A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

CONSTANTINE the first Christian Emperour.

THough it be a very rare thing to see the Name of an Emperour, in a Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, yet this of Constantine is commonly to be found among them, because of some Dis∣courses * 1.1 which he made and repeated, if we will believe Eusebius: and it may be also upon the account of the many Letters which he wrote, and Edicts which he made in favour of the Christian Religion: But before we say any thing of the Writings of this Emperour, it will be necessary according to our usual Method, to give a short Abridgment of his Life.

Constantine was the Son of the Emperour Constantius Chlorus, who was the only Person of all those that shar'd the Empire in his time, that did not Persecute the Christians a 1.2. His Mother was call'd Helena, a Woman of mean Birth, who had not the Title of Empress, while Constantius liv'd b 1.3.

Constantine in his youth, gave early proof of what might be expected from him afterward; His Conduct and Courage appear'd a little before his Father's Death: For being detain'd as an Hostage by the Emperour Galerius, and foreseeing plainly that he and his Associates had a design to kill him, that they might Invade that part of the Empire which belong'd to his Father Constantius, who could not live long, he made his Escape out of the hands of the Tyrants, took Post and went in great hast to find his Father in Britain. He kill'd all the Horses which he found at the Post-houses on the Road which ••e past, to hinder his Enemies from pursuing after him. When he came into Britain, he found his Father on his Death-Bed, who chose him for his Successor. After his Death, he was Proclaim'd Em∣perour by the Souldiers on the Sixth day of August, in the Year of Jesus Christ 306. He was no sooner Emperour, but he gain'd the love of all his Subjects, by visiting the Provinces under his Government, to give them necessary Orders, and by beating back the Barbarians, who would have pass'd the Rhine to enter into his Territories; but they were defeated, and two of their Kings kill'd in the Year 312. After this he attack'd the Tyrant Maxentius, who had laid Rome desolate by his Cruelties. He march'd towards Italy with an Army of 40000 Men, seiz'd upon all the Cities that oppos'd his Passage, or con∣strain'd them to submit, and defeated three several times the Troops of Maxentius. In short, The Tyrant coming to meet him with a great Army near Rome, was entirely conquer'd, and perish'd by the fall of a Bridge, over which he was passing to save himself. Eusebius says, That Constantine assur'd

him, he saw then in the Heavens, a Cross of Light with this Inscription, [By this Sign you shall over come your Enemies,] and that Jesus Christ appear'd to him when he was Sleeping, and commanded him to make a Standard after the form of a Cross, which he did in Obedience to this Revelation, and after his Victory, he plac'd his Standard among the Trophies in the midst of the City of Rome, with this Inscription: [By this Salutary Sign, which is the Mark of the true Power, I have deliver'd your City from the Yoke of Tyranny, and Establish'd your Senate and People in their ancient Splendor.] After he had regulated the Affairs of Rome, Constantine came to Milan, where he celebrated the Nuptials of his Si∣ster with the Emperour Licinius. In this City 'twas that the two Emperours publish'd their First Edict in favour of the Christian Religion, in which they granted Liberty of Conscience to all their Subjects; and a little after, at their going out of Milan, they allow'd the Christians by a second Edict, the Pub∣lick Exercise of their Religion, and commanded that those places should be restor'd to them wherein they had usually kept their Assemblies. A short time after this, the two Emperours quarrelled, and declar'd War against one another in the Year 314. Licinins lost at first a great Battel in Pannonia; but at the second in Thracia, the Advantage was equal on both Sides, which induc'd the Emperours to make Peace for that time.

The Wars and Affairs of the Empire did not hinder Constantine from concerning himself with the Affairs of the Christians: For having receiv'd Complaints in behalf of the Donatists against Caeci∣lian and other African Bishops, he appointed for Judges, such as liv'd out of Africk, and summon'd a Council to meet at Rome under Miltiades, about this Matter. But the Donatists still complaining of this Decision c 1.4, he call'd a Council at Arles, where they were condemned anew; and at last when they appeal'd from the Determination of this Council to the Emperour, either because he believ'd that he might take cognizance of the Matter, since there was nothing alledg'd, but a particular Accusation a∣gainst Caecilian, which was Matter of Fact; or because he would oblige the Donatists to yield, as St. Austin observes, he himself gave Judgment at Milan in favour of Caecilian, condemn'd the Donatists, and wrote against them in Africk; caus'd an Information to be drawn up against Silvanus, who was of their Party, and their Temples to be taken from them; but yet he recommended them to be gently dealt withal, as a means to bring them back again into the Bosom of the Church. About this time he made many Laws in favour of the Christians. He permitted Masters to grant Liberty to their Slaves that were within the Church, in presence of the Bishop and the People. He made Laws for the due Observation of Sunday, forbidding all sorts of Persons to Travel on that Day; and allow'd Men to leave their Goods to the Church by Testament. On the contrary, Licinius Emperour of the East, publish'd Edicts against the Christians, caus'd their Churches to be demolish'd, and themselves to be Persecuted, or at least conniv'd at those that did so. Constantine declar'd War against him in 324 conquer'd him near Adrianople and Chalcedon, and then besieged him in Nicomedia, whither he had re∣tir'd after his Defeat. Licinius seeing that he was not able to maintain the Siege, came and threw him∣self at Constantine's Feet, who gave him his Life at the instance of his Wife, who was Licinius's Daughter, and then sent him to Thessalonica, where a little after he caused him to be put to Death, under pretence that he design'd to stir up Sedition. After this, Constantine Abrogated the Edicts of Licinius against the Christians, and commanded that those who were Condemn'd to the Mines or Banishment, or had been depriv'd of their Honour or Goods upon the account of Religion, should be releas'd and re establish'd in their former Estate; That the Goods of the Martyrs which had been Consiscated should be return'd to their Heirs, That the Churches of Christians should be Rebuilt, and their Burial-places restor'd unto them: Then he Exhorted all his Subjects very earnestly in a Letter, to embrace the Christian Religion.

And he did not only take care to preserve the Church in Peace against the Attempts of its Enemies, but he us'd his utmost endeavours to hinder all Divisions in its Bowels by the Disputes of those who were its profess'd Members. He applied himself to allay the Controversy between Arius and Alexander, by writing a Letter to them, wherein he earnestly Exhorts them to Peace, in a most moving and per∣suasive manner, assuring them that he had delay'd his Voyage to the East, for fear of finding them there at Variance, and praying them to open by their good Agreement, his Passage to the East, which they had hitherto, as one may say, stopt up by their Differences. He sent this Letter by Hosius Bi∣shop of Corduba, a Man commendable for his Worth and Prudence. This Bishop having call'd a Synod in the City of Alexandria, did all that in him lay to appease their Differences, but not being able to compass his Design, Constantine judged, that the best way to restore Peace to the Church, was to summon a General Council of the East and West in the City of Nice in Bithynia. He himself As∣sisted at it, Exhorted the Bishops to Peace, and refus'd to receive the Accusations which one Party form'd against the other. He made them agree in the same Doctrine, and approv'd the Decision of the Council, to which they all Subscribed, except Secundus and Theonas. He wrote himself to all the World, and Exhorted all the Bishops to receive the Decrees of this Council. He banish'd Arius and two Bishops that had taken his Part in the Synod; he caus'd the Books of that Heretick to be burnt; he forbad all his Subjects to keep them; and wrote in particular two very earnest Letter against Arius, and his followers. In short, He treated the Bishops of the Council magnificently, testified a great deal of Friendship to them, and sent them away laden with Presents. Eusebius and Theognis having publish'd anew their Errors after the Council, altho' they had Subscribed to its Decrees, were by him sent into Banishment.

After this, he caus'd the Sepulchre of Jesus Christ to be found out in Jerusalem, and built a stately Church there, as well as at Bethlehem, and at the Mount of Olives. It's said, That he discover'd the Cross of Christ, and some pretend that many Miracles were then done by it. And yet it is very strange, that Eusebius, an Eye-witness of those things, who has exactly described all the Circumstances of the Discovery of Christ's Sepulchre, and who forgets nothing that may be to the Advantage of Religion, should not say one word, neither of the Cross of Christ, nor of the Miracles that are pretended to be wrought by it. About the same time, he gave the Name of Constantinople to the City of Byzantium, and endow'd it with the same Privileges which Old Rome enjoy'd, from whence it had the Name of New Rome. After this, he labour'd more than ever he had done, to aggrandize the Church; he made Laws against Hereticks, wrote to the King of Persia in favour of the Christians, destroy'd the Temples of Idols, gave great Gifts to Churches, and caus'd magnificent Copies of the Bible to be made: In a word, he did so much for Religion, that he had good right to be call'd Bishop of the Church, as to those things that concern its External Policy. And truly the Church had no reason to complain of his Conduct, till the latter end of his Life, when he gave ear to the Accusations that were brought to him against St. Athanasius, by those Bishops that favour'd Arius's Faction: For they being offended with him because he would not appear at a Council held at Caesarea, whither he had been cited to come, mov'd the Emperour to Summon a Synod in the City of Tyre, to Judge his Cause. There St. Athana∣sius appear'd, and finding that his Enemies had injuriously oppress'd him, he had recourse to the Em∣perour, and went to him at Constantinople. Constantine, although prejudic'd against him, yet heard him favourably, and commanded the Bishops of the Council of Tyre, who had called another after∣wards at Jerusalem, to come to him and render an account of their Proceedings. They deputed Six Bishops to go to the Emperour, and accuse St. Athanasius; but those Deputies durst not alledge the Facts, of which they had accus'd him at the Council of Tyre, for fear lest the Emperour, being a lover of Justice, should discover their Falsity, and declare him Innocent. They consult therefore how they might charge him with a Crime against the State, by saying, that he threatned to hinder the Transpor∣tation of Corn from Alexandria to Constantinople. This Accusation made such Impression upon the Emperor's Mind, and so stirred him up against St. Athanasius, that he immediately Banish'd him to Triers, a City of Gaule. The Enemies of St. Athanasius having thus procur'd his Banishment who was the great Opposer of Arius, they call'd back again this Heretick, and us'd all the Endeavours to restore him to the Communion of the Church. But Constantine would not hear of it, till after he had drawn up a Confession of Faith, which appear'd contrary to his Errors, and had Sworn and Protested that this was his Doctrine; yet, even after he had done this, the Emperour, being always jealous of the Man, said to him,

If thy Faith be right, as thou would'st make us believe, thou hast done well to Swear; but if not, then let God condemn thee to some Punishment for this false Oath.

Which words were follow'd with a suitable Effect; for in a little time after, Arius perish'd miserably, the day before he should have been admitted to the Communion of the Church at Constantinople.

The Reader no doubt may wonder that I have not spoke a word all this while of the Baptism of this Emperour; for it seems very strange, that one who took so great care of the Affairs of Christians, one who was convinc'd of the Truth of their Religion, and was ignorant in no Point of their Doctrine, should continue so long a time without initiating himself into the Church by the Sacrament of Bap∣tism. And yet this was certainly so either because he waited to receive Baptism, when he should be near his Death, that by this Sacrament he might throughly expiate his Sins, and so appear Innocent before God; or else because he had some other reason for this delay; However it came to pass, he never thought of preparing himself for Baptism until he felt himself Sick, nor had he ever the Im∣position of the Bishops hands, to make him a Catechumen, till the Year 337 d 1.5, a few days before his Death, being then at Helenopolis, as Eusebius observes in the Fourth Book of this Emperour's Life, Chap. 61. After this, he receiv'd Baptism from the hands of Eusebius of Nicomedia, in the Suburbs of that City, as Eusebius of Caesarea, St. Athanasius, St. Jerom and St. Ambrose, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Evagrius, and all the rest of the Ancients unanimously affirm e 1.6. It is therefore a fabulous Story which is related in the Acts, falsly attributed to Pope Sylvester, That the Baptism of Constantine was celebrated at Rome. And indeed, nothing can be more fabulous than the Account set down in those Acts: For there it is feign'd, that Constantine, being an Enemy to the Christian Religion, and desiring to Persecute it, was smitten with Leprosie; That the Soothsayers said unto him, the only way to cure him, was to bath himself in the Blood of New-born Infants; That many of them were sought out to have their Throats cut, but Constantine being mov'd by their Tears, and the Cries of

their Mothers, restor'd them again, without putting them to Death: That he was afterwards admo∣nish'd in a Dream by St. Peter and St. Paul, that he should be cur'd if he were baptiz'd by Sylvester; which having done, he was presently Purified by Baptism both from his Sins and from his Leprosie. What Forgeries, what Fables are here! What inconsistent Ravings of Madmen! Constantine was never an Enemy to the Christian Religion; he did never Persecute it; he was always a Christian from his heart before he came to Rome. There is no Historian that speaks of his having a Leprosie, or that he was cur'd of it by Baptism. How came Eusebius to forget so considerable a Miracle in the Life of Constantine? With what Face could Julian the Apostate object to the Christians, that Baptism never cleans'd any person from the Leprosie, if his own Grandfather had been cur'd by it? St. Cyril, to con∣fute this Falshood, never alledg'd an Example so Illustrious as this of the Emperour had been. But I forbear to mention any more of the many Absurdities and Impertinencies which are contain'd in those Acts f 1.7. It's certain, Constantine died in a little time after his Baptism in the Year 337, of the vulgar Account, May 22th. in the Consulship of Titianus and Felicianus, the 64th. Year of his Age, after he had reign'd Thirty Years and Ten Months.

This Emperour was one of the greatest Princes that ever was, whether you consider his Conduct and Policy, or take a View of the great Actions of his Life, or reflect on the great Services he had done to the Church. Some accuse him of being an Arian, but that's a Calumny; for though he fa∣vour'd some Bishops, that were of Arius's Faction, and unjustly Banish'd St. Athanasius, yet he always maintain'd the Creed of the Nicene Council, and suffer'd it not to be violated while he liv'd. The Greeks have given him excessive Praises, and plac'd him among the number of Saints, but I think the Latines have done more wisely, in suspending their Judgment as to that. We can say nothing of his Stile, because it is very probable, that the Writings which bear his Name, were composed by others, though done by his Order: They may be distinguish'd into three sorts; his Discourses, his Letters, and his Edicts.

Eusebius assures us. B. III. of the Life of this Emperour, Ch. 2. That he had acquir'd so profound a Knowledge of the Liberal Sciences, that even to the end of his Life, he compos'd Harangues for the Instruction of his Subjects; and that the Method which he observ'd in his Discourses, was, first to be∣gin with the Refutation of the Errors of the Pagans, who ador'd many Gods; and then he proceeded to prove the Unity of God, and his Providence by which he governs the Universe: After which, he explain'd the Motives which brought the Son of God down from Heaven to this Earth, and describ'd the Circumstances of the Life which he led here; from whence he pass'd on to the Description of the last Judgment, and terrified his Hearers with the vehemence of his Discourse, threatning the Vengeance of God, and the Just Punishment of their Sins against the Covetous, the Passionate and the Violent. The same Eusebius, gives us, B. III. Ch. 12. a short Harangue of Constantine's to the Fathers of the Council of Nice, exhorting them to Peace; to which may be added, that Form of Prayer which he

prescrib'd to his Souldiers, related in B. IV. and the Admonition he gave a Covetous Man of his Court, which is to be found Ch. 30. of the same Book: But doubtless the most considerable of his Monuments, is, that great Oration which he made to the Convention of the Saints, translated by Eusebius into Greek, and annexed to his Life. The Preface of this Oration is about the Feast of Easter, the Goodness of our Saviour, and the Ingratitude of Men; but he concludes it with an Apostrophe to the Church. In the Bo∣dy of this Discourse, he disputes against Idolatry and the multiplicity of Gods; and shows that there is but one only true God, the Creator of all things, and the Father of the Word, who is begotten of Him, tho' the Father suffer no Diminution by it, and who is united to Him: He confutes Destiny, establishes Providence and Free-Will, and overthrows the Errors of the Philosophers: He discovers the Advantages which Mankind receiv'd by the Incarnation of the Son of God, and shows that his Coming was foretold by the Prophets, to whose Authority he adds the Prediction of the Sybils, which he endeavours to verifie by the Testimony of Virgil: He describes the unhappy death of those Emperors who persecuted the Church, and finishes this Discourse with saying, That we ought to attribute all the Good we do to God, and be∣fore we undertake any thing, always to implore his Aid by Prayer, as being the Fountain of all Good. The whole Discourse is Sublime, and worthy of the Majesty of such an Emperour as Constantine was.

The Letters of Constantine, are much more numerous than his Discourses. Here's a Catalogue of them, an Account of their Arguments, the Times when they were written, and the Places where they are to be found.

1. There is a Letter of Constantine to Caecilian Bishop of Carthage, for distributing the Alms which he gave to the Poor of Africa, written in the Year 312, and set down by Eusebius, Hist. B. X. Ch. 6.

2. There is a Letter of his to Anulinus for the Immunity of the Clergy, written the same Year, B. X. Ch. 7.

3. His Letter to Miltiades Bishop of Rome, Empowering him to Judge the Cause of the Donatists, written in the Year 313, Euseb. B. X. Ch. 5.

4. His Letter to Ablabius, [Dr. Cave calls him, Aelaphius or Aelianus,] commanding him to send the Bishops of Donatus's Party, and Caecilian, to Arles, to be judg'd there; written in 314, at the end of Optatus.

5. His Letter to Chrestus Bishop of Syracuse, commanding him to repair to the Council of Arles; written the same Year, related by Euseb. Hist. B. X. Ch. 5.

6. His Letter to Caecilian, wherein he commands him to come to Rome, to be judg'd there a-new; written in 315, which is to be found at the end of Optatus.

7. His Letter to Probianus, Proconsul of Africa, to seize upon a Donatist, called Ingentius, set down by St. Austin, Ep. 68. and in his Third Book against Cresconius, Ch. 73. written in 315, as appears from hence, because Probianus did not suceed Aelianus in the Office of Proconsul of Africk, till this Year.

8. His Letter to Celsus, Deputy of Africk, written about the end of the same Year, or the beginning of the next, wherein he recommends it to him, to advertise the Bishops of both Parties, that he should come e'er long, to judge them; and to advise them in the mean time, to continue in Peace. He testifies in this Letter, That he had a mighty Passion to Establish a good Agreement among them.

9. Another Letter of his to the same Celsus, written by his Order by the Praefectus Praetorio in favour of Four Bishops of the Donatists, and one Presbyter who had obtain'd their Liberty.

10. His Letter to Eunalius, Deputy of Africk, in which he gives him Notice of the Judgment he had given in favour of Caecilian against the Donatists, recited in the Conference of Carthage, Ch. 516. There is a Fragment of it in St. Austin's Third Book against Cresconius, Ch. 71. It was written in 316.

11. His Letter to the Bishops of Africa wherein he testifies, That he had done all that was in his Power, to procure Peace to the Church; but since he could not compass it, he must wait till God him∣self afforded a Remedy for their Divisions. This Letter is at the end of Optatus.

12. His Letter to the Bishops of Numidia, in which he grants them a place to build a Church upon, in the room of that which the Donatists had taken by force, and discharges the Ecclesiasticks from Pub∣lick Taxes. Ibidem.

13. His Letter to Eusebius, for building of Churches at the Charge of the Emperour, written in 324 or 325, B. II. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 46.

14. His Letter to the Bishop of Alexandria and Arius the Presbyter, concerning their Differences, wherein he exhorts them to Peace, written about the end of the Year 324, and related by Eusebius, B. II. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 64, &c.

15. His Letter to all the Bishops about the Decisions of the Nicene Council, B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 17.

16. His Letter to the Egyptians upon the same Subject, Ibid.

17. His Letter to Alexander upon the same Subject, Ibid.

18. His Letter against Arius, mention'd by Socrates in the First Book of his Hist. Ch. 9. and related at the end of the History of Gelasius Cyzicenus.

19. His Letter to the Nicomedians against Eusebius and Theognis, related in part by Theodoret, Hist. B. I. Ch. 20. and entirely by Gelasius Cyzicenus.

20. His Letter to Macarius Bishop of Jerusalem, for building a Church in that City, in Euseb. B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 30.

21. His Letter to Eusebius for building a Church in the place where the Oak of Mamre stood, where Abraham had a Vision; in Euseb. B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 52.

22. His Letter to those of Antioch, upon the Deposition of Eustathius, written in 330, set down by Euseb. B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 60.

23. His Letter to Eusebius upon his Refusal of the See of Antioch, B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 61.

24. His Letter to the Synod upon the same Subject, Ibid. Ch. 62.

25. His Letter to Sapor King of Persia, in favour of the Christians, B. IV. of the Life of Constan∣tine, Ch. 9. &c.

26. His Letter to Eusebius upon his Book of Easter, Ibid. Ch. 35.

27. Another Letter to him, concerning the Copies of the Bible, Ch. 36.

28. His Letter to St. Athanasius, in favour of Arius, in Athan. Apol. 2. p. 778.

29. His Letter to the Church of Alexandria, in favour of St. Athanasius, Ibid. p. 779.

30. His Letter to St. Athanasius, against the Cheats of his Enemies, Ibid. p. 785.

31. His Letter to John, the Head of the Meletians, wherein he congratulates his Reconciliation to St. Athanasius, Ibid. P. 787.

32. His Letter to the Council of Tyre, in Euseb. B. IV. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 42.

33. His Letter to the Bishops of the Council of Tyre to cite them to Constantinople, in Athanasius, Apol. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. P. 803.

34. His Letter to Publilius Optatianus Porphyrius, who Dedicated some Poems to him, that were wrote in Prison; published by Paulus Veiserus, and annexed to the Nurenberg Edition of Marcus Velserus's Works. [The 6th. Letter to Caecilian is only hinted at in a Letter of Constantine's to the Donatist Bi∣shops, wherein he tells them, That tho' he had before given Orders that they should return into Afri∣ca, there to have their Controversy with Caecilian Examin'd, yet he was now resolved that they should of both Sides go to Rome, as he himself had written already to Caecilian. This Letter is in the Collection of Records at the end of Optatus.

As also another Letter to the Catholick Bishops in the Council of Arles, wherein he congratulates the Conclusion of their Differences, and expresses his detestation of those Persons who would not abide by what was already determined: Adding withal, That if the Donatists would not be quiet, they should be brought before the Vicarius Praefecturae, to whom he had given Orders to send them to his Palace, where they should meet with such treatment as they deserved.]

There are many other Letters, of which Eusebius design'd to make a distinct Volume, as he himself testifies, B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 24.

Tho' the Edicts which bear Names of the Emperours, are commonly Penn'd by their Secretaries of State, yet I must give an Account of those that Constantine publish'd in favour of the Christians.

The first Edict of Constantine for the Liberty of Religion, was publish'd at Milan, in the Year 313, whereof there is mention made in the following Edict.

The second Edict of Constantine, by which he gave full Liberty to Christians of the publick Exercise of their Religion, and commanded that their Churches should be restor'd to them, was published sometime after the first, and is set down by Eusebius, Hist. B. X. Ch. 5.

His third Edict restrains this favour to Catholicks. 'Tis found in the same place.

His fourth Edict in favour of Religion, is dated the last of October, the same Year: It continues the Immunity of Ecclesiasticks, whom the Hereticks had caus'd to be charg'd with publick Taxes, contrary to the Privileges which had been granted them. The Emperour commands that those who were taxed be discharg'd, and that a Course be taken to hinder any such Proceedings for the future.

Amongst the number of those Edict, made in favour of the Christians, that which was directed to Ablabius, may be reckoned, bearing Date, May 12. 315. in which Constantine commands, That Provi∣sion be made for the Maintenance of the Children of the Poor in Italy.

The fifth Edict of Constantine for the Christian Religion, is dated November 16. the same Year, wherein he condemns the Jews to the Fire, that should abuse the Christians. It is to be found in the Justinian and Theodosian Code.

His seventh Edict directed to Protogenes, dated June 7th. 316, grants a very considerable favour to the Christian Church, by appointing a new way of giving Liberty to Slaves, in the presence of the Bi∣shop and the People. This Law is related in the Justinian Code; Tit. 13. l. 1. Besides this, There are two other Edicts upon the same Subject: The first, which is dated in the Year 321, related in the same place, is added to that, which we have been speaking of, That the Clergy may give Liberty to their Slaves, even out of the Church. The third Edict upon the same Subject is lost.

The first which we have of those Edicts of Constantine, that Establishes the Jurisdiction of Bishops as to Temporals, seems to be that which is related in an Addition to the Theodosian Code, publish'd by Sir∣mondus, under Title 17th. It imports, That if those who plead a Cause, shall appeal to the Judgment of the Bishops, they shall be referr'd thither, altho the Process be enter'd before another Judge. This Edict is dated, June 21st. 318. There is besides this, another on the same Subject, without the date of the Year, related in the same Collection, under the first Title, wherein he Confirms and Explains the former Order, concerning the Judicial Decisions of Bishops, and he will have them to stand firm, even tho' they are given between Minors, commanding, that at all times, and as oft as any one of the two Parties shall desire an Appeal to the Judgment of the Bishop, it shall be granted him. He Ordains also in this Edict, That the Testimony of a Bishop shall be received by all the Judges.

In the Year 319, November 19th. He confirmed the Immunity of the Clergy by a new Edict, de∣claring, That they should be free from all publick Taxes. This Law is related in the Theodosian Code, Lib. 16. Tit. 2. l. 2.

There are many more Edicts of the Year 320, and 321, concerning the Church, among which may be plac'd that which abrogates the Papian Poppaean Law, which was made against those that continued unmarried; this Law, Constantine seems to have abolish'd, in favour of the Christians, who honour those that make Profession of continuing in Celibacy all their Life. Eusebius makes mention of this Edict, B. IV. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 26. and after him Sozomen, B. I. of his Hist. Ch. 9. and St. Am∣brose, B. III. of Virgins.

It was also about this time, that he made some Edicts against the Donatists. The first is related by St. Austin, B. II. against Petilianus, Ch. 92. and in his Letters 167, and 168, wherein he commands, that the Churches should be taken from them which they possess'd: It bears Date, Anno 320.

The second Edict directed to Verinus, dated May the 4th. in the Year 321, moderates alittle the Rigor of the first, for it permits them to return to their own Country, and to live there in quiet, re∣serving to God the Punishment of their Crime. This is also related by St. Austin, Ep. 152. and in his Book written after the Conference of Carthage. The Edict for the due observation of Sunday, of which Eusebius makes mention, B. IV. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 18, and 19. related in the Justinian Code, Lib. III. under the Title, De Feriis. B. III. is dated March 6th. in the Year 321. It imports, That all Judges, People and Artificers, shall cease from their Labour on this Day; yet he excepts Country-men, who are permitted to Till the Ground on this Day, because it often happens, says the Emperour, That a more seasonable time cannot be found to sow their Corn, or Plant their Vines, and it is not fit, that we should lose a favourable Opportunity which Divine Providence has put in our Hands.

There is another Edict of the first of July, the same Year, by which he permits all sorts of Persons to leave their Goods by Testament, to the Catholick Church.

In the Year 323, he publish'd an Edict against those who constrain'd Christians to Sacrifice to Idols, which is in the Theodosian Code, Tit. 2. B. V.

In the next Year he made many Edicts after the defeat of Licinius, for the Liberty of Christians, and for the Restitution of their Goods and their Honour. Eusebius relates them, B. II. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 20, 24, &c.

He produces likewise in the same place, his Edicts against the Worship of False Gods, and for the Establishment of the Church. Ibid. and Ch. 48.

After the Council of Nice, he publish'd an Edict, in which he condemns the Books of Arius to be burnt, and commands his followers to be call'd Porphyrians.

The Edict of the Month of May, in the Year 326, prohibiting the admitting of rich Persons into the Order of the Clergy, or those that were the Children of such as had born publick Offices, appears but little favourable to the Chergy; but it was necessary, because many rich and great Persons, took Holy Orders, to exempt themselves by this means, from the publick Taxes, which tended to the Oppression of the Poor. Wherefore Constantine, says wisely in this Edict, That it was just, the Rich should maintain the heavy Expences of the State, and that the Poor should be fed with the Riches of the Church: We have this Law in the Theodosian Code, B. XVI. Tit. 2. l. 6. Besides this, there is also another Edict publish'd in the Month of July, in consequence of the former, altho', it bears the Names of the Consuls for the Year 320, which forbids the disturbing of those that had taken Holy Orders, before the preceeding Law was publish'd, and commands at the same time, that such as had taken Orders since its publication, on purpose to avoid the publick Taxes, should be re∣mov'd from the Clergy, and sent back into the World, and left liable to publick Taxes. This Edict is related in the same place, B. III. After all, by another Edict of the first of September, the same Year 326, it is ordain'd, That Clergy-men who were Hereticks and Schismaticks, should not enjoy this Privilege of Exemption, but should be subject to Taxes and Impositions. This Edict is in the Justinian Code, B. I. Tit. de Heret. and in the Theodosian.

He treats the Novatians with more moderation than the other Hereticks, permitting them by an Edict of the Month of September in the same Year 326, to keep their Churches, their Coemeteries, and the Goods which they had purchas'd after their Separation from the Church. In the Code of Theo∣dosius, Tit. 5. B. II.

In the Year 330, he publish'd an Edict against the Hereticks, in which he forbids their Assemblies. It is related in Euseb. B. III. of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 63, &c.

There is in the Theodosian Code, another Edict of the same Year, in favour of the Clergy that were accus'd, or evil treated by Hereticks.

The Laws concerning the Jews, are the last which Constantine made in the favour of the Christian Religion.

By an Edict September 27th. 330, He grants to the Patriarchs of the Jews, i. e. to those that presided in their Assemblies, Exemption from the publick Taxes. He renews the same favour by another Edict December 1st. in the Year following. It is probable that he granted these favours to the Jews for no other reason, but because they Worship the same God with the Christians, and to leave them some kind of Consolation, as he says in one of his Laws, because their's was once the only true Religion: For at the same time he made very severe Laws against the Jews that should purchase or detain Chri∣stian Slaves, and condemn'd those to death, that circumcis'd them. There are many other Laws in the Theodosian Code upon this Subject, of the Years 330, 331, and 336.

I do not place among the Number of Constantine's Edicts, the Donation which bears his Name, in which he is suppos'd to give to the Bishop of Rome and his Successors, the Soveraignty of the City of Rome, and of the Provinces of the Western Empire; because this Act has so many signs of Forgery, that 'tis impossible it can be attributed to Constantine. I shall here subjoin some of those Reasons which clearly prove, that it is an Impostor.

1. Not one of the Ancients mentions this pretended Liberality of Constantine to the Church: But who can believe that Eusebius, and all the other Ancient Historians, who have exactly describ'd all the Benefits of this Emperour to Christians, and especially to the Bishops, should pass over in silence one so considerable as this of the Western Empire, to the Bishop of Rome?

2. Not one of the Popes who mention the Benefits of Kings and Emperours to the See of Rome,

or who d••••••nd their Temporal Patri••ony, did ever alledge this pretended Donation, tho' it had been very much for their Advantage so to do.

3. The Date of this Act is false, for it bears the Names of the Consuls, Constantine (for the fourth time,) and Gallica••••s: Now Constantine in his fourth Consulship, had not Gallica••••s, but Licinius, for his Collegue: And this Consulship answers to the Year 315, at which time Constantine was not bap∣tiz'd, even in the Opinion of those that believe he was baptiz'd at Rome by St. Sylvester; and yet men∣tion is made of his Baptism in this Edict of Donation. We must add to this Argument, another Er∣ror in Chronology: Byzantium is there call'd Constantinople, tho' it had not that Name, till Ten Years or thereabouts, after the Date of this Edict.

4. The Stile of it is barbarous, and very different from that of the Genuine Edicts of Constantine: It is full of new Modes of speaking, the Expressions are affected, and the Terms such as were never us'd in any publick Acts, till after the time of Constantine.

5. Who can believe that Constantine should give the City of Rome, all the Provinces and Cities of the West, that is to say, one half of his Empire, to the Bishop of Rome, and that this should never be known till the Eleventh Age of the Church?

6. There are infinite Numbers of Falsities and Absurdities in this Edict, which demonstrate that it was compos'd by an ignorant Impostor: take some of them as follows. In it the Pope is permitted to wear a Crown of Gold, like that of Kings and Emperours, whereas in those times, Kings and Empe∣rours did not wear a Crown at all, but a Diadem. The Fabulous History of Constantine's Baptism by Sylvester, and the miraculous Cure of his Leprosy, is reported there as a thing Certain. There are reckon'd up in this Edict, five Patriarchal Churches, and that of Constantinople is put in the second place, whereas it had not this Honour, till a long time after. And yet it is suppos'd, That Sylvester had already acknowledg'd it for a Patriarchal See. These Falfities and many others that occur in this Edict, do plainly prove, That it is a Forgery.

In short, to destroy entirely this pretended Edict, it is sufficient to observe, That while Constantine liv'd, and a long time after his Death, the City of Rome, and the Empire of the West, were always sub∣ject to the Power of the Emperours; That the Popes themselves acknowledg'd them as their Sove∣reigns, without pretending that the City of Rome, or Italy, or any part of the Western Empire, belong'd to them: That all the Temporal Power they have obtain'd since, is owing to King Pepin and the Emperour Charlemaigne. The Account of this, deserves a little Digression, which will not be tedious to the Reader, and will not carry us too far from our present Subject.

'Tis certain, that the City of Rome, Italy, and all the other Provinces of the Western Empire, were under the Power of Constantine, and the Emperours that succeeded him. History informs us, That they were absolute Masters of it, That they sent Governours thither, That the City of Rome depended upon their Laws, upon their Power, and the Magistrates whom they should appoint; That they made such Changes there as they pleas'd: In a word, That they were no less Masters of it, than of all the other Cities of the World. When afterwards the Barbarians begun to invade Italy, they sent thither Generals of Armies to defend it, as being a Country that belong'd to them: But in spite of all their Endeavours Theodorick King of the Ostrogoths having Conquer'd it, made it Tributary, and govern'd the City of Rome with a Power as absolute as that of the Roman Governours. His Successors, Athalaric and Theo∣dat, maintain'd the Possession of it, untill they were chas'd thence in the time of Justinian by Belisa∣rius the Roman Captain, who took the City of Rome by Force. A little time after, Count Narsetes de∣livered all Italy from the Tyranny of these Barbarians, and reduc'd it under the Power of the Greek Emperours, to which it had belong'd.

His Successor, nam'd Longinus, finding it was difficult to govern all Italy, which was divided into many Petty Principalities, appointed Dukes or Governours over the Principal Cities, and reserv'd to himself the Sovereignty over them; taking the Title of Exarch or Viceroy, and all this while acknow∣ledging the Emperour for his Lord. From this time forward, the Emperours sent Exarchs into Italy, who commonly resided at Ravenna, and govern'd all Italy. But this Exarchate was diminish'd by little and little, and at last was wholly destroy'd, when the Lombards made themselves Masters of Italy. Until this time it does not appear that the Popes were Sovereigns of the City of Rome, and of Italy; on the contrary, they themselves were subject to the Emperour or King of Italy, and obey'd him as all his other Subjects. The History of the Popes furnishes us with many Instances, which prove this clearly. The First is that of Pope Liberius, whom the Emperour Constantius order'd to be made Prisoner, and carried out of Rome by Leontius Governour of that City, as St. Athanasius testifies. The Schism of Damasus and Ursicinus, does also prove, that the Popes were subject to the Emperours. Maximus, that then govern'd the City of Rome for the Emperour, compos'd the Differences that arose between those two Competitors, and the Bishops themselves address'd to the Emperour, praying him, that Ursicinus might be forc'd to depart out of the City of Rome. The same Observation may be made upon the Schism of Eulalius and Boniface, which was also cur'd by the Order of the Empe∣rour, and afterwards by King Theodorick, when he became Master of Italy. 'Tis remarkable, that this King exercis'd his Power over the Church of Rome and its Bishop with so much Haughtiness, that he appointed a Visitor to this Church, and sent poor Pope John, being very sick, to the Greek Empe∣rour, to obtain a Revocation of the Edict he had made against the Arians; which John not being able to obtain, Theodorick caus'd him to be imprison'd at Ravenna, where he died. Theodatus sent in like manner from Rome, Pope Agapetus, to the Emperour Justinian, and when he became Master of Italy, he us'd the Popes no less roughly than Theodorick had done; for he exacted of them great Summs of Money to confirm their Ordination, and caus'd the Popes, Silverus and Vigilius, to be carried to Constan∣tinople, where he made them approve the Restauration of Anthimus, to the Patriarchal See of that City.

Martin the First, was also banished to the Province of Pontus, by the Exarch of Ravenna, according to the Orders he had receiv'd from the Emperour. Justinian the Younger banish'd also Pope Sergius. In short, The Emperour Leo Isauricus, would have put to Death, Pope Gregory the Second: But the Italians growing weary of their subjection to the Power of Strangers, who could not secure them against their Enemies, began to shake off the Yoke and to acknowledge their Dukes for Soveraigns. The Pope nevertheless oppos'd them in it, and did all that lay in his Power to retain them in their Allegiance, acknowledging, as he himself speaks in his Letter written to the Duke of Venice, That the Republick of Rome was subject to the Dominion of the Emperours. But the Lombards after∣wards invading Italy, and having no expectation of Succours from the Greek Emperour who was en∣tangled by other Wars, the Popes, Gregory the Third, and Zachary, were oblig'd to have recourse to Charles Martel Governour of the French. This Prince by menaces obtain'd of L••itprand King of the Lombards, and his Successor Rachiseus, the Restitution of the Exarchate of Ravenna, which by his means was twice restor'd to the Exarchs depending upon the Greek Emperours. But at last Astolphus the Brother of Rachiseus made himself Master of it for ever, and oblig'd Eutychius, the last Exarch of Ra∣venna, to retire into the East.

Stephen the Second being afraid, for the City of Rome was oblig'd to make a Truce with Astolphus for Forty Years in the Name of the Roman Republick. But this King breaking his Word, came four Months after with a great Army to Take and Sack the City of Rome. In this extremity, Stephen writes presently to the Greek Emperour for Succours, but seeing there were no hopes of any from thence, he had recourse to King Pepin, who coming to besiege Pavia, forc'd King Astolphus to sue for Peace; which was granted him, upon Condition that he should not only restore to the Church of Rome, all the Lands and Territories which she had possess'd in Italy; but also should yield up the Exarchate of Ra∣venna, and the Cities of the Roman Dutchy. This Peace was quickly broke by the perfidiousness of this Lombard King, who perceiving that Pepin was gone out of Italy, went forthwith and besieg'd the City of Rome. Pepin presently reliev'd it, and rais'd the Siege; and yet Astolphus found himself in too good a Condition to perform the Articles of Peace, which he had made: But Pepin forc'd him to give Hostages, and enlarg'd the Bounds of the Exarchate of Ravenna, which Fulradus the Abbot of St. Denys, receiv'd in his Name, and presently restor'd into the Hands of the Pope. It is observable, that in the time of these two Expeditions of Pepin, an Ambassador came from the Greek Emperour, and de∣manded back again the Exarchate of Ravenna, as belonging of right to his Master: But Pepin believing that he was lawfully dispossess'd, thought it more convenient to give it to the Pope. In the mean time, the Greek Emperour was still Master of Sicily, Apulia, Calabria, and all the extreme Parts of Italy, and had a Governour call'd George in the City of Naples, who combin'd with Desiderius the Suc∣cessor of Astolphus, to Invade the Exarchate of Ravenna.

Paul the First knowing of this League, and seeing himself attack'd by this Lombard, wrote pre∣sently to Pepin, his Protector. Desiderius fearing the Power of this King, push'd the Matter no fur∣ther at this time, and promis'd to restore to the Roman Church what he had taken from it: But, as it plainly appeared after the Death of Pepin, Pope Adrian implor'd the Aid of Charlemaigne, who came with a great Army, defeated Desiderius, and shut him up in Pavia. From thence Charles went to Rome, and restor'd to the Pope all the Cities which his Father Pepin had given him, and all the Estates which the Roman Church had possess'd in Italy. In consideration of which Benefits, Adrian, as Head of the Roman Republick, granted him, with the consent of the People of Rome, the Title of Patricius, and gave him the Sovereignty over the City and all the Republick of Rome; insomuch that all the People, and even the Bishop himself, took an Oath of Allegiance to him. After this, Charles wanted nothing but the Title of Emperour, which he received in the Year 800, being then Proclaim'd Emperour by the People of Rome, and afterwards Consecrated and Crown'd by the Pope. When Charles had gotten the Title of Emperour, he regulated all the Affairs of Italy; he permitted the Lombards to live peaceably under his Dominion; he gave the Name of Romania to the ancient Exar∣chate, and shar'd Italy with the Greek Emperour, on condition, that all which was on this side Naples, should belong to him; and that the City of Naples and all that was on the other side of it, should continue in the Greek Emperour's Power.

From this time the Successors of Charles were Kings of Italy, and Sovereigns of Rome; though the Popes were Temporal Lords of the Cities that anciently belong'd to the Exarchate of Ravenna, and some others. Ludovicus Pius, the Son of Charlemaigne, sent Bernard to Rome, to allay the Dissentions that were risen there. After the Death of this Bernard, Lotharius comes to Rome with an Army, to punish some Rebels, and ordains, That for the future the Magistrates of Rome should be cre∣ated by the Emperours. But Charles the Bald parted with this Noble Right, and Surrendred up to the Romans the Sovereign Power, restoring them, if I may so say, to their ancient Liberty.

In the mean while, the Popes begun to lay by little and little the Foundations of their Sovereign Dominion. For although the Sovereign Power did as yet remain in the Body of the People, who created the Magistrates in Rome, and the Neighbouring Cities, nevertheless, the Popes who were now grown Rich and Powerful, us'd all their Endeavours to make themselves Sovereigns, and that the shadow of Sovereignty should only remain in the People. Yet the Romans had two Consuls, one Praetor, and one Governor of the City, whom they chose; and oftentimes cast off the Yoke which the Popes would impose upon them; which was the Cause of those cruel Wars that happen'd between the Popes, the Principal Citizens of Rome, and the Emperours of Germany: But at last the Popes got the better on't, and remain'd sole Masters and Sovereigns of Rome, and the Countries about it.

All that we have said concerning the Foundation and Growth of the Pope's Power, plainly shews,

that the Settlement of their Empire is not owing to Constantine, but to the Kings of France; and by consequence, that the Edict of Donation that bears the Name of Constantine, is wholly Supposititious; but it is not so easie to find out who was the Author of this false Monument, and upon what Motives he Forg'd it. 'Tis certain, that it is more ancient than Hincmar, since that Bishop cites it in his Third Ep. Ch. 13. and Isidore * 1.8 has put it in his Collection. It is also alledg'd by Pope Leo the Ninth, in his Epistle to Michael Cerularius; and St. An∣selm, Ivo Carnutensis, and Gratian, have inserted it into their Collections. To conclude, Balsamon a Greek Author, has related a part of it in Greek, in his Commentaries upon Photius's Nomocanon. Baronius, and those that blindly follow his Conjectures, have suspected the Greeks of this Forgery, pretending that they forg'd this Monument to establish the Antiquity of the Patriarchate of Constan∣tinople, by affirming, that the Church of Rome ows its Grandeur to the Emperour Constantine. But besides, that 'tis no ways probable that the Greeks should forge an Act contrary to their own preten∣ded Right over Italy, this Edict is found cited by the Latines 200 Years before it was known to the Greeks. Morinus believes that it was written by John, a Deacon of the Church of Rome, who liv'd in the Year 963: But that cannot be, since it was cited before that time by Hincmar. Monsieur de Mar∣ca maintains, That the Popes fram'd this Monument with the consent of the French Kings, That they might oppose it against the Greek Emperours, who demanded back again the Exarchate of Ravenna, as belonging to them: But what probability is there, that the Popes and French Kings should have re∣course to this Forgery, which might easily be discover'd, having much better Reasons to alledge to the Greeks, why the Exarchate of Ravenna did not belong to them? Some have attributed this false Monument to the Author of the Collection of Isidore, a notorious Forger of such kind of Pieces; and this Conjecture is more probable than the rest, but neither is it certain, and therefore it is better to suspend our Judgment about this Matter, than to build it upon Conjectures that have so little so∣lidity.

Besides the Greek Fragments of this Edict recited by Balsamon, 'tis said, there are Four Greek Manu∣scripts of the whole Edict in the Vatican Library. The Latin Editions of it do not altogether agree; for Isidore's is different from that which is found in the ancient Manuscript of Justellus. One Bartho∣lomew Picernas, boasts that he made a new Translation of it from a Greek Manuscript in the Vatican Library, which he printed with a Dedication to Pope Julius the Second: But he has done nothing but corrected the ancient Latin Edition. A Priest of Deventer has also printed this Edition at Cologne in the Year 1535. The Differences of all these Editions are to be seen in Father Labbe's First Volume of the Councils. It seems more probable to me, That the Greek was taken out of the Latin, than that the Latin was translated from the Greek. However it be, this Monument has neither Authority nor Usefulness.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Constantine the Empe∣rour.
• a 1.2

  Who was the only Person of all those that shar'd the Empire in his time, that did not Persecute the Christians.] The D••na••ist•• in a Petition which they presented to Constantine, say, That he was the Son of a Just Father, who did not Persecute the Christians. Euseb. Hist. B. VIII. Ch. 13, 15. And Ch. 16. he relates, That Constantius was very favourable to the Christians: And Constantine himself in his Edict, recited by Eusebius, in his Books of the Life of that Emperour, says, That his Father was the only Emperour, who was favourable to the Wor∣ship of the True God.
• b 1.3

  Who had not the Title of Empress, while Constantius liv'd.] Eusebius 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Jerom, Cassiodorus, and Or••sius, make no scruple to give her the Title of Constantius's Concubine; Eutropius, altho' a Pagan, sweetens this Ex∣pression, by saying, That Constantine was born of a Marriage that was but little known, i. e. That tho' He∣lena was Married to Constantius, yet she had not the Ti∣tle of Empress; (and those Women that had not the honourable Name of Augustae, were called the Concubines of the Emperors.) Helena had not this Dignity till after the Death of Constantius, and then her Son gave it her, as Eusebius observes. She was of Drepane a City of Bithynia, to which Constantine gave the Name of He∣lenopolis, in honour of his Mother. It is agreed on all hands, That she was of mean Extraction; and St. Am∣brose says, She was an Hostess, and by this means Con∣stantius first became acquainted with her.
• c 1.4

  But the Donatists still complaining of this Decision.] Valesius has prov'd in his Dissertation about the History of the Donatists, That the Donatists did not appeal from the Synod at Rome; but only complain'd to the Em∣perour that their Cause was not fully examin'd; and that they appeal'd afterwards from the determination of the Council at Arles, to that of the Emperour.
• d 1.5

  To make him a Catechumen, till the Tear 337.] Eu∣sebius says expresly, That Constantine then first received Imposition of Hands, and that he assisted at the Solemn Prayers of the Church; which plainly shews, that he was not a Catechumen before. Neither does the Title of the First Book, Chap. 32. of the Life of Constantine, con∣tradict this Observation, for there it is only said that Constantine was Catechized, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the meaning of which is, only that he was instructed in the Christian Doctrine, which does not prove that he was a Catechu∣men, and we never read before this time that he assisted at the Publick Prayers of the Church.
• e 1.6

  All the Ancients unanimously affirm.] Eusebius, B. I. Of the Life of Constantine, Ch. 32. St. Jerom in his Chro∣nicle, says, Constantinus ultimo vitae suae tempore baptizatus est. St. Ambrose in his Funeral Oration upon Theodosius, says of Constantine, Cui licet baptismatis gratia in extremis constituto omnia peccata dimiserit. The Fathers of the Council of Ariminum, in a Letter written at the beginning of that Synod, say, That he died a little after he was baptiz'd: which is certainly spoken of Constantine the Great, after they had mention'd in the same place his assisting at the Council of Nice. I might add to this many other unquestionable Witnesses, such as Socrates, B. I. Ch. 39. Sozomen, B. II. Ch. 34. Theodoret, B. I. Ch. 32. Evagrius, B. III. Ch. 42. the Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle, &c.
• f 1.7

  I forbear to mention any more of the many Absurdities and Impertinencies which are contain'd in those Acts.] There 'tis said, That St. Sylvester first appointed the Celebra∣tion of Sunday, that he held a Synod of 75 Bishops at Rome in the Year 315, where they found 109 Jewish Priests. The same Author tells a Story of a Font and its Ornaments, which smells rank of a Fable. He makes Laws for Constantine which are ridiculous, and which never any heard of before. He reports, That Constan∣tine laid the first Foundation of the Church of Rome, and carried thither 12 Baskets full of Earth in honour of the 12 Apostles. These Remarks, and many more of that sort, make it as clear as day, that those Acts are Suppositious. And yet there is brought to maintain them, First, The Authority of Pope Gelasius, who pla∣ces them among those Monuments that are Genuine; And, that of Adrian, who cites those Acts in his Let∣ter to the Empress Irene, for maintaining Images; To which are added, the Testimonies of the Author of a Book call'd, The Pontifical of Damasus; of Nicholas the First in his Letter to the Emperour Michel; of Anasta∣sius, Nicephorus, and some other Modern Authors. But are all these Authorities to be compar'd with those of the Ancients whom we have cited? and what else do they prove, but that those Acts were forg'd since the time of Gelasius? This Pope therefore had never seen them him∣self, nor does he approve them of his own knowledge, but only saith, That he heard that some Persons had read them. As to Adrian 'tis very well known, that he was not very Critical in the choice of the Monuments which he cited, and that he alledges sometimes those that are forg'd, as well as those that are Genuine. The following Testimonies are still of less Authority.

  Secondly, Gregory of Tours is cited for those Acts, who B. II. Ch. 31. of his History, saith to King Clovis, Behold, a new Constantine, who goes to Baptism to heal the Malady of an Inveterate Leprosie, and to wash out the Spots and Stains of his past Life by those most holy Waters. But this passage proves nothing, because he does not mean the Leprosie of his Body, but only of his Soul; And moreover, it were not at all strange that Gregory of Tours, a very credulous Man, should give credit to those forged Acts.

  In short, Our Adversaries not finding any ancient Christian for their turn, have recourse to Zosimus a Pagan Author, and a great Enemy to Constamine, who says, That Constantine was tormented with remorse of Conscience, after he had kill'd Crispus his Son, and Fausta his Wife; and having sought in vain for some Expiation by the Sacrifices of the Pagans, he applied himself to an Egyptian, who told him, That the Christian Doctrine had Power to expiate all Sins; after which Dis∣course, he abandon'd the Religion of his Ancestors. But those who employ this passage to prove the Bap∣tism of Constantine at Rome, do great Injury to Constan∣tine's Reputation, by giving Credit to the Lye of an Heathen, who for this is convicted of Forgery by all Our Writers. Secondly, They do not consider that the Death of Crispus and Fausta happen'd after the Council of Nice, and so this whole Story of Zosimus is nothing to their purpose: In fine, Zosimus says not that he was Baptiz'd, but that he Embrac'd the Christian Doctrine. I shall not now stay to refute those that pre∣tend Constantine was twice Baptiz'd, the first time at Rome by Sylvester, the second time at Nicomedia by Eu∣sebius, for the same Authorities we have alledg'd, de∣stroy this Supposition; and besides, it is altogether in∣credible that Eusebius and the other Bishops with him, should have Re-baptiz'd Constantine with so much Pomp and Ceremony, if he had been Baptiz'd before; espe∣cially at a time when the Dispute about the Trinity was not started.
• * 1.8

  Mercator.