriarchate ofRome touched that of {67} Constantinople, and the claims of the two, sometimes at least conflicting, were complicated by the privilegesgiven by Justinian to his birthplace. In the tenth century it wasundoubtedly under the jurisdiction of Constantinople, in the seventh itappears to have been under that of Rome. In the Councils atConstantinople in 681 and 692, the Illyrian bishops appeared asattached exclusively to Rome; and so, it has been noticed, did those ofCrete, Thessalonica, and Corinth. In the sixth century there areinstances, though not numerous ones, of papal interference, in thenature of the exercise of judicial power, in the province of Illyricum;and at the end of the century Gregory the Great was especially activein his correspondence with the bishops. It would seem from one of hisletters that he counted even Justiniana Prima as under his authority, though the intention of the emperor was certainly not to make it so. This edict--for so it practically is--is interesting also because itappears to deal with all the ecclesiastical provinces of the empirewhich depended immediately on the Roman patriarchate. It omits Africa, and the fact that the popes did not send the pallium to the Bishop ofCarthage (the North African Metropolitan) shows that the popes did notclaim to confer jurisdiction, but merely to recognise a specialrelationship, by this act. [7] On the other hand, it is to be observedthat the code of Justinian contains a law of Theodosius II. Whichplaces the Illyrian bishopric under the jurisdiction of the patriarchof Constantinople. But this law is beset with many difficulties, andit has been {68} argued that it was merely the expression of atemporary rupture between the Empire and the papacy, which in theschism of 484-519 was gravely accentuated; and there are grounds forthinking that the bishops of Thessalonica exercised authority inIllyricum as delegates of Rome--yet rather from their political thantheir ecclesiastical associations. However this may be, there can beno doubt that the position given by Justinian to the city of his birthwas intended to be practically patriarchal, and that the Bishop ofThessalonica, whether vicar or not of the pope, was practicallyignored. The whole question is indeed a notable example of thedifficulties consequent on the close connection between religion andpolitics in the sixth century. 

[Sidenote: Gregory's claim to jurisdiction. ]

Gregory's action was that of a wise but masterful ruler, and it seemsto have been based on the view that all the bishops of the West weredirectly under his jurisdiction. Similar cases of interference are tobe found in regard to the churches of Istria, and to the great sees ofRavenna and Milan. In connection may be seen the claim to grant the_pallium_, a mark of honour which seems to have been gradually passinginto a sign of jurisdiction. [8] Gregory claimed for the successors ofS. Peter something like an apostolic authority, and he at leastsuggested a theory of the papal office which was capable of almostindefinite extension. Politic and religion here met together. WhenAirulf in 592 appeared before Rome the pope made a separate treaty withhim: he stepped into the {69} place of ruler of imperial Italy when hedisregarded the exarch and even the emperor, and entered intonegotiations on his own account; and up to the time of his death he waspractically responsible for the rearrangement of Italy. His letter tothe great Lombard queen, Theodelind, of whom memorials survive to-dayat Monza, show how the two sides of his position mingled; how he wasstatesman and diplomatist as well as priest and missionary. 

[Sidenote: His missions. ]

In his missionary interests he passed far outside Italy. The mostconspicuous example is the conversion of the English, which he had inearlier years been most anxious himself to undertake, and which wasbegun in 597 under his direction by Augustine; but it is not the onlyone. In Northern Italy, in Africa and Gaul, Gregory was active inseeking the conversion of pagans and heretics, and in endeavouring bygentle measures to lead the Jews to Christ. 

[Sidenote: His relations on monasticism. ]

More important still in the history of the papacy was Gregory's work inspreading, organising, and systematising monasticism. He insisted onthe strict observance of the rule of S. Benedict. Not only did hereform, but he very greatly strengthened, the monasticism of Italy. Conspicuously did his _privilegia_, granting or recognising aconsiderable freedom from episcopal control, start the monks on a newadvance. While not exempting them from the rule of bishops, he made itpossible for future popes to win support for themselves by grantingsuch exemptions. 

But Gregory's fame does not lie wholly in any of these spheres ofactivity. Great as a ruler and an {70} organiser, he was known also tolater ages, as to his own, for his theological writings. He was notonly a practical ruler and practical minister of Christ; he was also aleader in Christian learning--the last, as men have come to call him, of the four great Latin doctors. 

[Sidenote: His relations to learning. ]

The work of Gregory the Great was here as elsewhere far-reaching, butrather an organising than a formative one. Classical studies, in whichhe had been trained, he put aside; and when he did his utmost to spreadmonasteries over the length and breadth of Italy, it was not at all oflearning in a secular sense, but wholly of religion that he thought. Thus his own theology is primarily a biblical theology. The Bible wasto him the word of God. Like the author of the _Imitatio Christi_ inlater days, he did not care to argue as to the authorship of thedifferent books but to profit by what was in them. He was a greatexpositor, a great preacher, and that always with a practical aim. Ashe said, "We hear the doctrine words of God if we act on them. "[Sidenote: His doctrine of the church. ] In his more general theologicalwritings he sums up, with the precision of a master, not any newdoctrines or advances in speculation, but the theology of the Church ofhis age. And he is able thus to emphasise the crying need of unity inwords which state the claim of the Church for the conversion of thepagans and heretics of his day: "Sancta autem universalis ecclesiapraedicat Deum veraciter nisi intra se coli non posse, asserens quodomnes qui extra ipsam sunt minime salvabuntur. " Outside this there wasno hope of spiritual health. And this doctrine he based {71} on theunity of Christ's life with that of the Church: "Our Redeemer showedthat He is one person with the Church, which He took to be His own";and thus it was that "The Churches of the true faith set in all partsof the world make one Catholic Church, in which all the faithful whoare right minded toward God live in concord. " Thus he was, in theologyas in ecclesiastical politics, a concentrating and clarifying force;and when, on March 12th, 604, he passed to his rest, he had laid firmthe foundations of the medieval papacy, and in hardly less degree thoseof the theological system of the medieval Church. 

[1] _Paulus Diaconus_, iii, 26, ed. Waitz, pp. 105-7. 

[2] Diehl, _op. Cit. _, gives a list, p. 256. 

[3] Joannes Biclarensis, _Chronicon_ (Migne, _Patr. Lat. _, lxxii. 868). 

[4] See below, p. 76. 

[5] The _Vita Antiquissima_ (S. Gall. MS. ), by a monk of Whitby, doesnot represent them as slaves (pp. 13, 14), ed. Gasquet. 

[6] S. Greg. , _Epp. _, v. 18. The term _sacerdos_ is commonly used forbishop at this date. Thus Gregory of Tours calls a bishop _sacerdos_during this life, _antistes_ after his death. S. Gregory must not, however, be understood as disclaiming a papal supremacy. 

[7] The letter is Epp. Greg. (Jaffé), 1497; cf. Letter to Syagrius, Bishop of Autun. 

[8] It does not seem, from Bede i. 39, that, as has been asserted, itwas always necessary to apply for it. 

{72}

CHAPTER VI

CONTROVERSY AND THE CATHOLICISM OF SPAIN

[Sidenote: Pelagian controversy of sixth century. ]

Controversies which belong to this period are those connected withsemi-Pelagianism and with Adoptianism. Faustus, Bishop of Riez, whodied almost at the end of the fifth century, held views which wereopposed to those of S. Augustine as well as to those of Pelagius. Hiswritings were attacked by many, among them by Caesarius, Bishop ofArles from 501 to 542, who caused a synod at Orange in 529 to condemnsemi-Pelagian opinions, in a statement which declared that sufficientgrace is given to all the baptized (an expression which had animportant history centuries later). The writings of Faustus were thesubject of much discussion also at Constantinople, and they werecondemned by several of the popes. 

Of a wholly different kind was the heresy originating in the East, andprobably revived through the controversy of the Three Chapters, whichcame into prominence in the eighth century in Spain. It has beenthought that the exigencies of anti-Muhammadan controversy hadsomething to do with the importance which the question now assumed. The Spanish Church had a long record, in the Councils of Toledo, oforthodox and {73} strenuous adherence to the Christian faith; but itshowed also a strongly nationalistic spirit, and it was natural thatmuch should be developed, through antagonism to Muhammadanism and Arianinfluences, which would fall into danger of extreme reaction on the oneside or of unwise concession on the other. "Spanish Christianity, " ithas been said in a phrase which has become classical, "was a perpetualcrusade. " In Spain the Christian contest against sin and unbeliefbecame more often, or more constantly, than elsewhere an actualphysical struggle against those who distorted or denied the faith ofthe Church and those who trampled it under foot. This is, of course, most true of the ages which followed the Moorish invasions, of the longstrife between Christians and Moors, of the times and the thoughtswhich gave birth to the immortal literature of the peninsula, toCalderon and Cervantes, to Lope de Vega and S. Teresa of Jesus. But itis also true, though in a less degree, of the earlier times--of thosewhich extended from the introduction of Christianity--from themissionary visit, it may be, of S. Paul himself--down to thedestruction of the monarchy of the Wisigoths in 711. Spain was in 589won to Catholicism by the conversion of its king Reccared. But thiswas the end of a long and critical period, for from the acceptance ofArianism by Remismond in 466 the country was under the rule of princeswho were pledged to that error. 

The Wisigoths identified their heresy with their nationality. Thegeneral decadence of the Empire spread to Spain. The social system wasin a state of dissolution. The canons of the Councils show a {74}picture of life which is appalling in its corruption, but at the sametime are evidence of the earnest efforts of the Church for amendment. [Sidenote: The conversion of Spain. ] They show how Christianity hadpenetrated into the country districts, and how eager were the bishopsof the sixth century to do their spiritual duty far and wide. Side byside with the canons of Church Councils is the great Fuero Jusgo (inprocess of compilation from the fifth to the eighth century) inwitnessing to the efforts for a better state of things. During therule of the West Goths, persecution of Catholics had been frequent, butwhen Amalric married Hlothild, daughter of Chlodowech, promising hertolerance of her religion, a way was opened for a new life toorthodoxy. But Amalric broke his promise, and an invasion of Spain bythe Franks followed. In the reign of the Arian Theudis (531-48) therewas still more decisive intervention. Childebert and Chlothocharinvaded Spain and besieged Saragossa, but were driven back; and it wasnot till Athanagild called in the armies of Justinian that theconfusion and division of Spanish life; between orthodox and heretic, Roman and Goth, was healed in the slightest degree. The year 560witnessed the conversion of King Mir by Martin of Braga, and threeyears later, and again in 572, Councils at Braga witnessed to theCatholic faith of the Church. But it was an era of fightings andfears. The Roman armies of the Eastern Empire held the cities of thecoast long after Athanagild had come to be recognised as king of allthe Goths in Spain, but gradually unity was springing up under the ruleof that able chieftain. He died in 568, having married his daughters, Brunichild and Galswintha, to {75} the Frankish kings, Sigebert andChilperich. His successor Leovigild established a sway over all theWisigothic possessions and ruled from Nîmes to Seville. The wedding ofBrunichild, though sung by Venantius Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers, was but the beginning of crime and of sorrows; yet it led indirectly tothe conversion of Spain. Brunichild's daughter Ingunthis marriedLeovigild's son Hermenigild. She was bitterly persecuted as a Catholicwhen she came to Spain, but she clung to her faith with the devotion ofa martyr, and she won over her husband. [Sidenote: Hermenigild. ] AtSeville Hermenigild was for some time acting as king, under his father, and when he was threatened on his conversion with the loss of all hehad he took up arms. After a long contest he was subdued, and heunderwent a long persecution ending eventually in death when he refusedto receive communion at the hands of an Arian bishop on Easter Day, 585. [1] Ingunthis escaped to Constantinople. Then till 587 Arianismreigned supreme in Spain, and John of Biclaro, Catholic bishop ofGerona, writes as one crying in a wilderness. But Catholicism in Spainwas scotched, not killed, and when Reccared (586-601) called Arian andCatholic bishop alike before him, and after two years definitelyaccepted orthodoxy under the influence of his uncle Leander, Archbishopof Seville, it was not long before the whole of Council of Spainaccepted his decision and followed his example. [Sidenote: Council ofToledo, 589. ] This was in 587, and an {76} inscription shows that thecathedral church of Toledo was then consecrated in the Catholic faith. With the Council of Toledo (third synod of Toledo), 589, [2] whichaccepted the first four General Councils and the Procession of the HolyGhost from the Father and the Son, Spain returned to the unity of thefaith. From Reccared's reign, too, dates a civilisation distinctlytraceable to Constantinople and a recognition of absolute equalitybetween the different races in the peninsula. And to that golden agebelong also the great saint and preacher, Leander, who died in 603, andS. Isidore of Seville, the encyclopaedic writer, who died thirty-threeyears later. S. Leander had at Constantinople come to know Gregory theGreat. He was the chief theologian of Spain in his age, and his wordswelcomed and ratified the conversion. Thus the modern history of Spainand her most Catholic kings begins. The importance of the periodculminates in the compilation, almost final, of the great WisigothicCode, the Fuero Jusgo, at once civil and ecclesiastical, the result ofa union between Church and State even more perfect than thatrepresented in the English Witenagemot. 

The concentration of Spanish interests on theological questions ledbefore long to new developments, but meanwhile it helped the happytendency to unity which Recceswinth (652-72) confirmed by allowing theintermarriage which had long been forbidden--Recceswinth, whosesplendid gold crown, dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, still remainsamongst the most striking memorials of the Christian art of the seventhcentury. Wamba, his successor, established his supremacy in {77}Septimania by the capture of Nîmes from a traitorous vicegerent, andlived to show the sincerity with which the Wisigoths had accepted theidea of the sanctity of vows to God. During an illness, when he wassupposed to be incapable of recovery and remained in a stupor, hereceived the tonsure that he might die as a monk: when he recovered herefused to return to the world and abdicated the throne. Hissuccessors were equally strict, it would seem, in obedience to theChurch's laws, often unintelligently interpreted. 

[Sidenote: Persecution of the Jews. ]

To these days, too, belongs one of the first and darkest blots on thepopular Christianity of the Middle Age--the persecution of Jews. TheJews of Spain had long been restless under a government which was sostrongly ecclesiastical in its sympathies: persecuting laws oppressedthem, and they could hardly even in secret practise their religion. Plots were constant and natural, and at last it is said that the Jewsincited the Saracens, who had overthrown the imperial power in Africa, to cross the sea and strip from the weak Wisigoths of Spain the lastremains of their power. In 695 a Council at Toledo (the sixteenth)determined when the plot was discovered wholly to destroy the Judaicfaith in their land. It was ordered that all grown-up Jews should bemade slaves, and all children brought up as Christians. This was thevery year of the storming of Carthage. [3] It is not to be wondered atthat the Jews gave every help they could to the infidels who, beforelong, attacked the kingdom of the Wisigoths. Within twenty yearsSpain, up to the very mountains of the {78} Basque land and of theAsturias, was conquered by the followers of Muhammad, and silence fellupon the country which had appeared to be the home of an abiding Church. 

The splendid edifice which had seemed to be reared on the solidfoundations of religion and law was shattered by the repeated blows ofthe Arab invasion. Why was this? The chroniclers gave answer withouthesitation--"Peccatis exigentibus, victi sunt Christiani. " The Goths(as they proudly called themselves) "have so offended Thee, O Lord, bytheir pride, that they deserved a fall by the sword of the Saracen. "It was, in truth, as the great Sancho of Navarre declared in hischarter of foundation to the abbey of Albelda, "Our ancestors sinnedwithout scruple; they daily transgressed the commandments of the Lord, and so to punish them as they had deserved and to make them turn toHim, the Most Just of Judges delivered them to a barbarous people. " Intruth, the mass of the land had never been converted to CatholicChristianity at all, and a heretical society was powerless againstMoslem sincerity and swords. Only in the north was Catholicismsupreme, and thence came in later days the reconquest. But Catholicslived on all over Spain under their conquerors in comparative peace. 

[Sidenote: The Adoptianist heresy. ]

The Church survived. Persecution made its life strong and vigorous, and that life found outlet in new varieties of theological expression. Elipandus, Archbishop of Toledo, within seventy years of the Saracenconquest, became known outside his own land, with Felix, bishop of thenorthern see of Urgel, for his advocacy of the statement that {79}Christ's Sonship was that of adoption. Asserting the two Natures andthe two Wills of the Lord, the Adoptianists regarded Christ as only inHis divine nature truly the Son of God. Eager to assert the fullHumanity and to rebut the Muhammadan charges of idolatry, the Spanishtheologians taught that "one and the same Person was in two aspects aSon, in virtue of His relation to two different natures, " and that "theDivine Son of God, begotten from all eternity of the Father, not byadoption but by birth, not by grace but by nature--that He, when madeof a woman, made under the law, was Son of God, not by origin but byadoption, not by nature but by grace. " [4] It was an attempt to carryfurther the decisions adopted at Chalcedon and to account for theorigin of the two Natures, their completeness in distinction, and theirunion together. 

[Sidenote: Its condemnation. ]

Adoptianism was condemned at Regensburg in 792, and at Frankfort in794, and, under the influence of Alcuin, Felix made submission atAachen in 799. Elipandus, safe among the Saracens, held out in hisopinions. It would seem that the discussion represented theeighth-century expression of the age-long conflict between logic andmystery, the desire for exact definition, and the sense of somethingbeyond human understanding in what belongs to the nature of God, and tothe divine action in the Incarnation, the union of God and man. 

[Sidenote: Adoptianism in the East. ]

Adoptianism had in the East a greater success and a longer history thanin the West. In Syria and Armenia vast numbers joined the sectfounded, or revived, by one {80} Constantine in the middle of theseventh century. He lived near Samosata, and probably inherited theteaching of the earlier heretic, Paul of that place. The sect came tobe called Paulicians. They rejected the real divinity of Christ andplaced themselves in opposition to very much else which belonged to theearliest Christian tradition, as in their rejection of the OldTestament and the perpetual virginity of the Lord's Mother. Armeniabecame the headquarters of a large and prosperous sect, towards whichemperors alternately were persecuting or favourable. Nicephorus I. (802-11) was friendly to it, but his successor put it down withrelentless savagery; and after it had led to a formidable rebellion, its votaries were finally suppressed by the generals of Basil theMacedonian, 871. But its tenets lingered on in Thrace, whither it hadbeen transported when some of its disciples were expropriated byConstantine V. , till the eighteenth century, and still later in Armeniaitself. The authoritative book of the Armenian Paulicians, the _Key ofTruth_, has been thought to have been completed by one Smbat, ministerof Chosroes of Persia, whose date is 800-50, [5] but the history ofthose days is certainly very confused and may have been distorted. 

The intervention of Charles the Great in this controversy is but oneillustration of the importance of theological questions in the outlookof the reviver of the Empire in the Catholic West. Other theologicaldoctrines had a like interest in his view and in that of his house; andin some of them also Spain was concerned. At Toledo, in 589, Reccared, when he accepted the Catholic creed, had inserted his belief in {81}the double procession of the Holy Ghost. This was again discussed in767 at Gentilly, and at Aachen in 809. 

[Sidenote: The "Veni Creator. "]

Alcuin, as in the Adoptianist controversy, played a great part instating the view which the West was coming generally to accept. LeoIII. Was consulted, and advised that no addition should be made to theCreed for fear of widening the breach with the East. It would seemthat the great hymn, "Veni Creator Spiritus, " is the expression of thisdoctrine by the ninth century, and is the work of Rabanus Maurus, amonk of the famous house of Fulda. 

[Sidenote: The "Quicunque Vult. "]

While this sums up in devotional form the Christian thought as to oneof the mysteries of faith, the hymn of a character more distinctlycredal, called "Quicunque vult, " enshrines it in another aspect. The"Quicunque" has, indeed, a much earlier history. In 633 the FourthCouncil of Toledo quoted many of its clauses. Leodgar, Bishop of Autun(663-78), directed his clergy to learn it by heart; and it became a notuncommon profession of faith to be made by a bishop at hisconsecration. At the end of the eighth century it seems to have beenwidely recited in church. But it certainly goes back very muchearlier. Caesarius, Bishop of Arles (501-43), the opponent ofsemi-Pelagianism, has been proved to have used the creed continually:it was quoted also by his rival, Avitus, Bishop of Vienne (490-523), and it is probable that it represents the teaching of the great abbeyof Lerins in the controversies of the beginning of the sixth century. It was decisively a Western creed: it {82} never came into the officesof the orthodox Church of the East. In the West it became a popularmeans of instruction and a popular confession of the joy of Christianfaith. It was sung in procession, recited in the services, meditatedon by the clergy. It formed a model of orthodox expression of beliefin days of confusion and controversy. 

[1] This story is discredited by a recent writer, Mr. Dudden, _S. Gregory the Great_, i. 407 (following F. Görres), but I see no reasonto doubt that S. Gregory was rightly informed, and I accept what Dr. Hodgkin (_Eng. Hist. Rev. _, ii. 216) states as the facts. 

[2] Mansi, _Concilia_, ix. 977-1010. 

[3] See below, p. 109. 

[4] See B. L. Ottley, _Doctrine of the Incarnation_, ii. 152-4. 

[5] See F. C. Conybeare, _The Key of Truth_, p. 67. 

{83}

CHAPTER VII

THE CHURCH AND THE MONOTHELITE CONTROVERSY, 628-725

The years of peace that succeeded the death of Justinian ended with thetriumph of the Empire over barbarian foes. Christian philosophy hadseemed to be quiescent, but there were questions which thoughtful menmust have seen would soon come up for solution as the inevitable resultof the Monophysite controversy. Thought in the active Eastern mindscould not stand still; and the West too, as the barbarians wereconquered, assimilated, and converted by the Church, began to enterkeenly into the theology of the East. In Gaul and Britain, as well asat Milan and at Rome, there arose critics and historians who couldcarry on the work of Leo the Great and of the line of chroniclers whohad told in Greek the story of the Church's life. A word at first asto the general interest of the period. 

[Sidenote: The East in the seventh century. ]

With the victory of Heraclius over the Persians in 628, it might seemthat heresy would be driven from its home in the distant East, thatNestorianism would die out, and that Sergius I. , Patriarch ofConstantinople (610-38), would be able to win back the Monophysites tothe unity of the Church. But this happy result was {84} prevented bythe spread of the Muhammadan conquest, beginning even before the deathof the Prophet in 632, and by the rise of a new heresy--theMonothelitism which gave to the two Natures of our Lord but a singlewill. As the Mussulman arms spread the faith of Islam, the JacobiteChurch of Syria seemed almost to welcome it as a refuge from thedominance of orthodoxy. In Egypt the Coptic (Monophysite) patriarchentered Alexandria in triumph with the Muslim force when the Orthodoxpatriarch fled with the imperial troops. The Melkite (Orthodox) bodywas, however, not wholly unprotected by the conquerors, and atJerusalem it was allowed to remain in possession, though at Antiochthere was for long no Orthodox patriarch at all. Of the Monotheliteheresy--condemned at the Sixth General Council, 681--we may for themoment defer to speak, except to note that in the politicaldisturbances that swept over the Lebanon the heresy took root there, under one John Maron, and founded the division, religious andpolitical, of the Maronites, which still endures. 

[Sidenote: Missionary work. ]

But while the Church was thus suffering in various ways, the Byzantinemissionary energy was far from exhausted. Heraclius sought to convertthe barbarian tribes far and near, the Croats and Serbs, the Bulgariansand Slavs, and the Church of Constantinople appointed an official toinspect the districts on the frontiers and to examine candidates forbaptism. Equally he sought to reunite the Armenians to the OrthodoxChurch; but after interviews and theological discussions the opponentsof the Greeks triumphed, and the catholicos Nerses {85} III. In 645anathematised the Council of Chalcedon--a declaration which, after amomentary reunion, was renewed early in the eighth century. TheArmenian Church thus remained formally Monophysite. While the orthodoxemperors were thus unsuccessful in reuniting the separated Churches, the patriarchate of Constantinople was winning a strength within whichshe had lost without; the area of her confined jurisdiction wasstraitly ruled, and 356 bishoprics towards the end of the seventhcentury acknowledged the patriarchal throne. The emperors and theChurch alike recognised no supremacy of Rome--a fact which wasemphasised by the decree of 666 which declared Ravenna free from papaljurisdiction, and in the condemnation of Honorius by the Sixth GeneralCouncil. [Sidenote: The Trullian Council, 691. ] So, again, the Councilat Constantinople called _in Trullo_ (691), directed canon after canonagainst the customs and claims of the Roman Church. This independencewas emphasised by the compilation of a _Syntagma_, or collection ofcanons, parallel to the much later collection in the West. Thesecanons, it may be remarked in passing, throw most interesting light onthe customs of the Greek Church--on clerical marriage, for example, which was allowed to be dissolved only by the clergy of the recentlyconverted barbarous tribes, among whom a return to celibate life mightsometimes be advisable. 

So much for the general characteristics of the period 628-725. We maynow turn to the critical point of theology on which the ecclesiasticalhistory of the time turned. 

Monophysitism was not dead in spite of Chalcedon {86} orConstantinople. [Sidenote: The Aphthartodocetic controversy. ] TheFourth and Fifth General Council had still left points of debate forthose within as well as those without the Church. In the form which itwas asserted that Justinian had himself come to accept, it asserted theLord's Body to be incapable of sin or corruption, and only subject tosuffering by the voluntary exercise of His divine power. While theaccusations against Justinian in John of Nikiu and Nicetius of Trierare contradictory to each other, and make it clear that he did notaccept the opinion of Julian of Halicarnassus, they may serve toillustrate the confusion of thought with which these subjects werehandled. The followers of Julian, whose view has here been summarised, were nicknamed by those of the famous monk Severus (Monophysitepatriarch of Antioch in 513), "Aphthartodocetes" or "Phantasiasts. "Those who followed Severus, while they were prepared to recognise twonatures in Christ, yet dwelt strongly on their union, and especially onthe "one energy" of the Lord's will. From this a further step was tobe taken. There were some who believed in the transformation of thehuman nature into the Divine, and who came to be called _Aktistetes_, and, in a still further extreme, _Adiaphorites_, when they denied anydistinction between the Godhead and manhood in Christ. The error atthe root of all these contentions seems to have been the dwelling uponthe physical rather than the spiritual effects of the Divine powerrevealed in the incarnation of the Son of God. Theologians arose tocontrovert it and to develop the theological decisions of the Council;chief among them was Leontius of Byzantium, a philosophic apologist ofreal {87} eminence, whose work was taken up later and completed by Johnof Damascus. 

[Sidenote: The Emperor Heraclius as a theologian. ]

It is not to be wondered at that a great soldier, filled with a deepsense of the necessity of uniting the Empire against its foes, shouldbe led to accept a theological development which seemed to offer thehope of a reconciliation. From 622, under the advice of Sergius, as aPatriarch of Constantinople, a basis of reunion was sought in theformula that though the Lord had two Natures He had yet only "onetheandric energy. " The emperor Heraclius turned unwisely from the armyto the Church, which, like many able military men, he thought might becoerced or led into opinions which seemed to him to be common sense. For a time it appeared that he would succeed: three patriarchs ofConstantinople, one of Antioch, one of Alexandria, one of Rome(Honorius I. ), were in agreement, if a little tepidly, favourable tothe phrase. Honorius definitely stated that he confessed "_one_ WILLof our Lord Jesus Christ. " [1] [Sidenote: The Ecthesis, 638. ] OnlySophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (634), held out. In 638 the emperorissued the Ecthesis, [2] or Confession of Faith, drawn up by thepatriarch Sergius. It professed adherence to orthodox definitions, andcontinued, "Wherefore, following the Holy Fathers in all things, and inthis, we confess one Will of our Lord Jesus Christ, the very God, sothat never was there a separate Will of His Body animated {88} by theintellect, nor one of contrary motion natural to itself, but one whichoperated when and how and to what purpose He who is God the Wordwilled. " This statement was repudiated by Rome, and in 649 condemnedin a synod at the Lateran under Martin I. , who ended his days in exilefor disobeying the imperial power. The quarrel became one between Romeand Constantinople, at a time when the popes had recovered theirorthodoxy and the patriarchs were subservient to impetuous emperors. [Sidenote: The Type, 648. ] In 648 the _Type_ issued from New Rome as anattempt at pacification; but the Old Rome rejected it, with anathemas. In 680 a synod, under Pope Agatho, at which S. Wilfrith of Ripon waspresent and signed for the north part of Britain, rejected as heresythe doctrine of the two wills, and local councils (as at Hatfield sixmonths later) agreed with the rejection. 

[Sidenote: Sixth General Council, 681. ]

All this led on to the summoning of the Sixth General Council atConstantinople, which sat from November, 680, to September, 681. Thetemporary schism between Rome and Constantinople was healed. Agatho'sletter condemning the doctrine of the two wills was accepted; anathemawas laid upon those, dead or alive, who had accepted the heresy, andamong them Pope Honorius I. , a condemnation repeated by many a popeafter him. The Council declared that the Lord possesses two wills, "for just as the Flesh is, and is said to be, the Flesh of the Word, soalso His human will is, and is said to be, proper [natural] to theWord. " And also, "just as His holy and spotless ensouled flesh wastaken into God yet not annihilated, so His human will though taken intoGod was not annihilated. " Again, as so often in {89} the days ofJustinian, the words of S. Leo were appropriated for a definition ofthe orthodox belief. The Council was attended by 289 bishops, theemperor occupying the position which had been common since Nicaea, while on his right were the bishops of the East, on his left those ofthe West. Rightly was the doctrine of one will condemned as contraryto the Chalcedonian assertion of the Lord's perfect Humanity; and thecondemnation was readily accepted by the Church. Only in Syria, amongthe Maronites (followers of John Maro), did Monothelitism linger on forcenturies, till they became absorbed in the Latin Church. 

[Sidenote: The Monothelite controversy. ]

The chief opponent of Monothelitism was Maximus, whose _Disputationwith Pyrrhus_ remains the most important survival of the controversy. It is a subtle and rational exposition of the orthodox doctrine. Theoriginal phrase, _theandric energy_, from which the Ecthesis ofHeraclius started, seems to have been drawn from the unknown Platonistwho came to be called Dionysius the Areopagite, and whose writings hada continued influence in the Middle Age. But to all reasonablethinkers the main question was decided. The truth of Christ's humannature was an essential verity of the faith, and to deny His human willwould make His nature incomplete, and His goodness in any true senseimpossible. The difficulty would arise again when Luther and Calvincarried further the dispute concerning the nature of the human will, but as regards her Lord the Church had come to a decision based uponher knowledge of His divine life on earth. 

The Council _in Trullo_ (named from the {90} dome-shaped place ofmeeting), 691, called also _Quini-sextan_, summoned by Justinian II. (685-711), was not Oecumenical, and was disciplinary rather thandogmatic. It condemned many Roman practices, and asserted definitelythat the patriarchal throne of Constantinople should enjoy the sameprivileges as that of Old Rome, should in all ecclesiastical matters beentitled to the same pre-eminence, and should rank as second after it. The _Liber Pontificalis_, the Roman Church history of the time, statesthat the pope's legates gave assent to the decrees, which is unlikely. But this one was no more than the repetition of many previousstatements, as emphatic in the sixth as in the seventh century. Theposition was simply that claimed by the patriarch John when he signedthe formula of Catholic faith drawn up and proposed by Pope Hormisdas. [Sidenote: Repudiation of Roman claims. ] He insisted on prefixing arepudiation of the Roman claim to supremacy over Christendom. "Ihold, " he declared, "the most holy Churches of the Elder and the NewRome to be one. I define the See of the Apostle Peter and this of theImperial City to be one See. " By this it is clear that he designed toassert both the unity of the Church--which, as it has always seemed tothe East, was threatened by the demand of the Roman obedience--and theequality of the two great churches of the Old and the New Rome. 

Justinian I. Spoke of Constantinople as "head of all the churches"("omnium ecclesiarum caput"), but it is clear that he did not regardthis position as conferring any supreme or exclusive jurisdiction. Itwas a title of honour which he would use of other patriarchates; andthat he did not consider the power {91} of the patriarchates asunalterable is seen by his attempted creation of the new jurisdictionof his own city Justiniana Prima (Tauresium), a few miles south ofSofia, over a large district. To the archbishop whom he here createdhe gave authority to "hold the place of the apostolic throne" withinhis province. [3]

[Sidenote: Independent attitude of Constantinople. ]

This position, then, of the Byzantine patriarchate, as independent ofthe other patriarchates, and equal to that of the older Rome, butoccupying in point of honour a secondary position, was recognised byChurch and State alike; and it was this that the Council _in Trullo_reaffirmed. In another point it was divergent from Rome--that of themarriage of the clergy. Subdeacons, deacons, and priests wereforbidden to marry, but those married before ordination were equallyforbidden, under pain of excommunication, to separate from their wives. 

An attempt of the mad emperor Justinian II. To enforce the acceptanceof the decrees by Pope Sergius I. Was a complete failure. Popes werebecoming much stronger in Italy than was the distant Caesar. 

Rome was becoming independent of emperor and of exarch alike. In 711the pope Constantine visited Constantinople as an honoured guest, wherehe was treated with diplomatic politeness, and where, possibly afterthey had undergone modification, he signed the {92} decrees of theTrullian Council. On this point the papal biographer is silent, but heasserts with enthusiasm the reverence of the emperor for the pope andthe latter's regret when the bloody tyrant met the reward of his crimesa few weeks later. With this the ecclesiastical interest of Easternhistory is for a time in the background. 

[1] This is spoken of by a recent Roman Catholic writer as "ladéplorable réponse de Honorius, ce monument de bonne foi surprise et denaïveté confiante. " It does not support the notion of papalinfallibility. 

[2] Given in Baronius, A. D. 689. 

[3] See Procopius, _De Aedif. _, iv. 1 (ed. Bonn. , pp. 266, 267); and_Novellae_, xi. (de privilegiis archiepiscopi primae Justinianae) andcxxxi. (de ecclesiasticis canonibus et privilegiis), cap. 3. It is noalteration of patriarchal powers, but rather the assertion of them. Still patriarchal jurisdictions are not regarded as unalterable--as isclear from the creation of the modern national churches of the Balkanlands. 

{93}

CHAPTER VIII

THE CHURCH IN ASIA

[Sidenote: The Church in Persia. ]

In the East Christianity had spread to Persia from Edessa. [1] TheParthians seem to have put no obstacle in its way, but when thePersians came into conflict with the Roman Empire, now Christian, therewas long and bitter persecution. At last toleration was reached, afterSapor II. , and from the beginning of the fourth century the Church inPersia was organised, and governed by many bishops; the primate tookthe title of Catholicos and had his see at Seleucia, and had suffraganson both sides of the Persian Gulf. In Assyria and Chaldaea the mass ofthe population became Christians, and Christians were spread, lessthickly, over Media, Khorassan, and Persia itself. The dignity of thePersian catholicos was considerable; he might be compared with theByzantine patriarchs, and the Church almost occupied the position of anestablished religion, related to the civil power. But the distance, and the constant wars between the Empire and Persia, tended inevitablyto separate the Churches. From the end of the fifth century the Churchin Persia, surrendered to {94} Nestorianism, had begun visibly todecay. It was controlled by the Persian kings, it was a prey toendless controversy and intrigue, and when the Persian kingdom was atwar with the Empire it was in grave danger. It held councilsfurtively; it passed canons, and, itself heretical, condemned other andmore recent heresies than its own. But often its catholicos engaged inthe dynastic politics of the Persian dynasties, and Christianity, regarded as one among many religions, and tainted with the samematerialism as the rest, sank into impotence and was torn by schism. Meanwhile, in the neighbourhood of the Persian realm, Christianity wasspreading. 

[Sidenote: Growth of the Church under Justinian. ]

Many barbarous tribes during Justinian's reign were admitted to theChristian faith and fellowship. The Tzani dwelling on the border ofArmenia and Pontus, "separated from the sea by precipitous mountainsand vast solitudes, impassable torrent beds and yawning chasms, "[2]--in a land where, Procopius tells us, [3] "it is not possible toirrigate the ground, to reap a crop, or to find a meadow anywhere; andeven the trees bear no fruit, because for the most part there is noregular succession of seasons, and the land is not at one timesubjected to cold and wet, and at another made fertile by the warmth ofthe sun, but is desolated by perpetual winter and covered by eternalsnows. They changed their religion to the true faith, becameChristians, and embraced a more civilised mode of life. " The king ofthose Heruls who served in the Roman army, and a Hunnish king, Gordas, {95} became Christians. The Abasgi (or Albagrians) of the Caucasuswere converted, and for the most part remained associated with theArmenians and the Iberians of Georgia, [4] "when they were compelled bythe Persian king to worship idols, " put themselves under the imperialprotection, and they remained closely in connection with the ArmenianChurch till 608 when they accepted the decisions of Chalcedon. Theyremained independent and orthodox till their union, a century ago, withthe Russian Church. 

[Sidenote: Separation from the Church. ]

In Armenia, similarly, had grown up a national Church, which had acatholicos, a hierarchy, a vernacular liturgy of its own. When in themiddle of the fifth century the ancient kingdom was split up betweenthe Empire and the Persians, the Armenian Church still remained apart. Its national features were strongly marked even before dogmaticdifferences arose. With the Nestorian and Monophysite heresies newdivisions took place. The Persians gradually, between 435 and 480, accepted Nestorianism, and in 483 definitely separated from theCatholic Church, and Nisibis became a school of Nestorian theology. The Armenians survived this danger but were led into Monophysitism, andin 505 they pronounced against the Council of Chalcedon. Theirtheology became tainted with further heresy in the sixth century, andthey are still separate from the orthodox Church of the East. Thus, atthe time with which we have to deal, as we have said, Christianity eastof Antioch and on the borders of Persia was under Nestorian influence. After 431 Nestorianism became gradually established {96} as thedominant creed. The Church of the East, as it was officially called, rejected the Third General Council, and was cut off from the CatholicChurch. It long remained a strong body. The great schools of Nisibis, Edessa, and Baghdad were centres of religion, learning, andcivilisation. 

[Sidenote: The Nestorians. ]

The Nestorians[5] also sent out missionaries northward among thewandering Tartar tribes and along the shores of the Caspian; southwardto Persia, India and Ceylon; and eastward across the steppes of CentralAsia into China. The bilingual inscription of Singanfu, in Chinese andSyriac, relates that Nestorian missionaries laboured in China as farback as A. D. 636. [6] In the sixth and seventh centuries the Church ofthe East could count its twenty-five metropolitans or archbishops; andthe number and remoteness of their sees, stretching from Jerusalem toChina, testifies to her missionary zeal. Those who dwelt nearest toBaghdad met the catholicos in yearly synod; those farthest off senttheir confession of faith to him every sixth year. 

[Sidenote: Prester John and his conversion. ]

By the Middle Ages the Church of the East had spread over the whole ofCentral Asia. The curious legends of the powerful kingdom of PresterJohn, somewhere in the heart of Asia, grew out of the conversion, byNestorian merchants in the eleventh century, of a certain King ofKerait, a kingdom of Tartary to the north of China. This king is saidto have requested that missionaries might be sent to him from theChurch {97} of his converters; and, when they were come, thesemissionaries baptized him, naming him John, [7] and he was ordainedpriest (Presbyter or Prester). Two hundred thousand people of thenation embraced Christianity; the successors to the kingdom bore thedynastic name of John, and were ordained priests. However uncertainthis story is, the fact of the conversion of the princes of Kerait inTartary is sufficiently well established. [Sidenote: Height ofprosperity. ] The prosperity of the Church of the East culminated in theeleventh century. The khalifs of Baghdad protected their Christiansubjects, and important offices of state were often filled by them. 

The Indian Church, which was believed to date back to the time of S. Thomas the Apostle, had probably its origin in Nestorian missions, andaccepted Monophysite opinions. 

[Sidenote: Their missions]

As we have seen, the wider field of missionary work owed much to thelabours of the Nestorians. It is possible that Cosmas, [8] who hadtravelled far afield in the first half of the sixth century, may havebeen a Nestorian; but the reverence with which he speaks of theorthodox faith, and his constant use of the Catholic writers, wouldseem to show rather that, when he became a monk at any rate, he wasorthodox. From him, however, we obtain knowledge of the wide field ofNestorian missions. Recent discoveries have largely added to ourknowledge. It is clear that in the sixth century, {98} apparentlybefore 540, Nestorian bishoprics were founded in Herat and Samarkand. Monumental inscriptions date back as far as 547. [Sidenote: in the FarEast. ] Merv, as early as 650, is spoken of as a "falling church" [9]amid the triumphs of Islam. China has been already mentioned, andthough it is not clear that only Nestorian missions prospered in thefar land, there is no doubt that their success was the most prominent. Christian communities existed near the borders of Tibet[10] in theseventh century; and in the eighth and ninth they were strong in India. Even in the eleventh century the "Nestorian worship retained a greathold over many parts of Asia, between the Euphrates and the Gobidesert. " Into the later and fragmentary history of these missions itis not here the place to enter. Let it only be remembered that thelabours of "those Nestorian missionaries who preached and baptizedunder the shadow of the wall of China, and on the shores of the YellowSea, the Caspian, and the Indian Ocean" [11] were made possible by thediplomatic and military triumphs which radiated from Constantinople inthe sixth century, and by the Christian zeal of orthodox emperors andpatriarchs. 

[Sidenote: Nestorianism in Persia. ]

Meanwhile in Persia the Monophysites contended for supremacy with theNestorians, and organised themselves with considerable skill. But theNestorians, who founded schools and developed a Christology on linesdifferent from those on which European thought was {99} proceeding, became still more rigid in their rejection of the Catholic teaching. Maraba the catholicos (540-52) and Thomas of Edessa, his pupil, seem tohave drawn very near to orthodoxy; but the controversy of the ThreeChapters widened the breach. Council after council, theologian, catholicos, monastery, bishop, alike denounced Justinian; and they hadthe support of the pagan philosophers whom he had expelled from theschools of Athens. 

In Persia monasticism and the life of hermits--though the introductionof either is difficult if not impossible to trace[12]--flourished anddeveloped on lines of their own. For a long time there was nodistinction between monastic and secular life: it was only graduallythat an organised monasticism grew up out of the coenobitic life formen and for women. But from the sixth century onward the organisationof monasticism gave strength to the Church, and enabled it for sometime to resist the Muhammadan invasion. The Church, mapped out intodioceses and well served by numerous clergy, and having its own canonlaw, its own liturgical forms, and its own theology, was able for long, in spite of the absence of all state support and in spite often ofstate persecution, to survive in some appearance of strength till theMuhammadan invasion. The Mussulman conquest, when once it wasachieved, gave something like security to the Nestorians. Though therewas a time of persecution in the ninth century, it was short. Christians as teachers, physicians, philosophers, were famous in thefoundation of the learning of the palmy days of the khalifs. But thewhole {100} structure fell before the invasions, in later days, of theMongols and the Turks. 

[Sidenote: The Church in Palestine. ]

From the more distant parts of the Persian Empire we may pass to theland where the Church had its birth. During the period of revivedpower in the Empire, Palestine was at peace under Justinian's rule. 

In Jerusalem itself[13] it is chiefly to be said that the emperorengaged in large restorations and some original church building afterthe style of his better known work. He had a severe struggle with theSamaritans, but it led to many conversions. [14]

[Sidenote: Conquest by the Persians. ]

But here, as elsewhere, as time went on the encroachments of thePersians were a perpetual danger to the Christianity of the East. In615 Jerusalem fell into their hands. The Jews, whom earlier emperorshad, like Justinian, kept in subjection, had grown in the days ofHeraclius to be much more powerful in Syria than the Christians, and itwas they who secured Jerusalem and gave it into the hands of thePersians; and again, after the Christians had overpowered the garrison, the city was given back to them and to scenes of pillage and outrage;the churches, so splendid as early as the fourth century, and describedin glowing language by Procopius in the sixth, were sacked and defiled;the clergy and the patriarch were made captive; the Holy Cross, discovered by the Empress Helena, was sent away into Persia; and "allthese things, " says the chronicler, "happened not in a year or a month, but within a few days. " The ruined churches were, however, restored{101} before long by the alms of the faithful, and it was not longbefore the Christians themselves were favoured by the Persian king, andChosroes, in consequence of a council at Jerusalem in 628, legalised, it would seem, the Monophysite heresy as the representative ofChristianity. [Sidenote: Reconquest by Heraclius, 622. ] The conquestof Egypt followed on that of Syria; and the union of the Coptic Churchwith that of the Syrian Monophysites was a result, natural and almostinevitable, of the community of suffering between them. Within a fewyears--his campaign began in 622--the heroic emperor Heraclius won backall that had been lost, utterly defeated the Persians, won back theHoly Rood, restored the patriarch Zacharias to Jerusalem, and returnedin triumph to the imperial city. In 629 he went on a pilgrimage to theHoly City, and on September 14th--still observed as the feast of theExaltation of the Holy Cross--he restored the Rood to the Church of theResurrection. 

[Sidenote: Conquest by the Muhammadans. ]

In the year 610 Muhammad began his career as a prophet. It is no partof Church history to trace the origin of his opinions or his power, totell how he learnt from Jews and Nestorians, or how he established amarvellous organisation on a basis of theocratic militarism. Themigration from Meccah to Medinah in 622 was the beginning of his activeministry, of religious teaching carried forward by sword and fire. Thecapture of Meccah, the submission of Arabia, the extinction of theChristian (Monophysite) communities in the peninsula, were followedbefore long by the invasion of Syria and the capture of Jerusalem bythe Khalif Omar in 637. The year before, Heraclius {102} had takenaway the Holy Rood and the treasures of the churches to Constantinople. Two years later the Muhammadans seized Egypt, from which the Persianshad not so long been driven out by the armies of the Empire. The fatalpolicy of the Monothelite emperors had opened the way to the triumph ofIslam. Of this we shall see more, in Africa and in Southern Europe, inlater days. 

[1] See _The Church of the Fathers_ (vol. Ii. Of the present series), chapter xxix. , for the earlier history. 

[2] Bury, _History of the Later Roman Empire_, i. 441. 

[3] _Aedif. _, iii. 6. 

[4] Joannes Biclarensis, p. 853. 

[5] I quote from the admirable summary in the Reports of theArchbishop's Mission to the Assyrian Christians. 

[6] See an interesting account in Williams's _Middle Kingdom_. 

[7] His name was Ung; his title Khan; Ung Khan was Syriacised intoYukhanan, i. E. John. 

[8] The _Christian Topography_ was written between 535 and 537. Beazley, _Dawn of Modern Geography_, p. 279. 

[9] Assemani, _Bibl. Orient_, iii. I. 130, 131. 

[10] See Waddell, _Buddhism in Tibet_, pp. 421, 422. 

[11] Beazley, _Dawn of Modern Geography_, p. 211. 

[12] Cf. Budge, _The Book of Governors_, i. Cxvi. , and Labourt, _LeChristianisme dans l'empire perse_, 303. 

[13] Cf. Procopius, _Aedif. _; and John Moschus, _Pratum Spirituale_(Migne, Patr. Groec. , lxxxvii. [3]). 

[14] Procopius, _Aedif. _, v. 8. 

{103}

CHAPTER IX

THE CHURCH IN AFRICA

[Sidenote: The Church in North Africa. ]

In the middle of the fifth century the Christian power in North Africafell under the domination of the Arian Vandals. S. Augustine died in430 while the foe was at the gates of his city. In 439 Carthage fell, and Roman civilisation was extinguished. The rule of the Vandals wasnot only Arian but barbarous. It is not unlikely that their victorywas won with the aid of the remaining Donatists and the heathen Moors. With the reign of Gaiseric some degree of toleration was allowed to theCatholic Church, but the persecution which had marked the earlier daysof the Arian power now took the form of confiscation and thesuppression of public worship. The Church suffered grievously, and notleast in the class of persons ordained to the ministry and consecratedto the episcopate. But still the Catholics were the great majority, and it was seen that the Arian Vandals were in danger of absorption bythe subtle influence of the truth. It was a last effort of Gaiseric'sto deprive the Catholics of their leaders, which eventually broughtabout their restoration. The Bishop of Carthage and several of hisclergy were put on board a ship and told to escape whither they could. They reached Naples, {104} and their piteous plight and the news theybrought helped to direct the attention of the imperial power to itslost heritage. [Sidenote: The Vandal persecution. ] Meanwhile thesuffering Church, enjoying now a scanty toleration, now suffering aseverer persecution, continued to make converts and to produce martyrs. In 477 Gaiseric died. A year before his death he had allowed theCatholics to reopen their churches and to bring back their bishops andclergy from exile. And still their missionary efforts had never beenrelaxed. Church life still continued; inscriptions remaining to-daypreserve the epitaphs of men buried in the darkest days with Catholicrites; and in the interior ancient monasteries remained undisturbed. Hunneric, the next Vandal king, though nominally an Arian, set himselfto extirpate heresies which he did not accept: Manichaeans under hissway received treatment more severe than Catholics. Indeed, theCatholics began to raise their heads under the leadership of Eugenius, who was elected in 479 to the see of Carthage, the only bishopric inthe country which held metropolitan rank. The Bishop of Carthage wasthe spiritual head of the whole province, held a superiority over thebishops outside the limits of Proconsularis, and was, as it were, thepatriarch of the African Church. For twenty-three years the see hadhad no pastor, and the restoration marked a distinct step towards theending of the Vandal domination. But there was a final effort;Hunneric, unable to decoy the Catholics, determined to exterminatethem; a writer of the time tells that nearly five thousand clergy werebanished to the desert, where their fate was a practical martyrdom. Aconference was {105} summoned in 484, at which it was endeavoured tomake the Catholic clergy abate the strictness of their orthodoxy, butEugenius stood firm. Persecution again followed. The writer alreadymentioned, Victor Vitensis, says, "The Vandals did not blush to setforth against us the law which formerly our Christian emperors hadpassed against them and other heretics for the honour of the CatholicChurch, adding many things of their own as it pleased their tyrannicalpower. " Thus evil deeds bring their necessary consequences. A bitterpersecution swept over the land, and till the death of Hunneric, at theend of the year, atrocities of the most terrible kind were perpetrated. It was a brief age of martyrs, and rooted the Church more firmly in theaffections of its children. It was an age, too, of saints, andFulgentius shines out by the side of Eugenius as a pattern of Christiandevotion and asceticism. In the years that followed king succeededking, and the condition of the Church became gradually more tolerable, till under Hilderic much of the old organisation was restored and themonastic houses were established in a condition of considerableindependence. When Gelimer usurped the Vandal throne, the power ofJustinian was able to intervene, and in 533 Belisarius recovered NorthAfrica for the Empire. [Sidenote: Reconquest of Africa by Belisarius, 533. ] The restoration of the direct rule of the emperors was ofnecessity the restoration of Catholicism to dominance. But materiallythe Church had received blows from which she never fully recovered. Her possessions, buildings, treasures had for the most part passed fromher hands: and many sees, many parishes, {106} still remained withoutpastors. Such was the result of "the violent captivity of a century. "

[Sidenote: The revival of the North African Church. ]

Justinian aimed at restoring all things to their first estate. "Wewould be the guardians and defenders of the ancient traditions, " hewrote in 542 to the primate of Byzacene. He confirmed the Bishop ofCarthage in his metropolitan dignity; he restored sees, allowed synodsto meet, gave special privileges to the clergy. An era of churchbuilding set in, and fine monasteries were erected, in all theimpressive solidity of the Byzantine style, even in distant parts ofthe Roman territory. Tebessa remains a marvellous example of thewealth and dignity which came anew to the North African Church. Theliterary power of the Church revived with her material prosperity: aschool of writers arose again in the land of Augustine. Primasius, Facundus, Liberatus, Victor of Tonnenna, were among those who restoredthe activity and knowledge of the Church in history, theology, andapologetic. Over all the emperor Justinian kept his watchful eye, directing, interfering, exhorting, as seemed to him good. Thecontroversy of the Three Chapters had its echoes in Africa, and thedeacon Ferrand, a learned theologian, represented a very wide feelingwhen, in his _Defensio_, he deprecated any condemnation of the deadtheologians; and in Facundus, Bishop of Hermiane, the unhappyhesitating pope Vigilius found an adviser who, if anyone, might havegiven him firmness. In the result, the emperor, by the pen at least asmuch as the sword, overpowered resistance, and Africa accepted thedecisions of Constantinople. Reparatus, Bishop of Carthage, whoresisted, was deposed, Liberatus {107} preserves the record of bitterpersecution, and Victor of Tonnenna, who equally refused to accept thedecision against the Three Chapters, is especially bitter in hisdenunciation of Justinian. But the pope Pelagius was able, in 560, toannounce the assent of Africa to the statements of the Fifth GeneralCouncil. The Church from the death of Justinian settled down inpeaceable habitations, strong in the imperial support and the affectionof the people. But as, in the relaxation which set in as time went on, the power of the imperial administration decayed, the power of thepopes in Africa was gradually strengthened, and the power of thebishops rose equally. But this was not all. In time relaxation set inin the Church as well as in the State. There are tales of immoral andcorrupt bishops, of disobedience to authority, of a recrudescence, from591 to 596, of Donatism. It was the pope Gregory the Great who took inhand the needed reformation. [Its relation to Gregory the Great. ] Hisletters are full of African affairs: his keen attention, hisinstructions to Hilarus, the administrator of the Roman Church'spossessions in Italy, his minute knowledge, his wise understanding ofthe many difficult problems which beset the Church, are prominent inhis correspondence. It was he who reversed the conception of Justinianin regard to the Church of North Africa. The emperor had striven fororthodoxy, without the supremacy of the pope. Gregory was determinedto secure the latter, and the history of North Africa affords anexcellent example of how the papal power grew. It was by continualintervention, in affairs small as well as great, and by constantsolicitude: it was by the use of prudent {108} and sympathetic agents, and the firm adherence to a policy of charity, orthodoxy anddiscretion, that the great pope enforced his views on the bishops, theChurch, the imperial representatives. While he sternly rebuked allabuse of the political authority which had fallen into the hands of thebishops, he tenaciously clung to the right of hearing appeals in casesbetween churchmen and public officials which circumstances had placedin his hands. From a right of control he passed to a right of directintervention; and in State as well as Church the administrators feltthe power of his indomitable will. While disorganisation was spreadingin the civil order the Church was growing in concentration andauthority. 

[Sidenote: The Monothelite controversy. ]

But the Monothelite controversy went far to shatter the power which thelabour of Gregory had built up, and with it the Christianity ofNorthern Africa. The orthodox felt less and less bound to emperors whosupported heresy, and the Arab invasion drew near without the peopleperceiving the full extent of their danger. Fortunatus, Bishop ofCarthage, declared himself a Monothelite, but in every other provincebesides his the Church formally repudiated the heresy. In 646Fortunatus was deposed and Victor succeeded him; and this is almost thelast recorded incident in the history of the North African Church. Asthe Arab invader advanced, refugees from Syria and Egypt poured intothe land, and, since many of them were heretical, added to thereligious diffusions of the country. The abbat Maximus upheld thebanner of orthodoxy against all comers. The victory which he won overthe heresiarch Pyrrhus in 645, followed by the declarations of {109}provincial synods in 646, was the last expression of African orthodoxy. 

John, the Jacobite bishop of Nikiu, whose contemporary account of theSaracen conquest is of the first value, declares that "everyone saidthat the expulsion of the Romans and the victory of the Mussulmans werebrought about by the tyranny of the emperor Heraclius and the troubleswhich he made the orthodox suffer. " A general discontent with theByzantine government arose, and Rome, which was more in sympathy withthe people, was unable to help them. In 646 the patrician Gregory, theimperial governor, orthodox and a protector of the Church, declaredthat the Monothelite Constans II. Had forfeited the throne, and assumedfor himself the title of emperor. Within a year he was defeated andslain by the Saracens at Sbeitla, and Byzantine Africa was placed atthe mercy of the Muhammadan invader. The Copts long resisted, buttheir resistance was overcome in the autumn of 646. Alexandria fell asecond time and finally into the hands of the Arabs. 

[Sidenote: The conquest by the Muhammadans. ]

For fifty years the Byzantine power maintained a foothold, precariousand nominal. Inch by inch, and with intervals of repose and even ofreconquest, --as when John the Patrician, under Leo the Isaurian, recaptured Carthage, --the infidels advanced, and the Berber tribes ofthe interior pressed, too, upon the Christians. Carthage was againtaken by the Muhammadans in 698: the native tribes joined the invaders, and by 708 Roman Africa was wholly in their hands. Toleration was atfirst allowed; but from 717 the Christians had only the choice ofbanishment and {110} apostasy. Still many held out: Christian villagesremained, Christian communities, as late as the fourteenth century; andeven now it is said that in some parts Christian customs survive. TheChurch at Carthage existed certainly in some organised form till theeleventh century, and it was not till 1583 that the Church of Tunis wasutterly destroyed. 

Meanwhile events in other parts of Africa had run a different course. The patriarchate of Alexandria had a long and distinguished history, and from it had spread missions far into the south. 

[Sidenote: The Jacobites. ]

The Monophysite controversy led to the founding of the Jacobite sect. Secret consecrations at Constantinople by bishops in prison duringJustinian's severe rule sent a bishop to Hira for the ArabianChristians in Persia, and another to the borders of Edessa, who foundedthe Jacobites and with the assistance of Egyptian Monophysite bishopscontinued the episcopal succession. In Egypt there arose the divisionbetween the Melkites, who followed the imperial orders and accepted thedecisions of the Councils, and the Copts, who dissented. TheMonophysites of Syria, Egypt, and Armenia, with temporary andsuperficial differences, remained practically at one. Nationaldifferences confirmed their divergence from the Roman Empire and theCatholic Church. Thus while in Egypt, Syria, and elsewhere the Churchwas still powerfully represented, though side by side with strongsectarian organisations, there were, when the followers of Muhammadcame to add to the confusion, three nationalistic and heretical bodies, separate from the Church--those of Persia and Armenia and Ethiopia. Ofthe last something must now be said. 

{111}

[Sidenote: The Abyssinian Church. ]

South of Egyptian territory, properly so called, lay the Ethiopians, vassals of Egypt, tracing in a dim fashion their Christianity back toone of those queens who bore the title of _Candace_. These wild andwarring tribes kept up continual conflict, and among the Blemmyes menstill worshipped Isis in the temple of Philae. In 548 began theconversion of the Nobadae of the Soudan, of whose reception into theChristian fold the great Monophysite missionary, John of Ephesus, givesan account. Churches were built, and one inscription at least surviveswith the name of a Christian king. Beyond them the Alodaei learnt thefaith from the same preacher, Longinus. Nubia, or Mugurrah, was alsovisited by Christian missionaries at the same time. Under Justinian, the temple of Philae was turned into a church, and the Blemmyes becameChristian. Christian remains long existed, even down to theneighbourhood of Khartoum; and it was long before the Muhammadanconquerors swept all the worship of Christ away. Further southChristianity spread on both sides of the Red Sea. In Arabia Felix wasthe kingdom of the Homerites or Himyarites, whose chief city was Safar, and at different times they were ruled by the same king as the land ofAxum, "the farthest Ind" of the Greek chronicler Theophanes. After thedispersion, Jewish colonies settled in Arabia, and in the fourthcentury Christianity followed. At the end of the fifth century abishop is found among the Homerites, and a Trinitarian inscription isdated 542-3. About the same time the Church in Abyssinia, founded inthe time of S. Athanasius, received the national religion of thecountry through the conversion of the Negus at the end {112} of thefifth century. While the land of Safar at times relapsed intoheathenism and massacred Christians, the Abyssinians remained firm inthe faith. Procopius tells that Ellesthaeos, an Ethiopian king, duringthe reign of Justin I. , invaded the land of the Homerites to avengetheir persecutions and to suppress the Jewish predominance and set up aChristian king. With him and his successors Justinian entered intotreaties, as also with the kings of Axum or Abyssinia. While theMuhammadan conquest swept away the Christianity of the Arabians anddrove those who clung to it northward to the banks of the Euphrates, the Church in Abyssinia, which had accepted Monophysitism, remainedindependent, just as its mother church of Egypt obtained toleration. It still continues separate, Monophysite, and in communion with theCoptic Church of Egypt. 

{113}

CHAPTER X

THE CHURCH IN THE WESTERN ISLES

[Sidenote: Christianity in Britain. ]

When Gregory the Great sent Augustine and his brother monks to preachto the Teutonic tribes which had made Britain their home, there werealready two Churches in the island. There was the Church of theBrythons, gradually separated by the advance of the Saxons into theChurches of Cumbria or Strathclyde, Wales, and West Wales or Cornwall. These stood apart from the English for a long time, were late inaccepting the Catholic customs of the West, and had no influence on theprogress of English Christianity. And there was the Church founded inNorth Britain by Celtic missionaries from Ireland. In Ireland thereseems little doubt that Christianity was known by the end of the fourthcentury. In the fifth century the progress was extraordinarily rapid. S. Patrick "organised the Christianity which already existed; heconverted kingdoms which were still pagan, especially in the west; andhe brought Ireland into connection with the Church of the Empire, andmade it formally part of Universal Christendom. " [1]

The subsequent history of the Church in Ireland forms a fitintroduction to that of the Church in {114} England, in spite of theseparation between them. Irish Christianity did not long preserve itsclose union with Western Europe. The popes, as well as the emperors, were too weak to interfere in the distant islands. The Irish relapsedinto the use of what is called the Celtic Easter, and to otherpractices which were usual before Patrick's day and which served to cutthem off from the newly-converted Teutons, as well as from the Latinworld in general. [Sidenote: Death of S. Patrick, 461. ] Patrick diedin 461. In 563 Columba, trained in the great schools which had sprungup in the Irish monasteries, crossed to what is now called Scotland toconfirm the faith of the Irish settlers and to convert the heathenPicts. The organisation of the Church to which he belonged wasessentially tribal and monastic. [Sidenote: The Celtic Church. ] ThoughS. Patrick had probably consecrated diocesan bishops in large numbers, the Church soon became "predominantly monastic. " Tribal feeling was sostrong that the Church, too, assimilated itself to the tribal idea, andthe Church's monasteries were her tribes. In a land where there wereno cities monasteries took their place, and the bishops naturally cameto dwell in them, and so to seem less prominent in their episcopal thanin their monastic aspect. The monks became the chief power inChristian Ireland; and in the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuriesthere were many bishops without dioceses, and it seems probable thattheir rank, though not their function, was less important than that ofthe abbats, the heads of the tribal monasticism. 

In the seventh century again the Irish Church came back into closerassociation with the Church throughout {115} Europe. This union wasdue very largely to the influence of learning, and still more to theinfluence of missionary zeal. "From Iceland to the Danube or theApennines, among Frank or Burgundian or Lombard, the Irish energyseemed omnipotent and inexhaustible. " [2] Into Ireland it would seemthat classical culture was introduced by the first Christian teachers, and that from the first it was intended to serve as a preparation forreligious teaching. [3] It would seem that it was from Brittany that itspread to Ireland. [Sidenote: The influences outside Ireland] Theschools of Ireland became famous. Books as diverse as the Antiphonaryof Bangor and Adamnan's Life of Columba show that the teaching in itsdifferent ways was a sound and a liberal one. 

In England the Irish tradition and influence spread. If the Celticschool of Bangor perished in the stress of the bitter wars betweenEnglish and Welsh, Malmesbury, which trained S. Aldhelm, showed thatthe Irish love of letters was capable of transplantation into a landnow most prominently Teutonic. But the Roman influence and theinfluence of the East were still more effective. [Sidenote: inlearning, ] Benedict Biscop brought back with him to Northumbria thetraditions and rules of Italian art and learning, and Theodore ofTarsus brought a wider influence, which was Greek as well as Latin. Hehimself founded a school at Canterbury, and taught it; and in distanttimes Dunstan, at Glastonbury and at Canterbury, was his worthysuccessor. In the north Bede was at {116} Jarrow a writer of greatpower and wide scope, and the school of York was a nursery of classicstudies which produced the great scholar Alcuin. Thus the community ofscholarship brings the Churches together. 

[Sidenote: in missionary work. ]

More prominent was the zeal for the conversion of the heathen. Thework of Columban and of S. Gall had its origin in the Irish schools, and there was no more fruitful influence on the Europe of the Dark Age. The work of Columba and his followers was to begin in the north ofBritain what Roman missionaries undertook in the south. For more thanthirty years Columba, who landed in Iona in 563, taught the Picts andScots. His Life by his disciple Adamnan is one of the most beautifulmemorials of medieval saintliness that we possess. The monastery whichhe founded lasted till the eighth century. His school did a famouswork in North Britain in the seventh; King Oswald of Northumbria wastrained there, and S. Aidan, his fellow-helper, the typical saint ofNorthumbria. From the same source came Melrose, the great Scottishmonastery, and S. Chad, the apostle of the Middle English. 

[Sidenote: Scotland. ]

A century of intermittent strife swept over the northern lands. Scotland became Christian slowly and with little connection with thesouth. Heathen onslaughts ravaged the Christian lands, and yet, inspite of all, monasteries for men and women sprang up in the north. The influence of S. Aidan (died 651) was continued by S. Cuthbert andS. Hilda, typical parents of monks and nuns. In 664 (Synod of Whitby)at last came union with the Church of the English, who appealed to theauthority of Rome and {117} of S. Peter in favour of their customs, andthe Northumbrian king, Oswin, ratified the union of the Celtic and theEnglish Churches. Early in the eighth century other Celtic Churchescame into the agreement; only Cornwall held out for two centuries more. 

[Sidenote: The mission of St. Augustine, 597. ]

The English Church, which thus came to represent the Christianity ofthe whole island, was founded from Rome by S. Augustine in Kent in 597. It was from the first an active missionary body. It gradually won itsway over the whole island, conquering and assimilating the alieninfluences which were at first opposed to it. So when a storm ofheathen persecution swept over England and Scotland at the end of theeighth century, when "the ravaging of heathen men lamentably destroyedGod's church at Lindisfarne, " when the monks of Iona were given tomartyrdom, when English prelates and kings gave their lives to hold theland for Christ, the Church still endured, with material loss but with, for the time at least, enhanced glory and virtue. Three names standout conspicuously from the seventh and ninth centuries. [Sidenote:Theodore of Tarsus, 668. ] Theodore of Tarsus, Archbishop of Canterburyfrom 668 to 693, was the great organiser of the English Church. Ascholar, a teacher, a statesman, he knit the different tribes ofEnglish, Saxon, Jute, together in the unity of faith and discipline. Church councils sprang up under him to rule, and Church laws to guidemen in the way. He kept up a close connection with the Western Church, but he did not surrender independence to a papal supremacy. Wilfrithof Ripon, his contemporary, was great also as a teacher and as amissionary beyond the seas, {118} and among the Saxons of SouthBritain. The seventh century was the age in which the foundations ofthe English Church were laid on firm bases. 

[Sidenote: Bede. ]

Hardly less important, though in a different way, was the work of themonk Baeda, the father of English history. He was a man who knew thehistory and the theology of the Western Church, and who taught by hiswritings and his life. His influence on the development of the Churchin the north, both by his great history, his religious treatises, andhis influence on Egbert, Archbishop of York, is incalculable. 

[Sidenote: Alfred. ]

The age of Alfred, who died in 899, was equally important. Itwitnessed a more distinct union with the Church of Wales, whose gloriesgo back to the time of S. David in the fifth century. It confirmed astrong union between Church and State in England, and it witnessed arevival of Christian learning in which Alfred himself and a Welshman, Asser, whom he made bishop of an English see, were the leaders. Alfredwas a bright example of what Christianity could do for mankind. Warrior, scholar, saint, pattern king whose heart was given to hispeople, he bore himself nobly before the world as one who loved andworshipped the Master Christ. Under his sway the Church rose again toinstruct and guide the people, and when he died he left the Englishland a united Christian nation. The Danes, who after years ofpredatory invasion were become settlers over a large part of England, were brought into the Church; and the British Church in Cornwall wasbrought nearer to unity with the English, a union which was completefrom 931. 

{119}

[Sidenote: Conversion of the north. ]

While in the extreme north, Ross, Cromarty, Sutherland, and Caithness, the Church remained missionary rather than parochial, in the Scotlandof the south monasticism became prominent again under a new ordercalled, in Goidelic, "Culdees" (servants of God). In the midlandsyears of disturbance caused much of the organisation of the Church todisappear, bishoprics to cease, monasteries to be destroyed. After theDanish wars the work of reconstruction was an urgent need, and a greatprelate came to lead it. 

[Sidenote: Dunstan, 924-88. ]

Dunstan (924-88) was a West Saxon who was taught at Glastonbury byIrish priests, and who rose, through his friendship with leaders inChurch and State, by the holiness of his life, and by the experiencethat he won when in exile in Flanders, to be head of the EnglishChurch. As archbishop he was "a true shepherd. " He gave up all thepreferments he had before enjoyed, only visiting Glastonburyoccasionally for a time of repose. His friends, Aethelwold, Bishop ofWinchester, and Oswald, Bishop of Worcester, with King Eadgar's help, did their utmost to introduce the strict rule of S. Benedict into themonasteries, replacing the clergy of the cathedral churches (secularcanons) by monks. Dunstan sympathised, but he did not actively supporttheir action. Abroad there was strong feeling against clericalmarriage, and there were many canons passed against it. The danger ofthe Church falling into the hands of an hereditary class of officialswas a real one; but it does not seem to have been much felt in England. Dunstan paid far more heed to the clergy's books than their wives. 

{120}

[Sidenote: His work as archbishop and reformer. ]

He made rules, and encouraged schools for the training of priests. Heordered priests to learn handicrafts that they might teach them toothers. He ordered that a sermon should be preached in each churchevery Sunday. His zeal for moral reform was seen in many canons passedagainst the abuses of the age, and he did not hesitate to enforce themagainst the highest in the land. When the pope ordered him to absolvea great lord whom he had excommunicated for an unlawful marriage, herefused to obey. 

Early in the tenth century an illustration of the position occupied bythe English Church in relation to Rome, and of the learning of itsclergy and their style of preaching, is afforded by the writings ofAelfric, who described himself in his early years as "a monk and amass-priest, " and was later on abbat of Eynsham. Of his work, besideseducational treatises, eighty sermons, chiefly translated from theLatin, remain. In them he shows clearly that the claims of the papacywith regard to S. Peter were not accepted by all in England, and hetaught the spiritual, not corporal, presence of the Lord's Body in theHoly Communion. The English Church differed also from Rome in the factthat many of the clergy were married, and though this was not regardedas lawful, they were not separated from their wives. But in allessential matters the English Church remained in union with the foreignChurches and retained her ancient reputation for unbroken orthodoxy. This reputation was increased by the fame of S. Dunstan, whose sojournabroad had served to link English churchmen again to their brothersover sea. 

{121}

The last years of the great archbishop were given to prayer and study, and to the arts of music and handicraft which he had practised in hisyouth. He set himself to train the young, to succour the needy, and tomake peace among all men. He died on May 19th, 988, and with him thenew energy he had infused into the Church seemed to pass away. [Sidenote: The Danish invasions. ] New Danish invasions turned men'sthoughts other ways, but still monasteries made progress. TheBenedictine rule was accepted over Southern England, and in the norththe see of Durham rose replacing the older northern see, when it becamethe resting-place of the bones of the great missionary, S. Cuthbert. The Danish invasions were not so barbarous now as in earlier days. Some of the Danes were Christians, and it was at Andover that OlafTrigvason, King of Norway, was confirmed by Bishop Aelfeah, callingKing Aethelred father. He went back to Norway a Christian devoted tothe conversion of his people. [4]

The English Church at the beginning of the eleventh century was in fullcommunion with the Western Church, but was practically to a largeextent apart from papal influence. Church and State walked hand inhand, and the relations between sovereign and archbishop resembledthose of the New rather than the Old Rome. The missionary energy whichhad in former years sent forth Wilfrith and Winfrith was now for thetime exhausted. England needed a new religious revival. It camelater, at the time of a political conquest. 

Meanwhile the Irish Church was regaining its learning and itsmissionary zeal: both were expressed in {122} the _consuetudoperegrinandi_ with which the Irish monks were credited in the ninthcentury. But from the time of the Danish invasions the Irish Church, and the Welsh also, suffered severely. Heathen settlements in Irelandwere only gradually converted, as that of Dublin in 943. The disturbedstate of their home encouraged Irish monks to cross the seas. Actionand reaction led Ireland more close than ever to the Roman papacy. 

[1] Bury, _Life of S. Patrick_, pp. 212-13. 

[2] R. L. Poole, _Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought_, p. 10. 

[3] Cf. Roger, _L'Enseignement des lettres classiques_, p. 236. 

[4] See ch. Xi. 

{123}

CHAPTER XI

THE CONVERSION OF SLAVS AND NORTHMEN

[Sidenote: Cyril and Methodius, 868. ]

The ninth century was a great age of conversion, and the work is verylargely associated with two great names in the development ofcivilisation and learning, those of two brothers, born in Thessalonica, probably between 820 and 830--Constantine (who changed his name toCyril when he was consecrated bishop by Hadrian II. In 868) andMethodius. Their lives show the connection still existing between Romeand the East in Church matters, and illustrate the zeal for educationalwork which was so conspicuous a feature in the converting energy of theChurch of Constantinople. Cyril was not only a priest and amissionary, he was a "philosopher. " Methodius, it is said, had been acivil administrator. Both were scholars and linguists, and theinfluence which they exercised upon the Slavs is incalculably great. In missions always it is the personal influence which is the moststriking. But the time is needed as well as the man. So much we seeagain and again, however cursorily we study the evangelising work ofthis age. 

In missions the ninth century carried out what the eighth neglected orwas unable to accomplish. The {124} wars against the FinnishBulgarians from 755 onwards brought the Church as well as the Stateinto grave danger, or rather were defensive of each. [Sidenote: Theconversion of the Bulgarians. ] In the eighth century there were severalisolated conversions, including a whole family of boïars from whomsprang the recluse, saint Joannicius; but there was no generalmovement. The Bulgarians remained enemies of Christianity anddestroyers of all Roman civilisation: S. Theodore of the Studiumdeclared that it was criminal sacrilege to exchange hostages with them. But gradually the geographical nearness brought closer connection;barbarians enlisted in the Roman armies; at last illustrious prisonersin Constantinople were the cause of light being brought to their ownland. Boris, the Bulgarian king, obtained teachers from the New Rome, and applied also to Pope Nicolas I. (858-67) for instruction. In 864the Bulgarians accepted the faith, and the contest for patriarchalrights over them was hotly pressed between Nicolas and Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople (857-86). In the end, after receivinganswers from the pope to 106 questions, and after being treated withtoo little consideration by Hadrian II. (867-72), Boris decided toaccept an archbishop from Constantinople in 870, and ten bishopricswere founded. 

[Sidenote: The conversion of the Slavs. ]

But the great work of Cyril and Methodius was not directly concernedwith the Bulgarian conversion. In Pannonia and Moravia and Croatiathey were the great missionaries to the Slavs. Cyril invented aSlavonic alphabet, and was able to preach to the Slavs everywhere intheir own tongue; and in Serbia a flourishing Church sprang {125} upwhich retained the Slavonic rite. Early in the tenth century manySlavonian priests were ordained by the Bishop of Nona, himself a Slavby birth. But these districts were weakened by incessant strife, andtheir contests with the East were often fomented by the popes. TheirChristianity was distinctly Byzantine; but they were never able to be areal strength to the emperor or the Orthodox Church. 

[Sidenote: Poland. ]

Poland, on the other hand, and later, received its Christianity from aLatin source. There may have been earlier Greek influences through theSlavonic Christians to the south-east; but it was not till 965 that theking, Mieczyslaw, was converted, when he married a Bohemian princess. He became a member of the Empire and the vassal of Otto I. Thebishopric of Posen was founded in 968, and the gospel was preached byS. Adalbert, already Bishop of Prague. S. Adalbert, who for a shorttime held the see of Gnesen, passed on to preach to the heathenPrussians, by whom he was martyred in 997. Otto III. Visited theChristian king in A. D. 1000, and gave him a relic, the lance of S. Maurice, still preserved at Cracow. The ecclesiastical organisation ofthe country was then consolidated; Gnesen was made the metropolitansee, and Polish and Pomeranian dioceses were placed under it. TheLatin Church was dominant over Polish Christianity. 

[Sidenote: The Prussians and S. Adalbert. ]

But the pagan Prussians regarded S. Adalbert as a political emissaryand a sorcerer who destroyed their crops, and killed him withouthesitation; Bruno, whom Silvester II. Sent to succeed him, perishedwithin a year, and the attempt to Christianise the Prussians was {126}abandoned for nearly two centuries. Similar was the course of eventsamong the Wends. It is not till the tenth century that we knowanything of endeavours for their conversion, and then they were due tothe all-embracing energy of Otto I. Henry I. Had borne the royal armsin victory over the lands watered by the Elbe, the Oder, and the Saale;and now his successor began the establishment of an ecclesiasticalhierarchy, under the see of Magdeburg. Boso, Bishop of Merseburg, sethimself to learn and preach in the Slav tongue, but it seems that theGerman clergy who were introduced were unsuccessful as missionaries, and won the reputation of greedy political agitators. At the end ofthe tenth century a torrent of pagan fury swept over the land, destroyed the churches, and stamped the growing Christianity under foot. 

[Sidenote: The conversion of Russia. ]

The beginnings of Russian Christianity may possibly be found, as thepatriarch Photius asserted, before the results of the defeat of thebarbarians by John Zimisces. But it was not till nearly a centurylater that anything notable occurred. Olga, a "ruler of Russia, "visited Constantinople in 957 and was baptized. Yet the Greekmissionaries made but slow progress. It was not till Vladimir marriedthe sister of the emperor Basil in 989, and restored the city ofCherson, --in which Cyril more than a century before had been amissionary, --where he was baptized, to the Empire, that theevangelisation of Russia really began. Vladimir deliberately chose theGreek in preference to the Roman form of Christianity, and acted, itwould seem, with some semblance of national consent. The baptism ofthe people of {127} Kiev in the waters of the Dnyepr, as one flock, "some standing in the water up to their necks, others up to theirbreasts, holding their young children in their arms, " was typical ofthe national acceptance of Christ. Everywhere churches and schoolswere built and the Slavonic Scriptures taught the people; at Kiev wasbuilt the Church of S. Sophia by Greek masons, in commemoration of thedebt to the great Church of the New Rome. [Sidenote: S. Vladimir, 989. ] Vladimir became the apostle of his people. The Church pressedforward eagerly, forward over the vast expanse covered by the Russianpower, and, not without martyrdoms and tales of heroic adventure, wonits way triumphantly to Russian hearts. 

[Sidenote: The conversion of the Czechs. ]

The early days of Christianity in Moravia and Bohemia are wrapped inobscurity. In 801 Charles the Great endeavoured a forcible conversionof the former country, but with no more than transitory success. Yetin 836 a church was consecrated at Neutra by the Archbishop ofSalzburg. A little later than this we hear of the beginnings ofChristian faith among the Czechs. Early Bohemian history, when itemerges from an obscurity lighted by legend, is full of romanticincident. There are passages again and again in its records which forweirdness and ferocity remind us of a grim story of Meinhold's. Paganism lingered there with some of its ancient power, when it hadperished, at least outwardly, in all neighbouring lands. In theeleventh century Bohemian heathens still went on pilgrimages to thetemple at Arcona on the isle of Eugen, till the practice was stopped byBretislav II. Still a beginning had been made. In {128} 845 fourteenBohemian nobles, who had taken refuge at the court of Louis the German, were baptized at Regensburg; but the conversion of the country was tocome from the East. Cyril and Methodius, sent by the emperor MichaelIII. From Constantinople, converted the Moravians, and from them thegospel was handed on to the Czechs. It was Methodius, on whom the popehad conferred the title of Archbishop of Moravia, who baptized theBohemian prince Borivoj. For the history of Bohemian Christianity theearliest authority is Kristián, brother of Duke Boleslav II. , in _TheLife of S. Ludmilla and the Martyrdom of S. Wenceslas_. [Sidenote: S. Wenceslas. ] This is an extremely valuable book, not only as abiography--hagiological, like so much valuable early material forhistory, yet truthful--and as a record of manners in the tenth century, but as containing the account of the conversion of Moravia toChristianity, which shows that the conversion came first from the East, and the Church long retained a special connection with the Easternpeoples, Bulgarians and Greeks. The account of the murder of S. Wenceslas is of great interest as showing how close was the connectionof religion with family and dynastic feuds. S. Ludmilla was murderedin 927 by the orders of her daughter-in-law, who remained a pagan; ayear later, [1] her saintly grandson Wenceslas was slain by the men ofhis evil brother Boleslav. "Holy Wenceslas, who was soon to be avictim for the sake of Christ, rose early, wishing, according to hisholy habit, to hurry to the church, that he might remain there for sometime in solitary prayer before the congregation arrived; {129} andwishing as a good shepherd to hear matins together with his flock, andjoin in their song, he soon fell into the snares that had been laid, "and it was outside the church that he was slain. 

[Sidenote: Restoration of Christianity in Bohemia. ]

It was not till the invasion of the country by the armies of Otto I. In938 that Christianity was restored even to full toleration, and onlywhen Otto came himself in 950 that it was secured. Boleslav II. , thenephew of S. Wenceslas, was named the Pious; and Prague, in 973, wasseparated from Regensburg and became a bishopric. While among theMoravians the Slavonic rite introduced by Methodius was still largelyused, in Bohemia the Roman rite was followed. Voytech (Adalbert), aCzech, was the second bishop, and to him, in spite of failures anddifficulties, the conversion of Bohemia was largely due. He died amartyr (as we have said), while preaching to the heathen Prussians, andfor a time darkness again settled over the history of the Czechs. 

[Sidenote: The conversion of the Danes]

Meanwhile the current of conversion had spread northwards. It was in822 that Ebbo, Archbishop of Rheims, was sent to Denmark in consequenceof a political embassy to Louis the Pious, emperor from 814 to 840. Harold, the Danish king, had asked aid. The emperor gave him also aChristian teacher; and in 826 the king and his wife were baptized. Other missionaries went northwards, but before long the Danes drove outboth their king Harold and his teacher Ansgar. From Denmark, however, the mission spread to Sweden, and in 831 an archbishopric wasestablished at Hamburg to direct all the northern {130} missions, andAnsgar was invested with the pallium by Pope Gregory IV. The missionshad a chequered career. [Sidenote: and of Sweden. ] Hamburg was seizedand pillaged by the Northmen in 845, and the Swedish mission was for atime destroyed. In 849 a new revival took place, when Ansgar was giventhe see of Bremen in addition to that of Hamburg; and before long hewon over the king of the Jutes and his people of Schleswig. In 853Ansgar returned to Sweden, where he was favourably received by the kingOlaf. The tale of his vast missionary labours, from which he wasrightly called the "Apostle of the north, " is told with spirit andfeeling by Adam of Bremen, who wrote in the eleventh century, as wellas by the biographer who commemorated him on his death. He not onlypreached, but he "redeemed captives, nourished those who were intribulation, taught his household. As an apostle without, a monkwithin, he was never idle. " When it was said that his prayers wroughtmiracles of healing, he said, "If I could but think myself worthy ofsuch a favour from the Lord, I would pray Him to grant me but onemiracle--that out of me, by His grace; He would make a good man. "[Sidenote: S. Ansgar. ] S. Ansgar is, in his work as in his training, aparallel to S. Boniface. Like him one of the finest fruits ofmonasticism, which first taught in solitude and then sent out to workactively in the world, he was brought up at Corbie. For nearlythirty-five years he laboured incessantly among the peoples of thenorth, and at the very end of his life he gallantly went among heathenchiefs to rebuke them for buying and selling slaves. He died in 865, and S. Rimbert, {131} his disciple and biographer, was his successor inhis sees. 

[Sidenote: Norway. ]

Gradually, and in different ways, Christianity spread in the far north. Haakon, the son of Harold Haarfager of Norway, was sent to befoster-son to Aethelstan of England, who "had him baptized and broughtup in the right faith, " and he became a great king under the name ofHaakon the Good. From England he brought over teachers, and he builtchurches; and then at last he addressed all the leaders of his peopleand besought them "all, young and old, rich and poor, women as well asmen, that they should all allow themselves to be baptized, and shouldbelieve in one God, and in Christ the Son of Mary, and refrain from allsacrifices and heathen gods, and should keep holy the seventh day, andabstain from all work on it, and keep a fast on the seventh day. " [2]But it was long before his people obeyed him. Rebellion and dynasticwar followed in rapid succession; and he died of a wound from a chancearrow that struck him as he pursued his defeated foes. The firstChristian king of Norway died in a land which was still heathen. Butthe seed was sown in the hearts of the men who had seen the brave, strong, chivalrous life of him who owned Christ for Lord. 

[Sidenote: Olaf Trigvason. ]

In Denmark the conversion begun in the ninth century was long delayed, and it was not till Otto I. Conquered the Danes and sent Bishop Poppowho instructed King Harold and his army so that they were baptized, that the land {132} became definitely a Christian kingdom. FromDenmark the gospel spread again to Norway; but it was not till near theend of the tenth century that Olaf Trigvason was baptized by a hermiton one of the Scilly Isles, and then in his short reign devoted himselfto converting his people, often forcibly, as a choice between death andbaptism. To Iceland and Greenland too Olaf sent missionaries. He diedat last, like a true Wiking hero, in a sea fight; and it was not untilthe next century and the days of Olaf the Saint that the faith ofChrist conquered the North. 

[Sidenote: The conversion of Iceland. ]

There seems no doubt that Christianity in Iceland began by missionaryenterprise from Irish monks. From time to time anchorites soughtrefuge in that _ultima Thule_, "that they might pray to God in peace";but whether they did any direct work of conversion is doubtful. Theactual conversion came undoubtedly from Norway. A Christian queenlived in Iceland at the end of the ninth century, the wife of the NorseOlaf who was king in Dublin; but little if any impression was made onthe heathenism of the people. Nearly a century later an Icelandercalled Thorwald Kothransson brought a Christian bishop Frederic fromSaxony, who wrought some conversions and left a body of baptizedChristians behind him. In the year 1000 came a priest Thormod andseveral chiefs back from the Norse court of Olaf, and in a meeting ofthe Althing--the great assembly of the people--preached to them the OneGod in Trinity. The whole people became Christian, and the few heathen{133} customs that still lingered, as it were by permission, after thegreat baptism, soon fell away like raindrops in the bright sun. Amongthe last news that came to Olaf Trigvason was that his distant peoplehad fulfilled the wish of his heart. 

[1] According to the chronicle of Kristián. 

[2] The Saturday fast was still observed in many parts of Christendom. 

{134}

CHAPTER XII

PROGRESS OF THE CHURCH IN GERMANY

[Sidenote: The Lombards in Italy. ]

The acceptance of Christianity and of Catholicism by the barbariantribes which conquered Europe was a slow process. The conversion ofthe Lombards, for example, whom we have seen as Arians, sometimestolerant, sometimes persecuting, was gradual. The Church always heldits own, in faith though not in possessions, in Italy; and from thepontificate of Gregory the Great the moral force of the CatholicSociety began to win the Lombards to its fold. It was proved again andagain that heresy was not a unifying power. The Catholic Church heldtogether its disciples in the Catholic creed. It is possible thatAgilulf, the husband of the famous Catholic queen Theodelind, himselfbecame a Catholic before he died. Paul the Deacon says that he "bothheld the Catholic faith and bestowed many possessions on the Church ofChrist, and restored the bishops, who were in a depressed and abjectcondition, to the honour of their wonted dignity. " Whatever may be themeaning of this, it certainly expresses the fact that before the middleof the seventh century the Lombards were passing almost insensibly intothe Catholic fold, and Italy had practically become united in one faiththough far from united in one government. 

{135}

[Sidenote: The Church in the Frankish kingdoms. ]

With Germany it was different. As the Merwing kingdoms decayed, theEastern one, Austrasia, with its capital, Metz, was but a poor bulwarkagainst heathen tribes on its borders, which were yet, it might seem attimes, little more barbarous than itself. The kingdom of Austrasiastretched eastwards from Rheims "spreading across the Rhine an unknowndistance into Germany, claiming the allegiance of Thuringians, Alamanniand Bavarians, fitfully controlling the restless Saxons, touching withwarlike weapons and sometimes vainly striving with the terrible Avars. "[1] Kings of the Bavarian line came to rule in Northern Italy, butBavaria was little touched by Christian faith. At last when thedescendants of Arnulf[2] came as kings over a now again united Frankishmonarchy, when Charles Martel made one power of Austrasia, Neustria, and Burgundy, the time for a new advance seemed to have come. Theodelind, the Catholic queen of the Lombards, was herself of Bavarianbirth, but a century after her time the people of her native land, itseems, were still heathen. They were apart from the Roman civilisationand the Catholic tradition: conversion, to touch them, must be a directand aggressive movement. 

At the end of the seventh century S. Rupert began the work. He settledhis episcopal throne at Salzburg. He was followed by Emmeran, and byCorbinian. Slowly the work proceeded, hindered by violence on the partof dukes and saints, favoured by popes and making a beginning for Romanmissionary interest in the distant borders of the Empire under theGermans. 

{136}

But it was not to these Frankish missionaries, or to Roman envoys, thatthe most important work was due. It was due to an outburst ofconverting zeal on the part of the newly converted race who had madeBritain the land of the English. 

[Sidenote: Saint Boniface. ]

Of all the great missionaries of the eighth century perhaps thegreatest was Winfrith of Crediton, an Englishman who became the fatherof German Christianity and the precursor of the great religious andintellectual movement of the days of Charles the Great. He followedthe Northumbrian Willibrord who for twenty-six years had laboured inFrisia, and supported by the commission of Gregory II. He set forth in719 to preach to the fierce heathens of Germany. He was instructed touse the Roman rite and to report to Rome any difficulties he mightencounter. He began to labour in Thuringia, a land where Irishmissionaries had already been at work, and where he recalled theChristians from evil ways into which they had lapsed. He passed onthrough Neustria and thence to Frisia, where for three years he"laboured much in Christ, converting not a few, destroying the heathenshrines and building Christian oratories, " aiding the venerableWillibrord in the work he had so long carried on. But he felt the callto labour in lands as yet untouched, and so he determined to go to theGermans. As he passed up the Rhine he drew to him the boy Gregoryafterwards famous as abbat of Utrecht, and at last he settled in theforests of Hessen and built a monastery at Amöneburg. From his oldfriends in England he received sound advice as to the treatment ofheathen customs and the gentle methods of conversion which befit thegospel of {137} Christ. [Sidenote: His mission from Rome, 723. ] FromRome he received affectionate support; and in 722 he was summoned toreceive a new mission from the pope himself. On S. Andrew's Day, 723, [3] after a solemn profession of faith in the Holy Trinity and ofobedience to the Roman See--the first ever taken by one outside theRoman patriarchate--he was consecrated bishop. He set out with lettersfrom the pope to Christians of Thuringia and to the duke Charles. Charles Martel accepted the trust and gave to Winfrith (who had assumedthe name of Boniface) the pledge of his protection. The missionary'sfirst act on his return to Hessen was to destroy the ancient oak atGeismar, the object of devotion to the worshippers of the Germanicgods; and the act was followed by many conversions of those who sawthat heathenism could not resent the attack upon its sacred things. Still there were difficulties. Those who had learned from the oldCeltic mission were not ready to accept the Roman customs. Gregory II. Wrote in 724, exhorting him to perseverance: "Let not threats alarmthee, nor terrors cast thee down, but stayed in confidence on Godproclaim the word of truth. " The work grew: monasteries and churchesarose: many English helpers came over: the favour of Charles Martel wasa protection. As the Benedictines opened out new lands, ploughed, built, studied, taught, religion and education spread before him. [Sidenote: Boniface archbishop, 732. ] In 732 Boniface was madearchbishop, received a pallium from Rome, and was encouraged by the newpope Gregory III. To organise the Church which he had founded and {138}to spread forth his arms into the land of the Bavarians. ThereChristianity had already made some way under Frankish missionaries: itneeded organisation from the hand of a master. He "exercised himselfdiligently, " says his biographer Willibald, "in preaching, and wentround inspecting many churches. " In 738 he paid his last visit toRome, where he stayed nearly a year and was treated with extraordinaryrespect and affection. On his return he divided Bavaria into the fourdioceses of Salzburg, Regensburg, Freising, and Passau, and later on hefounded other sees also, including Würzburg. It was his next aim to dosomething to reform the lax morals of the Frankish Church, which hadsunk to a low ebb under the Merwings. The Austrasian Synod, whichbears in some respects a close resemblance to the almost contemporaryEnglish Synod of Clovesho (747), of 742 dealt boldly with thesematters. Other councils followed in which Boniface took a leadingpart, and which made a striking reformation. [Sidenote: His missionarywork and martyrdom. ] His equally important work was to complete theconquest of the general spirit of Western Christendom, which looked toRome for leadership, over the Celtic missionaries, noble missionariesand martyrs who yet lacked the instinct of cohesion and solidarity. Along series of letters, to the popes, to bishops, princes and personsof importance, shows the breadth of his interests and the nature of hisactivity. To "four peoples, " he says, he had preached the gospel, theHessians, Thuringians, Franks and Bavarians, not to all for the firsttime but as a reformer and one who removed heathen influences from theChurch. As Archbishop of Mainz he was untiring even in advanced age:in politics as well as in {139} religion he was a leader of men. Itwas he who anointed Pippin at Soissons in 751 and thus gave theChurch's sanction to the new Karling line. He determined to end hisdays as a missionary to the heathen. In 755 he went with a band ofpriests and monks once more to the wild Frisians, and at Dokkum by thenorthern sea he met his death at the hands of the heathen whom he cameto win to Christ. The day, ever remembered, was June 5, 755. 

Boniface was truly attached to the popes, truly respectful to the RomanSee: but he preserved his independence. His attitude towards thesecular power was precisely similar. He was a great churchman, a greatstatesman, a great missionary; but his religious and political opinionscannot be tied down to the limits of some strict theory. His was awide, genial nature, in things spiritual and in things temporalgenuine, sincere; a true Saint, a true Apostle. Through the lives andsacrifices of such men it was that the Church came to exercise soprofound an influence over the politics of the Middle Age. 

[Sidenote: The Emperors and missions. ]

The work which S. Boniface began was continued by weapons other thanhis own. When the Empire of the Romans was revived (as we shall tellin the next chapter) by the chiefs of the Arnulf house, when a CatholicCaesar was again acclaimed in the Roman churches, the ideas on whichthe new monarchy was to rest were decisively Christian and Catholic. Charles the son of Pippin was a student of theology, among many otherthings. He believed firmly that it was a real kingdom of God which hewas called to form and govern upon earth. The spirit which inspiredthe followers of {140} Muhammad inspired him too. He was determinednot to leave to priests and popes the propagation of the faith which hebelieved. 

[Sidenote: Charles and the Saxons. ]

For thirty-two years Charles the Great, as his people came to call him, was engaged in a war which claimed to be waged for the spread of theChristian faith. Charles was before all things in belief (though notalways in life) a Christian, and it was intolerable to him that withinthe German lands should remain a large and powerful body of heathens. In 772 he marched into the land of the Angarii and destroyed theIrminsul, a column which was representative of the power which theSaxons worshipped. It was destroyed, and the army after its victoriesreturned in triumph. In 774 the Saxons turned the tables and burnt theabbey of Fritzlar which had been founded by S. Boniface. In 775Charles resolved to avenge this loss, but made little progress. In 776he was more successful, and a great multitude of Saxons submitted andwere baptized. In 777 there was another great baptism, but, says thechronicler, the Saxons were perfidious. In 778 when Charles was inSpain the Saxons devastated a vast tract of land, and even for a timestole the body of S. Boniface from its tomb at Fulda. Charles crushedthe resistance, and from 780 he set himself to organise the Church inthe Saxon lands, issuing severe edicts which practically enforcedChristianity on the conquered Saxons with the penalty of death for theperformance of pagan rites, and even for eating meat in Lent. A lawwas also decreed that all men should give a tenth of their substanceand work to the churches and priests. Still the conquest was not {141}durable, for a terrible insurrection in 782 slew a whole army of theGermans and massacred priests and monks wherever they could be found. Then came years of carnage: once Charles--it is said--caused 4, 500Saxons to be beheaded in one day. In 793 there was a new outbreak. The Saxons "as a dog returneth to his vomit so returned they to thepaganism they had renounced, again deserting Christian faith and lyingnot less to God than to their lord the king. " Churches were destroyed, bishops and priests slain, and the land was again defiled with blood. They allied with the Avars, and Charles was thus beset with heathenfoes in Hungary and in North Germany at once. He tried every measureof devastation and exile; but it seems that by 797 he had come moreclearly to see the Christian way. "Let but the same pains be taken, "he wrote--or the English scholar Alcuin wrote for him--"to preach theeasy yoke and light burden of Christ to the obstinate people of theSaxons as are taken to collect the tithes from them or to punish theleast transgression of the laws imposed on them, and perhaps they wouldbe found no longer to repel baptism with abhorrence. " But he was farfrom always acting up to this view, and he even allied with heathenSlavs to accomplish the subjugation of his enemies. As he conquered hemapped out the land in bishoprics and planted monasteries at importantpoints: he took Saxon boys to his court and sent them back trained, often as ecclesiastics, to teach and rule. Among such was Ebbo, afterwards Archbishop of Rheims, the "Apostle of Denmark. " From abroadtoo came other missionaries, and notable among them was anotherEnglishman, Willehad of {142} Northumbria, who became in 788 the firstbishop of Bremen. At last Christianity was, at least nominally, inpossession from the Rhine to the Elbe, and in the words of Einhard"thus they were brought to accept the terms of the king, and thus theygave up their demon worship, renounced their national religiouscustoms, embraced the Christian faith, received the divine sacraments, and were united with the Franks, forming one people. "

Under Charles the organisation of the German Church, begun by Boniface, received a great extension. It was possible, after his death, toregard Germany as Christian and as organised in its religion on thelines of all the Western Churches. 

[1] Hodgkin, _Italy and her Invaders_, v. 203. 

[2] See p. 1-14. 

[3] This seems to me the most probable date. Cf. Hauck, _Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands_, i. 448. 

{143}

CHAPTER XIII

THE POPES AND THE REVIVAL OF THE EMPIRE

[Sidenote: Growth of papal power. ]

The growth of the temporal power of the bishops of Rome was due to twocauses, the withdrawal of the imperial authority from Italy and theconversion of the barbarians. As the emperors at Constantinople becamemore and more busied with affairs Eastern, with the encroachments ofbarbarians, heathen and Muhammadan, and the imperial rule in Italy wasdestroyed by the Lombards, the popes stood out as the one permanentinstitution in Northern and Central Italy. As gradually the barbarianscame to accept the faith they received it at the hands of the greatecclesiastical organisation which kept together the traditions, sostrangely transformed, of the Old Rome. The legislation of Justinianalso had given great political power to the popes: and this power wasgreatly increased when the papacy found itself the leader in theresistance of the great majority of Christian peoples against thepolicy of the Iconoclastic emperors. The history of Rome began to runon very different lines from that of Venice, Naples, or other greatcities. It became for a while a conflict between the local militarynobility and the clergy under the rule of the pope. The {144} strugglewas a political one, just as the assumption of power by the popes, ofpower over the country and a considerable district around it, was apolitical act. 

The popes had but very slight relations with the kings of the Merwinghouse. It was different when the Karlings came into power. Zacharias, both directly and through S. Boniface, came into close connection withPippin and Carloman. At first he was concerned simply with reform inthe Frankish Church, but before long he found himself able to intervenein a critical event and to take part in the inauguration of the KarlingHouse, the revival as it claimed to be of the Empire in the West. 

[Sidenote: The Karling reformation. ]

The growth of the papal power was closely associated with two otherhistoric events: the growth of the Karling house among the Franks, andthe process of revival in the Church's spiritual activity, showingitself in missions without and reforms within. The last leads back tothe first. 

Whatever may be thought of the Karling reformation, it cannot be deniedthat for the century before Charles assumed the Imperial crown theChurch showed many signs of corruption. The darkness of the picture isrelieved only by the lives of some remarkable saints. 

[Sidenote: The Karling House. ]

The first, of course, is S. Arnulf, Bishop of Metz, thegreat-grandfather of Charles Martel. Born about 582, he died in 641, and the holy simplicity of his life as statesman and priest comes likea ray of sunshine in the gloom of the days of "half heathen and whollyvicious" kings. Mr. Hodgkin, with an eye no doubt to modern affairs, comments thus on the career of the prelate so different from thegreedy, turbulent, and licentious men whom {145} Gregory of Toursdescribes: "In reading his life one cannot but feel that in some waythe Frankish nation, or at least the Austrasian part of it, has gropedits way upwards since the sixth century. " [Sidenote: S. Arnulf. ] Arnulfwas a type of the good bishops of the Middle Ages, strong, able to holdhis own with kings, a friend of the poor, eager to pass from the worldto a quiet eventide in some monastic shade. The tale that is told ofhim is typical of the sympathies and passions of his age. Bishop ofMetz, and chief counsellor of Dagobert whose father Chlothochar he hadhelped to raise to the throne, when he expressed his wish to retirefrom the world the king cried out that if he did he would slay his twosons. "My sons' lives are in the hands of God, " said Arnulf. "Yourswill not last long if you slay the innocent"; and when Dagobert drewhis sword on him he said, "Would you return good for evil? Here am Iready to die in obedience to Him Who gave me life and Who died for me. "Queen and nobles cried out, and the king fell penitent at the bishop'sfeet. Like S. Arnulf's is the romantic figure of his descendantCarloman, who turned from the rule of kingdoms and the command ofarmies to the seclusion of Soracte and Monte Cassino. The "greatrenunciation" is a striking tale. The disappearance, the long days ofpatient submission to rule, the discovery of the real position of thehumble brother, and then the last dramatic appearance to follow anunpopular cause, make a story as striking as any which have come to usfrom the Middle Age. But before Carloman come many other noblefigures. The fifty years that followed Arnulf's death are but a drearytale of anarchy and blood. It is broken here and there {146} byrecords of Christian endurance or martyrdom: bishops who tried to servethe State often served not wisely but too well and met the fate ofunsuccessful political leaders. Leodegar, Bishop of Autun, who helpedEbroin to raise Theoderic III to the throne of Neustria, was blinded, imprisoned and at length put to death and appears in the Church'scalendar as S. Leger. 

The crisis came when the long march of the successful Muhammadans wasstayed by the arms of S. Arnulf's descendant Charles Martel, mayor ofthe palace to the King of Austrasia 717, to all the kingdoms from 719, who lived till 741. In 711 the Wisigothic monarchy of Spain had fallenbefore the infidels: in 720 the Moors entered Gaul. From then to 731there was for Abder Rahman an almost unbroken triumph. The power ofthe Prophet reached from Damascus to beyond the Pyrenees. Then CharlesMartel came to the relief of Southern Gaul, and on an October Sunday in732 the hosts of Islam were utterly routed at Poictiers by the soldiersof the Cross. [Sidenote: The defeat of the Saracens. ] It was a greatdeliverance; and there is no wonder that imagination has exaggeratedits importance and thought that but for the Moorish defeat there mightto-day be a muezzin in every Highland steeple and an Imám set overevery Oxford college. Charles had still to reconquer Septimania andProvence. Arles and Nîmes, the great Roman cities, had to be recoveredfrom the Arabs who had seized them, and Avignon, Agde, Beziers, citieswhose future was as wonderful as was the others' past, were also wonback by the arms of the Christian chief. 

Charles died in 741. He had refused to help Pope {147} Gregory III. In739 against the Lombards. It was reserved for his son Pippin to makethat alliance between the papacy and the Karling house which dictatedthe future of Europe. [Sidenote: Pippin. ] To Pippin came the lordshipof the West Franks, to Carloman his brother that of the East Franks, when their father died. They conquered, they reformed the Church amongthe Franks, with the aid of Boniface, and then came that dramaticretirement of Carloman in 747 which showed him to be true heir of S. Arnulf. Four years later the house of the Karlings became the nominalas well as the real rulers of the Franks. In 751 the bishop ofWürzburg for the East Franks, and the abbat of S. Denis for those ofthe West, went to Rome to ask the pope's advice. Were the wretchedMerwings "who were of royal race and were called kings but had no powerin the realm save that grants and charters were drawn up in theirnames" to be still called kings, for "what willed the _major domus_ ofthe Franks, that they did?" Zacharias answered as a wise man would, that he who had the power should bear the name. And so, blessed by thegreat missionary S. Boniface, Pippin was "heaved" on the shield, andbecame king of the Franks, and Childerich, the last of the Merwings, went to a distant monastery to end his days. 

[Sidenote: The end of the Imperial power in Italy. ]

But this was only a beginning. The pope was threatened by thebarbarians, neglected by the emperors who reigned at Constantinople, and at last was in actual conflict with those who tried to imposeIconoclasm upon the Church. In 751 the exarchate, the representationof the Imperial power in Italy, with its seat at Ravenna, wasoverwhelmed by the {148} arms of Aistulf, the Lombard king. The timehad come, thought Pope Stephen II. (752-7), when the distantbarbarians, now orthodox, should be called to save the patrimony of S. Peter from the barbarians near at hand. In S. Peter's name letterssummoned Pippin to the rescue of the church especially dear to theFranks. [1] But before this Stephen had made Pippin his friend. In 753he left Rome and failing to win from Aistulf any concession to theImperial power made his way across the Alps, and on the Feast of theEpiphany, 754, met in their own land Pippin and his son who was to beCharles the Great. The pope fell at the king's feet and besought himby the mercies of God to save the Romans from the hands of theLombards. Then Pippin and all his lords held up their hands in sign ofwelcome and support. Then Stephen on July 28, 754, in the greatmonastery which was to become the crowning-place of Frankish kings, anointed Pippin and his sons Charles and Carloman as king of the Franksand kings in succession. 

[Sidenote: The crowning of Pippin. ]

A point of special interest in this event is the title given to Pippinat his crowning at Saint Denis. The title of Patrician of the Romanswas given by the pope, as commissioned by the emperor, "to act againstthe king of the Lombards for the recovery of the lost lands of theEmpire. " Pippin was made the officer of the distant emperor, and thepope would say as little as possible about the rights of him who ruledin Constantinople, and as much as he could about the Church which ruledin Rome. It was a step in the assertion of {149} political rights forthe Roman Church. A new order of things was springing up in Italy. The popes were asserting a political power as belonging to S. Peter. They were asserting that the exarchate had ceased in political theoryas well as in practical fact. In this new order Pippin was to beinvolved as supporter of the protectorate which the papacy assumed toitself. 

Then the Franks came forward to save Rome from the Lombards. The lastact of the romantic life of Carloman was to plead for justice toAistulf, --that what he had won should not be taken from him, --and to berefused. Twice Pippin came south and saved the pope: and then thecities he had won he refused to give up to the envoys of the distantemperor and declared that "never should those cities be alienated fromthe power of S. Peter and the rights of the Roman Church and thepontiff of the Apostolic See. " From this dates the Roman pope'sindependence of the Roman emperor, the definite political severance ofItaly from the East, and therefore a great stop towards the schism ofthe Church. Iconoclasm and the independence of the popes alike workedagainst the unity of Christendom. 

[Sidenote: The papal power. ]

Pope Stephen, thanks to Pippin, had become the arbitrator of Italy. The keys of Ravenna and of the twenty-two cities which "stretched alongthe Adriatic coast from the mouths of the Po to within a few miles ofAncona and inland as far as the Apennines" were laid on the tomb of S. Peter. The "States of the Church" began their long history, thehistory of "the temporal power. "

And this new power was seen outside Italy as well {150} as within. From the eighth century, at least, the popes are found continuallyintervening in the affairs of the churches among the Franks and theGermans, granting privileges, giving indulgence, writing with explicitclaim to the authority which Christ gave to S. Peter. Into therecesses of Gaul, among Normans at Rouen, among Lotharingians at Metz, to Amiens, or Venice, or Limoges, the papal letters penetrated; andtheir tone is that of confidence that advice will be respected orcommands obeyed. And this is, in small matters especially, rather thanin great. The popes at least claimed to interfere everywhere inChristian Europe and in everything. [2] Within Italy events movedquickly. 

The first step towards a new development was the destruction of theLombard kingdom by Charles, who succeeded his father Pippin in 768. Atfirst joint ruler with his brother he became on the latter's death in771 sole king of all the Franks. In 772 Hadrian I. , a Roman, ambitiousand distinguished, succeeded the weak Stephen III. On the papal throne. He reigned till 795 and one of his first acts was to summon Charles andthe Franks to his rescue against the Lombards. [Sidenote: Charles theGreat and Rome. ] In the midst of his conquests--which it is not hereour part to tell--Charles spent the Holy Week and Easter of 774 atRome. Thus the one contemporary authority tells the tale of the greatalliance which was made on the Wednesday in Easter week: "On the fourthday of the week the aforesaid pontiff with all his nobles both clerklyand knightly went forth to S. Peter's Church and there {151} meetingthe king in colloquy earnestly prayed him and with paternal affectionadmonished him to fulfil entirely that promise which his father of holymemory the dead king Pippin had made, and which he himself with hisbrother Carloman and all the nobles of the Franks had confirmed to S. Peter and his vicar Pope Stephen II. Of holy memory when he visitedFrancia, that they would grant divers cities and territories in thatprovince of Italy to S. Peter and his vicars for ever. And whenCharles had caused the promise which was made in Francia at a placecalled Carisiacum (Quierzy) to be read over to him all its contentswere approved by him and his nobles. And of his will and with a goodand gracious mind that most excellent and most Christian king Charlescaused another promise of gift like the first to be drawn up byEtherius his most religious and prudent chaplain and notary, and inthis he gave the same cities and lands to S. Peter and promised thatthey should be handed over to the pope with their boundaries set forthas is contained in the aforesaid donation, namely: From Luna with theisland of Corsica, thence to Surianum, thence to Mount Bardo, that isto Vercetum, thence to Parma, thence to Pihegium, and from thence toMantua and Mons Silicis, together with the whole exarchate of Ravenna, as it was of old, and the provinces of the Venetia and Istria; togetherwith the whole duchy of Spoletium and that of Beneventum. " [3] Thedonation was confirmed, says the chronicler, with the most solemn oaths. 

Now if this records the facts, and if two-thirds of Italy were given byCharles (who possessed very little {152} of it) to the popes, it isalmost incredible that his later conduct should have shown that he didnot pay any regard to it. But the question is of political rather thanecclesiastical interest, and it may suffice to say that there are verystrong reasons for believing the passage to be a later interpolation. [4]

[Sidenote: The revival of the Empire, 800. ]

Within four mouths Charles had subdued the Lombards and become "rexFrancorum et Langobardorum atque patricius Romanorum. " For nearly aquarter of a century Charles was employed in other parts of his empire:he dealt friendly but firmly with the pope; but he kept away from Rome. But in 799 the new pope Leo III. , attacked by the Romans probably forsome harshness in his rule, fled from the city and in July came toCharles at Paderborn to entreat his help. It is probable that thegreat English scholar, Alcuin, who has been called the Erasmus of theeighth century, had already suggested to the great king that theweakness of the Eastern emperors was a real defeasance of power andthat the crown imperial might be his own. However that may be Charlescame to Rome and made a triumphal entry on November 24, 800. Thecharges against the pope were heard and he swore to his innocence. Onthe feast of the Nativity, in the basilica of S. Peter, when Charleshad worshipped at the _confessio_, the tomb of S. Peter, Leo clothedhim with a purple robe and set a crown of gold upon his head. "Thenall the faithful Romans beholding so great a champion given them andthe love which {153} he bore towards the holy Roman Church and itsvicar, in obedience to the will of God and S. Peter the key-bearer ofthe kingdom of heaven, cried with one accord in sound like thunder 'ToCharles the most pious Augustus, crowned of God, the Emperor great andpeaceable, life and victory!'"

Thus the Roman pope and the Roman people claimed to make anew in Romethe Roman Empire with a German for Caesar and Augustus. It was not, ifwe believe Charles's own close friend Einhard, a distinction sought bythe new emperor himself. "At first he so disliked the title of_Imperator_ and _Augustus_ that he declared that if he had known beforethe intention of the pope he would never have entered the church onthat day, though it was one of the most holy festivals of the year. "[5] It may well be that Charles, who had corresponded with the Caesarsof the East, hesitated to take a step of such bold defiance. Men stillpreserved the memories of how the soldiers of Justinian had won backItaly from the Goths. Nor was Charles pleased to receive such a giftat the hands of the pope. He did not recognise the right of a Romanpontiff to give away the imperial crown. What could be given could betaken away. It was a precedent of evil omen. 

But none the less the coronation of Charles the Great, as men came tocall him, was the greatest event in the Middle Age. It allowed thevitality of the idea of empire which the West inherited from theRomans, and it showed that idea linked to the new power of the popes. It founded the Holy Roman Empire. Twelve years later the Empire of theWest won some sort of recognition from the Empire of the East. In 812an ambassage from Constantinople came {154} to Charles at Aachen, andCharles was hailed by them as Imperator and Basileus. The Empire ofthe West was an accomplished and recognised fact. 

[Sidenote: Results of the revived Empire. ]

Its significance was at least as much religious as poetical. Charlesdelighted in the works of S. Augustine and most of all in the _DeCivitate Dei_; and that great book is the ideal of a Christian State, which shall be Church and State together, and which replaces the Empireof pagan Rome. The abiding idea of unity had been preserved by theChurch: it was now to be strengthened by the support of a head of theState. The one Christian commonwealth was to be linked together in thebond of divine love under one emperor and one pope. That Constantinethe first Christian emperor had given to the popes the sovereignty ofthe West was a fiction which it seems was already known at Rome:Hadrian seems to have referred to the strange fable when he wrote toCharles the Great in 777. It was a legend very likely of Easternfabrication, and it was probably not as yet believed to have any claimto be authentic; but when the papacy had grown great at the expense ofthe Empire it was to be a powerful weapon in the armoury of the popes. Now it served only, with the revival of learning at the court ofCharles the Great, to illustrate two sides of the great movement forthe union of Europe under two monarchs, the spiritual and the temporal. The coronation of Charles was indeed a fact the importance of which, aswell as the conflicts which would inevitably flow from it, lay in thefuture. But it showed the Roman Church great, and it showed theabsorption of the great Teutonic race in the fascinating ideal of unityat once Christian and imperial. 

[1] _Cod. Car. _ in Muratori, _Rer. Ital. Script. _, iii. (2) 90. 

[2] Cf. Dr. J. Von Pflugk-Hartung, _Acta Pontificum Romanorum inedita_, 1880, 1884. 

[3] _Liber Pontificalis_, i. 498. 

[4] The question may be read in Mgr. Duchesne's Introduction to the_Liber Pontificalis_, ccxxxvii. -ccxlii. ; and Dr. Hodgkin, _Italy andher Invaders_, vii. 387-97. 

[5] _Liber Pontificalis_, ii. 6. 

{155}

CHAPTER XIV

THE ICONOCLASTIC CONTROVERSY

We have spoken already of two important periods in the history of theEastern Church. We must now briefly sketch another. 

[Sidenote: Sketch of the period, 725-847. ]

The third period (725-847) is that of Iconoclasm. Of this, theoriginator was the emperor Leo III. , one of those soldiers whoendeavour to apply to the sanctuary the methods of the parade-ground. He issued a decree against the reverence paid to icons (religiousimages and pictures), and, in 729, replaced the patriarch S. Germanusby the more supple Anastasius; a docile assembly of bishops at Hieria, under Constantine V. (Copronymus), passed a decree against every imageof the Lord, the Virgin, and the saints. A fierce persecutionfollowed, which was hardly ended before the accession to power ofIrene, widow of Leo IV. , under whom assembled the Seventh GeneralCouncil at Nicae in 787, a Council to which the West and the distantEast sent representatives. This Council decreed that icons should beused and receive veneration (_proskuêsis_) as did the Cross and thebook of the Gospels. A persecution followed, as bitter as that of theiconoclastic emperors, and the troubled years of the first half of theninth century, stained in Byzantium by every crime, found almost theironly brightness in the patriarchate (843-7) of S. Methodius, a wiseruler, an {156} orthodox theologian, a charitable man. In Antioch andJerusalem, about the same period, orthodox patriarchs werere-established by the toleration of the Ommeyads and the earlierAbbasaides; but on the European frontiers of the Empire conversion wasat a standstill during the whole period of iconoclastic fury andreaction, while in the north-east of Syria and in Armenia the heresy ofthe Paulicians (Adoptianism) spread and flourished, and theMonophysites still throve on the Asiatic borders. In theology theChurch of Constantinople was still strong, as is shown by the greatwork of S. Theodore of the Studium, famous as a hymn-writer, aliturgiologist, and a defender of the faith. 

Such are the facts, briefly summarised, of the history of rather morethan a century in the East. But we must examine more attentively themeaning of the great strife which divided the Eastern Church. 

[Sidenote: The orthodox doctrine of images. ]

The orthodox doctrine, as it is now defined, is this--that "the iconsare likenesses engraved or painted in oil on wood or stone or any sortof metal, of our Saviour Christ, of the Mother of God, and of the holymen who from Adam have been well-pleasing to God. From earliest timesthe icons have been used not only to give internal dignity and beautyto every Christian church and house, but, which is much more essential, for the instruction and moral education of Christians. For when anyChristian looks at the icons, he at once recalls the life and deeds ofthose who are represented upon them, and desires to conform himself totheir example. On this account also the Church decreed in early timesthat due reverence should always be paid {157} by Christians to theholy icons, which honour of course is not rendered to the picturebefore our eyes, but to the original of the picture. " This statementrepresents the views of the orthodox Eastern theologians of the eighthas clearly as it does the teaching of the nineteenth century. Itrepresents also the opinions of the popes contemporary with theIconoclastic movement, who withstood the emperors to the face. Leo wasthreatened by Gregory II. , and the patriarch who had yielded to thestorm, Anastasius, was excommunicated. The pope advocated, in cleardogmatic language, the use of images for instruction of the ignorantand encouragement of the faithful. In Greece there was something likea revolution, but it was sternly repressed. [Sidenote: The acceptancein the West. ] In 731 a council, at which the archbishops of Ravenna andGrado were present, and ninety-three other Italian prelates, with alarge representation of the laity, under Pope Gregory III. , orderedthat if anyone should stand forth as "a destroyer, profaner, andblasphemer against the veneration of the holy images, that is of Christand His sinless Mother, of the blessed Apostles and the Saints, heshould be excluded from the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and fromall the unity and fabric of the Church. " The answer to this, it wouldseem, was the separation of the Illyrian territories and sees from theRoman patriarchate, as well as the sees in Sicily and Calabria: thepope's authority was restricted to the territory of the exarchate, including Rome, Venice and Ravenna. In Constantinople the resistanceof the people to the Iconoclastic decrees was met by a bitterpersecution, which Constantine V. Began in 761. Under {158} his fatherLeo III. The virgin Theodosia was martyred, who is revered among themost popular of the Saints in Constantinople to-day. [Sidenote: TheIconoclastic persecution. ] The position of the people who clung totheir old ways of worship in the eighth century was indeed not unlikethat of those who to-day struggle on, always in dread of activepersecution, under the Muhammadan rule. Muhammadanism, with its sternsuppression of all representation of things divine or human, wasbelieved to have been one of the suggesting forces which brought aboutthe Iconoclastic movement. Leo III. Had been brought into intimateassociation with the Saracens; and it was said in his own day that hehad learned his fury against images from one of them. The tale was afable, but it showed how entirely Leo's action was contrary to thereligious feeling of his time. 

[Sidenote: Iconoclastic theology. ]

It is difficult perhaps for a Western, or at least an Anglican, to-dayto form a just estimate of the strong feeling of the majority of theEastern Christians in favour of "image-worship. " It is easy to see howthe stern simplicity of the Muhammadan worship, which in all thestrength of the creed that carried its disciples in triumphant marchover continents and over ancient civilisations was present to the eyesof the soldiers of Heraclius and Leo, appealed to all those who knewthe power and the need of stern self-restraint. That Islam should seemto be more spiritual than Christianity seemed irony indeed, but anirony which seemed to have facts to prove it. An age of superstition, an age of credulous limits after the miraculous, an age whenmaterialism made rapid progress among {159} the courtiers of the greatcity, was an age, it might well seem, which needed a protest against"iconoduly, " as the iconoclasts termed the custom of the EasternChurch. And if the controversy could have been kept away from thefield of pure theology it might well have been that an Iconoclasticvictory would not have been other than a benefit to religion. Leo wascontent to replace the crucifix by a cross. But it is impossible tosunder the symbol from the doctrine, and the Greeks would never restsatisfied with a definition, still less with a practical change, without probing to its inner meaning. This feeling was expressed inform philosophical and theological by one of the last of the greatGreek Fathers, S. John Damascene, and by the united voice of the Churchin the decision of the Seventh General Council. 

[Sidenote: S. John Damascene. ]

S. John of Damascus, who died about 760, was clear in his acceptance ofall the Councils of the Church, clear in his rejection of Monophysitismand Monothelitism. He described in clear precision the two natures inone hypostasis, the two wills, human and Divine, with a wisdom andknowledge related to each; but he was equally clear that the compositepersonality involves a _communicatio idiomatum_ (_antidosisidiômatôn_). The human nature taken up into the Divine received theglory of the Divinity: the Divine "imparts to the human nature of itsown glories, remaining itself impassible and without share in thepassions of humanity. " S. John Damascene taught then that our Lord'shumanity was so enriched by the Divine Word as to know the future, though this knowledge was only manifested progressively as He increasedin age, and {160} that only for our sakes did He progressively manifestHis knowledge. While he declared that each Nature in the Divine Personhad its will, he explained that the One Person directed both, and thatHis Divine will was the determinant will. It might well seem that inhis desire to avoid Nestorianism he did not attach so full a meaning toour Lord's advance in human knowledge as did some of the earlierFathers. But the practical bearing of S. John's writings was in directrelation to the great controversy of his age, to which he devoted threeaddresses in particular. He defined the "worship" of the icons as allbased upon the worship of Christ, and attacked iconoclasm as involvingultimately an assault upon the doctrine of the Incarnation. On thisground S. Theodore of the Studium and Nicephorus the patriarch ofConstantinople, who was driven from his see by the emperor, are at onewith S. John Damascene. 

[Sidenote: S. Theodore of the Studium. ]

Theodore of the Studium occupies a place in Greek thought which is, perhaps, comparable to that of S. Anselm in the Latin Church. If therenever was anything in the East exactly corresponding to the era of theschoolmen in the West, if the theology of Byzantium throughout mightseem to be a scholasticism, but a scholasticism apart, still it wouldnot be untrue to describe S. Theodore as the last of the Greek Fathers. He came at a time in Byzantine history when a great crisis was beforethe Church and State, so closely conjoined in the Eastern Empire. Bornin the last half of the eighth century, and dying on November 11th, 826, Theodore lived through the most vital period of the Iconoclasticstruggle, and he left, in his {161} theological and familiar writings, the most important memorial of the orthodox position which he did somuch to render victorious. 

Theodore of the Studium is a striking example of the influence ofenvironment, tradition, and _esprit de corps_. His life isinextricably bound up with the history, and his opinions wereindubitably formed to a very large extent by the influence, of thegreat monastery of S. John Baptist of the Studium, founded towards theclose of the fourth century by Fl. Studius, a Roman patrician, theremains of which still charm the traveller who penetrates through theobscurest part of Constantinople to the quarter of Psamatia. The housewas dedicated to S. John Baptist, and according to the Russiantraveller, Antony of Novgorod, it contained special relics of thePrecursor. A later description shows the extreme beauty, seclusion, severity of the place, surrounded by cypress trees and looking forth onthe great city which was mistress of the world. Even to-day thesplendid columns which still remain and the impressive beauty of thecrypt make the church, though in an almost ruinous condition, astriking object in Constantinople. The monastery first became famousas the home of the Akoimetai, or Sleepless Monks, (as they were calledfrom their hours of prayer, ) when they withstood the heresies of thelater fifth century, [1] and fell themselves into error, but from thedate of the Fifth General Council to the outbreak of the Iconoclasticcontroversy they remained in comparative obscurity. 

The era of Iconoclasm, which did so much to devastate the East, andwhich, by the emigration of some {162} 50, 000 Christians, cleric andlay, to Calabria, exercised so important an influence on the history ofSouthern Italy, might have cast a fatal blight on the Church inConstantinople had it not been for the stand made by the Monks of theStudium. [Sidenote: The Monks of the Studium and the IconoclasticControversy. ] The age of the Iconoclasts was the golden age of theStudite monks. Persecuted, expelled from their house by ConstantineCopronymus, they were restored at his death in 775, but had dwindled, it seems, to the number of twelve. A new era of power began for themunder their Archimandrite Sabbas, and this was increased by hissuccessor, Theodore, whose life covered the period of the greatesttheological importance in the history of Iconoclasm. When thepatriarchal see was held for seven-and-twenty years by Iconoclasts, Theodore upheld the spirits of his brethren, and even in exilecontrived to be their indefatigable leader and support. His was nevera submissive, but always an active resistance to the imperial attemptto dragoon the Church, and a typical audacity was the solemn processionwith all the monastery's icons, the monks singing the hymn "_Tênachranton eikona sou proskunoumen_, _agathe_" which caused hisexpulsion. His exile produced a series of impressive letters in which, with every vigour and cogency of argument of which a logical Greek wascapable, he exhorted, encouraged, and consoled those who, like himself, remained steadfast to their faith. The Studium gave, too, its actualmartyrs, James and Thaddeus, to the traditional belief; and Theodore inexile, who would gladly have borne them company in their death, commemorated their heroism and {163} implored their intercessions. Theodore's whole life was one of resistance, active or passive, to theattempt of the emperors to dictate the Church's Creed; and though hedid not live to see the conclusion of the conflict, its final resultwas largely due to his persistent and strenuous efforts. For a whileafter his death there is silence over the history of the Studites, till, in 844, we find them bringing back his body in solemn triumphfrom the island of Prinkipo. Till the middle of the ninth century theyremained a potent force; from that time up to the capture ofConstantinople by the Turks, if they retained their fame, theiractivity was diminished. 

[Sidenote: The rule of the Studium. ]

Professor Marin[2] has collected interesting details from many sourcesas to the rule of the house, its dress, liturgical customs, learning, discipline. The liturgy was said at six on days when the fast lastedtill nine, at three on other days; and the monks were expected tocommunicate daily. While the house was essentially a learned society, a community of sacred scholars, Theodore stands out from its wholeannals as a great preacher, and no less for the charm of his personalcharacter. It was he, fitly, who gave to the house that special Rule, which stood in the same relation to the general customary observance byEastern monks of that somewhat vague series of laws known as "the Ruleof Basil, " that the reform of Odo of Cluny stood to the work of S. Benedict himself. It was an eminently sensible codification offloating custom in regard to monastic life. All that Theodore did--andthis applies with special force to the sermons which he {164}preached--seems to have been eminently practical, charitable, and sane. There is an underlying force of the same kind in the argument of histhree _Antirrhetici_, in which he triumphantly vindicates the worshipof Christ in His Godhead and His manhood as being inseparable andessential to the true knowledge of the faith as it is in Jesus. Therecan be no rivalry between icon and prototype: "The worship of the imageis worship of Christ, because the image is what it is in virtue oflikeness to Christ. "

This was the point on which the orthodox met the theologians whodefended iconoclasm: the iconoclasts in seeking to destroy all imageswere seen to strike at a vital truth of the Incarnation, the truehumanity of Jesus. The theologians demanded the preservation andworship, --reverence rather than worship in the modern English use ofthe words, --of the icons as a security for the remembrance of theManhood of the Lord. The worship was not _latreia_, which can be paidto God alone, but _proskunêsis schetikê_. Christ, said S. Theodore, was in danger of losing the quality of being man if not seen andworshipped in an image. 

The long dispute ended, as we have said, after the accession of theEmpress Irene, who, unworthy though she was to have part in any greatreligious movement, yet had always been attached to the traditionalopinions of the Greek people. The monks of Constantinople hadexercised a steady influence during all the years of disturbance: andthey were to triumph. [Sidenote: The Seventh General Council, 787. ]The Empress Irene replaced the patriarch Paul in 783 by her ownsecretary Tarasius, and it was determined at once to reverse thedecrees that {165} had been passed at Constantinople in 754. In 787for the second time a council met at Nicaea, across the Sea of Marmora, which became recognised as the Seventh General Council. To it camerepresentatives of East and West, and the decision which was arrived atwas practically that of the whole Church. 

The persecution of the orthodox was renewed for a time under Leo V. (813-20), and it is said that more perished in his time than in that ofConstantine V. Theophilus (829-42) was almost equally hostile. It wasnot till his widow Theodora assumed the reins of power in 842 as regentfor her son that the final triumph of orthodoxy was assured; and thiswas followed by the five years' patriarchate of S. Methodius, a man ofpeace and of wisdom. 

To some the action of the emperors in attacking image worship hasseemed a serious attempt at social reform, an endeavour to raise thestandard of popular worship, and through that to affect the peoplethemselves intellectually, morally, and spiritually. But history hasspoken conclusively of the violence with which the attempt was made, and theology has decisively pronounced against its dogmatic assertions. 

The long controversy is important in the history of the Church becauseit so clearly expresses the character of the Eastern Church, sodecisively demonstrates its intense devotion to the past, and soexpressively illustrates the close attachment, the abiding influence, of the people and the monks, as the dominant factor in the developmentof theology and religious life. 

[1] See above, pp. 8, 14. 

[2] _De Studio Coenobio Constantinopolitano_, Paris, 1897. 

{166}

CHAPTER XV

LEARNING AND MONASTICISM

Something has been said in earlier chapters of the relation of severalgreat Churchmen towards education, towards the ancient classics, andtowards the studies of their own times. Something has been said, too, in the last chapter, of Greek monastic life. The period which beginswith the eighth century deserves a longer mention, inadequate though itbe; for there was over a great part of Europe in the days of Charlesthe Great a veritable literary renaissance which broke upon the longperiod which men have called the dark ages with a ray of light. 

[Sidenote: Learning at the court of Charles the Great. ]

Charles the Great had all the interests of a scholar. He knew Latinwell and Greek passably. He delighted to listen to the deeds of thepast, or to theological treatises, when he dined, after the fashion ofmonks. His interest in learning centred in his interest in theteaching and services of the Church. Most reverently, we are told byhis biographer, and with the utmost piety did he cultivate theChristian religion with which he had been imbued from his infancy. Hewas a constant church-goer, a regular worshipper at the mass. Near tohis religious interest was his interest in education. A famous letterof his to the abbats of monasteries {167} throughout the Empire, written in 787, is a salient example of the close connection betweenlearning and monasticism in his day. He urged that "letters" should bestudied, students selected and taught, that all the clergy should teachchildren freely, and that every monastery and cathedral church shouldhave a theological school. "Although right doing is better than rightspeaking, " he wrote, "yet must the knowledge of what is right go beforethe doing of it. "

What he tried to do throughout his empire was a reflection of what hedid in his own court. He delighted to surround himself at Aachen withlearned men. Most notable among them were Paul the Deacon, thehistorian of the Lombards, and Alcuin the Northumbrian whom he had metin Italy and whom he made prominent among his counsellors. 

Charles, says Einhard, spent much time and labour in learning fromAlcuin, and that not only in religion, but "in rhetoric and dialecticand especially astronomy"; and he "carefully reformed the manner ofreading and singing; for he was thoroughly instructed in both, thoughhe never read publicly himself, nor sang except in a low voice, andwith the rest of the congregation. "

[Sidenote: Alcuin of Northumbria. ]

Alcuin connects the learning of England with the revival on theContinent. He had been trained in the school at York by ArchbishopEgbert, who was himself a pupil of Bede. He had studied the ancientclassics in Greek as well as Latin and knew at least a little ofHebrew. The library at York is known to have contained books in allthose languages, and Aristotle was among them. Vergil, he said, whenhe was a boy he cared more for [Transcriber's note: a line appears tobe missing here] than the vigils of the Church and the chanting of the{168} psalms. About 782 he took charge of the schools which Charleshad founded at his court, and he became a very close friend and trustedadviser of the emperor himself. With him (but for a short return toEngland) he lived till in 796 he had leave to retire to Tours, where hewas abbat of the great monastery of S. Martin, and where he died in804. He was a great teacher; a writer of books of education and booksof Church practice, of lives of the saints, of hymns, epigrams, prayers, controversial tracts; a compiler of summaries of patristicteaching; a leader in the reform of monastic houses. Among the manynotable points in his career, as illustrating the life of learnedchurchmen of his age, are two especially to be observed. The first ishis "humanism. " He was a scholar of an ancient type; and the societyin which he lived delighted to believe itself classical as well asChristian. In a contemporary description of the life at Charles'scourt Alcuin is called "Flaccus" and is described as "the glory of ourbards, mighty to shout forth his songs, keeping time with his lyricfoot, moreover a powerful sophist, able to prove pious doctrines out ofHoly Scripture, and in genial jest to propose or solve puzzles ofarithmetic. " As a theologian he was most famous for his books againstFelix of Urgel and Elipandus of Toledo, on the subject of theAdoptianist heresy (see above, ch. Vi), and there is no doubt that hiswas an important influence in the Council of Frankfort which condemnedthem. The second is his attitude towards the monastic life. Headmired the monastic life, but he had not been trained as a strictBenedictine, indeed he was probably no more than a secular in deacon'sorders. He held abbeys as their superior, just as many {169} laymendid; but he never seems to have been inclined to take upon him anystrict rule. His example shows how natural was the next step inmonastic history which is associated with the abbey of Cluny. 

[Sidenote: The schools of Europe. ]

In Alcuin England was linked to the wider world of Christendom. Thishas been summarily expressed by a great English historian thus: "Theschools of Northumbria had gathered in the harvest of Irish learning, of the Franco-Gallican schools still subsisting and preserving aremnant of classical character in the sixth century, and of Rome, itself now barbarised. Bede had received instruction from thedisciples of Chad and Cuthbert in the Irish studies of the Scriptures, from Wilfrid and Acca in the French and Roman learning, and fromBenedict Biscop and Albinus in the combined and organised discipline ofTheodore. By his influence with Egbert, the school of York wasfounded, and in it was centred nearly all the wisdom of the West, andits great pupil was Alcuin. Whilst learning had been growing inNorthumbria, it had been declining on the Continent; in the latter daysof Alcuin, the decline of English learning began in consequence of theinternal dissensions of the kings, and the early ravages of theNorthmen. Just at the same time the Continent was gaining peace andorganisation under Charles. Alcuin carried the learning which wouldhave perished in England into France and Germany, where it wasmaintained whilst England relapsed into the state of ignorance fromwhich it was delivered by Alfred. Alcuin was rather a man of learningand action than of genius and contemplation like Bede, but his power oforganisation and of teaching was great, and his services {170} toreligion and literature in Europe, based indeed on the foundation ofBede, were more widely extended and in themselves inestimable. " [1]

[Sidenote: John Scotus. ]

Side by side with the career of Alcuin, of which much is known, may beplaced that of another scholar who was at least equally influential, but of whose life little is known. John the Scot, whose thoughtexercised a profound influence on the ages after his death, was one ofthe Irish scholars whom the famous schools of that island produced aslate as the ninth century. He became attached to the court of Charlesthe Bald, as Alcuin had been to that of Charles the Great. He becamelike Alcuin a prominent defender of the faith, being invited byHincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, to answer the monk Gottschalk'sexaggerated doctrine of predestination, which went much farther than S. Augustine, and might be described as Calvinist before Calvin; but hisarguments were also considered unsound, and his opinions were condemnedin later synods. The argument that, evil being the negation of good, God could not know it, for with Him to know is to cause, was certainlyweak if not formally heretical, and his subtleties seemed to thetheologians of his time to be merely ineptitudes. He was also, it isat least probable, engaged in the controversy on the doctrine of theHoly Eucharist which began about this time, originating in the treatiseof Paschasius Radbertus, _de Sacramento Corporis et Sanguinis Christi_. In 1050 a treatise bearing John the Scot's name was condemned; but itseems that this was really written by Ratramnus of Corbie. The view ofRadbert was that which was {171} afterwards formalised intoTransubstantiation. The view attributed to John was a clear denial ofany materialising doctrine of the Sacrament. Later writers say thatJohn returned to England, taught in the abbey school at Malmesbury, thefamous school originated by Irish monks and illustrated by the fame ofS. Aldhelm, and there died. His chief work was the _de DivisioneNaturae_, in which he seems to anticipate much later philosophicargument (notably that of S. Anselm and Descartes as to the existenceof God) and to have been the precursor if not the founder of Nominalism. 

With John the Scot it is clear that both the old literature andphilosophy survived and were fruitful and that new interests, whichwould carry theology into further developments, were arising. Arevival of learning was naturally the growth of the monastic system;but that system was itself far from secure at the time of which wespeak. 

[Sidenote: The Benedictine rule. ]

The Benedictine rule did not win its way over Europe without somechecks; nor was it always able to retain its hold in an age of generaldisorder. Much depended upon the abbat in each particular house. InGaul, the rule of S. Columban had made him absolute. But such asubmission was never accepted in central and southern Gaul. From theend of the sixth century it is clear that monasticism was beginning toslacken its devotion. The history of the monastery of S. Radegund asgiven by Gregory of Tours shows this; so does the letter of Gregory theGreat to Brunichild. Nor did the milder rule of S. Benedict longremain unaltered in practice. 

A new revival is connected with the names of Odo and Cluny. 

{172}

[Sidenote: The decay of monasticism in the ninth century. ]

Saint Odo emerges from an age in which the most striking feature wasthe reassertion of the imperial power and the imperial idea. The ninthcentury, as it began, witnessed a remarkable revival, the revival of adecayed and dormant institution--the Roman Empire--in whose ashes therehad yet survived the fire which had inspired the rulers of the world inthe past. The great idea of imperialism was reborn in the person of aman of extraordinary physical and mental power, a sovereign who, whilehe had not a little of the weaknesses of his age, had also in aremarkable degree centred in himself its highest philosophicaspirations. The early ninth century is dominated by the figure ofCharles the Great. The result was inevitable. Lay power, layover-lordship or supremacy, extends everywhere, intrudes into therecesses of monastic life, and dictates even in things purelyspiritual. And as the new tide of barbarian invasion, Saracen orNorman, sweeps on in Spain or Gaul, the Church, for very physicalneeds, seeks refuge under the protection of lay barons, princes, andkings. Feudalism is rising. The monastic houses fall often under thearrogant rule of lay abbats. And the popes, not rarely a preythemselves to the vices of the age, sink into impotence and becomeenmeshed in worldly, often shameful, intrigue and disorder. The canonsof Church councils show that it was below as it was above. Secularitywas general, vice was far from rare. 

The Divine spirit and the past history of Christianity made it certainthat a revival of life must come. The dry bones would feel the breathand would live {173} again. [Sidenote: S. Odo. ] On the borders of thelands of Maine and Anjou was born in 879, of a line of feudal barons, Odo, the regenerator of monasticism, the ultimate reviver of thepapacy, the spiritual progenitor of Hildebrand himself. Promised toGod at his birth, he was long held back by his father for knighthoodand the life of a warrior such as he himself had led; a grievoussickness gave him, on his recovery, to the monastic life. The disciplealike of S. Martin and S. Benedict, he took inspiration from them torevive the strict monastic rule. From a canon he became a monk, aftera noviciate at Baume, the foundation of Columban in the wild andbeautiful valley between the Seille and the Dard, in the diocese ofBesançon. For a time he tasted the life of the anchorite and thecoenobite. Then he passed to the abbey of Cluny, founded in 910 byWilliam of Aquitaine in the mountains above the valley of the Grosne, and ruled till 927 by Berno, who came himself from Baume. On his deathOdo became abbat; and to him the great development of the revival ofstrict monasticism is due. 

[Sidenote: Cluny. ]

Cluny became the type of the exempted abbeys, and the highestrepresentative of the monastic privileges. It embodied in itself thebest expression of the resistance to feudalism; it became the mostpowerful support of the papacy and of the much-needed movement for thereform of the Church. The first necessity of the new monasticism wasan absolute independence of the lay power. Thus the founder attachedit from the first to the Roman Church, and gave up all his own rightsof property. Its situation, in the heart of Burgundy, {174} removed itfrom the power of the king. Charles the Simple permitted itsfoundation, Louis d'Outremer confirmed its privileges. When Urban II. , a militant Cluniac, became pope the interests of Cluny and Rome weremore than ever identified. The monks elected their abbat withoutexterior interference. To prevent this becoming an abuse, the firstabbats always proposed their coadjutors as their successors. Thus itwas with Berno(910-27), Odo (927-48), Maieul (948-94), Odilo(990-1049). After that there arose the custom of appointing the grandprior as successor--as in the case of S. Hugh (1049-1109). From theconfirmation of its foundation in 931 by John XI. Cluny received thegreatest favours at the hands of the papacy, its abbats being createdarchabbots with episcopal insignia; and it was made entirelyindependent of the bishops. 

[Sidenote: The rule of Cluny. ]

Cluny soon attracted attention, wealth, and followers. Corrupt oldcommunities or new foundations sought the guidance or protection of itsabbats. When each monastery was independent and isolated it wasimpossible to reform a lax community, or for it to defend itself fromfeudal violence and the hostility of the secular clergy. Odo, thesaint who saw these evils, therefore started what soon became theCongregation of Cluny. The daughter-houses were regarded not asindependent, but as parts of Cluny. There was only one abbat, thearch-abbat of Cluny, who was the head of all. Necessary local controlwas exercised by the prior, responsible to and nominated by the abbat. Some houses resisted annexation to Cluny, such as S. Martial atLimoges, which kept up the contest from 1063 to 1240. Contact {175}between the abbey and its dependencies was preserved by visitation ofthe abbat; and the dependent houses sent representatives to periodicalchapters, which met at Cluny under the abbat. In the eleventh centurythese were merely consultative, but in the thirteenth they had becomepolitical, administrative, and judicial, even subjecting the abbat totheir control. The rule of S. Benedict was followed in the abbey andits dependencies. The monks did some manual labour, but devotedthemselves chiefly to religious exercises, to teaching the young, tohospitality and almsgiving. 

But the Cluniacs, protected by the papacy, and enriched by theofferings of the faithful all over Europe, taught an extreme doctrineas to the power of the Holy See. Their ideal was the absoluteseparation of Church from State, the reorganisation of the Church undera general discipline such as could be exercised only by the pope. He, in their ideal, was to stand towards the whole world as the Cluniacabbat stood towards each Cluniac priory, the one ultimate source ofjurisdiction, the Universal Bishop, appointing and degrading thediocesan bishops as the abbat made and unmade the priors. 

How much of all this did the great Odo plan? Not very much. But itwas his work to revive the discipline, the holiness, theself-sacrifice, which, through the reformed monasteries, should touchthe whole Church. 

And thus monasticism at the beginning of the eleventh century was awholly new force in the life of Christendom. It was destined to reformthe papacy itself. 

[1] Bp. Stubbs in _Dict. Of Christian Biography_, vol. I. P. 74. 

{176}

CHAPTER XVI

SACRAMENTS AND LITURGIES

[Sidenote: Baptism. ]

In the centuries with which we deal the importance of Baptism cannot beoverrated. It was everywhere, in all the missions of the Church, regarded as the critical point of the individual life and theindispensable means of entrance to the Christian Church. When thechildren of Sebert the king of the East Saxons wished to have all theprivileges of Christians, which their father had had, and "a share inthe white bread" though they were still heathen, Mellitus the bishopanswered, "If you will be washed in that font of salvation in whichyour father was washed, then you may also partake of the holy bread ofwhich he used to partake: but if you despise the laver of life youcannot possibly receive the bread of life"; and he was driven from thekingdom because he would not yield an inch. The tale however showsalso that there were still on the fringe of Christianity persons whowere not baptized, not catechumens, yet still interested in thereligion and to some extent anxious to be sharers in its life. Throughout the early history of Gaulish Christianity the same is to beobserved, and it is doubtless the reason why a number of semi-pagancustoms still survived among those who were nominally Christians, {177}as well as those who still stood outside the Church. Baptism in thecase of many was a critical point in the history of a tribe or nation. The baptism of Chlodowech was the greatest historical event in thehistory of the Franks: it was of critical importance that the Franks, with him, accepted orthodox Christianity, that he, robed in the whitevesture which West and East alike considered meet, and which wassometimes worn for the octave after baptism, confessed his faith in theBlessed Trinity, was baptized in the name of Father, Son and HolyGhost, and was anointed with the holy chrism and signed with the signof the cross. Baptism not only admitted into the Christian Church, butwas invested with the associations of the human family, and thus hadtransferred to it some of the conditions in which students ofanthropology find such interesting survivals, of primitive ideas. Theconception of spiritual relationship was endowed with the results whichbelonged to natural kinship. The sponsors became spiritual parents. The code of Justinian forbade the marriage of a godchild and godparent, because "nothing can so much call out fatherly affection and the justprohibition of marriage as a bond of this kind, by means of which, through the action of God, their souls are united to one another. "This led to the growth of as elaborate a scheme of spiritualrelationships as that which already hedged round among many tribes theeligibility for marriage among persons even remotely akin to oneanother. In the East, as in the West, baptism was most frequentlyconferred at the time of the great Christian festivals, Christmas (asin the case of Chlodowech), Epiphany, and especially Easter; and EasterEve became, later {178} on, especially consecrated to the sacred rite. In the East baptism was often postponed till the infant was two yearsold; and everywhere there was for long a tendency even among Christianparents to hold back children from the laver of regeneration for fearof the consequences of post-baptismal sin. It was thus that a name wasoften given, and a child received into the Church, some weeks or evenmonths before the baptism took place. The Greek Syntagma of theseventh century contains interesting information as to the baptism ofheretics. It is ordered that Sabellians, Montanists, Manichaeans, Valentianists and such like shall be baptized just as pagans are, afterinstruction and examination in the faith, and, after insufflation, bytriple immersion. 

[Sidenote: Confirmation. ]

Throughout these centuries baptism was not separated from Confirmation, except in the case of some converts from heresy. The two rites wereregarded as parts of the same sacrament, or at least the former was notconsidered complete without the latter. The sacramental life of theindividual in fact was to begin with his entrance into the Church andnever to be intermitted. Even infants were present throughout thecelebration of the sacred mysteries and partook of the Communion, acustom which was only abandoned in the West because of the difficultyof frequent giving of Confirmation and the consequent delay of thatrite till later years. 

[Sidenote: The Holy Communion. ]

Baptism and Confirmation was the gate by which the Christian wasadmitted to the Sacrament of the Lord's Body and Blood. Thecelebration of that Sacrament was the chief act of the Church's worshipevery Sunday and holy day, and in {179} Spain, Africa, Antioch, daily, in Rome every day except Friday and Saturday, in Alexandria except onThursday and Friday: indeed by the end of the sixth century it seemsprobable that in most parts of the Church a daily celebration wasusual. From the seventh century the mass of the presanctified, whenthe priest communicated from elements previously consecrated, is foundin use on certain days, and in the East throughout except on Saturdaysand Sundays. [Sidenote: Frequent Communion. ] It seems clear that atleast up to the sixth century it was usual for all who were confirmedto communicate whenever they were present, unless they were underpenance; but the custom of noncommunicating attendance was growing up. In the East a spiritual writer said, "it is not rare or frequentcommunion which matters, but to make a good communion with a preparedconscience"; while in the West Bede's letter to Archbishop Egbert ofYork supplies an excellent illustration of custom. [Sidenote: Bede. ]The people are to be told, he advises, "how salutary it is for allclasses of Christians to participate daily in the body and blood of ourLord, as you know well is done by Christ's Church throughout Italy, Gaul, Africa, Greece, and all the countries of the East. Now, thiskind of religion and heavenly devotion, through the neglect of ourteachers, has been so long discontinued among almost all the laity ofour province, that those who seem to be most religious among themcommunicate in the holy mysteries only on the Day of our Lord's birth, the Epiphany, and Easter, whilst there are innumerable boys and girls, of innocent and chaste life, as well as young men and women, old menand old women, who without any scruple {180} or debate are able tocommunicate in the holy mysteries on every Lord's Day, nay, on all thebirthdays of the holy Apostles and martyrs, as you have yourself seendone in the holy Roman and Apostolic Church. " It would seem from thisthat frequent communion was inculcated by the first missionaries toEngland in the sixth century. Bede tells also how in his day twoAnglian priests went on a mission to the heathen Saxons, and, whilewaiting for the decision of the "satrap, " "devoted themselves to prayerand psalm-singing, and daily offered to God the sacrifice of the SavingVictim, having with them sacred vessels and a hallowed table to serveas an altar. "

[Sidenote: Fasting Communion. ]

The Sacrament was received in both kinds and fasting, and the priestwas forbidden to celebrate after taking any food; some exception tothis rule may be inferred from a canon of the Second Council of Mâconin 585 enforcing it, and the ecclesiastical historian Socrates (whoseHistory extends from 306 to 439) states that some in Egypt did notreceive "as the custom is among Christians, " but after a meal. Thepresence of the Lord in the Eucharist was recognised and adored. [Sidenote: The doctrine of the Sacrifice. ] S. Anastasius of Sinai, probably of the sixth century, writes: "After the bloodless sacrificehas been consecrated, the priest lifts up the bread of life, and showsit to all. " The Eucharist is continually spoken of as the holySacrifice, the offering of the Saving Victim, the Celestial Oblation;and it was offered, as the writings of Gregory the Great show, inspecial intercession for the dead as well as the living. From thebeginning of the fifth century it seems to have been, at leastoccasionally, {181} reserved in church as well as sent to the sick intheir own houses. 

[Sidenote: The Roman mass. ]

During the fifth and sixth centuries it would seem that the Roman mass, the rite which has slowly superseded the local forms of service in mostparts of Europe, was undergoing the modifications which brought it tothe stereotyped form it now has. The severe, terse, practical natureof the liturgy, in words, ritual, ceremonial, which is socharacteristic of the Roman nature, was being altered by the admixtureof other elements. This was especially the case, it is said, in Franceand Germany, during the ninth century. Earlier changes had been madeby Gregory the Great, partly from Eastern sources. [Sidenote: Thefifth century. ] At the middle of the fifth century the rite, in wordsand action alike, was a simple one. The choir sang an introit, thepriest a collect, epistle and gospel were read, and a psalm was sung:the gifts were offered, the prayer or "preface" of the day was followedby the Sanctus, as in the East, and then came the Canon or actualConsecration. After this was the Lord's Prayer, communion of priests, clergy and people, a psalm and a collect and the end. The ceremonialwas equally simple, and was connected almost exclusively with theentrance of the celebrant and his ministers, at which incense was used, and with the reading of the gospel, where also lights and incense wereprominent. All else was simple and of dignified reticence. "Mysterynever flourished in the clear Roman atmosphere, and symbolism was noproduct of the Roman religious mind. Christian symbolism is not ofpure Roman birth, not a native product of the {182} Roman spirit. " [1]This reticent character is most clearly found in the Gregorian missal, which has been believed to represent the period of Gregory the Great. More probably the assertion of John the Deacon that Gregory revised theGelasian Sacramentary is an error, and what is called the GregorianSacramentary is simply the book which was sent by Pope Hadrian I. ToCharles I. Between 784 and 791. But that S. Gregory did make certainalterations is certain. They were three in the Liturgy, two in theceremonial of the mass. The Alleluia was ordered to be more frequentlychanted than before; and we find it used outside the Easter seasonalmost immediately after this by S. Augustine in England. He addedwords to the "Hanc igitur" in the Canon of the mass, praying for peaceand inclusion in the number of the elect. He inserted the Lord'sPrayer immediately after the Canon. He also forbade the deacons tosing any of the mass except the gospel and the subdeacons to wearchasubles at the altar. 

[Sidenote: The eighth century. ]

It is thought that the great change, which made the Roman mass into theelaborate rite it became, is due to the influence, at the end of theeighth century, of Charles the Great, who with the determination of aruler and the interest of a liturgiologist made one rite to be observedthroughout his dominions, but enriched the Gregorian book with detailsand ceremonies derived from uses already common in France. The studyof liturgies became common in the ninth century, and in Gaul additionswere made to the book sent by Pope Hadrian {183} to Charles the Great, which were finally accepted throughout the greater part of Italy, theAmbrosian rite in the province of Milan remaining different throughoutthe changes. 

It is natural that English readers should desire to know moreparticularly of the first English Christian worship. How did theChurch's worship first begin in our own land?

[Sidenote: The rites of the Western isles. ]

No doubt the Christians who received conversion during the Romanoccupation of Britain, and those of Ireland who were won by thepreaching of S. Patrick, worshipped according to the same rite as thechurches of Spain or the churches of Gaul, following that use whichsurvived in Spain generally till the eleventh century and in Gaul tillthe ninth. Gildas, who wrote during the stress of the conquest of theChristian Brythons by the heathen English, mentions one custom whichundoubtedly was Gallican, and which is preserved in the GelasianSacramentary and the _Missale Francorum_, the one a Roman collectionwhich contains Gallican uses, the other a Gallican rite. It is that ofanointing the hands of priests, and perhaps deacons, in ordination, andthe custom was kept up after the conversion of the English, at least insome parts of England in the tenth and eleventh centuries. But theinfluence of the British Church was slight. It is of more interest tous to know what was the first worship offered in this land by those whowere to convert our own forefathers. 

Bede tells us how first Augustine prayed when he came before theheathen king of Kent. Some days after their landing Aethelbertreceived the monks from {184} Rome. [Sidenote: S. Augustine in Kent. ]They had tarried, it seems probable, under the walls of the old Romanfortress of Richborough. They had waited, in prayer and patience, forthe beginning of their Mission. It was on prayer that they stilldepended when they were summoned before the king. On a ridge of rocksoverlooking the sea sat Aethelbert and his gesiths, and watched theband of some forty men draw near. Slowly they came, and the strangesound of the Church's music was wafted to the ears of the heathencompany as they drew near. Before them was borne a tall silver cross, and a banner which displayed the pictured image of the Saviour Lord, The Cross preceding Him who floats in air, The pictured Saviour. 

S. Gregory, the great pope who had sent the mission, who had himselflong dwelt at the court of the emperors in Constantinople, had learntthe value of _icons_, of sacred pictures, as texts for an appeal, or asstimulants to devotion. Those who cannot read, he said, should betaught by pictures, but pictures are valuable only because they pointto Him whom we adore as incarnate, crucified, sitting at the right handof God. As they came, they sang, and Bede says: "they sang litanies, entreating the Lord for their own salvation and that of those for whomand to whom they came. " The litany ended when they came to the king, and then Augustine preached the word. He declared, says an old Englishwriter of later days, "how the merciful Saviour with His own sufferingsredeemed their guilty world, and opened an entrance into the kingdom ofheaven to all faithful men. "

The king bade them deliver their message, and they {185} sat--for itwas no formal sermon, but rather, as we should say, a meditation on thethings of God--and "preached the word of life to him and all hisgesiths who were present. " Bede tells us the answer of the gravethoughtful Aethelbert--"They are certainly beautiful words and promisesthat you bring; but because they are new and unproved, I cannot give myassent to them and give up those things which I with all the Englishrace have so long observed. But since you are strangers and have comea long way, so that--as I think I can see clearly--you might impart tous that which you believe to be true and most good, I do not wish youany harm, but rather will treat you kindly and see that you have allyou need, and we will not hinder you from bringing over to the faith ofyour own religion all of our people that you can win. " And so he gavethem lodging in his own city, the metropolis, as Bede, as it were byprophecy, calls it, of Canterbury. [Sidenote: The litanies. ] TowardsCanterbury they went, still with litany and procession, and thus, Bedetells us, it is said they sang--still carrying the holy cross and thepicture of the great King, our Lord Jesus Christ. --

"We beseech Thee, O Lord, according to all Thy mercy, that Thy wrathand Thine anger may be turned away from this city, and from Thy holyhouse; for we have sinned. Alleluia. "

A tradition that lasted down to Bede's own day thus handed down theirwords. There is great interest in this picture of Christian worship inthe heathen land, our own, that was to be won for Christ. Itillustrates the worship of the land the missionaries came from, as wellas serves as a pattern for the worship which the {186} English, underAugustine's guidance, should follow. What was this litany? Litaniesat Rome were regulated by S. Gregory himself, and he was very likelyonly revising and setting in order a form of service already wellknown. But this very litany S. Augustine and his companions had mostlikely heard during their passage through Gaul. There the Rogationlitanies had been over a hundred years in use; and these words formpart of a Rogation litany used long after in Vienne, through whichdoubtless Augustine travelled. Thus the missionaries were using a partof the Gallican service-books, and not of the Roman; and the legationprocession, which lasted so long in England, which still lingers insome places in the form of "beating the bounds, " and which in lateyears has been here and there revived among us, comes to us withAugustine from Gaul, and not from Rome, where it was not yet in use. "Alleluia!" too, a strange ending to a penitential litany in modernears, was the close of Gallican litanies at Rogationtide, as later inChristian England itself, and its use outside the Easter season wasespecially authorised by Gregory the Great. And if Augustine's ownfirst public prayers were Gallican, so most probably was the use of thechapel of the Kentish Queen Bercta, who was daughter of the WestFrankish king, and who had with her a Frankish bishop, Liudhard. Buthis own use would be the Roman, just as his own manner of chanting, long preserved at Canterbury, was after the manner of the Romans. Andthus, with the strong sense of unity natural to a man trained in theschool of the great Gregory, Augustine was startled at the contrast ofcustoms when it came to him in practical guise. Why, {187} the faithbeing one, are there the different customs of different churches, andone manner of masses in the holy Roman church, another in that of theGauls? So he asked the great teacher who had sent him. A wise answercame from the wise pope, disclaiming all peculiar authority or specialsanctity for the use of Rome. "Things are not to be loved for the sakeof places, but places for the sake of things. " "Select, then, " headvises, "from many churches, whatever you have found in Gaul, or inRome, or in any other church, that is good; make a rite for the newchurch of the English, such as you think pious and best. "

[Sidenote: English uses. ]

All this, when Augustine's position is remembered, will be seen to showhow far Rome then was from arrogating to herself any strange supremacysuch as later days have brought. The first primate of the English wasallowed freedom to make an English rite. But, on the other hand, wehave no evidence that he did so. He preferred, we have every reason tobelieve, the Roman rite, with only here and there a few changes oradditions. The Council of Clovesho, presided over by Cuthbert, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 747, followed in his steps, taking inregard to rites "the model which we have in writing from the RomanChurch. " But none the less later English service-books show veryconsiderable Gallican influence. Celtic missionaries, and theconnection four centuries later with Gaul and Burgundy, left traces inthe way in which the service was performed; and England, up to theReformation, like all other countries indeed, had some distinct customsof its own. Throughout the long history of conversion which spreadsover the whole island, it is noteworthy {188} that preaching and thesinging of litanies, as at the first coming of Augustine, areconspicuous in the methods of the saints who won England to Christ. 

[Sidenote: The Eucharist in the sixth century. ]

What then was the service of the Holy Communion, as S. Augustinecelebrated it, and our English forefathers first came to know it? If, as we suppose, it was the Roman, it would proceed thus. First anantiphon, which came to be called an introit, or psalm of entrance, with a verse having special reference to the lesson of the day orseason, was sung, as the priest, wearing a long white surplice or alband a chasuble (the robe worn alike by lay and by clerical officials), entered with two deacons, wearing probably similar garments. In theGallican rite, as in the eastern, there followed the singing of the"Trisagion": and in both Gallican and Roman the "Kyrie Eleeson, " as inour own office to-day, though we now add to it a special prayer forgrace to keep the Commandments. Then in the Roman rite was sung the"Gloria in Excelsis, " while in the Gallican the "Benedictus" took itsplace. This was introductory. Now came the collect, the prayer whenall the people were gathered together. Then the Lesson from the OldTestament, the Epistle, and the Gospel. Between the Old TestamentLesson and the Epistle was sung the "Gradual, " a psalm sung from thesteps of the ambo or pulpit, but gradually the use of Rome was followedall over Europe, and the Old Testament reading was omitted altogether. After the Epistle was sung "Alleluia" or the psalm called the Tract. Then the Gospel was sung, introduced with special solemnity. Thedeacon mounted the pulpit, seven candles being carried before him, andthe choir {189} chanting "Glory be to Thee, O Lord. " After the deaconhad read the Gospel, a sermon was generally preached, but the Creed wasat this time not said. A short common prayer followed (in the Gallicanrite a litany), and then the mass of the catechumens was over, andthose who were unbaptized or unworthy to remain at that time for theconsecration departed from the church, a custom which has survived inEngland under changed conditions. 

Then, when the faithful only remained, the offertory was sung, and thebread and wine and water were offered (the ceremonial was different andmuch longer in the Gallican rite, and included the kiss of peace). S. Augustine, if he followed the Roman use, would offer the bread and winehimself, with the laity assisting: the Gallican use was to prepare theelements beforehand, and now bring them into church in procession. Thepriest then washed his hands and said privately a collect, while in theGallican rite he read from the diptychs, or tablets of the church, thenames of those departed who were to be especially commemorated. 

Then followed the prayer called the Preface, and the singing of "Holy, Holy, Holy. " After this, in the Gallican rite, came a special prayer, and then, as still in the Mozarabic, followed the recital of our Lord'sinstitution of the Sacrament, as in the English Prayer-book now; butthe Roman rite had also prayers for the Church, for the living anddead, and both united in the prayer (called _paraklesis_) that theelements might receive consecration from God, which was theconsecration itself until much later. Then the dead and living wereagain prayed for, and the fruits of the earth were dedicated by prayer. 

{190}

The Lord's Prayer, by the order of S. Gregory himself, concluded thispart of the service, which came to be known as the Canon, theinvariable part of the Mass. In the Roman rite the kiss of peacefollowed, the faithful kissing each other according to the ancientcustom. Then the priest broke the bread, and said the Lord's Prayeralone till the last clause. Then he placed a piece of the bread in thecup, and received the Sacrament himself, afterwards giving it in onekind to the clergy and laity, while the deacon followed with thechalice. Before the Communion it was a custom taken from Gaul, whichlasted in England up to the Reformation, that the Bishop, if present, should bless the people. A hymn was sung during the communion of thepeople; the ancient "Draw nigh and take the Body of the Lord" remainsstill to us from a Celtic source for use at this time. The serviceended with a "Let us pray" and collect after Communion, closelyfollowed by the second of the alternative post-communion prayers now inour English office. Immediately after this prayer the deacon said"Ite, missa est" ("Go: it is the dismissal"). 

In the English services to-day, while much is changed, and the languageis our own, we can still trace very much that has been usedcontinuously since the day when S. Augustine first said the wholeoffice of the Church on British soil. 

Much more might be said; but this may suffice to illustrate theinterest and importance which belong to sacraments and liturgical ritesin the ages of which we speak. 

[1] Edmund Bishop, "The Genesis of the Roman Rite, " in _Essays onCeremonial_, 1904. 

{191}

CHAPTER XVII

THE END OF THE DARK AGE

[Sidenote: The end of the age. ]

As we draw to the close of the long period which, through theconversion of the barbarian races and the growth of a central power inthe Church at Rome, so profoundly influenced the future of the world, we are met by some outstanding facts which mark an epoch of crisis andof reformation. They are--the widening breach in matters religious, asearlier in matters political, between East and West; the influenceswhich served to strengthen the theory of the papal monarchy even at thetime of its greatest practical weakness; and the strength of the Empireunder the Saxon Ottos as a power to unite Western Europe and to reformthe Western Church. 

[Sidenote: The papacy of Nicolas I. , 858-67. ]

Nicolas, who was elected in 858, was a great pope. He asserted themoral force of Christianity in a way in which his predecessors veryfrequently followed him, by vindicating the indissolubility of themarriage tie. Chlothochar, King of Lotharingia, separated from hiswife Theudberga, bringing against her foul charges, which a council ofclergy at Aachen accepted. Nicolas intervened: again and again heendeavoured to control the Frankish clergy and rescind the divorce; butit was {192} only in 863 by a council at Rome, where the archbishops ofCologne and Trier were present, that he was able to proceed toextremities. He excommunicated those two prelates, and deposed themwith all those who had assisted them: he warned Hincmar of Rheims ofwhat he had done. The emperor Louis, Chlothochar's brother, marched onRome and captured the city; but there, through illness it appears, hecompletely submitted to the pope. Nicolas enforced his decision on theFrankish king, the Frankish bishops, on Hincmar, the great archbishopof Rheims himself. In a letter he developed the theory that the Empireowed its confirmation to the authority of the Apostolic See, and thatthe sword was conferred on the emperor by the pope, the vicar of S. Peter. Truly it was said of this pope by one who wrote a century afterhis death, "Since the days of Gregory to our own sat no prelate on thethrone of S. Peter to be compared to Nicolas. He tamed kings andtyrants and ruled the world like a monarch: to holy bishops he was mildand gentle: to the wicked and unconverted a terror; so that truly maywe say that in him arose a new Elijah. "

Of equal though different importance was the action of the papacy inregard to the East. What is known as the Photian schism is thedivergence between the churches of Constantinople and Rome, whichbecame critical during the pontificate of Nicolas I. 

[Sidenote: The Photian schism. ]

Photius, a man of great learning and experience, a scholar andtheologian of the familiar Greek type, was elected Patriarch ofConstantinople on Christmas Day, 857. At the time when Michael III. Determined on his appointment he was not even ordained: in six days he{193} received the different orders and was made patriarch. But hiselection was uncanonical. Ignatius the patriarch, who was stillliving, was deposed because of his censures of the emperor's evil life. Photius announced his election to Pope Nicolas, but Ignatius refused tosurrender his rights; both parties excommunicated each other; and theemperor mocked at both. But he also asked the pope to send legates toa council which should restore order to the Church. The Council met in861. It confirmed Photius in his office, and the papal legatesassented. Nicolas refused to accept the decision and took upon him toannul it, to depose Photius, to declare the orders conferred by himinvalid, and to announce his decision to the other patriarchs and tothe metropolitans and bishops who owed obedience to Constantinople. Neither the emperor nor Photius would submit; and in 867 Photiusissued, in a council at Constantinople, an encyclical letter, in whichhe repudiated the papal claim of jurisdiction (which was complicated byassertions of supremacy over the Bulgarian Church), and denounced anumber of tenets held by Westerns, [Sidenote: The Philioquecontroversy. ] and most notably the addition of the word _Filioque_ tothe Nicene Creed, as asserting the procession of the Holy Spirit fromthe Father and the Son. He ended by excommunicating the pope. 

In the year 867 Nicolas died, Michael was deposed, Photius followed himinto retirement, Basil the Macedonian ascended the throne, and Ignatiuswas restored to the patriarchate. A council was held in 869 at whichpapal legates attended, which approved these acts, and which is countedby the Roman Church as {194} the Eighth Oecumenical Council. ThisCouncil confirmed the Church's decision as to image-worship. Ignatiusheld his throne till his death in 877, when Photius was reinstated. His return was signalised by a new agreement with Rome, in which PopeJohn VIII. Repudiated the insertion of the Filioque, and declared thatit was inserted by men whose daring was due to madness, and who weretransgressors against the Divine Word. Another council atConstantinople (879-80) confirmed the reinstatement, declared Photiusto be lawful patriarch, and anathematised the Council of 869. This isreckoned by the Greeks as the Eighth Oecumenical Council. [Sidenote:End of the schism. ] Then the schism was for the time healed. It madeno difference that a new emperor, Leo VI. , the Wise, deposed Photiusagain and appointed his own brother. The union remained formallythroughout the tenth century. But though the eleventh century openedwith a nominal agreement, it was not destined to endure. The points ofseverance must be dealt with in a later volume. It may here suffice tosay that the position of the Greeks was rigidly conservative, of thepopes aggressively authoritative. 

It was an age of growing papal claims; and the claims had now found anew basis. 

[Sidenote: The forged decretals. ]

The promises, true and legendary, of Pippin, and the spurious donationof Constantine, had still further extension in the False Decretals. These were first used by Nicolas I. , who was pope from 858 to 867. During his pontificate the collection of Church laws, with the canonsof the Oecumenical Councils, the letters of the most important bishopsand the like, with the ecclesiastical laws of the {195} emperors, whichwere practically becoming a _corpus juris canonici_, received a notableaddition. The genuine decretals of the popes begin with Siricius(384-98); but there now (between 840 and 860) appeared fifty-nine more, professing to date from the second and third centuries, and alsothirty-nine became interpolated among the genuine documents, whichranged from 386 to 731. These were put forth by a skilful forger asthe collection of Isidore of Seville, and they were incorporated in theauthentic collection made by him. A most remarkable series ofdocuments was this, in every point supporting the claims now put forthby the Roman See to political as well as ecclesiastical supremacy, deciding questions of discipline and right such as were then vexed, andsupplying a veritable armoury for the advocates of papal claims to ruleeverywhere, over all persons, and in all causes. The forged decretals, now known as the pseudo-Isidorian, had their origin among the Franks, and showed the aims and the needs of the Frankish reformers. They setforth three great objects--"freedom from the secular power, establishment of the ecclesiastical hierarchy with a firm discipline, and centralisation of organisation upon which all could depend. " [1]They represented, in fact, a scheme of reform and the way in which asomewhat unscrupulous reformer imagined it could best be carried out. Probably the forged decretals were concocted at Rheims, or possibly atMainz, and they were first used in a critical case in 866, when abishop of Soissons, deposed by Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, appealedto the pope on the ground that the power of deposition by the decretalsbelonged to him alone. It is difficult {196} to believe that whenNicolas I. Accepted them he was not aware that they were not thegenuine writings of the popes whose work they professed to be: he canhardly have thought that Spain (where it was said that they had beendiscovered) was more likely to have kept papal documents safely thanthe Roman Chancery itself. Their importance was, however, not evidentat first. In the ninth and tenth centuries comparatively little wasmade of them. It was in the eleventh and the centuries which followedthat a gigantic edifice of papal assumption was to be built upon themby popes who were fired with a true zeal to reform the world, and who, not doubting their authenticity, found in them an instrument ready totheir hands. 

[Sidenote: The decay of the papacy. ]

The weakness of the papacy in the tenth century was indeed such that notheory could give it respect in Europe. The weakness of the Church washeralded by that of the Empire. The Carling house expired in contemptalmost as great as that which had fallen on the Merwings. In Gaul theNorman had won fair provinces on the coast; and the house of the Countsof Paris came in the tenth century to rule over the Franks. There theChurch remained strong as the State decayed, and it was the greatarchbishopric of Rheims which gave the crown to the line of Hugh theGreat. In Germany the dynasty of the Carlings became extinct. In Romethe power over the city fell into the hands of the local nobility; andthe period was made infamous by the lives of Theodora and Marozia, whowere the paramours of popes. The tale of the age of disgrace whichmarks the greater part of the tenth century is of no importance in thehistory of the Church. A succession of {197} popes, whom theircontemporaries certainly did not believe to be infallible, followedeach other in rapid procession. John X. Alone (914-28) has any claimto greatness; but he, like the others, was deeply stained with thevices, political if not moral, of his age. It was not until the SaxonOtto came to Italy like a knight-errant to redress the wrongs of theNorthern princes, and was crowned at Rome in 962, that the Church inItaly began to revive from its ashes. He deposed and set up popes; andhe gave to the papacy something of the bracing ideals which the newlife of Gaul and Germany inspired. 

The moral weakness of the papacy, the political weakness of Italy, hadfounded the Empire anew, as it had been founded anew in 800. Therevival of the Empire under Charles the Great, and again under Otto, was not due to political considerations only; it was due also to theforce of religious ideas. 

[Sidenote: The religious revival of the Empire under the Saxons. ]

One great characteristic of the revived Empire in German hands was theimportant part played in its policy by missions, and, it must be added, missionary wars. It was said of Charles the Great by his eulogiststhat he converted Saxons and Vandals and Frisians by the Word and thesword: and this thought was embodied in a series of wars which havebeen somewhat fancifully compared to the Crusades of later days. OttoI. Thrice invaded the land of the Slavs and made all the barbariansfrom the Oder to the Elbe admit his lordship. Six new bishoprics werefounded as his sway spread, and the bishop of Magdeburg was raised tobe "archbishop and metropolitan of the whole race of the Slavs beyondthe Elbe which has {198} been, or still remains to be, converted toGod. " But though it was a real work of civilisation, a work which madefor peace, that the German Caesars undertook, it was not a Crusade. ACrusade was a war to win back from the infidel what had once been thepatrimony of the Crucified: the wars of the Ottos were directed toextend their own sway, and, as ever, the true work of the convertingChurch was not helped but hindered by the arms and enterprises ofsoldiers and statesmen. When the tribes revolted against thegovernment of the Germans, they often disowned their Christianity anddestroyed their churches. Under Otto III. The Empire did not recoverwhat she had lost, and the province of Magdeburg remained for nearlyhalf its extent in heathen hands. [Sidenote: Otto the Great'sendowment in Germany. ] The Church suffered from this association. Where the mission of S. Boniface had been purely spiritual, the work ofhis successors was often hampered by the ambition of the emperors. Inthe lands alike of Eastern and Western Franks the Church was often ledto lean on the State, and the results, of slackness, corruption, weakness, were inevitable. The rich endowments which were poured uponthe Church were not always wisely given or wisely used. The Caesarsthemselves showered gifts: Otto the Great surpassed all hispredecessors in lavishness, [2] and his dynasty followed in his steps. But the honours and riches were given quite as much for political asfor religious objects. In the bishops and abbats the sovereigns foundthe wisest servants, the most capable administrators. As among theWest Franks under the {199} Merwings, so now among the East Franks, thegreat ecclesiastics were the supports of the monarchy, the realgovernors of the country. It was thus that they came to owe theirposition--if not their election always yet certainly theirconfirmation--to the imperial will. As in Rome the emperors werestretching forth a hand to control the elections to the papacy, so inGermany there was growing up at the end of the tenth century thepractice of imperial control over the things of the Church. The policyof the Ottos and the reformation of the papacy were certain ultimatelyto lead to the contest concerning investitures. High clerical officehad come too often to be bought and sold, and the churches werebecoming mere appanages of the great principalities. It was wise ofOtto I. To try to win from the dukes the power they had obtained: butit was not for the good of the Church that the power should be even inthe imperial hands. 

[Sidenote: Otto III. And the popes. ]

Otto I. Died in 973. He had begun the reformation of the papacy. Hisson and grandson succeeded him, Otto II. In 973, Otto III. In 983. In996 died Pope John XV. , a Roman whom the Frankish chronicler, Abbo ofFleury, declares to have been lustful of filthy lucre and venal in allhis acts. To Otto the clergy, senate, and people of Rome submitted theelection of his successor. He chose his own cousin Bruno, "a man ofholiness, of wisdom, and of virtue, "--news, to quote the same saintlywriter, more precious than gold and precious stones. His throne wasinsecure: the Roman noble Crescentius drove him from it, but he won hisway back and overcame one who had been set up as an anti-pope. He diedin 999. 

{200}

At the close of the tenth century a pope and an emperor of great ideasstand forth from the blackness of an age when, according to theevidence of councils and of monastic chronicles alike, vice wasrampant--"the more powerful oppress the weaker, and men are like fishesin the sea, which everywhere in turn devour one another"--and thebishops and clergy alike neglected their duties. Otto III. (983-1002), the offspring of the German who sat on the imperial throne and thedaughter of the Caesars of the East, made himself a real ruler of theEmpire in Church as well as in State, and after the disputed successionof his cousin Bruno (Gregory V. , 996-99) placed on the papal throne thefirst of the great line of later medieval popes. Gregory V. Was thefirst pope of transalpine birth imposed by the Germans; Gerbert was thefirst of the French popes. It needed the imperial army to keep Gregoryon the throne, and to crush the last of the Roman princelets who hadmade the papacy infamous; Gerbert (Silvester II. , 999-1003) was onlyable to remain in the eternal city so long as Otto was there to protecthim. [Sidenote: Gerbert. ] But Gerbert's greatness belonged to a spherefar wider than that of the local papacy. He was a scholar in theancient classics, a logician, mathematician, astronomer and musician, agreat collector of books and a great teacher of men. An Aquitanian bybirth, he was brought up at Aurillac, and then passed from one place ofstudy to another, till, by the influence of the Emperor Otto I. , hesettled at Rheims in 972. His school was a famous one: among thosewhom he taught were many bishops, Robert the future king of the Franksand Otto the future emperor. From Rheims he went as abbat to {201}Bobbio, where the necessary severity of his rule provoked suchopposition that he was obliged to return to Gaul. [Sidenote: In Gaul]He returned in time to win the influence of the great see of Rheims onbehalf of the child heir of Otto II. , who died at the end of 983, andto take part in the diplomacy which ended in the transfer of the WestFrankish crown to Hugh the duke of the Franks. When Arnulf, of thevery Karling house which had been dispossessed, became archbishop, andtried to hand over Rheims to his kindred, Gerbert, the steadfastsupporter of the "Capetians, " was made his successor. The election wasof more than doubtful legality, and the politics, papal and imperial, of the time still further complicated the question: it was only settledby the transference of Gerbert, on the nomination of his old pupil, Otto III. , to the see of Ravenna, From 998 he remained in Italy tillhis death. [Sidenote: and in Italy. ] In 999 he became pope, and thenhe gave himself, heart and soul, to forward the great schemes, missionary, reforming, imperial, which were indeed as much his own asthose of the enthusiastic genius of the young emperor. The old officesof the "republic" were revived and harmonised, as in the East, with theChristian character of the imperial power. Pope and emperor workedhand in hand for the conversion of the barbarians: it is said that itwas Silvester who gave the kingship to the Hungarian Duke Stephen, as ason of the Christian Empire and the holy see of the imperial city. Inthe unquiet days of his papacy he was yet able to set an example ofwisdom, counsel, godliness, charity, which formed an epoch in theregeneration of the Roman episcopate. Zealous, loyal, inspired by anoverpowering sense of duty, {202} Silvester II. In a short timefulfilled a long time and left a mark on the history of the Middle Agessuch as was made by but few even of its greatest men. [Sidenote: PopeSilvester II. ] At his death in 1003 the age of reform had started onits way; and his was the light which had directed its beginnings. Thusin the West the end of the period shows the Empire and the papacy ofone mind, eager for a spiritual reform in the Church, for Christian andmissionary ideals in the State, not careful to delimit the provinces ofChurch and State, but eager rather for unity of action as well assentiment in the cause of Christian extension and endeavour. 

[Sidenote: The end of the Dark Age. ]

Though the contest was not yet over, it might be said with confidencethat the Church of Christ had won over the barbarians. Missionariesand martyrs had changed the face of Europe, and the fierce tribes whichwere pouring over the Continent in the fifth century, barbarous andheathen, were now for the most part tamed and converted to the love ofChrist. Out of a land which had been wild and barbarous, and where oneof the greatest of saints and missionaries had met his death, had comea revival in Christian form of the old imperial idea, and the great menwho had been nourished by it had given new health to the central Churchof Europe. For the moment, the Empire and the Papacy, Germany and thenew temporal State in the hands of the Roman bishop, were united tolead the Christian nations and to convert the heathen on their borders. In the East remained the magnificent fabric of the immemorial Empire, active still in missionary labour and setting an example of the unionof Church and State in {203} agreement to which the West could neverattain. The eleventh century was to bring to East and West alike, withnew responsibilities, new difficulties in action and new problems inthought. Everywhere it was for unity men strove, the unity which if inits main aspect it was political, was on its spiritual and ideal sideembodied in the visible Church of Christ. 

[1] Dr. O. L. Wells, _The Age of Charlemayne_, p. 434. 

[2] See H. A. L. Fisher, _The Medieval Empire_, ii. P. 65; Hauck, _Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands_, iii. 57-9. 

{205}

APPENDIX I

LIST OF EMPERORS AND POPES, 461-1003

 POPES. EMPERORS WEST EAST

 457 Leo I. 461 Hilarus 461 Severus --------- 467 Anthemius 468 Simplicius 472 Olybrius 473 Glycerius 474 Julius Nepos 474 Zeno 475 Romulus Augustulus 483 Felix III. --------- 491 Anastasius I. 492 Gelasius I. 496 Anastasius II. 498 Symmachus 514 Hormisdas 518 Justin I. 523 John I. 526 Felix IV. 527 Justinian I. 530 Boniface II. 532 John II. 535 Agapetus I. 536 Silverius 537 Vigilius 555 Pelagius I. 560 John III. 565 Justin II. 574 Benedict I. 578 Pelagius II. 578 Tiberius II. 582 Maurice{206}

 590 Gregory I. 602 Phocas 604 Sabinianus 607 Boniface III. 607 Boniface IV. 610 Heraclius 615 Deusdedit 618 Boniface V. 625 Honorius I. 638 Severinus. 640 John IV. 641 ( Heracleonas ( Constantine III. 642 Theodorus I. 642 Constans II. 649 Martin I. 654 Eugenius I. 657 Vitalianus. 668 Constantine IV. 672 Adeodatus 676 Domnus I. 678 Agatho 682 Leo II. 683 Benedict II. 685 John V. 685 Justinian II. 687 Sergius I. 694 Leontius 697 Tiberius III. 701 John VI. 705 John VII. 705 Justinian II. (restored) 708 Sisinnius 708 Constantine 711 Philippicus 713 Anastasius II. 715 Gregory II. 715 Theodosius III. 717 Leo III. 731 Gregory III. 741 Zacharias 741 Constantine V. 752 Stephen II. 752 Stephen III. 757 Paul I. 768 Stephen III. (or IV. ) 772 Hadrian I. 775 Leo IV. 779 Constantine VI 795 Leo III. 797 Irene{207}

 800 Charles I. 802 Nicephorus I. 811 Stauracius 811 Michael I. 813 Leo V. 814 Louis I. 816 Stephen IV. 817 Paschal I. 820 Michael II. 824 Eugenius II. 827 Valentinus 827 Gregory IV. 829 Theophilus 840 Lothar I. 842 Michael III. 844 Sergius II. 847 Leo IV. 855 Benedict III. 855 Louis II. (in Italy) 858 Nicolas I. 867 Hadrian II. 867 Basil I. 872 John VIII. 875 Charles II. (West Franks) 882 Marinus I. 882 Charles III. (East Franks) 884 Hadrian III. 885 Stephen V. 886 Leo VI. 891 Formosus 891 Guido (in Italy) 894 Lambert (in Italy) 896 Boniface VI. 896 Arnulf 896 Stephen VI. (East Franks) 897 Romanus 897 Theodorus II. 898 John IX. 900 Benedict IV. 901 Louis III. (in Italy) 903 Leo V. ---------- 903 Christopher 904 Sergius III. 911 Anastasius III. 912 Constantine VII. (till 958){208}

 913 Lando 912 Alexander ) 914 John X. 919 Romanus I. ) co- ( Constantine ) emperors 915 Berengar 944 ( VIII ) 928 Leo VI. (in Italy) ( Stephanus ) 929 Stephen VII. 

 931 John XI. -------- 936 Leo VII. 939 Stephen VIII. 942 Marinus II. 946 Agapetus II. 

 955 John XII. 958 Romanus II. 962 Otto I. 963 Leo VIII. 963 Basil II. ) [964 Benedict V. ] 963 Nicephorus ) 965 John XIII. II. ) co- 973 Benedict VI. 973 Otto II. 969 John I. ) emperors 974 Domnus II. 976 Constantine ) 974 Benedict VII. IX. ) 983 John XIV. 983 Otto III. 985 John XV. 996 Gregory V. 999 Silvester II. 1002 Henry (II. ) 1003 John XVII. 

NOTE. --This list is for the most part that adopted by Dr. Bryce, _HolyRoman Empire_; but the dates might be slightly varied by reference toDuchesne, K. Müller, and Funk (Weltzer and Welte, _Kirchenlexicon_). It may also be noted that the popes were frequently not elected tillthe year after the death of their predecessors. 

{209}

APPENDIX II

A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY

I. A list of original authorities for the whole of the period 461-1003would be too long in proportion to the text of this book, but a few ofthe most important may be mentioned for the sake of those who wish tobegin to study the period at first hand. Any such study shouldinclude:--

 Evagrius, ed. Bidez and Parmentier, 1898. Zachariah of Mitylene [translation], ed. Hamilton and Brooks, 1899. Bede, ed. Ch. Plummer, 1895. Procopius, ed. Haury (in course of publication). Joannes Diaconus, _Vita S. Gregorii_, ed. Migne, and _Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie_, XI. , 158-73. Gregory the Great, _Letters_, ed. Ewald and Hartmann, 1887, etc. Paulus Diaconus, ed. Waitz, 1878. _Monumenta Moguntina_, ed. Jaffé, 1866. Gregory of Tours, ed. Arndt and Krusch, 1884-5. _Liber Pontificalis_, ed. Duchesne, 1886-92. _Liudprand_, ed. Dümmler, 1877. _Letters of Gerbert_, ed. Havet, 1889. _Regesta Pontificum Romanorum_, ed. Jaffé, 1851, 2nd ed. 1885. Mansi, _Concilia_, 1759-98. Einhard, _Vita Caroli Magni_, ed. Pertz and Waitz, 1880. 

II. Reference to the other authorities can be most easily found throughmodern works, from which the following is a selection:--

 Milman, _History of Latin Christianity_. Gibbon, _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_ (ed. Bury). {210} Bury, _History of the Later Roman Empire_. Bryce, _Holy Roman Empire_. Oman, _The Dark Ages_. Hodgkin, _Italy and her Invaders_. Hauck, _Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands_. Harnack, _Dogmengeschichte_. Duchesne, _Les Églises Separées_. " _Les Premiers Temps de L'État Pontifical_. H. Leclercq, _L'Afrique chrétienne_. " _L'Espagne chrétienne_. M. J. Labourt, _Le Christianisme dans l'Empire perse_. P. J. Pargoire, _L'Église byzantine, de 527 à 847_. A. J. Butler, _The Arab Conquest of Egypt_. Diehl, _L'Afrique byzantine_. " _Justinien_. " _Études sur l'administration byzantine dans l'Exarchat de Ravenne_. F. H. Dudden, _Gregory the Great_. Hefele, _History of the Councils_. Gasquet, _L'Empire byzantin et la Monarchie franque_. Hutton, _The Church of the Sixth Century_. Besse, _S. Wandrille_. Du Bourg, _S. Odon_. Martin, _S. Colomban_. Hodgkin, _Charles the Great_. Davis, _Charlemagne_. Fisher, _The Medieval Empire_. Hunt, _The English Church, 597-1066_. Margoliouth, _Mohammed_. Gardner, _Theodore of Studium_. Marin, _De Studio Constantinopolitano_. Lavisse (ed. ), _Histoire de France_. Marignan, _Études sur la civilisation française (la sociéte mérovingienne)_. Lützow, _Bohemia_. Morfill, _Poland_. Rambaud, _Histoire de la Russie_. Poole, _Illustrations of Medieval Thought_. Kraus, _Geschichte der Christlichen Kunst_, I. Potthast, _Bibliotheca Medii Aevi_. 

{211}

INDEX

 Aachen, 167; councils at(809), 81; (860), 190 Abasgi, a Caucasian people, converted, 95 Abbassides, dynasty of Khalifs, descendants of Muhammad's uncle Abbas, 156 Abbats, lay, 168-9, 172; in the Rule of S. Columban, 171; Cluniac, 174-5 Abbo of Fleury, Frankish chronicler, 199 Abder Rahman I. , Ommeyad Khalif of Cordova (755), 146 Abyssinian Church, Monophysite, 9, 23, 111 Acacius, patriarch of Constantinople, 7, 8, 10 Acca, bishop of Hexham (709-32), 169 Adalbert, S. (Voytech), bishop of Prague, 125-6, 129 Adalwald, Lombard king, 63 Adam of Bremen, 130 Adamuan's Life of Columba, 115-16 _Adiaphorites_, 86 Adoptianist heresy, 72; in the West, 78-9, 81, 168; in the East, 79, 80, 156 Aelfeah (Alphege), bishop, 121 Aelfric, abbat of Eynsham, 121 Aethelbert, king of Kent, 183-5 Aethelred, king of England, 121 Aethelstan, king of England, 131 Aethelwold, bishop of Winchester, 119 Africa, the Church in North, 5, 17, 20, 103-10; increase of papal power, 65, 67, 69, 107-8; Eucharist, 179; survival of Christian customs to modern times, 23, 110; Vandals in, 103; reconquered by Belisarius, 105; Muhammadan conquest, 5, 108, 109 Agapetus (Agapitus), Pope, 15, 38 Agatho, Pope, 88 Agde, 146 Agilulf, Lombard king, 62, 134 Agnellus, archbishop of Ravenna, 33 Agriculture, cared for by the Benedictines, 36; by Gregory the Great, 65 Aidan, S. , 116 Airulf, Lombard king, 68 Aistulf, Lombard king, 148, 149 _Akoimetai_, 8, 14, 161 _Aktistetes_, 86 Alamanni, 42, 135 Alans, Mongol barbarians, in Gaul, 41 Albagrians of the Caucasus, converted, 95 Albinus, abbat of Canterbury (d. 732), 169 Alcuin, 81, 116, 141, 152, 167-70 Aldhelm, S. , of Malmesbury, 115, 171 Alexandria, Church and Patriarchate of, 8, 10, 16, 17, 24, 64, 65, 84, 87, 110; Eucharist, 179; conquered by the Arabs, 109 Alfred the Great, king of England, 32, 118 Alodaei, Soudanese people, converted, 111 Althing, Icelandic assembly, 132 Amalric, Wisigothic king in Spain, 74 _Ambo_ (pulpit), 188 Ambrosian Rite (so called from S. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, 374-97), 183 Amöneburg (Hessen), monastery, 136 Anastasius, emperor, 7, 9, 47 Anastasius, patriarch of Antioch, 63 Anastasius, patriarch of Constantinople, (703-53), 155, 157 Anastasius of Sinai, S. , 180. Andover, 121 Angarii, tribe allied with the Saxons, 140 Annegray, S. Columban's settlement at, 55 Anselm, S. , archbishop of Canterbury (died 1109), 160, 171 Ansgar, S. , archbishop of Hamburg, 129-30 Anthimus, patriarch of Constantinople, 15 Antioch, Church and Patriarchate of, 8, 10, 16, 17, 23, 24, 84, 87, 156; Eucharist, 179; synod at (541 or 542), 16 _Antirrhetici_ of S. Theodore the Studite, 164 _Antistes_ (bishop), 66 Antony, archbishop of Novgorod (c. 1200), 161 _Aphthartodocetes_, 21, 85 _Apocrisiarius_, papal envoy at Constantinople, 63 Aquilea, patriarch of, 21, 39 Aquitaine, 49 Arabia, conquered by Muhammad, 101; Arabian Christians in Persia, 110; Christianity in S. Arabia, 111 Arabs. _See_ Muhammadans. Architecture, Byzantine, 25-8, 100, 106 Arcona (Isle of Rügen), heathen temple at, 127 Arianism, extinct in the East, 9; of the Goths in Italy, 29, 30, 60; its suppression a political necessity, 33; the Frankish struggle against, 47-8; of the Vandals in Africa, 103-5; of the Lombards, 56, 61; in Spain, 73, 74, 75 Arles, 46, 49, 50, 146 Armagh, monastery, 53 Armenia, 3; Church of, 13, 84, 85, 95, 156; Monophysite, 23, 110; Adoptianiats in, 79; Paulicians in, 80 Arnulf, S. , bishop of Metz, 58, 135, 139, 144, 145 Arnulf, archbishop of Rheims, 201 Asser, bishop of Sherborne, 118 Assyria, Christians in, 93, 96 n. Athanagild, Wisigothic king in Spain, 74 Athanasian Creed, 81-2 Athens, 99 Augustine of Canterbury, S. , 62, 69, 113, 117, 182-90 Augustine of Hippo, S. , 3, 72, 103, 106, 170; _De Civitate Dei_, 154 Aurillac, 200 Austrasia, Eastern Frankish kingdom, 43, 49, 135, 145-6; Synod in (742), 138 Autun, Council of (670), 59 Avars, Mongol race, 135, 141 Avignon, 146 Avitus, bishop of Vienne, 81 Axum, Ethiopic kingdom, 111-12

 Baghdad, 96, 97 Bangor (Ireland), monastery, 54-5; _Antiphonary_ of, 115 Baptism, 176-8; of Chlodowech, 42; of Borivoj, 128; of the people of Kiev, 127; of Olaf Trigvason, 132 Basil the Great, S. (329-79), his Rule, 163 Basil I. The Macedonian, emperor, 80, 193 Basil II. , emperor, 126 Baume, monastery at, 173 Bavarians, 135, 138 Bede (Baeda), 68 n. , 115-16, 118, 167, 169, 170, 179, 180, 183-5 Belisarius, 30, 61, 105 Benedict Biscop, 115, 169 Benedict of Nursia, S. , 34-9, 53, 58, 163; his Rule, 35-7, 58-9, 69, 119, 121, 171, 173, 175; the Benedictines, 35-8, 60, 62, 137 Bercta, Kentish queen, 186 Berno, abbat of Cluny, 173-4 Besançon, 56, 173 Béziers, 146 Bishops, their position under Justinian, 24-5; share in the civil government of Italy, 33-4; without dioceses in the Celtic Church, 114; "Universal Bishop, " 66, 175; bless the people at the Eucharist, 190 Blemmyes, Ethiopic tribe, converted, 111 Bobbio, 53, 56, 201 Boethius, 32 Bohemia, Christianity in, 127-9; Bohemian princess brings about the conversion of Poland, 125 _Boïar_, title of Bulgarian magnates, 124 Boleslav I. , duke of Bohemia, brother of S. Wenceslas (died 967), 128 Boleslav II. , "the Pious, " duke of Bohemia (967-99), 128, 129 Boniface, S. (Winfrith), 130, 136-40, 142, 147, 198 Boris, Bulgarian king, 124 Borivoj, Bohemian duke, baptized, 128 Boso, bishop of Merseburg, 126 Braga, councils at (563, 572), 74 Bremen, archbishopric, 130, 142 Bretislav II. , king of Bohemia (1092-1100), 127 Britain, 83, 88; Christianity in, 113 ff; early British Church, 183; ritual in the British Church, 183. _See_ England Brittany, 115 Brunichild, 13, 48-9, 56, 74-5, 171 Bruno (Pope Gregory V. ), cousin of Otto III. , 199, 200 Bruno, missionary to the Prussians, 125 Brythons, Celts of Britain, their Church, 113, 183 Bulgarians, a Finnish race, conversion of, 124; they and their Church, 13, 23, 44, 84, 128, 193 Burgundians, 41; Frankish kings of, 49, 55-6, 135 Bury, Dr. J. B. , quoted, 21 n. , 46-7, 113 Byzacene, African see, 106 Byzantine architecture, 25-8, 100, 106; Church and Patriarchate, 91, _and see_ Constantinople; Empire, _see_ Umpire, Eastern

 Caelian Hill at Rome, 60, 64 Caesarius, bishop of Arles, 72, 81 Calabria, 157, 162 _Candace_, title of the queens of Abyssinia, 111 Canons, collection of, 85; canon law, 194-5; canon of the Mass, 181-2, 190 Canterbury, 115, 185-6 Capetians, House of Hugh the Great, duke of the Franks, 201 Carisiacum (Quierzy), 151 Carling House. _See_ Karlings Carloman, son of Charles Martel, brother of Pippin the Short, 114-5, 147, 149 Carloman, son of Pippin the Short, brother of Charles the Great, 148, 150-1 Carthage, taken by the Vandals, 103; by the Muhammadans, 77, 109; Church of, survival, 110; bishop of, 67, 103-6, 108 Cassiodorus, 30, 38 _Catholicos_, primate of the Monophysite Armenian Church, 84, 95; of the "Church of the East, " 96; of the Persian Church, 93-4, 99 Celibacy of the clergy. _See_ Marriage Celtic Church, 113-17, _and see_ Ireland; Celtic Easter, 55, 114; Celtic influence on the English liturgy, 187, 190; Celtic missionaries and Boniface, 138 Ceremonial, 181-90 Ceylon, 96 Chad, S. , 116, 169 Chalcedon, Council of (451), 2, 7, 9, 10, 18, 24, 65-6, 79, 85-6, 89, 95 Chaldeaecan Church, 23, 93 Châlons, Battle of, 41 Charles Martel, Frankish mayor of the palace, 135, 137, 141, 146 Charles I. , the Great, 50, 136, 182, 197; anointed king, 148; revives the Empire, 152-4; destroys the Lombard kingdom, 150, 152; supposed donation of, 151-2; theocratic ideas of, 139; religious wars, 127, 140-2; his share in the Adoptianist controversy, 80; his learning and piety, 166-70; aspirations, 172 Charles II. , the Bald, emperor, son of Louis I. , the Pious, 170 Charles the Simple, sole king of the West Franks (898-922), 174 Cherson, near the mouth of the Dnyepr, 126 Childebert I. , Frankish king, 39 Childebert II. , Frankish king, son of Sigebert and Brunichild, 49 Childerich III. , last of the Merwings, 147 Chilperich I. , Frankish king of Neustria, son of Chlothochar I. , 43, 51, 54, 75 China, Nestorian missions in, 96, 98 Chlodowech, king of the Franks, baptized, 42, 177; dies, 43; his aim, 46; receives the consulate, 47; his daughter, 74 Chlothochar I. , Frankish king, son of Chlodowech, 43, 47, 54, 74 Chlothochar II. , Frankish king, son of Chilperich I. And Fredegund, 56, 58, 145 Chlothochar (Lothar), king of Lotharingia, son of the emperor Lothar I. (855-69), 191-2 Chora, Church of the, at Constantinople, 26 Chosroes II. , Persian king (590-628), 101 Chosroes, Persian king (800-50), 80 Christmas baptisms, 177; communion, 179 Christology, 98. _See_ Heresies Chrotechild (Clotilda), wife of Chlodowech, 42 Church, The, her task in fifth century, 1; organisation, 2, 24; tendency to separation in East and West, 3, _and see_ Schism; Churches of Rome and Constantinople held to be one, 10; East and West differ in use of _Quicunque_, 81-2 Church, the Eastern, strengthens the Empire, 4; her firm position in 527, 11; united with the State, 12; history, 6-28, 83-92, 155-65; conservative character, 165, 194. _See_ Constantinople, Schism Church, the Western: Church property and jurisdiction under the Gothic kings in Italy, 30-1; determines the development of the Frankish nation, 45; maintains imperial tradition, 45-6; her aggressive claims, 194; subject in Germany and Italy to the control of the Saxon emperors, 191, 197-201. _See_ Papacy, Rome, Schism "Church of the East, " Nestorian, 96-7 Clonard, monastery, 53, 55 Clonfert, monastery, 53 Clonmacnoise, monastery, 53 Clotilda, Clotilde. _See_ Chrotechild, Hlothild Clovesho, Synod of (747), 138, 187 Cluniacs, monks of Cluny, 174-5 Cluny, monastic reform of, 169, 171-5; abbey of, 173-4; Rule of, 174-5; congregation of, 174 Cologne, archbishop of, 192 Columba, S. , 114-16 Columban, S. , 53-8, 116; his Rule, 55, 171; monastery at Baume, 173 Communion, Holy, 178-90; received by the Stylites, 25. _See_ Eucharist Confirmation, 178; of Olaf Trigvason, 121 _Consolation of Philosophy, The_, by Boethius, 32 Constans II. , emperor, 109 Constantine I. , emperor, 12, 40; donation of, 154 [Constantine IV. ], emperor, 89 Constantine V. , Copronymus, 80, 155, 158, 162, 165 Constantine, pope, 91 Constantine of Thessalonica (S. Cyril), 123 Constantine, founder or reviver of Eastern Adoptianism, 79-80 Constantinople, theological bent of its people, 8; buildings at, 25-7; captured by the Turks (1453), 163; modern, 158, 161 Constantinople, Church of, its growing isolation, 13; a witness for religious liberty, 14; valuable services to the Church Universal, 20; quarrel with Rome over the Ecthesis and Type, 88; missions to Bulgarians, 124; to Russians, 126-7; to Moravians and Czechs, 128; theology in, 156. _See_ Church, Eastern; Schism Constantinople, councils at: Fifth General (553), 15, 17, 18, 20-2, 39, 63-4, 86, 106-7, 161; synod of 588, 66; Sixth General (680-1), 21, 84-5, 88; Council of 681, 67; _in Trullo_ (691), 85, 89-92; Council of 692, 67; iconoclastic synod of 754, 165; Councils of 861 and 867, 193; Eighth General (869), 193-4; Council (879-80), 194 Constantinople, Patriarchate of, 24, 67, 85, 90, 124, 192-4 Constantinople, patriarchs of, 87-8; claim the title of Oecumenical, 65. _See_ Acacius, Germanus, Ignatius, John the Cappadocian, Mennas, Methodius, Nicephorus, Paul, Photius, Sergius, Tarasius Coptic Church, 9, 23, 84, 101, 110, 112; Copts resist Saracens, 109 Corbie (New Korvey), monastery, on the Weser, 130, 170 Corbinian, S. , 135 Corinth, bishops of, 67 Cornwall, early British Church of, 113, 117 Corsica, 151 Cosmas, sixth-century traveller, 97 Councils, valuable work of the, 19. _See_ Aachen, Antioch, Austrasia, Autun, Braga, Chalcedon, Clovesho, Constantinople, Frankfort, General, Gentilly, Hatfield, Mâcon, Orange, Regensburg, Rome, Toledo, Whitby Cracow, relics at, 125 Creed, at the Council of Chalcedon, 2; proposal to reform, 14; importance of a logically tenable, 19; Pope Leo III. Discourages additions to, 81; Athanasian, 81-2; Nicene, 193 Crescentius, John, patrician of Rome, 199 Crete, bishops of, 67 Croatia, Croats, 84, 124 Cross, the Holy, 100-2; tolerated by the iconoclast emperor Leo III. , 159; sign of the, in baptism, 177; used by S. Augustine in his mission, 184-5 Crusades, true and false, 197-8 "Culdees, " Celtic monks, 119 Cumbria (or Strathclyde), early British Church of, 113 Cuthbert, M. , 116, 121, 169 Cuthbert, archbishop of Canterbury, 187 Cyprus, Church of, 21 Cyril, S. , patriarch of Alexandria (412-44), opponent of Nestorius, 10, 18, 22 Cyril, S. (Constantine), apostle of the Slavs, 123-4, 126, 128 Czechs, Slav race of Bohemia, 127

 Dagobert I. , Frankish king, son of Chlothochar II. , 44, 58, 145 Danes ravage England and Scotland, 117-19, 121; settle, and are converted, 118; Danish invasions, 122; conversion of Denmark, 129, 131 David, S. , 118 Decretals, false, 194-6 Deira, northern kingdom of England, 63 Denmark, conversion of, 129, 131 Desiderius (Didier) of Cahors, S. , 58 Dionysius the Areopagite, Platonist so called, 89 Dnyepr (Dnieper), Russian river, baptisms in, 127 Dokkum, S. Boniface martyred at, 139 Donation of Constantine, 154; of Pippin, at Quierzy, 149, 151; of Charles the Great, 151-2 Donatists, 103, 107 Double procession of the Holy Ghost, 76, 80-1, 193-4 Druidism favoured the growth of Christian monasticism, 53 Dublin, conversion of Danes at, 122; Norse king of, 132 Duchesne, Mgr. , quoted, 40, 208 Dudden, F. H. , quoted, 50, 75 n. Dunstan, S. , 115, 119-21 Durham, see of, 121

 Eadgar, king of England, 119 East, the, large number of ecclesiastics in, 25 East and West, reunion of, after the quarrel of pope and emperor, in 519, 10; political severance completed, 149; breach widens, 191; divergence, Photian schism, 192-4; nominal reunion throughout tenth century, 194. _See_ Schism Easter baptisms, 177; communion, 179; use of the alleluia, 182; Celtic Easter, 55, 114 Eastern Church, orthodox, securer than the West in its Christianity, 7; its intense conservatism, 27; dictates to the papacy under Vigilius and Pelagius, 40. _See_ Church, Constantinople, Schism Ebbo, archbishop of Rheims, 129, 141 Ebroin, mayor of the palace in Neustria, 146 _Ecthesis_, issued by Heraclius, 87, 89 Edessa, 93, 96, 110 Education, 166-7, 175. _See_ Learning Egbert, archbishop of York, 167, 179 Egypt, 9; National Church, 13; Monophysite Church, 23; sects, 110; Church, 112; Holy Communion, 180; Muhammadan invasion, 84, 108. _See_ Alexandria, Coptic Einhard, biographer of Charles the Great, 142, 153, 167 Eligius, S. , 58 Elipandus, archbishop of Toledo, 78-9, 168 Ellesthaeos, Ethiopian king, 112 Eloi (Eligius), S. , 58 Emly, monastery, 53 Emmeran, Emmeram, S. , missionary in Bavaria, 135 Empire, the, becomes a Christian power, 1; obsolescent, 2; representative of Christian unity, 3; invaded by barbarians, 1, 3; its vitality, 3 Empire, Eastern, relations with the Franks, 46-7; its strength renders the Nestorian missions possible, 98; becomes more purely Oriental, 113; end of the imperial power in Italy, 147-8; its recognition of the Western Umpire of Charles the Great, 153. _See_ Constantinople Empire, Western, ends with Romulus Augustulus (476), 28; tradition preserved by the Church, 45-6; revival of the imperial idea, 172; Charles the Great restores the Empire, 139, 144, 152; origin of the "Holy Roman Empire, " 153; papal theory of the Empire, 192; weakness of the Empire in ninth and tenth centuries, 196; revival under the Saxon Ottos, 191, 197-202 England, conversion of, 62-3, 69, 117, 183-7; Church of, 117-21; its independent attitude towards Rome, 117, 120, 121; kings the nursing fathers of the Church, 27; English missionaries to Germany, 136-9, 141-2; ritual in, 183-90 Ennismore, monastery, 53 Epiphanius, bishop of Pavia, 29 Epiphany baptisms, 177; communion, 179 Etherius, chaplain and notary to Charles the Great, 151 Ethiopian Church, 110-12 Eucharist, celebration of, in sixth century, 188; doctrine of, controversy concerning, 170-1; Aelfric's doctrine of, 120; reservation of, 180-1. _See_ Communion, Mass Eugenius, S. , bishop of Carthage, 104-5 Eutychian heresy, 7 Evagrius, ecclesiastical historian (period 431-594), 21 n. Exarch of Ravenna, 34, 40, 91; the Exarchate, 61-2, 69, 147-9, 151, 157

 Facundus, bishop of Hermione, 106 Fasting Communion, 180; Saturday fast in tenth century, 131 Faustus, bishop of Riez, a semi-Pelagian, 72 Felix II. , pope, 8 Felix, bishop of Urgel, 78-9, 168 Ferrand, African deacon, writer in the "Three Chapters" controversy, 106 Feudalism, rise of, 44-5, 172-3 _Filioque_ ("and [from] the Son"), word added to the Nicene Creed in the West, leads to controversy with the East, 193-4 Fontaine, monastery, 55 Fontenelle, abbey, 57 Fortunatus, bishop of Carthage, 108 Frankfort, Council of (794), 79, 168 Franks in Gaul, 42; conversion of, 4, 43, 177; their imperfect Christianity, 43-4, 54; staunch Catholicism, 42, 47-8, 177; break up of their kingdom, 44; formative influence of the Church, 45; relations with the Eastern Empire, 46-7; alliance with the papacy, 49; their Church's relations with Rome, 50; greatly influenced by monasticism, 58; they invade Spain, 74; laxity and corruption of their Church, 138, 144; Karling reformation, 144; Frankish missal, 183; relations with England, 186; Frankish clergy concoct the forged decretals, 195 Fredegund, wife of Chilperich I. , 43 Frederic, Saxon bishop in Iceland, 132 Freeman, Edward Augustus, quoted, 3 Freising, see of, 138 Frisians, 197; English missionaries to, 136, 139 Fritzlar, abbey, 140 Fuero Jusgo, the Wisigothic code, 74, 76 Fulda, monastery, 81, 140 Fulgentius, S. , African bishop, 105

 Gaiseric (Genseric), king of the Vandals, 103-4 Gall, S. , 56, 116 Gallican Church, 39, 41-59, _see_ Franks, Gaul; Gallican liturgy and ritual, 47, 181-3, 186, 188-90; influence on the English liturgy, 186-7 Galswintha, wife of Chilperich I. Of Neustria, 48 Gaul, Roman, 41; Christianity in, 41-59, 83, 176; Gregory the Great in, 48-51, 65, 69; monasticism in, 171; feudalism, 172; Normans in, 196 Gelasian Sacramentary (so named from pope Gelasius I. , 492-6), 182-3 Gelimer, Vandal king, 105 General Councils, first four, 76; Third (of Ephesus, 431), 96; Fourth (of Chalcedon, 451), 2, 7, 9-10, 18, 24, 65-6, 79, 85-6, 89, 95; Fifth (of Constantinople, 553), 15, 17, 18, 20-2, 39, 63-4, 86, 106-7, 161; Sixth (of Constantinople, 680-1), 21, 84-5, 88; Seventh (of Nicaea, 787), 155, 165; Eighth (of Constantinople, 869), 193-4; Eighth, according to the Greeks (of Constantinople, 879-80), 194 Gentilly, Council of (767), 81 Georgia, Church of, 23, 95 Gerbert of Aurillac (Silvester II. ), 200-2 Germanus, S. , patriarch of Constantinople, 155 Gildas, British historian, 183 Glastonbury, monastery, 115, 119 Gnesen, archbishopric of, 125 Goidels, Celtic stock in Ireland, 53; Goidelic language, 119 Goths, Eastern (Ostrogoths), in Italy, 4, 29-32; Western, _see_ Wisigoths Grado, archbishop of, 157 _Gradual_, 188 Greece, iconoclasm causes a rising in, 157; Greek Church, its character, 6: the Eastern Empire in its religious aspect, 13. _See also_ Church, Constantinople, Eastern, Schism Greenland, mission to, 132 Gregorian Sacramentary, 182 Gregory I. , the Great, S. , pope, 21, 25, 34, 40, 55, 76, 113, 134, 171, 180-2, 184, 186, 190, 192; his life and work, 60-71; his relations to Gaul, 48-51, 65, 69; to Africa, 107; to missions, 69; to monasticism, 69; to classical learning, 52, 70; his claim to jurisdiction, 68; claimed no special authority for the use of Rome, 187; his theology, 70-1; his writings, 35, 60, 63-5 Gregory II. , pope, 136-7, 157 Gregory III. , pope, 137, 147, 157 Gregory IV. , pope, 130 Gregory V. (Bruno), pope, 199, 200 Gregory of Tours, bishop and historian, 43-5, 51-2, 58, 66 n. , 145, 171 Gregory, abbat of Utrecht, 136 Gregory, patrician, upstart emperor, 109 Guntchramn (Guntram), king of the Burgundian Franks, 55

 Haakon (Hacon) the Good, king of Norway, 131 Hadrian I. , pope, 151, 154, 182 Hadrian II. , pope, 123-4 Hamburg, archbishopric, 129-30 Harnack, A. , referred to, 22 Harold Bluetooth, king of Denmark (died 978), 131 Harold, Danish king in 822, 129 Harold Haarfager (Fairhair), king of Norway, 131 Hatfield, Council of (680), 88 Helena, empress, 100 _Henotikon_, the, 7, 8, 10 Henry I. , "the Fowler, " first German king of the Saxon House(919-36), 126 Heraclius, emperor, 22-3, 83-4, 100-1, 109, 158; as a theologian, 87 Herat, Nestorian bishopric of, 98 Heresy, not a unifying power, 134; real danger of sixth and seventh century heresies, 19; heresy akin to patriotism in the East, 13; an expression of national independence, 23; baptism of heretics, 178. _See_ Adoptianist, Aphthartodocetes, Arianism, Donatists, Eutychian, Jacobite, Monophysites, Monothelites, Nestorians Hermenigild (Hermenegild), Wisigothic king in Spain, 75 Heruls, a Teutonic tribe, 29, 94 Hessen, 136-8 Hieria, iconoclastic synod at, 155 Hieroclea, author of the _Synekdemos_, 24 Hilarus, papal official under Gregory the Great, 107 Hilda, S. , 116 Hilderic, Vandal king, 105 Himyarites, Christians in South Arabia, 111-12 Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims, 170, 192, 195 Hira (in Persia), Monophysite bishop of, 110 Hlothild (Chlothildis), daughter of Chlodowech, 74 Hodgkin, Dr. Thomas, quoted, 32-3, 48, 75 n, 135, 144 Homerites (Himyarites) in South Arabia, Christian, 111-12 Honorius I. , pope, 87-8; condemned by the Sixth General Council, 85 Hormisdas, pope, 9-10, 90 Hugh the Great, duke of the Franks (923-56), 196 Hugh Capet, duke (956), and king (987-96) of the Franks, 201 Hugh, S. , abbat of Cluny, 174 Hungary, 141; received a Christian king, 201 Hunneric, Vandal king, 104 Huns, 41, 94 Hymns, 15 n, 81, 156, 162, 168, 190

 Ibas of Edessa, 16-18 Iberians of Georgia, 95 Iceland, 115; conversion of, 132-3 Iconoclastic controversy, 12, 143, 147, 155-65, 194 Ignatius, patriarch of Constantinople, 193-4 Illyria, Illyricum, 65-7, 157 Image-worship. _See_ Iconoclastic Incarnation, doctrine of the, the Church's tenacity of, 19; endangered by iconoclasm, 160, 164. _See_ Heresies India, 9, 23, 96-8 Ingunthis, Frankish princess, daughter of Sigebert and Brunichild, wife of Hermenigild of Spain, 48, 75 Iona, 116-17 Ireland, Christian and outside the Empire, 3; the Church in, 53, 113-16, 121-2, 183; Irish learning, 169-71; missionaries in Thuringia, 136; monks in Iceland, 132; priests at Glastonbury, 115, 119 Irene, Empress, 154, 164 Irminsul, the, a column worshipped by the Saxons, 140 Isidore of Seville, 76, 195 Isis, worship of, 111 Islam, 98. _See_ Muhammadanism Istria, 63-4, 68, 151 Italy, conquered by Goths, 4, 29; reconquered by Belisarius and Narses, 32; Imperial restoration, 33; Church in, 29-40; S. Columban in, 56; saved from Arianism, 60; liturgy, 183; end of the Eastern Imperial power, 143, 147-8; Charles the Great, 150-4; the Saxon Ottos, 197-201 Italy, Northern, long refuses to accept the Fifth General Council, 21; Gregory the Great's activity, 65, 69; Bavarian kings in, 135 Italy, Southern, Benedictines in, 62; effect of iconoclasm on, 157, 162

 Jacobite sect, 109-10; in Syria, 23, 84 James, Studite monk, 162 Jarrow, monastery, 116 Jerusalem, Church and patriarchate of, 8, 16-17, 84, 87, 100-1, 156; councils at (553), 20; (628), 101 Jews, Gregory the Great tries to convert, 69; persecuted in Spain, 77; Jews in Syria, 100; influence Muhammad, 101; Jews in Arabia, 111-12 Joannicius, S. , Bulgarian recluse, 124 John I. , pope, martyred, 31 John II. , pope, 15 John VIII. , pope, 194 John X. , pope, 197 John XI. , pope, 174 John XV. , pope, 199 John XVI. , anti-pope set up by Crescentius (997-8), 199 John of Biclaro (Joannes Biclarensis), bishop of Gerona, 62 n. , 95 n. , 75 John the Cappadocian, patriarch of Constantinople, 10, 90 John of Damascus (John Damascene), S. , 87, 159-60 John the Deacon, biographer of Gregory the Great, 64, 182 John of Ephesus, Monophysite bishop and Syriac writer of sixth century, 24, 111 John Maro, 89 John of Nikiu, Jacobite bishop, 86, 109 John the Patrician, recaptures Carthage from the Arabs, 109 John the Scot (Johannes Scotus "Erigena"), 170-1 Julian of Halicarnassus, 86 Justin I. , emperor, 10, 32, 112 Justin II. , emperor, 21-2 Justinian I. , emperor, 86, 89, 90, 94, 99-100, 107, 110-12, 143, 153, 177; his birthplace, 24, 67-8, 91; building, 26, 27, 100, 106; Christian legislation of, 28; controversies of his reign, 14-22; corresponds with the pope, 10, 14; deals with the Monophysites, 15; his alleged heresy, 15, 21, 22; summons Fifth General Council, 17; intervenes in Africa, 105-6; his relations with the Franks, 47; restores the imperial rule in Italy, 33; Spanish war, 74; hymn-writer, 15 n. Justinian II. , 90-1 Justiniana Prima, 67, 91 Jutes in Britain, 117; of Jutland, converted, 130

 Karlings, Frankish royal house, 57, 139, 144, 147, 196, 201 Kerait, Tartar kingdom of, 96-7 _Key of Truth, The_, book of the Armenian Paulicians, 80 Khalifs of Baghdad, 97, 99; Khalif Omar, 101 Khartoum, Christian remains near, 111 Khorassan, 93 Kiev, town on the Dnyepr, becomes Christian, 127 Kothransson, Thorwald, Icelander, 132 Kristián, tenth-century Bohemian historian, 128

 Lateran synod (649), 88 Leander, archbishop of Seville, 63, 75-6 Learning, 5, 38, 123; survival of, 5; at the court of the Merwings, 51; classical, taught to Gregory the Great, 60; yet he opposed classical learning in bishops, 52; classical, of the Irish Church, 115; in England, 115; of the Irish monks, 121-2; of the Studite monks, 163; revival of, under Charles the Great, 154, 166-70. _See_ Aelfric, Bede, Gerbert, Education, Literature Lebanon, 84; Monothelites in, 22 Leger (Leodegar), S. , 81, 146 Lent, 36, 140 Leo I. , the Great, S. , pope, 6, 7, 10, 29, 63, 89 Leo III. , pope, 81, 152 Leo III. , the Isaurian, emperor, 109, 155, 157-8 Leo IV. , the Chazar, emperor, 155 Leo V. , the Armenian, emperor, 165 Leo VI. , the Wise, emperor, 194 Leodegar, Leodgar, (S. Leger), bishop of Autun, 81, 146 Leontius of Byzantium, 86 Leovigild, Wisigothic king in Spain, 48, 75 Lerins, abbey, 81 _Liber Pontificalis_, 39 n. , 151 Liberatus, sixth-century theological writer in Africa, 106 Limoges, 150, 174 Lindisfarne, 117 Litanies, 184-6 Literature in North Africa, 106; literary renaissance under Charles the Great, 166. _See_ Boethius, Cassiodorus, Gregory the Great, Gregory of Tours, John of Damascus, Learning, Paul the Silentiary, Procopius, Venantius Fortunatus, Theodore of the Studium Liturgies, 181-90 Liudhard, Frankish bishop in Kent, 186 Lombards, 40, 147-50, 152; invade Italy, 34, 61; pope negotiates with, 62; conversion from Arianism to Catholicism, 4, 56, 63, 134 Lothar (Chlothochar) II. , king of Lotharingia, 191-2 Louis I. , the Pious, emperor, son of Charles I. , 129 Louis II. , emperor, son of the Emperor Lothar I. , 192 Louis the German, king of Bavaria (840-76), son of Louis the Pious, 128 Louis d'Outremer, king of the West Franks (936-54), son of Charles the Simple, 174 Ludmilla, S. , of Bohemia, 128 Luxeuil, S. Columban's monastery at, 55-6

 Mâcon, Second Council of (585), 180 Magdeburg, archbishopric, 126, 197-8 Maieul (Majolus), abbat of Cluny, 174 Mainz, 195; S. Boniface, archbishop of, 137-8 Malmesbury, abbey, 115, 171 Manichaeans, 104, 178 Mansi, G. D. , Italian theologian (1692-1769); his Concilia referred to, 15 n. , 17 n. , 21 n. , 76 Maraba, catholicos of Persia, 99 Mark, S. , evangelist, 64 Maron, John, founder of the Maronites, 84 Maronite Church, 23, 89 Marozia, paramour of Pope Sergius III. , mother of Pope John XI. , 196 Marriage of the clergy, 25, 91, 119-20; in the Greek Church, 85; marriage of spiritual relations forbidden, 177 Martel, Charles, Frankish mayor of the palace, 135, 137, 144, 146 Martial, S. , monastery at Limoges, 174 Martin, S. , monastery at Tours, 168, 173 Martin I. , pope, 88 Martin, S. , bishop of Braga, 74 Martyrdom of S. Adalbert, 125, 129; S. Boniface, 139, 202; Pope John, 31; S. Theodosia, 158; S. Wenceslas, 128-9 Mary, the Blessed Virgin, 18, 80; images of, 156-7 Mass, the, 15 n. ; Mass of the presanctified, 179; the Roman Mass, fifth to eighth century, 180-2: sixth century, 188-90; "ite, missa est, " 190 Maurice, emperor, 22, 62, 66 Maurice, S. , 125 Maximus, orthodox African abbat and controversialist, 89, 108 Meccah, 101 Media, 93 Medinah, 101 Melkites, orthodox, in Egypt, 84, 110 Mellitus, bishop, 176 Melrose, monastery, 116 Mennas, patriarch of Constantinople, 15, 17 Merovech, son of Chilperich I. , 43 Merovingians. _See_ Merwings Merv, Nestorian Church of, 98 Merwings, Frankish royal house, 43-7, 138, 144, 147, 196, 199; encourage literature, 51; their sins, 52-4: their age called golden by Mabillon, 57; decay of their kingdoms, 135 Mesopotamia, national Church of, 13 Methodius, S. , patriarch of Constantinople (843-7), 12, 156 Methodius, S. , archbishop of Moravia, 123-4, 128-9 Metz, capital of Austrasia, 135; bishop of, 144 Michael III. , "the Drunkard, " emperor, 192-3 Mieczyslaw, king of Poland, 125 Milan, archbishop of, 39; church of, 183 Mir (Theodemir), king of the Suevi in Spain, 74 _Missale Francorum_, 183 Missions, important in this period, 2, 3; Byzantine, 6, 84; supported by the emperors, 23; missions from Rome, 62, 117, 183-90; Nestorian, 6, 96-8; Monophysite, 24, 111; missionary zeal of the Irish Church, 116, 121-2; missions of the ninth century, 123; to the Bulgarians, 124; to the Slavs, 124-9; to Northmen, 129-32; to Frisians, 136, 139; missions checked by the iconoclastic controversy, 156; mission of S. Augustine, 183-90; missionary wars of Charles the Great, 139-42, and of the Saxon emperors, 197; zeal of Otto III. And Silvester II. For missions, 201-2 Monasticism, in the East, 25, 161-3; its debt to S. Benedict, 37; to S. Columban, 53; Irish, 53, 114; monasticism in Gaul, 54, 171; a defence against the secularisation of the Frankish Church, 57; in Persia, 99; in Scotland, 119; missionary fruits of, 130; close connection with learning, 167; Alcuin's attitude to, 168; decay in ninth century, 172; revival at Cluny, 173-5; the Studium at Constantinople, 161-3; kings become monks, 77, 145 Mongols, 100 Monophysites, Monophysitism, 23, 83, 85, 110, 156, 159; Eastern attempts at compromise rejected by Rome, 7-8; Justinian studies the question, 10-11, and condemns it, 15; its condemnation necessary to the acceptance of a logically tenable creed, 19; Monophysite missions, 24, 111; Monophysitism in Abyssinia, 112; Arabia, 101; Armenia, 95; India, 97; Persia, 98-9; Syria, 101 Monothelites, Monothelitism, 22-3, 84-9, 159; its condemnation necessary, 19; favoured the progress of Islam, 102; weakened African Christianity, 108 Montanists, heretical followers of the second-century fanatic Montanus, 178 Monte Cassino, monastery, 35, 39, 61, 145 Monza, Lombard relics at, 69 Moors, heathen, of fifth century, 103; Muhammadan, in Spain and Gaul, 73, 146 _Moralia_ of Gregory the Great, 63 Moravia, 124, 127-9 Mosaics at Constantinople and Ravenna, 26 Mozarabic rite, Christian liturgy which survived the Moorish occupation and is still in use in Spain, 189 Mugurrah (Nubia), visited by missionaries, 111 Muhammad (Mohammed), the prophet, 101 Muhammad II. , conqueror of Constantinople in 1453, 27 Muhammadans, Muhammadanism, theocratic ideal of, 139-40; absorb the attention of the Eastern emperors, 143; contributes to the iconoclastic movement, 158; conquests, 84; conquest of Arabia, etc. , 112; Merv, 98; Persia, 99; Syria, 101; Egypt, 102; Africa, 5, 108-9; Soudan, 111; Spain, 72-3, 77-8, 146; defeated in Gaul by Charles Martel, 146

 Naples, 143 Narses, general of Justinian, 32, 34, 61 Nationalism, a complicating factor in theological controversy, 9; nationalism of the Spanish Church, 73; nationalism and heresy, 110 _Negus_, title of the ruler of Abyssinia, 111 Nerses III. , Armenian "Catholicos, " 84-5 Nestorians, Nestorianism, 9, 23, 83; missions, 6, 96-8; in Armenia, 95; in Persia, 93-6, 98-9; Nestorianism and Muhammad, 101; Nestorian "Church of the East" 96 Neustria, Western Frankish kingdom, 43, 135-6, 146 Neutra (in modern Hungary), Christian Church at, 127 Nevers, S. Columban at, 56 Nicaea, First General Council (325), 89; Seventh General Council (787), 165 Nicene Creed, 193 Nicephorus I. , emperor, 80 Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, 160 Nicetius, bishop of Trier, 47, 86 Nicolas I. , pope, 124, 191-6 Nîmes, 75, 77, 146 Nisibis, Nestorian school of theology at, 95-6 Nobadae, a people of the Soudan, converted, 111 Nona, bishop of, 125 Normans, 150, 172, 196 Northmen, ravages of, 169; pillage Hamburg, 130; converted, 129-33. _See_ Danes Northumbria, 116-17; schools of, 116, 167. _See_ Deira Norway, conversion of, 121, 131-2 Nubia, missionaries in, 111

 Odilo, abbat of Cluny, 174 Odo, S. , abbat of Cluny, 163, 171-5 Oecumenical Councils, canons collected, 194; the Eighth disputed, 193-4. _See_ General Councils Oecumenical patriarch, 65-6 Olaf, king of Sweden (in 853), 130 Olaf Trigvason, king of Norway (995-1000), 121, 132-3. Olaf, S. , king of Norway (1017-29), 132 Olaf, Norse king of Dublin, 132 Olga, S. , a "ruler of Russia, " baptized, 126 Omar, Khalif, 101 Ommeyads, dynasty of Khalifs, descended from Omeyya, 156 Orange, synod at (529), 72 Ordination, anointing the hands at, 183 Origen, his doctrines condemned, 16; Origenists, 15-16 Oswald, king of Northumberland, 116 Oswald, bishop of Worcester, 119 Oswiu, king of Northumbria, 117 Otto I. , emperor, revives the Empire and reforms the papacy, 197; ecclesiastical policy in Germany and Italy, 198-9; patron of Gerbert, 200; overlord of Poland, 125; Slav missions, 126; intervenes in Bohemia, 129; and Denmark, 131 Otto II. , emperor, 199, 201 Otto III. , emperor, 125, 198-202 Ouen, S. , bishop of Rouen, 58

 Paderborn, 152 Palestine, Church in, 15-16, 100. _See_ Jerusalem, Syria Pallium, its significance, 67-8; sent to S. Boniface, 137; to S. Ansgar, 130 Pannonia, 124 Papacy and the popes: Papacy rises as the Empire decays, 4; wins political power, 5, 61, 149; acquires rights of jurisdiction, 31; popes act as envoys of Arian Gothic kings, 15, 31; papal elections confirmed by the emperor or the exarch, 34, and controlled by the Saxon emperors, 199; papacy supported by the Benedictines, 37, as afterwards by the Cluniacs, 173-5; degradation of the papacy in sixth century, 39; papal infallibility not dreamt of in sixth century, 39-40, nor in the early tenth, 197; growth of new ideals, popes begin to intervene in politics, 61; pope styled "oecumenical archbishop and patriarch, " 65; papal power increases in Africa, 107-8; papacy preserves the traditions of the Empire, 143; alliance of the papacy with the Karlings, 147; growth of the temporal power, 143, 149; beginning of the Papal States, 149; loss of the Bulgarian Church, 134; papacy foments strife between the Slavs and Constantinople, 125; popes oppose iconoclastic emperors, 157; pope crowns Charles the Great emperor, 152-3; Nicolas I. Claims to be the source of the Empire, 192; degeneracy of the popes in ninth and tenth centuries, 172, 196-7, 199; papal monarchy grows in theory at the time of its practical weakness, 191; papacy supports its claims by the forged decretals, 194-6; papacy reformed by the Saxon emperors, 197, 199-202; list of popes, 205-8. _See_ Rome Paschasius Radbertus, abbat of Corbie (died about. 865), 170 Passau, see of, 138 Patriarchates, the five, 24; question of supremacy, 90; their jurisdictions not considered unalterable, 91; patriarchal rights over the Bulgarian Church, 124; Illyria lost to Rome, 157. _See_ Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Rome "Patrician of the Romans, " title conferred on Pippin the Short, 148; borne by Charles the Great, 152 Patrick, S. , 57, 113-14, 183 "Patrimony of S. Peter, " 65, 148 Paul the Deacon, 62 n. , 65, 134, 167 Paul, patriarch of Constantinople, 164 Paul of Samosata, 80 Paul the Silentiary, 25-6 Paulicians, 80, 156 Pelagius, founder of the Pelagian heresy in fifth century, 72 Pelagius, I. , pope, 16, 21, 34, 39-40, 107 Pelagius II. , pope, 62, 64-6 Persecution of Catholics by Arians, 32, 74-5, 103-5; of Catholics by Moslems, 78; in the iconoclastic controversy, 155, 158, 165; of Jews, 77; of Nestorians by Muhammadans, 99 Persia, 12, 22-3, 80, 83, 110; the Church in, 93-5, 98-9; kings of, 93-5, 100, 102 Peter, S. , 117, 120; _Confessio_ of, 152; patrimony of, 65, 148; Charles the Great's gift of lands to, 151; popes act in the name of, 148-50 Peter the Stammerer, bishop of Alexandria, 8 _Phantasiasts_, 86 Philae, temple of, 111 Phocas the Cappadocian, emperor, 22 Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, 124, 192-4 Picts, heathens in Scotland, 114, 116 Pippin the Short, Frankish king, 150; anointed by S. Boniface (751), 139, 147; by Pope Stephen II. (754), 148; relations with the papacy, 144, 147-9; donation of, 149, 151, 194 Poictiers, Battle of, 146 Poland, conversion of, 125 Pomerania, 125 Poppo, bishop, missionary to the Danes, 131 Posen, bishopric of, 125 Pragmatic Sanction of Justinian for the government of Italy, 33-4 Prague, see of (bishopric, 973; archbishopric, 1343), 125, 129 Primasius, sixth-century theological writer in Africa, 106 _Privilegia_ to monasteries granted by Gregory the Great, 69; to the Cluniacs, 173-4 Procession of the Holy Ghost, Double (i. E. From the Father and the Son), 76, 80-1, 193-4 Proconsularis (i. E. Africa Proconsularis, the modern Tunis and Tripoli), 104 Procopius, 11, 26, 91 n. , 94, 100, 112 Prussians, missions to, 125, 129 Pseudo-Isidorian decretals, 195 Pyrrhus, Monothelite heresiarch, 89, 108

 _Quicunque vult_, 81-2 Quierzy (on the Oise), donation of, 151 Quini-sextan Council at Constantinople (_in Trullo_), 85, 89-92

 Rabanus Maurus, 81 Radegund, S. , Frankish princess, 51; monastery of, 171 Ratramnus of Corbie (died 868), 170 Ravenna, 85, 147, 149, 151, 201; Odowakar's capital, captured by Goths, 29; recaptured by Belisarius, 30; mosaics at, 26; archbishopric, 68, 157 Reccared, Wisigothic king in Spain, 73, 75-6, 80 Recceswinth, Wisigothic king in Spain, 76 Regensburg (Ratisbon), Bohemians baptized at, 128; see of, 129, 138; Council of (792), 79 Remigius, S. , baptizes Chlodowech, 43 Remismond, Suevic king in Spain, 73 Reparatus, bishop of Carthage, 106 Reunion of Eastern and Western Church (in 519), 10; sought by Justinian, 11; nominal, after the Photian Schism, 194 Rheims, 195-6, 200-1 Rimbert, S. , archbishop of Bremen, 130-1 Rome, Church and patriarchate of, 24, 65-6, 157; insists on obsolete claims, 14; its supremacy repudiated at Constantinople, 85, 90; quarrel with Constantinople over the _Ecthesis_ and _Type_, 98; authorises the missions of S. Augustine, 117, and S. Boniface, 136-9; attitude of S. Boniface to, 139; connection with Ireland, 113-15, 122; with the East, 123; with England, 117, 120-1; assumes the political rights of the exarchate, 148-9; Eucharist, 179; councils at (680), 88; (731), 157; (863), 192. _See_ Church (Western), Papacy Rome, city of, its peculiar history, 143; dominated by the local nobles, 196 Romulus Augustulus, 29 Rügen, isle of, 127 Rule of Bangor, 54-5; of Basil, reformed by Theodore the Studite, 163; of S. Benedict, 35, 58-9, 69, 119, 121, 171, 173, 175; of Cluny, 174-5; of S. Columban, 55, 171 Rupert, S. , missionary in Bavaria, 135 Russia, conversion of, 6, 126-7; modern Russian Church, 95

 Sabas, S. , 15 Sabbas, archimandrite of the Studium, 162 Sabellians, followers of the heretic Sabellius (third century), 178 _Sacramentary_ of Pope Gelasius I. (492-6), 182-3; of Gregory the Great, 182 Sacraments, 176-181 Saints, Celtic "age of saints, " 53; Merwing, 51; images of the, 156-7 Salzburg, archbishopric, 127, 135, 138 Samaritans, 100 Samarkand, Nestorian bishopric of, 98 Sancho the Great, king of Navarre (970-1035), 78 Sapor II. , king of Persia, 93 Saracens, 77, 158, 172; in Africa, 109; in Spain and Gaul, 146. _See_ Muhammadans. Saxons, 135; forcible conversion by Charles the Great, 140-2, 197; the Saxons in Britain, 113, 117-18, 176; "Old" Saxons of the Continent, 180 Schism between East and West, formal beginning due to Monophysitism, 8; schism of 484-519, 68; schism of 649-81 caused by the _Ecthesis_ and _Type_, 88; steps towards, 149; the Photian, 192-4 Schleswig, converted, 130 Scholarship, 5, 38, 55. _See_ Learning Scholastica, S. , sister of S. Benedict, 37 Scilly Isles, 132 Scotland, Church in, 114, 116-17, 119 Scotus, Johannes. _See_ John the Scot Sebert, king of the East Saxons, 176 Seleucia, see of, 93 Semi-Pelagianism, 72, 81 Septimania, 77, 146 Serbia, Church of, 124 Serbian Church, 23, 84 Sergius I. , pope, 91 Sergius I. , patriarch of Constantinople, 83, 87 Sermons, 64-5, 120, 163, 185, 188 Severus, Monophysite patriarch of Antioch, 10, 15, 86 Severus, patriarch of Aquileia, 62 Sigambrians, a Teutonic tribe, allied to the Franks, 43 Sigebert (Sigibert), Frankish king of Austrasia, 43, 54, 75 Silvester II. , pope, 7, 125, 200-2 Simplicius, pope, 8 Siricius, pope, 195 Slaves, slavery, 130; freed by Gregory the Great, 65; Jews enslaved in Spain, 77 Slavs, 44, 84; Charles the Great allied with heathen, 141; conversion of, 123-9; attacked by Otto I. , 197 Smbat, supposed author of the Paulician _Key of Truth_, 80 Soissons, 139, 195 Sophia, S. , the Church of the Divine Wisdom, at Constantinople, 25-7; Church of, at Kiev, 127 Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, 87 Soracte, monastery, 145 Spain, 172, 196; Gregory the Great active in, 65; invaded by the Franks, 74; Dagobert I. Influential in, 44; Charles the Great in, 140; conflict of Arianism and Catholicism in, 48; Catholicism wins, 62-3, 73, 75; conquered by the Muhammadans, 77-8; Church has to contend with Islam, 72; Catholicism survives in the North, 78; Eucharist, 179; Spanish rite, 183; literature, 73 Squillace, monastery, 38-9 Stephen II. (or III. ), pope, 148-9 Stephen III. (or IV. ), pope, 151 Stephen, king of Hungary, 201 Strathclyde, early British Church of, 113 Studium, the, monastery at Constantinople, 161-3 _Stylites_, 25 Subiaco, S. Benedict at, 35 Suevi (a Teutonic confederate people) in Gaul, 41. _See_ Mir, Remismond Sweden, missions to, 129-30 Syagrius, bishop of Autun, 49, 67 n. Symmachus, Senator, father-in-law of Boethius, executed, 32 _Syntagma_, a collection of canons, compiled, 85, 178 Syria, 100-1, 156; Syrian Church, Monophysite and Nestorian, 9; National Church, 13; monks disregard the Fifth General Council, 20; Jacobites in, 23, 84; Adoptianism in, 79; Monophysitism, 110; Monothelitism, 89; Muhammadan invasion, 108

 Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople, 164 Tartars, 96-7 Tauresium, 91. _See_ Justiniana Prima Tebessa (in modern Algeria), monastery, 106 Thaddeus, Studite monk, 162 Theandric energy, 87, 89 Theodebert I. , Frankish king, 47 Theodelind, Lombard queen, 56, 69, 134-5 Theoderic III. , king of Neustria, 146 Theodora, empress (842), wife of Theophilus, 165 Theodora, paramour of Pope John X. , mother of Marozia, 196 Theodore of Mopsuestia, 16-18 Theodore of the Studium (or the Studite), S. , 124, 156, 160-4 Theodore of Tarsus, 115, 117, 169 Theodoret of Cyrrhus, 16-18 Theodoric the Ostrogoth, king of Italy, 29; his tolerant ecclesiastical policy, 30; executes Symmachus and Boethius, 32; aims at a united Italy, 60 Theodoric II. , Frankish king of Burgundy, son of Childebert II. , 56 Theodosia, S. , 158 Theodosius II. , emperor, 67 Theology, important in this period, 1; the predominant interest in the literature, 5; the theology of statesmen and military men, 9, 87; theology at Constantinople, 8, 156; iconoclastic, 158-9; theology of S. John Damascene, 159-60 Theophanes, Greek chronicler (758-817), 111 Theophilus, emperor, 165 Thessalonica, 67-8, 123 Theudberga, wife of Chlothochar, king of Lotharingia, 191 Theudis, Wisigothic king in Spain, 74 Thomas of Edessa, 99 Thormod, missionary priest in Iceland, 132 Thorwald Kothransson, Icelander, 132 Thrace, Paulicianism in, 80 "Three Chapters, " controversy of the, 16-20, 22, 62-3, 72, 99, 106-7 Thuringia(ns), 135-8 Tiberius II. , emperor, 22 Tithes, 140 Toledo, cathedral of, 76; councils, 72; Third Synod (of 589), 76, 80; Fourth (of 633), 81; Sixteenth (of 695), 77 _Tome_ of S. Leo, 63 Tomi, monks of, 14 Tonnenna, Victor of, 106-7 Totila, Gothic king, 37 Tours, 168; battle of, _see_ Poictiers. _See also_ Gregory of Tours Transubstantiation, 171 Trier (Trèves), archbishop of, 192 Trullian Council (691) at Constantinople, 85, 89-92 Tunis, survival of the Church of, 110 _Type_, issued by Constans II. , 88 Tzani, Asiatic people, converted, 94

 Unity, the central idea of the period, 2, 154, 203; need of unity in the Church, 70 "Universal bishop, " title declined by Gregory the Great, 66; Cluniac ideal, 175 Urban II. , pope (1088-99), 174

 Vandals, 197; in Gaul, 41; in Africa, 103-5 Venantius Fortunatus, bishop of Poictiers, 51, 75 _Veni Creator Spiritus_, 81 Venice, 143, 151, 157 Victor, bishop of Carthage, 108 Victor of Tonnenna (Victor Tununensis), 106-7 Victor Vitensis, 104-5 Vienne, 186 Vigilists, 15. _See_ Akoimetai. Vigilius, pope, 17, 20, 39-40, 106 Vivarium, monastery of, 38 Vladimir, S. , of Russia, 126-7

 Wales, Church of, 113, 118, 122; West Wales (i. E. Cornwall), 113 Wallachian Church, 23 Wamba, Wisigothic king in Spain, 76 Wandrille, S. , 57 Wenceslas of Bohemia, S. , 128-9 Wends, missions to the, 126 Whitby, Synod of (664), 116 Wilfrith (Wilfrid) of Ripon, S. , 88, 117-18, 121, 169 Willehad, archbishop of Bremen, 142 William of Aquitaine, founder of the abbey of Cluny, 173 Willibald, biographer of S. Boniface, 138 Willibrord, S. , Northumbrian missionary in Frisia, 136 Winfrith of Crediton (S. Boniface), 121, 136-40, 142 Wisigoths in Spain, 73-8; corruption of society, 73-4; accept Catholicism, 5, 62-3, 73, 75; their monarchy falls before the Moors, 146 Würzburg, 138, 147

 York, school of, 116, 167

 Zacharias, pope, 147 Zacharias, patriarch of Jerusalem, 101 Zeno, emperor, 7