West with war; but being vanquished by Licinius, he put an end to his own life by swallowing poison at Tarsus, in the year 313.

§ 7. About this time, Constantine the Great, who was previously a man of no religion, is said to have embraced Christianity; being chiefly moved by the miracle of a cross that he saw in the heavens. But this account is very doubtful. For his first edict in favour of the Christians, and many other things, sufficiently declare that he was indeed at that time well disposed towards the Christians and their worship, but that he by no means regarded Christianity as the only true and saving religion. On the contrary, he appears to have thought other religions, and among them that of old professed in Rome, as likewise true and useful to mankind: he therefore wished every one of them to be freely practised in the Roman world." But

the Christians,) yet he did not publish it in his provinces; but afterwards, by underhanded evasions, he violated it. For, if we may believe Lactantius, (de Mortib. Persecutor. c. 36,) he slyly so managed, that what some cities petitioned for, namely, that the Christians might be prevented from erecting temples within their walls, was effected. Eusebius relates, (Hist. Eccles. 1. x. c. 2,) that through the medium of one Theotecnus, he induced the Antiochians to petition to him, that no Christian might be allowed to reside in their city, and then granted them their petition. Other cities followed this example, and thus a new persecution was set on foot. Perhaps Lactantius and Eusebius erred, in representing Maximin as the original cause of these applications to himself. Such petitions were in fact presented; and as the emperor was about engaging in war with Constantine, he used every means to secure the fidelity of cities in the East to himself; and as the persecution of the Christians was one of the means to be used, therefore he gratified their wishes. Subsequently, when the first edict of Constantine and Licinius was brought to him, in the year 312, he would not suffer it to be published in his provinces; probably from pride, he deeming it unsuitable for him to be the publisher of edicts given out by persons whom he regarded as his inferiors in rank. Yet, according to Eusebius, (Hist. Eccles. 1. ix. c. 9,) he sent a letter to his

governors of provinces, which was very favourable to the Christians, and in which he requested his subjects to treat them kindly and tenderly. The Christians, however, put no confidence in this letter, but were still afraid openly to profess their religion. But after he had been vanquished by Licinius, in the year 313, he published a new edict in favour of the Christians, (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 1. ix. c. 10,) in which he laments, that the judges and magistrates had misinterpreted the former law; and he now expressly gives the Christians liberty to rebuild their temples, and commands that the property taken from them should be restored. Soon after this he died, and the ten years' persecution ended. See Mosheim, Comment, de Rebus Christianor. p. 961, &c. Schl.]

9

[This is evident from Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, 1. i. c. 27. In the commencement of the war with Maxentius, he was still at a loss to what God he should trust himself and his affairs. He at length determined to honour that one God only whom his father had worshipped, and to show no reverence to the ancient Roman deities. The grounds on which he came to this decision were feeble namely, the good fortune of his father, who adhered to this worship; and the ill fortune and lamentable end of Diocletian, Galerius Maximian, and other emperors, who had worshipped the pagan deities. And, according to Eusebius, (de Vita Constantini, 1. i. c. 28,) he knew so little of the God of his

as time ran on, Constantine kept pace with it in the knowledge of things divine, and he gradually came to regard Christianity as the only true and saving religion, all others as false and impious. When his mind was thus made up, he next employed himself in exhorting his subjects to embrace Christianity, and at length he went so far as to proclaim war against the ancient superstitions. At what time this alteration in the emperor's views took place, and he began to look upon all religions but the Christian as false, cannot be determined. This is, however, certain, that the change was first made manifest by his laws and edicts, in the year 324 after the death of Licinius, when he became sole emperor. His purpose, however, of abolishing the ancient religion of the Romans, and of tolerating no other than the Christian, he did not disclose before the very end of life, when he issued edicts for pulling down the pagan temples and abrogating sacrifices.2

father, that he prayed he might be able to know him. He was a deist of the lowest class, who considered the God of his father as a limited being, though more benevolent and powerful than any of the Greek and Roman deities. This is manifest from his regulations in favour of the Christians, and from his laws tolerating the pagan haruspices. Codex Theodos. I. ix. tit. 16, leg. 1, 2, and L. xvi. tit. 10, leg. i. Compare Zosimus, lib. ii. p. 10, ed. Oxford, 1679, 8vo. See Mosheim, Comment. de Rebus Christianor. p. 971, &c. Schl.]

Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, 1. ii. c. 20 and 44. [In this year, 324, all those who, for their adherence to Christianity during the preceding persecution, had become exiles, or been sent to the mines, or been robbed of their property, were restored to their country, their liberty, and their possessions; and the Christian temples were ordered to be rebuilt and enlarged. Schl.]

See Ja. Godfrey, ad Codicem Theodos. tom. vi. pt. i. p. 290, &c. [The statement of Zosimus (lib. ii. p. 104,) is not to be wholly rejected. He says, that after the death of Licinius, a certain Egyptian came to Rome from Spain, and convinced the emperor of the truth of the Christian religion. No reason can be assigned why Zosimus should have fabricated such a story. Egyptian was probably Hosius, the bishop of Corduba, who was a native Egyptian, and was then at the court of Constantine, very probably, soliciting

VOL. I.

This

U

the restoration of the church goods which had been confiscated; at least, it is expressly stated, that the money destined for Africa was paid in consequence of his efforts. This conjecture is favoured by Baumgarten, Auszug der Kirchengesch, vol. ii. p. 691. The later Greeks ascribe the emperor's conversion to a courtier named Euphrates; of whom, however, the ancients make no mention. Theodoret (Hist. Eccles. 1. i. c. 17,) ascribes it to the influence of Helena his mother; but she was brought to embrace Christianity by her son, according to Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, l. iii. c. 47.-Zosimus relates, further, that Constantine asked the pagan priests to absolve him from the guilt of destroying Licinius, Fausta, and Crispus; and when they told him this was impossible, the Egyptian, before mentioned, undertook to show that the Christian religion offered the means of cleansing away his guilt; and this it was induced the emperor to embrace Christianity. There is, perhaps, some degree of truth in this story; perhaps Constantine did, in fact, after the death of Licinius, first learn, either from this Egyptian, or from some others, that the blood of Christ was expiatory for believers therein. It is, at least, certain, that in the first years, after his victory over Maxentius, he had very incorrect ideas of Christ and of the Christian religion; as is manifest from his Rescript. to Anulinus, in Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. 1. x. c. 7. See Mosheim, Comment. de Rebus Christ. p. 976, &c. Schl.]

4

§ 8. That the emperor acted from real, not simulated motives, no one can doubt who considers men's actions any clue to their feelings. It is, indeed, true, that Constantine's life was not such as the precepts of Christianity required 3; and it is also true, that he remained a catechumen all his life, and was received to full membership in the church, by baptism, only a few days before his death, at Nicomedia. But neither of these is adequate proof that the emperor had not a general conviction of the truth of the Christian religion, or that he only feigned himself a Christian. For in that age many persons deferred baptism till near the close of life, that they might pass into the other world altogether pure and undefiled with sin 5 and it is but too notorious, that many, who think nothing more true and divine than Christianity, live, notwithstanding, in violation of its precepts. It is another question, whether worldly reasons might not have had some share in making Constantine prefer the Christian religion to that of

[He put to death his own son Crispus, and his wife Fausta, on a groundless suspicion; and cut off his brother-in-law Licinius, and his unoffending son, contrary to his plighted word; and was much addicted to pride and voluptuousness. Schl.]

4 Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, lib. iv. c. 61, 62. Those who, in reliance on more recent and dubious authorities, maintain that Constantine received Christian baptism at Rome, in the year 324, and from the hands of Sylvester, then the bishop of Rome, do not at this day gain the assent of intelligent men, even in the Roman Catholic church. See Henry Noris, Historia Donatist. in his Opp. tom. iv. p. 650. Tho. Maria Mamachius, Origines et Antiqq. Christiana, tom. ii. p. 232, &c. [Valesius, in his Notes on Eusebius, de Vita Constantini, 1. iv. c. 61, where Eusebius relates, that Constantine first received imposition of hands, previous to his baptism, a little before his death, infers, that the emperor then first became a catechumen, because he then first received imposition of hands. But the bishops laid hands on the catechumens at various times, and for various purposes: and the connexion here shows, that Eusebius refers to that imposition of hands which immediately preceded, and was connected with, baptism. See Tertullian, de Baptismo, c. 20. It will not follow, there

fore, that 'Constantine had never before received imposition of hands for other purposes. But suppose he had not, still we do not know that the only mode of constituting a catechumen, in that age, was by imposition of hands: and if it was, so great an emperor might be excused from the ceremony which could plead no divine authority. That Constantine, long before this time, declared himself a Christian, and was acknowledged as such by the churches, is certain. It is also true that he had, for a long time, performed the religious acts of an unbaptized Christian, that is, of a catechumen; for he attended public worship, fasted, prayed, observed the Christian Sabbath, and the anniversaries of the martyrs, and watched on the vigils of Easter, &c. &c. Now these facts show that he had, in fact, long been a catechumen; and that he did not first become so, at the time hands were laid on him in order to his baptism. See Mosheim, Comment, de Rebus Christianor. p. 966, &c. Tr. The learned author says there, that catechumens were made by the imposition of hands and prayer, and that this ceremony was repeated by the bishops a little before baptism, after a confession of sin, and a solemn renunciation of the devil. Ed.]

5 [See Ant. Fred. Busching's Disput. de Procrastinatione Baptismi apud veteres, ejusque Causis. Schl.]

ancient Rome and every other, and in his recommendation of it to his people. He may, indeed, have viewed it with a sovereign's eye, as a mighty instrument, while idolatry was none at all, for strengthening an empire and keeping subjects to their duty.6

§ 9. The sign of the cross, which Constantine most solemnly affirmed was seen by him in the heavens, near mid-day, is a subject involved in the greatest obscurities and difficulties. It is, however, an easy thing to refute those who regard this prodigy as a cunning fiction of the emperor, or who rank it among fables; and also those who refer the appearance to natural causes, ingeniously conjecturing that a cross was formed

in a solar halo, or in the moon; and likewise those who ascribe the thing to divine power, then exerted for the confirmation by a miracle of Constantine's wavering faith. Each