Chapter V: Worship, Life, Discipline and Morals (3)

§ 61.3. =Sickness, Death and Burial.=--The anointing the sick
with oil (Mk. vi. 13; Jas. v. 14) as means of charismatic bodily
healing is met with down to the 5th century. Innocent I. put
it in a decretal of A.D. 416, for the first time as a sacrament
for the dispensation of spiritual blessing to the sick. But many
centuries passed before the anointing of the sick was generally
observed as the sacrament of Extreme Unction (§ 70, 2; 104, 5).
On the other hand, the Areopagite (§ 47, 11) reckoned the
anointing of the dead a sacrament. The closing of the eyes
implied that death was a sleep with the hope of an awakening
in the resurrection. The fraternal kiss sealed the communion
of Christians even beyond the grave. The putting garlands on
the corpse as expressive of victory still met with opposition.
Several Synods found it necessary to forbid the absurdity of
squeezing the consecrated elements into the lips of the dead
or laying them in the coffin. Passionate lamentation, rending
of garments, wearing sackcloth and ashes, hired mourners, cypress
branches, etc., were regarded as despairing, heathenish customs.
So too festivals of the dead by night were condemned, while on
the contrary funeral processions by day, with torches, lamps,
palm and olive branches, were in high repute. Julian and the
Vandals prohibited them. In the 4th century the celebration of
the Agape and Supper at the grave was still frequent. In their
place afterwards we find mourning feasts, but these, on account
of their being abused, were disallowed by the church.

§ 61.4. =Purgatory and Masses for Souls.=--The connection of the
custom already referred to by Tertullian of not only praying in
family worship for members of the family that had fallen asleep,
but also by oblations of sacramental elements on the memorial
days of the dead (_Oblationes pro defunctis_) of giving to the
intercessions at the Supper in public worship a special direction
to them, with the doctrine of =Purgatory= (_Ignis purgatorius_)
which had developed itself in the West since the 5th century,
gave rise to the institution of masses for souls (§ 58, 3). The
idea of a place of punishment between death and the resurrection,
in which the venial sins (_peccata venialia_) of believers must
be atoned for, was quite unknown to the whole ancient church down
to the age of Augustine and to the Greek church till even after
his day (§ 67, 6). Mention is made indeed even by Origen of a
future πῦρ καθάρσιον or καθαρτικόν; but he means by it a mere
spiritual burning, from which even a Paul and a Peter were not
exempted. In the West it was first Augustine who deduced from
Matt. xii. 32, that even in the hereafter forgiveness of sins
is possible, holding in accordance with 1 Cor. iii. 13-15 that
it is not incredible, but yet always questionable, that many
believers who took over with them into the hereafter a sinful
connection with their earthly past life, might there he purified
by an “_ignis purgatorius_” of longer or shorter duration
as the continuation and completion of the earthly “_ignis
tribulationis_,” fiery trial, from the earthly dross still
adhering to them, and so might be saved. With greater confidence
_Cæsarius of Arles_ teaches that believers who during their
earthly life had neglected to atone for their minor offences
by almsgiving and other good works, must be purified by a
lingering fire in the next world, in order to win admission
into eternal blessedness. Finally, Gregory the Great raised
this idea into an established dogma of the Western church, while
he, at the same time, taught that by the intercession of the
living for the dead, and especially by the sacrifices of the
mass offered for them their purgatorial pains would be moderated
and curtailed. He too referred to Matt. xii. and 1 Cor. iii.
The reference to 2 Maccabees xii. 41-46 belongs to a later
period.--Continuation, § 106, 2, 3.

§ 62. HERETICAL REFORMERS.

During the 4th century a spirit of opposition to the dominant ecclesiastical system was awakened, but as it manifested itself in isolated forms, it had no abiding result and was soon stamped out. This spirit showed itself in various attempts which passed beyond what evangelical principles could vindicate. It directed its attacks partly against the secularization of the church, branching out often into wild fanaticism and rigorism, and partly against superstition and externalism. Disgusted with the interminable theological controversies and heresy huntings of that age, many came to regard the distinction between orthodoxy and heresy as a matter of indifference so far as religion is concerned, and to look for the core and essence of Christianity not so much in doctrine as in morals.

§ 62.1. =Audians and Apostolics.=--As fanatical opponents of the
secularizing of the church, besides the Montanists (§ 40, 1) and
the Novatians (§ 41, 3) still surviving as isolated communities
down to the 5th century, we meet during the 4th century with the
Donatists (§ 63, 1), the Audians and the Apostolics. The sect
of the =Audians= was founded about A.D. 340 by a layman, a monk,
Audius or Udo from Mesopotamia. Having been challenged for his
crude anthropomorphic views, in support of which he referred to
Gen. i. 26 and other passages, he allowed himself to be chosen
and ordained bishop over his adherents. Placed thus in a directly
hostile relation to the Catholic church, they accused the church
of most arrant worldliness and degeneracy, called for a return
to apostolic poverty and avoided all communion with its members.
They also rejected the Nicene canon on the observance of Easter
and adopted the quartodeciman practice (§ 56, 3). On the motion
of several Catholic bishops the emperor banished the founder
of the sect to Scythia, where he laboured earnestly for the
conversion of the Goths, founded also some bishoprics and
monasteries with strict rules, and died in A.D. 372. The
persecution of the Christians under Athanaric, in A.D. 370
(§ 76, 1), pressed sorely upon the Audians. Still remnants of
them continued to exist down to the end of the 5th century.--The
so-called =Apostolics= of Asia Minor in the 4th century went
even further than the Audians. Of their origin nothing certain
is known. They declared that the holding of private property and
marriage are sinful, and unconditionally refused readmission to
all excommunicated persons.

§ 62.2. =Protests against Superstition and External
Observances.=--About the end of the 4th century lively protests
were made against the superstitions and shallow externalism of
the church. They were directed first of all to the worship of
Mary, especially the now wide-spread belief in her _perpetua
virginitas_ as mother of Jesus (§ 57, 2). The first protesters
against this doctrine that we meet with are the so-called
=Antidicomarianites= in Arabia, whom Epiphanius sought to turn
from their heresy by a doctrinal epistle incorporated in his
history of heresies. In the West too there sprang up several
opponents of this dogma of the church. One of the most prominent
of these was a layman =Helvidius= in Rome in A.D. 380, a scholar
of Auxentius, the Arian bishop of Milan. Then about A.D. 388 the
Roman monk =Jovinian= opposed on substantial doctrinal grounds
the prevailing notions about the merit of works and external
observances, especially monasticism, asceticism, celibacy
and fasting. And finally, =Bonosus=, bishop of Sardica, about
A.D. 390, wrought in the same direction, though at a later period
he seems to have given his adhesion to the Ebionite error that
Jesus had been an ordinary man whom God adopted as His Son on
account of His merit (_Filius Dei adoptivus_). At least his
younger contemporary Marius Mercator describes him as an advocate
of these views alongside of Paul of Samosata and Photinus. We
also find many allusions during the 7th century to a sect of
Bonosians teaching similar doctrines in Spain and Gaul, who are
frequently associated with the Photinians. Even before Jovinian,
=Aërius=, a presbyter of Sebaste in Armenia, about A.D. 360,
entered his protest against the doctrine of the merit of external
observances. He objected to prayer and oblations for the dead,
would have no compulsory fasting, and no distinction of rank
between bishops and presbyters. In this way he was brought into
collision with his bishop Eustathius (§ 44, 3). Persecuted on all
sides, his adherents betook themselves to the caves and forests.
The two monks of Milan, Sarmatio and Barbatianus, about A.D. 396,
were perhaps scholars of Jovinian, were at least of the same
mind with him. Finally, =Vigilantius=, presbyter at Barcelona
about A.D. 400, with passionate violence opposed the veneration
of relics, the invocation of saints, the prevailing love of
miracles, the vigil services, the celibacy of the clergy and the
merit of outward observances.--The counterblast of the church was
hot and violent. Epiphanius wrote against the Audians and Aërians;
Ambrose against Bonosus and the followers of Jovinian; Jerome
with unparalleled bitterness and passion against Helvidius,
Jovinian and Vigilantius; Augustine with greater moderation
discussed the views of Jovinian which in their starting point
were related to his own soteriological views.[184]

§ 62.3. =Protests against the Over-Estimation of Doctrine.=--Even
in the times of Athanasius a certain Rhetorius made his appearance
with the assertion that all heretics had a right to their opinion,
and Philastrius [Philaster] speaks of a sect of =Rhetorians= in
Egypt who, perhaps with a reference to Phil. i. 18, set aside
altogether the idea of heresy and placed the essence of orthodoxy
in fidelity to convictions. The =Gnosimachians= were related to
them in the depreciation of dogma, but went beyond them by wholly
withdrawing themselves from the domain of dogmatics and occupying
themselves exclusively with morals. They are put in the list of
heretics by Joh. Damascenus. This sect had sprung up during the
monophysite and monothelite controversies, and maintained that
since God requires of a Christian nothing more than a righteous
life (πράξεις καλάς), all striving after theoretical knowledge
is useless and fruitless.

§ 63. SCHISMS.

The Novatian and the Alexandrian Meletian Schisms (§ 41, 3, 4) continued to rage down into our period. Then in consequence of the Arian controversy there arose among the orthodox three new schisms (§ 50, 8). Among them was a Roman schism, followed later by several others that grew out of double elections (§ 46, 4, 6, 8, 11). The most threatening of all the schisms of this period was the Donatist in North Africa. On the Johannite schism in Constantinople, see § 51, 3. Owing to various diversities in the development of doctrine (§ 50, 7), constitution (§ 46), worship (§ 56 ff.), and discipline (§ 61, 1), material was accumulating for the grand explosion that was to burst up the connection of East and West (§ 67). The imperial union attempts during the Monophysite controversy caused a thirty-five years’ schism between the two halves of the Christian world (§ 52, 5), and want of character in the Roman bishop Vigilius split off the West for half a century (§ 52, 6). The split between the East and West over the union with the Monothelite party (§ 52, 8) was soon indeed overcome. But soon thereafter the second Trullan Council at Constantinople, A.D. 692, which, as the continuation of the 5th and 6th œcumenical Councils (σύνοδος πενθέκτη, _Concilium quinisextum_), occupied itself exclusively with questions of constitution, worship, and discipline, which had not there been discussed, gave occasion to the later incurable and disastrous schism.

§ 63.1. =The Donatist Schism, A.D. 311-415.=--In North Africa,
where echoes of the Montanist enthusiasm were still heard, many
voluntarily and needlessly gave themselves up to martyrdom during
the Diocletian persecution. The sensible bishop of Carthage
Mensurius and his archdeacon Cæcilian [Cæcilius] opposed this
fanaticism. Both had given up heretical books instead of the
sacred books demanded of them. This was sufficient to make the
opposite party denounce them as _traditores_. Mensurius died
in A.D. 311, and his followers chose Cæcilian [Cæcilius] as
his successor, and had him hastily ordained by bishop Felix
of Aptunga, being sorely pressed by the machinations of the
other party. The opposition, with a bigoted rich widow Lucilla
at its head, denounced Felix as a traditor, and so treated his
ordination as invalid. It put up a rival bishop in the person of
the reader Majorinus, who soon got, in A.D. 313, a more powerful
successor in Donatus, called by his own followers the Great. The
schism spread from Carthage over all North Africa. The peasants,
sorely oppressed by exorbitant taxes and heavy villeinage,
took the side of the Donatists (_Pars Donati_). Constantine
the Great at the very first declared himself against them. When
they complained of this, the emperor convened for the purpose of
special investigation a clerical commission at Rome in A.D. 313,
under the presidency of the Roman bishop Melchiades, and then a
great Western Synod at Arles in A.D. 314. Both decided against
the Donatists. They appealed to the immediate decision of the
emperor, who also heard the two parties at Milan, but decided
in accordance with previous judgments in A.D. 316. Now followed
severe measures, taking churches from them and banishing
their bishops which powerfully excited and increased their
fanaticism. Constantine resorted therefore to milder and
more tolerant procedure, but in their fanatical zeal they
repudiated all compromises. Under Constans the matter became
still more formidable. Ascetics mad with enthusiasm, drawn from
the very dregs of the people, who called themselves _Milites
Christi_, _Agonistici_, swarmed as beggars through the country,
_Circumcelliones_, roused the oppressed peasants to revolt,
preached freedom and fraternity, forced masters to do the work
of slaves, robbed, murdered, and burned. Political revolution
was carried on under the cover of a religious movement. An
imperial army put down the revolt, and an attempt was made
in A.D. 348 to pacify the needy Donatists by imperial gold.
But Donatus flung back the money with indignation, and the
rebellion was renewed. A severe sentence was now passed upon
the heads of the party, and all Donatist churches were closed
or taken from them. Julian restored the churches and recalled
the exiled bishops. He allowed the Donatists with impunity to
take violent revenge upon the Catholics. Julian’s successor
however again issued strict laws against the sectaries, and
schisms arose among themselves. Toward the end of the 4th
century bishop Optatus of Mileve opposed them in his treatise
_De Schismate Donatistarum Ll. VII._ In A.D. 400 Augustine,
bishop of Hippo Regius, began his unwearied attacks upon this
sect. The mildest terms were offered to induce the Donatists to
return to the church. Many of the more moderate took advantage
of the opportunity; but this only made the others all the
more bitter. They refused repeated invitations to a discussion,
fearing Augustine’s masterly dialectic. Augustine, who at first
maintained that force should not be used in matters of faith, was
moved by the persistent stiffneckedness and senseless fanaticism
of his opponents to change his opinion, and to confess that
in order to restore such heretics to the church, to salvation,
recourse must be had to violent compulsion (_coge intrare_,
Lk. xiv. 23). A synod at Carthage in A.D. 405 called upon the
Emperor Honorius to take proceedings against this stiffnecked
sect. He did so by imposing fines, banishing their clergy,
and taking their churches. Augustine renewed the challenge to
a public disputation. The Donatists were at last compelled by
the emperor to enter the lists. Thus came about the three days’
_Collatio cum Donatistis_ of A.D. 411 at Carthage. There appeared
279 Donatist and 286 Catholic bishops. Petilian and Primian were
the chief speakers on the side of the Donatists, Augustine and
Aurelian of Carthage on the other. The imperial commissioner
assigned the victory to the Catholics. In vain the Donatists
appealed. In A.D. 414 the Emperor declared that they had
forfeited all civil rights, and in A.D. 415 he threatened
all who attended their meetings with death. The Vandals, who
conquered Africa in A.D. 429, persecuted Catholics and Donatists
alike, and a common need furthered their reconciliation and
secured a good mutual understanding.--The Donatists started from
the principle that no one who is excommunicated or deserves to
be excommunicated is fit for the performance of any sacramental
action. With the Novatians they demanded the absolute purity
of the church, but admitted that repentance was a means for
regaining church fellowship. They maintained that they were
the pure and the Catholics were schismatics, who had nothing
in common with Christ, whose administration of the sacraments
was therefore invalid and useless, so that they even rebaptized
those who had Catholic baptism. The partiality of the state for
their opponents and confused blending of the ideas of the visible
and invisible church led them to adopt the view that church
and state, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the world, had
nothing in common with one another, and that the state should not
interfere in religious matters.

§ 63.2. =The _Concilium Quinisextum_, A.D. 692.=--This Council
claimed to be regarded as œcumenical and was recognised as such
even by Pope Sergius I. The Greeks had not yet got over their
vexation at the triumph which Rome had won at the last œcumenical
Council (§ 52, 8). It thus happened that among the multitude of
harmless decrees the following six were smuggled in which were
in flat contradiction to the Roman practice.

1. In enumerating the sources of the canon law alone valid
almost all the Latin Councils and Papal Decretals were
omitted, and the whole 85 _Canones Apostt._ (§ 43, 4)
included, whereas Rome had pronounced only the first
50 valid.

2. The Roman custom of enforcing celibacy on presbyters and
bishops is condemned as unjustifiable and inhuman (§ 45, 2).

3. Fasting on the Saturdays of the Quadragesima is forbidden
(§ 56, 4).

4. The 28th Canon of the Council of Chalcedon which makes the
patriarch of Constantinople equal to the bishop of Rome is
repeated and anew enforced (§ 46, 1, 7).

5. The Levitical prohibition against blood and things strangled
is sanctioned as still binding upon Christians, although it
had never been enforced by the Roman church.

6. Images of Christ in the shape of a lamb, which were very
common in the West, were forbidden. The papal legates
subscribed the decrees of the Council; but the Pope forbade
their publication in all the churches of the West. Compare
further § 46, 11.