any other motive for conviction but the rapid diffusion of our dogmas in so short a time through the whole earth, so that there is no nation, how barbarous soever, or removed from civilization, which, under the influence of the love of Jesus Christ, has not softened the rudeness of its manners, and exchanged its ferocity for sentiments more humane?

35. These Facts admitted by Pagan Authors themselves.

These testimonies, so decisive in themselves, are still further confirmed by profane historians, who describe the terror of the pagans at the ever-increasing progress of Christianity, the universal decline of their worship, and the immense multitude of victims that should be sacrificed if the edicts against the Christians were to be rigorously executed. So incontestable is the prodigious diffusion of Christianity at the close of the third century, that it is generally admitted even in those latter days by the greatest enemies of religion. Most of the modern infidels pretend that the conversion of Constantine was not the result of conviction, but a stroke of policy to win over the Christians to his party. We are very far from admitting this charge, which is irreconcileable, we believe, with all the monuments of history; but those who maintain it do, by the very fact, acknowledge the

"Quòd si falsa, ut dicitis, historia illa rerum est, unde tam brevi tempore totus mundus illâ religione completus est? Aut in unam coïre qui potuerunt mentem gentes regionibus disjunctæ, ventis, cœlique convexionibus dissitæ ?... Nonne vel hæc saltem fidem vobis faciunt argumenta credendi, quòd jam per omnes terras, in tam brevi temporis spatio, immensi nominis hujus (scilicet, nominis christiani) sacramenta diffusa sunt? Quòd nulla jam natio est tam barbari moris, et mansuetudinem nesciens, quæ non, ejus amore versa, molliverit asperitatem suam, et in placidos sensus, assumptâ tranquillitate, migraverit?"-Arnobius, Adv. Gentes, lib. i. cap. 55; lib. ii. cap. 5. (Biblioth. PP. tom. iii. p. 438, 2nd col.; 446, 2nd col.)

2 Plinii Epistol. lib. x. epist. 97, 98. Lamprid. Vita Alex. Sev. cap. 43. Lactantius, De Mort. Persec. cap. 11. Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. lib. viii. cap. 14; lib. ix. cap. 7-9. These authorities and many others are quoted by the Abbé Bullet, and by the Card. de la Luzerne ; ubi supra.

Voltaire, Dict. Philos.-arts. Christianisme, Julien, &c. Tableaux des Saints, by the B. d'Holbach, part ii. ch. 7, p. 90. De la Félicité Publique, by Chastellux, vol. i. sect. 2, ch. 4.

See, on this point, Bergier, Traité de la Religion, vol. ix. p. 552. Labletterie, Vie de Jovien, p. 257, &c. Duvoisin, Dissert. sur la Vision de Constantin, part ii. § 14, 15.

important truth which we contend for here, namely, that before the conversion of Constantine, the Christians were so numerous and powerful in the empire, that it would have been the best interest of the emperor to declare for them, and that he could do so without having anything to fear from the pagans. Indeed, it is manifest that, had the relative numbers been otherwise, Constantine's act, as a measure of policy, would have been the most absurd and unwise imaginable.1

36. The Triumph of Christianity over Paganism assured before the Conversion of Constantine.

From these observations, we may infer that without plainly contradicting the monuments of history, no one can attribute the triumph of Christianity over idolatry to the patronage of the Christian emperors and to their constitutions in favour of the Christian religion. That triumph was manifestly assured before the conversion of Constantine; and far from being the author of that movement of society, he merely followed the general

It may be inferred, we think, from these observations, that at the conversion of Constantine, and for a long time previous, the Christians were in the empire, "a multitude at least equal in number to the pagans." The testimony of Tertullian, and of others whom we have cited, proves this fact clearly to the judgment of intelligent and impartial persons. Cardinal de la Luzerne even maintains with great appearance of probability that at the time of Constantine's conversion, the number of Christians exceeded that of the pagans (ubi supra, n. 19-25). But whatever may be thought of that opinion, we believe it may be confidently asserted, that the opinion of some modern authors who estimate the number of the Christians of the empire, when Constantine was converted, at the fifth, twelfth, or twentieth part of the population, is not only utterly destitute of proof, but evidently contrary to the monuments of history. M. Beugnot, in his Hist. du Décad. du Pagan. en Occident, goes so far as to assert that even about sixty years later, under the reign of Valentinian I., all the Christians throughout the whole empire did not constitute more than a twentieth of the population (book ix. ch. 13, et alibi passim). His conjectures on the subject are founded exclusively on isolated documents relating to certain cities, or to particular provinces, which cannot serve as a basis for calculating exactly, nor even by approximation, the number of Christians in the rest of the empire. It must be admitted, it is true, that notwithstanding the wonderful progress of Christianity before the conversion of Constantine, the pagans continued to be, long after that time, a considerable party, especially in the West, and above all in Rome, where a considerable number of senators persisted long in their adherence to idolatry. In support of these assertions, the reader may consult L'Hist. de l'Église, by M. l'Abbé Receveur, vol. iii. p. 38, note. See, also, some other observations on the work of M. Beugnot, in Documentary Evidences, No. 1, at the close of the work. 2 De la Luzerne, ubi supra, n. 114, &c.

impulse, which had long since, in all parts of the empire, been attracting the people into the bosom of the Christian Church. His example, doubtless, supported by his edicts and by those of his successors, must have favoured the progress of Christianity and accelerated the ruin of idolatry; but it is nevertheless certain, that the triumph of the Christian religion over paganism was assured before his conversion, and that God's almighty power had clearly manifested itself in the establishment of the Christian Church, before the princes of the earth were called in to sustain it by their protection and their edicts. For as Bossuet observes, "God, who knows that the most energetic virtue grows up amidst sufferings, founded his Church by martyrdom, and kept her during three hundred years in that state, without allowing her even one moment of repose. Having demonstrated by so long a trial that he had no need of human succour, nor of the powers of the earth to establish his Church, he at length called on the emperors, and made the great Constantine the declared protector of Christianity.1 It was God's decree, and if I may so speak, the destiny of truth, that she should be completely established in spite of the kings of the earth, and that in the course of time she should have them, first as her disciples, and next as her patrons. He did not call them when he built his Church; when he had laid the immovable foundations and completed the erection of that great edifice, then it pleased him to call them. "Et nunc reges. "He has called them, therefore, not from necessity, but as a favour. The establishment of the truth does not depend on their assistance, and the empire of truth is not a dependence of their sceptre. If Jesus Christ has made them defenders of his gospel, it was to honour them, not because he needed them; it was to honour their authority and to consecrate their power. His sacred truth ever sustains itself and maintains its independence."3

....

Bossuet, Hist. Univer. part ii. ch. 20 (vol. xxxv. of his works, p. 311). 2 Ps. ii. 10.

3 Bossuet, Sermon sur la Divinité de la Rel. (vol. xi. of his works, p. 227).

After these observations, which have appeared to us very important to demonstrate the miraculous character of the establishment of Christianity against the assertions of some modern writers, we now proceed to state in detail the principal provisions of the Roman law in favour of religion, after the conversion of Constantine.1

37. First Edicts of Constantine in favour of the Christian Religion.

The first fruit and the principal result of that conversion, was the full and perfect liberty secured to Christians, of assembling, of building churches, and of practising all the exercises of their religion. That was the object of the edicts published by Constantine and Licinius, in 312 and 313. The first of these edicts, which was addressed to the prefect of the prætorium, as we learn from Eusebius, has not come down to us; but that historian has preserved the second, of which the principal points are the following: "Having long been of opinion, that no person ought to be refused liberty in the choice of his religion, we have already ordered, that Christians, as well as others, should enjoy the free exercise of theirs. But since, in the rescript which gives them that liberty, there are certain clauses on which some disputes have been raised, some persons have thought themselves dispensed from observing it. Therefore we, Constantine Augustus and Licinius Augustus, having auspiciously met at Milan, and deliberating on the concerns of the public safety and interests, have felt that one of our first cares should be to regulate what regards the worship of the Divinity, and to grant to Christians and to all others, the liberty of following what religion they please, in order to draw down the favour of heaven on us and on our subjects. Be it known to you, therefore, [the emperors

An analysis of Roman law on this point may be seen in the following works: Hist. des Aut. Ecc. by D. Ceillier, vol. iv. ch. 5, art. 4; viii. ch. 15; xvi. ch. 20. Domat, Droit Public, book i. tit. 19. Fleury, Hist. Ecclés. vol. iii. &c. passim. We shall, in another place, point out the principal passages to be consulted in that author.

2 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. ix. cap. 9. ; lib. x. cap. 5. Fleury, Hist. Ecclés. vol. ii. book ix. n. 46. Hist. de l'Eglise Gallicane, vol. i. p. 171, &c.

continue addressing the officers to whom the edict is directed] that all clauses in the letters addressed to you concerning the Christians notwithstanding, it is our will to order absolutely and expressly, that all who wish to observe the Christian religion, may do so without being molested or disturbed in any manner whatsoever. And we have thought it our duty to make known to you this announcement, that you may know, that we have given to the Christians full and absolute liberty of observing their religion; allowing, nevertheless, to all others a similar liberty, in order to promote the tranquillity of our reign." The subsequent portion of this edict orders the restitution of all churches and places where the Christians used to assemble, as well as of all the property belonging to the churches, whether they had been confiscated by the state or acquired by individuals, giving, however, to the latter the right of applying to the governor of the province to obtain a suitable indemnity.

To these first edicts, Constantine and his successors afterwards added many others, to secure more effectually for the Christians the free exercise of their religion, and to protect them against the violence and the persecutions of their enemies. According to a law of Constantine, promulgated in 322, all who used any violence against Christians, on account of their religion, were condemned to be scourged if they were slaves, and to heavy fines if they were of better condition.1 Honorius made it even a capital crime to insult a priest in the church, to attack the holy places, or to give any violent interruption to the divine service.

"Quoniam comperimus quosdam ecclesiasticos, et cæteros catholicæ sectæ (i.e. societati) servientes, à diversarum religionum hominibus (scilicet, paganis) ad lustrorum sacrificia celebranda compelli; hâc sanctione sancimus, si quis ad ritum alienæ superstitionis cogendos esse crediderit eos qui sanctissimæ legi serviunt, si conditio patiatur, publicè fustibus verberetur ; si verò honoris ratio talem ab eo repellat injuriam, condemnationem sustineat damni gravissimi (i. e. mulctæ pecuniaria), quod rebus publicis vindicabitur (i.e. de civitatis redditibus exsolvetur)."-Cod. Theodos. lib. xvi. tit. ii. n. 5.

"Si quis in hoc genus sacrilegii proruperit, ut in ecclesias catholicas irruens, sacerdotibus et ministris, vel ipsi cultui locoque aliquid importet injuriæ;...deferatur in notitiam potestatum ;...atque ita provinciæ moderator sacerdotum et catholicæ ecclesiæ ministrorum, loci quoque ipsius, et divini VOL. I.

E