Monday, October 19, 2020

Supplement 04: Rule of St. Benedict


THE RULE OF SAINT BENEDICT


Saint Benedict of Nursia (c.480–547) is the father of Western Monasticism because of his main achievement, the “Rule” containing precepts for his monks  which became one of the most influential religious rules in Western Christendom. He founded twelve communities for monks at Subiaco, about 40 miles to the east of Rome, before moving to Monte Cassino in the mountains of southern Italy. His “Rule” is heavily influenced by the writings of John Cassian, and shows strong affinity with the Rule of the Master.

The Rule of Saint Benedict (Regula Benedicti) is a book of precepts written by St. Benedict of Nursia for monks living communally under the authority of an abbot. Since about the 7th century it has also been adopted by communities of women. During the 1500 years of its existence, it has become the leading guide in Western Christianity for monastic living in community.

The spirit of St Benedict's Rule is summed up in the motto of the Benedictine Confederation: pax ("peace") and the traditional ora et labora ("pray and work").  

Compared to other precepts, the Rule provides a moderate path between individual zeal and formulaic institutionalism; because of this middle ground it has been widely popular. Benedict's concerns were the needs of monks in a community environment: namely, to establish due order, to foster an understanding of the relational nature of human beings, and to provide a spiritual father to support and strengthen the individual's ascetic effort and the spiritual growth that is required for the fulfillment of the human vocation, theosis.


INFLUENCES

John Cassian is a Christian theologian and one of the ‘desert fathers’. He wrote two major spiritual works, the Institutions and the Conferences. In these, he codified and transmitted the wisdom of the Desert Fathers of Egypt. These books were written at the request of Castor, Bishop of Apt, of the subsequent Pope Leo I, and of several Gallic bishops and monks. His books were written in Latin, in a simple, direct style. They were swiftly translated into Greek, for the use of Eastern monks, an unusual honor.

A. The Institutions (De institutis coenobiorum) deal with the external organization of monastic communities.

Books 1-4 discusses clothing, prayer and rules of monastic life.

Books 5-12 are rules on morality, specifically addressing the eight vices - gluttony, lust, avarice, pride, wrath, envy, acedia, and boasting - and what to do to cure these vices.

B. the Conferences (Collationes patrum in scetica eremo) deal with "the training of the inner man and the perfection of the heart." It summarized the important conversations that Cassian had with elders from Scetis about principles of the spiritual and ascetic life. This book addresses specific problems of spiritual theology and the ascetic life. It was later read in Benedictine communities before a light meal, and from the Latin title, Collationes, comes the word collation in the sense of "light meal."

Furthermore, the Regula Magistri or Rule of the Master is an anonymous sixth-century collection of monastic precepts. It was also regarded to influence the Rule of Saint Benedict. It is no longer in active use by any monastic community.

But it also, and this persuaded most religious communities founded throughout the Middle Ages to adopt it. As a result, the Rule of Benedict became one of the most influential religious rules in Western Christendom. For this reason, Benedict is often called the founder of western Christian monasticism.


ANALYSIS OF THE BENEDICTINE RULE

Of the seventy-three chapters comprising the Rule, nine treat of the duties of the abbot, thirteen regulate the worship of God, twenty-nine are concerned with discipline and the penal code, ten refer to the internal administration of the monastery, and the remaining twelve consist of miscellaneous regulations.

The Rule opens with a prologue or hortatory preface, in which St. Benedict sets forth the main principles of the religious life, namely: the renunciation of one's own will and the taking up of arms under the banner of Christ. He proposes to establish a "school" in which the science of salvation shall be taught, so that by persevering in the monastery till death his disciples may "deserve to become partakers of Christ's kingdom".

In Chapter 1 are defined the four principle kinds of monks: (1) Cenobites, those living in a monastery under an abbot; (2) Anchorites, or hermits, living a solitary life after long probation in the monastery; (3) Sarabites, living by twos and threes together, without any fixed rule or lawfully constituted superior; and (4) Gyrovagi, a species of monastic vagrants, whose lives spent in wandering from one monastery to another, only served to bring discredit on the monastic profession. It is for the first of these classes, as the most stable kind, that the Rule is written.

Chapter 2 describes the necessary qualifications of an abbot and forbids him to make distinction of persons in the monastery except for particular merit, warning him at the same time that he will be answerable for the salvation of the souls committed to his care.

Chapter 3 ordains the calling of the brethren to council upon all affairs of importance to the community.

Chapter 4 summarizes the duties of the Christian life under seventy-two precepts, which are called "instruments of good works" and are mainly Scriptural either in letter or in spirit.

Chapter 5 prescribes prompt, cheerful, and absolute obedience to the superior in all things lawful, which obedience is called the first degree of humility.

Chapter 6 deals with silence, recommending moderation in the use of speech, but by no means prohibiting profitable or necessary conversation.

Chapter 7 treats of humility, which virtue is divided into twelve degrees or steps in the ladder that leads to heaven. They are: (1) fear of God; (2) repression of self-will; (3) submission of the will to superiors; (4) obedience in hard and difficult matters; (5) confession of faults; (6) acknowledgment of one's own worthlessness; (7) preference of others to self; (8) avoidance of singularity; (9) speaking only in due season; (10) stifling of unseemly laughter; (11) repression of pride; (12) exterior humility.

Chapters 9-19 are occupied with the regulation of the Divine Office, the opus Dei to which "nothing is to be preferred", or Canonical Hours, seven of the day and one of the night. Detailed arrangements are made as to the number of Psalms, etc., to be recited in winter and summer, on Sundays, weekdays, Holy Days, and at other times.

Chapter 19 emphasizes the reverence due to the presence of God.

Chapter 20 directs that prayer in common be short.

Chapter 21 provides for the appointment of deans over every ten monks, and prescribes the manner in which they are to be chosen.

Chapter 22 regulates all matters relating to the dormitory, as, for example, that each monk is to have a separate bed and is to sleep in his habit, so as to be ready to rise without delay, and that a light shall burn in the dormitory throughout the night.

Chapter 23-30 deal with offences against the Rule and a graduated scale of penalties is provided: first, private admonition; next, public reproof; then separation from the brethren at meals and elsewhere; then scourging; and finally expulsion; though this last is not to be resorted to until every effort to reclaim the offender has failed. And even in this last case, the outcast must be received again, should he so desire, but after the third expulsion all return is finally barred.

Chapter 31 and 32 order the appointment of a cellarer and other officials, to take charge of the various goods of the monastery, which are to be treated with as much care as the consecrated vessels of the altar.

Chapter 33 forbids the private possession of anything without the leave of the abbot, who is, however, bound to supply all necessaries.

Chapter 34 prescribes a just distribution of such things.

Chapter 35 arranges for the service in the kitchen by all monks in turn.

Chapter 36 and 37 order due care for the sick, the old, and the young. They are to have certain dispensations from the strict Rule, chiefly in the matter of food.
Chapter 38 prescribes reading aloud during meals, which duty is to be performed by such of the brethren, week by week, as can do so with edification to the rest. Signs are to be used for whatever may be wanted at meals, so that no voice shall interrupt that of the reader. The reader is to have his meal with the servers after the rest have finished, but he is allowed a little food beforehand in order to lessen the fatigue of reading.

Chapter 39 and 40 regulate the quantity and quality of the food. Two meals a day are allowed and two dishes of cooked food at each. A pound of bread also and a hemina (probably about half a pint) of wine for each monk. Flesh-meat is prohibited except for the sick and the weak, and it is always within the abbot's power to increase the daily allowance when he sees fit.

Chapter 41 prescribes the hours of the meals, which are to vary according to the time of year.

Chapter 42 enjoins the reading of the "Conferences" of Cassian or some other edifying book in the evening before Compline and orders that after Compline the strictest silence shall be observed until the following morning.

Chapters 43-46 relate to minor faults, such as coming late to prayer or meals, and impose various penalties for such transgressions.

Chapter 47 enjoins on the abbot the duty of calling the brethren to the "world of God" in choir, and of appointing those who are to chant or read.

Chapter 48 emphasizes the importance of manual labor and arranges time to be devoted to it daily. This varies according to the season, but is apparently never less than about five hours a day. The times at which the lesser of the "day-hours" (Prime, Terce, Sext, and None) are to be recited control the hours of labour somewhat, and the abbot is instructed not only to see that all work, but also that the employments of each are suited to their respective capacities.

Chapter 49 treats of the observance of Lent, and recommends some voluntary self-denial for that season, with the abbot's sanction.

Chapters 50 and 51 contain rules for monks who are working in the fields or traveling. They are directed to join in spirit, as far as possible, with their brethren in the monastery at the regular hours of prayers.

Chapter 52 commands that the oratory be used for purposes of devotion only.

Chapter 53 is concerned with the treatment of guests, who are to be received "as Christ Himself". This Benedictine hospitality is a feature which has in all ages been characteristic of the order. The guests are to be met with due courtesy by the abbot or his deputy, and during their stay they are to be under the special protection of a monk appointed for the purpose, but they are not to associate with the rest of the community except by special permission.

Chapter 54 forbids the monks to receive letters or gifts without the abbot's leave.

Chapter 55 regulates the clothing of the monks. It is to be sufficient in both quantity and quality and to be suited to the climate and locality, according to the discretion of the abbot, but at the same time it must be as plain and cheap as is consistent with due economy. Each monk is to have a change of garments, to allow for washing, and when traveling shall be supplied with clothes of rather better quality. The old habits are to be put aside for the poor.

Chapter 56 directs that the abbot shall take his meals with the guests.

Chapter 57 enjoins humility on the craftsmen of the monastery, and if their work is for sale, it shall be rather below than above the current trade price.

Chapter 58 lays down rules for the admission of new members, which is not to be made too easy. These matters have since been regulated by the Church, but in the main St. Benedict's outline is adhered to. The postulant first spends a short time as a guest; then he is admitted to the novitiate, where under the care of a novice-master, his vocation is severely tested; during this time he is always free to depart. If after twelve month' probation, he still persevere, he may be admitted to the vows of Stability, Conversion of Life, and Obedience, by which he binds himself for life to the monastery of his profession.

Chapter 59 allows the admission of boys to the monastery under certain conditions.

Chapter 60 regulates the position of priests who may desire to join the community. They are charged with setting an example of humility to all, and can only exercise their priestly functions by permission of the abbot.

Chapter 61 provides for the reception of strange monks as guests, and for their admission if desirous of joining the community.

Chapter 62 lays down that precedence in the community shall be determined by the date of admission, merit of life, or the appointment of the abbot.

Chapter 64 orders that the abbot be elected by his monks and that he be chosen for his charity, zeal, and discretion.

Chapter 65 allows the appointment of a provost, or prior, if need be, but warns such a one that he is to be entirely subject to the abbot and may be admonished, deposed, or expelled for misconduct.

Chapter 66 provides for the appointment of a porter, and recommends that each monastery should be, if possible, self-contained, so as to avoid the need of intercourse with the outer world.

Chapter 67 gives instruction as to the behavior of a monk who is sent on a journey.

Chapter 68 orders that all shall cheerfully attempt to do whatever is commanded them, however hard it may seem.

Chapter 69 forbids the monks to defend one another.

Chapter 70 prohibits them from striking one another.

Chapter 71 encourages the brethren to be obedient not only to the abbot and his officials, but also to one another.

Chapter 72 is a brief exhortation to zeal and fraternal charity

Chapter 73 is an epilogue declaring that this Rule is not offered as an ideal of perfection, but merely as a means towards godliness and is intended chiefly for beginners in the spiritual life.


CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BENEDICTINE RULE

1.     The Rule has a unique spirit of BALANCE, MODERATION and REASONABLENESS (ἐπιείκεια, epieikeia)
-       It manifested its wonderful discretion and moderation, its extreme reasonableness, and its keen insight into the capabilities as well as the weaknesses of human nature.
-       There are no excesses, no extraordinary asceticism, no narrow-mindedness, but rather a series of sober regulations based on sound common sense.
-       This is contrary to the austerity and asceticism of the monks of Egypt.

2.     ON FOOD: With regard to food, the Egyptian ascetics reduced it to a minimum, many of them eating only twice or thrice a week, whilst Cassian describes a meal consisting of parched vetches with salt and oil, three olives, two prunes, and a fig, as a "sumptuous repast" (Coll. vii, 1). St. Benedict, on the other hand, though he restricts the use of flesh-meat to the sick, orders a pound of bread daily and two dishes of cooked food at each meal, of which there were two in summer and one in winter. And he concedes also an allowance of wine, though admitting that it should not properly be the drink of monks (Chapter 40).

3.     ON CLOTHING: St. Benedict's provision that habits were to fit, to be sufficiently warm, and not too old, was in great contrast to the poverty of the Egyptian monks, whose clothes, Abbot Pambo laid down, should be so poor that if left on the road no one would be tempted to take them (Apophthegmata, in P.G. LXV, 369).

4.     IN THE MATTER OF SLEEP: The Egyptian monks regarded diminution[1] as one of their most valued forms of austerity, St. Benedict ordered from six to eight hours of unbroken sleep a day, with the addition of a siesta in summer. The Egyptian monks, moreover, often slept on the bare ground, with stones or mats for pillows, and often merely sitting or merely reclining, as directed in the Pachomian Rule, whilst Abbot John was unable to mention without shame the finding of a blanket in a hermit's cell (Cassian, Coll. xix, 6). St. Benedict, however, allowed not only a blanket but also a coverlet, a mattress, and a pillow to each monk. This comparative liberality with regard to the necessaries of life, though plain and meagre perhaps, if tested by modern notions of comfort, was far greater than amongst the Italian poor of the sixth century or even amongst many of the European peasantry at the present day.

St. Benedict's aim seems to have been to keep the bodies of his monks in a healthy condition by means of proper clothing, sufficient food, and ample sleep, so that they might thereby be more fit for the due performance of the Divine Office and be freed from all that distracting rivalry in asceticism which has already been mentioned.

There was, however, no desire to lower the ideal or to minimize the self-sacrifice that the adoption of the monastic life entailed, but rather the intention of bringing it into line with the altered circumstances of Western environment, which necessarily differed much from those of Egypt and the East. The wisdom and skill with which he did this is evident in every page of the Rule, a learned and mysterious abridgement of all the doctrines of the Gospel, all the institutions of the Fathers, and all the Counsels of Perfection".

5.     COLLECTIVISM: St. Benedict perceived the necessity for a permanent and uniform rule of government in place of the arbitrary and variable choice of models furnished by the lives and maxims of the Fathers of the Desert. And so we have the characteristic of collectivism, exhibited in his insistence on the common life, as opposed to the individualism of the Egyptian monks. One of the objects he had in view in writing his Rule was the extirpation of the Sarabites and Gyrovagi, whom he so strongly condemns in his first chapter and of whose evil lives he had probably had painful experience during his early days at Subiaco.

On the Types of Monks (Chapter 1)
aa)    Cenobites -  They live in a monastery, serving under a Rule and an Abbot.
bb)   Anchorites or Hermits – They live a solitary life after long probation in the monastery.
cc)    Sarabites – They live by two’s and three’s together, without any fixed rule or lawfully constituted superior; and
dd)   Gyrovagi- a species of monastic vagrants, whose lives spent in wandering from one monastery to another, only served to bring discredit on the monastic profession. It is for the first of these classes, as the most stable kind, that the Rule is written.

6.     STABILITY: To further the aim of collectivism,  he introduced the vow of Stability, which becomes the guarantee of success and permanence. It is only another example of the family idea that pervaded the entire Rule, by means of which the members of the community are bound together by a family tie, and each takes upon himself the obligation of persevering in his monastery until death, unless sent elsewhere by his superiors.

It secures to the community as a whole, and to every member of it individually, a share in all the fruits that may arise from the labors of each monk, and it gives to each of them that strength and vitality which necessarily result from being one of a united family, all bound in a similar way and all pursuing the same end.

Thus, whatever the monk does, he does it not as an independent individual but as part of a larger organization, and the community itself thus becomes one united whole rather than a mere agglomeration of independent members.

7.     CONVERSION OF LIFE: The vow of Conversion of Life indicates the personal striving after perfection that must be the aim of every Benedictine monk. All the legislation of the Rule, the constant repression of self, the conforming of one's every action to a definite standard, and the continuance of this form of life to the end of one's days, is directed towards "putting off the old man and putting on the new", and thereby accomplishing the conversio morum which is inseparable from a life-long perseverance in the maxims of the Rule.

8.     OBEDIENCE: The practice of obedience is a necessary feature in St. Benedict's idea of the religious life, if not indeed its very essence. Not only is a special chapter of the Rule devoted to it, but it is repeatedly referred to as a guiding principle in the life of the monk; so essentials it that it is the subject of a special vow in every religious institute, Benedictine or otherwise.

In St. Benedict's eyes it is one of the positive works to which the monk binds himself, for he calls it labor obedientiae (Prologue). It is to be cheerful, unquestioning, and prompt; to the abbot chiefly, who is to be obeyed as holding the place of Christ, and also to all the brethren according to the dictates of fraternal charity, as being "the path that leads to God" (Chapter 71).

It is likewise extended to hard and even impossible things, the latter being at least attempted in all humility. In connection with the question of obedience there is the further question as to the system of government embodied in the Rule. The life of the community centers round the abbot as the father of the family. Much latitude with regard to details is left to "discretion and judgment", but this power, so far from being absolute or unlimited, is safeguarded by the obligation laid upon him of consulting the brethren - either the seniors only or else the entire community - upon all matters affecting their welfare.

And on the other hand, wherever there seems to be a certain amount of liberty left to the monks themselves, this, in turn, is protected against indiscretion by the repeated insistence on the necessity for the abbot's sanction and approval.


What Kind of Man the Abbot ought to be (Chapter 2)
Chapter 2 describes the necessary qualifications of an abbot and forbids him to make distinction of persons in the monastery except for particular merit, warning him at the same time that he will be answerable for the salvation of the souls committed to his care.


9. POVERTY AND CHASTITY: The vows of Poverty and Chastity, though not explicitly mentioned by St. Benedict, as in the rules of other orders, are yet implied so clearly as to form an indisputable and essential part of the life for which he legislates. Thus by means of the vows and the practice of the various virtues necessary to their proper observance, it will be seen that St. Benedict's Rule contains not merely a series of laws regulating the external details of monastic life, but also all the principles of perfection according to the Evangelical Counsels.


10. BINDING POWER OF THE RULE: With regard to the obligation or binding power of the Rule, we must distinguish between the statutes or precepts and the counsels. By the former would be meant those laws which either command or prohibit in an absolute manner, and by the latter those that are merely recommendations. It is generally held by commentators that the precepts of the Rule bind only under the penalty of venial sin, and the counsels not even under that. Really grave transgressions against the vows, on the other hand, would fall under the category of mortal sins. It must be remembered, however, that in all these matters the principles of moral theology, canon law, the decisions of the Church, and the regulations of the Constitutions of the different congregations must be taken into consideration in judging of any particular case.

______________________

REQUIRED READING:




Prologue of the Rule of St. Benedict


What, dearest brethren, can be sweeter to us than this voice of the Lord inviting us? See, in His loving kindness, the Lord showeth us the way of life. Therefore, having our loins girt with faith and the performance of good works, let us walk His ways under the guidance of the Gospel, that we may be found worthy of seeing Him who hath called us to His kingdom (cf 1 Thes 2:12).

If we desire to dwell in the tabernacle of His kingdom, we cannot reach it in any way, unless we run thither by good works. But let us ask the Lord with the Prophet, saying to Him: "Lord, who shall dwell in Thy tabernacle, or who shall rest in Thy holy hill" (Ps 14[15]:1)?

After this question, brethren, let us listen to the Lord answering and showing us the way to this tabernacle, saying: "He that walketh without blemish and worketh justice; he that speaketh truth in his heart; who hath not used deceit in his tongue, nor hath done evil to his neighbor, nor hath taken up a reproach against his neighbor" (Ps 14[15]:2-3), who hath brought to naught the foul demon tempting him, casting him out of his heart with his temptation, and hath taken his evil thoughts whilst they were yet weak and hath dashed them against Christ (cf Ps 14[15]:4; Ps 136[137]:9); who fearing the Lord are not puffed up by their goodness of life, but holding that the actual good which is in them cannot be done by themselves, but by the Lord, they praise the Lord working in them (cf Ps 14[15]:4), saying with the Prophet: "Not to us, O Lord, not to us; by to Thy name give glory" (Ps 113[115:1]:9). Thus also the Apostle Paul hath not taken to himself any credit for his preaching, saying: "By the grace of God, I am what I am" (1 Cor 15:10). And again he saith: "He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord" (2 Cor 10:17).

Hence, the Lord also saith in the Gospel: "He that heareth these my words and doeth them, shall be likened to a wise man who built his house upon a rock; the floods came, the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock" (Mt 7:24-25). The Lord fulfilling these words waiteth for us from day to day, that we respond to His holy admonitions by our works. Therefore, our days are lengthened to a truce for the amendment of the misdeeds of our present life; as the Apostle saith: "Knowest thou not that the patience of God leadeth thee to penance" (Rom 2:4)? For the good Lord saith: "I will not the death of the sinner, but that he be converted and live" (Ezek 33:11).

Now, brethren, that we have asked the Lord who it is that shall dwell in His tabernacle, we have heard the conditions for dwelling

there; and if we fulfil the duties of tenants, we shall be heirs of the kingdom of heaven. Our hearts and our bodies must, therefore, be ready to do battle under the biddings of holy obedience; and let us ask the Lord that He supply by the help of His grace what is impossible to us by nature. And if, flying from the pains of hell, we desire to reach life everlasting, then, while there is yet time, and we are still in the flesh, and are able during the present life to fulfil all these things, we must make haste to do now what will profit us forever.

We are, therefore, about to found a school of the Lord's service, in which we hope to introduce nothing harsh or burdensome. But even if, to correct vices or to preserve charity, sound reason dictateth anything that turneth out somewhat stringent, do not at once fly in dismay from the way of salvation, the beginning of which cannot but be narrow. But as we advance in the religious life and faith, we shall run the way of God's commandments with expanded hearts and unspeakable sweetness of love; so that never departing from His guidance and persevering in the monastery in His doctrine till death, we may by patience share in the sufferings of Christ, and be found worthy to be coheirs with Him of His kingdom.




[1] The act or process of diminishing; a lessening or reduction.

CHAPTER VIII THE TRIUMPH OF THE CROSS – IN HOC SIGNO VINCES – EDICT OF MILAN (313)


CHAPTER VIII
THE TRIUMPH OF THE CROSS –
IN HOC SIGNO VINCES – EDICT OF MILAN (313)


Edict of Toleration (311)
            In spite of the ferocity of the long campaign and with all the advantages apparently on the side of the civil power, Rome was finally obliged to admit defeat.  The persecution was a total failure and by an imperial edict it came to an end on April 30, 311.  It was signed by Galerius and his co-regent Constantine.  The Christian religion was allowed to be practiced by this Edict of Tolerance.  It is no more than this, that is, an edict of tolerance because there is a clause quite restrictive for Christianity:

Ut denuo sint christiani et conventicula sua componant; ita ut ne quid contra disciplinam agant.[1] That they may be Christians again and build the houses in which they used to gather, provided that they do nothing contrary to the discipline.

This is how Galerius’ Edict reads:

Since they (Christians) still persist in their impious folly and are deprived of public exercise of their religion, we are disposed to extend to these unhappy men the effects of our accustomed mercy.  We allow them, consequently, to profess their private opinions and meet at their places of worship without fear of disturbance, provided always that they respect the existing laws.  We hope that our clemency will induce the Christians to offer prayers to the Deity whom they worship for our safety and prosperity, for their own, and for that of the state.[2]

Soon after Galerius died eaten by worms and in a pitiful state.  Eusebius, in his Ecc. Hist. says that Galerius was punished by God.

Beginning with his very flesh and proceeding to the soul.  For an abscess suddenly appeared in the center of his privy parts, then a deeply perforated ulcer, incurable and feeling into the very depths of his bowels.  From these an innumerable multitude of worms burst forth and gave out a deathly stench…

Wrestling with so many evils, he felt conscious-stricken for the deed which he had brazenly committed against the pious, and so reflecting within himself, he first openly confessed to the God of the universe; then, summoning those about him, he commanded them without delay to put an end to the persecution against the Christians.


In Hoc Signo Vinces

            In the meanwhile, the political situation in the West worsened to such an extent that a decisive context between Constantine and Maxentius was rendered inevitable.  War broke out between Constantine and Maxentius (306-312).  When the war began in 312, Constantine was not a Christian but possibly followed his father’s religion, a form of that new moral monotheism, popular with the army, whose symbol was the Sun – Sol Invictus.  By the time of the actual expedition against Maxentius, he has abandoned also the cult of the sun and is much closer to Christianity, that is, to the belief in one God.  And just before the decisive step, that is, the battle at the Milvian Bridge, when Constantine was marching at the head of an army of 30 thousand men against the 100 thousand strong army of Maxentius, a cross of light appeared in the heavens, with the woven words: in hoc signo vinces (In This Sign You Shall Conquer).”  According to Eusebius, in his Life of Constantine, immediately after the vision of the Cross, Christ appeared to him and told him to adopt the Cross as his standard instead of the Roman eagle.  He did so.  In the fight which followed he was victorious and Maxentius was drowned in the Tiber as he fled from the field.  Constantine entered Rome convinced now that the one, supreme God was the God whom the Christians worshipped: Jesus Christ.
            The impression which this victory made on the pagan world was tremendous.  The God of the Christians had proved his superiority over the gods of the Capitol.  Constantine entered the city amid the rejoicings of the people.  Upon the triumphal arch which the Senate and people erected to him, and which is still standing among the ruins of the city of the Caesars, his great victory is ascribed to the “decree of God.”  Constantine himself caused his own statue to be set up, holding in his hand the standard of the cross (labarum), with the inscription: “through this saving sign, have I freed your city from the tyrant’s yoke.”
            The full text on the triumphal arch reads like this:

To Emperor Caesar Flavius Constantine the Great, Felix, Augustus, because inspired by the Godhead, by the greatness of his spirit, at one stroke avenged the State upon the tyrant and his entire faction by just a show of force together with his army, the Senate and the People of Rome have dedicated this arch in token of his triumph.

            Elsewhere on the Arch appears:

Liberator of the City. Founder of Peace.[3]

            This is the original Latin:

Imp[eratori] Caesa[re] Fl[avio] Constantino Maximo, P[ius], F[elix], Augusto S.[enatus] P.[opulus] Q.[ue] R.[omanus] Quod Instinctu Divinitatis Mentis magnitudine cum exercitu suo tam de Tyranno Quam De Eius Factione Uno Tempore Iustis Rempublicam Ultus est Armis Arcum Triumphis insignem Dicavit.
           
            Liberator urbis. Fundatori Quietis.[4]

The Edict of Milan (313)
            The religious problem received Constantine’s immediate attention.  Towards the end of 312, in a letter to Maximinus Daia, he pleaded in favor of the Christians of the East.  He freed the African clergy from public duties.  In a meeting with his brother-in-law Licinius, held at Milan in February of 313, he gave to the Christians throughout the Empire unrestricted freedom of worship.  The two of them commanded to restore to the Christians the property which had been confiscated during the persecutions.  The agreement is known as the Edict of Milan, in the words of Eusebius “a very perfect and comprehensive law in favor of Christians[5] but more properly, a rescript or circular mandate to the governors of the provinces.
            With this act, the exclusive union between the Roman State and the pagan cult was broken, a new religious policy was opened.  The Edict inaugurates a memorable turn in the history of Christianity.  For the moment, the new happy order of things had still an enemy in Maximinus Daia, who had renewed his hostility against the Church.  Maximinus Daia took advantage of the absence of Licinius in the West and, despite the difficulties of the winter, invaded his states, crossed into Europe, and with his powerful army laid waste the rich provinces which are now the Balkans.  There, at Nicopolis, he met, and was defeated by Licinius, returned from Milan in haste; and with the defeat and death of Maximinus Daia, the authors of the Edict of Milan were masters of the Roman world.  As Eusebius says:

From that time on a day bright and radiant with no cloud overshadowing it, shone down with shafts of heavenly light on the Churches of Christ throughout the world, nor was there any reluctance to grant even those outside our community the enjoyment, if not of equal blessings at least of an effluence from and a share in the things that God has bestowed on us.[6]

The Vision of the Cross by Constantine
            We have already seen Constantine’s triumph over Maxentius and his ‘coeleste signum Dei’ as narrated by Eusebius in his “Vita Constantini,” (I, 28-31) written in 337.  Are we to admit a miraculous intervention by God in the way described by Eusebius?  It is quite difficult to admit Eusebius’ description as it sounds, but we cannot reject it outright or take it as pure illusion.  There is a nucleus of truth in it, which at a distance of so many years and under the impression of the happy reign of Constantine, was transformed into a legend.  It cannot be denied that the Emperor, who by nature was inclined to dreams and visions, had a certain day a strong religious commotion, which brought him closer to the Christian religion.
            This is how Lactantius in his book, On the Deaths of the Persecutors described the vision of Constantine:

Already civil war had broken out between Constantine and Maxentius.  Although Maxentius remained at Rome – an oracle had predicted that he would die if he crossed the city gates – the war was conducted by his able commanders.  His forces were superior to those of his adversary.  For he not only had his father’s army, which had deserted from Severus, but his own as well, which he had just collected from Mauritania and from the country of the Getulians.  They clashed and Maxentius’ troops held the advantage, up until the time when Constantine, prepared either to win or to die, brought all his forces close to Rome and encamped near the Milvian Bridge.  It was near the twenty-eighth of October, the anniversary of his completion of five years of reign.

During his sleep Constantine was directed that God’s heavenly sign should be inscribed on the soldier’s shields before they should begin the battle.  He did as he was commanded, and he had inscribed on the shields the name of Christ by means of an “X” that was crossed by an “I” curved over the top.  Armed with this sign, his soldiers stood to arms … And the hand of God was stretched over the fray.[7]

One thing is certain, since the victory at the Milvian Bridge (312) Constantine, although still a pagan in many practices, was not only favorable to Christianity but also embraced Christianity himself.

Stages in Constantine’s Conversion
            We must not absolutely reject a divine intervention in Constantine’s conversion.  However, this seems to be the process of events which led him on to embrace Christianity.
  1. From family tradition he was well disposed towards the Christians.  Possibly the Christian religion was not unknown in his family because one of his father’s daughters was called Anastasia, a name which appears almost exclusively among Christians.
  2. From his aversion against Diocletian (284-305) and Galerius (292-311), who excluded him from the imperial succession, he leaned towards a different religious policy.
  3. The Church although materially and politically was not strong, yet, morally and religiously excelled all other cults and had a wonderful internal and external organization.
  4. The martyr’s strength and heroism, among the terrible precedent persecutions, was something admirable and without as natural explanation.
  5. Constantine knew a little about the dogma and Christian moral precepts, but he conceived a high opinion of Christ’s exceptional power.
During the war against Maxentius, given the tremendous difficulties facing him, he asked Christ’s help and experienced his power in battle.
  1. He had, then, possibly, that dream or admonition related by Lactantius:

Commonitus est in quiete Constantius ut coeleste signum Dei notaret in scutis atque proelium commiteret. Fecit ut iussus est, et transversa X littera, summo capite circumflexo, Christum in scutis notat. Quo signo armatus exercitus capit ferrum.[8]
           
He ordered to paint on the shields of his soldiers the monogram of Christ and adopt a new standard (Labarum) before the decisive battle.

After the great Victory at the Milvian Bridge (312), because the god of the Christians had shown his power and fulfilled His promise, Constantine embraced Christianity.
With Constantine Christianity finally triumphed over paganism. This victory was “the purest ever won.” For it was won by witnessing and enduring, by loving and suffering, by pouring of innocent blood.  It was won by weak men and women, slaves often, opposed to the mightiest of governments and all the social and intellectual pride and prejudice of the civilized world.

Chronological Note
305         1st of May, Diocletian (284-305) and Maximian Herculean (286-305) leave the Empire; Galerius (292-311) and Constantius Chlorus (292-306) become Emperors; Maximinus Daia (305-313) in the East and Severus (305-307) in the West become Caesars.
306         25th of July, death of Constantius Chlorus, father of Constantine.  Constantine is elected augustus by the soldiers.
27-28th of October, Maxentius elected augustus by the Pretorian Guard.
307         February, Severus defeated by Maxentius
31st of March, Constantine marries Fausta, sister of Licinius.
308         April, Maximian the Herculean expelled from Rome by Maxentius, his own son, Maximian the Herculean goes to Constantine.
309         Autumn, Maximian plots against Constantine.
310         January, Maximian dies.
311         30th of April, Edict of Tolerance of Galerius, Constantine and Licinius, Augusti.
312         Autumn, War between Constantine and Maxentius
28th of Oct., Maxentius dies at the Battle of Milvian Bridge at the outskirts of Rome
Nov-Dec, Constantine in Rome
313         Jan-Feb, Meeting at Milan and so-called Edict of Milan
April, Maximinus Daia invades Licinius’ provinces
1st of May, Licinius victory over Maximinus Daia at Hadrianapolis, in Thrace
13th of June, Licinius publishes in Nicomedia the Edict of Milan
Aug-Sep, Maximinus Daia dies
314         War between Licinius and Constantine.  Constantine receives Illyricum.
324         War between Constantine and Licinius.  Constantine Lord over the whole Empire

The Cult of Martyrs

            The etymological meaning of the word “martyr” is that of ‘witness’.  The Christian martyr is the one who gives testimony of Christ’s faith, faith in the resurrection of the Lord.  The Church, however, has reserved the word for those Christians who shed their blood for Christ.  All the other Christians who suffered persecution but did not lose their lives are known as confessors - martyrs without blood.  Martyrdom, that is the testimony given with sufferings, with blood and with death in favor of the truth of a fact and of the divinity of a doctrine, is a unique property of Christianity.  Neither philosophy, nor paganism, not even Judaism had true martyrs.  Only the Christians had sacrificed their lives, and this en masse, to affirm the fundamental facts and doctrine of their religion, whose witnesses and testimonies they wanted to be.  “Nobody”, writes St. Justin, “believed in Socrates to the extent of dying for the doctrine that he taught.”[9]  There had never been in paganism a man who, with his death, testified that his religion was true.  This extraordinary testimony was part of the plan of the Founder of Christianity as a proof of the Divinity of his origin and of the transcendence of his doctrine.  The Christian suffers, with total freedom, a violent death and, in this way, his voluntary condemnation becomes a resplendent triumph of the moral freedom that Christianity brought to the world.
            For Christianity, this testimony of the martyrs has a priceless value, so great that it is impossible to understand the deaths of so many Christians of all regions, ages, sexes, and walks of life unless we have recourse to a supernatural help and intervention.  For us, Christians, those brothers of Christ and ours were not fanatics, were no people who despised life, but men and women like us, with the same hope and faith of redemption whose love for Christ, their Savior and Redeemer, was so great, so profound that they valued for nothing this temporal life if by it they were to be cut off from Christ’s love and friendship and to lose their eternal life.  They are the warriors for Christ’s kingdom, who, when the hour of trial comes, go happy into battle, considering it a privilege to suffer for Him who first suffered for them.  No doubt then, that they from the very beginning of the Church, were held in great respect and their memory blessed forever.  The martyrs were the crown of every Church.
            At the outset their relics were placed in the Catacombs or underground cemeteries and their tombs served as altars to celebrate the Sacred Mysteries.  These relics were the objects of a pious cult from the part of the faithful and, at the same time, they celebrated the martyr’s death as the day of triumph, the dies natalis – the natal day of their martyrdom.  A wonderful illustration of this is found in Polycarp’s Passion:

But we taking up his bones, valued more than precious stones, more tried than gold, deposited them in a suitable place.  There also, as far as we can, we will celebrate the natal day of his martyrdom in joy and gladness, both in commemoration of those who finished their contest before, and to prepare those that shall finish hereafter.

The Number of Martyrs
            The aim of this question is not to arrive at knowing the exact number of martyrs, something which will always be totally impossible.  Only God knows.  We will attempt to arrive at an approximate number of martyrs, putting the figure at the millions.  The admirers of the Roman empire, on the other hand, defend that only a few thousand died before Constantine.  And these were condemned because, as breakers of Roman laws, they were criminals.
            We will not go into the intricate problem of finding the criteria how to judge the number of martyrs, but only, following the latest research on the matter, give you the approximate and prudent figure defended by Catholic scholars.
            We have two ways of knowing whether a Christian was a martyr or not:
a.     Direct Way, or the so-called Historico-Literary Way: a way by which from the sources and writers of the time we have the names of those who died for Christ.  Through this was we have around two to three hundred martyrs.
b.     Indirect Way or the so-called Archeological Way, which tells us the number of martyrs by the cult they received, for the Christians built an altar round the martyr’s sepulcher.  Through this way, we know of 1,000 martyrs.  But the question is this: did all the martyrs receive cult?  It was quite impossible that all the martyrs received cult for it began sometimes, especially in the Roman Church, in the middle of the 3rd century.  So, the precedent martyrs during the persecution of Nero (54-68), Domitian (81-96), the Antonines (98-181) never received a cult.  But not only this, not all the martyrs during Diocletian’s persecution received cults, because this required a sepulcher and where are the sepulchers of those many martyrs who died in the mines, in the sea, in the mountains, in the forests, in exile?  On the other hand, many churches were happy with one martyr or one with a group who died with him.  Except the most important churches of Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, and Carthage, the other churches of the Empire had only the cult of one martyr, although they had many more whose cult was never celebrated, for it is ridiculous to believe that the Emperors took a great deal of pain to have only one martyr for each Church.  Later on, the bishops tried to have a catalogue of the martyrs of all churches but the memory of many of them had disappeared.
From this we can conclude that the number of martyrs is much higher than the one thousand from whom we have cult.
There are testimonies of many writers for almost all the persecutions. For Nero (54-68) Tacitus says: “Ingens multitudo”.[10]
For Domitian (81-96) the Apocalypse 6.9:

…I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne.

For Trajan (98-117): Plinius the Younger (111): “If they still persevered, I ordered them to be persecuted” who were many because he adds:

…considering the numbers endangered, persons of all ranks and ages, and of both sexes…are involved.[11]

For the second century the apologists Justin (ca. 100- ca. 168), Tertullian (ca. 155-228), Minucius Felix testify of the many persecutions and the innumerable number of Christians killed by the populace.
For Septimus Severus (193-211): Clement of Alexandria (150-215) speaks of an “Infinite multitude”[12]
St. Irenaeus (ca. 140-202): “The Church offered in all places at all times a multitude of martyrs to the Father.”[13]
These testimonies refer only to the persecutions before the terrible ones of the 3rd century and the impression the Christian writers give is that the number of martyrs was exceptionally high.
For Decius (249-251): St. Cyprian and Dionysius of Alexandria speak of great numbers killed for the faith.  Dionysius even speaks:

A multitude of Christians” who fled to avoid falling into the hands of the persecutors and died in the mountains, in the deserts, killed by beasts, by robbers, etc.[14]

For Valerian (253-260) we have, again, the testimonies of St. Cyprian and Dionysius of Alexandria:

To give all the names of our people, who are so numerous and quite unknown to you, would be a waste of time, but I must tell you that men and women, youngsters and graybeards, girls and old women, soldiers and civilians, every race and every age, some the victims of scourges and the stake, others of the sword, came through their ordeal triumphantly and have received their crowns.[15]

For Diocletian we have many testimonies from Eusebius.  Speaking only of Nicomedia, he has this to say:

The spectacle of what happened after this beggars descriptions: in every town great numbers were locked up, and everywhere the gaols built long before the homicides and grave-robbers were crowded with bishops, presbyters, and deacons, readers and exorcists, so that now there was no room in them for those convicted of crimes.[16]

After the third edict –

It was laid down that if the prisoners offered sacrifice they should be allowed to go free, but if they refused they should be mutilated by endless tortures.[17]

He again writes this:

Now once more, how could one count the number of martyrs in every province of the empire, especially those in Africa and Mauritania, in the Thebais of Egypt?[18]

When he describes the persecution in the Thebais, he is even more categorical about the number:

In this way they carried on, not for a few days or weeks, but year after year.  Sometime ten or more, sometimes over twenty were put to death, at other times at least thirty, and at yet others not far short of sixty; and there were occasions when on a single day a hundred men as well as women and little children were killed, and condemned to a succession of ever-changing punishments.[19]

These are then, the testimonies of pagan and Christian contemporaries for every persecution.  They describe quite vividly the impressions about the persecutions, an impression that says that the number of martyrs was indeed great. We have no reason to doubt their truthfulness.  So we can conclude that the number of martyrs was, in fact, very high.  Naturally, it is quite difficult to put into figures those “great multitudes”, “ingens multitudo”, “great numbers”, “infinite multitude”, etc…but this way of writing makes us to believe that the number was really great.
According to the latest research the number, then, could be put at one hundred thousand. Five thousand for the first century; ten thousand for the second; twenty to thirty thousand for the third and fifty thousand for Diocletian’s persecution.[20]
As a conclusion we can ask ourselves this question: is this number 100,000 small or great? Without any doubt it is a large number, because it refers to 100,000 martyrs who were killed just for their faith, with no other crime but that of being Christian.  So, it is a very great injustice.
On the other hand, to have a clear idea of the persecutions we must talk not only of the martyrs, but also of the many other kinds of punishments: prison; confiscation, torments, difficulties, penalties of all kinds, which the Christians had to suffer for the name of Jesus.  For every martyr some twenty or thirty other Christians suffered torments, prison, exile, confiscation, etc.  All the Christians, on the other hand, lived in a continuous danger of losing their lives for three centuries.  So, in giving the number of Christians who died as martyrs, we do not give the whole picture of the persecutions.





[1] Cf. Lactantius, De Mortibus Persecutorum, 34; Eus. H. E., VIII, 17.
[2] Lactantius, Persecutor’s Death, 34.  The following is the Text of the Edict of Toleration as recorded by Eusebius, Ecclesiatical History, 8, 17.
“Among the measures which we conceive for the good and profit of the people, we wished formerly to set all aright in accord with the ancient laws and public discipline of the Romans, and to make provision for the following: that the Christians, also, whoever had left the religion of their ancestors, should return to a good attitude of mind, since by some reasoning such arrogance had laid hold on them and such folly seized them as to cause them not to follow what had been introduced of old by their ancestors, which perhaps their own forefathers had formerly established, but according to their attitude of mind and as each one wished, thus made laws for themselves and observed these and assembled various multitudes in various places.  Therefore, when an order by us soon followed to the intent that they transfer themselves to the institutions established by the ancients, a great many gave in to danger, but a great many were harassed and suffered all kinds of death; and since, when the majority persisted in the same attitude of mind we say that they were carrying on the worship due to the gods of heaven nor attending to Him of the Christians, having regard for our humanity and our invariable custom by which we regularly extended pardon to all men, we thought that in this case, also, we should most eagerly accord our indulgence, that they may be Christians again and build the houses in which they used to gather, provided that they do nothing contrary to the discipline.  In another letter we shall show the judges what they shall have to observe.  Therefore, according to this indulgence of ours they should beseech their own God for our safety and that of the people and that of themselves, in order that in every way both the welfare of the people may be secured and they may be able to live free from care at their own homes.”
[3] Herbert Masurillo, SJ., The Fathers of the Primitive Church, Mentor Book, p. 243.
[4] Conradus Kirsch, SJ. Enchiridion Fontium Historiae Ecclesiasticae Antiquae, Herder, Barcelona, 1964, pp. 227-228.
[5] Eus., H.E., IX, 9, 12.
[6] Eus. Ecc. Hist., X, 1.
[7] Herbert Masurillo, SJ., The Fathers of the Primitive Church, A Mentor-Omega Book, p. 242.
[8] Lactantius, De Mortibus Persecutorum, 44,5.
[9] St. Justin, Apol. II, 10
[10] Cf. Conradus Kirsch, Enchiridion Fontium Historiae Ecclesiaticae Antiquae, p. 25, no. 34.
[11] Cf. Colman J. Barry, Readings in Church History, I, p. 75-76.
[12] Cf. Migne, p. 8, 1070.
[13] Cf. Adv. Haer. H, 33.
[14] Cf. Eus. H.E., VI, 42.
[15] Eus. H.E., VII, II.
[16] Eus. H.E., V, III, 6.
[17] Eus. H.E., VIII, 6.
[18] Eus. H.E., VIII, 6.
[19] Eus. H.E., VII, 9.
[20] Cf. L. Hertling, Die Zahl der Christen zu Beginn des 4 in Jahrhundertes ZKT 58 (1934), p. 243-253.