XX. Diocletian, but they acquired a perfect title to all CHAP. the possessions which they had hitherto enjoyed by the connivance of the magistrate. As soon as christianity became the religion of the emperor and the empire, the national clergy might claim a decent and honourable maintenance; and the payment of an annual tax might have delivered the people from the more oppressive tribute, which superstition imposes on her votaries. But as the wants and expences of the church increased with her prosperity, the ecclesiastical order was still supported and enriched by the voluntary oblations of the faithful. Eight years after the. D. 321. edict of Milan, Constantine granted to all his subjects the free and universal permission of bequeathing their fortunes to the holy catholic church; and their devout liberality, which during their lives was checked by luxury or avarice, flowed with a profuse stream at the hour of their death. The wealthy christians were encouraged by the example of their sovereign. An absolute monarch, who is rich without patrimony, may be charitable without merit; and Constantine too easily believed that he should purchase the favour of heaven, if he maintained the idle at the expence of the industrious, and distributed among the saints the wealth of the republic. The same messenger who carried over Habeat unusquisque licentiam sanctissimo Catholicæ (ecclesiæ) venerabilique concilio, de eedens bonorum quod optavit relinquere. Cod. Theodos. 1. xvi, tit. ii, leg. 4. This law was published at Rome, A. D. 321, at a time when Constantine might foresee the probability of a rupture with the emperor of the East. XX. CHAP. to Africa the head of Maxentius, might be entrusted with an epistle to Cæcilian, bishop of Carthage. The emperor acquaints him, that the treasurers of the province are directed to pay into his hands the sum of three thousand folles, or eighteen thousand pounds sterling, and to obey his farther requisitions for the relief of the churches of Africa, Numidia, and Mauritania.' The liberality of Constantine increased in a just proportion to his faith, and to his vices. He assigned in each city a regular allowance of corn, to supply the fund of ecclesiastical charity, and the persons of both sexes who embraced the monastic life, became the peculiar favourites of their sovereign. The christian temples of Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, Constantinople, &c. displayed the ostentatious piety of a prince, ambitious in a declining age to equal the perfect labours of antiquity." The form of these religious edifices was simple and oblong; though they might sometimes swell into the shape of a dome, and sometimes branch into the figure of a The timbers were framed for the most part of cedars of Lebanus; the roof was covered cross. 1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. x, 6; in Vit. Constantin. 1. iv, c. 28. He repeatedly expatiates on the liberality of the christian hero, which the bishop himself had an opportunity of knowing, and even of tasting. m Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. x, c. 2, 3, 4. The bishop of Cæsarea, who studied and gratified the taste of his master, pronounced in public an elaborate description of the church of Jerusalem (in Vit. Cons. 1. iv, c. 46). It no longer exists; but he has inserted in the life of Constantine (1. iii, c. 36), a short account of the architecture and ornaments. He likewise mentions the church of the holy apostles at Constantinople (1. iv, c. 59). with tiles, perhaps of gilt brass; and the walls, CHAP. the columns, the pavement, were incrusted with XX. variegated marbles. The most precious ornaments of gold and silver, of silk and gems, were profusely dedicated to the service of the altar; and this spacious magnificence was supported on the solid and perpetual basis of landed property. In the space of two centuries, from the reign of Constantine to that of Justinian, the eighteen hundred churches of the empire were enriched by the frequent and unalienable gifts of the prince and people. An annual income of six hundred pounds sterling may be reasonably assigned to the bishops, who were placed at an equal distance between riches and poverty," but the standard of their wealth insensibly rose with the dignity and opulence of the cities which they governed. An authentic but imperfect° rent-roll specifies some houses, shops, gardens, and farms, which belonged to the three basilica of Rome, St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. John Lateran, in the provinces of Italy, Africa, and the East. They produce, besides a reserved rent of oil, linen, paper, aromatics, &c. a clear annual revenue of twentytwo thousand pieces of gold, or twelve thousand n See Justinian. Novell. cxxiii, 3. The revenue of the patriarchs, and the most wealthy bishops, is not expressed: the highest annual valuation of a bishopric is stated at thirty, and the lowest at two, pounds of gold; the medium might be taken at sixteen, but these valuations are much below the real value. • See Baronius (Annal. Eccles. A. D. 324, No. 58, 65, 70, 71). Every record which comes from the Vatican is justly suspected ; yet these rent-rolls have an ancient and authentic colour; and it is at least evident, that, if forged, they were forged in a period when farms, not kingdoms, were the objects of papal avarice. XX. CHAP. pounds sterling. In the age of Constantine and Justinian, the bishops no longer possessed, perhaps they no longer deserved, the unsuspecting confidence of their clergy and people. The ecclesiastical revenues of each diocese were divided into four parts; for the respective uses, of the bishop himself, of his inferior clergy, of the poor, and of the public worship; and the abuse of this sacred trust was strictly and repeatedly checked.P The patrimony of the church was still subject to all the public impositions of the state. The clergy of Rome, Alexandria, Thessalonica, &c. might solicit and obtain some partial exemptions; but the premature attempt of the great council of Rimini, which aspired to universal freedom was successfully resisted by the son of Constantine," P See Thomassin, Discipline de l'Eglise, tom. iii, 1. ii, c. 13, 14, 15, p. 689-706. The legal division of the ecclesiastical revenue does not appear to have been established in the time of Ambrose and Chrysostom. Simplicius and Gelasius, who were bishops of Rome in the latter part of the fifth century, mention it in their pas toral letters as a general law, which was already confirmed by the custom of Italy. 9 Ambrose, the most strenuous asserter of ecclesiastical privileges, submits without a murmur to the payment of the land-tax. "Si "tributum petit imperatur, non negamus; agri ecclesiæ solvunt "tributum; solvimus quæ sunt Cæsaris Cæsari, et quæ sunt Dei "Deo: tributum Cæsaris est; non negatur." Baronius labours to interpret this tribute as an act of charity rather than of duty (Annal. Eccles. A. D. 387); but the words, if not the intentions of Ambrose, are more candidly explained by Thomassin, Discipline de l'Eglise, tom. iii, 1. i, c. 34, p. 268. r In Ariminense synodo super ecclesiarum et clericorum privile glis tractatû habito, usque eo dispositio progressa est, ut juga quæ viderentur ad ecclesiam pertinere, a publicâ functione cessarent inquietudine desistente; quod nostra videtur dudum sanctio repulsisse. Cod: XX. jurisdic IV. The Latin clergy, who erected their tri- CHAP. bunal on the ruins of the civil and common law, have modestly accepted as the gift of Constan- v. Civil tine, the independent jurisdiction, which was tion. the fruit of time, of accident, and of their own industry. But the liberality of the christian emperors had actually endowed them with some legal prerogatives, which secured and dignified the sacerdotal character.t 1, Under a despotic government, the bishops alone enjoyed and asserted the inestimable privilege of being tried only by their peers; and even in a capital accusation, a synod of their brethren were the sole judges of their guilt or innocence. Such a tri Cod. Theod. 1. xvi, tit. ii, leg. 15. Had the synod of Rimini carried this point, such practical merit might have atoned for some speculative heresies. s From Eusebius (in Vit. Constant. 1, iv, c. 27), and Sozomen, (1. i, c. 9) we are assured that the episcopal jurisdiction was extended and confirmed by Constantine; but the forgery of a famous edict, which was never fairly inserted in the Theodosian Code (see at the end, tom. vi, p. 303), is demonstrated by Godefroy in the most satisfactory manner. It is strange that M. de Montesquieu, who was a lawyer as well as a philosopher, should allege this edict of Constantine (Esprit des Loix, 1. xxix, c. 16), without intimating any suspicion. The subject of ecclesiastical jurisdiction has been involved in a mist of passion, of prejudice, and of interest. Two of the fairest books which have fallen into my hands, are the institutes of Canon Law, by the Abbé de Fleury, and the Civil History of Naples, by Giannone. Their moderation was the effect of situation as well as of temper. Fleury was a French ecclesiastic, who respected the authority of the parliaments; Giannone was an Italian lawyer, who dreaded the power of the church. And here let me observe, that as the general propositions which I advance are the result of many particular and imperfect facts, I must either refer the reader to those modern authors who have expressly treated the subject, or swell these notes to a disagreeable and disproportioned size, |