It was a happy day when the Christians could walk abroad without fear of persecution. But Constantine claimed the right to supervise re ligion, as the emperor had always done in the case of paganism. lie accounteehimself still the great high priest, or Pontifex Maximus, and assumed the prerogative to compose differences, decide questions of religious policy, call ecclesi astical councils, and appoint the leading of ficers. He had no faith in paganism, hut would not suppress it. His line of conduct was to allow it to go on as he found it, and yet to help the Christians to conquer it. He was, of all successful rulers, the most successful trimmer.
Hitherto the Church had been a grand moral unity, held together by ties of love and doctrine. But now it was absorbed by the State. Its frame work was lost in the body politic. Freeman says: "The Church conquered the State." This is a great error. Constantine's adoption of Christian ity as the State religion was the conquest of the Church by the State. All the moral forces of the Church were now impaired. The bondage of the Church to the State, thus early begun, pro duced the great evils of the following twelve cen turies—superstition, the purchase of office, the an gry controversy about theological trifles, the moral corruption of the clergy and the ignorance of the masses.
When Julian came to the throne in 361, for a time he was silent as to his attitude toward the Christians, but he soon exhibited a spirit of refined opposition to all Christian institutions and doc trines. He issued no formal edict against Chris tianity, but raised barriers on every hand. He was the last ruler on the Roman throne who was hostile to Christianity. He passed into history as Julian the Apostate. The epithet is probably a misnomer, as it is not likely that Julian was ever a real disciple of Christ.
The march of the Roman bishop towards pri ority throughout the Christian world was steady. Bishop Leo I. (440-461) was a man of strong in tellect, and he did much to clothe himself with power and prestige. But the most eminent incum bent of the Roman episcopate was Gregory, who vas called the Great, and ruled A. D. 590-6o4. Un der him every department of the priesthood and the episcopacy advanced in strength.
Roman centralization became constantly greater. Church offices multiplied rapidly, and the close of the early period was the signal for larger measures for Roman primacy. The Bishops of Rome were the real rulers of Southern Europe from the Constantinian dynasty to the reign of Charles the Great.
(4) The MediEevaI Church (A. D.768-1517). The significance of the Middle Ages lies in their transitional character. It was the far-reaching mission of this remarkable period to test the pow er of Christianity for meeting the wants of new nations; to withstand the shock of all philosophi cal schools; to sift and preserve the best that re mained of the ancient world and pass it safely down for modern use ; and, above all, to prove the ultimate power of Christianity to rise above the infirmities of those who professed it, and to lay the foundations of a new spiritual life by a re turn to the pure, apostolic example. The office of
the Mediaeval Church was to conduct man from the narrow limits of the pagan to the Protestant world.
The first period of the Medieval Church ex tends from Charles the Great to the papacy of Gregory VIL—A. D. 768-1073. This was the time of the full appropriation and unification of the Germanic and other northern elements. Moham medanism, lying at the border-line between the ancient and the mediaeval time, arose as a coun ter-force to Christianity. Papal supremacy in Church and State culminated. Looked upon in retrospect, there is almost no intellectual or polit ical treasure of the nineteenth century whose precious seeds were not cast into the ready soil between the ninth and sixteenth centuries.
The process of centralization north of the Alps began with Charles the Great—Charlemagne. His rule was the signal of death to the tottering Ro man empire. It was also the first prophecy of the ascendency of the new Gothic nations of the North and of their firm place in the later life of Europe. In him the old classic conditions disap peared and the new political life began its career.
Charles the Great ascended the throne on the death of his father, Pepin, in 768. He divided with his brother, Carloman, the Frankish empire. Carloman died in 771, and Charles the Great unit ed his own empire with that of the rest of the family and claimed rule over all, without regard to the rights of his brother's family. The soil was now prepared for the new European life— the Church and the State working hand in hand for universal dominion. Charles the Great re garded himself as a theocratic lord. His notion of himself was not that he was a mere successor of Constantine or Augustus Cxsar, but of David or Solomon—the head of a vast theocracy. To the pope, Leo III., he made this declaration of their mutual relations: "It is my bounden duty, by the help of the Divine compassion, everywhere to de fend outwardly by arms the holy Church of Christ against every attack of the heathen and every de vastation caused by unbelievers; and inwardly to defend it by the recognition of the general faith. But it is your duty, Holy Father, to raise your hands to God, as Moses did, and to support my military service by your prayers." Leo III ac cepted this declaration with the utmost com plaisance.