CRISTO RAUL. READING HALL THE DOORS OF WISDOM

THE HISTORY OF THE POPES

THE LIFE AND TIMES OF POPE GREGORY I THE GREAT. A.D. 540 – 604

BOOK INTRODUCTORY

II.

BIRTH AND PARENTAGE.

THE exact date of Gregory's birth is unknown. It was probably about the year 540, some ten years after Benedict of Nursia had founded the Benedictine order. He was well-born, and well-educated. His father Gordianus was a wealthy Roman of senatorial rank, descended from a pope Felix (probably Felix III, who became pope AD 467), and described as a religious man. He bore the title “Regionarius”, denoting an office of dignity, the precise nature of which is not clear. His mother Silvia (who, after her husband's death, lived in ascetic seclusion), and two sisters of Gordianus, Tarsilla and Emiliana (who lived in their own house as dedicated virgins), have obtained a place in the calendar of Saints.

With such surroundings his early training is spoken of by John the Deacon, his biographer, as having been that of a saint among saints, and at no time of his life do his first religious impressions appear to have lost their hold on him. It is interesting to be able to form an idea of the outward aspect of parents under whose eye and influence such men as St. Gregory have grown up. We are enabled to do this in the present case through a description by John the Deacon of portraits of Gordianus and Silvia placed by their son, when pope, in his monastery of St. Andrew. The father is tall, has a long face, a grave countenance, “green” eyes, a moderate beard, and thick hair. The mother's face is round and fair, showing traces of great beauty though wrinkled with age; her countenance is cheerful, her eyes large and blue, and her lips comely.

The description gives us the idea of an interesting pair, the more so from the contrast between them; and that of the mother especially of a very pleasant saint. It is further interesting to learn, from the same authority, that Gregory himself, who left his own portrait in the same monastery, combined the paternal and maternal features, his face being a happy medium between the length of his father’s and the roundness of his mother’s, “most becomingly prolonged, with a certain rotundity”. He had the advantage also of a liberal as well as a religious education, by which he profited so much that the historian Gregory of Tours, his contemporary, states that in grammar, rhetoric, and logic, he was considered second to none in Rome. He also studied law, as befitted his rank in life; he soon distinguished himself in the Senate; and, at an unusually early age (certainly before 573, in which year he would be little more than 30 years of age), he was appointed by the Emperor Justin II to the dignified office of praetor of the city.

While thus living in the world, pursuing honorably the career opened to him by his birth and talents, we find no allusion to any failure in purity of life; nor, on the other hand, to any ascetic affectation. He dressed, at any rate, conformably to his rank; for Gregory of Tours speaks of the contrast, striking the eyes of observers, between the monkish garb which he afterwards assumed and the silk attire, the sparkling gems, and the purple-striped trabea (toga) with which in the earlier period he had paced the streets of Rome. This mode of life, however, did not long satisfy his religious aspirations.

We do not read in his case of any crisis of conversion, as in the case of some saints. As far as we know, he was always religious, having striven, while living in the world (as he says in one of his letters), to live to God also, but having found it difficult. Accordingly, on his father's death (the date of which is not known), he kept but a small part of the large patrimony that came to him, employing the rest in charitable uses, and especially in founding monasteries, of which he endowed six in Sicily, and one, dedicated to St. Andrew, on the site of his own house near the church of St. John and St. Paul at Rome, in which he himself became a monk. This was the line to which strong devotion would almost necessarily lead him at the age in which he lived, especially with the recent example of St. Benedict before him, whom he much admired, and of whom he has left us many interesting records.

A.

RESIDENCE AT CONSTANTINOPLE.

With what fervency, or even excess, of zeal he took up the monastic life will appear presently. It was, however, soon interrupted by the pope, Benedict I, who required his services in the capacity of his representative (apocrisiarius) at Constantinople, to qualify him for which office, having summoned him from his monastery, he ordained him one of the seven deacons of Rome.

Pelagius II also employed him afterwards in the same capacity, requiring his services especially for urging on the emperor the necessity of sending aid to Rome, both in money and soldiers, against the aggressions of the Lombards, which the exarch at Ravenna had declared himself powerless to oppose.

Gregory remained thus employed for several years at Constantinople; and the time so spent, however uncongenial to him the employment might be, was doubtless of great importance in preparing him for the high position to which he was afterwards to be called, bringing him in contact with the emperor and his court, giving him acquaintance with political parties and influences, and opportunity for cultivating the talent for diplomacy which he possessed in an eminent degree.

Secular affairs, however, did not occupy him entirely. We are told by his biographer, John the Deacon, that he found continual refuge from them in the society of many of his brother monks, who, out of their love to him, had followed him from Rome, and with whom he kept up his aspirations after the heavenly life, “retiring to their society from the constant storm of business as to a safe port, bound by their example, as by an anchor-cable, to the placid shore of prayer”.

He also found opportunity for the exercise of his theological acquirements. We find him engaged in a long dispute with the Constantinopolitan patriarch Eutychius, who had written a treatise on the nature of the body after the resurrection, maintaining that it would be of an impalpable kind, subtle as air. This position Gregory opposed, alleging the recorded palpability of the risen body of the Saviour, the first-fruit of the resurrection, which was such as could be touched and handled. The emperor himself, Tiberius, is said to have terminated the dispute in favor of Gregory; and both the disputants are affirmed to have been so fatigued by their controversy that they had both to take to their beds at its close.

He also commenced during his stay — at the instigation (it is said) of Leander, Archbishop of Seville, whose intimate acquaintance he at this time formed — his famous commentary on the book of Job, of which further mention will be hereafter made.

Recalled at length to Rome, he was allowed, at his own earnest request, to return to his monastery, of which he became the abbat on the removal of the former abbat Maximianus to the see of Syracuse; but was still employed by the pope as his secretary; and here he remained till, in the year 590, when he was about 50 years of age, circumstances again disturbed his peace, and forced the popedom upon him.

It has been said above that he threw himself with great zeal into monastic life. It appears from many passages in his writings to have been his ideal, not only of saintly perfection, but also of peaceful happiness. He says in his preface to his Dialogues, which were written (he tells us) by way of solace to his mind under the constant sadness arising from the cares of office:

"My unhappy mind remembers what it was in the monastery; how it soared above the vicissitudes of fleeting things, because it thought only of things celestial; and, though retained in the body, transcended through contemplation the enclosures of the flesh; while even of death, which to almost all men appears a penalty, it was enamored as being the entrance into life, and the reward of its labor. But now, by reason of the pastoral care, it has to bear with secular business, and, after so fair a vision of rest, is fouled by terrestrial dust. I ponder on what I now endure; I ponder on what I have lost. For lo! now I am shaken by the waves of a great sea, and in the ship of the mind am dashed by the storms of a strong tempest: and when I recall the condition of my former life, I sigh as one who sees with reverted eyes the shore that he has left behind". His asceticism appears to have been extreme, as was likely to be the case with a sincere devotee.

B.

MONASTIC LIFE. ASCETICISM.

The monastic theory required it of all aspirants to perfection. His fasts are said to have been such as to endanger his life, had he not been induced to abate their rigor. He himself speaks in the Dialogues of his perpetual illnesses while in his convent, due probably (as might be also in part the bad health from which he suffered through life) to excessive abstinence. During one Holy Week it is particularly mentioned by his biographer that he fainted so frequently, and seemed so nearly at death's door, that he feared greatly lest he should not be able to continue his fast till Easter Day. But a holy monk, Eleutherius, from another convent, came and prayed for him that he might have strength to persevere; whereupon all at once he lost all desire for food, and even all recollection of his former craving, and, when Easter came, could have fasted a day longer, if he had wished to do so.

We are told, further, that his mother Silvia, who at that time lived a secluded life in the neighborhood, used to feed him in his monastery with raw peas or beans. His regime as abbat may be judged of from an anecdote related by himself in his Dialogues, which shall be given in his own words. It is introduced by him as evidence of the salutary effect of Eucharistic offerings for the dead, and is interesting as also illustrating his tone of feeling and belief.

“There was a certain monk called Justus, skilled in medicine, who had been accustomed to serve me diligently in the same monastery, and to watch with me in my perpetual illnesses. He fell sick, and was reduced to the last stage. His own brother, Copiosus by name, who still practices medicine in this city, attended him. But the aforesaid Justus, when he perceived his end approaching, informed his brother Copiosus that he had three pieces of gold concealed. Which thing could not be hidden from the brethren, who, subtly searching, and examining his medicine, found the three gold pieces concealed in a drug.

“The matter being announced to me, I could not bear with equanimity so great an evil in a brother who had lived with us in common: for it had always been a rule of my monastery that the brethren should have everything in common, and no one anything of his own. Smitten then with excessive grief, I began to think what I should do either for the purgation of the dying man or for example to the living brethren. So I called to me Pretiosus, the prior of the monastery, and said: 'See that none of the brethren approach him as he is dying, and that he receive no word of consolation from any one's mouth; but when at the point of death he shall ask for the brethren, let his brother after the flesh tell him that on account of the hidden gold pieces he is abominated by them all; so that at least in death bitterness for his fault may pierce his soul, and purge him from the sin that he has committed. But after his death let not his body be laid with those of the brethren, but make a hole in any dunghill, and throw his body into it with the three gold pieces, all of you exclaiming together, ‘Thy money perish with thee’; and so cover him with earth. All this was done, and had the effect I desired. For when this same monk was at the point of death, and anxiously desired to be commended to the brethren, and none of them deigned to come to him or speak to him, and when his brother after the flesh explained to him why he was abominated by them all, he groaned grievously for his sin, and in the midst of his sadness departed from this body, and was buried as I have said. But all the brethren, perturbed by this sentence upon him, began to bring forth even the commonest little things which they had been always allowed by the rule to have, being mightily afraid of keeping anything for which they might be blamed.

“But, when thirty days had elapsed, my mind began to commiserate the departed brother, and, thinking with deep sorrow of his punishments, to seek some way of delivering him. So I again summoned Pretiosus the prior, and said to him: ‘It is now long that that brother who died has been tormented in fire: we ought to show him some charity, and further his deliverance as far as we can. Go, therefore, and see that the sacrifice be offered for him from this day daily for thirty days; let no single day be omitted on which the salutary host is not offered for his absolution’. He departed, and obeyed.

“Now we, being otherwise occupied, did not keep count of the days as they passed by; but on a certain night this departed brother appeared in a vision to his own brother Copiosus, to whose inquiry how he was he replied, ‘Till now I have been in evil case, but now it is well with me; for today I have received the communion’. Copiosus having at once informed the brethren in the monastery, they diligently computed the days, and found that it was the day on which the thirtieth oblation had been completed. And thus, as Copiosus had known nothing of what the brethren were doing for his brother, and as they had known nothing of what he had seen, the coincidence of the vision and the sacrifice proved clearly that the departed brother escaped punishment through the salutary host”.

In this narration some modern readers may only see an unlovely union of inhumanity and superstition. But with regard to the charge of inhumanity it is to be borne in mind that Gregory was at the time in the fresh fervor of monastic enthusiasm. That he was really at heart both humane and charitable his subsequent life and letters prove. If he seems at first sight otherwise in this case, it was because a paramount religious motive had possession of him. And it is observable further, that all through the proceedings he had regard to the spiritual advantage of the offending monk quite as much as to the maintenance of the monastic rule. As to the superstition or credulity involved in the latter part of the story, more will be said hereafter about his mental attitude in these respects. All we need say here is that he held the views of his day. It is to be remembered also that he was not so absorbed in the contemplative life as to be incapable of an influx of missionary enthusiasm. For it was during this period that, roused by the sight of the English slaves in the market-place of Rome, he conceived the idea of going forth to convert England, of which more will be said hereafter.

C.

GREGORY ELECTED POPE.

Pope Pelagius died on the 8th of February, 590. The people of Rome, as has been already intimated, were at this time in the utmost straits. Italy lay prostrate and miserable under the Lombard invasion; the invaders now threatened Rome itself, and its inhabitants trembled; famine and pestilence within the city produced a climax of distress; an overflow of the Tiber at the time aggravated the general alarm and misery; Gregory himself, in one of his letters, compares Rome at this time to an old and shattered ship, letting in the waves on all sides, tossed by a daily storm, its planks rotten and sounding of wreck. In this state of things all men's thoughts at once turned to Gregory.

The pope was at this period the virtual ruler of Rome, and the greatest power in Italy; and they must have Gregory as their pope; for, if anyone could save them, it was he. His abilities in public affairs had been proved; all Rome knew his character and attainments; he had now the further reputation of eminent saintliness.

He was evidently the one man for the post; and accordingly he was unanimously elected by clergy, senate, and people. But he shrank from the proffered dignity. There was one way by which he might possibly escape it. No election of a pope could at this time take effect without the emperor's confirmation, and an embassy had to be sent to Constantinople to obtain it. Gregory therefore sent at the same time a letter to the emperor (Mauricius, who had succeeded Tiberius in 582), imploring him to withhold his confirmation; but it was intercepted by the prefect of the city, and another from the clergy, senate, and people sent in its place, entreating approval of their choice.

During the interval that occurred, Gregory was active in his own way at Rome. He preached to the people, calling them to repentance; he also instituted what is known as the “Septiform Litany”, to be chanted in procession through the streets of the city by seven companies of priests, of laymen, of monks, of virgins, of matrons, of widows, and of poor people and children, who, starting from different churches, were to meet for common supplication in the church of the Blessed Virgin. In it the words occur, peculiarly interesting to us as having been afterwards sung by his emissaries Augustin and his monks, as they marched into Canterbury at the commencement of their mission in this country: “We beseech thee, O Lord, in all thy mercy, that thy wrath and thine anger may be removed from this city, and from thy holy house. Allelujah”. It was at the close of one of these processions that the incident is said to have occurred from which the Castle of St. Angelo has derived its name; the story being that Gregory saw on its site, above the monument of Hadrian, an angel sheathing his sword, as a token that the plague was stayed.

At length the imperial confirmation of his election arrived. He still refused; fled from the city in disguise, eluding the guards set to watch the gates, and hid himself in a forest cave. Pursued and discovered by means, it is said, of a supernatural light, he was brought back in triumph, conducted to the church of St. Peter, and at once ordained on the 3rd of September, 590.

Flight to avoid the proffered dignity of the episcopate was not uncommon in those days, and might often be mere affectation, or compliance with the most approved custom. A law of the Emperor Leo (469), directed against canvassing for bishoprics, had even laid down as a rule, that no one ought to be ordained except greatly against his will; “he ought to be sought out, to be forced, when asked he should recede, when invited he should fly; for no one is worthy of the priesthood unless ordained against his will”.

But there is no reason to doubt that Gregory felt a real reluctance, though he may have been partly actuated by the received view of what was proper in such a case, and though it may be suggested that he could hardly have thought seriously that flight from the city would in the end avail. Throughout his life he gives us the impression of a sincere man; he often afterwards recurs with regret to the peace of his convent; and it would be very unfair to him to question his sincerity, when he gives as his reason for refusal the fear lest “the worldly glory which he had cast away might creep on him under the colour of ecclesiastical government”.

Five letters remain, written by him soon after his accession, in which he expresses his feelings on the occasion. They are addressed to John, patriarch of Constantinople, to Anastasius of Antioch, to Paulus Scholasticus in Sicily, to his closest friend Leander of Seville, and to Theoctista, the emperor's sister. To the last, whose acquaintance he had doubtless made at Constantinople, and with whom, as being a pious lady of rank, it was according to his habit to keep up correspondence, he wrote as follows:

“Under the color of the episcopate I have been brought back into the world; I am enslaved to greater earthly cares than I ever remember to have been subjected to as a layman. For I have lost the joys of my rest, and seem to have risen outwardly, while inwardly I have fallen. I lament that I am driven far away from my Maker's face. For I used to strive to live daily outside the world, outside the flesh; to drive from the eyes of the mind all phantasms of the body, and incorporeally to see supernal joys. Desiring nothing in this world, fearing nothing, I seemed to be standing on an eminence above the world, so that I almost thought the promise fulfilled in me, ‘I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth’. But suddenly driven from this eminence by the whirl­wind of this temptation, I have fallen into fears and tremblings, since, though I fear nothing for myself, I am greatly afraid for those who have been committed to me. On all sides am I tossed by the waves of business, and pressed down by storms, so that I can say with truth, 'I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me'. I loved the beauty of the contemplative life, as a Rachel, barren, but beautiful and of clear vision, which, though on account of its quietness it is less productive, yet has a finer perception of the light. But, by what judgment I know not, Leah has been brought to me in the night, to wit the active life, fertile, but 'tender-eyed'; seeing less, though bringing forth more”.

He concludes, with a touch of humour, such as often enlivens even his most serious letters, “Lo, my most serene lord the emperor has ordered an ape to be made a lion. And, indeed, in virtue of this order, a lion can the ape be called, but made one he cannot be. Wherefore my pious lord must needs lay the charge of all my faults and shortcomings not on me, but on himself, who has committed to one so weak an office of such excellence”. His treatise also on “The Pastoral Care”, written, as will appear in our review of his writings, with the immediate object of excusing his reluctance to accept the popedom, shows evidently how a peculiarly deep sense of the responsi­bility of the episcopal office, and of risk to the souls of its bearers, had actuated him in his refusal.

Having been once placed in the high position he so little coveted, he rose to it at once, and fulfilled its multifarious duties with remarkable zeal and ability. His comprehensive policy, and his grasp of great issues, are not more remarkable than the minuteness of the details, in secular as well as religious matters, to which he was able to give his personal care. And this is the more striking in combination with the fact that, as many parts of his writings show, he remained all the time a monk at heart, thoroughly imbued with both the ascetic principles and the narrow credulity of contemporary monasticism. His private life, too, was still in a measure monastic: the monastic simplicity of his episcopal attire is noticed by his biographer; he lived with his clergy under strict rule, and in 595 issued a synodal decree substituting clergy for the boys and secular persons who had formerly waited on the pope in his chamber.

D.

OBEDIENCE TO THE EMPEROR.

After sending, as was usual, a confession of his faith to the four Eastern patriarchs,—in which he declared his reception of the four Gospels, and of the four General Councils of Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon, speaking of the latter as the square stone on which the faith rests; and also his condemnation of the “three chapters” (above alluded to) which the Fifth Council called General had condemned—, one of his first measures was an attempt to induce the Bishops of Istria to assent to this condemnation. The Bishops of Italy generally had by this time assented, as the popes after Vigilius had also done: but those of Istria still held out. He therefore obtained an order from the emperor summoning them to Rome to attend a synod to be convened for the purpose, and wrote to Severus, the metropolitan of Aquileia, desiring him to attend with his suffragans. But they resisted his demand, affording an early instance during his reign of repudiation of papal claims. Having assembled in synods of their own, they petitioned the emperor to revoke his order, alleging that they only held what Pope Vigilius had taught them, objecting to the Bishop of Rome as their judge, on the ground of his being prejudiced in the matter of dispute, and undertaking to satisfy the emperor on the purity of their faith as soon as the state of Italy should permit their doing so. The emperor complied with their request, and wrote to Gregory command­ing him, in consideration of the existing confusion of affairs, to give no further trouble to the Istrian bishops. And Gregory at once obeyed.

Notwithstanding his undoubtedly high view of; the authority of St. Peter's see, he always showed singular deference to the Imperial power. In his letter to Severus he had expressly mentioned "the command of the Most Christian and Most Serene Emperor" as supporting his summons; and writing afterwards to the Bishop of Ravenna, he says that he had refrained from further proceedings in obedience to “the commands of the most pious princes”, adding that he would not cease to “write again to his most serene lords with the utmost zeal and freedom”.

Another instance of his attitude of obedience to the civil power in a matter on which he felt strongly may be mentioned here, though it occurred a few years later. The same Emperor Mauricius (AD 593) issued an edict, which he required the pope to publish in the West, forbidding soldiers to become monks during their period of service. This, though a reasonable requirement from the emperor's point of view, ran directly counter to the religious views of Gregory. Yet he at once published the edict, contenting himself with addressing pathetic remonstrances to the emperor, through the court physician Theodorus, in which he fully acknowledged the duty of submission.

In his letter, which is characteristic of the writer both for its respectful tone and its plain speaking, as well as for its forcible language and the views maintained in it, he says:

“He is guilty before Almighty God, who is not pure in all he does and says before our most serene lords. But in what I now suggest, I speak not as a bishop, nor as a public servant, but as a private person, because, most serene lord, you have been my lord from the time when you were not yet lord of the world … Which constitution (viz. the edict complained of) has filled me with great alarm, because by it the way to heaven is closed to many, and what has hitherto been lawful is made unlawful. For, though there are many who can combine a religious with a secular life, yet there are very many who can by no means be saved before God unless they leave all they have. But what am I, who speak this to my lords, but dust and a worm? Nevertheless, feeling that this law is against God the author of all things, I cannot be silent. For to this end has power over all men been given from heaven to my lords, that those who desire good things may be aided, that the way to heaven may be more widely opened, that the earthly may be subservient to the heavenly kingdom. And lo, it is now openly proclaimed that no one who has been once enlisted as an earthly soldier, unless dismissed for bodily weakness, or after completion of his service, shall be allowed to become a soldier of our Lord Jesus Christ. To this, by me, the last of His servants and yours, will Christ reply, 'From a notary I made thee a count of the body-guard; from a count of the bodyguard I made thee a Caesar; from a Caesar I made thee an emperor; nay more, I have made thee also a father of emperors: I have committed my priests into thy hand: and dost thou withdraw thy soldiers from my service? Answer thy servant, most pious lord, I pray thee, and say how thou wilt reply to thy Lord in the judgment, when He comes and thus speaks. And indeed it is a serious consideration that at this time especially any are forbidden to leave the world; a time when the very end of the world is at hand. For lo! there will be no delay: the heavens on fire, the earth on fire, the elements blazing, with angels and archangels, thrones and dominions, principalities and powers, the tremendous Judge will appear. Should He remit all ether sins, and allege but this single law promulged against Himself, what excuse will there be? Wherefore by that tremendous Judge I implore thee, lest all the tears, all the prayers, all the alms of my lord should, on any ground, lose their luster before the eyes of Almighty God. But let your piety, either by interpretation or alteration, modify the force of this law; since the army of my lords against their enemies is the more replenished when the army of God is replenished for prayer"”.

He concludes:

“And now, I have on both sides discharged my duty. On the one I have yielded obedience to the emperor; on the other I have not been silent in the cause of God”.

It is to be observed that in this remonstrance he showed discrimination and willingness to concede what he could. He allowed the reasonableness of forbidding soldiers to take holy orders, because in this case they might only be wishing to change one form of worldliness for another. But he argues that no such worldly motives could operate in drawing them to the monastic life, and that to impede them in their aspirations was to fight against God. And he appeals to numbers of cases, known to himself, in which soldiers who had become monks had been saintly converts, and had even worked miracles.

It would seem, however, that further experience led him to see the necessity of placing some restriction on the liberty for which he had so earnestly pleaded, for in 598 he addressed a circular to various metropolitans and other bishops, accompanied by the Imperial law above referred to, in which, while he decidedly discountenances the hasty ordination of any who had been engaged in secular offices, whether civil or military, he directs that they are not even to be received into monasteries till released from their worldly obligations, not till after strict inquiry into their lives, and a probation of three years before assuming the monastic habit. He adds: “In which matter, believe me, the most serene and most Christian emperor is entirely satisfied, and willingly allows the conversion of those whom he knows not to be implicated in public duties”. The emperor may be concluded from these expressions to have yielded so far to Gregory's remonstrances as to use moderation in the enforcement of the law, and to have come to an amicable understanding with him on this subject.

E.

THE AFRICAN DONATISTS. PERSECUTION AND TOLERATION

In his second year (591) his orthodox zeal was directed against another form of heresy, that of the Donatists in Africa. (The sect of the Donatists had originated in North Africa at the beginning of the fourth century, being a secession from the Church on the ground of the then Bishop of Carthage–Cecilian–having been ordained by another bishop–Felix of Aptunga–who was accused of being a “traditor”, i.e., one who had given up the Holy Scriptures of his church to the civil authorities during the Diocletian persecution. This unfaithfulness was held by the seceders to have incapacitated him from transmitting the apostolical succession. Hence they set up a rival bishop to Cecilian; first Majorinus, and then Donatus, surnamed “the Great”, who transmitted the Donatist succession. They were not, strictly speaking, heretics, though schismatics, regarding themselves as the only true Church).

It has been said already that the African Church, having been delivered through the reconquest of Africa under Justinian (533) from about a century of persecution under the Arian Vandals, had since that time submitted willingly to the authority of the Roman see, though in an earlier age (notably under St. Cyprian in the 3rd century) it had asserted considerable independence. But the old Donatist sect, which had originated there as early as 311, in spite of severe measures of repression in past times, lingered there still, and seems at this time not only to have been spreading itself, but also maintaining friendly relations with the orthodox, and tolerated by their bishops, some of whom were accused of ordaining Donatists under the influence of bribes.

It was the custom in Numidia for the senior bishop, whatever his see, to assume the primacy, and so interfused were the two parties in that province that a Donatist primate had thus come to exercise jurisdiction over the Catholic bishops. Such a system of comprehension, and, indeed, Donatism altogether, Gregory, ever intolerant of all forms of heresy or schism, set himself resolutely to oppose. He kept up a correspondence, lasting through several years, with the African bishops, and especially with Dominicus, bishop of Carthage, and Columbus of Numidia, urging them to hold synods for the correction of such abuses and for the suppression of Donatism.

The latter prelate, whose devotion to the see of Rome is praised highly by his correspondent, seems to have incurred the enmity of many of his colleagues on account of it: an evidence, by the way, that the claims of Rome were not even yet fully acknowledged in Africa. To this enmity Gregory alludes in one of his letters, and encourages Columbus by reminding him that the good must ever be exposed to the hatred of the wicked. He had recourse also to the civil arm, writing urgently, at the outset of his proceedings, to Gennadius, the exarch of Africa, desiring him to admonish the Catholic bishops how to proceed in the matter, and exhorting him to fight as valiantly against the enemies of the Church as he had done against those of the State, to repress the attempts of heretics, and subdue their proud necks to the yoke of rectitude. He continued to write to him with the same purport, and in 596 complained to the Emperor himself of the Imperial laws against the African Donatists not being adequately enforced.

His conduct in this case suggests the question how far Gregory approved of persecution as a means of suppressing error. When we consider how recently in the history of the Church any theories of tolerance have prevailed, we cannot with reason expect to find him maintaining them. Accordingly he did afterwards encourage the Catholic rulers of the Franks to use force in their dominions; in the papal possessions in Sicily he ordered the Manicheans to be recalled to the faith by vigorous persecution, and elsewhere the peasants on his estates to be recovered from heathenism, if freemen, by exactions and imprisonment, and, if slaves, by "blows and torments." But, on the other hand, he showed a spirit of unusual forbearance towards Jews.

In the same letter which orders the severe persecution of Manicheans, he directs Jews to be attracted to the faith, rather than compelled, by the remission of one-third of the taxes due to the Church in the case of such as might conform; and even for this appeal to interested motives he makes a sort of apology, saying that, though the conversions thus obtained might be insincere, yet the children of the converts would be baptized as Christians. Further, we find letters to three bishops, one of whom had driven Jews from their synagogue, and the others had converted many by offering them the option of conformity or exile, in which letters he strongly condemns such measures. “Conversions”, says he, “wrought by force are never sincere, and such as are so converted seldom fail to return to their vomit as soon as the force is removed”.

Again: “Those who differ from the Christian religion should be gathered to the unity of the faith by gentleness, kindness, admonition, persuasion, lest those whom the sweetness of preaching and the fear of future judgment might have invited to believe, be repelled by threats and terrors”.

Here we have sentiments expressed which many in ages boasting of superior enlightenment might often have studied with advantage. And if his action in some cases seems to discredit these professions, it is but an instance of human inconsistency. The humanity and good sense thus expressed is no less real, though warped sometimes by the impulses of zeal in accordance with current views.

BOOK INTRODUCTORY.

III.

SEPARATION BETWEEN MONKS AND CLERGY