ORIGIN OF VOLUNTARY FASTINGS AND MORTIFICATIONS. 325

mass of corruption in the church of Rome: I refer to the duty of fasting. Ecclesiastical history abounds with proofs of the tendency of mankind to run into extremes; and thus to convert institutions, which in their original design and application were beneficial and salutary, into sources of the most pernicious errors and abuses. Were we required to produce an instance, in confirmation of the truth of this remark, a very striking one would be found in the subject now mentioned. Fasting, as enjoined upon Christians in the New Testament, was evidently intended as a means to a moral end—a means peculiarly fitted both to the circumstances and to the nature of man, of nourishing in him those feelings of contrition and self-abasement, and of enabling him to acquire that mastery over his sensual appetites, which is essential to the Christian character. A life of habitual indulgence, even though it be not carried to positive excess, is not favourable to either intellectual or spiritual improvement. It enfeebles the mental powers, deadens the moral perceptions, and tends to render us selfish and regardless of the wants and feelings of others. But, when experience also tells us that such a course of life terminates almost invariably in excess, no further argument can be wanting to prove the reasonableness and utility of occasional abstinence, if used only as a means to an end-to invigorate the principles of devotion and promote humility of mind and purity of heart. These are obviously the ends for which abstemiousness and fasting are enjoined upon Christians in the Holy Scriptures. Unhappily however, from the propensity of the human mind to run into extremes, from an increasing fondness for the Platonic philosophy, and an indiscriminate imitation of what is recorded in Scripture concerning some holy men, who, being placed in extraordinary circumstances, were never designed to be held up as examples in every part of their conduct to ordinary Christians ;-from the combined operation of all these causes, fasting instead of being considered as a salutary discipline, or as a means of producing holiness, came at this time to be regarded as holiness itself. The piety of men came to be estimated by the frequency and severity of their fastings. In proportion as they subjected themselves to greater privations and hardships, they acquired a higher reputation for sanctity. Thus a kind of rivalry was excited; new and strange methods

were invented of macerating and torturing the body; till at length extravagance in practice led to error in principle-fasts and mortifications were regarded as meritorious in themselvesas procuring by their intrinsic efficacy the pardon of sin and the favour of heaven. So much for the origin of these voluntary fastings and mortifications on the extravagant and absurd extent to which these things came to be carried out in the Catholic church, during the fourth and subsequent centuries, I shall have occasion to enlarge hereafter.

Having mentioned the introduction of these fastings and mortifications, I may take this opportunity of also hinting at the monastic and eremetical modes of life, which are said to have had their origin in the third century-in other words, the practice of retiring from the active concerns of human life and living as monks and hermits. The subject has been treated by Dr. Campbell with his wonted ability, and I shall give you the substance of his remarks

In times of persecution in the church's infancy, whilst the heathen yet raged, and the rulers took counsel together against the Lord and against his anointed, many pious Christians, male and female, married and unmarried,—justly accounting that no human felicity ought to come in competition with their fidelity to Christ, and modestly distrustful of their ability to persevere in resisting the temptations by which they were incessantly harassed by their persecutors,-took the resolution to abandon their possessions and worldly prospects, and, whilst the storm lasted, to retire to unfrequented places, far from the haunts of men, that they might enjoy in quietness their faith and hope, and, without incurring temptations to apostacy, employ themselves principally in the worship and service of their Maker. The cause was reasonable and the motive praise-worthy. But the reasonableness arose solely from the circumstances of the case. When the latter were changed, the former vanished, and the motive could no longer be the same. Accordingly when matters got into a more tranquil state, and the profession of Christianity was rendered perfectly safe, many returned from their retirement and lived like other men. Some however, familiarized by time to a solitary life, at length preferred, through habit, what they had originally adopted through necessity. They did not waste their

FANATICISM OF MONKS AND HERMITS.

327

time in idleness, but supported themselves by their industry, and bestowed the surplus in charity. But, as it was purely to avoid temptation and danger that men first took refuge in such recesses, they never thought of fettering themselves by vows and engagements, because by so doing they must have exposed their souls to new temptations, and involved them in more and perhaps greater dangers. This, however, laid the foundation of the monastic institutions, which came to prevail so generally in after ages in the Catholic church. These signal sacrifices had a lustre which dazzled the eyes of the weak, and powerfully engaged their imitation. The imitators, regardless of the circumstances which alone could render the conduct laudable, were led, by a strange depravity of understanding, to consider it as the more meritorious the less it was reasonable, and the more eligible the less it was useful. Overlooking the clear intimations, supplied by the constitution of human nature, that man is designed for society—overlooking the express declarations of scripture, and the examples there recorded of active benevolence-they passed their hours in a state of indolent abstraction,.discharging no one social duty, and living as if they were alone in the world. They succeeded in persuading themselves and others that they were treading the path which leads to Christian perfection, and pursuing the course most pleasing in the sight of God-that they were the special objects of his regard-were holding intercourse with him, and enjoying a foretaste of that ineffable bliss which would be their portion when removed from this world of sin and misery to his immediate presence. That all this was visionary and delusive, I need not waste your time in proving. It is beside my present purpose to enter into a minute detail of the follies and extravagancies which were the natural fruits of the eremetical and monastic modes of life-the hermitages, and monasteries, and nunneries, which in process of time sprang up and deluged all the countries of Europe. Let it suffice to have pointed out the sources from which they took their rise; and to have exposed the mischievous consequences of refining upon the rules of holiness laid down in the New Testament-setting up any mode of life as pre-eminently pure and holy, and so rendering those who adopt it as the peculiar favourites of heaven. I shall have occasion to resume the subject in a future Lecture.

LECTURE XVII.

Some account of the tenth and last Heathen persecution under Diocletian and Galerius-Its excessive severity, and effects upon the Christians-Character of Constantius Chlorus, emperor of the West-His death at York, and transfer of his power to his son Constantine-Death of the emperor Galerius, who previously revokes his sanguinary edicts against the Christians— Constantine defeats Licinius and becomes sole emperor.—A. D. 300 to 312.

In the preceding Lecture, the leading object of which was a review of the principal persecutions which came upon the Christian church during the third century, I mentioned that we should have to resume the subject when we entered upon the history of the fourth, at which we are now arrived.

At this period the imperial throne was filled by Diocletian, who had a colleague in the government of the empire of the name of Maximian; but besides these two emperors there were also two governors of subordinate rank, namely, Constantius Chlorus and Maximinus Galerius, who were honoured with the humble appellation of Cæsars.

Diocletian was raised to the throne in the year 284, and consequently had reigned sixteen years; but, though naturally addicted to superstition, he was not hostile to the Christians, and during this period they had enjoyed a large portion of outward peace. Constantius Chlorus, to whose lot it fell to exercise the sovereign power in the western provinces, including Gaul and Britain, was a mild and amiable prince, under whose government

REIGN OF THE EMPEROR DIOCLETIAN.

329 we find no traces of persecution. He had himself, in a great measure, abandoned the absurd rites of Polytheism and treated the Christians with respect and kindness: they were even admitted to some of the principal offices in the royal household. He liked their persons, and esteemed their fidelity, nor had he any aversion to their religious principles. We cannot therefore wonder that this should excite the alarm and jealousy of the Pagan priests, whose secular interests were so intimately connected with the continuance of the ancient superstitions, and who apprehending, not without reason, that, to their manifest detriment, Christianity was becoming daily more universal and triumphant, addressed themselves to Diocletian, whom they knew to be of a timorous and credulous disposition, and, by fictitious oracles and other perfidious stratagems, strove to prevail on him to persecute the Christians.

The treacherous artifices of a selfish and superstitious priesthood, however, failed for some time to move Diocletian. They next had recourse to Maximinus Galerius, one of the Cæsars, who had married one of Diocletian's daughters; a prince whose gross ignorance of every thing but military affairs was accompanied by a fierce and savage temper, which rendered him a proper instrument for executing their sanguinary purposes. Stimulated by the malicious insinuations of the Pagan priests, the suggestions of a superstitious mother, and the ferocity of his own natural temper, he importuned Diocletian, in so urgent a manner, for an edict against the Christians, that he at length obtained his horrible purpose.

The Roman emperors were at this time in the habit of taking up their residence occasionally at Nicomedia, the capital of the province of Bithynia. This city, for its beauty and splendour, has been compared to Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, and it had abounded with Christians from the days of the apostles. Diocletian had taken up his abode at his palace in Nicomedia, and his son-in-law Galerius had come to pass the winter with him. In the year 302, the latter prevailed upon his colleague to grant an edict for pulling down all the places of worship belonging to the Christians-to commit to the flames all their books and writings-to deprive them of all their civil rights and privi