**
§§ §§
§ §
§ º
º § º º
N *
§§

i
§
:
;
==
F-
i
|
-
|
Jºſiº Tºº"Tº
*. • *-Li-
--II-
ºślsº |
t
|
º
Tolº Tiji.
Jº — sº
*N ||
& NW, N.
.*...* >} \
& T f
F. l ---
*
S.”
;
J
- 'S - *- - -
º >. & 2: 2
§3. .k ... — Tºº
º
-*
||| *** - BARBOUR
|g| Peouts'
, 24*,
y; -
*
* -
ºTECITATESTAIRTEXTELETXZºº YTº
~~~----------. -, -, --~~~~ ... + i.
+ill
|
#| ||
ºrgº” . . . . .
Hiſ H RiTITITITITUTITTTTTTTTTTTh.j
+++. ######"> :
‘. . ºrrºriſm; !.
HTTTTTT)}
r
*******Fº

* -º- ºr - -º-º:
... ----------es-- --- is sº-º-º-º: * ~ * * *
f
|
- ****** *** * * * * * *

·{\（)
«»*ºſ-~--~
`t' ） ）;
¿
§%…….-


CEIRISTIAN CELATEITY
IN THE ANCIENT CHURCEI
\
“By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love
one to another.”—JOHN xiii. 35.
CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN THE
ANCIENT CHURCH
BY
DR. GEREIARD UHLHORN
*…*
ABBOT OF LOCCUM
• * * * *
* * *
* , &
Čranslattb from fºr Örrman
T TITH THE AUTHOR'S SA-NCTION
NEW YORK
C EIA R L E S S C R IB N E R S S O N S
1883
Q
\
&
§
4.4 (*4–42.…”
&’–7–33 *
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
-0-
B O O K FIRST.
T H E O L D A N D T H E N E W.
CHAP. PAGE
I. A World without Love, o º º C º 2
II. Under the Law, © te º tº © © 44
III. The Manifestation of Love in Christ Jesus, . º & 56
IV. Commencement and Foundations in the Apostolic Age, © 73
B O O K SEC O N D.
THE A G E O F C O N FLICT.
I. Poverty and Distress, . e e O º e 99
II. First Love, tº o O e º º wº 120
III. The Means for the Relief of the Poor, tº ſº • 141
IW. Officials and Offices for Charity, e C º . 160
W. The Work and its Results, . e & e . 178
WI. Obscurations, . . . º º tº * • 203
V1 CONTENTS.
B O O K THIRD.
A FTER T H E W I CTO R.Y.
CHAP. PAGI.
I. A Perishing World, . O º º e . 219
II. Congregational Relief of the Poor, . O lº . 246
III. Alms, . o o e © º o . 274
IV. Hospitals, © Q º o o O . 323
W. Monasteries, . tº e o tº º . 338
WI. The Church the Refuge of all the Oppressed and Suffering, .. 361
Notes to Book I., º o o e º . 399
Notes to Book II., . O O ſº º . 403
Notes to Book III. . O O O © . 411
INDEX, © º Q O tº te º 421
B O O K F I R S T.
*-*-
THE OLD AND THE NEW.
CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN THE ANCIENT
- CHURCH.
C EIA P T E R I.
A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE.
OUR Lord calls the commandment of love which He gave
to His disciples a new commandment (John xiii. 34).
And such indeed it was, for the world before Christ came
was a world without love. Lactantius, writing at the
time when, after a struggle which had lasted for cen-
turies, Christianity had at length obtained the upper hand,
lays great emphasis upon this difference between the
Christian and the heathen world, saying: “Compas-
sion and humanity are virtues peculiar to the righteous
and to the worshippers of God. Philosophy teaches
us nothing of them.” And should this witness, as
coming from one who was himself a Christian, appear
suspicious, there is still quite trustworthy evidence in
the astonishment with which the heathen regarded the
charitableness of the Christians, which seemed so strange
to them ; and a still stronger witness may be seen in the
endeavour of the Emperor Julian to introduce into
heathendom this new thing, which he could not but
recognise as a peculiarity of Christianity.
4. CHRISTIAN CIIARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
And yet the opinion as to the world before the
Christian era, that it was a world without love, requires
Some explanation, and in a certain sense some modifica-
tion as well. Of isolated acts springing from natural
pity there was never any want. There was at all times
a gift ready for the beggar, and that even after the idea
that beggars and those in distress were under the special
protection of the gods, had long lost its force. In Rome
and in the other great towns numerous beggars were to
be found sitting at the corners of the streets, on the
bridges, before the gates of the temples, and in general
wherever the traffic was most lively; and the passers-by
readily threw them some small coin, whilst the beggars
acknowledged the gift with a blessing in the name of
some one or other of the gods. Begging had never been
prohibited in the Roman Empire; the first edict against
it proceeded from a Christian Emperor. And, indeed,
how could men see in begging a punishable offence, so
long as they did not see that in work there lay a duty
to be performed by all ? Towards travellers, those who
had been wrecked at sea, and all others in distress, the
general attitude was one of generosity; and in great
calamities there was never a lack of assistance and relief
even from distant quarters. When, in the reign of Nero,
the great amphitheatre at Fidemae fell in and buried
beneath its ruins 50,000 men, the wealthy Romans
despatched physicians and all kinds of medical appliances
to the scene of the disaster, and received the wounded
into their houses.” At the eruption of Vesuvius, in the
year 79 A.D., when Herculaneum and Pompeii were
overwhelmed, the readiness to relieve the distress was
universal. But it is remarkable that upon the whole we
hear of but few similar instances; and still more remarkable
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 5
are the occasional expressions of opinion on the subject.
“Canst thou by any means condescend so far as that the
poor shall not appear to thee loathsome 2" asks Quinc-
tilian ; and in one of the plays of Plautus we meet with
the following, which is surely the expression of the
general sentiment: “He does the beggar but a bad
service who gives him meat and drink; for what he gives
is lost, and the life of the poor is but prolonged to their
own misery.” Moreover, in however great abundance
isolated acts of compassion may have been done, the main
point is this, that there is no trace whatever of any
organized charity. It is not that here and there Christians
gave gifts to the poor, or that they here and there
assisted those in distress: the new thing, the thing
hitherto unknown in the world, was rather that in the .
Christian communities there was organized a regular
system of charity, designed not only to relieve the distress
of the poor for the moment, but also to war against
poverty itself, and to suffer no one to be oppressed by
want. And what in the old world was done with regard
to this matter, either by the State or from the resources
of individuals, is of quite a different character. A special
oversight of the poor, such as we are accustomed to, was
at no time and at no place known to the ancient world.
A good deal was indeed done. When Boeckh” says:
“Compassion is no Hellenic virtue,” we assent to what
he says, and must even add to his statement this, that it
is still less a Roman virtue. But we must not forget that
liberality was one of the virtues exercised in the ancient
world in the fullest measure. Men gave generously to
their friends, to their relatives, and to their guests. The
giving of presents was much more customary than it is
amongst us. A man displayed his liberality towards his
/
6 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I
native city, his fellow-citizens, or his fellow-members in
the guild or club to which he belonged, or of which he was
chosen as patron. To the latter office, indeed, he was elected
avowedly with an eye to the liberal donations which were
expected from him. What abundance of donations of all
kinds is revealed to us by inscriptions ! Here one man
builds for his native city a new theatre, or a house for gladia-
torial shows, rebuilds the ruined walls, or constructs a new
road, aqueduct, or fountain. Another makes it his care to
see that grain shall always be sold at a low price, or gives
corn, wine, and oil to be distributed; provides games and
banquets for his fellow-citizens; erects baths where one
may bathe for nothing, and in many cases also receive
oil for anointing oneself gratis. He founds a library, or
whatever else it may be. No man of means, who would
worthily fill his position in the State or in his native
town, can absolve himself from the duty of voluntarily
giving up a share of his wealth for the benefit of his
fellow-citizens, or for the public weal. And this spirit of
liberality extends even beyond the grave. Legacies and
testamentary endowments are frequent, and require
special legislation. It is customary to give legacies to
one's friends, and to the higher officials. Frequently we
read of stipulations in wills, in accordance with which on
an appointed day, usually the birthday of the testator, a
banquet is partaken of at his grave, and sums of money
are distributed amongst those present. The custom
amongst the Romans, of honouring the dead by Com-
memorating their acts of generosity in the inscriptions on
their tombstones, gives us a glimpse of an abundance of
donations and endowments which by no means falls
behind anything of the same kind done in our own day.
And all this at last found its climax in the liberal gifts
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 7
of the Emperor and of the State, where it becomes a case.
of dealing with millions.
No doubt this kind of liberality had in some measure
the same effect as that of subsidies for the relief of the
poor. It was always of assistance to those of Small
means, that they should obtain bread at a cheap rate, or
grain as a gift, or that they should receive a share in the
distribution of gifts of money. But it was, for all that,
something quite different from a system of poor relief.
Liberality is the heathen virtue which corresponds to the
compassionate love, the caritas of Christianity; but it is
just as different from that love as is heathendom itself
from Christianity. The compassionate love of the
Christian looks at necessity as the first thing; it cares
not to inquire who the needy man may be in other
respects, but is rather concerned to know whether he be
really in distress. In the case of liberality, necessity
falls altogether into the background. Presents are made
and given, not with a view to the relief of distress, but
rather with an eye to pleasing the recipient ; and even in
cases where the necessaries of daily life constitute the
stbstance of the gift, no inquiry is made into the needs
of individuals. The citizen receives his share, even
although he has no need of it; the non-citizen remains
shut out, however great his necessities may be. For the
most part, the presents are limited to the circle of the
citizens; and where they go beyond this limit, where
strangers also have a share in the distribution of corn,
and a place at the banquets, or where a bath stands free
and open for strangers and travellers, this is due not to
any regard for their possible wants, but simply to a desire
to enhance the splendour of the liberality. It is note-
worthy that wherever any proportion in the gifts is
&
8 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
mentioned, it is stipulated, either that all shall receive
the same amount, or that the higher personages, such as
the municipal officers, or the presidents of the guilds,
shall receive double or threefold,” being thus in the
inverse ratio of the necessities of the case; for those
obtained the most who should properly have received
least, as being the least in need of the gift. It is
noteworthy, further, that every one accepts his share
without hesitation, even when he does not stand in need
of it. Men were then by no means so dubious about
accepting gifts as they are now-a-days. Supposing that
in our time, at the celebration of the coming of age of
some heir, every one present was presented with a small
gift of money, we should hesitate within ourselves as
to whether we should accept it. In those days every
one accepted it. Hence it came to pass that even
well-to-do men accepted their share in the distribution
of grain, or allowed their freedmen to fetch it away in
their stead ; indeed, they even took their share of the
money distributed to the guests in the more distinguished
men's houses. It was never for a moment considered as
an alms, and indeed it was not such. The fundamental
distinction between the ancient liberalitas and the
Christian caritas lies in this, that the latter always keeps
in view the welfare of the poor and needy; to help them
is its only object; whereas the Roman, who exercises the
virtue of liberality, considers in reality himself alone
(I do not mean always in a bad sense), and exercises his
liberality as a bribe wherewith to win the favours of the
multitude. Nor does he always exercise it in the spirit
of common vanity, but in order that it may be the means
of displaying and increasing the splendour of his name,
of his position, and of his house, or, what he considered
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 9
of just as much importance, the splendours of his native
city, and of the municipal community. Christian charity
is self-denying; heathen liberalitas is at bottom self-
seeking, even although personal Selfishness be limited by
the interests of the commonwealth, for the sake of which
Greek and Roman alike were at all times prepared to
make a Sacrifice.
That a sense of one's duty to the poor, such as has
been introduced by the Christian caritas, could not grow
up out of the heathen liberalitas, is sufficiently clear.
One must rather say that we find a number of regula-
tions, not in the least connected with it ; but in the
development of these we can find traces of a stream as
it were flowing out from heathendom over this tract of
life, towards the tide of advancing Christianity.
The nearest approach to an actual system of poor
relief seems to be what was done in Athens for
necessitous citizens. As a rule, the Greek is by natural
disposition more inclined to benevolence than the
Roman, in whose characteristic traits one finds a certain
sort of meanness, not to say avarice; whence he is colder
and more selfish than the Greek. At Athens, those who
through bodily weakness or infirmity were unable to gain
their own livelihood, such as the blind, the lame, and the
crippled, received a daily subsidy of two oboli. This
subsidy was by law restricted to those whose means
amounted to less - than three mima'. The vote for it
depended upon the popular will. Inquiry into each
individual case rested with the Council of the Five
Hundred." The orphans of citizens who had fallen in
war were brought up at the expense of the State—in the
case of boys till they were eighteen years old, at which
age they were dismissed fully equipped. And orphans
10 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book 1.
in general were treated with speeial leniency, their
property not being liable to any property-tax." All this
is peculiar to Athens, and is not found elsewhere. And
hence in old times Athens had this to her credit, that no
One of her citizens ever lacked the necessities of life, or
brought shame upon the State by begging from visitors.”
Later on, when Athens sank into a wild democracy, it
became the practice of the popular leaders to flatter and
cajole the Sovereign rabble by distributing amongst it
by way of gift the State moneys. Thus Themistocles
divided the revenues drawn from working the mines.
Next came the moneys for the theatres, the so-called
Theorikai"—a true curse of Athens. Each citizen
received two oboli as entrance money to the theatre.
For attending the popular assemblies he was paid three
oboli, and he also received as much, as pay for sitting
in the courts of justice; and as every day about one-third
of the people sat in the courts, the consequence was
that they desisted from work more and more, that they
fell lower both in economy and in morals, and thus,
when the disastrous issue of the Peloponnesian war put
an end to her Supremacy, Athens, once so flourishing and
prosperous, sank into the lowest poverty.
What was given to the people at Athens at the cost
of the State was altogether insignificant compared with
what was distributed at Rome. While in the case of
the former we have to deal with the comparatively small
sums exacted by the Athenians from their allies, in the
case of the latter we have to deal with the spoils of a
conquered world, their share of which was received by the
people in the shape of distributions of money, Congiaria,
banquets, and theatrical displays.
The providing of the city of Rome with corn, the
CHAP, 1.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 11
Annona, is one of the greatest achievements ever accom-
plished by statesmanship. The grain was partly collected
from the various provinces, partly bought up by the
State, and was brought to Rome by a fleet of vessels
specially set aside for the purpose; once there, it was
stored up in granaries, and afterwards distributed. It
was the duty of a whole host of officials to exercise the
necessary foresight in providing grain for feeding the
metropolis of the world; a famine in Rome would have
shattered the whole Empire. In the earlier times it was
thought sufficient if the price of grain was maintained at
a low rate. Caius Gracchus first of all ordained that the
Roman bushel of wheat should be sold to citizens at
5 as, which was far under cost price ; later on, Clodius pro-
cured an enactment whereby a certain quantity was dis-
tributed gratis. The consequence was that impoverished
citizens flocked to Rome in crowds. Whereas in the
year 73 before Christ the price of the grain distributed
in Rome amounted to ten million sesterces (£87,700),
in the year 46 after Christ it had already amounted
to nearly seventy-seven million sesterces (£675,000).
Caesar found that there were 320,000 men who received
this grant of corn; he reduced the number to 150,000,
and decreed that this should never be exceeded. Only
upon the occurrence of vacancies through death could new
names be added to the list. Soon afterwards, however,
Augustus found that the number on the list had again
increased, and he reduced it to 200,000, which appears
to have remained the normal number thereafter. The
only necessary conditions upon which participation in
the distribution rested were Roman citizenship and resi-
dence in Rome. In no case was inquiry made into the
question of deserving it or not. Nor do the well-to-do
12 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book 1.
appear to have been excluded by law; in order, however,
to be put on the list, it was necessary to make applica-
tion ; and the wealthy, at any rate in later times, would
not have made this application. On this account those
who obtained grants of corn were often known as the
poor.” Whoever had his name upon the list received a
ticket (tessera), which entitled him to draw from the
granaries five bushels monthly. In addition to this,
there were distributions every now and then of oil, salt,
meat, and even of clothing. From the time of Septimius
Severus oil was regularly given out." Aurelian added
pork, and wished to have wine distributed also ; but from
this latter purpose he desisted on representations being
Imade to him by the prafectus praetorii that in that case
the people would soon be clamouring for roast fowls.”
The distribution of grain in natura probably came to an
end under Alexander Severus. It is not quite clear
whether it was at once succeeded by the distribution of
bread. It is very possible that during the troublous
times the distribution may have ceased altogether for
some years. From the time of Aurelian * onwards bread
was given out instead of corn, each man receiving two
pounds of bread a day (panis gradilis). This distribution
of bread lasted on into the last year of the Empire.
Moreover, Trajan had founded in Rome a guild of bakers,
who were under the superintendence of the officers of the
Annona, and who obtained corn from the public granaries
at a very cheap rate, but who were bound in return for
this privilege to bake good and cheap bread.”
The motives which called into existence this practice
of distributing grain were not by any means of a charit-
able, but, on the contrary, of a purely political nature.
Gracchus and Clodius hoped to win over the people by
chap. 1.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 13
their corn laws. And both Caesar and Augustus were
influenced by political motives when they directed special
attention to this branch of the government. Knowing as
they did that hunger has at all times been a most power-
ful agent in promoting revolution, they wished to make
the people as content as possible under their loss of
liberty. But we must not on that account close our eyes
to the fact that such regulations as those for restricting
the number of participants, and the confining of them to
those citizens who made application, bear somewhat of
a different character. It became in the course of the
Empire a sort of system of poor relief, though a very
undesirable and one-sided one. But it is, for all that, one
of those symptoms from which we can learn that some-
thing new was beginning to make itself felt even within
the confines of heathenism itself.”
Nor were the distributions of grain the only way in
which the people received their share of the spoils of
the conquered world. Of no less importance were the
largesses of the emperors, the Congiaria and the dona-
tions. At every accession to the throne, at the celebra-
tions of the fifth or tenth years of a reign, on the
occasion of every joyful event in the reigning family,
such as a birth, or a triumph, and even from the will of
the dead emperor, the people expected and received a
largesse. This differed both as to the amount and as to
the circle of those who received it. Sixty or one hundred
denarii (£2 to £3, 10s.) to each was considered little.
Hadrian gave 1000 (£35), Septimius Severus 1100
(£38, 10s.), Gallienus 1250 (£43, 15s). As a rule,
the Congiarium was given to the recipients of the grain
only, but not infrequently the number of those who
received it was much greater. A tolerably reliable
14 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, ſpook 1.
calculation tells us that from the accession of Nero to
the death of Septimius Severus there was distributed
annually in this way, on the average, about £300,000."
Moreover, there were at the same time public banquets
and games. On the occasion of Caesar's triumph, the
people feasted at 22,000 tables; Chian and Falernian
ran in rivers, and the people had for once an opportunity
of learning the flavour of the much-famed Muranian
wine.” So also, in connection with the games in the
circus, which, under Marcus Aurelius, were provided for
the people on 135 days in the year, there were frequently
presents made to the spectators. Under the porticos of
the theatre was laid out merchandise of all sorts, which
at the close of the play was abandoned to be scrambled
for by the people. Or money and victuals were thrown
amongst the people, or sometimes lottery tickets by
which one might win a prize. Thus Nero scattered
1000 lottery tickets, and those who obtained them could
win, according to the luck with which they were favoured,
corn, money, foreign birds, horses, even ships and landed
properties.”
The sums which were thus expended were enormous.
Even when we appraise the games and the other things
in connection with them at a very low rate, we are below
the mark rather than above it when we reckon the ex-
penditure at about £1,500,000 annually. So much as
this was swallowed up by the one city of Rome, which
could not at that time have had more than about one
and a half million inhabitants. And what was accom-
plished by this expenditure ? Not even the support of
the 200,000 recipients of grain. For five bushels per
month were not sufficient for one family. And beyond
this nothing was done. There were no poorhouses, no
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 15
hospitals. Tazarettos in the Roman Empire were
curiously enough known as places for soldiers and slaves
only. Antoninus Pius indeed tells us that he had built
beside the temple of the Epidaurian AEsculapius a build-
ing for the reception of the sick. But this was not a
hospital. It was rather a kind of hostelry for those who
had come to pray to the god on account of their sick-
ness.” There was a total want of any care for widows
and orphans; and for those who were not citizens there
was, as a rule, no help whatever. At the utmost, there
fell to them a very little when there happened to be a
surplus of grain. The worst feature, however, of this
system was its demoralizing influence. A gift springing
from true charity elevates him who receives it, such is
the power of the love which underlies it. Those frag-
ments of the spoils of the conquered world which were
thrown to the people in this way could only corrupt
them. The Roman populace became more and more a
work-hating, pleasure-seeking crowd, which cheered every
new accessor to power in the hopes of new largesse, and
which even went out to meet the matricide Nero, when,
after that frightful crime, he entered Rome clad in white
garments and adorned with wreaths. In no other way
than by contemplating the gifts and largesse showered
upon the Roman people in such stupendous abundance,
can we adequately perceive how that thing was wanting
in the old world which alone could lend value to these
gifts and make them fruitful. They had not charity.
The provincial towns endeavoured to be in all things
copies of Rome. In the liberality which was exercised
at Rome they had indeed no share ; on the contrary, they
were obliged to contribute in order to make that liberality
possible. It was only in the case of extraordinary mis-
16 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book 1.
fortunes that the emperors caused grain to be distributed
amongst them also, as, for instance, Tiberius among the
Asiatic towns overwhelmed by earthquake, or Marcus
Aurelius amongst the Etrurian towns in the time of
famine.” But as the system of communal government
grew up, equal care was taken, although on a smaller
Scale, to provide abundant and cheap supplies of grain
for the provincial towns also. And in consequence of
the ever active local patriotism, there were not wanting
persons who from their private means gave grain, oil, and
even money for distribution. Here, also, it was the
custom of the aediles and praetors, who stood at the head
of the State government, for the decemvirs, who occupied
in the municipal towns the same position as the Senate
at Rome, to give the people banquets and games on the
occasion of their election. The president of the Augus-
tales, to which guilds the wealthy freedmen had the right
of entry—although offices of State were closed against
them—were also expected to show their open-handed-
ness; and when a statue was decreed to some prominent
man, some wealthy member of the State community, he
invariably acknowleged the honour by providing a ban-
quet for the people, or even by giving to each man a
money-present.” What happened at Rome was repeated
in the provinces, only on a smaller Scale.
Some, however, while they admit that all this Organiza-
tion was in no true sense of the term charitable, have
endeavoured to find a system of poor relief, or, at any
rate, something analogous to it, in two other institutions
which were an important feature of the Social life of the
time, the planting of colonies and the system of clientage.
The supposition is in both cases without foundation.
The colonies were never a charitable institution: they
CIIAP. 1.1 A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE, 17
were planted from motives quite apart from any con-
sideration for the welfare of the poor. In the heyday of
the Republic they were of use in securing the possession
of conquered territory, and later on, after the civil Wars,
they served to keep in check and to reward the disbanded
soldiery. Salla divided amongst his soldiers lands in
Italy, the former owners of which had been ejected by
force. After the battle of Philippi there were 170,000
men for whom some provision had to be made. In order
to accomplish this, possession was taken, under the form
of compulsory sale (the purchase money, however, was
never paid), of a number of districts, in addition to the
properties of proscribed persons. Once driven out of
their possessions, the quondam owners swelled the
numbers of the proletariat at Rome ; the veterans had
no inclination for agriculture, and very soon resold their
farms. The consequence was, accordingly, that the posses-
sions of the great landed proprietors, the Latifundi, were
increased ; and the unpropertied classes were increased at
the same time. Augustus entertained at one time the
idea of transporting into foreign colonies 80,000 poor
citizens, but the plan was never carried into effect. So
that here also we find that the intention was not really
one of providing for the poor, but rather of removing
from Rome a restless and hence dangerous class of the
population.
Still less was it the intention of the great men of
Rome, when they assembled around them crowds of
clients, to do anything in the way of relieving necessity;
although indeed many a one, who would otherwise have
been destitute, might find in the system a chance of
Some means of subsistence however small. The clientela,
which was originally a relationship of piety and duty,
B
18 CIIRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [book 1.
had already in the days of the Empire sunk into a system
of mercenary service. The throng of clients came in the
morning to greet the great noble, and accompany him
when he went out; in short, they contributed generally
to the pomp of the family. In return for this they
received the sportula. This consisted in earlier times of
a banquet; but in later times it took the form of a
pecuniary reward, amounting to about fifteen pence per
diem. On the occasion of great festivities they were also
bidden to a banquet; but in this case they were gene-
rally very poorly treated. The food they received was
inferior to that served to the other guests; and while the
master drank Falernian wine, they had to content them-
selves with the cheaper brands. On the whole, they eked
out but a scanty subsistence. The sum which they
received annually was insufficient for their needs, and
they had to bestir themselves greatly, in order that by
special acts of service they might obtain here and there
a supplementary gift. Moreover, there were in Itome
many thousands of them. The IRoman of that day would
much rather busy himself as a beggar and sycophant in
the hall of some great man, than stick to any ordinary
and regular work.
The case is somewhat different when we come to the
so-called alimentationes, or endowments for the education
of poor children.” We find them from the time of
Nerva onwards, and Trajan, in particular, took a special
interest in them. Antoninus Pius founded such an
institution for girls in memory of his wife Faustina
(puellae Faustiniana), Septimius Severus one for boys
and girls in memory of Julia Mammaea (pueri puclloque
Mamma-ami). The capital devoted to this purpose was
invested in landed property at a moderate rate of interest,
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 19
and with the income derived from this source boys and
girls, for the most part free-born alone, were maintained
and educated. One of these foundations, that of Beleja
in Upper Italy, possessed a capital of 1,044,000 HS.
(£9156), which at 5 per cent. interest yielded an income
of 52,200 HS. This sum provided for 281 children
(245 legitimate boys, 34 legitimate girls, and also two
illegitimate children, one boy and one girl). The boys
received 16 HS. (3s.) and the girls 12 HS. (2S. 2d.) per
month. In the case of the former this subsidy continued
till the age of eighteen, in that of the latter to the age of
fourteen. In later days similar foundations were scattered
over the whole of Italy. They were under their own
officers, and their operation was confined to certain
districts. They must also have been very numerous, for
we find them even outside Italy. Thus there was in
Spain the foundation of the pueri Juncini; * and in the
African colony of Cirta Sicca, in the reigns of Antoninus
Pius, every one contributed a certain sum. With the
proceeds of these contributions 300 boys and 200 girls
were educated. There was expended annually for the
boys 30 denarii (20s.) and for the girls 24 den. (17s).
The ages of the boys ranged from three to fifteen, and of
the girls from three to twelve years. The number was
always kept at its highest. The children of Inquilini
might be elected as well as the children of citizens.”
The motives for making these foundations also were to
a large extent of a merely political nature. The over-
whelming population of Italy no doubt drew the attention
of the Emperor to the rising generation, and the unmis-
takeable preference given to the boys, as seen from the
figures mentioned above, seems to indicate that he had
an eye to the provision of recruits for his legions.
20 CHRISTIAN CIIARITY IN ANCIENT CIIURCII. [Book 1.
But that the endowments were not due to political
motives entirely, but sprung in some measure from
motives of humanity as well, is shown not only by the
fact that girls also had a share in their benefits, but also
by the Emperors founding institutions of this sort in
honour of their wives, and still more by the fact that a
great many of them were the deeds of private individuals.
Pliny” presents to the town of Comum 500,000 HS.
(£4385) as an endowment for free-born boys and girls,
and increases the sum by his will by 300,000 IIs.
(£2630). A wealthy lady, Macrina, bequeathed one
million for the same purpose; * and even more signifi-
cant is the already mentioned endowment, of which the
inscription found in Spain gives us information. A
certain Fabia bequeathed to the pueri Juncini and the
puellae (the name is wanting in the inscription)
50,000 Hs. (£440). The interest at 6 per cent,
3000 Hs. (£26), was to be distributed twice a year, on
her husband's birthday and on her own. The boys
received each 30 IIs. (5s. 6d.), the girls each 40 IIS.
(7s). If the money was not sufficient for this, the girls
were to receive only 30 HS. each ; if there was any
surplus, it was to be divided in the same proportions.
Now in this case, in the fact that the girls were more
liberally treated than the boys, we have undoubted evi-
dence of the humane character of the foundation. How
very different were the ideas of the ancient world which
they put into execution in making foundations of this
kind how meanly were boys and girls alike treated
Here also one seems to perceive that a new influence
was making its way. The picture of Trajan which has
been preserved to us, of the Emperor in the midst of the
children for whom he provided, is an important symptom
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 21
of that current flowing out from the midst of heathendom
towards the advancing flood of Christendom.
We shall notice this current still more distinctly if
we turn our attention to the life of the numerous Societies
(collegia) which played so important a part in the whole
social life of the imperial age. In these we find for the
first time something analogous to Christian charity, or if
that is perhaps saying too much, it is in them that the
above - mentioned current approaches most nearly to
Christianity, and that altogether apart from the import-
ance which the collegia also possess in that they laid
down the legal form and order for so much in the life of
the Christian communities, and in especial for Christian
charity.”
Even in Greece there were societies of every kind, and
with the most diverse objects. If a few young people
wished to hold a merry feast, or to celebrate some
festivity, or if they designed to accomplish some object
through bribery for which a considerable sum of money
was requisite, they formed a “society” (cranos), and
provided the requisite money by contribution. Trades-
men also formed Societies; and they were also instituted
for purposes of mutual support. If one of their members
fell into difficulties, the Society made him an advance,
which he, when he had retrieved his position, repaid.*
In Rome, from an early date, we find guilds of tradesmen
and societies for other purposes, especially for the
common worship of some god or other. The Republic
allowed them to do as they pleased, and only restrained
them from outrageous excesses. In the eyes of the
Emperors the collegia were suspicious, since they might
so easily become the seats of conspiracies. For this
reason the majority of them were suppressed, and the
22 CIIRISTIAN CIIARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book 1.
institution of new ones made dependent upon the per-
mission of the Senate. By a decree of the Senate, how-
ever, colleges of the humbler classes (collegia tenuiorum *)
were permitted. Their object was, by a monthly sub-
scription of their members (stips menstrua), to form a
treasury (arca), Out of which, on the death of a member,
the expenses of his burial might be defrayed. Thus
they were burial funds. The recognition which was
extended to them was united with the condition that
they should meet only once a month, and should enter-
tain no other aim than that which had been appointed
them. In spite of this strict legislation the collegia
increased, and the Government allowed them to remain
unmolested so long as they appeared harmless. Alex-
ander Severus gave charters to all collegia for art or
business, and regulated their legal position. From that
time onwards they multiplied in the greatest abundance,
especially when the reception into the Roman citizenship
by Caracalla of all the provincial citizens empowered
these also to form themselves into societies. Not only
merchants of different branches, artisans of every kind,
workers in wool, makers of purple, shoemakers, fishermen,
shipbuilders, but even compatriots united as such, the
provincials who lived in Rome, and the Romans who
lived in the province. The period was one in which
there was a great necessity for co-operation; and especially
was this felt among the lower classes, for whom the
collegia were the principal means of bettering their con-
dition and of enabling them to hold up their heads in a
society so exclusively aristocratic. In addition to this,
there was the necessity for pleasant Social intercourse.
All collegia were at once pleasant meeting-places; indeed,
many of them appear to have had no other aim than that
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITEIOUT LOWE. 23
of promoting social intercourse. The constitution of the
guilds was ordered after the pattern of the constitution
of the municipium. At the head stood the magistri or
curators, who were elected annually. From amongst the
higher classes the guilds sought to procure patrons,
mainly with a view to having the honour thus conferred
rewarded by liberal gifts, which constituted one of the
chief sources of the society's income. While the poorer
societies held their meetings in some tavern or other, the
more wealthy possessed their own meeting-house (schola),
with an assembly and eating-hall, and also with a chapel,
or at least an altar. For all had alike some religious
background, and worshipped as their protector some one
or other of the gods, the special worship of whom
constituted one of their objects.
There is nothing in the guilds which reaches to the
height of actual charity, and this is a sure sign of how
far distant that was from the ideas of the heathen world.
Tertullian expressly lays weight on the fact that in
Christian communities the collected contributions, which
in other respects he treats as parallel to the subscriptions
of the guilds, were spent not in gluttony and in drunken-
ness, but in the relief of the poor.” But in many of the
guilds mutual support was one of the objects for the
bromotion of which they had been formed. In the first
place, we must remember that, as has been mentioned
above, they frequently formed burial funds. Such a guild
was, for instance, that of the worshippers of Diana and
Antinous (cultores Diana ct Antinoi), with the statutes
of which we are familiar through an inscription of the
year 136.” There belonged to it people of the poorer
Tanks, freedmen and slaves. Every member paid on
entry 100 HS (12s. 6d.), and thereafter as a regular
*
24 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
monthly subscription 5 asses (about 206.). On the death
of a member there were paid for the costs of his burial
300 IIs. (54S.), whereof 50 HS. (about 9s) were distributed
amongst those members of the guild who were present
at the interment. In the event of the dead man having
no relatives, the arrangements for the funeral were looked
after by the Society. Mention is also made of common
banquets, at which no doubt the slaves would also be
present, and would thus in this circle of friends feel
themselves free for at least a few hours at a time. If a
slave were manumitted, he was obliged, in accordance
with the regulations, to provide an amphora of wine, with
which his manumission was celebrated by the others.
Mutual funds of other kinds are also to be found. In
the Legio III. Aug. there was a schola of 36 persons.”
The candidate paid on admission 750 den. (£26), and
also gave a current subscription. In return he received
from the chest, in the event of his requiring to travel
over the sea, a contribution towards his travelling
expenses of 200 den. (£7); a horseman, of 500 den.
(£15), and, if necessary, a contribution of 500 den.
towards the expenses of outfit ; finally, on his death
the costs of his burial were defrayed. Whoever was
honourably discharged as a veteran, received on his
departure 6000 HS. (£52).
Many of these societies collected in the course of time
considerable wealth, cSpecially from the presents or
endowments made by their patrons or other leading
members. Houses, pieces of land, Capital sums were
either presented or bequeathed to them, in order that, on
appointed days, a sportula, a distribution of bread, wine,
or money, might be made amongst their members.
Especially worthy of notice are the endowments in
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 25
memory of the dead, as they clearly are the origin of
those important kinds of memorials so common in the
Church a little later on. It was universally the custom
to arrange for one's burial and for one's memory after
death. Rich men built mausoleums with chapels, altars,
and banqueting-halls, sometimes also with gardens, or
even wide-reaching parks. Care was also taken that
there should always be those who would think of the
dead, and show respect to his memory, especially by
bringing wreaths on his birthday, kindling lamps, offering
sacrifice, and holding banquets. With this in view
capital sums were set aside ; and in order to make the
endowment more secure, and to obtain the punctual
performance of the stipulations in the will, men gladly
availed themselves of public bodies, and especially of the
guilds. Money and landed property was bequeathed to
them, and they were held bound, in accordance with the
conditions, to celebrate the anniversaries of the deceased
with sacrifices, wreaths, banquets, and distributions of
money. In the event of a guild not doing its duty there
was a fixed penalty,” or it was even stipulated that the
money should pass to some other corporation.” In the
year 149 a certain Sextus Fadius bequeathed to the
guild of the Fabres Narbonenses 16,000 HS. (£140), in
order that the interest might be distributed amongst the
visitors and guests on his birthday.” Another bequeaths
100,000 HS. (£870), that out of the proceeds there might
be provided at his grave each year a banquet for at least
twelve men. The duty of seeing to this was confided to
the guild of the Centenarii.” The number of guests is,
for the most part, distinctly mentioned, and directions
given for the filling up of vacancies caused by death.”
Moreover, minute directions are frequently laid down.
26 CIIRISTIAN CIIARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
For instance, one man directs that on his birthday his
statue is to be anointed, and crowned with wreaths, and
that two wax candles are to be lighted in front of it.
Before the pedestal of the statue there was to be, from
the third hour onwards, a distribution to the decuriones
of a sportula.” Again, a lady named Valeria bequeaths
to the guild of the Fabres Centenarii a certain sum,
stipulating that out of the proceeds of it there should be
held every year on her birthday a banquet to cost
200 den., and that 200 den. should be given away in
her memory. Her husband presents to the Schola
Veacillariorum 30,000 HS., out of which 250 den. were
to be devoted to a banquet, and 250 den, given away
as a sportula amongst those present.” In many cases
also the proportions in which the distributions are to be
made are fixed, and these are always so arranged that
the officials of the society receive more according to their
rank. Thus a president of the Augustales bequeaths
100,000 HS. (£870). The interest is to be divided on
his birthday as a sportula ; the presidents are to receive
4 dem. (3s.), the others 3 den. (2s. 8d.), but always only
those who are present. If a smaller number should come
forward, then those who had appeared were to receive
a proportionately larger sum." Salvia Marcellina be-
queathed in memory of her husband, who had been
overseer of the imperial tablets, the sum of 50,000 IIS.
(£438) to the college of AEsculapius and Hygeia. Out
of the interest a sportula was to be distributed twice
a year; the higher officials of the guild were to receive
6 denarii each and 8 jars of wine, the lower officials
4 denarii and 6 jars of wine, and the ordinary members
2 denarii and 3 jars of wine. This was in addition to
three loaves to each." In this case again the proportion
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 27
of the shares shows that we are in no sense dealing with
charity. Necessity is not regarded : those who are to all
appearances the least necessitous are to receive the most.
The object, moreover, of the giver is not to aid the poor,
but to honour the memory of herself and her relatives,
or at least to procure a gratification for the members of
the guild. Still, no doubt, the sportula and the banquet,
and the distributed bread and wine, might be of service
to many a one in distress, and thus although we have
no actual charity before us, still we have something
analogous to it, something which bears the same relation
to Christian charity as does the ancient liberalitas to the
Christian caritas ; and in any case, the constitution of
these guilds, and the kind of life developed within them,
have been of the greatest importance in the history of
Christian charity and its development.
Certainly it was the case that these guilds laid down
the recognised forms in accordance with which, when
once the power of true love began to stir the Christian
communities, their charity was to be exercised. Just as
in the guilds there was a monthly subscription collected,
so also were there subscriptions in the Christian com-
munities: the latter also had an arca, and it is
remarkable that Tertullian, in speaking of collections for
the benefit of the poor, makes use of expressions which
had acquired a technical significance in the guilds. Just
in the same way as the heathen made endowments in
memory of the dead (ad memoriam), so do we find
hereafter within the Church innumerable memorial-
foundations; the only difference is this, that the object
of the latter is the relief of the poor. In the former
case, and this is in portant, the guilds cherished the spirit
of co operation annongst the lower classes, and the idea of
28 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
brotherliness. What ties of family and alliances of race
were to the higher classes, the guilds were to the lower.
Nor must we omit to notice that the members of the
guilds called one another brothers and sisters;” that their
presidents and presidentesses were known as fathers and
mothers; and that even in the case of the dead in the
inscriptions on the tombs, whilst in earlier times it had
been written that they were affectionate towards their
friends, it was now recorded that they had proved
themselves affectionate towards their guilds.” All this
is, as it were, a shadow of love and charity ; and here
again we may recognise traces of that current which
flowed out from the midst of heathenism to meet the
advancing tide of Christianity. What an elevating
thought it must have been to the artisan, excluded from
all offices in the State or the municipality, from all
priestly guilds and posts of honour, that in his own
guild at least he was of some importance, and might
there attain to office and honour ! And what a boon it
must have been to the slave that there at least he was
treated as a man | We must try to picture to ourselves
the extremely oppressed condition of the lower classes in
this aristocratic world, if we would rightly appreciate
what the guilds were in their eyes, and understand how
it was that they cherished them so zealously.
Put we have not yet touched upon the point of chief
importance. This lies first of all in the fact that it is in
the guilds that we find in heathenism for the first time
anything approaching to the life of a Christian com-
munity. Indeed, this matter deserves careful considera-
tion. One of the main causes why, in the ancient world,
they never arrived at true charity, at true care for
the poor, is that the spirit of community, which was its
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 29
true prop, was wanting. In the course of this sketch we
shall have frequent opportunities of observing in how
very close dependence upon the rise and fall of the
communal life has been the rise and fall of charity. To
the ancient world the idea of the community was quite a
strange one. Robbertus, in a passage in his treatise on
the Roman taxes,” remarks that we can speak first of a
community only after Christianity had formed such, and
that it is exactly in this that one of the strongest
influences of Christianity upon the general Social
development of mankind lies. In the ancient world
there was no political community. Above the family
there rises immediately the State, and even the Roman
Empire is but a union of States. And just as little do
we find in the ancient world religious communities or
communities for worship. We are only too apt, when
considering the appearance of Christianity, involuntarily
to think that there was in the Christian worship some-
thing similiar to the heathen, as if there had been in the
latter case any community for worship at all. Iłut this
is altogether a mistake. The heathen temple is not the
place of meeting of any community for worship like the
Christian Church: it is the house of the god, which was
never entered by the people, but only by the priests.
The altar stands in front of the temple, and the assembled
people take no share whatever in the worship of the god.
They look on at the sacrifice in silence. “Facete linguis”
was cried out at the beginning of the sacrifice, and a
flute-player used to play during the sacred ceremony in
order to drown any inopportune word which might, in
accordance with the belief of the Romans, be so easily
converted into an evil omen. As a rule, the presence of
the people at these acts of ceremonial worship was quite
30 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CIIURCH. [Book I.
a matter of indifference. The State made the prescribed
sacrifices by means of the priests in the presence of the
officials, who, in conformity with the law, were obliged
to stand by during the ceremony. If the people were
present, it was only as spectators, just as they were at
the games. The utmost that was permitted to them was,
as for instance at Sacrifices for the Emperor, to make
private offerings afterwards, or to throw incense about.
It is abundantly evident from this that the worship
afforded no opportunity for or inducement to charity.
The giving of alms is no part of it. Certainly it was in
several temples the custon, to make a present (slips) to
the god ; but this went to the temple, or was in Some cases
thrown into sacred fountains or lakes. The sin-offerings,
piacula, required by the indwelling Superstition of the
Romans were innumerable; as, for instance, at any place
which had been struck by lightning, where unlucky birds
had been seen passing, or where some bad omen or other
lad come true. Men made vows to ward off evil, or to
secure the good-will of the gods; but the vows had
reference to presents, grand Sacrifices, games, etc., never
to alms.” Connected with the worship there were
banquets, either recurring regularly or held upon special
occasions, and especially for warding off some evil
fortune or other, in which case the costs were defrayed
by subscriptions; but these were gluttonous banquets of
priestly colleges, such as the Salii or the Arvales, which
were notorious for their accompanying luxury, or they
were the banquets of citizens; poor people were never
fed at them. I only find one quite isolated instance
of distributing alms in the worship of Ceres, who,
moreover, is not one of the old Roman deities, but was
introduced first of all in the year 258, in accordance with
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 31
the requisition of the Sibylline books. The temple of
Ceres was under the protection of the AEdiles, and the
fines which were recovered by them were given to the
temple. Here they were partly expended in offerings
and upon statues, but partly also in distributing bread
to the poor.”
The case of the worship of the gemtes and the collegia,
and of the worship of foreign gods, differs from that of
the public or State worship. The members of the gens
or of the collegium were bound to be present at the
recognised sacrifices of the gems or collegium on appointed
days and at appointed places, and the schola of the guild
is much more analogous to the Christian Church than the
temple of the god. And especially did the Societies of
foreigners, who united for the worship of some of their
native gods in Rome or one of the provincial towns, bear
a certain resemblance to the Christian community formed
for the worship of God in Christ. To take only one
example, there was in Puteolia Society of Syrian merchants
who had united for the purpose of worshipping the Jupiter
of Heliopolis. While the official temples of the State
divinities were richly endowed, societies of this kind
must necessarily have of themselves borne the cost of
their worship, which must therefore have been defrayed
by means of subscriptions amongst their members. Here,
then, we have already a kind of community which
collected subscriptions for purposes of worship, a thing
which was only done in the official worship of Rome in
the case of the worship of Apollo, and on a few isolated
occasions where we have to do with exceptional cere-
monies by way of expiation for sin, such as, for instance,
the Lectisternium."
Of a slips being collected for generous purposes I can
32 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK 1.
find no instance, but many for the purpose of conferring
honours. Thus the people contributed a sextans each to
defray the expenses of the funeral of Menenius Agrippa,
and on the death of Valerius Poplicola every one threw
a quadrans into the house of the consul, in order that his
obsequies might be celebrated with greater pomp by
means of the money thus collected.” Very frequently
statues of distinguished men were erected by voluntary
subscription. But the man so honoured did not come best
off, as he generally displayed his liberality by defraying
the cost of it himself.” But that a stips should be
collected to feed the hungry or to clothe the naked was
a thing to which their religion did not point, an idea
which did not enter into the popular mind. It was only
when first the religion of love appeared in Christianity,
when first the crowds of men who had believed on Christ
formed themselves into real communities, of which the
societies of foreigners in the Roman States had been but
a shadow, that in their Christian communities a stips was
collected, just as it had been collected in the societies,
but not now to be thrown into sacred wells, no longer to
be expended on the erection of statues or on social eating
and drinking, but in extending aid to the poor and
needy.
Nor did philosophy lead any further towards charity
than did religion. Lactantius was right when he said to
the heathen : “Of such things your philosophy teaches
nothing.” The ethics of the Greeks and IRomans did not
advance beyond a more or less refined eudaimonism.
The chief principle of action is always one's own benefit.
Even with Plato it is not otherwise, a fact which makes
us wonder how it is that in the case of this best repre-
sentative of the ancient world a naked egoism so
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE, 33
frequently comes to the front. According to him the
highest idea is that of the good, which, transcending
mere existence in strength and value, requires nothing for
itself, and the influence of which upon everything else is
beneficent.” It is the cause of all that is sacred, all
that is just and beautiful.” Hence the Deity, the prime
Source of all existence upon the earth, is good, and will
reject nothing that is good and well-doing. And to
become as like as possible to this God, must be the
endeavour of mankind.” Hereupon follows the idea of
the State, that in the laws enacted by the State there
shall be nothing which benefits one class of citizens only,
but only that which benefits the whole State ; and hence
it should strive to bring the citizens into such union with
one another, that they shall help One another, each man
in such measure as will be to the greatest advantage of
the community.” To this there are added thoughts
which, if carried further into practice, must have led one
on to charity as a sharing of the common life. But it is
well known how unsatisfactory, confusing, and impossible
any extended practical application of Plato's ideas as to
the life of a community is. In his ideal State there
is no room for the poor. Beggars are simply turned out.
They mar the common prosperity. Is a worker ill 2
There is no obligation binding upon the physician to
interest himself in him. If his constitution is not strong
enough to enable him to withstand what is hurtful, he
must die: the life of such a man has no value beyond
his being able to carry on his handiwork. If he is no
longer in a position to do this, his life is then no longer
worth anything.”
We seek in vain for charity amongst the virtues
enumerated by Aristotle in his Ethics. We only find a
C
34 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCII. [Book I.
Sort of echo of the name in Generosity, which, according
to Aristotle, is the true mean between extravagance and
avarice. But the practice of this is restricted ; that is
to say, the generous man may give of his wealth when
and where and as much as he pleases,” so long as these
empty rubrics are fulfilled. Moreover, the motive of
generosity, with Aristotle, is not benevolence and love :
the generous man gives “because it is beautiful to give,” "
and thus, here again, only for his own sake, only in order
to adorn himself with this virtue. However, Aristotle
declares, and here he comes nearest to the Christian idea,
that the Worth of the generosity is not to be measured by
the amount of the gift, but by the spirit of the giver.
The object, moreover, of this generosity is not to combat
distress ; its practical proof lies always in the giving of
gifts. Aristotle advances a little further when he treats
of friendship. Here, also, he discusses benevolence and
beneficence. It is a seemly thing to hasten, without
being asked, to the assistance of unfortunate friends; for
it is a proof of friendship to help the needy without
being entreated thereto." In general, with Aristotle,
the only incitement towards friendship lies in the virtue
of the friend and in the feeling of satisfaction which is
experienced in this virtue; but it widens into something
very unlike a universal love of mankind. According to
the teaching of Aristotle, friendship cannot subsist between
such as have nothing in common with one another, for
example, between masters and slaves. For, inasmuch as
the latter is a slave, he is only an animated machine.
But yet friendship with him is possible, inasmuch as he
is a man.” In connection with this, we may take a
saying of Aristotle's, which has been preserved by Diogenes
Laertius.” When blamed because he had given an alms
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 35
to a bad man, he is said to have replied : “I pitied not
his habits, but the man himself; ” or, according to another
version : “I did not give to the man himself, but to man-
kind.” Here, indeed, we have arrived at last at the selfish
foundation. For all this generosity and benevolence
springs not from love, but from the reflection that such
conduct is decorous and worthy of a noble man. The
generous man does much for his friends and fatherland;
he gives treasures, wealth, possessions to attain to the
beautiful. For, “of everything praiseworthy, the generous
man takes as his own share the best.” The best for
himself-how far removed is that from the simple apos-
tolic saying: “Charity seeketh not her own " |
The last quoted version of Aristotle's saying has a
strong affinity to Stoicism. The Stoics were the first
who broke through the rigid ideas of nationality of the
ancient world ; they speak of one humanity, in which
every one, even the slave, has a share. Here, again,
hough it is not love which binds together this com-
munity of mankind, but nature and our common origin
from nature, yet there is an evident advance amongst the
Stoics, who have much to say upon beneficence in parti-
cular. Thus Seneca has written seven books upon “Good
Deeds,” in which he discusses from every side the duty
of beneficence. He requires not only that we should
display kindness towards our fellow-men generally, but
also that we shall give willingly and without hesitation;
that the gifts which we bestow upon the poor and needy
be given quietly, and sometimes even so that the giver
shall not be known.” He expressly declares that we
must not give in the hope of receiving again ; that is
usury, not beneficence. As true virtue must be exercised
for its own sake alone, so also must true beneficence be
36 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
exercised for its own sake alone.” For in Seneca the
thought appears, that by so doing we imitate and secure
the favour of the gods, who will reward us.” This,
viewed in itself, seems very like the precepts of the New
Testament, and is yet at bottom something very different.
It is remarkable how clearly Seneca speaks upon the
point of one's duty in choosing very carefully those for
whom we are to exercise beneficence. “I would choose
out,” says he, “a blameless, simple man, one who would
be grateful and mindful of the benefit.”" For, “it belongs
to beneficence to give willingly to any one whom I esteem
worthy, and to reap joy as the reward of my good deed.”
And it is remarkable that Seneca, while he says so much
of beneficence, deals at still greater length with gratitude
and the duty of being grateful. He can hardly find
words strong enough to characterize the turpitude of
ingratitude. He even goes so far as to discuss the ques-
tion whether the benefactor should not have the right of
laying a criminal complaint against the ungrateful man.
Seneca himself does not indeed incline to this, but he
deduces from it a lesson, that since there is no complain
possible against the ungrateful, for there is no judge who
can aid us, we ought on that very account to be more
careful in our choice of those to whom we are to do good.
He who gives to an ungrateful man acts like him who
puts his trust in traitors, or appoints a scoundrel to the
guardianship of his children." This does not exclude us
from giving an alms to a chance beggar, or providing an
unworthy man with fire and water. For these are not
benefits; we do such things instinctively, without con-
sidering the individual." Indeed, Seneca goes even
further in such sentences as these : “Rindness persisted
in subdues at last even the wicked; ” “The ungrateful
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 37
man only injures himself in the long run; ” “I will not
therefore weary, but will go on the more diligently, as a
good husbandman conquers the barrenness of his land by
a double sowing of seed.” And he closes with this
splendid saying: “It is not the sign of a noble spirit to
give and to lose, but it is the sign of a noble spirit to lose
and still to give.”" Thus all that he says of beneficence
comes at last to this, though perhaps in a more delicate
sense, that what man gives he gives in order that he may
receive in return, if not a reward, yet gratitude; if not
gratitude, still the consciousness of having a noble spirit.
“If you ask me what I receive in return for my benefac-
tions, I reply, a good conscience.” ”
Although it is thus plain that the good deeds, praised
by Seneca with so much rhetorical emphasis, are yet
something quite different from the simple heartfelt com-
passion of the Christians, the difference becomes still
more distinct when we see that he has no hesitation in
considering pity as something morbid and unworthy of a
wise man. Just as superstition (superstitio) is a morbid
perversion of the Roman religion, so is pity a morbid
caricature of mercy and kindness. Pity is the fault of a
weak spirit, which succumbs at the sight of a stranger in
distress. Old women are pitiful, but the wise man is
not. He helps the weeping one, but does not weep with
him ; he gives the poor man a gift, and extends a helping
hand to the shipwrecked and dying, but does all this
with a quiet unmoved spirit, not from compassion, but
from Sound judgment, while he gives to man as man of
our common possessions, while he says to himself that
nature is common to us all."
And now we begin to see how it was that the Roman
philosophy, quite apart from the fact that it was never
sº
38 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
the property of more than the few, could produce no
benevolence like the Christian, and how it was that the
ancient world, in spite of all its talk of humanity and
brotherhood, of kindness and beneficence, was what it
was–a world without love. The Stoics, indeed, made a
notable advance. The idea of humanity was wanting to
the old world ; the man was hidden behind the citizen,
mankind behind the State. The new idea was indeed
promulgated by the Stoics, but in an unsatisfactory
fashion. The undying value of the human soul, the eternal
significance of every one of these human individualities,
remained hidden ; for their humanity was nothing but
nature, and the dependence upon each other under nature
all that unites men. Their view of the world is, like that
of all the rest of the ancient world, exclusively one-sided.
The other side, eternity and the significance of humanity
as regards eternity, is hidden from them. There is an
idea, which has been again met with in our own day,
that men, when they first clearly came to believe that
human life finds its end in this life alone, would be on
that account the more ready to help one another, so that
at least life here below might be made as pleasant to all
as possible, and kept free from evil. But, in truth, the
opposite is the case. If the individual man be only a
passing shadow, without any everlasting significance, then
reflection quickly makes us decide: Since it is of no
importance whether he exist or not, why should I deprive
myself of anything in order to give it to him For
the rule of life soon becomes this, that every one makes
himself as comfortable in this life as possible ; and this
implies that he need not trouble himself about the poor
and needy, whose existence or non-existence is at bottom
a matter of no importance. All charity is based upon
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 39
this, that the man towards whom love is shown is some-
thing in himself, and not a mere passing shadow of some-
thing eternal, not a mere specimen of a genus, but a
personal existence, which as such possesses something
possessed by no other person or thing. It was only when
through Christianity it was for the first time made known
that every human soul possessed an infinite value, that
each individual existence is of much more worth than the
whole world,—it was only then that room was found for
the growth of a genuine charity.
Since the ancient world possessed not this knowledge,
the fundamental principle of the ancient life, as well
amongst the Stoics as with Seneca, is nothing else than
a selfishness or egoism, cramped and confined by the
egoism of the State. The State mercilessly makes the
other nations bow before her interests. There are no
duties towards conquered enemies. They and their pro-
perty are at the mercy of the conqueror. Mercilessly,
again, does the individual make others yield to his inte-
rests. Of the duty of love, of compassion, of such a love
as denies itself, of such a compassion as is self-sacrificing
for the sake of others, we hear nothing. Even in the
making of gifts and presents, it is not the individual, but
the State, the town, the citizenship that is regarded.
There is plenty of liberality, but no compassion; plenty
of good deeds, but none of the works of charity. While
one furthers the interests of the State, one furthers one's
own interests, for one depends upon the State; with-
out it, one is nowhere. Here again we find selfishness
at the bottom of all. Each individual is valuable only
in so far as he aids in realizing the idea of the State.
Therefore the poor are of no account, for they signify
nothing to the State; they are but a burden upon its
40 CHRISTIAN CIIARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
shoulders. If you cannot live, you must perish ; as
Plautus says: “What is given to the poor is lost.”
Hence the small interest taken in children. The chil-
dren of citizens who had fallen in the service of the
State were indeed educated at the cost of the State, and
guardians were appointed to the children of the noble
and wealthy, for it was for the interest of the State that
this should be done. Where it was not done, nobody
troubled himself about the children. Hence came it
that in ancient times there were hospitals for soldiers
and slaves only. The State had an interest in the
former, the great landowners in the latter. Every pos-
sible care was taken of the wealthy in their palaces;
about the middle classes and the artisans no one cared.
Pſence comes the small estimation in which woman was
held, her dependent position, her want of all legal rights,
which also was a co-ordinate cause why true charity
never was attained to, for that only becomes a possibility
by the service of that sex specially created and provided
for the ministry of the distressed.
This ancient selfishness comes more prominently for-
ward among the Romans than among the Greeks. The
only piece of real care for the poor which we meet with
is at Athens, not at Rome. The Roman is very avari-
cious, very careful about the keeping together of his
money, very unscrupulous as to the ways in which
he obtains it. The well-known saying with which the
Emperor Vespasian justified his disgraceful taxes is
typical of the Romans. The great men of Rome were not
ashamed to gain money even from usury and brothels.
The Romans were less influenced by generosity of any
kind than the Greeks.
But from the time of the Emperors onwards, as has
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOWE. 41
been frequently remarked, a new influence begins to make
itself felt. We cannot understand the first centuries of
the Christian Church, we cannot understand its swift
extension and its proportionately swift victory, if we do
not notice this influence. And herein the divine Wisdom
is revealed; it answers to the “fulness of the times " of
which St. Paul speaks (Gal. iv. 4). Had the stream of
new life flowing forth from Christ encountered the still
unbroken ancient life, it would have recoiled from the
encounter ineffectually. But now the ancient life had
already come amongst the breakers, its strong foundations
had begun to be weakened, and the Christian influence
meets with a current of heathen opinion already flowing
partly in its own direction. In the Roman Empire there
had appeared a spirit of universalism unknown to the
ancient world. Nationalities had been effaced, and the
idea of universal manhood had struggled into the light
out of the obscurity of the ideas of nationality. From
the Stoics the word had gone forth that all men are equal;
they spoke of brotherhood and of the duties of man
towards man. The lower classes, up to this time despised,
asserted their place. The treatment of slaves becomes
more gentle. If Cato likened them to cattle amongst
straw, Pliny beholds in them his “ serving friends.” The
position of the artisan is improved; freedmen work their
way upwards. The guilds provide them with not only a
centre of Social life, but also with the means of better-
ing their social position. The women, hitherto without
legal position, receive privileges and rights in increasing
fulness. Care is taken of children. The distribution of
grain, which was at first a purely political institution,
becomes by degrees a sort of system of poor relief. We
meet with an ever-increasing number of acts of liberality,
42 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book 1,
presentations, and endowments, which are of a more
charitable description. Even the inscriptions give us
glimpses of this. Thus a freedman of Hadrian's dedi-
cates his private burying-ground not only to his relations
and friends, as in former days, but adds, “ and to charity.”
Thus the foreigner and the stranger may be buried there.”
Here some one builds baths expressly for foreigners.”
There a certain Cornelius makes provision for securing a
distribution of bread in the surrounding villages.” A
drug-seller leaves a number of boxes of healing ointment
to be given to the sick poor.” And a heathen woman is
honoured on her tombstone as a “mother to all men; ”
while a man is commemorated as good, compassionate,
and kind to the poor.”
This is indeed the turning-point. This heathen influ-
ence paving the way for the advancing Christianity must,
later on, even after Christianity had completely gained
the upper hand, have had the tendency of favouring a
combination of heathen and Christian elements. And
we shall see hereafter how strongly indeed, more strongly
than men are accustomed to suppose, heathen customs
and the ancient idea of the world influenced the develop-
ment of charity; but first of all they paved the way for
the reception of Christian ideas, and contributed materi-
ally to their spread and victory. How far this current
of thought itself was modified by Christian influences it is
very difficult to say. At all events, the charity of the
Christian made a great impression upon the heathem, and
it is hard to believe that this should not have brought
forth fruit of some sort or other. But such mutual influ-
ences are in their beginnings of inappreciable magnitude.
They are first noticed only when the beginnings are things
of the past. Therefore, when in the opening of the third
CHAP. I.] A WORLD WITHOUT LOVE. 43
century Philostratus makes his Apollonius of Tyana
deliver a noble speech to the heathen, in which he remarks
upon the sparrows, how they call each other to feed, and
share what they have found, and warns his hearers to be
of mutual support to one another, and to take care of the
poor," these sentiments no doubt flow, not from heathen,
but from Christian sources.
But amid all these remains the deep-lying difference
between the ancient and the Christian life. Heathendom
did not of itself produce a real, organized charity; that
is, as it were, something quite new springing from Chris-
tianity. The ancient world stretched forth in this respect
towards Christianity, but could not of itself produce what
Christianity brings. It still is, and remains, a world
without love.
C EIA PT E R II.
TJNDER THE LAW.
THE case of Israel, the nation which knew and worshipped
the only true God, is different from that of the rest of the
heathen world. Of course we do not find even in Israel
any completely organized charity, any actual system of
poor relief. But there was not, and could not be, a great
amount of poverty or any considerable proletariat. The
land-laws, in accordance with which the land always
returned after appointed intervals of time into the hands
of the family, prevented this; and even although these
land-laws may never have been put into execution to
the fullest extent, yet the character of the people as
husbandmen, the want of the greater industries, the
simplicity of their whole life, and, above all, that customary
respect paid to work as a duty imposed by God upon
every man,—a very different view from that taken by the
heathen, all these things prevented any of the more
severe kinds of distress. Of course there was not complete
freedom from it. There were poor in Israel as well as
elsewhere, and a number of the enactments of the law are
devoted to the relief of their distress and the softening of
their fate. The olive-tree is not to be twice shaken, the
vineyard is not to be twice gathered, nor are the sheaves
of corn left in the fields to be gleaned; all that belongs
to the poor, to the widow and the orphan. It was
44
CHAP. II.] LNDER THE LAW. 45
allowable to pluck with the hand the ears of corn while
passing through a neighbour's field (Deut. xxiii. 25),
though a sickle might not be used. Whatever crops
grew in the seventh year were for the benefit of the poor
(Lev. xxiii. 11). They have, so to speak, a share in the
land, which belongs to God alone, from whom Israel
only holds it in loan. The idea of property in the Old
Testament is not the absolute one which appears in the
Roman law. All proprietorship is merely relative : there
is bound up with it the duty of allowing others also to
enjoy a share of it. The Lord over all is God, and He
gives it to whom He wills. Every mean advantage over,
every act of oppression of the poor, is most strictly
forbidden; and in order to give emphasis to this com-
mandment, the people are reminded of the time of their
oppression, when they also were strangers in Egypt (Ex.
xxii. 21). All usury towards their fellow-countrymen is
forbidden (ibid. 25). All debts are to be released in the
Seventh year, and the approach of that seventh year is
not to hinder any one from lending to the poor man in
distress (Deut. xv. 2 ft.). “The poor shall never cease
out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou
shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, who is poor
and needy.” Upon him who does this the blessing of
God will descend; to him who does it not, the omission
will be reckoned for sin. The poor man is to receive
his wage before the sun goes down (Deut. xxiv. 15).
The law cares most anxiously for widows and orphans, for
“God is a father of the fatherless and a judge of the
widows” (Ps. lxviii. 5). A widow's rainent might not
be taken in pledge, and both widows and orphans were
to be invited to their feasts. An institution specially
designed for the protection and relief of the poor was the
46 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK 1.
second tithe, the so-called poor's-tithe. The first tithe
belonged to the Levites. What remained over was again
tithed, and the produce of this second tithe, devoted in
the first two years to a feast in the sanctuary at the
offering of the first-fruits, was devoted in the third year
to a feast in the dwelling-house, to which the Levites
and the strangers, the widows and the orphans, were
invited (Deut. xiv. 28, 29, xxvi. 12, 13).
But these legal precepts were in accordance with the
ideas of the people, and that the spirit of gentleness which
finds expression in them was active in the life of the
people, is shown by the Psalms and the Proverbs of
the Israelites. Compassion for the poor and distressed is
a trait which must not be wanting in the character of a
righteous Israelite. “He is ever merciful and lendeth"
(Ps. xxxvii. 26); he “considereth the poor” (Ps. xli. 1);
“he showeth favour and lendeth gladly" (Ps. cxii. 5).
Job, in whom is portrayed the upright man, appears as
the father of the poor (xxix. 16). On the other hand,
the want of compassion is a distinguishing feature of the
ungodly. “The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel”
(Prov. xii. 10). For God Himself is compassionate and
gentle, He has a father's heart and is full of pity.
Therefore “he that hath mercy on the poor honoureth
God” (Prov. xiv. 31). Herein lies a deeper reason why
that spirit of compassion, for which we seek in vain
among the heathen, is to be found in Israel. Israel has
a merciful God, who is considerate, who is kindly,
merciful, and full of help. Therefore the poor were
viewed by the Israelites in quite a different light from
that in which they were regarded by the heathen. Here
there is no trace of that contempt with which they were
treated in the other case. On the contrary, the poor and
cHAP. II.] UNDER THE LAW. 47
needy stand nearest to God. He cares for them, He
assures their rights, He raises them up out of the dust.
And the loving God requires from mankind love in return.
“Mercy is better than sacrifice’ (1 Sam. xv. 22), and
right and beneficent actions are more pleasing to the
Lord. “Is not this the fast that I have chosen 2 to loose
the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and
to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every
yoke 2 Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and
that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house 7
when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him; and
that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh 2 ”
(Isa. lviii. 6, 7). Thus there is a double motive in the
commandment to be compassionate ; one with reference
to God, since mercy is the true way in which to serve
Him, and one with reference to the poor, because they are
our flesh, and we are thus connected with them. It is
the very same idea as that which found its highest
expression in the commandment: “Thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself, for I am the Lord thy
God.”
We have thus the germ, as it were, of that charitable life
which appears in full vigour in the New Testament. And
yet compassionate love in the Old Testament is limited
in two respects, the national and the legal: there is still
wanting that universality and that freedom which is of
the essence of true charity. And thus the way of the
Old Testament does not of itself and as a natural
consequence lead to the charity of the Christian com-
munity. It may also lead, and it did lead, to the almsgiving
of the Pharisees, that caricature of true love for one's
neighbour. Some one was needed to come and sweep
away the barriers which in the Old Testament still
48 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
surrounded it. And thus the charity of the New Testament
is something fresh even as compared with that of the Old.
It would indeed be too narrow an interpretation of the
Old Testament, if we were to say that by the neighbour,
whom the Israelite is commanded to love, is meant his
fellow-countryman alone." That would be the Pharisaic
interpretation, which extracts from the commandment,
“Thou shalt love thy neighbour,” its converse, “but hate
thine enemy,” and at the same time contracts the meaning
of the word “neighbour.” In opposition to this, let us
point to the beautiful precept quoted by the Apostle Paul
in the New Testament : “If thine enemy be hungry, give
him bread to eat ; and if he be thirsty, give him water to
drink: for thus shalt thou heap coals of fire upon his
head" (Prov. xxv. 21, 22); and to such commands as this,
that one must restore to an enemy his lost cattle, even at
the expense of one's own time. And since, in reference
to this matter, it is of a personal rather than of a national
enmity that we are to think, we see that the stranger, the
non-Israelite, was by no means regarded simply as an
enemy. The foreign settler, “the stranger which is
within thy gates,” is not without rights. “Ye shall have
one ordinance, both for the stranger and for him that is
born in the land ” (Num. ix. 14). The stranger is to
enjoy the rest of the Sabbath, is to be invited to their
feasts, and is to be kindly treated (Ex. xxii. 21, xxiii. 9;
Iev. xix. 9, xxiii. 22). They are even to treat him as
one of themselves: “The stranger that dwelleth with you
shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt
love him as thyself” (Lev. xix. 34). Moreover, that in
this respect the children of Israel were very different from
the heathen, is distinctly seen in the humane regulations
regarding slaves. How carefully (Ex. xxi. 20 ft) are
CHAP. II.] UNDER THE LAW. 49
they protected against the cruelty and harshness of their
masters, and how far beyond the heathen mind is the
delicacy displayed in the enactment, that whoever takes
to wife a slave from among the captives taken in battle,
must first allow her a month in which to bewail father
and mother Of course the stranger has not exactly the
same privileges as a native. The usury forbidden in
the case of fellow-countrymen is permissible as regards
him, his debts are not released in the seventh year like
those of the natives, and he cannot inherit land. And
the case of the complete stranger differs again from that of
the foreign settler, although even in his case also there is
often displayed that universalist impulse which is grounded
on the Messianic expectations of the Israelites. In the
prayer at the dedication of the temple, Solomon prays for
those who are not Israelites. Melchizedek, Abimelech,
who are set forth as persons worthy of honour, Job, who
is the pattern of uprightness—all these are foreigners.
Israel is the first-born of God (Ex. iv. 22), and though
he therefore has some advantages on that account, yet
the other nations are not shut out from God. But all
the same, as Ewald says, “The principle of love in the
Old Testament is always limited by the idea of the
nation.” Just as its religion still lay buried in a husk
of nationality, so was there wanting to its charity the
habit of looking upon men as men, and without reference
to nationality. That universal love which no longer asks,
Who is my neighbour 2 but looks upon every man as a
neighbour, is indeed there in the seed-form, but the
universalism is still buried in the idea of the nationality.
Disinterment is required, and release from its barriers; but
all the same it was quite possible to look upon the shell
as the principal thing, and thus to pass by the universalism.
D
50 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
In just the same manner as it lacked universality, so
also did charity in the Old Testament lack freedom ; it
is still bound under the law. Let us, in order to make
this clear, compare the New Testament with the Old.
Nowhere in the New Testament do we find precepts
enjoining upon Christians the duty of almsgiving at
prescribed times, in prescribed proportions, or in pre-
scribed ways. The feeling of love for one's neighbour is
alone enjoined; out of this the deeds of love will quickly
come. Charity is quite free to set to herself her own
method and measure, to give and to help when and
where and in what degree she pleases. “Let every man
do according as he is disposed in his own heart, not
grudgingly or of necessity, for the Lord loveth a cheerful
giver;” such is now the commandment. Nowhere in the
New Testament do we find directions given which bear
directly upon the clearing away of social difficulties.
The removal of these is always expected to proceed from
the development of the Christian ideal, to grow from
within outwards. It is quite otherwise in the Old
Testament. We have already discussed a number of
legal regulations bearing directly upon the amelioration
or removal of social distress. The fulfilling of these
precepts, the giving of tithes, the leaving of fields
ungleaned, the releasing of debts, and all such things,
constituted in the eyes of the Israelites a religious duty,
while in the New Testament almsgiving is nowhere
inculcated as such ; all that the New Testament requires
of Christians in reference to matters of charity, is simply
the fulfilment of one's customary duties, which fulfilment
grows out of the religious life, but is completely free in
its action. We must not, however, conclude that in the
Old Testament only the outward performance is required,
CHAP. II.] UNDER THE LAW. 51
and not the inner spirit. The passages which have
already been quoted from the Psalms and from the
prophets would show the opposite; but, as a rule, these
exhortations to almsgiving are isolated, and hence the
possibility may arise of a man outwardly punctually
fulfilling them without possessing the corresponding spirit,
just as he would outwardly fulfil the ceremonial law, and
then think that he had done enough. This difference
between the Old and New Testament is most distinctly
shown in the commandment of love for one's neighbour.
Now this is indeed found in the Old Testament, but
separated from the commandment of love to God. It is
something new when our Lord takes the two command-
ments together, looks upon them as parallel, and combines
them in one precept, teaching that true love to God can
never exist without love for one's neighbour, nor true
love for one's neighbour without love to God, and that
the love of God is active in our love for our neighbour,
the latter being rooted in the former. Here, in one
sense, there was required a limitation of love, and with
that limitation it is freed from the fetters of the law,
freed from the bonds of national prejudice; and as free
love it becomes universal love.
If, then, the love which appeared in Christ Jesus is
something new as regards Israel, it is still more so when
we consider that Our Lord had opposed to Him not the
Israel of the Old Testament, but the post-exilian Judaism.
In the case of the latter we do not find the seeds of a
free and universal exercise of charity sown in the Old
Testament grown into the flower; but, on the contrary,
these seeds which had been provided have been destroyed,
and in their stead only those things which we have
designated as their fetters in the Old Testament have
52 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [BOOK I.
received a one-sided cultivation. There are two charac-
teristics of post-exilian Judaism, national pride and the
works of the law. To the commandment, “Thou shalt
love thy neighbour,” was added the clause, “and hate
thine enemy;” and by neighbour was understood
exclusively fellow-Jew ; every foreigner, every non-Jew
being an enemy. Contempt of Gentiles is now a part of
piety, and is a sort of proof of zeal for God and for His
law. And while this national pride hemmed charity in,
its legal aspect must have corrupted, if not altogether
destroyed it. The necessary consequences of a legal
regulation of charity are of two kinds. In the first place,
its activity is at once split up into a number of isolated
acts of almsgiving. For, while the truly charitable soul
directs his endeavours to the improvement of his neigh-
bour's condition and the prevention of social distress, the
legal precept refers only to individual acts, and the
accomplishment of these is sufficient. And again, the
laying weight upon almsgiving, and upon the making
one's alms as large as possible, is always a sign that in
that instance the charity is charity enacted by law. So,
then, the giving of alms becomes something done for the
sake of a reward, for the fulfilling of the law entails a
reward.
Both these symptoms of a legal bondage are strongly
prominent in the post-exilian Judaism. What a stress the
Apocrypha lay upon the giving of alms, how often do they
refer to it (Tob. iv. 8, xii. 8 ; Sir. iii. 3, xxix. 12), how
strong a feature it is in the character of the righteous
men as presented to us in the portrait of Tobias Indeed,
to so great an extent has the giving of alms come by
this time to be considered as a principal part of righteous-
ness, that righteousness and almsgiving have become
CHAP. II.] |UNDER THE LAW. 53
synonymous. Thus the Septuagint in the passage (Dan.
iv. 27) : “Break off thy sins by righteousness,” translates
the word “righteousness” by “almsgiving;” and the later
Judaism interprets Ps. xvii. 15: “I will behold Thy
face in righteousness,” in such a way as to deduce from
the passage the duty of giving alms on entering the
synagogue. The view of almsgiving as a meritorious
action also comes prominently forward. Of course, in the
Old Testament the blessing of God is promised to the com-
passionate and merciful man : “He that hath pity on the
poor lendeth to the Lord: and that which he hath given
will He pay him again" (Prov. xix. 17); but nowhere is
there any expiatory virtue attached to the alms. Even
the passage in Dan. iv. 27, when Daniel warns the king:
“Break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities
by showing mercy unto the poor,” has not this meaning;
for here righteousness signifies not the giving of alms, but
the whole change to a right moral conduct, in addition to
which the second half of the verse names as a generally
inportant part of such conduct, benefactions to the poor.
But this (latterly so much abused) passage forms the
bridge of communication with those sentences of the
Apocrypha which clearly point out alms as having an
expiatory effect. The beautiful counsel which Tobias gives
to his son (Tob. iv. 5 ft.) : “Be merciful after thy power.
If thou hast much, give plenteously; if thou hast little, do
thy diligence gladly to give of that little,” is followed
by “for so gatherest thou thyself a good reward in the
days of necessity. For thine alms loosen thee from sin,
and leave thee not in the fear of death.” In another
passage almsgiving is joined with prayer and fasting:
“Such a prayer with fasting and almsgiving is better
than the heaping up of treasures of gold; for alms release
54 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
from death, atone for sin, and support in life" (Tob.
xii. 8). “As water extinguisheth a burning fire, so do
alms blot out sin,” says Sirach, iii. 33.
These ideas were still more prominent amongst the
Pharisees in the time of our Lord and in the Talmud.
The Pharisees give alms, but without charity; it is the
public performance of a work of the law. It is not the
welfare of their neighbour that they bear in mind, but
their own glory. When they give alms, they sound a
trumpet before them, that they may be seen of men.
Thereafter, they set about the robbing of widows' houses.
The Talmud calls almsgiving a great commandment.
The giving of alms leads to eternal life, and preserves one
from untimely death. He who gives them never dies
prematurely.” Again, the giving of alms is one of those
things that prevail to alter the judgment of God upon us,
for (Prov. x. 2 and xi. 4) it is written: “Itighteousness
delivereth from death,” and here “righteousness” is
considered as synonymous with “almsgiving.” The
protection of strangers and the visiting of the sick is
specially recommended. He who protects a stranger
inherits Paradise; he who visits the sick will be saved
from hell. There is a characteristic passage in the
treatise of Pirke Aboth, which is undoubtedly the finest
part of the Talmud. “Four classes of men are there in
respect of almsgiving. One gives himself, but will not
that another should give. He casts the evil eye upon
the other, for he grudges him the blessing of almsgiving,
which maketh rich. The second allows others to give,
but will not give himself. He casts the evil eye upon
himself and his. The third gives himself, and wishes
others to give. He is chasid (devout). The fourth gives
not, nor wills that others should give. He is godless.”
CHAP. II.] UNDER THE LAW. 55
Moreover, the Talmud, when it speaks of almsgiving,
does so only with reference to giving to one's own fellow-
countrymen. Alms should neither be given to nor
accepted from the heathen It is only permitted for the
sake of peace. Kindness and compassion is in no sense
their due.”
Certainly in the time of Jesus there was no lack
amongst the Israelites of almsgiving, and of splendid
almsgiving too. This is sufficiently clear from the fact
that our Lord speaks as of something perfectly well
understood, when He says: “When thou givest thine
alms.” It is also pointed to by the gifts of the wealthy
thrown into the treasury, as well as by the alms of
Cornelius. The Emperor Julian certifies to the fact that
amongst the Jews in his time there were no beggars.
And in our own day, what a ready disposition to mutual
support has been shown by the Jews, especially the Jews
of the dispersion But although there was plenty of
alms, there was but little charity apparent; and in spite
of the Ostentatious almsgiving of the Pharisees, we must
pass upon Israel, even in the time of Jesus, the judg-
ment that it was—a world without love. With regard
even to the children of Israel, charity, as it was
manifested in Jesus, was something new.
C H A PTE R III.
THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST JESUS.
THAT which was wanting both in heathenism and in
Judaism, is to be found in the Christian community.
From the very beginning not only did its members, each
in his own sphere, recognise compassion for the distressed
as one of the necessary duties of their new life, but the
community as such from the very outset accepted as a
task laid upon it the practice of charity by means of its
different organizations. And although this practice, like
the life of the community generally, sank often in the
course of time to a very low ebb, it never altogether
failed. The Christian Church can never be conceived of
as without charity : it was inherent in it from the very
beginning. And it was so, not only because its Lord and
Head taught love and commanded love, but because He
Himself practised it. He was not only a teacher of love,
or a lawgiver of love, but His life was also the first
example of a life of love. It was not the maxims which
Pſe uttered about it, nor the commandments which He gave,
but the fact that in Him personally love was manifest,
that moved by love He came to us, and lived upon earth
a life which from its very first breath to its latest was
spent in the service of love, and that He finally, through
the greatness of His love, gave Himself for us to the
death of the cross; that is the beginning and the never-
56
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 57
failing source of charity amid His followers. The
beginning and the end of the history which we wish to
narrate lies in these words of the Master : “The Son
of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister,
and to give His life a ransom for many.”
It is not from the idea of the Church that we must set
out, but from the idea of the kingdom of God; for Christians
exercise charity not in respect of their membership of the
Church, but in respect of their membership of the kingdom
of God. Only when we have learned that the exercise of
charity is a necessary proof of belonging to that kingdom,
will we be able to understand why, and with what idea,
and in what degree, the Church has been the supporter of
this exercise.
The whole work of our Lord may be summed up in
this, that He founded upon earth the kingdom of heaven,
the kingdom of God. But the kingdom of God is the
community of men, in which God is absolute and undis-
puted Master. God is love, and therefore the kingdom of
God is a kingdom of love : and the community of those
who have been reconciled to God in Christ must hallow
its whole life and conduct by love. The whole duty of
members of the kingdom of God is comprehended by our
Lord in one word: “Be ye therefore perfect, as your
Father which is in heaven is perfect,” and again: “Beye
therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.” The
righteousness of the kingdom of God, which our Lord
enjoins upon His people, is nothing else than the ordering
of their whole life in accordance with the law of love. It
is in this very matter that their righteousness approves
itself as better than that of the scribes and Pharisees,
since these omitted the weightest matters of the law, love
and mercy, whilst the members of the kingdom of God
58 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
practise them. No doubt the commandments of love:
“Thou shalt love God above all,” and again : “Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself,” are found in the Old
Testament. But our Lord takes the two together, and
elevates the commandment of love into the one foundation
of the kingdom of God. Love for our neighbours is nothing
Outside or independent of love to God, but is its active
exercise.
Hence all the barriers which restrained love on every
side have been broken down. The heathen world could
never fully realize that all men without distinction are the
proper objects of our love. Polytheism entailed as a
necessary consequence divisions among men. Only where
the one true God was recognised could the unity of the
human race be recognised. The mysterious philosophical
recognition of this unity by the Stoics was not sufficient.
For philosophy is at all times the privilege of the few only.
It was only in religious soil that the universal duty of
love could strike root, for only religion is altogether
universal. Amongst the Jews the knowledge of the one
God was indeed present, but love to God and love to man
were torn asunder. The Pharisees, who paid tithe of
mint and anise and cumin, and yet devoured widows'
houses, considered that they had shown sufficient of their
love to God by the punctual observance of the ceremonial
law, whilst they omitted that wherein love to God is
truly shown, namely, love to men. With them it was:
“Corban, it is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be
profited by me.” But so soon as love to one's neighbour
is seen to be the exercise of love to God and the neces-
sary sign of belonging to His kingdom, then are all the
barriers which surround it broken down. As in respect
of the kingdom of God all differences of nationality, of
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 59
rank, and even of sex are without significance, so also are
they in respect of love. It is remarkable that in the
parable of the good Samaritan our Lord only says:
“A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho and
fell among thieves,” without particularizing the man in
any way, either as to his country, his rank, or his religion.
We do not need to know all this; it is a matter of no
importance. Enough for us if we know that he is a man,
and therefore our neighbour. For all men without
distinction are appointed to be members of the kingdom
of God, and he to whom the kingdom of God has become
the chief object of his life, sees over again in the object of
every man's life that of his own, and holds himself pledged
to assist every one to attain to it. And all other barriers
have also fallen down. As the kingdom of God lays its
claims upon all men, So also does love. We cannot in
respect of it absolve ourselves by a certain statutory,
well-defined quantity of actions: it requires us to place
at its service our whole persons, and all that we possess.
Love can admit of no other aim but this one, namely, the
aiding of our neighbour in his efforts to attain what is the
highest aim in life, membership of the kingdom of God :
it may not cherish any collateral aims such as honour,
advantage, or reward, but must, fully unrestrained in this
particular, be a completely self-denying love.
This love to our neighbour embraces more than well-
doing, but it includes the whole of that. For, since life
here upon earth finds its object in the kingdom of God, so
everything that is done to aid the life of our neighbour,
and so to order it as to make the attainment of this end
most feasible, must work towards that great end. There-
fore our Lord includes almsgiving amongst the necessary
proofs of love to our neighbour, and in Matt. xxv.
60 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
enumerates the works of mercy which must be engaged in
by His own people, the “righteous,” that is to say, such as
belong to the kingdom of God and strive after its right-
eousness. These are the six recognised works of mercy,
“feeding the hungry, giving water to the thirsty, clothing
the naked, protecting the stranger, tending the sick, visiting
the prisoner;” and to these the Church, in order to complete
the sacred number of seven, has added “burying the dead.”
But all these works possess true worth only in so far as
they tend to the higher object than that of helping that
distress which is nearest to one, which is ready to hand,
namely, the advancement of the kingdom of God. They
possess their value in that they are done to Christ in the
persons of the distressed. Therein is expressed both their
motive and their end. Their motive is love to Christ, and
their end is His service, or what is the same thing, what
they do they do as members of the kingdom of God, and
in order to the advancement of that kingdom.
Hence it becomes clear how very different from that
of the heathen world was the treatment of the poor in
the Christian world. In the Greco-Roman world the
pauper was despised as a cipher, and whatsoever was
given him considered as thrown away. And quite
naturally so, for the poor man was of no service to the
State, and thus there was no object in preserving his life
or in maintaining him. The only object which the giving
of alms upon grounds of expediency alone can have,
namely, that of making the poor happy in this world, is
in most cases altogether unattainable. If no aim beyond
this life is recognised, there is no higher object to be
gained by almsgiving. Christ sees in every man, even
in the poorest and most miserable, a human being whose
privilege it is to become a member of the kingdom of God.
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 61
This end is in all cases attainable, even although we have
to allow that it is not in our power to relieve all the
distress and misery in the world : for misery and distress
are no hindrance to any man's being or becoming a mem-
ber of the kingdom of God. It is a truly heathen idea
to say, as a reason for desisting from works of mercy :
“All this is of no use ; we can never make all men
happy.” For that is not the only object of Christian
charity. It has a much higher end in view, and all that
is done in the way of removing or alleviating misery and
distress, is only done as a means towards this higher end,
the advancement of the kingdom of God. Accordingly it
is a fundamental misconception of the work of Christ and
of Christianity to say, speaking from the social point of
view, that the work of Christ has failed, and that Christi-
anity has not succeeded in fulfilling the task set before it,
since there is at the present time quite as much distress
and misery in the world as before. As though Christ
had wished to be a social reformer ; when what He really
did was to proclaim that in comparison with the highest end
in life, Social position is a matter of absolute unimportance,
and to appoint to human life an object, attainable by every
one, namely, the kingdom of God, in which every one may
have a share, be his outward position what it may, be he
rich or poor, high or low, freeman or slave. It was not
to take away poverty that Christ appeared; on the
contrary, He says: “The poor always ye have with you”
(John Xii. 8). He came to bring the poor into the
kingdom of God. He did not come to put an end to all
the distress in the world: on the contrary, He says to
His disciples: “In the world ye shall have tribulation”
(John Xvi. 33). He came to comfort the broken-hearted
and Sorrowing. Not social reform, but the founding of
62 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK I.
the kingdom of God was His life's work. And He did
found that kingdom which is in Himself, and when this
is realized, then are the influences which flow from Christ
and play upon the Social side of our life found to be
Sanctifying and healing; but they are only the consequences
of the inner change, and hence only indirectly experienced.
They are of the things which are “added unto ” those
who seek first after the kingdom of God. Hence it must
appear that it would be imputing an erroneous motive to
Christian charity, and adopting a wrong standard whereby
to judge of its history, were we to ask how far it has
succeeded in doing away with all poverty, and in making
all here upon earth outwardly happy.
It will be necessary, however, to define still more
clearly the aim and peculiar object of Christian charity.
We have already had several opportunities of observing
that true Christian charity cannot exist where there is
no object beyond this life to be attained. To view the
world as being exclusively of this life, is fatal to all
charity. The ultimate consequence is always this: He
who has not the means of living must die; for him life
has no value, and therefore whatever may be done to
preserve his life is also valueless. At the same time,
however, charity will wither and perish where the world
is viewed exclusively from the standpoint of the future
life. The Middle Ages afford us a proof of this. The
charity itself does not indeed change, but its task, its
object, is completely altered. People perform works of
mercy not for the sake of helping the poor, but for their
own sakes, that they may receive the reward for so
doing. If the kingdom of God, which was brought to us
by our Lord, had been purely a thing of the future, of the
next world, then the gospel of that kingdom could have
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 63
evoked no charity. For this life would no longer have
possessed any worth, and to leave him to die would be
doing the poor a better service than to keep him in a life
which can only be one of misery and distress. Charity
places before herself, on the one hand, a higher aim of life,
transcending the limits of this present existence; and, on
the other hand, the true value of the earthly existence as
a means towards the attainment of that aim. She cannot
be properly developed where this life itself is looked
upon as the highest and only good, but only where it is
considered as but relatively good—as good, that is to
say, only inasmuch as it leads to the highest good of
all.” *
Now the kingdom of God, viewed as perfect and com-
plete, is indeed a thing of the next world, a thing of the
future; but as growing, it is a thing of this world and of
the present time. It is a gift of the grace of God, but
at the same time it involves the laying of a task upon
us. The importance of the present time is that now,
after the Master has gone away, the servants must trade
with the talents entrusted to them until He come again.
The whole of this earthly life, with all its natural
relations of family, state, and Society, is the material for
the exercise of the righteousness of the kingdom of God.
Midst work and sorrow, while fulfilling his earthly calling,
and while bearing the Sorrows which, under God, overtake
him, every man must, in the place appointed him by God,
keep himself a member of the kingdom of God, and the
peculiar task of charity is to render this a possibility for
every one who is willing to try. She strives, therefore,
imitating the example of her Master, to save the lives of
men wherever she can. For every human life possesses
worth, since every one, whoever he may be, is called upon
64. CHRISTIAN CHARTY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
in some way or other, be it through labour or be it
through sorrow, to fulfil his task as regards the kingdom
of God. It is not a conceivable thing that there can be
any human life of no value to this kingdom. Therefore
charity strives to put every man in such a position as to
make it possible, and so far as practicable, easy for him
lightly to perform his life's task. In the natural relations
of this life, complicated by sin, lie many hindrances,
which make it difficult for men to fulfil their life's task
as members of the kingdom of God. Such hindrances
are to be found especially in the contrast between rich
and poor. Poverty may make it impossible for any one
to work, and thus by his work to fulfil his duty as a
member of the kingdom. Then it is the task of Charity
to give him such assistance as shall put him again in a
position to do his work. She strives to make the poor
independent again, not only that they may be raised
above the need for further assistance,—for that would be
a very low view of the case, and would not answer to
true love, but in order that they may again fulfil their
calling. Any man may become so poor or be in such
distress that it is difficult or well-nigh impossible for him
to bear his sorrows with patience, thanking God, as a
member of the kingdom should. Then Love steps in and
does her duty; she lightens his sorrows, so that he can
bear them in patience, and learn even amid his suffering
to thank God.
We can now understand how consistent our Lord is,
in that while, on the one hand, He simply alludes to
property and to the difference between the rich and poor,
and declares that this difference is of no importance in
respect to the heavenly kingdom, He yet, on the other
hand, exhorts His followers to labour with love to remove .
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHIIST. 0.5
this difference. It must be removed in so far as it
hinders any individual from filling his place in the
kingdom.
It has indeed been held that our Lord despised all
earthly possessions, and that those only perfectly ful-
filled His commandments who renounced all property.
Certainly, if we would overcome the world, we must
renounce the world; only he who inwardly is free from
it, is its master. So is it also with earthly possessions;
if our hearts are free from the love of them, then are we
no more servants, but lords. This is all that our Lord
means when He warns us against the service of mammon,
and exhorts us to lay up for ourselves treasures not on
earth, but in heaven. This inward renunciation carries
with it always readiness to resign outwardly also all
earthly possessions, in so far as this is required in the
interests of the kingdom. Our Lord requires this of the
rich young man (Matt. xix. 17, etc.), not that He may
signify thereby a command which is to be binding on all
true Christians, nor that He may point out thereby a higher
grade of Christianity, a sort of standard of perfection, but
because the task which the young man wished to take
upon himself, that, namely, of being a disciple and apostle
of Jesus, involved, in the circumstances of that time, the
Surrender of all property; and also because He wished to
lead him to recognise the fact that he was not yet free
Within from the bonds of his wealth. Hence also that
lament which our Lord pronounces over the rich, and His
saying: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye
of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom
of God.” But these involve no abandonment of wealth
as such. For they refer to those selfish men who employ
their wealth only for the satisfaction of their personal
E
66 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
pleasure, instead of serving others with it. All wealth
is property held in trust; we are but tenants of it.
Property does not give rights alone ; it brings with it
duties. He who possesses earthly wealth must make it
of Service. And this service embraces within it the
Smoothing away of difference of position in respect of
wealth. Our Lord will not remove this distinction. It
remains and must remain, for it is part of the divinely
ordered creation. To the individuality of a man belong
not only those peculiarities which distinguish him from
other men, his talents and his inclinations, but also his
possessions. But as all these differences are so arranged
as to make up a mutual whole, so also must the differences
of property be so arranged, through the instrumentality of
the work of love, in so far as the objects of the kingdom
of God require it. Herein lay the sin of the rich man, in
that he did nothing to bridge over the difference between
himself and the poor Lazarus whom God had laid before
his door. Therefore he receives his punishment; it is
that in the next world the difference, which is now a
difference the other way, may not be bridged over (Luke
xvi. 19–31).
It is as the rendering of a service that almsgiving
attains its true worth. The value of it lies not in the
associated renunciation of part of our earthly possessions,
but in the love manifested in it, the Service done by it.
Therefore our Lord esteems the farthing of the widow
more highly than the large gifts of the wealthy (Mark
xii. 41). The story of the widow's mite, however, does
not refer directly to this point, since it deals with the
casting of money into the treasury, not as alms, but as
an offering to the temple ; but at the same time it
implies a rule which holds good of all voluntary offer-
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 67
ings. Therefore our Lord lays down no statutory regu-
lations for almsgiving, either by appointing outward laws
for it, or by appointing that it should bear a fixed pro-
portion to one's means. He does not do the one because
He requires of us not the outward work, but the inward
love, which will itself lead to action; and He does not
do the other because He requires of us in asking for our
love not a part only, but the whole. Where it is necessary,
and when love requires it of them, His people will sell
all that they have and give to the poor.
Our Lord therefore appoints the duty of almsgiving
without adding conditions or limitations: “Give to him
that asketh of thee" (Luke vi. 30 ; Matt. v. 42). This
is no rhetorical hyperbole; our Lord wishes to express in
this way the fact that Love finds her only limits within
herself. His followers must never place outward limits
upon their love by saying: “To so and so will I not
give.” But Love is not thereby excluded from setting
limits to herself. Where Love herself forbids the gift, it
is not given; for it may be necessary to withhold the
gift for Love's sake. But in other respects she gives to
every one. Therefore our Lord expresses the inexhaustible
nature of love. It can never be exhausted. The inward
bonds of property have all been cast off. Whatever a
disciple of Jesus has, he holds for the good of all. But
it is only the self-seeking barriers of property that have
been removed. Love takes care of her possessions, that
she may be able to use them. The same Lord who
exhorts His followers that if necessary they must count
their possessions as naught, and be ready to sacrifice
them all, caused the fragments left after the feeding of
the thousands in the wilderness to be taken up.
This affords us an explanation of a passage which is
68 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
at the first glance very remarkable, and which requires
reference and discussion the more on account of its
having been of the highest importance in the history of
charity—that, namely, from Luke xi. 41 : “But rather
give alms of such things as ye have ; and, behold, all
things are clean unto you.” It might appear as though
an expiatory virtue were here assigned to alms; and in
this way the passage was very frequently misinterpreted
in the Middle Ages. But it is impossible that our Lord
could have meant that, for He would then have been
giving utterance to that very error of the Pharisees
against which He contends. It is not the property
itself that is here stigmatized as unclean, that must first
be purified ; but the unclean thing is the Self-seeking
which clings to the property. There is in earthly
possessions a wonderful inducement to selfishness. How
many does wealth render heartless | Therefore we must
purify ourselves from this, and we do so by inwardly
releasing ourselves from its power. This inward freedom,
however, finds room for exercise in the giving of alms,
and first becomes an accomplished fact in the giving of
alms. It is a blessing upon almsgiving, and Our Lord
wishes to point out this blessing in the fact that the
man thereby becomes inwardly freed from his worldly
possessions, and that thus they lose their power over him.
Neither does the passage assign what Some have
discovered in it in later days, a standard, that is to say,
to tell us what proportion of his income every one must
give away in alms. The words which have been
translated, “ of such things as ye have,” have been taken
to mean, “ of such things as are Superfluous to you,” and
upon this has been based an obligation to give to the
poor all that is not absolutely necessary for oneself.”
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 69
Our Lord has, however, never laid down any such
obligation. He has nowhere limited the rights of
property to such things as are absolutely necessary for
life. On the contrary, at the marriage of Cana He
provided wine in abundance, and defended against Sordid
fault-finders the sacred luxury displayed by Mary in
anointing Him.
Our Lord requires of us thé giving of alms, without
any reference to the receiving of a reward. Of the
Pharisees, who stand at the corners of the streets and
sound a trumpet before them, He says: “They have
their reward.” Of His own He requires that they give
their alms in secret, nor let their left hand know what
the right hand doeth. But, on the other hand, He
Himself promises a reward to those who do the works of
mercy. Even a cup of cold water, with which one of
His people is refreshed, will not pass without reward.
But the promised reward is not an outward one, or one
connected with the alms; it is one lying within them-
Selves. He who advances the kingdom of God in others,
advances it also in himself. He who is merciful wins
for himself always more and more of the mercy of God.
“Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.”
Thus we heap up for ourselves abiding treasures in
heaven; thus we make friends to ourselves of the
mammon of unrighteousness, and find an entrance into
the eternal mansions.
Our Lord Himself gave alms, Himself performed works
of mercy. Let us remember it well. He is in this
respect also the founder of charity within His com-
munity. It is no pleasantry, though it may here and
there degenerate into such, that leads us to distinguish
establishments for Christian charity by Bible names, to
70 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
call a deaconess-house “Bethany,” a hospital for the
deaf and dumb “Ephphatha,” or a refuge for fallen women
“Magdalene.” We would imply by so doing that our
work is but a continuance of the Master's work. He
first took pity upon the sick, the blind, the leprous, and
the dumb, brought back the unfortunate to a godly life,
gave bread to the hungry in the wilderness; and every
one of these works of His has been as it were a seed of
corn, which has in the course of centuries brought forth
fruit a thousand-fold. He does all this, moreover, so
that it may not fail to be observed by them, before the
eyes of His disciples, in the midst of the circle of
believers which He calls around Him, in order that thus
His disciples may themselves take part in His actions.
At His orders they give to the poor (John xiii. 29);
when He feeds the thousands in the wilderness, they
distribute the bread and fishes, and have to serve at
tables (Matt. xiv. 19); they lead to Him the blind man
who has appealed to His pity. They are in this way
led into, educated into a life of charity. Moreover, the
employment of women in works of charity, which has
been of so much importance in the development of the
same in the Christian Church, is anticipated. There is a
circle of serving women surrounding Our Lord, which is a
type of the deaconesses and of all charitable women, in
whom the history of the Church is so rich. This circle
of men and women disciples which surrounds our Lord
is nothing else than the growing Church; and in this
growing Church there thus already lie the germs and
possibilities of charity. In the Church at Jerusalem is
continued what had been already begun : care is taken
of the poor and needy, just as they had learned to do
from our Lord Himself when in His company. And
CHAP. III.] THE MANIFESTATION OF LOVE IN CHRIST. 71
then, when the Church spread beyond Jerusalem and
beyond the Jews, she understood for herself that in
every community, just as in the mother-community,
care must be taken of the poor, and works of mercy
attended to.
And thus charity was implanted in the Christian
communities from the very outset: they received it from
their Lord Himself. It is not, however, peculiar to them
alone. Just as the kingdom of God and His Church are
not co-extensive, so also Christian and Church charity
are not co-extensive ; just as the kingdom of God has a
wider embrace than the Church, so also does charity
extend beyond the Church. The State, burgh com-
munities, corporations, all take part in the performance
of this work. It is owing to a morbid one-sidedness
that in the Middle Ages charity becomes exclusively
ecclesiastical, and it is the consequence of falsely
identifying the Church with the kingdom of God, and
placing them in opposition to the State as the kingdom
of this world. But we should be one-sided also, only in
the opposite direction, were we, as several are inclined to
do now-a-days, to contest with the Church its right to
the exercise of charity, and especially to the relief of
the poor, and to prefer to her, with her vast-reaching
embrace, other organizations. If the consequence of the
exclusively ecclesiastical character of the charity of the
Middle Ages were disastrous to it, they would be not less,
but more disastrous to-day if the Church were excluded
from it. As there could be no kingdom of God upon
earth without the Church, so would charity soon die out
in all other spheres if the Church desisted from it; and
whatever rendering of assistance and care for the poor
there might remain, would be of quite a different character
72 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
from compassionate love. For all love has its origin in
the love of God in Christ Jesus, of which the Church is
witness, not only by her words, but also by her deeds,
inasmuch as she practises the works of charity. From
her is derived the call to, as well as the strength for,
charity in all other spheres; she shows to its every form
that its highest end lies in the advancement of the
kingdom of God ; she leads us to love, just as our Lord,
while He Himself did works of mercy, taught His
disciples to do the same. Just as the idea of the
kingdom of God is more comprehensive than that of the
Church, while the Church is the central point of the
kingdom of God upon earth ; so also is Christian charity
more comprehensive than that of the Church, but the
Church is and remains the central point. Let us
remember that there could not be any real charity in
the heathen world because there was no community.
There is one now ; our Lord has founded it. The day
of Pentecost was, as it were, the birthday of the Church ;
and it was also the birthday of that Christian charity
which is inseparable from the Church. -
C H A P T E R IV.
FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS IN THE
APOSTOLIC A.G.E.
THE church of Jerusalem was at first merely the enlarged
circle of disciples. The three thousand baptized at
Pentecost were, as St. Luke very significantly says (Acts
ii. 41), “added ” to the church. The church thoroughly
bore the character of the family, and was, even in its
manner of life, only the continuation of the family-like
circle by which our Lord was surrounded. In this circle
community of goods had prevailed. Its members lived
upon what was given not merely by those outside, but
also by those within it. They contributed according to
their means to their common maintenance. And this con-
tinued after the Lord's departure, during the days before
Pentecost, in the company of the hundred and twenty, and
also when this company had been enlarged, by the out-
pouring of the Holy Spirit and the preaching of St. Peter,
into the church first properly so called. Each contributed
of that which was his own to what was necessary for
the common maintenance, without thereby depriving
himself of all property. Still less were any compelled to.
do this, or to persevere in it, by any decree of the church.
The family feeling was, however, so strong, that none of
them said “that ought of the things which he possessed
73
^,
74 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
was his own, but they had all things in common"
(Acts xviii. 32).
This was the so-called community of goods in the
church of Jerusalem. There could be no falser represen-
tation of it, than to think of it as an institution similar to
those prevailing among the Essenes and Therapeutae. It
is far more correct to represent the state of things as an
absence of institutions of any kind. We might as well
speak of the institution of a community of goods in a family.
But as in a family the consciousness of belonging to each
other is so strong as entirely to subordinate the individual
possessions of each member, so was it in the primitive
church. The boundaries of private property were inter-
nally abolished, and so far as this was necessary for the
service of the community, the individual also gave up his
possessions externally, sold his lands and houses, and
brought the price to the common treasury presided over
by the apostles. No one was, however, obliged to do this.
St. Peter emphatically declared to Ananias that he might
have kept his land, and also that after he had sold it
he might have retained its price (Acts x. 4). Such dis-
tribution was an act of perfectly free love, but this was
powerful enough to level the existing inequalities of
property, so that there were none in the church who
lacked anything. Still the fact with which we are
dealing is not the institution of community of goods, but
noble almsgiving, a free equalization of possessions,
carried out in the glow of first love to the largest-hearted
and greatest extent, and differing, not in kind, but only in
.degree and extent, from what we subsequently meet with
in the Church at Jerusalem and elsewhere. This explains
the reason why we find in the Acts not the slightest hint
of the abolition of a previously existing institution, nor
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 75
any notice of its extension to other churches, a fact which
appears a striking proof of the correctness of our view.
As in family life community is especially prominent in
the common meals, so also was it in the family of the
Jerusalem church. Common meals, with which was
combined the celebration of the Lord's Supper, were daily
partaken of These were the so-called Agapa or love-
feasts. And these it was which made a formal institu-
tion, an official appointment necessary. Hitherto the
entire direction of the church had lain in the hands of
the apostles. They had served in “the word,” and had
also “served tables” (Acts vi. 2). But the two offices
could no longer remain united. The chief duty of the
apostles could not but suffer amidst the various labours,
which “the serving of tables,” the equalization of property
carried out in perfectly free love in the increasing church,
involved ; and if the apostles still regarded the ministra-
tions of the word as their first duty, it is not surprising
if one thing or another was overlooked in the daily
administration of charity. St. Luke, at least, gives no hint
that the complaint of the Hellenists, that their widows
were neglected, was unreasonable. Hence, on the pro-
posal of the apostles, Seven men were chosen “over this
business.”
It is generally thought that these seven men were the
first deacons, and that their selection was the institution
of the diaconal office, or to view it more broadly, of an
office for the administration. of charity, besides that for
the ministration of the word." For my part, I think this
view a mistaken one. First of all, it is striking that they
are never called deacons, but always the seven. Certainly
their office is called a “serving of tables,” and this expres-
sion it is which has chiefly led to their being regarded as
76 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK I.
the first deacons. But the expressions “to serve” and
“Service ’’ are used in the New Testament of every kind of
ministration existing in the ehurch, and not only of that
of the deacons.” Still more striking is it, that St. Luke
never afterwards mentions the seven in the church of
Jerusalem, although he does presbyters (elders) (Acts xi.
30, XV. 6), and that, nevertheless, he nowhere tells us
that the former office was abolished and the latter insti-
tuted. If this observation borders upon the conjecture,
that the Seven were not the first deacons, but the first
elders, or, to express it more correctly, that their office,
at first instituted for a single and quite special need, was
afterwards gradually enlarged into the office of elder, the
conjecture becomes a certainty by the further considera-
tion, that, according to the express testimony of the Acts,
the administration of alms was subsequently in the hands
of the elders even in Jerusalem. The relief, which the
church at Antioch collected for the poor in Jerusalem at
the time of the famine under Claudius, was delivered not
to the seven, but to the elders (Acts xi. 30). Of course,
the matter may be so represented as to make the office of
the seven last only as long as the community of goods
existed, to have been done away with at the same time,
and elders to have been then appointed for the general
direction of the church. But we have already seen that a
formal abolition of the community of goods is out of the
question. Besides, when the equalization of property in
its first and wider extent ceased, it still remained in a
more limited measure ; for gifts were still given, and alms-
giving always practised. There would, therefore, still
have been room for the agency of the seven, not to
mention the circumstance that it would be strange if St.
Luke should give no account at all of such far-reaching
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 77
alterations in the government of the church, but let the
seven disappear and the elders appear upon the Scene
without a word. We must then picture to ourselves the
development in the following manner. The seven were
at first chosen to discharge a special present need, that of
serving tables, while the management of the church was,
in all other respects, left with the apostles who were still
in Jerusalem. When the apostles subsequently left
Jerusalem, the management also passed into the hands of
the seven, whose office was thus gradually enlarged till it
reached that of the elders, and was afterwards designated
by this name.
It is, moreover, a mistake to represent the diaconate
as the “office of mercy,” the “office of almonry.” The
management of works of mercy, of almsgiving, was never
conceded to the deacons. It was in the hands of the
presbyters and afterwards of the bishops, and the deacons
only gave their assistance. And this is, in general, the
position of deacons in the organism of the church. The
constituting office is that of the elders; it is they who
govern and manage the entire church life, and without
their office a well-regulated church is inconceivable. To
them the deacons, whose office it is to furnish assistance
in the most varying respects to the church and the elders,
are subordinate. Their office is related to that of the
elders as the gift of “helps" is to that of “governments.”
It is true, that to assist the elders in the care of the poor
is so essential a branch of this help, that “ diakonia” means
also almsgiving. The management, however, was always
in the hands of the bishops or elders, and a special “office
of almoner " never existed as well as the office of elder.
It is striking that deacons are so seldom mentioned in
the New Testament. They only occur expressly twice,
78 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
viz. in Phil. i. 1, where they appear in the salutation,
together with the elders, as officers of the church, and in
1 Tim. iii. 8, where the apostle gives directions to them
as well as to the elders. They are nowhere else found.
Paul and Barnabas ordained elders in the churches they
founded (Acts xiv. 23), but nothing is said of deacons.
Similarly does St. Paul command Titus to ordain elders in
the cities, but never mentions deacons (Tit. i. 5). In the
First Epistle also of St. Peter, we meet indeed with elders,
but not with deacons. At all events, it is hence evident
that they fall far behind the elders. There could not have
been a church without elders, there certainly could have
been one without deacons. For their services could be
very well rendered, at least while a church was still small,
by such members as were fit and willing to undertake
them, without their assuming any specially official
character. This is shown especially by the passage
(1 Cor. xvi. 15), so interesting with respect to the origin of
the office, where it is said of the household of Stephanas,
“it is the first-fruits of Achaia, and they have given
themselves to the ministry of the saints.” Such volun-
tary services were, of course, the earliest, and correspond
with the origin of offices in the church. Two things
appertained to an office, the gift and the calling, i.e. the
recognition of the gift, the charge to exercise it in a
special circle. The order was not, first the appointment
of offices by the apostles, but the bestowal of gifts by the
Lord, gifts which were then freely exercised, and not
comprised into an office until necessity and order required
it. This was especially the case with the diaconate.
Those who had the requisite gifts and love rendered of
their own accord the service afterwards allotted to the
deacons, and it was not till the increase of the church
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. }*
79
rendered this needful that a regular office grew up out of
the free gift and love. The circumstance, that centuries
afterwards we find, besides the deacons maintained by the
church, others who were not so maintained, but gave their
services gratuitously, is a further proof. Nay, in a certain
sense this occurrence is ever and again repeated in the
sphere of active charity. Where new needs make new
work necessary, the Lord endows one and another with the
gift and the impulse required for such work. It is at
first done freely, and afterwards, when it has proved itself
permanently needful and efficacious, it gradually passes
into a regular office. The diaconate is moreover, by its
very nature, of a more fleeting character than the office of
governing. Every Christian is to be a servant with his
gift and in his circle (1 Pet. iv. 10). While, then,
deacons are but seldom spoken of in the New Testament,
serving and service very frequently occur. Besides, if
there are persons on whom service is officially incumbent,
their official action and their personal service pass into
each other. In the office of ruling this is not the case;
this was by its nature from the very first more exclusive.
Not every Christian is a presbyter; but every one is really
and naturally a deacon, a servant of all.
The female diaconate was evidently even more transient,
and this is the Teason why the notices of it in the ancient
church are so difficult to combine into a whole. There
undoubtedly were, even in apostolic times, females to
whom the diaconate was officially committed. Such a
female deacon (the name “deaconess " does not occur in
the New Testament) was Phoebe, to whom the apostle
delivered the Epistle to the Romans, and whom he
designates as a deacon of the church at Cenchrea.
Whether the subsequently named Tryphaena and Try-
80 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
phosa (ver. 12) and Persis, of whom the apostle says
“they laboured much in the Lord,” were deaconesses, or
only women who from love to the Lord freely performed
the same services as deaconesses, cannot be determined.
Still less probable is it that Euodia and Syntyche, men-
tioned Phil. iv. 2, were deaconesses. On the other hand, I
am convinced that the injunctions given, 1 Tim. iii. 2, do
not apply, as is mostly supposed, and as even Luther by
inserting the word “ their "in his translation assumes, to
the wives of deacons, but to deaconesses.” Of the position
of deaconesses and the extent of their services, nothing
certain can be learnt from the New Testament. Still the
above-mentidºned passage borders on the conclusion, that
their service was rendered in the houses of members of
the church, on which account the apostle requires them
not to be slanderers, carrying gossip from one house to
another ; and also that they had to do with the distribu-
tion of alms for the poor, whence he specially enjoins
them to be “faithful in all things.” Quite different in
kind is the institution of widows, mentioned 1 Tim. v.
3 sqq. The deaconesses were in the first place called to
render service, and then received, if needful, their main-
tenance from the church ; while in the case of widows,
as their age (above sixty years) and the injunction of the
apostle, that no widow who could be supported by
believing relatives should be admitted on the list, show,
maintenance was the main point. Besides this, however,
they received, as “widows indeed,” who had proved their
Christian faith by holy behaviour and active benevolence,
an honourable position in the church, and also rendered
such services as their age permitted, though the apostle
gives more prominence to the obligation of prayer and
intercession, of continuing in supplications and prayers
CHAP. Iv.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 81
night and day." For the rest, we must not imagine that
this official organization of charity in the earliest times
was as stable as it afterwards became. This would not
correspond with the character of the times, in which it
was far from the custom to commit exercises of mercy
to officially instituted individuals. On the contrary, they
then still bore for the most part a private character, each
doing willingly and gladly what he could. The Acts
speak of a Christian woman, Tabitha of Joppa, whose
Works of love are, in a certain sense, held up as typical,
without saying a word of her occupying any official
position, although her care extended to persons who, as
widows, were otherwise cared for by the church. There
may have been many who, like Tabitha, were “full of
good works and alms-deeds,” without being deacons or
deaconesses. Circumstances, too, were certainly very
different in different churches. While Tabitha was volun-
tarily ministering to the poor in the church at Joppa, the
official position was elsewhere predominant. Only the
outlines of an organization of charity existed. Besides
the voluntary efforts of individual members, churches as
such assumed through their organs the care of the needy.
The management of this charity also fell to the elders,
who were assisted by official but subordinate deacons
and deaconesses, or even by widows or other qualified
persons. -
Let us not forget that it was in this very organization
of charity that a novelty existed; but at the same time
let us not overlook the fact that this organization itself
Originated solely in the new spirit by which the church
was animated. We recognise this spirit in the apostolical
Epistles. We will therefore collect the main features, at
least, of what these tell us concerning charity.
F.
82 CIIRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
In Eph. iv. 28, St. Paul says: “Let him that stole
steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his
hands the thing that is good, that he may have to give to
him that needeth.” In these words three points are con-
nected, upon the true moral appreciation and correct com-
bination of which depends the healthiness of moral life,
while all its diseases are occasioned by the wrong moral
appreciation of these three points, and by their separation
from each other. To understand the development and
form of charity in the different ages of the Church, we
shall have to test each epoch by its position with regard
to these three points, by the soundness of its moral judg-
ment with respect to labour, property, and alms, and we
shall find that not only does failure in one point involve
failure in another, but that the entire charity of the age
also correspondingly varies.
In the above-quoted words the apostle already lays
down labour as the duty of a Christian ; and, indeed,
derives the injunction to work from the prohibition to
steal. Not to work is also to steal. For he who does not
in some manner take an active part in the production of
earthly goods, lives in one way or another at the expense
of his working fellow-men. Still more decidedly is the
command to work brought forward in 1 Thess. iii. 12,
where the apostle expressly, in the “name of Jesus,”
lays down the command “to work with quietness.” For
a Christian to work, then, is an essential feature in the
manifestation of his Christian life, and the apostle, con-
sequently, would exclude from the Christian Church the
idlers who walk disorderly, and holds himself up as an
example to the Church on this very point. This he does
with an unmistakeable touch of pride. He regards it as
his glory and honour not to have eaten any man's bread
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 83
for nought, but to have wrought with labour and travail
day and night, that he might be a burden to no one.
Labour, in the vocation assigned to each by God, is, however,
always meant. A Christian is to work “with quietness;”
he is not to rush from one thing to another, but, constantly
aiming at one point, to persevere in doing what God has
assigned him in his vocation. It is true that Scripture
never speaks of the earthly calling. When a calling is
spoken of, as it very often is, the heavenly call, the call
to the kingdom of God, is intended. But this calling
includes the earthly, for it is ºn the work of his earthly
calling that each is to work out his call to the kingdom
of God, to promote the interests of that kingdom, by
doing his part towards fulfilling that great task—imposed
on man at the creation—of subduing the earth. It is a
matter of indifference what the individual calling may be.
The relation of the earthly calling is, with respect to the
kingdom of God, an entirely neutral one. A man may
be bond or free, married or single, and in either condition
may equally have part in the kingdom of God. Or, to
express it positively, every calling can and may become
the material which is to be worked up into and made to
manifest the Christian life, adoption of God, and partici-
pation in His kingdom. Hence the rule (1 Cor. vii. 20):
“Let every one, even the slave, abide in the same calling
wherein he was called.” For the slave, too, may be, and
prove himself, a member of the kingdom of God. It is
thus that labour regains its moral dignity, its honour.
It is God's, it is the command of Christ, it is the working
out of the heavenly calling. The qualitative difference
of work is done away with. Simple manual labour, and
it was of this that the apostle was thinking when he spoke
of work,+nay, the labour of the slave, is, in a moral point
84 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
of view, just as valuable as that of the loftiest kind and
most comprehensive extent. Everything depends, not on
what a man does, but on how he does it, with what
motive, and in what spirit.
The result of labour is property. “Study to be quiet
and to do your own work,” is said 1 Thess. ix. 11, and
2 Thess. iii. 10. “If any will not work, neither let him
eat.” It is God's moral order, that the possession and
enjoyment of earthly goods should be united with labour.
Respect for labour involves respect for property. The
two are inseparably connected. Respect for property
perishes with respect for labour, and vice versa. Hence
the apostles unreservedly acknowledge the rights of pro-
perty. Nowhere can we find a trace of wealth being
considered sinful, or as springing from sin. It is called
uncertain (1 Tim. vi. 17), and a Christian is enjoined not
to be proud of nor to trust in his riches; and they that
would be rich are warned (1 Tim. vi. 9), because so many
temptations accompany wealth, but its possession in itself
is recognised. St. Paul can do all things in Christ, can
even be rich and have abundance, as well as be poor and
suffer need; and St. John does not command the rich to
throw away their riches, but to have an open hand for a
needy brother. It is not the rights of property—not even
the rights of a property exceeding the necessaries of life
—that are disowned ; it is only the selfishness that
accompanies it that is reproved. Against this, too, are
directed the striking words in which St. James invokes a
woe upon the selfish rich (ver. 1 sq.). The aim of labour
is, according to Eph. iv. 18, not selfish acquirement, pos-
session, and enjoyment, but “that he may have to give to
him that needeth.” The Christian is a steward of earthly
goods, and knowing himself to be an incorporated member
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS, 85
with others, knows also that it is his duty to minister to
them with these gifts of God.
Hence results, on the one hand the duty, and on the other
the liberty, of almsgiving. No one ever preached more
strikingly the duty of serving one's neighbour in love than
St. Paul, the great apostle of faith. In each of his Epistles
we find exhortations to this effect. But never did any
one also lay such stress upon perfect freedom in giving as
he. He reminds us that the Lord gave Himself for us,
that for our sakes He became poor (2 Cor. viii. 9). He
points to the harvest which is to follow the sowing (2 Cor.
ix. 6), and urgently exhorts to a contribution for the poor
Saints in Jerusalem (2 Cor. viii. 14). But nowhere do
we find a word which is even like a law. He exhorts to
give liberally, he praises the Christians of Macedonia, who
have given almost beyond their power (2 Cor. viii. 2, 3),
and strives to excite the Corinthians to imitate them.
But nowhere is there even a hint that it is a duty to give
a certain proportion, but again and again he insists that it
is entirely at the free choice of the ‘individual whether
and how much he will give. “Every one according as he
purposeth in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity, for
God loveth a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. ix. 7). Such is, so
to speak, the Magna Charta of free charity. Everything
here depends on readiness, on there being a willing mind
(2 Cor. viii. 11), a cheerful giver, on showing mercy with
cheerfulness (Rom. xii. 8). To these, and not to the great-
mess of the gift, is the approbation of God awarded. The
Macedonians are praised because they gave simply, and
therefore abundantly (1 Cor. viii. 2). Simplicity gives
abundantly because it has no secondary motives, but keeps
straight in view the work of love and its object. He says
of them, that they first gave themselves to the Lord
86 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
(2 Cor. viii. 5); and in saying this, tells us what it is that
gives its true value to almsgiving, viz. that it should not
be a dead offering of money, a merely external renuncia-
tion of a portion of property, but a self-devotion, a sacrifice
of selfish interest. The object of giving is to level the
difference between superfluity and want, and so to produce
equality (2 Cor. viii. 14). For if God made an unequal distri-
bution of earthly goods, and allotted to one superfluity, to
another want, it was not His purpose that this should con-
tinue, but in His plan of the world He calculated on the
equalization to be effected by the love which impartsto others,
and upon that end prefigured in Scripture by the gather-
ing of the manna being thus attained : “He that gathered
much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no
lack.” Nor need it be feared that the difference would
thus be only, so to speak, shifted, and that want would
now arise on the part of the giver. For God, who minis-
tereth seed to the sower, will also minister bread to those
who give to others, and cause them to have all sufficiency
(2 Cor. ix. 10, 8). The blessing of giving is, that the giver
is contented. Contentment is, on the one hand, the pre-
supposition of giving, on the other its moral result. Giving
makes a man contented. He who is rich, but discon-
tented, never has enough, and always thinks he neither
can nor ought to give. He who has little, but is con-
tented, has always enough, and has something to give, and
by giving becomes increasingly contented. Herein lies
the secret why the poor so often give more than the rich.
The history of charity proves in innumerable instances
that the greatest results are accomplished when many small
gifts are combined. Hence the Apostle Paul attributes
great importance to small gifts. He directs the Church
to lay by small gifts on every Sunday, each according
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 87
to his income, especially when any one has prospered in
business, so that when the apostle comes to fetch the
collection, the money may be ready. A large gift is at
last the result of many small gifts. Nowhere is the power
of the little in this world so evidently seen as in charity.
The widows' mites have always effected more than the
handfuls of money of the rich. It is not where the rich
give with liberal hand, but where many small gifts com-
bine, that Charity has celebrated her greatest triumphs.
It is thus chiefly that the blessing is manifested which
was expected by the apostle from giving, viz. that it
‘should become a bond to unite hearts, and that God should
be glorified by all (2 Cor. ix. 12, 13).
Lastly, the apostle brings forward the carefulness with
which the collection is managed. He does not deliver it
alone, but associates with himself messengers from the
churches, to avoid any blame on account of this abundant
collection administered by him, and to ensure all being
honestly done, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also
in the sight of men (2 Cor. viii. 20, 21). This, too, is
connected with perfect freedom of giving. For this free-
dom presupposes confidence in him who collects and
administers the gifts. Where this is wanting, gifts will
not come in ; nothing but confidence can attract them in
rich abundance.
None of the other apostles, indeed, has expressed him-
self so amply concerning alms and deeds of charity, though
all have earnestly exhorted thereto. How does St. James
fulminate reproofs against the selfish rich, who nourish
their hearts as in a day of slaughter, who keep back the
wages of their labourers How, like a prophet of the Old
Testament, does he set before them the approaching judg-
ment And how, on the other hand, does he insist upon
88 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
works of love, without which faith is not saving faith !
The true worship of God is, to visit the widows and father-
less in their affliction (i. 27). What does it profit, he
says, to love in words only 2 Love must become deed, the
deed of giving to one's neighbour what he needs (ii. 14, 15).
How often, too, does the exhortation to exercise love recur
in the writings of St. Peter, while St. John declares that
he who does not love his neighbour does not love God,
and exhorts to openhandedness, and to love, not in words
and with the tongue, but in deed and in truth.
We do not possess sufficient information to enable us
to give a detailed account of charity in the apostolic age.
We have, however, enough to show how heartfelt and how
abundant was the love that then prevailed. We should,
indeed, do well to represent it as simply as possible, and
not to conceive of complicated institutions or of anything
under rule and regulation. As offices with definite spheres
of operation originated in the different gifts with which
Christians were endowed, so here, too, did the gift of
“helps” still predominate. Voluntary private benevolence,
which helps wherever it can, and is combined with no
office, was by far the chief point ; nay, the smallness of
the churches, which assembled in private houses, still
caused but little difference to be found between private
charity and that of the Church. There certainly was,
however, even in small churches, a church treasury, Sup-
plied by voluntary gifts, from which was furnished not
only what was necessary for the maintenance of church
officers, so far as these could not maintain themselves, or
of travelling evangelists and apostles, but also means for
the relief of the poor. Such means were only supplied
when a member of the church was, by reason of age, sick-
ness, or any other misfortune, incapable of earning his
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 89
bread. Idlers, who walked disorderly, were, according to
the direction of the apostle, to be excluded from the
church (2 Thess. iii. 6). Such exclusion put an end to
all regular support. Individuals might bestow gifts on an
excluded person, as also upon a heathen, but they received
NJº" from the church, which gave no assistance to
idlers. It was, moreover, assumed that relatives would
do what they could. They were not to abuse the assist-
ance furnished by the church, for the purpose of escaping
their own duty. If any provide not for his own, especially
them of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is
worse than an infidel (1 Tim. v. 8). It is self-evident
that the assistance given was restricted to the necessaries
of life. If the apostle requires contentment from all
Christians, if they have food and raiment (1 Tim. vi. 8),
much more would this be required of the poor.
Assistance was also rendered to the poorer members of
the church by means of the Agapas. These were in the
church at Jerusalem at first held daily, though afterwards
only on appointed days, probably even in early times on
the first day of the week, the Sunday. In Troas, at least,
we find the church assembled on Sunday for a love-feast,
while from 1 Cor. xi. 34 we may at least conclude that
the members of the church had their regular daily meals
in their own houses. The members of the church brought
with them both food and drink for the meal, the rich
more, the poor less or nothing. The provisions were then
eaten in common ; the celebration of the Lord's Supper
followed, on which account the apostle (1 Cor. xi. 20) also
calls the whole meal the Lord's Supper. In Corinth and,
as it appears, in other places also (Jude 12), all kinds
of disorders prevailed at the love-feasts. Instead of con-
Suming in common what was provided, each took before-
90 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
hand what he had himself brought, and made an inde-
pendent meal instead of the common Lord's Supper. Thus
the poor were left with only what they had supplied, and
went away “hungry and ashamed.” This is severely
blamed by the apostle, who enjoins that they should tarry
for one another and then partake of a common meal, in ad
which one should not have superfluity and ºr
Scarcity, but that the Superfluity of one should compensate
for what was lacking to another. Thus these love-feasts
became a bond uniting the whole church without distinc-
tion, and contributing at the same time to the support of
the poor, and the more so that the fragments that remained
were undoubtedly allotted to them.
Widows and orphans were very specially received among
the poor. The Old Testament, in which they so often
appear as particularly the objects of the Divine protection,
and are commended to the special care of the pious,
already pointed to such reception. It was just in this
point that the regular care of the church for the poor
showed itself most active. That a certain number of
widows occupied an honourable position in the church has
been already mentioned ; but 1 Tim. v. 3 Sqq. shows that
even those who, because they were too young, or for other
reasons, were not admitted to the list of these widows,
were supported. Testimony was required concerning those
to be admitted to the honourable position of widows, that
they had brought up children, meaning certainly not merely
their own, but more especially other and orphan children.
This shows both that private people received children not
their own into their families, for this was required of a
widow before she was placed on the list of widows, and also
that on the part of the church care was taken for the bring-
ing up of orphans; for the fact that just this good work is
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 91
brought forward, points out that it belonged to the office
of these honoured widows to bring up the Orphans pro-
vided for by the church. If the Lord Hiz,1self had bidden
the children to come to Him, taken them up in His arms
and blessed them, what could His Church do but interest
itself in them 2 If the Lord Himself had been a child,
and as a child lain in a manger, childhood must be a
sacred thing to His people.
The entertainment of strangers is very frequently
spoken of. It is required of a widow that she have
washed the saints' feet (1 Tim. v. 10), and very often do
the apostles exhort to hospitality. Begiven to hospitality,
says St. Paul (Rom. xii. 13). Use hospitality without
grudging, says St. Peter (1 Pet. iv. 9); nay, the writer of
the Epistle to the Hebrews recalls that great reward of
hospitality, that some have entertained angels unawares
(xiii. 2). To Gaius it is said with especial praise, in the
Third Epistle of St. John, that he dealt faithfully with the
brethren and strangers, and set them forward on their
journey in a manner worthy before God; while, on the
contrary, Diotrephes is spoken of with special reproach,
because he neglected these duties. It is quite natural
that so much stress was laid upon just this work of love.
The church still bore its missionary character ; every
member regarded it as his duty to propagate the gospel,
and to gain more believers for the Lord. All were still
under the Lord's command : Go ye into all the world and
teach all nations. Hence it cannot astonish us to find a
more than usual movement among the Christians of the
earliest times. Not only apostles, but other Christians
also, went from place to place to labour for the Lord.
Thus we meet with Aquila and Priscilla first at Corinth,
whither they have come from Rome, then at Ephesus,
92 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
and then again in Rome. We find Apollos at Ephesus,
at Corinth, and then in Crete. There was a continual
going and coming of the brethren. If we add to this the
sharp Severance of the Christians from the heathen who
were here and there already of hostile mind, we shall
understand why hospitality was so commended, and why
it was exercised to so great an extent. The brother who
was travelling was not only received into the house and
provided for; he was also furnished for his further journey
(Tit. iii. 13), accompanied some distance on his road, and
then taken leave of with prayer. And not merely did
individual Christians exercise this hospitality, but the
church too, as such, took care, by means of its rulers, for
strangers and guests. Hence, among the qualities required
of a bishop is, that he should be given to hospitality
(1 Tim. iii. 2); and hence the apostle directs Titus to
furnish Zenas and Apollos for their journey, that nothing
be wanting to them, for which purpose the members of
the church are to render their assistance (Tit. iii. 14).
Wherever a Christian came, if he found a church, he found
a family, who received him as a member. We learn this
from the Acts of the Apostles, and the salutations and
thanksgivings of the Epistles furnish a further proof.
Indeed, the greatness of the age consisted in this very
feature, that Christians of all places knew themselves to
be fraternally one, and that in this oneness all differences
disappeared.
Even that most deeply rooted social distinction of the
ancient world, the distinction between bond and free, dis-
appeared and became unimportant. The relation of the
Church and of Christianity to slavery is viewed erro-
neously, when the former—as is frequently the case—is
regarded as labouring from the very first with full con-
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 93
sciousness for the abolition of slavery. On the contrary,
the position taken up by the church towards slavery was
at first an entirely neutral One. In its sphere the contrast
between the free man and the slave is, like every other
contrast, done away with. Here there is no more master
* , and slave, than there is Greek and barbarian, rich and
-Spoor, male and female; all are one in Christ, and bondage
is no more a hindrance than freedom is a requisite for
admission into the kingdom of God. The slave has just
as much a share in it as the free man. If the free man
is Christ's bond servant, the slave is the Lord's free man.
In the sphere of the external, however, in civil and social
life, the church did not think of abolishing these contrasts.
The master remained a master, the slave remained a slave.
The result of the obliteration of the contrast in the king-
dom of God was not the external emancipation of the
slaves, but only that the Christian slave served his master
more faithfully and conscientiously, and that the Christian
master treated his slave with kindness and gentleness as
a brother in Christ. There is not in the New Testament
a trace of the emancipation of slaves, not even 1 Cor.
vii. 21, where the apostle, on the contrary, advises the
slave, instead of caring for freedom, rather to make good
use of his calling as a slave." Neither can I read in the
Epistle to Philemon, that St. Paul entreats for the liberty
of Onesimus. Such thoughts were far from the minds of
the early Christians, if it were only because they lived in
the hope of the Lord's speedy return, which threw quite
into the background the span of time still separating them
from the longed-for consummation of the kingdom of God.
To prepare for and expect that great day of Christ's
appearing claimed all their care, and this was as much in
the power of the slave as of the free. Of what use then
94 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book I.
would freedom be to him Looking to a higher aim, to
the freedom which Christ brings, he did better to remain
for this short time a slave.
On the whole, this hope of Christ's speedy return, which
was the ruling power of the entire sphere of Christian
life, was so also of charity. Arrangements were not made
in view of a long continuance on earth. The time is
short; and if this fact urged on tº hand to employ it
profitably in abundant well-doing (Gal. vi. 9), still, not
the future, but only the present was its aim. In prospect
of the end, when all misery, all need will cease, Christians
helped each other as much as they could, shared what
they had with each other in brotherly association, and
were content and patient in hope of the day which
would bring eternal joy. And thus, without many special
institutions or need of elaborate arrangements, the end
was attained, that in the Christian Church none suffered
want. Nay, these poor churches were thus able to stretch
out a helping hand beyond their own immediate circle.
For when famine was imminent at Jerusalem, the
Christians of Antioch sent relief (Acts xi. 29), and St.
Paul gathered in the Gentile churches a large collection,
whose proceeds exceeded even his expectations, and came
with it, in fulfilment of a promise he had made (Gal. ii.
10), for the relief of the poor saints at Jerusalem. Love
proved itself to be a powerful bond uniting the Gentile
churches with the Jewish mother church at Jerusalem,
and with each other. Nay, even the heathen experienced
this love. For if it was a rule to do good, specially to
fellow-believers (Gal. vi. 10), this love was still large-
hearted enough to prove itself to be love to all men, and
to show to the heathen what a new spirit—a spirit un-
known to the ancient world—here prevailed.
CHAP. IV.] FOUNDATIONS AND BEGINNINGS. 95
This state of things could not continue. It was the
spring-time, which, like every earthly spring, passed away.
It was the time of childhood, which with its glow and
brightness disappears. It is a mistake to look upon the
apostolic age as in such wise a model for after ages, as to
make its institutions always a standard. It is only the
disposition then prevailing that furnishes a standard. As
for institutions, it is only their foundation that was laid, and
upon this future ages have to build. The Church has to
live its life in the world, to perform its tasks in the world.
And this cannot be done without the sin that is in the
world working too, and bringing forth its obscuring effects.
Pven the history of charity exhibits such obscurations.
Already in the New Testament itself we hear the reproof:
I have this against thee, that thou hast left thy first love
(Rev. ii. 4). Still the image of the primitive church,
which we take with us, gives us the certainty that there
is in it a something new, which the ancient world never
knew, that the love of Christ is implanted in His Church;
and herein we have a pledge, that although this new life
of love may be temporarily obscured, it can yet never dis-
appear. The Church of Christ never can and never will
be without the exercise of love and mercy. The sun has
risen, and will always triumphantly break through every
cloud that obscures it.
B O O K S E C O N D.
THE A GE OF CON FLICT.
C H A P T E R I.
V POWERTY AND DISTRESS,
We -
THERE was poverty and distress enough in the mighty
Boman Empire. Whether there was more than among
ourselves is a question difficult to answer. For, apart
from the fact that the information extant does not suffice
to furnish even an approximate statistic of poverty, the
circumstances of the times were so fundamentally different
from those of the present day, that a comparison would
only lead to very erroneous results. Thus much may,
however, be said, that a pauperism such as we see accom-
panying our present state of civilisation did not exist, at
least in the first centuries of the Church.
In Rome itself, indeed, the Proletariat was more nume-
rous than in any one of our modern cities. If we may
regard the 320,000 of the male population of the city
(the plebs urbana), to whom Augustus presented a bounty
of 60 den. each (almost 50s.), as being nearly all persons
who could not live without relief, we get—even supposing
boys to be included in this number, and therefore adding
only a due proportion of females to the plebs—about
580,000 of the class needing support, to 10,000 senators
and knights, i.e. persons possessed of property. If then
we add to these (not reckoning slaves) about 20,000
soldiers, and 60,000 foreigners living by trade and com-
merce, as persons possessed of a competency, we have
99
*
:
º
i
;te
.
;
100 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
90,000 not needing support to 580,000 Proletarians, i.e.
a proportion of one to six and a half, a proportion very far
above that existing in any modern city." In Paris, which
may best be compared with Rome, there were in the
winter of 1879–80 but 130,000 registered paupers. And
this, too, was Rome, the capital of the world, which was
privileged to be maintained by the rest of the Empire. 2
We must indeed beware of judging by the utterly excep-'
tional circumstances of Rome those of the whole Empffe,
a mistake often committed, for the simple reason that we
know most about Rome. Things were very different in the
provinces; and even large cities like Alexandria and Antioch,
much as they strove to be miniature copies of Rome, undoubt-
edly exhibited more favourable proportions. Chrysostom, at
a time when poverty had considerably increased, reckons
one-tenth rich and one-tenth poor to eight-tenths between
these two classes.” On the whole, the first ages of the
imperial epoch, down to the times of the Antonines, under
whose government declension was already apparent, are
among the most prosperous periods not only of Roman,
but of universal history. After the storms of the civil
war, the provinces enjoyed a lasting peace. The con-
tests carried on on the borders did not affect the lands of
the Mediterranean coasts; the arbitrary government and
domestic disorders of the later emperors of the Julian house
were felt chiefly at Rome. Many inscriptions testify that
the provincials were contented, even under the sway of
emperors, whose images, like that of Nero, appear to us
in the darkest colours. The government was systematic,
the administration of justice in civil cases was uniform,
such exhaustion of the provinces as prevailed in the later
days of the republic no longer took place, at least not in
like proportions. Taxation was moderate, and on the whole
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 101
justly distributed. The direct taxes were received at the
imperial treasury; the indirect taxes were still indeed
farmed, and under this system the over-assessment of the
taxpayers could not be entirely avoided, though even bad
emperors strove to lower it. The rates of taxation were
set up for public inspection, and facilities were everywhere
afforded to provincials to prosecute legally for any injustice
done them in this respect. Trade and commerce flourished.
A network of artificial roads, kept in excellent repair,
traversed the Empire; the sea was now free from pirates,
and the government devoted great attention to harbours,
canals, and river navigation. The standard of gold intro-
duced by the emperors failed, indeed, to effect perfect unity
of coinage, but it created a coinage willingly accepted
throughout the Empire. An intercourse and exchange of
produce between the wealthy Mediterranean countries, such
as the world had not yet seen, was developed. Besides
Alexandria, Antioch and Carthage, Rome was especially
the great mart for the wares of both East and West.
Enormous treasures flowed into Rome, and the provinces
were still taxed in her behalf; but money was always
flowing back again from Rome to the provinces, and the
luxury practised in the capital, repulsive as may be the
form it often assumed, contributed to the promotion of
trade and commerce. Even if the industry cannot be
compared with that of modern times, it was nevertheless
highly developed, skilled handicraft especially having at-
tained a perfection never before witnessed. Agriculture
and cattle-rearing were carried on in a rational manner,
and their results far surpassed, both in quantity and quality,
those of former times. The cultivation of fruit, vegetables
and the vine were scarcely behind that of our own days.
Pliny’s Epistles, which give us a glimpse into life in the
102 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
country and towns of Upper Italy, exhibit throughout
well-ordered conditions, in which poverty, to any large
amount, could not occur. This is also the case through-
out the whole East, where trade especially flourished, and
where the contempt for labour, found in Rome, never
prevailed. Even beyond Rome care was taken by the
authorities for the regular importation of corn, for the due
supply of the markets and the suitableness of the prices
charged for provisions. Hardly any other government
ever did so much as the Roman for this branch of ad-
ministration ; and whenever a town or district was visited
by any special calamity, such as earthquake, conflagration,
or temporary famine, even bad emperors showed them-
selves ready to send relief.
Nor must we lose sight of the fact, that circumstances,
in many respects so entirely differing from our own, pre-
vented the occurrence of such distress as we are acquainted
with. Even the difference of climate is an important
one. The countries lying round the Mediterranean Sea
have all a milder climate, in which the struggle for exist-
ence is more easy to wage. Whether the necessaries of
life were more reasonable in price than at present, is
difficult to determine ; but at all events, the wants of the
inhabitants of the South were less, and this alone would
make living cheaper. In Rome everything was of course
dearer, especially, as is always the case in large cities,
rent. A modest dwelling in the upper stories of one of
the large lodging-houses came to about £16.” Many
possessed only a sleeping-place, or wandered about in the
taverns, or in the worst case spent the night in Some
portico." On the 1st July, the day for change of lodgings,
many poor families, driven from their dwelling, might be
seen wandering in the streets, because they were unable to
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 103
pay their rent. Martial describes such a departure." A
man, emaciated by hunger and cold, and Some women,
are dragging a three-legged bedstead, a table with two
legs and other old lumber, broken earthenware, a pot
smelling of bad fish. This looks like what occurs in our
days. In the provinces, however, living was cheaper.
The times, indeed, in which, as Polybius relates,” a medim-
nus of wheat (about 1% bushels) was worth 4 oboli- 6%d.,
and board could be had in taverns for half an as, i.e. a
little above half a farthing per day, were indeed past. The
imperial epoch exhibits a great rise of prices. But still
these bore a not unfavourable proportion to wages.
Mommsen reckons the Roman bushel of wheat in the
early days of the Empire at 1 denarius; and this was, as
the parable of the vineyard labourers also shows, the
usual day's wage. Now, the week's ration of an adult
would amount to about five bushels, consequently this
quantity could be procured for five days' wages. An in-
Scription of the imperial age shows that a traveller paid
at a tavern 1 as (; of a farthing) for bread, and 2 ases for
other food." The two denarii, which the good Samaritan
left with the host, were therefore an ample provision.
Meat was proportionally dear. According to the famous
inscription of Stratonice, Diocletian settled the price of beef
and mutton at 1s. 23d. the kilogram, pork at about 2s. 10}d.;
a fowl cost 1s. 2%d. But the lower classes ate little or
no meat, which was regarded as a luxury. An edict of
Nero expressly forbids the sale of meat in cooks' shops;
they are only allowed to offer for sale cabbage and shell-
fruits,” a restriction which could only be carried out
among a Southern people.
The inequality of property was indeed considerable,
still it was not as great as at present.” The largest
104 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
property mentioned during the imperial epoch does not
reach £4,500,000. The augur Cn. Lentulus and Nar-
cissus, the freedman of Nero, are said to have possessed
this amount. When it is considered, that such property
could in those times be scarcely otherwise invested than
in estates, and yielded in this manner at most 4 per cent.,
the result would be an annual income of £180,000. And
what is this compared with property to-day ? The
property of the Rothschild family amounted in 1875 to
£200,000,000, and doubled itself every fifteen years.
The consciousness of the equality of all citizens, a survival
of the republic still operative, considerably mitigated the
inequality of property. Conscious of this equality, the
people expected from the rich an equalization of property
by means of gifts and the application of wealth to the
public good; and such equalization was, as we have seen,
extensively practised. “If he has inherited millions of
sestertii, he can well spend 400,000!” exclaim the fellow-
citizens of Trimalchio in Petronius," and this feature of
the satire is certainly taken from life. An industry like
ours, now the source of so much distress, was unknown to
the ancient world. Equally so was such a system of
credit as ours, trade being everywhere carried on for ready
money. Property was not so fluctuating, and though it
became increasingly so, the fluctuation of the present day
was not even approximated. Great possessions for the
most part assumed the form of extensive land-owning, and
pernicious as was the effect of the latifundia, still this
form of capital was less oppressive to the classes without
property than that which now prevails.
All this considered, we may well declare, that in the
earlier ages of the Church, there was no pauperism of the
masses except in Rome; and there, imperial liberality took
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 105
care that every citizen should be fed, however poorly.
Independently of great calamities and times of famine,
distress was confined to cases of individual poverty. How
helpful it was to the Church, that its beginnings and the
beginnings of its charity took place at a period so favour-
able in a financial point of view, need not be further
detailed. Its duty was thereby essentially facilitated. In
Yresence of a poverty thus confined to individual cases,
its aimsgiving could also be of a strongly individual
character; while the pauperism of masses always impresses
upon almsgiving also a wholesale character, and makes
an individual treatment of special cases difficult, if not
impossible. The Church had time to strengthen in all
directions, that, when the system of the Roman Empire
fell into decay, and a hitherto unknown pauperism of the
masses was the result, it might prove equal to the greater
task imposed on it.
For the Roman Empire was evidently on the road to a
universal impoverishment, the first traces of which may
be perceived even under the emperors of the Flavian
house. Under the Antonines they are still more plainly
visible, in connection indeed with the great calamities
then experienced by the Empire, the sanguinary wars in
East and West, the bad harvests and pestilences. The
increasing oppressiveness of taxation, the constant in-
troduction of new objects of taxation, are, as well as the
remission of taxes, symptoms that impoverishment was
Setting in. When, e.g., the Emperor Hadrian remitted
£6,750,000 arrears of tribute, which had accumulated
during sixteen years, this was a sign of the great difficulty
experienced in the collection of taxes. For each year
fº?5,000 had been uncollected. We do not indeed
know the amount of this tribute, but the deficiency was
i
º:
;
i
106 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
in any case disproportionately great. In Prussia, in the
year 1863, the deficiency of taxes was only 0.03 per
cent. A still more evident symptom is presented in the
fact, that estates had now very frequently to be sold to
raise money for the arrears of the land-tax. Already, in
the reign of Caracalla, a law was enacted to this effect.
From a similar law of Aurelian, it appears that such
estates often found no purchasers, because none was will-’
ing to bear the burdens laid upon them. It was there-
fore enacted by the emperor, that the Decurions should
take the land and pay up the arrears. This, however, not
answering, it was appointed that all unsold land should
be divided pro rata among such neighbouring proprietors
as were capable of paying taxes." Another suspicious
symptom was the decrease of the population, not only in
numbers, but also in physical strength. A great increase
of population, such as is now met with, was unknown to
the old world. Several causes combined to prevent it.
Such were, the want of esteem for infant life, resulting in
an entirely disproportionate amount of infant mortality,
the exposing of children, which was nowhere regarded as a
crime, the widespread and increasingly known hereditary
sins. The laws which imposed special taxes on the
unmarried and childless, and promised rewards to the
married and those who had many children, were of no
avail. After the third century, the numbers and strength
of the population everywhere decreased. What legions
had not Italy formerly sent forth ! Pliny already wonders
how it could have been possible. All Greece could not
supply more soldiers than were furnished by the one city
of Platea in the times of its prosperity. Even so early
as the reign of Nero, the interior of Sicily was almost
depopulated.
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 107
º
The deepest reason for this impoverishment is to be
found in the prevailing contempt for labour. No people
can attain to lasting prosperity among whom labour is
not held in honour. But an Athenian or Roman had a
right, and it was even in a certain sense his duty to be
idle—a right, for he was a member of the ruling people,
and as such had a share of the spoils of war, which in the
old world were a special and chief source of the public
property—his duty, for the State made claims upon his
activity. He had to be present in public assemblies, in
the Comitia to vote, and in courts of justice to act as
juryman. In Athens a third of the citizens sat daily in
court. Hence a trade or business could not be regularly
carried on. For such attendance a citizen received in
Athèns his judicial fee, his theatre-money, in Rome, his
corn-money and congiaria. Thus the free man grew un-
accustomed to work, and let himself be maintained by the
State. As for work, there were slaves to do it. It is the
curse of slavery that it makes free labour a disgrace.
Besides, slave labour is far more costly. It was computed
that in Rome a slave performed only half the work of a
free man. Nevertheless, free labour cannot hold its own
against slave labour. It is supplanted, and the worst
injury done by slavery is the ruin of the middle classes.
This was the case in Athens, where the once vigorous
class of artisans could not compete with the factories in
which the work was done by slaves; and in a still higher
degree in Rome. The class of small landowners, who
formed the strength of Italy in earlier times, gradually
disappeared, being supplanted by the large estates of the
Roman nobles. In the place of farms and villages ap-
peared the Ergastula, the slave prisons, with their hundreds
of slaves. An administrator with slaves divided into
108 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
decuries and centuries, working by day with fetters on
their feet, and sleeping at night huddled together in slave
prisons, ruled, where formerly free peasants had tilled
their own fields. If the estates were too distant to be
safely cultivated by slaves, they were, indeed, let, but
under oppressive conditions. The tenant was obliged to
deliver up the whole produce, and received only a fifth,
Or even only a ninth, for himself. Under such circum-
stances a well-to-do class of tenants would not, of course,
arise. It was but natural that, as plantain farming in-
creased, the cultivation of corn should entirely cease on
large estates, and be superseded by pasturage. Larger
and Safer profits were thereby obtained, because fewer
slaves were needed ; and these, now that the great foreign
wars of conquest had come to an end, began to be expen-
sive. Slavery produced similar effects in the sphere of
industrial activity. The great estate owners, with their
herds of slaves, not only produced the raw material, but
also carried on its manufacture by their means. Nay, they
even entrusted the sale of, and traffic in these manufac-
tured articles to slaves, who received a certain rate upon
them; and thus slaves often acquired property. It not
unfrequently happened that slaves carried on some branch
of trade at the expense of their masters for a certain
share in the profits, or that a master set his slaves at
liberty upon condition of their paying him a certain pro-
portion of their gains in business. Thus did Callistus,
the subsequent Bishop of Rome, carry on for his master,
Carpophorus, a banking business.” In the towns there
were edifices, etc., for the greater undertakings, and per-
sons who carried these on by means of their slaves, while
in the houses of the Roman nobles the productions of
handicraft were also the work of slaves; and thus the
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 109
free artisan could only obtain the custom of those of
lower rank. The free workman could not resist such a
development of slave labour. He was often worse off
than the slave. For the latter was taken care of by his
master from Selfishness, for the sake of the capital in-
vested in him. “If I were free,” says a slave in Plautus
to his master, “I should live at my own risk, I now do
so at yours.”
If the supplanting of the middle class as a result of
slavery enlarged the chasm between rich and poor, the
perfect economic liberty which existed concurred in pro-
ducing the same effect. The imperial epoch down to
Diocletian was a time of free trade in the widest sense
of the word. There were, indeed, customs, excise, har-
bour rates, but these did not exceed the limits of moderate
exchequer dues. There was freedom of transit through-
out the Empire, for every freeman could travel and sojourn
wherever he would ; there was freedom of trade, for
every one might seek profit by his own means, where and
how he thought he could most advantageously find it.
There was no kind of organization of labour. The con-
sequences of this were the same as they are with us.
Capital accumulated in ever fewer hands, while great
capital in the general struggle outflanked and exhausted
Small capital. Certain examples of rapid enrichment,
met with in the Satirists, are characteristic. It must
have been Juvenal's own experience, that the barber,
“under whose razor his beard had rustled,” became the
possessor of innumerable estates, and could compete with
the aristocracy in luxury;” and Martial’s, that a manu-
mitted cobbler was rolling in riches upon the estate of
his former master, which had now become his own.”
Under Domitian, a former shoemaker of Bologna, and a
110 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book II.
fuller of Modena, gave gladiatorial shows.” The father of
the emperor Pertinax at first carried on a large charcoal,
and afterwards a large wood trade. Having grown rich,
he traded with his money, especially by the cutting up
of peasant farms, lending to small proprietors at high
interest, in order afterwards to drive them from their
possessions. He thus accumulated large estates. The
financial talents of the father were inherited by his son,
who had all the paraphermalia of Commodus' extravagance,
including hundreds of prostitutes, sold by public auction.
That extravagance would thus be dispersed in a larger
circle did not trouble him, for it brought in money.
Vespasian invested a portion of his capital in a hired-
carriage business, on which account the people jocularly
called him the hired-coachman. It is quite charac-
teristic of an age of economic freedom to seek gain
wherever it is to be found, without much caring how
it is acquired. -
Capital, thus accumulated in the hands of individuals,
took chiefly the form of landed property. As with our-
selves large capital swallows up small, and large indus-
trial undertakings lesser enterprises, so too did large
landed estates absorb smaller ones. The enormous latt-
fundia, the estates of many square miles, which have
been already mentioned, arose. Even in Nero's time
half the province of Africa belonged to only six owners.
Seneca tells us that country-seats were like provinces;
and Pliny, in whose days the harm of this system was
already very evident, says: “The latifundia have ruined
Italy.””
Times in which capital accumulates on the one side,
while means become so much the more straitened and
wretched on the other, are exactly fitted to furnish a pro-
GHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 111
ductive field for usury. All Roman history is interwoven
with complaints about usury, and with a fruitless contest
against it.” In the times of the first emperors the rate
of interest in Rome was moderate, viz. 6, and often only
4 per cent, while to take above 12 was reckoned usury.
In the provinces much more, 24, nay even 40, was taken,
and even respectable people were not ashamed of thus
enriching themselves. Seneca, who talks so much of
virtue, carried on an extensive traffic in usury. He had
invested several millions in Britain, and when he suddenly
gave notice that he required higher interest for his capital
there, all Britain was disquieted.” Countless numbers
were ruined by such blood-suckers, and, with increasing
impoverishment, the complaints concerning usury and its
pernicious consequences also increased.
The result of all these circumstances was not merely
a shifting of property, an accumulation of it with the
few and the impoverishment of the many, but also the
impoverishment of the Empire in general. The unequal
distribution of property is in itself no evil, assuming that
the money is again circulated with prolific effect by those
with whom it has accumulated. The luxury rendered
possible by wealth awakens industry, revives trade, and
gives employment and food to thousands. And this was
the case in Rome. The early imperial epoch everywhere
exhibits an enhanced activity running parallel with
increasing luxury. The glass manufactories of Phoenicia,
the purple dyeries of Tyre, the weaving factories of Alex-
andria, the whole produce of skilled workmanship then at
its perfection, the horticulture, the cultivation of the vine—
all these could not have continued unless Rome had been
a mart for their different wares, unless the increasing
wealth of individuals had made it possible to pay the
112 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
highest prices for them.” But luxury has these results
only so long as it remains within certain reasonable
limits. There is also a foolish luxury which produces
exactly opposite effects, and may, as may generally be
Said of Roman luxury in the time of the emperors, be
certainly carried too far. In fact, it was the luxury now
existing in Rome, which could not fail at last to lead to
the impoverishment of the whole people. How much
fertile land was withdrawn from its proper destination by
the country-seats as large as provinces, by the gardens
and preserves of the Roman grandees; how much labour
power was squandered unproductively in buildings, when
lakes were made where land had been, merely to gratify
a whim, and a site for a palace produced in the midst
of the sea by artificial mounds; what capital was laid
out in the silver plate and expensive furniture with which
the palaces were filled, silver vases of 500 lbs. weight,
triclinia which cost four million sestertii (about £35,000),
in ornaments of pearls and precious stones, which were
then in fashion ; how many strong men, who might by
their labour have contributed to the increase of the
national wealth, wandered idly about the streets of Rome
as clients in the atria of the nobles, as citizens who
received largesses of corn. If a great part of the money
expended in luxury remained in the Empire, a great part
was consumed without results, and no less went abroad.
The trade with India and Arabia was almost entirely
passive. Some wine and pottery were indeed sent thither,
otherwise the silks of China, the precious stones and dyed
goods of India, the spices of Arabia, would have had to
be paid for in ready money, without any mutual exchange,
and Pliny estimates their annual amount at 150,000,000
Hs. (about £1,200,000 to £1,250,000).”
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 113
If such extravagance on the part of private individuals
must have been pernicious to the general welfare, how
much more so that of the emperors themselves . It was
the wasteful profusion of Nero in particular, that laid the
foundation of these financial embarrassments of the State,
which, notwithstanding the subsequent careful admini-
stration of the finances by the emperors of the Flavian
house, never ceased and led to a continually heavier
burden of taxation. The gifts of Nero to his friends and
dependants which can be computed—and how many are
there which cannot—amounted to 2200 million HS. (about
£19,300,000). After his reign the Pretorians received
their corn gratis, and ever increasing largesses in addition.
At the commencement of a new reign they received,
according to Tacitus, 15,000 HS. (£130), according to
Josephus, 20,000 (£1.75) each, an expenditure of 150 or
200 million HS. (£1,750,000). The government of the
State became on the whole increasingly expensive. The
army required more, the rising and increasing bureaucracy
not less.
Legally regarded, taxation in the Roman State was
unlimited. The emperor imposed it arbitrarily. The
provinces were a conquered country, which as such was
entirely in the hands of the conqueror, and when under
Caracalla the provincials collectively received the Roman
citizenship, the rule of the emperor was already so
absolute, that he could treat the whole Empire as his
domain. Augustus, perceiving the importance of a careful
administration of finance to the monarchy which was coming
into existence, laid a secure foundation for the levying
of taxation by instituting an accurate survey of the land.
But if the levying became thereby more equitable, the
screw was now only the more severely applied. To the
H
114 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book II.
original taxes, poll-tax and tribute, were added after
Vespasian taxes on trade and commerce. The oppressive-
ness of taxation was rendered still worse by the manner
of levying it. While with us, if an individual is
incapable of paying his taxes, his quota gets left out and is
paid by no one, the whole body of citizens was, accord-
ing to Roman fiscal law, answerable for it. The taxes
were calculated for the entire community and must be
fully paid up, even if ever so many persons were unable
to contribute their shares. If even the city could not pay
the whole, the deficiency was regarded as a debt due to
the State ; and thus was formed, it might be said, a nega-
tive national debt, of the extent of which we have an
example in Hadrian's remission of taxation, and which
must have been far more burdensome than modern
national debts.
Besides taxes properly so called, a large quantity of
natural productions (munera publica) had to be delivered.
The provinces had to furnish corn, and what was more, to
send it where it had to be consumed. Clothing, arnis,
etc., had to be supplied for the army. There were also
endless transports of supplies and soldiers, relays of horses,
ad apparatum annona, ad splendorem diſensionis publict.
When the emperor Probus kept the soldiers to useful
labour, e.g. to the laying out of vineyards on the Rhine,
“that they might not eat their bread for nothing,” and,
beguiled by the dreams of peace which we often meet
with in a world weary of the noise of arms, added, “we
shall soon need no more soldiers,” his biographer, Vopiscus,
breaks out into the sigh : “The blessing is scarcely to be
understood A State at peace far and near ! Who in all
the world would then need to forge arms, to forward
supplies, to give personal or horse service The ox would
CHAP. L] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 115
again belong to the plough, and the horse to the employ-
ments of peace.” The supply of post-horses was felt to
be a specially burdensome requisition. Augustus had
instituted, at the expense of the State, a regular postal
service, which was afterwards imposed upon the cities. The
use of the post was not open to the public, but the officials
all had free travelling. Aurelius Victor shows how severe
was this burden, when he calls the post “a very useful
institution, which the greed of posterity transformed into
a pest to the Roman world.”
If we add to this, that with the Antonines the season
of peace came to an end, that the whole world was in
arms during the third century, that on the boundaries
there was the never-ending war with the barbarians, who
were already penetrating with desolating results into the
Empire, in the interior continual revolutions, no strong
government, but a series of conspiracies and assassinations,
we shall no longer be surprised at the rapidly increasing
impoverishment of the Empire, and shall understand how
the emperor Diocletian, with whom a new period begins
to dawn, found himself constrained to adopt despotic
financial measures, to tax the necessaries of life, etc.;_
measures which for a period postponed, but could not
entirely prevent, the overthrow of the Empire. From
Constantine onwards the Empire already exhibits the
appearance of political bankruptcy. -
While prosperity was thus everywhere declining, a
revolution in political economy was at the same time
commencing from very small beginnings. In this sphere,
too, the life of the old world was dying out, and gradually
giving place to a new ; and from the time of Constantine
economic relations bear a modern, and no longer the
ancient character. And the more powerful the subse-
116 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
quent influence of this revolution upon charity also, the
more necessary is it to notice its beginnings.
The entire ancient economy received its impress from
slavery. Now, in the imperial epoch the number of slaves
began considerably to decrease. There was nothing to
compensate for the cessation of the wars of conquest,
which had constantly furnished the Empire with fresh
hordes of slaves. The Jewish war once more brought a
multitude of slaves—for the most part, indeed, tolerably
useless—into the market; but from that time the only
important supply was from children born in slavery, for
the wars with the barbarians yielded but few. Though
the marriages of slaves were, consequently, more favoured
than formerly, though the attempt was made to preserve
the existing races of slaves by better treatment, though
they were chastised—we must use the expression, because
it answers to the views of the ancients—more rationally,
so to speak, all this was insufficient. For the manumissions
were now more numerous than the increase. Hence the price
of slaves rose considerably. While Cato states the price of
an agricultural slave to be £48, 15s., Columella reckons it
at £78, 15s. This rise of prices made slave labour so
costly, that in the sphere of agriculture, recourse was had
to a different system of farming. For this other reasons
also existed. The employment of the latifundia, especially
for pasturage, became increasingly unprofitable, because
the impoverishment of the people seriously reduced their
ability to purchase the products of pasture farming, meat,
wool, skins, etc. Able inspectors for the great estates
were, as we perceive from the complaints of Columella
and Pliny, difficult to find. Letting was impossible,
because a respectable class of tenants did not exist. Thus
the farming of large estates gave way again to small
CHAP. L] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 117
farming. The proprietorship of the latifundia indeed re-
mained, but the proprietors increasingly gave the farming
of portions of their lands to slaves, for the surrender of a
portion of the produce. These, indeed, remained slaves,
but they already occupied a different position from the
former agricultural slaves, who worked divided into
decuries, with fetters on their limbs. Slavery was begin-
ning to be transformed into vassalage.
A corresponding change was simultaneously accom-
plished in trade. Here, too, retail trade was obtaining
more room; here, too, the free workman was beginning
to supplant the slave. A kind of middle class was being
formed out of the numerous freedmen. But the main
point is that the period of free trade was ending, and an
organization of labour of a peculiar kind beginning. The
means were furnished by the collegia of artisans, who
much resembled the guilds and companies of the middle
ages, but nevertheless essentially differed from them in
being institutions connected with the State. The State
demanded from the collegia certain performances, and
granted them in exchange certain privileges, especially
immunity from other burdens. Their members were a
kind of State officials, and the labour thus organized
formed a part of the ever increasingly complicated ma-
chinery of the State. Something similar had formerly
existed. All the officials of the Ammona, the seamen who
carried corn, the storehouse officers who collected, housed,
and distributed it, and the bakers who baked the bread,
were State employés. The State had already a multitude
of officials such as the modern State is unacquainted with.
The organization of labour was instituted, while this class
of officials was increasing; and labour, when organized into
collegia, Was received into the machinery of the State.
118 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
The entire development, which commences in the
period we are now considering, and comes to maturity in
that which follows, was undoubtedly a progress. Labour
again began to be appreciated ; the thought, that the
hitherto despised artisan also served the State, became a
customary one. A just moral estimation of free labour
was not indeed yet reached. To this the old world never
rose. The organization of labour was only a forced
organization; and force, as we shall see, became, as the
difficulties of the State increased, more and more the
impelling and uniting power.
The question, whether Christianity had already had
any influence in this change, is an obvious one. It is
possible, for it took place at a time when the influence of
Christian views in general on heathen views cannot be
doubted. On the other hand, Christianity, as then con-
stituted, must be reproached for not making the spirit by
which it was ruled more powerfully dominant. If the
genuine Christian appreciation of the work of a man's
calling had been still active in the Church, and had been
carried out to its consequences, the result must have been
something very different from this forced organization of
labour, which at last transformed all into slaves. But
when the Church began to exercise an influence upon
public life, the Christian view of labour was already much
obscured. This, too, furnishes a proof of the fact, how
little Christianity pervaded the ancient world.
Nor could this new organization prevent the financial
ruin, being indeed, on the contrary, a symptom of it,
and becoming in its turn a co-operative cause ; for it
made a flourishing state of trade and agriculture impos-
sible. It could only with difficulty postpone it for a
period. The characteristic of the age continued to be an
CHAP. I.] POWERTY AND DISTRESS. 119
increasing impoverishment ever extending to larger
numbers. It was in the period next succeeding, that it
reached its full development and imposed new tasks and
duties on Christian charity. But it was of importance,
that the Church was born in a more fortunate age, and its
activity begun before it was made difficult by a distress
So gigantic in its proportions, that it could gain strength
while troubles were increasing, and thus become capable
of greater exertions.
C H A P T E R II.
FIRST LOWE.
THE charity of an age, the proportion of its alms, the
motives from which, and the manner in which they are
given, the application of its liberality, and the end kept
in view therein, are not accidental. For as charity is
but one department of Christian life, so too does it receive
its impress from the character of Christian life in general
during the period in question.
The Christian life of the first centuries still exhibits
first of all the character of youthful vigour. Faith
developed its full energy in the transformation of the
moral life, love was ardent and rendered men willing
and capable for any sacrifice, hope for the speedy con-
summation of the kingdom of God, by the glorious return
of Christ, pointed to an aim of the whole life, beside
which all others appeared insignificant. The transition to
another period is first denoted by the crisis called forth
by Montanism. From that time onwards the Church
lived, mingled with the world, and itself became different.
Its early youth was past. In the time of Cyprian the
features may already be recognized—at least as in for-
mation—which give their impress to the Post-Constan-
tinian Church, nay, which in truth characterize the entire
mediaeval Church down to the Reformation.
Youth does not reflect, it acts from the direct impulses
120
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 121:
arising from its present abundant vitality. Youth is
willing to make sacrifices, ready in its easily excited
enthusiasm to give up anything. Youth is easily moved ;
the abundance is as yet greater than the form of its
vitality. There is as yet nothing of ossification, hence
the manifold variety of shape it can assume ; it is rather
hostile than inclined to uniformity, and its life has a
facility for taking new forms. In short, everything is as
yet in a state of active fluxion.
So, too, was it with the charity of the period. There
was as yet no reflection as to why alms were given and
benevolence exercised. For this was self-evident. Still
less was consideration exercised as to whom to give and
do good to. Where there was distress, relief was given.
“We communicate to all, and give to every one who is
in need,” says Justin; and the older Fathers interpret our
Lord's saying, “Give to every one that asketh of thee,”
to mean quite simply, that every suppliant was to receive
without distinction.” “Give simply to all,” it is said in
the Shepherd of Hermas,” “without asking doubtfully to
whom thou givest, but give to all. For God desires thee
to give to all of that which thou hast. They who receive
will give account to God, why and for what they receive.
They who take anything under an appearance of pretended
need, will have to give account of it to God, but they
who give will be blameless.” Similarly does Clement of
Alexandria” warn, not to judge who is deserving and who
is undeserving. “For by being fastidious and setting
thyself to try who are fit for thy benevolence, and who
not, it is possible that thou mayest neglect some who are
the friends of God.” Still less was it reflected what the
giver of alms and kindnesses would obtain for himself.
The thought, indeed, that almsgiving and beneficence
122 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book II.
bring a blessing was not absent, this being already stated
in the New Testament. Nay, here and there emerges
already that notion, which goes beyond the New Testa-
ment, that this blessing consists in the expiation of sin. .
But all these thoughts are by no means so prominent as
they are in Cyprian, and still more so in later writers.
Alms were given, not for the sake of the giver getting
something, but to relieve the poor and needy, from the
direct constraint of sympathizing love, and the conscious-
ness of the love experienced in Christ. How simply does
the reference to reward appear in the Epistle of Barnabas,
and how does it still keep within the limits of apostolic
teaching ! “Hesitate not to give, and give without
grudging, but consider who will be the good Repayer of
the reward.” “
Great self-sacrifice was found in all the churches.
Christians gave willingly, not merely according to their
means, but beyond them. They gave not of their super-
fluity, but of their labour, and shunned no sacrifice. Not
till the third century do we hear complaints of the abate-
ment of this readiness for self-sacrifice. Hence there
needed as yet no special incentive to arouse it, and still
less any constraint, whether direct or indirect. It was the
time of perfectly free gifts. “Every man according as he
is disposed in his heart l” The apostolic Saying was still
the rule; and if here and there some teacher of the third
century already spoke of the law of tithes and first-fruits,
this points, indeed, to the way in which alms would
subsequently be given, but in presence of the gladness
with which they were then bestowed, it sounds almost
like a discord. Nay, there was as yet no need of urgent
exhortations to almsgiving. The preachers of the Post-
Constantinian age, a Chrysostom, a Basil, an Ambrose, an
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 123
Augustine, use every inducement to move their hearers
to liberal alms. Of this we find nothing in this period.
It is remarked, that it is the command of Christ, love is
praised, the love of Christ to us extolled, the congregation
are reminded, that they are common sharers in things
spiritual, and that it should therefore be their custom
to be such in things earthly,” but all this so simply and
plainly, that we directly feel there was as yet no need of
oratorical arts to arouse to activity the love which every-
where existed. Cyprian is in this respect also the first
who strikes a different note. His work on alms is the
first that was written on the subject. The fact that it
should be necessary to write upon it, already shows that
the times were beginning to change and first love to
abate.
Appointed forms for the practice of charity in the
churches existed indeed from the first, appointed rules,
appointed persons, on whom the relief of the poor was
officially incumbent ; but all these were more or less
fluctuating. And this is why it is now so difficult to
obtain a correct view of them. Undoubtedly there were
different arrangements in different places. It was not till
church government in general acquired a more stable
form, that these rules also took a firmer and more uniform
shape. As yet institutions did not exist. There was no
need of houses of hospitality, houses for foreigners,
orphanages, hospitals, so long as every Christian house
was an asylum for travelling brothers, and every Christian
man and woman was ready to receive the indigent.
There was indeed an official diaconate, but this did not
exclude any from freely exercising in their measure and
in their own manner the works officially incumbent upon
it. Together with the regular charity of the Church, was
124 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
developed a rich abundance of private beneficence, and
the two frequently run into each other without observing
any strict limits.
Besides, this period was the time of conflict with the
prevailing heathenism, the time of persecution. This not
only imposed new tasks on Christian charity—care for
those who were the objects of persecution, for confessors
in prison, for those who had suffered the loss of property
and were in poverty through their faith, for those also
whose entrance into the Church caused them to give up
their former trade, and so deprived them of the necessaries
of life, it also impressed upon all other exercises of
charity a character quite peculiar. Even if persecutions.
came only by fits and starts and lasted in their violence
but a short time, the opposition to the surrounding
heathen world, the internal struggle against it, and the
consequent tension were lasting. Christian life during
this period acquired thereby great energy, deep earnest-
ness, genuine simplicity. Christians, as Tertullian says,
are always standing on guard against the dark demoniac
powers which rule around them : a “race ready for death,”
they know what they are about, and what pertains to
winning the victor's crown; all their efforts are concen-
trated on this one point. The task of fleeing from the
world was in the front rank of the Christian's duties, that
of penetrating the world with the new life only gradually
dawned upon him. The Church had as yet no abiding
place in the world; it was more like a camp in presence
of the enemy than a peaceful city. It had not yet
developed the ornamental, the luxuries of life were still
far off; no splendid churches, no proud priesthood, no
lands, no possession of money or property. Till the turn
of the second and third century it was Scarcely imagined,
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOVE. 125
that the Church could ever become a ruling power, could
ever occupy the same position in respect to the State that
heathenism now did. On the contrary, thought was turned
to quite another victory, to the Lord's return and to the
victory which He would introduce. Hence the future
was not yet cared for, the present conflict demanding all
the Christian's efforts and strength. In conformity with
this state of things, charity, too, was never directed towards
the future. The Church as yet made no collections for
the benefit of posterity, nor do we meet with institutions
calculated to be a benefit to future generations. Such
means as it had were devoted to the exigencies of the
moment, and men did not shrink, especially in times of
persecution, from giving all that they possessed to con-
tribute to the distress of the hour. With respect to this,
however, the greatest energy was displayed. The object
aimed at and actually attained, was, that no member of
the Church should suffer want. But all was plain and
simple. Just as there were no large churches, so there
were no large buildings and institutions for the relief of
the poor. As it was required of every Christian that he
should labour with all diligence for his own maintenance
and then be satisfied with bare necessaries, so also was
this required of the poor. Almsgiving had then nothing
of that weak humanity so often apparent in later times,
and nothing was more remote from the practice of
Christians, than the encouragement of mendicancy and the
preparation of a comfortable living for idlers and vagrants
at the expense of the Church. “For those able to work,
work, for those unable to work, compassion,” is a saying
which, though found in a heretical work,” was the motto
of the whole Church.
Work, property, alms—these three are closely united.
126 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. LBook II.
A healthy charity is only possible where healthy moral
views of work and property prevail, as inversely, a false
moral appreciation of labour and property inevitably
produces morbid phenomena in the sphere of charity. A
healthy charity can neither be attained to, where there is
an over-estimation of property, where wealth is regarded
as the Supreme good, poverty as the greatest evil, nor
where property is undervalued and wealth looked upon
as no real good, poverty as no real evil. For in the
former case no one can feel bound to sacrifice his earthly
good, for the sake of a higher good, for the service of his
neighbour, and gifts and alms will fail. In the latter
these will not indeed be wanting; on the contrary, alms-
giving will be enormous, but its right application will
fail. For if to be poor is no evil, if, on the contrary, it
denotes a higher moral condition than to be rich, the task
of charity cannot consist in opposing and alleviating
poverty. Almsgiving then becomes a good work in
itself, a good work complete in the act of giving and the
renunciation of property therein involved, without regard
to the application of the gift and the end attained
thereby.
A rejection of property on principle is only met with
in schismatic circles. The Gnostics, in whose eyes this
world was the production of an inferior, and not of the
supreme God, could not but consistently reject all pos-
sessions and enjoyment of earthly property ; and such
notions were also so much the more natural to the Judaeo-
Christians with their legal and ascetic tendency, in that
they had in the Essenes' the model of a communistically
constituted society before their eyes.” When, on the
other hand, it is said in the Epistle of Barnabas:” “Thou
must in all things be in partnership with thy neighbours,
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 127
and not say: That belongs to me ! for if we share in
imperishable things, how much more in perishable ;” or
when Tertullian" boasts: “We Christians have all things
in common except wives,” these sayings are but stray
expressions for the duty of the equalization of property in
love, and do not designedly go beyond the appreciation
of property laid down in the New Testament.
It is certain, however, that we do really encounter a
strong indifference to earthly possessions. The more
heartily the heavenly blessings of the kingdom of God
were embraced, the more must earthly goods have lost
their value. The more intently the eye was directed to
another world and to a speedy termination of this dispen-
sation, the more must earth have appeared a foreign
country, and earthly property an uncertain possession. To
this was added the fact, that in times of persecution the
temptation connected with wealth was stronger than usual,
while experience showed, that the rich renounced their
faith more readily than the poor. “You are dwelling
here in a foreign city,” says Hermas to Christians.” .
“Would any one dwelling in a foreign city provide himself
with fields and expensive accommodations !” Christians
should consider, that in such a case the lord of the city
will require of them also, obedience to the laws therein
enforced. Then they must obey and thus apostatize from
Christ, or lose their possessions and be driven out.
Hermas had himself experienced the dangers of riches,
and was reminded by the Angel of Repentance: “When
thou wast rich thou wast useless, now (after Hermas had
lost his property) art thou useful and skilful in thy call-
ing.” But such thoughts also have indeed their points
of contact in the New Testament, and even if individuals
have exceeded in this respect, like the ascetics met with
128 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
in many churches, e.g. the confessor Alcibiades in Lyons,
who lived on bread and water only, but was afterwards
persuaded by his fellow-confessor Attalus, that it was
not wrong to enjoy what God had made,” or liket he
Christians in Carthage whom Tertullian praises” for
abstaining from the use of wine and meat, the Church on
the whole held firmly to the rule, that it is not sinful to
acquire and possess earthly goods and to enjoy in modera-
tion what God bestows. Hermas” somewhere compares
the rich to round stones, who must be hewn before they
can fit into the building of the Church, that is to say,
must be deprived of their wealth if they are to be genuine
members of the Church. He is, however, by no means of
opinion, that their whole property should be taken from
them, but only So much, that they may not succumb to
the temptations of riches. This happens to them because
they are good, and God would have them remain good.
Even Tertullian, with his strong tendency to despise the
world, and greatly as he delights in certain individual
ascetics, like those who took neither wine nor meat, when
speaking less from such individual inclinations than from
the common consciousness of the Church, describes
Christians as taking part in the intercourse and trade of
the world and possessing and enjoying the good things of
earth: “We are no Brahmans or Indian gymnosophists,
no wild men of the woods, and separatists from life. We
are mindful of the gratitude which we owe to the Lord
our God, and do not despise the enjoyment of His works.
We only so moderate it as to avoid excess and abuse.
Hence, like yourselves, we do not dwell in the World
without markets, baths, hotels, workshops, fairs, and every-
thing pertaining to the intercourse of life. Like your-
selves, we practise navigation, agriculture, commerce ; We
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 129
take part in your trades, we let you make use of our
labour for the common profit.”
Clement of Alexandria expresses himself the most fully
concerning earthly possessions in his work: “What rich
man is saved £" He first rebukes the fear, that a rich
man cannot generally speaking be saved, as unfounded.
He can, if he lives rightly. He then shows, in an
exposition of the history of the rich young man, how he
must live to be saved. “The Lord commanded the rich
young man to sell all that he had. But what does this
mean Z He does not command him, as Some too hastily
conclude, to throw away his present property, to separate
himself from his possessions, but to get rid of false
opinions concerning wealth, the desire and pursuit of it,
the cares of life, the ‘thorns which choke the good seed.’
For it is not great and a matter worthy of emulation to
suffer want of property. Else indeed, he who is stripped
of everything and begs for the barest necessaries, would
be happiest and most pleasing to God, and would
alone possess eternal life. This too would be nothing
new, for even before Christ there have been those who
have renounced property, one to have leisure for science,
another for the sake of dead wisdom, a third for vain
praise and honour. The Son of God does not demand
that which is an object of sense. He demands something
greater, more divine, more perfect, the cleansing of the
soul, the disposition from all that proceeds from passion.
This is a learning peculiar to a believer and a teaching
worthy of the Redeemer. They who renounce property
still retain passion in the soul. They walk in pride and
vanity and in contempt for other men, as though they
were themselves something supernatural.” Clement then
expressly acknowledges that wealth is a benefit. It too
I
130 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
has its advantages, for it enables us to help others. If
the Lord had taught us to cast away our possessions, His
teaching would be in opposition to the command to love
our neighbour as ourselves. Hence we are not to cast
away our property. It is the material, the instrument
subjected to the right use of those who know how to
make a right use of it. If any one makes a wrong use
of a tool, the tool is blameless. And this is the case
with wealth wrongly applied, as it is by many. Its
nature is to be useful, and everything depends upon how
it is applied. Nay, Salvation in general depends on
nothing external. It is not the question whether a man
is high or low, rich or poor, but whether he has faith,
amendment, love.”
These are thoroughly sound views of earthly posses-
sions ; the kingdom of God here occupies a neutral posi-
tion with respect to riches and poverty. The rich man may
obtain salvation as well as the poor, if only he uses his
wealth aright. It is true that Clement sees the right use
of wealth chiefly in almsgiving, but how healthy the
moral views still were is shown by the fact, that while he
urgently exhorts to make friends of the poor by means
of wealth, he also reminds that this is not done by
isolated gifts, but by active association in giving. The
right use of property is not wholesale almsgiving, but the
application of a man's own property to the care of the
community.”
It is then upon the community that Clement lays the
greatest weight. “God led the race of man to brotherly
community by giving up His Son and bestowing the
Logos as a common benefit on all, by granting all to all.”
Hence everything ought to be common, and the rich
should desire to have no more than the poor. The Say-
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 131
ing, “I possess it, why should I not enjoy it 7” is therefore
not humane nor brotherly. “I possess it, why should I
not impart it 7” sounds more like Christian love. He
who so speaks and acts is perfect, and fulfils the
command: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”
“I know that God has given us the right of enjoying, but
only to the limits of the necessary, and according to His
will enjoyment must be common. It is not right that
one should live in superfluity, while many are in want.
And how much better is it to be a benefactor to many,
than to possess a splendid house; how much wiser to
spend one's wealth on men than on jewels 1’”
Only the necessary This is everywhere accounted a
principle in the use of earthly possessions. Simplicity,
contentment, moderation, are required of every Christian.
All luxury, all wantonness met with the more disfavour,
the more the surrounding heathen world had at that time
sunk into an immoderate voluptuousness, a frequently
senseless luxury. The first particular by which a woman
who had become a Christian was distinguished from her
former female friends, was her simple life and renuncia-
tion of luxurious dress. The Christian family was
distinguished from the heathen by the great simplicity
which prevailed in furniture, in domestics, in eating and
drinking. This corresponded with the earnestness of
Christian life. How often do Clement and Tertullian
insist that luxury enervates, that it is womanly and not
manly “On the road to heaven,” says the former, “the
best provision is frugality, moderation is the shoe, and
beneficence the staff.” ” In his Paedagogus he gives
numerous injunctions of the kind respecting even the
Smallest details, and they all amount to this, that a
Christian must be moderate in eating and drinking, in
132 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book II.
clothing and furniture. He pities the insatiable, who
collect their dainties from all parts of the world, with
whom “the basting ladles and the kitchen form the central
point of existence,” ” who “emasculate ” the simplest
aliments by the over-refinement of their cookery, and
eat cakes and pastry instead of nutritious bread. He
does not, indeed, desire to condemn variety of dishes,
but says that no special eagerness should be shown for
any of them. So, too, he regards it as no sin to drink
wine, but reproves the luxury which is practised about
different kinds of wine. No one should be eager about
Chian wine just when it is scarce, or about Syracusan
just when it is difficult to procure. One single kind of
wine, the gift of the one God, will satisfy a prudent drinker.
So, too, should moderation be observed in house-gear.
All such things as polished glass vessels, which cannot
be drunk out of without fear of breaking them, silver
plates and dishes, and all things made of ivory, must be
far removed from our well-ordered life. The Lord also
ate out of an ordinary dish, and made His disciples sit
down on the grass. He, the humble Lord of the universe,
washed their feet, girded with a towel. He brought no
silver basin from heaven. He asked drink of the
Samaritan woman, who came to draw water in an earthen
pitcher, and desired no royal gold.” We cannot escape
the admission that these details are affected with a certain
amount of one-sidedness. The propensity to the renun-
ciation of the world is far stronger than that to the
appropriation of it. Here and there we find a certain
quaintness in this zeal against luxury, as when Tertullian
can suffer no wreaths, because God made flowers grow,
but not wreaths, and does not allow dyed wool, because
if purple wool had been pleasing to God, He would have
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOVE. 133
made purple-coloured sheep; * or when Clement goes
on to say, that God openly supplies all that is necessary
for life, but, on the contrary, conceals things unnecessary,
such as gold and pearls with earth and sea.” Clement
also rejects wreaths because they are unnatural, we can
neither see nor smell the flowers. When the Lord wore
a crown of thorns, it does not become His people to
crown their heads with wreaths. They know of a better
crown, an eternal wreath. At the most, he allows orna-
ments of flowers on the table.” All this sounds some-
what strange to us, though we cannot fail to admire the
earnestness by which it is pervaded, its healthy natural
contrast to the luxury of the age, a luxury which had
degenerated into something contrary to nature, its manly
opposition to the prevailing effeminacy, and can under-
stand how, in churches which were on the average but
poor, there was never a lack of means when the assist-
ance of oppressed brethren was in question. Simplicity
and contentment were, to quote another saying of
Clement's, “always full arsenals.”” “The love which
imparts to others is like a spring, which is always
furnishing a draught to the thirsty, and yet always fills
again.””
Very specially does Clement disapprove of the keeping
of a large establishment of servants. He describes in one
place, and not without biting sarcasm, the life of the
aristocratic ladies of the day. There is no spinning or
weaving room, no work-room for women; they are sur-
rounded by men, who chatter to them all day long all
manner of gossip, and relate to them the scandals of the
town. They trifle away their time with deformed slaves,
with lap-dogs, peacocks, and parrots. But they care not
for the poor widow, who is surely worth more than a
134 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
Maltese puppy; they have no eyes for the pious old man,
who is certainly of greater value than those caricatures
of men ; they give themselves no trouble about little
children, but feed parrots and plovers. “They turn out
their own children and take young birds into their
houses.” It is very characteristic, that the want of
deeds of charity is here placed in connection with the
dislike of work, and with a vain and empty life, as on
the other hand, that we always find, both in Clement
and Tertullian, when describing the Christian woman,
the combination of the three features of diligence, sim-
plicity, and beneficence. She works at home, she clothes
herself, her husband, and her children in garments made
by herself; she works in the kitchen to prepare a treat
for her husband ; she is not ashamed to stand herself at
the hand-mill; and then she stretches out her hand to the
poor, bestows upon the beggar the fruit of her labour, and,
emulating Sarah, feels no shame in ministering to the
traveller. “There is something beautiful,” cries Clement,
“in a diligent housewife. There is joy all around her.
The children rejoice in their mother, the husband in his
wife, she herself in both, and all together in God.” She
is, on the other hand, far removed from a vain love of
finery. “The handmaids of Christ should love simplicity.
Simplicity is the forerunner of holiness. It smooths out
the inequalities of property. A holy ornament should
surround your wrists, the joy of giving and the diligence
of the housewife. On your feet should glitter untiring
zeal in well-doing, and walking in the ways of righteous-
ness. Your necklaces and chains are modesty and
simplicity. Such jewellery comes from God's work-
shop.”” -
Of work we find but little, nay, strikingly little, in the
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 135
Eathers. Even when Clement of Rome and Barnabas
state in detail what appertains to a truly Christian life,
work is omitted. When, however, it is spoken of, we
directly feel that it is quite differently estimated from
what it was in the heathen world. It is no longer
looked on as a disgrace. Clement of Alexandria repre-
sents labour, even hard labour with the spade,” as
something which is an honour to man. That on the
part of the Church there was earnest exhortation to
labour, is shown by the Apostolical Constitutions. These
make the apostles themselves exhort young men: “Work
with self-restraint at your handiwork, that you may
always have enough for yourselves and for the poor, and
may not be a burden to the Church of God. Idleness
is a disgrace, and he who will not work among us must
not eat, for the Lord our God hates idlers, and none
must be idle who honours God.”” It is characteristic
that the apostles therein bring themselves forward as
examples of labour, a sign that the remembrance of the
apostles, the remembrance that the founders of the
Church had themselves been working men, was a strong
motive to industry. It was just this side of apostolic
life that tradition had carried out still further. We
possess an old catalogue of the apostles, in which some
trade or occupation is ascribed to each of them. Peter,
Andrew and the sons of Zebedee are fishermen, Philip
an ass-driver, Bartholomew a vegetable gardener, James the
son of Alphaeus a mason.” It is a sign of the high respect
entertained for labour, that the Church should depict these
features, or, if we have in them the remains of a true tradi-
tion, should maintain them. It also testifies to the high
estimation of labour, that many ecclesiastics then carried on,
besides their ministrations in the Church, some trade or
136 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
handiwork, and supported themselves by it. This was
not considered as dishonouring nor inconsistent with
their clerical calling. Even after the time of Constantine
the occupations of clerics were so extended, that the
exemption from the trade tax granted them by Constan-
tine was revoked by subsequent emperors, because the
loss of revenue was too great. The Apostolic Constitutions
also enjoin the bishop to take care that orphans should
learn a craft, “for happy is he who can help himself, that
he may not take the place of the orphan, the stranger,
and the widow.” Every kind of work was considered
honourable, except such as ministered to heathen worship,
and all connected therewith—the theatre, the circus, etc.
He, who as a heathen had carried on such an occupa-
tion, had to give it up when he became a Christian.
But trade, and even stockjobbing, were not excluded.
Callistus, afterwards a bishop, formerly kept a money-
changer's stall.”
It is true that the deeper moral appreciation of work,
the idea of the vocation, the connection of the earthly
with the heavenly calling, had not yet risen upon the
Church. The motive to work still continues to be only,
that a man may thereby support himself and give alms,
may help others. At most is it hinted, as in Clement of
Alexandria, that it is manly and a part of self-discipline
to work. The universal duty of work, the importance of
the work of any calling, as a test of our Christian life and
as promoting the kingdom of God, is nowhere expressed.
Hence the Apostolic Constitutions, after having said that
no Christian should wander about idly, but should apply
himself to his work, can only say of the rich, that they
ought to visit believers and hold pious conversation with
them.” Nevertheless, work and benevolence are, in con-
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 137
formity with New Testament thoughts, most intimately
connected, nay, it may be said they were never so
intimately connected as then. There were not many of
the rich who could give of their superfluity in the
churches. The largest quantity of alms and contributions
to the Church's labour of love, came from those who had
to earn their daily bread by the Sweat of their brow.
This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why charity was
then so greatly blessed. What is easily parted with from
superfluity and given without sacrifice, is also easily
taken and easily lavished. But where what has been
given has been laboured for, care that the gift is rightly
applied accompanies it, and a blessing rests upon it.
This is among the traits, which bestow upon the charity
of the period its peculiar character. -
Finally, and this feature of the Christian life should
be specially noted, since, more than anything as yet re-
marked upon, it is specially distinctive of the charity of
this age, Christian life is as yet thoroughly congregational.
The connection of the Christian community was closer
and more intimate than ever again. The individual
Christian lived entirely in and for the Church. The
churches were still small and like a family; each Christian
knew all others. Even Cyprian in a town like Carthage
knew all the members of the church.” When Marcia,
the mistress of Commodus, was about to apply to him for
the Romish Christians imprisoned in the mines, she asked,
and Victor the bishop told her, all their names.” The
churches still consisted in an overwhelming majority of
living members, of those who, with full conviction and
free choice, had taken the step of uniting themselves to
the Church, and who were thoroughly in earnest in their
Christianity. They were as yet unencumbered by the
138 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II,
dead weight of an indifferent multitude. Nor had the
notion as yet obtained, that a perfect Christian life could
only be led in separation from the ordinary congregation,
that this contained only imperfect Christians, while the
perfect led their separate lives apart in monasteries or in
the desert. The more abrupt the external severance from
all non-Christians, the closer was the connection of those
who knew themselves to be united by faith to the one
Lord. Discipline was strict, but it verified the saying:
That which excludes also the more energetically includes.
The distress of the times, the common suffering, bound
them only the more closely together. How must these
churches have kept together in the conflict, how must
each persecution have contributed to weld them into a
solid whole ! If Christians called themselves brothers
and sisters, they were so indeed, and the kiss of peace,
which was given before the celebration of the Holy
Supper, was no empty symbol. Correspondingly with
this, charity also was congregational. The individual
gave to the Church what love impelled him to bestow ;
gifts were collected for the poor in the meetings of the
Church, at public worship and at the Lord's Supper; the
officers of the Church dispensed them. The relief of the
poor by the Church is the special characteristic of the
charity of this age.
This did not exclude a liberal abundance of private
benevolence. “Our compassion gives more in the streets
than your religion does in the temples,” says Tertullian ;”
and we only need to read the description which he gives
of the charity of a Christian woman, as she goes from
street to street, even into the poorest hovels, how she
receives the stranger brother into her house, and opens
kitchen and cellar to provide for him, to be convinced,
CHAP. II.] FIRST LOWE. 139
that there was certainly no lack of such private charity,
of personal almsgiving and the rendering of personal
service. Nor was there yet any kind of effort to narrow
this private benevolence, and to place all charity, in a
onesided manner, under the immediate direction of the
Church and its officers. The first traces of this are not
apparent till the end of this period. According to the
Apostolic Constitutions, the individual member of the
Church, who desires to relieve the poor, is to apply in the
first place to the deacons, for they know the poor; the
deacons are also to be the managers when any one
proposes to prepare a love-feast for the poor.” Nay, they
even express the notion, that the bishop is the mediator
between God and the poor. “It is fit that thou (the
member of the Church) shouldst give, and that he (the
bishop) should dispense.” But even when such restric-
tion and guardianship of private benevolence was not
yet thought of, charity nevertheless found its centre of
gravity not in the latter, but in the relief administered by
the Church. This is the special characteristic of the
times. It certainly continued also, nay, was still more
conspicuously developed, during the period next ensuing,
the times after the triumph of Christianity. It was
then, however, already accompanied by another element,
viz. the institutional. For, while the churches had
hitherto been entirely relegated to their own resources,
the now Christian State asserted itself as a joint factor in
deciding; and both these circumstances contributed to
alter and to deteriorate the character of Church aid to the
poor. In the Middle Ages it entirely disappears, and in
its place we find, on the one side, private benevolence
broken into endless fragments, a wholesale almsgiving,
which properly scarcely deserves the name of relief of the
140 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
poor; on the other, the agency of the orders in hospitals,
monasteries, till at last, in the times of the Reformation,
the notion of the relief of the poor by the Church was
again brought efficiently forward, and its restoration was
striven for under entirely different circumstances.
It is this care of the poor by the Church that we shall
specially have to discuss, for private benevolence with-
draws by its very nature from observation and exhibition.
It is a picture full of light that we have to sketch. It
is like a sunny morning, on which indeed the clouds that
will afterwards obscure the sun are already appearing on
the horizon. It is the time of first love, which passes
away, and must do so. Youth cannot last for ever,
either in the Church or in an individual. If the charity
of this heroic age of the Church, as well as Christian life
in general, is comparatively purest and fairest, the germs
and beginnings of the subsequent corruption are also
latent in this same age.
C H A P T E R III.
THE MEANS FOR THE RELIEF OF THE PóOR.
EVEN the collection of alms for the relief of the poor is
in clösest connection with Church life, is an act of this
Church life itself. It takes place in the assemblies of the
Church, and it is in his contribution to these collections
that the individual testifies his membership therein.
There were, however, in such collections, gifts of two
kinds, the one of which answers rather to Church life on
its legal side, the other to its public worship of God.
This distinction has hitherto been not, or at least not
sufficiently, regarded, a circumstance evidently connected
with the fact, that only very recently has the relation of
the Christian churches to the Romish collegia been clearly
perceived." According to its legal form, the Church
appears as a collegium, very much resembling the legally
allowed collegia of the poor (collegia tenuiorum), and
Christians had undoubtedly cause for giving prominence
to, may, insisting on, this similarity, because it afforded
them, at least in the more peaceful times, and before
Systematic persecutions began, a certain legal protection.
Now, as we before saw, these collegia were allowed to
collect contributions for their social purposes, though
with this limitation, that only one collection per month
was allowed. Thus, too, did the members of the Christian
churches give in every month their contributions to the
141
142 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
church chest ; and Tertullian designates these contributions
Stips, the very same name which they bore in the collegia,and
the church chest arca, as was then also customary. There
was indeed this essential distinction, that the members of
the collegia were obliged to pay a certain sum, while
Christians were quite free to choose whether and how
much they would put into the arca. “Every one deposits
a moderate contribution monthly, if he chooses and if he
can, for no one is forced, but each contributes voluntarily,”
says Tertullian, and adds concerning the application of
the contributions: “It is, so to speak, a depositum of
piety. For it is not applied to feasts and drinking bouts
(as was the custom with the collegia), but to the support
or the interment of the poor, the bringing up of boys and
girls who have neither property nor parents, the relief of
the aged, the shipwrecked, and those who are in mines,
in prisons, or in exile.” Similarly Justin Martyr:
“Those who are able, and desire to do so, give of their
free will as much as they choose. What is collected is
deposited with the president, and with it he supports the
widows and orphans, and those who through sickness or
any other cause are in want, assists prisoners and strangers,
and provides for the needy in general.” He is not here
speaking of the gifts offered at the Lord's Supper, the
oblations, but of the voluntary contributions of the Church,”
which Cyprian also decidedly distinguishes from the obla-
tions.” The two were originally offered in quite different
assemblies, the oblations at the celebration of the Lord's
Supper, the stips at morning worship. In Cyprian the
church chest is not called arca, as in Tertullian, but
corbona. It is also thus designated in the Apostolical
Constitutions.” And this is not without significance.
The name corboma is derived from the Jewish worship
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 143
(comp. Mark vii. 11), and its employment is a sign, that
the likeness between the assemblies of the Christian
Church and the collegia was already beginning to be lost
sight of, and giving way to Old Testament Jewish models.
The analogy with the meetings of the collegia recedes
also in the circumstance, that contributions were after-
wards made, not monthly, but on the first day of every
week. Cyprian reproves those who, when they attend
public worship, disregard the corban, with desecrating the
Sunday. Similarly do the Apostolic Constitutions regard
it as among the duties of a Christian to put something
into the corban every Sunday.” It seems, however, that
only smaller sums were at that time put into the corban,
and that larger gifts had assumed another form. The
corban had then already forfeited the character of church
chest. This latter had become the fund of the poor,
and as such remained in the Church, to give every one
who entered the house of God the opportunity of also
thinking of the poor.
More important than the deposits in the corban, at
least more significant with respect to the development of
charity, are the gifts of natural produce, the so-called
oblations, connected with the celebration of the Lord's
Supper. If the contributions hitherto discussed mani-
fested that the giver was a member of the flock, the
custom of oblations most closely connected the giving of
alms with the highest act of worship, brought forward
gratitude to God as the motive of giving, and, which is
Specially important, gave prominence to the sacrificial
character of the gift.
The custom of offering gifts at the celebration of the
Lord's Supper is evidently connected with the original
form of this solemnity. This formed no part of morning
144 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
Worship, but was joined to an evening meal partaken of
in common. It is thus that we meet with it in the days
of the apostles, and this seems to have remained the
general custom down to the beginning of the second
century. Then, however, the celebration of the Lord's
Supper was separated from the common meal, and trans-
ferred to the morning service," while the evening meals
continued at first still as love-feasts (Agapas) of the
whole Church, and afterwards as meals prepared for its
poorer members. To these meals every member of the
Church contributed according to his ability, and this
custom continued even when the celebration of the Lord's
Supper was transferred to the morning service. At its
commencement the members of the Church brought
natural productions, which were collected by the deacons.
Of these, what was required for the Holy Supper was
placed upon the altar, the rest was applied partly to the
maintenance of church officers, partly to the relief of the
poor. A thanksgiving, expressing gratitude for the gifts
of the first as well as of the second creation, was then
pronounced over the gifts. For believers offered these
gifts to God as the first-fruits of the creatures (prinitiae
creaturum), and at the celebration a portion of these gifts
were to be the vehicles of the gifts of the second creation.”
At the same time, those who had presented the oblations
were mentioned by name in the prayer. The prayer in
question, which we find in almost the same form in all
the older liturgies,” and which may therefore be regarded
as a component part of the liturgy of this period, runs
thus: “And, O Lord, accept also the offerings of those
who to-day bring an offering, as Thou didst accept the
offering of righteous Abel, the offering of our father
Abraham, the incense of Zachariah, the alms of Cornelius,
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 145
and the two mites of the widow ; accept also their thank-
offering, and give them back the eternal for the temporal,
the heavenly for the earthly.” Then followed the prayer
of consecration and the distribution of the holy bread
and wine.
The gifts offered, at first by no means consisted merely
of the bread and wine needed for the Lord's Supper, but
of natural products of every kind. This may be inferred
from the fact that, at the beginning of the fourth century,
a series of resolutions was passed in Councils to restrict
the oblations to bread and wine. Milk, honey and oil,
which were also required in worship, were only allowable
on certain days." Gifts of natural products of another
kind did not, however, therefore cease; they were only
no longer treated as oblations properly so called, no
longer laid upon the altar and blessed, but brought
without benediction into the bishop's house, or if church-
buildings already existed, into the place appointed for
their reception, one of the cells at the east end of the
church, the so-called Pastophorium or Gazophylacium.”
These oblations then, in the narrower and wider sense,
formed during this period the special and chief means
for the relief of the poor. They were supplemented by
other gifts and collections when a special need made
special efforts requisite. This is highly significant with
respect to the whole charity of this period, nay, it may be
said that herein is its character most strikingly manifested.
Herein is disclosed to us its full beauty and purity, but
herein too we have already occasion to observe the points
on which the subsequent, but now already commencing
corruption fastened.
There is significance even in the fact, that almsgiving
took place in public worship, nay itself formed a part of
K
146 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
worship. The Church moved quite on New Testament
lines, and verified the saying of St. James: “Pure and
undefiled worship is to visit the fatherless and widows
in their affliction ” (i. 27), and that of the Epistle to the
Hebrews: “To do good and to communicate forget not,
for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.” Where the
Church learnt of the highest love, the love of Christ, who
died for His people and feeds them with His body and
blood, there love was not merely preached about, extolled
and inculcated, but also practised, and there too it was
not merely symbolically represented, but an act of love
was actually performed, the act of giving to the poor and
needy. The Christian, too, did not approach without a
gift the altar, where he was to partake of the results of
Christ's sacrifice. He showed his gratitude for all God's
gifts in creation and redemption by offering a portion of
these gifts for the good of the poor. It was just at the
altar, where all the members of the Church, both rich and
poor, know themselves to be one in the one Lord, that the
equalization of property between rich and poor by giving
and receiving also took place in love. -
Hereby were rich and poor in the first place brought
into the right position towards each other. The rich
gave what he gave to God, and the poor received what
he received from God. Thus the temptation of the rich
to exalt themselves above the poor, and the humiliation
of the poor at being obliged to receive assistance from
others, were removed, while at the same time discontent
and murmuring, as well as insolent demands and pre-
sumptuous requests, were done away with. The rich
became conscious that he only gave back to God what he
had first received. The poor became conscious, that the
same God, who had imparted to himself a smaller measure
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 147
of earthly goods, yet took care that he should not suffer
want. It was no longer a disgrace to be poor and to
receive assistance from the Church. The poor, like the
officers of the Church, lived of the altar; nay, to apply
to the poor in general a much used expression in the
Epistle of Polycarp, with respect to widows, they were
themselves “the altar of the Church “” on which it
deposits its offerings. Such gifts had not the effect, so
often occurring in other instances, of separating between
rich and poor by increasing and rendering still more
prominent the chasm existing between them, but were
a bond which united them in God, by making them
conscious of their oneness in the one Lord. And the
more so that the gifts were accompanied by prayer.
From the very first the Church has specially remembered
the poor in prayer, the whole congregation praying for
its needy and suffering members. Even in the oldest
form of Church prayer, as found in the Epistle of Clement
of Rome,” we meet with intercessions for the poor, the
hungry, the distressed, and subsequently widows and
orphans are in the Church prayers placed next after
Church officers.” On the other side the poor pray also
for the rich, for, as above remarked, those who brought
gifts were remembered in the prayers of the Church. It
is a beautiful trait, too, that they also are remembered
who would give but cannot, in whom therefore the
disposition of love exists, but who lack the means of
changing the disposition into the act. In the eyes of the
Church they are of equal value with those who actually
give, for she prays “for those who give secretly and those
who give openly, for those who give much and those who
give little, and also for those who would give and
cannot.” The poor is not even to have the annoyance
148 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
of feeling, that the rich surpass him at least in being
able to give, and that they only. are remembered in
prayer. If the poor has but his heart full of love, he
too is remembered in prayer among the givers.
Thus was perfect liberty of giving inculcated, and the
purity of the gift at the same time secured and main-
tained. No one was in any way constrained to give, and
this principle was still most emphatically insisted on.
As each participated without compulsion in the Lord's
Supper, so too did he without compulsion offer his gifts.
The freedom of the gifts cannot be made more strongly
apparent than by the fact, that it is made where fullest
liberty prevails, viz. at the altar. Thus too it is precisely
in the oblations that Irenaeus" perceives this freedom.
He goes on to say that sacrifices are not absolutely
abolished in the New Testament though their form is
indeed altered, because they are no longer offered by
slaves but by freemen, of which just the oblations are the
proof. The Jews gave tithes; Christians, as those who
have obtained freedom, “gladly and freely give all that
they have for the Lord's service.”" The Church indeed
exhorts to giving, warns also and rebukes the sluggish,
but she receives only perfectly free gifts. She takes
only such as can be given with a good conscience. No
unclean gift may be laid upon the Lord's altar. Profit
made from sinful occupations was not accepted as an
oblation, neither were the oblations of impenitent sinners.
The right of presenting oblations was a direct expression
for being in the communion of the Church. Heretics and
excommunicated persons could bring no oblation.” “It
is better to die of want, than to receive gifts from the
ungodly and the wicked,” say the Apostlic Constitutions.
If such gifts are received ignorantly and unintentionally,
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 149
they should be used for fuel, for it is fitting that fire
should consume the gifts of the ungodly.” When
Marcion, the well-known Gnostic, seceded from the
Church, the 200 HS. which he had presented were
returned to him.” The concern of the Church was not
for the amount of the gifts, but for the love shown
thereby, for she knew that love is truly a vital force, and
that much love with even small gifts can effect more
than great gifts without love. This was the reason she
watched with such jealousy over the purity of the gifts,
and of this jealousy even the above-mentioned unusual
decision of the Apostolical Constitutions is a proof.
But above all is it significant that alms should be
viewed as sacrifices and given as sacrifices. Herein too
does the ancient Church directly follow the New Testa-
ment. This thought is excellently developed in Justin
Martyr.” To the heathen the Christians, who had
neither temples nor images, and offered no sacrifices,
appeared to be godless. Justin is defending the Chris-
tians against such a supposition. He shows that they
worship the true and living God and serve Him. It is
true, that they bring Him no such sacrifices as the
heathem, who burn in the fire what God has appointed
for food, but they are taught to regard as sacrifices
whatever they partake of with thanks or bestow upon
the needy. We meet with exactly the same thoughts in
Irenaeus. According to Irenaeus, God did not prescribe
Sacrifices to the Jews for His own sake, because He
stood in need of them, but for their sakes for paedagogic
ends. So too has God enjoined on us Christians the
sacrifice of oblations, not because He needs them, but
that we may not be unfruitful and unthankful. And
the thought that these sacrifices are thankofferings” is
150 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
again and again brought into the foreground in Irenaeus.
Clement of Alexandria” also moves in the same circle of
thought. The whole life of a Christian is a festival, a
continuous sacrifice, and this sacrifice consists on the one
side in prayer and thanksgiving, on the other in imparting
of his substance to the needy. -
In Tertullian, however, a suspicious change is already
apparent in this ancient Christian circle of ideas. He
still adheres indeed to the ancient view, in not yet
applying the notion of sacrifice to the body and blood of
Christ; these are partaken of, not offered. The gifts
presented are the only sacrifice.” But the character of
this sacrifice as a thankoffering is obscured, it becomes
instead a matter of works, and acquires thereby a meri-
torious character. It is a plain sign of this, that oblations
were now brought also for the dead. The husband
offered yearly for his departed wife, the wife for her
husband.” In Cyprian, “offering for every one " is
already the general custom, and it was a part of Church
discipline to refuse permission to make offerings for a
person deceased. Thus Cyprian forbids offerings being
brought for a late member of the Church, because the
deceased had, contrary to the Order of the Church, chosen
an ecclesiastic as guardian.” It is true that this custom
of offering oblations for the dead grew out of the thought
of communion in love and prayer with the departed.
Death does not separate the departed from the Church,
they still belong to it, for it is the one Church of both
perfected and still militant Christians. Cyprian plainly
expresses this thought : “We think of each other, and
even with respect to the departed, our love for them in
the Lord still continues.” “Not merely the high priest,
but also the souls of the departed pray with us,” says
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 151
Origen, and refers to the love which unites the departed
and the living. But another thought is soon mingled
with this, and then becomes the chief notion. While the
offering of the oblation had been hitherto an act of
thanksgiving, followed quite simply by the mention of
those members of the Church who offered it, with the
intention that the offerers should be named before God,
this mention in the intercessory prayer at the Lord's
Supper next became the special end of the oblation. It
was brought for the purpose of obtaining the intercession
to which, as made in this place and at this transaction,
special efficacy was attributed. For this reason too it
was brought for the dead, that the intercession might
apply to them also. The husband offered for his
deceased wife on the anniversary of her departure, says
Tertullian, “to procure for her eternal repose and a share
in the first resurrection.” These are the first beginnings
of a custom, which was subsequently much further
developed by the doctrine of purgatory, and which
became in the Middle Ages a main lever of charity, may
in a certain sense the centre round which it revolved.
Even the other custom mentioned by Tertullian, that
custom so excellent in itself, for the newly married to offer
a common oblation on the succeeding Sunday, partakes of
this notion.” The oblation was to procure the interces-
sion of the Church for the newly married pair. From a
thankoffering, the oblation had become a work performed
for the obtaining of grace.
But the thoughts originally connected with the obla-
tions were also obscured in another aspect. While
Tertullian still entirely adheres to the old view, that the
presentation of the oblations is itself the thankoffering of
the Church, the presentation of the body and blood of
152 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book II.
Christ by means of the priest becomes after Cyprian the
proper offering. Of course this could not but react upon
the manner in which the oblations were regarded. If
these had formerly been the common thankoffering of
the Church, the symbolical expression of the offering of
the heart accompanying prayer, they now became an offer-
ing of alms. This change of import is plainly testified
by the position taken in the liturgy by the brotherly kiss.
This was formerly given before the oblations, these being
the proper offering. Now it was given after the oblation,
for not these but the priestly presentation of the body
and blood of Christ, had become the offering proper.”
As the original view of the oblations as a thank-
offering more and more recedes, the offering of alms
becomes increasingly looked upon as a meritorious act.
It is especially Origen who thus regards it. The first
forgiveness of sins is obtained by baptism, the Second by
martyrdom, the third is that which is procured by alms-
giving. For the Saviour says: “Give alms, and all
things are clean unto you.” Similarly does Cyprian
regard the offering of alms as the means given to man
for obtaining the remission of even post-baptismal sins.”
The relation too of alms to prayer now becomes changed.
Prayer and alms from the beginning always accompanied
each other, as Scripture had already combined them.
They form together the outward expression of the inward
sacrifice of the heart. Now, however, alms are regarded
as giving efficacy to prayer. Without alms prayer is
unfruitful, it is alms that make it bear fruit, because
they dispose God to kindness and indulgence. “For,”
explains Cyprian, “He who will at the day of judgment
reward alms and good works, listens more graciously even
to-day to a prayer, if it is accompanied by alms.” “A
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 153
prayer is good when accompanied by fasting and alms.”
We have here then already the three good works, which
henceforth are more and more regarded as properly
speaking good and meritorious : prayer, fasting, and
almsgiving. The original thought, so well brought out
by Irenaeus and Justin, that the oblations and other alms
are a thankoffering, is choked, and alms have already
become a propitiatory and meritorious work.
The proceeds of the fund for the poor and of the
oblations formed at this time the chief, and as a rule the
sufficient means for relieving the poor, for Church pro-
perty with any considerable returns did not as yet exist.
The accumulation of permanent Church property, at least
the acquisition of estates, begins to occur indeed in the
last times of the conflict, but the possessions of the
Church were still at any rate very inconsiderable. If
the ordinary means did not suffice, or if some special
need required special resources, these were obtained by a
collection, a way of gathering money not unknown to the
heathen, who very often obtained funds for a statue, a
monument, the building of a bridge or the restoration of
a temple, by collecting contributions.” Tertullian *men-
tions such collections, and the Apostolic Constitutions
enjoin them on the bishop. “If the gifts (the oblations)
are not sufficient, tell the brethren so, and appoint a
collection and succour therewith the widows and
orphans.” From a letter of Cyprian,” we learn par-
ticulars of such a collection. Many Christians having
been made prisoners of war in Numidia, the bishops of
that country applied for help to Cyprian, who appointed
a collection from both clerics and laics, which yielded
100,000 HS. (£877). Cyprian accompanied its con-
signment with a special list of the givers, “that you may
154 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
remember the brethren and sisters who willingly and
speedily helped in so necessary a work, in your prayers,
and give them a compensation for their good work in
the offerings and prayers.” It is evident that prayer at
the celebration of the Lord's Supper in the Numidian
churches is intended.
The extraordinary gifts bestowed upon the Church by
certain affluent individuals, when they joined it, formed
another source. Thus Cyprian at his conversion sold
lands and gardens, to give the price to the Church and to
the poor.” He also subsequently assigned to it part of
his private property, when the fund for the poor was
during the distress caused by persecution insufficient.”
That similar acts often took place is expressly mentioned
by Eusebius,” but they did not furnish considerable sums,
because the great body of Christians still belonged to the
poorer classes. By far the greater part was given not by
persons of property, but was on the contrary the result
of the small gifts of people of low condition, who, as the
Apostolical Constitutions say, gave of their labour and of the
sweat of their brow.” It was just this which gave special
value to the gifts. In those days it was not a propor-
tionate though still a trifling gift that was given out of
superfluity, but they who had little gave much because
they loved much. Nay, they who could not give of their
earnings imposed privations on themselves, that they might
be able to give as alms what they had spared by fasting.
Already in the Pastor of Hermas, the shepherd teaches
Hermas how he ought to fast. He is to abstain from
drink and food, and, after calculating by the expenditure
of other days what he has saved, to put it aside and to give
it to the widows and orphans and the poor. Thus will
fasting be an offering acceptable to God.” Similarly
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 155
Origen.” To abstain from evil, he says, is the true fast,
but to abstain from meats which God has created to be
received with thanksgiving by believers, is not true fasting.
This is not however to be said, to loosen the bridle upon
the flesh, for we have the forty days’ fast, and the fourth
and sixth days of the week on which we fast. The
Christian is also at liberty to fast every day, not in the
superstition of an observance, but in the power of
abstinence. Origen then adds: “There is also another
kind of pious fasting, whose praise is expressed in the
writings of some of the apostles.” For we read in a
certain book the judgment of the apostles: “Happy is he
who fasts for the purpose of feeding the poor.” “Such
fasting is acceptable to God and truly worthy. For it
imitates Him who laid down His life for His brethren.”
The Apostolic Constitutions also give the express injunc-
tion : * “If any one has nothing to give, let him fast and
apply the day's share to the Saints,” which in this place
certainly means the Christians condemned to the mines.
Besides, it was not merely individuals who employed this
means of procuring themselves the power of giving alms,
it sometimes also happened, that the bishop would
prescribe a fast to the whole Church for the purpose of
applying what was thus spared to the wants of the needy.
However admirable may be the strength of the love which
thus imposed sacrifices on itself, that it might be able
to give to others, we must not on the other hand ignore
the fact, that this combination of almsgiving and fasting
already announced a corruption of almsgiving by secondary
motives of an ascetic character. Emphasis was at least
laid on the renunciation therein shown, as well as on the
love of the brethren, and it was just this notion, that
there was some independent moral value in self-depriva-
156 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
tion of a portion of earthly possessions, which became,
as We shall See, extremely dangerous to charity, nay
destroyed its inmost core.
Thoughts already emerge fitted to obscure the freedom
of giving which was at first so firmly adhered to. .The
effort may be perceived, though as yet only in its be-
ginnings, to convert freely offered, into legally prescribed
gifts. Two things conduced to this. First the inclina-
tion, by reason of viewing of Christianity as a new law,
to apply to Christians the appointments of the Old
Testament law. And this not merely by seeing in
Christianity a spiritual fulfilment of Old Testament
precepts, as e.g. of circumcision in baptism, but also by
transferring the appointments of the ceremonial law
directly to the Church.” Now the Old Testament enjoined
the children of Israel to give first-fruits and tithes. The
question then, whether Christians were not also obliged
to do the same, was an obvious one. Irenaeus” indeed
sees the advance of the New Testament beyond the Old
Testament in the fact, that the former contains no external
command, but that Christians gave freely more than the
Jews gave legally. So long as this was actually the
fact, there was certainly no necessity to recur to the Old
Testament law. But when love began evidently to wax
cold, when Christians no longer gave so much, the thought
must have the more impressed itself, that Christians were
at least bound to do so as much as Jews. This is shown
by the circumstance, that it was none other than Cyprian,
the first in whom we encounter complaints of the decrease
of free gifts, who was also the first in the West to refer
to the tithes, and that just in connection with such a
complaint. He recalls the fact, that the primitive
Christians sold their possessions and gave the price to the
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 157
poor. “We on the contrary now give not even the
tenth of ours, and while the Lord commands us to sell,
we rather buy, and increase our estates.” Though
we perceive from this, that the tenth was not then the
law, also that it was not as subsequently regarded as
an apostolic institution, yet there is a ring in the words
indicating that Cyprian was well inclined to make it a
law.
It is in the East that we already meet with the first
attempts to raise it into one. Origen directly declares
the Old Testament law to be on this point binding.
“The law commands the priests to sacrifice the firstlings
of all fruits and cattle. I hold it needful to observe this
law, as well as certain others, literally (therefore not
merely spiritually as in the oblations, which were often
looked upon as the first-fruits). For there are some laws
of the Old Testament, which the disciples of the New
must of necessity keep.” Origen himself evidently
gives his view as only a private opinion. It was in the
nature of the case, that it soon became something more.
The various writings in which the ordinances and rules
of Christian and ecclesiastical life were in the end of the
third and beginning of the fourth century deposited, and
whose latest edition the Apostolical Constitutions appear
to have been, all contain the command of the first-fruits
and the tenth. In the book of Clement it is required
that a believer who tills a field should bring the first-
fruits to the bishop.” In the canons attributed to
Hippolytus, the command is still further enlarged.” Not
only the first-fruits of the barn-floor and the wine-press,
of oil, honey, milk and wool, but also the first-fruits of
the profits of handicraft are to be brought to the bishop
who then pronounces a blessing upon them, that they
158 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
may serve for the feeding of the poor. Lastly, the
Apostolic Constitutions expressly declare Christians, on
the ground of the Old Testament law, to be bound to
give first-fruits and tithes. This is in the second book,
which is prae-Constantinian, restricted to corn, wine, oil
and field-fruits, while in the seventh, which certainly
belongs to the times after Constantine, the tenth of
everything is required.” Of course all this does not
show that the tenth was as yet law. The works quoted
desired to make it such, and the ample proof adduced
for the law of tithes in the Apostolic Constitutions just
serves to show, that the command made its appearance as
a new one which still stood in need of this. In reality
the duty of giving tithes was not yet carried out,
although individuals might personally fulfil it. It is
well seen, however, which way the current was tending,
and how far, even so early as the turn of the third and
fourth centuries, that liberty of giving was departed from,
which St. Paul makes so prominent in his Epistle to the
Corinthians, and which found in Irenaeus its enthusiastic
eulogist.
The needful data to answer one obvious question, viz.
what the means for the relief of the poor in a church
might at this period amount to, are wanting. The only
two numbers which, so far as I can see, are extant, show
however, that the sums must have been, not merely in
proportion to the size and means of the church, but also
in themselves, very considerable. Cyprian collected in his
church 100,000 HS., i.e. above £850, for the Numidian
prisoners. The Carthaginian church cannot have been
large, Cyprian makes the passing remark, that he knew
every member. This points to at most from 3000 to
4000 persons. If such a church, in which there were
CHAP. III.] MEANS FOR RELIEF OF THE POOR. 159
certainly many poor, made in a short time a collection of
over £850 for one single definite object, and that more-
over for members of foreign churches, this testifies to a
great readiness in giving. According to a note in
Eusebius, 1500 widows and indigent persons were Sup-
ported in Rome by the Church. Reckoning then for
an adult a month's rations of five Roman bushels, which
according to their average value in the imperial era were
worth about 4s. 5d., a year's ration would amount to about
£2, 12s. Hence, if we reckon only £2, 10s. per head,
we have for the 1500, £3750.” Here, then, we come
upon a considerable sum for even the Roman church.
In later times far larger sums were given, but no period
gave with a liberality proportioned to this. This indeed,
considering the smallness of the churches and the scanty
possessions of their members, was only made possible by
the fact that all gave and gave liberally. It is just this
which distinguishes this period above others.
CHAPTER IV.
OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY.
IT is not in its resources but in individual energy, that
charity has its centre of gravity. Considerable as were
the sums distributed during this period by the members
of the Church, later ages furnished incomparably greater
and yet attained incomparably smaller results. What
distinguished this period above all others, and produced
results never again attained in like proportion, was on
the one hand the personal energy which was exerted in
the Church, and next the regulations by which and the
offices in which this energy and by it the existing means
were employed.
The congregational character borne, as we have seen,
by the charity of this period, naturally involves the fact,
that its conduct lay where the conduct of the Church in
general lay, i.e. in the hands of the presbytery, and
subsequently in that of the bishop. The few documents
which we possess of the same date as the origin of the
episcopate, exhibit the deacons in a position equally
dependent upon the presbyters, as afterwards upon the
bishop. They never independently managed the relief
of the poor, not even when indications are here and there
found which lead us to conclude, that they disposed with
somewhat greater freedom of the contributions for the
needy." In the Epistle of Polycarp,” and also in the
160
CHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 161
Shepherd of Hermas,” the care of widows and orphans
is not designated as the duty of the deacons, but of the
presbyters. Here, too, it is seen, that there never was
an independent office for the relief of the poor besides
that for the government of the Church. When, then, the
bishop was raised above the college of presbyters, and
the constitution of the Church became monarchical, the
increasing authority of the bishop must naturally have
made the position of the deacons still more dependent,
whether in the care of the poor or in other duties. The
relief of the poor, like the entire conduct of the Church,
was more and more concentrated in the person of the
bishop, and this concentration rather increased than
decreased during the course of the third century. From
the Epistles of Cyprian we perceive, that the bishop
exclusively administered the means for the poor, and
that the deacons merely occupied a position of service,
inquiring by order of the bishop into the circumstances
of the poor, and then conveying to them what the bishop,
with whom alone the decision rested, appointed." Only
in the time of persecution, when Cyprian was obliged to
retire from Carthage for a period, did he divide the
existing resources among the deacons, and commission
them to deal with them according to their judgment,
“that several may have wherewith to alleviate their
affliction and distress.”* Still Cyprian did not hereby
give this branch of his office entirely out of his hands,
for even from his place of exile he still communicated
injunctions with respect to it, and had even left a larger
sum with the presbyter Rogatianus, who evidently exer-
cised, in the place of the bishop, some kind of oversight
of the deacons.” The same kind of thing took place in
Rome. At the time of the Decian persecution, Fabian
L
162 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
the bishop' divided the Church funds among the seven
deacons. It was also during a persecution, that the
deacon Laurentius gave away all the existing means to
the poor, and then presented the poor to the town-prefect
as the treasures of the Church. But these were extra-
ordinary circumstances, from which no general conclusions
can be drawn. In quieter times, when all went on in
the usual order, the whole care of the poor was concen-
trated in the hands of the bishop.” This too we find in
the Apostolical Constitutions. They compare the bishop
to a father, the deacon to a son. As a son does nothing
without his father, so is the deacon to do nothing without
the bishop. He is to give nothing to a poor person
without the previous knowledge of the bishop. By so
doing he would slander the bishop, as though he did not
care for the poor.” The bishop himself is responsible to
God alone for the management of the alms for the poor.
No one must interfere with or control him. It is, how-
ever, expressly enjoined as a sacred duty upon the bishop
to be faithful and conscientious in the relief of the poor.
He is to be compassionate, zealous in love, liberal, one
who loves widows and strangers, ready to do service,
himself a good deacon, and then he is reminded of the
account which God will one day demand of him."
Such a concentration of charity in one hand could be
salutary only on the supposition, that sufficient and able
assistance was at his command. This he received from
the deacons, whom we find in post-apostolic times in all
churches. We need but glance at the Epistles of Polycarp
and Ignatius to see, the very different appearance they
make in these, and in the apostolic epistles. Presbyters
and deacons, and afterwards bishop priests and deacons
now form the regular official staff of every church. Their
CHAP. IV.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 163
numbers vary. In many places the number of seven was
felt binding after the analogy of the seven at Jerusalem.
It was thus in Rome, where two of the fourteen districts
of the town were apportioned to each deacon.” The
Council too of Neo-Caesarea, said to have been held in
314, determined the number of the deacons at seven.”
Elsewhere the number of deacons was regulated by the
size of the church. A resolution corresponding herewith
is contained in the Apostolical Constitutions.” Even so
early as the third century, we meet with sub-deacons,
evidently because the deacons did not suffice. They
relieved the deacons of the inferior duties. There were
in Rome seven sub-deacons corresponding to the number
of deacons, as we find stated in a letter of the Bishop
Cornelius to Bishop Fabius of Antioch.” The first
mention of them in Spain is in the Synod of Elvira (305).
In the East they were of still later appearance, not
occurring during our present period.” For the rest, the
sub-deacons do not seem to have been employed in the
care of the poor, but to have relieved the deacons of all
kinds of subordinate employments, especially the service at
the church door, the maintenance of order in the church,
the deliverance of messages, etc., by which arrangement not
only was the position of the deacons raised, but their atten-
tion was more entirely given to the relief of the poor.
According to the Apostolic Constitutions, the deacons
were to be the eye and ear of the bishop, through them
he was to learn what was going on in the church, they
were at the same time to be the right hand by which he
acted.” And especially so in the care of the poor. The
bishop made use of them both in the collection and dis-
tribution of funds. They made exceptions to gifts and
gathered contributions, while on the other hand they
164 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
conveyed to the poor what the bishop appointed for
them. Above all, they had to investigate strictly and in
detail the circumstances of the poor. They went about
into houses, and when they found cases of distress they
notified them to the bishop, that he might make the
necessary arrangements.” They were not to act behind
the bishop's back, though a certain amount of freedom
was left them ; at least the Apostolical Constitutions enjoin
the deacons to dispose of the Smaller affairs themselves,
that the bishop may not be overburdened, and allude on
the occasion to the advice given by Jethro to Moses.”
Probably a list of those relieved by reason of the informa-
tion obtained by the deacons was now already made, the
so-called matricula in which were entered the names of
all relieved, with a statement of their circumstances and
of what they were to receive.” The services of the
deacon are the most fully described in the book of
Clement,” which indeed in its present state is perhaps
post-Constantinian. He is to minister to the infirm, to
strangers and widows, to be a father to orphans, to go
about into the houses of the poor to see if there is any
one in need, sickness, or any other adversity ; he is to
care for and give information to strangers; he is to wash
the paralytic and infirm, that they may have refreshment
in their pains. Every one is to have what he is in need
of with respect to the Church. He is also to visit inns,
to see if any poor or sick have entered, or any dead are
in them ; if he finds anything of the kind, he is to notify
it, that what is needful may be provided for every one.
If he lives in a seaside town, he is to look about on the
shore to discover if a body has been washed ashore, and
if he finds one to clothe and bury it. He is not to burden
the bishop with too many requests, but to make him
CHAP. IV.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 165
acquainted with all on Sundays. It is very significant
that the deacons have a kind of patronage of the poor.
If the deacons are on the one hand enjoined carefully to
assist the poor in every respect, the latter have to render
obedience and respect to the deacons.” This was of
special importance, when the question was, to enable the
poor to resume work, and to induce them to earn their
own living.
There was a female as well as a male diaconate. I
say designedly a female diaconate—not deaconesses. For
there were not always during this period, nor everywhere
in the Church, deaconesses, though there was always and
everywhere somewhat of female ministration (diakonia),
though not by any means in the proportion or develop-
ment usually supposed. The history of female ministra-
tions in the ancient Church has caused great confusion of
two kinds. First, distinction has not been made between
widows and deaconesses, but the former have without
further ceremony been regarded as deaconesses, e.g., by
Bingham in former, and Neander in more recent times.
Secondly, the inclination has been fostered to transfer many
features taken from the idea of the modern deaconesses
to the first centuries, because the desire to find there the
deaconesses of to-day” caused their presence to be believed.
The development of female ministrations was in its larger
features probably as follows: that of the two institutions
existing in the Apostolic Age, viz. those of widows and
deaconesses, the latter for a long period entirely dis-
appeared. In both East and West only widows are
met with. Then at the end of the third century the
institution of deaconesses again emerges in the East, and
attains a maturity and dissemination which it never
before possessed, while the Western Church, in which
166 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
the need of a female diaconate was not nearly so great as
in the Eastern, did not accept the institution of deacon-
esses, at least not as a generally diffused one, but kept
to that of widows, which certainly was soon afterwards
vitiated, and was never of much importance in the matter
of charity. During the whole period terminating about
the end of the third century, deaconesses are mentioned
but once, and that in the well-known letter of Pliny to
the Emperor Trajan.” Neither in the writings of the
apostolic Fathers, nor in Tertullian or Cyprian, do we meet
with them, and Origen's exposition of Rom. xvi. 1 shows,
that this teacher no longer knew of deaconesses, whom
he also omits in his enumeration of Church dignitaries.**
I)eaconesses have disappeared, though we everywhere
meet with widows, who, supported by the Church, occupy
a position of honour therein, and at the same time
render it their services. This is evidently the same
institution with which 1 Tim. v. makes us acquainted.
Ignatius frequently sends greeting to the widows, they
always follow immediately after the deacons and evidently
belong to the clerical body. They are mentioned by
Polycarp.” In the Shepherd of Hermas, Grapte occupies
a position of honour at the head of the widows.” In the
homilies of Clement, the regulation of the institution of
widows forms part of the complete Ordering of offices in a
Church.” Clement of Alexandria reckons widows among
Church dignitaries.” Origen knows of them,” and so does
Tertullian. The institution is evidently one spread over the
whole Church. We best learn the position of these widows
from the writings of Tertullian.” They are older widows,
who have resolved to remain unmarried. Being chosen
for the purpose on account of their exemplary Christian life
and other qualities, they occupy an honourable position in
cHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 167
the Church, and are at the same time maintained thereby.
They are at the head of the women in the Church, and
have to speak at marriages.” Although they are reckoned
among the clergy, and occupy a seat of honour in the
assemblies of the Church, they are not allowed to speak
publicly in the Church, though they do instruct the
women and children, especially those being prepared for
baptism.” There is certainly no distinct intimation, that
they also performed such offices as belonged to the
diaconate, though it may be inferred, that in the Western
Church the institution continued to exist, when in the
Eastern much that was allotted to widows was transferred
to deaconesses, and certain intimations which at least
tend to this are met with. Lucian, in his satire of the
death of Peregrinus,” relates that when Peregrinus was
cast into prison, the Christians ministered to him with
great zeal. Certain aged widows, accompanied by orphan
children, were seen waiting at the prison early in the
morning. This leads us to assume, that it was among the
services allotted to widows, to care for those imprisoned
for conscience' sake, to provide them with food and other
necessaries, and that for this purpose they employed the
assistance of the orphan children. This notice, as well
as the circumstance that widows and orphans are always
named together, also places widows in relation to orphans.
It was, moreover, natural to entrust the bringing up of
orphans to the widows.” Nor would that care of the poor
and sick, which we at present regard as the chief point
in the office of deaconesses, be entirely absent from that
of widows, though it cannot be denied that it was strik-
ingly in the background. If it had been of greater
importance, more would certainly have been said of it
by Cyprian, Origen, and Tertullian. The main point
168 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
certainly was the honourable position occupied by the
widows, their belonging to the clerical order, presiding
Over and instructing the other women of the Church.
A passage of Origen is in this respect decisive, for he
interprets 1 Tim. v. 10, where it is said of widows, that
they wash the Saints' feet, figuratively of doctrine. And
if the entertainment of strangers had then belonged to
the duties of widows, such an exposition would hardly
have been possible.
During the last decades of the third and first of the
fourth century, a change was effected in the Eastern
Church, but certainly only in this. There arose beside
the institution of widows an order of deaconesses, to
whom the former surrendered both their office and their
post of honour, so that they were now only maintained by
the Church, and in return prayed for it, while in other
respects they fell behind the deaconesses—nay, were under
their supervision. It is thus that we find matters in the
Apostolical Constitutions” in the canons ascribed to
Hippolytus,” and in the epistles of the pseudo-Ignatius.”
We are certainly without the documents which might
enable us accurately to follow up this change to its
motives, but their main features may nevertheless be
perceived. It is evident that several motives co-operated,
the advancing high estimation of celibacy and deprecia-
tion of the married state, the need that various offices
should be performed for the female portion of the flock
and the development of worship, especially the Arcani
Disciplina. Already in Tertullian we find traces of a
disorganization of the institution of widows. What he
characterizes as a monstrosity, viz. that a virgin not yet
twenty years of age was received into the viduage,” shows,
that the thought had already receded which had called
CHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 169
the order of widows into existence, viz. that the widow
who had behind her an unspotted married life was the
worthiest representative of the female sex, and the fittest
to assist other women with her advice and comfort, and
to set before them an example worthy of imitation, and
that, on the contrary, unmarried virginity was beginning to
be more highly esteemed. From Tertullian even it may
be inferred, that the occurrence which excited his wrath
was not an isolated one, and when Clement of Alexandria
says of a widow, who was leading a truly Christian
widowhood, that she was “a virgin again,” it is a sign
that there was already an inclination to value the present
unmarried condition of the widow above her former
married life. This must certainly have lowered the
position of widows and exalted that of virgins; and in
fact, though subsequently the admission among the
deaconesses of a widow, supposing her to have been but
once married, was not excluded, it formed the exception,
the rule being that virgins were taken for this office.”
It is thus evident that the widow, hitherto so highly
esteemed, now took a position inferior to virgin-deacon-
esses. This is plainly shown in the revision of the
Ignatian Epistles, which is about contemporaneous with
the Apostolical Constitutions. While in the genuine
Epistles, the widows immediately succeed the deacons,
the Order in the revised Epistles is, that the deacons are
followed first by the subordinate clergy, then by the
deaconesses, the virgins (living an ascetic life), and last
of all by the widows. It is the same in the Apostolical
Constitutions, in which widows in general occupy a very
subordinate position, and scarcely a trace of their former
high estimation is to be found.”
The higher view of the clerical office co-operated in
170 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
lowering the position of widows, and making it untenable.
Their position and sphere of action at first corresponded
more with the office of the presbyter than with that of
the deacon. They were in a certain sense the presbyters
of the women. So leading a position as that of instructing
the women, however, was no longer in accordance with
the notions of office entertained in the third century.
The presbyter had become a priest, the climax of his
office now lay in the offering. This a widow could not
present. Nor could her position with respect to the
women be maintained. A woman could only be placed
on a level with a deacon, who likewise could not offer,
and the whole development may be expressed by saying,
that the official position of the woman in the Church fell
from the level of the presbyterate to that of the diaconate.
Now to provide for the female circle in the Church just
those services which the deacon performed for the men,
was, with the increase of the churches, at all events in
the East, a necessity. The service rendered at baptism,
the anointing after baptism, could not be transferred to
men. The case too of sick, and the relief of poor females,
was not suitable for men, and when, through the enhanced
dignity of the priestly office, the pastoral care of women
also came into the hands of the priests, there was needed,
by reason of the customs of the East, which forbade the
intercourse of men and women, some one to be the
medium of such intercourse. It is true that many of
these needs were also formerly in existence, but when the
churches were small, there was found, independently of
that rendered by the widows, a sufficiency of voluntary
female assistance. And here too it must not be forgotten,
that the diaconate, and especially the female diaconate,
was of a transient character, and that much of what
CHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 171
belonged to the vocation of a deaconess also fell to all
women. This is very plainly shown in the Church rules
ascribed to Clement. After settling what were to be the
services of the deaconesses, it is there added : “But if
another woman of the Church is desirous to do good
works, let her do so according to her inclination.” There
is here evidently a glance of the former state of things,
which the institution of deaconesses was not intended
entirely to do away with. Voluntary services, however,
were no longer sufficient to meet the increased claims for
them, and as there was in those days a tendency to give
official stability to all services, even in the civil sphere,
so here too it was no less apparent.
In the book just quoted, there is found a passage,
transferred also to the Apostolical Constitutions, as used
in the Church in Egypt,” plainly showing that the
motives stated above, were actually those then active. It
is a conversation of the apostles concerning female minis-
trations.” Andrew says: “It is fitting, my brethren, for
women also to exercise a ministration.” Peter replies:
“That has been already done, but that some appointment
must be made concerning the dispensing of the body and
blood of Christ ;” and John then reminds them, “that the
Lord had not let women share in the institution of the
Lord's Supper.” Martha then interposes with the words:
“Because of Mary, for He saw her smile.” Mary: “I did
not smile, but the Lord said beforehand : ‘The weak is
saved by the strong.’” This sets a limit to the office of
the woman, she is not a priestess, she cannot bring the
offering, may not dispense the sacrament; the man does
this, and through his instrumentality the woman also
receives the benefit. But she is to serve. As there is a
ministry for men, so is there also a ministry “for women.”
172 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
Similarly is the bishop enjoined in the Apostolical Con-
stitutions: “Choose a deaconess for the service of the
women.” Epiphanius too makes a regard for decorum a
reason for the establishment of a female diaconate.”
To this was added another need, that experienced at
public worship. We must not overlook the fact, that
public Worship was beginning to assume a far more
elaborate form than it had hitherto done, that its already
often splendid appearance necessitated the performance of
a variety of Services, that the Arcani Disciplina especially,
which was now introduced, required an oversight of the
worship and its frequenters, quite unknown at a former
period. Many persons were required to take care, by
strict oversight, and especially by careful watch at the
church doors, that no uninitiated persons should take part
in the service. The same times in which the inferior
male church-officers were increased, created also a corre-
sponding female office, that of the deaconesses. For it
is in fact here, viz. in the service of the Church, that we
find the centre of gravity of this office, and not, where we
are inclined to seek it, in the care of the sick and poor.
The deaconesses were above all “the guardians of the
sacred doors.” This duty stands in the first rank, when
they are greeted by the pseudo-Ignatius; and the prayer
of consecration for deaconesses in the Apostolical Con-
stitutions does not see the model of the deaconesses in
such women as Tabitha, but in Anna and Huldah, who
served in the temple, and in the portresses in the Old
Testament.
The supposed work of Clement already so often quoted,
gives us a glimpse into the transition from the institute of
widows to that of deaconesses. Deaconesses properly
so called, it is as yet unacquainted with, but it appoints,
CHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 173
that there should be three widows in every church, two
of whom engage to pray, while the third undertakes the
care of the sick and needy. She is to be willing to give
her services and temperate, she is to announce the names
of the needy to the elders, she is not to be greedy of gain,
not given to wine, that she may be able to watch at night
services.” It is true that the book, from which this
notice is taken, does not represent the common faith of
the Catholic Church. It is nevertheless likely that a
genuine historical feature is here preserved. The attempt
was obviously made to supply a prevailing necessity, at
first by transferring to a single widow, the services of
deaconesses until the further step was taken of insti-
tuting actual deaconesses. Perhaps it is in connection
with the first step, that only one deaconess is spoken of
in the Canons of Hippolytus. The older portions too of
the Constitutions have almost always but one deaconess
—a number, i.e. an order of deaconesses first appearing
in the later books.”
We must not, moreover, conceive of the matter as
though the deaconesses had suddenly everywhere super-
seded the widows. The institution of deaconesses seems
indeed to have spread rapidly. The 19th Canon of
Nicea treats it as already generally existing even among
the sects,” but it was not till the Council of Laodicea
that the fall of the ancient institution of widows was
sealed by the general prohibition (by Canon 11) of the
future appointment of presiding widows. Finally, the
West did not agree in making this entire change. The
widows here remained in their ancient position. At
least, they were not superseded by deaconesses proper.
There never were in the Western Church deaconesses
like those in the Eastern. Those that have been esteemed
174 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
such were widows, to whom the name of deaconesses
may have been here and there transferred, and dedicated
virgins (Sanctimoniales), who voluntarily assisted them.
This is proved by the manner in which Jerome interprets
the passages Rom. xvi. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 11, for with respect
to both he says by way of explanation, that in the East
(therefore not in the West) there are still deaconesses;
and adds to this by a passage in the letter of the same
Father to Nepotian, in which he advises the latter to let
himself be taken care of in his sickness by a brother or
sister, or if he has not such relations “the Church
maintains many aged women, who give their services and
receive support while serving, so that your infirmity will
bear the fruit of an almsgiving.”.” This plainly shows,
that in the West the aged women, the widows, still per-
formed the services, which had in the East devolved on
the deaconesses. The epitaphs too, in which so many
deacons and dedicated virgins occur, never name deacon-
esses in the West. I at least have found but one from
Upper Italy, and this, standing as it does alone, cannot
prove the existence of an institution of deaconesses.”
That of widows did not indeed last much longer in the
West. If it remained somewhat longer than in the East,
it could not but succumb there also. The only difference
was, that no compensation for it was made in the West.
The times were too stormy, and charity had already
assumed another character. -
In the oriental churches the deaconesses undoubtedly
belonged to the clergy, although only to its lower order.
The Apostolical Constitutions assign to them the rank of
sub-deacons, and their supplies correspond with this—the
bishop receiving four portions, the presbyter three, the
deacon two, and the deaconess like the sub-deacon one
CHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 175
portion.” The deaconess, as belonging to the clergy,
was also ordained. This has been questioned, but it is
plainly shown by many passages, in which the laying on
of hands is spoken of in the case of deaconesses.” We
have a certainly somewhat later description of the in-
auguration of a deaconess, which was, however, essentially
in use also at the date of the Apostolical Constitutions,
which in Book viii. give only the prayer of consecration.”
The deaconess in a veil comes to the altar. The bishop
greets her with : “The grace of God, which is powerful
in the weak, be with thee.” Then she bends not her
knee, but her head, and the bishop prays: “Eternal God,
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who didst create
man and woman, who didst fill Miriam and Deborah, and
Anna and Huldah with the Holy Spirit, who didst not
deem it unfit, to let Thine only-begotten Son be born
of a woman, who also didst appoint in the tabernacle
a witness, and in the temple female guardians of Thy
sacred doors, look upon this Thine handmaid, who is
chosen for Thy service, give her Thy Holy Spirit, and
cleanse her from all pollution of the flesh and the spirit,
that she may worthily perform the work committed to
her, to Thy glory and the glory of Thy Christ, with whom
and the Holy Spirit be glory and worship to Thee, for
ever, Amen.” After the prayer he puts on her, under
the veil, the Orarium (the ancient stole) of the deacons.
Then follows the celebration of the Lord's Supper, at
which the deaconess receives the cup from the hand of
the deacon, but on her part does not hand it on, but
places it on the altar, this being the sign that she is not
to take part in the distribution of the sacrament.
The services of the deaconesses lay first, as already
remarked, in the sphere of public worship. They stood
176 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK II.
as portresses at those entrances of the church which
were appointed for women, to keep away unfit visitors;
they showed women, especially strangers, their places, and
kept order. According to the book of Clement above
referred to, they were also to reprove those who came
too late, and to pray with them, that they might be more
zealous.” Then they attended on women at baptism,
and, after the priest had anointed them on the forehead,
performed the unction of the breast.” I do not find
that they had also to prepare candidates for baptism by
instruction, though a synod in Carthage does indeed
prescribe such instruction by widows and God-betrothed
virgins. They are to teach inexperienced and uneducated
women before baptism, how they are to answer the
baptizer, and how they ought to live after its reception.”
According to the book of Clement, it is also their duty to
carry the sacrament to sick women, who cannot go to
church. This seems, however, not to have been the
general custom.”
Besides these Church services, however, the deacon-
esses were also active in the care of the poor. They
occupy, in respect of the female portion of the congrega-
tion, exactly the same position which the deacon does in
respect of the male. The bishop could not send a
deacon to visit the women, because of unbelievers, lest,
as the Apostolic Constitutions say, evil reports should
arise. Hence he is in this case to send a deaconess.”
We must therefore conclude, that the deaconess in this
case investigated the circumstances of the poor, and then
furnished the necessary relief. Also, when a woman on
the other hand desired to go to the bishop, she could only
do so under the escort of a deaconess, for the sake of
decorum.” The entire ministrations of the diacomate, so
CHAP. Iv.] OFFICIALS AND OFFICES FOR CHARITY. 177
far as they relate to women, are very expressly trans-
ferred to deaconesses. After first describing the qualities
of a deacon, it is said: “And let the woman (the
deaconess) be zealous in assisting the women. But
both are to undertake the offices of bringing messages,
going out, giving assistance and Service. They are not
to be ashamed of ministering to the poor after the Lord's
example, who came not to be ministered to, but to
minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.” Nay,
if needs be, they too must not hesitate to lay down their
lives for the brethren.”
It was just this full development of the diaconal
office which made it possible for the bishop to practise
an individual care of the poor, even to the smallest
details. The services of deacons and deaconesses
furnished him on the one hand with information of all
the distress existing in the Church, and on the other
gave him the means of affording to every one who was
sick or poor, just the assistance his circumstances required.
On the one side strict centralization, on the other the
utmost individualization,--such were the advantages of
this organization, and those which enabled it to produce
So great results. -
C H A P T E R W.
THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS.
THE work developed by the Ancient Church among the
distressed of every kind was abundant and many-sided.
Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Apostolical Constitu-
tions depict it in quite similar words, a sign that it was
pretty much the same in the most opposite districts of
the Church, in Rome, in Africa, and in the East. We
have already become acquainted with the passages
respecting it from Justin and Tertullian, when the
collecting of means for the poor was spoken of. In the
Apostolical Constitutions the whole sphere of charity is
still more fully described. It is there made the duty of
bishops to take care for the maintenance of all who are
in distress, and to let none of them want. They are to
supply to orphans the care of parents, to widows that of
husbands, to help to marriage those ready for marriage,
to procure work for those out of work, to show com-
passion to those incapable of work, to provide a shelter
for strangers, food for the hungry, drink for the thirsty,
visits for the sick and help for the prisoners.”
It was esteemed a general principle, that only the
really needy were to be relieved, and that these were
to be supplied with only absolute necessaries. Gluttons
and idlers, who were in distress through their own faults,
were excluded from Support. They are not worthy to
178
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 179
be members of the Church at all, let alone living at its
expense.” On this side the strict discipline of the
Church, by which the unworthy were excluded, was a
powerful protection against the waste of means for the
poor. A supposed saying of our Lord Himself, which is
met with both in Clement of Alexandria and again in
the Apostolic Constitutions, is appealed to. In Clement
it runs : “Woe to them who have somewhat and yet out
of hypocrisy and idleness let gifts be bestowed on them
by others,” and the Apostolic Constitutions place it as a
parallel to the Lord's saying: “It is more blessed to give
than to receive.” The same Lord, who thus speaks, says
also : “Woe to those who have and hypocritically take,
or who, while they could help themselves, rather take
alms from others, for both will have to give account to
the Lord at the day of judgment.” He who can himself
work and yet receives alms, robs the really poor of his
bread, and the Lord will punish him for it.” On the
other hand the truly poor, who, by reason of the infirmities
of age or sickness, are incapable of themselves earning
their bread, are highly esteemed and honoured. It is no
shame to them to receive alms. They are the altar of
God, upon which the Church lays its gifts; and if they on
their part repay it as alone they can repay it, with faithful
intercessions for their benefactors, they will receive praise
from God in eternity.”
Only necessaries were given to the poor. If the
Christians of those days were unfavourable to luxury
of every kind, and very highly esteemed the virtue of
singlicity in all the requirements of life, this was self-
evident. Cyprian in one of his letters gives directions
concerning an actor, who desires to become a Christian.”
He must give up his business, and if he can find no other
180 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
way of earning, he may be received among the number of
those supported by the Church, but with the condition
that he should be content with frugal and simple food.
It is especially inculcated on the poor, that they should
be contented, humble, and devoted to God. It is im-
pressed upon them with the utmost confidence, that they
have no right to support, but that it is free love which
offers it to them. They are always to regard what they
receive as the gift of God, who bestows it upon them by
means of His faithful ones. “The rich give to the poor,
the poor praises God, for sending to him some one, by
whom his wants are supplied,” as it is said in the Epistle
of Clement of Rome." At no time has the Church more
strongly insisted on the duty of assisting the poor in love,
but at no time also has she more decidedly pronounced,
that all is love and to be done with justice. Never has
she more highly reverenced the poor, more kindly and
lovingly treated them ; never also has she been farther
from fostering beggary, and making their life easy to
idlers. Christian life was then too earnest, and its view
too actively directed to another world, for anything of the
kind to occur.
The aid afforded consisted first in the distribution of
the necessaries of life in natural products. Those
presented as oblations were dispensed on the same day, or
if anything was left, on the second or third.' Those
regularly assisted, the aged, the infirm, and those unable to
work or not in a condition to support alone a large family,
received regular and probably monthly aid, each according
to the bishop's appointment. Thus we read, e.g., in
Hippolytus, that the bishop Victor, from compassion,
allows Callistus a monthly assistance for his maintenance.”
The lists of the poor, which were probably now drawn
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS, 181
up, and in which the names of those assisted and their
circumstances were accurately notified, served to prevent
any being forgotten, and at the same time any being
relieved whose circumstances had not been accurately
inquired into. In general, the help of the deacons, as
above remarked, rendered a great individualizing possible
in the relief of the poor. Every one received the assist-
ance which his necessities required. Efforts were above
all made to render the poor again capable of work, and to
put them in a condition to earn their own livelihood.
They were directed where to find work, and were fur-
nished with tools. Where there were still connections
or relatives, their aid was first requested ; they were not
to suffer the Church to be burdened with those whom it
was their own first duty to help.” If the more the relief
to the poor is individualized, the higher its value, that
which was exercised at this period is of a very high rank.
The Agapas were still at this time a peculiar kind of
assistance to the poor. Even after the celebration of the
Lord's Supper was separated from them and transferred
to the morning service, they continued to be held as
occasional love-feasts of the whole Church, to which each
contributed according to his means. They were thus at
the same time a help to the poor in a most dignified
form, which gave the poor a consciousness of forming
- part of the Church. This is expressly brought forward by
Tertullian, in answering the reproach of extravagance
brought against these meals by the heathen. Whatever
they cost, it is a gain to incur expense in the name of
love to one's neighbour, for this refreshment is in behalf
of all the poor. We do not, however, receive it like
parasites, who hold it no dishonour to sell even their
liberty, and will put up with any kind of indignity for the
182 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
price of being able to cram their bellies, but because the
consideration of the poor is highly esteemed by God.
Then Tertullian gives a description of the meal, which, though
it may perhaps somewhat idealize it, still gives us so true a
glimpse of the active brotherly association of all Christians
both rich and poor, who were present at the common table :
“As the motive of the feast is an honourable one, you may
estimate accordingly the regulation of the rest of our
conduct, how it corresponds with our religious duty, which
allows of nothing mean, nothing superfluous. We do not
sit down to table till prayer to God has been first tasted ;
we eat as much as the hungry need, we drink no more
than serves the modest. We appease our hunger as those
who know that we must pray to God even during the
night; we talk with the consciousness that the Lord
hears us. After we have washed hands and the lamps
are lighted, the summons to praise God goes forth to all,
and he who is able to impart anything out of the word of
God or from his own mind does so. Herein lies the test as
to how we have drunk. The whole meeting closes with
prayer, and we do not separate to commit improprieties
in the streets, but to continue Our practice of decency,
because we are not coming from a drinking bout, but from
an exercise of propriety and modesty.””
Subsequently indeed, when Tertullian had become a
Montanist, he would have nothing more to do with these
Agapae, which he had described as so admirable. He
applies to them Rom. xiii. 13, and says derisively, “The
Agapa (love) is glowing in your kettles, if faith is hot in
the kitchen, hope rests in the plates.” In fact all sorts
of disorders occurred at the Agapae, and these were
sufficient to bring straightforward minds like Tertullian's
to reject them entirely. Clement Alexandrinus” too speaks
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 183
with disapprobation of the little meals “at which there is
an odour of roast meats and Sauces,” and laments, that
“the excellent and salutary institution of the Logos, the
common meal, is disgraced with overturned Saucers.” He
does not, however, entirely reject them because of their
abuse, but only requires “that the meal should be simple
and frugal.” He then grants, that “the love-feast is an
excellent nurse for public spirit, where contentment thereat
is as an abundantly filled poor-box.” “The pleasures of
the common meal possess a certain excitement for Chris-
tian love, and are a reminder of eternal pleasures. The
essence of Christian love does not therefore lie in the
meal, which is but something accessory.” Neverthe-
less, such irregularities as Clement assumes, were the
reasons that the Agapae ceased as meals of the whole
Church. They then became meals for the poor, prepared
by any benevolent member, and only the poor were
invited. It is as such that the Apostolical Constitutions
and kindred writings are acquainted with them. Aged
women seem especially to have been invited. This, how-
ever, was to be through the deacon who knew them. It
is strange to find that such presbyters as were present were
to receive a double portion, and moreover a sign that
the original character of these repasts was pretty well
obliterated.” We get further details concerning them from
the canons of Hippolytus and the book of Clement.
These tell us, that they were held on Sundays towards
evening. When the deacon had lighted the light, the
bishop prayed for the poor and those who had invited
them. Then the meal began, but no one was to begin to
eat before the presbyter. All were to eat in silence, and
not to say anything unless the bishop or presbyter asked
them a question. Psalms were sung at the meal, and all
184 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
were to retire singly before darkness set in. This was
indeed no longer the ancient love-feast, at which the
whole church had assembled as one family at a common
table. The times of such association were over. But it
was still an echo from the older times. The honour of
eating at the same table as the bishop was still accorded
to the poor, although on the other hand, the rules which
prevailed made them plainly enough conscious of the
distance between him and themselves. It seems also that
the bishops then already withdrew from these repasts of
the poor, and left their management to the inferior officers
of the Church. According to the Apostolical Constitu-
tions, the bishop was no longer present at them.”
Of widows, so far as they occupied a position of honour,
a sort of office in the Church, we have already spoken
above. Whether there were so early as the second
century, as Zahn ” thinks, special widows' houses, in
which they dwelt as a community, is, I think, doubtful;
on the other hand, such are already presupposed by the
Apostolic Constitutions. The manner in which widows
are there spoken of as living together leads to this con-
clusion. They had then yielded their official duties, and
much of their position, to the deaconesses, but are still
spoken of as a separate corporation apart from the other
members of the Church. Only such as were sixty years
of age, had been but once married, and were well reported
of, were received into it, and they then made a promise
to remain unmarried. Younger widows were, if they
required it, to be otherwise assisted. To such even a
second marriage might be allowed, though this was
already regarded with disfavour." It was forbidden to
widows to wander about in the church, and this on the
ground that they are the altar of God, and the altar does
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 185
p-
&
not wander about. They are not to be talkative, not to
solicit gifts, but to wait till something is given them, and
then to pray for the giver and for the whole Church.
Such intercession was set before them as the special duty
of their lives." Nay, in the Apostolical Constitutions a
liturgical form of prayer is prescribed. If a widow has
been clothed by any one, or has received money, food,
drink, or shoes, her fellow-widows, on seeing their sister,
who has received relief, shall say: “Blessed be Thou, O
God, who hast refreshed my fellow-widow ; Lord, bless
and glorify him who has thus ministered to her, that his
good work may come up to Thee in truth, and remember
him for good in the day of his visitation. Bless also my
bishop, who serves Thee truly, and has taught in due
time to give alms to my poor fellow-widow. Increase
his honour, and give him the crown of glory when Thy
coming is manifested.” The widow, too, who has received
the gift, is also to pray with her for the giver.
Orphans as well as widows are always commended to
Christian love. The bishop is to have them brought up
at the expense of the Church, and to take care that the
girls be given, when of marriageable age, to Christian
husbands, and that the boys should learn some art or
handicraft, and then be provided with tools and placed
in a condition to earn their own living, so that they may
be no longer than necessary a burden to the Church.”
It would also often happen, that individual members of
the Church would receive orphans, especially those whose
parents had perished in a persecution. Thus, e.g., was
Origen adopted, after Leonidas his father had suffered
martyrdom, by a pious woman in Alexandria.” Again,
the child of the female martyr Felicitas found a mother.”
and Eusebius tells us of Severus, a Palestinian confessor,
186 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
ſº
who specially interested himself in the orphans and
widows of those who had fallen.” In the Apostolical
Constitutions, members of the Church are urgently
exhorted to such acts. If any Christian, whether boy
or girl, be left an orphan, it is well if one of the brethren,
who has no child, receives and keeps him in a child's
place. They who do so perform a good work, by becoming
fathers to the orphans, and will be rewarded by God for
this service.” Of foundlings nothing is at this time
expressly mentioned, but with the wide dissemination of
the custom of exposing children, which was never esteemed
a crime by the heathen, we may safely conclude, that
Christians took pity on these unfortunate creatures, and
bestowed upon them the care which their unnatural
parents had denied them. If Tertullian in his Apologeticus
represents to the heathen with such terrible earnestness,
that the exposing of children is murder.” Christians
would also regard it as murder not to take charge of a
foundling; and if Lactantius * reminds the heathen, that
it is ungodly to leave children to the compassion of
strangers, Christians certainly would not have suffered
themselves to be devoid of such compassion. When we
first meet with the mention of the adoption and bringing
up of foundlings, this work appears not as a novelty, but
as one long practised. It is true that the heathem also
used to take care of exposed children, but for the purpose
of bringing them up as gladiators or prostitutes, or to use
them in their own service, for a healthy child belonged
as a slave to any who harboured it. Christians brought
up the children whom they took charge of for the Lord,
and for a respectable and industrious life.
As yet there were no hospitals. The sick were attended
to in their own houses. The bishop, the presbyters and
CHAP. v.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 187
deacons, visited them there. “It is a great thing for one
who is sick,” it is said in the canons of Hippolytus, “to
be visited by the chief among the priests. He not seldom
recovers from his sickness if the bishop comes to him,
especially if he prays over him.” A deacon is to accom-
pany the bishop.” The book of Clement speaks still
more particularly. The deacon is to find out whether
the sick person is in distress, and then to provide all that
is necessary for his case.”
The grandest manifestations of Christian compassion
took place in the times of those great calamities, which
broke in upon the Roman Empire in increasingly rapid
succession during the third century. A fearful pestilence
was then going about, and making its appearance now in
one place, now in another. In Cyprian's days it broke
out in Carthage. The bishop's biography gives us a
moving description of the almost entire dissolution of all
ties which was the result of the pestilence.” “There
was a general panic. All fled. All avoided contact with
the infected, and let their relations lie without help, as
though they could thus keep death at a distance. There
were corpses lying about in the street throughout the
town. No one thought of anything else than of making
horrible profits. No one did to another what he would
have wished done to himself.” Almost more strongly
does Cyprian himself, in his apologetic book to Demetri-
anus, describe the selfishness of the heathen, which, as is,
alas ! So often the case, broke out in this general distress.
“No compassion is shown by you to the sick, only
covetousness and plunder open their jaws over the dead;
they who are too fearful for the work of mercy, are bold
for guilty profits. They who shun to bury the dead, are
greedy for what they have left behind them.” He
188 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
reproaches them with leaving the sick in the lurch for
the sake of taking possession of their property after their
death. “They run about everywhere to plunder, to take
possession.” It was quite different with the Christians.
Of them Cyprian says, they would more have broken the
storm themselves than have been broken by it. With
burning words did the bishop summon them to give
their assistance, and, as was his nature, himself energeti-
cally organize them. Services were allotted to each, says
his biographer, according to their individual ability.”
Some gave money, others their personal assistance.
“Who would not have hastened under such a teacher to
be found taking some part in this warfare ?” Thus the
sick were nursed, the dead interred. The heathen, too,
had a share in the deeds and sacrifices of love. “For,”
preached Cyprian, “if we only do good to those who do
good to us, what do we more than the heathens and
publicans ? If we are the children of God, who makes
His sun to shine upon good and bad, and sends rain on
the just and the unjust, let us prove it by our acts, by
blessing those who curse us, and doing good to those who
persecute us.””
The pestilence raged in Alexandria under the Emperor
Gallienus. Eusebius has preserved a letter of Dionysius,
then its bishop, in which he describes the conduct of the
Christians during this visitation:” “Most of our brethren,
in the fulness of their brotherly love, did not spare them-
selves. They mutually took care of each other, and as
instead of preserving themselves they attended on the
sick, and willingly did them service for Christ's sake, they
joyfully laid down their lives with them. Many died
after having been by their exertions the means of restoring
others. The best among the brethren, many presbyters,
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 189
deacons, and distinguished laymen ended their lives in
this manner, so that their deaths, which were the result
of piety and strong faith, seem not inferior to martyrdom.
Many who took into their hands and laid upon their
bosoms the bodies of Christian brothers, closed their
mouths and eyes, and reverently interred them, soon
followed them in death. It was quite different with the
heathen. They thrust out those who were beginning to
sicken, fled from those who were dearest, and cast the
dying into the streets; they let the dead lie unburied in
their desire to avoid infection, which nevertheless they
could not escape.” It was the same when this city
suffered from famine and pestilence under Maximus.
While the heathen quite lost courage, and each thought
only of his own preservation, the Christians were active
throughout the whole city. Some distributed bread to
the hungry, others attended on the sick, others again took
care for the interment of the dead, so that even the
heathen praised the God of the Christians, and declared,
that Christians alone were pious and godly.”
It was at other times also esteemed a work of mercy to
bury the dead. Lactantius” reckons the interment of
strangers and of the poor as among the duties which
humanity imposes on men. He reproaches the heathen
for their neglect of this duty, and for their estimation of
duties only according to their utility. It is indeed
indifferent to the dead whether they are buried or not.
“But we will not suffer the image and creature of God to
be thrown for a prey to the wild beasts and birds, but will
give it back to the earth from which it was taken, and
fulfil to even an unknown man the office of his relations,
into whose place, if they be absent, humanity steps.” It
belonged, as we have seen, to the duties of the deacons to
190 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
provide for the interment of the poor and of strangers; nay,
even the corpses cast up by the sea, found, through the
love of Christians, a decent grave.
With special love did the Church, mindful of our Lord's
words: “I was in prison, and ye came unto me,” interest
herself in prisons and prisoners. For this there was
plenty of opportunity. There were not only brethren
cast into prison for the sake of the faith, of provision for
whom we shall soon have to speak more particularly,–
there were also prisoners of war, for the inroads of the
barbarians became increasingly frequent even in the third
century; there were at all times many who were impri-
soned for the non-payment of taxes, and debtors who were
kept in prison by reason of the Severity of the Roman laws
of debt, because they could not meet their engagements
to private individuals. It is of such imprisoned debtors
that we must especially think, when Ignatius and the
Apostolical Constitutions name the liberation of prisoners,
together with the maintenance of widows and orphans, as
a conspicuous portion of the Christian exercise of mercy.”
That prisoners of war also were ransomed, and often in
great numbers, an example has been given in the noble
deed of the bishop of Carthage already mentioned.
Among the captives may also be reckoned” slaves,
whose lot, though it gradually became milder, was still
one of great hardship. On them, too, Christian love had
compassion, only not in such wise as to labour for an
emancipation of slaves, as the Church has been here and
there represented to have done. This, on the contrary,
lay entirely beyond her horizon. She simply recognised
slavery, as well as the other institutions of civil life.
Emancipation theories, in connection with communistic
ideas, do indeed make their appearance among the
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 191
Gnostics, but cannot be found in the Church. She
occupied just as neutral a position with respect to the
contrast of bond and free, as to that of rich and poor.
All might be Christians, all might have a share in the
kingdom of God, whether bond or free. “If I am a
slave, I bear it; if I am free, I glory in my free birth,” is
a saying found in Tatian.” Nay, Tertullian speaks in a
depreciatory manner of civil freedom, as of something
which to Christians, who know of a better liberty, is of
no value. “The freedom of the man of this world puts
on a wreath.” (It was the custom for freedmen to put on
a wreath to express their joy at their freedom.) “But thou
art already ransomed by Christ, and at a high price.
How should the world be able to give liberty to one who
is in another's service 2 If it looks as if one were free,
it is just as clear that he is still in servitude. All that
is in the world is appearance, and nothing in it is truth.
For before, thou wast, as one redeemed by Christ, free
from the authority of man, and now thou art a bond-
servant of Christ, though set free by man ſ”* Or if we
are to suppose, that it is the strict Montanist who is here
speaking, we meet with essentially the same views in
Lactantius,” who makes the distinction between bond and
free exactly parallel to that between rich and poor. To the
objection, that there are still among Christians rich and
poor, bond and free, and that it is therefore all over with
equality and brotherly love, he replies : “We estimate
human affairs not according to the standard of the body,
but of the spirit. Hence our servants, though occupying
a different position according to the body, are still not our
servants, but we esteem them in spirit as our brethren, and
in religion as our fellow-servants;” and then he refers to
the fact, that in this life everything is transitory and of
192 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
short duration. Hence it is in truth indifferent, whether
a "man is a slave or a free man. Let us not forget the
powerful attraction towards another world with which
Christianity is affected. This life is short, and its aims
are upwards. If the slave may, just as much as the free
man, have a share in the future glory, it is indeed a
matter of indifference whether he is free during the short
span of time in this world.
Nowhere then is there found a trace of the keeping of
slaves being thought wrong on the part of a Christian.
Clement Alexandrinus assumes it as self-evident, that
Christians as well as others should have slaves, and when
he condemns a large establishment of servants, he does so
only in the same sense in which he reproves all luxury.
When, in the Apostolic Constitutions, Christians are
exhorted to go but seldom to the market, and then only
to purchase necessaries, slaves are mentioned among such
necessaries without the slightest scruple." The Church,
too, never urged the manumission of slaves or made this a
Christian duty. Manumissions did occur, but certainly
not often, or we should have heard more of them ; they
were not indeed so frequent among Christians as among
heathens. The heathen often freed their slaves from
impure motives, for the sake of fame, or pomp, that very
many might follow at their funeral with the hat, the
token of manumission, and even for the sake of gain, tha
they might get more profit out of freedmen than they
could out of slaves. All these motives were lacking with
Christians, nay, they would have regarded it as an act of
injustice to give their slaves liberty for such reasons.
On the contrary, Christian masters had a special motive
for keeping their slaves, viz., that they might have the
opportunity of exercising a religious and moral influence
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 193
upon them, and of winning them for Christ. A slave was
much better off with a truly Christian master, than a freed-
man cast out by his owner into a world in which free
labour was so little esteemed. During this whole period,
I only find two passages in which the liberation of slaves is
certainly spoken of. In the Apostolical Constitutions it is
reckoned among the works of love,” in what sense we
shall hereafter have an opportunity of observing; and
Ignatius, in his Epistle to Polycarp,” exhorts slaves not to
wish to be ransomed by the Church, that they be not
found to be the slaves of desire. From this passage it
appears, that slaves were then indeed ransomed at the
cost of the Church, but Ignatius desires that slaves are
not to press for this, lest they thus become slaves
indeed, slaves of their own desire. We must conceive of
the state of affairs so as to consider, that cases would
occasionally occur, in which his relation to his master
would make it just impossible for a slave to lead a truly
Christian life, or in which this was in the highest degree
endangered. Then, indeed, the Church took the case in
hand, and liberated the slave from such a condition. But
slaves were not to think they had a right to this, they
were not to think themselves too good as Christians
to perform servile labour, and not to make themselves
slaves to an unchristian desire for worldly freedom. In
fact, what we find related in contemporary delineations
of the efforts of the Church, to give liberty to slaves, is
only true of spiritual liberty ; if we understand it of
numerous manuumissions, it is inconsistent with facts. As
a rule the slave remained a slave, even when he became
a Christian, and the Christian master kept his slaves as
before, but the slave served and the master ruled in a
different manner from what they formerly did.
N
194 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK II.
It was in this respect that the change was effected.
Everywhere we meet with exhortations both to slaves
to obey, and to masters to be just, kind, and gentle
towards their slaves. They are not to be used, says
Clement of Alexandria, like beasts, but the Christian
master must treat his Christian slave like a son or a
brother, for the sake of their common faith.” If the
heathen treated them like things, like bodies without
souls, the Christian was to esteem it his duty to take an
interest in his slaves, to bring them to knowledge and to
faith. “We reject none,” says Origen,” “not even the rude
slave. We turn to him as to an ignorant woman or child,
to improve him; ” and in another place,” “We instruct the
slave how to gain the disposition of a free man, and to
obtain through faith true freedom.” The Church was as
open to the slave as to the free. It is true that at his
admission, the consent of his master was, at least in the
third century, required, and if the latter were a Christian,
required absolutely. If he were a heathen, his refusal
was only regarded, in case the master could prove a
hostile disposition in his slave towards him. The Church
was not to serve as a refuge to slaves, who were
either disobedient or of hostile disposition to their
masters.” But if the slave was received into the Church,
there was no distinction between him and the free man.
Where the Apostolical Constitutions treat of places in the
Church, there is not a trace of separate places for slaves.
The slave sat with his master, ate of the same bread and
drank of the same cup. Every office too was open to
him. Callistus from a slave became bishop of Rome.
Slaves, who with free men had obtained the highest crown,
were honoured by the Church among the martyrs. With
all this the slave continued bound to obey his master, the
CHAP. V.1 THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 195
only difference being, that his obedience was limited by
the commandment of God. If his master abid him do
anything contrary to the command of God and of Christ,
the slave must not obey. In the persecutions of Diocletian,
certain Christian masters had caused sacrifices to be offered
for them by their slaves, for the sake of escaping persecu-
tion. The Church punished the masters with a penance
of three years, the slave with a penance of one year,” for by
their obedience to their masters according to the flesh, they
had violated their obedience to Christ. Thus the slave
was looked upon as self-responsible, as though a bond-
servant yet free in conscience even with respect to his
master. The Church also came to the slave's assistance with
its means of punishment. According to the Apostolical
Constitutions,” the bishop was to receive no oblation from
those who.ill-used their slaves, and the Synod of Elvira (305)
determines, that a woman who in anger so strikes her
slave, that she dies within three days, is to be excluded
from the communion for seven years if it were done inten-
tionally, for five if it were done accidentally.” It is sad
enough to think, that it was necessary to threaten such
punishments, and a sign to how slight a depth Christianity
had penetrated. While the condition of slaves ought to
have been progressively improving, such appointments
prove, alas ! that it again became worse, and we shall
subsequently hear still more of such examples.
Special tasks were imposed on Christian charity in
times of persecution. Poverty and distress might easily
become a strong temptation to apostasy. Persecution
too inflicted material damage on many, their business
suffered, they were entirely withdrawn from it, when they
were either thrown into prison, exiled, or compelled to
flee. Confiscations also took place, or the houses of Chris-
196 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
tians were plundered by the heathen populace. In
such times the bond of love had to prove itself the firmer,
and it was needful that those whose lot it was to answer
for their faith in prisons, in mines, before tribunals, should
know themselves to be supported by the whole com-
munity. Hence it is that Cyprian so very specially
exhorts to zealous care for the poor during the Decian
persecution : “Let neither your care nor your zeal be
lacking—as I wrote to you before—to the poor, especi-
ally to those who, fighting firmly and bravely in the faith
with ourselves, have not forsaken the camp of Christ.
We must bestow all the greater care and diligence upon
them, because, neither conquered by poverty, nor over-
thrown by the storm of persecution, they faithfully serve
the Lord and give the rest of the poor an example of
faith.” Meantime have as much care as ever you can
for the poor, even for those who, standing in unshaken
faith, have not forsaken the flock of Christ, so that what
is necessary for their support under their privations may
be bestowed on them by your zeal, lest distress should
effect in the sufferers what the storm of persecution was,
as to their faith, unable to accomplish."
If a Christian were cast into prison on account of his
faith, the Church cared for him with the greatest zeal.
He was visited, he received necessary provisions, and also
the means of procuring from the soldiers and gaolers all
kinds of alleviations. Tertullian, speaking of the destina-
tion of the gifts of love administered in assemblies, men-
tions” also the maintenance of those who are in mines,
in islands, and in prisons, supposing only that they suffer
merely for the sake of God. Cyprian, in his epistles.”
gives directions how the confessors were to be received.
The Apostolical Constitutions most impressively lay this
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS, 197
duty upon the heart of the members of the Church,
certainly not without some admixture of that increased
veneration of the martyrs, which appeared in the later
times of the persecutions:* “If a Christian is condemned
to the combat, or to be thrown to the wild beasts, or sent
to the mines for the sake of his faith and love to God,
you are not to despise him, but to send to him of your
labour and of the sweat of your brow, wherewith to live
and to pay the soldiers their fees, that he may obtain
some alleviation and be cared for. For he who is con-
demned for the sake of God's name, is a brother of the
Lord, a son of the Almighty, a vessel of the Holy Spirit.
Therefore, all ye believers, send of your possessions for
the help of the Saints through your bishop. But if any
one has nothing, let him fast, and appoint the day's pro-
visions for the saints. But if any has superfluity, let
him give more in proportion to his property. Nay, if
any can free them from prison by the sacrifice of his
whole property, he will be blessed and a friend of Christ.
For if he, who even gives his goods to the poor, is perfect,
how much more will he be perfect, who devotes all for
the martyrs l’ Christians are then also admonished to
visit the prisoners at peril of themselves becoming martyrs,
and to let themselves be hindered by neither shame nor
fear.
The lot of those sent to work in the mines was the
hardest. With scanty fare, almost naked, cruelly treated
by harsh and unpitying overseers, they were compelled to
do the hardest and most disagreeable work, so that most
succumbed after a short period. Of these sufferers Chris-
tian love then took even extraordinary care. The Romish
Church is especially praised by the Bishop Dionysius of
Corinth for having sent help everywhere,” and among the
198 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
Epistles of Cyprian are found many letters of thanks from
Christians in the mines, in which they express their
gratitude for gifts, which the bishop had sent them
through a sub-deacon and several acolytes, together with
letters of condolence.” It is felt from the letters what
refreshment such gifts must have afforded to the poor
creatures under sentence, furnishing them besides the
assurance, that the Church at home was mindful of them,
suffered and struggled with them. It is a touching proof
how far Christianity had inwardly altered the relation of
master and slave, that at the close of one of the letters, a
slave sends special greeting to his master. And how
must it have raised the courage of the confessors to know
that their belongings were cared for, that wife and children
would not be allowed to want, if they themselves suffered
death in prison or at the place of execution | Lactantius
once expressly refers to this: ” “God has on this account
commanded us to defend and provide for the widows and
orphans, that no one may let himself be kept back, by
compassion or regard for the pledges of his love, from
dying for righteousness' sake, but may without hesitation
boldly incur death, knowing that he leaves his loved ones
to God, and that help and protection will never be want-
ing to them.”
The highly esteemed virtue of hospitality too is only
rightly appreciated, when the condition of Christians in
the times of persecution is considered. This virtue
indeed seems least of all a novelty or one peculiar
to Christians. And yet Christian entirely differed from
heathen hospitality. Lactantius calls the hospitality of
the heathen just ambition, its aim being not to succour
the poor and needy, but by the reception of “illustrious
guests,” as Cicero expresses it, to oblige others, and to
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 199
gain respect and power abroad also. Lactantius thinks,
that Cicero in hospitality really had his own advantage
in view, and yet desired also to be considered humane.”
With the Christian it is not the important guest who is
received, but the Christian brother, independently of who
or what he is. It was in this sense that hospitality was
inculcated, in this sense that it was everywhere exercised.
Bishop Melito, of Sardis, wrote an entire book upon
hospitality,” and it is always placed in the first rank, in
accordance with the apostolic exhortations, wherever the
exercises of Christian compassion are spoken of.” It is
among the chief qualifications of a bishop to be hospit-
able,” and Cyprian not only by word lays it on the
heart of the presbyters left at Carthage to entertain
strangers, but furnishes them also with means to do so
from his own property.” Clement of Rome praises the
Corinthian Church for receiving those who came there
with liberal hospitality,” and Bishop Dionysius of Corinth
in return praises the Romish Church for the same virtue.”
It was among the duties of a bishop to receive and pro-
vide for strangers. As yet, houses for their reception did
not exist;" if the bishop's house were not large enough,
they were taken to that of some member of the Church.
Tertullian assumes it as self-evident of the Christian
Woman, that she should receive into her house and enter-
tain brethren from a distance.” The abuse which was
made of the hospitality of the Church, necessitated pre-
cautions for keeping away false brethren and also spies
and Vagabonds. No brother was received, who was unable
to authenticate himself as a member of the Church, by a
letter of introduction. Only the bishop could issue such
letters, for communion with the bishop is Church com-
munion. But afterwards, when even such letters were
200 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
forged, it was found necessary to give them an appointed
form (Litera formata) for the purpose of preventing
forgeries, or at least making them more difficult. The
Synod of Nicaea is said to have passed resolutions on this
account, prescribing the use of certain artificial combina-
tions of the three letters representing the Trinity, T v a
(Father, Son, and Holy Ghost), to be placed on the letters.
Whether this resolution was, however, of so early a date
is questionable." But all, who brought with them proper
and genuine letters of introduction, were received and
entertained as brethren.
Hospitality thus regulated was of great importance to
the development of the Church. As each separate church
formed a family, so also did the whole Church through this
exercise of hospitality. “The whole sphere was united by
the exchange of letters of introduction into one community,”
says Optatus of Mileve. This was the more valuable,
inasmuch as the ties of constitution and government, which
serve to otherwise keep the Church together, were at
this time lacking. Each church, each bishop, was as yet
very independent. Intercourse was, however, very active.
There was much travelling, if not as much as with us at
present, at any rate more than with us a hundred years
ago. Hospitality brought about a constant exchange of
intercourse between the different churches. They heard
of and learnt from each other, suggestions of all kinds
came and went, and in times of distress and persecution
they could the more easily assist each other.” -
By such mutually rendered assistance, love stretched
out her hands beyond the individual church. Where a
church fell into special trouble, it found prompt and will-
ing assistanée from others, who were for the time more
favourably circumstanced. When the Numidian bishops
CHAP. V.] THE WORK AND ITS RESULTS. 201
could not raise the means for the ransom of the prisoners
in their own churches, they applied to Cyprian, and the
Carthaginian churches collected what was lacking. Even
in the time of Basil the Great, the church of Caesarea, in
Cappadocia, remembered that Dionysius, bishop of Rome
(259–269), had sent them a letter of condolence, when
they were in great affliction through the incursions of
the Barbarians, and accompanied it with money for the
ransom of prisoners. The letter was then still preserved in
the church.” It is also elsewhere said of the eminently
flourishing and affluent Romish Church, that it was always
ready to succour other churches;" and certainly such
services contributed not a little to procure for the Church
of the world's metropolis, the illustrious and subsequently
dominant position which it occupied.
In all these respects we get a view in some degree of
the ample blessing with which the charity of this period
was crowned. The result already was, that in the Christian
churches there were actually no beggars, and none who
suffered want. If Julian was constrained against his will
to testify this of Christians even in his days, when circum-
stances had become far more unfavourable, how much more
does it apply to those of which we are treating ! But that
we may not over-estimate this result, we must certainly
remember, that the churches were still small, and that
financial circumstances did not as yet point to such
distress as afterwards. This external result, however, is
not the only nor the greatest result. How far the charity
of a period may be successful in overcoming its poverty,
depends upon other conditions than merely the intense
vitality of its love. Far more highly must we estimate
the blessing obtained by the Church itself, from this
labour of love, and the impression produced thereby upon
~ *
202 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
the heathen. Besides the courageous faith, and happiness
in death of Christians, it was above all their love which
at last won for the little flock its victory over the enormous
power of the heathen world. Athenagoras was right
when he declared this love to be the best apology for
Christianity: “The Christians make no declamations, but
point to good deeds; being struck, they do not strike in
return ; and being plundered, they do not accuse before
tribunals; they give to those that ask, and love their
fellow-men as themselves.” The heathen themselves
could not resist the impression, that here was a new life
such as they had not known, and that this life of love
was somewhat higher than what they, with their philo-
sophy, their political life, their art and science, were
capable of attaining. “See,” they exclaimed, “how these
Christians love one another ſ” Here too was the say-
ing fulfilled : “He that is in you, is greater than he that
is in the world.” The world full of love, which had
originated in Christianity, could not but at last gain the
victory over the world without love; and it gained it in
spite of the human weakness, which certainly was not
lacking, and in spite of the obscurations, which now
already began to darken the shining light of first love.
CHA PTER VI.
OBSCURATIONS.
IT is a still widely disseminated notion, that the corrup-
tion of the Church did not begin till its victory under
Constantine. Before that epoch nothing is seen but light
and brightness, from it is dated its secularization, the
relaxation of its strong faith and first love, the obscura-
tion of genuine Christianity by external rites and self-
righteousness; and the act of Constantine is made
responsible for all, even if a chief argument is not derived
from it, against all close connection of the Church with
the State. In fact, however, these evils only come out
more strongly after Constantine; their commencements
existed before, and the Church, which obtained the victory,
was already in many respects different from that which
began the contest. The turning-point lies, on the con-
trary, especially if we have regard to Christian life and
its development, in the Montanist movement and in its
Separation. It is just there too, that we perceive those
first obscurations of charity, which it is so important to
observe and fix, if we are to attain a right understanding .
of the next epoch.
Montanism made its appearance with a claim, based
upon a new revelation by the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit,
which, compared with the revelation in Christ, was said
to be a more exalted one, of raising the Christian life to a
203
204 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
higher level. Under the law, righteousness was in its
childhood, under the gospel it was glowing with youth,
through the Paraclete it was to be brought to maturity."
In truth, however, Montanism was nothing else than the
reaction against that making itself at home in the world,
which was beginning to take place in the Church. Herein
Tertullian quite rightly saw, that the youth of the Church
was departing. Towards the end of the second century a
relaxation of the first enthusiasm is already plainly trace-
able ; men were no longer so earnest, so strict about their
Christianity ; much already passed as permissible, which
would formerly have been avoided as inconsistent with
Christianity; the separation from the surrounding heathen
world was no longer so abrupt, the feeling of only so-
journing here in a strange land was giving way, arrange-
ments were made with a view to a longer continuance of
the Church on earth, and the thoughts of the Lord's
speedy return, of a speedy termination to the present
dispensation, receded. In Montanism the old stricter but
also narrower and somewhat conventicle-like Christianity
was reacting. So far, Montanism was not without justifi-
cation, and it must not be regarded, as its adversaries
chose to do, as an antichristian or even a diabolical
phenomenon. Nevertheless its pretension to represent a
new revelation was a grievous self-delusion, and the way
it struck out for healing existing evils, and raising Chris-
tian life to a higher level, a fundamentally erroneous one.
Montanism knows of no other means than increasing the
severity of discipline; the place of the “new law,” as
Christianity was then universally comprehended, was to
be taken by “a newest law,” distinguished from the
former by greater strictness. If hitherto the principle :
“What is not forbidderſ is allowed,” had been current, it
CHAP. VI.] OBSCURATIONS. 205
was now to be said: “What is not expressly allowed is
forbidden.” The notion of the allowable, the category of
things indifferent, was wholly expunged. The newest
law of the Paraclete regulated everything, down to the
slightest trifle, as e.g. the veil of virgins. Asceticism was
increased, fasting made more rigid, and second marriage
forbidden. The Christian must entirely break with the
world, for the world is approaching its destruction. The
expectation of the speedy return of Christ, which was
abating in the Church, was revived in glowing colours by
the Montanists. These heightened moral claims were
made not only upon individuals, but upon all Christians.
Only they who satisfy them are genuinely spiritual men;
others are the psychical, the sensuous, in fact not Christians
at all. The churches must become churches of Saints,
and the means to make them such consists in increasing
the strictness of discipline. Every mortal sin after bap-
tism absolutely and for ever excludes from the Church.
There is no more repentance after baptism. By this it
is not meant to declare the forgiveness of even such sins
impossible, but that they are left to God. The Church
forgives no more. *
Such a tendency was incapable of becoming the vehicle
of the Church's further development. Had Montanism
been victorious, the Church could not have become a
universal power, and it was to this she was called. She
did become such, but not without forfeiting by this step
a portion of her original endowment. She separated from
Montanism, but this separation did not ensue without
Some adulteration. She protested against the stricter
demands made by Montanism on all Christians, but
in place of these, began to make still higher claims
upon individuals in the Church. She rejected the con-
206 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book II.
trast set up by Montanism between spiritual and psychi-
cal men, but in its place gave currency to a contrast
within the Church between perfect and imperfect Chris-
tians. It was just this distinction, this double ethic, that
of perfect and that of ordinary Christians, which was the
chief harm the Church came off with from the Montanist
controversy.
Let us endeavour to make this somewhat clearer; for
it is the point on which depends the further development
of charity in the Christian Church. If the Church was
to become a universal power, if it was to exercise a
transforming influence upon the world around, its position
with regard to the world, to science, to art, to the State,
must not continue to be of a purely negative character.
A congregation of Saints, sharply separated from the world
around, is no universal power. The Church had to gain
a firm footing in the world, to enter into the natural
conditions of life. A Church, such as the Montanists
conceived, maintaining the Supernaturalness of its origin
by its inflexible reserve, would have hovered above the
world, and have been utterly incapable of transforming
it. It must become larger-hearted, more indulgent to
human weakness, “a safety company for a weak genera-
tion standing in need of milder discipline.” Thus only
could it become a Church for the masses, a national
Church capable of pervading national life with a new,
a Christian spirit. That the Church should after its
conquest of Montanism turn into this path, was a
thoroughly necessary and right development. Nor is it
to be accounted a fault, that it became milder in disci-
pline, and made reconciliation possible to the fallen, that
the whole idea of Christian life was somewhat lowered ;
for what the first enthusiasm had effected in the Church's
CHAP. VI.] OBSCURATIONS. 207
youth, could no longer be required in the subsequent
centuries. But the Church was now in presence of the
great task of penetrating the surrounding national life—
the State, art, Science, social relations—with the Christian
spirit, and of transforming them within and without.
Against this task the vessel struck, and was thus driven
into false paths. Incapable of christianizing the masses,
herself on the contrary but too soon caught by the
ancient heathen spirit, she surrendered one point after
another of her moral requirements, became increasingly
indulgent and lax in discipline, and was more and more
contented with a Christianity, which consisted merely in
a participation in Church ceremonies. In the same
proportion, however, in which she thus despaired of the
moral transformation of the people in general, did she
strain the more tightly her claims upon those who desired
to be perfect Christians. As the universal priesthood of
all Christians was replaced by the hierarchical priesthood
of the few, so was the holiness of all by that of some
few Saints; the perfection required in Scripture from all
became the aim of a select band, of a moral aristocracy,
standing as a correlative beside the clerical aristocracy.
The germs of a double ethic, of a distinction between
perfect and imperfect Christians, are early to be recog-
nised.” They are found especially in the high estimation
of the unmarried state. Hence it is here also, that the
double ethic, the distinction between commandments
binding on all Christians and counsels left to free decision,
first comes forth clearly and consciously in Origen and
Cyprian, even the counsel of celibacy, which is chiefly
brought forward. The firstlings of the Church are
according to Origen, virgins, and its tenths those who
live continently after marriage. He very decidedly dis-
208 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
tinguishes between the commandment and what exceeds
the commandment. He, who does only that which is
commanded, is, according to Luke xvii. 10, an unprofitable
servant ; but he who adds something to the keeping of
the commandments, does something beyond his duty, and
receives the praise: “Well done, good and faithful
servant.” And this work surpassing the commandment
is celibacy, which in 1 Cor. vii. 8 is not commanded, but
only advised.” So too in Cyprian, it is on the counsel
of celibacy that emphasis is chiefly laid. The Lord does
not command celibacy, but He admonishes to it; and
they who follow His monition, obtain thereby a better
mansion in the world where there are many mansions,
and then are of a higher rank than ordinary Christians.”
If then celibacy was regarded as a point of perfection
in Christian life beyond the condition of the Christian
living in the married state, it was but a short step further,
to view in a similar manner the renunciation of earthly
property. In both Origen and Cyprian it is plainly
seen, how the development is tending this way. How
very differently from Clement of Alexandria does Origen"
already expound the history of the rich young man It
is true that he too quite acknowledges, that wealth does
not prevent salvation ; but, he adds, that it makes it in
many respects more difficult, and is then inclined so to
understand the passage, that he, who gives his goods to
the poor, is for this supported by their prayers, and thus
the more easily brought to perfect virtue—to perfection.
The renunciation of earthly goods is thus at least made
a way to perfection. While Clement holds him up as
the victor, the true hero, who, united, with God, conquers
sorrow and pleasure in marriage, in the bringing up of
children, in care for his household,’ Origen already says:
CHAP. VI.] OBSCURATIONS. 209
“When a man gives himself up entirely to God, when
he releases himself from all the cares of the present life,
when he keeps himself separate from other men, who
live after the flesh, and seeks no longer what is of earth,
but only things heavenly, he truly deserves to be called
holy.” It is as though we already saw monasticism
making its appearance. In a similar manner do we find
voluntary poverty combined with celibacy in Cyprian.
His exhortations to virginity had been opposed by: “I
am rich, and must use what God has given me to
possess.” To which Cyprian replies: “Use it but for
salutary things. Let the poor experience, that thou art
rich; the needy, that thou hast property. Put out thine
inheritance to usury with God.”" The renunciation of
marriage entails that of property. Cyprian already
regards property as a burden, and the rich are in his eyes
unwise for seeking to increase this burden, instead of to
rid themselves of it." He very decidedly demands of
those who have fallen away in persecution, that they
should give up their wealth : “Let him who has been
deceived and conquered by his wealth, neither retain nor
love it. Property is to be fled from as an enemy, to be
avoided as a robber, to be feared as a sword.”" The
saying of our Lord to the rich young ruler: “Sell all
that thou hast !” is now without any hesitation under-
stood of external giving away. If the rich had done
this, they would not have perished through their riches.
Nay, the notion already makes its appearance in Cyprian,
that he who gives away his earthly goods, can mork
freely serve the Lord, and thus follow the example of
the apostles.” These are in germ the views, which
subsequently had so deep and decided an influence upon
charity. To give away property is in itself a good work;
O
210 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
Voluntary poverty is a more elevated moral condition than
the possession of wealth.
Certainly things could not have come to this pitch,
unless the New Testament doctrine of a Christian's
fulfilment of the law had already been greatly obscured.
According to New Testament teaching, the fulfilment of
the law proceeds from faith; the moral conduct of man,
his obedience to God, is the intrinsically necessary result
of his entering into a right religious relation to God
through faith in Christ. Justified by grace through
faith, man is a new creature, and he now walks in
obedience to the Divine commandments, in love, which is
the fulfilling of the law. This connection was, however,
soon lost to the Church. Even Clement of Rome, one
of the earliest of the Apostolic Fathers, no longer grasps
it. He strongly insists on justification through faith,
but the fulfilling of the law is in his writings no longer
rooted therein, but made to stand unconnectedly beside it.
The tie, which unites faith and good works, justification
and the fulfilling of the law, the religious relation of man
to God and his moral conduct, is dissolved. The conse-
quence is, that the two sides of the Christian life come
into a false relation towards each other. Faith dwindles
into an obedient reception of the rule of faith ; the
fulfilling of the law, as something not yet implied by .
faith, no longer having its roots in faith, exists indepen-
dently beside it. Two things are required from him who
desires to be a Christian : he must accept the rule of faith
and fulfil the law of Christ. The less the moral value
attributed to the first point, viz. faith, i.e. the acceptance
of the rule of faith, the more strongly must the second,
the fulfilling of the law, be insisted on. Christ is
regarded as a new lawgiver, and Christianity esteemed a
CHAP. VI.] OBSCURATIONS. 211
“new law " in distinction from the old law. The further
consequence of this, however, was, that Christian life was
no longer comprised as a whole in obedience to the
Divine commands, but shattered into a multitude of
single good works, and that thus the road was smoothed
for the thought, that it was possible for a man to do more
than he was obliged to do. For as long as Christian life
is comprised as a whole in faith working by love, there
is no room at all for such a notion. In other respects
too this legal view of Christianity could not fail to have
a disturbing influence upon charity. All legality is
deficient in constancy. The appointing will remains one
alien to man, it is not assimilated to his own will.
Hence a fulfilment of this will as a whole is not attained
to, but only a performance of single works. This is the
reason that charity too, when a legal view of it was
taken, was more and more split up into isolated alms-
givings. Already in Cyprian it is no longer, as in Clement
of Alexandria, upon the community that emphasis is laid,
but upon the most abundant possible almsgiving, and in
the post-Constantinian period charity is entirely comprised
in wholesale almsgiving. And the more so, that now, as
a further consequence of legality, almsgiving came to be
looked on as meritorious and sin-atoning.
That there is in almsgiving an inherent satisfactory and
sin-atoning power, was even in the second century no
unheard-of matter. Justification by faith being no longer
understood, the forgiveness of sins was soon made depen-
dent on the fulfilment of the Divine commands, “Happy
are we,” writes already Clement of Rome, “if we keep
the commandments of God in the unanimity of love, that
our sins may be forgiven through love ;” and when
3.
We read in the Epistle of Barnabas the admonition:"
212 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
“Labour with thy hands for deliverance from thy sins,”
it is meant, that he who does his neighbour service with
his hands, thereby obtains the forgiveness of his sins.
Hermas represents in a peculiar manner the blessing
brought by alms. He compares” the rich to the poles
to which the vines are fastened. The pole itself bears no
fruit, but so helps the vine, that it can bring forth fruit,
and the fruit is so far to its advantage, that it indirectly
bears fruit. The rich man prays little, and his prayer is
powerless. But if he helps the poor, they pray for him,
and their prayer is fruitful. God gives to the rich man
all good, because the poor pray for him. But these
isolated expressions are still something very different from
the systematic insertion of almsgiving in the scheme of
salvation. This is first met with in Origen and Cyprian,
and with it the foundation of what was subsequently so
significantly developed, and handed down throughout the
whole period of the Middle Ages.
The universally accepted proposition, that baptism
procures only the forgiveness of sins committed before
baptism, is presupposed. Since then a Christian sins also
after baptism, it is asked, how he obtains the forgiveness
of post-baptismal sins. According to Origen, a sacrifice,
to be brought by man himself, is required for this.
Martyrdom is esteemed as such in the first rank.
Martyrdom is a continuation of the sacrifice of Christ,
and like it, though certainly only, as Origen adds, in
virtue of it, has atoning power, which may then be
applied to others, by the martyr also, in the way of
intercession. But even this means of forgiveness is not
sufficient, for there are not always martyrs in the Church.
Origen then knows of other ways, in which sins may be
forgiven, and among these alms stand first. Next to this
CHAP. VI.] OBSCURATIONS. 213
the forgiveness of offences committed against us by others,
the fulness of love, and lastly, public Church penance.
While the latter is appointed for grievous and mortal
sins, alms are above all the means of covering daily and
slighter transgressions.”
Still greater stress is laid by Cyprian upon the sin-
atoning power of alms, nay, it may be said, that he was
the first to strike out the path, which was not again left
till the era of the Reformation. His work On Good
Works and Alms is here in all respects fundamental.
He too starts from the proposition, that baptism takes
away only the sins which preceded it. Hence baptism
and the forgiveness of sins in baptism would have availed
us nothing, unless God “ had opened to us a way of salva-
tion through works of mercy, that we might by alms
wash off the defilements of sin, which we subsequently
contract.” We plainly perceive in Cyprian also the way
in which alms are intruded, in a hitherto unprecedented
manner, into the scheme of pardon. Hitherto penitent
prayer had been regarded as the means of obtaining
pardon. Even public Church penance was only distin-
guished from penitence for daily sins by the circumstance,
that in the former the penitent prayer of the individual
was supported by the prayer of the Church. Cyprian
now combines prayer and alms. Prayer is unfruitful
unless accompanied by alms. It is alms which makes it
powerful “For He, who on the Day of Judgment will give
their reward to prayers and alms, now also graciously
hears the prayer that is combined with alms.” In
confirmation of this proposition, Cyprian has now recourse
to the Old Testament, and especially to the Apocrypha.
Not only are Ps. xli. and Dan, iv. 24 brought in, but
Cyprian is also the first to make use of the Apocrypha,
214 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book II.
and to introduce into the Church that apocryphal estima-
tion of alms, which goes beyond the lines of the Old
Testament. We there find, Tob. xii. 9, and above all
Wisd. xxix. 12, and iii. 33: “As water extinguishes
fire, so do alms extinguish sin.” Cyprian introduced into
the judgment of the Church, that judgment concerning
alms which was peculiar to post-Babylonian Judaism, and
it is accordingly characteristic to find him making such
copious use of the Apocrypha. New Testament passages
are then also applied in a corresponding sense, especially
Luke xi. 41. Our Lord here teaches, according to
Cyprian, that we are to cleanse not the outside, but the
inside, and adds, that this is to be done by alms.”
Tabitha serves as an example, that alms deliver from
death, even the death of the body. Thus alms appear
beside baptism as sin-atoning. “As through the bath of
the healing water the fire of hell is extinguished, so
through alms and good works is the flame of sin put out.”
Henceforward the motion that alms are sin-atoning
never recedes. We meet with it in the oldest sermon we
know of, the so-called Second Epistle of Clement,” wherein
alms are called repentance for sin ; in the Apostolical
Constitutions, where we find the exhortation : “If thou
gainest anything by the labour of thy hands, give, that
thou mayest work for the expiation of thy sins;” and in
Lactantius, where it is said: “Great is the reward of
mercy, which God promises, that He will forgive all sin.”
Lactantius, however, lays far less stress upon the sin-
atoning power of alms than Cyprian does. On the
contrary, he places in the foreground the notion of
humanity, which brings forth all the works of love, and is
a part of the righteousness required of the Christian.
On the whole, the notions developed by Cyprian take
CHAP. VI.] OBSCURATIONS. 215
less effect during the prae-Constantinian era. There was
still too much real love to need the impulse involved in
this combination of alms with pardon. The era of dis-
tress and of conflict offered Christians So much opportunity
of showing their readiness for sacrifice, that there was
no necessity for special self-imposed sacrifices. “So
long as ”—again to use expressions of Cyprian—“the
purple crown" of martyrdom beckoned, “the dazzling
white crown’ to be obtained by the voluntary surrender
of property in the form of alms, could exercise no great
attraction. But when the victory was won, when the
Church became dominant, when love decayed in the
multitude of nominal Christians, while distress increased,
and a wholesale poverty, unknown in former times, set in,
these notions began to influence and to obscure charity in
ever-increasing proportion. Motives were altered. In
the place of simple love, was found a regard to the
blessing which alms bestow ; respect was had not to the
poor, but to self and what was to be gained thereby,
This could not but gradually have a pernicious effect
upon charity. The care of the poor on the part of the
Church was stunted ; in its place was found, on the one
side, wholesale almsgiving, on the other benevolent
institutions, the hospital and the monastery. Other
causes certainly contributed to bring about this change,
but in truth its main cause is to be found in that view
of the atoning power of almsgiving, which was first clearly
expressed by Cyprian. The post - Constantinian Age
furnished much that was still great, in some respects
greater, and at all events more dazzling in the sphere of
charity, but it was no longer that simple, purer, and
therefore so greatly blessed exercise of love, which
prevailed in the earlier centuries. -
B O O K T H II: D.
AFTER THE WICTORY.
C H A P T E R I.
A PERISHING W ORLD.
THE history of Christian charity can only be understood
in connection with the entire development of ecclesi-
astical, nay of secular history. For only thus shall
we be in a position to comprehend the special tasks
imposed upon it in each period, and how in fulfilling
them it co-operated, as no small and unimportant factor,
in the fulfilment of those imposed upon the world, and
duly to appreciate those changes in its character, which
corresponded with the changes of the times. Let us
then first bring before ourselves that last period of the
Roman Empire, which commences with Constantine."
The rule of Constantine and his acts, directed as they
were towards a restoration of the Empire, were even then
very differently judged of, according to differing views
of their results. While the heathen saw in him the
destroyer of the Empire, and in all the troubles which
from this time onwards increasingly overwhelmed the
State, only the result of his supplanting the native religion
by Christianity, he appeared to the Christians as crowned
with the halo of a restorer of the Empire, and his acts
were esteemed by them as in a special sense saving acts.
In truth both were right, for as a powerful remedy
infused into a sick body, calls forth a salutary reaction,
which for the moment checks the progress of disease, but
219
220 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book, m.
on the other hand, because the body lacks the vitality
required for lasting health, produces pernicious effects
and makes death only the more certain; so did the acts
of Constantine bring about this double result. On the
one hand their influence was preservative, the Empire
owed to them its last appointed respite ; on the other
they could not but bring on with greater certainty the
dissolution of the decaying body. After Constantine, the
Roman Empire, notwithstanding the saving acts of the
Emperor, nay in a certain sense by their means, was a
perishing world.
There are three points, which chiefly indicate that final
period of the Roman Empire, which, already preparing
under Diocletian, fully set in with Constantine.
First, the totally altered character of the Empire itself.
The forms of the republic, hitherto firmly though only
apparently kept up, were now entirely obliterated. The
Imperator became the Dominus, the absolute ruler.
Oriental pomp, a numerous retinue of court officials, a
ceremonial most minutely carried out, were calculated to
separate him from the people, and to give a character of
sacredness to his person. He was seldom seen by the
people, and then only in the greatest pomp, in the purple
and diadem of pearls, and surrounded by the bodyguard
with their golden shields. It was only from a distance
that the multitude could cast a furtive glance on all this
glory. Access to him was difficult, a host of officials,
by whom everything was brought before him, and his
commands obtained in reply, stood between him and the
people, while he himself, like an all-directing deity, sat .
enthroned out of sight in the “sacred apartments’ of his
palace.
Undoubtedly this nicely calculated and new system of
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 221
government exercised a salutary influence. The throne
was more secure; the assassinations of emperors, which
had, in the second half of the third century, brought the
Empire to the brink of ruin, were less frequent. There
grew up again a kind of legitimacy, which, though not
one according to our conceptions, with a settled hereditary
succession, was yet of a nature to bind men to fidelity to
the once acknowledged emperor, and to make it esteemed
a crime to rise against him. This system of government
had, however, its suspicious reverse side. The govern-
ment proper was in the hands of the bureaucracy. The
people sick unto death were no longer in a condition to
rule themselves, all self-government having long ceased.
Whatever was done, was done from above. But the
Emperor too was on his part governed, while he thought
he was governing. He saw only what he was to see,
and heard only what he was to hear. How things were
really going on in the Empire, he never learned, but only
that of which his all-notifying, all-enregistering officials
thought fit to inform him. Never was a ruler more
exceptionally deceived—as Diocletian already complained
—than the Roman Emperor; never were the laws more
badly obeyed, than in the absolutely governed Roman
State. Amidst cringing devotion and apparent subjection
to every imperial command, each law, each injunction,
was nevertheless evaded. Of these thoroughly deceitful
and intriguing officials, but few had the good of the people
in view ; the majority were only bent upon their own
advantage, accessible to every kind of corruption, striving
only to raise themselves to large incomes, to brilliant
positions, to the utmost possible nearness to the imperial
sun, the dispenser of all benefits. The demoralizing
influences, which despotism exercises, are most fearfully
222 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
apparent in the corruption of the official world. The
tribunals were no better. They were, as Marcus
Ammianus” says, not temples of justice, but pits and
Snares, which those who did not know how to help
themselves did not, however innocent, get out of for
years, nor till they were sucked to the very marrow,
while the guilty, if they only knew the trick, got off
with impunity. Everything was to be obtained by
bribery. To the rich and powerful it was easy to make
their injustice triumphant; to the poor it was difficult, if
not impossible, to obtain justice.
Next, it was Constantine, who, conscious of the necessity
of infusing young and vigorous blood into the sinking
Roman power, was the first Emperor to attract the
Germans, to favour their reception into the Empire, the
army, the personal service of the Emperor, and thus to
bring about a development of the greatest importance to
after ages. From this time onwards Germans were
mingled in ever-increasing proportion among the Romish
population. They came as prisoners of war and slaves,
as mercenaries willingly entering the Romish service, as
individual adventurers seeking to make their fortunes in
the Empire, as hordes settling within its boundaries, and
they were soon able to say, as Tertullian makes the
Christians do : “We are of yesterday, and we do every-
thing.” Germans cultivated the land as colonists, served
in the houses as slaves, in the bureaus as officials, in the
imperial palace as courtiers, filled the squares of the
legions, commanded the army as officers and generals,
governed the State as ministers.
Certainly new power was thus infused into the decaying
State, and to this it was indebted, in part at least, for its
temporary preservation. They were for the most part
CHAP, I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 223
Germans, who, now fighting under the Roman standards,
with difficulty defended the boundaries of the Empire
against their fellow-tribesmen. Still more important was
this mingling of Germans and Romans with respect to
the future. The Germans, who were thus received into
the Empire, were brought into contact with Roman
civilization, acquired a sense for it, were educated to
become one day its inheritors, and yet remained in suffi-
cient proximity to their kinsmen to civilize them in
return. Rome, when receiving the Germans, was uncon-
sciously subserving higher ends,” for we really have
already before us the “beginning of the conquest of the
Empire by the Germans, the beginning of the formation
of a new Romano-Germanic world; and the same act,
which under former emperors had preservative influence,
could not fail to fall out subsequently to the destruction
of the Empire. When Valens permitted the Goths to
cross the Danube, he did nothing else than what many
emperors before him had done with advantage to the
realm, and yet he then signed, without knowing it, the
death-warrant of Rome.
But the act which is specially distinctive of Constan-
tine is, that he gave in Christianity a new religious
foundation to the Empire. At first merely acknowledged,
Christianity as the religion of the ruler soon became the
dominant, and then the only dominant religion. The
Empire became externally at least a Christian State.
Whatever we may think in other respects of the first
Christian emperors, we must at any rate acknowledge,
that this act of Constantine was supereminently an act
preservative of the State. Without the new religious
fermentation, a restoration of the Empire in general would
have been impossible. At the same time, it is certain,
224 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
that the Christian religion could only have permanently
strengthened, actually renovated, and longer preserved the
Empire, if it had succeeded in really penetrating the
national life with the leaven of the gospel. To this,
however, it did not even approximate, and hence in other
aspects Christianity could not but have a destructive and
explosive influence. There is truth in the saying: “The
old world died of Christianity.”
In endeavouring to explain a proposition at first sight
so strange, we must start from the statement, that to be a
genuine Roman and at the same time a Christian, was an
irreconcilable contradiction. He who became a Christian
broke, even if he did not know it, with the entire past;
he disowned the whole existing condition of political,
civil, social, scientific, and artistic life. For this life
was everywhere penetrated by heathenism ; at whatever
point its roots were followed, heathen ideas were always
at last struck against. Hence Christianity could not fail
to implant in all the relations of life germs of rupture,
the effect of which was a gradual loosening and splitting
up, just as water gradually rends asunder even the hardest
rocks. Of this Christians themselves had, I repeat, no
consciousness, at least no clear consciousness. They
esteemed themselves good citizens. How often, in their
apologies, do they appeal, in reply to the reproach of
being enemies to the State, to their faithful fulfilment of
their civil duties, their punctual payment of taxes, their
respect for the Emperor, their obedience to authorities.
All this was quite true; yet Christians had a secret
feeling, that the heathen State was one properly alien to
them, and if this feeling did not degenerate into hostility,
because they knew themselves to be bound by the
apostle's words: “The powers that be are ordained of
CHAP, I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 225
God,” still their real disposition towards the State was
that of indifference. In earnest Christian circles all
positive participation in political life, the filling of a
magistracy, military service, had long been esteemed
sinful. The kingdom of God was more to Christians
than the Roman Empire, the Church more than the State.
It was there that they found their life's centre, and so
long as the State was hostile to Christianity (and we
must not forget that this was for centuries), it could not
be otherwise. The Church became a state within the
State. The. Christian found his point of support in the
Church, to it belonged first of all his affections and his
service; he there sought not only the word of life and
what conduced to his salvation, but he there sought also,
in the episcopal tribunal, his rights, and aid when he was
in trouble.
It might have been expected, that all this would have
been changed, when the position of the State towards
the Church became a friendly one, when the supreme
head of the State himself, and soon afterwards the whole
nation, belonged to the Church. But by that time the
Church was already a state within the State, and such it
continued. For Constantine and his sons, perceiving the
power of the Church, and hoping to make this friendly
to themselves, aimed rather at still further increas-
ing its power and influence. The jurisdiction of the
bishops was recognised and even extended; the Church
was overwhelmed with favours, privileges, exemptions
from taxation, wealth. Thus the Church increased while
the State decreased, nay, it may be said that the Church
exhausted the State. A glance at the period shows, that
real vitality was on the side of the Church; the State
ageing, the Church in youthful vigour; on the side of the
P
226 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
State increasing feebleness, on that of the Church an
access of power and influence ; in the one a slavishly-
minded people ground down by despotism, in the other a
feeling for liberty. At least it was the office-bearers of
the Church who alone ventured to plead the cause of the
people before their capricious despots. In the former,
moral corruption ; in the latter, at all events in the more
conspicuous figures, in the rulers of the Church and in
thousands of its members, moral earnestness, which, even
if it struck out false paths and sought salvation by
ascetic self-denial, was still imposing. The State grew
poor, the Church became rich ; the State lost its influence
on popular life, the Church acquired what the State lost;
the State broke up into fragments, the Church was com-
pressed into an ever more and more compact unity.
While two or three emperors were dividing among them
the imperial power in Constantinople, Milan and Treves,
Rome, forsaken by its emperors, was becoming the eccle-
siastical point of unity and preparing itself, for a second
time and in another manner, to rule the world. What
intellectual powers the State forfeited, because all intel-
lectually important characters were attracted to the
Church How many thousand citizens were lost at a
time when every hand that could guide the plough, every
arm that could wield the sword was not to be replaced—
lost by the departure of Christians by troops into the
wilderness, that they might there in solitude follow after
the ideal of a supposed Christian perfection | What
material losses did the State incur by privileges and
exemptions from taxation granted to the Church, and by
the accumulation of such great treasures, such enormous
landed property by the latter | A feature of the period
was a kind of flight from the State, and this flight set
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 227
towards the Church. Hither did all who longed to
escape from the oppressions of the State betake themselves.
The Church indeed requited the State for this, by exer-
cising a moralizing influence upon the people, but not
in such proportions as to supply an actual compensa-
tion. For just here was the failure, the leaven of the
gospel did not penetrate, an actual christianization of the
Itoman Empire was never attained, and hence, in the end,
Christianity was more a destructive than a conservative
agency.
It will now be clear, that the acts of Constantine could
not, and why they could not, preserve the Empire ; also
in what sense they themselves contributed to its dissolu-
tion. It is a perishing world that we are contemplating.
Everything was falling to ruins. There is something hoary
in the character of the age. Population was decreasing
both in numbers and strength. Industry, trade, art,
science, all were in a state of declension. Financial
embarrassments were increasing, the burdens laid upon the
people were becoming more and more intolerable. And
worst of all, morality was sinking lower and lower.
Debauchery, even unnatural crimes were again in vogue.
A semi-barbarous luxury swallowed up whatever property
still existed. It was as though the desire was to consume
time. Falsehood and deceit became fundamental features
of the Roman character. How many a German petty
king perished through over-confidence in Roman artifice
how many an incursion of barbarians was owing to Roman
breach of faith ! It was truly felt that morality was
sinking ; Draconic laws were enacted, justice became, as
is always the case in such times, harsh and cruel. It
was of no avail, the laws were not kept, and the judges
were just as corrupt as the rest of the people. And this
228 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCII. [Book III.
internally decaying Empire was encompassed by hordes of
Germans, lusting for the glories of Rome and Greece, and
only waiting for the moment when they must fall a prey
to them. It was now only a question of time, when the
hour of ruin was to strike for the Empire.
Strange to Say that neither the teachers of the Church,
nor the far-Seeing men of the age, were conscious of living
and working in a perishing world. If we read, e.g., the
Oration pronounced in Milan by Ambrose on the deceased
Emperor Theodosius, we cannot doubt that he really
believed in a regeneration of the Roman Empire by the
act of Constantine, and nothing is further from his
thoughts than its speedy fall. He places Theodosius
with Constantine ; what Constantine began, Theodosius
has completed. The Empire has again one faith. He
recalls the circumstance, that his mother Helena presented
the first Christian Emperor with two nails out of the
rediscovered sacred cross. Constantine placed one in the
imperial crown, the other in the bridle of his horse. “Oh
wise Helena,” exclaims Ambrose, “who assigned to the
cross its place upon the head of the Emperor, that in the
IEmperor the crown might be honoured Oh good nail,
which holds the Roman Empire together!” Ambrose really
believed, that the crown had received fresh splendour
from the cross, that the Christian faith was the nail that
kept the Empire together. How near this Empire was, in
spite of the sacred nail, to its destruction, Ambrose did
not perceive. And yet the conquest of the Empire by
the Germans had already begun. The golden shielded
guards, who were keeping watch by the corpse of the
Emperor, the generals who were commanding the army, the
ministers who were standing by the side of the Sons, as
yet minors, of the great Emperor, of whom the realm had
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 229
been too soon deprived, were Germans. The Goths were
already in Thrace, and if the eyes of Ambrose had been
miraculously opened to behold the future, he would
already have seem before him the man who, for the first
time since the Gauls, was to enter as a victor into the
hitherto unconquered Rome—the mighty Goth, Alaric.
It was with others as with Ambrose. They could not
avoid the conviction, that since the Empire had become
Christian, distress and misery had increased on all sides,
that the christianization of Rome by no means resulted in
its revived glory. They often meditated on the question,
how this could be ; the reproach of the heathen, that
this distress was a punishment for forsaking the native
gods, constrained them to inquire into it, but they never
had a notion, that the Empire could perish, or the Bar-
barians take the place of the Romans. And well that it
was so. For the consciousness of working in a perishing
world would have paralyzed their courage for work, and
this was necessary not indeed for the preservation of the
Empire, but for the realization of the then hidden pur-
poses of God. It was natural also that it was so. Faith
in Eternal Rome was too deeply rooted ; the Romans
were too conscious of their superiority to the Germans in
civilization, to have been ever able to conceive, that these
Barbarians should supplant them. The thought indeed
was not absent, that the present distress was a chastise-
ment of God, a well - deserved chastisement of the
degenerate race. Salvian preached thus in touching
terms to his contemporaries, and represented to them,
that the Germans were victorious because they were
chaste, self-restrained and truthful, while the Romans
were debauched and deceitful. The fundamental notion
of his work Om God's Government of the World, is: The
230 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
government of the world is the judgment of God.
Therefore Africa, a country full of debauchery, fell into
the hands of the chaste Vandals. At the same time,
however, it was always maintained, that the chastisement
Was a temporary one, and every glimmer of improvement,
a momentary mitigation of misery, an isolated victory
Over the Barbarians, nay, even a gracious letter from the
Emperor to the Senate, awakened the boldest hope, that
troubles were now over, and that a new era of prosperity
was about to dawn upon the Empire. No Roman, and
even no Christian Roman ever entertained the notion
that the Barbarians could ever put an end to the Roman
Empire and Roman civilization. Hence no results were
obtained by their treatises on Divine Providence, its
plans and purposes. Never was the question of Divine
Providence so much discussed as then. Augustine's great
work On the City of God starts from it; Orosius, in his
work, On the Calamities of the whole World; Salvian,
in his before-mentioned work, On the Divine Government,
discuss it. Every fresh trouble again revived this ques-
tion. How energetically was it debated after the
defeat at Adrianople, when Valens fell and the Goths
destroyed the Roman army—a defeat which everywhere
made as great an impression as formerly that of Cannae
To the assertion of the heathen, that Christianity was the
cause of all this misfortune, that under its ancient gods
Rome had flourished, while under the God of the Chris-
tians there was nothing but misery, the Christians had
nothing to oppose but the retort, that neither had there
been any lack of misfortune under the gods of Olympus.
Calculations and counter-calculations were made, but in
such wise, that one party took no notice of the calcula-
tions of the other. The entire mode of viewing the
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 231
matter was somewhat mechanical ; the punishments and
rewards of heaven were regarded in a very external
manner. Neither heathen nor Christians were able to
perceive the deeper meaning which events had according
to God's hidden counsels. The key was yet lacking for
the comprehension of the age.
We have this key, for we can see whither the deal-
ings of God were tending, and just this age in which the
saying, “His footsteps are in the deep waters,” was so
conspicuously fulfilled, and which was therefore so incom-
prehensible to the generation then living, is to us clear
and transparent. If any one were to ask me what
period of history he should study, to gain a direct im-
pression of the rule of Divine Providence, I should say
the era of the migration of the nations.
It was not the civilised nations of the Graeco-Roman
world, but the Germans, who were to be the vehicles of
Christianity. The old world was too much penetrated by
heathen traditions for Christianity to take deep root in it.
But if the Germans were to become the inheritors of
ancient civilization, and to carry on the work of the
Greeks and Romans, a preparation was needed, and this
preparation was furnished by the period after Constantine,
as also, though without their understanding it, by
Ambrose, Augustine, Gregory, and other great men, in
whom this period was richer than almost any other.
Augustine, in his City of God, has, so to speak, uncon-
sciously written out the programme of the Middle Ages;
for the Middle Ages are properly nothing else than the
effort to realize the ideas laid down in this work.” Let
us just suppose, that the Roman Empire had at an earlier
period—say when Marcus Aurelius with difficulty kept
the intruding Marcomanni to the Danube—fallen into
232 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
the hands of the Germans. They would have extirpated
every trace of the civilization of the ancient world, and
Christianity with it. Hence the delay, the last respite,
which was granted to the Empire by the act of Con-
stantine. The Germans were to be first so far matured
as to be capable of fulfilling their high vocation. Not as
Pagans but as Christians were they to conquer the Empire.
How very differently from Alaric the Goth, would a Mar-
comannian chief have treated Rome ! And the main point,
the Church itself, was to be so far strengthened as to be able
to furnish a shelter for the treasures of old-world culture.
Whatever was saved was preserved in the new world of
German culture, i.e. by the Church ; it was her care that
hindered the thread of development from being utterly
severed. But if the Church was to effect this, it was
necessary that it should strengthen beside the State,
become a state in the State, grow rich, gain power and
influence. What the Church gained was thus indeed
lost to the existent State, but only to be preserved to
mankind. The treasures of old-world cultivation, the
produce of millenniums of labour, were concealed for later
ages in the Church; for when the State perished, the
Church did not perish with it, but remained, and was
the means of handing over what was saved to the young
nations, of raising them to a new culture. And not till
the further development was thus prepared for, was the
sign for the revolution given far off in Asia. The Huns
rushed upon the Goths; the Goths poured into the
Roman Empire. The death hour of the ancient world
had struck. The Roman Empire might now be de-
stroyed, the thread of culture development was not
broken, the new nations became the heirs of the old
nations.
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 233
It is from this point of view that we can understand
the task of charity to have been a double one. It had
first to stand, so to speak, at the deathbed of the old
world with its aid and comforts. These were such times
of most appalling misery, of most wholesale wretchedness,
as do not recur in the history of the world. Love,
Christian compassion, at least alleviated and mitigated
the death-pangs of the dying world; and even if she
could not prevent the general misery, she yet dried the
tears of individuals, and afforded comfort and repose to
countless numbers. But she had also to stand with her
aid and service at the cradle of the new age. Christian
charity became undoubtedly one of the main educational
agencies for the young German nations, helped to win
them for the Church, bound them to the Church, and co-
operated in the most diverse manners in their trans-
formation. -
What Christian love effected towards the fulfilment of
this second task, what she did for the education of the
German nations, will not be spoken of till we treat of
the beginnings of the Middle Ages. What we have in
the first place to deal with, is the exercise of charity in
the perishing old world.
A perishing world—what a summary of sorrow and
misery, of anxiety and distress, is contained in the words !
Let us try to take a glance at it, that we may the more
plainly perceive how gigantic was the labour now imposed
on Christian love.
If we turn over the writings of the time, the sermons
of great preachers, their letters and their devotional
works, we come upon thousandfold complaints and sighs
over the misery which everywhere prevailed; but no
complaint recurs so frequently as that concerning the
234 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
increasingly oppressive taxation. Let us then also first
put in the foremost place this feature in the sad linea-
ments of the perishing world, which is so extremely
distinctive of the whole picture. Already, before Con-
stantine, we become aware of such complaints, but they
now form the heart-rending cry of the whole people.
The State at that period knew of scarcely any other than
fiscal interests. The whole land was treated as a domain
of the Emperor, from which his officials exerted them-
selves to extort, by ever new arts and violence, as much
money as possible. For money, and much money, was
wanted at Constantinople. First, the maintenance of the
court Swallowed up enormous sums. A brilliant court,
Oriental pomp and luxury, formed, as we have seen, part
of the new system of government begun by Diocletian and
carried out by Constantine. Everything was calculated to
be imposing in the eyes of the people. The Emperor now
sat in his palace in the sacred chambers, surrounded by
the seven great dignitaries of the crown and a host of
court officials, chamberlains, eunuchs, guards and in-
numerable attendants of every kind. In the palace there
was everywhere the rustling of silk and the glittering of
gold and jewels. The dignitaries drew large incomes,
the whole crew swallowed up immense sums. An
occasional notice informs us, that a court cook received,
besides his considerable income, twenty portions from the
imperial kitchens; and Julian, who indeed was but a
short time at the head of affairs, says derisively, that a
court barber was going about in the dress of a minister
of finance. Then there was the army, which, though
inferior to that of former times, cost incomparably more,
for officers and soldiers had become effeminate ; then
the second army of civilians, the entire many-membered
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 235
bureaucracy, which was now looked upon as necessary to
the administration of the Empire, the Pretorian praefects,
the Diocesans, the 120 provincial governors, each of
whom received, besides perquisites, an income of £4500,
the crowds of officials and secretaries of lower rank. If
we remember the cost of the games, which were celebrated
with ever-increasing splendour, the cost of buildings,
always a special fancy of despotic rulers, the heaps of
gold, which the Barbarians, who could no longer be
restrained, carried off under the name of imperial largess,
but in reality as tribute; and lastly, if we take into
account, that there never was a more fraudulent official
world than at this time, that embezzlement and defrauding
were the order of the day, and often brought the imperial
menage into difficulties, we shall be able to gain an
approximate notion of what the State consumed. The
Emperor was no longer in a condition to protect the
people, he could only exhaust them. “The splendour
of one was the ruin of all,” says Salvian.”
Now all this had to be levied from a population already
poor, and daily growing more so. For the rich, the high
officials, the great proprietors, even the Church and its
officers, rejoiced—thanks to imperial favour—in great
privileges and exemptions. “When a tax is to be raised,”
says Salvian, who may indeed occasionally exaggerate,
but who nevertheless expresses complaints which were
universally diffused, “the rich know how to manage that
the poor may have to bear the main burden, while, when
a mitigation of taxation takes place, they take care that
the poor shall get nothing, the rich everything.” The
mass of the people, annually diminishing in numbers, and
whose property was continually being lessened by wars,
by the irruptions of the Barbarians, alone bore the heavy
236 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
burdens. Vespasian computed the whole taxation of the
Roman Empire as amounting in his days to £30,000,000
annually. The population of the Empire might then be
from about ninety to one hundred millions. But now Gaul,
which contained at most eight millions of inhabitants, had
to raise £19,200,000, i.e. about 48s, per head, in land
tax alone. Now, though the land tax was the highest of
all imposts, a multitude of other burdens were added,
poll-tax, customs and rates of various kinds, and many
with unusual titles, the furnishing of natural produc-
tions, crown-gold on the accession of an Emperor, and
many others.
Almost worse than the high rate of taxation was the
harshness with which it was collected. Humane Emperors
tried, indeed, but were unable to alleviate it. Unless
the machinery of the State was to come to a standstill,
all that was possible must be extorted from the impover-
ished people. Besides, what did the Emperor know of
the treatment they received from his officers He only
read in his sacred chambers the rose-coloured accounts
that were furnished to him, and if a complaint ever
penetrated so far, care would certainly have been previ-
ously taken by bribery to have it represented as mere
falsehood and deception, and the complainers might be
glad if nothing worse happened to them, than to be sent
home with their ears slit. To the financial and fiscal
agents, from the highest to the lowest, every new tax
was a delight. For it gave them the opportunity of
providing for themselves and filling their own pockets, or
even of proving themselves able officials, by extorting
from the people more than was prescribed, and sending
to Constantinople larger sums than were expected, as a
pure labour of love, and to obtain imperial favour in the
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 237
surest manner. By long routine they had learned the
art of discovering and profiting by new Sources of finance,
and as for compassion, they were unacquainted with it.
They would take inexorably the last possession, would
deprive the wife of the ornament, the heirloom of better
days, which she still wore, the child of the golden
amulet with which its mother had provided it as a
defence against Sorcery, the poor of even his garment.
Those who could not pay were thrown into prison, where
cruel treatment, hunger and often torture might per-
chance extort concealed treasures. Whenever a levying
of taxes was announced, a cry of grief and despair burst
from the exhausted population. The dungeons filled,
many fled, some even committed suicide to put an end
to their woes. It is related that parents sold their sons,
nay, Sacrificed the honour of their daughters, to be able
to pay their taxes with the proceeds.” Basil gives, in
One of his sermons, a heart-rending description of a father
who, to satisfy the tax-gatherer, has had to sell one of his
Sons, and is hesitating before the terrible choice, which
of the three to part with. The eldest ? But he has the
right of primogeniture in his favour. The youngest ?
But he is the weakest and smallest. The middle one
But he is the son who has specially grown round his
heart.” Certainly this was no dream of the bishop, but
a picture drawn from the life. Palladius too on one
Occasion tells of a knight meeting in the desert a woman,
who told him her Sad tale. Her husband had been cast
into prison and tortured for arrears of taxes, her two sons
sold, herself often scourged, until she fled, and had now
been wandering three days without food.
It was a special hardship that a tax computed accord-
ing to landed property and the number of heads was
238 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
imposed on municipal towns as a lump sum, and that
‘then the Decurions had to advance the money. The
only choice left them was, either to be plundered them-
selves or to plunder others. Things came to such a
pitch, that the Decurions, i.e. the highest class in the
municipal population, the moneyed class, preferred to
give up house and grounds, place and dignity, only to be
released from taxation. But a whole arsenal of laws
prevented this, and bound them with iron fetters to
property, which was only a burden. The small land-
owners were, however, worst off. Now it was money
that had to be paid under no one knows how many
names, now conveyance to be provided, horses to be in
readiness for the imperial post, now corn or other matters
to be furnished. If they did not pay, if they did not pro-
vide and furnish, they were cast into prison. Thousands
of small proprietors chose to sacrifice their freedom, and
betake themselves to the great landowners in a relation
of bondage. Then the latter would be obliged to provide
for them. There was a rush to be rid of freedom, it was
sold for a morsel of bread. In other instances they
would simply decamp, leave house and grounds behind,
and wander about as mendicants in the towns. In Gaul,
extensive tracts, which were formerly flourishing fields,
lay desolate, vines grew wild without culture. From an
investigation made at the turn of the third and fourth
centuries, it appeared that in Campania, fertile land
which usually yielded its cultivators three harvests per
year, 528,642 jugera of formerly cultivated land, i.e. about
an eighth of the entire province, lay quite waste. The
State in vain offered this land to any one capable of
paying the land tax imposed on it. No one was to be
found. Hence the neighbouring landowners were forced
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 23.9
to pay the tax upon this deserted land as well as upon
their own, and were thus utterly ruined." >
Force was now in general the sole means of govern-
ment. The Empire could only be kept together by
bands of iron. The period of free trade was over. An
organization of labour was again attained, but of what a
kind | Purely an organization of force. The age was
capable of none other. While the lot of the slave was
mitigated, all were really becoming slaves. In this
development, with the beginnings of which we became
acquainted in the preceding period, fiscal interests played
a considerable part, nay, were here as everywhere the
ruling interests. During the whole imperial period there
existed a widely branching system of contributions of
natural products, and of labour of all kinds. Hand
labour and horse labour had to be furnished, the corn
and all the provisions needed by the army had to be
delivered gratis, by those who were bound to do so.
From the time of Constantine the pursuit after freedom
from these burdens begins; whoever could attain it
sought release. The result was, that in fact many
classes enjoyed this immunity; the palace officials, the
lessees of estates, the Church and its property, the pro-
fessors and the inhabitants of Constantinople obtained it.
They thus became a still more insupportable burden to
those less highly favoured, and the further consequence
was, that these were the more strictly bound to them by
laws and penalties, and themselves and their children
kept to the position they occupied in the State. Hence
arose one of the most characteristic traits of the political
economy of the age, the state of obligation in which all
classes and associations in any way bound to the State
were held. Nay, the children being also bound to occupy
240 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
the same position as their father, it was in form a system
of caste.”
The upper classes—to begin with these—were obliged
to undertake the office of praetors, of whom there were
three in Constantinople and two in Rome. The office
itself was no longer of any importance, but combined
with it was the duty imposed supon its holders, of giving
the public games at their own expense, for the games
formed part of the official pomp with which the govern-
ment was surrounded. For the games actors were
required. Hence actors were forbidden to relinquish
their business. They were obliged to continue actors,
and their children must become such in their turn.
Even if they desired to be Christians, which was only
possible on condition of their giving up their occupation,
their joining the Church was only permitted under strict
limitations. The mariners who carried corn to Rome and
Constantinople, the store-keepers, the bakers, butchers,
and workmen of all kinds, who supplied the wants of the
army, the fire-engine men formed corporations, which
they might not leave, and the son was in his turn obliged
to become what his father had been. The office of the
Decurions, formerly a post of honour, had become one of
constraint, as we have already seen ; and as the Decurions
were bound to their office, so too were the Coloni in the
country to the sod. The Coloni were partly freemen,
partly slaves, to whom a large landowner had delivered
up a portion of his land to cultivate, for payment in kind.
Hitherto the freemen among them might, if they chose,
leave and seek for another and perhaps more advantageous
position, while the slaves might be sold by their masters.
In fiscal interest, for the sake of ensuring the taxes to be
furnished by the property, they were now bound step by
CIIAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 241
step more firmly to the soil (glebae adscripti). At first
the masters were forbidden to sell their slaves from
province to province, and then to sell them at all. The
slave-Coloni could only be sold with the fields which
they cultivated. To themselves this was in a certain
sense an improvement of their condition. From slaves
they had become serfs. But equally had the free become
serfs. They too could not leave the land they tilled.”
Thus all free movement was done away with ; every one
was bound with fetters to the position which he once
occupied, however insupportable might be the burden he
had to bear. Only in the region of the Church was there
liberty. If any one entered into the service of the
Church, or became a monk, settled in the desert, went
into a monastery, he was free, he shook off the whole
burden at once. Hence that pressure into the Church's
service, that fleeing from the world, that rapid increase
of monasticism, until the State there too intervened, there
too drew limits, forbidding entrance into the service of
the Church, or into a monastery to one, and uniting it
with certain conditions to another.
That in such a state trade and commerce, industry
and agriculture could not flourish, that the lively inter-
course of the earlier imperial times should come to a
stop, needs no proof. Much wealth still existed. The
treasures accumulated in former centuries were not yet
consumed. There were families of enormous landed
property, in whose numerous palaces incalculable riches
were amassed, who, like the Senator Symmachus, could
squander £400,000 on festivities in the praetorship of
his son, or like the Senator Maximus, £800,000 on a
like occasion, without ruining themselves. But property
was unequally distributed, and its distribution became
Q
242 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
increasingly unequal. The circulation of the blood in
the body of the Empire had stagnated. Capital was not
invested in profitable undertakings, but squandered in
semi-barbarous luxury. Who, too, would invest his money
in industrial or commercial undertakings, or employ it in
the improvement of estates, when the general insecurity
made the result so uncertain 2 “In the whole Roman
sphere,” sighs Salvian, “peace and security are equally
null.”” Who, too, would labour only to feed the greedy
world of officials, and to have his hard earnings wrung from
him by the tax-gatherer, or to lose them at the next
inroad of the Barbarians ? The nobles, the powerful, and
the rich still indeed found protection; the humble and
obscure were exposed defenceless to every extortion and
oppression. How often in the sermons of this period is
the history of Naboth's vineyard brought forward “The
history of Naboth,” says Ambrose,” “is, if time is con-
sidered, old ; in fact it is repeated daily. Not one Ahab
is born, but one daily, and he never dies in this generation.
If one is killed, there are more to take his place. Not
one poor Naboth is slain, but Naboths are daily destroyed,
the poor is murdered every day.” Means and ways
enough were open to the rich and respectable to oppress
and drain the poor, and besides the testimony of the
Church and its discipline, there was no hindrance in their
path. Usury especially assumed the largest dimensions.
Thus the relation of the rich to the poor became increas-
ingly unequal, thus the numbers of those entirely without
property progressively increased. A few rich, who, as
Chrysostom so often describes them in his sermons, lived
in luxury, ate from gold plate on silver tables, with troops
of running footmen, satellites, slaves, around them, rode
on golden-bridled horses, or drove in golden decorated
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 243
carriages, slept on beds of ivory; and beside them were
the countless numbers of a proletariat suffering the want
of the commonest necessaries. In every town there were
crowds of beggars, they filled the high roads, and went
from place to place, lay by hundreds in the public places,
and especially before the churches, naked, hungry, freezing
with cold, sick and emaciated, calling on the passers-by
for assistance, showing their wounds, their Sores, their
deformities, and trying in every way to excite compassion.
All courage was extinct in these unfortunates; powerless
to rise, they bore in gloomy indifference whatever might
happen to them. Many fled to the Barbarians, because
life seemed more bearable among them than in the
Toman Empire; or, driven to despair, began to rob and
plunder like them, thus increasing the general misery.
Gaul was for many decades spoiled by hosts of those who
had been driven to insurrection (the so-called Bagandae) by
the oppressions of men of office or property. If any unusual
calamity were added to the general misery, a drought, as
in the time of Basil in Cappadocia, a pestilence like many
which visited the Empire, a wretchedness arose which
baffles all description.”
Distress was brought to a climax by the continual
wars and the irruptions of the Barbarians. The struggle
of the Germans against Rome assumed after Constantine
more and more the gloomy character of a struggle for
life and death. The Romans regarded everything as
allowable against the Barbarians. If once they succeeded
in gaining temporary advantages, often enough more by
intrigues and treachery than by valour, they then sought
utterly to extirpate their hated antagonists, who in their
turn requited them in like manner. They traversed the
whole of Gaul as far as into Spain, murdering and plun-
244 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
dering everywhere; the Thracian peninsula was for a long
time entirely in their power; in their ships they visited
Southern Italy, Greece, and Asia Minor. In Jerusalem,
the colony of pious men and women, presided over by
Jerome, trembled before them. Scarcely was there a
place left in the Roman Empire, which the light-haired,
blue-eyed hordes had not visited as conquerors and plun-
derers. Numerous towns and villages lay in ruins, far
and wide the country was trampled on, the fruit-trees
hewn down, the houses burnt, the inhabitants put to the
Sword or led away prisoners or wandering about in beg-
gary. We can understand how Gregory the Great exclaims
in one of his sermons: “What more can befall us in this
world ! We see nothing but sorrows, we hear nothing
but complaints. Ah, Rome formerly mistress of the
world, what has happened to thee ? Where is the senate 7
Where are the people 2 Yet why should I speak of men;
the buildings are in ruins, the walls are falling;” and how,
on another occasion, he concludes a Sermon with the
words: “You all know how our troubles are increasing.
Everywhere the sword Everywhere death ! I am weary
of life.””
Who was to help in this universal misery : The State
could not. It made, during this whole period, no serious
attempt to relieve the poor. It provided the Church with
large means, it enriched it with donations and privileges,
made over to it a portion of the contributions of corn,
with which a sort of maintenance of the poor had been
carried on, remitted also certain orders concerning the
police of the poor, the prohibition of mendicancy, and
enactments relating to the treatment of beggars; but as
for the relief of the poor, that was entirely abandoned to
the Church. The Church alone could help, and to her
CHAP. I.] A PERISHING WORLD. 245
*
glory it must be said that she did much, and effected a
great result. Her task was indeed quite different from
what it had been in earlier days. Then, only isolated
cases had to be dealt with, now a wholesale poverty of
the most terrible kind. Even this one circumstance could
not fail to exercise a most powerful influence upon the
whole character of the relief of the poor. It operated
upon even the motives of charity. For, undoubtedly, it
was under the impression of this wholesale poverty, and
in the effort to procure the most abundant possible
donations for the poor, that the Church, in whose mem-
bers the ardour of first love was already considerably
cooled, so strongly brought forth the motive of reward,
the purification from sin to be obtained by almsgiving.
Still more must this wholesale pauperism have influenced
the kind and manner of relief. A congregational care
of the poor, such as existed in the first period, became
increasingly an impossibility. In its place appeared, on
the one hand, a wholesale almsgiving; on the other, chari-
table institutions, of which hospitals and monasteries
were the central points. And with these we have already
reached the transition to the Middle Ages. As in many
another aspect, so too in the sphere of charity, this period
is the preparation for the Middle Ages. If the period
before Constantine may be characterized as that of congre-
gational or Church relief of the poor, this feature now
more and more recedes, till in the Middle Ages it entirely
ceases, and hospitals and monasteries become the central-
points of a charity, resolving itself into wholesale alms-
giving.
C H A P T E R II.
PROSPERITY AND DECAY OF CONGREGATIONAL RELIER OF
THE POOR.
THE first century and a half after the victory form one of
the most brilliant periods in the history of the Church.
The longer the conflict had endured, the more violent
the last persecution had been, the stronger would be the
impression of the change, and the Church, elevated by the
consciousness of victory, developed her strength on all
sides. Under Constantine, while still considerably in the
minority, she rapidly won the masses of the people; one
hundred and fifty years after, the heathen had become an
utterly unimportant minority. In every city churches vying
in magnificence with the temples were now built. Worship
received during this period its full development ; dogma
was, after many violent contests, definitely settled at the
great CEcumenical Synods. A series of great bishops and
teachers, of whom we never find again so brilliant a suc-
cession,-Athanasius, the three Cappadocians, Basil the
Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, Chrysos-
tom in the East, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Leo the
Great in the West, to name only the most illustrious,
testify to the power which lay in the new faith. This
development of strength manifested itself also in the de-
partment of charity. It was both the period of greatest
prosperity in Church relief of the poor, and at the
246
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 247
same time that which created in the hospital and the
monastery the central point of the charity of succeeding
centuries.
The change in the condition of the Church could not
fail to accrue to the especial profit of the relief of the
poor. The Church could now act freely and openly,
there was no longer any necessity for acting secretly.
Means now came in more plentifully, and powerful
personal assistance was more abundantly at command.
In place of the State's disfavour, there was now its
supreme approbation, the effort to support and promote
the work of the Church in every respect. That
Constantine already perceived the importance of this
work is proved by the fact, that, soon after his recogni-
tion of the Church, he awarded to it a portion of the
corn contributions." The increasing respect, too, in
which the bishops were held, the recognition of their
jurisdiction, the many privileges accorded to the Church,
the germs even of a christianization of legislation, all
contributed to promote its designs. That the Church
did not fail to profit by these favourable circumstances is
shown by the testimony of its opponent, the Emperor
Julian, given just at this time. For he could not help
recognizing the charity of the Church, and seeing in it a
chief means of that rapid propagation of the Christian
faith, which was to him so abhorrent.
The kind of work, its organization, its principles, at first
remained the same. All this had indeed been handed
down from the times before the conflict. Only now
everything was extended and assumed larger dimensions.
The direction lay as before in the hand of the bishop,
numerous deacons and deaconesses were his assistants,
the matricula” contained the names of hundreds and
248 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
thousands to whom the church granted assistance. The
larger towns, such as Rome and Alexandria, were
divided into districts, each of which was committed to
the special oversight of a deacon. Special houses were
also erected in the different quarters of the town, in
which the poor assembled and were fed. These were
called Diakonia,” because they also were under the
direction of a deacon. The number of deacons and
deaconesses was of necessity considerably increased.
The resolution of the Synod of Caesarea (A.D. 314–320),
according to which there were to be but seven deacons
in each town, was without effect. With the exception of
certain cities, in which, as in Rome, this number was kept
to, and other kinds of assistance awarded in compensation
to the deacons, it was greatly exceeded. In Alexandria
there were numerous deacons; in Constantinople Justinian
limited the number in the church of St. Sophia to
one hundred deacons and forty deaconesses," hence it
must before have been still larger. Besides the deacons,
who received payment from the Church, there were also
those who served voluntarily and without remuneration.”
The objects of relief were the distressed of every kind,
widows, orphans, foundlings, the sick, cripples, those
incapable of work, those of decayed fortune through the
distress of the times, and all who were unable to earn
a living. For all these the church interested itself, and
the deacons were especially to search out those poor, who
from shame did not venture to come forward and entreat
assistance." There were many thousands who thus lived
upon the gifts of the church. The matricula of the
Church of Antioch numbered in Chrysostom's days
3000 widows and virgins. To these Chrysostom adds
many who were in prisons, who were lying sick in the
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 249
Xenodochium, the strangers, the lepers, the daily sup-
pliants, to all of whom the church gave food and
clothing." At another time he speaks of hosts of
registered poor, of multitudes of sick, of tens of thousands
of persons in distress.” In Alexandria the matricula in
the time of John the Almoner included 7500 names.”
and at Rome, in the time of Gregory the Great, it formed
a thick volume." These were, however, only the settled
poor of the Church. To these were added in ever-increas-
ing swarms the wandering mendicants, who crowded into
the towns, besieged the churches, and who equally
expected assistance from the officers of the church.
Gregory of Nyssa describes how they assembled in troops,
and sought to excite compassion. One would stretch
out a withered hand, another would show his swollen
stomach, a third his cancerous leg. Each would expose
the part in which he was suffering, to show his misery.*
Chrysostom speaks of the crowds of beggars he used to
meet in going to church.” Ambrose represents them to
us as pressing and crying out aloud, while the most
deserving and needy waited silently, till something was
given them.” So too does Augustine, for there is not
a preacher of the time in whose sermons we do not find
an echo of the tremendous distress which surrounds him.
In the presence of such wholesale poverty, an indi-
vidualizing care of the poor, like that of former times,
was of necessity impossible. If we even leave out of
the question beggars arriving from without, who were
satisfied with a single gift, and then went their way, or
who found a lodging in one of the benevolent institutions
now everywhere arising, in a house for strangers, or an
asylum for the sick or poor, if we reckon only the poor
belonging to the church itself, their numbers were
250 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
already much too large to suffer assistance, adapted and
proportioned to their circumstances, to be, after due
inquiry, extended to all. In Antioch, Chrysostom reckons
100,000 Christians, of whom according to his statement
10,000 were well-to-do, 10,000 quite poor, and the
remaining 80,000 in circumstances varying between the
two former classes.” Even supposing only these 10,000
to be objects for relief, although the former thorough care
of the poor would have included many besides within
its sphere of operations, it is evident that the numbers
are already far too large for an individual care of the
poor. A regular administration of relief had to be
adhered to, but that separate care of the poor as indi-
viduals, which had been possible in the small supervisible
churches, which were moreover filled with an active con-
sciousness of their unity, was no longer so in such enormous
churches, consisting besides of so many dead members.
There would, indeed, have been one means of obviating
this evil state of things. The large churches might
have been divided into smaller, and thus better adapted
to the development of a genuine church life. It was
fatal not only to charity, but to church life in general,
that not only was this way not taken, but that, on the
contrary, even the existing beginnings of the formation
of smaller churches were suppressed. The reason is
found in the ascendency of the episcopal office. A
Church was only to be thought of as under the guidance
of one bishop ; churches and episcopal dioceses were
coincident. Even if in a larger town several places of
worship existed, still the collective Christians of the
town, like the 100,000 of Chrysostom's times, at Antioch,
formed only one church. The service in the several
places of worship, in which the bishop could not himself
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 251
be present, was provided for by presbyters either
appointed thereto once for all, or only for each separate
Sunday, by the bishop. The former was, e.g., the case in
Alexandria, the latter in Rome.” But a severance of
churches, and especially a separate administration of
property, did not exist. For all the means of the
church, and all the gifts of its members, flowed into a
common treasury, which the bishop administered, and
out of which he provided for the collective clergy of the
town, and also for all its poor. Nay, the Church
stretched beyond the town, and included the surrounding
country district. Where the Church had been planted
in the villages from the town, this was naturally the case.
But even where, in the smaller places, independent
churches under country bishops had for a long time
existed, these too now came into dependence. The
bishops of the smaller places were either entirely done
away with and replaced by presbyters sent by the town
bishop, or where they remained as country bishops, their
sphere of operations was limited, and they were subor-
dinated to the town bishops, even with reference to the
administration of property.” As long as Christianity
had its professors chiefly in the towns, this might be to
a certain degree justifiable. It was otherwise when, in
the course of the fourth century, the country population
also were converted to the Christian faith. But the
bishops of the larger towns, who had now attained to
great consideration, knew how to prevent in their own
interest the formation of independent country churches.
Several synods expressly forbade the appointment of
bishops in the country.” The frequently recurring
prohibition of the alienation of the property of country
churches, without the consent of the bishop, was cal-
252 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
culated to keep these churches in a state of dependence
with respect to the legal disposal of property.” The
rule everywhere held good, that whatever accrued to
country churches of landed or other property, was,
according to the ancient canon, to come under the power
of the bishop.” Not before the end of the fifth century
do we meet with the first traces of the legal indepen-
dence of single churches with respect to property, and
in Gaul alone was a proper parochial system arrived at
from the commencement of the sixth. Elsewhere this
was not effected till still later. But it was then too
late, a genuine church life could no longer be developed.
During the entire period of the Middle Ages, Christian
life was sick of this disorder, that there were indeed
parishes, but no churches.
If we recollect in how close a connection church life
and charity stand with each other, we shall easily
perceive how great an influence this depression of church
life would have upon charity. If the latter had in early
times borne an entirely congregational, a church character,
it now forfeited this more and more. In place of the
relief of the poor by the Church, there appeared on the
one side a wholesale almsgiving, on the other benevolent
institutions.
One symptom of the change which was taking place,
was the entire abolition of the Agapas. For it was on
them especially that the family-like unity of the Church
was so fully impressed. For a long time, indeed, they
had ceased to be the regular common meals of the whole
congregation; but even in their subsequent form of meals
for the poor, they still made those who partook of them
conscious of their Church membership. Ascetically con-
stituted minds had indeed frequently taken offence at
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 253
these repasts in the churches. The Synod of Gangra
(A.D. 360) still protected the Agapas against them.”
But still more dangerous to the Agapae was the offence
taken at the combination of the Lord's Supper with these
meals. It seemed beneath the dignity of the communion,
that it should be celebrated after the meal, and the
disorders which occurred served to confirm this. Hence
it was at first enjoined, that the Lord's Supper should
precede the Agapae. An exception was made on
Maunday Thursday only, in remembrance of the Lord
having instituted the Sacrament after the Paschal
Supper.” The Council of Trulla did away with this
exception also. The strictly observed rule, that the
communion should be partaken of fasting, allowed of no
connection with the Agapae, which were held in the
evening. Next, the holding of the Agapae in the
churches at all was forbidden. The Council of Laodicea’
first passed the decree, “that the so-called Agapae are
not to be held in churches, and that neither eating nor
the preparation of couches must take place in the house
of God.” In the West it was chiefly by Ambrose and
Augustine,” that the abolition of the Agapae was carried
out. The Council of Trulla says quite briefly : “The
Agapae in churches are forbidden.” “ Thus was an
institution buried, whose existence is as distinctive of
the church life of the most ancient church, as its
destruction is a sign that such a church life no longer
existed.
The altered character of the relief of the poor will
more plainly appear, if we consider the manner in which
the means for it were now collected. Formerly the
main stock consisted of the regular gifts of members of
the congregation at public Worship, and especially of the
254 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book m.
oblations offered at the celebration of the Lord's Supper
The church character of the relief of the poor lay just in
the circumstance, that it was the congregation who at
their public worship laid upon the altar the gifts destined
for the Service of their brethren. This was now different.
The oblations dwindled; compared with the large means
in other respects at the Church's disposal, they were
scarcely taken into account, and during this period
entirely lost their original character of means for the
poor. The cause is here, too, to be found in the
depression of church life. Formerly it had been the
order of Christian life, that every member of the Church
came to church on Sundays, participated in the celebra-
tion of the Lord's Supper, and regularly brought his
oblation at it, but now the decay of church life was
already plainly shown by irregularity of attendance on
public worship. It was no longer, as before, the whole
church that assembled every Sunday. Even such
preachers as Chrysostom had to complain of empty
churches, especially if it so happened, that races in the
circus, or a spectacle at the theatre, presented a counter
attraction to the multitude. Chrysostom on one occasion
compares Christians to the Jews, who go up but three
times a year to worship in the temple. He also
complains, that so many, when the Sermon is over,
noisily crowd out of church without staying to the Lord's
Supper. Even those who partook of it did not always
bring oblations. It was only on high festivals, on days
of martyrs and in memory of the dead, that abundant
offerings were still laid upon the altar.” This shows
that entirely different motives were now operative. The
oblations were no longer the thank offerings of the
congregation, offerings of love for the poor, as at first, but
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 255
gifts by which the individual members of the church
hoped to obtain the intercession of the martyrs for
themselves or for the dead. Oblations proper now
consisted only of bread and wine, and on certain days of
the natural products oil, milk and honey, used in public
worship on other occasions. These thus inwardly
shrunken oblations, which had long ago forfeited the
character of alms, thus lost altogether about the year
500 their destination of being for the use of the poor.
They devolved as dues to the clergy, partly to the bishop,
partly to those who read mass.”
There was, however, no lack of gifts and presents to
the Church ; these, on the contrary, came in with an
abundance formerly unknown. The treasure chamber of
many a church was filled with expensive garments, gold
and silver vessels, even with coined money ; in every
town were splendid ecclesiastical buildings, whose interiors
glittered with jewels and ornaments of every kind; the
Church, which had hitherto been satisfied with having
what was necessary for the moment, accumulated from
donations and legacies a constantly increasing property
especially of estates. Constantine began to make the
Church rich in these, and frequently as the finances of
the Empire were depressed under his successors, means
were always found for inclining them to make donations
to the Church. Rich commoners vied with the emperors.
To give or bequeath anything to the Church was esteemed
a Specially good work, and one sure to secure the favour
of God. Even Chrysoston was obliged to remind his
hearers, that Salvation was not to be obtained by
presenting to the Church a golden chalice set with
jewels, and that the Church is not a storehouse of gold
and silver wares, but that she far more needs souls
256 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
dedicated to God.” With the increasing dissolution of
heathenism, the Church also came into the possession of
a great part of the property destined for the temples and
the heathen worship. She became in this respect also
the heir of the Olympian deities, and many treasures,
which had formerly adorned the temple of a Jupiter or
an Apollo, now served for the decoration of a Christian
altar. The large accumulated property, too, of many
collegia was also in the course of time transferred to her,
e.g. that of the collegium of the Dendrophori.
But an ever flowing and abundant source of earthly
possessions was opened to the Church by the legal
enactment of Constantine, that testamentary bequests
might be made in favour of the Church. According to
Tomish law, certain gods had the rights of juristic
personality, and thus the capacity of being made inheritors
by testamentary dispositions; nay, they were in this
respect distinguished above private individuals by many
privileges. These rights were now transferred to the
Church, and were in such wise taken advantage of, that
even a few decades later, Valentinian I. had to make a
law to restrain the legacy-hunting of the Church. That
there actually existed reasons for such a law is seen from
an expression of Jerome, in which he, who in other
respects well understood the collection of means for the
church, complains not of the law, but of the causes of
the law.” Certainly all bishops were not so conscientious
as Augustine, who disapproved of parents disinheriting
their children by making wills in favour of the Church
and the poor, and refused to accept an inheritance, if the
relatives of the testator seemed to him to be injured by
it, “for the Church desires no unjust inheritance.”
Augustine praises in a sermon * his friend and fellow-
CHAP. II.j CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 257
Bishop Aurelius for restoring to a widower of his Church,
who while yet childless had bequeathed his property to
the Church, retaining only the usufruct, the legacy
without his applying for it, when children were sub-
sequently born to him. “Let him who would make the
Church his heir by disinheriting his own Son, find some
one else than Augustine to receive the inheritance. I
hope to God he may find none.” But however many
bishops might in this respect think and act as nobly as
Augustine, the view became increasingly general, that it
belonged to a man's care for his soul's salvation to leave
by will a portion of his goods to the Church. The more
it was hoped that sins committed would thus be covered,
and a favourable sentence obtained from the Judge of the
world, the more abundant were the gifts presented to the
Church. It was decidedly expected ºf the clergy, virgins
and married people who had taken vows of chastity, of
monks and nuns, that if they had not already given
away their property during their lifetime, they should
leave it by will to the Church. Salvian considers their
not doing so to arise from covetousness, and their salvation
to be endangered thereby. “If the Lord commanded
His disciples to go without scrip or purse, how far are
those from following His command, who desire to possess
their property even after death in their relations; how
far are they from the piety which disinherits itself for
the sake of God, who will not even disinherit others for
their own sake They disinherit themselves (for eternity)
in order not to disinherit others.” Salvian also
earnestly exhorts other Christians, not living like clerics
and monks in a state of special piety, to remember the
Church and the poor in their wills. If during their lives
they have not done many good works, it the more behoves
R
258 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
them to retrieve the omission when they leave the world,
So that they may at least have the excuse for their
neglect, that by a last act of piety they have atoned for
what they had left undone. But if during their life
they have already done good works, the same advice
must be given ; for no one does good enough, and at the
moment when they are about to appear before the Judge's
throne, they must the more reconcile Him to themselves.”
Nay, he advises even those who to the end have passed
their lives in wickedness, as a last means to give away
all their property at death. He will not indeed say for
certain, that it will be of any use, but at all events it is
better to try something than to do nothing.” In this
matter Salvian will allow of no consideration for children
or relatives. “For in taking care for one soul's salvation,
we must love ourselves first of all.” “What good does
a rich man get, who makes his sons rich and plunges
himself into eternal damnation ?” Certainly Salvian
excuses, but still only excuses, consideration for children;
“since in this case faith is placed after blood, and the
claims of natural affection conquer religious piety.”
But he sharply rebukes those who adopt children or leave
anything to strangers. It is in general better that
children should be poor in this world than parents in the
next.
It must be confessed that Salvian is one of those, who
lay on the colours somewhat thickly and express them-
selves strongly. But there can be no doubt that, in his
urgency for wills in favour of the Church, he represented
the tendency of the times.” The appreciation of
testamentary liberality is always a sign, and at the same
time a consequence, of esteeming the Surrender of earthly
possessions in itself, and independently of its intention,
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 259
a good and meritorious work. In times when the life of
love is vigorous, as in the first centuries, more is given
during life and personally, for the intention is personally
to help the poor. As soon, however, as regard to the good
work to be performed and the reward to be thereby
obtained preponderates, testamentary giving preponderates
also ; for the end striven for, viz. that of gaining merit
by good works, may be thus equally, may be thus, in a
certain sense, far more conveniently attained, since there
is no need at all for renouncing anything during life.
To this is added—a particular not to be overlooked—an
after effect of the views of antiquity in this matter as in
some others. It had been the custom in Rome to think
of friends, of illustrious men, and above all of the
emperor in wills. This was now transferred to the
Church. If it had been for a period esteemed high
treason in Rome to leave nothing to the emperor, it
was now regarded as almost treason to the Church, and
even to God, for a man not to remember the Church in
his will; and as legacies formed an important item in the
imperial revenue, so did they now in that of the Church.
Less profitable were the results obtained by the
Church by preaching the doctrine of tithes. The notion
that the Jewish law of tithes applied to Christians also,
that the tenth was the least a Christian should give,
is now frequently met with. It was evidently a view
now generally held. Eminent Church teachers, such as
Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine, zealously exhort to give
the tenth.” But it was by no means as yet the general
practice, and still less a settled enactment. Many cer-
tainly gave a tenth voluntarily, or made the law of tithes
the standard of their almsgiving. Thus, e.g., it is with a
good intention that Chrysostom says, that God imposed a
260 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
tenth on the Jews, but a Christian must not stop at this;
he must exceed the righteousness of the Pharisees, and
give whatever he saves, but at least a tenth. The tithe
did not become a really settled law until, in the newly
arisen German kingdoms, agrarian circumstances were
more favourable to it than in the Roman Empire. In
fact it was in Frankish synods, that the law of tithes was
first decidedly pronounced. A Synod of Tours, in the year
567, still stops at mere exhortation: the second synod
of Macon, in the year 583, is the first which raises the
giving of the tenth to a universally binding law, thus
opening to the Church a source of revenue, which shows
more plainly than anything else how far the once so
zealously preserved liberty of giving was departed from,
but which was of eminent importance with respect to
the property of the Church.
The Church was a good steward. A large portion of
the administrative ability and thrifty spirit of the
Bomans was transferred to the churches of the West,
and chiefly to the Romish. The management of Church
property was strictly regulated in a series of synods,
care was taken to keep it together and to protect it
from diminution. Only the bishop could alienate Church
property, and he only with the consent of a council or
two fellow-bishops, subsequently of the metropolitan.”
He must neither give away anything nor dispose of it
by will, especially to relatives,” and might exchange
even single appurtenances only to a small extent, and
when it would bring some advantage. Telatives had
to make compensation for alienated Church property;
laymen who alienated it were excommunicated.” The
management lay exclusively in the hands of the bishop.
It now formed one of the most important of a bishop's
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 261
duties, and was often, as the Occasional complaints of
just the more spiritually-minded bishops show, felt to be
a heavy burden. How frequently are Gregory the
Great's letters full of the business imposed by this
management; what exact arrangements does he make,
down to the slightest details, concerning the administra-
tion or letting of estates, the purchase and sale of their
produce He orders on One occasion that the breeding
of horses is to be limited, because the grooms, cost too
much, and too little is made by it, and at the same time
does not forget what is to be done with the stock of
harness in hand. By a decree of the Synod of Chalcedon,”
every bishop is, moreover, bound to appoint a steward for
the management of Church property. Gregory carries on
the administration by a larger number of defensores,
upon whom a kind of oversight of the bishop is at the
same time imposed.
Under careful administration and continual accessions,
a considerable property was thus accumulated. Already,
in the fifth century, the Church was the greatest land-
owner in the Empire. The privileges conceded to her
considerably facilitated the management and increase of
property, and induced many smaller landowners to take
refuge in her protection and to transfer their estates to
the Church, that they might then receive it again as a
Precarium. When Pope Damasus wanted to induce the
Romish town-praefect Praetextatus to become a Christian,
he replied ironically : Make me Bishop of Rome, and I
will be a Christian directly. And yet this Praetextatus
was one of the richest of men, and had, besides his large
salaries from various offices, an income of £150,000 per
annum from his private property. By this wenay judge
of the amount then at the disposal of the Romish
262 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
bishop.” In the time of Gregory the Great, the Romish
Church possessed extensive landed property not only in
Italy and Sicily, but also in Gaul, nay in the East.
The Church of Milan was also very wealthy, while, in
the East, that of Alexandria was eminently so. When
John the Almoner was bishop there, he found 8000
gold pieces in the treasury of the Church. Among the
heathen, to be a bishop and to be rich meant the same
thing. “He who has gained a bishop's see,” says
Ammianus Marcellinus * derisively, “need take no care
for the future, presents make him rich, he drives about
proudly in expensive carriages and in raiment that is
magnificent, and has such extravagant repasts as to out-
trump the Emperor’s.” But even this heathen was obliged
to add, that there were also bishops, “who, moderate in
eating and drinking, and simple in their dress, showed
themselves to be worthy priests of the Deity.”
It is generally a paltry view, which places the increasing
wealth and growing power of the Church solely in the
category of its augmenting corruption. Tt was needful
for the Church to be rich and powerful, if she was to be
equal to the tasks then before her. Even to assist the
numberless poor of the times, to give some alleviation
to their unspeakable misery, she required abundant
resources. She could not have contended with such
wholesale poverty with the means at her disposal during
the first centuries. Safely invested funds too were
required, for voluntary gifts fail most under those un-
favourable financial circumstances, which make them the
most sorely needed, while the revenues derived by the
Church from landed property were still a resource, when
all other sources were dried up. But this is a point
whose full importance can only be seen in connection
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 263
with others. The Church was now to be the advocate of
the poor and wretched, even in presence of the decaying
State. But if so, then it was necessary that the bishops
should be respected and endowed with such power and
honour as to be imposing in the eyes of Illustrious High-
nesses and Excellencies, nay, of the Emperor himself.
Even such a man as Ambrose would scarcely have been
able to encounter the Emperor in the manner he did,
unless he had been at the same time a prince of the
Church. If the Church was to bear the culture of the
ancient world safely through the storm of the migration
of the nations, she must herself become a kind of State,
and her bishops powerful lords, and it was a paedagogic
moment not to be depreciated, when the bishop appeared
before the poor Frank or Goth as a kind of portrait of
Lord of heaven surrounded with magnificence, but at the
same time mild and liberal, and reflecting the goodness of
God by the abundant gifts which he dispensed.
There might indeed be such bishops as Ammianus
Marcellinus, in the above-quoted passage, has before his
eyes, proud lords in magnificent carriages, whose repasts
out-trumped imperial feasts, but at all events they
formed the exception. All the great bishops of the time
were fathers of the poor, and it must in justice be said of
the Church, which had now become wealthy, that she
really used her large resources as the property of the
poor, and relieved countless multitudes. Ambrose was
justified in replying, with a certain degree of pride, to
Symmachus, who, in his petition to the Emperor Gratian
for the re-erection of the statue of Victory in the Roman
| Senate, had pointed also to the large revenue of the
Church: “Why do not they who appeal to us, as having
/ means, employ their incomes as we do?” “The Church
|
264 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book In.
possesses nothing but faith. Her possessions are the
support of the poor. Let them point to the prisoners
whom their temples have ransomed, the poor whom they
have fed, the ruined whom they have assisted. And
because what the priests formerly profited by is now
applied to the public good, public calamities have, they
say, come upon us.” He reminds him, as well he might,
that they who became priests renounced their property,
for he had himself done so. When he became bishop, he
gave all that he possessed of gold and silver to the Church
for the benefit of the poor, retaining only an annuity for
his sister Marcellina. When his brother Symmachus
died, the brother and sister gave his property also to the
poor. Similar accounts are given of several bishops.
Chrysostom individually lived very plainly, and applied
all his income to the poor, of whom he regularly supported
77.00.” Augustine, in a sermon, entreats that expensive
garments may not be given him, for he shall only sell
them and give their price to the poor. If any one
wishes him to wear it himself, he must send him such a
coat as he could give in his turn to any poor brother who
has none.” Basil, Epiphanius of Cyprus, Paulinus of
Nola, gave all their private property—may, it was so far
the rule as to be expected of every bishop. After the
death of Attilus, the people of Constantinople demanded
the presbyter Sisimnius for bishop because he gave so
much to the poor. In fact he became bishop.”
It is true that Church property was used for other
purposes than the relief of the poor. The requirements
of public worship, the magnificent churches, their splendid
fittings, the rich furniture, the pomp of divine service,
made claims upon a large portion. To this was added
the maintenance of the numerous church officers, the
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 265
/
.#
y
presbyters, deacons, and sub-deacons, the cantores, readers,
doorkeepers, the whole host of lower officials. Most of
these, it is true, received but trifling salaries, which
merely supplemented the income they already had
from their property or the labour of their hands.
Many clerics engaged in agriculture or some handicraft,
and especially in trade. It was nothing uncommon to
see them sitting at stalls, or in apothecaries' shops, or at
the weekly markets. Occasionally this was even made
their duty by synodal decrees. For a time they enjoyed
the privilege of exemption from the trade tax, but this
caused too heavy a deficit in the revenue, and the
privilege was withdrawn. The demands upon the Church
treasury were nevertheless considerable by Teason of the
great numbers of the clergy. The view was, however,
still adhered to, that the property of the Church is the
property of the poor. Canon 25 of the Council of
Antioch, 341, e.g., determines concerning Church property:
The bishop has authority over the property of the Church,
so that he distributes it to all the needy with perfect
conscientiousness and in the fear of God. It is, however,
permitted to him to take what is necessary for himself
and his guests. The bishop himself may only have such
lousehold furniture, and keep such a table as a poor man,
He may also only give to his relations if they are poor,
but then in the same proportion as to other poor.” The
Synod of Agde grounds the prohibition to alienate Church
property expressly on the fact, that it is the property of
the poor.” The same view is found in many fathers, and
that this was not a mere form of speech is proved by the
fact, that no hesitation was felt at selling even the Sacred
vessels to feed the hungry and to ransom prisoners.
When the Arians reproached Ambrose for having done
266 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
this, he justified himself with the words: “The Church
possesses gold not to keep it, but in times of distress to
help with it.” And Augustine writes to his deputy
Bonifacius: “It belongs not to us, but to the poor; we
only direct its administration, and lay claim to no
property.” Subsequently the custom of quartering the
Church property spread from Rome outwards. One
quarter was for the bishop, one for the rest of the clergy,
one for the maintenance of the Church fabric, and one for
the poor. The motives for this division are no longer
Quite apparent. That the intention was not to limit the
poor is guaranteed even by the circumstance, that Gregory
the Great was a chief promoter of this custom.” Such
an intention would not be in accordance with Gregory's
character, who fretted for days upon hearing that a man
had died of starvation in Rome, and accused himself of
being his murderer.” The reason of the arrangement
may rather be the desire to introduce a certain annount
of order into the application of Church property, an order
which profited the poor, as assuring to them in any case
a fourth of its revenues. The reservation was made, that
when need required more might be applied to their use,
at least such a reservation was acted on.
Church property then, as administered by the bishop
with the help of his steward, now formed the main stock
of the means for the poor, and consequently the relief
distributed could not fail to assume a form different from
that of the times, when the regular gifts of the congrega-
tion still funished the means. It lost on this side also
its Church character, and took the form of magnificent
almsgiving on the part of the bishop. In this respect
his steward stood beside him in the front rank. It was
he who had the control of the receipts and expenditure;
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 267
and if the deacons still helped as of old in the distribution
of relief, they were no longer as formerly the eyes and
hands of the bishop.” Their importance with respect to
the relief of the poor could not but diminish, when the
steward was inserted between them and the bishop, and
when, on the other hand, a large number of individuals
were at the bishop's disposal for the service of the poor
in the presidents and servants of the benevolent insti-
tutions. Besides, a multitude of needy persons, who had
formerly been visited and tended by the deacons in their
own homes, now found shelter in the xenodochia, the
hospitals, the poorhouses, while in the case of those who
did not require such care, assistance was confined to
regular gifts, the dispensation of which was now the task
not of the deacons, but chiefly of the head manager of
the Church property, the steward. Ministration to the
poor in their homes everywhere fell into the background,
the diaconate lost in importance, and after the latter half
of the fifth century its gradual decay is clearly perceived.
To begin with the female diaconate. In the East,
widows were already in Constantine's time superseded by
deaconesses. The Council of Chalcedon quite put an end
to the institution of widows by its general prohibition of
the appointment of presiding widows.” In Basil and
Chrysostom widows still occur, but only as persons
supported by the Church.” With this the institution
falls also in the West, where widows had not been,
as in the East, superseded by deaconesses. Ambrose
and Augustine already no longer know of widows of the
former kind.” A series of Gallic synods forbids the
ordination or consecration of widows, and it is character-
istic, that the second Synod of Orleans gives as a reason
for the prohibition, the weakness of the female sex.”
268 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Hitherto widows and deaconesses had belonged to the
clergy, but now such exalted views were entertained of
the dignity of the clergy and of ordination, that it seemed
an unworthy thing to Ordain women. To this was added
the increased estimation of the unmarried state, and on
this account virgin deaconesses lasted longer in the East.
But they too lost in importance with respect to charity
and then also in dignity. It is true that we just now
meet with several renowned deaconesses of the highest
rank, as Macrina, the sister of Gregory of Nyssa, and
especially the illustrious Olympias, the friend and disciple
of Chrysostom. But their far-famed benevolence was
still rather private than official. Neither Gregory of
Nyssa nor Chrysostom ever speak of any official agency
on their part in this respect. We have several letters of
Theodoret to deaconesses, but in these too we meet with no
mention of such agency. In the East also advancing
monasticism and increased priestly dignity were equally
unfavourable to deaconesses. Sozomen “tells of a virgin,
who, being qualified for the office of deaconess, renounced
it to devote herself to a contemplative life. The
deaconesses had formerly access to the altar, but this
was afterwards done away with and their ordination
abrogated.” Their agency was after this confined to
external services at worship. As female servants of the
Church of a lower grade, there were in Constantinople,
about A.D. 1200, in the smaller Eastern churches at a
later date, still deaconesses.”
The deacons also occupied a different position. They
ceased to be the vehicles of relief to the poor. Service
in the church and at the altar was now their especial
duty. It is on this account that they are so frequently
compared to the Levites, who served in the temple, and
|
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIER OF THE POOR. 269
that many appointments concerning the Old Testament
Levites, their age and services, were transferred to them.
So greatly had the consciousness of the earlier diaconal
service vanished, that the Council of Trulla declines the
comparison with the seven men, on the ground that
deacons are appointed to serve in the mysteries of
worship, while the Seven were appointed to serve
tables.”
We thus see how the old Church care of the poor was
dissolved on all sides. It was no longer the Church
which, by means of its rulers and deacons, exercised
towards her poorer members, with the resources offered in
her assemblies, as individual a case as was possible; it was
the bishop, who was the great dispenser of alms, who
distributed from the property of the Church, and what
was bestowed upon the Church, wholesale alms to
the deserving and the undeserving, to members of
the Church and to the multitudes, whom the common
misfortunes had made beggars. It is true that many
passages may be adduced from the Fathers, in which
they exhort to be careful in the distribution of gifts, and
to inquire into their circumstances. Basil” says:
“Great experience is required to distinguish between
those who are really poor and those who beg only that
they may collect money. He who gives to a distressed
and sick person gives to God, and will receive a reward.
But he who gives to a vagabond and parasite, throws his
money to the dogs, i.e. gives it to men who deserve
rather contempt for their audacity, than pity for their
poverty.” Ambrose * speaks of the arts of pretended
beggars, and warns to take care lest the portion, which
belongs to the needy, becomes the prey of rogues. But
it was very difficult, nay inpossible, to obey such rules,
270 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [BOOK III.
when unfortunate creatures in danger of perishing with
hunger were pressing round in crowds. Ambrose lays
down thoroughly excellent rules: “They often say they
are overwhelmed with debts, try whether they speak the
truth ; they say they have been plundered, try whether
this is the case; in one word, find out whom you are
relieving.” But he then warns them again not to be
inhuman, and reminds them in another passage : “Love
does not weigh deserts, but first of all assists distress.” “
“We ought not to be too mistrustful. If Abraham had
been mistrustful,” says Chrysostom,” he would not have
entertained strangers, and Gregory Nazianzen "comes to
the conclusion, that “it is much better for the sake of
those who are deserving, to give to the undeserving, than
by fearing to give to the undeserving, to deprive the
deserving of the benefit.” In most cases, then, it must
actually have happened, that all were relieved without
much distinction. When distress is as great as it then
was, all distinction ceases.
The former Church care of the poor was such no
longer. The beneficence of the bishop, distributing with
open hand to the needy, had, on the contrary, an
unmistakeable likeness to what the ancient world also
was acquainted with, viz. the distributions of the
emperors and the Roman Nobles. When Gregory the
Great had corn, oil, wine, meat distributed every month,
when he had carts full of provisions driving through the
town for the relief of the poor," this looks more like a
revival of the old distribution of corn than of the relief
of the poor by the Christian Church. The Bishop of
Tome had come into the place of the Emperor, the bishops
into the place of the Roman nobles; Christian caritas
has assumed a suspicious similarity to the ancient
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 271
liberalitas. Still it was a splendid sight to see a bishop
daily in the midst of the hungry as the open-handed
dispenser of alms, from whom every one expects assistance
and receives as much as possible, the poor Roman driven
from house and home by the Barbarians, and the German,
whom the mild breath of Christian love, now for the first
time touches, awakening in his heart the feeling of the
Divine mercy therein reflected ; a bishop with whom the
stranger finds an asylum, and the sick attendance, who
sells the Church furniture, the golden and silver vessels
for the Lord's Supper, to ransom prisoners, and leads in
his home the life of a poor man, to let the poor find that
the Church possesses what is hers only for the poor; a
Basil, attending himself upon the sick and leprous; a
Chrysostom, in the midst of Byzantine luxury himself
living simply and modestly, and daily feeding 7000 poor;
an Ambrose, a proud Roman, but at the same time a
humble Christian, encountering the Emperor and con-
descending to all the poor; an Augustine, desiring no other
garment than such as he can give to any poor brother; a
Gregory, taking so deeply to heart the whole misery of
the times, and yet fretting when an individual dies of
starvation in Rome.
The aim, indeed, formerly attained, that no one suf-
fered want, was no longer attainable. Julian still praises
Christians for maintaining, not only their own people,
but the heathen also, and for having no beggars among
them. This was soon otherwise; the Roman people was
resolved into a mendicant multitude. It is characteristic,
that the first mendicancy laws were now made. So great
a multitude of beggars had in the reign of Valentinian II.
Congregated in Rome, that the Emperor caused an investi-
gation to be made, and all beggars capable of work to be
272 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
expelled from the city. Beggary could no longer be sup-
pressed, as, indeed, it never can be by merely compulsory
laws; hence the attempt was made to organize it, this
age being, in this respect also, the precursor of the Middle
Ages. A law was enacted under Theodosius, that no one
should in future beg in the streets, until his case had been
investigated as to age, health, and circumstances. If
incapable of work, he was allowed to beg; if capable of
work and continuing to beg, he was deprived of liberty.”
The enactments of Justinian were still stricter. If the
mendicant were a bondsman, he was to be given back to
his owner; if a free man, work was to be given him ; if
he refused to accept it, he was to be expelled. “These
commands,” says Justinian, “are in favour of the beggars,
for their purpose is to preserve them from the crimes to
which idleness might seduce them.”"
Christianity has been reproached with the fact, that
not till Christian times did the laws against mendicancy,
which were unknown to antiquity, become necessary, the
Church having, it is said, by her almsgiving first brought
beggars to maturity. This verdict thus boldly stated is
an unjust one. The times, in which an ageing civilisation
is decaying and dissolving, have ever been times in which
mendicancy increases. The age of the Reformation pre-
sents a similar spectacle, and ours is making a like
experience. To make Christianity and the Church respon-
sible for this is unjust. The Church is not, indeed,
without fault in this matter. We shall have to return
to the fact, that she did not succeed in renovating the old
world by infusing into it the new Christian life. Herself
involved in an erroneous estimation of earthly posses-
sions, incapable of rising to a sound moral appreciation
of labour, she contributed to this dissolution, and her
CHAP. II.] CONGREGATIONAL RELIEF OF THE POOR. 273
abundant almsgiving certainly attracted many a beggar.
But this shadow should not prevent our acknowledging
the light that exists, and admiring the splendid charity of
the Church. What would have become of the Roman
Empire without Christianity | What numbers the Church
assisted, how much misery it alleviated, how many tears
it dried The ancient world must die, Christianity could
not prevent it ; but it did what it could, it ministered
comfort and consolation to a dying world.
C H A P T E R III.
ALMS,
SCARCELY ever were alms so much preached, and alms-
giving so frequently and so urgently insisted on, as during
this period. Distress compelled. The Church was every
day besieged by hordes of poor and distressed of all kinds;
the hungry, the naked, the sick, the houseless, looked to
her and expected help. The Church, however, would
not have been able to give so much, if abundant dona-
tions had not flowed in ; and largely as she distributed,
this would not nearly have sufficed, if an extensive private
benevolence had not been added. The preachers of the
day must often have had the feeling, which impelled
Chrysostom to preach his famous sermon for the poor, in
which he puts himself in the place of an ambassador
from the poor, for whom he is supplicating, to the Church.
“I stand up to-day,” he begins, “to speak to you for a
cause just, righteous and worthy of you. To this I have
been summoned by the beggars of this town. Summoned
not by words, not by common resolutions, but by the
saddest of sights. For, as I was hurrying through the
market and narrow streets to your assembly, and saw
many lying in the streets, who were mutilated in hands
or eyes or covered with incurable sores, I esteemed it the
harshest cruelty not to speak of them to your love, espe-
cially as the time also invited. For it is indeed at all times
274
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 275
necessary to exhort men to mercy towards their brethren,
since we ourselves need it on the part of Our Lord and
Creator, but especially now during the extreme cold.”"
Quite similarly does Augustine conclude a sermon on
alms with the words: “Give then to the poor, I entreat,
I exhort, I enjoin, I command you. For I will not con-
ceal from you the reason why I esteem it necessary to
preach this sermon to you. When I go to church and
when I return, the poor call to me and beg me to speak
to you, that they may receive something from you. They
exhort me to speak to you, and if they see that they
receive nothing from you, they will believe that I have
bestowed labour upon you in vain. They expect some-
thing from you. I give as much as I have, I give as
much as I can, but am I capable of allaying their misery 2
Since then I am not in a condition to appease their need,
I am their ambassador to you. You have heard the
gospel, you have added the word of thanksgiving: thanks
be to God | You have received seed, you have returned
words. Your thanksgivings weary me; I support their
load, and tremble under it. But, my brethren, your
thanksgivings are only leaves, and fruit is required of
you.” All the great preachers of the day were powerful
preachers of almsgiving. How often does Chrysostom
say : “Every day, I am told, you speak of alms. Yes
undoubtedly, and I shall not cease to speak of it. If you
were as docile as I could wish, I should even then speak
of it, to preserve you from relaxing. If then you stop
half way, whose fault is it ! Ought an untractable pupil
to complain of the repetitions of his master ?” How well
did Basil, when Cappadocia was visited by a drought, know
how to incline all hearts to give during the distress
“He opened by his sermons,” says Gregory Nazianzen,
276 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
“the granaries of the rich, and like a second Joseph,
provided the poor with food and provisions.” How well
did the two Gregories of Nyssa and Nazianzus under-
stand how to arouse a "love for the poor We have a
sermon by the latter on love for the poor," which is one
of the most beautiful and touching ever delivered. “If
you would listen to me, ye servants of Christ, ye brethren
and fellow-heirs, let us,” he cries, “so long as we have
the time, minister to Christ, feed Christ, clothe Christ,
receive Christ, honour Christ : ” and then continues, that
we too are daily in danger, and do not know what may
soon become of us, a reference to the changes of fortune,
which, in those days, in which so many rich and prosper-
ous were often suddenly plunged into beggary, must have
made a double impression. “He who is in a ship is near
to shipwreck. Therefore, so long as thou art sailing with
a favourable wind, hold out a hand to those who are
suffering shipwreck; as long as thou art healthy and rich,
help the unfortunate. Man has nothing so divine as
beneficence. Be a god to the unfortunate, by imitating
the mercy of God.” Nor are the Latins, Leo the Great,
of whom we have a number of collection sermons, Alm-
brose, Augustine, Gregory the Great, behind the Greek
fathers. From every pulpit in every church the people
were exhorted to compassion and to bountiful almsgiving
with untiring zeal, and with all the means afforded by the
extremely rhetorical style of preaching then in use.
Even this is sufficient to show that the ardour of first
love had abated. Almsgiving was no longer self-evident,
it needed urging. Nor was there. lack of complaints
concerning the hard-heartedness of many of the rich.
How frequently does Chrysostom turn to them, and
reproach them with their injustice in living in the
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 277
midst of every luxury and squandering their property
in superfluities, while so many poor men cannot even be
sure of bread “I am much ashamed,” he says, “when I
see so many rich men riding about with golden bridles,
with gold-laced slaves trailing behind them, and sleeping
on silver couches, who, when they are asked to give to a
poor man, are poorer than the very poor;” and he thus
addresses the church in Antioch : “Through God's grace,
the number of Christians in Antioch amounts, I believe,
to 100,000. If each of you would give a loaf to the
poor, all would have more than enough ; if each would
give an obolus, we should have no more poor.”” In
Basil, Ambrose, Augustine, we meet with like complaints.
They are obliged to refute the thousand excuses, by which
hardness of heart, then as ever, sought to justify itself;
they have to remind their hearers that it is not right to
leave all to the Church, and that the officers of the Church
cannot give if nothing is given them. If we add to this
the misery which these Fathers had daily before their
eyes, how painful it must have been to them not to be
able to relieve it, and how often they must have been
moved by what Augustine on One occasion expresses:
“So many beg daily, so many sigh daily, so many haunt
us daily for assistance, that we are obliged sadly to give
up the greater part, because we have not enough to give
to all,”" we shall understand how it was that just that
motive for almsgiving was now so prominently brought
forward, the motive of reward, which always produces an
effect in churches in which love has waxed cold and the
deeper Christian motives are no longer powerfully opera-
tive. This is not, however, to say that purer motives
were absent. The Fathers of those days also often remind,
that the poor are our brethren, that they are of the same
278 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
nature, bear the same image of God, that we are walking
with them on the same road towards the same end. “We
are all one in the Lord,” preaches Gregory Nazianzen,
“whether rich or poor, bond or free, healthy or sick, and
we have all one head, even Christ. What the members
are one to another, each should be to each and all to all.”
Ambrose often dwells upon humanity and what we owe
our fellow-men, and, of course, there is not lacking a fre-
quently recurring reminder of the gratitude we owe to
God and to the Lord, or of the fact, that in ministering
to the poor we do it unto Christ, that we ourselves must
all hope in God's mercy, and are all beggars standing
before His gates." Still the motive of reward, that thus
we lend to God, that we make God our debtor, that
He will repay, is brought far more into the foreground.
“Thou hast me for a giver,” are the words put into God's
mouth by Augustine, “ now make me also a debtor.
Thou givest me little, I will repay thee much. Thou
givest me things earthly, I will requite thee with things
heavenly. I will give thee thyself, by giving thee back
to Myself” Countless times is the thought expressed,
that almsgiving is a safe investment of money at good
interest with God in heaven. “Invest thy money above,”
exclaims Augustine; “do not entrust it to thy servant,
but to thy God. God would have thee for His creditor,
but His, and not thy neighbour’s.” One must not say:
“I am serving my children when I lay by money.” It
comes to pass that he loses one of his children, why does
he not send his property after his son 2 Why does he
keep it in his purse and dismiss him from his mind
Pray give him what you saved for him. He is dead.
Well, he went first to God, his portion belongs to the
poor, it belongs to Him to whom he is gone; he is gone
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 279
to Christ, it belongs to Christ, who says: “Inasmuch as
ye did it unto one of the least of my brethren, ye did it
unto me.”
The notion that alms have an atoning efficacy, which
had already made its appearance in the former period, is
now universally acknowledged, and is expressed again
and again in every variety of form and expression as the
motive of almsgiving, which is predominant and prepon-
derant above all others. To put together only a few of
the most distinctive utterances of the kind : “Charity,” it
is said in a homily of Chrysostom on repentance, is “the
queen among the virtues, who quickly lifts a man into
the atmosphere of heaven, and is the best intercessor.
Charity has strong wings, she cuts through the air, rises
above the moon, ascends beyond the shining sun, and
penetrates to the heights of heaven. But there too she
does not remain, but penetrates the heavens also, hastens
through the host of angels, the choir of archangels, and
all the higher powers, and places herself before the throne
of the King Himself.” Learn this from Holy Scripture,
which says: “Cornelius, thy prayers and thine alms are
come up before the presence of God.” This “before the
presence of God” means: Hast thou even many sins, but
hast alms for an intercessor Z fear not, for none of the
higher powers opposes alms, it claims payment, and brings
its bond in its hands. For the Lord Himself says:
“What ye have done to one of the least of My brethren,
ye have done to Me.” “With whatsoever sins then thou
mayest be burdened, thy charity outweighs them all.”
There is a still stronger passage in the same cycle of
homilies: “To-day begins a trade in alms, for we see the
prisoners and the poor, we see those who wander about
the market, we hear how they cry, and weep, and mourn,

280 CIIRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
we have a wonderful fair before our eyes.” At a fair,
however, there is but one object; the man of business has
no other aim than to buy goods cheaply, and to sell them
dearly. Such a fair has God opened to us: “Buy the
works of righteousness cheaply, to realize in the future a
higher price, if indeed it is allowable to call requital
realization. Here righteousness is sold cheap, sold for an
insignificant piece of bread, for a miserable garment, for
a cup of cold water. As long as the market lasts let us
buy alms, or rather let us purchase salvation through
alms.” “Give the poor a piece of money,” it is else-
where said, “ and thou hast reconciled the Judge.” To
say the truth, the benevolent Judge lets himself be gained
by money, which he does not take for Himself, but which
the poor receive. Repentance, without alms, is dead, and
shorn of its wings. Tepentance is unable to fly, unless
she has the wings of alms. “Understand the goodness
of God,” it is said in one of Leo the Great's sermons,”
“ and the arrangement of His love. God has therefore
willed thy superfluity, that by means of thee another may
not starve, and that by the benefactions of thy work of
love He may deliver the poor from distress and affliction,
and thee from the multitude of thy sins;” and elsewhere :
“The food of the needy is the purchase-money of the
kingdom of heaven.” “Mercy,” continues Ambrose, “is
a source of salvation for those for whom covetousness has
kindled the flame of death, that they, who have kindled
the flames by sinning, may extinguish them by alms-
giving. Let him buy innocence who formerly bought
sin.” Still more plainly is it said in another place:
“Thou hast money, buy off thy sins. God is not venal, ,
but thou art venal; ransom thyself with thy works, \
ransom thyself with thy money. Money is a trifle, but \
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 281
mercy is precious.” Augustine, too, carries out the
thought, that alms give wings to prayer, and that by alms
sin is expiated: “The sacrifice of the Christian is the
alms bestowed upon the poor. Thereby God becomes
indulgent towards sinners. If God is not indulgent to
sinners, who is not guilty 2 Men are cleansed by alms
from those sins and transgressions, without which life
cannot be passed here below.” “Nothing is bought for
a lower price than the kingdom of heaven,” preaches
Gregory the Great ; “hast thou no cup of cold water to
give to the needy ? the goodwill will suffice, for before God
no hand is empty, if the heart is filled with goodwill.”
Dut most largely, I might say in the most wholesale manner,
does the thought, that alms earn merit, appear in Salvian.
It must not be thought, he says, that only the wicked
ought to give alms, for the purpose of expiating their sins.
The good must do it too. For they owe much to God
for the goodness which they have experienced, and even
they are not sure of their salvation. Therefore they also
do well, to give away as much as possible of their earthly
goods, “Let it be granted, that they have no punishment
to fear, can we then hope for reward without merit
Hence, if we do not sacrifice our wealth to redeem us from
sin, let us devote it to purchase our salvation; if we do
not give, that we may not be condemned, let us at least
give, that we may be rewarded. If there is no evil in the
past, for which we have to atone, there are still eternal
possessions, which we have to procure; if we have no
punishment to fear, we have the kingdom of heaven to
obtain ; if the Saints have nothing from which to redeem
themselves, they have something to purchase. The
bargain is a safe one, and there is no loss to fear, for God
is a faithful requiter.”
282 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK III.
This may suffice to afford a general impression of the
manner in which alms were then preached about, and
almsgiving inculcated. The passages quoted are, it must
be confessed, after the fashion of the times, highly
rhetorical. What is said of redeeming from sin, and
purchasing the kingdom of heaven, must not be taken too
literally, although (as we shall afterwards have occasion
to show) they may frequently have been so under-
stood by the hearers. But they are certainly some-
thing more than only a rhetorical paraphrase of the New
Testament thoughts, that God rewards beneficence, and
that they who exercise mercy shall find mercy. These
passages are certainly based on definite doctrines and
definite ethical views, doctrines and views which, clearly
and sharply impressed, especially by the Latin Fathers
Augustine and Gregory the Great, were handed down
to the Middle Ages, and became the governing principles
of Christian life during that period.
We must remember, that the connection between faith
and good works was early lost sight of in the ancient
Catholic Church. There is a hiatus between faith and
morality. The latter is not the proof of faith, does not
grow out of it as a necessary consequence, but stands as
second with it. Even Augustine did not rediscover
this connection. In his writings also faith and love are
separated; faith does not as such work by love, but love
is added to faith. There is a faith without love, without
hope, without good works. Hence Augustine's doctrine
of justification by faith presents a very different appear-
ance from that of the reformers. We are justified by
faith, because faith works by love. Hence a merit is
awarded to love even by Augustine, though he regards
this merit as an outflow of grace; and here is the root of
w
&
\
\
^*.
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 283
the oft-recurring maxim, found in Augustine also,-
“That alms have power to extinguish and expiate sin.”
It is true that he very strongly insists, that alms are
of no avail without amendment of life. He decidedly
rejects the then widely diffused doctrine, that in case a
man only believes what the Church teaches, and does not
separate from the Church, alms will help to save him,
even though as by fire. First of all, he says, must the
life be changed for the better. A charter to sin cannot
be purchased by alms. All sins are not of such a kind
as to be expiated by alms; but when a man continues in
the faith and amends his life, then alms are the means of
obtaining forgiveness for daily light sins. For Augustine
distinguishes three classes of sins—very heavy, heavy,
and light. The means of obtaining forgiveness for the
first is public penance in the Church ; for the second,
brotherly correction; for the last, prayer with alms.”
Among these slight sins he reckons the sins of weakness,
by which the Christian is affected even after baptism, the
daily sins which none can live without, such, for example, he
says, as speaking a harsh word to a neighbour, as laughing
immoderately. Even the use of the allowable involves such
light sins. They must not, however, be lightly regarded.
They are to be feared not for their greatness, but for their
numbers. It is their number that ruins men; just as a
grain of corn is in itself small, but if too many grains are
poured into a ship, the ship is wrecked. These sins are
purged away by alms, only care must be taken to keep
from committing those sins which separate from the Com-
munion and from the Church, such as murder, adultery,
witchcraft, idolatry. Against these alms are of no avail.”
We see that in Augustine the maxim, that alms have
atoning efficacy, is still surrounded with many precautions.
284 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
They have only such efficacy for those who amend their
lives, and keep themselves from heavy sins, and for them
only when they are actual manifestations of love; lastly,
their effect is limited to the third kind of sins—the light,
daily, and inevitable. It lay, however, in the nature of
the case, that these precautions should not endure, not
even in theory, to say nothing of practice. Augustine's
threefold division of sins universally gave way to a two-
fold division into deadly and venial sins, and the atoning
power of alms was consequently extended to the whole
sphere of sin—the very heavy, such as idolatry, murder,
adultery, and those which separate from the Church,
alone excepted. Cyprian had already placed alms
beside baptism as a means for atoning for sins committed
after Baptism, and this thought comes forth far more
strongly in Ambrose:” “Alms are then to a certain extent
a second bath of the soul, so that, if any one has, after
baptism, failed through human weakness, there still remains
to him the means of purging himself by alms, as the
Lord said: ‘Give alms, and lo, all things are clean unto
you.’ Nay, reserving faith, I might say that alms afford
still more forgiveness than baptism. For baptism is
administered once, and promises forgiveness once, but
alms bring forgiveness as often as they are given. These
two then are the sources of mercy, which give life and
forgive sins. He who avails himself of both is endowed
with the honour of the heavenly kingdom. But he who,
having stained the living source (baptism) by sins, betakes
himself to the stream of charity, will also obtain mercy.”
It is true that Ambrose speaks only of sins of weak- ,
ness. Alms alone are not sufficient to expiate deadly
sins. For this Church penance is needed. But even
here alms play a great part. Consider, that Cyprian
\
º
\,
CHAP. III.] ALMS. - 285
already reckons alms among the proofs of the earnestness
of repentance, that he counsels those who had fallen away
in persecutions to be zealous in almsgiving. Alms are
among the deeds by which a sinner makes satisfaction for
his sins. In Gregory the Great, we find this doctrine in
as developed a state as that in which it was held in the
Middle Ages. The fundamental notion is, that God,
while He remits guilt, does not remit punishment. This
has to be endured by man, and hence repentance must
include the satisfaction of a work, in which man inflicts
punishment upon himself. He who has done what is
not allowed, must deny himself what is allowed, by way
of satisfaction; he who has sinned must make up for
it by good works.” Three kinds of works, however, are
now everywhere deemed good : praying, fasting, and alms-
giving, and of these the latter is esteemed the best and
most efficacious. “Fasting is good, but almsgiving is
better. If any one can do both, both are well; but if he
cannot do both, almsgiving is the better. When it is not
possible to fast, almsgiving is sufficient. Fasting with
almsgiving is doubly good.” Thus alms are inserted, as
an important item, in the plan of Salvation. It is they
that expiate venial sins, it is they that, to use a favourite
expression, give wings to repentance. All this—I repeat
it—under the presupposition of sincere repentance of
heart, of which alms alone are said to be the expres-
sion. Frequently do the teachers of the Church bring
this forward, and often do they recall it to their hearers’
minds, that not the external work, but the loving dis-
position proved thereby, is the main point. Very beauti-
fully says Gregory the Great, in a collection sermon :
“Although in this work all the gifts are not equal,
still the love must be equal. For the liberality of the
286 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
faithful is not estimated according to the largeness of
the gift, but according to the amount of benevolent love.
Let the gift of the wealthy be more abundant, but let not
the poor be behind him in love. For though a larger
harvest is hoped for from more abundant sowing, yet rich
fruit of righteousness may shoot forth from scanty seed;”
and in another place : “Property which is unequally
distributed, may afford equal merit, if, whatever the extent
of the gift, the love is none the less.” Augustine still
more frequently insists, that by alms he means not only
the gifts bestowed upon the poor, but brotherly love,
especially the forbearing love which forgives a brother.”
Ambrose reminds that it is not alms given from ambition
that atone for sin, but those whose expenses are provided
for by faith.” In Matt. xxv. Christ means that those
only, who give to hungering Christians as such, give to
Christ Himself; and these are they who do not do what
Christ disapproves, says Augustine, and delights in carry-
ing out the thought, that we must first give to ourselves
the bread of conversion before we give bread to others.
Else alms are of no avail. The Lord has regard to the dis-
position with which we give.” To think that we may sin
because we give alms, that while paying for our faults
we may commit new ones, is, according to Gregory the
Great, “to give ourselves to the devil while giving our
property to God.”
But what could all these reminders avail with a
generation only too much inclined to release themselves
from the moral demands of Christianity by external
works, to regard Christianity in general more as an insti-
tution for a magical kind of atonement, than as a power of
moral renovation ? In effect, countless multitudes sought
in the largest possible almsgiving, the Safest means of
CHAP. III.] ALMS, 287
atoning for their sins and rendering God propitious to
them, and we need only read Salvian or the pseudo-
Augustinian sermons of Caesar of Arelate, to be convinced
that the Church was a participator in their error. It is
there said again and again: This or that is sin, but instead
of then insisting on a moral change, there follows imme-
diately : But alms atone for sin. How much had not the
Church to overlook and actually did overlook, how lax
had discipline become ! Alms are said to afford a remedy
for all, for “as water quenches fire, so do alms sin;” such
was the maxim now preached in countless instances.
Alms had totally changed their character. They were no
longer a moral, but a religious duty ; men no longer gave
with regard to their neighbours, to serve and to help them
in love, but with regard to themselves, to exercise an
influence upon their own relation to God, to gain a reward
for themselves. “Certainly every one of us does himself
and his own soul the greatest benefit, whenever he
relieves the distress of others,” preaches already Leo the
Great; * and this motive of benefiting oneself and one's
family was ever after more and more strongly brought
forward in place of the self-denying, self-sacrificing love,
which seeketh not her own.
Nothing more effectively promoted this propensity than
the thought, that the sin-atoning power of alms reaches
also to the other world. It may be said, that the doctrine
of purgatory, and of the influence which almsgiving
exercises even upon Souls in purgatory, determined more
than anything else the charity of the entire mediaeval
period. This doctrine was now already developed, its
) outlines were complete in Gregory the Great, and it was
thus passed on to the Middle Ages.
We have in the first period already noticed the begin-
t
{
|
288 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
nings of this doctrine. As early as Tertullian's day, obla-
tions were offered for the departed on the anniversary of
their death. The intention then evidently was to obtain
for them the intercessions of the Church, any merit to be
applied to the deceased was not as yet thought of. In
Cyprian, however, the stress is no longer laid upon the
intercession, but upon the sacrifice offered in behalf of the
departed, and it is no longer the oblation, but the celebra-
tion of the Lord's Supper, the offering of the mass, which
is regarded as such a sacrifice. We have in truth already
the mass for souls, the only difference being, that this is
not yet severed from the offering of the Church. It now
consequently becomes the general custom, to offer for the
departed, and the persuasion is generally entertained, that
this offering is to their advantage. “It is not to be
doubted,” it is said in one of Augustine's sermons,” “that
the departed are assisted by the prayers of the Holy
Church, by the saving sacrifice and by the alms, which
are offered for their souls, that the Lord deals more
mercifully with them than their sins have deserved.”
Still more amply does he explain this in the Enchiridion :*
“It cannot be denied, that the souls of the departed find
alleviation through the piety of survivors, when the
sacrifice of the Mediator is offered, or when alms are
given in the church for them.” “But certainly,” adds
Augustine, “it only profits those, who have in their lives
deserved that it should do so.” He distinguishes in this
respect three kinds of persons. There are those who do not
need it. For them it is a sacrifice of thanksgiving. There
are those not entirely wicked. For these it is an atoning
sacrifice. There are those quite wicked. Then it is at
least a means of consolation for the survivors. But even
in the last case Augustine still admits, that a mitigation of
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 289
their doom may be hoped for. Hence it is in any case,
as Augustine says in a work devoted to the subject (On
Care for the Dead), a universal duty to offer the sacrifice
for every departed soul, since one cannot know what is
appointed to any individual. º
These passages from Augustine already show, that alms
were combined with the sacrifice offered for the dead.
Alms were given in the Church, when, soon after a death,
or on the anniversary of a death, the sacrifice was offered;
alms were also given at funerals and at graves, in the
hope that their merit might be of advantage to the
deceased.” Such a custom was the more easily formed,
inasmuch as it was connected with an ancient custom,
indeed was only an ancient custom remodelled. Scarcely
anywhere can we so well trace the continuation and
transformation of ancient in Christian customs, as in
funerals and the solemnities connected with them, be-
cause it is just here that epitaphs afford us a glimpse of
prevailing customs. That just in this point ancient
customs were retained with special pertinacity, need not
surprise us, because the ancient world was distinguished
by great reverence for the dead. How highly was the
sacredness of the grave esteemed among the Romans,
with what attention was a fitting funeral prepared, and
how much was expended in permanently honouring the
dead and their memory ! All this was the more faith-
fully preserved, inasmuch as it now obtained a fresh and
firmer support through the doctrine of the resurrection.
To Christians the grave must have become still more sacred,
since they believed, that he who was now laid in the grave
would not remain there, but rise again. The Christian
epitaphs also furnish proofs, that in many respects the
ancient custom passed over into the Christian custom.
T
290 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Thus it was the custom among the Romans, to forbid
under penalties the subsequent opening of the grave; and
we read upon many heathen graves, that whoever presumes
to open this grave is to pay such or such a fine to the
Romish exchequer, the Vestal Virgins, or whatever other
place is stated as authorized to receive such fines. Simi-
larly do we read also upon a Christian grave : Whoever
shall open this Sarcophagus after my interment, shall pay
to the church at Salona fifty pounds silver.” Here is the
same infliction of a fine, only the receiver is now designated
as the Church. Threats are also frequently read. Who-
ever disturbs the grave is said to incur punishment by
the infernal gods. Upon Christian graves it is said : He
shall have his reward with Judas, with Gehazi, with
Dathan and Abiram, or also, let him be Anathema.”
It is especially significant, that, as we saw above,
legacies and endowments occur in remembrance of the
departed. Money is bequeathed, that the grave of the
deceased may on his birthday be decorated with roses
and violets, that lights may be lit and a repast held at
his grave, or that appointed gifts of bread and wine, or a
sum of money, may be distributed at his grave in celebra-
tion of his birthday to the members of the collegium to
which he belonged, or to his fellow-townsmen. All this
was “in remembrance,” in memoriam, of the deceased.
Some heathen memorials so resemble the Christian
memorials of the Middle Ages, that they might easily be
mistaken for them, but for the certainly important
difference, that they are never benevolent endowments,
but minister solely to vanity, or, at all events, are only
intended to honour the memory of the departed. The
particular in which we notice the transformation effected
in this custom by Christianity is, that these memorials
CHAP. III.] ALMS, 2.91
now became distributions of alms to the poor. Chry-
sostom already speaks of it as an ancient custom, to keep
up the remembrance of a deceased wife, husband, or child,
by inviting the poor at the interment, or on the anni-
versary of the death, and giving them food and drink.
Subsequently feasts held at graves became a nuisance to
the Church, a scandal to all earnestly-minded Christians.
At the graves of relatives, at the graves of martyrs,
luxurious banquetings were held on their anniversaries.
Augustine had often to contend with this obnoxious
custom. It was, however, too firmly rooted to be extir-
pated, and hence the efforts of the Church were directed
so to change it, that the repasts and presents for friends
and relatives should be replaced by the sacrifice of the
mass, with the oblation and alms for the poor. Thus
arose the Christian memorials, endowments for masses for
the dead, and distributions of alms on the anniversaries
of deaths. For it was part of the transformation of the
heathen custom, that the birthday hitherto celebrated, was
exchanged for the day of death.”
This development reaches its maturity in the doctrine
of purgatory. The distinction between heavier and
slighter sins is here again at the foundation. Gregory”
adduces especially the passage of St. Paul, 1 Cor. iii. 11
Sqq. The apostle does not say, that every one may be
saved, who builds upon the one foundation, instead of gold
and silver, iron, brass, lead, i.e. great and heavy sins, not
to be expiated in another world, but he who builds there-
upon wood, hay, stubble, i.e. light and trifling sins, which
fire easily consumes. These are sins such as those which
Gregory adduces by way of example, frequent and useless
talk, immoderate laughter, or a sin in the management of
property, which can hardly be carried on without sin by
292 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
those who know how sin must be avoided. All this
does not plunge into perdition, but it burdens the
soul even after death, if it is not pardoned during life.
Such a man therefore goes before the judgment into a
purgatorial fire, in which sins are burned like hay and
stubble. It is true that Gregory takes for granted, that
the man, while in this world, merited purification through
his good works, or he will never obtain it in the next.
Only under this condition, but then certainly, will the
sacrifices and good works performed for him here on earth
by others profit him." Gregory's dialogues are full of
histories to prove this. He tells of souls who come into
the fire burdened with slight sins, who then themselves
pray that the sacrifice of the mass may be offered for
them, and as soon as this is done are released. It may
suffice to give here but one, which is of interest because
it involves the commencement of a mediaeval custom
which became very productive in respect of alms. A
monk of the name of Justus, who had applied himself to
the study of medicine in Gregory's monastery, had secretly
been in possession of three gold pieces. When this was,
shortly before his death, discovered, Gregory ordered that
none of the brethren should resort to him, and afterwards
caused his corpse to be buried in a dung-heap. The three
gold pieces were thrown after him, the brethren exclaim-
ing in chorus, “Thy money be thy ruin " Thirty days
after his death, Gregory had compassion upon the monk
who had been thus punished. He called Pretiosus, the
prior of the monastery, and said to him, “For a long time
has the departed brother been tormented in the fire. We
must now show our love to him, and help him as much
as possible to be released. Go then and order the sacred
sacrifice of the mass to be offered for him for thirty
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 293
successive days from to-day, so that there may not
be one on which the Holy Eucharist is not offered for
him.” On the thirtieth day, then, Justus was actually
released from the fire, and testified the same to his
brethren by appearing to them.” Accordingly, it became
the custom, first of all in Benedictine monasteries, to read
mass thirty days for a departed brother, during which
period his portion was distributed to the poor; and this is
the origin of the custom, observed throughout the whole
mediaeval period, of having masses read and alms dis-
tributed for the soul of any one departed in the so-called
thirties, i.e. thirty days after death.*
It is palpable what a strong motive for almsgiving was
involved in the notion, that it could deliver oneself and
others from the torments of hell. Venial sins, it is said
in a pseudo-Augustinian sermon,” do not indeed cause
death, but they make the soul so loathsome, that it can-
not meet the heavenly bridegroom without confusion.
Hence they must be expiated by fasting, praying and
almsgiving. Otherwise we must remain in purgatory till
these sins are consumed like wood, hay and stubble.
We must not, however, say: Although I must go into
purgatory, what is the harm, if only I be saved at last 2
I’urgatory is worse than anything we can conceive on
earth. We would not willingly thrust a finger into the
fire now, and we shall then be tormented for years. We
must therefore abstain from mortal sins, and expiate
pardonable offences with good works. As often as we
visit the sick, deliver those lying in prisons and in chains,
fast on the appointed days, wash the feet of strangers,
come frequently to vigils, give alms to the poor who pass
our doors, our Smaller sins are daily atoned for by these
good works.
294 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book III.
Thus was the sin-atoning power of alms extended to
this world and the next ; they were deemed capable of
preserving ourselves and others from the horrors of
purgatory. This motive for almsgiving was the more
powerfully efficient, inasmuch as it could not be known
when a sufficient quantity of good works had been per-
formed. It is easily seen, that in those exhortations which
make use of this motive, the uncertainty which impels to
do more and more, because it can never be known whether
enough has been done, is powerfully brought forward.
It cannot be known whether one departed needs or does
not need alms, for his deliverance out of purgatory, or
whether they profit or do not profit him. Hence the one
thing advisable is to give them for all. “Perhaps,” says
Salvian, “it may even help the quite wicked,” and
Augustine also concedes the possibility of an alleviation
of perdition.” Who would not devote as much as he
possibly could, if there were but a glimpse of hope, that
he might thereby procure for his father, mother, brethren,
children, a mitigation of torment 3 Besides, no one was
ever certain of his own salvation. Man does not know
whether his works are so constituted, that God judges
them to be good works. Hence even the Saints have no
unmixed joy in their good works. A letter of Gregory
the Great to a lady-in-waiting of the Empress, named
Gregoria, is in this respect characteristic. Gregoria had
written to him, that she would leave him no peace till he
wrote to her, that the forgiveness of her sins was revealed
to him. Thereupon Gregory replies : Thou hast asked
something which is hard to comply with, and moreover
unprofitable. Hard to comply with, because I am un-
worthy to receive a revelation; unprofitable, because thou
must not surrender thyself to full Security on account of
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 295
thy sins, till on the day of thy death thou canst weep for
them no more. Till that day comes, thou must ever fear
and tremble because of thy sins.” No one must be
certain, every one must live in fear, and this fear must
urge him to do more and more. As much alms as
possible, was now the rule. We do not indeed know
whether we still need them, but in any case we earn
thereby so much the more merit, and if we do not need
this merit ourselves, we can apply it to others. It is
also but a trifle that we give, compared with the great
thing we expect. For who would not rather sacrifice
something here, than suffer there unspeakable torments in
purgatory ! Therefore, as much alms as possible. If the
distress of the times urged the teachers of the Church to
use every lever to impel to almsgiving, the members of
the Church with their now increasing laxity, if they,
surrounded as they were by hundreds of poor, expecting
everything from them, were already near enough to
regard rather the quantity of the alms obtained, than
the purity of the disposition in which they originated,
what must have been the case with the ordinary Chris-
tian 2 Alms can do everything, atone for everything,
help in every need How often must earnest men, like
Augustine, have had to oppose the delusion, that a man .
might live as he pleased, if only he gave alms to the poor
But the worst harm lay in that uncertainty as to forgive-
ness and a share in everlasting blessedness, so decidedly
declared by the Church to be inevitable, nay, necessary,
and which it was sought to obviate by almsgiving. The
hurch offered to her members expiation upon expiation ;
these were, moreover, believingly received, but it almost
seems as if they were, nevertheless, not really trusted in ;
men were not at heart satisfied with them, and therefore


296 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
strove to obtain, or at least to strengthen an assurance of
Salvation by their own doings, especially by almsgiving.”
In order, however, to a right estimation of the alms-
deeds of this period, it will now be necessary to take a
glance also at the moral views held concerning property,
and concerning riches and poverty. It is not quite easy
to be certain in this matter, and opinions therefore differ.
While some represent the views of the Fathers as more
or less communistic, others, on the contrary, maintain,
that they always firmly adhered to the scriptural decision
concerning property, and that their views on wealth and
poverty were still, in a moral point of view, thoroughly
sound.” The investigation is rendered the more difficult
by the highly rhetorical character of our documents.
These are in the first rank sermons, and certainly words
spoken in ardour and eagerness must not be, without
further ceremony, taken as they stand. It would be easy
to collect a series of passages which sound quite com-
munistic, and seem to deny all right to private property.
“Whom do I injure, sayest thou, if I keep what is my
own 2" are the words put by Basil, in one of his homilies,
into the mouth of the hard-hearted, to whom he replies:
“Tell me then what is thine own 2 Whence didst thou
obtain it and bring it into the world ! The rich are just
like one who has taken his place in the theatre, and
crowds all who come in later, as if the playhouse, which
is for all, were for him only. For they first take possession
for themselves alone of what is common to all, and then
lay claim to it as property, because they obtained it first
If each would only take as much as he needs to satisf
his necessary requirements, where, then, would be th
rich, and where the poor 2 " " But we should be doing
Basil injustice if we should at once conclude from this,






CHAP. III.] ALMS. 297
|
that Basil intended to deny the rights of property, and
looked upon riches as in themselves sinful. We ought
rightly to estimate, and not to turn into doctrinal proposi-
tions the words of Ambrose, when, in his sermon on
Naboth, he thunders against those who do like Ahab, and
thus addresses the rich:” “How far will you stretch your
mad desires 2 Do you alone dwell upon the earth ? Why
do you cast them out, who are by nature your fellows,
and seize upon the possessions of nature for yourselves
alone The earth is given as a common property to all,
to rich and poor. Why do you, who are rich, claim
rights of property for yourselves only 2 Nature, which
brings forth all poor, knows of no rich. Naked did we
come into the world, and a grassy hillock equally covers
rich and poor.” Nor must we take it literally, when
Chrysostom, addressing a richly dressed lady, says: “Of
how many poor, O woman, dost thou bear upon thine
arms the spoil 7”. Or when Jerome says: “Rightly does
Jesus call wealth the unrighteous mammon, for all wealth
arises from unrighteousness. The One can only gain
what the other loses; hence the saying: ‘Every rich
man is a rogue, or the heir of a rogue.’”
Nor is the matter settled by opposing to this series of
passages another series, in which the rights of property
are acknowledged, and the possession of wealth justified.
Certainly the Synod of Gangra was protecting the rights
of property against hyper-ascetic efforts, when it said in
its 4th canon: “We do not despise wealth, if it is com-
bined with justice and benevolence.” “It is not wealth,”
says Ambrose,” “but pride of wealth, that is reproved in
the righ man, otherwise poor Lazarus would not have
been carried to the bosom of rich Abraham.” “Paul did
not forbid men to enrich themselves; he did not command
298 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
them to make themselves poor, to deprive themselves of
their wealth, but only not to be proud of their wealth,”
preaches Chrysostom ; * and in entire agreement with
Scripture do we read in Augustine: “Wealth is in itself,
and according to its nature, a good, though not the highest,
nor a great good.” “ The Fathers also define giving as a
matter entirely left to the free-will of the individual.
“God might have constrained us to give alms, He chose
instead to make it depend entirely on our free-will, that
He might have the opportunity of rewarding us.” We
are at liberty to give or not to give. Ananias and
Sapphira were punished only because “they lied unto the
Holy Ghost.”" The Fathers are very far from preaching
to the poor: What the rich possess, properly belongs to
you. On the contrary, they urgently warn the poor
against envy, and energetically as they remind the rich
of their duty to give all to the poor, they equally testify
to the poor, that they have no right to this.
But all these utterances do in truth prove nothing to
the purpose, for what they certainly do prove, viz. that
the Fathers had no intention of abolishing the rights of
property, is really in no need of proof. This does not,
however, show that the views now held of property, of
wealth and poverty were still morally sound, that they
were still the same as in the early days of the Church,
and had not already undergone a great change.
The latter is, on the contrary, shown in the now
universally accepted maxim, that the relinquishment of
property is the higher state of Christian life. The Synod
of Gangra prefixes to its recognition of property the
sentence: “We approve of abstinence from worldly occu-
pations, if it is accompanied by humility.” To possess
property, to be rich, is quite allowable for a Christian,
\
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 299
and does not hinder his salvation. The Church most
decidedly rejects the view, that wealth is sinful. Still to
be poor is a higher moral condition. All the Fathers
whom we have quoted lived in this condition, they gave
up their property, and so ought it to be with all Chris-
tians. Augustine on one occasion explains,” that all the
strife in the world, wars, rebellion, offences, murder,
injustice, arise concerning what we individually possess.
Concerning those things which we possess in common,
like the sun and the air, no strife arises. “Let us then,
my brethren,” he continues, “abstain from private property,
or at least from the love of it, if we cannot abstain from
its possession.” The latter is thus evidently designated
as the morally inferior condition, and as one only per-
mitted to weakness, and in this connection the above-
mentioned utterances on common and private property
acquire another significance than that of mere rhetorical
treatment. Augustine” says, indeed, very decidedly, that
it is not a sin to be rich, nor is it a sin if any one makes
use of his riches, fares, e.g., better than others; but still it
is a weakness, and riches are a burden, which one would
do best to cast off. “God did not create thee alone, but
also the poor man as well. You find yourselves com-
panions, and are walking on the same road. He carries
nothing, and thou art heavily laden. He brings nothing
with him, and thou more than is needful. Give him of
what thou hast, and thou wilt both feed him and lighten
thine own load.”
It is everywhere the opinion of the Fathers, that the
natural and original order is common property, and that
\private property first arose from sin. It is for this very
\reason, that Ambrose, in his work on duties, refuses the
} ancient definition of justice, which makes it refer also to
300 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
private property. It refers only to the common life of
men. For this corresponds with nature. “Nature has
equally poured forth everything upon all, that food might
be common to all, and the earth a common possession.
Nature brought forth the rights of the community,
usurpation first created private rights.” ” Gregory of
Nazianzus having, in his sermon on love to the poor, first
laid down the proposition : “Love is the shortest way of
Salvation, the easiest ascent to heaven,” explains, that
wealth and poverty, like freedom and slavery, are not
original institutions of God, but came into the world
through sin. Envy, strife, the allurements of pleasure,
power first called forth these inequalities. It is, therefore,
the duty of the Christian to labour for the removal of the
inequality, brought in through sin and for the restoration
of the primitive equality. “Do thou, O Christian, look
to the former equality and not to the subsequent disunion,
to the law of the Creator, not to the law of him, who
gained the victory over him. Help the natural order
with all thy powers.” With Gregory the distinction
between rich and poor is therefore entirely parallel with
that between bond and free, as a thing contrary to the
original ordinance of God, and it is the duty of the
Christian to labour by gifts and grants and alms, for the
restoration of the original equality.
Chrysostom really paints in lively colours, in a sermon
on the Church of Jerusalem, in which there was none
that suffered want, the picture of a communistically
constituted society. If all the Christians in Con-
stantinople would sell their possessions, they would
certainly produce a million pounds gold, perhaps even
two or three millions. This would fully suffice, if all
would live in common, to Satisfy the wants of all, so that \
CHAP. III.] ALMS, 301
no one would lack anything, as was the case in Jerusalem.
Eor as he now shows, with a fair amount of detail and a
glance at monastic life, where this is realized, living in
common requires far smaller means. If a father, mother,
and ten children live together, this costs far less than if
each child lived alone and had his separate house, table,
and attendants. Certainly Chrysostom did not seriously
contemplate the carrying out of such a plan, still he
draws the picture with such evident Zest, that we feel,
that though it is an ideal whose realization he deems
impossible, he yet enjoys its contemplation in private.
He does but paint the ideal, which in truth hovered
before the eyes of all the Fathers, an ideal to become also
a reality, not indeed among the multitudes of ordinary
Christians, but among the perfect in monasteries. So far,
there is a communistic feature in the view entertained by
the Fathers.” .
Hence, when the right use of wealth is spoken of,
giving it away is always dwelt on in a onesided
manner. Nay, it may be said, that the Fathers see its
right use in giving it away. Its use for our own
necessities is indeed conceded, and even the adornments
and enjoyments of life permitted, but still these are
already under a cloud. They are not exactly sins, but
they are weaknesses. The Christian must only so far
use his property for himself, as the necessaries of life
require. It is quite common to meet with the maxim, that
all that a man possesses beyond what is necessary, belongs
to the poor, and ought to be given away. So Augustine: ”
“All that God has given us beyond what is necessary,
He has not properly speaking given to us, He has but
entrusted it to us, that it may by our means come into
the hands of the poor. To retain it is to take possession
302 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
of what belongs to others.” “Of what God has given
you, take beforehand what you need. The rest, which is
the Superfluous for you, is the necessary for the poor.”
“Let not what remains after moderate food and modest
clothing are provided for, be retained for luxury, but
laid up, by means of alms distributed to the poor, among
heavenly treasures.” And to give only one more example,
Jerome" quite similarly says: “We are debtors to the
poor of all that exceeds necessary food and raiment.”
As a Scriptural proof Luke xi. 42 was now adduced,
according to the interpretation, “What is superfluous,
give as alms.” "
Thus the rights of property were limited to the
necessary, the Superfluous is not the property of him who
possesses it, but of the poor. “Thou dost not give to the
poor what is thine own, thou restorest to him what is
his. The earth belongs to all, not to the rich only.
Thou art there for paying thy debt, and givest him only
what thou owest him,” says Ambrose. And Chry-
sostom : * “The poor beg for their own, not thine.” The
error is here quite evident. The rich man is truly a
debtor; he is only doing his duty, when he does not use
his riches for himself, but shares them with the poor.
But he is God's debtor, and his alms have a moral worth,
just when it is for God's sake, that he gives to the poor
what is really his own. To divide property into the
necessary and the Superfluous, and to limit the rights of
property to the former, and consequently to restrict the
duty of almsgiving to the latter, is to make a false
distinction and one really impossible to carry out.” The
Christian is in the fullest sense the possessor of all that
God has given him, but also on the other hand bound, ,
when need requires, to give away all.
*
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 303
If all that is possessed beyond the necessary belongs
properly to the poor, and what is given them is only
what is their due, the duty of love has acquired somewhat
of the character of a legal duty, and hence we cannot be
surprised, if in the treatment of morals, benevolence
should be discussed under the category of justice. It
now obtains this situation, to retain it during the entire
mediaeval period. Not only on this account, however, is
it important, to take one more glance at this form of
doctrine, but because also it is characteristic in the
highest degree of the period we are now discussing. For
it is a very evident symptom of a development, which
deserves the highest degree of notice, if we are rightly to
understand the times of the ancient church, a symptom
of the fact, that now—as we have already had occasion
several times to remark in particulars—a wide current of
ancient views and ancient life flows into and mingles
with Christian views and Christian life.
The first Christian Ethic is the work of Ambrose, On
Duties. It borrows its title, and something more than
its title, from Cicero's famous work. It might be called
a translation of a Ciceronian work into Christian. It is
just in the sphere of morals, that the influence of ancient
views would make itself more strongly felt than in that
of dogma. The Romans had never been strong in
theology. Besides, men will sooner part with dogmas
than moral aims. The teachers of the Church found a
complete and well-worked out philosophical system of
Ethic. They had learned this in the schools. The great
Cappadocians, Basil and Gregory, had studied in the
rhetorical Schools of Athens, and Ambrose had been
brought up and taught, like any other aristocratic Roman
of the day. Hence they accepted the entire framework
304 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
of ancient Ethic, its categories and definitions, and used
it for the insertion of the new Christian matter. The
new wine was put into old bottles, and this could not be
done without its acquiring their flavour. The form
influenced the matter, and the result was not a Christian
Iºthic, but a mixture, which is perceived to have flowed
from two sources, one ancient, one Christian, just as
Dasil was at once a Christian and a classically educated
Greek, and Ambrose a Christian and a genuine Roman,
nay, just as the Christianity of those days was of
similarly mixed appearance, rooted on the one side in
Bethlehem and Golgotha, on the other in Rome and
Athens.
This is seen as soon as Ambrose defines the principle
and the task of Ethic.” Ancient Ethic is thoroughly
eudaemonistic ; the aim of the philosopher, even in his
moral conduct, is his own wellbeing. Ambrose of course
had to renounce this principle, but he lays down a more
refined eudaemonism in its place. Philosophers, he
argues, ask what is “profitable and honourable,” but have
in this inquiry only this life in view. “We, however,
estimate what is profitable and honourable, rather by the
standard of things to come, than of things present, and
define as profitable not what contributes to the enjoyment
of this life, but what helps to attain the grace of eternal
life.” Here too, then, all turns upon Ethic teaching us
not how to prove our faith, how to develop the new
life in all aspects, but what we must do for our own
weal, with only the difference that our welfare, not in a
this world, but in the world to come, our eternal Salva- º
tion, is the question. An enormous difference truly; but
that a sound moral estimation of earthly property can
never by this means be arrived at, is shown at once by
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 305
the manner in which Ambrose himself exemplifies the
difference. Just because Christians look to another
world, earthly possessions appear to them not an advan-
tage, but a disadvantage; they are, unless they are cast
away, only a burden. The Christian ethic of Ambrose
is the counterpart of the ancient, the latter is an ethic
purely of this world, the former purely of another world;
but, in truth, their aim is the same, a man's own well-
being. With this corresponds also the manner in which
benevolence is regarded, the aim is always self, the reward
to be gained thereby. It is not the necessary working
of faith by love, but a means of obtaining salvation.
More plainly still is the influence of ancient ethic
shown, when we notice in what position, and how,
Ambrose speaks of benevolence.” Here, too, he makes
use of the ancient framework handed down by ancient
ethic. This, as is well known, distinguished four
cardinal virtues, prudence, justice, fortitude, and temper-
ance. Ambrose introduced this mode of treatment
into Christian ethic, and it continued in force down to
the Reformation. Benevolence is discussed under the
head of “justice,” and is its proper agency, because
true justice relates to the common. It comprises two
points, benevolence and liberality. Both are insepar-
ably connected, for it is not enough to have a good
will, we must also act ; and again, it is not enough
to do good, but this must also proceed from a good
will. Very beautifully does Ambrose say: “Take away
benevolence from the intercourse of men with each
other, and thou hast taken the sun out of the world.”
Benevolence becomes a fact in liberality, and Ambrose
now describes Christian beneficence as liberality. Un-
doubtedly much that he here says is genuinely Christian,
Uſ
306 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
it could not have grown up out of the soil of antiquity;
but it acquires a very strongly ancient colouring from
the circumstance, that all is treated of under the ancient
title of liberality. How the practice agrees with the
theory, we have seen above, for we were already struck
by the suspicious likeness between ancient liberality and
the almsgiving of the bishops. We may now characterize
the charity of the age by saying, that as all Christian
life exhibits a mingling of Christian and ancient elements,
and as the ethic of Ambrose is Christian-Ciceronian, so
too is charity a mingling of Christian caritas and ancient
liberalitas. Men gave with full hands, but more and
more lost sight of the purpose for the sake of which they
gave. Giving was itself esteemed a virtue. The more
any one gave, the more perfect was he.
In saying this, nothing is further from my intention,
than to depreciate the charity of this period. On the
contrary, I stand admiring before the exalted figures
which it produced, before those bishops daily opening
their hands to feed the hungry and to clothe the naked,
while themselves living simply and sparingly," before
those men, who give away millions, and themselves
choose poverty, before that band of noble women, whose
whole life was a series of good deeds. It would be
doing them the greatest injustice not to acknowledge, that
it was indeed genuine Christian love, shed abroad in their
hearts from the Cross, which acted in them. Nor did
they stop at giving, but added to it their personal
services. Dasil himself took care of the sick, and the
Scions of noble Roman families did not think themselves
too good to put their own hands to the work and to per-
form menial services in the houses for the sick and for
strangers. But it is doing them no injustice to estimate \
l
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 307
them according to the standard of the gospel, which was
itself the source of their life and strength; and when this
is done, we must, in the midst of our admiration, confess,
that this charity was no longer healthy.
The life of love appears in its purest form during this
period in certain women, whom we meet with in the
East, by the side of the great teachers of the Church :
Macrina, the sister of Basil and Olympias, the friend of
Chrysostom, and to name, beside a virgin and a widow,
two married women, Nonna, the mother of Gregory
of Nazianzus, and his sister Gregoria. Macrina was
betrothed, her lover died, and she regarded herself as
bound to him. She therefore led an ascetic life with her
mother. She assembled about her a circle of like-minded
women, but though of both higher and lower class, “the
same mode of life, one order, one discipline, one peace,
one rank" united them all. Her servants and slaves were
now her companions, and she used her abundant means
only in benevolence. In the period of famine especially,
which came upon Cappadocia, she assisted many, and it
was her brave spirit which attracted her whole family,
her brothers, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa and Peter, into the
same path. Olympias, a woman of most aristocratic
birth, rich, intellectual, beautiful, much admired and
sought after, preferred, when her husband Nebridius,
the prefect of Constantinople, died, to remain a widow,
though only eighteen years of age, and to live only for
God and for her brethren. The Emperor Theodosius,
who wanted to marry her, deprived her, for the purpose
of inducing her, of the management of her property. She
only replied with thanks. “You have,” she wrote to the
emperor, “shown towards your humble servant, the
Wisdom and goodness not only of a sovereign, but of a
308 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
bishop, by laying the heavy burden of my estates upon
an official, and thereby delivering me from the care and
disquietude, which the necessity of managing them well
imposed upon me. I now only request one thing more,
by granting which you would much increase my joy:
Command them to be divided between the Church and
the poor. I have already felt the stirrings of vanity,
which are wont to accompany one's own distribution,
and I fear lest the distractions of temporal possessions
might make me neglect those true treasures which are
divine and spiritual.” Theodosius subsequently restored
to her the management of her estates, and she then
applied everything to the poor and to the Church.
Chrysostom directed her beneficence, which seems to have
often surpassed all bounds, and might often have been
shared by the undeserving, into right paths. He
reminded her, that she would also have to give account
of how she had given. “If thou wilt therefore obey me,
guide thy gifts according to the necessities of those who
beg of thee. In this way thou wilt be able to relieve
more, and receive from God the reward of thy wisdom
and love.” When Chrysostom fell into disfavour and
was banished, his deaconess remained faithful to him,
and proved herein also the genuineness of her love.
Olympias is one of the healthiest manifestations of the
times. She is always natural, she never coquets with her
poverty and her simple apparel; humility and noble eleva-
tion of mind are large features in her character. But we
meet also with married women, who are zealous in good
works. Nonna, the mother of Gregory of Nazianzus, is
depicted to us, by her famous son, as a philanthropist,
who could never do enough in supporting widows and
orphans, in visiting the sick and poor, so that she always
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 309
found her property less than her impulse to do good, and
would, had it been possible, have sold herself and her
children to serve the poor. She died, after the death of
her husband, the bishop of the church, praying at the
high altar “a holy sacrifice.” The sister of Gregory was
the wife of a burgess of Iconium ; but her brother says of
her also : “She was eyes to the blind, feet to the lame,
a mother to orphans. Her house was the common
asylum of all the distressed.”
The characteristic traits of the period are encountered
in still greater force in the West. As it was the Western
bishops, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Gregory the Great,
who matured the doctrine of whose development we have
been speaking, so are its peculiarities most sharply im-
pressed on the Christian life of the West.
It was an amazing sight,” in the last quarter of the
fourth century, to see a number of men and women of
the highest Roman aristocracy devote themselves to an
earnest Christian life, as then understood. Members of
the proud old Roman families, who had hitherto adhered
to the old gods, who had made Rome great, Marcelli,
Scipios, Gracchi, left their palaces to procure their salva-
tion, by the strictest self-denial, in the monastery or the
desert, or turned their palaces into monasteries, laid aside
the purple toga or the brocaded state dress, to put on
the dusky garments of the monk or nun, distributed to
the poor the treasures they inherited from their fore-
fathers, and themselves became poor. Rome saw with
amazement Senators and consulars going along the streets
in the garb of monks, and ladies, whose names had been
the pride of the republic, ladies who had hitherto led idle
and luxurious lives in their palaces, surrounded by troops
of attendants, ministering, as widows or virgins devoted
310 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
to God, to squalid beggars, and to those sick of loathsome
diseases. At first the new folly was derided and rebuked,
then men began to admire and extol it. At the funeral
of Blesilla the multitude was indignant; “the young lady,”
it was said, “was killed through fasting; ” her mother,
Paula, was pitied because her daughter had been seduced
into becoming a nun; voices were heard saying that “the
monks ought to be driven out of the town.” A few years
later, at the funeral of Fabiola, a triumphal procession
was formed, which Jerome compared to the triumphs of
Camillus and Scipio. All Rome took a part in it, the
streets, the colonnades, could not contain the multitudes,
psalms and hallelujahs resounded on all sides.
The spiritual father of this circle, its centre and leader,
was Jerome, whose narrow and monastic, but at the same
time self-denying and self-renouncing piety, set its stamp
upon it. Marcella is said to have been the first who let
herself be induced by him to enter the condition of
monastic widowhood. In her palace on the Aventine
Hill, and afterwards in her country seat near Rome, were
found assembled all who had attached themselves to this
tendency. It was there that Jerome expounded the
Scriptures, there that Epiphanius and others sojourned
when they visited Rome. Like Marcella, Furia, of the
race of Camillus, preferred a monastic widowhood, and
to live only for her soul's salvation and for good works,
to a splendid second marriage. But the most prominent
figure of this circle is Paula, whose descent on her
mother's side was derived from the Scipios and Gracchi,
on her father's from Agamemnon, and whose husband
was a connection of the Julian house. Moved by care
for her soul's salvation, and by love to the Lord, she
distributed her abundant possessions with liberal hands
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 3.11
to the poor, in the hope, as she said, of thus leaving to
her children a better inheritance, even the mercy of
Christ. Seeking out the poor through all the city, she
reckoned it a loss if the hungry or the sick were fed by
another than herself. “What poor man,” exclaims Jerome,
“has not been buried in raiment supplied by her, what
sick man not fed by her ?” When she was remon-
strated with on account of this excess of beneficence, she
replied, that she wished to die a beggar, and at her death
to be covered in a shroud bestowed as a gift. “When I
have become poor, I shall find many who will give to
me; but if that beggar receives nothing from me, and
dies, of whom will his soul be required 3’ ” Afterwards,
leaving her other children in Rome, she went, accom-
panied by her daughter Eustochium, who entirely entered
into her way of life, and shared her sentiments, to visit
the holy places where the Lord had sojourned, and then
settled permanently at Bethlehem, that she might live
and die near His cradle. There she built a house for
pilgrims, and a monastery, in which she and her daughter
spent the last years of her life in ministering to all.
Her second daughter, Blesilla, died before her, the same
at whose funeral Rome was horrified at the new kind of
life. A third, Paulina, married to a Senator, Pamma-
chius, a descendant of Camillus, followed the example
of her mother. After her death Pammachius continued
her works. He sold her jewels and ornaments, her silk
dresses, her costly furniture, to give the proceeds to the
poor. Jerome describes his good deeds, and this descrip-
tion, in his somewhat bombastic manner, gives us at the
same time a glance of the misery then existing:” “That
blind man stretching out his hand, and often crying out
when there is no one passing, is the heir of Paulina, the
312 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III,
co-heir of Pammachius. That man, maimed in his feet,
who stumbles along with difficulty, is supported by the
hand of a tender girl. The doors, which formerly were
beset by tribes of visitors, are now besieged by the
wretched. Here is one languishing of dropsy and near
to death ; there one deaf and dumb, he has not even the
Organ for begging, but for this very reason supplicates
the more urgently. This man, feeble from a child, does
not beg alms alone; that one, already corrupting from
leprosy, still survives his corpse. Other husbands scatter
roses, lilies, violets upon the graves of their wives, seeking
consolation in such service. Our Pammachius bedevs the
beloved body with the balsam of alms.”
Pammachius devoted a portion of his means to found
a house for strangers in Portus, the port of Rome, in
which Fabiola, another woman of this circle, assisted
him with both her property and services. Fabiola, de-
scended, as her name already shows, from the Fabian gens,
had married a rich spendthrift and been divorced from
him. She was then, however, convinced of her sin, did
public penance, and henceforth lived only for the sick
and poor. She employed the great treasures at her dis-
posal to found the first hospital in Rome. Sufferers, of
whom there were then so many, men with mutilated
noses, with eyes thrust out, with half-gangrened feet and
mortified hands, those affected with corrupting sores and
leprosy, found there shelter and care. Fabiola herself
often carried the sick into the house, washed and bound
up wounds, which other ladies would not even have looked
at, gave them food, and refreshed them with drink. Her
attention to them was so maternal and so amiable, that,
as Jerome says, the poor wished to be sick, if only to
come under her care.
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 313
Besides this circle, gathered around Paula, we must
not omit to mention especially the two Melanias, the
elder the grandmother, the other her granddaughter of
the same name. The elder Melania, descended from a
side branch of the Marcelli, the daughter of a consul, lost
in one year her husband and two children. Seeking
alleviation for her grief, she left her only remaining son
in Rome, and went, when but twenty-two years old, to
Egypt, there visited the monks, and devoted herself
entirely to that kind of life. In Jerusalem she built a
convent, in which she gathered around her fifty virgins.
Her income was given to the monks and to the poor.
She lived there for more than twenty-five years, when
care for her son and his daughter, the younger Melania,
urged her to revisit her home. Upon her road, she visited
Paulinus, her relative, at Nola, who was, even during his
lifetime, honoured as a saint, and who lived there in a
small house with his wife, Theresia, and passed his time
in religious exercises. Paulinus, too, was one of those
Roman nobles who retired from the world, nay, was
perhaps the most characteristic figure among them. Born
in Bordeaux, and immensely rich (Ambrose calls his
possessions kingdoms, and Augustine designates him as
“ the richest of the rich”), he received a liberal education.
His tutor was the poet Ausonius, who, with some amount
indeed of flattery, declared himself surpassed by his
Scholars. In the year 378, Paulinus became consul, and
afterwards went, as a consular, into Campania. Even then
his love for a monkish life seemed to awaken. For
Martin of Tours, who loved him, and said of him, that he
alone of his contemporaries had entirely fulfilled the
Command of Christ, and Ambrose, whom he himself
honoured as his spiritual father, had taught him, that only
314 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
as a monk can one become a perfect Christian. When,
then, his only son, whom Theresia had borne him, was
torn from him by death, both the parents resolved to
renounce the world and lead a monastic life. In Spain,
whither he first repaired, he distributed a large propor-
tion of his own and his wife's property to the Church
and to the poor, because, as he himself said, “it required
more strength than he gave himself credit for to renounce
the use of possessions while retaining their ownership,
than if he cast them from him.” He then settled in Nola,
where he built a monastery, in which he and Theresia
occupied a humble dwelling, and subjected themselves
entirely to a strict rule of life. He gradually distributed
his whole property. “He opened,” says his disciple
Uranius, “his barns to the poor, his storehouses to
strangers who arrived. It was too small a thing for him
to feed whole provinces, he invited from all quarters
those whom he fed and clothed. How many prisoners
did he not ransom, how many debtors oppressed by their
creditors did he not liberate by paying off their debts, by
the same pious deed drying the tears of the debtor and
rejoicing the creditor l’” Nola became a place of refuge
for crowds of unfortunates, and what was believed of
him, is shown by the legend handed down concerning him
by Gregory the Great, that when, on an incursion of
the Vandals, all his means for ransoming prisoners were
exhausted, he exchanged himself with the son of a widow,
and was carried away into Africa. All those, too, who
devoted themselves to this mode of life, strangers who
admired him, men and women who revered him, flocked
to Nola. He corresponded with all the great men of the
time, and was looked up to by all as a model of piety.
Having become Bishop of Nola, he remained there till
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 315
his death, the guardian of the grave of St. Felix, to whom
he had dedicated his life, showing himself to be in this
respect also a man of his age by his excessive veneration
of saints and martyrs. Melania greatly delighted him
by presenting him with a piece of the true cross, which
she had brought with her from Jerusalem.
Melania remained some years in Rome, entirely occu-
pied in leading her relatives, and whoever else came in
contact with her, to that path to heaven which she
believed herself to have found. She then prepared to
return to Jerusalem, and this time not alone. It was a
whole colony that accompanied her, her son Poblicola,
her granddaughter Melania and her husband, and many
others. Before they started, plentiful gifts were distri-
buted to the poor and to the hospitals, and the churches
were liberally remembered. The younger Melania set
her slaves at liberty, and bequeathed her property in
Spain and Aquitania to the poor. They then set off. It
was in the year 409, one year before the conquest of
Rome by Alaric. It was as though they desired to save
themselves from perishing Rome, and what they gave to
the poor seemed also to have been snatched at the right
season from the “Barbarian Lion.”
The party went first to Africa. At Tagaste, Alyppius
was greeted, at Hippo, Augustine. The elder Melania
then went to Jerusalem, where she soon after died. The
younger built a convent at Tagaste, but afterwards went
also to Jerusalem, where she lived on, in a narrow cell,
for fourteen years.
They are the chief personages of the Western Church
of those times, who have thus been grouped before us in
a picture, which represents the piety of the age in sharply
cut outlines. Strange as much of it appears to us, we
316 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
*
must still confess, that they were in earnest about Chris-
tianity, that they were sincerely concerned for their
Salvation. Even from the bombastic descriptions of
Jerome, we still feel something of that ardent love which
animated them and moved them to give all their goods
to the poor. Jerome tells on one occasion of a rich
matron, who was, on her way to church, distributing
alms. The poor, standing in a row, received her gifts
one after another. When, however, an old woman who
had had her share, ran forward and placed herself again
in the row, she received from the giver a blow on the
face instead of a second gift. A Paula or a Fabiola
would never have acted thus. When they distributed
alms, it was no external and Ostentatious work, but done
from love. They gave also their personal services. In
their convent, Paula and Eustochium trimmed the lamps,
swept, and cooked ; in her hospital, Fabiola personally
attended on the sick. We cannot help admiring the
self-denial with which Paulinus distributed all his goods,
and then, when the Vandals had devastated Nola, ex-
claimed: “Lord, I do not grieve for gold and silver, for
Thou knowest where all mine is; ” and the composure
with which Paula, when it was announced to her, that
all her great property was given away, and that nothing
was now left, answered only in the words of the two
passages of Scripture: “What is a man profited, if he
shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul ?” and :
“Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked
shall I return.” It certainly shows what a new world
had been created by Christianity, that where once a
Livia and a Messalina had indulged in lusts, a Paula and
a Fabiola were now ministering to the poor.
Nevertheless, all was no longer healthy; there was a
CHAP. III.] ALMS, 317
morbid element which originated neither in love nor in
the gospel. An unhealthy state of mind was shown,
when Paula left her daughter poor, nay, loaded with
debts, and obliged in her turn to claim the charity of
others; and when she left her children in Rome, standing
on deck, her eyes lifted towards heaven, while her little
Toxatius was stretching out his arms to her. It was
surely unhealthy, to name the chief point, to forsake the
calling directly handed down, and arbitrarily to choose
another, or instead of justly administering property,
without setting the heart upon it, which, as Paulinus of
Nola rightly observes, is difficult, to give it away. In
all the proceedings of this circle, there is a morbid rest-
lessness, which is indeed perfectly comprehensible in an
age when everything was falling asunder, and the present
afforded so little satisfaction. They wandered hither and
thither, and even their longing after the Sacred places was
but a symptom of this unrest. Nor could they find
actual satisfaction even then. It would at all events
have been more productive, more satisfying, to their love-
craving hearts, to have retained their property and
administered it faithfully for the common good. Besides,
let whoever chooses, wilfully close his eyes against the
fact, a more refined selfishness will, upon closer inspec-
tion, be found to be connected with such self-sacrifice.
The unmeasured panegyrics of Jerome must indeed be set
to his own account, but Jerome would not have praised
after this fashion, unless he had been able to take for
granted a certain amount of receptivity for such encomiums.
His epistle to Pammachius flows at last into a kind of
begging letter for his monastery at Bethlehem, and is
certainly calculated to dispose Pammachius to giving;
and what interested adulation do we not find in it! He
318 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III,
calls Pammachius not only the general of the monks in
Rome, he exalts him not merely above all the senators
and consuls, but also speaks of the quartett of piety which
the family of Pammachius has set forth, and sees the four
cardinal virtùes incorporate therein. Justice in Paula,
prudence in Eustochium, fortitude in Fabiola, temperance
in Pammachius. It is a proof of not only the vanity of
Jerome himself, when he says: “Blesilla will never die
in my books.” Nor is this feature absent in the character
of Paulinus of Nola. It is still in truth the proud
Roman, handing the sportula to his clients, whom
Paulinus describes, in his famous discourse “On the
Treasury,” and not the simple Christian, giving to his
brother in love, when it is there said: “Many are
expecting thee and looking eagerly for thy arrival, looking
about when they see thee. It is one thing when thou
prayest alone, another, when a multitude trembling
before God, pray for thee. Thou art silent, they cry out
for thee. And they see thee and rejoice ; they find thee
and salute thee, they pray for thee in every church,
they congratulate thee in every street, they keep thee in
memory with thanksgiving to God in every place, and
kiss thee though absent, when they kiss their hands.”
If Paulinus thought by such a description of the gratitude,
which one who gives alms may expect, to incite to alms-
giving, it is allowable to infer, that he was not himself
far from entertaining such thoughts. In fact, Paulinus
was very well pleased with the encomiums of his adorers,
and made no ceremony of sending to Severus, who was
about to put up his image in a chapel, as though he was
already a Saint, an inscription for the purpose. This
secret self-approbation is the necessary result of alms
having become a meritorious work. The simple works of
CHAP. III.] ALMS. 3.19
a man's own calling were not duly esteemed, hence the
works of a self-chosen renunciation were over-prized.
Such renunciation is in truth only the reverse side of a
worldly life, not a victory over it. The unnaturalness of
luxury is left for the unnaturalness of an exaggerated
asceticism, which does not however yield inward Satis-
faction, and therefore produces this need of excitement,
which we find in almost all the characters described.
Their Christianity impels them to great, to admirably
great sacrifices, but to serve their brethren constantly and
regularly in the position wherein God had placed them,
was not even recognised as a duty. Thus a Christian
perfection, as then understood, was attained, but not the
perfection which the apostle sets before us as the end to
be striven for, in the words: “Whatsoever ye do in word
or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving
thanks to God and the Father through Him.”
Undeniably, this estimation of wholesale almsgiving
did not continue. It was just the abundant gifts which
flowed from Rome to Jerusalem, through the agency of
Jerome, for the support of the monks living there, which
gave occasion to Vigilantius to oppose it. His work,
which is only known to us from Jerome's evidently very
partial refutation, was directed against the over-estima-
tion of celibacy, the exaggerated reverence of martyrs, the
vigils held at their graves, and against those very alms,
which were given for the saints at Jerusalem. He
maintained that we should rather feed the poor in our
own country. He also declared it better to make a
reasonable use of property, to manage it justly, and
gradually to apply the profits to the poor, than to sell
it and give away all at once. Jerome's manner of
controversy is undignified. When he has no reasons to
320 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
bring forward, he tries to replace them by cheap raillery.
He appeals to the history of the rich young ruler, and
defends the gifts for the pious at Jerusalem by saying,
that it is better to give to these poor than to others,
because such poor as are not themselves godly, cannot
fulfil the words: “They will receive you into everlasting
habitations.” Thus the final point is again a regard not
to the necessity of those who receive, but to the reward
which he who gives hopes for. For the rest, the irritable
tone of Jerome gives reason to suppose, that the work of
Vigilantius had made an impression. Nor did the refuta-
tion of Jerome everywhere find favour, his friends tried
to prevail upon him to mitigate it. The attack, however,
left no mark upon the prevailing tendency of the times,
and Vigilantius was soon forgotten. It could not be
otherwise. He had not perceived the deeper cause of the
disease, and had fought only against symptoms. Hence
his criticism could only be petty censure of single out-
growths, which could not repress the development as a
whole. It was not till the connection between faith and
love, as its practical proof, was rediscovered at the time of
the Reformation, not till men's eyes were open to the true
perfection to be striven for by all Christians, that a just
moral estimation of earthly possessions, and consequently
of alms also, could be arrived at. To require this of
Jerome and his contemporaries, is to drag them out of
their times. Let us then judge what they did from the
standpoint of their age, and we cannot fail to acknowledge
that they did truly great deeds, and that in these times
also the power of the love of Christ was not left
untestified.
Lastly, it will not be without interest to cast one more
look upon the epitaphs of the period. They have this
CHAP. III.] ALMS, 3.21
advantage over all other documents, that they bring us
into most immediate contact with the times. We have,
so to speak, the persons who acted before us; we see them
in their acts and dealings, not merely the most eminent
among them, not those only who fill a place in history,
but plain and simple people. The older inscriptions
afford us indeed but little information. They are dis-
tinguished, in contrast to heathen epitaphs, which
detail all the merits of the departed, by their great
simplicity. The name, age, day of interment, at most a
short expression of Christian hope, a symbol, the fish, the
dove, or a palm branch, is all. From the fourth century
they are fuller, and follow the ancient custom of
eulogizing the virtues and merits of the departed. This
affords us the advantage, as we have said, of such a direct
glance into Christian life, at this period, as no other
documents are capable of furnishing. In numerous
epitaphs then of the time, we find love to the poor,
benevolence, abundant almsgiving, commemorated. A
certain Junianus is called a “lover of the poor,” and his
wife Virginia, who is buried near him, “a lover of the
poor, and zealous in good works.” Another married
woman is also designated as a “lover of the poor.” We
read in one of a Christian that “widows and orphans had
in him a father,” and of a Christian woman, that “noble
by birth and rich in possessions, she was the mother of
the poor.” “Charitable to the poor” is a frequently
recurring eulogium,” and it is said of a merchant, “He
was a refuge to the wretched and a haven to the poor.”
At the same time he is praised for having often visited
the holy places, and diligently addicted himself to prayer
and alms.” In the case of eminent persons, their charity
is described in detail. “The poor went away from him
X
|

322 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
happy, the naked left him clothed, the prisoner rejoiced
that he was ransomed,” is read in an inscription on Bishop
Namatius of Vienna, who died in the year 522,” and
upon another grave: “Devoting all to the stranger, the
widow, the prisoner, he went, rich through pious poverty,
to the stars.”" The thoughts, too, which we have seen to
be prevalent in these days concerning alms, the motive
from which they were given, the expectations and hopes
connected with them, are also reflected in epitaphs. We
read: “He conquered avarice, which is wont to conquer
all,” and very often : “He sent his treasures before him
to heaven,” or, “He sent what was superfluous to
heaven.” Of Bishop Hilalius of Arles, it is said: “A
priest of God, who preferred the love of poverty to gold,
and took the kingdom of God by force.” On one occa-
sion we already meet with the formula “for the salvation
of his soul.” One Arenberga, it is said on her grave-
stone, gave liberty to a slave “for her soul's salvation.”
Thus do even the gravestones show us the cha-
racteristic feature of the age, abundant alms-deeds, but
with a view to the reward of eternal salvation, thereby to
be attained. The really universal view, the view which
had penetrated and was embraced by the people, was,
to conclude with two distinctive expressions of it, that
which Gregory the Great announces, and the Middle Ages
countless times re-echo: The poor are not to be lightly
esteemed and despised, but to be honoured as patrons,
and as Eligius exclaims: “Oh, happy poverty, through
which the heavenly inheritance is gained Happy
exchange, to receive the eternal and the unspeakable
happiness of reigning for ever with Christ for the
transitory !” -
GHAPTER IV,
Hospitals.
IF the only thing effected by this age had been the
creation of hospitals, it would have produced a grand
result, and one deserving the gratitude of all future ages.
The old world was not acquainted with hospitals.
There were only houses for the sick, for slaves, perhaps
also for gladiators and for the army. There were near
the temples of AEsculapius houses for the reception of
the visitors, who resorted thither to seek for themselves
or others advice in sickness by dreams, during the in-
cubation of the god. Such a one, e.g., existed near the
renowned and much frequented temple of Æsculapius in
Tithorea, and Antoninus Pius built one out of compassion,
near the temple of the Epidaurian AEsculapius. But
these were only hospices for shelter, and not hospitals for
care and attendance." There were also public hospices
elsewhere, which were certainly the precursors of the
Christian hospital. For the hospital at its first appear-
ance was quite as much a house for strangers, a xeno-
dochium, a hospice, and the first institutions of the kind
received all who needed an asylum, strangers, the poor,
widows, orphans, the sick, till by degrees there were
separate institutions, according to the various classes of
the needy; and thus hospitals, in their present sense of
houses for the reception and care of the sick and infirm,
823
3.24. CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book III.
were formed. Still the separation was not fully carried
out. In the smaller places the xenodochia were, as a
rule, employed for various purposes; and even in the
larger towns, where there were already several institu-
tions of different kinds, the separation was not a strict
Olle. -
The rise of hospitals has been regarded as a retrogression
in charity.” It is said that they arose when love had
waxed cold, that they ministered rather to ostentation,
than to simple self-devoting love. This is, to say the
least, a very partial judgment. What is true in it, I
have already taken occasion to acknowledge. Hospitals
had now become a necessity, and were, so to speak, the
spontaneous result of the circumstances of the time.
They were called into existence, on the one hand, by the
extreme amount of misery, on the other, by the institu-
tional impulse which then prevailed. It had been
possible to provide for the small number of strangers and
the comparatively few distressed persons of former times.
They had found shelter in the house of the bishop, in the
private houses of members of the Church, or, if needed, in
inns, where they were provided for. When, since Con-
stantine, the number of Christians rapidly multiplied, and
distress at the same time increased, such expedients no
longer sufficed; institutions were needed. This is
palpable. But I should like to refer also to the other
co-operating moment, viz., that the whole period had
a strong propensity to institutions. It is a special
characteristic of this epoch of civilization, that everything
becomes institutional. The time of free movement is
past ; everything is organized, comprised in appointed
forms, and indeed, because vital power is lacking, more in
the way of force than of free development. Let us only
CHAP. IV.] HOSPITALS. 3.25
remember what we have seen to be the case in the
organization of labour. In an age in which the bakers,
butchers, etc., formed settled corporations, institutions, that
is, so to speak, for the maintenance of the public, it is the
more explicable, that charity also should become institu-
tional. If this may be in a certain sense a retrogression,
compared with the time in which there was no need of
institutions, it is in another sense a progress—a progress
never again lost to mankind and to the Church. For
since then there have always been institutions, hospitals,
of different kinds, and just during the periods in which
love has vigorously revived, has it shown itself specially
active in the foundation and Superintendence of such
institutions.
Obscurity govers the beginnings of hospitals. It can-
not be said when or where the first xenodochium was
founded, nor what thoughts and purposes led to its
foundation. The supposition, that the difficulty of main-
taining the numerous believers whom Constantine re-
leased from the mines and prisons, was the occasion of
it, is quite without foundation.” The notion, that there
were formerly in the bishop's dwelling, or connected with
it, special rooms for the reception of strangers, and that
the origin of the xenodochium was merely the separation
of these rooms from the abode of the bishop, the building
of a separate house for strangers, may far rather be
entertained. I believe, however, that this cannot be
proved, and also that there is no need of such supposi-
tions." Quite sufficient starting-points for the xenodochia
are to be found in the hospitality, which was always
esteemed an eminent Christian virtue, in the obligation of
the bishop to receive strangers, which continued even
after the existence of xenodochia. Augustine, e.g., still
326 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH, [Book III.
entertained strangers at his table; also in the inns
(pandocheia), which had long existed, and which it was
the duty of the deacons to visit, for the purpose of giving
assistance to certain suffering strangers. Undoubtedly
the chief occasion lay in the increasing numbers of poor
and suffering who had no shelter, for the xenodochia
were from the first not especially intended for strangers,
but for poor strangers and the poor in general, so that
the house for strangers and the poor-house, the xenodo-
chium and ptocheion or ptochotropheion, were quite-
synonymous.”
It is generally considered that the first xenodochia
were already founded in the time of Constantine. There
is, however, none that can be certainly proved to have
arisen during the reign of the first Christian emperor."
The first perfectly authentic information is found in the
efforts of Julian to promote the restoration of paganism
by the erection of xenodochia and ptochotrophia on the
part of the heathen.' He commanded Arsacius, the high
priest in Galatia, to establish a xenodochium in every
city, “So that strangers may experience our humanity, and
not our own people only, but whoever is in need.” For
means he refers him, partly at least, to public property.
Of the 30,000 bushels of wheat and 60,000 sextares of
wine delivered as imposts, one-fifth is to be applied to
the heathen worship, and four-fifths to such humane
purposes. But Arsacius is also to teach the Greeks—
and this is specially deserving of notice—to contribute to
such works of humanity. “For it is disgraceful; when
there is not a beggar found among the Jews, and when
the godless Galileans support our poor as well as their
own, that our people should be without our help.” The
efforts of Julian himself may evidently be characterized
CHAP. Iv.] HOSPITALS. 327
as an imitation of Christians. Hence there must have
been already xenodochia and ptochotrophia among them,
nay, such institutions must have been already widely
disseminated and their efficiency recognized. We must
then admit, that their first appearance was still earlier,
but the five-and-twenty years of Constantine's reign offer
a sufficient period of time for this. On the other side,
institutions of this kind were, even in the times of
Julian, somewhat of a novelty. It is just during the
last third of the fourth century, that we hear much of the
foundation of xenodochia. About 370 Basil founded the
famous hospital in Caesarea, which had from him the name
of Basilias, and this institution was quickly imitated in
all the towns of Caesarea. Even in the country there
were already ptochotrophia.” Somewhat later Epiphanius
testifies to the existence of xenodochia in Pontus, where
they were called ptochotrophia.” In Edessa, about 375,
there seems as yet to have been none. For when Saint
Ephraem came to the town at a time of famine, and saw
the great misery which prevailed there, the starving and
the sick, he rebuked the Christians for their hard-hearted-
mess. They excused themselves on the plea, that they
were indeed willing to give, but did not know to whom
to entrust their gifts. Then Ephraem offered to administer
their charity. He had three hundred beds provided in a
colonnade, and provided for the hungry, and even for the
strangers who flocked into the town." In Antioch
there was a tolerably large Xenodochium, when Chry-
sostom was preaching there.” He exercised in this
Sphere also his loving, and at the same time practical
mind. He employed what, thanks to his economy and
simple mode of life, was left from the church revenues, in
erecting two hospitals at Constantinople.” In Ephesus
328 Q )
CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Bishop Brassianus, whose episcopal dignity gave occasion
to long discussions in the Council of Chalcedon, founded,
when he was a presbyter, a hospital with eighty beds.”
At this very Council of Chalcedon (451), this institution
appears, in a canon regulating the position of clergymen
in houses for strangers or the poor, as one generally
disseminated and regularly met with, at least in the
East.*
It then spread from the East to the West. Even the
reception into Latin of the titles xenodochium (also
senodochium, sinodochium)” and nosocomium, which were
not till afterwards replaced by hospitium and hospitale,
points to this origin. The first hospitals in the West are
the house for the sick founded by Fabiola in Rome, and
the house for strangers founded in Portus by Pammachius.
Paulinus of Nola established in that town a house for
strangers in connection with a monastery. Thus it was
the circle dependent on Jerome, and connected through
him with the East, that “transplanted,” as he expresses
it, “this twig of the terebinth of Abraham to the Ausonian
shore.” The institution does not appear to have spread
very rapidly in the West. In the time of Ambrose there
were still no xenodochia in Milan; Augustine on one
occasion describes them as quite a novelty. He himself
induced Leporius, a presbyter who lived a monastic life
with him, to build one in a garden belonging to him."
In Rome, Pope Symmachus (498–514) built abodes for
the poor near three churches, and Pelagius II., a
ptochium ; while Belisarius, the general of Justinian,
founded and endowed a large xenodochium in Rome.”
In Gaul the Council of Orleans (549) is acquainted with
xenodochia in the towns. There was especially a large
institution of the kind at Lyons.” From the letters of
CHAP. IV.] HOSPITALS. 3 29
Gregory the Great, we obtain the impression, that in his
time at least there was a large number of hospitals in
Italy. He mentions such in Naples, in Sicily and
Sardinia, and when we see, that several of those in Sicily
were in the unimportant see of the Bishop of Cagliari,
we may well conclude, that the institution had then taken
root in the West also, and that a home for strangers and
the poor, a hospital, was there also reckoned among neces-
sary ecclesiastical arrangements.” They could not indeed
be as yet of as splendid a form in the West as in the East.
Dr. Lange reckons in Constantinople thirty-five hospitals
of all kinds,” and the legislation of Justinian shows
us, how fully developed the life of such institutions
then was. In the West, so long as the storm of the
migration lasted, they continued to be both less numerous
and simpler; they there produced very specially happy
results, and were still more amply developed under the
new German forms of government.
As we have already remarked, the institutions in their
earlier days combined various objects. They were in
general asylums for the needy and homeless of every
kind. In them strangers found a shelter, beggars a
maintenance, the sick care and attendance. Even the
different designations, which seem to refer them to special
branches of charity, did not exclude the assistance of
other kinds of distress. The homes for strangers were
also homes for the sick and poor, and vice versa. In
Fabiola's house for the sick, the poor also were received,
and in that of Pammachius for strangers, the sick also.
Chrysostom's homes for strangers were at the same time
houses for the sick. The legislation of Justinian shows,
even by the multiplicity of their names, the many-sided
development of the institutions. We there find Xeno-
*
330 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
dochia (houses for strangers), Nosocomia (houses for the
sick), Cherotrophia (houses for widows), Orphanotrophia
(Orphanages), Brephotrophia (houses for the rearing of
little children, whether bereaved of friends or foundlings),
Geronto.comia (houses for the aged). A house of the
latter kind was founded, besides others, by Narses, in
Constantinople. John the Almoner instituted, in various
quarters of the town of Alexandria, besides the Xeno-
dochia and Nosocomia it already contained, seven houses
for the reception of poor lying-in women, in which they
might find beds and necessary food and attendance.”
Justinian built in Constantinople a house for the recep-
tion of fallen women, called a home of penance.” This
was not, however, like the Magdalene hospitals of our
days, an asylum and an institution for improvement, but
on the contrary, a conventual institution of discipline,
females in general being in those times often accustomed
to undergo their punishment not in prisons but in con-
vents. For the rest, it is going too far to infer, from the
occasional mention of the blind, the dumb, and the
insane in hospitals and monasteries, that there were there
already institutions for the blind, houses for the deaf and
dumb, and asylums for the insane. At all events, such
were also received and cared for by the monks. Theo-
doret relates of the monk Thalassius,” that he assembled
about him blind beggars, and taught them to praise God,
and solicited, from all who came to visit him, contribu-
tions to supply the blind with necessaries. The insane
were also received in the monasteries on the island of
Tabennae in the Nile;” but there were as yet no special
institutions for their reception.
The means for maintaining these institutions flowed
from various sources. If the institution was a direct
3.
CHAP. IV.] HOSPITALS. 3.31
establishment of the Church, the revenues of the Church
were applied to its support. In Antioch, Chrysostom
reckons the keeping up of the xenodochium and the
maintenance of the sick received into it as annong the
burdens which the church bears, as well as the support
of the poor whose names were on the Matricula.” In
Alexandria, John the Almoner appointed regular deliveries
of corn from the revenues of the Church, for the Supply
of the hospitals.” If private individuals founded an
hospital, they also endowed it with either funds or landed
property. Basil solicited and obtained from the rich of
his church means for the maintenance of the Basilias.
Pammachius, Fabiola, Paulinus of Nola, and other founders
of homes for the sick and for strangers, gave the sums
required out of their private property. To this was
added the gifts of Christian people, which flowed in
abundantly. Special collections also occur.” At first
the State also seems to have participated in the main-
tenance of the hospitals. At least a law of the Emperor
Gratian of the year 382 reckons the reparation of the
hospitals among the mumera sordida. But this already
fell through under Valentinian.” The xenodochia and
all kindred institutions are, from his time onwards, treated
as matters purely ecclesiastical, and entirely under the
management of the Church, and the State confines itself
to protecting and fostering these institutions by legisla-
tion. The same privileges which the Church possessed
were now accorded to the institutions. Their presidents
had the same immunities as clerics, the institutions them-
Selves the rights of moral individuals, including therefore
the right of acquiring property and receiving legacies.
Specially important was the enactment, that in case any
one had, in his will, left orders for the building of an
332 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
hospital, and his heirs did not execute them within the
space of a year, the bishop of the place was empowered
himself to undertake the building, and arranging, without
being bound by any dispositions, that the testator might
have made concerning the administration of the hospital,
the appointment of officials, etc.
Besides, whatever authority the testator might have
given to his heirs with respect to the foundation and
management of the institution, the rights due to the
bishop were in no wise to be prejudiced. The chief
superintendence of all the benevolent institutions of his
diocese was allotted to the bishop, whether they were
directly founded by the Church, or founded and endowed
by private individuals. It was he who nominated the
officials, the xenodochi, ptochotrophi, orphanotrophi, had
the supervision, took care that the institution fulfilled
the ends for which it was appointed; it was to him that
accounts were delivered, and by him that jurisdiction was
exercised. The letters of Gregory give us a glance into
the care devoted by conscientious ecclesiastical superiors
to these institutions. How great is his anxiety for the
xenodochia, not only in the episcopal see proper of Rome,
but also in the wider sphere in which the sovereign posi-
tion of the Bishop of Rome was already acknowledged.
His letters contain copious directions of the kind to the
defensores by whom he exercises the oversight of the
property of the Romish Church, and also already of the
bishops. In Sardinia a xenodochium has fallen into
decay, he orders its restoration. In Naples a certain
Isidorus has left a legacy for the building of a xenodo-
chium. The defensor is to see that the will is carried
out. If the means are insufficient for the building of a
separate xenodochium, the legacy is to devolve to the
CHAP. IV.] HOSPITALS. 333
already existing xenodochium of St. Theodore. In Cag-
liari the accounts of various xenodochia of the bishopric
have not been, as formerly, brought before the bishop.
He is to take care that this is done regularly. He is
also to give heed, that such men are placed over the
xenodochia as have been found worthy by their lives,
their morals, and their diligence.” The Church knew
what a treasure it possessed in the hospitals, and what
assistance they had afforded during the fearful times of
distress which had overwhelmed the West. But for them,
it would have been still less possible to get the mastery
over the abounding misery. How many, whom the
troubles of the times had driven from house and home,
found here a shelter; how many sick and maimed, who
would have perished in the streets, found loving attend-
ance; to how many starving was food dispensed; to how
many naked, raiment; all knew that here there was a
place of refuge for all. “The door of this house is open
to all,” are the words of an inscription found in Africa,
which had probably stood over a xenodochium.” Nay,
when the storm of an irruption of barbarians raged over
the country, when towns and villages lay in ashes, the
houses of mercy were certainly the first to rise again
from the ruins. A true shepherd of the flock would
rebuild “ the house of the Christian poor” before his own,
and when the storm had passed, these houses were, as
well as the churches, the centres about which the flock
could assemble.” In the East they, together with the
whole Church, were Ossified ; in the West there was still
a rich development before them ; they were there destined
to become for centuries the special vehicles of charity,
and we shall hereafter see how this development had now
already begun.
334 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Our information is not sufficient to afford a correct
picture of the arrangements of the xenodochia. These
undoubtedly differed, according to the size and purpose
of the institution. There were smaller institutions, such
as the houses in large towns, called diakonia, and after-
wards matriculae, where the deacons provided for the poor
of the district ; and there were larger, up to those which
comprised several buildings. The Basilias in Caesarea is
described as a town before the town. In the centre was
a church, round it a large number of single houses,
arranged in due form in streets, some being for the recep-
tion of the sick and needy of various kinds, others for
the servants and officials, others for workshops, where all
that was required for the institution was prepared by
workmen of its own.” We no longer possess representa-
tions of a xenodochium of this time, still remains are in
existence of Some, though certainly of only such as served
as asylums for the reception of pilgrims, and were in
connection with churches situated near sacred places and
famous shrines, and these enable us to form an image at
least of them. In Central Syria two such buildings
have lately been discovered. One of these is, according to
the inscription on its portal, a Pandocheion (asylum for
pilgrims), consecrated on the 22nd July 479. In Deir
Sem'an, where a monastery of St. Simon Stylites, in
which was still shown the pillar upon which the saint
spent whole years, attracted many pilgrims. Still larger
is a Pandocheion in Turamin. It is a stately building,
directly connected with the church, surrounded on three
sides by a colonnade. It contains on each of its two
stories a large hall, evidently for the reception of pil-
grims.” If small Syrian places can show such asylums
for pilgrims, we may imagine that the xenodochia and
CHAP. Iv.] HOSPITALs. 33.5
hospitals of the larger towns, at least many of them,
must have been large and stately buildings. As the age
delighted in a profusion of decoration in its magnificent
ecclesiastical buildings, so too did those which served the
purposes of charity testify to the wealth and power now
attained by the Church.
But it is the personal attendants that have most inte-
rest for us. Besides the physicians, of whom the noso-
comia at least had several of their own, many attendants
were, of course, required for various services. These
were, partly at least, hired. One class of them was the
so-called Parabolani or Parabalani, who also played a not
very creditable part in the ecclesiastical history of the
times, being more frequently the strong guard of tyran-
nical bishops, and interposing with their fists in the
dealings of synods, as e.g. at the so-called Robber-synods.
This gives no attractive picture of their agency; they
appear as rough and excited fanatics. They are pro-
bably the same that are called “ leaders” in the descrip-
tion of the Basilias,” and their duty was to seek out the
sick and suffering, to lead them into the hospitals, and
then attend on them while there. They, like the Copiates,
the buriers of the dead, belonged to the clerical body, as
its lowest order. There were hundreds of them. In
Alexandria, Theodosius II., 416, reduced their numbers to
five hundred, on account of the disturbances they had
excited at the Eutychian controversy, and placed them
under the supervision of the imperial prefect. Two years
later their number was again raised to six hundred. We
may hence conclude, that the numbers of those who were
received into charitable institutions was very considerable.
Certainly the Parabolani were not the only personal
attendants. In the West there seem to have been no
336 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Parabolani. We frequently meet also with those who
attended gratuitously on the sick and poor. We have
already heard this of Fabiola, and Theodoret tells us the
same of the Empress Placilla, the wife of Theodosius the
Great. She went herself into the hospitals, made the
beds of the poor, gave them their food, and waited on
them like a maid-servant. When remonstrated with on
this account, she replied : “If the Emperor distributes
money, I will willingly do this for those from whom he
received the Empire.” Similar examples frequently
occur. There were also those, who sought to make
amends for their former sinful lives by serving in
hospitals.” Or the intention was to lead in them a
monkish and ascetic life.
The close connection between the xenodochia and
monachism is, moreover, worthy of remark. It was just
the teachers who promoted monachism, who were also the
cherishers and promoters of xenodochia, viz. Basil and
Chrysostom in the East, and Jerome in the West. The
circle of ascetically living men and women assembled
around Jerome, and the persons connected with them
were just those who transplanted the institution to the
West. The xenodochia were often combined with
monasteries or were themselves a kind of monasteries.
We are often unable to decide whether a monastery or a
xenodochium is before us. A sign of this similarity is
found in a story told by Palladius of two brothers, both
rich, who resolved to lead an ascetic life. The one gave
all his money at once to the poor, the churches and
monasteries, learnt a handicraft and lived as a monk.
The other built “a monastery’ with his money, in which
with certain brothers, he received the poor, attended to
the sick, provided for the aged and fed the poor. The
CHAP. IV.] ALMS. 337
monks were contending together as to which had done
best. But St. Pamleo decided : They are both equal, for
the one has fulfilled the saying of our Lord : “Sell all
that thou hast, and give to the poor;” the other is like the
Lord, who says: “I came not to be ministered unto, but
to minister.” The xenodochium of Paulinus of Nola
and that of Severus, mentioned by him, were very like
monasteries.” We may certainly accept it as a fact, that
both the male and female attendants in hospitals (not to
mention those who were properly speaking its servants)
led a monastic life. This applies especially to the West,
where, as far as I see, the monastic element was stronger
in the hospitals than it was in the East, with which is
connected the circumstance, that there were there no
Parabolani. Gregory the Great expressly requires, that
such only should be chosen as presidents of the hospitals,
as were “religiosi,” i.e. as were monks and nuns; and
when he adds, that this is to be the case, that the secular
rulers may not have the power of bringing them before
the judgment-seats, and of thus finding opportunity for
plundering the goods of the xenodochium, this addition
only discloses another strong reason, which could not
but lead to an organization of personal attendance of a
more and more monastic kind. We find here the germs
of the ministrant orders, the hospital orders of the Middle
Ages.
In other respects too did the development of the
hospital resemble that of the monastery. As the
monasteries were at first entirely subjected to the regular
Supervision of the diocesan bishop, so too were the
hospitals; and as monasteries, towards the end of this
period, already received certain rights and privileges, and
became more independent of the diocesan, so too do we
Y
338 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
find in Gregory's letters the first example of the exemption
of an hospital. Bishop Synagrius and Queen Brunhilde
had founded a xenodochium in Augustodunum. The
president was called the Abbas, and there were momachi
as attendants. Hence the xenodochium was a hospital
and monastery in one. Gregory now appoints, that
nothing of what has been or shall afterwards be given to
the xenodochium shall under any pretence be withdrawn
from it. The abbot is to apply all, according to his
discretion, to the purpose for which it was bestowed. If
the abbot dies, none other is to be obtruded upon the
institution, than one chosen by the king with the consent
of the monks. He can only be deposed on account of a
crime. In this case the bishop is not to pass sentence
alone, but only in conjunction with six other bishops.
We have here already the beginnings of the subsequent
development of the hospitallers. As the monasteries
were combined into close orders by the reception of a
common rule, so also were the attendants of single
hospitals combined into an order of hospitallers. And as
the monasteries were released by exemption from epis-
copal supervision, and became an independent power
beside the hierarchy, so did the hospitallers become the
self-dependent vehicles of a charity independent of the
more and more stunted relief of the poor by the bishop.
A compensation was formed for that church relief of the
poor which was now extinct, viz. the hospital, and—by its
side, and in manifold combination with it—the monastery.
C H A P T E R W.
MONASTERIES.
WE have already had frequent occasion to remark, that
the charity of this period bears upon it a strongly monkish
and ascetic feature. This is in conformity with the
character of Christian charity in general in these times.
The monk became in increasing proportion the ideal of
Christian life. A monkish life was esteemed philosophic,
angelic, apostolic, truly Christian, and it follows that
the life of other Christians was also judged according to
this standard, esteemed the more highly the nearer
it approached to the monkish, and thought the less of
the more it swerved from it towards the secular side.
Hence this character was impressed upon charity. But
monachism had a still more direct influence upon the
development of charity. It created for it a second
centre; the monastery appeared beside the hospital as its
abode. ' Hence we cannot avoid taking a nearer survey
of monachism.
The beginnings of monachism have recently been made
the subject of much discussion. The attempt has been
made to remove its origin and formation somewhat farther
back than formerly, even to the second half of the
fourth century, and at the same time to seek for all
kinds of starting-points in prae-Christian religions. The
Therapeutae, the servants of Serapis, even the Buddhists
889
340 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
and Indian Fakeers, are said to be the models of the
Christian monks. Neither of these questions is here of
concern to us, for however early or late we may place
the first beginnings of monachism, it is certain that in
the last quarter of the fourth century it was already
a power, which determined the type of Christian piety;
and even if such prae-Christian starting-points did
actually exist, they would at most have been able to
afford an occasion for the rise of monasticism, while the
real inward impulse, which caused its rapid growth,
which drove thousands into the wilderness and into
monasteries, must have been one existing within Chris-
tianity, and lying in the state of the Church itself.
The key to the right understanding of monachism, as
well as of the tone of Christian piety in general in this
age, is found in the fact, already frequently touched on,
that the leaven of Christianity never thoroughly penetrated
the mass. A transformation of national life by the spirit
of Christianity was never attained. Now it is a law of
Christian life that if the leaven of the gospel cannot
penetrate the national life, it will draw back. The more
public life proves itself impenetrable with respect to the
Christian spirit, the greater is the tendency to separation.
And this was then also the case. Those who were in
earnest about their Christian life, began to retire from
association with the rest, whether entirely, by going into
the desert or the monastery, or partially, by at least lead-
ing a more or less isolated life within the Church. Men
despaired of pervading the whole mass with the leaven
of the gospel, and were contented, that there should be
individual saints and perfect Christians. With this was
then connected a second element. The genuinely ancient
notion, the distinction between philosophers and the
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 341
common people, the aristocratic feature by which ancient
ethic is predominated, again found acceptance in Chris-
tianity, and in entire correspondence with ancient ethics,
the contemplative life of the Christian philosophers, of
the monks, was esteemed as higher and better than the
life of ordinary Christians, living and working in the
world. But we here encounter a phenomenon, which
is at first sight a very strange one, viz., that just
monasticism, which flees from the world, should create
in the cloister a new centre for charity, from which
immeasurable blessings have accrued to Society ; and
that the circles addicted to contemplation should become
the starting-point for a new development of labour ; that
the cloister was the school in which the world learned
again to work.
The Roman Empire was now externally Christian,—
much, indeed almost everything, was wanting for it to
be internally so; indeed, Christianity did little more
than graze the skin of the ancient world. What we
have before us is in truth only a turbid mixture of
heathenism and Christianity. Even the widely dis-
seminated custom of deferring baptism as long as pos-
sible, and till just before death, is characteristic. Men
desired to remain as long as possible in the mongrel
position between heathenism and Christianity, .to shun
the obligation of being entirely and fully Christians, and
were willing rather to reserve the absolute expiation of
baptism for the effacement of all preceding sins, than to
labour for their sanctification in its power. For a long
time even Christian emperors were still invested with the
office of Pontifex Maximus, and were thus as Christians
still at the head of the heathen cultus. When consuls
entered into office, auguries were still employed, and even
342 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
in Salvian's time, the sacred fowls which generals took to
battle with them for the purposes of the oracle, were fed
at the expense of the State." Nor was the case different
in private life. There too, heathen and Christian ways
were strangely intermingled. Prayer was now made to
the Christian God, but if He did not help immediately,
and as desired, recourse was had to the ancient gods, and
they were still honoured according to the old custom,
though only from fear lest they perhaps might do some
mischief. A Christian as well as a heathen mother would
hang an amulet round her child's neck, to protect it from
witchcraft, only she liked to take a text from the Bible
or Testament for the purpose. The Synod of Laodicea
had even to forbid the clergy to practise astrology, or
prepare amulets. The undoubtedly Christian epitaph on
a child, of the year 364, discovered in Rome, designates
the hour of its birth as, according to astrological maxims,
an unlucky one, evidently for the purpose of accounting
for its early decease. On the birth of a child, even in
Christian families, a number of candles were lighted, and
a name given to each. The child then received the name
of the candle which burned the longest ; this was said to
ensure him a long life.” The churches were frequented,
favourite preachers were applauded by the clapping of
hands, pompous worship was delighted in, but to the
multitude it was but a spectacle like any other. The
crowds that flowed into the circus or the theatre were as
numerous as ever, and often more so,” and were just as
passionate as formerly in their partisanship for the different
colours in the chariot races. The gladiatorial games were
not abolished, until in Rome a monk Once rushed in
between the combatants and thus sacrificed his life. The
true faith was contended for, dogmatical propositions
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 343
excited passionate strife, the formula of the then prevail-
ing orthodoxy was in the mouth of every artisan in his
stall, of every female seller in the vegetable market in
Constantinople. It was, as Theodoret on One occasion
complains, as if our Lord and Saviour had only com-
manded us to hold certain doctrines, and had given us no
precepts at all concerning our life and walk.” Chry-
sostom once compares the Church to a woman formerly
rich, but now in reduced circumstances, still showing
indeed the chests in which formerly lay the treasures
which she had long ago lost.” Of moral amendment little
or nothing could be traced in the masses. Debauchery,
covetousness, deceit, were now as formerly prevailing
crimes. “Where is the catholic law, in which they
believe 2 ” exclaims Salvian ; “where are the examples of
chastity and piety which they learn ? They read the
Gospels and commit lewdness; they listen to the apostles
and intoxicate themselves; they follow Christ and are
plunderers; they lead a life full of all unrighteousness,
and yet boast, that they possess the pure law.” ” In
Carthage it was the Vandals, who after their entry, first
abolished the utterly shameless debauchery, and, as owned
by the better-minded Romans, restored chastity and
morals. An incredible levity possessed the people ; even
the fearful chastisements with which the Empire was
visited, were unable to suppress it. The theatre was the
first building restored in Treves after it had been burned
by the Germans, and it was soon filled again with a
joking, laughing crowd. “Bome is dying and laughing.”
says Salvian with bitter irony,' and we are even more
touched than by this saying, by the melancholy lament of
Chrysostom : “When I think of this frivolous multitude,
who clap their noisy approbation of my words, my heart
344 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
is deeply grieved ; and when I return to my solitary
chamber, I begin to weep bitterly.”
Let us not, however, imagine that the word of God then
bore no fruit. There were besides the frivolous, light-
minded, morally perishing multitude, many active Chris-
tians fully in earnest about their Christianity. The
Church has never been richer in great moral characters,
both male and female, than then. We can comprehend,
however, how obvious it seemed to such, to separate
themselves as true Christians from the corrupt mass of
ordinary Christians; we can understand how it came to
pass, that in an age in which the contrast between
heathens and Christians was gradually disappearing, and
the former impulse to an earnest Christian walk had been
lost, the contrast in Christendom itself, between perfect
and imperfect Christians, should impress itself with ever
increasing distinctness. This contrast had indeed long
existed ; long had it been the custom to distinguish
between commandments binding upon all, and counsels,
which it was the way of perfection to follow ; long had
there been an inclination to place the contemplative above
the active life, to prefer a meditative to a practical
Christianity. It was now, however, that these notions
first attained, so to speak, a palpable form, that the
severance was also externally effected in monachism, that
the ideal of the Christian life was incorporated before
the eyes of other Christians, in the monk and the nun,
and that even those who did not go into the desert or the
cloister, still strove as far as possible after this ideal, and
led, even while living in the congregation, a really
separate life. Such a contrast, however, if once intro-
duced, would, by an inward necessity, be step by step
increased. The leaven had withdrawn from the mass; it
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 345
was self-evident, it was quite in order, that it could not
be pervaded by the Christian spirit, that it was and must
remain the corrupt world. The fulfilment of the duty of
Christianizing the life of the people was entirely given
up, nay, it was no longer recognized as such ; that the
multitude should be what it was, was regarded with in-
difference, nay, to a certain extent, with inward satisfac-
tion, because this dark background brought into more
prominent relief the holiness of the few perfect Christians.
It was just the soil of the decaying ancient world, that
was favourable to such a process. In monachism also,
as everywhere in these times, ancient and Christian ideas
were mingled. Here too do we come upon a reaction of
that ancient life, which was repressed in the earlier times
of Christianity. For it is very characteristic to find
monachism called philosophy, and the admirers of a
monkish life so willingly applying the analogy of the
philosophic life. In fact, it belongs to the ancient circle
of thought to place the contemplative above the practical,
the active life. Aristotle expressly declares dianoetic
to be higher than ethic virtue, i.e., a life passed in
contemplation superior to a life of action. True happi-
ness is found in leisure; a life of thought is, compared
with an active, a busy life, godlike.” Quite in accord-
ance with this, the contemplative life of the monk was
now set up in Christendom as angelic, as higher than that
of the Christian active in the world, while according to
the gospel the ideal is the mutual interpenetration of the
contemplative and the active life, the union of prayer
and work. The distinction too between counsels and
commandments, between the duties of the perfect and the
ordinary Christian, finds its starting-point in the ancient
view. Ambrose exactly adopts in his ethic the distinc-
346 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
tion of the Stoics between perfect and medium duties.
He regards as perfect duty what the Lord required of the
young ruler, viz. to forsake all." It was a fundamental
thought of ancient ethic, that there were different kinds
of virtue, a virtue of masters and a virtue of slaves, a
virtue of men and a virtue of women, the virtue of the
multitude and that of the wise, while the gospel on the
contrary declares all these distinctions indifferent, and
knows of but one duty, one virtue for all. How decidedly
did the Church in the first centuries oppose this aristo-
cratic feature of the ancient world ! While the adversaries
of Christianity made it a reproach, that artisans, women,
and slaves are by it instructed in the same wisdom, directed
to the same life, the apologists boast of it as the glory of
Christianity, that it fills even the poor and simple with
the same spirit, adorns them with the same virtue. The
ancient spirit was now reacting, and we come, in the
midst of Christendom, upon the same distinction between
Christian philosophers practising a more exalted virtue,
and the masses who must be contented with a lower,
against which Christianity once contended. From this
point of view it is also intelligible, that just the men, who
were most strongly imbued with the ancient spirit, who
had appropriated the culture of the philosophical Schools,
were such special admirers of the monastic life. To
mention only Basil and the two Gregories, whose path led
from the schools in Athens to Solitude, to the monk’s
cell, whose whole type is properly a combination of the
philosopher and the monk, and in the West men in whom,
as in Ambrose, the old Roman spirit can be so strongly
traced, and who, not in spite of it, but because of it, so
energetically advocated the monastic life. To just such
natures must the monastery have appeared a release from all
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 347
the misery, the unnaturalness, the hollowness of the life of
those times. In fact, we are reminded of Rousseau's flight
from civilization, when Jerome depicts to Pammachius in
Rome, how charming life is in the fields of Bethlehem,”
or when Gregory of Nazianzus reminds Basil” of the
days when they “revelled in privations,” the vigils,
the prayers “of that superterrestrial and incorporeal life,”
that community, that spiritual harmony of the brethren,
who were raised to a godlike life. We get a deep insight
into the motives which then drove many into monasteries,
in a narrative which occurs in the Confessions of Augustine,
of two attorneys at the court of Treves, who in a walk
come upon monks, and find with them the work of
Athanasius upon monasticism. “Tell me,” says one to
the other, “what do we attain by our efforts 2 What are
we seeking 2 Why are we serving 2 What better hope
can we have than that of gaining a closer friendship with
the Emperor ? And even if we do so, how fragile is :
fortune | Through how much danger are we striving
after greater danger And when shall we attain this
object 2 On the other hand, if I desire to be a friend of
God, I am so at this very moment.” They forthwith
resolve to renounce the world and become monks.”
In fact, it was freedom that was sought in the cell of
the hermit and in the monastery, freedom from the misery
of a decaying world, from a state which was but an
institution for the employment of force, and left no space
for free activity, from a society in which only deception
and appearance bore rule, from a civilization which had
become hyper-civilization and was therefore unnatural.
It was this that drove the decurion unable any longer to
bear the burden of taxation, the artisan who had become
the slave of the State, the impoverished small proprietor,
348 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
nay, even the aristocratic and wealthy Roman educated
in the schools of Athens, into the cloister. For even the
possession of wealth, even a liberal education was in this
perishing world a burden which men sought to get rid of.
He who built a cell in the desert, who entered a monastery,
was released at a stroke from the whole burden, was free
from all bonds. For monachism denied on principle the
whole existing order, it denied the State and marriage, all
social and civilized life, and strange as it may seem, it
was for this very reason in a condition to become the
starting-point of a new civilization.
The rise of monachism set a seal on the renunciation
of penetrating the entire national life with the Christian
spirit. Not that such renunciation was consciously,
though it was actually made. It is quite self-evident,
that an avowedly Christian life was now a demand
made only of monks or of those who lived a monkish
life. It was they who were the converted, the followers
of Christ, the religious ; they who lived after the Spirit,
who were the special militia of Christ, contending for eternal
life. Others were indeed Christians, but Christians of a
lower grade. Christians properly so called, were only those
who had renounced the world—widows, virgins, those who
had taken vows of chastity, monks, ecclesiastics. We need
only read Salvian to be convinced, that he looks upon
these as alone such. A separation of this kind must
have had a destructive effect upon Church life. A
Church life like that of the first centuries became thereby
impossible. All active Christianity exhibited a more or
less monkish impress, separated itself from ordinary
Christians and thus lost its influence over them. Even
so zealous a favourer of monachism as Chrysostom felt it
necessary to warn the pious in his flock, not to withdraw
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 349
from the society of other Christians, whom they might
influence for good.”
But the appearance of monachism has also another
side ; its influence was not merely destructive, it was
also promotive of Christian life. The monasteries became
its home and hearth, in them was assembled all that still
remained of decided Christianity, to recommence from
them the process of penetrating national life with the
Christian spirit. The proper destiny of the cloister still
lay in the future. Even monachism and monastic life
can only be understood in the light of the divine purposes.
The ancient world was now impenetrable by Christian
truth. It was the German world which was to be and
could be a really Christian one. The transmission thereto
of Christianity, and in connection with Christianity, of
the ancient culture as the foundation of a new culture,
was to be effected especially through the co-operation of
the monasteries. The hand of God was building in
them the fortresses, in which Christianity might maintain
itself, when the Barbarian deluge should overwhelm the
Roman Empire, and from which should proceed the
Christianization and civilization of the new nations.
Monachism, whose principle it was to flee from the world,
became the world-conquering power, and all that Christian
life, of which the old world was deprived by the cloister,
turned to the advantage of the new German world.
It is truly a strange world, that we get a glance
of, by reading the history of the fathers of monachism,
the description of the life of Antony ascribed to
Athanasius, Palladius's Historia Lausiaca, the Historia.
Teligiosa of Theodoret, or the life of St. Martin by Sul-
picius Severus, and his Dialogues, and at first sight we
seem to have before us anything but the beginning of a
350 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
new development of Christian civilization. Everything
Seems, on the contrary, antagonistic to civilization, nay, to
be directed towards the abolition of all civilization, of all
existence worthy of human nature, while all that is put
forward as Christian life, nay, is admired and honoured as
holiness, as a godly and angelic life, has not the slightest
similarity to primitive Christianity. These anchorites
living apart from all men in deserts and forests, in caves
and leafy huts, these recluses who, inmured for life,
receive their scanty Sustenance, perhaps a handful of
barley, through a small aperture, these swarms of monks,
men of uncouth manners, roaming through the country,
and feeding like cattle on the herbs of the field, make
upon us at first a revolting impression. Here is one who
has carried fasting so far as only to require food once a
week; another who does not eat his barley till it is half-
rotten ; this man sprinkles his food with earth and ashes
to make it less palatable, while that one lies all day long
in a swamp and exposes his body to the stings of insects.
They are on more intimate terms with the beasts than
with human beings. A she-wolf bears one of them
company, a chamois selects herbs for another, that he may
eat nothing poisonous. St. Martin commands the birds,
who are catching fish in a pond, and they fly away; he
rebukes a dog, and he ceases from pursuing a hare.
Miracles everywhere take place, the strangest, most
fantastic, and at the same time most purposeless of
miracles. Especially are these holy men constantly
contending with demons, who wander about in the desert,
sit on the rocks, and annoy men in their homes. St.
Martin even delivers a cow from a demon who is riding
her, and an imperial post-horse on whose neck a demon is
seated. But we should be dealing very unjustly to judge
CHAP. V.] MONASTERIES. 351
of monachism by such circumstances. This often
tumultuously fermenting movement clears, and monachism
assumes quite a different appearance in a well-ordered
monastery, in a society of monks living according to an
appointed rule. Decidedly as we must reject the claim
that the apostolic life is here realized, we cannot still
mistake the existence of a certain similarity between such
a brotherhood of monks and the earliest Christian churches.
We here again meet with that which the existing churches
no longer exhibited, viz. a society of men and women, all
Christians and desiring to live as such. However much
the requirements of Christianity might in several points
be misunderstood by them, they were still in earnest
about them ; and though they secluded themselves from
all who did not belong to their society, there was still
within it a fellowship of love, common prayer and work,
each serving the whole in self-denial and obedience. And
these monastic communities were free from all the
hindrances which elsewhere opposed, as insurmountable
barriers, the development of a Christian life. For them
this whole corrupting civilization had no existence.
Within the walls of the cloister, it was possible to make
an entirely new beginning.
Nowhere did this new beginning come forth more
illustriously, than in a department of moral life, most
closely connected with charity, viz. in that of labour.
The monasteries were the birthplaces of free labour. In
them was felt for the first time full earnestness concerning
the moral duty of work as an evidence of Christian life,
and for this very reason are they of such vast importance
to the further development of charity. For as we have
often had occasion to remark, and as Scripture directly
shows, labour and benevolence are inseparably united.
352 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Where there is no work, there will be no energetic,
permanent exercise of benevolence, and it is in this, that
work first fulfils its higher moral purpose. It is Christian
to work that we may have to give to him that needeth.
. If we remember the economical condition of the Roman
Empire at this period, we shall easily perceive that free
labour could not thrive in it. Where all was force, where
the Decurion was bound to his office, the colonus to the
soil, the artisan to his collegium, there was no room for
free labour. The monk was free. The State indeed did
not allow every man to become a monk. When harassed
and oppressed peasants and townsmen fled by thousands
to monachism from the control of the State, it was
forced to interfere, to save its own existence. But he
who had once become a monk had all this constraint behind
him. In the monastery was to be found, what was to be
found nowhere else, a place for free work. As long as
monachism appeared only in its first irregular form of
anchoritism, work, at least profitable and useful work, was
out of the question. As soon, however, as a regular
monastic life was formed, labour was one of its funda-
mental ordinances. As the quickly perceived moral
dangers of solitude led to the gathering of isolated monks
into monasteries, so did the dangers of idleness impel to
work. “Be always working at something,” writes Jerome
to Rusticus, “that the devil may always find you
employed.” In Egyptian monasteries it was the custom
to receive none who would not bind themselves to work,
and this not so much for their necessary support, as for
their souls' health.” And a proverb much in use was,
“A monk who works is troubled by one evil spirit, an
idle monk by countless ones.” “Solitary life,” says
Basil, “is contrary to the nature of true love, since each
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 353
cares only for what himself needs, nor will such a one
easily perceive his faults.” In his rules for monks, Basil
already lays great stress upon work.” “It is among the
duties of a monk to work.” Idleness is a great evil;
work preserves us from evil thoughts. We are not to
think that the aim of a pious life gives countenance to
idleness and avoidance of work; it is, on the contrary, a
life of conflict and of much labour. The object of work
is certainly, in the first place, to earn a livelihood; still
this is not its only object. We work to please God, and
that we may fulfil the Lord's command: “I was hungry
and ye fed me.” “Every one must in work keep in
view as his object the support of the needy.” Work also
must have its appointed order, and must alternate with
prayer and singing psalms. Each is to do the work he is
fitted for, and which the head of the monastery gives him
to do. None is to go from one thing to another, none
arbitrarily to give up his own handicraft.” According to .
locality, such work as the material may be easily procured
for, and as will find a ready sale in the neighbourhood, is
to be chosen ; also such as will not disturb a peaceful and
quiet life. Basil esteems the weaving of simple stuffs
as the best ; carpentry, cabinetmaking, and forging, also
agriculture, are in themselves useful, but they make too
much noise and disturb the brethren. Only as much art
is to be employed as is necessary in the article required,
simplicity and cheapness must in every case be the rule.”
If we may consider, as we may, that these rules of Basil
were even approximately put in practice, nay, if they were
probably for the most part taken from what was already
acted upon, we have before us a society of free workers,
such as the ancient world knew not of. Though at first
only in Small circles, secluded from the rest of the world,
- Z
354 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
the New Testament ideas of work are here realized.
Work is done, because God commands it ; each perseveres
in the work of his own vocation, work and prayer are
combined, labour alternates with rest, and the object of
work is not the merely selfish one of earning for oneself,
but also that of serving others.
Elsewhere, too, do we learn, that the monks of the East
were workmen. They make baskets, sew sacks, weave,
and carry on, to a small extent, agriculture and horti-
culture.” Chrysostom describes them as follows : —
“Having renounced all earthly possessions, they use the
labour of their bodies for the support of the needy. They
divide the day between prayer and handiwork. They put
us all to shame, both rich and poor, when they, who have
nothing, but their hands, earn money for the poor.”
Theodoret tells us of the monk Theodosius in Cilicia, that
he directed those who came to him to work. “For,” said
he, “it is not fitting, that they who live in the world,
should support their wives and children, bear the burden
of taxes and customs, offer the first-fruits to God, and
assist the poor, while we put our hands in our bosoms and
live upon the work of others.” In the East, however,
the monasteries did not become a civilizing power. The
contemplative tendency was there stronger than the
active. Idle meditation and fantastic asceticism got the
upper hand. Pillar-saints, who passed whole years stand-
ing on a column, recluses who had themselves immured,
anchorites who renounced in Solitude all participation in
the products of civilization, here passed for great Saints;
while the Western monks were carrying on in silence the
work of civilization, clearing forests, draining morasses,
converting barren tracts into fertile fields, and becoming
the instructors of the young German nations. It was in
CHAP. v.] MONASTERIES. 355
the West that monachism first fulfilled its vocation, it
was there that the cloister first became a school of work.
It cannot indeed be said, that work was made more
prominent in the rule of St. Benedict of Nursia, which
prevailed in the West, than in that of Basil. Western
monachism was in the first instance a growth transplanted
from the East to the West, but it there found a different
soil. A Gaul, who became a monk, was already very
different from an Egyptian or a Syrian, and, as must be
well considered, the tasks set before monachism in the
West were also different. Both circumstances are brought
forward in the comparison made by Sulpicius Severus
between Eastern and Western monachism. With a
certain amount of wholesome humour, he dwells upon the
fact, that the Gaul, with his often derided appetite, cannot
live like the monks in Egypt,” and brings it forward as
the greatness of St. Martin, that “in the midst of the
throng and in the company of people,” he did just as
much as those anchorites, who in their solitude were
hindered by nothing.” Western monachism was from
the first placed in the midst of the great problems of
civilization. While the East, ossifying in Byzantinism,
was becoming a mummy, and monachism was accordingly
stiffening in resultless contemplation and unnatural
asceticism, a new era of civilization, with new duties, was
setting in in the West with the entry of the Germans,
and the important feature in Western monachism was
just the fact that it entered into these duties of civilization.
The same maxims concerning work in the rules of St.
Benedict as in those of Basil, could not but be carried
into practice quite differently in the West from what they
were in the East.
On the first appearance of monachism in the West, we
356 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
meet there too with the same inclination to idle contem-
plation. Men sought in the monastic life a wished-for
opportunity for inaction, and to be supported by the
charitable gifts of others, instead of earning their own
living. Scripture was appealed to, and idleness was given
out as the fulfilment of Christ's command, to take no care
for the morrow, while the apostolic rule: He that will not
work, neither let him eat, was set aside by a spiritual
interpretation. This inclination to holy idleness is
energetically opposed by Augustine in his work On the
Work of Monks. He replies to the monks, who appealed
to our Lord's words about the birds of heaven, that they
ought then neither to grind nor to cook, for the birds do
neither, nor ought they to lay up in storehouses. He
says banteringly, that then God must give them wings,
that they may seek their food in the fields. No man, he
continues, can live without stores, without property, hence
it is every one's duty to work. If any one is weak and
unable to work, God will provide for him by the gifts
of others; but if he can work, God provides for him by
giving him work and blessing it.” He brings to bear
upon the monks in the most decided manner the plain
and literal meaning of the apostolic rule: “He that will
not work, neither let him eat.” He who has entered a
monastery as a slave, a freedman, or an artisan, is to go
on working there ; he who has entered as a rich man is,
after giving away his property, to begin working, if he
possibly can, that, by such an example, he may show still
more mercy, than by even giving away his goods. “For
the rich do not humble themselves in the warfare of Christ,
that the poor may be exalted. In no wise is it becoming,
that in the life in which Senators become workers, artisans
should be idlers, and that when landowners give up all
CHAP. V.] MONASTERIES. 357
the enjoyments of life, peasants should live in luxury.
If those out of the upper classes work themselves, they
deprive the humble of every excuse.”
That it should be just Augustine, whose credit in the
Church was for centuries so decisive, who should so write
about the work of monks, as to make labour their duty, was
of the greatest importance in the development of the Western
monasteries. In fact we hear far less of idle monks in the
West than in the East. Asceticism was here less strict.
“The Gallic appetite” must be taken into account, but
work was also more zealously pursued; and when Benedict
gave a single settled rule to monastic life, which had
before been multiform, it gave full expression to just
these characteristics of Western monasticism, moderate
asceticism, and a prescribed combination of meditation
and labour. Seven times a day did the brethren, accord-
ing to Benedict's rule, assemble at the seven canonical
hours in the church. Their remaining time was divided
between work and meditation. The day began with four
hours' work, the next two were devoted to the reading of
the Scriptures or good books. After dinner there was a
time of rest, then work again till supper, and again a
shorter period of work till bed-time; for “idleness is the
enemy of souls.” The diet was more or less nourishing
in proportion to the work, and in the time of summer labour
rations were increased.” While in Eastern monasteries
agriculture fell into disfavour, as too noisy and too alien
to meditation, it took the first place in the Western, and
it was just in this respect that the monks produced such
great results. Gaul, which had become almost a desert,
was re-cultivated by them, the monasteries became every-
Where the advanced posts of civilization, the monks made
roads and built bridges, and it was from them that the
358 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Franks and other German races learnt agriculture, handi-
crafts, and arts.
By work the monasteries obtained the means not only
for their own Support, but for extensive benevolence.
We have already seen how Basil lays down, in his rules,
as the proper object of work, not merely the earning of our
own maintenance, but also the assistance of the needy.
Certainly what was earned went in the first instance to
the support of the brothers, but what was over was then
to go to the poor outside the cloister, that, as it is written,
the sun may rise upon the evil and the good.” It is gene-
rally interesting to observe, how, notwithstanding the high
estimation in which asceticism was held, the consciousness
that love is of higher value and greater use breaks through.
When St. Spiridion was once visiting an exhausted stranger,
he, saint and great pastor as he was, had meat brought
up, although it was a fast-day, nay, ate himself in com-
pany with the stranger. “For,” as he explains, “to the
pure all things are pure. To show love to a stranger is
more than fasting.”.” It is said of Evagrius, a monk,
that he advised a brother, who was greatly tormented
by night visions, to attend on the sick, and that, being
asked the reason of this advice, he replied : Such visions
are more certainly dispelled by works of mercy than by
anything else.” Such traits are evidently reported with
approbation, a proof that a feeling still prevailed, that
the exercise of mercy more promoted the inner life than
any chastisement of the flesh. Hence much is related
also of the charity of the monks of the East, in spite of
their tendency to contemplation. Cassian * tells us, that
the monks of Egypt not only supported themselves by
their labour, but also assisted those districts of Libya
which were suffering from famine, and supported the
CHAP. V.] MONASTERIES. 3 bº
Christians who were languishing in prison for their faith's
sake under Valens; and Augustine relates,” that the
monks in Syria were able, by diligent work and moderate
living, to send whole ship-loads of provisions to different
districts. Strangers, beggars, the sick, found reception in
the monasteries. A xenodochium for their use was
combined with many cloisters. The monk Thalassius
collected blind beggars about him in the district of the
Euphrates, built them dwellings, taught them to sing
psalms and Christian hymns, and procured them a main-
tenance from his many visitors.” Even children were
often brought into the monasteries to be taught. In
these rude times wealthy parents thought their children
were most securely concealed in monasteries, and were
glad to see them led from their earliest years to monkish
piety. Basil in his rule gives precepts, as to how the
children are to be brought up in separate dwellings,
and Chrysostom boasts of how much the monks did in
education.” -
All this was in the West comprised in settled orders.
Among good works, or more strictly speaking, among the
“the tools of the spiritual art,” by the handling of which
eternal life is obtained, Benedict reckons, immediately
after naming fasting, feeding the poor, clothing the naked,
visiting the sick, burying the dead.” According to his
rule, the care of the children, the sick, the strangers, and
the poor is imposed upon the cellarius of the monastery,
and he is to interest himself in them with all diligence,
in the consciousness that he will have to give account at
the day of judgment.” The porter is to answer every
stranger who knocks, every poor man who begs, with
“Thanks be to God " and then to give him a kind recep-
tion. The poor and strangers are to be received with
360 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
respect, and attended to with care, for in them is Christ
received. The prior is to eat with them, and is for their
sake to break off fasting, except on the great fast-days.
Spiritual food, reading of the Scriptures and prayer, is to
be added to bodily.” Many a poor man, many a stranger,
many sick found shelter, food, and restoration to health in
the cloister. Other kinds of benevolence were also among
monastic virtues. The cloister was a source of blessing
to its neighbourhood far and near. In times of scarcity,
in the irruptions of the barbarians, it was the monasteries
that preserved the miserable remnant of the population
from starvation, that sheltered them, that inspired them
with fresh courage. Benedict himself, during a famine
in Campania, made no ceremony of causing all the stores
of the monastery of Monte Cassino to be distributed to
the poor, trusting to God to bestow fresh ones. One
Abbot Suranus acted in like manner, on the occasion of
an invasion of Upper Italy by the Lombards.” And
when the floods of the migration gradually subsided, the
monasteries were capable of becoming the centres of a
new civilization, and the monks of becoming, as indeed
they did, the instructors of the young nations.
C H A P T E R W I.
THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF ALL THE OPPRESSED AND
SUFFERING.
AMBROSE reckons it among the duties of an ecclesiastic
to take an interest in the oppressed and suffering. “Your
office will shine gloriously, if the oppression of widows
and orphans attempted by the powerful, should be hin-
dered by the servants of the Church, if you show that
the command of the Lord is more to you than the favour
of the rich.” In fact the command of the Lord was
more to the Church, than the favour of the great and
powerful, of imperial officials, and of the Emperor himself,
when the question was to protect the oppressed, and to
assist the poor and needy. Not that there was, even in
such action, any lack of hierarchical presumption and self-
complacent monkish exaltation. When Bishop Cyril of
Alexandria offered violent resistance to imperial officers,
when a monk of Constantinople, in arrogant conceit of his
own Sanctity, excommunicated the Emperor Theodosius II.
(who did not rest till the ban was removed), the canon of
Ambrose, enjoining that “we must not, in our obedience
to the Lord and our love to the brethren, appear to act
more from vanity than from mercy,” was not observed,
and transgressions of the kind frequently occur. In spite,
however, of such transgressions, it is one of the most
brilliant and honourable pages in the history of the Church
361
36.2 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
which we are now about to turn over. It was when
misery became greater and greater in the perishing world,
when the arm of the State was more and more paralyzed,
when the authorities no longer offered assistance to the
poor and the oppressed, nay, themselves took a part in
oppressing and exhausting them, that the Church became
on a grand scale the refuge of all the oppressed and
suffering.
Among the means at the command of the Church, for
the fulfilment of her destiny in this respect, the preaching
of the Word of course stands first. Boldly did such men
as Gregory Nazianzen, Chrysostom, Augustine, who, in
spite of their pompous rhetoric—a rhetoric characteristic
of the period—will always be reckoned among the greatest
orators of any age, rebuke the vices of the times; boldly,
too, did they openly and specially reprove the sins of the
rich, the great and the powerful. To this was added the
means of discipline. The oversight, which the Church
exercised upon the behaviour of all her members, now
extended, so far as they were Christians, to the imperial
officials, nay, even to the Emperor himself. &
Even in the year 305, the holding of a magisterial
office was held to be so incompatible with church member-
ship, that, according to a canon of the Synod of Elvira,”
any one invested with the office of duumvir, was obliged,
during the period of his magistracy, to withdraw from the
Church. In the year 314, however, a Synod of Arles
decrees,” that if a Christian becomes prefect of a province,
a testimony to his church membership is to be given him,
for the bishop of his seat of office. This bishop is to
watch him, that he may commit no injustice, and not
till he does something inconsistent with church discipline,
is he to be excluded from the Church. To be a Christian
CHAP. vi.) THE CHURCH THE 1:FFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 363
and to fill a magistracy were, since the relation of the
State to the Church had become a friendly one, no longer
regarded as incompatible. But the Church by no means
gave up the claim to inspect the behaviour of such of her
members as filled magisterial posts, and if necessary to
exercise discipline upon them, as upon any other member.
Athanasius excommunicated the viceroy of Lydia, noto-
rious for his cruelty and excesses; and Basil, who had
made this excommunication known to his flock, could
testify to him, that the Church agreed with it." After
Synesius of Ptolemais having in vain warned the Prefect
Andronicus to cease from his injustice and his oppression
of the people, excluded him from the Church. No church
was to be open to him, no priest to enter his house.”
Even the Emperor was not too high for the word of exhor-
tation and, if necessary, the discipline of the Church to
reach him. When the inhabitants of Antioch were trem-
bling before the wrath of the Emperor, because they had
overthrown his statues in a tumult, Bishop Flavian went
to Constantinople to intercede for the town, and to dispose
the Emperor to leniency, while his presbyter Chrysostom
comforted the people and kept up their hope by daily
sermons, the famous “statue sermons” of the great orator.
When, however, judicial proceedings began, and hundreds
were thrown into prison and cruelly tortured, a monk
seized the bridle of the judges, as they were riding through
the streets, and cried to them : “Tell the Emperor: You
are not only an emperor, but a man, and those you reign
Over are your fellow-men. Human nature was made in
the image of God; do not then so mercilessly and cruelly
destroy the image of God.” Chrysostom had the pleasure
of being able to proclaim to the people the Emperor's
pardon, and they were expressly Christian motives, which
364 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
led the Emperor himself to this decision. “What merit
is it in me,” are his words, “who am but a man, to
renounce my revenge upon other men, when the Lord of
the universe, who took for us the form of a servant, and
who only did good to men, prayed to His Father in
heaven for those who crucified Him " Nay, when Theo-
dosius the Great had not so moderated his easily-excited
wrath, but had taken fearful vengeance on the city of
Thessalonica on account of a tumult, thousands of inno-
cent persons, women and children, having been massacred
by his soldiers, and was afterwards about to visit a church
in Milan, Ambrose met him at the door, and expelled
him from both the church and the sacrament, until he did
public penance, a step which honoured the Emperor no
less than the bishop, and proved to the whole people, that
there existed in the Church a spiritual power, which
afforded protection against even the absolute ruler of the
world.
Far-seeing statesmen could not but perceive, that such
action on the part of the Church would at last be to the
advantage of the State, that the Church was in this sense
a power protective of the State. Theodosius was well
aware of it. When Ambrose, a few days after his ordina-
tion as bishop of Milan, remonstrated with him on
account of the conduct of some of his praefects, he
answered him : I have already experienced your candour,
and yet I consented to your elevation to a bishopric ;
therefore give us help, as the divine law prescribes, in
our sins.” The feebler the State became, the more was
its power transferred to the Church, and that with its own
consent. The interposition of the Church in favour of
the oppressed became the subject of legislation. Already,
before Constantine, an episcopal jurisdiction, independent
CHAP. VI.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 365
of the Church, had been formed within the Church, and
this was now formally recognised, and still further ex-
tended by the State. Ecclesiastics were bound by it, it
was free to other members of the Church to apply to the
bishop's court, if they chose ; but if they had once sub-
jected their cause to it, the sentence of the bishop was
binding and unalterable. If the poor and humble could,
in the increasing corruption of imperial tribunals, scarcely
obtain justice, it was of the more importance that recourse
to the tribunal of the bishop should be open to them.
It was also the right and duty of the bishop, to interest
himself in those who had been condemned by imperial
justice, especially those condemned to death ; and if they
often asserted this right to a wider extent than was
consistent with a strict administration of justice, nay,
occasionally sought to obtain, in spite of it, favour for the
guilty, it still often afforded them the means of interpos-
ing in behalf of those unjustly condemned, or of mitigating
a jurisprudence which, as often happens in times of
decaying civilization, had again become barbarous. The
thought lying at the basis of all these enactments is, that
it is the part of the Church to exercise humanity and
advocate mercy in opposition to strict justice. Hence
the oversight of the prisons and the duty of providing for
the humane treatment of prisoners were also transferred
to the Church, as well as the care of widows, orphans, and
exposed children, and that of the chastity of women and
young girls. Finally, and this is a point deserving of
special attention—the State recognised the Church's right
of Sanctuary. This right it was, which furnished her with
such powerful assistance in the fulfilment of her task, for
in Sanctuary a temporary refuge at least was open to all,
who desired protection against violence and oppression.
366 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
The temples and altars of the gods, the images also of
the Emperor, for he was esteemed a god, had rights of
sanctuary among the heathen. He who fled to them
might not be violently taken away. This right was
transferred to the Church, when Christianity became the
dominant religion." At first it was the altar—the holy
table—that was esteemed a sanctuary. Afterwards, be-
cause it seemed unfitting that fugitives should sleep at
night in the church, by the altar, or should eat and drink
in the church, the accessory buildings, the court, the
bishop's dwelling, and the surrounding space to thirty
paces' distance, were admitted to the right of sanc-
tuary. The Church insisted strenuously, that here there
was peace, and imperial legislation acknowledged it,
with certain limitations. No one might take refuge in a
church with arms; he must deposit these in front of the
church. Nor might any one incite to tumult and
rebellion from the church. The sacred places were to be
places of peace with regard to both sides. Nor was an
asylum open to all without distinction. Murderers,
adulterers, carriers-off of virgins and public debtors were
excluded. Sanctuary was not to contribute to the escape
from punishment of the really criminal. It was only to
afford a refuge to those who were unjustly pursued, and
to enable them to assert their rights; it was to secure to
them the first necessary protection, that they might take
steps towards reconciliation with their adversary; by the
temporary safety of the pursued, time was to be won,
that meantime the first wrath might blów over, and room
be obtained for mediation and intercession. Hence the
sojourn in sanctuary was limited to thirty days. During
this time, the fugitive, if poor, was to be maintained at
the expense of the Church. The Church, however, not
CHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 367
merely received the fugitive into her peace, but also
advocated his cause. When an unjust judge was desirous
of forcing a rich widow to marry him soon after her
husband's death, she fled to the church, and Basil pro-
tected her.” When a debtor, sued for about seventeen
solidi (£10, 15s), fled to the church, Augustine paid the
debt for him.” When the quarrels of individuals were in
question, the Church did not deliver up a fugitive until
his adversary had sworn on the Gospels, that he was will-
ing to be reconciled to him. The fugitive had on his
part to take the same oath.” The Church vindicated
this right, if needful, with all energy. He who violated
the right of Sanctuary was excommunicated. It was just
because the Praefect Andronicus despised the right of
sanctuary, and issued a decree forbidding fugitives to take
refuge in the church, declaring that he knew where to
find them, even if they were embracing the feet of Christ,
that Bishop Synesius was induced to pronounce excom-
munication against him. Nor was Basil terrified by the
threats of the praefect, who cited him before his tribunal,
from defending the fugitives who had fled to the
church.”
Equipped with such means for the protection of the
oppressed and suffering, the Church extended her shelter
to them in the most various ways, and exerted herself
on every side in mitigating the immense mass of misery
with which the Roman Empire was filled. As we are
about to survey what she did in this respect, as the
advocate of all the suffering classes of the population, we
must in reason begin with those who belong to its lowest
grade—the slaves.
We have seen above (p. 190 sqq.), that the notions of
the Church concerning slaves were far removed from
3.68 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
emancipation, and this was still more the case during this
period, than in that of the conflict. The Church was now
living at peace with the State, and had itself become a
power preservative of the State. But the institutions of
slavery, and the bondage now to so large an extent exist-
ing and continuously increasing, were inseparable from
the State of those days. The Church then recognised
these institutions so far as herself to enter into them.
She was herself a slaveowner. In the canons of Councils
in which Church property is computed, slaves are, in con-
formity with the laws of the day, reckoned, as well as
estates, houses, moveables, as a part of her possessions, and
the bishop was just as much bound to retain the slaves as
to preserve the rest of the Church property. He was as
little able to alienate them as any other possession, except
such as fled, and were, after they had been recaptured,
troublesome to keep :* these he might part with, as other
masters also did with refractory and unmanageable slaves.
He might not give them their freedom, for this would
be a deterioration of Church property. He was only
permitted to do so to a very small extent, viz., when
individual slaves had deserved especially well of the
Church. He might then also settle landed property upon
them, but not above the value of twenty solidi (£12, 10S.).
To this extent his successor had to recognise the manu-
mission and donation.” Nay, the Church was as decided
in the assertion of her rights as any slaveowner could
legally be. If the descendants of slaves—decrees the
Synod of Orleans, 541 "-are again found in the place to
which they belong, the bishop shall demand them back,
and they shall remain in the same condition in which
their parents were. Laymen who keep back the offspring
of Church slaves are excommunicated. Gregory the Great
CHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 369
makes no ceremony of having a fugitive slave brought
back “by any means” from Otranto, though he was also
torn from wife and children, to serve as a baker in Rome.”
The monasteries also possessed slaves. Here the rights
of property were even increased. The bishop might,
under certain circumstances, give freedom to individual
slaves, the abbot nôt at all, “for it is not fair, that, while
the monks work, their servants should be idle.”" As
the Church asserted her own right in the matter of slaves
without scruple, so did she also protect the right of others.
If in the preceding period a slave might be ordained,
even against the will of his heathen master, this was now
unconditionally forbidden. A bishop who ordained a
slave, or a colonus who was a bondsman, against the will
of his master, had to pay double his value as a compensa-
tion, and was subject to Church penance.” Nor could the
monasteries admit a slave or bondsman as a monk, against
the will of his master.” The consent of their masters
was unconditionally required for the marriage of slaves.
If a male and female slave were to flee to a Church to be
married, against the will of their owners, such marriage
was invalid, and ecclesiastics are not to defend such a
connection.” These facts must warn us, that certain
passages in the Fathers, which speak of the original
freedom of all men, are by no means to be understood in
the sense of the emancipation theories of later times.
Many such expressions are also found in this period. It
is much dwelt upon, that God created all men free, that
the distinction between masters and servants first entered
the World through sin, that Christ redeemed and made all
men free, that in Him all men are brethren, all equal.
But these words would be entirely misunderstood, if the
conclusion were to be drawn from them, that it is there-
2 A
370 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
fore wrong to possess slaves, or if they were used to prove,
that it was the duty of Christians to set their slaves at
liberty. Even Chrysostom, who so frequently brings
forward these very thoughts, does not demand of his
hearers, that they should release their slaves, but only
declaims against the keeping of numerous slaves, as
against all luxury, and recommends his auditors to limit
themselves to a few. But these few a Christian may keep
with a good conscience, if only he takes care of them and
treats them in a Christian manner. A document, in
which Gregory the Great gives their freedom to two
Church slaves, is in this respect very characteristic.”
“As our Redeemer, the Author of the whole creation, took
upon Him human nature for the purpose of releasing us
by His grace from the chains of bondage, in which we
were held, and of restoring us to our original liberty, so
is a salutary action performed, when men, whom nature
from the beginning made free, and whom the rights of
nations have subjected to the yoke of slavery, are restored
to the freedom in which they were born.” This saying
is often quoted * to prove, that the Church regarded
slavery as a relation antagonistic to the universal dignity
of man, as an injustice, which it was the duty of every
Christian to repair. But it is not so often noticed, that
Gregory, immediately after these words, carefully defends
the rights of the Romish Church under certain circum-
stances to the property of the manumitted slaves, that he
therefore, as his conduct at other times sufficiently shows,
does not intend to abolish entirely the right of slave-
owning, nor by any means feels it against his conscience
for the Church to possess slaves and to deal with them
according to prevailing laws.
Such expressions concerning the original freedom of all
chap. vi.) THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 371
men are to be understood from the standpoint of the views
of the time, and not till we try thus to estimate them,
shall we, instead of spuriously imputing to the Church
notions of an abolition of slavery, of a compensation for
it by a powerful middle class, which she never enter-
tained,” perceive what she really effected for the slave,
and this was something truly great. Let us not forget,
that the teachers of the Church also regarded the unequal
distribution of property, the distinction between rich and
poor, the subjection of the wife to the husband, nay, the
existence of the State as opposed to original Divine order,
and first entering into the world through sin. Chrysostom
on one occasion * even declares the bondage inflicted by
the power of the State upon the freeborn to be the harder,
compared with slavery, and Gregory Nazianzen, in a
sermon on love to the poor, places poverty and wealth
quite on a level with freedom and bondage, and says:
“Poverty and wealth, freedom and bondage, are not
original institutions of God, but came into the world
through sin.” The Church had just as little notion of
abolishing slavery, as of doing away with the distinction
between rich and poor. She expected the abolition of
all these conditions in the perfected kingdom of God; till
then, the Christian must bear them with patience. But as
the Church strove to mitigate the hardships existing in
these conditions, and so too the hardships of slavery, and
as she took under her protection all the oppressed, all who
were suffering from the troubles of this life, so also did
she extend it to slaves.
This she was now capable of doing to a far greater
degree than formerly, for, as the dominant Church, much
greater resources were, as we have seen, at her command.
Above all, however, she sought now as formerly to influ-
372 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
ence both masters and slaves by the preaching of the
Word. How frequently does Chrysostom, how frequently
does Augustine, speak in his sermons of the relations of
masters and slaves | The slave is exhorted to faithful
service, and referred to the example of Christ, who Him-
Self became a slave. “Only see,” cries Augustine * to
slaves, “ Christ did not make slaves free masters, but bad
slaves good slaves. What thanks do not the rich owe to
Christ, for keeping their households in order . If they
have an unfaithful servant, Christ converts him, and does
not say to him : Let your master go, you now know your
true master; your master is ungodly, you are believing
and righteous, it is not fitting that the believing and
righteous should serve the unbelieving and unrighteous.
Christ speaks not thus, but says: Slaves, look to my
example, for I too served the unrighteous ! for from whom
did the Lord, who endured so great sufferings, endure
them but from the slaves, and the bad slaves, whose
master He was.” By the Word of God the Church dis-
pensed moral power to slaves, to prove themselves, even
in this condition, truly free, to bear in faith and hope the
hardships it involved. They were taught, that to be born
in slavery was a temporary matter, that true nobility
consisted in willingly humbling themselves to serve their
neighbours. As Christ destroyed death, so that now only
the name of death remains, and it has in truth become
but a sleep, so too only the name of slavery remains, and
in truth slaves have become free men and brethren through
Christ. The stain of slavery is removed from him who
serves not against his will, but from the resolve of his
will, for Christ's sake, he is a free man.” “Slaves,” as
Augustine * says, “are themselves to exchange their
bondage for liberty, by serving not in slavish fear but in
chap. v1.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 373
true love,” and he comforts them with the hope of the
time “when all unrighteousness shall be over, when all
dominion, all human power shall be done away, and God
shall be all in all.” On the other hand also, the Church
sets before masters in good earnest, their duties towards
their slaves. This was, alas, but too much needed ; and this
continued harsh treatment of slaves was another symptom
how little the spirit of Christianity had penetrated Romish
society. The stick ruled even in Christian houses, and
many a Christian woman was as little ashamed as a
heathen lady, of cruelly chastising her female slave for
the most trivial fault. Augustine even maintains the
right of a master to strike his slaves,” “only it is to be
done in just and allowable measure ; ” and Chrysostom
felt it necessary frequently to exhort to more lenient
treatment in his sermons—on such occasions it is striking
to find that he especially addresses himself to the female
portion of his audience. He concedes, that the slaves
have faults, but reminds his hearers that “there are other
means of correcting them than the stick. Kindness
would effect more than fear.” “They are inclined to
drunkenness: take from them the opportunity of getting
drunk. They are inclined to unchastity: marry them.
This slave is thy sister in Christ. Has she not an
immortal soul like thyself 2 Is she not honoured by the
Lord Himself 2 Does she not sit at the same table of
grace with thee ?”* What the preachers of the day
inculcate upon masters is, that it is their duty to im-
prove their slaves, that they are responsible for their
Souls. A father of a family, says Augustine, takes care
also for his slaves like a father for his sons, to lead them
to the true worship of God; * and when interpreting the
text, “He that will take thy coat, forbid him not to take
374 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book m.
thy cloak also,” he seeks to apply it to a man's whole
property, but excepts his slave, “if he is brought up better,
more morally and more consistently with the honour of
God, by thee than he can be by him, who would take
him from thee.”.”
Where her words produced no effect, the Church gave
them emphasis by punishments. He who treated a slave
cruelly, or killed him without a judicial sentence, was
excommunicated.” The sanctuary of the Church pro-
tected also the fugitive slave. If a slave fled to a church,
he was not delivered up to his master, till the latter had
taken an oath on the Gospels, that he should not be
punished.” Even if the slave was guilty, the Church
protected him, at least from the worst. The master had
thus only to swear that he would not corporeally chastise
him by strokes or death; but he was allowed to cut off
his hair or to keep him to hard labour.” The clergy,
too, often interposed as mediators for the slave. Basil
succeeded in inducing one Callisthenes by his intercession
to spare the lives of two slaves.”
That the manumission of slaves was esteemed a good
work, is already shown by the before-quoted document of
Gregory the Great, though quite other notions prevailed
in it than that of a general though gradual abolition of
slavery. The Church as little contemplated this, as an
abolition of property, when she declared it a good work
for any one to renounce his property. Under this
point of view, it may be stated that the Church ap-
proved of manumission, exhorted to it, gave the act the
appearance of an ecclesiastical one, by having it take
place in the church, and so imparting to it a religious
consecration. Hence Chrysostom, in speaking of luxury
in general, exhorts to an emancipation of superfluous
CHAP. vi.) THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 375
slaves. Necessary slaves might be retained, only the
superfluous were to be set at liberty and taught a trade.”
It is on this account that we meet with the circumstance,
that those, who desired to enter upon a monastic life, first
deprived themselves of their slaves, as of the rest of their
property. Augustine and his clerics gave freedom to
their slaves, when they were about to commence in com-
mon their monastic life.” Melania freed all her slaves
according to Palladius, 8000,—when she left Rome to
begin a conventual life. In epitaphs also we meet with
the manumission of slaves, “for the soul's health.” It
is in this sense too that we must understand the reply of
Abbot Isidor of Pelusium, to a man of rank, who applied
to him to be allowed to retain one of his slaves: “I
should not have thought, that one who loved Christ, who
knew the mercy that makes all men free, would have a
slave.”* It is the monk, in whose eyes one who loves
Christ is, one who has renounced the world, who speaks
in these words. This too accounts for the important
influence of monachism upon slavery ; and here we come
upon as apparently contradictory a phenomenon as before.
An institution calculated in the first place entirely to
deprive men of liberty, utterly to absorb freedom in
monastic obedience, was essentially to contribute to its
restoration. - ſº
He who became a monk, quitted a secular for an
“angelic " life. For him, therefore, all that is distinctive
of life in this world no longer existed. For him there
was no State, no marriage, no property, and therefore no
longer the distinction of rich and poor, of bond and free.
In the sphere of monachism slavery was virtually abolished.
It was on this account, that so many, who desired to
escape from the fetters of the life of those times, streamed
376 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
into the monastery. This was especially the case with
slaves, many of whom ran away from their masters under
the pretence of “leading a pious life.” The matter became
so serious, that not only had Emperors to interfere with
the secular arm, but the Church also. One Eustathius,
probably the same whom we meet with as bishop of
Sebaste, consistently carrying out monastic notions, invites
slaves to leave their masters and assume the monastic
habit, that they may at a stroke abolish their servitude.
On the other hand, a council held at Gangra, the capital
of Paphlagonia, interposes and decrees: “If any one,
under the pretence of piety, advises a slave to leave his
master and run away from his service, and not to serve
his master with good-will and full respect, let him be
anathema.” ” This canon, which obtained universal
validity in the Church, was quite consistent with those
views of slavery, which, as we have seen above, prevailed
in the Church. But the consistent carrying out of a
monkishly ascetic isolation from all secular life, could not
fail to result in the entire dissolution of all human
relations.
Hence the idea of monachism could not be in every
respect carried out, and monachism, if it had continued in
anchorite isolation, would never have become the civiliz-
ing power it did. It was obliged to take up its position
in the world, in a certain sense to re-enter the world, and
consequently to give up that entire renunciation of slavery,
which its principles involved. In the East these principles
were so far carried out, that the monasteries kept no slaves.
In the West, no scruple was felt on the point.” Nay,
slavery was in this case even more stringent, inasmuch
as the slaves of a monastery had no chance of being Set
at liberty. This apparently unfavourable distinction of a
cHAP. vi.) THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 377
Western monastery turns out upon closer observation to
be in its favour. The monachism of the East, which
retired entirely from the world, and was in its purely
contemplative character without influence or result, could
well dispense with slaves. That of the West needed them
for its work of civilization. But it was just through this
work of civilization, that it contributed far more than
Eastern monachism to the internal conquest of slavery.
The fruit, indeed, was not reaped till centuries afterwards.
But still the idea of monachism was even now working
itself out in this direction. Whoever became a monk—
for which certainly in the case of a slave, the consent of
his master was required—was free, and that for ever. The
slaves of monasteries were treated with absolute kindness.
The monks themselves shared their labours in the field.
Besides, the high respect in which monachism was held,
could not but influence masters the more willingly to give
their freedom to such slaves as desired to become monks,
while the Church, if needful, exercised a certain amount
of pressure to obtain their consent. Lastly, the idea, that
it was a step towards perfection to deprive oneself of slaves,
as of any other possession, could not fail to extend itself
far beyond the sphere of the convent, and to dispose many
to the manumission of their slaves. It was the persuasion
that they were thereby doing a work well-pleasing to God,
that induced many of the rich and great of this world to
give freedom to their slaves, and often in great numbers,
especially by testamentary disposition ; and the Church,
decidedly as it maintained the lawfulness of slavery,
energetically promoted this tendency. The manumission
took place in church, in order to make it clear that the
slave owed his freedom to the Church and its influence;
and when once he was free, it was the Church again who
378 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
protected and defended him in his freedom in these rough
times. It is often laid down in the canons of Synods,
as being expressly the duty of the Church to protect
those who have been legally emancipated by their
masters.” And if the freedman, for whom his master no
longer has to provide, should, as so often happened, fall
into distress, it was once more the Church who assisted
him with her exercise of mercy, with her gifts and
benefits.
There was yet another point of view, which induced
the Church to take an interest in slaves. Their servile
relation must not be allowed to hinder them from ful-
filling their church obligations, must not endanger their
salvation. It was on this account, that the Church So
often impressed upon masters the duty of allowing their
slaves to attend public worship and to keep holy days.
Thus, e.g., the Council of Orleans, 511, decrees that slaves
are not to work on the Rogation Days, held at Ascension-
tide.” It is true that Constantine had already forbidden
the Jews to keep Christian slaves,” but this prohibition
seems not to have been carried out. In the 5th and 6th
centuries we frequently find Jews owning Christian slaves;
indeed, the slave-trade of the times was chiefly in their
hands. It was they who bought prisoners of war from
the barbarians, and brought them into the slave-market
in the Roman Empire. Among them were also Christians,
or slaves who, at first heathen, afterwards became Chris-
tians. But that a Christian should be in bondage to a
Jew, seemed not only unworthy, but with the hatred still
borne by Jews towards Christians, dangerous to his faith
and salvation. Hence the Church regarded it as a duty
to take a special interest in such slaves. The Council of
Orleans, 538,” insists that they shall be protected, if their
cHAP. vi.) THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 379
Jewish master exacts from them anything contrary to the
Christian religion, or if he punishes them for a fault which
has been already remitted by the Church. A Synod held
three years later in Orleans, goes still further. It appoints,
that if a Christian who is slave to a Jew, flees to a church
or to another Christian, he is to be ransomed according to
a just valuation, which appointment the Synod of Macon
extends to the decree, that every Jew must submit to the
redemption of his Christian slaves at the settled price of
ten solidi (£6, 7s.).” If he refuses to accept this price,
they are without further ceremony free. Finally, Gregory
the Great entirely forbids the keeping of Christian slaves
by Jews. He declares it to be an objectionable and
abominable thing. He even permits such slaves as only
intend to be Christians, to flee from their masters, and
assures them of the protection of the Church. He like-
wise limited the trading of the Jews in Christian slaves,
a limitation " which was the more important, because, as
it was just the Jews who carried on so flourishing a trade
in slaves, the prohibition must have directly co-operated
in the limitation of slavery itself.
Next to the slaves were the serf-coloni and the tenants
who held estates by hereditary tenure for a rent of natural
products.” These were frequently treated in an unjust
and arbitrary manner by their landlords. Even when the
year was a bad one, when the harvest failed, the same
supplies were demanded from them, or a money payment
according to high market prices. When, on the other
hand, there was a good harvest, money payments at the
lowered market prices were refused, and more demanded.
Rent was arbitrarily raised, demanded twice over, or the
supplies required to be delivered in larger proportion.
If the tenants had to deliver them at an appointed place,
380 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
which was often across the sea, and if the corn already
sent were lost on the way, through shipwreck or any other
misfortune, it was not credited to them, but they had to
send it once again.” In short, as much as possible was,
without consideration, got out of them. “How they ill-
use the poor farmers,” exclaims Chrysostom ; do they
treat them more humanely than the barbarians do They
do not hesitate to impose insupportable burdens, daily
heavier, upon those who are perishing with hunger, who
are toiling away their lives. Whether the land yields any-
thing or nothing, they always demand the same.” In them
too the Church took an interest. Theodoret in a letter
entreats a landowner for some indulgence towards the
coloni of his flock: “Have pity on the labourers who
have laboured in the fields and have gained but little.
Let the scanty harvest be an occasion to thee of a plenti-
ful spiritual harvest.” “ Augustine seriously appeals to the
conscience of one Romulus, concerning his oppression of
coloni, on whom double supplies were about to be imposed,
and threatens him with eternal judgment. “They toil
for a short time, but do thou look to it, that thou heap not
up treasure against the day of wrath and revelation of the
righteous judgment of God.” Gregory the Great's letters
show how careful he was about the welfare of the country
people, and contain a number of directions to his defensores,
for the alleviation of their condition. “ Not only by
frequent injunctions,” he writes to his sub-deacon Anthe-
mius,” “but also personally, have I, as I remember,
exhorted thee, to have less in view, in thy deportment as
our vicar, the temporal profit of the Church, than the
alleviation of the miseries of the poor, and on the contrary,
to protect them against whatever oppression may, be
inflicted on them.” To the sub-deacon Peter, too, who
CHAP. VI.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 381
administered the Church property in Sicily, he gives the
excellent advice : “I desire, that the noble and respect-
able may honour thee for thy humility, and not loathe
thee for thy pride. But if thou shouldest see them
commit an injustice against the poor, then quickly raise
thyself up from thy. humility, so that thou mayest be
submissive to them as long as they act justly, but their
opponent as soon as they do evil.””
There were two kinds of evils, which pressed heavily
upon the humbler, and especially the rural classes, oppres-
sive taxation and the prevailing usury. The taxes grew
more and more exorbitant ; the arbitrariness of officials,
their efforts to enrich themselves, increased the oppression.
Many among them had employed large sums in obtaining
an office, and of course thought it no harm to extort all
the more.” It was difficult, almost impossible, for the
people to make their complaints heard. Only from the
bishops, if they could help them in no other way, did
they find at least audience and sympathy; they also made
use of their high position, their relations with the court,
to appear as intercessors for the people, and to make their
often too well-founded accusations heard. When a tax-
collector in Cappadocia, for the sake of extorting more
from the people, had recourse to the means of requiring a
statement on Oath of property, Basil earnestly remonstrated
with him on the perniciousness of this proceeding, on the
temptation to perjury it involved, and actually required
its abolition. The letters of Basil also show in many
other places, how actively he interposed in behalf of the
heavily-taxed members of his flock.” We possess a heart-
moving letter of Theodoret to the Empress Pulcheria, in
which he describes to her the misery in his diocese, and
begs for a mitigation of taxation. “The whole district is
382 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
heavily oppressed. Many estates are forsaken by the
coloni, and are lying waste. And yet the unfortunate
decurions are held responsible for it, who, incapable of
bearing such burdens, either become beggars or escape
from them by flight.” Gregory the Great represents to
the Empress Constantina the great misery of the island
of Corsica, where the taxes are so high, that “many are
scarcely able to meet the demands by the sale of their
children.” “Would that the most gracious Empress
would take all this into consideration, and stop the sighs
of the oppressed. For I do not believe that these things
have hitherto come to your most gracious ear. If this
had been the case, they would not have lasted till now.
Representations ought to be made concerning them to the
most gracious Emperor at a fitting season, that he may
remove this dreadful burden of sin from his soul, from his
Empire, from his children.””
Woe to him who should in his necessity have recourse
to a loan ; what with the high rate of interest, the severity
of the laws against debtors, and the greed of usurers, he
was almost hopelessly ruined. Productive loans were at
this period out of the question. It was only distress which
forced a man to borrow, and only the endeavour to get
profit out of others which induced any one to lend money.
The poor, urged by hunger, were obliged, as Gregory of
Nyssa expresses it, “to swallow the barbed hook of
interest.” We everywhere meet with complaints of the
insatiable avarice of usurers. They profited by the distress
of their fellow-men, and made “the miseries of the unfor-
tunate a source of gain.” “The poor man comes to seek
help from thee and finds an enemy, he seeks a remedy
and finds poison.” “What can be more cruel than to derive
advantage from the poverty of a neighbour, and under the
CHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 383
pretence of obliging him, to plunge him into the abyss 2" *
The usurers well knew how to take advantage of the
distress of some, and the inexperience of others. “They
inquire,” says Ambrose in describing their guile,” “where
an heir to wealth may be found. Then they go to him
under a pretence of paternal friendship, and find out his
inclinations and needs. They call his attention to some
fine estate, to be sold on advantageous terms. If he says:
I have no money, they answer: Use mine, as if it were
yours. Thus they draw him into the net. Then begins
the torture. Interest is heaped upon interest, the poor
man is forced to sell everything, and yet this is not
enough to satisfy the creditor. He is thrown into prison,
and often driven to suicide. Oh insatiable avarice,
worthy of Satan, whose most faithful portrait thou art | * *
It must be understood, that the teachers of the Church
did not distinguish between fair and just interest and
usury; that in their eyes all interest was unrighteous
usury. They taught, that to a Christian the reception of
any interest was sin. Proof was adduced from Luke vi.
34, 35, but especially from the Old Testament (Ex. xxii.
25 ; Deut. xxiii. 19). The fact that it was allowable to
lend to an enemy could not be appealed to. “Thou mayest
kill him with whom thou livest in a state of war, and thou
mayest lend to him whom thou mayest kill, for it is but
another kind of killing.”.” Interest being allowed by the
civil legislation, the Church confined, indeed, its express
prohibition to ecclesiastics,” but made it a moral duty to
the laity also, to lend without interest.” While thus usury
in general was opposed by the Church, she at the same
time assisted, as far as possible, the unfortunate debtor.
To deliver debtors out of the hand of usurers was esteemed
an especially good work. Thus Augustine pays seventeen
384 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
solidi, for which sum a certain Fascius, pressed by his
creditor, had taken refuge in the church, and then begs
his flock to replace the money which he has had to lend,
by a collection.” Gregory the Great having learnt, that
many farmers, constrained to pay their taxes before selling
their harvests, were having recourse to loans, and thus
falling into the hands of usurers, commissions Peter, the
sub-deacon, to make them an advance out of the Church
resources, which they may repay by instalments.” The
deacon Cyprian receives a like commission. He is to
make advances to the farmers, that they may not get
money elsewhere, since they will then either have to pay
interest or have their produce undervalued. “For thus
neither will the Church treasury be ruined, nor the
prosperity of the farmers destroyed.”"
The Church, which thus denounced the oppression of
the poor by the usurers, also opposed whatever violence
was exercised by the rich and noble against the poor and
humble ; and, as Ambrose says, protected the Naboths
against the Ahabs, of whom a new one rose up every
day." Especially did she grant her protection to those
who needed it above others—to the widows and Orphans.
The Synod of Sardica, which in other respects endeavoured
to limit the superfluous journeys of bishops to the imperial
court, allowed them to travel thither for the purpose of
interceding, if a widow were oppressed, or an orphan
plundered; and Ambrose, as well as Augustine, reckons
it among the most pronounced duties of bishops, to protect
them against injustice.” It was among the circumstances
by which Chrysostom drew down upon himself the wrath
of the Empress Eudoxia, that when the Empress, relying
upon a law, desired to possess herself of the vineyards of
certain poor widows, for a payment in money, he protected
cHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 385
them in their possessions, unconcerned about the wealth
of the Empress.” The property of widows and orphans
was frequently entrusted to the Church for preservation
and management. Augustine once mentions this, and
adds: “The bishop protects the orphans, that they may
not be oppressed by strangers, after the death of their
parents.”" In Pavia, a respectable man had surrepti-
tiously obtained an imperial rescript, by which the property
of an orphan, held as a deposit by the Church, was ad-
judged to him. Nevertheless, Ambrose refused to deliver
it up, withstood all the threats and annoyances of the
corrupted officials, and at last effected the withdrawal of
the rescript. Many of Augustine's letters treat of the
proposed marriage of an orphan girl, who had been en-
trusted to the Church, and the care of whom the bishop,
notwithstanding his numerous cares and labours, did not
neglect. “For your piety knows,” he writes to Felix,
“what care the Church and the bishops should take for
the protection of all men, but especially of Orphan chil-
dren.” "
The exposing of children was still of frequent occur-
rence. The consciousness that it was a duty of a parent
to bring up a child, and a wrong to leave it to accident,
only gradually made way. Nor did the laws punish the
exposing of children. Valentinian I. was the first to
promulgate a law, by which the rearing of children was
made an obligation, and exposing them forbidden. Still,
for a long time this did not put an end to the crime.
Diocletian sought to dispel the evil by declaring all
foundlings free, and by thus thwarting that love of gain
which led to the bringing up of these poor creatures for
shameful profit, to abolish indirectly the evil itself. But
this, too, was of no avail. Constantine, in the first zeal
2 B
386 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
of his humanity, appointed that to such parents as declared
that they did not possess the means of bringing up their
offspring, assistance should be given from the public
treasury. This seems for a long time not to have been
done. The resources required surpassed the power of the
State. There remained only the help of the Church, and
a field of labour was here opened to Christian charity,
which the remembrance of the high value of children in
the eyes of the Lord, induced her to cultivate with special
zeal. The care also of foundlings was incumbent on the
bishop. They were transferred to him by both ecclesiasti-
cal and civil laws. The emperors Honorius and Theo-
dosius II. appointed, that whoever took in and brought up
a child should keep it, if witnesses declared that it had
not been claimed, and the bishop signed this declaration.
Whoever found a child was to announce it to the Church.
On the following Sunday this was proclaimed by the
clergy from the altar, and the relatives were summoned to
claim the child. The finder was to keep it for ten days,
and to receive payment for so doing from men, or, if he
preferred it, from God. If no one came forward, it was
awarded to him. Whoever subsequently claimed such a
child and slandered the finder, was exposed to the punish-
ment of the Church. The Church itself brought up those
children whom no one would receive. In Africa, the nuns
collected foundlings and brought them to baptism.” The
desire of procuring for children the blessing of baptism,
must specially have impelled to this work. The brepho-
trophia also received such children. Houses specially for
foundlings did not as yet exist. The Church also contended
with all her power against the crime of exposing children,
and the still more frequent one of infanticide. “The
clergy,” says the Synod of Toledo, 589, “and the secular
CHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 387
judges must unite, in extirpating the widespread and
terrible crime of parents' killing their children to escape
the trouble and cost of bringing them up.””
Certainly many an orphan girl and many a foundling
were preserved by the good offices of the Church, from
sinking into the abyss of prostitution, which had in the
heathen world demanded so many sacrifices, and which,
alas, still demanded them in the Christianized world.
The complaints of many Fathers, the dark pictures drawn
by Salvian of Aquitaine, by Augustine of Africa, prove
how general this evil still was. Unconscientious dealers
bought up girls and women, to carry them to Constanti-
nople and other large towns. It was incumbent on the
Church, at least, to watch that this was not done against
the will of the persons in question, and to defend chastity
from this disgraceful speculation. Other attempts, too,
were made to check the evil, especially by assisting young
girls to marry early, and by giving some contributions
towards their dowry.” I have already had occasion to
mention the “ House of Penance,” which was erected
under Justinian for fallen women. It was indeed scarcely
a Magdalenium in the present sense, an asylum and an
institution for improvement, but rather a conventual house
of discipline. It frequently occurred in those days, that
Women had to pass their time of imprisonment in con-
ventual institutions.”
It was now, too, that the influence of Christianity was
first felt in the mitigation of imprisonment. An imperial
decree of the year 400 imposes upon bishops the duty of
ascertaining, by regular prison visitation, that no one was
detained there unlawfully, and that the prisoners were
humanely treated." A canon of the Synod of Orleans, of
the year 549, goes still farther. The prisoners are to be
388 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK III.
visited every Sunday by the archdeacon of the Church,
that their misery may, according to God's commandments,
be alleviated by compassion. The bishop is to appoint a
faithful and diligent person to care for the wants of the
prisoners. They are to receive necessary food from the
Church."
Christian love turned, however, still more to those who
had been taken captive by their enemies, than to those
whom the arm of justice had cast into prison, and the
ransoming of such captives takes a very prominent place
among works of mercy at this period. “It is the highest
act of liberality,” says Ambrose in his work on duties,”
“to ransom prisoners, to withdraw them from the
hands of their enemies, to rescue men from death, and
women from shame, to restore parents to their children,
and citizens to their native land.” We feel here the
heart of the Christian and that of the Roman, beating in
unison; in the eyes of the Roman, prisoners are citizens
whom he restores to their native land, in those of the
Christian, fellow-men whom he benefits. Opportunities
for such deeds were but too abundant. When the bar-
barians made inroads, they made prisoners of all who
were not slain by the sword. When the Goths overran
Thrace and Illyria, after the fall of Valens, there were so
many prisoners, that “if you could ransom them all, they
would fill a province.” What hosts the Vandals carried
away from Italy to Africa, how had Gaul constantly
to suffer from this calamity, and afterwards Italy, when
the Lombards took the place of the Goths, who were but
just driven away All who were not ransomed, incurred
slavery, and were treated in the most cruel manner, or
ruthlessly slaughtered. It was a sad spectacle to behold
the former masters of the World, with chains on their
cHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 389
hands and feet, bound to the chariots of the barbarian
hosts, and carried off covered with blood and dust. They
often succumbed to their miseries and to hunger, and
if their ransom was too long in arriving, were hewn down
in troops. Or some would return with mutilated limbs,
with noses and ears cut off, to bring intelligence of the
misery of others. How deeply all hearts were moved by
such distress, is testified by the litanies of the time, which
contain special intercessions for prisoners. “Remember,
O Lord, the faithful, who languish in prison, and grant
them to see their native land again.”
All the more did the Christians of those times feel a
lively interest in granting their aid in such cases. Am-
brose zealously urged the ransoming of prisoners from the
Goths. Chrysostom applied, even in banishment, a portion
of the sum, which Olympias sent him from Constantinople,
to ransoming captives from the Savage Isaurians; Paulinus
of Nola gave all that he still possessed to rescue as many
as possible from the hands of the Vandals, and to save
them from the fate of being sent away into Africa; the
letters of Gregory the Great contain numerous directions
and injunctions in this respect.” At one time he sends
thanks for sums received for this purpose, at another he
directs a bishop how to get money for it, at another he
himself gives money for this work of love. Even when
the prisoners had already been carried off to the abodes of
the barbarians, presbyters were sent after them to deliver
them from slavery.
Large sums were required for such a purpose. The
barbarians kept up the price of their captives in the hope
of large ransoms. Gregory at one time complains, that
the Lombards are demanding too much. For one prisoner,
certainly a cleric, for whom a specially high sum would
390 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
be demanded, 112 solidi (= £71, 11s.) were paid,” and
it was a question of thousands. For two bishops carried
away from Cilicia, the barbarians had taken 14,000 gold
pieces (about £9000).” But the Church made no scruple
about employing her resources on a large scale. She was
also frequently assisted in this work by individuals. One
Rusticiana, a patrician lady, sends Gregory ten pounds of
gold for this purpose, and Theotistus, a patrician, sends
thirty for this and for the poor in general. Gregory
applied half of the gold to the ransoming of prisoners
from the Lombards, the other half he used in purchasing
warm beds for the female servants of God in Rome, who
were suffering much from the cold winter. He sends
Theotistus, out of gratitude, a key, which, having been
brought in contact with the relics of St. Peter, had thereby
acquired great miraculous powers. If no means were at
the Church's disposal, no hesitation was felt at borrowing
money, contracting debts, nay, selling the sacred vessels.
It is related of a whole series of bishops, that they did
not shrink from this act. Exsuperius, bishop of Toulouse,
had cut glass vessels for the celebration of the Lord's
Supper. All gold and silver had been used for the ran-
som of prisoners.” No one more excellently defended
this act than Ambrose, whom the Arians had reproached
with it. “It is far more useful, to preserve Souls for the
Lord, than to keep gold. For He who sent out the
apostles without gold, also collected the Church without
gold. The Church does not possess gold to hoard, but to
distribute it, and to help with it in distress. Would not
the Lord ask us: Why did you let so many die of hunger ?
why were so many prisoners carried away and not ran-
somed ? why were so many killed by the enemies it
would have been better to preserve the living than the
CHAP. VI.] THE CHURCH TIIE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 391
metal vessels. And what wilt thou answer ? Will it be :
I feared lest the temple of God should lack necessary
adornment 2 Would He not reply: The Sacraments
being not bought for gold do not need gold, nor find
acceptance for the sake of gold. The adornment of the
Sacraments is the ransom of prisoners. How glorious to
be able to say, at the sight of the prisoners ransomed by
the Church : Christ has ransomed these ! Behold a kind
of gold of great value, useful gold, the gold of Jesus Christ,
which delivers from death, which ransoms modesty, pre-
serves chastity. I would rather set these prisoners free
than keep the gold. The long lists of the ransomed
are far nobler than the splendour of the gold.” Besides,
the canons of the Church declared it allowable to sell
the treasures and jewels of the Church for this object,
and Gregory the Great often praises bishops who have
done so, for “it would be a sin and crime to esteem the
furniture of the Church above the prisoners,” while he
severely blames a bishop, who had refused to pay the
money needed to ransom a boy.” Hence the Church was
able to restore large numbers to liberty. Candidus, bishop
of Sergiopolis, on one occasion ransomed 12,000 prisoners
for 14,400 solidi (£9136, 16s). Especially, as the in-
Scriptions show, was the Gallic Church zealous in this work,
to which private individuals also contributed. “With her
treasures she delivered prisoners from unjust fetters,” is
read on the gravestone of Eugenia, a Christian woman.”
This work of mercy extended beyond the boundaries of
the Roman Empire, a sign that it was prompted by more
than mere patriotism, and that something more was thought
of than restoring citizens to the country, and clergy to
the Church. When, on the occasion of a great victory
of the Emperor Theodosius II. over the Persians, many
392 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
prisoners had fallen into the hands of the Toman soldiers,
Acacius, bishop of Amida, called his clergy together, and
represented to them : “Our God needs neither the plates
not the cups, for as One who needs nothing, He neither eats
nor drinks. What then do we want with so much silver
plate 2 It is right that we should sell it and ransom and
feed the prisoners.” And this was done, the prisoners
were ransomed and sent back to the Persian king supplied
with necessary provisions for the journey.”
And how much more may have been done in private
Theodoret tells us on one occasion, in his letters, all of
which are pervaded by the remembrance of the miseries
inflicted on Africa by the Vandals, a little history of the
kind, which well deserves to find a place here. Mary, a
noble lady, was taken prisoner by the Vandals, dealers
had brought her to Cyrus in Syria, and there sold her and
her maid. The maid, though now her fellow-slave, still
continued to serve her mistress faithfully. When this
was known, certain Christians ransomed her, the bishop
commended her to the care of a deacon, and assigned her
a certain supply of corn for her support. She then heard
that her father was still alive and invested with an office
in the West. She therefore set out to go to him, and
Theodoret gave her a letter of introduction for the
journey.” In several other letters Theodoret recommends
one Celestiacus, who had formerly been rich, but having
lost everything at the conquest of Carthage by the
Vandals, was now wandering about in poverty with his
wife and child, and entreats that he may be assisted.”
We must now just turn our attention more directly to
the misery of the perishing world, and survey that which
is, in the times when great revolutions are effected, so
easily overlooked, the manner in which this misery
chap. v.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 393
affected the lives of individuals. Those who suffered
were countless multitudes. It was amid thousandfold
calamities, in such wretchedness as scarcely ever recurred,
as was perhaps just at one time approximated during the
Thirty Years' War, that the old world perished, and all
its glory was buried. Like successive floods did the
German nations inundate the Empire, wrecking the old
forms and ordinances of political and national life, and,
themselves as yet incapable of creating new and
permanent ones; they came in the vigour of youth,
and but too soon enervated by the mild climate, to
which they were unaccustomed, weakened by the in-
dulgences of a foreign civilization, consumed by the sins
of those whom they had subdued, were drawn down
with them to destruction. How soon were the Vandals,
to whom, as Salvian says when rebuking the Romans,
God gave the victory because of their chastity, quite as
morally corrupt as the Romans ! How did the Ostro-
goths perish in Spain, how tragically the Visigoths in
Italy At first an unparalleled chaos ensued. The
new, the Christianized, German world was born amid
thousandfold pangs ; centuries passed before settled and
permanent policies and nations emerged from the deluge
of the migration of the nations. And in the midst of
this chaos, stood the Church as the sole power which
survived the universal ruin, and continued to perform its
office of being the refuge of all the oppressed and
suffering. In these times of confusion, when every other
support failed, she alone still held out a helping hand to
the poor, pursued, and alarmed people. Did an invasion
rage over the land, and towns and villages lie in ashes,
the Church was still there, and immediately recommenced
her work. Churches, chapels, hospitals and monasteries,
394 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
the houses of mercy, were the first to be rebuilt. There
distributions again began, there did the poor daily find
the storehouses of the Church open to them, and receive
such food, shelter and assistance as she could give.
Besides material help, however, they also received
spiritual gifts. Distributions of alms were combined
with public worship. The poor, who came to get bread to
appease their hunger, or a garment to cover their naked-
ness, or medicine and advice for their sickness, heard at
the same time the word of God, preached as well as the
Church knew how, received comfort from this source of
all comfort, and acquired strength to go on suffering and
hoping. If the people did not utterly despair, they owed
this to the never-ceasing charity of the Church. In fact,
it was a great, a marvellously great, work which the
Church effected at that time, a work which proves, that
in the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, a new power had
entered the world, which even these tempests could not
destroy, which, on the contrary, only manifested itself
the more great and glorious in the midst of the tempest
and the universal misery. The Church could not save
the old world, but she sat at its death-bed with help and
comfort, and lighted up its last hours with such an
evening glory as the old world had never known in the
times of its greatest prosperity.
At the same time she stood also at the cradle of a new
world, of the German Christian world, at the cradle of
the Middle Ages.
The work effected by the Church with respect to the
German nations, falls indeed outside the limits of the
picture, which I proposed in the first instance to paint,
of charity in the ancient Church. We may, however,
just cast a glance at it. They were young nations in
cHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 395
unbroken, but still rude power, who now intermingled
with the remnants of the ancient nations, occupied their
place, were their heirs, and at the same time the
continuers of their work. To educate them to this was
the task of the Church, and among educational forces
compassionate love was one of the most prominent.
Nay, I might in a certain sense say, that hospitals and
cloisters were, together with the house of God, the
episcopal cathedral, or the quiet forest chapel, the two
national centres of education. Love in the hospital,
work in the cloister, these were the educational powers.
The Church made no distinction between Germans and
Romans. The poor German, equally with the poor
Roman, received her alms, or was welcomed into her
hospitals. But what he saw and experienced made a far
deeper impression upon him. To the Roman, charity was
already a thing with which he had long been familiar ; to
the German it was entirely new. For whatever kindness
there was in the German nature, expressed as it was by
the old word “Milte,” which means especially liberality
towards the poor, it was still something very different
from Christian love. Besides, all that was best and most
excellent about it had been long since lost amidst the
migrations and invasions. It was a far more Savage race,
that was now Sojourning within the Roman boundaries,
than that which had formerly settled in the German
districts. How then must the Church's work of love have
bound the young nations to her, how must it have rendered
them accessible also to her doctrines and ordinances,
and have gained their hearts for the exalted Lord of
heaven, who once walked on earth as a poor man And
in the monasteries and from the monasteries, the people,
now alienated from and despising work, again learned to
396 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [BOOK III.
work. The monasteries became everywhere the starting-
points of a new civilization. There was the field again
tilled, the vine again cultured ; there, too, was also
cultivated whatever of art and science had been rescued
from the overthrow. Thence originated that new
Germanic civilization, which everywhere had its roots in
the ancient civilization, but with this difference, that Chris-
tianity now penetrated far more deeply into national life,
than it had ever done in the Roman Empire, and that
the Church became for a thousand years almost the
all-dominating power.”
It was in the Church life of the Middle Ages, that all
that had hitherto existed only in germ, was developed in
full maturity. To the Middle Ages were transferred
those ethic views of riches and poverty, of earnings and
alms, and of the meritorious and expiatory power of the
latter, of which we have spoken. In Thomas Aquinas
and in the ethical works of the Middle Ages, we find
again, at least on the whole, the same views which we
have already met with in Ambrose, Augustine, and
Gregory the Great, only they are now systematically
developed into a complete view of the world, which
influenced the entire social life of the Middle Ages. To
these were also transferred the forms of charity, as they
had been already fashioned, the combination of alms with
masses for the departed, the memorials, the charitable
endowments for the soul's Salvation of the deceased,
together with the hospital and monastery as centres of
charity, but all was developed in infinitely more copious
variety. No period has done so much for the poor as
the Middle Ages. What wholesale distribution of alms,
what an abundance of institutions of the most various
kinds, what numbers of hospitals for all manner of
CHAP. vi.] THE CHURCH THE REFUGE OF THE OPPRESSED. 397
sufferers, what a series of ministrant orders, male and
female, knightly and civil, what self-sacrifice and devoted-
ness In the mediaeval period all that we have observed
germinating in the Ancient Church, first attains its
maturity.
The Middle Ages, however, also appropriated whatever
tendencies existed towards a one-sided and unsound
development. Church care of the poor entirely perished,
and all charity became institutional ; monks and nuns,
or members of the ministrant orders, took the place of
the deacons—the diaconate died out. Charity became
one-sidedly institutional and one-sidedly ecclesiastical.
The Church was the mediatrix of every exercise of
charity, she became in fact the sole recipient, the sole
bestower, for the main object of every work of mercy, of
every distribution of alms, of every endowment, of all
self-sacrifice in the service of the needy, was the giver's
own salvation. The transformation was complete. Men
gave and ministered no longer for the sake of helping and
serving the poor in Christ, but to obtain for themselves
and theirs merit, release from purgatory, a high degree of
eternal happiness. The consequence was, that poverty
was not contended with, but fostered, and beggary brought
to maturity ; So that, notwithstanding the abundant
donations, the various foundations, the well - endowed
institutions, distress was after all not mastered. The
mediaeval period first works out, in this respect also,
what was begun in the period we have been observing,
and furnishes in its issue, in its utter bankruptcy with
respect to poverty, a proof that charity, like all Christian
life, no longer corresponded with the gospel, no longer
sprung from it alone, but was contaminated by the recep-
tion of extra-Christian, of Jewish, and ancient elements.
398 CHRISTIAN CHARITY IN ANCIENT CHURCH. [Book III.
Not till the Reformation was the source returned to,
the primitive Christian notions of riches and poverty, of
property and alms, of work and vocation revived, and
consequently new fountains of active love unsealed.
These notions, however, are very far from having been
fully carried out ; we must on the contrary confess, that
our Church has in this respect also, and perhaps most of
all in this, come short in practice of what has been given
her in knowledge. The first duty of our age is to
realize in action the evangelical and reformed ideas
concerning charity and the relief of the poor, in connec-
tion with those concerning calling and work, wages and
property. Beginnings, thank God, exist. Would that
they may but develop with increasing power Then
alone can we contemplate, if not without fear, yet still with
hope, the changes, the new formations of social life, which
we or our children will experience. As in those times,
when the Christian Germanic world came forth from the
destruction of the ancient world, so now again has love a
great task to accomplish ; God grant that we may be
equal to it ! In Christianity is given us the remedy for
all evils, the inexhaustible source of healthy life, but let
us not forget how our Lord says: “By this shall all men
know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to
another.” .
N O T E S.
BOOK I.
C H A PTE R. I.
(1) Lact. Inst. vi. 10. — (2) Tacit. Ann. iv. 63. — (3) Quinctilian
Declamat. 301, ed. Bipont. p. 175. Plautus, Trinummus, act iii. Sc. 2. —
(4) Staatshaushalt der Athener, ii. 260,-(5) E.g. Corp. Inscr. Lat. ii.
1270 ; 45.11 ; viii. 4202 and 5.148. Orelli, 80 ; 4042, etc.—(6) Bºeckh,
Staatshaushalt der Athener, i. 260 sqq.-(7) Idem, ii. 83.−(8) Isocrates,
Areop. 38.-(9) Boeckh as above, i. 235 sqq.-(10) Plebs, frumentaria,
$xxo; rañáo; &ropol révnºrss. Comp. Dio Cass. 38, 23; Appian B.C. ii. 120.
—(11) Wit. Sever. c. 18.-(12) Wit. Aurel. c. 35, 48.-(13) Comp. Hirsch-
feld, die Getreidelieferung in der Röm. Kaiserzeit, Göttingen 1869, pp. 20,
21. –(14) Hirschfeld’s above-named work, p. 44.—(15) Comp. Mommsen's
Röm. Gesch. 491 : “Caesar first developed into an organic institution of the
State, that which in the narrow restriction of Athenian life had remained
an affair of the community, and transformed an arrangement which was a
burden and disgrace to the State into the first of those innumerable
institutions so rich in blessing, in which infinite human compassion
contends with infinite human misery.” This is certainly saying too
much, but it correctly points out the path this institution was taking.—
(16) Mommsen and Marquardt, Handbuch der Röm. Alterthümer, v. 106
sqq.-(17) Plin. ix. 81; xiv. 27. Friedländer, i. 421. —(18) Sueton. Nero,
c. 9, 18.-(19) Häser, Gesch. der Krankenpflege, p. 3.−On the houses for
suppliants at the temples of AEsculapius, comp. Paus. ii. 27, 2 ; x. 32, 8. —-
(20) Tac. Ann. ii. 47; Marc. Aurel. Wit. c. 11.-(21) Innumerable inscrip-
tions testify to this fact. Comp. e.g. Or. 80, 748, 2172, 3848, 5323 ;
C. J. i. 190 ; ii. 4514; v. 5651, 7881 ; viii. 967, 6948, and elsewhere.—
(22) Comp. Marquardt and Mommsen's above-named work, 137 sqq.-
(23) Corp. Inscr. ii. 1174.—(24) C. J. viii. 1641. –(25) Ep. vii. 18.-
(26) Bullet de l’Inst. 1839, 153.−(27) Comp. on the collegia especially,
Mommsen, De collegiis et Sodaliciis Romanorum, Kiliae 1843, and Boissier,
400 NOTES.
La Religion Romaine, ii. 277–342. —(28) Comp. Boeckh's above-named
work, i. 267 sqq. — (29) Comp. on these especially, Marquardt and
Mommsen's above-named work, vi. 137 sqq.-(30) Tertulliam, Apolog. c.
39.—(31) Or. 6086.-(32) C. J. viii. 2557.-A passage in Plin. Epp. x.
93, 94, is also interesting. Pliny is entreating permission for an Eranos,
a collegium in the town of Amisus, and Traja.1 grants it, with the words,
“eo facilius, si tali collatione, non ad turbas et illicitos coetus sed ad
sustinendum tenuiorum inopiam utuntur.” Hence the question was
concerning a collegium for mutual assistance. In spite of which Trajan
objects : “In caeteris civitatibus, quae nostro jure obstrictae sunt, res
hujusmodi prohibenda est.”—(33) Or. 3999; 4107.-(34) C. J. v. 5907.-
(35) Or. 7215.-(36) Or. 3999. –(37) Or. 4366.-(38) C. J. viii. 9052. —
(39) C. J. v. 5272.-(40) C. J. ii. 4511. –(41) Or. 2417. –(42) Comp. e.g.
Or. 1485; 1238. –(43) C. J. ii. 1976. —(44) “Zur Geschichte der
römischen Tributsteuern seit Augustus” in Hildebrand's Jahrbüchern für
Nationalókonomie, viii. 461. — (45) Marquardt and Mommsen, vi. 254
sqq.-(46) Liv. xvi. 23 ; xxxiii. 2, 25. Varro in Non. S. v. pandere.
Marquardt and Mommsen, vi. 347, note 2. —(47) Comp. Ovid ex Ponto, i.
1, 39 ; iv. 352; Cicero, de Leg. ii. 9, 22; Minuc. Felix Octavius, c. 24;
Terfull. Apolog. c. 13; Liv. xv. 12; xxii. 1.-(48) Liv. ii. 33 ; iii. 18.-
(49) Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 10. Among the inscriptions are found many
which speak of the erection of a statue “stipe collata.”—(50) Republ.
vi. 508. — (51) Definit. p. 414 ; Republ. vii. 517. – (52) Tim. 29 ;
Republ. x. 613.−(53) Rep. vii. 519. –(54) Rep. iii. 168.—(55) Eth.
Nicom. iv. 1.-(56) Ibid. c. 2. —(57) Ibid. viii. 2; ix. 5, 9.-(58) Ibid.
viii. 2. —(59) Diog. Laertius, v. 1.-(60) Eth. Nicom. ix. 8.—(61) De
beneficiis, ii. i. 9, 14.—(62) De benef. iv. 3, Non est beneficium, quod
fortunam spectat. C. 9 : Ergo beneficium per se expetenda res est. Una
spectatur in eo accipientis utilitas ; ad hanc accedamus, semotis commodis
nostris.—(63) iv. 11. –(64) iv. 9.—(65) iv. 29.--(66) iv. 26–28. –(67) iv.
29: “negligente ’’ “non homini damus sed humanitati.”—(68) vii. 32. –
(69) iv. 12.-(70) De clementia, ii. 5, 6.—(71) Giornale Arcadico, t. 39,
p. 223.−(72) C. J. v. 6668.-(73) Or. 3177.-(74) Or. 114.—(75) C. J.
viii. 7384.—A similar inscription is found in Le Blant, Inscriptions
chrétiennes de la Gaule, i. 171. The last-named inscription is in the
Journal de l'instruction publique, Feb. 26, 1853.—(76) Philostratus,
Apollon. iv. 3.
C H A P T E R II.
(1) Comp. Diestel, Die Idee der Gerechtigkeit im alten Testament.
Jahrb. f. deutsche Theologie, 1860, p. 214. — (2) Comp. Eisenmenger,
Entdecktes Judentlıum, ii. 287.-(3) Tractat. Rosch haschana.-(4) Pirke
NOTES. 401
Aboth, v. 13. Comp. also the same, v. 10 : “Many qualities are found
in men. Some say, What is mine is mine, and what is thine is thine.
These are the medium sort. Some say, What is mine is thine, and what
is thine is mine. That is the way of the ignorant. Some say, What is
mine is thine, and what is thine is thine. That is a Chassid (a pious
person). Some say, What is mine is mine, and what is thine is also mine.
That is the way of the ungodly.”—(5) Eisenmenger's above-named work,
i. 617 sqq. Rabbi Israel says: Show no kindness and mercy to the
nations of the world.
C H A P T E R III.
(1) It is utterly unsatisfactory, though from his point of view quite
intelligible, when Ratzinger, in his “Geschichte der Armenpflege,”
(Freiburg in Brisgau 1868), discussing the beginnings of Christian relief
of the poor (p. 4 sqq.), can speak of nothing but the teaching and
commands of Christ. This shows beforehand the character of his other-
wise very meritorious and useful work. He has carefully collected
materials for a history of the relief of the poor, but he is not in a condition
to represent its development, because his Roman Catholic standpoint
obstructs his view of the development of Christian life and of ethic views.
Also Chatel, “Etudes historiques sur l'influence de la Charité durant les
premiers siècles chrétiens” (Paris 1853), dwells in far too one-sided a
manner, livre i. chap. i., upon “la prédication de la charité par Jésus
Christ,” as though the teaching, the preaching, could of itself have
called forth a life of love. The consequence of this is, that he too does
not attain to a deeper insight of the development. Comp. my “Worstudien
zu einer Geschichte der Liebesthätigkeit im Mittelalter,” Zeitschrift für
Kirchengesch. iv. 1.-(2) In the Middle Ages the seven works of mercy
were comprised in a versus memorialis : “Vestio, poto, cibo, redimo, tego,
colligo, condo,” and besides these eleemosynce corporales, were also placed
seven eleemosynae spirituales : “Consule, carpe, doce, solare, remitte, fer,
ora,” to advise, admonish, teach, and comfort one's neighbour, to forgive
him, bear with him patiently and pray for him. This whole method of
teaching is already hinted at by Augustine.—(3) Comp, the excellent
saying of Nitzsch, Pract. Theol. i. 1, p. 214: “Christianity could not
but become habitual love of the poor and active compassion, just because
human nature and personality were regarded according to a higher destina-
tion than a merely worldly one.”—(4) The Vulgate translates the words
T& #vávra, which must either be understood as “what is in it " (namely in
the cup and platter), or with Luther, “what there is,” by the words “quod
superest.” This view already appears in Jerome, Epp. 150. Whatever is
2 C
402 NOTES.
left beyond what is necessary for food and clothing, you owe to the poor.
So, too, Augustine, p. 249, de temp.: “Quidguid excepto victu mediocri et
vestitu rationabili superfuerit, non luxuriae reservetur sed in coelesti
thesauro per eleemosynas pauperum reponetur.” Comp. p. 219, de temp. in
Ps. cxlvii. In the Middle Ages this was the sole prevailing interpretation.
C H A P T E R IV.
(1) So e.g. Löhe in his work On Mercy, Nordlingen 1877; also Chatel
in his above-named work, p. 53; Ratzinger, p. 33, also has a correct view.
Comp. on this question in general, its thorough discussion in Ritschl's
Entstehung der altkathol. Kirche, p. 354.—(2) Comp. e.g. Acts xx. 24, xxi.
19 ; Rom. xi. 13, xv. 31 ; 1 Cor. xii. 5; 2 Cor. iii. 8, 9, iv. 1, v. 18;
Eph. iii. 7; 1 Thess. iii. 2; 1 Tim. iii. 10, 13; 1 Pet. i. 12, iv. 10. –(3)
1 Cor. xii. 28, 'Avºri!? Aspels ºv6 spyhoºls. This corresponds also with classical
usage. Auzzovſz. 37,222ſ2, are in Demosthenes: Munera publica et adminis-
trationes publicae.—(4) “x&i el; 312xovízy rois &yíoſs ºrožay touroſs,” Ritschl
(above-named work, p. 348) understands the passage so as to make them
the presidents of the Church. But the plural seems to include women
also, hence it seems to me more correct to think of a ministration of
service. So, too, should I understand Col. iv. 17. –(5) My reasons are
these :—(a) That dazºro's must, according to the whole plan of the sentence,
introduce a new category of church officials; comp. ver. 8. (b) At ver. 12
31&zovo is repeated, but why if ver, 11 too was speaking of them This
is only explicable if something else, certainly of a kindred nature, was
inserted, and vers, 12, 13 resume the previous subject. (c) The family
relations of the deacons are first spoken of, ver, 12. (d) The wives of the
bishops are not mentioned. Why then the wives of the deacons It is
said they were of more importance to church life. This is, however,
neither proved nor capable of proof. (e) If the wives of the deacons were
designated, witãy would absolutely be found, if the designation is to be
intelligible. (f) yuvaſzz; may well designate deaconesses. The “312x.6vous”
must be completed from the context. Exactly similar is a passage in the
Apostolic Constitutions, iii. 19: “‘H yoyº rês yuvaixo.; wrovºovoo, espa-
zeſsly.” Here too the mere yovň denotes the deaconess, after deacons had
been immediately before spoken of. Where this is not the case, iii. 15,
“yvyazīzo. 31&cowow " stands in full.—(6) This strikingly accords with the
description given in the Apostolic Constitutions of the widows, whose
chief duty also is to pray for the congregation.—(7) That the passage is
not grammatically to be otherwise understood, comp. Meyer in loco, and
also Heinrici. Certainly no other exposition would have been arrived
at, but for the preconceived opinion, that it was unworthy of the apostle
NOTES. 403
to estimate civil freedom so slightly. What we shall afterwards hear of
the attitude of the Church towards slavery, entirely coincides with the
view taken of this passage.
B O O K S E C O N D.
C H A P T E R I.
(1) The population of Rome is still very variously stated. I have made
the computation of Marquardt and Mommsen (Röm. Alterthum. v. 120)
the foundation. According to this work, the population is represented as
follows:–Roman citizens, 320,000 ; women and children, 300,000 ; Sena-
tors and knights, 10,000; garrison, 20,000; slaves, 900,000 ; strangers,
60,000–total, 1,610,000. Whether boys are included in the number of
those who received the largess of Augustus, is very uncertain. To be quite
sure of not painting too dark a picture I have assumed this, and have
hence reduced the number of women and children. Thus the actual con-
dition was formerly still more unfavourable than stated in the text.—(2)
Chrysostomus Hom. in Matt. lxvi. 3.−(3) Comp. Friedländer, i. 281. –(4)
Seneca, de vit. beata, c. 25.—(5) Martial, xii. 32.-(6) Polyb. i. 15, comp.
Boeckh's above-named work, i. 65 sqq.-(7) Marquardt and Mommsen's
above-named work, v. 2, 82 sqq.—(8) Suet. Nero, 16 ; Dio, 62, 14. Comp.
Schiller, Nero, p. 518.—(9) Comp. Friedländer, iii. 8. –(10) Petronius, Sat.
c. 45.-(11) Comp. Rodbertus : Zur Geschichte der röm. Tributsteuern seit
Augustus; Hildebrand's Jahrbücher für Nationalókonomie, viii. 461 sqq.-
(12) Hippolyt. (Pseudo-Origenis) Philosophumena, ix. 12.—(13) Juvenal,
i. 24; x. 224.—(14) ix. 73.−(15) Juv. iii. 32–40 ; Martial, iii. 16, 59, 99.
—(16) Senec. de tranquillitate animi; Plin. H. N. xviii. 35 ; “Latifundia
perdidere Italiam.”—(17) Comp. Streuber : Der Zinsfuss bei den Römern.
—(18) Dio, lxiii. 2, 3. –Pliny the younger advises the Emperor Trajan to
lend the State funds under 12 per cent., as otherwise no creditors will
be found, Ep. 62, 63. Horace, Sat. i. 2, 12, censures a usurer who took
60 per cent.—(19) Comp. Schiller, Nero, p. 488 sqq.-(20) Plin. H. N.
vi. 101 : “Tanti nobis deliciae et feminae constant ’’ (‘‘So much do
pleasures and women cost us ”).—(21) Wopiscus Probus, c. 10.
C H A P T E R II.
(1) Justin, Apolog. i. 14; comp. Barnabas, Ep. 19, 8.-(2) Pastor. Hermae
Mand. ii.—(3) Quis dives salvus, c. 13. –(4) Barnabas, Ep. 19.-(5) Clem-
404 NOTES.
Rom. ad Cor. i. 49 ; Barnab. c. 19.-(6) Clement, Homil. Ep. Clem. c.
8.—(7) Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. 4, 5.-(8) In the Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs, belonging to Nazarene circles, are frequently found opinions
adverse to wealth. Also in the portions preserved, though touched up, in
Mellitus, de passione S. Joannis ap. (Fabricius, Apocryph. N. T. iii. 609),
from the Acts of the Apostles of Leucius, which may be of about the middle of
the 2nd century. Comp. Zahn, Acta Joannis, p. xciv. and p. 238. It is strik-
ing, that the Clementine Homilies, which certainly originated from Essenic
Judaic Christianity, do not reject property. It is also one of the points in
which the author of this book accommodates himself to the views of the
Catholic Church, in order to gain room for his Judæo-Christian Propaganda,
and is consequently also a sign, that the Church kept itself free from such
views, which flourished only in sectarian narrowness.-(9) Barn. Ep. c. 19,
8.—(10) Tertulliam, Apolog. 39.-(11) Similit. i.-(12) Hermae Pastor. Wis.
iii. 86.-(13) Euseb. H. E. v. 3.--(14) Tertullian, de cultu fem. ii. 9. –(15)
Hermae Pastor. Wis. iii. 2 and 6.--(16) Tertullian, Apolog. 42. –(17) Clem.
Alex. Quis dives salves, c. 11, 12. —(18) Idem, c. 13, 14.—(19) Idem, c.
32.-(20) Paedagogus, ii. 12.-(21) Paedagog. iii. 7. —(22) Paedagog. i. 1.
—(23) Paedagog. i. 2, 3.−(24) Tertull. de cultu fem. i. 8.-(25) Paedagog.
ii. 12. –(26) Paedagog. i. 8.-(27) Paedagog. ii. 1.-(28) Paedagog. iii. 7.
—(29) Paedagog. iii. 4.—(30) Paedagog. iii. 10, 11, i. 10. –(31) Paedagog.
iii. 10. –(32) Const. Apost. ii. 63. –(33) Comp. Cotelier on Const. Apost.
ii. 63.−(34) Const. Apost. iv. 2.-(35) Philosophum. ix. 12. —(36) Const.
Apost. i. 4.—(37) Cyprian, Ep. 41 : “ut jam nunc ego cui cura incumbit,
omnes optime mossem,” Cypriani Opp. Windobonae 1868. —(38) Philos. ix.
12. —(39) Tertullian, Apolog. 42 ; ad uxor. ii. 4.—(40) Const. Apost. ii.
28,-(41) Const. Apost. ii. 35.
C H A P T E R III.
(1) Comp. Heinrici, The Christian Church of Corinth and the Religious
Communities of the Greeks, in the Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche
Theologie 1876, iv.–(2) Apolog. c. 39.-(3) Justin M. Apolog. i. 67.
This statement is usually referred to the oblations, but then it is not to
be explained why Justin does not come to the contributions till after he
has concluded his description of the Lord's Supper. Neither the view
embraced by Neander, that (K. G. i. 2, p. 387) the oblations were not
offered till after the Lord's Supper, nor Harmack's (der christliche Gemein-
degottesdienst, p. 256 sqq.), that Justin is not observing the succession of
the transactions, but stating here what properly, according to the sequence
of time, belongs to a former passage, is satisfactory. In fact the oblations
are not spoken of at all here, but stand in Justin in the usual position
NOTES. 405
(⪯ ºrportſpera xz of as x2) #3ap). Justin just means the contributions,
which Tertullian calls 8tips and describes them exactly as he does. Even
the several words remind us of Tertullian, e.g. the “re ovXxty%atvoy rap?
rposerør, &rorſés ral ” of Tertullian's words, “haec quasi deposita pietatis
sunt.”—(4) Cyprian, Ep. 64, 3, where it is said of the apostate bishops,
who still desired to continue in office, “stipes et oblationes et lucra
desiderant.” Also de Op. et eleemos. 14: “Locuples et dives es, et do-
minicum celebrare te credis, quae corban omnino non respicis quae in
dominicum sine sacrificio venis quae partem de sacrificio, quod pauper
obtulit Sumis.” Here corban non respicere relates to the stips, sacrificium
is the oblation.—(5) Cyprian's above work ; comp. Inote 4. Const. Apost.
ii. 36. Ratzinger (in his above-named work, p. 39) thinks it was afterwards
called concha, and appeals to Canon 48 of the Conc. Elib. This is a
mistake. Concha there means the baptismal basin. So, too, Krauss in the
R. Encyclop. of Christian Antiquities under this word.—(6) Const. Apost.
ii. 36.-(7) It is well known that the letter of Pliny to Justin denotes
the time of this transference. Justin and Irenaeus already know of it at
no other time. The custom, however, seems not to have become at once
general, but to have spread at first gradually. Even at a later period a
celebration of the Lord's Supper was combined with the agapae. Eus.
H. E. 19; Augustin, ep. ad Januarium.–(8) Comp. Harnack's above-named
work, p. 285.-(9) Liturgia divi Marci in Bunsen's Anal. Antinicaena,
iii. 163. In the liturgy of St. Basil the prayer runs: “Lord, remember those
who offer these gifts, and those for whom and for whose sake and for whose
profit they offer them. Lord, think of those who bring forth fruit and do
good works in Thy holy Church, and who remember the poor. Requite
them with Thy treasures and Thy heavenly gifts. Give them for the
earthly the heavenly, for the temporal the eternal, for the corruptible the
incorruptible,” Bunsen, iii. 226; comp. also Const. Apost. viii. 10. –(10)
Cone. Elib. can. 49.—(11) Const. Apost. iii. 4; viii. 13.−(12) Polyearp,
ad Philip. c. 4.—(13) Clem. Rom. i. 59.—(14) Const. Apost. viii. 10.—
(15) Comp. the Liturgia Marci, Bunsen, iii. 188. Similar words are also
found in the Coptic liturgy.—(16) Comp. also Höfling, Lehre vom Opfer,
p. 156 sqq.-(17) Irenaeus, adv. Haer. iv. 18, 2.-(1S) Cypr. Ep. 15, 34.
—(19) Const. Apost. iv. 8, 10. –(20) Tertullian, de praeser. Haer. c. 20. –
(21) Apol. i. 13.—(22) Adv. Haer. iv. 17. –(23) Strom, vii. 6.-(24)
Comp. Ritschl's above-named work, p. 397.-(25) Tertull. de monogam.
c. 10; de exhortat. castit. c. 11; de corona mil. c. 3.-(26) Cypriam,
ep. 1.-(27) Cypr. Ep. 60 at the end.—(28) Origenes, ºr pi six;a, c. 11.—
Tertullian, de monog. c. 10. The refreshment (refrigerium) is not a miti-
gation of punishment in purgatory, of this Tertullian as yet knows nothing,
but eternal happiness.—(29) Tertullian, ad uxor. ii. 8, where it is said,
matrimoniam confirmat oblatio et obsignat benedictio.—(30) Comp
406 NOTES.
Harnack's above-named work, p. 393 sqq.—(31) In Levit. ii. 4.—(32)
Cyprian, de Op. et eleemosyn. c. i. 2. —(33) Cyprian, de domin. oratio,
c. 32.-(34) Cyprian, de op. et eleemosyn. c. 5.-(35) Comp. above,
p. 28. Examples: a statue, Or. 1572, 1971, 2086; a monument, 13,
1348, 1380, 2022; a bridge, 760; a temple, 5659. –(36) De jejuniis,
c. 13. –(37) Const. Apost. iv. 8. The same injunction is found in
Hom. Clem. iii. 71, a sign that this was a general mode of procedure.
—(38) Cyprian, Ep. 62.-(39) Vita Cypriani, c. 2.-(40) Cypriani Ep. 7;
comp. Vita, c. 15.-(41) Euseb. H. E. iii. 37.-(42) Const. Apost. v. 7 :
‘‘’Ex row x6%rov xx. ix roº impºros.”—(43) Sim. v. 3.—(44) Levit. x. —
(45) Const. Apost. v. 1.-(46) Similar acts are also met with in ancient
times. The whole population of Sparta fasted and gave what was
thus spared to assist the Samnites, who were seeking to reconquer
their native land. Aristot. CEcon. ii. 2, 9 ; comp. Boeckh's Staatshaushalt
d. Ath. ii. 131. –(47) Iren. adv. Haer. iv. 18, 34.—(48) Cyprian, de cathol.
eccl. unitate, c. 26.-(49) Origenes in Num. Hom. xi. 1; in librum
Josue Nave, Hom. xvii.; comp. in Prov. iii. 9.—(50) Lagarde, Reliq. jur.
ant. p. 88.-(51) Can. Hipp. 36.-(52) Const. Apost. ii. 34, 35 ; vii. 29. –
(53) Euseb. H. E. vi. 43. The sum supposed in the text is purposely
very low. In the first century, the cost of a slave's maintenance is
computed to have been £7, 10s. (Marquardt and Mommsen, v. 52). If
we take this sum for granted, it would amount to £11,250 per annum.
C H A P T E R I W.
(1) Valens, a deacon, embezzles some of the money for the poor. Polyc.
Ep. ad Phil. c. 11, 12; comp. Herm. Past. Sim. ix. 26. –(2) Polye. Ep.
ad Phil. c. 6. –(3) Herm. Past. Sim. ix. 27.-(4) Cyprian, Ep. 41.-(5)
Cyprian, Ep. 5.-(6) Cyprian, Ep. 7.-(7) Anastasius, Vit. Pontif. p. 21
(Roma, 1728).-(8) Ambrosius, de off. min. ii. 28.--(9) Const. Apost. ii.
26, 31.-(10) Const. Apost. ii. 35, 3, 25. –(11) Euseb. H. E. vi. 43. –
Sozomenus, H. E. vii. 19.--(12) Conc. Neocaesar. can. 15. The canon
appeals to the Seven in Jerusalem.—(13) Const. Apost. iii. 19. The
number is to be in proportion to the size of the Church, that so they may
be able to support the weak, as workmen in whom there is nothing to
blame.—(14) Euseb. H. E. vi. 43.−(15) The older books of the Const.
Apost. are unacquainted with them, they are first mentioned in the post-
Constantinian eighth book.--(16) Const. Apost. ii. 44.—(17) Const. Apost.
iii. 19 ; ii. 31, 32.--(18) Const. Apost. ii. 44. The matricula is expressly
mentioned in Ep. Clem. c. 151; it is, however, doubtful what date should be
ascribed to this book. But Cypr. Ep. 2, where the admission of an actor
who had become a Christian is spoken of, certainly gives the impression
NOTES, 407
that a matricula was then kept.—(19). In Philosoph. ix. 12 is also found
a similar allusion. At any rate there was a list of the widows to be
maintained, and a general catalogue of all to be relieved would soon be
made.—(20) The BigAuoy Kxhatyro; is found in Lagarde's Reliq. p. 80 sqq.
To what date it belongs is uncertain. Bunsen ascribes it to the reign of
Caracalla and Geta, whom he finds in the book. This can hardly be
correct. In its present form, I feel inclined rather to regard it as contem-
poraneous with Book viii. of the Apost. Constitutions. To this date the
injunction to communicate fasting points. It, however, evidently contains
older passages.—(21) Const. Apost. iii. 7.-(22) Certain remarks of Zahn
in his “Ignatius von Antiochen,” pp. 148, 325, and above all Dieckhoff's
excellent treatise “die Diakonissen der alten Kirche,” in Schäfer’s Monat-
schr. f. Diakonie, 289, 348, 391, have for the first time thrown more
light upon the history of the ancient deaconesses. But much still
remains obscure. Dieckhoff especially has so far not yet disengaged himself
from the former view, as still to suppose that there were subsequently
also deaconesses in the West.—(23) Plin. Ep. x. 97 : “Quo magis neces-
sarium credidi, ex duabus ancillis, quae ministrae (deaconesses) dicebantur,
quid esset veri et per tormenta quaerere.” – (24) In Luc. Hom. 17.-
(25) Ignatius, ad Smyrn. 6; ad Polye. 4; Polye. Ep. ad Phil. c. 4. The
much discussed passage in Ignat. ad Smyrn. c. 13: ‘‘’Agºràºoga, rås
rapévows, rê; A tyoºva's zápas,” I consider corrupt and in the present text
unmeaning.—(26) Wis. ii. 4.—(27) Hom. xi. 36; Recogn. iv. 15. —(28)
Paedag. iii. 12.-(29) Orig. in evang. Joann. Hom. 17, in Jes. Hom. 6.—
(30) Tertull. ad uxor. i. 7: “cum viduam adlegi in ordinem nisi univiram
non concedit.” De virg. vel. c. 9; de exhortat. castit. c. 7. –(31) Tertull.
de monog. c. 11.-(32) Origen, in Jes. Hom. 6. Quite so subsequently
the Conc. Carthag. can. 12. –(33) Lucian, de morte Peregrini, c. 12. —
(34) Grapte also in Hermas, Wis. ii. 4, appears as commissioned with the
instruction of orphans.—(35) Const. Apost. iii. 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 15.-(36)
The A12 rāśsis of Hippolytus in Lagarde's Reliq. p. 5.-(37). Ignatius ad
Tarsenses, c. 9; ad Antioch. c. 12.—(38) Tertull. de virg. vel. c. 9.—(39)
Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. 12 (ed Potter, p. 875): “‘H zhez 31& rapporſyn;
2541; rapévos.”—(40) Epiphanius, Expos. fidei, c. 21 ; Const. Apost. vi.
17. –(41) Const. Apost. iii. 15. It is complained that the widows stroll
about and gossip, that they beg, are shameless in begging, insatiable in
taking, so that by such behaviour they have already made many believers
slack in giving. They are then threatened with punishment, especially
with that of fasting ; comp. iii. 7.-(42) Aug.raya; ai 31& Kx?asviro; in
Lagarde, Reliq. p. 78 : “xxi si riva tºpo. GovXoſro ipycºck&sº.” The text
gives thus no meaning. According to Bunsen, the Syriac translation has the
addition : roi tire x2+& rºy rºoëvaizy abrºs, which brings out the meaning
given.—(43) Lagarde, Reliq. p. 79.-(44) iii. 15.—(45) Epiph. Expos.
4.08 NOTES.
fid. c. 21 : “Kozł 31zzoyfrow, 3' x 24ſarov.ral el; borspºrtzy yuvaixòy ºvov. 31& rhy
o'suwórnro, 29 ×psíz zarza raín xovirpoº vszz à triox{\psos goºzárov.”—(46)
Lagarde, Reliq. p. 74.—(47) Const. Apost. iii. 15. —Const. ii. 25 has the
plural, but the passage has also certainly been retouched, as even the
reference to the persecutions having passed over shows.-(48) So I under-
stand the canon when it says, that the deaconesses who turn to the Catholic
Church retain their dignity. “We speak, however, of such deaconesses
as have been regularly ordained ; if any have received no ordination, they s.
are to be treated entirely as laity.”—(49) Jerome on Romans xvi. 1 :
“Sicut etiam in Orientalibus diaconissae mulieres in suo sexu ministrare
videntur in baptismo sive in ministerio verbi, quia privatim docuisse
feminas invenimus sicut Priscilla ; ” ad Tim. iii. 1 : “Similiter eas ut
diaconos eligi jubet.—Unde intelligitur, quod de his dicat, quae hodie in
Oriente diaconissas appellant.” These passages evidently prove that the
institution of deaconesses was, at least in Jerome's time, peculiar to the
East, and on the other hand was unknown in the West. We may infer
the state of things in the East from the following passage, Ep. ii. ad
Nepotianum : “Multas anus nutrit ecclesia, quae et officium praebeant et
beneficium accipiant ministrando, ut infirmitas quoque tua fructum habeat
eleemosynae.” Certainly deaconesses are subsequently mentioned also in
Gallic synods. Council of Orange (441), can. 26: “Diaconae omnimodo
non ordinandae, si quae jam sunt,” etc.; Epaon (517), can. 21 : “Widuarum
consecrationem, quas diacomas vocitant, ab omni regione nostra penitus
abrogamus ; ” Orleans (533): “Placuit etiam ut nulli postmodum feminae
diaconalis benedictio pro conditionis hujus fragilitate credatur; ” Worms,
can. 73. Fortunatus also tells us, in the Vita Radegundis (Surius Aug. xiii.)
of Bishop Medardus, that “feminam manu superposita consecravit
diaconam.” Except in Gaul, the only trace is found in a quite isolated
mention in a Romish Council of 721. Hence I feel certain, that in the rest
of the West there were no deaconesses. It is just possible that the institu-
tion passed over into the Gallic Church, which had special relations with the
East. I scarcely even think this, but suppose that the so-called diacoma,
in Gaul were only widows and Sanctimoniales whom those acquainted
with the Oriental deaconesses called by this name as resembling them.
In this respect can. 21 of Epaon, which says precisely this, is conclusive.
With it entirely agrees can. 12 of the Conc. Carthag. iv., which exhibits
the “vidua vel sanctimoniales" as entrusted with the services elsewhere
performed by deaconesses. It is also to be observed that all these canons
are but the echo of can. xi. of Laodicea, which relates to widows. Nor
would it be intelligible why the institution of deaconesses should have
been abolished in the West (and it should be remarked that the above
canons deal with its abolition), while it was still in a very flourishing
condition in the East. All is, however, consistent if the “diacona’ ” are
*--
---
~,
NOTES. 409
widows, since the institution of widows was abolished at the same time
in the East also. Lastly, all other church dignities are found mentioned
in epitaphs of Italy, Spain, Africa, and Gaul, but not once a deaconess,
with the exception of the one case quoted in the text. It is especially
important, that also in Le Blant's extremely careful work, Les inscriptions
chrétiennes de la Gaule, also a deaconess never occurs.-(50) C. Inscr.
v. 2, 6467. The inscription is from Ticinum, “Hie in pace quiescit B.
M. Theodora diaconissa quae vixit in seculo annos pl. m. xlviii.” Its
date is 539.-(51) Const. Apost. viii. 31.-(52) So especially Conc.
Nicaen. c. 19.-(53) Matthaeus Blastaras im Syntagma, c. 11 ; comp.
Ziegler, de diaconis et diaconissis, p. 362. Const. Apost. viii. 20.-(54)
Const. Apost. ii. 57; viii. 28. Lagarde, Reliq. p. 89.-(55) Const. Apost.
iii. 15, 16; viii. 28. Auzºrésis of Hippolytus in Lagarde, p. 9; Jerome on
Rom. xvi. 1.-(56) Conc. Carthag. iv. can. 12.-(57) Lagarde, Reliq. p.
89.-(58) Const. Apost. iii. 15.-(59) Const. Apost. ii. 7.—(60) Const.
Apost. iii. 19. Dieckhoff (in his above-named work, p. 405) does not
refer this passage to deaconesses, but, incorrectly as I think, to the wives
of deacons. Epiphanius, too, Haeres. 79, 3, and expos, fid. c. 21 (comp.
note 45 above), treats (against Dieckhoff, p. 406) of attendance on the
sick by deaconesses. Aoûrpoy here is medicinal waters.
- C H A P T E R. W.
(1) Const. Apost. iv. 2. Quite similarly Clem. Hom. ep. Clem. c. 8.
—(2) Const. Apost. ii. 4.—(3) Const. Apost. iv. 3. There is a quite
similar passage in Clem. Alex. Fragm. Comm. in Matt. v. 42. –(4)
Const. Apost. ii. 26 ; iii. 7 ; iv. 3. –(5) Cyprian, ep. 2. —(6) Ad Cor. i. 3S.
— (7) Can. Hippolyt. 32. — (8) Philosoph. ix. 12. –(9) Const. Apost.
iv. 2.-(10) Tertullian, Apolog. 39.-(11) Tertull. de jejun. 17. –(12)
Clem. Alex. Paedag. ii. 1. –(13) Const. Apost. ii. 28.-(14) Big Alov Kxna.
in Lagarde, p. 88 ; Hippol. c. 32; Const. Apost. ii. 28.-(15) Zahn's
Ignatius of Antioch, p. 336. To zºpixoy is not a house for widows, but the
order of widows, the Viduage.—(16) Const. Apost. iii. 1, 2-(17) Const.
Apost. iii. 5: “The widow is to think of nothing but praying for the
givers and the whole Church ; ” Const. Apost. iii. 13.−(1S) Const. Apost.
iv. 2.--(19) Euseb. H. E. vi. 2. —(20) Euseb. H. E. v. 17. –(21) Euseb.
de mart. Palaest. c. 11.-(22) Const. Apost. iv. 1.-(23) Tertull. Apolog. 9.
—(24) Inst. vi. 20. – (25) Can. 24. — (26) Lagarde, Reliq. p. 84; comp.
also p. 164 above.—(27) Vita Cypriani, c. 9, 10. –(28) Cyprian, ad
Demetrianum, c. 10. –(29) Id. c. 11.—(30) Vita Cypriani, c. 10.-(31)
Id. c. 9. –(32) Euseb. H. E. vii. 22.-(33) Euseb. H. E. ix. S.–(34)
Instit. vi. 12.-(35) Ignatius, ad Smyrn, c. 6; Const. Apost. iv. 9.-(36)
410 NOTES.
Comp. on slaves, Overbeck's article in the Studien zur Geschichte d. alten
Kirche, i. p. 158 sqq.-(37) Orat. c. 11.-(38) Tertull. de corona mil. 13.−
(39) Instit. v. 15.-(40) Const. Apost. ii. 62.-(41) Const. Apost iv. 9. —
(42) Ignatius ad Polyc. c. 4.—(43) Paedag. iii. 11.-(44) Contra Celsum, iii.
49.-(45) Id. iii. 55.-(46) Const. Apost. viii. 32; Lagarde, Reliq. p. 87.
—(47) Petrus, Alex. lib. de poenit, can. 6, 7, in Routh, Reliq. iv. 29.-
(48) Const. Apost. iv. 6. —(49) Conc. Elib. can. 5, –(50) Cypr. ep. 12. –
(51) Cypr. ep. 14; comp. ep. 5, 7.-(52) Comp. above, p. 40. —(53)
Cyprian, ep. 5, 12, 14.—(54) Const. Apost. iv. 9; v. 1.-(55) Euseb. H. E.
iv. 23. –(56) Cyprian, ep. 76–79. —(57) Instit. vi. 12.-(58) Id.—(59)
Fuseb. H. E. iv. 26.-(60) Clem. ad Cor. i. 11, 12 ; Hermae Past. Sim.
ix. 27.-(61) Const. Apost. ii. 3.−(62) Cyprian, ep. 7, 8, etc.—(63) Ep.
ad Cor. c. 1.-(64) Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. –(65) In the oft-named Bígxuzy
KXàºzēvºros (Lagarde, Reliq. p. 80) a ray3ozefov certainly occurs, but it is
an ordinary inn, such as existed for travellers of the lower class.
Ratzinger (in his above-named work) speaks of a special fund for strangers.
But Const. Apost. ii. 38 does not prove its existence. The expenses of
lodging, when a member of the Church did not undertake it, were met
from the Church fund.—(66) Ad ux. ii. 4.—(67) Comp. Herzog's Real-
Enc. under the word literae formatae.—(68) Comp. on the whole section
Zahn, Christenthum und Weltsverkehr in dem ersten Jahrhunderten.—
(69) Basil, ep, 70.—(70) Euseb. H. E. iv. 23. –(71) Athenagoras, Legatio,
c. 11. –(72) Tertull. Apolog. c. 39.
C H A P T E R W I.
(1) Tertull. de virg. vel. c. 1; comp. on Montanism in general, Ritschl,
altkathol. Kirche, p. 462 sqq. —(2) Hase, K. G. § 70. –(3) The distinction
between commandments and counsels is generally already found in Past.
Hermae, Sim. v. 3, where I cannot as yet find it, but only the contrast
between what is always required and what is required under special
circumstances, but under these from all. —(4) Orig. in Nunn. xi. 3.; ad
Rom. iii. (ed. de la Rue, iv. 507). —(5) Cyprian, de habitu virg. c. 23. —
(6) Origenes ad Matt. xv. 15 sqq.-(7) Strom. vii. 12, 70. –(8) Origenes
in Lev. xi. 1.-(9) Cyprian, de habitu virg. c. 11. –(10) Cyprian, ad
Donatum, c. 12.-(11) Cyprian, de lapsis, 35. –(12) Id. c. 11. –(13) Clem.
Rom. ad Cor. i. 50.-(14) Barnab. Ep. 19, 8.--(15) Hermae Pastor. Sim.
ii. (16) Origenes in Lev. hom. ii. 4.—(17) Cyprian, de op. et eleem. c. 1.
—(18) Cyprian, de orat. domin. c. 32.-(19) Cyprian, de Op. et eleem. c.’
2, 5. (20) Id. c. 2. —(21) Id. c. 6.-(22) Clem. Rom. Ep. ii. 16, 4.—(23)
Const. Apost. vii. 12; Lactantius, Instit. vi. 12, 41 ; Cyprian, de Op. et
eleem. c. 26.
NOTES. 411
B O O K THIR. D.
C H A PTE R. I.
(1) Compare on this whole period, especially Richter, Geschichte des
weströmischen Reiches.—(2) Ammianus Marcellinus, Rer. gest. xxx. 4.—
(3) Comp. besides Richter Ozanam, Etudes Germaniques, i. 343 sqq.-(4)
Ambrosius, Oratio funebria de morte Theodosii M. (Opp. Paris 1569, p.
491).-(5) Compare Harnack's lecture on Monachism.–(6) Salvian, de
gubernat. iv. 4.—(7) Salvian, de gubernat. v. pp. 148, 155. –(8) Zosimus,
Hist. ii. 38.-(9) Basilius, Hom. in div. c. 5. –(10) Palladius, Hist. Laus,
c. 36. —(11) Comp. on this, Hegel, Gesch. der Städtverfassung von
Italien, i. 79 ; Kuhn, Die stadtische und birgerliche Verfassung des
Rom. Reiches, i. 77 sqq.-(12) Comp. Rodbertus on the history of the
agrarian development of Rome in Hildebrand's Jahrb. ii. 1864, p. 239
sqq.—(13) De gubern, vii. 1,–(14) Ambrosius, de Nabuthe, lib. c. 1.-
(15) Compare in general Dureau de la Malle, Economie politique des
Romains, vol. ii.—(16) Gregor. M. Hom. in Ezech. 18, hom. ult.
C H A P T E R II.
(1) Theodoret, H. E. 1, 10. Julian abolished this award. His successor
restored it, but only to one-third the amount. The financial eondition of
the State had already considerably deteriorated. Besides, the supply of
corn was not appointed directly for the poor, but for the Church and its
ministers, including virgins and widows.-(2) Chrysostom in Matt. Hom.
66 : ‘‘ 3 x 27:42.070; ;” and in 1 Cor. Hom. 21 : “‘rājy $yyiyoºvay artwärov rºs
&y{xas ; ” Joann. Diaconi Vita Gregorii M. ii. 28 ; comp. Dueange under
the word matricula egenorum. — (3) The diakonia were also called
matriculae, because the poor entered in the matricula, hence called, the
matricularii, were there provided for. They were a kind of xenodochia
or ptochia. Comp. Ducange under the word diaconia. Baronius in
martyrolog. ad d. 8 Aug. ; comp. Ziegler, de diaconis, p. 36.-(4) Can, 14
of the Synod of Neocaesarea, Nov. 3, c. 1.-(5) Can. 62 of Nicaea, ‘‘ut sint
septem diaconi, qui ecclesiae sumptu vivant ae reliqui gratis aministrent.”
—(6) Ambrosius, de off. min. ii. 15, especially lays this to the hearts of the
clergy.—(7) Chrys. in Matt. Hom. 67.-(S) Hom. in 1 Cor.—(9) AA.
SS. ad 23 Ian. ii. 499. –(10) Joann. Diac. Vita Gregorii M. ii. 2S.--(11)
Gregor. Nyssa, de paup. annandis, Or. 2. —(12) Chrysost. Sermo de eleem.
—(13) Ambrosius, de off, ii. 10.—(14) Chrysostomus, Hom. in Matt. 66, 3.
(15) Epiph. Her. 69, l ; Innocentius, ad Decent. c. 5; comp. Bingham,
412 NOTES.
Origenes, iii. 599. In Constantinople, Gennadius first orders, that at least
the oblations should be left for the clergy of the several churches.
Excerpt. Nic. Callisti, i. 13.—(16) Council of Laodicea, can. 57.--(17)
Sardica, can. 7.-(18) Cod. can. eccl. Afric. ; comp. Hefele, Conciliengesch.
ii. 115; Council of Agde, c. 53.—(19) Council of Orleans, can. 15.-(20)
Can. 11.-(21) Jerome on 1 Cor. xi.; Chrysostomus, Hom. 27 in 1 Cor. ;
August. Ep. 54.—(22) Can. 28. –(23) August, Conf. vi. 2; Ep. 22.--
(24) Conc. Quinisext, can. 74.—(25) Chrys, in 1 Cor. Hom. 27; in Matt.
Hom. 31. –(26) This change was effected in Constantinople in 490 (see
above, note 15), and at the same time in Gaul; comp. Synod of Orleans
(511), can. 14, 15. In the cathedral church the bishop received a half, in
other churches a third.—(27) Chrysostomus, Hom. 50 in Matt.—(28)
Hieronym. Ep. 34 ad Nepotianum.—(29) Augustinus, p. 355. —(30) Salvian,
de avaritia, ii. 48, ii. 4.—The clergy, moreover, were not legally bound to
leave their property to the Church. —(31) De avaritia, iv. 133.−(32)
De avaritia, i. 29.—(33) De avaritia, iii. 101. –(34) De avaritia, iii. 80:
Cessit sanguini fides et vicerunt devationem religionis jura pietatis.-(35)
Zschimmer (Salvian, Halle 1875) has endeavoured to explain and justify
Salvian's urgency for wills by the hypothesis, that he was striving against
a reform of social relations upon an ascetic basis, a Christian communism.
Such a hypothesis is neither well founded nor needed. Salvian only
expresses in strong terms what, as we shall afterwards more particularly
see, was implicitly held during the whole period.—(36) Chrysostomus,
Hom. 64 in Matt. ; Hieronym. Comm. in Ezech. c. 45, 46; August. p.
219. –(37) Synod of Antioch in Encaeniis, can. 24; vi. Carthag. can. 5;
Cod. can. eccl. Afric. c. 33. The Romish Synod under Symmachus, 502,
in Hefele, ii. 616; Synod of Agde, can. 7, 33, 51 ; Epaon, can. 12–17.
—(38) Antioch, can. 25; Agde, can. 48.-(39) Agde, can. 33 ; Orleans,
can. 22.—(40) Council of Chalcedon, can. 26. —(41) Comp. Richter, Gesch.
d. weström. Reiches, p. 339. —(42) xxvii. 3, 14, 15. –(43) Ambrosius, Ep.
18. –(44) Palladius, Wit. Chrys. c. 5. —(45) Augustimus, p. 356, § 13. —
(46) Socrates, viii. 26.-(47) Conc. iv. Carthag. can. 51; Council in
Encaeniis, can. 25 ; Carthag. iv. can. 15 ; Con. Apost. 39. —(48) Council of
Agde, can. 7.-(49) Ambrosius, de oft. ii. 28.-(50) August. Ep. 50.-
(51) Gregory very specially promoted the division ; comp. Epp. iii. 11,
iv. 42, vi. 49, xi. 29, 51.-(52) Joann. Diac. Vita Gregor. vi. 29.-(53)
Very characteristic is in this connection the narrative found in Sozomen,
vii. 27, of Bishop Epiphanius of Cyprus, who gave so abundantly out of the
Church treasury, that his steward had often to remonstrate with him.
Here the steward only is the medium. There is not a word of deacons.
— (54) Conc. Chalc. can. xi. : “Iſipi row ºn 3sy 7&s Asya...svgs ºrpeggºrºzs
” The canon is very diſſerently
understood. Many think of deaconesses or upper deaconesses (Heſele).
# ro, ºrpoxo.4na vo.; iv tax 2 no ſo. 228to razéal.
NOTES. 413
But it is impossible that the object of the canon was the abolition of
the institution of deaconesses, which lasted for centuries longer. Others
speak of presbyteresses, but there never were such. arpeggðribes are not
arpeggvrégiºs; or ºrps agº repo, yuya.72 is. These existed only in the sects (comp.
Epiph. Haer. 69). rps aggris is simply an aged woman (comp. Tert. 21 ;
Const. Apost. ii. 57, iii. 5), and denotes the aged widows, who in the
church presided over the women (Epiph. 79, 4). The canon means
nothing else but the entire abolition of the ancient institution of widows
in the Eastern Church. —(55) Basilius, ep. 199, c. 24; Chrysost. on 1 Tim.
v. 9. Comp. Dieckhoff’s above-named work, p. 399, notes 54 and 60.
—(56) In Ambrosius, de viduis, c. 2, 5, much is indeed said of the good
works of widows, but nowhere anything about their official position in
the Church. On Augustine comp. Dieckhoff, p. 400, note 59, Can. 12
ad Conc, Carthag. iv. still speaks of widows and sanctimoniales (virgins
living a monastic life) assisting at baptism. But this canon Inay be of
older date than Augustine, the so-called canons of Carth. iv. being only a
collection of canons of various councils. Besides, even in Augustine we
see that the sanctimoniales were beginning to supplant the widows.-(57)
Conc. Araus. (447), i. e. 26 ; Conc. Epaon. (507), c. 21 ; Orleans, ii.
(513), can. 18 : “Placuit ut nulli postmodum feminae diaconalis
benedictio pro conditionis hujus fragilitate credatur.”—(58) Sozom. viii.
23.−(59) Balsamon, Resp. ad Marci patriarchae Alex. interrogationem
35. The “inquinatio menstruorum ” is stated as a reason for deaeonesses
no longer having “gradum ad altare.”—(60) In the Pontificale Jaco-
bitarum it is said: “Potestatem intra altare nullam habet diaconissa
quoniam et quando ordinatur in ecclesia tantum stat.” So too in the
resolutiones canonicae of Jacobus Edessenus : Ordinatur non in nomine
altaris Sed ecclesiae. They were allowed to administer the communion to
children up to the age of five. They could not minister at the altar, but
might place the incense, though not utter the prayer aloud in so doing.
They washed the sacred vessels and read the Gospel in monasteries for
females. Comp. Assemani Bibl. or. iii. P. 2, p. 847 sqq.-(61) Conc. Trull.
can. 16.—(62) Ep. 292.-(63) De offic. ii. 10.-(64) De Nabuthe, c. S.–(65)
Ad Hebr. Hom. 11. –(66) Or. xix. —(67) Joannes Diaconus Vita Gregor.
ii. 26, 28.-(68) Cod. Just, lib. ii. tit. 25.-(69) Nov. Tit. ix. c. 4, 5.
C H A P T E R III.
(1) Chrysost. S. de eleemosynis, Opp. iii. 248,-(2) Augustinus, S. 62, 12.
— (3) Chrysost. Hom. SS in Matt. — (4) Gregorius Nazianz. de pau-
peribus amandis. - (5) Chrysost. Hom. S5 in Matt. –(6) Augustinus,
S. 355, 5.-(7) Compare the fine passage in Chrysostom. Hom. 88 in
414 NOTES.
wº
Matt., where Chrysostom says that they would all give willingly to the
Lord if He came to beg in person, but that we ought to see Him in the
poor, who supplicate us.—(8) Augustin. S. 83, 2. —(9) Augustin. S. 123, 5.
—(10) Augustin. S. 9, 19.--(11) Chrysostomus, Hom. iii. 1, on penance.
—(12) Chrysostomus, Id. Hom. vii. 6.—(13) Leo the Great, 6th Collection
Sermon. —(14) Id. 9th Sermon.—(15) Ambrosius, Sermo de eleemosynis,
c. 30, 31. —(16) Ambrosius, de Elia et jejunis, c. 20. — (17) Augustin.
S. 42, 1 ; S. 210, 12; S. 206, 2; S. 83, 2. — (18) Gregor. M. Evang.
1 Hom. 5.—(19) Salvianus, de avaritia, ii. 64, 65.-(20) August. Enchiri-
dion, xvi. 70, -(21) August. de fide et opp. c. 26. — (22) Augustin.
S. 9, 17–19.; S. 56, 11, 12.-(23) Ambrosius, Sermo de eleemosynis, 30, 31.
—(24) Gregor. M. Moralia xiii. ; Evang. ii. Hom. 34; 1 Hom. 20.- (25)
Caesarius of Arelate in the Pseudo - Augustinian Sermons, S. 142; in
Augustine also the three weeks of fasting, praying, and almsgiving stand
together as the three chief, S. 9, 11. –(26) Leo the Great, 8th Collection
Sermon.—(27) Id. 11th Sermon. —(28) Augustin. Enchir. xvi. 72. ; Id.
S. 42, 1, he distinguishes duo genera of alms “erogando et remittendo,
erogando quod habes bonum, remittendo quod pateris malum.” We find
here the root of the distinction — quite general in the Middle Ages—
between eleemosynas corporales and spirituales.—(29) Ambrosius, de poenit.
ii. 9.-(30) Augustin. de civ. dei, xxi. 27.-(31) Gregorii M. cura past. 21.
—(32) Leo the Great, Collection Sermon 6.-(33) Augustin. S. 172. —
34) Augustin. Enchirid. xxvi. 110.—(35) Comp. also Chrysost. Hom. 27
in 1 Cor. ; Hom. 31 in Matt. ; Hom. 29 in Act. Apost.—(36) Orelli, 4432:
“Si quis post nostram pausationem hoc sarcofagum aperire voluerit
inferat ecclesiae Salon argenti libras quinquaginta.” Examples of heathen
graves, Or. 4428, 4549. —(37) Examples in Le Blant, inscript. chrét. de la
Gaule, 207. Si quis hunc sepulcrum violaverit partem habeat cum Juda
traditoren—habeat partem cum Gezi—cum Juda gemitus experietur inops
—habeat anathema ad cockviii. Pat (the Council of Nicaea); also in Angel.
Maio Scriptorum vet. nova collectio v. 216, 217. –(38) Chrysostomus, Hom.
29 in acta: "Eéo; # 35ivo, #x2, ºrousſy rhy &vdavnow ris a nºrphs % Tz's 'yvvaixo; h 700
aroſłſov.–(39) Gregor. M. dialog. iv. 39.-(40) Id. iv. 57. –(41) Id. iv. 55.
(42) Comp. my “Studies for a History of Christian Charity in the Middle
Ages,” in the Zeitschrift für kirchliche Geschichte, iv. 1, p. 73. —
(43) Augustin. p. 104 (Caesarius, 8). — (44) Salvian, de avaritia, i. 29.
Augustin. Enchirid. xxvi. 110.—(45) Gregor. M. Mor. xiii. 21 ; Epp.
vii. 25.-(46) Comp. Rothe, Lectures on Ch. Hist. ii. 33. Rentu, Augus-
tinische Studien. Zeitsch. ſtir K. Gesch. iv. i. p. 33. — (47) Comp.
Ratzinger's above-named work, p. 112 ; Chatel's above-named work,
p. 203 sqq.-(48) In the homily on Luke xii. 18, Opp. ii. 49 sqq.-
(49) Ambrosius, de Nabuthe, lib. c. 1-(50) Hieronym. Ep. ad. Hedibium.
—(51) Ambrosius on Luke viii. 13.-(52) Hom, ad pop. Antioch. Hom. 2.
NOTES. 415
(53) Augustin. S. 50.-(54) Chrysost. in Matt. Hom. 90.-Hieronym.
Ep. ad Hedib.—(55) Enarrat. in Ps. cxxxi. 5, 6: “Abstineamus ergo nos,
fratres, a possessione rei privatae aut ab amore si non possumus a
possessione.”—(56) S. 61, c. xi. 12.-(57) De off. i. 28 : “Natura igitur
jus commune generavit, usurpatiojus fecit privatum.”—(58) Chrysostomus,
Hom. xi. in Acta Apost.—(59) August. S. 219; in Ps. cxlvii.; S. 249. —
(60) Hieronym. Ep. 150. –(61) Comp, above, Book i. chap. 3, note 4.—
(62) De Nabuthe, lib. c. 12.-(63) The impossibility of carrying it out is
proved by the fact, that the ethic of the Middle Ages wore itself out at this
separation.—(64) De off. i. 9.—(65) De off. i. 32 sqq.; ii. 15.-(66) Basil,
to adduce but one example, had but one tunic and one cloak, and slept on
the earth : Gregor. Naz. Or. 43, c. 61.—(67) Comp. on Macrina : Greg.
Nyss. de vita Macrin. Opp. ii. 177; on Olympias; Böhringer, Chrysostom
and Olympias; on Nonna ; Ullmann, Gregory Nazianzen. — (68) The
chief sources are the letters of Jerome, which, as being well known, I
omit quoting particularly.—(69) Hieronym. Ep. 27, ad Eustochium.—
(70) Hieronym. Ep. 26, ad Pammachium.—(71) De Rossi Inscr. christian.
62.-(72) Corp. Inscr. v. 2, 6286.-(73) Le Blant, Inscr. 386. –(74) Id.
407, 450.—(75) Id. 17. –(76) Id. 425—(77) Id. 426.-(78) Id. 451.-
(79) Id. 218.-(80) Id. 516.-(81) It is of special interest to ascertain
when the formula, “pro redemtione,” or “pro remedio animae,” after-
wards so current, first appeared. Chatel, in his above-named work,
appeals for its occurrence at this time to Maio Call. Script. vet. v. p. 216,
but the inscriptions there found are of more modern date. The one dated
inscription given in Le Blant, Inscr. 374, is the only certain one, and this,
as at least the oldest inscription yet discovered, well deserves a place here.
It is twofold. On the one side is:—
Hic requiescit
In pace bonae
Memoriae Arenberga
qui vixit annos xxviii.
Obiit in pace viii.
Kalendas Maias
Aviemo viro cla
rissimo console.
On the other:—
Hic reliquit
leberto puero
nomine Mannone
pro redemtionem
anilniu Suze.
With due regard to the corrupt Latin often occurring in inscriptions, the
words can only mean, that Arenberga gave freedom to a slave named Manno,
“pro redemtione anima, suæ.” Avienus appears in the consular Fasti
416 NOTES.
450, 501, 502. Even adopting the last date, the inscription is the oldest
I know of, in which the formula occurs. It is also found in Paulinus of
Nola, who, Ep. xiii., congratulates Pammachius for having cared, by
means of alms, for the salvation of Paulina's soul. “Pro salute” occurs
more frequently. I have, however, been able to find no inscriptions in
which almsgiving is mentioned “pro salute animae,” but only the building
of churches and such acts. In Corp. Inscr. v. 1583–1616 are found a
number of inscriptions relating to the restoration of the church of St.
Euphemia in Aquileia, undertaken in 515. It is frequently said of the
contributors, that they did thus “Pro salute sua et omnium sanctorum.”
Willmanus seems to regard as Christian an inscription from Africa. Corp.
Inscr. viii. 86.29 : “Fl. Innocentius num (mum) pro salute sua suorumque
omnium tesselavit.” I regard it, however, as doubtful. The formula
“ pro salute” is also heathen, and therefore first borrowed by Christians;
comp. e.g. Orelli 1214, where some one dedicates an altar to Jupiter
O. M. “pro salute sua suorumque.” Here too the leaning of the
Christian custom on the heathen is visible. In the Corp. Inscr. Graec.
8616 an inscription occurs, according to which a certain Elias has built a
martyrium of St. Theodore, “tºrip &phasos &aaptuoy.” It is of the year
4.17, and comes from Syria.
C H A P T E R IV.
(1) Comp. Häser, Geschichte der Krankenpflege, p. 3 sqq.-(2) So
e.g. Moreau, Christophe, Histoire de la misère, ii. 236. Comp. Ratzinger's
above-named work, p. 93. Chatel's, p. 264.—(3) Morin, Histoire critique
de la pauvreté in the Mem. de l'Acad. des inscr. iv. 305. Comp. Chatel's
above-named work, p. 265. –(4) Ratzinger, who advocates this view
(p. 25), quotes only one passage in Sozom. vi. 13 (p. 86, note 1), for the
existence of such special rooms for strangers in the bishop's residence,
but “‘rā trioxºruxov x2+zydºylov” there denotes the bishop's dwelling itself,
and there is not a word of a “ diversorium ” for strangers. Can. 12 of the
so-called Conc. Carthag. iv. also proves nothing.—(5) In Pontus, e.g., as
Epiphanius (adv. Haer. 56) mentions, the étrobozilov is called arrozorpoption.
In Conc. Chalcedon, c. 8, too, they are call d arrozsiz. –(6) St. Zotikus,
who had already departed from Rome for the new Rome on the Bosphorus,
is said to have founded there a lobotrophium, which Constantine restored
(comp. Du Cange, Fam. Byz, p. 165). This is the only example of a
xenodochium under Constantine. The information, however, is very
doubtful. According to Du Cange, it is derived from later sources. It is
also suspicious to find, that the first institution of the kind should have
been quite a special one destined for the maimed and for cripples. The
NOTES. 417
spurious canon 70 of Nicaea also shows that there was a tendency in later
times to remove institutions of the kind to the earliest possible date.
The Apostolical Constitutions know as yet of no xenodochia, neither do
Eusebius and Lactantius.-(7) Sozom. v. 16.-(8) Gregor. Naz. Or. 30, in
laudem Basilii.-(9) Basilius, Ep. 143.−(10) Sozom. iii. 16.-(11) Chrysos-
tomus, Hom. 66 in Matth. –(12) Palladii Vit. Chrys. c. 5.- (13) Comp.
the Acts of the Council, 11 Session, Hefele, ii. 471. –(14) Conc. Chal-
cedon, c. 8.-(15) Muratori, Script. Ital. Medii aevi, iii. p. 575.-(16)
Hieronym. ad Oceanum—ad Pammachium.—(17) The passage is remark-
able. Exposit. in Ev. Joann. tr. xcvii. c. 16, “et xenodochia et monasteria
postea sunt appellata novis nominibus, restamen et ipsae et ante nomina
sua erant.” On the xenodochium of Leporius, S. 356, 10. –(18) Anastas.
pp. 82, 107, 114.—(19) Can. 13–15.-(20) Gregorii M. Ep. viii. 14; x. 11;
iii. 24.—(21) Du Cange, Constantinopolis Christiana, iii. 163 sqq.-(22)
Baronius, Ann, eccl. ad a. 610. –(23) Procopius, de aedificiis Justin. 1, 2, 9,
11. –(24) Theodoret, Hist. Relig. c. 21. –(25) Comp. in Palladius, Hist.
Laus. The history of St. Piterum. Weingarten (Ursprung des Mönch-
thums Zeitschr. für K.-Gesch.) here passes an error. He thinks the state-
ment “off-ro y&p #xeſ xzxoval rows aro. oºzoázz; depends upon the words iv 73,
Azzyelpí, sorív,” so that “she is in the kitchen’’ is an expression currently
applied to the insane. It simply depends on the preceding “airy tzoas,
orax hy.”—(26) Chrysostomus, Hom. 66 in Matth.-(27) Baronius, Ann. ad
610. –(28) Histor. Laus. c. 6. —(29) Compare on the legal condition of
institutions, Jacobson's article “Wohlthatigkeitsanstalten,” in Herzog's
Real-Enc. xviii. 234 sqq.-(30) Comp. Gregory's letter, quoted note 20
above.—(31) Corp. Inscr. viii. 1, 839.-(32) Comp. Rückert, Cultur-
geschichte des deutschen Volkes, ii. 345.-(33) Gregor. Nazianz. Or. 30.-
(34) De Vogüe, La Syrie centrale, Paris 1877, pp. 128, 138. The inscrip-
tion on the pandocheion in Deir Sem’an is as follows: f X M T (Christus
Michael Gabriel) 'Ey: vs to rod.ro +3 ºray?oxsiov #y anyi IIzyna & 9' roº Kxp' #rows
Xplori goñé.—(35) arapa.ºrsøroyrts, comp. Gregor. Nyss. Or. 30.-(36) Theo-
doret, Hist. Eccl. v. 18.—(37) Socrates, iv. 23 ; Palladius, Hist. Laus, c.
140.—(38) Hist. Laus, repi IIzyngiov zai 'Hoziov.–(39) Paulinus, Nol. Ep.
ad Severum.—(40) Gregor. M. Ep. iii. 24.—(41) Gregor. M. Ep. xi. 10.
C H A PTE R. W.
(1) Salvian, de gubernatione Dei, vi. 173.—(2) Conc. Laodicea, can. 36.
—De Rossi, Inscr. christ. 172; Hieronym. in Matt. 23 ; Chrysost, ad
pop. Antioch. Hom. xix.-(3) Chrysost. Hom. in Annam. iv. 3.-Hom.
6 in Genes. Hom. 7 in Lazarum. Comp. Cod. can. eccl. Afric. 61.--
(4) Theodoret, Ep. 147.-(5) Chrys. Hom. 36 in Cor.—(6) Salvian, de
2 D
418 NOTES.
gubernat. Dei, iv.–(7) Id. vii. 24: “Populus Romanus moritur et ridet.”
–(8) Hom. 30 in act. ap. Comp. also Neander, Chrysostomus, ii. 107.-
(9) Aristoteles, Nicom. Eth. x. 7, 6–8.--(10) Ambrosius, de off. i. 11.-
(11) Hieronym. Ep. ad Pammachium.—(12) Gregor. Nazianz. Ep. 8, 9.
—(13) Augustinus, Confess. viii. 6.—(14) Neander, Chrysost. 1, 90 sqq.-
(15) Hieronym. Ep. ad Rusticum.—(16) Cassian, de Instit. Coenob. x. 23.
—(17) Comp. generally Harnack's excellent lecture.—(18) Basil's Ascetic
Instructions, iii. 1.-(19) Basil's Greater Rule, c. 37.-(20) Id. c. 41. —
(21) Id. c. 38.—(22) Hist. Lausiac. c. 39. Theodoret, Hist. Relig. c. 10.
—(23) Chrysost. in Matth. Hon. 8. –(24) Theodoret, Hist. Relig. c. 10.-
(25) Sulpicius Severus, Dial. ii. 8.—(26) Id. i. 25.-(27) Augustinus, de
op. monach. c. 35.-(28) Id. c. 33.—(29) Regul, S. Benedicti, c. 48. —
(30) Id. c. 39, 40. –(31) Basil's Abridged Rule, 302. –(32) Sozomen, i. 11.
—(33) Socrat. iv. 23.−(34) Cassian, Instit. Coenob. x. 22.-(35) August.
de moril. eccl. cathol. i. 31.—(36) Theodoret, Hist. Relig. c. 22.-(37)
Basil's Greater Rule, 15, 38, 53. Chrysost. adv. opp. vit. Monast. iii.
12 sqq.-(38) Regula S. Benedicti, c. 4.—(39) Id. c. 46, 53.—(41) Gregor.
M. Dial. ii. 28 ; iv. 22.
C H A P T E R W I.
(1) Ambrosius, de offic. ii. 29.-(2) Conc. Elib. (305 or 306), can. 56.-
(3) Council of Arles, can. 7. –(4) Basilius, Ep. 61. –(5) Synesii Epp.
57, 58, 72.-(6) Theodoret, H. E. iv. 6. –(7) Comp. on Sanctuary
Bingham's Antiquities, iii. 353 sqq., and the article “Sanctuary" in
Herzog's Real - Enc. — (8) Gregor. Nazianz. Or. de laude Basilii. —
(9) Augustin. Ep. 268. —(10) Council of Orleans, 511, can. 1.-(11) Comp.
Neander, Kirch. Gesch. i. 490. —(12) Council of Agde (506), can. 7...—
(13) Id. can. 7. —(14) Can. 32. — (15) Gregor. M. Ep. ix. 102. – (16)
Council of Agde, can. 56.-(17) Council of Orleans (538), can. 26; Leo
M. Ep. iii. 1. —(18) Conc. Chalcedon, can. 4.—(19) Council of Orleans
(541), can. 24.—(20) Gregor. M. Ep. v. 12. —(21) E.g. Neander, Kirch.
Gesch. ii. 52. –(22) So e.g. Ratzinger in his above-named work, p. 91.
—(23) Hom. xxix. in Genes.—(24) August. Enarr. in Ps. cxxiv. 7. –(25)
Chrysost. Hom. 29 in Genes. ; 22 in Ep. ad Ephes.—(26) Augustin. de
civitat. Dei, xix. 15.-(27) Id. xix. 16. —(28) Chrysost. Hom. 15 in Ep.
ad Eph.--(29) Augustin. de civitat. Dei, xix. 16. — (30) Augustin. de
sermone Dom. in monte, i. 59.—(31) Council of Epaon (517), can. 34.—
(32) Council of Orleans (511), can. 3.−(33) Council of Epaon (517), can.
39. –(34) Basilius, Ep. 73. — (35) Chrysost. Hom. 40 in 1 Cor. — (36)
Augustin. S. 355 and 356. Hist. Lausiac. c. 19.-(37) Le Blant, Inscript.
374, 379.-(38) Neander, Kirch. Gesch. ii. 53.−(39) Comp. Hefele, Con-
NOTES. 419
ciliengesch. i. 755.-(40) Theodor. Cantuar. capit. eccl. c. 16. “Grae-
corum monachi servos non habent, Romani habent.” Comp. Wassersch-
leben Bussordnungen der abendländischen Kirche, p. 146. –(41) Council of
Agde, can. 29. Council of Orleans, can. 7. –(42) Can. 27.-(43) Euseb.
Wit. Const. iv. 27.-(44) Can. 13.−(45) Council of Orleans (541), can.
30. Council of Macon, can. 16. –(46) Gregor. M. Ep. iii. 9; v. 31 ; vii.
35. Comp. on slavery generally, Overbeck, Studien zur Gesch. der alten
Kirche, i. 1875, p. 158 sqq.-(47) Theodoret, Ep. 23.−(48) Examples in
Augustin. Ep. 241. Gregor. M. Ep. i. 44.—(49) Chrysost. Hom. 61 in
Matth. —(50) Comp. note 47 above.— (51) Ep. i. 51.-(52) Ep. i. 36.-(53)
An example in Gregor. M. Ep. v. 12.-(54) Basilius, Ep. 85, compare also
36, 37, 76, 83, 84, 110, etc.—(55) Theodoret, Ep. 43. —(56) Gregor. M.
Ep. v. 12.-(57) Gregor. Nyss. Ep. canon 6.-(58) Basilius, contra foene-
ratores.—Chrysostom, Hom. 5 in Matth.—(59) Ambrosius, de Tobia, c. 5, 6.
—(60) Id. c. 8. —(61) Id. c. 14.—(62) Conc. Elib. can. 20; Laodicea,
can. 5; Carthag. iii. can. 16 ; Hippo (393), can. 22, etc.—(63) Augus-
tinus contra Faustu, xix. 25 ; Hieronymus in Ezech. vi. 18. –(64) Augus-
tin. Ep. 268. –(65) Gregor. M. Ep. i. 44.—(66) Gregor. M. Ep. v. 8.-
(67) Comp. the work of Ambrosius, de Nabuthe, which is especially
directed against such tyranny.—(68) Ambrosius, de off. ii. 29. Augus-
tinus, Ep. 252. –(69) Baron. Ann. ad a. 401, v. 142. Neander's above-
named work, ii. 115.-(70) August. S. 171. –(71) Ep. 252-255.-(72)
Synod of Waison (442), can. 9 and 10. Also the second Synod of Arles
and the Synod of Agde.—Augustinus, Ep. 98. “Aliquando etiam quos
crudeliter parentes exposuerunt nutriendos a quibuslibet, nonnum Tuam a
sacris virginibus colliguntur et ab iis offeruntur ad baptismum.”—(73)
Can. 17. –(74) Cod. Theod. xv. 8, de lenonib. i. 1, 2.-(75) Ambros. de
off. ii. 15. It is striking that both Salvian and Augustine approve
of and defend houses of ill-fame. Salvian says: “Minoris quippe esse
criminis etiam lupanar puto ; meretrices enim, quae illic sunt, foedus con-
nubiale non norunt. Ac per hoc non maculant quod ignorant.” Augus-
tin thinks that there must be a drain, so that the whole house may not be
infected.—(76) Cod. Theod. ix. 3, de custod. reor. i. 7.—(77) Can. 20. —
(78) Ambrosius, de off. ii. 15. –(79) Gregor. M. Epp. iii. 17; v. 34; vi. 13,
23, 35 ; vii. 23.−(80) Gregor. M. Epp. iii. 17.—(S1) Theodoret, Hist. Rel.
c. 10. On the price of prisoners comp. also Le Blant, Inscript. ii. 287.-
(82) Hieronym. Ep. 125 ad Rusticum.—(S3) Ambrosius, de off. ii. 28. —
(84) Gregor. M. Epp. ii. 46.-(85) Le Blant, Inser. 543. —(S6) Socrat.
H. E. vii. 21.-(87) Theodoret, Ep. 70,-(88) Theodoret, Epp. 33 sqq.-
(89) Comp, especially Rückert's excellent work, Culturgesch, der Deutschen.
IN DE X.
—O-
ABBOT in a Xenodochium, 338.
Acacius of Amida, 392.
Agapae, 75, 89 sq., 144, 181 Sqq., 253.
Agde, Synod of, 265.
Alimentations, 18 sqq.
Alms, 4, 30, 34, 36, 45 sqq., 52 sqq.,
66 Sqq., 84 sqq., 121 sqq., 142
Sqq., 211.
Alms as sacrifices, 149.
Alms sin - atoning, 211 sqq., 279
sqq., 294.
Ambrose, 228, 263 sqq., 270 sq.,
280, 284, 297, 299, 302, 303, 305,
364, 383, 384, 388, 390.
Amulets, 342.
Anchorets, 349.
Annona, 11 sqq.
Antioch, Council of 265.
Antoninus Pius, 15, 18.
Antony, St., Life of, 349.
Apocrypha, 52, 213.
Apostolic legends, 135.
Arca, 22, 27.
Arcani disciplina, 172.
Aristotle, 33 sqq., 345.
Arles, Synod of, 362.
Arsacius, 326.
Asceticism, 127, 350.
Assurance of salvation, 294.
Astrology, 342.
Athanasius, 363.
Athenagoras, 202.
Athens, 9 sq.
Auguries, 342.
Augustine, 264, 275, 277, 278, 286,
288, 294, 299, 301, 328, 347, 372,
373, 380, 383.
BANQUETs, heathen, 24, 32.
Baptism, 212, 284.
Barnabas, epistle of, 122, 126, 211.
Basil, 275, 296, 352, 353, 381.
Basilias, the, 327.
Begging, 4, 33, 201, 243, 249,
271.
Benedict of Nursia, 355, 357, 359.
Bishop, the, as ruler of the relief of
the poor, 161 sqq., 246 sq., 256 sq.
Bishop, the, the manager of church
property, 260 sqq., 306.
Blesilla, 310.
Blind, the care of 330.
Brephotrophia, 330, 380.
Bureaucracy, the, under Constantine,
221, 235.
Burial funds, 23.
Burialof the dead, 24sq., 189,289 sqq.
CAESAREA, Synod of, 248.
Caesarius of Arrelate, 287.
Calling. See Vocation.
Candidus, 391.
Capitalism, 104, 110.
Carthage, Synod of, 176.
Cassian, 358. g
Celibacy, 207, 319.
Chalcedon, Council of, 261, 328.
Chrysostom, 264, 254, 259, 274, 276,
279 sq., 297, 298, 300, 302, 354,
363, 372, 373, 374, 380.
Children, education of, in monas-
teries, 359, 386.
Church, the, the reliever of the poor,
56 Sq., 88, 137 sqq., 141 sqq., 160
Sqq., 246 Sqq.
422
INDEX,
Church arca, the, 27, 142.
cº the, and charity, 57, 70 sq.,
397.
Church, attendance at, 254, 378.
Church discipline, 179, 205, 207,
283.
Church penance, 213.
Church prayers, 144, 147.
Church property, 260 sqq.
Cicero, 303. -
Clement of Alexandria, 121, 129 sqq.,
150, 169, 182, 208.
Clement of Rome, 147, 210, 211.
Clement, book of, 157, 164, 172.
Clement, epistle of, 214.
Clergy, the, mode of life of, 136.
Clientela, 17. -
Collections, 87, 94, 153 sqq., 201.
Collegia, 21 sqq., 141 Sqq., 290.
Colonia, 240, 379.
Colonies, 16.
Community of goods, 73 Sqq., 127,
296 sq., 300.
Congiaria, 13.
Constantine, 203, 219 sqq., 385.
Constitutions, the Apostolic, 135,
139, 142, 157 sq., 162, 169, 172,
196, 214.
Copiates, 335.
Corban, 143.
Corn, distribution of.
Cyprian, 120, 123, 142, 150, 152,
153, 156, 161, 187 sq., 207 sq.,
213 sq., 288.
Cyril of Alexandria, 361.
DARNASUS, 261.
Deaconesses, 70, 79 Sqq., 165 sqq.,
248, 276 sq.
Deacons, 74 sqq., 144, 160 sqq., 248,
266 Sqq.
Defensores, 261, 332.
Departed, masses for the, 287, 291,
396.
I)iocletian, 385.
Distributions at graves, 25, 289.
TLIGIUs, 322.
Elvira, Synod of, 195, 362.
Emancipation of slaves, 190 sq., 367.
Endowments, 24 sqq., 42, 125, 290,
396.
Ephraem, 327.
Epiphanius, 172, 310.
Episcopal jurisdiction, 365.
Episcopal intercession, 384.
Epitaphs, 24, 289, 320.
Essenes, 126.
Ethic, ancient, 32, 304 sqq., 341,
345 sq.
Ethic, Christian, 304 sqq., 341, 396.
Ethic, double, 206 sqq., 344 sq.
Eudaimonism, 32, 304.
Eudoxia, 384.
Eustochium, 311.
lºxemption of a hospital, 338.
Expiations of the heathen, 30,
Exsuperius, 390.
Eustathius, 376.
FA BIOLA, 310, 312.
Fasting, 154 sq., 205, 285, 350, 358.
Financial ruin, 118.
Flavian of Antioch, 363.
Foundlings, 186, 385.
Free trade, 109, 239.
Furia, 310.
GANGRA, Synod of, 297, 298, 376.
Gazophylacium, 149, 245.
Generosity, 34 sq.
Germans, the, 222, 231, 393.
Gifts to the Church, 255 sqq.
Gladiatorial games, 342.
Gnostics, 126.
Good works, 283, 293.
Goths, 388, 393.
Gratian, 331.
Gregory the Great, 266, 285,
287, 291, 294, 332, 368,
379 sq., 382, 389.
Gregory Nazianzen, 275, 278,
347, 371. -
Gregory of Nyssa, 307, 382.
286,
370,
300,
HERMAs, 121, 127, 128, 154.
Hippolytus, Canons of, 157, 173.
Honorius, 380.
Hospitality, 91 sq., 123, 198 Sqq.
325 sqq.
INDEX,
423
Jºf
2.
Hospitals, 14, 312, 323 sqq., 395.
Hospitia. See Xenodochia.
Humanity of the heathen, 19 sq., 41.
IGNATIAN Epistles, 169.
Institutionalism, 324 sqq., 397.
Intercession, 151, 185.
Interest, reception of, 383.
Interments, 24, 189.
Irenaeus, 148, 149, 156.
Isidor of Pelusium, 375.
JAMES, St., 87.
Jerome, 256, 302, 310 sqq., 328, 347,
352.
Jerusalem, Church of, 73 sqq.
Jews, the, slave dealers, 378 sq.
John, St., 87.
John the Almoner, 262, 330.
Judaism, Post-exilian, 51 sq., 213.
Julian, 271, 326.
Justin Martyr, 142, 149.
NATIONAL Church, idea of 206 sqq.
Natural products, delivery of, ll:4,
238.
Neocaesarea, Council of, 163.
Nicea, Council of, 173.
Nonna, 307.
OBLATIONS, 142 sqq., 254.
for the dead, 150 sq., 287 sq.
Old Testament, 48 sqq.
in the Church, 143, 156 sqq.,
213, 259, 268.
Olympias, 307 sq.
Ordination, 267, 369.
Origen, 152, 155, 157, 207.
Orleans, First Synod of, 368, 378.
Second Synod of, 267, 328, 379,
386.
Orosius, 230.
Orthodoxism, 342 sq.
PALLADIUs, 336, 349,
Pammachius, 311 sq.
Parabolani, 335 sq.
Pastophorium, 149.
Paul, St., 82 sq.
Paula, 310 sq., 316.
Paulina, 311, 316.
Paulinus of Nola, 313 sq., 317, 318,
389. -
Pelagius II., 328.
Perfection, Christian, 207, 299, 320,
344.
Persecutions and charity, 124, 195
SCI (I.
Piº % the ancient world, 37.
Placilla, 336.
Plato, 32 sq.
Poor, houses for the, 326 sqq.
Poor, the amount of means for the
relief of, 158, 261, 330.
Poor, relief of the, 5, 9, 30, 39, 44
Sqq., 105, 125 sq., 141 sqq., 177,
178 sqq., 246 Sqq., 274 Sqq., 323
Sqq., 358 Sqq.
Poverty, estimation of, 126, 146 sq.,
208, 296.
Poverty, extent of, 99 sqq., 233
Sqq., 248 Sqq.
Poverty, voluntary, 209, 298.
Prayer, 152, 213, 285.
Presbyters, 76 sq., 160, 170.
Prisoners, 190, 195, 387 sqq.
Private benevolence, 88 sq., 124,
138 sq.
Proletariat in Rome, 99.
Prostitution, 3S7.
Provincial towns, 15, 100, 238.
Purgatory, 291 sqq.
RECLUSEs, 350.
Reformation, 398.
Repasts, Christian.
Repentance, 205.
Rome, 10 Sqq., 21, 99 Sqq.
See Agapae.
SALVIAN, 229, 257 sq., 281 sq.,
294, 343, 348, 393.
Sanctuary, the Church's right of,
365.
Sardica, Synod of, 3S4.
Satisfaction by good works, 285.
Seneca, 35, 111.
Seven, the, 75 sqq.
Sick, the care of, 186 sqq., 311.
Sins, forgiveness of, 21.1 sqq., 282
SQQ1,
424
INDEX,
Sins, mortal, 205, 213, 283 sq.
Sins, venial, 284, 291 sqq.
State and Church, 224 sqq.
Stips, 22, 30, 31 sq., 136 sqq.
Stoicism, 35 sqq., 58, 346.
Strangers, care of, 91 sq., 323 sqq.
Sub-deacons, 163.
Symmachus, Pope, 328.
Symmachus, Prefect, 263.
Synesius of Ptolemais, 363.
TALMUD, 54.
Taxation, 100, 105, 113 sq., 234
Sqq., 381.
Tertullian, 23, 27, 127 sq., 132,
142, 150, 181 sq.
Testamentary bequests to the
Church, 258, 331.
Thalassius, 330.
Theodoret, 380, 381, 392.
Theodosius I., 271, 364.
Theodosius II., 335, 361, 386, 391.
Thomas Aquinas, 396.
Tithes, 46, 122, 148, 156 sq., 259.
Toledo, Synod of, 386.
Tours, Synod of, 260.
Tribute, reception of, 383.
Trulla, Council of, 253, 269.
UNIVERSALISM, 38 sq., 41, 49, 59, 67,
Usury, 48, 111, 242, 381 sqq.
WALENs, 223, 388.
Valentinian I., 256, 386.
Valentinian II., 27.I.
Vandals, 388, 392.
Victor, Pope, 137.
Vigilantius, 319 sq.
Vº 83 sq., 136, 317, 319,
397.
Wows of the heathen, 30.
WEALTH, greatness of, 104, 241.
Wealth, estimation of, 127 sqq.,
146 sq., 208 sq.
Widows, care of, 45, 90 sq., 184
sq., 323, 361, 384 sq.
wiłº houses for, 184.
Widows, institution of, 80 sq.,
165 sqq., 184, 267.
Worship, connection between, and
charity, 30 Sqq., 145, 394.
XENODOCHIA, 267, 323 sqq.
22
<ſ
| $2
~ ~
$2
>:
ö
È
?
\，\!
>
2
=D
!\， ，
№
GRADUATE LIBRARY
DATE DUE

==
--~~~~. Tº
* * - * *
—- sº-ºº--~~ * *
l-1，3
>
O
=
|----
©<
| –
O
2-2
O
©
MUTILATE CARD
... s. sº-º-º:

N
§
§§
Nº.
§§ §
Ş
º
§§ N
§ §§
NºN
§ §§
Nº
Nº.
Ns
- §
NS
* §
S
wº Nº.
§ Sº N §§§
Nº. w N §§ §§
§§ § §
§ § § N
c. w SNSN r &
§§§
§§§
§§§
X. * §§ NNºN §N
§§§ R&N
§§§
§ N
N
is
§
NSN
§§
N
N § N
N N N º
S º
§ §
§ &N N
º
§
* * * *
º
&
*sº
§§N
*Yº Yº
Nº.
&
&, Nº. - - Yºº NSS
N *NSº º
§ §§ - º § §
§§§ § º sº
N
**.