has nor can have any other than voluntary subjects. These things are everywhere inculcated in the holy Scriptures, and are the acknowledged characteristics of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the new order of things, however, which took place under the emperor Constantine and his clergy, a state of things, in almost every respect the reverse of this, ensued. One of their first objects was to remodel the form and order of the Christian church, the administration of which was, as far as possible, arranged conformably to the government of the state. The emperor himself assumed the episcopal functions, and claimed the power of regulating its external affairs-in other words, he was constituted head of the church. He and his successors convened councils, in which they presided, and determined all matters of discipline. The bishops corresponded to those magistrates whose jurisdiction was confined to single cities; the metropolitans to the proconsuls, or presidents of provinces; the primates to the emperor's vicars, each of whom governed one of the imperial provinces. Canons and prebendaries took their rise from the societies of ecclesiastics, which Eusebius, bishop of Verceil, and after him Augustine, formed in their houses, and in which these prelates were styled their fathers and masters. Now, it may be worth our while to look at this new order of things and compare it with that which was instituted by the apostles of Christ, and which had hitherto generally obtained in all the churches for 300 years. Scarcely any two things can be more dissimilar. The learned Mosheim, speaking of the overseers of the apostolic churches, and those of the second century, says :-"Let none confound the bishops of this primitive and golden period of the church with those of whom we read in the following ages. For, though they were both designated by the same name, yet they differed extremely in many respects. A bishop, during the first and second centuries, was a person who had the care of one Christian assembly, which at that time was, generally speaking, small enough to be contained in a private house. In this assembly he acted not so much with the authority of a master, as with the zeal and diligence of a faithful servant. The churches, also, in those early times, were entirely independent; none of them subject to any foreign jurisdiction, but each of them governed by

PROCEEDINGS OF CONSTANTINE AND HIS CLERGY. 381

its own rulers and its own laws. Nothing is more evident than the perfect equality that reigned among the primitive churches; nor does there ever appear, in the first century, the smallest trace of that association of provincial churches from which councils and metropolitans derive their origin." So far my author-to which I take leave to add, that nothing could be more abhorrent to the first churches than to acknowledge any earthly potentate as their head. "Be not ye called Rabbi," said Jesus to his apostles; “ for one is your master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren. Neither be ye called masters; for one is your master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant; and whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." These divine maxims, which may be regarded as forming the constituent principles of the Christian kingdom, were lost sight of by the ecclesiastics who undertook to remodel the churches under the auspices of the emperor Constantine, whom they, as a matter of courtesy, condescended to make their earthly head.

The conduct of the clergy of that age is calculated to furnish us with a useful and instructive lesson on the subject of the corruption of human nature. In proportion as they enjoyed any intervals of exemption from persecution, they became more litigious in their tempers, and more worldly-minded. But now that the restraint was entirely taken off by the emperor, the churches endowed, and riches and honours profusely heaped on the clergy; when he authorized them to sit as judges upon the consciences and faith of others, he confirmed them in the spirit of this world —the spirit of pride, avarice, domination, and ambition; the indulgence of which has, in all ages, proved fatal to the purity, peace, and happiness, of the kingdom of Christ. The glaring inconsistency which marked the conduct of the leading ecclesiastics, in professing a religion the prominent characteristics of which are humility and self-denial, and at the same time pursuing the pleasures and aspiring after the honours of this world, seems to have struck the very heathen themselves. Hence an historian of that class, who lived shortly after the days of Constantine, remarked concerning some of the leading bishops-" It would be well if, despising the magnificence of the city, they would copy the example of some of the bishops of provincial

towns, whose temperance, plainness of dress, and heavenlymindedness, must recommend them to the Deity as his sincere worshippers."*

The short sketch now exhibited of the proceedings of the leading ecclesiastics of that day may suffice to show us how "the mystery of iniquity" was then working, and busily working, in the churches, gendering the "man of sin, the son of perdition," as well as the powerful hand which the clergy had in it. Restored to the full possession of their liberty, the places of worship rebuilt and secured to them, and the imperial edicts every where published in their favour, these new bishops soon gave the emperor convincing proof what manner of spirit they were of! As their several revenues became augmented, they grew more and more ambitious, less disposed to endure contradiction, more arrogant and haughty in their behaviour, more litigious, and more reckless of the simplicity and gravity of their character and profession. Constantine's letters afford ample proof of the jealousies and animosities which reigned among them. Adverting to a violent quarrel that had arisen between Miltiades, bishop of Rome, and Cæcilianus, bishop of Carthage, in which the principals had enlisted a host of their colleagues as auxiliaries; he tells them, that it was a very grievous thing to him to see such a number of persons divided into parties, and even bishops disagreeing among themselves. He earnestly wished to compose their differences; but, in defiance of all his efforts, they persisted in their quarrels, which drew from him a feeling complaint, that those who ought to have been the foremost in maintaining a brotherly affection and peaceable disposition towards each other, were the first to separate from one another in a scandalous and detestable manner, giving occasion to the common enemies of Christianity to scoff at and deride them. To put an end to such disgraceful proceedings, Constantine summoned a council to meet at Arles, in France; in order, if possible, to bring to a friendly and Christian compromise this long-pending altercation, at which the emperor condescended to be present, and there exerted all his influence to restore peace and harmony between them, but it proved to be with little effect. He had unfortunately sown

* Ammianus Marcellinus, lib. 27.

SPIRIT OF THE CLERGY IN CONSTANTINE'S DAY. 383

the seeds of strife and contention, by his liberal endowment of the churches, and by the riches and honours which he had conferred upon the bishops; and he was now reaping the fruit of his own folly. In after ages, and particularly among the Waldenses, it was a common saying, that Constantine, by the things now mentioned, had poured poison into the church, and there assuredly was much truth and justice in the remark.

Had Constantine rested satisfied with repealing the persecuting edicts of his predecessors, and then left Christianity to its own internal resources to make its own way, he had acted the part of a wise, good, and impartial governor. His first edict, without particularizing any sects or parties, gave full liberty to all of them, whether Christian or Pagan, to follow their own convictions in professing their religious faith; but that liberty was of short duration, and soon abridged in reference to both Christians and Heathens. For though in that edict he had commanded that the places of worship, and other effects which had been cruelly and unjustly wrested from them by the magistrates under the former emperors, should now be restored to Christians in general, it was soon followed by another, which restricted the restitution to the "Catholic church." In a letter which he wrote soon after to Miltiades, bishop of Rome, complaining of the differences that were fomented by the African bishops, he tells him that he had so great a reverence for the "Catholic church," that he advised him not to suffer, in any place, either schism or difference of any kind to exist. There are in his letters many things which savour of the same intolerant spirit, and which leave us no room to doubt that, by the Catholic church, we are to understand that system of things which was approved by those bishops who had the greatest share of interest in his favour. And, with respect to his treatment of the Pagans, his measures were in flagrant violation of the first principles of Christianity. He prohibited by law all idolatrous worship throughout the empire-commanded that no statues should be erected to the honour of their deities, nor any sacrifices offered upon their altars; and he sent into all the provinces Christian presidents, with instructions to prohibit the offering of sacrifices by the Pagan priests, and confirming to the former the

honours which he considered to be due to their characters and stations; thus endeavouring to support the kingdom of Christ, a dispensation of truth and righteousness and peace, by means altogether worldly; the prospects and rewards of temporal grandeur and emolument.

It cannot reasonably excite our surprise, that the persons who could recommend the issuing of such edicts as these, which had for their object to suppress by force the ancient religion of the empire, should be against tolerating any sects among themselves that they considered to be heterodox. For, if we once concede that the civil magistrate may prohibit religious opinions or punish the abettors of them, merely because in his view they are erroneous, it will follow, by necessary consequence, that his power extends to the inflicting of punishment on professing Christians whose sentiments and practices he may disapprove. If the magistrate's jurisdiction be allowed to extend to his exercising a control over the human mind in one instance, we cannot consistently deny it to him in any other; and as his own judgment is, in all cases, the authorized standard of truth and error, he bears the sword, upon this principle, to punish every deviation from that standard which he has erected, whether it be found in Christian, Jew, or Pagan. Thus, if Constantine and the clergy of his day were justified in abolishing the superstitious worship of the Pagans by the civil power, merely because they deemed it erroneous, Diocletian and Gallienus with their priests were equally justified in putting down the Christians by virtue of their authority, for this plain reason, that they deemed it impious and even blasphemy against their gods, and as bordering upon Atheism itself. It is, however, high time that I dismissed this part of the subject, and proceeded to notice other evils which resulted from this unscriptural alliance between church and state.

From the change which at this time took place, with respect to the rank and character of the ministers of religion, the transition seems easy and natural to the subject of the revenues of the church. And on this topic it will be curious to observe by what steps the pastors, elders, or overseers of the churches, who ought to have been their servants, came to have independent and even