Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 4.djvu/345

 CONSTANTINE

299

CONSTANTINE

For a time it seemed as if merely tolerance and (•■I I ility wore to prevail. Constantine showed equal I I . Hir to Ijotli religions. As pontifex maxiniu.s he w (ii Itcil over the heathen worship and protected its limits. The one thing he did was to suppress divina- ti i)i:iiid magic; this the heathen emperors had also at

t s .sought to do. Thus, in 320, the emperor for-

I):m].' the diviners or haruspices to enter a private liiMisi' under pain of death. Whoever by entreaty or pi'itiiise of payment persuaded a haruspex to break tlii> law, that man's property should be confiscated an. I he himself shovild be burned to death. Informers wi I.' to be rewarded. Whoever desired to practise 1h iihcn usages must do so openly. He must go to t iir liublic altars and sacred places, and there observe truliiional forms of worship. "W'e do not forbid", ^:lll| the etnperor, "the observance of the old usages III ihi' light of chiy." And in an ordinance of the same >:i'. iiitcniled for the Roman city prefects, Constan-

1 .lirected that if lightning struck an imperial pal-

iir a public building, the haruspices were to .seek

I I I'cording to ancient custom what the sign might .■• nullify, and their interpretation was to be written 'I' '" n and reported to the emperor. It was aLso per- il i it i id to private individuals to make use of this old

111, but in following this observance they must

HI from the forbidden sacrificia domestica. A

1,1 1 prohibition of the family sacrifice cannot be

• )• niii'd from this, although in 341 Constantine's .son

( - iiistantius refers to such an interdict by his father

I I ii,i. Theod., XVI, x, 2). A prohibition of this kind wniild have had the most severe and far-reaching ri Milts, for most sacrifices were private ones. And hiiw could it have been carried out while public siicrilices were still customarj'? In the dedication of ( iiiistantinople in 330 a ceremonial half pagan, half t'liiistian was used. The chariot of the sun-god w!».s set in the market-place, and over its head was placed X\ii- Cross of Christ, while the Kyrie Eleison was suMi,'. Shortly before his death Constantine con- lirinid the privileges of the priests of the ancient gods. M: iiy other actions of his have also the appearance of li;i!l'-?neasures, as if he himself had wavered and had always held in reality to some form of syncretistic religion. Thus he commanded the heathen troops to make use of a prayer in which any monotheist could ji'in, and which ran thus: "We ackno%vledge thee al' iiM- as god and king, we call upon thee as our helper. I'r^'iii thee have we received the victorj', by thee have

MTcomo the foe. To thee we owe that good

• I we have received up to now, from thee do we

for it in the future. To thee we offer our en-

11' It lis and implore thee that thou wilt preserve tons

our c-inpcror Con.stantine and his god-fearing sons for

riiiny years uninjured and victorious." The em-

r went at least one step further when he with-

his statue from the pagan temples, forbade the

I of temples that had fallen into decay, and sup- 1' - 111 offensive forms of worship. But these meas- II! did not go beyond the syncretistic tendency w til. h Constantine had showTi for a long time. Yet 1h iiiust have perceived more and more clearly that .s\iHTctism was impossible.

Ill the same way religious freedom and tolerance

'1 not continue as a form of equality; the age was

•'■ady for such a conception. It is true that

tian writers defended religious liberty; thus Ter-

II said that religion forbids religious compulsion i-st religionis cogere religionem quse sponte sus-

I'bet non vi. — "Ad Scapulam", near the close); ana l.actantius, moreover, declared: "In order to de- fend religion man must be willing to die, but not to ikill." Origen also took up the cause of freedom. Mn-it probably oppression and persecution had made 111. II realize that to have one's way of thinking, one's (■'iiiitption of the world and of life, dictated to him « a- a mischief-working compulsion. In contrast to the

smotnermg violence of the ancient State, and to the power and custom of public opinion, the (liristians were the defenders of freedom, but not of individual subjective freeilom, nor of freedom of conscience as understood to-dtiy. And even if the Church had rec- ognized this form of freedom, the State could not have remained tolerant. Without realizing the full import of his actions, Constantine granted the Church one privilege after another. As early as 313 the Church obtained immunity for its ecclesiastics, in- cluding freedom from taxation and compulsory serv- ice, and from obligatory state offices — such for ex- ample as the curial dignity, which was a heavy bur- den. The Church further obtained the right to in- herit property, and Constantine moreover placed Sun- day under the protection of the State. It is true that the believers in Mithras also observed Sunday as well as Christmas. Consequently Constantine speaks not of the day of the Lord, but of the everlasting day of the sun. According to Eusebius, the heathen also were obliged on this day to go out into the open coun- try and together raise their hands and repeat the ))rayer already mentioned, a prayer without any marked Christian character (Vita Const., IV, xx). The emperor granted many privileges to the Church for the reason that it took care of the poor and was active in benevolence. Perhaps he showed his Chris- tian tendencies most pronouncedly in removing the legal disabilities which, since the time of Augustus, had rested on celibacy, leaving in existence only the leges deciynarice, and in recognizing an extensive ec- clesiastical jurisdiction. But it should not be for- gotten that the Jewish communities had also their own jurisdiction, exemptions, and immunities, even if in a more limited degree. A law of 318 denied the com- petence of civil courts if in a suit an appeal was made to the court of a Christian bishop. Even after a suit had begun before the civil court, it would still be per- missible for one of the parties to transfer it to the bishop's court. If both parties had been granted a legal hearing, the decision of the bishop was to be bind- ing. A law of 333 commanded the state officials to enforce the decisions of the bishops; a bishop's testi- mony should be considered sufficient by all judges, and no witness was to be summoned after a bishop had testified. These concessions were so far-reaching that the Church itself felt the great increase of its jurisdiction as a constraint. Later emperors limited this jurisdiction to cases of voluntary submission by both parties to the episcopal court.

Constantine did much for children, slaves, and women, those weaker members of society whom the old Roman Law had treated harshly. But in this he only continued what earlier emperors, under the in- fluence of Stoicism, had begun before him, and he left to his successors the actual work of their emancipa- tion. Til us some emperors who reigned before Con- stantine h.ad forbidden the exposure of children, although without success, as exposed chililren or foimdlings were readily adopted, because they could lie used for many purposes. The Christians especially exerted themselves to get possession of such found- lings, and consequently Constantine i.ssued no direct prohibition of exposure, although the Christians regarded exposure as equal to murder; he com- manded, instead, that foundlings should belong to the finder, and did not permit the parents to claim the children they had exposed. Those who took such children obtained a property right in them and could make quite an extensive use of this; they were al- lowed to sell and enslave foundlings, until Justinian prohibited such enslaving under any gui.se. Even in the time of St. Chrysostom parents mutilated their children for the sake of gain. When suffering from famine or debt, many parents co'.ild only obtain re- lief by selling their children if they did not wish to sell themselves. All later laws against such practices