Notes
Introduction 1. As J. Daniélou has rightly remarked ("La Non-violence selon l'Ecriture et la
Tradition," Action Chrétienne et Non-violence, Compte rendu du Congrès national Pax Christi, Paris, March 19-20, 1955 [Paris, 1955], 9), "Almost all [the books on Christian nonviolence] are falsified by their justificatory aims, whether they are trying to justify war or to defend conscientious objection. So long as we stay at this level, we shall be lost in sterile debate."
2. The firs w
t few pages of A. Philip's pamphlet, Le Christianisme et la Paix (Paris 1933) were a revelation to me, even though they made no claim to be scientific. I had not previously realized that in this area the first Christians had in any sense been "nonconformist." Then there was G. J. Heering's famous book, The Fall of Christianity: A Study of Christianity, the State, and War (New York, 1943), the original Dutch edition of which was analyzed by F. J. Leenhardt in an article (" Le Christianisme primitif et la guerre," CS, 43 [ 1930], 331-337) which was both insightful and objective. More recently, the article by Mgr. H. F. Davis ("The Early Christian Attitude to War," Blackfriars, 30 [1949], 477-482) asked whether the time was not ripe for a renewal of conscientious objection. One may sympathize with his approach, but as a historical study it was not very strong. Among the recent authors who, broadly speaking, have defended the traditional Christian attitude to war, special place must be given to E. A. Ryan ("The Rejection of Military Service by Early Christians," TS, 13 [1952], 1-32) and to H. von Campenhausen ("Christians and Military Service in the Early Church," in his Tradition and Life in the Early Church: Essays and Lectures in Church History [London, 1968], 160-170). Both Ryan and von Campenhausen have come to the same general historical conclusions as I have. But both of them were convinced that the political and social developments following Constantine's conversion completely transformed the situation, thereby justifying the adoption by Christians of very different and apparently opposite answers to the questions of war and military service. Although I cannot follow these scholars in their ethical conclusions, their presuppositions concerning historical method seem to me to be the only ones possible. I was also delighted to read in a book by a Mennonite author (H. A. Fast, Jesus and Human Conflict [Scottdale, Pa., 1959]) that Christian nonviolence must not be made into a code for automatic application.
3. J. Lasserre, War and the Gospel, transl. O. Coburn (London and Scottdale,
Pa., 1962). Also noteworthy are F. Leenhardt, Le Chrétien doit-il servir l'Etat? (Geneva, 1939) and O. Cullmann, The State in the New Testament, rev. ed. (London,1963). Both of these authors adopted an approach which is slightly different from that of Lasserre. They were also less concerned to draw concrete conclusions.
4. Examples of this method of interpreting the facts will be found in the Appendix to this volume.
5. H. Leclercq ("Militarisme," DAL, XI [1933], cols. 1108-1181, which at points is virtually a verbatim rendering of P. Batiffol, " Les Premiers Chrétiens et la Guerre," Revue du Clergé français, 67 [1911], 222-242), attempted to contrast the teaching of Tertullian the Catholic (who in 197 purportedly accepted military service) with that of Tertullian the "Montanist" heretic after 210. But Leclercq was then forced to admit, "On the first occasion following the proclamation of the gospel on which a Christian writer declared himself on the subject of war, he condemned it in the name of the gospel." A. Vanderpol asserted even more clearly (La Doctrine scolastique du Droit de Guerre [Paris, 1925], 180) that "one cannot find in any of the Christian writers prior to Constantine a word of praise for the military profession, or even a passage stating plainly that it was permissible for Christians to fight."
6. Vanderpol, Doctrine scolastique, 171; Campenhausen, "Christians and Military Service," 162.
7. In contrast to the numerous writings which forbade Christians to take part in war and which denounced it as an evil, there is not a single surviving text from the same period which invited Christians to take part in it or which recommended it as a lesser evil. In his review of the French edition of this book (henceforth cited as EL), M. Villey (RHDF, 40 [1962], 268) wrote that "for all his good intentions M. Hornus cannot avoid hiding under a bushel the texts which may be advanced against his theory." But with all his good intentions in the opposite direction, Villey was unable to produce a single one 0f the patristic texts which I had purportedly disregarded. He fell back upon "the Holy Scriptures which are the origin of tradition," but confined his scriptural citations to those (Matthew 8; Acts 10) referring to the two centurions. He also recommended that I take St. Augustine's City of God more seriously than Hippolytus's Canons. Villey's last prescription would lead to an astonishing methodology for discovering the position of the pre-Constantinian Church! All that one can find in the relevant patristic texts is either a consciousness of membership in an empire which also had soldiers, or an acknowledgement of the presence of some Christians in the military camps. But while these Christians were not always explicitly denounced for this, never was their behavior in any sense commended. Significantly, too, the early Christians never conjoined the two subjects-of living in the empire, and of being in the army; they would surely have done so had the latter been the normal consequence of the former.
8. ASS, October, XII (1867), 533-536, provides a detailed discussion of this contradiction, with specific reference to the case of Ferrutius. The author of the article considered the attitude of conscientious objection to have been not so much the exaggerated viewpoint of certain intellectuals as the unintelligent stance of certain recent converts. After citing as examples of this (p. 533) the three Gallic saints, Martin, Victricius, and Paulinus (see below, pp. 142-152), he went on to state more broadly (p. 536) that those soldiers who took literally the commands "Thou shall not kill" and "No man can serve two masters" were uninstructed peasants (viri utique agrestes et non eruditi). But in the same sentence he stated that these soldiers' error came From their having read Origen, St. Cyprian, Lactantius, and Titus of Bostra, and from having detected in these writings the echo of Tertullian. Of course, they heard this echo wrongly (p. 536). But on p. 533 our author had seemed to take the opposite

252
point of view when he conceded that before "the Church Peace" some learned Christians had shared Tertullian's position on this matter. Who can these men have been if not those named above? It is admittedly difficult to conceive of these unlettered peasants who were simultaneously patristic scholars. But if they had indeed existed, they would be proof that the "rank and file" in the Church was far more open to conscientious objection than is often conceded.
9. Without realizing that he was thereby destroying the rest of his argument, Vanderpol wrote (Doctrine scolastique, 180), "The end of military service, war, is the shedding of blood; and even if this happens without guilt, it defiles the one who is responsible for it or who executes it. . . . And the early Church . . . had a horror of bloodshed."
Chapter l
1. M. Lods, "L'Eglise du IIIe Siècle devant le Service de l'Etat " Bulletin de la Faculté libre de Théologie protestante de Paris, 13, no. 35 (1950), 18; L. Homo, Les Empereurs romains et le Christianisme (Paris, 1931), 42n.; M.D. Chenu, "L'Evolution de la Théologie de la Guerre," LV 7, no. 38 (1958), 78-79; M. Durry, Les Cohortes prétoriennes (Paris, 1938), 349. On the general question of military service in this period, see C. J. Cadoux, The Early Church and the World (Edinburgh, 1925), 116 and especially 116n. In his review, Villey (pp. 267-268) stressed how completely different the situation of the early Church was from that of our own times, in which in many countries conscription has become an accepted tradition.
2. J. Lebreton and J. Zeiller, The History of the Primitive Church, transl. E. C. Messenger (London, 1942-1948), IV, 1028; Ryan, "Rejection," 9-10; W. Seston, Dioclétien et la Tétrarchie (Paris, 1946), I, 300; F. Lot, Nouvelles Recherches sur l'Impot foncier et la Capitation personnelle sous le Bas-Empire (Paris, 1955), 28; A. J. Visser "Christianus sum, non possum militare, Soldatenmartyria uit de derde eeuw," Nederlandsch Archief voor kerkelijke Geschiedenis, 48 (1967), 18. This has been studied in particular in connection with the three cases to which I shall be referring later: those of Maximilian (see p. 287 for bibliography), Victricius (E. Vacandard, Saint Victrice, Evêque de Rouen [Paris, 1903], 7), and Martin (Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 2, 5, which episode has been studied in detail by A. Régnier, Saint Martin, 6th ed. [Paris, 1925], 34-35). See also P. Ménard, "Profil de Saint Martin," Revue de l'Université de Laval, 8 [1953], 9; H. C. Babut, "Saint Martin de Tours," RHL, 1 (1910), 173; and now J. Fontaine, SCH, CXXXIV, 453-460. It must be remembered that the system of veterans consisted of settling former soldiers on the empire's boundaries by making them owners of land given by the state. This was not primarily a matter of rewarding them for past services but of providing a permanent cover for the frontiers. The law of Septimius Severus, which ordered the confiscation of an aging veteran's land if the veteran's son upon reaching manhood refused to enlist (Scriptores Historiae Augustae, LCL, 58), was therefore perfectly logical. No doubt this arrangement was accompanied by moral and social pressures which made enlistment practically compulsory. Constantine, however, in the second half of his reign still left a choice between the army and the onerous civil office of decurion (Cod. Theod., VII, 22, 2). The strict obligation for the son to enlist, which imposed sanctions upon the father if the son failed to do so, dates from 365 (Cod. Theod., VII, I, 8).
3. Joseph us Antiquities, XIV, 10, 6; Batiffol, "Les premiers Chrétiens et la Guerre," 223. Ryan ("Rejection," 4) stated that the exemption of the Jews from service in the Roman army was not a matter of their avoiding killing but merely of
their escaping from the pagan law. This is beside the point. He also remarked that J. Juster (Les Juifs dans l'Empire romain [Paris, 1914], II, 268ff. ), who admitted that this exemption had been in effect in 49 BC, was of the opinion that it was later withdrawn by Augustus or Tiberius. But Ryan, even though he did not specifically discuss this thesis, did not seem himself to be in agreement with it.
4. Joseph us, Antiquities, XVIII, 5. Even the Christian emperor Valens in a moment of fury, resorted again to this punishment against recalcitrant monks (L. Duchesne, Early History of the Christian Church [London, 1922], 412)
5. M. Goguel, The Life of Jesus, transl. O. Wyon (London, 1933), 464-467; idem, Jésus, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1950), 385-386, and 392-393 for the appendix which traces the development of this tradition through primitive Christianity; see also the same author's "Juifs et Romains dans l'Histoire de la Passion," RHR, 62 (1910), 165-182, 295-322, and his The Birth of Christianity, transl. H. C. Snape (London, 1953), 440442. Oscar Cullmann (The State in the New Testament, 34-39) gave the historical background to the controversy and firmly supported the position of H. Lietzmann (first argued in "Der Prozess Jesu," Sitzungsbericht der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften [1931], 313 ff.) on the essential point-that it was the Romans, not the Jews, who condemned Jesus. M. Simon (Verus Israël [Paris, 1948], 147) also showed how this distortion of the accounts of the Passion was designed to spare Rome. More recently Miss A. Jaubert (La Date de la Cène [Paris, 1957], 128) has argued that the solution which she proposed would restore"to the Jewish trial, in accordance with the synoptic tradition, a legal character which scholars had denied." This solution remains very much in dispute. Even if we were to accept it, we would still have to insist that Roman law would have started the trial all over again, and would not merely have ratified the sentence which had already been pronounced. The same intention of acquitting the Roman state-this time without placing the blame on the Jews-is also to be found in "the popular legend which has Jesus struck during the Passion not by a Roman soldier but by an Ethiopian" (F. Lovsky, Antisémitisme et Mystère d'Israël [Paris, 1955], 152, quoting John Moschus, Pratum Spirituale, 30). The strange silence of Acts 28 concerning the death of St. Paul has also sometimes been explained by the author' s desire not to make it obvious that the apostle was condemned to death by Roman justice.
6. Simon, Verus Israël, 127-128; Fast, Jesus and Human Conflict, 200. W. H. C. Frend, "The Persecutions: Some Links between Judaism and the Early Church," JEH, 9 (1958), 142, maintained that this confusion lasted until the end of the second century, at least in the mind of the ordinary public.
7. S. Case, The Revelation of John (Chicago, 1919), 31; Goguel, Birth, 500-504; W. Hobhouse The Church and the World in Idea and in History (London, 1910), 4148; Homo, Les Empereurs, 50-51; P. H. Menoud, L'Evangile de Jean, 2nd ed. (Neuchâtel-Paris, 1947), 63; Ryan, "Rejection " 7 Simon, Verus Israël 144-145. The last of these, relying essentially on Justin, attributed to the Jews alone the initiative for the rupture. The responsibility for the persecution, Simon contended, was therefore theirs.
8. Frend "Persecutions," 142-148, 155. 9. Ibid., 157.
lo. Ibid., 153. 11. Ibid., 158.
12. Ryan, "' Rejection," 16, 30. 13. Ibid. 11.
14. Arnobius, Adv. Nat., 4, 7.

15. Archelaus, Controversy, 1 (end).
16. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, VI, 18, 167. 17. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Romans, 5, 1. 18. Mart. Pol., 6, 2 [Hornus transl.].
19. Mart. Pionii, 15 (Musurillo, 157). 20. Ibid., 21 (Musurillo, 163).
21. Passio Mariani, 2, 2-4 (Musurillo, 195-197). 22. Ibid., (Musurillo, 197).
23. Ibid., 2, 4-5 (Musurillo, 199).
24. Eusebius, Martyrs, 4, 8-13, and 7, 2.
25. See, for example the case of the virgin Ennathas of Scythopolis, who suffered an appalling martyrdom solely as a result of the initiative of the tribune Maxys (Eusebius, Martyrs, 9, 7).
26. Ibid., 11, 6. "Barbarous" can here be understood in both the ethnic and the moral senses of the term.
27. Eusebius, HE, V, 1, 17 ff.
28. Ibid., VII, 3, 4 in which there is a detailed description; or VIII, 10, 3 ff. and VIII, 11, 1 which tells of a terrible massacre in Phrygia.
29. Ibid., VIII, 14, 3.
30. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 27, 5 ff. As a matter of fact, in this passage there is also some trace of an opposition between the Dacian patriotism of Galerius and the strict "Romanism" of Lactantius. See J. Moreau's notes in his edition of De Mort. Pers., SCH, XXXIX, ii, 256, 360-361.
31. Didascalia, V, 1, 1.
32. Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus, II, 13, 121, slightly misquoting Homer, Iliad, I I, 872-873.
33. Seston, Dioclétien, 261, 295; Moreau, La Persécution du Christianisme dans l'Empire romain (Paris, 1956), 112.
34. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 7, 5. On Diocletian's army, see Moreau's footnote in SCH, XXXIX, ii, 234-235.
35. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 37, 5. 36. See Chapter 2 below, p. 68 ff.
37. Acta Carpi, 4 (Musurillo, 33). 38. Acts of St. John, 6.
39. Martyrdom of Perpetua, 9, 16, 21 (Musurillo, 117, 125, 131). 40. Pontius, Vita Cypriani, 16.
41. Eusebius, HE, VI, 41, 16.
42. Gregory the Wonder-Worker,PanegyrictoOrigen,5,67-72.
43. A. Hamman, ed., La Ceste du Sang (Paris, 1953), 324. Here, as in similar cases elsewhere, it is not clear whether it was the sight of the martyrs which brought about the soldiers' conversion or whether the converts were former Christians who were recalled to faithfulness by seeing the sacrifice of their brethren.
44. For this question in general, the work by L. Cerfaux and J. Tondriau (Un Concurrent du Christianisme, le Culte des Souverains [Tournai, 1958]) takes precedence over the bibliography which I provided in my "Etude sur la Pensée politique de Tertullien," RHPR, 38 (1958), 14n. See also Seston, Dioclétien, 212-228; Homo, Les Empereurs, 204-206, 211, 226-227; E. Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars (London, 1955), 208-211.
45. K. M. Setton, Christian Attitude Towards the Emperor in the Fourth Century (New York, 1941 ), 17; Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 262-267.
46. Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 395.
47. Roman tolerance is shown precisely in the fact that Judaism was recognized as a religio licita and that the Jews were exempt from a ceremony which would have offended their religious feelings (Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 384-386). "But the Christians were in quite a different situation: they were either Jews by birth or converted Gentile subjects of the empire. So officially they had the choice only between the God of the Jews and the gods of the empire" (Homo, Les Empereurs, 51 ). At the beginning of this chapter I demonstrated that for opposite reasons Jews and Christians alike refused to consider Christianity a Jewish sect. As a result, the Christians' anomalous position was bound to give rise to question; and the Roman authorities would have needed extraordinary prescience to allow to a small Galilean sect the same privileges which they allowed to Judaism, an ancient religion already practiced extensively throughout the empire (M. Goguel, Les Chrétiens et l'Empire romain à l'Epoque du Nouveau Testament [Paris, 1905], 23). Moreover, the exemption of the Jews was essentially an empirical measure, for experience had shown that this was the best way to obtain peace and order in the regions where they lived. This exemption could not apply to a religion which was new and universalist and thus would inevitably be on the offensive and cause upheavals (T. M. Parker, Christianity and the State in the Light of History [London, 1955], 33).
48. Jerome wrote, "Pagans commit the error of considering as a god any man who rules over them" (Commentary on Daniel, 3, 46). See Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 439-440, and R. Schilling, La Religion romaine de Vénus depuis les origines jusqu'au temps d'Auguste (Paris, 1954), 316-317, the latter of whom gave detailed references to Cicero, Varro, and Lucretius. R. Mehl (" Le Christianisme primitif et le problème de la guerre," Le Monde, December 26, 1961), on the other hand, wrote, "It seems difficult for us to accept the idea that in pagan antiquity there was no radical difference between gods and men, and that, therefore, to proclaim the divinity of the emperor meant merely to recognize the scope of his power." He then went on to comment that "for Christian sensibility . . . to swear a religious oath to the emperor . . . meant an impossible betrayal."
49. "The cult of the emperor is only the mark of an exceptional respect for a man above other men. It does not necessarily imply faith in the reality of his divinity" (P. Monceaux, Histoire littéraire de l'Afrique chrétienne [Paris, 1901-1902], I, 27n. ). It is true, however, that pagan manifestations tended to center increasingly on the person of the emperor. But at the same time official paganism was increasingly losing its strictly religious character. See H. Mattingly, "The Later Paganism," HThR, 35 (1942), 171-179.
50. Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars, 211; D. van Berchem, "Le 'De Pallio' de Tertullien et le Conflit du Christianisme et de l'Empire," Museum Helveticum, 1 ( 1944 ), 102.
51. Setton, Christian Attitude, 21.
52. Van Berchem, "Le 'De Pallio,' " 102.
53. A. D'Alès, Théologie de Tertullien (Paris, 1905), 394; Homo, Les Empereurs, 28; Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars, 236.
54. I. T. Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John (New York, 1919), 198.
55. Detailed studies of this double terminology occur in Setton, Christian Attitude, 18-21, and in Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 446-451. The latter pointed out, however, that this factor, although it undoubtedly existed, should not be overestimated. Similarly, C. Mohrmann (" Epiphania," in Etudes sur le Latin des Chrétiens, 2nd ed., I [Rome, 1961], 249), showed that since the time of the Ptolemies the terms Epiphania and Parousia were frequently used to indicate the arrival of a visiting political ruler, who was himself referred to as Soter. But these words did not go with

256
any strictly religious ceremonial. They were simply the technical vocabulary of imperial etiquette. It was precisely for this reason, because for him Christ is the Lord, that St. Paul borrowed these words, which originally had applied to the Hellenistic rulers (Ibid., 253).
56. Setton, Christian Attitude, 18, 22; Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 449; Ryan, "Rejection," 11. [Cf. Arthur Darby Nock, "The Roman Army and the Roman Religious Year," HThR, 45 (1952), 1S7-252.] ,,
57. Because the crowns have been inaugurated by the false gods, believers should scorn them as the work of the devil (De Corona, 7). Furthermore, because the crowns, in the very ceremony of the donativum, have been explicitly related to the idols, they have become repugnant to the Christian (Ibid., 10-12)..There has been a good deal of debate about the validity of these arguments. Monceaux (Histoire, 271), followed by d'Alès (Théologie, 414), considered them to be one long sophism and rejected them completely. But if the Christians did not refuse military service because they rejected idolatry, it must have been because they rejected violence; and this is something which the above authors do not seem to realize. For in the last resort, no matter how much one accuses Tertullian of false reasoning, the fact remains that there actually were soldier martyrs, and men do not die for a sophism. E. Vacandard, on the other hand (" La Question du Service militaire chez les Chrétiens des Premiers Siècles," Etudes de Critique et d'Histoire religieuse, 2nd ser: [1910], 139), took exactly the opposite line to Monceaux, declaring that to take part in a donativum was to declare oneself a pagan. Finally, A. von Harnack (Militia Christi: Die christliche Religion und der Soldatenstand in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten [Tübingen, 1905; repr., Darmstadt, 1963], 66-68) saw the action by the hero of this story as merely reclaiming for Christianity a privilege already allowed to the initiates of Mithras. The last lines of the treatise, on which Harnack relied exclusively, do have this sense. But it would be a mistake to treat the whole treatise solely along these lines. On this point one may refer to a short note by G. de Plinval ("Tertullien et le Scandale de la Couronne," Mélanges de Ghellinck [Gembloux, 1951], 183-188) which recalled the precedents of Clement of Alexandria and Minucius Felix, and which showed how a Christian soldier might be tempted, where the crown was concerned, to imitate his fellow soldiers who were initiates of Mithras.
58. Eusebius, HE, VI, 5, 3-6.
59. Seston, Dioclétien, 211-230; Lods, "L'Eglise," 25.
60. Seston, "A Propos de la Passio Marcelli Centurionis," in Aux Sources de la Tradition chrétienne, Mélanges M. Goguel (Neuchâtel, 1950), 244. See also Moreau, La Persécution, 115.
61. Lods (" L'Eglise," 24) thought that this measure was only applied effectively in the armies of the Danube and Asia Minor, both of which were under the direct control of Galerius.
62. Epiphanius, Panarion, 68, 2.
63. Homo, Les Empereurs, S0. The relevant texts are: Eusebius, HE, VIII, 1, 7; VIII, 4, 2-3; Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 10.
64. Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 392-396. 65. Acta Fructuosus,2,2-3[Hornustransl.].
66. Lods, "L'Eglise," 15. G. Giannelli (" La Primitiva Chiesa cristiana di Fronte alle Persecuzioni e el Martirio," Nuovo Didaskaleion, 3 [1949], 5-22) indicated clearly that the refusal of the cult was something important, but he failed to bring out its full significance.
67. Clement of Rome, Letter, 60, 4.
68. J.-R. Palanque, Le Christianisme et l'Occident barbare (Paris, 1945), 2.
69. Parker (Christianity and the State, 37) contended that the apocalyptic tendency was to be found chiefly among the "lower-class" Christians, while believers from more cultivated circles tried theologically to justify their emotional attachment to a society in which they were among the privileged. I do not feel that such a sociological interpretation applies convincingly in the present case. See the excellent remarks of Hobhouse (The Church and the World, 64) on the differences between the political approaches of the Book of Revelation and the writings of St. Paul.
70. In Chapter 2 I shall deal at greater length with this prayer, its bases, and its development in Christian thinking.
71. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, III, 24, 7. 72. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 65.
73. Origen mentioned in passing the problem raised by the fact that some kings betray their mission. In this passage, however, he did not try to solve it. He simply referred the reader to his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.
74. The title had already been used by Justin during the reign of Antoninus, Marcus's predecessor (Justin, Second Apology, 2). See Setton, Christian Attitude, 3637, on the care with which the apologists addressed the emperors by their official titles and on the great hopes which they placed in Marcus's intelligence and kindness.
75. Athenagoras, Legatio, 37.. As Moreau (La Persécution, 73) wrote, "During the first two centuries of the empire the Christians lived in a hostile world which hated them. But Roman peace and order ensured for them the minimum of security which allowed the Church to expand and consolidate; so it can be said without paradox that the state protected them more than it persecuted them." See R. L. P. Milburn, Early Christian Interpretations of History (New York, 1954), 54-55, for the persistence in the third century, before the Church Peace, of this view "of the good order and political stability which had favored the growth and expansion of the missionary Church."
76. Legei gar toi dikaiõs ho kurios (Hermas, Similitudes, 1, 4). See the discussion of this text on p. 100 below.
77. Justin, First Apology, 12, 1; 16, 14. 
78. Justin, Second Apology, 9, 1 [Hornus translation]. 79. Acta Achatii, 3, 2.
80. Tertullian, Apology, 4, 5.
81. Ibid., 4, 13. Tertullian (ibid., 10) labeled as stulta (idiotic) the law which punished the name of Christian.
82. This divine law is to some extent the Decalogue, for God, the universal Creator, gave his law through Moses for all peoples according to his lovingkindness. However, this ancient law despite everything has a historical character, i.e., it has full validity only for a certain time and place. Taking the concrete example of circumcision, Tertullian showed that this is contingent upon God's sovereign grace and upon the believer's loyal obedience to him, which alone are normative. The true and immutable law is the newly revealed law of mercy and love (Adv. lud., 2-3).
83. Origen, Contra Celsum, V, 37 and VIII, 56. W. A. Banner ("Origen and the Tradition of Natural Law Concept," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 8 [1954], 49-82) showed clearly the apologetic function which this natural law had for Origen and traced its origins in. pagan philosophy. His examination of these sources led him, however, unduly to minimize Origen's originality.
84. Basil of Caesarea, Homilies, XII (in Princip. Proverb.), 2.
85. G. Bardy, in the notes to his French edition of Theophilus (SCH, XX, i [ 194$], 69 n. ), pointed to parallel passages in Mart. Pol., 8, 2; Acta Cypriani, 2; Acta Apollonii, 3; Tertullian, Apology, 28, 3, and 32, 2-3. An infinite number of other

258
references could be adduced on a question of this importance. I would mention only the dialogue, which I shall quote below (p. 82), between the martyr Achatius and his judge Marcian, a dialogue which has a very direct bearing on the pax Romana and the army. Achatius ended his comments by saying, "I pray to the great and true God for the safety of the emperor, but he cannot demand sacrifice of us and we cannot give it to him. Who indeed could offer sacred honors to a man?" (Acta Achatii, 1, 5 [Hamman, 107]).
86. Theophilus of Antioch, I, 11. The quotation at the end is from Proverbs 24:21-22.
87. Irenaeus, Ado. Haeres., 11, 32, 2. Again Origen conceded to Celsus that "probably . . . in the so-called wars of the bees there lies teaching that among men wars, if they are ever necessary, are to be just and ordered" (Contra Celsum, IV, 82).
88. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., IV, 30, 3. Cf. DTC, VII (1923), col. 2440. 89. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., IV, 36, 6.
90. Ibid., V, 24, 1-3. For comment on this long and very important text, see DTC, VII, ii, col. 2440, and P. Allard, Histoire des Persécutions pendant la Première Moitié du IIIe Siècle (Paris, 1886), 152.
91. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, III, 23, 1-3. 92. Tertullian, Scorpiace, 14.
93. Tertullian, De Anima, 33, 6. 94. Tertullian, Apology, 30, 1-2. 95. Ibid., 5, 2 and 21, 2.
96. Ibid., 5, 6.
97. Tertullian, Ad Scapulam, 4. In the same chapter, as proof of the benevolent attitude of Severus towards the Christians, Tertullian cited the fact that the emperor always kept near him a certain doctor who had once saved his life, although he was well aware that the doctor belonged to the sect. But as C. Guignebert (Tertullien [Paris, 1901], 111) remarked, such action was by no means a proof of his benevolence towards Christianity: "It was mere gratitude and also prudence." In all this Tertullian's aim seems clear: he was harassing the local authorities, who were still directly responsible for the persecution, and hoped thereby to make them hesitate before taking measures of which the emperor might disapprove; he was also clearing the Christians from the a priori suspicion of guilt which would arise if the supreme authority had condemned them beforehand; finally, he was allowing the believers to resist persecution without thereby having to assume the attitude of rebels. On these three objectives of Tertullian, see my "Etude," 15-16. Many Christian apologists prior to and including Eusebius attempted to excuse the emperors as far as possible from any direct responsibility in the persecutions. For Eusebius, however, the primary object was no longer to secure relief for the Christians but to remove any suspicion that the imperial authority itself might have been wrong (J. Sirinelli, Les Vues historiques d'Eusèbe de Césarée durant la Periode prénicéenne [Université de Dakar, Faculté des Lettres et Sciences Humaines, Publications de la Section de Langues et Littératures, X] [Dakar, 1961], 414-416).
98. Van Berchem, "Le `De Pallio,' " 110. 99. Ibid., 104.
100. Hornus, "Etude," 38.
101. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, I, 26 and I, 168. 102. Pseudo-Melito, 10.
103. This may seem to be a rather broad generalization, but in its justification I would mention that: (a) Cyprian was a fervent disciple of Tertullian, whose position on this point is beyond doubt (see below, p. 284); (b) Cyprian was the master who
inspired the martyr Maximilian, who was executed for refusing to bear arms, and whose mother brought his body back for burial at the foot of Cyprian's tomb; (c) Cyprian's writings contain both positive and negative statements which are exactly congruent with the position of conscientious objection.
104. Cyprian, Testimonia, III, 13. 105. Cyprian, Ad Dem., 3 and 17.
106. Origen, Contra Gelsum, IV, 83. (See above, p. 258).
107. Eusebius, Praep. Ev., 6, 6. Eusebius's text, which I quote here, attacks the doctrine of destiny which would render such punishment and reward impossible. I felt entitled to remodel the sentence and to formulate it in a positive way.
108. Ibid., 4, 2. See also HE, IX, 5 ff.
109. Eusebius, Praep. Ev., 2, 6. Half a century later-or earlier if we take into account the periodoi Petrou of which they are only a summary (Cadoux, Early Church, 457)-the Clementine Recognitions were just as practical and pessimistic as Eusebius in their estimate of human nature: "Who is there among men that does not covet his neighbor's goods? And yet they are restrained, and act honestly, through fear of the punishment which is prescribed by the laws. Through fear, nations are subject to their kings, and armies obey with arms in their hands" (Recognitions, IX, 15).
110. Eusebius, HE, VII, 30, 19 [Hornus translation]. On the real significance of Aurelian's expulsion of Paul from the see of Antioch, see G. Bardy, Paul de Samosate, 2nd ed. (Louvain, 1929), 358-363.
111. Eusebius, HE, VIII, 1, 2.
112. Ibid., VI, 5, 3 and VI, 21, 4. See also p. 22 above. 113. Ibid., VIII, 14, 11.
114. Ibid., IX, 10, 3.
115. The excessiveness of Eusebius's eulogies of Constantine is obvious (Milburn, Early Christian Interpretations, 66 ff. ). As to Licinius, he was the initial object of Eusebius's flattery when he, at a time when Constantine's position was still undecided, appeared to be the Christians' real protector (Moreau, La Persécution, 129, 133 ff.). But afterwards, when Constantine had come out in favor of the Christians and Licinius had thus been led to acts which the Constantinians presented as religious persecution, no insult against Licinius could be too caustic. Milburn praised Eusebius for historical honesty in not deleting the eulogies of Licinius from the later editions of his History of the Church, to which he however added some vehement attacks upon the former emperor. It is true that Eusebius inadvertently failed to delete some plural pronouns which imply praise of Licinius (e.g., HE, X, 4, 60 [quoted by Milburn, 201 n. ], or X, 2, 2). But in most cases Eusebius revised his work quite drastically. This applies to HE, IX, 9, 1, which however is the only example (apart from the one cited above) that Milburn gave of Eusebius's objectivity (Milburn, 201 n.). It also applies to HE, IX, 10, 3: whereas later editions read "the prince of that time," the first edition unambiguously spelled out "Licinius." Identical corrections occur elsewhere in the HE which have been indicated in the editions of G. Bardy and E. Grapin (HL, II, xxiv-xxxvii, especially xxxi-xxxiii): HE, VIII, 17, 5; table of contents of book IX (Bardy, III, 43; Grapin, HL, XVII, 304); IX, 9a, 12; IX, 10, 3; IX, 11, 8. Eusebius has deliberately deleted the text which later came to be called the Edict of Milan, whose author was Licinius (HE, X, 5, 1-14; see J. Moreau, "Notes d'Histoire romaine," AUS, 2 [1953], 103). In at least one other case there is evidence that he has "arranged" history (cf. J. Moreau, "Vérité historique et Propagande politique chez Lactance et dans la Vita Constantini," AUS, 4 [1955], 95-96; see also R. Laqueur, Eusebius als Historiker seiner Zeit [Berlin-Leipzig, 1929]). The references to Licinius which Eusebius expunged from the later editions of the HE can fortunately be restored thanks to the

260
survival of certain manuscripts which he had not corrected. In sum, it is clear that the so-called "objectivity" which others have eulogized in Eusebius's work was manifestly only the result of his failure systematically to carry out his damnatio memoriae. Sirinelli (pp. 23-24), who reviewed once again the difficult question of the chronology of the various editions of the HE, argued that Eusebius must have finished the first editing by 312 and the last editing by 324. During these twelve years "out of a simple ecclesiastical chronicle, it [the HE] became a study of contemporary politics as well as a reflection on the meaning of history in the making" (Sirinelli, 434-436).
116. E. Honigmann, Patristic Studies (Vatican City, 1953), 6.
117. J. Moreau, "Les Litterae Licinii," AUS, 2 (1953), 100-105; Moreau, "Notes," 102-105. H. Grégoire had already pointed out ("La `Conversion' de Constantin," Revue de l' Université de Bruxelles, 36 [1930-1931], 259, 261-263) that it was only in 313 that a clear confrontation between paganism and Christianity took place, "but that the champion of Christianity was not Constantine; it was Licinius." It was the latter who at Nicomedia posted the edict which has been "commonly called ... the Edict of Milan and obstinately attributed to Constantine." But J.-R. Palanque, who espoused this view with certain shades of difference in two works ("A propos du Prétendu Edit de Milan," Byz, 10 [1935], 607-616; J.-R. Palanque, G. Bardy, et al., The Church in the Roman Empire, transl. E. C. Messenger [London, 1949-1952], I, 10-12), has shown a tendency to return to the classical thesis in his "Constantin, Empereur chrétien, d'aprés ses Récents Historiens," Etudes médiévales offertes d M. le Doyen Fliche (Montpellier, 1952), 134. A similar traditional assessment is found in H. Dörries, Constantine the Great, transl. R. H. Bainton (New York, 1972 ), 44-47.
118. See below, pp. 208-211. 119. Eusebius, HE, IV, 26, 6-11. 120. See above, p. 32.
121. Origen, Contra Celsum, II, 30. On the connections between the Pax Romana and the gospel, which for some authors was a positive relationship and for others (particularly Hippolytus, with whom I shall be dealing later) was decidedly negative, see E. Peterson, Der Monotheismus als politisches Problem (Leipzig, 1935), especially 66 ff. For even more extensive treatments of this subject, see E. Preuschen, Analekta, I: Staat und Christentum bis auf Konstantin, 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1909); H. Berkhof, Kirche und Kaiser (Zürich, 1947); W. Hartke, Römische Kinderkaiser (Berlin, 1951); and Parker, Christianity and the State.
122. Pseudo-Justin, Exhortation, 17.
123. Sirinelli, 111-113, 133-134. We shall again encounter this lack of responsible theological thinking in Eusebius.
124. Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica, III, 7, 35, quoted by Sirinelli, 450.
125. Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica, VI, 20, which Sirinelli (p. 451) dated from 315 or a little later. Sirinelli devoted a chapter (pp. 388-411) to the theme of this "coincidence between empire and incarnation." Reluctant though he was to recognize any major significance in Eusebius's thought on this point, he traced with clarity the outlines of the entire tradition.
126. John Chrysostom, Commentary on Isaiah, 2, 4. 127. Idem, Homilies on St. Matthew, 75, 2.
128. Lactantius, De Ira Dei, 17, 6-7. See also the remainder of chapter 17. 129. Ibid., 23, 10.
130. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, I, 1, 15. From the context it is clear that Lactantius meant this sentence to indicate that God was siding with Constantine and against his adversaries.
131. "Daia . . . obtained authority to trample underfoot and oppress the empire of the East; a person ignorant alike of war and of civil affairs, and from a herdsman become the leader of armies" (Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 19, 6).
132. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, I, 1, 13. 133. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 18, 10.
134. A good summary of the period 306-323, during which the system of the Tetrarchy collapsed in confusion, can be found in Moreau, La Persécution, 125 ff.
135. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 44-48. See Moreau's edition of this work (SCH, XXXIX, ii [Paris, 1954], 433-436) for a discussion of the meaning of the signum Dei on the Milvian Bridge. The bibliography on this subject is too extensive to summarize here; Moreau treats it especially well in his edition. For his discussion of the Edict of Milan, see ibid., 458. In Chapter 6 I shall comment further on the historical falsity of Lactantius's views.
136. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, V, 9, 15-17.
137. Basil of Caesarea, Moralia, 79, 1-2; idem, Homilies on the Psalms, 1, 14. 138. Mansi, I, col. 46.
139. Mart. Pol., 10, 2 (Musurillo, 11).
140. John Chrysostom, Commentary on the Psalms, 148, 4-5; idem, Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans, 23, 2.
141. Origen, Contra Celsum, I, 3.
142. Sirinelli, 417. At this stage Eusebius was merely quoting the explanations put forward by the Christian communities of Lyons and Smyrna. He never adhered to these himself. What interested him was already solely the prowess of the martyrs (Ibid., 418).
143. Ibid., 445.
144. Ibid., 439. The sole exception was Maximinus, against whom Eusebius had a highly personal argument.
145. Ibid., 440.
146. Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica, III, 7, 39. 147. Sirinelli, 452 ff.
148. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, V, 12.
149. For an excellent survey (with exhaustive bibliographies) of the empire's persecutions of the Christians, see J. Vogt and H. Last, "Christenverfolgung," in RACh, II, cols.1159-1228. Another lucid recent study of manageable proportions is J. Moreau, La Persécution. An important work by H. Grégoire (Les Persécutions dans l'Empire romain [Brussels, 1951]) stimulated a constructive debate with E. de Moreau ("Le Nombre des Martyrs des Persécutions romaines," NRTh, 73 [1951], 812-832). Both authors further developed their points of view under the joint title of "Nouvelles Observations sur le Nombre des Martyrs," BARB, 38 (1952), 37-70. Personally I subscribe to the finely worked out views of Parker, who regretted that a sort of Hegelian dialectic had led from one obviously false thesis (of Christians undergoing three centuries of uninterrupted terror) to an antithesis which was just as false (of Christians during the same period enjoying a wonderful life free from all difficulties) (Parker, Christianity and the State, 22 ff. ). Parker then proceeded to give several historical examples of what the life of the whole community within a hostile state may really have been like (Ibid., 26-28).
150. Lactantius, De Ira Dei, 20, 7. 151. Cyprian, Ad Dem., 11.
152. Ibid., 2 and 5.
153. Pseudo-Cyprian, Quod Idola, 4 ff. 154. Origen, Contra Celsum, IV, 70, 72.

262
155. Pseudo-Melito, 10.
156. Irenaeus, Ado. Haeres., V. 30.
157. Ascension of Isaiah, 4, 2, 6, 7, 8, and 11. The Sybilline Oracles, III, 63, also made a close connection between Belial as the future manifestation of Satan and the emperors. Commodian (Carmen Apologeticum, 805 ff., 887, 891, 933, 935) also saw Nero as an eternal symbol of the bloody dictator, whose imminent return he proclaimed-for an exemplary punishment.
158. Apocraphal Acts of St. John, 36 (end).
159. Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 241 ) did not exclude this hypothesis in this particular case.
160. Eusebius, HE, VIII, 6, 8.
161. Tertullian, Ad Nat., II, 9. Here, as often, Tertullian-who in the present case was depending upon Horatius-made use of a theme which he had already found in the Latin pagan writers.
162. Tertullian, Adv. lud., 9. Cf. his Adv.,Marc., III, 13, where he already used the same expressions.
163. Tertullian, De Fuga, 12.
164. "Whatever is not God's can belong to nobody but the devil," Tertullian commented, speaking of the pagan magistrates. "The demons are the magistrates of this world. They [i.e., the magistrates and demons] carry the fasces and wear the purple of one and the same college" (De Idololatria, 18). Tertullian also stated (De Spec., 7) that Rome was the place where the demons assembled. For an important study of Tertullian's convictions concerning Christian participation in military service, see W. Rordorf ("Tertullians Beurteilung des Soldatenstandes," VC, 23 [1969], 105-141; for comment upon De Idol., 18, see pp. 108-109), which was published too late for me to use it in this revised edition.
165. Tertullian, De Corona, 13. For the significance of pompa diaboli, see J. H Waszink, "Pompa Diaboli," VC, 1 (1947), 15-41.
166. G. Bardy, intro. to Hippolytus of Rome, Cammentary on Daniel, SCH, XIV ( 1947), 24.
167. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, III, 8, 9. 168. Ibid., IV, 8, 7-8.
169. Ibid., IV, 9, 2. In striking contrast, Eusebius maintained that, even if the devils had had total dominion over pre-Christian history, their reign had been wholly ended by the coming of Jesus (Sirinelli, 323-326).
170. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, IV, 35; Eusebius, Demonstratio Evangelica, VIII, 2, 9-45.
171. On the various patristic exegeses of these seventy weeks and the consensus which was finally reached to make them end with the birth of Christ, see DTC, IV (1911), cols. 75-79.
172. Sirinelli, 464. With reference to the exegesis of the "seventy weeks" (pp. 459-465), Sirinelli showed that if Eusebius borrowed the eschatologists' interpretation, while their earlier adversaries had rejected it, it was in order to deprive the eschatologists of one of their most effective weapons. While accepting that the last "week" did not end with the birth of Christ, Eusebius made it end with his death. After Jesus Christ's time, therefore, history was all that remained for the future. As a result, there was no external standpoint left from which to judge history. It is beyond dispute that apocalyptic illuminism can at times lead to puzzling mistakes (see, for instance, Bardy's intro. to Hippolytus's Commentary on Daniel, SCH, XIV, 11 ff.). But Hippolytus was writing precisely to provide a safeguard against such divagations. His interpretation was thus not that of an irresponsible fanatic. It was that of a theolo
gian who, however learned, remained aware that the history of the present world was to culminate in an end which was already judging it.
173. We are not dealing here with biblical theology. Let us merely recall that in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 Paul speaks of the thing and the man whose actions for a moment restrain "the mystery of lawlessness." Most commentators, from the early Fathers onwards, have seen these as the empire and the emperor (Goguel, Birth, 445). O. Cullmann has been almost alone in seeing them as the preaching of the gospel to the heathen and as the man carrying this out (i.e., St. Paul himself) (" Le Caractère eschatologique du Devoir missionaire et de la Conscience apostolique de Saint Paul," RHPR, 16 [ 1936], 244-245; idem, Christ and Time: The Primitive Christian Conception of Time and History, rev. ed. [London, 1962], 164-165; idem, The State, 52 n.). The two interpretations, however, are not as much in conflict as appears at first sight. In fact, the unity of the empire, with the material and intellectual opportunities for communication which it afforded and which I have stressed above, provided a providential framework for the propagation of the gospel (cf. E. F. Scott, Man and Society in the New Testament [New York, 1946], 171). So it can be admitted that for St. Paul the empire was opposed to the Antichrist, whether because it was itself the "restrainer" which gave time for the spread of the preaching of the gospel, or whether it simply enabled preaching, the activity of which may also have been the primary meaning of the word "restrainer." For the non-Christian context of this idea, see Cerfaux and Tondriau Concurrent, 389.
174. Tertullian, Apology, 32, I. See also his De Res. Carnis, 24, which in effect amounts to a repetition with a few verbal alterations of the text of 2 Thessalonians 2 along with some glosses, all of which is suffused with the clear intention of transforming a rather enigmatic text into a direct and unequivocal designation of the Roman empire. On Tertullian's political position in general, see the interesting remarks of Ryan, "Rejection," 17-18.
175. M. Dibelius, "Rom und die Christen im ersten Jahrhundert," in his Botschaft und Geschichte, Gesammelte Aufsätze, ed. G. Bornkamm (Tübingen, 19531956), II, 186-187. Dibelius viewed Tertullian's position as a misunderstanding of St. Paul's thinking and as a very unattractive "petit bourgeois" search for quietist. Certainly St. Paul was far less precise than Tertullian in his identification, and certainly the whole of his thinking was directed toward the dynamism of the preaching of the gospel, not toward the problem of preserving a political reality. I find, even so, that Dibble's overstated his case and that Tertullian's contentions contained real insights into Pauline thought.
176. "The Antichrist will be proud, he will feed on war and be a bold enough tyrant to raise himself above God. He will swell with pride because of his army, he will sack the fortresses of his enemies. . . . He will utter monstrous words against God, and he will want everyone to adore him alone, like the one God." He will destroy Tyre, Egypt, Libya, Ethiopia, and will reign over Jerusalem. He will declare himself king of the Jews. "It is he whom the unbelievers adore as God. They will bend the knee before him, taking him for the Christ because they will not remember the word of the prophet who called him an imposter and cheat" (Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, IV, 49, 1, 4-5). Several of these points could be applied to the empire. The passage which I quote in the main text, immediately after this footnote (Commentary on Daniel, IV, 17, 7-8), however, proves that they referred not to the empire but to one of its adversaries.
177. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, IV, 17, 8. 178. Ibid., IV, 17, 7.
179. Ibid., IV, 21, 3. The word ** with which Hippolytus designated

264
the Deceiver, is precisely the term used in 2 John 7 as the equivalent for the Antichrist.
180. Bardy, intro. to Hippolytus, SCH, XIV, 25. 181. Goguel, Birth, 440; Cullmann, The State, 46. 182. Parker, Christianity and the State, 40.
183. Tertullian, Apology, 21, 24. For penetrating comment upon this general attitude, see Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 212-213. He showed that for St. Paul and the Fathers the sovereign who could be called just, whom they recognized must employ violent means, was invariably a pagan sovereign. This meant that the nonChristians did not escape from God's sovereignty; but that fact could not justify the Christians in using methods available only to those who did not yet know Jesus Christ. On this point see Campenhausen, "Christians and Military Service," 160-161; Daniélou, "La Non-Violence," 21-22; Guignebert, Tertullien, 38-42; Setton, Christian Attitude, 17; Hornus, "Etude," 11.
184. Hobhouse, The Church and the World, 65.
185. A. Molnár, "L'Eschatologie contre l'Impérialisme romain," unpublished lecture given at the pastoral meeting of the Union of Czech Brethren, January 30February 3, 1955, reported in Protestant Churches in Czechoslovakia, 2, No. 2 (1956), 13. [For Molnár's treatment of eschatological themes in a later period of church history, see his A Challenge to Constantinianism: The Waldensian Theology in the Middle Ages (Geneva, 1976), ch. 3.]
186. Sirinelli (p. 485) wrote that Eusebius found "this present age, which was constituted politically by the empire and religiously by the Church, substantial enough, rich enough, exciting enough for him not to need to disparage and negate it by continual reference to the future." For Eusebius all the prophecies of the Old Testament had already been fulfilled, and a second coming of the Lord was of no interest whatsoever (Sirinelli, 465, 465 n., 466-467, 470-484).
187. Ibid., 410 n.
188. See J. Turmel, Histoire des Dogmes (Paris, 1931-1936), IV, 213-215, and also Turmel's very detailed study "L'Eschatologie à la fin dulv** siècle," RHL, 3 (1900), 97-127, 200-232, 289-321. It is unlikely, however, that Eusebius would have been bold enough to write plainly, as Didymus the Blind later did: "The Day of the Lord, in all probability, is the enlightenment produced in the soul by the true light" (Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 1, 13).
189. See Sirinelli, 51, 455-458, 468.
190. J. Daniélou, Les Anges et leur Mission d'après les Pères de l'Eglise, Collection Irénikon, new ser., V, 2nd ed. (Chevetogne, 1953), 176.
191. J. C. Bennett, Social Salvation (New York, 1935), 141. Similarly, Sirinelli wrote (p. 455): "The end of history, the end of the world, is one of the problems in which the opinions of an historian who knows something about theology can be seen most clearly."
192. Cullmann The State, 11-12, 49. 193. Ibid., 67. Cf. also pp. 44-45, 55. 194. Ibid., 55-56; Hornus, "Etude," 3.
Chapter 2
1. See, among other texts, Irenaeus, Demonstration, 20, 27 and 29; Cyprian, De Zelo, 5; pseudo-Cyprian, Adv. Iud., 6; Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, I, 8, 3. My purpose here is not to examine the Old Testament directly, but merely to note how the Fathers understood and utilized its texts. For clear and concise general
analysis of the bellicose passages of the Old Testament, see A. M. Brunet, "La Guerre dans la Bible," LV, 7, no. 38 (1958), 31-47.
2. Tertullian, Adv. Marc., I, 24, and IV, 29. 3. (Adamantius), Dialogus, I, 9-16, 18.
4. Clement of Rome, Letter, 12, 7. 5. Exodus 17:8-13.
	6. Barnabas, Letter, 12, 2. Similarly, Cyprian wrote (Testimonia, II, 16): 	"Amalek was overcome by Jesus [ Joshua], that is, the devil was overcome by Christ." 	7. Numbers 21:6-9.
8. Barnabas, Letter, 12, 5-7. 9. Numbers 23:18.
10. Barnabas, Letter, 12, 8. 11. Exodus 17:14.
12. Barnabas, Letter, 12, 10.
13. It was a standard argument, which Clement as well as Tatian, Theophilus, Tertullian, and Eusebius borrowed from Josephus, that since Moses was even more ancient that Homer he had greater authority.
14. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, I, 24, 158, 1. 15. Ibid., I, 24, 158, 2.
16. Ibid., I, 24, 159. 17. Ibid., I, 24, 160.
18. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., IV, 27, 1.
19. Origen, De Princ., IV, 2, 8. See also IV, 1, 9 (end). 20. Origen, Homilies on Joshua, 15, 1.
21. U. Treu, "Etymologie und Allegorie bei Klemens von Alexandrien," SP, IV (TU, 79 [Berlin, 1961]), 200-211. In addition, see below, p. 111.
22. Philoxenus of Mabbug, Letter Sent to a Friend, 61. The expression "the Egypt of evil" recurs in sections 6, 10, and 36.
23. Origen, De Princ., II, 4, 4. 24. Aristides, Apology, 8.
25. Ibid., 10.
26. Arnobius, Adv. Nat., l, 6. 27. Didascalia, VI, 19, 1.
28. Barnabas, Letter, 16, 4. 29. Ibid., 6-10.
30. Origen, Homilies on Joshua, 17, 1. .This passage was cited in a slightly different form by Lovsky, Antisémitisme, 463.
31. Lovsky, Antisémitisme, 125.
32. The Ascension of Isaiah, 7, 9-12; see also 10, 29-31.
33. Victorinus of Pettau, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 19. 34. Cyprian, De Mortalitate, 2.
35. Minucius Felix, Octavius, 33, 3.
36. (Adamantius), Dialogus, I, 10, 12, 13. 37. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., III, 17, 3.
38. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, IV, 40, 3.
39. Basil of Caesarea, Treatise on the Holy Spirit, 16, 39. 40. Tertullian, Scorpiace, 3.
41. Theophilus of Antioch, Three Books, III, 11. 42. Pseudo-Cyprian, Quod Idola, 10; see also 12. 43. Tertullian, Apology, 26, 3.
44. Tertullian, Adv. Marc., III, 23.

266
45. Mart. Pionii, 4, 18 (Musurillo, 141).
46. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, IV, 58, 3. 47. Hippolytus, On the Antichrist, 30.
48. Justin, First Apology, 47.
49. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, 110, 6. 50. Ibid., 139, 3.
51. Origen, Contra Celsum, IV, 73.
52. Ibid., VIII, 42. See also I, 47; II, 8, 13, 34, 78; IV, 32; V, 43; VII, 26; VIII, 47, 69.
53. Ibid., IV, 22.
54. Minucius Felix, Octavius, 33, 5. 55. (Adamantius), Dialogus, I, 11. 56. Pseudo-Cyprian, Adv. Iud., 6-8. 57. Eusebius, Praep. Ev., 1, 3.
58. Sybilline Oracles, IV, 115-118, 125-127..See also Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 185.
59. Augustine, Discourse on the Psalms, 74, 17. 60. Pseudo-Cyprian, De Pascha Computus, 15. 61. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, IV, 21, 5.
62. J. Isaac La Dispersion d'Israël, Fait historique ou Mythe théologique (Algiers, 1954), 26 ff. On the Christian interpretation of the disaster of AD 70, see Goguel, Birth, 546-547.
63. Lovsky, Antisémitisme, 72. 64. Ibid., 150.
65. Cited by Eusebius, HE, II, 23, 18.
66. Origen, Commentary on St. Matthew, 10, 17; Contra Celsum, I, 49; II, 13. Later on John Chrysostom combined the two traditions (Homilies on St. Matthew, 69, 1 ): he argued that-the catastrophe of AD 70 was indeed the punishment for the death of Christ, but that God in his mercy had not punished the Jews immediately. But events such as the murders of James and Stephen had finally exhausted his patience.
67. Theophilus of Antioch, Three Books, II, 36. 68. Tertullian, Apology, 20, 2.
69. Tertullian, Adv. Marc., IV, 39. 70. Clement of Rome, Letter, 8; 9.
71. Commodian, Instructions, II, 9-10.
72. Jerome, Ep., 60, 17. On the events to which Jerome was referring see L. Halphen, Les Barbares, 3rd ed. (Paris, 1936), 15; G. Bardy, L'Eglise et les Derniers Romains, 8th ed. (Paris, 1948); and P. Courcelle, Histoire littéraire des Grandes Invasions 
germaniques (Paris, 1948).
73. Eusebius, HE, VIII, 1, 8-9. 74. Tertullian, De Idol., 19.
75. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., IV, 36, 6, which has already been mentioned on p. 32.
76. On the theme of the de morte persecutorum in Eusebius, see Sirinelli, 420, 433, 444. In the last of these instances, Eusebius also applied this theme to Maxentius, who had never persecuted the Christians but who received judgment as a bad ruler. For Eusebius, however, this theme was less central than it was for Lactantius; in fact, Eusebius ultimately abandoned it altogether (Sirinelli, 439).
77. Eusebius, HE, VI, 41, 9., On Eusebius's occasional extension to a whole group of the punishment which he viewed as that of the responsible individuals, see Sirinelli, 442-443.
78. Eusebius, HE, IX, 9, 1.
79. Eusebius, HE, IX, 10, 13 and 15. 80. Ibid., X, I, 7.
81. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 44-48. 82. Ibid., 49.
83. Ibid., 50, 1. 84. Ibid., 52, 4.
85. See below, pp. 184-187.
86. E. Grapin, introduction to Eusebius, HE, HL, II, xii. On Lactantius, see Moreau, "Vérité historique," 93.
87. Cyprian, De Bono Patientiae, 21.
88. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, VI, 18, 11.
89. F. Casavola, "La Politiche dei Cristiani pregiustinianei," Labeo, 1 (1955), 55-73.
90. Romans 6:13, 23; 13:12; 16:7; 1 Corinthians 9:7, 25; 2 Corinthians 6:7; 10:36; 11:8; Ephesians 6:12-18; Philippians 2:25; Colossians 4:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:8; 1 Timothy 1:18; 4:12; 2 Timothy 2:3; 4:7; Philemon 2, 23. "Whereas in the Old Testament infidelity was called adultery, in the New Testament and the early Church it is described as desertion" (R. H. Bainton, "The Early Church and War," HThR, 39 [1946], 189).
91. E. Nielsen, "La Guerre considérée comme une religion et la religion comme une guerre," Studia Theologica, 15 (Aarhus, 1961), 109.
92. H. Edmonds, who devoted an article ("Geistlicher Kriegsdienst: der Topos der Militia spiritualis in der antiken Philosophie," in O. Casel ed., Heilige Uberlieferung, suppl. vol. to Beiträge zur Geschichte des alten Mönchtums und des Benediktinerordens [Münster, 1938], 21-56; repr. in Harnack, Militia Christi [1963 ed. ],133-162) to the study of the theme of the militia spiritualis in pagan philosophy, contended that the militia Christi was simply a later application of this classical theme.
93. Harnack Militia Christi, 35. See also J. Gagé, " Stauros nikopoios , La Victoire impériale duns l'Empire chrétien," RHPR, 13 (1933), 395; Rordorf, "Tertullians Beurteilung," 130-138; [and J. Auer, "Militia Christi," DS, X (1979), 1213-1217].
94. It is enough to point out that a patrology such as that of F. Cayré (3rd ed. [1945], II, 904) has in its "doctrinal table" no fewer than seventeen lines of patristic references under the heading of "spiritual battle." See also J. Lortz, Tertullian als Apologet (Münster, 1928), II, 30-54; DS, III (1954), art. "Démon" esp. cols. 150-152, 177-196, 204-208, 216-219; J. Daniélou, Essai sur le Mystère de l'Histoire (Paris, 1953), 57-60; J. Fontaine, SCH, CXXXIV, 417-419.
95. C. Mohrmann, "Statio," VC, 7 (1953), 244. See also F. J. D&lger, "Sacramentum Militiae," in his Antike und Christentum: kultur-and religionsgeschichtliche Studien (Münster, 1930), II, 268-280.
96. E. Malone, "Martyrdom and Monastic Profession as a Second Baptism," in A. Mayer, J. Quasten, and B. Neunheuser, eds., Vom Christlichen Mysterium (Festschrift O. Casel) (Düsseldorf, 1951 ), 115. See also C. Mohrmann, "Sacramentum dans les plus anciens textes chrétiens," in Etudes sur le latin des Chrétiens, 1 (Rome, 1958), 233-244, which demonstrates how Tertullian played upon the ambiguity of the word sacramentum in popular Latin in which military enrollment simultaneously had religious and legal meanings. But the extreme linguistic artificiality of this play on words is an indication of the significance of this idea in the history of thought.
97. Clement of Rome, Letter, 45, 7.

268
98. Ibid., 36 6-37, 4 On Clement's admiration for the Roman army, see Guignebert, Tertullien, 191 n.; Harnack Militia Christi, 18 ff., 52 ff.; H. Weinel, Die Stellung des Urchristentums zum Staat (Tübingen, 1908), 26.
99. Clement of Rome, Letter, 21, 4. 100. II Clement, Ep., 7.
101. Ignatius, Epistle to Polycarp, 6, 2. P. Lelong, in the notes to his edition of Ignatius (HL, XII, 2nd ed., [1927]), remarked on the presence at this place in the Greek text of three "technical terms of [Latin] military language." He speculated that Ignatius was familiar with these terms because of his constant contact with soldiers following his condemnation. The close similarity with Eph.6:13-17 is unmistakable.
102. Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, 1, 2. 103. Mart. Pol., 3.
104. Harnack, Militia Christi, 40-43.
105. Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 166-167. We should especially note the Passio Mariani, 1, 3; 3, 4; 8, 4; 10, 3; Passio Montani, 1, 1; 4, 6; 6, 3-5; 14, 5; Acta Fructuosus, 7. H. Leclercq, Les Martyrs (Paris, 1902-1911), I, Iv, made a close study of the comparison between the martyr and the soldier.
106. Minucius Felix, Octavius, 37, 1-3.
107. E. Demougeot, "Remarques sur l'Emploi de'Paganus,' " Studi in Onore di H. Calderini e R. Paribeni (Milan, 1956), I 337-350.
108. Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 167; idem, Early Church, 409, 569. Cf. C. Mohrmann, "Encore une Fois'Paganus,' " VC, 7 (1952), 109-122. See also p. 73. The articles of Mlles. Demougeot ("Remarques") and Mohrmann ("Encore") are full of fine nuances, and the linguistic evolution of the term paganus is complex. The line of development which I indicate here, however, is one of its certain components.
109. Acts of Paul, 4. 110. Ibid., 3, 4, 6.
111. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, 131, 2. 112. Simon, Verus Israël, 145.
113. Justin, First Apology, 55, 6. 114. Ibid., 39, 5.
115. Pseudo-Justin, Discourse, 5.
116. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., III, 16, 4; IV, 24, 1, frags. 18, 44; idem, Demonstration, 20, 27, 29. All of these are cited in Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 174.
117. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., II, 2, 3; IV, 20, 11, frag. 21. 118. Clement of Alexandria, Protrept., X, 93, 2.
119. Ibid., XI, 116, 1-4.
120. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, II, 20, 110. 121. Ibid., I, 11, 3, 6.
122. The word 6cvmuaxrlavs** is to be preferred here, but scholars are by no means fully agreed on this point. Indeed, unless we keep in mind the strictly military context of much early Christian language, other terms might seem more appropriate than this to indicate temptations.
123. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, II, 20, 120.
124. Clement of Alexandria, Excerpta ex Theodoto, 72, 1-2.
125. It is clear that in Clement's terminology this term was equally applicable to the Christians.
126. Clement of Alexandria, Excerpta ex Theodoto, 85, 3. Cadoux (Early Church, 409 n.) cited the following passages in which Clement used the military metaphor to describe a Christian's life: Stromata, IV, 4, 14-16; 8, 60; 13, 91; 22, 141;
VI, 12, 103; 14, 112; VII, 3, 21; 11, 66; 13, 83; 16, 100; Qui Dives, 25 and 34. 127. Jerome, De Vir. Ill., 53.
128. Tertullian, Apology, 50; De Cultu Fem., II, 5; De Fuga, 10; Adv. Mare., V, 5. Malone ("Martyrdom," 116) wrote of Tertullian: "Not only was the life of the Christian a true military service, but it was one which in the eyes of many Christians was also incompatible with actual military service in the armies of the Roman empire." See also R.C. Gerest, "Les premiers chrétiens face a leur monde," LV, 12, no. 73 (1963), 18-19.
129. Tertullian, De Anima, 31.
130. Tertullian, De Fuga, 10. See also the similar affirmations of a much later date that the Lord is really commander, master, and king (Homélies anonymes dans la tradition d' Origéne, ed. P. Nautin, SCH, XXXVI [1953], I, 19). r
131. Tertullian, Adv. Mare., III, 13-14; IV, 20; V, 18; Adv. Iud., 9; De Res. Carnis, 20. See also Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 183; idem, Early Church, 409. In Tertullian's De Corona, 11, there is the following untranslatable play on words: "Apud hunc tam miles est paganus fidelis, quam paganus est miles fidelis." (A rough rendering of this into English is: In Christ, the civilian who is one of the faithful is a soldier-of-Christ, in similar manner to the soldier who, faithful to his calling, is a civilian-pagan non-Christian. ) ,For a contrasting of the concept of paganus=civilian with that of the miles Christi, see Hobhouse, The Church and the World, 371-372.
132. See, for example, Origen, Homilies on Exodus (SCH, XVI, 273), in which a significant number of texts are listed under the heading of "spiritual combat."
133. Origen, De Princ., III, 2, 5.
134. Cyprian, Ep., 73, 10 (ANCL ed., 72, 10). 135. Cyprian, De Bono Patientiae, 12.
136. Cyprian, Ad Fortunatum, 13; Testimonia, III, 117; De Zelo, 2. J. Capmany (" Miles Christi" en la Espiritualidad de San Cipriano, Collectanea San Paciano, Serie Teológica, I [Barcelona, 1956], demonstrated, with numerous details and quotations, that this idea of spiritual combat was the key to St. Cyprian's s thought. He unfortunately, however, did not seem even to conjecture that the sources of this conception might have been St. Paul and the earliest Fathers.
137. Pseudo-Cyprian, De Pascha computus, 10. 138. Commodian, Instructions, II, 12.
139. Ibid., II, 22. One could also cite II, 9-11, 20. The allegorization in these passages at times becomes so obscure that it is hard to know precisely what the author is talking about, but the general vision clearly remains one of hideous apocalyptic combat.
140. Didascalia, II, 6, 6-11.
141. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, Epilogue (73). 142. Eusebius, HE, V, 1, 18.
143. Ibid., VI, 41, 16.
144. Eusebius, Martyrs, 11, 22.
145. Athanasius, Letter on Love and Temperance, 288; see also 290, 291.
146. Basil of Caesarea, ,Homilies on the Psalms, 7. In a curious fashion, this text associates "the injuries received in battle" with "blemishes and traces of sin." Thus the sanctity which will allow entry into the kingdom consists not so much in having fought valiantly as in having been able to avoid battle to the very end. Nor does this text imply (as some have argued) that Satan collaborates actively with God in judgment. Cf. S. Giet, Les Idées et l'Action de Saint Basile (Paris, 1941), 179.
147. John Chrysostom, Letters to Olympias, VIII, 9b. 148. Ibid., XVII, 26. The author was addressing these strictures to Jeremiah.

270
149. Ibid., XV, la and 16.
150. Aphrahat the Syrian; Demonstrationes, VU, 18.
151. Life of Pachomius, ed. and transl. L. Th. Lefort, Bibliothèque du Muséon, XVI (Louvain, 1943), 2. The editor commented (p. 2 n.) that the Coptic word for legion has a meaning which is exclusively military.
152. Malone, "Martyrdom," 118. 153. Frend, "Persecutions," 141.
154. Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Sabbas, 92-93.
155. This is the origin of the Eastern clergy's obligation to wear beards. 156. Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Euthymius, 25-26.
157. Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Theodosius, 239. If here as elsewhere there was no clear distinction between military and sporting contests, it is because there was a deep psychological resemblance between them. See J.-Y. Jolif, "Pourquoi la Guerre?" LV, 7, no. 38 (1958), 13.
158. R. Génier, Vie de Saint Euthyme le Grand (Paris, 1909), 164.
159. W. K. L. Clarke, ed., The Ascetic Works of St. Basil (London, 1925), 56. 160. Ibid., 55 n.
161. John Chrysostom, Homilies on St. Matthew, 69, 3.
162. A. Vanderpol (Doctrine scolastique, 204-206) summarized this treatise and quoted extensively from it.
163. Sulpicius Severus, Dialogue, I (2, 11).The text specified that St. Martin was requiring a common pursuit of the monastic life, which entailed the exclusion of all sexual relationships. The Basilian Preliminary Sketch, as we have just seen also stipulated the abandonment of feminine companionship as a prerequisite for the life of both the soldier and the monk. But it further stressed that the woman, for her part, could also "serve as soldier" for Christ,
164. Jerome, Ep., 58, 8.
165. Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job, Preface, 1, 7; I, 9-11, 35, 49; II, 2, 13, 19, 32, 70, 73, 79.
166. Diehl, I, 198 (no. 1,041 ).
167. H. Rahner, "Pompa Diaboli," Zk Th, 55 (1931), 239-273. 168. Waszink, "Pompa Diaboli," passim.
169. See, for example, A. Bayet, Pacifisme et Christianisme aux Premiers Siècles (Paris, 1934). For Bayet's treatment of the apocalyptic wars see pp. 20-25 and 118120. For a representative sample of his general method and interpretation, see his p. 53, n. l.
170. James Moffat, "War," in j. Hastings, ed., Dictionary of the Apostolic Church (Edinburgh, 1915-1918), II, 657.
171. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, VI, 4, 14-24. 172. Ibid., VI, 4, 11.
173. Ibid., VI, 20, 16 ("neque militare iusti licebit cuius militia est ipsa iustitia"). For the context to this passage, see below, pp. 219-220.
174. Chenu, "L'Evolution," 82. This "spiritualization" is no doubt very bad exegesis. We should note, moreover, that the same method would lead, in the opposite direction, to taking the concrete meaning out of the Old Testament prophecies of peace the importance of which I shall shortly be demonstrating. Thus, in Cyril's Life of Sabbas (p. 99, lines 12-18), Micah 4:2-4 became an invitation to stop fighting wicked thoughts, which the saints henceforth were to defeat definitively in their own hearts, and to begin cultivating the masses of people, whose souls had been neglected.
175. John Chrysostom, Commentary on Isaiah, 2, 3. 176. Eusebius, HE, VII, 11, 20.
177. This would have been the logical place for Dionysius-like the earlier Christian writers-to insert a clause commenting that these soldiers had passed from the vain conflicts of this world to the real conflict, from obedience to the world's leaders to obedience to the one true Lord, etc.; but he failed to do so.
178. "You who are a soldier, work to the same end as the gospel. Fight the good fight against the evil spirit, against the desires of the flesh. Put on the whole armor of God, so as not to allow yourself to be imprisoned in the affairs of life, and so as to be agreeable to him [God] who chose you for the army" (Basil of Caesarea, Homilies, 3, 4).
179. Ibid. See Giet, Ides, 173. 180. Tertullian, Apology, 31, 2.
181. Clement of Rome, Letter, 60,4-61,3. Goguel (Birth, 552-553) studied intensively the astonishing manner in which the bishop of Rome minimized as mere disagreeable "incidents" the terrible persecutions of Nero and Domitian.
182. See H. Hemmer, intro. to vol. II of Pères apostoliques, HL, X, liii. See also Cullmann, The State, 65.
183. Acta Apollonii, 6-7.
184. In this passage there is perhaps something reminiscent of the Tertullian quotation which I have just cited (in n. 180 above). In any case, no state cares very much for the spiritual insight on the part of its subjects, when they come to recognize that it, too, needs forgiveness.
185. Arnobius, Adv. Nat., 4, 36.
186. Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians, 12, 3.; By a careful exegesis of the Latin version of this text, which is its only extant version, Goguel (Birth, 551 ) was confident that he could prove that it is identical with Tertullian's thinking. I agree that this is likely (but unprovable). Polycarp concluded: "The Roman authorities are to be prayed for because they are enemies of the Christians." Cullmann, commenting (in The State, 47) on the key text concerning submission to the authorities (Romans 13: 17), reminded his readers to keep in mind the context of this passage, which proves that "the matter under discussion at this point is the Christian commandment of loveevil is not to be rewarded with evil, rather one is to do good to his enemy. This stands in Romans 12 immediately before the section about the state in Romans 13:1 ff.; and directly afterwards, in verse 8, the same theme is resumed."
187. Justin, First Apology, 17, 3.
188. Tertullian, Apology, 30, 4. See also 31, 3; 37, 9; 39, 2. 189. Ibid., 40, 13.
190. Acta Achatii, 1, 3.
191. Cyprian, Ad Dem., 20.
192. Basil of Caesarea, Letters, 155. 193. Eusebius, HE, X, 8, 10.
194. Ibid., VIII, 12, 42.
195. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 68-70. Van Berchem ("Le'De Pallio'," 193) made some useful remarks concerning the seriousness of Celsus's arguments. See also Gerest, "Les premiers chrétiens," 15, 20-21.
196. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 73 (beginning). See also VIII, 68, 74-75.
197. What is the exact meaning of this "righteous" (just) cause? Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 208) adduced this text-among others-as proof that for Origen the non-Christian empire had a lawful right to make war.
198. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 73. This translation of this vitally important passage is that of Chadwick (p. 509). (For French equivalents, see Lods, "L'Eglise," 23, and Leclercq, "Militarisme," col. 1128. ) At a later date, St. Jerome wrote sadly of

272
the barbarians' overthrow of the empire and recalled the way in which Israel's heroes had conquered-by intercession rather than by the sword. Then he remarked, "If we wish to be lifted up, let us first prostrate ourselves." If we were to do so, he added, the disgrace of the Roman army's rout would end immediately. "Then we should see the enemy's arrows give way to our javelins, his caps to our helmets, and his nags to our chargers" (Jerome, Ep., 60, 17).
199. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 74. This was to claim for the entire Christian community a function which-as we shall see in Chapter 5-later came to be restricted to a specialized clergy. During the thirteenth century, however, the founding of a lay Third Order gave that ideal a new lease on life, even for laymen. The Rule of the Franciscan Brethren of the Third Order states that the Tertiaries "shall not receive nor carry with them any weapon which could kill someone" (VI, 3, quoted by P. Lorson, Défense de tuer [Paris, 1953], 21). Although popular reaction was enthusiastic, those in power were not amused. In time an interplay of casuistry and practical pressures progressively weakened the Rule.
200. Most of the patristic texts which follow have been collected more or less in the same order by Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 61-63). Daniélou ("La Non-violence," 13, 17) emphasized that the Christian authors of the first two centuries were unanimous in finding in the pacifism of Christians a conclusive proof that this prophecy had indeed applied to Jesus Christ.
201. .btr,~c, euoaoiowrec ibv xcno~cbv, ~e,~ou~** (Justin, First Apology, 39, 1-3. ). 202. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho, 109; 110, 3.
203. Isaiah 66:5.
204. Matthew 5:44-46.
205. Theophilus, Three Books, III, 14. 206. Irenaeus, Demonstration, 61. 207. Idem, Adv. Haeres., IV, 34, 4. 208. Origen, Contra Celsum, V, 33. 209. (Adamantius), Dialogus, I, 10. 210. Pseudo-Cyprian Adv. Iud., 9.
211. Cyprian, De Habitu Virginum, 11 [ Hornus transl. J. 212. Tertullian, Adv, Iud., 3.
213. Idem, Adv. Marc., III, 21. See-also IV, 1. 214. Sirinelli, 57 n., 164-170.
215. Eusebius, Praep. Ev., I, 4, and VI, 1.
216. Athanasius, De Incarnatione Verbi, 52, 4-6. 217. Ibid., 53, 1.
218. Ibid., 53, 3-5.
219. John Chrysostom, Commentary on Isaiah, 2, 4-5.
220. Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus, I, 12, 98; II, 2, 32; II, 4, 42. 221. Clement of Rome, Letter, 8, 4 (already quoted on p. 64).
Chapter 3
1. Eusebius, Praep. ev., 1, 4; 4, 16-17; 5, 1; 5, 4. 2. Tertullian, De Idol., 19.
3. Mart. Pol., 3; Tertullian, Adv. Mare., V, 17; idem, De Spec., 8. 4. Tertullian, De Spec., 25.
5. Ascension of Isaiah, 10, 13. 6. Ignatius, Eph., 19.
7. Arnobius, Adv. Nat., 2, 1.
8. Tatian, Oratio, 11.
**a Ba time -ed. R. Refoul~ SCH, XXXV Paris, 1952), 499. Tertullian, Traité d p (
50, includes a note which provides both a listing of other passages in which Tertullian develops this theme and a bibliography of recent scholarly work. See also above, p. 69.
10. Ignatius, Rom., 6, 1.
11. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel, IV, 9.
12. Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 4, 3 (SCH, CXXXIII, 260). 13. Mart. Pionii, 3, 2-5 (Musurillo, 139).
14. Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres., V, 26. 15. Origen, Contra Celsum, VII, 70. 16. Ibid., IV, 70.
17. Gregory of Nazianzus, Discourse 4;i: in honor of Basil the Great, 48. Giet (Les Ides, 358) quoted the Greek text, and commented: "There are two reasons for the refusal: a. All God's creatures are equal, at least in this respect. So there is no reason why one person should surrender his liberty and rights to another; b. The Christian, who has been called by grace to share in the divine nature, least of all can accept this degradation."
18. Gregory of Nazianzus, Discourse 43, 48. 19. Tertullian, Apol., 33.
20. Eusebius, Vita, I, 16 ff. 21. Basil, Ep., 99, 1.
22. Ibid., 299.
23. Tertullian, De Cultu fem., II, 11. Tertullian qualified this, however, by instructing them not to follow Roman fashions of dress.
24. Tertullian, De Idol., 16. 25. Ibid., 18.
26. Tertullian, Apol., 36, 1. 27. Ibid., 41, 1.
28. Ibid., 44, 1.
29. Tertullian, De Idol., 17. Tertullian took his stand on the concrete example of Joseph and Daniel, who had been able to fill the highest public offices without trespassing the borders of idolatry. The Christian of his day could still do the same, if it were at all thinkable that such a thing might be possible (si haec credibile fieri posse). These words seem to have meant that Tertullian considered that this eventuality, although it might have been realizable in theory, was illusory in practice in the world of his own time.
30. Tertullian, Ad Nat., I, 17; idem, Apol., 30, 3; 32, 2. 31. Tertullian, Adv. Marc., I, 13.
32. Tertullian, De Spec., 15.
33. Anonymous Homilies, III, 18. 34. Eusebius, HE, VIII, 9, 6.
35. This was a familiar theme in John Chrysostom's preaching. In the Homilies on St. Matthew (9, 7), for example, he argued that the flight of the infant Jesus and his family into Egypt had implicitly confronted every believer with the question, "Why do you pride yourself on your country, when I am commanding you to be a stranger to the whole world?" Again, in the Homilies on St. John, he wrote that those who listened to the apostle's preaching "could no longer be mere men nor remain upon earth, [but] would dwell on earth just as if it were heaven" (1, 1). In a later homily on the same gospel, he declared that "thou art a stranger and a sojourner . . . for thou hast a city whose artificer and creator is God, and the sojourning itself is but for a

274
short and little time. . . . We are citizens of heaven, registered for the country which is above" (79, 3). In his Homilies on Ephesians he quoted, "So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners for, you are fellow-citizens with the saints" (VI, 1). But elsewhere he corrected the evasive impression which such statements might leave. Should Christians claim privileges by virtue of their heavenly citizenship so as to avoid obedience t0 earthly magistrates? Not at all. Precisely because they were "strangers and sojourners" on earth, believers were required to obey the governing authorities. The effects of the Christians' liberation would only be realized in the future (Homilies on Romans, 23, 2).
36. Mart. Pionii, 18, 7 (Musurillo, 159). Pionius was the priest in charge of the group of martyrs.
37. St. Augustine, Confessions, IX, 11, 28.
38. Eusebius, Martyrs, 11, 8-12. This scorn of the name given by parents, because it represented the natural man and not the Christian, was often to be found in the records of the martyrs. E.g., Acta Tarachii, 1, and Acta Dasii, 6.
39. Sirinelli, 144. See also 151-157, 219, 250.
40. Clement of Rome, Letter, 1, 1. There is an identical greeting at the beginning of the Letter of Polycarp.
41. Irenaeus Contre les Hérésies, ed. F. Sagnard, SCH, XXXIV, 9.
42. P. de Labriolle, "~",o~xCa,** Paroecia," RSR, 18 (1928), 60-72. On p. 61 Labriolle simply identified ,~,ow~ with ~u~m~wo~ **, the "parishioners" with the "metics" or the "people without a country." This is a theme which should have saved us from slogans like For Christ and France," "For God and Country," etc. See also Giet, Les Ides, 317 n., who refers to Labriolle, "Paroecia," ALMA, 3 (1927), 196-205, and L'Année philologique, 2 ( 1927 ), 321.
43. Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Euthymius p. 8; idem, Life of Theodosius, p. 235; and, in a slightly different form idem, Life of Sabas, p. 86, I. 27. In each case, as if to accentuate the contrast, Cyril then provided information on the human origins (familial and national) of the hermit.
44. John Chrysostom, Homilies on St. Matthew, 69, 4 (end). On the consequences of this qualification, see pp. 193 ff.
45. Hermas, Similitudes, I, 1-6. Here it is the verb katoik8** which is used, but with the immediate specification epi xenr;s** In his edition of this text, P. Lelong wrote (HL, XVI [Paris, 1912), 138 n.), "The 'earthly city' is the world. Yet [T.) Zahn (Der Hirte des Hermas [Gotha, 1868]) was not altogether wrong to understand the earthly city' to mean Rome and its empire. For in the eyes of many Christians Rome . . . was the kingdom of the devil, and the emperor was his minister."
46. II Clement, Ep., 5, 1. 47. Ibid., 5, 4.
48. Ibid., 5, 6-7. 49. Ibid., 6, I. 50. Ibid., 6, 3.
51. Tertullian, De Corona, 13.
52. Tertullian, De Idol., 15; idem, De Fuga, 12; idem, Adv. Mare., IV, 38; idem, Scorpiace, 14.
53. Tertullian, Apol., 31, 2. 54. Tertullian, De Spec., 30. 55. Tertullian, De Patientia, 15.
56. See especially Tertullian, Ad Scapulam, 3. 57. Tertullian, Apol., 1, 2.
58. Van Berchem ("Le 'De Pallio,' " 103) contrasted this conciliatory view with
the attitude of complete rupture which he thought to find in the treatise De Pallio. He rightly noted, however (p. 113), that this contrast-independent of Tertullian's movement towards Montanism-did not represent a complete contradiction; it was rather a tension between complementary viewpoints, as was shown by the existence in the Apology itself of texts as stern as the one I have just quoted. It seems at any rate that for Van Berchem the most characteristic stance of the first Christians was one of rejection. He wrote (p. 101), "They acknowledged a leader who was not the emperor. They announced the establishment on earth of a new empire, which was to replace that of Rome, and they pleaded for this change in their suffrages and their prayers. So it might reasonably have been wondered whether they were not the sworn enemies of the empire."
59. Cyprian, De Mortalitate, 26.
60. Clement of Alexandria, Protrept., X,108, 4. See also his Paedagogus, II I, 8, 1. 61. Fragment quoted in Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, VI, 5, 41.
62. H. I. Marrou (L'Epître à Diognète, SCH, XXXIII [Paris 1951], 132) showed that Aristides took up this idea (Apology, 2) without, however, putting Christians in a different category from other men. Marrou rejected the facile argument that if Christians were recognized to have the characteristics of a people, they could claim the right to live, like any other people, in accordance with their own laws, ta patria (a remark inspired by Simon, Verus Israël, 136); even if the Christians were few and isolated, "they nevertheless represented by right a universal society, immanent in the whole universe." A year after the publication of the French edition of this book (EL) and without any knowledge of it, Sirinelli (pp. 140-141) developed the same argument on the basis of Marrou's points, in a strikingly parallel form. He convincingly demonstrated (pp. 140-143) the special importance of this idea for Eusebius, who was struggling on two fronts: with the Greeks, to show them that Christianity was more rational than their own systems; with the Jews, to prove that Christianity was the legitimate historical heir of the promises; and with both, to convince them that Christianity could not be reduced to either of them. Instead, Eusebius argued, Christianity "is neither a form of Hellenism, nor of Judaism, but is a religion of its own characteristic stamp. . . . This is not anything novel or original, but something of greatest antiquity, something natural and familiar to the godly men before the times of Moses.... "(Demonstratio Evangelica, I, 2, 8). On the problems with which Eusebius had to struggle in regard to this idea of the tertium genus, see Sirinelli, 248-249.
63. Minucius Felix, Octavius, 8.
64. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 2. On the subject of the accusations brought against the Christians, see Hornus "Etude," 6.
65. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 75. The rest of the chapter is a continuation of the same theme. It demonstrates that the essential tasks are mutual edification within the Church and evangelization, in order to lead the rest of mankind as well into this community of redeemed sinners.
66. Anonymous Homilies, III, 6. 67. Giet, Les Idées, 158-165.
68. Basil of Caesarea, Ep., 51; 74, 3; 75; 76; 104; 165; all of which were mentioned by Giet, Les Ides, 368.
69. Basil of Caesarea, Ep., 87.
70. Giet, Les Idées, 164. It is curious, however, that Basil borrowed the very expression of this idea from the pagan Euripides.
71. Basil of Caesarea, Homilies on the Psalms, 59, 3. 72. Ibid., 48, 1; idem, Ep., 66, 2.
73. Gregory of Nazianzus, Discourse 43: in honor of Basil the Great, 49.

276
74. In the text which Sozomen supplied of this interview, Basil explained the contradiction by saying, "I dwell on the earth as a traveler" (Ecclesiastical History, VI, 16).
75. See Giet, Les Ides, 165, 358-361. 76. Epistle to Diognetus, 5, 4-5.
77. Ibid., 5, 8-9.
78. Ibid., 6, 1-3. One can find the same theme, not only in the authors whom I have already quoted, but also in a letter in which St. Jerome exhorted St. Paulinus to turn away from the earth and to strive toward the heavenly Jerusalem, the city in which the apostle "rejoices to have his citizenship with the righteous (se municipatum cum iustis habere)" (Ep., 58, 2). In the ensuing paragraph Jerome expanded upon the idea that God was the same everywhere and that therefore there could be no place that was specially privileged. The example of the monks confirmed this view, for they did not need to travel to the earthly Jerusalem to be holy (Ep., 58, 3).
79. Epistle to Diognetus, 6, 7-8.
80. Hans Lietzmann, A History of the Early Church, transl. B. L. Woolf (London, 1961), II, 53.
81. Pontius, Life of Cyprian, II.
82. Tertullian, Apol. 38, 3. Although he did not expressly quote this text, Father Chenu ("L'Evolution, 80) considered this thought to be the natural sentiment of any "evangelistic theologian." In this connection he quoted (p. 95) the remark of Vitoria, the great Spanish theologian of the sixteenth century: "Since a state is a part of the whole universe, if a war is profitable for a state but detrimental to the universe . . . I am of the opinion that the war thereby becomes unjust." On Vitoria, whom I can only mention here, the interested reader should consult Lewis U. Hanke, The Spanish Struggle for Justice in the Conquest of America (Philadelphia, 1959), as well as A. Vanderpol's contributions to P. Batiffol, et al., L'Eglise et la Guerre (Paris, 1913).
83. Philippians 3:20. Insofar as they are balanced by other complementary affirmations, we may take as a faithful gloss on these words St. John Chrysostom's expression, "Their true citizenship is in the heavens," which referred to the life of the ascetics (Letters to Olympias, VIII, 9d).
84. It should be noted, however, that this criticism by Karl Marx was directed at a Christianity which rendered its adherents indifferent to the present social order and thus made them accept any form of society, thereby stifling revolutionary inclinations. The opposite accusation, such as Guignebert made against Tertullian, of destroying society by indifference instead of preserving it, is excessive, but seems to me to be better founded. This is a danger about which the thinking of responsible Christians, as well as the practice of casual Christians, must remain on the alert.
85. Ignatius, Rom., 6, 2. ,
86. Job was a typical example of these persons.
87. Gregory the Great, Morals on the Book of Job, I, 20, 24, 36, 34.
88. Commodian, Carmen Apologeticum, vv. 805 ff., 887-892, and esp. 920-926, which read:
"And the brutes no longer know in what age they are living. Once she [ Rome] rejoiced, but all the world groaned;
And yet she has scarcely received as much as she deserved.
She will weep for eternity, she who has flattered herself that she was eternal, And her tyrants will be judged at last by the All-High.
Smouldering Rome the time has at last been fulfilled;
And the wages shall be paid to each according to his deserts."
In his Instructions (I, 34), Commodian rejected both the vain struggles and the empty joys of this world, so that he could turn himself toward the heavenly city:
"Here below they fight, then they sing of love instead of psalms.
You think that life consists of amusements, and these are the things that you are hunting for.
You are gathering ashes, you foolish ones that seek gold."
89. Eusebius, HE, III, 5, 3. Similarly, Sirinelli (pp. 113-115) was of the opinion that Eusebius had assigned a preeminent place in his Chronicle to the Jewish kingdom solely to accord greater importance to its final downfall, which exemplified the end of a "national" people of God.
90. Daniélou, "La Non-Violence," 19. ,St. John Chrysostom interpreted the Jews' hostility to the new faith very much along these lines. "Priests and Pharisees," he wrote, "feared that if everyone believed in Christ there would be no one left to defend the city of God and the Temple against the Romans. They thought, therefore, that Christ's teaching was directed against the Temple and against their traditional laws" (Homilies on St. John, 49, 26).
91. Eusebius, HE, VII, 32, 7-11.
92. Mart. Pionii, 5, 3-5 (Musurillo, 143).
93. G. Florovsky ("Eschatology in the Patristic Age," SP, 2 [Berlin, 1957], 245, 249), recalling that Celsus had called the Christians philosomaton** genos (Origen, Contra Celsum, V, 14), showed that it was true that the Christians, in contrast to the philosophers, were attached to earthly life and considered death to be a catastrophe. As an example he pointed to Tertullian, who declared in strong terms that death-far from being natural, normal, or pleasant-was the dramatic consequence of sin (De Anima, 52).
94. Athenagoras, Legatio, 35, 4.
95. Yet this was the position of both Cardinal F. J. von Hefele (Beiträge zur Kirchengeschichte, Archäologie and Liturgik [Tübingen, 1874], I, 21) and J.F. Bethune-Baker 
(The Influence of Christianity on War [Cambridge, 1888]); the latter's arguments were quoted and discussed by Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 100-103. A. Bigelmair (Die Beteiligung der Christen am öffentlichen Leben in vorkonstantinischer Zeit [Munich, 1902], 166), on the other hand, limited himself to the insinuation that such a broadening of the meaning of the text could not be ruled out completely. On the significance of these last words "even justly," see Cadoux, op. cit., 214.
96. Athanasius, Letter on Love and Temperance, 282.
97. Basil of Caesarea, Ep., 63. Most of this sentence is a word-for-word translation of Euripides (Giet, Les Ides, 165).
98. Basil of Caesarea, Ep., 199 and 217.
99. Isidore of Pelusium, Ep., IV, 200 (to Ophelius).
100. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, II, 18, 88. Clement went on to give two picturesque examples: one was the female captive, whom a specific biblical law protected against a possible conqueror's lust to have intercourse with her (ibid., 89; see also 82); the other has our enemy's beast of burden, which our Lord has commanded us to succor. He had taught us "not to indulge in joy at our neighbors' ills, or to exult over our enemies, in order to teach those who are trained in these things to pray for their enemies" (ibid., 90).
101. Arnobius, Adv. Nat., 3, 26. This argument had appeared as early as Justin, who had used it to accuse the wicked angels, and their descendants, the demons, of

278
being those who "sowed among men murders, wars, adulteries, and intemperance, and every kind of vice" (Second Apology, 5, 4).
102. Tertullian, De Patientia, 4. 103. Idem, De Anima, 33.
104. Idem, Apol., 28, 3; 30, 1. 105. Ibid., 9, 5.
106. Ibid., 39, 7-8. 107. Ibid., 8, 1-5.
108. Idem, Ado. lud., 7.
109. Idem, De Corona, 12. Theophilus (Three Books to Autolycus, III, 14) already observed that the Christians were not "kindly disposed . . . only towards those of our own stock, as some suppose."
110. Tertullian, Adv. Marc., V, 17, in which passage he followed the text of Paul's epistle to the Ephesians.
111. See the penetrating remarks of Refoulé (SCH, XXXV, 15) on the identity between death, sin, and Satan in the thought of Tertullian as well as that of all the Fathers of the earliest centuries. See also the paragraph on "the prohibition of shedding blood" in Rordorf ("Tertullians Beurteilung," 124-130). In his review of EL, Roques (p. 241) thought that he was raising an objection to my interpretation when he wrote: "When the Christian clearly and definitely refuses to kill, he does not do so without reference to God's order, which must prevail over all human injunctions. The absolute primacy of God constitutes, therefore, the cardinal motivation of the Christian conscience, even when Christian behavior seems directly to take into consideration only respect for human life." I entirely agree with this interpretation: and I simply cannot understand where it fails to tally with my own.
112. Tertullian, Apol., 9, 8.
113. The law to which it leads is simple and unequivocal: "The Christian does not do evil, even to his enemy" (Tertullian, Apol., 46, 15). That is why I could not follow Seston when he remarked ("A propos de la Passio," 244) that "the compromises which qualified Tertullian's anti-militarism" were to be explained by the fact that his rejection of the army had nothing to do with a refusal to shed blood but only with a repudiation of certain pagan acts.
114. Tertullian, Apol., 50, 1-2. 
115. John Chrysostom, Letters to Olympias, X, 3f-g. It must be said, however, that this argument rings of dubious rhetoric when one realizes that it leads to a final assertion that sadness is even more fearsome than death! Cullmann (The State, 35-36) has felicitously emphasized how "the purely human dread which Jesus feels in the face of death" reveals a choice in the realm of values which Christians should emulate: "Jesus is not a Greek philosopher. Death for him as for St. Paul is the last enemy." This acknowledgement of the horror of death was also, as a matter of fact, in the philosophical tradition of the Aristotelian school. K. Giocarinis ("An Unpublished Late Thirteenth-Century Commentary of the Nicomedian Ethics of Aristotle," Traditio, 15 [1959], 317) has shown rightly that the Christian commentators on Aristotle's Ethics prior to the Middle Ages have a true understanding of the text when they "freely and frequently refer to death as the malum maximum, maximus defectus, terminus totius. Death is the supreme object of fear; through it man loses all the goods of his life."
116. John Chrysostom, Homilies an St. John, 79, 3. 117. Idem, Homilies on Romans, 14, 5-end.
118. There may be an allusion here to the tradition whereby Diocletian, according to a prophetess's intimations, "only wanted to obtain the empire, although he had
a desire for it, by killing in the boar-hunt." This tradition, which is obviously apocryphal, was developed in detailed form in the middle of the fourth century, when it was seen to be necessary to find an explanation for the murder through which Diocletian-who by then had become the symbol of Roman order and legitimacyhad come to power. The pretorian prefect, who was accused of having killed the previous emperor, Numerian, in order to set himself up in Numerian's place, and who in turn was put to death by Diocletian, was in fact called Aper (which in Latin means wild boar). See Seston, Dioclétien, 48.
119. Le., to the temples.
120. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, I, 18, S-10. A little later (ibid., I, 19, 6) he returned to the argument, saying that the so-called gods of mythology had not even been good men, for one could relate all sorts of weaknesses and wickedness about them, not least the fact that they engaged in warfare.
121. Ibid., VI, 6, 18-24. A little earlier in the same chapter Lactantius had forbidden the resort to arms even defensively and in a just cause. For, he observed, it was not always the better side which won; quite the contrary. War was in fact nothing but a bloody game of chance, which if anything favored the wicked.
122. Ibid., II, 6. 123. Ibid., II, 9, 63.
124. Idem, De Opificio Dei, 2, 6. The same argument in almost the same words occurs in his Div. Institutiones, VII, 13-14.
125. Idem, Div. Institutiones, II, 10, 23. 126. Ibid., V, 9, 2.
127. Ibid., VI, 11, 1 ff. 128. Ibid., VI, 18.
129. Ibid., VI, 20, 10, 15-17.
130. E. g., see Tertullian, Adv. Iud., 2-3.
131. Jerome, De Vir. ill., 80.-See R. Pichon (Lactance, Etude sur le Mouvement philosophique et religieux sous le Règne de Constantin [Paris, 1901], 2, 454), who wrote of Lactantius that "his name is inseparable . . . from the appearance of the first Christian government." He occupies a "double situation of philosopher respected in the Church and personal friend of the prince." Moreau ("Vérité historique," 93) was convinced that Lactantius was privy to Constantine's confidential decisions and that the De Mortibus Persecutorum, for example, must thus have been published a few months before the measures of January 1, 321, to prepare public opinion for them.
132. If we reflect on this attitude with care, it becomes clear that it was founded on the tension between the believer's waiting for the full manifestation of the kingdom and his daily presence in the world. A. Molnár ("L'Eschatologie," 13) has rightly pointed out that the eschatological perspective saved Lactantius from lapsing, like Eusebius, into complete servility toward Constantine. Cullmann (" Le Caractère eschatologique," 210-245) had already shown that the active expectation of Christ's return was at the heart of St. Paul's missionary ardor; and he had contended that it ought to animate today's Church in the same way. Lactantius gives us an idea of how this expectation could and should foster in the Christian a prophetic political attitude, which would not refrain from living out the gospel in the world, but would never forget that the criterion of earthly success can never be final in the eyes of faith. (In addition to the Lactantius texts quoted above, see his Epitome, 52. ) Such reflections have been suggested by H. I. Marrou in "La Fin du Monde nest pas pour Demain," LV, 2, no. 11 (1953), 77-99. I find, however, that the earlier remarks of E. Peterson (Le Mystère des Juifs et des Gentils dans L'Eglise [Paris, n.d.], 77-82, 88-89, 97) went too far. So did the late Cardinal Daniélou in his Le Mystère du Salut des Nations

280
(Paris, 1946). But Lactantius was convinced that the Christians knew about the beginnin and the fulfillment of history (Div. Institutiones, VII, 14), whereas for Eusebius-who had no time for transcendent origins or culminations-the only thing that mattered was history itself (Sirinelli, 38-41, 51, 62, 455), Eusebius's only "theological" aim was "to prove the historical superiority of Christianity" (p. 135) and to convince those who still hesitated that if they joined the Christian group they would be swimming with the tides of historical development (p. 26).
Chapter 4
1. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, MSS. Parisini lat. 16929-16935.
2. E. Le Blant, Manuel d'Epigraphfe Chrétienne d'après les marbres de la Gaule (Paris, 1869), 15-16: 5.42 percent of the pagan inscriptions were of soldiers compared to only 0.55 percent of the Christian inscriptions. See also Le Blant, Inscriptions chrétiennes de la Gaule (Paris, 1856), I, 84.
3. Leclercq, "Militarisme," col. 1130. 4. Ibid., cols. 1155-1167.
5. Ibid., cols. 1167-1170.
6. Ibid., cols. 1170-1179. Leclercq provided significant details about only a few of these.
7. Ibid., col. 1155 (italics mine).
8. Ibid., col. 1164, no. 47; Diehl, no. 277; CIL, VI, no. 37273. Its first modern rendering was in O. Marucchi, "Lavori nelle catacombe romane," Nuovo Bullettino di Archelogia Cristiana, 6 (1900), 338. Leclercq dated it without hesitation from the diarchy of Septimius Severus and Caracalla (198-211). Diehl was unsure whether to date it in this period or in the diarchy of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus (177-180).
9. C. Mercurelli, "Il sarcofago di un centurione pretoriano cristiano e la diffusione del cristianesimo nelle coorti pretorie," Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana, 16 (1939), 73-99. The author's thesis-that there were numerous Christians among the praetorian troops-is too bold. But one must bear in mind the inscription from which he began. It reads as follows, with Mercurelli's interpretations (p. 84):
	AELIUS MARTINUS	Aelio Martino [centurioni]
	COHIPR ET STATIAE	cohortis primae praetoriae et Statiae
	MOSCHIANETI CONIV	Moschianeti coniu
	CIETUS ET STATIAE MAR	gi eius et Statiae Mar
	TINAE FILLAEORUM	tinae filiae eorum
	AELIUS VERINUS EVOK AUGGN	Aelius Verinus evokatus Augustorum nostrorum
	FRATRI BENEMERENTIBUS	fratri, benemerentibus
	FECIT	fecit
That this inscription was that of a Christian is clear from certain characteristic details in the imagery of the bas-relief. Mercurelli conjectured that this could have been the same Aelius Martinus who had already buried a first wife, Aurelia Julia, and their son, Aelius Martinus, aged ten while he was centurion to the Legion 22a Primigenia at Mainz. Their inscription (Diehl, no. 735) was recognized to be crypto-Christian, because it used the expression Innocenti spirito for the child.
Another praetorian centurion's epitaph, which is full of lacunae, was found at Rome in the Christian cemetery in the Viale Regina Mergherita, to the left of the Via
Tiburtina (Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana, 11 [1934], 247, no. 198; L'Année épi- graphique (1935) i.e., Revue Archéologique 6th ser. 6 [1935], ii 245, no. 155). But the fragment itself contains nothing which distinguishes it as a Christian inscription, and the place of its discovery is arguably not sufficient evidence for regarding it as one.
10. G. Mihailov, Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae (Sofia, 1966), III, i, 80, no. 80. See the first commentaries by Jeanne and Louis Robert, "Bulletin épi- graphique," Revue des Etudes Grecques, 75 (1962), 175, and in "Séance du 4 Mai 1962," Comptes rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Leitres pour 1962 (Paris, 1963), 115, which Louis Robert quoted and developed in his Noms indigènes ènes dans l'Asie-Mineure gréco-romaine (Paris, 1963), 364 n.
11. W. M. Ramsay published this inscription for the first time in "The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia," Journal of Hellenic Studies, 4 ( 1883), 428 ff. In the notes below I shall cite the more recent editions of the same inscriptions.
12. Aurelioi** Gaios kai Menophilos** apo ,sstrateion,** paides ,Aur . . . hos medeni** hetero(i) exeinai episenenkein a theinai xenon nekton a sophon monois gnesiois hemon teknois, ktl. W. M. Ramsay, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia (Oxford, 1897), fI, 717.
13. This inscription, which has often been reproduced (e.g. the bibliography of it in DAL, V (1922), col. 742, no. 19), has been systematically studied by Louis Robert (Noms indigènes, 360-365). See also Hellenica, 11-12 (Paris, 1960), 399.
14. This inscription, which was first published by G. B. de Rossi (Inscriptiones Christianae urbis Romae [Rome, 1861], I, no. 9), is reproduced in DAL, III (1914), col. 146, and in Diehl, no. 3332. See also Cadoux, Early Church, 392 n., for the epitaph of Prosenius, and 421 n., for the addition of Ampelius.
15. One of the points under discussion was whether these were physical tortures, as W. M. Calder ("Studies in Early Christian Epigraphy," Journal of Roman Studies, 10 [1920], 53) and H. Grégoire ("Les Inscriptions hérétiques d'Asie Mineure," Byz, 1 [1924], 695-710) believed, or merely moral torments, as A. Wilhelm ("Griechische Grabinschriften aus Kleinasien," Sitzungsberichie der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 27 [ 1932], 792-865) and F. Halkin (" Faux martyrs et inscriptions hagiographiques," AB, 67 [ 1949], 90) asserted.
16. The value of this inscription had already been well demonstrated by C. M. Kaufmann (Handbuch der altchristlichen Epigraphie [Freiburg/Breisgau, 1917], 114). The remaining pages in which Kaufmann discussed other Christian soldiers (Handbuch, 114-118) dealt above all with the period after Constantine. He devoted pp. 249-251 to Eugenius. The translation which I use is Caldei s ("Studies," 45), with slight modifications. The primary authorities on this inscription-in addition to Calder himself-have been Grégoire ("Les inscriptions," 695-699) and Wilhelm ("GriechischeGrabinschriften," 834-847).
17. H. Grégoire ("Notes épigraphiques, IV," Byz, 8 [1933], 68-69) argued that Eugenius could not have left the service at once and that he was obliged to sacrifice. This epitaph would thus have been the clear echo of the justification which Eugenius could give-according to Canon 3 of the Council of Ancyra-in order to escape excommunication and, a fortiori, to become a bishop.
18. W. M. Calder, "The Epigraphy of the Anatolian Heresies," in idem and W. H. Buckler, eds., Anatolian Studies presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (Manchester, 1923), 59-91. See also H. Grégoire, "Les inscriptions," 695-710, which sums up and substantially confirms Calder's work, but which does not accept the identification between our Julius Eugenids and the heretic Eugenius who is attested by another inscription.

282
19. Leclereq, "Militarisme," col. 1157, no. 12; Diehl, no. 400; CIL, XIII, no. 5383, add. 71. But the titles of legionary centurion and quaestor are only attested by the ligatures, of which the reading is not absolutely certain.
20. DAL, IV (1921), cols. 63-64; Diehl, no. 280; CIL, III, no. 8752, add. 2261. It will be noticed that, if the soldier mentioned in this case was the husband of the deceased, he was not the man who erected the monument.
21. Leclercq, "Militarisme," list in cols. 1155-1165, no. 5 (DAL, XI, col. 1156); Diehl, no. 396; CIL, III, no. 8754, add. 1510; DAL, IV, col. 39.
22. Leclercq, lists as in n. 21 above, no. 30 (DAL, XI, col. 1162); Diehl, no. 414; CIL, VI, no. 32691. M. Durry (Cohortes prétoriennes, 355) recognized this inscription as valid, even though his general thesis (pp. 348-358) was that the Christians were not present among the praetorian troops. He was also inclined (p. 354) to think that inscriptions 24 and 32 were Christian, while G. Lopuszanski ("Les Chrétiens dans l'armée romaine," unpub. PhD thesis, Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres, Brussels University, 1949) considered them to be doubtful. Inscription 24 is the description of the beneficiary Maritus (Diehl, no. 409; CIL, VI no. 32971), which Bainton("Early Church," 192-193) accepted as going back to the period before Constantine. Inscription 32 is a description of the soldier Pyrrus (Diehl, no. 415a; CIL, VI, 32979). Durry (p. 355) identified the inscriptions in Diehl, nos. 414, 2199 (CIL, VI, nos. 32980, 32654) as referring to Christian praetorians. But these inscriptions are too badly damaged to be deciphered with certainty.
23. Diehl, no. 398b; CIL, VI, no. 2873, add. 3377.
24. Diehl, no. 402, where it is dated 384; CIL, VIII, no. 9967, add. 976.
25. Diehl, no. 403, where it is dated 372; cf. references in CIL, VIII, no, 21634. 26. Diehl, no. 411, where it is dated 408; CIL, VI, no. 33712.
27. Diehl, no. 412, where it is dated as well after the beginning of the Christian empire.
28. Diehl, no. 423, where the date of 583 is hazarded; CIL, VIII, no. 9870, add. 2059.
29. Diehl, no. 394; CIL, VIII, no. 9909, add. 2065. According to Lopuszanski (" Les Chrétiens," 46), it is not even certain that this is a Christian inscription.
30. Diehl, no. 397; CIL, VI, no. 32974.
31. Diehl, no. 401; CIL, III, no. 4190, add. 1751.
32. Diehl, no. 407; CIL, VI, no. 2870, add. 337 only the appearance of this (probably pagan [ Diehl, IV, 407] inscription indicates possible third century dating.
33. Diehl, no. 406; CIL, VIII, no. 9964; DAL, IV, col. 1450. 34. Diehl, no. 410; CIL, VI, no. 2704, add. 3370.
35. Diehl, no. 416; CIL, VI nos. 3565 and 32975. 36. Diehl, no. 426; CIL, VI, no. 33010.
37. Diehl, no. 428; CIL, VI, no. 3450.
38. Bainton, "Early Church," 193. .
39. The teaching of John the Baptist (Luke 3:14), the centurion whose faith Jesus admired (Matthew 8:5-13), the centurion Cornelius (Acts 10:1-7), and the jailor at Philippi (Acts 16:27-34).
40. Bainton, "Early Church," 191. A. J. Visser ("Christianus sum," 17) and A. Benoit (review of EL, RHPR, 42 [ 1962], 341-342) were upset by this sentence and emphasized that other historians have drawn the opposite conclusion from this silence. But these critics do not seem to have noticed that, in the very next sentence, I have dealt with precisely that alternative interpretation. It is true, as Benoit rightly remarked, that in the French edition I dealt "a little too quickly" with the question of "the witness of the stones." As a response to this fair criticism, the present edition in
corporates a more fully developed study of that topic.
41. Cadoux (Early Church, 440 n. ) quoted and then refuted the writings of those who considered Christian conscientious objection to have been a late phenomenon. Even Ryan ("Rejection," 11) maintained that until the middle of the second century those who were converted while in the army did what they could to leave it, and that those who were already Christians did not join it. He went on to maintain that Christian soldiers became more numerous at the end of the third century (cf. pp. 11 and 23; there is surely a misprint here, and we should read second century)"despite the unfavorable attitude of the Church and of the body of the Christian people" (p. 15).
42. In the following chapter I shall demonstrate that the divergence of the two attitudes which the early Christians took toward the military profession originated here, and only here. Some believers, starting from the Church s constant principle which forbade the seeking out of martyrdom, believed that, provided both that they had been constrained by external forces and that they were not called upon to commit homicide, they could don the military uniform without its being-strictly speakinga denial of their faith. Others who, like Tertullian, were more rigorous, rejected this concession to adverse circumstances. It is clear that these two points of view are still very close to each other. It is not fair, with D'Alès (Théologie, 414-415), to account for Tertullian's intransigent antimilitarism by identifying it with the Montanism of his final years. In fact, it is a viciously circular argument to reject his firmest text on this subject on the grounds that they emanated from his final and heretical period, and for that reason to dismiss them as being unrepresentative of the thought of the Church. For, in general, the only means of dating the works of Tertullian is by the extent of their unbending severity, a quality which many have assumed that he increasingly manifested as he advanced in age. But it is hardly a fair procedure to advance a hypothesis (i.e., severity) as a criterion for chronological classification, and then to claim to prove this hypothesis on the basis of the classification which had only been assumed. Moreover, in my opinion Tertullian's position was far more consistentfrom the start to the finish of his writings-than many have alleged. This is also the point of view of Visser ("Christianus sum," 7), who has boldy written that according to the alternative interpretation, which for him is exemplified by Leclercq's article in the DAL ("Militarisme"), Tertullian would have thought-during his first, Catholic, period-"more or less like a contemporary French patriotic Catholic à la De Gaulle."
Writing of Tertullian's attitude to human wisdom, A. Labhardt ("Tertullien et la Philosophie ou la Recherche dune Position pure," Museum Helveticum, 7 [1950], 166-167) observed that in this area there was "a line of thought which [he] had never abandoned for one moment in his spiritual development after his conversion. The orthodox thinker's convictions were the same as those of the Montanist afterwards, the disciple of Montanus's views just like those of the defender of orthodoxy." This judgment could easily be applied as well to his position regarding military service. Moreover, other Fathers, who have never been accused of Montanism, shared his point of view on this question. As Daniélou stated categorically (" La Non-Violence," 20), "The texts here are clear and must not be minimized. The military profession was shown to be incompatible with the profession of Christianity." If Tertullian was the first to articulate that opinion clearly, this can certainly in no way be attributed to his heresy. In fact according to Daniélou, "it is certain that it was only the echo of the Church's regulations."
Cyprian, who in the years immediately following Tertullian's time was bishop of Carthage and primate of Africa, and whose catholicity has never been questioned, regarded Tertullian with reverence as his master in Christian thinking. Cyprian's former private secretary recalled that Cyprian "was accustomed never to pass a day

284
without reading Tertullian, and that he frequently said to him, 'Give me the master,' meaning by this Tertullian" (Jerome, De Vir. ill., 53). In particular, Cyprian was in total agreement with Tertullian's views concerning the emperors and the army. P. Monceaux (Saint Cyprien [Paris, 1914j, 170-180) showed that the saint based his whole attitude on Tertullian, although he never quoted him because Tertullian had died a schismatic and thus Cyprian "could not have quoted his master's name without condemning his memory" (p. 175).
43. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 10; idem, Div. Institutiones, IV, 24. See also Fliche et Martin, II, 462; Lods, "L'Eglise," 24; and above all Moreau, "Notes," 8992.
44. On this point, see J. Fontaine's critical edition of the De Corona (Coll. Erasme, XVIII [Paris, 1966], 11, 18).
45. Tertullian, De Corona, 1.
46. Idem, Apol., 37, 4; 42, 3. See also idem, Ad Nat., I, 1-2; in addition, for the number of Christians especially in the province of Africa, but without special reference to the army, see idem, Ad Scap., 5, 2-3. Concerning what one should make of these statements, see my"Etude," 4, and Visser, "Christianus sum," 7.
47. Clement of Alexandria, Protrept., X, 100 (end).
48. Leclercq, "Militarisme," cols. 1125 n. and 1130. There is a marked difference, for no obvious reason, between the two translations which Leclercq quoted. The first of them reads: "The gnosis has taken hold of you when you were in service; obey the righteous orders of your leader," The second of them is different: "The Christian faith has taken hold of you while under warlike arms; listen to the captain whose rallying cry is righteousness." Could Leclercq possibly have been in doubt between one interpretation, whereby the soldier, once he had become a Christian, could still obey the "righteous orders" of his superiors but would henceforth have to disobey unrighteous orders, and another interpretation-which in my view in the context is infinitely more probable-whereby the soldier who had become a believer has passed from submission to a human leader to obedience to the only true Leader, who was God?. I am convinced that the text can only be understood through the spiritual transformation of military terminology which we have considered at length in chapter 3. A parallel can be adduced in the declaration of Speratus, the martyr of Scilli, who told the proconsul, "Never have we uttered a curse; but when abused, we have given thanks, for we hold our own emperor in honor." But he also asserted, "I do not recognize the empire of this world, ego imperium huius seculi non cognosco" (Passio Scillitanorum, 2, and 6).,Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 76) was eminently justified in glossing, "We pay heed to our emperor (i.e., Christ)." Visser ("Christianus sum" 18 n. ) explicitly expressed his inability to accept the interpretation of the passage from Clement which I am here advancing. Bayet (Pacifisme, 112-113), on the other hand, contended that Clement in this text would have preferred to refer to Christ, but that at the same time he did not want to upset Christians who had accepted military service.
49. "It will perhaps be objected that, when speaking to the soldier, Clement does not tell him explicitly to continue, as he does the two others, and indeed that the imperfect tense instead of the present might indicate a different idea. But the close connection with the two others would seem to exclude any hesitation, and this triple admonition is, in truth, only a paraphrase of the words of St. Paul: 'Let every man abide in the same calling in which he was called' (1 Cor. 7:20)" (Lebreton and Zeiller, History of the Primitive Church, IV, 1031 n. ).
50. Cadoux (Early Church, 418 n. ), who quoted this passage (A. von Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, 2 vols.
[ London, 1908], II, 55 n. ) without comment, was apparently in agreement with it.
51. Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 233 n., with reference to Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, II, 717.
52. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, III, 12, 91. 53. Ibid., II, 11, 117; IV, 14, 96.
54. Romans 8:38-39.
55. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, II, 18, 82. 56. Cyprian, Ep., 39, 3.
57. Leclercq, "Militarisme," col. 1132.
58. Basil of Caesarea, Various Homilies, 18, 7. One cannot help sensing in these lines an element of self-justification against the prevalent opinion that there was a contradiction between military service and the Christian faith.
59. This martyrdom, which was supposed to have taken place in 320, had inspired many other well-known homilists (DAL, XIV [1948], col. 2004). In reality, however, it was a legend which was based on the incidents which occurred in the army of Licinius after 315 when he had reverted to paganism and tried to force his soldiers to sacrifice (Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 242). At least two cases of refusal to enlist, those of Marcellianus and Theogenes, occurred in the same period and the same circumstances, although it is hard to disentangle the various motives for their refusal (ibid., 260; idem, Early Church, 591 ).
60. Basil of Caesarea, Various Homilies, 19. 61. Giet, Ges Ides, 163.
62. Basil of Caesarea, Ep. 116.
63. Ibid., 106. Although Basil was one of the propounders of the then-emerging view that monasticism was the only certain route to a perfect Christian life (by departing altogether from the preoccupations of the present world), it is notable that in this passage he argued the opposite case. In Sulpicius Severus (Vita Martini, 2, 8) one finds the same conditional approval of involvement in worldly affairs.,Cf. Fontaine, SCH, CXXXIV, 468-473, 501-503.
64. Basil of Caesarea, Homilies on the Psalms, 1, 6.
65. H. Delehaye, Les G~gendes grecques des Saints militaires (Paris, 1909), 2. Thus a "former naval chaplain," the Abby C. Profillet, delighted in compiling-for purposes which can easily be guessed-a martyrology of military saints (Les Saints militaires, Martyrologe, Vies et Notices, 6 vols. [Paris, 1891]), of which approximately one hundred pages were crammed with names and dates alone. H. Gaubert (Les Saints sur les Champs de Bataille [Paris, 1941)) had the same idea. But after St. Martin, whose case caused Gaubert some embarrassment (see n. 150 later in this chapter), the first saint whom he found on a battlefield was St. Leger in the seventh century.
66. Delehaye, Les L~gendes, 112. It is true that on the following page he also mentioned the opposite case of the "demilitarization" of saints who had probably originally been soldiers.
67. Ibid.
68. H. Delehaye, "Saints de Thrace et de Mesie," AB, 31 (1912), 265-268; idem, Les Passions des Martyrs et les Cenres litt~raires (Paris, 1921), 321-328. See also J. Dubois, "Dasius," Catholicisme, III (1952), col. 471.
69. Acta Dasii, 6-10.
70. D. van Berchem, Le Martyre de la Legion th~baine (Basel, 1956), 46, which cited the various passages in which Delehaye had provided this evidence.
71. In all the military legends "one can recognize one and the same pattern and an identical purpose" (Delehaye, Les L~gendes, 118). See also B. de Gaiffier, "Saint

286
Marcel de Tanger ou de Lion," AB, 61 (1943), 132 n. [On the extension of military imagery in Christian iconography and pastoral care, see Charles Pietri, Roma Christiana (Rome, 1976), I, 316, 541 ff.]
72. See the studies by J. Guey: "La Date de la Pluie miraculeuse (172 apres J. C. ) et la Colonne aurrslienne," MA H, 60 (1948), 105-127, and 61 (1949), 93-118; and "Encore la Pluie miraculeuse," RPh, 23 (1948), 16-62. For Bardy's controversy with Guey on this subject, see SCH, XLI, 30 n.-31 n.
73. Fliche et Martin, I, 316; Leclereq, "Militarisme," col. 1131; DAL, V, cols. 2692-2703; Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 230. It is astonishing to observe that all of these authors-even though they recognized that there was no historical basis for the tale of a Christian legion which prayed for rain, had its prayer heard, and for that reason had received the name Fulminata-nevertheless concluded that the account proved that during that period there were numerous Christians in the army. Cadoux's only reservation was that no doubt the religious authorities had not approved of this.
74. Eusebius, Chronicle, 238 olymp., xiii (pp. 206-207); idem, HE, V, 5, 3 ff.; Tertullian, Apol., 5, 6; idem., Ad Scapulam, 4.
75. For a sound and detailed study of this passion, see ASS, November, III (1910), 748 ff. Its main arguments can be found more conveniently in two works of H. Delehaye: "Le Culte des Quatre Couronn~s a Rome," AB, 32 (1913), 64-71; and Etude sur le G~gendier romain, les Saints de Nooembre et de D~cembre (Brussels, 1936). The learned Bollandist has shown that nothing can be made of the Passio ftomana, which tells of five soldiers as martyrs at Rome, and that the most that can be accepted is the Greek version which speaks of stone-cutters who were put to death in Pannonia. It was probably the word "coronati" which encouraged the "militarization" of these stories. See also DAG, XIV, cols. 2009-2014. [Dom Dubois has recently suggested (Annuaire de l'Ecole pratique des hautes Etudes [Paris, 1972], 503-505) that this confusion arose from the fact that these men were said to be working "in comitatu," which meant "at the court," but which has been misinterpreted as meaning "in the imperial army."]
76. They are known only through the martyrdom of Symphorosa and her seven sons. She, who was supposed to have been the wife of Getulius and the sister-in-law of Amantius, has declared to the emperor Hadrian: "Vir mews Getulius, cum fratre suo Amantio, tribuni tui cum essent, pro Christi nomine passi sunt diversa supplicia, ne idolis consentirent ad immolandum."
77. VSB, XI (1954), 207. 78. Ibid., 332.
79. There is no historical basis for the martyrdom. But it is rooted in an ancient tradition, since in 514 Severus of Antioch devoted an entire homily to the two saints. Cf. VSB, X (1952), 191-197.
80. B. Aub~, L'Eglise et G'Etat dans la Deuxteme Moitt~ du Ille SiQcle (Paris, 1886 ), 377.
81. Eusebius, HE, VI, 41, 11. I mention this fact here because of the close contact which existed between the state and the army. Later, for instance, during Diocletian's persecution, one of the martyrs was to be Philoromos, "who had been entrusted with an office of no small importance in the imperial administration at Alexandria, and who, in connection with the dignity and rank that he had from the Romans, used to conduct judicial inquiries every day, attended by a bodyguard of soldiers" (HE, VIII, 9, 7).On the spread of Christianity throughout the upper strata of Roman society, in connection with the legend related by Eusebius (HE, V, 21) of the Senator Apollonius, see both the note in G. Bardy's edition of the HE (SCH, XXXI [ 1952], 63) and the comments of M. Lods (" L' Eglise," 17).
82. Eusebius, HE, VI, 41, 22.
83. I say "perhaps," because, although the text of the martyrdom 0f Julian speaks of Ferreolus, the best recension of the martyrdom of Ferreolus does not refer to Julian. References to him occur only in the recension reproduced by ASS, September, V (1857), 764-765. On the nature of the post filled by these two men, see below, p. 318.
84. Eusebius, HE, VII, 15. 85. Ibid., VIII, 1, 7.
86. Ibid., VIII, 4, 2-3. A similar "purge" was also undertaken soon thereafter by Galerius (ibid., VIII, app. 1).
87. See the unpublished thesis of A. Mascaux ("Les Martyrs militaires en Afrique ~ la Fin du IIIe Si~cle" [Faculty of Protestant Theology, Paris, 1925]), which was entirely devoted to these texts, and the more recent work of Visser (" Christianus sum," 8-11 and 16-17 dealing with Maximilianus, 11-13 with Marcellus, and 15-16 with Juhus).
88. Lods, "L'Eglise," 25-26.
89. The italics are mine. The minimizing of the emperor's divinity prior to 291 is essential to Seston's thesis, as is the overrating of it after that date.
90. Seston, "A propos de la Passio," 241. 91. Ibid., 243.
92. For the details of this evolution, see Seston, Dtocl~tien, 212-230, 354-355. I follow him completely in his rejection of H. C. Babut s thesis concerning the adoratio (L'Adoration des Empereurs et les Origines de la Persecution de Diocl~tien [Paris, 1916], 21 ); but I can no longer follow him in his suggestion that the increase in the emperor's religious status, which he described superbly, constituted not only an increase but also a radical change in conception from the thinking which had been prevalent since Augustus (Diocl~tien, 356). The same thesis had been put forward already in ASS, October, XII (1867), 535.
93. P. Allard (La Persecution de Dlocl~tien, 3rd ed. [Paris, 1908], I, 97-98) was of the same opinion as other authors against whom I am arguing-that the antimilitarist attitudk\ was confined to Africa, where it derived from the Montanist teaching of Tertullian, and that it had been clearly excluded from the teaching and practice of the Church. Allard's originality lay in his insistence that this attitude survived, as a sort of family tradition, in certain circles which otherwise returned to complete orthodoxy. He apparently did not see an unsurmountable obstacle in the fact of a father, who was himself a soldier, bringing up his son in antimilitarist family tradition (ibid., 100). Monceaux began his study (La Vraie L~gende, 249) by speaking of Maximilian in these terms: "An uncompromising Christian, by virtue of a personal conception which was contrary to the Church's traditions and teaching, he was convinced that he must refuse military service. But he was not punished as a Christian. If he had consulted his bishop, he would not figure among the martyrs. His story is nevertheless very touching." Allard's opinion (La Persecution, 105-106) was much the same. But I have already demonstrated that the tradition of the Church on this point was not what Monceaux assumed; and in the next chapter I shall show that the same applied to its teaching. I can imagine that such a contention may have seemed strange to someone who belonged to a community which claims to be a Church with an infallible and unchangeable teaching; for clearly with time the tradition and regulations of the Church on this point have altered considerably. On the essential historical fact, however, I am in agreement with Monceaux. Maximilian was condemned as a conscientious objector, not as an atheist (in the Roman sense). Cadoux too, whose historical honesty was punctilious and in no way was distorted by his personal religious convictions, wrote

288
(italics mine): "It is fairly clear from the martyi s own words that his objection was largely, if not solely, to the business of fighting. The question of sacrificing to idols or to the emperor is not mentioned by either party" (Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 149; idem, Early Church, 585). [See the recent study of Paolo Siniscalco (Massimiliano: un obiettore de coscienza del tardo impero [Turin, 1974], 134-135) who, after citing a whole list of authorities, pronounced firmly: "The question of sacrificing to idols does not play a noticeable part. As a matter of fact, nowhere in the entire Passio is it even expressly mentioned." He added (p. 135 n. ), however, that he did "not feel [that he could follow] in toto and per totum" the position elaborated in the present paragraph, which he quoted from the French edition. Unfortunately, he did not specify the nature and extent of his dissatisfaction. ]
94. This Fabius Victor was temonarius. [For a full discussion of the hypotheses of various authors concerning the precise meaning of this almost unknown Latin word, see Siniscalco, Massimiliano, 10-11, 39-40.]
95. Mihi non licet militare, quia Christianus sum. (Acta Maximiliani, 1-2, (Homus traps. ))
96. Seston, "A propos de la Passio," 242.
97. Non possum militare; non possum malefacere. Chrtsttanus sum. 98. Lods, "L'Eglise," 21.
99. Non milito . . . non milito saeculo, sed militd deo meo.
100. Militia mea ad Domtnum meum est. Non possum saeculo militare. lam dixt, Chrtstianus sum.
101. If Seston's explanation were right, how could the Church have avoided condemning these new idolators? And why did the martyr not reply to his interrogator that if they remained in the army, they would thereby lose any right to be called Christians? [See D. F. O'Reilly, "The Theban Legion of St. Maurice," VC, 32 (1978), 201. ]
102. Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 150 n.) wrote: "Ruinart . . . tells us that this last question and answer are absent ' in editis,' the reason for the omission apparently being that the words contradict the traditional Roman Catholic view of war. Ruinart inserts the words but suggests that they mean that Maximilianus'did not reject military service as if it were evil in itself, but on account of the opportunities of sinning which soldiers often meet with.' This is clearly insufficient to account for the language used; and the Roman Catholics remain faced with the awkward fact that one of the canonized saints of the Church died as a conscientious objector! It is significant that Bigelmair, throughout his full treatment of the early Christian attitude to military service, makes no mention of Maximilianus at all. He is certainly an awkward martyr for a Romanist to deal with, but doubly so for one who is both a Romanist and a German." In Early Church, 585 n., Cadoux was more lenient in his judgment. He also removed the anti-German bias, which was obviously nothing more than an inverted nationalism.
103. Especially M. Meslin, review of EL, Archives de Sociologie des Religions, 10 (1960), 184, and Jacques Fontaine, "Sulpice Swore a-t-il travesti S. Martin de Tours en martyr militaire?" AB, 71 (1963), 43 n.
104. See above, pp. 25-26.
105. Roger Mehl was convinced-wrongly, to my mind-that Seston had overstressed the importance of the innovation of 291. He wrote ("Christianisme primitif" ), "The refusal of idolatry has played a major part since the beginning. The human Caesar's claim to be Lord collided head-on with the Christian conviction that Christ alone is Lord." (For subsequent lines of this passage, see ch. 1, n. 48. ).
106. Monceaux, La Vrate L~gende, 257-258. See also his earlier and more
detailed work, "Etude critique sur la Passio Tipasii," Revue archeologique, 4, no. 4 ( 1904 ), 267-274.
107. Or before, if we accept that this episode had been added to Tipasius's 1'assio at a later date in order to make the position less absolute-for after Constantine's concordat conscientious objection was no longer generally maintained.
108. This introduction, which comes from the M 2 family of MSS, is of a later date. B. de Gaiffier ("Saint Marcel," 116-139) does not reproduce it. It can be found in AB, 41(1923), 261; Knopf, 87; Musurillo, 250-251.
109. Le., a week earlier.
110. Sacramenta huic militare non posse,~(MS. M. ). VSB, X, 990-following the Madrid MS, supplied by de Gaiffier, which reads huic officio militare non possetranslates this as "I could not serve him as an officer," something of a mistranslation.
111. The Madrid MS has "to act as you have done," whereupon it breaks off. 112. "Molestiis saeculi militare'' (MS. N ). [This is to be preferred to the formerly accepted text of "militia saecularibus militare." See F. Dolbeau, "A Propos du texte de la'Passio Marcelli Centurionis'," AB, 90 (1972), 331, who has finally settled the question. ]
113. AB, 41 (1922), 277-278.
114. Leclercq, "Militarisme," col. 1142.
115. "Septies in hello egressus sum, et post neminem retro steti nec alicuius inferior pugnavi" (Pussio luli Veterani, 2, 2). I stress in hello and pugnavi, for these two terms directly contradict the thesis which I shall be advancing in the next chapter. But this may be why Julius goes on to say that he had strayed (errare) when agreeing to become a part of the army (see below, n. 117).
116. "I have always adored the God who made heaven and earth. I still try to serve him today" (2, 3).
117. In vana militia quando uidebar errare (2, 1 ).
118. Eusebius, Martyrs, 11, 20-21: "He had served in the army ... [He) belonged to a picked band of young men in the army; and of those who held positions of rank among the Romans had attained to no small distinction." In the second recension of the text Eusebius added in the following paragraph (22): "He displayed himself a true soldier of Christ."
119. In the Acta Tarachti there are many episodes, of which I quote only one, from the first chapter. "The Governor Maximus: `What is your name?' Tarachus: `I am a Christian.' Maximus: `Don't say that impious word, tell me what your name is.' Tarachus answered again in the same manner. Then, after being slapped, he continued: 'The name I have given you is indeed the one I bear personally. But if you want the name which is in common use, I was called Tarachus by my parents, and while I was a soldier, I was given the name Victor.' Maximus: ' Where do you come from?' Tarachus: 'I am of Roman and military race, born at Claudopoiis_in Isauria.'.." Then Tarachus explained how, because he was a Christian, Fie-had asked for and obtained his discarge from the army. The Greek words here are nun paganeuein he (i)retesamen, which the old Latin version rightly translates as renuntiavi militare. In Chapter 2, I showed how the use of military metaphors in Christian parlance was purely spiritual. Here we have an exact counterpart, in what to modern ears sounds like a spiritual metaphor given a military connotation: "to become pagan" means to cease to be a soldier.
120. E. Am~lineau, Les Actes des Martyrs de l'Eglise copte (Paris, 1890), 26-29, 42, 48, 49, 58, 59, 97.
121. Ibid., 103.
122. Ibtd., 34, 36, 37, 75-77, 104.

290
123. Ibtd., 76. 124. Ibid., 77.
125. Ibid., 112. ' 126. Cf. above, p. 131. '
127. Moreau, "Notes," 94.
128. Le., the rival imperial claimants.
129. Life of Pachomius, Codex sahtdicus, 7 (ed. Lefort, 293); Codex bohairicus, 7 (ed. Lefort, 83); Vita prima, 4 (ed. Halkin, 3).
130. Ibid., Codex bohairicus, 8 (ed. Lefort, 83); Vitaprtma, 5 (ed. Halkin, 3-4). 131. E. Misset, Pourquoi Saint Marttn refusa-t-il de combattre: Pugnare mihi non licet et le 74 a Canon'd'Hippolyte (Paris, 1907), 12. Apart from Misset, nobody to my knowledge has used or discussed this episode, even in cases in which it would have been most relevant. Menard ("Profil," 5) merely stated that the conversion of Pachomius occurred after he had been "released from military service."
132. E.g., by Louis Bouyer, La Sptrttualtt~ du Nouoeau Testament et des Pyres (Paris 1960), 389.
133. N. K. Chadwick, The Age of the Saints in the Early Celtic Church (London, 1961 ), 107 n.
134. A. de VogU~, La Communaut~ et I'abb~ Bans la ftt?gle de St. Basile (Paris, 1961 ), 23.
135. P.-T. Camelot, "Bulletin d'histoire des doctrines chrEtiennes," 751 n. [Jean-Marie Vianney, the "Curd d'Ars," was a famous nineteenth-century French saint who deserted rather than "serve" during the Napoleonic wars.]
136. See above, p. 252. ~ >
137. Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 2 (SCH, CXXXIV, 254-257). 138. Ibtd., 3, 5,(SCH, CXXXV, 258).
139. In SCH, CXXXIII-CXXXV (Paris, 1967-1969), Jacques Fontaine has published a careful edition and French translation of the Vita and the Letters of Sulpicius Severus, in which he has also provided an illuminating introduction and detailed annotations. Although Fontaine was right in emphasizing the importance of Severus s use of literary "clich~s" which must not be taken at face value as historical accounts (a theme which he had already developed in " Verity et Fiction Bans la chronologie de la Vita Martini," Studia Anselmiana, 46 [ 1961], 189-236; "Une Cl~ litt~raire de la Vita Martini de Sulpice Swore: la typologie proph~tique," in Melanges Mohrmann [Utrecht, 1963], 84-95; and "Sulpice Swesre," 31-58), he has probably overstressed this necessary corrective. [All the Severian textual information concerning Martin has now been published in a handy popular edition of tlae latest French translations (by Fontaine and Monceaux) (Luce Pietri, ed., Saint~Martin, textes de Sulpice S~U~re, supplement to the Lettre de LigugE, nos. 172-178 [July-October, 1975]).]
140. Gregory of Tours, Htstoria ecclesiastics francorum, I, 34.
141. Sulpicius Severus, Vtta Mart., 2, 2, and 3, 6,(SCH, CXXXIII, 225, 259).
142. H. Delehaye, "Saint Martin et Sulpice S~v~re," AB, 38 (1920), 19-33, and esp. 26, 31; Lecoy de la Marche, Saint Martin, 3rd ed. (Tours, 1890), 109-110; A. Resgnier, Saint Martin, 36, 42). Gaubert (Ges Saints, 17), no doubt inadvertently, put it under Constantine II; M~nard ("Profit," 18 n.) dated it under Constantius, as also did J. Christophe (Saint Martin, le soldat paciftque [Lyon, 1966], 27).
143. H. C. Babut, St. Marttn de Tours (Paris, 1913), 168-170. On this promising historian (who was killed on February 28, 1916, at the early age of thirty-eight during the battle for Verdun) and his coqtrubution to our subject, see J.-R. Palanque, "Un anniversaire," Le Monde, March 3, 1966.
144. For example, E. Griffe, in the first edition of La Caule chr~tienne (Paris
Toulouse, 1947), 203-204, suggested that one should read oicennium instead of the biennium which is universally evidenced, not only by the MSS, but also by Paulinus of Perigueux only a century after the events to which the passage was referring. In subsequent works ("La Chronologie des annees de jeunesse de Saint Martin," BGE, 63 [1961], 114-118; and La l:aule chr~tienne, 2nd ed. [Paris, 1964], 277 n.), Griffe suggested an ingenious change of punctuation, whereby the reference to two years of waiting could be made to apply to something other than military service, and the reference to adolescence would apply to the date of his entering the service and not to its duration. J. Fontaine, for his part, was convinced that Sulpicius Severus, for apologetic reasons and at the cost of what must strictly be called a masking of historical truth, had intentionally attempted to give the reader the impression of as short a period of military service as possible (SCH, CXXXIII, 205; SCH, CXXXIV, 501; "Sulpice Severe," 38 and especially the entire paper "V~rite et fiction" ).
145. B. de Gaiffier, "Sub Juliano Apostata dans le martyrologe romain," AB, 74 (1956), 41; Fontaine, "Sulpice S~vt're," 36. Paulinus of PBrigueux (I, 139-177), who gave a detailed account of St. Martin's refusal, did not even mention Julian, although by that time his name had become a byword for the persecuting pagan emperor. Nor did Paulinus give the slightest hint that in Martin's attitude there might have been anything connected with the rejection of idolatry. These omissions are all the more conspicuous since Sulpicius Severus was no doubt influenced by the projection onto the still-Christian Julian of 356 in the West of the characteristics which he demonstrated in 362 in the East (e.g. the sad story of Juventinus and Maximinus, two Christian officers of his guard. See the thorough study of this incident in Fontaine, "Sulpice Swt're," 49).
146. Christi ego miles sum: pugnare mihi non licet (Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 4, 3 [SCH, CXXXIII, 260]). After reciting this statement, Paulinius of PErigueux (I, 35 ff.) contrasted the chains of the miles Christi with those of the worldly soldier, and then continued with a long antithetical elaboration upon that classical theme.
147. Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 4, 5, and 7,(SCH, CXXXIII, 260).
148. M~nard, "Profit," 18. Note 58 on the next page suggests, however, that M~nard was scarcely convinced by his own explanation.
149. It is astonishing, for example, to find Courcelle (Histoire, 214 n.) wondering, with reference to passages in Severus and Paulinus dealing respectively with Martin and Victricius, "whether such formulations were really an apology for conscientious objection, or whether they were not simply customary circumlocutions to say that an officer had embraced the religious life." As we shall see, the "circumlocution" of Victricius entailed the execution squad. For reasons of charity I shall refrain from quoting the amazing passage in VSB, 11 (1954), 338, which is devoted to St. Martin. The only prior reference to his desertion was in this delectable summary on p. 337: "He received baptism and finally he was freed." The most recent popular biographies of St. Martin (G. Hiinermann, L'ApBtre des Gaules, transl. E. Saillard [Paris, 1964], 90-93; and Marguerite Jardel, Le soldat du Christ, Saint Martin de Tours [Paris, 1967], 54-57) have both respected historical truth on this point. The former, however, did not give any explanation for the saint's behavior. The latter was convinced that up to the time of his leaving the army St. Martin, although already an old soldier, had never had any occasion to take part in a battle. Then, at the decisive moment, "Martin sensed that he must obey; he knew that a Christian must bear arms to defend the soil which is his. But he wanted to become a monk, and the Church forbade monks to make war. If he were to fight, the Church would perhaps refuse to ordain him. And yet he must fight . . . since he was an officer." Two pages later (p. 59)

292
Jardel also invoked an argument of "providential convenience" which, to say the least, is unexpected. The foes of the moment were Franks. But now, "many centuries later . . . Gaul was to become France. It would have been most improper for the saint who was to be its protector to have triumphed over it in the first place by arms."
150. Christophe, Saint Martin, 27; Jardel, Soldat du Christ, 57; Lecoy de la Marche, Saint Martin, 112. The essential argument in the last of these works is that the expression miles Christi was a technical term used only for monks. As we have seen earlier (p. 76), the term did apply to monks; but it had also been used prior to the advent of monasticism and thus it bore a much broader meaning. Sulpicius Severus (Vita Mart., 2, 2) indeed spoke of the attraction which Martin had felt since his infancy for monachism; but this was an obvious anachronism on the part of his biographer (Delehaye, "Saint Martin," 88; Fontaine, SCH, CXXXIV, 441-446, who followed his usual pattern of interpretation in seeing in this passage a projection of hagiographic stereotypes). Gaubert (Les Saints, 18) observed that the modern historians' resort to a monastic explanation is a clumsy and futile attempt to escape from an embarrassing situation. But his own escape route is even worse. He begar~. by observing (p. 17) that so-called Christian conscientious objection made its first~ppearance in recent times, "amidst American and Anglo-Saxon sects which, for want of sufficient theological culture, divert certain biblical texts from their precise meaning." But then on pp. 19 and 22 he was forced to acknowledge that St. Martin must have allowed himself to be carried away by the same "somewhat hazardous personal interpretation." He was quick, however, to rehabilitate the saint by recalling that a sin committed through imprudence is a venial sin. One is tempted to rejoice upon finding that a Catholic author considered it only a venial sin to share a theological point of view with "American and Anglo-Saxon sects;" but one is prevented from doing so by the recollection that the venial sin consisted in diverting biblical texts from their precise meaning. The only way that one can escape from perplexity in harmonizing these different statements is by attributing to St. Martin the ideas of a nineteenth- or twentieth-century American theologian)
151. ASS, October, XII (1867), 53, stated that the three saints-Martin, Victricius, and Paulinus-persuasum fuerit licitum non esse sanguinem humanum fundere etaim in justo hello, imperantibus christianis prtncibus. But it went on: term adhuc erant laid, in doctrina christiana parum eruditi. In the In Sulpicium Severum observationes which G. da Prato added to his Verona edition (1741) of the works of Severus, he likewise stressed (p. 325) the identity i0 the situations of the three "chained enlisted men"-Maximilian, Pachomius, and Martin. Vanderpol (Doctrine scolastique, 185) grouped together Maximilian, Martin, Victricius, and Paulinus, and judged them in the same expeditious way as did the ASS. This enabled him to dispose of the testimony of three bishops and a martyr in exactly eight lines-no mean achievement in a book of 534 large pages, all of them devoted to the Christians' attitude to war.
If Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 10, 6 (SCH, CXXXIII, 274) actually said that St. Martin was unlettered, it was only in comparison to himself and Paulinus, who were extremely well educated. Nor should we forget that St. Martin was "the founder of a training center at Marmoutier, out of which emerged the elite of the Gallic episcopate ' (M~nard, "Profil," 6). Fontaine (SCH, CXXXIV, 676 n. ) went even further in refuting the argument of ASS and Vanderpol when he showed that in Severus's vocabulary the word ars, far from denoting intellectual activity, was always used for manual work.
152. E. Griffe, "Saint Martin et le monachisme gaulois," Studia Anselmiana, 46 (1961), 3. One may suppose, but only on a conjectural basis, that Martin had met
monasticism in the East and was therefore himself a kind of "bridge" between the two parts of the Christian world of his day. This would indeed fit with the place of his birth. See Willy Schatz, "Studien zur Geschichte and Vorstellungswelt des frUhen abendl0ndischen Monchtums" (unpub. thesis, University of Freiburg/Breisgau, 1957), to which M. Fontaine has called my attention.
	153. For example, Bouyer (Spirituality, 384), commenting upon St. Anthony and 	his time, wrote that "the primitive monk did not appear at all as a kind of specialist 	he was simply a Christian, and more precisely a pious layman who merely took
the most radical means to make his Christianity all-embracing."
154. "St. Martin's life as a soldier . . . seems traced-exactly traced-on the 14th canon of Hippolytus" (Misset, Pourquoi Saint Martin, 12). Leclereq ("Militarisme," cols. 1150-1152), who developed the same view at length, concluded, "This prohibition of shedding blood was certainly, in the eyes of Sulpicius Severus, the explanation for St. Martin's behavior."
155. Sulpicius Severus, Dialogue, III, 15. In accordance with the Christian "strategy" of human relationships, St. Martin confronted this verbal violence, like all violence, with a patience which bore evil but did not accept it. The result was that this "bad monk" later became St. Brictio, St. Martin's successor as bishop of Tours.
156. Concerning Fontaine's method of interpretation in his SCH (CXXXIII-CXXXV) edition of the Vita Martini, see my review in RHPR, 50 (1970), 77-79.
157. Fontaine, "Su1pice Swere," 36.
158. Idem, "V~rit~ et fiction," 213; "Sulpice Swiire," 38.
159. In "V~rite et fiction," 213, Fontaine observed that the body of antimilitarist church laws, which we shall be studying later (pp. 161-168), had a precise application to St. Martin's case. Paradoxically, it was because Siricius was an "adversary of the new ascetic spirit"'' (Erich Caspar, Ceschichte des Papstiums [Tiibingen, 1930], I, 259) that he viewed his harking back to an earlier tradition as a weakness in the Western monastic movement; for he could neither approve of its founder nor reject him.
160. Fontaine,"SulpiceSevisre,"39.SeealsoSCH,CXXXIV,423,428,andesp.441. 161. Fontaine, "V~rit~ et fiction," 208; SCH, CXXXIV, 441, 454-459.
162. Fontaine, "Sulpice Swesre," 43-46. 163. IMd., 51, 57; SCH, CXXXIV, 463 n.
164. DTC, XV (1950), cols. 2954-2956. See also R. Herval, "La Province ecclesiastique de Rouen aux IVe et Ve siccles," MSR, 16 (1959), 53-57, which portrayed St. Victricius as "the outstanding bishop [who] brought the Christian group in Rouen out of the darkness, and who was the first to organize upon solid foundations the religious life of the entire Second Province of Lyon."
165. DTC, XII (1935), cols. 68-71; DAL, XII (1936), cols. 1437-1455. The latter study-especially its first part-examines the entire Romano-Gallic circle with which we are concerned here. Martin, Paulinus, and Victricius First met at Vienne (Isrsre) in 386 (Herval, "La Province," 51). In a letter (Ep., 18), Paulinus also reminded Victricius that they had formerly met at the home of St. Martin, "to whom the Lord had done the same as for you, even though you are younger." On the relationships between these personalities, see A. Baudrillart, Saint Paulin, 4th ed. (Paris, 1928), 33-34.
166. Paulinus, Ep., 18., It is from this letter, especially para. 7, that I have derived the account of the events which followed. See also J. Mulders, "Victricius van Rouan, Leven en leer," Bijdragen, 17 (1956), 7-9.
167. Paulinus, Ep., 25. 168. Ibid., 37.

294
169. B. de Gaiffier, "Sub Juliano Apostata," passim. 170. Griffe, La Caule chr~tienne, 1st ed., 227.
171. Martin, who was the son of a superior officer, was placed by virtue of his name under the patronage of Mars, the god of war (ME'nard, "Profit," 4). The name Victricius similarly had a military resonance, and it is virtually certain that he was the son of a veteran who had settled on the imperial frontier (Vacandard, Victrtce, 3-4; Herval, "La Province," 54). The power of the gospel was thus stronger than the attraction of conformity to their background.
172. Vacandard (Victrlce 14 n., 15) demonstrated, as Paulinu~. had already done (Ep., 18), that Victricius faithfully imitated the conduct of Martin/and even of Maximilian. See also Griffe, La Caule chr~ttenne, 1st ed., 226.
173. Sulpicius Severus, Dialogue, III, 11-13; idem, Vita Mart., 20; idem, Chronicle, II, 49-5l;,Fontaine, SCH, CXXXV, 913-946. [See also H. Chadwick, Priscillian of Aoila (Oxford, 1976), 138-148.]
174. Sulpicius Severus, Vita Mart., 20, 2;,SCH, CXXXIII, 296.
175. Priscillian and six of his companions were finally executed. See Sulpicius Severus, Chronicle, II, 51.
176. This charge had already been made by Ithacus, the accuser of Priscillian (Sulpicius Severus, Chrontcle, II, 50). It has been revived in several of H. C. Babut's works ("Paulin de Nole et Priscillien," RHL, 1 [1910], 97-130; Saint Martin, passim), in which he reiterated the themes of his Sorbonne thesis, Priscillien.
177. A. d'Al~s, Priscillien et l'Espagne chr~tienne d la fin du IVe SiPcle (Paris, 1936); J. A. Davids, De Orosio et Sancto Augustino Priscillianistarum Adversarti (Nijmegen, 1930); E. Dalaruelle, A. Latreille, and J.-R. Palanque, Histoire du Catholicisme en France, I (Paris, 1957), 53, Delehaye, "Saint Martin," esp. 108 ff.: P. Monceaux, "La Question du Priscillianisme," JS, n.s., 9 (1911), 70-75, 104-113; A. Puech, "Les Origines du Priscillianisme et 1'Orthodoxie de Priscillien," BALAC, 2 (1912), 8195, 161-213. St. Ambrose of Milan came to Trier at the same time as Martin, and the two men took precisely the same position on the controversy.
178. Delehaye, "Saint Martin," 88.
179. F.-L. Ganshof, "Saint Martin et le Comte Avitianus," AB, 67 (1949), 203223.
180. Griffe, La Caule chr~tienne, 1st ed., 228. 181. Paulinus, Ep., 19, 4.
182. Pariter spectantes Jussa tyranni. The elliptical style peculiar to inscriptions makes this text almost impossible to translate. One could easily lapse into a paraphrase in an attempt to make the meaning explicit. To my mind it means that the two martyrs at first believed falsely that one could serve God and Caesar on equal terms. Then they realized that a choice between the two was necessary; this is the meaning of the phrase"they turned" (were converted).
183. Diehl, no. 1981.
184. Ambrose, Hymn XI,.in PL, Supplementum I (Paris, 1958), cots. 584-585. 185. Prudentius, Pertatephanon, I, 34, 39.
186. Ibid., 58-59, 61.
187. The inscription gives suscendit, for which an alternative reading surrexit has been suggested. Is it not more likely to have been ascendit, or possibly a falsely conjugated perfect of succedere?
188. On Ferrutius, see ASS, October, XII (1867), 530-543 (the inscription is on p. 530). The passion which follows is certainly quite unhistorical.
189. Monceaux, La Vraie Gdgende, 280.
190. Van Berchem (Le Martyre, 25-33) concluded, "The elements of the legend
which we have determined to be irreducible are mutually contradictory . . . and the tradition falls apart." For reviews of Le Martyre, see H. G. Pflaum, RELA, 34 (1956), 410-413; H. I. Marrow, RHR, 152 (1957), 236-240; and C. Roth, Revue Suisse d' Histoire, 1957, 511-514.
191. L. Dupraz, Ges Passions de S. Maurice d'Agaune: Essai sur I'historicitE de la tradition et contribution d 1'etude de l'armke pry-dtocl~tienne (260-286) et des canonisations tardives de la fin du IVe siPcle, Studia Friburgensia, n.s., 27 (Fribourg, 1961). [For a recent re-examination of this question, see O'Reilly, "The Theban Legion of St. Maurice " 195-207. ]
192. In his book (Les Passions, 294-295), Dupraz clearly set forth the chronological sequence of the events of the martyrdom as he understood them. He was convinced that the occasion was probably not a persecution of the Christians, but was rather an expedition to suppress a revolt of uprooted farmers called the Bagaudes. The only reason for the martyrdom of Maurice and his fellow soldiers, whom Dupraz reduced from a legion to a mere company (i.e., from 6,000 to 600 men), was their refusal to take idolatrous oaths.
193. Cf. my review of this book in RHPR, 48 (1968), 285-288.
194. Van Berchem, Le Martyre, 27, 53. In the Catholic journal of the Bernese Jura L'Echo (October 21, 1961) G. Bavaud-although a professor in the Higher Seminary of Fribourg-really exceeded all bounds. Under the title "Pourquoi Saint Maurice et ses compagnons ont-its est~ martyris~s?" he claimed that both Dupraz's historical restoration and my own interpretation of the primitive Christian discipline are equally valid. He therefore came to the impossible conclusion that Maurice and his six hundred companions were executed en masse for conscientious objection. Another article by Bavaud in the preceding (October 14, 1961) issue of the same newspaper (" Les premiers Chr~tiens ~taient-its objecteurs de conscience?" ) argued that the attitude of conscientious objection, which was salutary for all Christians as long as they were only a minority in the empire, at a later date naturally and necessarily became the sole privilege of the clergy. On this point, see above, p. 93. 195. Passio Acaunensium, 3.
196. Hostis. Ferreolus, whose case might at first glance seem similar to that of Maurice, spoke not of enemies but of the guilty. It is this which indicates the difference between the soldier and the policeman. The relevant portion of his answer is: "I served the emperors as long as religion allowed me. I promised obedience to just laws, never to sacrilegious laws. I enlisted to serve against the guilty, not against Christians."
197. Intmicus.
198. Pugnavimus pro fide (i.e., the faith which they owe to the emperor as well as their faith toward God).
199. Juravimus primum in sacraments diving, Juravimus deinde in sacraments regia.
200. Passio Acaunenstum, 9. 201. Ibid., 10.
202. In these paragraphs, stylistic convenience has led me to personify the members of the Theban Legion. Quite clearly, however, what I am setting forth and criticizing here is the viewpoint of St. Eucher, who speaks through his heroes. The soldiers themselves come from the realm of pure myth.
Chapter 5
1. It was precisely at the moment at which Church policy opened its doors to

296
compromise that it became necessary to establish boundaries and to legislate on the subject.
2. Tatian, Oratio, 28.
3. Arnobius, Adv. Nat., 2, 38. 4. Tertullian, De Idol., 19.
5. Idem, De Pallto, 5.
6. Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus, I, 12, 99 and II, 4, 42. 7. Idem, Stromata, IV, 8, 61.
8. Ibid., VII, 11, 62. 9. Ibid., VII, 14, 84. 10. Cyprian, Ep., 73, 4.
11. Idem, De Bono Patientiae, 14. 12. Idem, Ad Donatum, 6-10.
13. Origen, Contra Celsum, VIII, 68, 73.
14. It is particularly important to remember this date in light of explanations such as Seston's, which I set forth in Chapter 4.
15. Kaufmann, Handbuch, 114.
16. E.g., Jacques Zeiller (Lebreton & Zeiller, History, IV, 1031).
17. The basic contributions were those of Dom R. H. Connolly and Dom Gregory Dix, which in more recent years have been incorporated in and superseded by the masterly works of Dom Bernard Botte. The article in which. he most clearly expresses his general conclusions on the relationships between the various texts is "L'Authenticit~ de la Tradition apostolique de saint Hippolyte," RTAM, 16 (1949), 177-154. See also pp. xvii-xxviii of Botte's second edition of the Apostolic Tradition (La Tradition apostolique de Saint Hippolyte, Essai de reconstitution, 39`' Cahier des Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen and ForschungentMiinster in Westphalia, 1963]). J.-M. Hanssens has advanced an opposing position. In a polemical assessment of the reviews-which were admittedly often scathing-aroused by his book La Liturgie d'Hippolyte, ses documents, son titulaire, ses origines, et son charactere, Orientalia Christiana Analecta (Rome, 1959), he has insisted ("La Liturgie d'Hippolyte, assentiments et dissentiments," Gregortanum, 42 [1961], 290-302) upon the great difficulty which scholars still face in establishing an exact line of derivation between the various Hippolytus texts.
18. Bernard Botte, "Le Texte de la Tradition Apostolique," ftTAM, 22 (1955), 161. See also Botte's "Les plus anciennes collections can0niques," Orient Syrien, 5 (1960), 331-350, and R.-G. Coquin, Les Canons d'Hippolyte, PO, 31, ii (1966), 308340. J. Quasten (Patrology, 3 vols. [Utrecht-Brussels, 1950-1960], II, 180-181 ) wrote of the Apostolic Tradition, "It is, with the exception of the Didache, the earliest and the most important of the ancient Christian Church Orders. . . . [It] has given us the richest source of information that we possess in any form for our knowledge of the constitution and life of the Church in the first three centuries." I am astonished that J. Fontaine ("Christians and Military Service in the Earl Church," Concilium, 7 [1965], 116 n.) can still question whether"the Canons of Hippolytus, the rigorist antipope, can be taken in the form in which they have reached us as reflecting the Church's discipline without any further qualification? And how can one speak of one discipline of the Church at such an early date and particularly on such very controversial questions...?" These are the only points at which I sense that Fontaine's criticisms of my work went beyond healthy questioning and became somewhat arbitrary.
19. J. and A. Prier, eds., "Les ' 127 Canons des Ap6tres: Texte Arabe," PO, 8 (1912), 553. See also Botte, "Les plus anciennes collections," passim.
20. C. C. Richardson, "The Date and Setting of the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus," Anglican Theological Review, 30 (1948), 38-44.
21. Pierre Nautin (Hippolyte et Josipe: Contribution d l'histoire de la litt~rature chr~tienne du 3e siPcle [Paris 1947], attempting a reconstruction of the historical Hippolytus, found that one had to distinguish between two persons. According to his findings, one Hippolytus was an antipope, whose statue has been discovered at Rome and whose real name was Josippus; the other Hippolytus was an author, who wrote the works which bear his name but who was certainly not a Roman (p. 92). The latter Hippolytus was a mid-third-century Easterner from some area other than Syria (p. 93). It is not even certain that he was a bishop. Nautin maintained that the surviving text of the Apostolic Tradition was indeed written by the latter Hippolytus, and thus is distinct from the identically entitled treatise that is mentioned on the base of the Roman statue. Nautin (p. Sl) thought it possible, however, that the Eastern Hippolytus used the Apostolic Tradition as one of his sources, which-if there were two such different people-seems to me not merely possible but virtually certain. In that case the primitive text (which reflected the Roman Church's discipline at the beginning of the third century and which, according to Nautin's hypothesis should be attributed to Josippus) would still be beyond our reach. The first document in our possession would thus be a revised version of the treatise emanating from the East toward the end of the first half of that century.
22. P. de Lanversin, "Une belle dispute: Hippolyte est-il d'Occident ou d'Orient?" Proche-Orient Chr~tien, 6 (1956), 118-122; R. Salles, "La Tradition apost0lique est-elle un t~moin de la liturgie romaine?" RHR, 148 (1955), 181-213. Salles' interpretation is even more radical than that of Nautin, since it attempts to prove that the Traditton is evidence of an Eastern-type liturgy very different from that of Rome. But it would not basically threaten the validity of my argument; for the existence of an ancient Latin version of the Tradition proves in any case that this text was disseminated in the West as well as the East.
23. Cf. Quasten, Patrology, II, 166-169, who gave an exhaustive bibliography of the controversy, in which Marcel Richard ("Comput et chronographie chez S. Hippolyte," MSR, 7 [1950], 237-268; 8 [1951], 19-50) opposed Nautin's reconstruction with especial vigor. See also Richard's "Bibliographie de la Controverse: HippolyteJosipe," PO, 27, ii (1954), 271-272.
24. We should then simply have to say: "The state of the Roman discipline at the beginning of the third century was described in an Apostolic Tradition, the work of the antipope Josippus. Unfortunately this has been lost. But we can get quite an accurate idea of it from the identically titled work produced shortly thereafter by the writer Hippolytus, who use Josippus's work as his primary source. The relationship between Hippolytus's text and the Roman discipline is confirmed by the fact that the earliest and best evidence for this text is the Latin translation, which we' will discuss
25. See, for example, Bernard Botte, ed., Ga Tradition apostolique, SCH, XI (Paris, 1946), 8.
26. H. Tattam, ed., The Apostolical Constitutions of the Apostles in Coptic with an English Translatton (London, 1848).
27. W. Till and J. Leipoldt, eds., Der koptische Text der Kirchenordnung Hippolyts, TU, 58 (Berlin, 1954).
28. Prier, "Les'127 Canons des ApBtres.' "
29. H. Duensing, Der aethiopische Text der Kirchenerdnung des Hippolyt (GBttingen, 1946).
30. E. Hauler, Dtdascaliae apostolorum fragments Veronensia latina (Leipzig, 1900).

298
31. A. Wilmart, "Le texte Latin de la Paradosis de Saint Hipolyte," RSR, 9 ( 1919), 62-71.
32. This point can be demonstrated by a comparison with other surviving versions of the same text, which also guarantees that the translator has not tried to "slant" his text.
33. Butte, La Tradition apostoloque, SCH, XI, 12-13.
34. Butte, La Tradition apostolique (1963 ed. ), 36, canon 16. H. F. Davis ("Early Christian Attitude," 478-479) vigorously asserted that it was because the Christians were not allowed to kill that "it became the official custom in Rome in the latter half of the second century to forbid . . . [them] to volunteer for certain positions." He also declared that even in the fourth century, after the empire had officially become Christian and the numbers of Christians in the army had multiplied, the Church rnntinued to maintain a certain scruple about baptizing soldiers. But at the same time he contended that the Apostolic Tradition could not have applied to the case of war, because (he remarked rather naively) "it would be difficult to understand how they [the Christians] could continue in service at all . . . if the prohibition to execute included killing men in battle." If we were to follow this interpretation, we should arrive at a pecular paradox: a law based on the principle of respect for human life which did not allow the believer to take the slightest responsibility;in the execution of common-law criminals but which found it normal for believers to!slaughter soldiers whom only the hazard of war had made into enemies.
35. Canon 41,(Till and Leipoldt, Der kopttschk Text, 10-11 ).
36. Canons 27 (end) and 28 (Prier, "Les `127 Canons des Ap&tres,' " 527).
37. Canons 27 (end) and 28 (Duensing, Der aethiopische Text, 44-45). In other MSS, these canons are numbered 28 and 29, or even 31 and 32.
38. Here, as later, I have italicized the words which differ from other texts of the same family, and have placed between brackets words not in the original text which I have added for clarity in translation.
39. The exact words are: "and if he has not left off, he will be rejected." These are the identical words that we encounter in the following canon. One might justifiably understand these words to mean that "if he does not refuse to carry out that order, he shall then not be admitted as a catechumen." But for one thing, was not the only solution for the soldier and others in the same category to give up their job before taking part in homicidal action? Furthermore, since these passages refer to someone who had already been entangled in the contradiction between the use of the sword and Christian morality, it seems that the only person to whom this could have applied was someone who at an earlier date had formally become a believer and who was dismissed when he failed to draw the logical consequences of his Christian profession. I am therefore convinced that my translation is in fact the only possible one.
40. This is why Butte, who in his 1946 edition of the Apostolic Tradition (p. 45 n. ) had rejected the words "let him not be permitted to take the oath," restored them in his 1963 edition (pp. 36-36 n. ).
41. D'Ahs, Th~ologie, 415 n. The eighth book of the Constitutions is the one which interests us here, for it is a systematic exploitation of the Apostolic Tradition. The Constitutions especially in their first six books, depend otherwise and just as closely on the Didascalia. Since the original Greek version of the Didascalia-like that of the Tradition-has disappeared, it is extremely difficult to judge whether the two works, which were almost contemporary with each other even though they came from the opposite ends of the world of that time, were completely independent of each other. In any case, the two texts are closely linked in their common canonical descent and F. X. Funk (Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum [Paderborn, 1905]) has
provided an edition of them in parallel.
42. Constitutions, VIII, 32, 10: "If a soldier comes, let him be taught to'do no injustice, to accuse no man falsely, and to be content with his allotted wages:' if he submit to those rules, let him be received; but if he refuse them, let him be rejected."
43. Ibid., II, 14, 12; see below, p. 307.
44. Butte (1963 ed.) rightly regrouped these three versions along with the Bohairic under the common name of "Alexandrine versions." This canonical collection from Alexandria also contains translations of the Apostolic Canons (not to be confused with those of Hippolytus), of the Apostolic Tradition, and of the Epitome of the eighth book of the Constitutions. A similar compilation is to be found in Verona MS. Bibl. cap. LV (53) published by Hauler (Didascaliae). Only the English translation of the three versions by G. Homer (The Statutes of the Apostles or Canones ecclesiastics [ London, 1904] ) and the edition of the Arabic version by J. and A. Perier (" Les ' 127 Canons des ApBtres' ") have supplied the entire texts of these three compilations, whereas Duensing as well as Till and Leipoldt (see above, nn. 27 and 29) published only those parts which interested them. The arrangement of materials in the various versions is as follows: Sahadic (Canons nos. 1-30; Tradition nos. 31-62; Epitome nos. 63-78); Arabic (Canons nos. 1-21; Tradition nos. 21-47; Epitome nos. 49-72). The canon that we are studying here is Sahidic 75, Arabic 62, and English 63 (respectively Homer, 351; Prier, 646; Horner, 208).
45. J. And A. Prier (" Les ' 127 Canons des ApBtres,' " 555) assumed that the findings of Dom R. H. Connolly (The So-called Egyptian Church Order and Derived Documents, Texts and Studies, VIII, iv [Cambridge, 1916]) were the indisputable basis for further work on these texts.
46. Dom G. Dix, ed., The Treatise on the Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus of Rome, rev. Henry Chadwick (London, 1968), lxiii, lxv. See also A. G. Martimort, "La Tradition Apostolique d'Hippolyte et le rituel baptismal antique," BLE, 60 ( 1959 ), 57-62.
47. A. Salles, ed., Trois anttques rttuels de bapt~me, SCH, LIX (Paris, 1958), 7 n., 35 n. This Judaizing tendency was retained for a long time. Coquin (Les Canons, 52-53, 320-321 ) found it again in the Canons of Hippolytus (which I shall be discussing) in connection with the rule which is of especial interest to us-that concerning the "sin of blood."
48. Butte's review (BTAM, 8 [ 1958], 174-176) of Salles' work was scathing. Martimort s assessment (see n. 46 above), which although more moderate was still highly critical, had the merit of providing the reader with a short r~sum~ of the hypothesis upon which Salles was working. Neither of these reviewers referred to the most obvious weakness in Salles' theory-the Ethiopic text's transparent dependence upon an earlier Arabic one-no doubt because both imagined that it was common knowledge.
49. Butte ( 1963 ed. ), 36 n.
50. Testament of Our Gord, II, 2 (ed. Cooper and Maclean, 118; ed. Rahmani, 114; ed. Nau, 62-63).
51. The Arabic translation, which was made from the Sahidic Coptic and which is all we possess, dates from as late as the thirteenth century. But a Greek original must be postulated which would date from the period indicated in the text. The surviving MSS of this Arabic translation are divided into three groups: the Arabic Berlin 10181 (="R"); the Nomocanon of Michael of Damiette (="d"); and the Macaire Collection ( ="m" ) of which there are numerous copies.
52. This is the reading of "R". "m" reads: "let him not be received in any case." 53. "m" simply omits the entire text between n. 52 and this.

300
54. Once again, ' `m" reads, "let him not be received in any case," and thereby it refuses admission into the Church even to the "nonviolent" soldier.
55. At an early stage of his research, Coquin, arguing from the parallel text in the Constitutions (VIII, 32, 10, quoted n. 42 above), speculated that this clause might denote acting as an informer. This reference might then apply to the present canon, for the informer kills by his words as certainly as the soldier by his weapon and the magistrate by his sentence. By the time that he published his findings, however, Coquin had returned to the explanation which Botte had given to justify the retention in the text of the Tradition of the words "he shall not take the oath," even though they are attested only by the Sahidic. As Botte (1963 ed., 37 n. ) argued, "The prohibition of the military oath (Sahidic text) must have appeared impossible in the era in which the empire had become Christian. Hence its omission [in the Arabic and Ethiopic versions]. The reading [of the Sahidic text] seems confirmed by [the Canons of Hippolytus]: he will not utter evil words. Between the prohibition of killing and that of wearing crowns, it could not have been a question of evil conversations, but rather of words which had an idolatrous meaning." This argument is unconvincing. Although the prohibition of the oath might have seemed impossible after the empire had espoused Christianity, the words which immediately preceded these-which stated bluntly that the soldier must not obey certain of the orders of his lawful superiormust have seemed even more impossible to admit.
56. All~mat. This word can mean either a rank, a decoration, or a sum of money which is presented at a donativum. The "F" MS (a late copy which dates from the fourteenth century) repeats the word "crown": "Let those who have received a crown as a token not put the crown on their head." But this addition, which is attested by only one MS, looks too much like a clumsy explanatory interpolation for it to be retained.
57. "d" replaces these words with: "nor let him be a chief having the sword."
58. Partly because of the "d" variant quoted in n. 57 above, Coquin (Les Canons, 368 n.-369 n. ) indicated that others had speculated that the original text had been: "The Christian must not become a soldier, unless he is constrained. Let the chief having the sword not take on himself the sin of blood." See, for example, the German translation of W. Riedel (Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien [Leipzig, 1900], 207). But Coquin remarked rightly that the translator's task is to render the text as it is not to produce a text adulterated by the translator s assumptions of what may have been behind it.
59. Coquin, Les Canons, 367 (99)-369 (101).
60. A. Bayet, who was generally overimaginative in his interpretations of our subject, at least had the merit of seeing that "these Canons of Hippolytus, which at first we find so severe, are in reality only a softening of an older law" (Pacifisme, 77). This process becomes even clearer when we turn from the Canons to the Tradition. Of course, Hippolytus himself did not claim to be producing an original work. So probably the Ethiopian versions of the Tradition, like the "m" reading of the Canons, are an echo of the historical starting point of this development.
61. Coquin, Ges Canons, 322 (54). , 62. Cooper and Maclean, The Testament of Our Lord, 209.
63. Cadoux (Early Christian Attitude, 238) remarked that "the silence of the Synod of Illiberis [Elvira] on the legitimacy of military service is significant." But I do not grasp what he thought the significance to be. Cf. J. Gaudemet, "E1vire," DHGE, XV (1963), cols. 317-348.
64. Hefel~, I, i, 252. [Because of the authoritative character of Leclereq's French edition, we have preferred it to the English translation of W. R. Clark, et al. (A His
tort' of the Christian Councils, 5 vols. [ Edinburgh, 1871-1896] ). ]
65. A. W. W. Dale, The Synod of Elvira and Christian Life in the Fourth Century (London, 1882), 234. r '
66. Basil of Caesarea, Homilies on the Psalms, 61, 4. , .
67. Obviously this admission by Basil may seem to reinforce the thesis against which I am arguing-that conscientious 0bjection was a late development. But for the proponents of this thesis, "late" means the end of the third century, not the latter }lalf of the fourth century; and in any case, I have elsewhere demonstrated that those who argue in this way are wrong. The testimony of St. Basil, who incorrectly believed that he was contradicting the traditional position, and who nevertheless took his stance because of faithfulness to the gospel, thereby becomes all the more authoritative.
68. Basil, Ep., 188 (canonica prima), 13. Earlier in the letter Basil had prepared the ground for this conclusion by discussing various cases of murder which, he stressed, were obviously more serious when intentional than when unintentional. He continued: "He who makes use of a sword or any other such weapon has no excuse.
. . And again entirely voluntary and admitting of no doubt are, for instance, the acts ~f robbers and the attacks of soldiers. For the former kill for the sake of money and to avoid exposure, and men in warfare proceed to slaughter openly, proposing neither to terrify nor to chastise but to kill their opponents" (Ibid., 8). In this penetrating criticism of the "direction of intention," Basil, reversing the usual argument, placed the soldier-killer even lower in the hierarchy of murder than bandits and perpetrators of crimes of passion.
69. Balsamon, Commentary on the Canons, canon 13, II, 65.
70. Ibid., 70.,See G. Fritz, "Service militaire," DTC, XIV (1941), col. 1980. The Greek text of these different passages from Basil and Balsamon is reproduced by Giet, Ges Ides, 167-169. L. Arpee (A History of Armenian Christianity [New York, 1946], 189), after noting the wary attitude of the Church toward soldiers, remarked that this was not the case with the Armenian Church-which, in fact, canonized all those who fell in the tragic defeat of Avarair in 451. But Arpee also cited a canon of St. Isaac which refused communion to soldiers as well as to drunkards and other disreputables. This provision is unique in the corpus of Armenian religious literature; but its extremely late date (426) makes it noteworthy.
71. Quoted in Hefel~, I, i, 591. See also E. Vacandard, "La Question du Service militaire," 159 n.: "[This canon] deals only with soldiers who had been expelled for their Christian feelings and who had then betrayed their faith by returning into the service under Licinius." Nevertheless, later in the fourth century Popes Damasus and Siricius understood the canon in exactly the same way as Fritz has done recently (see pp. 152, 190). It is hard to comprehend how Jean Gaudemet (L'Eglise Bans 1' Empire romain (IV e-V'' si~cles], Histoire du Droit et des Institutions de 1'Eglise d'Occident, III [ Paris, 1958], 141 n. ) can have failed to reach a similar understanding of it.
72. DTC, XIV, col. 1978: "The canon did not forbid the Christian to be a soldier. It recalled the ancient rule which forbade him to be one voluntarily." See also Lorson, Defense, 35.
73. Hefele, I, i, 592. Bayet (Pacifisme, 189) offered a different explanation. According to him, this canon was directed at those who had consistently refused to serve under Licinius but who w0uld have liked to serve again under a Christian emperorConstantine. Thus interpreted, canon 12 would imply an indirect but genuine antimilitarism. Although it admittedly conceded the right of soldiers to remain in the army, it condemned those who, having left the service under special circumstances, wanted to return to it once these circumstances had changed. It is true that this interpretation is the one which flows most naturally from the verbal construction of the

302
sentence. But it does not fit properly with the canon's psychological context. And in any case, Bayet misunderstood Hefele', citing him as the authority for his interpretation despite the fact that Hefel~'s position was diametrically opposed to Bayet's.
74. [J. Gaudemet (Conciles Caulois du IV a Si~cle SCH, CCXLI [Paris, 1977], 48-49) gives the text, with a new French translation, of the Canons of Arles, with comment. ]
75. L. Sturzo (Church and State [Notre Dame, 1962], 33), having recalled Constantine's essential role in this synod, wrote: "This Council, acting on his inspiration, blamed the anti-militarism of Christians as prejudicial to the empire."
76. G. Bardy, "Arles (Conciles d')," Catholicisme, I (1948), col. 838. For similar interpretations see Babut, L'Adoration, 20; Bayet, Pacifisme, 124; Harnack, Militia Christi, 88; Delaruelle, Latreille, and Palanque, Histoire du Catholicisme, I, 43. All of these, however, detected in the canon a departure from former teaching which the author of the passage in Catholtclsme failed to recognize.
77. E.g., Paris, Bibliotheque rationale, cod. lat. 12097 and 1452, as well as in the MSS of Cologne and Albi. All four of these MSS have many other omissions as well. 78. E.g., Toulouse Biblioth~que municipale, cod. 364, which dates from before
666, has bellum as a correction in its margin.
79. Cardinal C. J. von Hefel~, in the first German edition of his Conciliengeschichte ([Freiburg/Breisgau, 1855], I, 186), and Bigelmair (Beteiligung, 182) were not adverse to this interpretation, which was also favored by Cooper and Maclean (Testament of Our Lord, 209) and defended vigorously by De Jong (Dtenstweigering, 55). Bayet (Pacifisme, 8-9), on the other hand, mentions it only to ridicule it. The second German edition of Hefel~'s Conciliengeschichte (I, 206), as well as the French translation by H. Leclercq ([Paris, 1907], I, i, 283), follow the interpretation which I shall discuss below, according to which canon 3 did indeed refer to possible desertions and condemned them because of the advent of peace between Church and state.
80. Dale, Synod of Elvira, 238 ff., 281.
81. Harnack, Militia Christi, 88. Kaufmann (Handbuch, 114) was of the same opinion. Le Blant (Manuel d'Epigraphte, 15n.) indicated that, despite the fact that he had at first supported this position, he had been led by a close comparison of this canon with Roman juridical texts to recognize that "the Council of Arles speaks of desertions in time of peace as opposed to those which might take place in wartime."
82. H. F. Secr~tan, "Le Christianisme des Premiers Si~cles et le Service militaire," RTP, 2 (1914), 364.
83. Ibtd., 360. Fritz ("Service militaire," col. 1977) vigorously upheld this interpretation; but he acknowledged that "this attitude of the Council of Arles can be characterized as bizarre." He was keenly aware of the unity of the movement which extended from Tertullian to St. Basil, and which passed without interruption through the Apostolic Tradition, the soldier saints, and the Arles decision. See also Rordorf, "Tertullians Beurteilung," 121.
84. Vanderpol, La Doctrine scolastique, 116.
85. This attitude, alas, still lives on. For example, M. Villey, in his review of the French edition of the present book (RHDF, 40 [ 1962], 268), after reciting my explanation of the words in pace, commented: "M. Hornus would conclude a contrario Erom this that desertion in time of war was authorized. Such an interpretation seems to me to defy sense: what would be the use of military service in time of peace, if it were to be followed by refusal to take part in war?" Such a position would indeed be useless to the state, and I am not personally advocating it as a sound ethical stance. But this has been-and still is-the solution that "reasonable people" within the Church keep urging upon young men who hear the inner call to refuse to participate in bloodshed.
In this way endless "disagreements" can allegedly be avoided without violating anyone's ethical principles.
My interpretation of the meaning of the Arles wording in pace was also that of von Campenhausen ("Christians and Military Service," 168 n. ), who summed up the position of the Christians of the last years of the third century as follows: "Soldiers who are Christians never actually enter the field of battle, even if the emperor demands it" (Ibid., 165). Gerest ("Les premiers chr~tiens," 16 n.) also wrote: "It is perhaps necessary to introduce a distinction between the fact of serving and the fact of fighting (see the canons of Hippolytus and of the Council of Arles). Such a distinction would not have been absurd; during the third century one could remain in the army without taking part in fighting." Cf. the pungent comment of Ramsay MacMullen, "Many a recruit need never have struck a blow in anger, outside of a tavern" (Soldier and Civilian in the Later Roman Empire [Cambridge, Mass., 1963], v).
86. Cooper and Maclean (Testament of Our Lord, 208) provided an illustration of concessions which invariably lead to still other concessions once one has started to make them: "The Constitution of the Egyptian Church [i.e., the Apostolic Tradition] has almost the same rule as the Testament [of our Lord), one which seems impossible to put in practice, that Christians are not to become soldiers. And yet the Constitutions of the Egyptian Church probably represents a code actually in existence. The Canons of Hippolytus rule is hardly less impracticable. For how can a soldier help killing an enemy in war?"
87. Augustine, Discourse on the Psalms, 124, 7.
88. Tertullian himself suggested this argument (Apol., 37, 5): "For what war should we not have been fit and ready even if unequal in forces-we who are so glad to be butchered-were it not, of course, that in our doctrine we are given ampler liberty to be killed than to kill?"
89. See Chap. 4 above, pp. 155-157.
90. We should not forget that Lactantius, although he at times was quite as much of a "concordat man" as Eusebius, was also capable of courageous affirmations (Dlo. Institutiones, VI, 20, 10, which I quoted on p. 116 above). With reference to these passages, D,AI~s (Th~ologie, 416) wrote: "One may regard as exceptional the opinion of Lactantius, who also proscribed for the Christian the profession of arms." We now know that initially all the Church Fathers shared this "exceptional opinion."
91. Eusebius, HE, IX, 8, 2 and 4. 92. Ibid., IX, 9, 1.
93. Ibid., IX, 9, 2; see also IX, 11, 9. 94. Ibid., IX, 11, 2-7.
95. Ibid., IX, 11, 5. 96. Ibid., IX, 10, 13.
97. Eusebius, Vita, II, 16.
98. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 46. In his edition of this text, J. Moreau (SCH, XXXIX, ii, 450) showed that this prayer, which Eusebius afterwards attributed to Constantine, has a distinctly Christian coloration, even though it remained ambiguous enough also to be acceptable to pagan soldiers. Moreau also quoted, text of a similar nature from the Martyrdom of St. Basil of Amasea: "Licinius, therefore, upheld by the almighty hand of our Lord Jesus Christ, gained the victory over Maximinius."
99. See above, p. 171., Cf. Harnack, Militia Christi, 91, and Cadoux, Early Christian Attitude, 260.
100. Bavaud, " Les premiers chr~tiens."
101. Courcelle, Histoire, 13. Some of Courcelle's reservations to this statement

304
are, however, astonishing (see 13 n. ).
102. Ambrose of Milan, De Off., II, 15, 71; II, 28, 136; III, 13, 14.
103. Ibid., I, 27, 129. See also Chenu, "L'Evolution," 84-86, which lays particular stress on Augustine's feeling of "Romanity" (romanitas).
104. Sturzo, Church and State, 46.
105. M. Villey (RHDF, 40 [1962], 268) noted, "I find it hard to conceive of a breach as complete as M. Hornus supposes between Augustine's doctrine of war and the preceding Christian tradition." But on this very point G. S. Windass (Christianity Versus Violence [London, 1964], 80) has indicated clearly that "St. Augustine's thought about war . . . was in a state of tension. On the one hand, he felt bound to concede, with the world, that it was possible to fight in war and yet to be a Christian; but on the other hand, he was always aware that the early Christian tradition was an important part of himself, and the teaching and example of Christ in the Scriptures, pulled in another direction." See also ibid., 88, in which Windass reminds the reader of St. Augustine's classical denial of the right of "legitimate self-defence."
106. Both robberies and kingdoms, Augustine explained, have their leaders, their agreements, and their laws. This is a disconcerting idea for those who make the "maintenance of order" to be the supreme virtue of the state. For although there can be a good order, there is also an "order" which is nothing more than a well-organized brigandage.
107. Augustine, City of God, 4, 4. See also ibid., 4, 3, which contains a parallel passage glorifying the rule of the good.
108. Ibtd., 4, 6.
109. Idem, Contra Faustum, 22, 70. See also ibid., 22, 74.
110. Idem, City of God, 19, 12; Ep., 189, 6. In Ep., 47, 5, Augustine developed the distinction between public and private murder, to which St. Leo the Great also pointed (Ep., 167, 12 and 14). Similarly, St. Makimus of Turin (Homily, 114, 1) argued that, although civil or military service should not be allowed to serve as a pretext for crimes, the fact of serving was not in itself morally objectionable: "Non enim rnilitare delictum est, sed propter praedam militare peccatum."
111. Augustine, On the Free Will, I, 4, 9; I, 5, 12. The same ideas recur in almost identical language in the City of God, I, 21 and 26. Seven centuries after Augustine bishop Rufinus wrote that "one should not be at peace [with the wicked], but one must rather make war on them. For no sensible person is unaware that this gives us a clear advance toward the good of peace itself. . . . It is only in order that the good should remain intact in all things that we must make war and use weapons. It is also for this reason that the laws order tortures" (De Bono Pacis, II, 14). Already in the ninth century Pope Nicholas I was contending that "man would tempt God" if he did not prepare arms for the defense of himself and his country (Responsa, 46).
112. G. Combs, La Doctrine politique de Saint Augustin (Paris, 1927), 284-285; R. Ragout, La Doctrine de la Guerre juste de Saint Augustin d nos fours (Paris, 1935), 39-44; P. Monceaux, "Saint Augustin et la Guerre," in P. Batiffol, et al., L'Eglise et la Guerre (Paris, 1913).
113. Combs, La Doctrine politique, 289 and esp. 290, on which he quoted many literally "scandalous" texts from St. Augustine. Before leaving Augustine, I would like to mention a question which at present divides the interpreters of his thought. Between the heavenly city and the earthly city, the latter of which is often pictured as diabolical, is there room for a third city-one which would still be human but would be good because of its subjection to God? C. Journet has written a confused article on this ("Les Trois Cites [de Dieu, de 1'Homme et du Diable]," Nova vetera, 33 [1958], 25-48). H. I. Marrow ("Civitas Dei, Civitas terrena: num tertium quid?"
SP, 2 [Berlin, 1957], 342-350) seems to me to have been correct when he observed that in Augustine's thought the two cities existed as clearly differentiated abstract ideas; concrete reality, on the other hand, far from being a representation of the third idea, is simply a degraded expression of an intricate intertwining of the first two ideas.
114. Ambrose seems to us to have lived in an earlier period than Augustine: he died at a relatively young age-over thirty years before Augustine-and had played an important part in the latte>'s conversion. In fact, there was a difference of less than fifteen years between the two men. For this reason I have taken the liberty of not fully respecting chronology, in order to be able to consider the thinker (Augustine) before the man of action (Ambrose). For Ambrose's activity is a striking illustration of Augustine's style of thinking.
115. See A. de Brogue, Saint Ambroise (Paris, 1891 ), and R. Thamin, Saint Ambroise et la Morale chr~tienne au IV a SiQcle (Paris, 1895), which discuss at length this aspect of Ambrose's activity. For an authoritative treatment of the whole question, see A. Paredi, S. Ambroglio a la sua Eta, 2nd ed. (Milan, 1960), which clearly demonstrates Ambrose's contribution to the crystallization of the new ideology.
116. DHGE, II, cols. 1091 ff.
117. For example, Ambrose pleaded for and obtained a pardon from Theodosius for the partisans of Eugenius (Ep. 62).
118. See F. van Ortroy, "Saint Ambroise et 1'Empereur Th~odose," AB, 23 (1904), 418 ff., and P. de Labriolle, Saint Ambroise (Paris, 1908).
119. Ambrose, De Obitu Theodosii, 48. 120. Ambrose, Exp. in luc., II, 77.
121. Ambrose, De Off., I, 27, 129.
122. Ambrose, De Fide, II, 16. R. Roques (review of EL, RHR, 164 [ 1964], 242) was offended here-as in my quotations (n. 183 below) from Eusebius (HE, X, 7) and the Cod. Theod. (XVI, 2)-by my use of the adjective "Catholic." In all three instances, however, the word occurs in the quoted texts themselves. Obviously, it is not in opposition to"Protestant," as he assumes that I am hinting, but to the heresies of that era-Arianism and Donatism. See my comments below (p. 307) concerning my solidarity as a Protestant theologian with many of the ideas of the "Old Catholicism."
123. Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel, 11; idem, Book of Questions on Genesis, 10, 2.
124. Athanasius was attempting to prove that the "wet dreams" to which monks may be prone were not a sin.
125. Athanasius, Letter (48) to Amun.
126. Cod. Theod., XVI, 10, 2l,,quoted by Ryan, "Rejection," 27.
127. When from time to time the Christian conscience has spoken out against violence, it has been a voice "crying in the wilderness," even though it has generally been tolerated because of its rarity. Efforts have invariably been made to neutralize it, and the sensitive conscience has been informed that it has taken the wrong road, and that only the monastic life can satisfy its desire for purity and the absolute. At the end of this chapter I shall demonstrate that monachism was one of the primary forces that were responsible for the watering down of the Christian ethic.
128. Parker, Christianity and the State, 41, 42; Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars, 244, 301. As Hobhouse has rightly stressed (Church and the World, 77, 91), by the end of the third century the Christians-in spite of the relative setbacks about which he had written a few pages earlier-had come to be the most dynamic element, although not yet a majority, within the empire. It was therefore to them that the future belonged, and mere political prudence dictated that one should try to rally them to one's side.

306
129. Hobhouse, Church and the World, 66-67.
130. Ibid., 112-114, which are three pages of great force and conviction.
131. Combes, La Doctrine politique, 260. Such an admission was significant, for Combes did not conceal his personal adherence to the theory of the just war and his approval of necessary violence. Durry (Cohortes pr~toriennes, 330-331) similarly believed that by the end of the third century the Christians had already come to be numerous-perhaps a majority-within the Roman army, in spite of the efforts of the state to prevent this. (Durry did not consider what efforts the Church might have been making, in one direction or another. )
132. Monceaux, Histoire, 274. G. F. Hershberger (The Way of the Cross in Human Relations [Scottdale, Pa., 1958], 24, 59) has delineated the interrelationship between Constantine's pseudo-conversion, the invasion of the Church by superficial initiates, and the identification (which he deplored) between Christianity, Christendom, the social order and the empire.
133. A. Puech, Saint Jean Chrysostome et les Moeurs de son temps (Paris, 1891 ), 303.
134. John Chrysostom, Homilies on St. Matthew, 61, 2. 135. Idem, Homilies on St. John, 82, 4.
136. S. L. Greenslade, Church and State from Constantine to Theodosius (London, 1954), passim.
137. Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 408. Bayet (Pacifisme, 186) has also shown that from Claudius to Constantine the imperial government pursued exactly the same religious policy. Bayet even claimed, with some exaggeration (ibid., 173, 175), that the emperors finally opted for Christianity because it was more exclusive than the other cults and thus was more congruent with their desire for totalitarian uniformity. F. J. Foakes-Jackson (Eusebius Pamphili [Cambridge, 1933], 48) did not go as far as this; but he nevertheless commented, "Constantine . . . was the real successor of Diocletian, and though one sanctioned a cruel persecution, and the other loaded the Church with benefits, the ultimate object of both was the same, namely, to make religion the handmaid of the empire." See also Gage, "La Victoire," 400, and the excellent little book by O. Heggelbaeher, Vom RSmischen zum Christlichen Recht (Freiburg/Breisgau, 1959). Basing his argument on references to laws and institutions in the Ambrosiaster, Heggelbacher has demonstrated that the first Christian empire took its stand on Romans 13 in order to reemploy Roman law and natural right for its own benefit.
138. Cerfaux and Tondriau, Concurrent, 409.
139. Setton, Christian Attitude, 24-25; Gags, "La Victoire," 393-394.
140. Optatus of Milevis, De Schismate Donatistarum, III, 3..It was only at the beginning of the eighth century that what F. Dvornik has called "the idea of a single universal Church in a single universal empire" began to be questioned in the West, or rather that the submission of the Roman religious power to the Byzantine political power began to fade away, only to be replaced by another synthesis. Dvornik, who has examined all of these developments (Byzance et la Prlmaut~ romaine [Paris, 1964], 77-87), has stressed that in the exchange of letters between emperor Leo III and Pope Gregory II, the pope did not yet challenge the priestly character claimed by the emperor as a part of his imperial function. But the pope reminded him that his imperial/ priestly role "did not permit him to oversee the Church and to judge the clergy, nor to consecrate and distribute the holy sacramental signs."
141. Sekto~t,-Christian Attitude, 28. 142. See above, pp. 25-26.
143. Hobhouse (Church and the World, 68-69) has analyzed with clarity the
relationship between the deteriorating ethical standards of the Church, the Montanist reaction, and clerical specialization.
144. SCH, XXXIII, 167.
145. Marrou himself has shown (see n. 144 above), however, that observers as early as Origen and Clement of Alexandria described the cleavage between the different categories of Christians.
146. Good theology should never be unbalanced. Perhaps it is therefore necessary to specify here that a monachism freed from the idea of supererogatory merits, such as our brethren in the community of Taiz~ are apparently realizing, would not be subject to this criticism. It is the same in the case of the "old Catholicism," with which I share a dual concern-for responsibility toward the civil community, and for order within the Christian community.
147. Goguel, Birth, 550, in which passage he also paid tribute to Dibelius for having shown clearly that this tendency had existed from the early days.
148. Ibid., 434-435. D. E. Hall ("La Conversi6n del Emperador Constantino," Pensiamento Cristiano, 6 [1958], 149-169), whose article was otherwise mediocre, made a valuable contribution by emphasizing the connection between the ecclesiastical and the political evolutions within early Christianity. As Roger Mehl commented ("Christianisme primitif"), "It is one of J.-M. Hornus's important contributions that he noted the subtle but real link between the evolution of the Church's political attitude and a particular conception of monasticism."
149. Constitutions, II, 14, 12. The text of Didascalta, VI, 14, 10 and 12 (sd. Nau, 51-52; ed. Connolly, 44-45) is substantially identical. In Constitutions, VIII, 12, 42 there is also a prayer for the king, the power-holders, and the entire army, "So that all which is ours may remain in peace." But Dtdascalia, XVIII, 6, 4 (ed. Nau, 142; ed. Connolly, 158) blamed the bishops who, in order to feed orphans and widows, accepted impure offerings coming from "soldiers who act lawlessly; or from murderers; or from spies who procure condemnations; or from any Roman officials, who are defiled with wars and have shed innocent blood without trial."~ The text of Constitutions, IV, 6, 5, which Funk cited in his edition (p. 225) as a parallel, is really quite different.
150. Prier, "Les'127 Canons des Apatres,' " II, 55. This double clause also occurs in canons 83-84 of the series of Apostolic Canons in Greek or in Latin, published by Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, 2nd ed., 285-286. Leclercq's French translation of Hefele (Histoire, I, ii, 1203-1204) did not reproduce their text, but dated them in about the fifth century and commented on their wide geographical diffusion. On these Greek and Latin canons, see also F. Nau, DTC, II (1905), cols. 1605-1611, and G. Bardy, DDC, II, cols. 1288-1295.
151. A. H. M. Jones, The Gater Roman Empire (Oxford, 1964), I, 566; MacMullen, Soldier and Civilian, 48 n.
152. Gaudemet, G'Eglise, 143. See also Fontaine ("V~rit~ et fiction,~~ 211), who rightly noted that even if, as was long thought, soldiers could not be the only people to whom this law alluded, they were still included in a more general reprobation.
153. MacMullen, Soldier and Civilian, chap. 3.
154. Letter of the bishops of IIlyria to the Eastern bishops, Mansi, III, Col. 388, which Theodoret of Cyrus included in full in his Ecclesiastical History (IV, 8). Hefel~ (Ilistoire, I, ii, 982) dated the Council in 375; Mansi (III, Col. 388) put it even earlier. I have retained the date given by J. 7.eiller (Origines chrestiennes Bans les prol;inces danubiennes [ Paris, 1918], 326-327 ), although Zeiller discerned in this text an opposite meaning-to the effect that only irreproachable people were to be chosen as priests, euen if they had come from the magistracy or the army. If that reading were

308
correct, the significance of the decision would certainly be different from the one I have seen in it. But it would still provide evidence of a general attitude of reserve on the part of the Church toward the professions which it mentioned.
155. Hefel~, Histoire, II, i, 136.
156. E.g., PG, XIII, cols. 1181 ff., in which it was presented as the tenth letter of Siricius.
157. H. C. Babut, Ga plus ancienne d~cr~tale (Paris, 1904), 69-87, in which the best edition of the text, which is called the Canones ad Gallos, is to be found. [Although Fontaine ("Verity et fiction," 212 n.) and Gaudemet (L'Eglise, 220) have revived the former attribution, Pietri (Roma Christiana, I, 764-772) has reverted to Babut's position. ]
158. Canon 7. The same attitude can be seen in canon 13, where it is mixed with a more general condemnation of the various civil offices which entailed participation in coercive power.
159. Hefele, Histoire, II, i. 6'9; P. Jaff~, Regesta Pontificum Ronranorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natuim 1198 (Leipzig, 1885), l, 41; Siricius, Letter (no. 5) cant in unum, 2 (PG, XIII, col. 1158; PG, L.VI, col. 727). This letter, which Siricius addressed to the episcopate of Africa, was substantially repeated with further explanations in Siricius's ecumenical Letter (no. 6) cogitantibus uobis, 1, 3 (PL, XIII, col. 1165; Fontaine, "Verity et fiction," 211-213). 
160. Hefele, Histoire, II, i. 123: "Si yuis post baptismurn militaverit et chlamydem sumpserit aut cingulum, etiamsi graviora non admiserit, si ad clerum admissus fait, diaconti non accipiat dignitatem" (Mansi, III, col. 1000).
161. Mansi, III, col. 1064.
162. Ibid., III, col. 1069; Innocent I, Letter (no. 3) Saepe me (PG, XX, col. 492a); Jaff~, Regesta, I, 45. This canon, like Letter 6 of Siricius which I have quoted above, borrows from Damasus Canones ad Gallos in yet another erroneous attempt (ef. nn. 71-72 above) to claim the Council of Nicaea's authority for their antimilitarist position.
163. H. Warm, Studien and Texte zur Decretalensammlung des Dionysius Exiguus (Bonn 1939), 128, esp. n. 5. Warm quoted the various available authorities, but failed to take a position as to the preferred reading. He also failed to give indication as to the likelihood and date of a Council at Toulouse.
164. Maesi, III, cols. 1038-1041; PG, XX, cols. 495-502. 165. Innocent I Let r
to 2, 2 (4), PL, XX, col. 472 (also in PL, LVI, col. 521, and in Jaff~, Regesta, I, 44). A. Vanderpol attempted (Doctrine scolastique, 191) to evade the obvious meaning of this text (which recurred in a canon of Pope Leo I) by arguing that "remission of sins" meant not baptism but the postbaptismal penance which would have made the penitent sinner into a veritable monk for the rest of his life. PL, XX, col. 471 n. has made clear, however, that the most probable original meaning of this expression was baptism. The other two texts from Innocent I (to which I have referred above) enable one to assess this evasion at its true value.
166. Innocent I, Letter 37, 3 (5)_ PL, XX, col. 63 (JaffE', Regesta, I, 47), which cannot be dated precisely. It is interesting to note that this part of the sentence has been deleted from the later recension of the same letter (PL, LXXXIV, cols. 651-654).
167. E. Hildesheimer, "Les Clercs et 1'exemption du service militaire 31'epoque franque," RHEF, 29 (1943), 17. See also the texts collected by Vanderpol (Doctrine scolastique, 121-122).
168. Chalcedon, Canon 7 Hefel~, Nistoire, II, ii, 788-789.
169. Angers, Canon 7, CCG, GXLVIII, 138: "There is no injustice in the rejection by the Church of the clerics who have abandoned the clergy to mingle with the
secular army and with the laity."
170. Agda, Canon 20, Hefel~, Histoire, II, ii, 973 (mansi, VIII, col. 319), which condemned the clerics who bore arms.
171. Lerida, Canon I, Hefele, Histoire, II, ii. 1063 (Vanderpol, Doctrine scolastique, 599), which prescribed that any priest who had shed enemy blood while contributing to the defense of a besieged place was to be excommunicated for two years and excluded from advancement in the ecclesiastical hierarhcy.
172. Macon, Canon 5, MGH, Legum, III, i (Concilta aevi Merovingici), 156, which prohibited clerics from bearing arms.
173. Toledo (Fourth Council), Canon 45"Hefel~, Histoire, III, i, 273. I ~ r-174. MGH, Legum, III, i, 215.
175. St. Jean de Losne, Canon 2, MGH, Legum, III, i, 218.
176. MGH, Epistolae, III (Epistolae Merovingici et Karolini Aevi, I), 229. 177. Ibid., 303.
178. Germanic Council (742), Canon 2,. MGH, Capitularia Regum Francorum, I, 25: MGH, Gegum, III, ii, 3.
179. MGH, Legum, III, ii, 7.
180. Mainz, Canon 17, MGH, Legum, III, ii, 266. To compensate for their loss of temporal weapons, clerics could at times take up these "spiritual" or intellectual weapons in a very literal sense. Thus in 833, when the troops of Lothair, accompanied by Pope Gregory IV, were advancing against Emperor Louis the Pious, Archbishop Agobard of Lyon wrote to the emperor, whose sincere partisan he was, that the priests should bring their intercessory support and spiritual resources to the laity who would be fighting with temporal arms. Whereas the one order must fight with swords, "the others contend with words so that like may be opposed with like' (MGH, V [Annales, chronica et fiesta aevi Salici], 226). For other examples of the numerous prohibitions of clergy bearing arms, see the Councils of Meaux (845) and of Paris (846) (MGH, Capitularia, II 407) or the Council of Tribur (895) (ibid., 248).
181. MGII, Epistolae, VII (Epistolae Karolini aevi, V ), 311. 182. Hildesheimer, "Les Cleres et 1'exemption," 18.
183. Eusebius, HE, X, 7; Cod. Theod. XVI, 2.
184. Charlemagne, Admonitio generalis, canon 70, MGH, Capitularia, I, 59. 185. Epernay Canon 10,,MGH, Capitularia, II 262.
186. Bainton ("The Early Church and War," 82) rightly called attention to this function of monastic life as an alternative to military service. The radical distinction between two entirely different types of Christians-clerics and monks on the one hand, and laymen on the other-was already present in the Decretum of Gratian (Part II, Causa XII, 9, 1, cvii). It is symptomatic that an entire paragraph of Jerome's letter to the monk Heliodorus (Ep., 14, 2), which has been viewed as a kind of charter of Occidental monasticism, should have limited the Militia Christi to monasticism, which it contrasted in classical fashion to the Militia Mundi.
187. John Chrysostom, Homilies on Ephesians, 6, 4. - ~ ~ · r 188. Idem, Homilies on St. Matthew, 69, 4.
189. Bouyer, Spirituality, 371.
190. Vacandard, "La Question," 168. 191. Augustine, Ep., 189, 4-5.
192. Ibid., 220, 3.
193. See above, pp. 145-146.
194. DDC, I (1935), col. 1047; III (1942), cols. 868-869; L. Viollet, "L'Objection de Conscience," L'Ami du Clergy, 60 (1950), 376; A. de Soras, "Le Probleme de 1'Objection de Conscience," Revue de l'Action populaire, 36 (1950), 241.

310
195. Synesios even stated that he wanted to have "many fine children" by her. 196. Synesios Ep., 105~(transl. C. Lacombrade, Syn~sios de Cyr~ne, Hell~ne et
chr~tien [Paris, 1951], 220-223). Lacombrade contended (ibid., 224-227) that Synesios eventually relinquished his archbishopric; but he certainly remained an impenitent neo-Platonist (ibid., 264-265). Despite Lacombrade's censure of U. von WillamowitzMoellendorff ("Die Hymnen des Proklos and Synesios," SAB, 14 [1907], 272-295) for oversimplifying matters, it is hard to see that the Tatter's basic thesis has really gone astray.
197. Synesios must have felt quite in his element afterwards among the clergy of Africa, where the priests, upon coming out after Mass, would form irregular bands with their parishioners and stone to death any prowlers who fell into their hands (Synesios, Ep., 122).
198. Synesios, Discourse, 9. ~- ~--w ~ .. ->= ,u~, , 199. Ibtd., 23. '
200. Ibid., 25.
201. On the meaning of this speech, see E. Demougeot, Ga Th~orLe du Pouvoir imperial au ,D~but du V a Si~cle, Melanges de la Society tou1ousaine d'Etudes classiques, T (Toulouse, 1946), 205. Begin reading at line 20, and only return to the top of the page afterwards.
202. Synesios Catastasis, 2..This is but one example of the general development which Hobhouse (Church and the World, 110) tersely described: "More and more the emperor becomes the head of the Church on earth, and more and more the bishops approximate to the position of civil administrators."
203. Synesios, Ep., 78. 204. Ibtd., 57-58.
205. Ibid., 90. 206. Ibid., 121.
207. K. Treu, Synesios von Kyrene, Ein Kommentar zu seinem "Dion," TU, LXXI (Berlin, 1958), 26.
208. Dani~lou, Les Anges, 176-177. Dani~lou then proceeded to assert that although internationalism had had its Christian expression in the Holy Roman Empire, in its modern guise-a secularized, post-Christian version of the Eusebian conception of a Christian empire-it had become a demonic temptation which would lead to the kingdom of the Antichrist. My own ethical position-virtually point by point-would be exactly the opposite. But then when two men-one of them now [ 1970] to be found on the conservative fringe of the group of French cardinals, and the other for many years a militant member of a revolutionary party-pass from the establishment of facts to the making of judgments of value and meaning, differences are inevitable.
209. DaniElou, "La Non-Violence," 26.
210. R. de Pury (La Maison de Dieu, Cahiers th~ologiques, XIV [Neuchritel, 1946], 32-33) has splendidly denounced the self-deceit whereby the Church has believed that it has been serving its Master when it has reigned over "spiritual" spheres but has relinquished the proclamation of God's will in and for the world.
211. Dani~lou, "La Non-Violence," 28.
212. An anonymous reviewer of the French original of this book ("P.M.," in Ga Feuille d'Avis de Lausanne, November 15, 1960) stated, in words diametrically opposite to those of Dani~lou, that "The Christian vocation is always, as this historical study reminds us, a vocation to sanctity. Hornus tells this to us again through the Christian authors of the first centuries."
213. J. Dani~lou, Prayer as a Political Problem, transl. J. R. Kirwan (London, 1967 ).
214. Cf. my review in CS, 74 (1966), 666-668. The book is full of interesting insights, but I disagree with its basic presuppositions.
215. Moreau, La Persecution, 77; Homo, Les Empereurs, 29. Homo was not afraid of paradox, as can be seen in his contrasting of the "fanatical" Christians "who, should occasion arise, refused military service" with "pacific" Christians who accepted it.
216. Jerome, Vita Malchi, init.
217. Milburn (Early Christian Interpretations, 70) rightly quoted the above passage from Jerome to contrast it with Eusebius's oversimplified and unscrupulous attitude.
Chapter 8
1. Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., 54; Eusebius, Vita, I, 28.
2. On this veneration, see F. Halkin, "Une Nouvelle Vie de Constantin dans un L~gendaire de Patmos," AB, 77 (1959), 63-107, 370-372, and the old but still basic study of F. Nave, "Constantin et Th~odose devant les ttglise orientales," in his G'Arm~nie chr~tienne et sa litt~rature (Paris, 1886), 155-191.
3. A summary of the discussion (with bibliography) can be found in A. Piganiol, "L'Etat actuel de la Question constantinienne, 1930-1949," Historic, 1 (1950), 82-96. See also E. Delaruelle, "La Conversion de Constantin," BLE, 54 (1953), 37-54, 84100; and J.-R. Palanque, "Constantin I~er le Grand," DHGE, XIII (1956), col. 607.
4. A. A1f81di, The Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome (Oxford, 1948). H. Berkhof (Kirche and Kaiser [Zilrich, 1947], 60 ff. ) evidenced the same admiration of Constantine, as did K. Aland ("Die religi8se Haltung Kaiser Konstantins," SP, 1 [Berlin, 1957], 549-600). The latter (p. 575) even rejected the modest reservations about Constantine of H. Lietzmann (" Der Glaube Konstantins des Grossen," SAB, 29 [ 1937], 274). H. Ddrries (Constantine, passim) also believed in the sincerity, if not the depth, of Constantine's religious development. R. A. G. Carson ("The Emperor Constantine and Christianity," History Today, 6 [1956], 20) was convinced that "despite many of his actions, the consensus of evidence indicates a genuine personal acceptance of Christianity by Constantine."
5. On the positive contribution made by Gr~goire and his school, see P. Orgels, "A propos des erreurs historiques de la Vita Constantini," Melanges H. Gr~goire, Revue Internationale de Philosophie (Brussels, 1963), 575-576. Most of the disagreement between the contending parties depends on whether one believes, with the classical school, that Eusebius, Vita, 2, 5-17, alludes solely to the 324 war, or whether one follows Gregoire in thinking that it refers both to that war and to the war of 314 together. Orgels (pp. 592, 600, 612) was of the latter opinion, basing his conclusion on a comparison between Vita, 2, 11 and Zosimus, Ecclesiastical History, 2, 19, 1. The transition between the first war and the second would thus be in Vita 2, 15. See also H. Gr~goire, "Nouvelles Recherches constantiniennes," Byz, 13 (1938), 566.
6. P. Petit, "Libanius et la `Vita Constantini,' " Historla, 1 (1950), 578-579. 7. H. Gr~goire, "Notes bibliographiques," BARB, 34 (1947), 229.
8. Cod. Theod., V, 20, 1.
9. H. Ehrhardt, "Some Aspects of Constantine's Legislation," SP, 2 (Berlin, 1957), 114-121.
10. H. Gr~goire, "La `Conversion' de Constantin," Revue de CUniversit~ de Bruxelles, 36 (1930-1931),55.
11. Idem, "Nouvelles Recherches " 561 idem, "L'Authenticit~ et I'historicit~ de la' Vita Constantini' attribute ~ Eus~be de C~sar~e," BARB, 39 ( 1953), 426-478.

312
12. Setton, Christian Attitude, 51-53; F. Vittinghoff, ' `Eusebius als Verfasser der Vita Constantini," RhM, 96 (1953), 330-373. J. Moreau ("Eus~be de C~sar~e," DHGE, XV [ 1963], col. 1456) has also concluded for Eusebian authorship. For persuasive arguments in favor of the substantial authenticity of the Vita, see A. H. M. Jones, "Notes on the Genuineness of the Constantinian Documents in Eusebius' `Life of Constantine,' " JEH, 5 (1954), 196-200. P. Petit "Libanius et la `Vita Constantini,' " 580-581 ), on the other hand, has provided a good summary of the critical view. One must note that Petit merely stressed that the author could not have been Eusebius in person. But he argued that the Vita was most probably composed before 340 by someone who had been closely connected with Eusebius, who had access to his files, and who shared his political views, Gr~goire ("Nouvelles recherches," 583) proposed as a simple hypothesis that Euzoios, the Arian bishop of Caesarea who inherited Eusebius's library, was the author. It was not Eusebius himself, Gr~goire contended, but rather this second Eusebius" who made Licinius's persecution of the Christians into the cause of the wars of 314 and 324, and who referred to the celestial vision as well as to the Labarum (ibid., 578). Petit (" Libanius et la' Vita Constantini,' " 581 ) was of the opinion that the additions to books 3 and 4, which were made during the reign of Theodosius, simply made Constantine t0 appear to be more fanatically opposed to paganism than he actually had been. Gr~goire (" L'Authenticit~," 467-470), on the other hand, was far more radical, basing his view on "objective evidence" that before 420 none of the sources currently extant contained a single quotation from the Vita or showed any discernible influence of it. He nevertheless admitted that both the style and the fundamental ideology of the Vtta are clearly Eusebian.
13. But, as A. Brasseur ("Les deux visions de Constantin," Latomus, 5 [1946], 35-40) has pointed out, Constantine's vision was merely an unimportant pagan dream which gave a rallying sign to the army.
14. On the latter see Panegyric, 7, 21, with E. Galletiei s comments (Galletier, ed., Pan~gyriques latins, II, Les Pan~gyrtques constantiniens [Paris, 1959], 43-46).
15. J. Gags ("Le `Signum' astrologique de Constantin et le Mill~narisme de `Roma aeterna,' " RHPR, 31 [1951], 181-223) has referred to, and corrected, an observation by F. Heiland (Die astronomische Deutung der Vision Konstantins [Lecture, Zeiss Planetarium, Jena, October, 1948]).
16. Carson, "The Emperor Constantine," 14-16. On this point, see the exhaustive documentation in M. R. Alfdldi, Die Constantintsche Goldpr8gung (Mainz, 1963). Alf8ldi's no. 118 (reproduced in plate 5, no. 60) is the famous coin of 313 with the triumphal entry into Rome and the text "FELIX ADVENTVS AVGG NN" on the one side; on the other side is Constantine's head in profile with the symbol of the divine sun behind him. (This coin has been reproduced and described with an analysis of its significance in Gr~goire, "Nouvelles recherches," 579.) The same image is found in coins produced in the periods of 313-317 (Alf8ldi, nos. 479, 480, 483, 489, 492 [plate 7 no. 105]), 314-315 (nos. 491 495), 317 (no. 486 [plate 7, no. lO6J), 317324 (nos. 481, 490 [plate 8, no. 126] 493 [plate 8, no. 125], 494 [plate 7, no. 120]), even 324-326 (no. 482). See also S. P. Kyriakides, "Konstantinos ho Megas kai he autokratike latreia", Hell'enika, XVII, 220-240. The important book by Jules Maurice (Numismatique constantinienne, 3 vols. [Paris, 1908-1912J, II, xxix-xxx) provides significant information about Constantine as an apostle of the monotheistic solar cult. See also Maurice's Constantin le Grand L'ortgine de la civilisation chrEtienne (Paris, 1924), 28. But Maurice still believed that Constantine had experienced a complete Christian conversion at the Milvian Bridge. The later ambiguities he explained by the fact that with Constantine a truly Christian monarchy had taken over an empire that was still predominantly pagan. Constantine was thus like "a very Christian King of
France, governing a Muslim empire" (Constantin, 68). But on the other hand, Maurice was also able to point out that as early as 313 the Tarragona mint in Spain was using the cross on the back of its coins at the same time as it was casting medals with the solar sign to commemorate the Milan meeting (Numismatique, II, 339). This would seem to prove that Constantine's syncretism worked in both directions and that some imperial officials soon understood this.
17. Maurice, Cottstantin, 99. Gr~goire ("L'Authenticit~," 465, and "Nouvelles recherches," 57) also made much of the triumphal arch with purely pagan decorative motifs which was erected in 315.
18. Delaruelle, "Conversion," 95.
19. F. Altheim, "Konstantins Triumph von 312," Zeitschrift ftlr Religion and Geistesgeschichte, 9 (1957), 221-231; GagE, "La Victoire," 386; idem, "Le ' Signum,' " 210; Galletier, Pan~gyriques latins, II, 112-115.
20. Gags, "Le `Signum,' " 209. J. R. Palanque (DHGE, XIII, rnl. 597) has also noted that initially at least Constantine's Christianity was thoroughly permeated by astrology.
21. J. Moreau, "Zur Religionspolitik Konstantins des Grossen," AUS, I (1952), 165, 168.
22. Combs, Doctrine politique, 304, 313. 23. Galletier, Pan~gyriques latins, II, 3, 20. 24. Maurice, Constantin, 22.
25. V. C. de Clercq, Ossius of CordoUa: a Contribution to the History of the Constantinian Period (Washington, 1954), 184. It was Constantine as well who had started the war of 312 (Pan~gyriques, 9, 2).
26. A Piganiol, L'Empire chrestien, 325-395 (Paris, 1947), 35-36. Foakes-Jackson (Eusebius Pamphili, 103) agreed that something terrible must have happened, but he advised against pressing details too far since they have reached us only through historians who were hostile to Constantine (Ammianus Marcellinus, Roman History, XIV, 11, 20; Philostorgos, Ecclesiastical History, 2, 4; Victor, Epitome; Flavius Eutropius, Breoiarium, 10, 6; Zosimus Ecclesiastical History 2, 29). But can one cast this suspicion of prejudice against all of these sources? And what about the observer who was certainly not a prejudiced pagan-the anonymous author of the Vita Sancti Artemii (41, ASS, October, VIII [1853], 856)? Similar testimony is also to be found in Jerome, Orosius, Sidoine Apollinaire, and Gregory of Tours. On this bloody tale see also Maurice, Constantin, 22, 93, 182-190. Carson ("The Emperor Constantine," 18) has provided a detailed description of this incident, and has concluded that "these murders are often quoted as evidence of Constantine's insincere Christianity; but although they were not the acts of one who truly embraces Christ's teaching, they are unfortunately not unparalleled in acts of many who are accepted as genuine professing Christians." To this I would simply like to add that acts of this nature have certainly never been acceptable except within "Constantinian" Christianity. Carson's reasoning is therefore circular, and is yet another example of the way in which the gospel of Jesus Christ has been corrupted by the Constantinian concordat.
27. L. Duchesne, Liber pontificalis (Paris, 1886), I, cix-cxx, which text dates from about 500.
28. Herval, "La Province," 52.
29. Gregoire, "Notes bibliographiques," 230.
30. A. Alfgldi, A Festival of Isis in Rome under the Christian Emperors of the IVth Century, Dissertationes Pannonicae, 2nd ser., 7 (Budapest, 1937), 36-37.
31. Parker, Christianity and the State, 50, citing Augustine, Confessions, I, 2.
32. Zosimus, Ecclesiastical History, 2, 2., A. Piganiol (L'Empereur Constantin .~!

314
[Paris, 1932], 80) suggested that Ossius of Cordova was the proponent of this argument.
33. Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, 1, 39.
34. Philostorgos, Ecclesiastical History, 2, l6~Piganiol, L'Empereur Constantin, 215.
35. Julian the Apostate, The Caesars, 2, 336b; idem, To the Athenians, 3, 270c. 36. Parker, Christianity and the State, 46, 49.
37. Gags, "La Victoire," 379.
38. Parker, Christianity and the State 47, 48. Cf. M. Besnier, L'Empire romain de l'Av~nement des Sw~res au Concile de Nice ( Paris, 1937), 358.
39, Gr~goire, "La'Conversion' de Constantin," 234, 265. 40. Ibid., 242-243.
41. Gags, "La Victoire," 388-389; idem, "Le 'Signum,' " 181, 185, 206; Galletier, Pan~gyriques latins, II, 112-115.
42. Orgels, `A propos des erreurs historiques," 584-585. 43. Gr~goire, "Nouvelles recherches," 588.
44. Gags, "Le `Signum,' " 198-199, 213.
45. Galletier, Pan~gyriques latins, II, 155-157. Jules Maurice, who was one of Constantine's most convinced admirers, listed among his hero's significant achievements "the sign of Christ attributed to the army, as legionary insignia" (Constantin, 49). Whether this was an achievement or a betrayal remains an open question.
46. Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars, 219, 271.
47- De Clercq, Ossius of Cordova, 148, 175, 158-160. 48. Piganiol, L'Empire chr~tien, 293.
49. Eusebius, Praep. ev., 6, 1; idem, Demonstratio evangelica, II, 2.
50. On this theological degeneration within Eusebius's thought, see H. Eger, "Kaiser and Kirche in der Geschichtstheologie Eusebs von Ca~sarea," ZNW, 38 (1938), 97-115 N. H. Baynes, "Eusebius and the Christian Empire," in idem, ed., Byzantine Studies (London, 1955), 168-172; E. Peterson, "Das Problem des Nationalismus im alten Christentum," ThZ, 7 (1951 ), 81-91 (reprinted in a French transl. in Dieu Vivant, 22 (1952), 88-106, and as an appendix to Dani~lou, Les Anges, 153169); F. E. Cranz, "Kingdom and Polity in Eusebius of Caesarea," HThR, 45 (1952), 47-66.
51. Epiphanius, Panarion, 68, 8; Athanasius, Apologia, 8.
52. Moreau, "Eustzbe," col. 1440. Hefele (Histoire, I, ii, 642 n. ) has placed primary emphasis upon the fact that Eusebius was a sable clearly to take sides.
53. See the excellent article on Eusebius of Nicomedia by M. Spanneut (DHGE, XV [1963], cots. 1466-1472). Eusebius (of Caesarea) had at first enjoyed a close relationship with Constantine's sister Constantia, and as such was one of Licinius's intimates.
54. The oft-repeated statement that it was Eusebius who made the speech which welcomed Constantine to the council (Eusebius, Vita Const., I, preface; III, 11; Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, 1 19; J. B. Lightfoot, "Eusebius of Caesarea," DCB, Il, col. 312) is not in accord with the facts. Instead, this detail was added to the texts at a later date, by which time the two Eusebii had been able to win the emperor's confidence and to reverse the situation to theiradvantage. This is a good example of the rewriting of history which was common in Eusebius's circle. The actual speaker was probably Eustathius of Antioch (~M oreau, "Eus~be," cols.1440-1441 ).
55. Theodoret, Ecclesiastical History, I, 20, 1.
56. Gr(goire, "L'Authenticit~," 471. See also Moreau, "Eus~be," col. 1443, which emphasized that Eusebius had fully shared in this pliant doctrine.
57. Setton, Christian Attitude, 42.
58. The expressions between quotation marks are those of Orgels (" A propos des erreurs historiques," 586), who noted that the Labarum was created on precisely that occasion. Orgels also emphasized (p. 588), on the basis of Eusebius, HE, X, 8, 16, that what have been termed the Licinian persecutions were only police precautions against the "fifth column" which his rival was organizing.
59. Orgels, op. cit., 584; Gr~goire, "Nouvelles recherches," 559-560.
60. Gr~goire, "L'Authenticit~," 464. This does not mean that Licinius-who murdered in cold blood the two Christian princesses Valeria and Prisca, the widow and daughter of Diocletian-was any less btuel than Constantine (idem, "Nouvelles recherches," 565).
61. Sirinelli, 488.
62. Ibid., 493, 253, 409. Sirinelli added that for this reason Eusebius had not imagined that the Church itself might colonize and organize the state according to its own principles. In this, his attitude was similar to that of Lactantius (Ibid., 495). Sirinelli also pronounced the following severe judgment (Ibid., 490): "[In Eusebius's writings] the stress was no longer on the Christian faith and on the hopes, new insights, and uniqueness which it implied; but it was rather on the perfect coincidence which existed between the teaching of Christian doctrine and the universe as it stood . . . . The question was not so much to demonstrate the new ideas which Christianity brought with it, but rather [to show] that Christianity did not introduce anything particularly new which would call for the renunciation of ideas which were commonly held."
63. Pichon, Lactance, 450.
64. I have already pointed out (Ch. 1, n. 115) that Eusebius, after Licinius's downfall, "corrected" history in order to erase most of his initial estimates of himwhich had been highly positive. GrEgoire ("Nouvelles recherches," 563) dated the three "editions" of the Ecclesiastical History as follows: 1st ed., 314-315; 2nd ed., 325; 3rd ed., after 326. On this point see also J. Vogt, "Die Vita Constantini des Eusebius ilber den Konflikt zwischen Constantin and Licinius," Historic, 2 (1953-1954), 463-471.
65. Sirinelli, 410. Since the Roman Empire was the worldly system within which the Christians must live, there was "a somewhat organic unity between empire and Church" (ibid., 485).
66. Ibid., 483.
67. Ibid., 257-258. 68. Ibid., 287.
69. Ibid., 253, 491.
70. Ibid., 211, 494. As Sirinelli elsewhere observed (ibid., 472 n.), Eusebius was "basically the holder of a natural, rational religion in which there was more room for values of organization and edification than for those of devotion, self-sacrifice, and redemption."
71. Ibid., 244, 203, 240-243. 72. Ibid., 238.
73. Ibid., 163.
74. J.-R. Palanque, "Constantin, Empereur chretien," 142. See also Palanque's treatment of "The Conversion of Constantine" in Palanque, Bardy, et al., The Church in the Roman Empire, 12-24, and his article "Constantin Ie~ le Grand," in DHGE, XIII (1956), cols. 593-608, in which he wrote (col. 599): "Doubtless motivated by superstitious reasons (he [Constantine] had gambled on the protection of the God of the Christians, to whom he attributed his unexpected victory over Maxentius),

3~6
his `conversion' was never a rnmplete one." In a similar vein, G. Downey ("Education in the Christian Roman Empire: Christian and Pagan Theories under Constantine and his Successors," Speculum, 32 [1957], 50) wrote: "Some students believe that Constantine experienced a true conversion and that his policy toward Christianity was based upon genuine religious conviction, while others maintain that he was a calculating statesman who concluded that Christianity offered a means of uniting the empire and saving it from the political, military, and economic dangers with which his predecessor Diocletian had been struggling. . . . It seems beyond question that there was some feeling of a quid pro quo in the early stages of Constantine's connection with Christianity, a feeling which is certainly visible among the Christians of the period." To be complete, we must also mention Albert Floras, "La Conversion de Constantin le Grand," Mt'moire de dipl8me de 1'Ecole pratique des Hautes Etudes [mimeographed ed.] (Paris 1949), which presents a moderate, rather conservative view it was, however, already out of date at the time of its publication.
75. Greenslade, Church and State, 12. 76. De Clereq, Ossius of Cordova, 159. 77. Parker, Christianity and the State, 52. 78. Foakes-Jackson, Eusebius Pamphlli, 108. 79. Hobhouse, Church and the World, 88-89.
80. Hefel~, I ii, 679. See the out-of-date but thorough bibliographies on various Constantinian questions in ibid., I, ii, 680-681. H. Leclercq (DAL, I, col. 2818)has even questioned the objective validity of Constantine~s baptism.
81. F. Laufer, "O triunfo da Cruz no tempo de Constantino," Estudtos [Brazil], 19, no. 73 (1959), 81-95.
82. Greenslade, Church and State, 16-18. Constantine summoned the Synod of Arles (Eusebius, HE, X, 5, 23-24) and the Council of Nicaea (P.-T. Camelot, "Les conciles oecumeniques des IVe et Ve'si~cles," in Le Concile et les conches [Paris, 1960], 49 ff., which was based on Eusebius, Vtta Const., III, 6, p. 79, on the synodic letter to the Egyptians quoted by Athanasius [Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, I, 9], and on the letter written by Constantine to the Church of Alexandria in which he claimed to have acted under "divine inspiration" [ibid., col. S7]). At Nicaea it was Constantine who made the introductory speech (Eusebius, Vtta Const., III, 13) and imposed the homoousios (letter, Eusebius to his flock, q. Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, I, 8, col. 72; Opitz, Athartasius Werke, III, i, 4344). At Chalcedon the situation was apparently still the same: "It does seem, as a matter of fact, that it was the emperor who presided and arbitrated at the discussions, and the bishops seem also to have found this quite natural" (Camelot, "Les Conciles," 58). The emperor Marcianus, however, who drew a parallel between the late Constantine and himself, seems in fact to have been far more respectful of Church authority than Constantine had been (Actin [VI] Concilii Chalcedonensis, in ACO, II, ii [Berlin-Leipzig, 1933], 140). Furthermore, a new factor at the time of Chalcedonaccording to Camelot-was the development of increased authority on the part of the Roman pope.
83. F. Dvornik, "The Authority of the State in the Oecumenical Council," The Christian East 14 (1934), 95-107.
84. Eusebius, Vita Const., IV, 24y See the useful bibliography in Y. Congar, After Nine Hundred Years (New York, 1959), 105.
85. A. Piganiol, G'Empire chrEtien, 61.
86. J. Straub, "Kaiser Konstantin als ~ntowo,~ nun bmbc," SP, 1 (Berlin, 1957), 678-695.
87. Greenslade, Church and State, 11; H. Kraft, " bwoumx ," ZKG, 66 (1955), 1-24; idem, "Kaiser Konstantin and das Bischofsamt," Saeculum, 8 (1957), 32-42.
88. G. Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, transl. J. Hussey (Oxford, 1956, 42-44.
89. This can already be seen in Donatism.
90. Palanque, "Constantin," DHGE, XIII (1956), col. 599.
91. E. Laboulaye, Journal des d~bats, October 2, 1860. It goes without saying that Laboulaye was in agreement with our condemnation. He therefore put these words into the mouths of those whom he singled out as the people who were really responsible for the alienation of so many people from the Christian faith.
Chapter 7 (Conclusion) 1. Marcellinus to Augustine, in Augustine, Ep., 136, 2.
2. Bainton ("The Early Church and War," 90) has contrasted the Christian view of peace as a dynamic reality with the Roman view in which peace was static and contractual.
3. Barnabas, Ep., 11, 8.
4. [See the recent and exhaustive study by M. Spanneut ("Geduld," RACK, IX [Stuttgart, 1976], cols. 243-294), which has convincingly demonstrated that-for the early Christians-patience involved both strength and power; and also that-for the early monks-patience, when intertwined with the hope of the kingdom, was a cardinal virtue. ]
5. P. Fabre, Saint Paulin de Nole et I'Amiti~ chr~tienne (Paris, 1949), 116.
6. For examples, see Didache, 1, 2-4; 2, 6-7; 3, 2; Clement of Rome, Letter, 13, 1; 19; 30, 3 and 8; Ignatius, Eph., 10, 1-3; 13, 2; idem, Pol., 1, 2; idem, Tral., 3, 2; 4, 2; Polycarp, Ep., 2, 2; 10, 2; Hermas, Precepts, V, 1, 1 and 5; 2, 3; 8; Tatian, Oratio, 19; Aristides, Apology, 15; Justin, First Apology, 11, 2; 14, 3; 15, 9; 16, 1-4; Acta Apollonii, 37; Athenagoras, Gegatio, 1; 11; 34; Irenaeus, Demonstration, 96; idem, Adv. Haeres., III, 18, 5-6; IV, 13, 3; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, II, 1, 2; idem, Qui Dices Salvetur?, 42, 1-15; Passio Scillitanorum, 2 and 7.
7. Tertullian, De Corona, 11. 8. Idem, Apol., 37, 5.
9. Ibid.,6,7.
10. Idem, Ad Scapulam, 5. 11. Idem, De Patientia, 1. 12. Ibid., lo.
13. Ibid., 6-7; 15.
14. Origen, Contra Celsum, III, 7.
15. Ibid., III, 8., In his edition of the Contra Celsum ([Cambridge, 1953], 512), Henry Chadwick has suggested that these lines, which in the present state of the text are separated from the preceding passage by approximately a page, in the original followed it directly; he has also speculated that the gap was caused by the accidental turning over of a page in the course of binding. I concur with these hypotheses.
16. Origen, Contra Celsum, IV, 9.
17. Ibid., VII, 26, 27. The last words, which are a quotation from Exodus 1:7, emphasize that the old Israel had made way for the new.
18. Ibid., VIII, 65.
19. Minucius Felix, Octavius, 30, 6.
20. Cyprian, Ad Dem., 17, 25. See also his Testimonia, III, 3, 8, 22, 23, 49, 106. For similar passages from the period between Tertullian and Lactantius, see Di

318
dascalia, I 2, 1 and 2; II, 6, 1; II, 45, 1; II, 46, 2; V, 14, 22; Gregory the WonderWorker, Canonical Epistle, 5; Passto Montani, 10, 5; Arnobius, Adv. Nat., 2, 45.
21. Lactantius, Div. Institutiones, VI, 18, 10-20. 22. Ibid., VI, 18, 25.
23. Ibid., VI, 18 29-32. Other Lactantius texts with a similar argument are: De Ira Dei, 20, 5 and 12; 21, 10; Div. Institutiones, V, 4-5, and 13-14; V, 8, 6.
24. Ambrose, Ep., 20_~See A. de Brogue, Saint Ambroise, 85.
25. Augustine, De Pattentia 2. See also ibid., 1 7 (6-7); 26 (22); 29 (26). See also Athanasius Getter on Gove and Temperance, p. 284; Basil, Homilies on the Psalms, 48; John Chrysostom Letters to Olympus, XIII, 4d; idem, Homilies on St. John, 82, 2; idem, Homilies on Romans, 14, 7.
26. Fontaine, "Sulpice Severe," 37, 38 n. 27. Am~lineau, Actes, 32-34.
28. Sulpicius Severus, Dialogues, II, 3.
29. Hershberger's The Way of the Cross in Human Relations is a remarkable meditation on this problem. See esp. pp. 33-42, in which he-closely following Bonhoeffer-has shown that the cross must permeate the Christian's entire life.
30. P. Burgelin ("La Fin de 1'Ere constantinienne," Fot et Vie, 58 [1959], 16-17), in the course of a discussion of the Christian's political behavior, has strongly and rightly emphasized that the Church's primary concern must consist of refusing to allow itself to be split at this level.
31. Clement of Rome, Ep., 13, 3 ff.
32. Bainton, "Early Church and War," 86-87; Ryan, "Rejection," 15. A passage in the VSB (VIII [1950], 550) commented with reference to SS. Ferreolus and Julian of Brioude, "Today their functions would be regarded as belonging more to the police than to the army." VSB (IX [ 1950], 380) added that Ferreolus's functions as a military tribune were "practically the same as those of a police inspector." Perhaps this is also the direction in which we should look for a solution to the chronological contradiction in St. Martin's life. About 336, two years after he was baptized, he transferred into a unit of the protectores-the nonfighting imperial police-and he stayed with them for twenty years (Fontaine, "Sulpice Swore," 54 n. ). From 334 to 336 Martin would thus have been a "soldier in name only" (Sulpicius Severus, Vita Martini, 3, 6; SCH, CXXXIII, 258). And thereafter he would no longer have been a soldier at all, for he had become a policeman (who in French is still called a "gardien de la paix" ).
33. For a discussion of the differentiation between the police and the army, which to me is ethically essential, see my paper "Dieu et la Guerre dans la ThBologie de Karl Barth," CS, 63 (1955), 580-590.
34. The word soclus is used, but apparently in a very broad sense. 35. Ambrose, De Off., I, 36, 178.
36. Bayet,Pacifisme,133.Forthebasisofthisjudgment,seeabove,p.264.
37. P. Ricoeur (Etat et Violence [Geneva, 1957], 13-14) vigorously stressed the contrast between war and the "violence" used by magistrates. I have not quoted these passages, because they are required reading for everyone. Ricoeur did not, however, feel that this was a completely satisfactory solution to the problem, for there was still the question of the survival of the state as such. Danielou ("La Non-Violence," 17) believed that, within the Palestinian circles closest to Jesus, the distinction was commonly drawn between the legitimate use of arms against brigands and the illegitimate use of arms for national or political struggles.
38. Cf. Chenu, "L'Evolution," 81, 87-90. Also w0rth consulting is Stephen Neill, A History of Chrfsttan Missions (London, 1964), 115, which quotes the negative judgment of Sir Steven Runciman (A Htstory of the Crusades [Cambridge, 1952-1954],
III, 469, 480). See also my own article "L'Imposture des Croisades," Communio Vtatorum, 6 (1963), 143-166. M. Villey himself concluded his review (RHDF, 40 [1962], 268) by remarking: "We must indeed distinguish between the Holy War, for which credentials cannot easily be found in the first Christian tradition, and the war waged by Caesar. There is no evidence that the average Christian of the first three centuries would have called for conscientious objection in opposition to this [latter form of warfare].'~
39. This was a complete contradiction, for the central idea of monachism was that some people, far from the compromises of the world, should be able to live a perfect life and thereby compensate for the sins which the ordinary Christians-involved as they were in the complexities of daily life-could not help committing. Protestant theology, as I have noted, has rejected this system in principle. But it became doubly scandalous when the very people who pretended to keep their hands clean began plunging them into the blood of their brethren-apparently with a clear conscience. It is therefore not surprising that serious objections were raised when the military monastic orders were first founded. In the recently rediscovered letter Ad milites templi, the writer (probably Hugues of Payns, the founder of the Templars) found it necessary to react strongly against the doubts which were assailing his recruits on this point (j. Leclereq, "Un document sur les debuts des Templiers,' RHE, 52 [1957], 86-89). I ~: ·".~
40. Orentius of Auch, Commonitorwum, II, 181-184 (quoted in P. de Labriolle, Histoire de la Litt~rature Latine Chr~tienne, ed. G. Bardy [Paris, 1947], II, 723-724). 41. Jerome, Ep., 127, 12. See also Ep., 126, 2 and 128, 4J all three of which are quoted in Labriolle, Histotre, I, 585.
42. Jerome, Ep., 60, 15-16, 18. 43. Ibid., 60, 16.
44. The first to use this expression in this sense was Frederic Ozanam, in an 1848 issue of the Correspondant (Fliche et Martin, XXI, 42).
45. This was acknowledged unambiguously by H. I. Marrou (SCH, XXXIII; 176), to cite only one example. See also Burgelin, "La Fin de I'Ere constantinienne,' 19-20. It is interesting to note that the Hesychasts, who in the fourteenth century were the largest school of mystics in the Greek Orthodox Church, were accused of national betrayal because they refused to identify Christian truth with the interests of the Byzantine Empire. Gregory Palamas, for example, found no difficulty in recognizing the positive aspects of the Turkish regime. The Hesychasts' humanist adversaries, on the other hand, were so dominated by the assumptions of politico-religious syncretism that they were eventually ready to sacrifice the integrity of the faith itself (J. Meyendorff, Introduction d l'~tude de Gr~goire Palamas [Paris, 1959], 158-159).
Postscript I. As H. Rahner has done in the first part of his remarkable collection of texts,
I. Eglise et l' Etat dons le Christianisnte printitif, transl. G. Zinek ( Paris, 1964), 29-38 (" Le refusopposeeal'~tat'),39-47("L'acceptationdel etat").
2. Fontaine "Christians and Military Service," 115. For a similar point of view, see the reviews of M. Meslin (Archives de Sociologie des Religions, 10 [ 1960], 185), R. Roques (RHR, 164 (1964], 241), and especially M. H. Vicaire (RIIE, 56 [1961], 391392), whose brief notice was not a critique-it was a summary execution. A. Dumas' complaint ("L'Eglise d'avant Constantin et la violence," Esprit, 29 [1961], 315), on the other hand, was that my texts "were more often thrown in than presented in an orderly manner."

320
3. Visser ("Christianus sum," 19). Roques (review, 241) commented that he would have preferred that the French edition's subtitle had read "the attitudes of the first Christians" rather than "the attitude of primitive Christianity."
4. Fontaine ("Christians and Military Service," 102), who had already commented upon some valuable pointers rnncerning the undue systematization whichin his eyes-resulted from it. M. Villey likewise remarked concerning my "passionate interest" at the beginning of his short review (RHDF, 40 [ 1962], 267). J. Danitslou also used this term in his contribution to the Nouvelle Histoire de l'Eglise, I, Des Origines h Gr~goire le Grand (Paris, 1963), 559. But then one may be quite cool in developing a totally distorted picture and, conversely, be passionately involved in arguing a wellgrounded case. Such seems to have been the view of G. Richard-Molard. In a brief review of EL in R~forme (October 15, 1960), after stressing that I had made no attempt to conceal my commitment, he maintained that "this deep feeling, far from reducing in the slightest the objectivity of the study, gives it a vigor lacking in many scientific and abstract works." I have argued elsewhere ("Christianisme et desordre ~tabli," CS, 74 [1966], 666-668) that Cardinal Dani~lou had his "passionate interest" to0-an interest (no doubt diametrically opposed to mine) in the preservation of social conformity and of "the established order" in both politics and religion.
5. This is why I agree with Mehl and Dumas more than they seem to have thought. The former spoke (" Le Christianisme primitif" ) of an "ambiguity as fundamental as it is necessary in the common attitude of Christianity toward the state and its politico-military order"; the latter referred (" L' Eglise," 311 ) to the "constant ambiguities of a thesis [mine] which in intention claimed, on the contrary, to be purely objective." Would it be merely a play on words to say that my intention was precisely to demonstrate at least one ambiguity-that of the "Constantinian" historians in the overassurance of their clear consciences? Villey (review, 267) found in my text "many an embarrassed page and some abortive attempts to modify [my] positions." What is embarrassing in recognizing that the facts are complex? Fr. Rouquette (review, Etudes, 308, i [1961], 424), on the other hand, was convinced that I, as a Protestant theologian, must have been deeply troubled at having to quote from the Church Fathers as well as from the Scriptures. An excellent response to him came from the very Protestant Fraternity Evangeslique (May 1960): "One cannot censure the author for falling into the simplifications of a fanatical pacifism. One must, on the contrary, acknowledge that he has brought us-within the limits of his discipline-a precious aid to calm reflection in the form of countless quotations from the Church Fathers. After reading this book . . . one will realize better what an anti-ecumenical sin certain Protestants commit who behave-even in the present day-as if the history of the Church had started in the sixteenth century." A similar approval of my method was expressed by P. Verseils (review, Etudes ~oang~liques, 20 [ 1960], 120), a spokesman of the most fundamentalist grouping within French Protestantism, who did not in the slightest degree share this book's ethical conclusions, and by P. Gagnier (review, Bulletin du Centre Protestant d'Etudes et de documentation, n.s., 53-54 [Aug.-Oct. 1960], 5-6), who did not share them either. Mehl, who also expressed satisfaction at the renewed interest in patristics which several of us have exemplified, explained it thus: "Admittedly, Protestantism does not accord a normative value to the Church Fathers; it subordinates their authority to that of the Scriptures, but it sees in them both an approach to the Scriptures which is profitable to the Church in all eras and a consistent attempt to incarnate the evangelical demands in the concert of history." I regret, therefore, that the journal of the French Jesuits has proved to be so ill-informed concerning what constitutes a sound reading of the Bible in its dialogue with tradition. I also wonder whether Fr. Rouquette, who has tried to confound me with
the holy wars of the Old Testament and the use of the interdict, would uphold these as moral prescriptions which current Christians ought to follow.
6. Merlin (review, 185). Hobhouse (Church and the World, 87) had already written, "Whatever merits Eusebius possessed as a historian ... his critical faculty deserted him in describing his hero . . . and his account of Constantine is little better than a nauseous panegyric, sometimes bordering on blasphemy." Hobhouse quoted Fleury's remark that one would not go far wrong on Constantine by retaining only the ill said of him by Eusebius and the good said of him by Zosimus (chiefly, Ecclesiastical History, II, 28-29). But in that case, Hobhouse concluded, one would have practically nothing at all to say about the first"Christian" emperor.
7. Thus J. Newman concluded his contribution to the debate with S. Windass ("The Early Christian Attitude to War," Irish Theological Quarterly, n.s., 29 [1962], 248) with the following words, "The early Christian attitude to war . . . is a notoriously controverted subject which it would not be profitable to pursue at length." Yet it was Newman who had trotted out all the most threadbare clich~s of the traditional approach to this topic, particularly in "Modern War and Pacifism," Irish Theological Quarterly, n.s., 28 (1961), 187-188. Without Windass's spirited response, readers would never have been given any indication that this was in any sense a "controverted subject."
In similar fashion, Ryan began his review (Erasmus, 15 [1963], 453) by stating: "Whether the early Church was antimilitaristic or not is a problem which will never be solved historically." His conclusion is equally limp: "His [my] scholarly efforts have not been in vain because he has thrown much light on a problem which, however, remains unsolved, and is in fact insoluble." It thus appears that historically agnosticism is the last-ditch defense of those who for a long time professed to be certain that the Christian faith and military service had always been able to coexist happily in the same believer-and should do so in the future as well.
8. Roques, review, 242.
9. R. Aron, Introduction d une philosophte de l'histoire (Paris, 1938), 142.
10. Ibid., 134. On the same page Aron also stated, "The historian perhaps projects his own categories into the past. . . . The anachronism plays a legitimate part if the action had come before the awareness of it, if the present theory illuminates a behavior which had been unconscious of it."
11. D. Gu~rin, Jeunesse du soctalisme libertaire (Paris, 1959), 133-167. Guerin had previously set out his views concerning the uses and limits of anachronism in history in La Lutte des classes sous la Premiere R~publique, 7th ed. (Paris, 1946), II, 396399. It is to him that I owe the quotations from Aron and Monod.
12. G. Monod, "L'Histoire," in F. Thomas, ed., De la m~thode dons les sciences (Paris, 1909), 336-337.
13. J.-M. Hornus, "Les Pi'res de 1'Eglise et la non-violence," Cahiers de la Reconciliation, March 1962, 8', in which I gave two examples from very different periods of history. Here is the first: the fundamentally bourgeois and reactionary character of "Gaullism" after 1950 "became apparent far more quickly and far more clearly to those who had been the 'Gaul1ists of 1940' and who, having formerly exposed the Vichyist imposture, could more easily than the rest read the new version of Gaullism through the code offered them by their prior experience of having rejected P~tainism." Here is the second: "There are some of us who cannot thoroughly understand anything about the great ecumenical councils (of the first centuries) or the lacerating schisms of the Communist International, in the fury-often stupid and always revolting-of their respective major conflicts, except by illuminating through each other the behavior of the theologians and leaders of the Christian factions on the

322
one hand, and the Marxist theorists and authorities on the other. In each case the elements are entirely different, yet a certain structure emerges which is identical and which becomes an aid to our understanding."
14. C. Martin, in Nouvelle Revue tltBologique, 84 (1962), 1001. After having given unqualified approval to my analysis up to the developments of the fourth century, Martin was unable to follow me in my assessment of those developments themselves. "The problem," he wrote, "... is a matter of theology, not of history. The answer one brings will inevitably depend upon the ideas one has formed about three great factors: the Gospel, the Church, and human society; their respective nature and degree of finality; and their interrelationships. As the author's [my] positions probably do not come near to my own on these different points, my silent reservations will be easily understood. But after all, these considerations extend beyond the conclusions of the strictly historical inquiry which forms the essential part of the work."
15. Martin, review, 1000. Similarly, P.-Th. Camelot concluded his review of EL as follows (RSPT, 45 [1961], 530): "With this thesis . . . the historian can only express his agreement, at least in its main lines: the facts and texts quoted are too numerous and fit together too well for one to reject the conclusions as a whole." Gerest ("Les premiers chr~tiens," 17) wrote that the "motives for this Christian antimilitarism were many. There was a dread of idolatry . . . but the most frequently mentioned reason was the horror at the she8ding of blood." See also Dumas ("L'Eglise d'avant Constantin," 314-316), who was more cautious in his agreement at this level because he did not feel that he had sufficient historical qualifications. Mehl (" Le Christianisme primitif"), on the other hand, wrote of this book: "If he [Hornus] is right in his unwillingness to discard the evangelical refusal to shed blood as one of the motives for Christian conscientious objection . . . I still think that he is wrong to make it the first and most obvious motive; the rejection of idolatry operated strongly from the outset." Perhaps it is not so important to know which of the two motives was the first, once one accepts that the two coexisted. I have, in fact, indicated above that I agree with Roques in'seeing the core of the Christian attitude as the recognition of "God's absolute primacy." I have also shown that I still find today-in the nation-states of the late twentieth century-the idolatry of those nations or states, even if perhaps in slightly subtler forms, to be the core of military ideology. Even Fontaine ("Christians and Military Service," 114), whose assessment of the rest of my work was rather severe, nevertheless recognized as a fact "the gradual chance in the Christian attitude toward the militiaarmata." For me, at any rate, that is the basic historical point.
16. H. Chavannes, L'ObJectton de conscience (Lausanne, 1961), 71. Similarly, in a clear though rather embarrassed way, an editorial in the hyper-Constantinian France catholique was obliged to admit: "No doubt absolute conscientious objection can invoke the support of certain Church Fathers of the first centuries: a period in which divergencies were the sign of a thought trying to find forms of expression and to become articulate; admirable and sometimes abrupt beginnings, in minority communities, whose Christian ethic on temporal matters had scarcely been worked out. With St. Augustine and the advent of a largely Christian society, such an ethic became progressively more explicit. Absolute conscientious objection ceased to be allowed in the Catholic Church. . . . The Church then retained only the obligation to total nonviolence for certain people who were consecrated to God in the priestly or religious life" (Luc Baresta, "L'Objection de conscience," France catholique, no. 848 [March 1, 1963]). I have italicized ceased and then retained only because these words show how much historical ground the author had conceded with relation to the former official thesis.
17. Windass, Christianity Versus Vtolence, 126. For an account of this attitude of
"Protest," and for its extension even into the early part of the "Constantinian" period, see ibid., 1-27; for a discussion of the extremely significant internal contradiction in St. Augustine's thought, see pp. 80 and 88-89. See also Gerest (" Les premiers chr~tiens, ' 14-22), who generously sent me an offprint of his article inscribed "To M. Hornus-my presentation of this article to him is really a'restitution.' "
18. J. Comblin, Th~ologte de la Paix, II, Applications (Paris, 1963), 9-19, 21-24. Visser ("Christianus sum," 8) observed, "One thing seems evident: the primitive Church never formally accepted the use of violence as a necessary evil in order to defend a just cause." For a similar statement, see L. Vischei s review of EL (ThZ, 17 [ 1961 ], 67 ).
19. [The recent article by John Helgeland ("Christians and the Roman Army, A.D. 173-337," Church History, 43 [1974], 149-163, 200), which is based on his University of Chicago doctoral thesis of 1973, indicates that, for one scholar at least, the issue has not been as definitively settled as Dr. Hornus-writing in 1970thought. ]
20. A. F. Villemain, Tableau de l'eloquence chr~tienne au IV"' si~cle (Paris, 1849), 81.
21. CombIin,ThEologiedelaPaix,22. 22. Roques, review, 242.
23. Comblin, Th~ologie de la Paix, 22. Camelot (see n. 15 above) was the first of my reviewers-earlier but less emphatic than C. Martin-to perceive and state clearly that, regardless of the agreement with which he could respond to my thesis on the historical level, there remained a difference between our two ecclesiologies which he was not free to surmount. In my reply (" Les Pyres de I' Eglise," 16 n. ) I expressed the hope that the Catholic theologians themselves might be able to attempt a new formulation in this field. But at that time I did not dare to think that this might come to pass so soon as a result of the Second Vatican Council.
24. This contemporary ethical concern is prominent in the introduction to Rordorf's article ("Tertullians Beurteiling," 105), and also in "Problemi de non violenza," Protestantismo (1967), 186-187. Visser ("Christianus sum," 6) put it like this: "The problem for the Church of old, and not only for the Church of old, is: can a Christian in good conscience be a soldier?" Similarly, the title given by E. de Peyer to his review of my book (Journal de CenPoe, 28 June 1960) was significantly "The Church on its road towards fidelity." M. Gavillet ended his review (Le Lien de l'Eglise ~uangElique du Canton de Vaud, November 24, 1960) by referring to the pamphlet of R. Hegnauer (Ge Combattant non-violent [Lausanne, 1960]), which is a manual for practical action today. R. Rouget s review (Vie Protestante, December 2, 1960) did the same. And Mehl (" Christianisme primitif" ) wrote that I was tackling "a problem which has lost none of its relevance and indeed seems likely during the coming decades to acquire additional topical and tragic importance."
25. Dumas, "L'Eglise d'avant Constantin," 309. This idea was borrowed from P. Ricoeur, "L.a merveille, 1'errance, I'enigme," Esprit, 28 (1960), 1670. P. R. Regamey ("La conscience chr~tienne et la guerre," Cahiers St. Jacques, no. 27 [1962]) argued that "so long as the Christians were a minority in the empire, they could be mere minors politically. . . . But then the responsibility for the earthly city in the political sphere fell to the Christians as well. Then they were obliged to reach political maturity." The whole problem is to decide whether that "responsibility for the earthly city" must necessarily consist of giving to it a general coat of whitewash of a vaguely religious coloration, or whether it rather should consist of working within it like the leaven and salt of which the gospel speaks. On this point, the conclusion of Dumas (p. 309) is excellent. I am also grateful to Dumas for having grasped that it was

324
the very complexity of the historical record which made it "a living question for us today."
26. On this point see the important book by B. Besret, Incarnation ou eschatologie (Paris, 1964) and my review of it in "Christianisme," 671-673. My original intentions in Eoangile et Labarum were clearly perceived by M. Gavillet, in a review/ editorial under the title of "Un problcme a revoir' (A Problem to be Reconsidered) (see n. 22 above): "The great merit of this book lies in its being an objective study, made in the perspective of present-day theology-the eschatological perspectiveand in not being a piece of special pleading. This is how he [the author] seizes the attention of his readers and wins them over. In this perspective, conscientious objection no longer appears as a flight from the world or as `a refusal to defend one's neighbor, but rather as a confession that there was no one anywhere who was not one's neighbor.' So the `no' is a `yes,' a very bold one in fact to the mission given by Christ to his Church: that of being by men's side, not as judges, but as witnesses to Jesus Christ, who takes on himself the sin of his brethren." Mehl ("Christianisme primitif" ) also observed, "Hornus rightly emphasizes that by losing its eschatological dimensions, Christian thought has increasingly been ready to accept the regime of Caesaropapism."
27. Dumas, "L'Eglise d'avant Constantin," 312; Meslin, review, 185.
28. See my comments on these "perfectionist" experiments in "Les Peres de 1'Eglise," 12, and concerning a particularly typical case in "Du edtB des Mennonites," CS, 69 ( 1961 ), 698-701.
29. This set of problems has always been central to the reflections on this topic in the journal Esprit. See especially its issues of February 1949 ("Revision de Pacifisme" ) and of August-September 1954 (" Les Pacifismes et la guerre" ). I can contribute a small personal anecdote to the catalog of ambiguities inherent in decisions concerning concrete political ethics. I originally wrote the article "Les Peres de 1'Eglise" for Esprit as a rejoinder to Dumas's article. Since the editors of Esprit were not interested in it, I resubmitted it to the more modest Cahiers de la Reconciliation. But even that journal would only publish it if they could delete a whole section of the conclusion in which I argued that resistance of a violent type was inevitable in certain situations (e.g., the landing of paratroops on Paris which Michel Debra in April 1961 had announced to be imminent). For such a suggestion had contradicted the consistent nonviolence position which the editors of the Cahiers were dedicated to maintain. And Paix et Coexistence, to which I then agreed to give the same text as well so that it might appear at least once in its entirety, eventually also published the expurgated textinstead!
30. This staggering over-simplification is evident in H. Chavannes' L'Objection de conscience. Even though he recognized the soldier's right to "Refuse to carry out certain particularly odious acts" (p. 89), he declared that basic distinction between the assassin and the soldier is that the soldier is constrained to do what he does, on pain of the most severe sanctions, and so becomes "the instrument of the state's violence" (p. 74). But this did not stop him from asserting immediately afterwards that the good soldier who dies for his country is the temporal transposition of Christ who died for the world's salvation (p. 75). Finally this pearl: "It is because the army exists that peace is assured" (p. 68). For, as everyone knows, it is the antimilitarists who start wars and wage them!
31. Dumas, "L'Eglise d'avant Constantin," 316 n.
32. Gregarious influence and propaganda are so potent-once a country is catapulted into the unknown territory of war-that almost everyone lets himself be dragged into it. Only too late do people discover the extent of their blindness, unless
they have previously and unconditionally fortified their consciences by deciding to refuse to allow their bodies and minds to participate in large-scale butchery-which is what every international war is. This psychological dimension has been neglected by the Barthian conception of the "commandment for the moment." And for that reason, although from the theological point of view it is theoretically irreproachable,
"Dieu et la uerre " 580-590 . . it remains completely inadequate in practice (cf. my g , ) J M. Domenach ("Les pacifismes et la guerre," Esprit, 22 [1954], 161-175) put forward some interesting views concerning the need for any pacifism to be sociologically rooted in the interests of a given group. He also discussed changes in the world situation which had resulted from technological "advances" in the destructive potential of weaponry. Since then "nuclear pacifism" such as his has made some progress in the Christian and humanist consciences. But I am still surprised to see it so little followed up in concrete commitment. As Mehl ("Christianisme primitif") wrote, "In the perspective of a total and ideological war using atomic weapons and involving every country in the world, it becomes futile to look for the dividing line between a just and an unjust war. The means employed are bound by their very nature to lead to corrupt ends."
Visser ("Christianus sum," 19) was ready to accept that prior to Constantine most Christians had favored total nonviolence. But he argued that that had only been because they had not realized that a government could vindicate justice only by resorting to a limited amount of violence. Therefore an "adult" Christian thought must now free itself from the naivety-characteristic of early Christianity-of a state deprived of a "secular arm." But simultaneously, he emphasized, it must free itself from the madness of the motto si ois pacem, parra bellum, which motto has been inherited from the false and godless "wisdom of the nations." Domenach, on the other hand, appealed (p. 173) to nonviolent pacifists to "intervene so as to break a vicious circle-to intervene not by setting itself [pacifism] up as an absolute ideal, as [they do] . . too often, but by becoming involved in the order of means, in the actuality of situations."
It is on this basis that one must judge the most recent problem in this field-revolutionary violence. Insofar as the revolutionary intends, by using a lesser violence, to prevent worse violence, he is morally identifiable with the policeman. But it is his duty beforehand to take as clear a view as possible of the point beyond which his violence would cease to be justifiable and would become absurd.
33. See, for example, R. B. Gregg, The Power of Nonoiolence (London, 1961 ). P. Ricoeur (" L'homme nonviolent et sa presence a I'histoire," Esprit, 18 [ 1949], 229) was perfectly justified in issuing a warning against a pacifism which is overly facile in belief and practice. For pacifism is an attitude which can be costly, and its adherents must honestly assess its price. But Ricoeur was also right in regretting that we in the nonviolent Christian movement have spent so little time studying Gandhi's "techniques" in detail. In fact, the example of India's liberation, although it has no normative character (ef. the stern demystifying study of M. Biardeau, "Gandhi, histoire et I~gende," Esprit, 22 [1954], 176-214), nevertheless has value as a historical experiment. And there have been others since. Taken as a method of political effectiveness, it is through the analysis of such experiences that nonviolence must be tested, its possibilities defined, and its techniques and limitations assessed.

Systematic Table of Primary Sources
Achatius, Acts of (Acta Achatii) (250) Knopf, 57-60; Hamman, 107-111
1,3(83); 1,5(258) 3,2(30)
[Adamantius], Dialogue on the Orthodox Faith (Dialogus de recta in Deum fide)
Ed. W. H. Van de Sande Bakhuyzen, GCS, 4(1901)
I, 9-16, 18(53-54) I,10(87); I,10, 12-13(60); I,11(63)
Agaune, Passion of the Martyrs of (Passio Acaunensium) (ed. 5th c. by St. Eucher)
MGH, Scriptores rerum merotringicarum, 3 (1896), 32-40; Monceaux, 282-292
	3(155-156); 9(156); 10(156) 	Ambrose, of Milan, St. (339?-397) 	The Duties (De Of ficiis)
Ed. J. G. Krabinger (Tiibingen, 1850); trans. H. De Romestin, NPNF, 2nd ser., 10(1896), 1-89
I,27,129(180)(182); I,36, 178(223)
II,15,71(180); II,28,13s(lso) I I I,13,14( 180)
On Faith (De Fide) PL, 16, 527-698
II,16(182) Funeral Oration for Theodosius (De Obitu Theodosii)
Ed. O. Faller, CSEL, 73(1955), 369-401
48(182) Hymn XI
PL, Supplementum I (Paris, 1958), 584-585; ed. A. Walpole, Early Latin Hymns (Cambridge, 1922), 82-86 (153)
Letters (Epistolae)
PL, 16, 875-1286; ed. O. Faller, CSEL, 82(1968)
20(220); 62(305)
Treatise on the Gospel of Luke (Expositio Evartgelii secundum Lucan)
Ed. M. Adriaen, CCL, 14, iv(1947), 1-400; ed. & trans. G. Tissot, SCH, 45(1956), 52(1958) II,77(182)
Ammianus Marcellinus Roman History
Trans. C. D. Yonge (Bohn's
°The number in the parenthesis following each citation indicates the page on which we refer to the source. If the number is italicized, we quote the source (at least in part) verbatim. E.g., Ambrose's De Officiis (I,27,129) is referred to on p. 180 and quoted on p. 182; his eleventh hymn is quoted on p. 153; etc.

328
Classical Library) (London, 1887).
XIV,11,20(313) Anonymous Homilies (in the tradition of Ongen ) (Alexandria, c. 400)
Ed. & traps. P. Nautin, SCH, 36(1953)
I,19(269); III,6(103); III 18(97)
Aphrahat the Syrian (early 4th c. ) Denwnstrationes Ed. R. Graffin, Patrolo Syriaca, I, i(Paris,1894~rans. J. Gwynn, NPNF, ser. 2, 13(1898)
VII,18(76) Apollonius (martyred under Commodus, c. 180-185)
Martyrdom of (Acta Apollonii) Knopf, 30-35; Monceaux, 148157; Musurillo, 90-105
3(257-258); 6-7(82); 37(317) Apostolic Constitutions (end 4th c. ) Ed. F. X. Funk Dtdascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum (Paderborn, 1905); traps. J. Donaldson, ANL, 17 (1870); ed. & traps. H. Tattam The Apostolical Constitutions or Canons of the Apostles in Coptic (London, 1848)
II,14,12(164)(188-189); IV,6, 5(307)
VIII,12,42(307); VIII,32, 10(184)(299) Archelaus
Controversy Ed. C. H. Beeson, GCS, 16(1906)
1(19) Aristides of Athens (mid 2nd c. ) Apology
Ed. J. Geffcken, Zwei griechische Apologeten (Leipzig-Berlin, 1907), 1-96; ed. & traps. J. R. Hams & J. A. Robinson, Texts and Studies, I, i (Cambridge, 1891 ); ed. & traps. L. Gauthier, RTP,12(1879), 7882
2(275); 8(56); 10(56); 15(317) Arles Synod of(314)
Hefele, I, i, 281-294; Mansi, II, 469-477; ed. & traps. J. Gaudemet, SCH, 241(1977), 4849
Canon 3(172); Canon 7(172)( 173-17~ ) Arnobius (d. c.330)
Against the Heathen (Adversus Nationes)
Ed. C. Marchesis, Corpus Paravianum 62(Turin, 1934); ed. & traps. G. E. McCracken, ACW, 7-8( 1949)
1,6(57), 2,1(93); 2,38(159); 2,45(318) 3,26(110-111 )
4,7(19); 4,36(82) Artemius
Vita Sancti Artemii
ASS, October, 8(1853), 856-885 41(313)
Athanasius, St. (295?-373)
Apology Against the Arians (Apologia Secunda)
PG, 25, 241-409; ed. H. G. Opitz, Athanasius Werke II (Berlin, 1938), I, 87-168; traps. M. Atkinson, NPNF, ser. 2, 4 (1892),97-147 8(208)
Letter on Love and Temperance Ed. A. Van Lentschoot, Museon, 40(1927), 265-292
282(109); 284(318); 288(75); 290-291(75)
The Incarnation of the Word (De lncarnatione Verbi)
PG, 25, 95-197; ed. & traps. P. Th. Camelot, SCH, 18(1946); ed. & traps. A. Robertson, LCC, 3(1954), 55-110
52,4-5(88); 53,1(88); 53,35(88-89)
Letter 48, to Amun (ad Amunem) PG, 26, 1169-1176; traps. A. Robertson, NPNF, ser. 2,
4( 1892 ), 556-557 (1~)
Athenagoras (second half of 2nd c. )
A Plea Regarding Christians (Legatio pro Christianis)
Ed. E. Schwartz, T U, 4, ii(1891); ed. & traps. G. Bardy, SCH, 3(1943); ed. & traps. E. R. Hardy, LCC, 1(1953), 300-340; ed. & traps. W. R. Schoedel (Oxford, 1972)
1(317); 11(317); 34(317); 35, 4(109); 37(29)
Augustine, St. (354-430)
City of God (Civitas Dei)
CCL, 47-48(1955); ed. & traps. G. E. McCracken, et al., LCL, 7 vols.(1957-1972)
I,21 & 26(304) IV,3(3D4); IV,4(180); IV,6(180)
XIX,12(181) Confessions Ed. P. Knoell, CSEL, 33( 1896); ed. P. de Labriolle, CUF, 2 vols. (1950-1954); traps. J. G. Pilkington, in Augustine, Works, 14(Edinburgh, 1876)
I,2(313); Ix,11,2s(ss) Against Faustus (Contra Faustum)
Ed. J. Zycha, CSEL, 25, i(1891), 251-797; traps. R. Stothert, in Augustine, Works, 5(Edinburgh, 1872), 145-560
22,70(180-181); 22,74(180-181) Discourse on the Psalms
Ed. E. Dekkers & J. Fraipon, CCL, 10, 2 vols.(1956); ed. & traps. S. Hebgin & F. Cosrigan, ACW, 29(1960)
74,17(63); 124 7(176) On the Free Will (De Libero Arbitrio)
Ed. W. M. Green, CCL, 29 (1970), 211-321; ed. & traps. M. Pontifex, ACW, 22(1955); I,4, 9(181); I,5,12(181)
Letters Ed. A. Goldbacher, CSEL, 44(1904), 57(1911), 58(1923); traps. M. Dods, in Augustine, works, 6( 1872), 13( 1875 ).
47,5(304); 136,2(213); 189,45(195); 189,6(181); 220,3(195)
On Patience (De Patientia)
Ed. I. Zycha, CSEL, 41(1900), 663-691; ed. G. Combes, Biblioth~que augustinienne ( 1937 )
1,7(318); 2(220); 2x(318); 29(318)
Aurelius Victor, Sextus Epitome de Caesaribus
Ed. F. Pichlmayr (Leipzig, 1911)
(313) Balsamon (1140-1195) Commentary on the Canons
PG, 138, 571 ff. 13,II,65,70(171) Bamabas (end 1st c. ) Letter
Ed. H. Hemmer, G.Og er & A. Laurent, HL, 5, 2nd ed.(1926); traps. E. J. Goodspeed, The Apostolic Fathers (New York, 1950), 19-46
11, 8(214); 12,2(54); 12,57(54-55); 12,8(55); 12,10(55); 16,4(58); 16,6-10(58)
Basil, the Great, of Caesarea, St. (330?379)
Homilies on the Psalms PG, 29, 208-494
1,6(120; 1,14(42); 7(75); 48(318); 48,1(104); 59,3(104); 61,4(61 )
Homilies, various
PG, 31, 163-618,1429-1514 3,4(80)(271); 12,2(31); 18, 7(126); 19(126)
Letters (Epistolae)
Ed. & traps. R. J. Deferrari, LCL, 4 vols. (1926-1934); ed. Y. Courtonne, CUF, 1(1957)
51(104);63(109-110); 66, 2(104); 74,3(104); 75(104);
76(104); 87(104); ss,~(s6>; 104(104); 106(127); 116(127); 155(83); 165(104); 188, 13(171 ); 188, 8(301 ); 199( 110); 217(110); 299(96)
Moral Principles (Moralia)

330
PG, 31, 692-870 79,1-2(42)
Preliminary Sketch of the Ascetic Life
Ed. W. K. L. Clarke, The Ascetic Works of St. Basil (London, 1925), 55-59
Treatise on the Holy Spirit
Ed. & traps. B. Pruche, SCH, 17 (1947); traps. B. Jackson, NPNF, ser. 2, 8(1895), 2-50 16,39(60)
Bet Hezuyah, Martyrs of (341?)
Ed. P. Bedjan, Acta Sanctorum et Martyrum, II (Paris-Leipzig, 1891), 241-248; Hamman, 322326.
(22-23) Boniface, St. (680-754) Letters
MGH, Epistolae, III (Episto(ne Merovingici et ICarolini Aevi), 229; traps. E. Emerton, ed. A. Evans (Records of Civilization, 31) (New York,1940), 78-83 Letter to Pope Zacharias (I92) Canones ad Gallos
Ed. H. C. Babut, La plus ancienne decretale (Paris, 1904), 69-87
	Canon 7 (190) 	Canon 13 (308) 	Canon Law
DDC, I(1935), 1047; III(1942), 868-869
Article 121 (195)
Carpus (Acts of Carpus, Papylus and Agathonice) (un er Marcus Aurelius) (Acta Carpt)
Ed. H. Delehaye, AB, 58(1940), 142-176; Hamman, 41-45; Musurillo, 22-37
4(22) Cassian, Acts of
Knopf, 89-90; traps. H. Leclercq, Ges Martyrs, II, 159-160
(138) Clement of Alexandria (150?-215?) Carpets (Stromata)
Ed. O. St'~hlin, GCS, 15(1905),
17(l9os); 2nd ed.(ls3s); ed. & traps. C. Mondesert & M. Caster, SCH, 30(1951) and P. Th. Camelot & C. Mondesert, SCH, 38(1954); traps. W. Wilson, ANF, 2(1885), 299-567
I,11,3,6(73); 24,158,1(55);
26(36);158,2(55); ls9(55); 160(55); 168(36) II,1,2(317); 11,117(125); 18,
82(I25) (277);l8,ss(Ilo); 18,89-90(277); 20,110(72); 20,120(73)
I I I,12,91(125 ) IV,4,14-16(268); 8,60(268);8, 61(159); 13,91(268);14 96(125); 22,141(268)
VI,5,41(103); 12,103(269); 14, 112(269); 18,167(20) VII,3,21(269); 11,62(159); 11,
66(269); 13,83(269); 14, 84(159-160); 16,100(269) Extracts from Theodotus (Excerpta ex Theodoto)
Ed. & traps. F. Sagnard, SCH, 23(1948); ed. & traps. R. P. Casey
(Studies and Documents,l)~ (London, 1934).
72,1-2(73); 85,3(73) Exhortation (Protrepticus) Ed. & traps. C. Mondtssert, SCH, 2, 2nd ed. (1949); ed. & traps., G. W. Butterworth, LCG(1919), 2-263
X,93,2(72); Ioo(724);108, 4(102); 116,1-4(72)
The Tutor (Paedagogus)
Ed. O. Stahlin GCS, 12, 3rd ed.(1972); ed. ~& traps. H.-I. Marrow, M. Harl, C. Mond~sert & C. Matray, SGH, 70(1960), 108(1965), 158(1970); traps. W. Wilson, ANG, 4(1867), 113-346
I,12,98(90); 12,99(159) II,2,32(90); 4,42(90) (159); 13, 121(21)
III,8,1(102) Who Is the Rich Man That Is
Saved?(Quis dives salvetur?)
Ed. O. Stahlin, GCS, 17(1909); ed. & traps. G. W. Butterwo rth, LCL(1919), 270-367
25(269); 34(269); 42,1-15(317) Clement, of Rome, St. (end 1st c. ) Letter
Ed. H. Hemmer, HL, 10, 2nd ed.(1926); ed. & traps. C. C. Richardson, LCC, 1(1953), 43-73
1,1(ss); 8,4(x4) (so);12,7(s4); 13,1(317); 13,3(222); 19(317); 21,4(70); 30, 3&8(317); 36,637(70); 45,7(70); 60,4(27); 60, 4-61,3(81)
Clement of Rome (Pseudo-)
Sermon Called the Second Letter of Clement (II Clement, Ep.)
Ed. H. Hemmer, HL, 10, 2nd ed.(1926); ed. & traps. C. C. Richardson, LCC, 1(1953), 193212
5,1(100); 5,4(100); 5,6-7(100
lol); 6,1(101); 6,3(101); 7(70); 8(101) Clementine Recognitions
Ed. B. Rehm, GCS, 51(1954); traps. T. Smith, ANL, 3(1867), 140-471
IX,15(259) Commodian (mid 3rd c. or 5th c. ) Carmen Apologeticum
Ed. B. Dombart, CSEG, 15(1887), 115-188; ed. J. Durel, Revue tunisienne, 19(1912), 369-383; 20(1913), 46-61
805 ff.(108) (262); 887(262); 887-892(108); 891(262); 920926(276);933-935(262) Instructiones
Ed. B. Dombart, CSEG, 15(1887), 3-112; ed. J. Durel, Les Instructions de Commodien (Paris 1912); traps. A. Roberts & J. Donaldson, ANL, 18(1870), 434-474
1,34(277); II,9-10(64); II,9-11, 20(269); II,12(74); II,22(74) Coptic Church, Acts of the Martyrs of the
Ed. A. Amelineau, Les Actes des Martyrs de CEglise copte (Paris, 1890)
(139-141) (221) Coronati, Passion of the Four
Ed. ASS, November, 3( 1910), 765-784
(129) Cyprian, St. (210?-258)
Acts of Cyprian (Acta Cypriani) Ed. Monceaux, 192-198; Musurillo, 168-175
2(257) The Advantage of Patience (De Bono Patientiae)
Ed. C. Moreschini, CCL, 3a, ii(1976), 118-133; ed. & traps. M. G. E. Conway, PSt, 92(1957)
12(74);14(ISO); 21(ss) To Demetrianus (Ad Demetrianum)
Ed. M. 5imonetti, CCL, 3a, ii( 1976), 35-51 ~ traps. R. E. Walks, ANL, 8(1868), 423-443
2(45); 3(36-37); 5(45); 11(4445); 17(36-37); 17,25(218219); 20(t33)
To Donatus (Ad Donotum) Ed. M. Simonetti, CCL, 3a, ii(1976), 3-13; traps. R. E. Wallis, ANL, 8(1868), 1-13 6-10(160)
The Dress of Virgins (De Halritu Virginum)
Ed, & traps. A. E. Keenan, PSt, 34(1932)
11(87) Exhortation to Martyrdom (Ad Fortunatum)
Ed. R. Weber, CCG, 3(1972), 185-216 traps. R. E. Wallis, ANG, 13(1869), 52-77
13(74) On Jealousy and Envy (De Zelo et livore)
Ed. M. Simonetti, CCG, 3a, ii(1976), 75-86; traps. R. E. Wallis, ANL, 13(1869), 39-51
2(74); 5(264) Letters (Epistolae)

332
Ed. & traps. L. Bayard, CUF, 2 vols.(1925); traps. R. E. Walks, ANG, 8(1868), 1-332
39,3(126); 73,4(160); 73, 10(74)
On the Mortality (De Mortalitate) Ed. M. Simonetti CCG, 3a, ii(1976), 17-32; ed. & traps. M. L. Harman, PSt, 36 (1933)
2(59); 26(102)
Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews (Testimonia) Ed. W. Hartel, CSEL, 3, i(1868), 33-184; traps. R. E. Walks, ANL, 13(1869), 78-198
II,16(265); III,13(36); III,117(74); III,3,8,22,23,49, 106(317)
That the Idols Are Not Gods (Quod Idola dii non sint) Ed. W. Hartel, CSEL, 3, i(1868), 17-31; traps. R. E. Wallis, ANG, 8(1868), 443-451; Quasten, Patrology, II, 364 (on authorship)
4ff.(45); 10(61); 12(61) Cyprian (Pseudo-)
Against the Jews (Adversus ludaeos)
Ed. W. Hartel, CSEL, 3, iii(1871), 133-144: traps. S. D. F. Salmond, ANL, 9(1869), 4145
6(264); 6-8(63); 9(87)
The Computation of Easter (De Pascha Computes)
Ed. W. Hartel, CSEL, 3, iii(1871), 248-271 10(74); 15(63)
Cyril of Scythopolis (6th c. )
Ed. E. Schwartz, TU, 49, ii(1939) Life of Euthymius
8(274); 25-26(76-77) Life of Sabas
86(274); 92-93(76); 99(270) Life of Theodosius
235(274); 239(77)
Damasus I, St. (Bishop of Rome, 366384)
Inscription in Memory of Nereus
and Achilleus
Diehl, no. 1981 (152) Dasius, Martyrdom of (Acta Dasii) Knopf, 91-95; Monceaux, 273278; Musurillo, 272-279
6(274); 6-10(128)
Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) (probl. first half of 2nd c. ) Ed. T. Klauser, Doctrina Duodecim Apostolorum, Florilegium Patristicum, 1 (Bonn, 1940); ed. & traps. C. C. Richardson, GCC,1(1953), 161-179
1,2-4(317); 2,6-7(317); 3,2(317) Didascalia Apostolomm (mid 3rd c. ) Ed. E. Hauler, Didascaliae apostolorum fragmenta Veronens~ia latina (Leipzig, 1900); ed. F. X. Funk (see under Apostolic Constitutions); ed. & traps. R. H. Connolly, Didascalia Apostolorum (Oxford, 1929); ed. & traps. F. Nau, La Didascalie, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1912)
I,2,1-2(318); II, 6,1(318); II,6, 6-11(75); II,45,1(318); II,46,
2(318); v,l,l(21); v,14, 22(318); VI,14,10 & 12(188189); VI,19,1(57-58); XVIII,6, 4(307)
Didymus Alexandrines (the Blind) (313?-398?)
Commentary on 2 Corinthians PG, 39, 1677-1732
1,13(264) Diognetus, Letter to (2nd c.?)
Ed. & traps. H. I. Marrow, SCH, 33( 1951 ); ed. & traps. E. H. Fairweather, GCC, 1(1953), 205224
5,4-5(105); 5,s-s(los); x,13(105); 6,7-8(105)
Dionysius of Rome (Bishop of Rome, 259-268 )
PL, 5, 99-136 Elvira, Synod of (306)
Hefele, VI, i, 221-264; Mansi, II, 1-20
Canon 56(170)
Epiphanies of Salamis (315?-403) Medicine Chest (Panarion)
Ed. K. Holl, GCS, 25(1915), 31(1922), 37(1930) 68,2(256); 68,8(208)
Eusebius of Caesarea (263?-340?) Chronicle
Ed. R. Helm, GCS, 24(1913) 238 olymp., XIII(129) Ecclesiastical History (Historia Ecclesiastica (HE))
Ed. & traps. G. Bardy, SCH, 31(1952), 41(1955), 55(1958); ed. & traps. K. Lake & j. E. L. Oulton, LCL, 2 vols. (19281932)
II,23,18(63); III,5,3,(108); IV,26,6-11(39) v,1,17ff.(21); l,ls(75); 5,3
ff.(129); 21(286) VI,5,3(37); 5,3-6(25); 21,
4(s7); 41,s(6s); 41,11(130); 41,16(22) (75); 41,22(130131)
VI1,3,4(21); 11,20(79-80); 15(131); 30,19(37); 32,711(108)
VIII,1.2(37); 1,7(131) (256); I, 8-9(65); 4,2-3(131)(256) (287);6,8(95-46); 9,6(97); 9,
7(28x);10,3(21);11,1(21); 12,42(8x);14,3(21);14, 11(37); 17,5(259); app. 1(287)
IX,8,4,2(178); 9,1(65-66) (178) (259); 9,2(178); 9,5 ff.(259); 9a,12(259); 10,3(38) (259); 10,13(66)(178-17x); lo, 15(ss);11,2-7(178);11, 5(178); 11,8(259); 11,9(178)
x,1,7(66); 2,2(259); 4,so(2s9); 5,1-14(259); 5,23-24(316); 7(193) (305); 8,10(83); 8, 16(315)
Life of Constantine (Vita Constantini)
Ed. I. A. Heikel, GCS, 7(1902), 1-148; traps. A. C. McGiffert, NPNF, new ser., 1(1890), 481610
I,preface(314); I,16 ff.(96); I,28(200); II,5-17(311 ); II,16(179); III,6(316); III,11(314); III,13(316); IV,24(211)
The Martyrs of Palestine
Ed. & traps. G. Bardy, SCH, 55(1958), 121-174 ed. & traps. H. J. Lawlor & J. E. L. Oulton (London, 1927-1928), I, 327-400
4,8-13(21); 7,2(21); 9,7(254);
ll,s(21); ll,s-12(x8);11,2021(139)(289); 11,22(75)(289) Preparation for the Gospel (Praeparatio Evangelica)
Ed. K. Mras, GCS, 43, i(1954), ii(1956); ed. & traps. E. H. Gifford, 4 vols. (Oxford, 1903)
1,30);1,4 (~) (s2); 2,s(37); 4,2(37); 4,16-17(92); 5,1(92); 5,4(92); 6,1(88) (208); 6,6(37)
The Proof of the Gospel (Demonstratio Evangelica)
Ed. I. A. Heikel, GCS, 16(1913); ed. & traps. W. J. Ferrar, 2 vols. (London, 1920)
I,2,8(275); II,2(208); III,7, 35(40); ILI,7,39(44);
vl,2o(40); vHI,2,9-45(47) Eutropius, Flavius
Breviarium ab Urbe Condita Ed. F. Ruehl (Leipzig, 1887) 10,6(313)
Fabius, Acts of (c. 303) AB, 9(1890), 123-134 (138)
Ferreolus St., Passion of (under Decius?)
ASS, September, 5(1857), 766-767 (131)(287)
Fructuosus and His Companions, Acts of (Acta Fructuosii)
Knopf, 83-85; Hamman, 132-136; Musurillo, 176-185
2,2-3(26-27); 7(268)
Gregory I, the Great, St.(c.540-604) Morals on the Book of Job
Ed. & traps. R. Gillet & A. de Gaudemarie, SCH, 32(1952); LFC, 3 vols.(Oxford, 1844-1850)

334
Preface,l,7(78); I,9-11,35,
	4x(78); I,2o,24,34,3s(lo7); 	II,2,13,19,32,70,73,79(78) 	Gregory of Nazianzus, St. (330?-389?)
Discourse 43: in Honor of Basil the Great
PG, 36, 493-606; trans. C. G. Browne & J. E. Swallow, NPNF, ser. 2, 7(1894), 395-422
48(95); 49(104)
Gregory of Tours St. (c. 540594) Ecclesiastical History of the Franks (Historic ecclesiastica francorum )
PL, 71,161-572; ed. & traps. O. M. Dalton, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1927)
I 34(143)
Gregory the Wonder-Worker, St. (213?-273?)
Canonical Epistle
PG, 10, 1019-1048; traps. S. D. F. Salmond, ANL, 20(1871), 30 35
5(318) Panegyric to Origen
Ed. P. Koetschau, Sammlung ausgewQhlten Quellenschriften, 9 (Freiburg/Breisgau 1894); traps. M. Metcal~e (London, 1920)
5,67-72(22) Hermas (first half of 2nd c. ) The Shepherd
Ed. P. Lelong, HL, 16(Paris, 1912); ed. & traps. R. Joly, SCH, 53(1958); ed. & traps. E. J. Goodspeed, The Apostolic Fathers (New York, 1950), 101201
Similitudes 1,4(29); 1,1-6(100) Precepts
V,1,.1 & 5(317); V,2,3(317); V 8(317)
Hieron and His Companions, Martyrdom of
ASS, 7 November, 3(1910), 329335; VSB, 11(1954), 206-207 (130)
Hippolytus of Rome, St. (d.236) The Antichrist
Ed. H. Achelis, GCS (1897), 147
30(61) Apostolic Tradition Reconstruction of the text (from Latin & Ethiopic MSS): B. Botte, ed., La Tradition apostolique de Saint Hippolyte, Fssai de reconstitution, 39'e Cahier des Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen and Forschungen (Miinster/Westphalia, 1963). See also G. Dix
ed. & traps., rev. H. Chadwick (London 1968), and G. ~. Cuming, ed. & traps. Hippo ytus: A Text for Students (Grove Liturgical Studies 8) (Bramcote, Notts., 1976)
16(163) Arabic text: J. and A. Perier, "Les Cent Vingt-Sept Canons dlOApotres," PO, 8(1912), 55327-28(163)
Coptic text: W. Till & J. Leipoldt eds. & traps., Der Koptische Text der Kirchenordnung Hippolyts, T U, 58 (Berlin, 1954)
41(163) Ethiopic text: H. Duensing, ed., Der Aethopische Text der Kirchenordnung des Hippolyt (Gottingen, 1946); Ethiopic, Arabic & Bohairic texts: G. Homer, ed., The Statutes of the Apostles or Canones Ecclesiastici (London, 1904)
27-28(163) Canons of Hippolytus: B. Haneberg, ed., Canones S. Hippolyti (Munich, 1870); R.-G. Coquin, ed., " L.es Canons d' Hippolyte," PO, 31, ii(1966), 273-443
13-14(167)(169) Commentary on Daniel
Ed. G. Bardy & M. Lefevre,
SCH, 14(1947) I,8,3(264) III,8,9(47); 23,1-3(334); 24, 7(28)
IV,8,7-8(47); 9(93); 9,2(47); 17,7(49); 17,8(98); 21,3(49); 23-24(49); 35(47); 4o,3(so); 49,1,4-5(263); 58,3(61)
Ignatius of Antioch, St. (end of 1st c. ) Ed. & trans. P. Th. Camelot, SCH, 10, 2nd ed. (1951); ed. & traps. C. C. Richardson, LCC,
1 ( 1953), 87-120
Letter to the Ephesians (Eph.) 10,1-3(317); 13,2(317); 19(92) Letter to Polycarp (Pol.)
1,2(317); 6,2(70)
Letter to the Romans (Rom.) 5,1(20); 6,1(93); 6,2(107);7(92) Letter to the Smymaeans (Smyr.)
1,2(70) To the Trallians (Tral.) 3,2(317); 4,2(317)
Innocent I, St. (?-417)
Letter to Exuperus of Toulouse Mansi, III, 1038-1041; PL, 20, 495-502
(191) Letter to Felix, Bp. of Nuceri PL,20,63; PL, 84, 651-654
37,3(5) (191)
Letter to Spanish Bishops Mansi, III, 1064
(191) Letter to Victricius
PL, 20, 469-481; 56, 519-527 2,2(4)( 191 )
Irenaeus, St. (c. 130after 200) Against Heresies (Adversus Haereses)
Ed. W. W. Harvey, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1857, reprinted 1949); Book III ed. & traps. F. Sagnard, SCH, 34 (1952); traps. A. Roberts & W. H. Rambaut, ANL, 5 (1868),9(1869)
II,2,3(72); 32,2(32) II1,16,4(72); 17,3(60); 18,56(317)
IV,13,3(317); 20,11(72); 24, 1(72); 27,1(55); 30,3(32); 34,4(86); 36,6,(32)(65)
V,24,1-3(323); 26(94); 30(45)
Fragments 18, 21, 44(72) Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching
	PO, 12, v(1919); ed. & trans. L. 	M. Froidevaux, SCH, 62(1959) 	20,27,29(264); 61(86); 96(317) 	Isaiah, Ascension of
Ed. & traps. R. H. Charles (London, 1900); ed. & traps. of Ethiopic version, E. Tisserant (Paris, 1909)
4,2,6,7,8,11(45); 7,9-12(59);
	1o,13(s2); lo,2s-31(59) 	Isidore of Pelusium, St. (?-450) 	Letters (Epistolae)
PG, 78, 177-1646 IV,200(110) Jerome St. (c. 342-430)
Book of Questions on Genesis Ed. P. da Lagarde, CCL, 72(1959), 1-56
10,2(182) Commentary on Ezekiel
Ed. F. Glorie, CCL, 75(1964) 11(182)
Commentary on Daniel
Ed. F. Glorie, CCL, 75a (1964) 3,46(255)
Illustrious Men (De Viris illustribus)
Ed. E. C. Richardson, TU, 14, 1(1896); traps. idem, NPNF, 2nd ser., 3(1892), 359-384
53(73)(284);80(116) Letters (Episto )
Ed. & traps. J. Labourt 6 vols., CUF(1949-1958); 1-22~ed. & traps. C. C. Mierow, ACW, 33(1963); selected letters ed. & traps. F. A. Wright, LCI.(1933)
14,2(309); 58,2-3(276); 58, 8(78); so,l6(22s); 6o,17(s465) (271-272); 60,15-16,
18(225);126,2(319);127, 12(225); 128,4(319)

336
Life of Malchus (Vita Makhi) PL, 23, 53-60
init. (199)
John St., Apocryphal Acts of (second half of 2nd c. )
Ed. R. A. Lipsius & M. Bonnet, Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha (Leipzig, 1891-1903), II, i, 151216; ed. & trans. M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1924), 22&270
6(22); 36(45)
John VIII (Pope, 872-882)
Letter to Empress An ilberga MGH, Epistolae, 7 ~Epistolae Karoliniaevi, 5), 311
(193) John Moschus, St. (550?-619) Spiritual Meadow (Pratum Spirituale)
Ed. & traps. Rouet de journal, SCH, 12(1946)
30(253) John Chrysostom, St. (344?-407) Commentary on the Psalms
PG, 55, 35-528 148,4-5(43) Commentary on Isaiah
PG, 56, 11-94
2,3(79); 2,4(40); 2,4-5(89) Homilies on St. Matthew PG, 57; 58, 975-1058; ed. & traps. D. R. Bueno, Bibliotheca de Autores cristianos, 141, 146(Madrid, 1955-1956); traps. S. G. Prevost, ed. M. B. Riddle, NPNF, 10(1888)
9,7(273); 61,2(185); 69,1(266); 69,3(77); 69,4(99) (194); 75, 2(41)
Homilies on St. John
PG, 59, 23-482; ed. P. Schaff, traps. G. T. Stupart, 14(1890), 1334
1,1(273); 49,26(277); 79, 3(114) (278-274); 82,2(318); 82,4(185)
Homilies on Romans
PG, 60, 391-682; ed. G. B. Stevens, traps. j. B. Moms &
W. H. Simcox, NPNF, 11(1889),335-564
14,5-end(114); 14,7(318); 23, 2(43) (274)
Homilies on Ephesians
PG, 62, 9-176; ed. G. Alexander, trans. W. J. Copeland, NPNF, 13(1889), 49-172
6,1(274); 6,4(194) Homily on St. Lucian PG, 50, 520-526 (97-98)
Letters to Olympias
Ed. & trans. A. M. Malingrey, SCH, 13(1947)
VIII,9b(75); VIII,9d(276); X,3f-g(113-114); XIII,4d(318); XV, la-b (75-76); XVII,2b(75)
Josephus, Flavius (c. 37-c. 100) Jewish Antiquities (Antiquitates judaicae)
Ed. B. Niese (Berlin, 18871895); traps. J. Weill, 1-2(Paris, 1900, 1926); traps. J. Chamonard, 3(Paris, 1904); traps. G. Mathieu & L. Hermann, 4(Paris, 1929)
	xlv,lo,6(252); xvln,5(253) 	Julian of Brioude, Passion of (under 	Decius?)
ASS, August, 6(1868), 173-175 (131)(287)
Julian the Apostate (332-363)
Ed. & traps. W. C. Wright, 3 vols. LCL(1913-1923)
The Caesars 2,336b(206) To the Athenians
3,270c(206) Julius the Veteran, Martyrdom of (302?) (Passio luli Veterani)
Knopf, 105-106; Hamman, 184186; VSB, 5(1947), 525-528; Musurillo, 260-265
(139)(289) Justin (?-165?) First Apology
PG, 6, 327-440; ed. & traps. E. R. Hardy, LCC, 1(1953), 242289
11,2(317); 12,1(29); 14,3(317); 15,9(317); 16,1-4(317); 16, 14(29); 17,3(82); 39,1-3(85); 39,5(71-72); 47(62); 55,6(71) Second Apology
Ed. L. Pautigny, HL, 1(1904); trans. G. J. Davie, LFC(1861), 57-69
2(257); 5,4(277-278); 9,1(2930)
Dialogue with Trypho
Ed. G. Archambault, HL 8, 11(1909); ed. & trans. A. L. Williams (London, 1930)
109(85); 110,3(85); 110,6(62); 131,2(71); 139,3(62)
Justin (Pseudo-) Disa>urse Ed. & Latin traps. J. C. T. Otto, Corpus Apologeticarum Christianorum Saeculi secundi, 3, 3rd ed. (Jena, 1879), 2-18 5(72)
Exhortation to the Gentiles
Ed. & traps. Otto, Corpus, 19127
17(40) Lactantius (after 250-after 320) The Death of Persecutors (De Mortibus Persecutorum)
Ed. & traps. J. Moreau, 2 vols., SCH, 39(1954); traps. W. Fletcher, ANL, 22(1871), 164210
7,5(21-22); 10(123-124)(256); 18,10(42); 19,6(261); 27,5 ff. (21); 37,5(22); 44-48(42) (66); 46(179); 49(66); 50,1(66); 52, 4(67); 54(200)
Divine Institutions (Divinae Institutiones)
Ed. S. Brandt, CSEL, 29(1890); traps. W. Fletcher, ANL, 21(1871)
1,1,13(42); 1,15(41 )
II, 6(115); 9,63(115); 10, 23(115); 18,8-10(114); 19, 6(279)
IV,21,5(63); 24(123-124) V,4-5(318); 8,6(318); 9,2(115);
9,15-17(42); 12(44); 1314(318)
V1,4,11(79); 4,14-24(79); 6,1824(114-115); 11,1 ff.(115116); 18(116); 18,1020(219); 18,11(6f1); 18, 25(219-220); 18,29-32(220); 20,10(116) (303); 20,16(79)
VII, 13-14(279); 14(280) Epilogue,73(75) Epitome Divinarum Institutionum
Ed. S. Brandt, CSEL, 29(1890), 675-761; ed. & trans. H. Blakeney(London,1950) 52(279)
God's Workmanship (De Oplficio Dei)
Ed. S. Brandt, CSEL, 27(1893), 1-64; traps. W. Fletcher, ANI., 22( 1871 ), 49-91
2,6(115) The Wrath of God (De Ira Dei) Ed. S. Brandt, CSEL, 27( 1893), 67-132; traps. W. Fletcher, ANL, 22(1871), 1-48
17,6-7(41); 20,5 & 12(318); 20,7(44); 21,10(318); 23, 10(41)
Leo I, the Great, St. (before 400-461 ) Letters
PL, 54, 551-1218; traps. C. L. Feltoe, NPNF, 2nd ser., 11(1896)
167,12 & 14(304) Marcellus, Acts of (298) (Passio Marcelli)
Ed. P. de Gaiffier, AB, 61('1943), 116-139; Musurillo, 250-259 1-5(137-138) (289)
Marianus and James, Passion of (Passio Mariani) (259)
Knopf, 67-74; Monceaux, 202219; Musurillo, 194-213 1,3(268); 2,2-4(20); 2,4-5(2021); 3,4(268); 8,4(268); 10, 3(268)
Maximilian, Acts of (Acta Maximiliani) (295)
Knopf, 86-87; Monceaux, 251

255; Musurillo, 244-249 1-2(133-135) (288)
Maximus of Turin, St. (d. early 5th c. ) Homilies
Ed. A. Mutzenbecher, CCL, 23(1962)
114,1(304) Melito (Pseudo-) Discourse
Ed. & Latin trans. J. C. T. Otto, Corpus Apologeticarum Christianorcim, 9(Jena, 1872), 419-432, 497-512
1~~) (~) Menas Passion of
Ed. G. van Hoof, AB, 3(1884), 258-270; traps., VSB, 11(1954), 328-336
(130) Minucius Felix (end of 2nd c. ) Octavius
Ed. C. Halm, CSEL, 2(1867); ed. & traps. G. W. Clarke, ACW, 39(1974); ed. & traps. G. H. Rendall, LCL ( 1931 ), 314437
8(103); 30,6(218); 33,3(59); 33,5(63); 37,1-3(71) Montanus, Lucius and their Com
panions Passion of (Passio Montani) (259)
Knopf, 74-82; Monceaux, 225247; Musurillo, 214-239 1,1(268); 4,6(268); 6,3-5(268); 14,5(268); 10,5(318)
Nicaea, Council of (325)
Hefel~, I i, 528-620; Mansi, II, 667-1019
Canon 12(lil)(179)
Nicander and Marcian Acts of (c. 297) ASS, June, 3(1867), 266-278; traps. H. Leclercq, Les Martyrs, II, 419-423
(139) Nicholas I, St. (Pope 858-867) Responses to Questions of the Bulgars (Responsa)
PL, 119, 978-1016 46(304) Optatus of Milevis (second half of 4th c. )
Against the Donatists (De Schismate Donatistarclm)
Ed. C. Zivsa, CSEL, 26(1893); ed. & trans. O. R. Vassall (London, 1917)
	III,3(187) 	Orientius of Auch 	Commonitorium
PL, 61 977-1005; ed. & trans. M. D. Tobin, PSt(1945)
I I,181-184(225) Origen (185-253)
Against Celsus (Contra Celsum) Ed. P. Koetschau, GCS, 2-3 (1899); ed. & trans. H. Chadwick (Cambridge, 1953)
I,3(43); 47(62); 49(63) II,8(62); 13(62-63); 30(39-40); 34(62); 78(62)
I I I, 7(217); 8(217)
IV,9(217); 22(62-63); 32(62); 70(45) (94-95); 72(45); 73(62); 82(258); 83(37)
V,14(277);33 (86-87); 37(31); 43(62)
VII,26(62); 26-27(217-218); 70(94)
VIII,2(103); 42(62); 47(62); 56(31); 65(28-29) (218);
sa(ISO) (271); ss-7o(s3); ss(62); 73(84); 74(84-ss); 74-75(271); 75(103)
Commentary on St. Matthew
Ed. E. Klostermann, E. Benz, L. Fruchtel, and U. Treu GCS, 40( 1937 rev. 1976), 41, i(1941 ), 41, ii(1968); traps. J. Patrick, ANF, 9(1897), 411-512 1017(63)
First Principles (De Principiis) Ed. P. Koetschau, GCS, 22(1913); ed. & traps. G. W. Butterworth (London, 1936)
II,4,4(56); III,2,5(74); IV,1, 9(56); IV,2,8(55-56) Homilies on Exodus
Ed. H. de Lubac, traps. P. Fortier, SCH, 16(1947) (74) Homilies on Joshua (Homiliae in lesu Nave)
Ed. W. A. Bahrens, GCS, 30(1921),286-463
15,1(56); 17,1(58) Pachomius, St., Life of (292-346) Greek text: ed. F. Halkin, Subsidia Hagiographica, 19(Brussels, 1932)
4(141); 5(142)
Coptic text: ed. & trans. L. Th. Lefort, Biblioth~que du Museon, 16(Louvain,1943)
2(76); 7(141); 8(142) Panegyrics, Latin
E. Galletier, ed., PanEgyriques latins, II, Les Pan~gyriques constantiniens, CUF ( 1959)
7,21(312); 9,2(313)
Paul, Apocryphal Acts of (before end of 2nd c. ).
Ed. R. A. Lipslus & M. Bonnet, Acta Apostolonam Apocrypha (Leipzig, 1891-1903), I, 235-272; ed. & traps. M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1924), 270-299
3,4,6(71) Paulinus of Nola, St. (353-431) Letters (Epistolae)
Ed. W. Hartel, CSEL, 29(1894); ed. & traps. P. G. Walsh, ACW, 35-36(1967)
	ls(148-14x) (2ss) (2x4);19, 	4(151-152); 25(148); 37(148) 	Paulinus of P~rigueux (second half of 	5th c. )
De Vita Sancti Martini episcopi Ed. M. Petschenig, CSEL, 16( 1888), 1-190
I,35 ff. (291 ); 1,139-177(291 ) Perpetua and Felicitas, Sts., Martyrdom of (202)
Knopf, 35-44; Monceaux, 165188; Musurillo, 106-131 9,16,21(22)
Phileas, St., and Philoromus, Acts of Knopf, 113-116; Hamman, 253258; DAL, 14 i(1939), 703-70x; Musurillo, 328-354
(22-23 )
Philostorgos(368?-433?) Ecclesiastical History
Ed. J. Bidez, rev. F. Winkelmann, GCS(1972) 2,4(313); 2,16(205)
Philoxenus of Mabbug (d. 523) Letter Sent to a Friend Ed. & trans. G. Olindeo , Goteborgs Hbgskolas Arsskrift, 56,i( 1950)
6,10,36(265); 61(56) Phocas St., Acts of
ASS, July, 3(1867), 610-617; ed. & trans. F. C. Conybeare, The Apology of Apollonius and Other Monuments of Early Christianity (London, 1894), 103-121
(22) Pionius, St., Martyrdom of (Mart. Pionii)
Knopf, 45-57; Hamman, 89-106; Musurillo, 136-167
3,2-5(94); 4,18(61); 5,3-5(109);
15(20>;1a,7(9s); 21(20) Polycarp, St., Martyrdom of (Mart. Pol.)
Musurillo, 2-21
3(71) (92); 6,2(20); 8,2(257); 10, 2(42-43)
Polycarp, St., (c. 70-c. 156) Letter to the Philippians
Ed. & traps. P. T. Camelot SCH, 10, 2nd ed.(1951); ed. & traps. E. J. Goodspeed, The Apostolic Fathers (New York, 1950), 237-244
2,2(317); 10,2(317); 12,3(82) Pontius St. (d.c.260)
Life of Cyprian (Vita Cypriani) Ed. W. Hartel, CSEL, 3(1871), xc-cx
11(106); 16(22) Prudentius(348-424?) Peristephanon
Ed. M. P. Cunningham, CCL, 126(1966), 251-389; ed. & traps. M. Clement Eagan (Washington,1942)
I,34,39(153-154); I,58-59, 61(154)

340
Reculf (Archbishop of Mainz) (early 9th c. )
Epitaph of Ferrutius
ASS, October, 12(1867), 530 (154)
Rufinus, Tyrannius (c.345-410) The Advantage of Peace (De Bonn Paris)
PL, 150, 1593-1638 I 1,14(304 )
Scillitan Martyrs, Acts of the (Passio Scillitanorum) (180)
Knopf, 28-29; Monceaux, 141143; Musurillo, 86-89
2 & 6(284); 2 & 7(317) Sebaste, Forty Martyrs of (320) Testament
Knopf, 116-119 Hamman, 281284 Musurillo, 354-361
(130) Sergius & Bacchus Acts of Saints AB, 14(1895), 373-395
(130) Severus, Sulpicius (c. 360-after 420) Chronicle
Ed. A. Lavertujon, La Chronique, 2 vols. (Paris 1896-1899) II,49-51(150); 50(294); 51( 151 ) Dialogues
Ed. C. Halm, CSEG, 1(1866), 152-216; traps. P. Monceaux, Saint Martin, 2nd ed.(Paris, 1927); traps. A. Roberts NPNF, 2nd ser., 11(1894), 24-54
I,2,11(78); II,3(221); III,1113(150); III 15(146)
Life of Martin (Vita Martini) Ed. & traps. J. Fontaine, SCH, 133-135(1967-1969); traps. A. Roberts, NPNF, 2nd ser., 11(1894), 3-17
2(143); 2,2(143); 2,8(285); 3, 5(143); 3,6(143) (318); 4,3(94) (144); 4,5 & 7(144-145); 10,
6(2x2); 20 (150); 20,2(150) Severus of Antioch (d.538) Cathedral Homilies
Ed. & traps. R. Duval, PO, 4, i(1908) 83-94
57(286)
Sibylline Oracles (2nd c. )
Ed. j. Geffcken, GCS, 8(1902) 111,63(262); IV,115-118,125127(63)
Siricius, St. (334?-399) Letters 5,2(190) (308): PL,13, 1158 6,3,1(308): PL, 13, 1165 Cum in unum (308); PG, 56, 727
Socrates Scholasticus (380-440) Ecclesiastical History
PG, 67, 29-842; traps. A. C. Zenos, NPNF, 2nd ser., 2 (1891), 1-178
1,8-9(316); 1,39(205) Sozomen, Hermias (mid.-5th c. ) Ecclesiastical History
Ed. J. Bidez & G. C. Hanson, GCS, 50(1960); traps. C. D. Hartranft NPNF, 2nd ser., 2(1891), 239-427
1,19(314); VI,16(276) Symphorosa, Acts of the Saint and of Her Seven Sons
Ed. T. Ruinart Acta Martyrum (Regensburg, 1859), 70-71; traps. H. Leclercq, Martyrs I 208-209; DAL, 15, ii(1953), 1817-1822 (286)
Synesios of Cyrene (c. 370-c. 413) Discourse on Royalty
PG 66, 1053-1108; ed. & traps. A. Fitzgerald Essays and Hymns 2 vols. (London 1930), I 108-147 ed. & traps. C. Lacombrade (Paris 1951)
9(196); 23(196); 25(196) Letters
PG, 66, 1321-1560; ed. & traps. A. Fitzgerald (London, 1926) 57-58(197); 78(197); 90(197);
lo5(lss);121(ls7);122ys6) (310)
Orations (Catastasis)
PG 66, 1561-1578; ed. & traps. A. Fitzgerald Essays and Hymns, II 363-368 2(196-197)
Tarachus, Probus and Andronicus,
Acts of (Acta Tarachii)
Ed. T. Ruinart, Acta Martyrum, 451-476; traps. Leclercq,Martyrs, II, 258-290
1(274); 1-2(139) (289) Tatian (second half of 2nd c. ) Address to the Greeks (Oratio ad Graecos)
Ed. E. Schwartz, T U, 4, i( 1888); traps. B. P. Pratten, ANL, 3(1867), 5-45
11(93); 19(317); 28(159) Tertullian (c. 155-after 220) Apology (Apologeticum)
Ed. E. Dekkers, CCL, 1(1954), 85-171; ed. & traps. T. R. Glover, LCL ( 1931 ), 2-227
1,2(102); 4,5(30); 4,10(30); 4,
13(30); 5,2(35); 5,6(35) (129); 6,7(215); 8,1-5(111-112); 9,
5(111); s,s(113); 20,2(64); 21, 2(35); 21,24(50); 26,3(61); 28, 3(111) (258); 30,1(111); 30.12(34); 30,3(97); 30,4(82);31,
2(80) (lol); 31,3(82); 32, 1(48); 32,2(97); 32,2-3(258); 33(95); 36,1(97); 37,4(124); 37,5(214); 37,6-7(317); 37, 9(82); 38,3(106); 39,2(82); 39, 7-8(111); 40,13(82); 41,1(97); 42,3(124); 44,1(97); 46, 15(278); 50(73); 50,1-2(113)
On the Cloak (De Pallio)
Ed. A. Gerlo, CCL, 2(1954), 733-750; traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 18(1870), 181-200 5(159)
On the Soldier's Crown (De Corona)
Ed. A. Kroymann, CCL, 2(1954), 1039-1065; ed. & traps. J. Fontaine Coll. Erasure 18(Paris, 1966); traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 11(1869), 333-355
1(124); 7(256); 10-12(256); 11(214) (269); 12(112-I 13); 13(46) (101)
On the Dress of Women (De Cultu Feminarum)
Ed. A. Kroymann, CCL,
1(1954), 343-370; ed. & traps. M. Turcan, SCH, 173(1971); traps. S. Thelwall, ANL,
11 ( 1869), 304-332 II,5(73); II,11(96)
On Flight in Persecution (De Fuga in Persecutione)
Ed. J. J. Thierry, CCL, 2(1954), 1135-1155; traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 11(1869), 356-378
10(73); 12(46) (101)
To the Heathen (Ad Nationes) Ed. j. G. P. Borleffs, CCG, 1(1954), 11-75; traps. P. Holmes, ANL, 11(1869), 41& 506
I,1-2(284); 1,17(97); II,9(46) On Idolatry (De Idololatria) Ed. A. Reifferscheid & G. Wissowa, CCL, 2(1954), 11011124; ed. & traps. S. L. Greenslade, GCC, 5(1956), 83-110
15(101);16(96); 17(97); 18(9li97) (262); 19(65) (92) (159) Against the Jews (Adversus ludaeos)
Ed. A. Kroymann, CCL, 2(1954), 1339-1396; traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 18(1870), 201258
2(257); 2-3(116); 3(87) (257); 7(112); 9(46) (73-74); 7(26'2); 8(92), 15(97); 25(92); 30(101102)
Against Marcion (Adversus Marcionem)
Ed. A. Kroymann, CCL, 1(1954), 441-726; ed. & traps. E. Evans, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1972)
1,13(97); 24(52-53) III,13(73-74) (262); 14(73-74); 21(87); 23(61)
IV,1(87); 20(73-74); 29(5253); 39(64); 38(101) V,5(73); 17(92) (113); 18(7374)
On Patience ~De Patientia) Ed. J. G. P. Borleffs, CCL, 1(1954), 299-317; traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 11(1869), 205-230

342
1(216); 4(111); 6-7(216); 10(216); 15(102) (216)
On the Resurrection of the Flesh (De Resierrectione Carnis)
Ed. J. G. P. Borleffs, CCL, 2(1954), 921-1012; traps. P. Holmes, ANL, 15(1870), 215332
20(73-74); 24(263)
To Scapula (Ad Scapulam)
Ed. E. Dekkers, CCG, 2(1954), 1127-1132 traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 11( 1869 ), 46-52
3(102); 4(35) (129); 5(215216); 5,2-3(284)
Scorp iace
Ed. A. Reifferscheid & G. Wissowa, CCL, 2(1954), 10691097; traps. S. Thelwall, ANL, 11(1869),379-415
3(60); 14(34) (101)
On the Shows (De Spectaculis) Ed. E. Dekkers, CCL, 1(1954), 227-253; ed. & traps. T. R. Glover, LCL(1931), 230-301
On the Soul (De Anima) Ed. J. H. Waszink, CCL, 2(1954), 781-869; traps. P. Holmes, ANL, 15(1870), 410541
31(73); 33(111); 33,6(34); 52(277)
Testament of Our Lord
Ed. I. E. Rahmani, Testamentum Domini Nostrl lesu Christi (Mainz, 1899); traps. F. Nau Ga Version syrivque ( Paris, 1913); ed. & traps. J.Cooper & J.A. Maclean (Edinburgh, 1902)
II,2(166)
Theodoret of Cyrus (393?-466?) Ecclesiastical History
PG, 82, 882-1280; traps. B. Jackson, NPNF, 2nd ser., 3(1890), 1-348
I,20,1(208); IV,B(190) Theodosian Code (Codex Theodosianus)
Ed. T. Mommsen, Theodosiani Libri XVI, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1905) V,20,1(201-202); VII,1,8(252); VI1,22,2(252); XVI,2(193) (305); XVI,10,21(183)
Theophilus of Antioch, St. (late 2nd c. ) Three Books of Autolycus
Ed. & traps. G. Bardy & J. Sender, SCH, 20(1948); traps. M. Dcxls, ANG, 3(1867), 53-I33
I,11(31-32); 11,36(64); III,11(61); III,14(86) (278) Tipasius, Passion of (Passio Tipasii)
AB, 9(1890), 116-123; Monceaux, 259-269
( 136-137)
Victorinus of Pettau, St. (end of 3rd c. ) Commentary on the Apocalypse Ed. J. Haussleiter, CSEL, 49(1916), 12-154
19(59) Zosimus (2nd half of 5th c. ) Ecclesiastical History
Ed. L. Mendelssohn, Zozimi Comitis et Exadvocati Fisci Historic nova (Leipzig 1887); traps. J. A. C. Buc~~on, Ouvrages historiques de Polybe, H~rodien et Zozime (Paris, 1836)
2,2(205); 2,19,1(311); 2,2s29(321); 2,29(313)
Secondary Sources
A. G. (initials). Review of EL. Fraternity Evang~lique, May 1960. Aland, Kurt. "Die religiose Haltung Kaiser Konstantins." SP, 1 (Berlin, 1957), 549-600.
D'Ales, A. Priscillien et l'Espagne chrl?tienne h la fin du IV a Si~cle. Paris, 1936.
. Th~ologie de Tertullien. Paris, 1905.
Alfoldi, A. The Conversion of Constantine and Pagan Rome. Oxford, 1948.
. A Festival of Isis in Rome Under the Christian Emperors of the IVth Century. Dissertationes Pannonicae, 2nd ser., 7. Budapest, 1937.
Alfoldi, M. R. Die Constantinische Goldprdgung: Untersuchung zu ihrer Bedeutung fair Kaiserpolitik and Hofkunst. Mainz, 1963. Allard, P. Histoire des Persecutions pendant la Premiere Moiti~ du Ill a Si~cle. Paris, 1886.
. La Persecution de Diocl~tien, I. 3rd ed. Paris, 1908. Altheim, F. "Konstantins Triumph von 312." Zeitschrift fiirReligion and Geistesgeschichte, 9 (1957), 221-231.
Amelineau, E. Les Actes des Martyrs de l'Eglise copte. Paris, 1890. Aron, R. Introduction h une philosophie de l'histoire. Paris, 1938. Arpee, L. A History of Armenian Christianity. New York, 1946. Aube, B. L'Eglise et l'Etat daps la Deuxieme Moitie du Ill a Si~cle. Paris, 1886.
Babut, H. C. L'Adoration des Empereurs et les Origines de la

344
Persecution de Diocl~tien. Paris, 1916.
. La plus ancienne d~cr~tale. Paris, 1904.
. Priscillien et le Priscillianisme. Paris, 1909.
. "Paulin de Nole et Priscillien." RHL, 1 (1910} 97-130, 252275.
. Saint Martin de Tours. Paris,1913.
Bainton, R. H. "The Early Church and War." HThR, 39 (1946), 189-212. Also in Rufus M. Jones, ed., The Church, the Gospel, and War. New York, 1948, pp. 75-92.
Banner, W. A. "Origen and the Tradition of Natural Law Concept." Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 8 (1954), 49-82.
Bardy, G. "Arles (conches d' )." Catholicisme, I (1948), cols. 837-839. . L'Eglise et les Derniers Romains. 8th ed. Paris, 1948.
. Paulde Samosate, rev. ed. Louvain,1929.
Baresta, Luc. "L'Objection de conscience." France catholique, no. 848 (March 1, 1963).
Batiffol, P. "Les Premiers Chretiens et la Guerre." Revue du Clergy fran~ais, 67 (1911 ), 222-242.
Baudrillart, A. Saint Paulin. 4th ed. Paris, 1928.
Bavaud, G. "Pourquoi Saint Maurice et ses compagnons ont-ils et~ martyrises?" L'Echo, October 21, 1961.
. "Les premiers Chr~tiens ~taient-ils objecteurs de conscience?" L'Echo, October 14, 1961.
Bayet, A. Pacifisme et Christianisme aux Premiers Si~cles. Paris, 1934.
Baynes, N. H. "Eusebius and the Christian Empire." Melanges Bidez. Brussels, 1934, pp. 13-18; repr. in his Byzantine Studies and other Essays. London, 1955, pp. 168-172.
Beckwith, I. T. The Apocalypse of John. New York, 1919. Bennett, J. C. Social Salvation. New York, 1935.
Benoit, A. Review of EL. RHPR, 42 (1962), 341-342.
Berchem, D. van. Le Martyre de la Legion th~baine. Basel, 1956.
. "Le 'De Pallio' de Tertullien et le Conflit du Christianisme et de 1'Empire." Museum Helveticum, 1 (1944), 100-144. Berkhof, H. Kirche and Kaiser: eine Untersuchung der Entstehung
der byzantinischen and theokratischen Staatsauffassung im vierten Jahrhundert. Zurich, 1947.
Besnier, M. L'Empire romain de l'Av~nement des Sw~res au
Coneile de Nice. Paris, 1937.
Besret, B. Incarnation ou eschatologte. Paris, 1964.
Bethune-Baker, J. F. The Influence of Christianity on War. Cambridge, 1888.
Biardeau, M. "Gandhi, histoire et légende." Esprit, 22 (1954), 176214.
Bigelmair, A. Die Beteiligung der Christen am 8ffentlichen Leben in vorkonstantdnischer Zeit. Munich, 1902.
Botte, B. "L'Authenticité de la Tradition apostolique de saint Hippolyte." RTAM, 16 (1949), 177-184.
. Review of A: Salles, Trois antiques rituels du bapt~me. BTAM, 8 (1958), 174-176.
. "Les plus anciennes collections canoniques." Orient Syrien, 5 (1960), 331-350.
. "Le Texte de la Tradition Apostolique." RTAM, 22 (1955), 161-172.
Bouyer, L. La Spirttualit~ du Nouveau Testament et des Pyres. Paris, 1960.
Brasseur, A. "Les deux visions de Constantin." Latomus, 5 (1946), 35-40.
Broglie, A. de. Saint Ambroise. Paris, 1891.
	Brunet, A. M. "La Guerre dans la Bible.'"LV, 7,~no. 38 (1958),31-47. 	Burgelin, P. "La Fin de 1'Ere constantinienne." Foi et Vie, 58 	(1959), 3-20.
Cadoux, C. J. The Early Christian Attitude to War. London, 1919. . The Early Church and the World. Edinburgh, 1925.
Calder, W. M. "The Epigraphy of the Anatolian Heresies." In W. H. Buckler and W. M. Calder, eds., Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay. Manchester, 1923, pp. 59-91.
. "Studies in Early Christian Epigraphy." Journal of Roman Studies, 10 (1920), 42-59.
Camelot, P.-T. "Bulletin d'histoire des doctrines chrétiennes." RSPT, 46 (1962), 735-773.
. "Les conciles oecuméniques des IVe et V a siccles." In Le Concile et les conciles. Paris-Chevetogne, 1960, pp. 45-73.
. Review of EL. RSPT, 45 (1961), 530.
Campenhausen, H. von. "Christians and Military Service in the

346
Early Church." In his Tradition and Life in the Early Church: Essays and Lectures in Church History. Transl. A. V. Littledale. London, 1968, pp. 160-170.
Capmany, J. "Miles Christi" en la Espiritualidad de San Cipriano. Collectanea San Paciano, Serie TeolBgica, I. Barcelona, 1956. Carson, R. A. G. "The Emperor Constantine and Christianity." History Today, 6 (1956), 12-20.
Casavola, F. "La Politiche dei Cristiani pregiustinianei." Labeo, 1 (1955), 55-73.
Case, S. The Revelation of John. Chicago, 1919.
Caspar, E. Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anf~ngen bis zur H~he der Weltherrschaft. 2 vols. Tl~bingen, 1930-1933.
Cayre, F. Patrologie et Histoire de la Th~ologie. 2vols. 3rd ed. Paris, Tournai, Rome, 1945.
Cerfaux, L., and J. Tondriau. Un Concurrent du Christianisme, le Culte des Souverains. Tournai, 1958.
Chadwick, N. K. The Age of the Saints in the Early Celtic Church. London, 1961.
Chavannes, H. L'Objection de conscience. Lausanne, 1961.
Chenu, M. D. "L'Evolution de la Théologie de la Guerre." LV, 7, no. 38 (1958), 76-97.
Christophe, J. Saint Martin, le soldat pacifique. Lyon, 1966. Clarke, W. K, L., ed. The Ascetic Works of St. Basil. London, 1925. Clercq, V. C. de. Ossius of Cordova: a Contribution to the History of
the Constantinian Period. The Catholic University of America, Studies in Christian Antiquity, XIII. Washington, 1954. Combés, G. La Doctrine politique de Saint Augustin. Paris, 1927. Comblin, J. Th~ologie de la Paix, II, Applications. Paris, 1963. Congar, Y. After Nine Hundred Years: The Background of the
Schism Between the Eastern and Western Churches. New York, 1959.
Courcelle, P. Histoire litt~raire des Grandes Invasions germaniques. Paris, 1948.
Cranz, F. E. "Kingdom and Polity in Eusebius of Caesarea." HThR, 45 ( 1952 ), 47-66.
Cullmann, O. Christ and Time: The Primitive Christian Conception of Time and History. rev. ed. Transl. F. V. Filson. London, 1962.
. "Le Caractére eschatologique du Devoir missionaire et de la Conscience apostolique de Saint Paul." RHPR, 16 (1936), 210245.
. The State in the New Testament. rev. ed. London, 1963. Cunningham, W. Christianity and Politics. London, 1916.
Dale, A. W. W. The Synod of Elvira and Christian Life in the Fourth Century. London, 1882.
Danielou, J. Les Anges et leur Mission d'apr~s les Pyres de l'Eglise. 2nd ed. Collection Iresnikon, new ser., V. Paris-Chevetogne, 1953.
. Essai sur le Myst~re de l'Histoire. Paris, 1953. . Le Myst~re du Salut des Nations. Paris, 1946.
. "La Non-Violence selon 1'Ecriture et la Tradition." Action Chr~tienne et Non-Violence. Compte rendu du Congrés national Pax Christi, Paris, March 19-20, 1955. Paris, 1955.
. Prayer as a Political Problem. Ed. and. and transl. J. R. Kirwan. Compass Books, XVI. London, 1967.
. and H. I. Marrou. Nouvelle Histoire de l'Eglise, I, Des origines d Gr~goire le Grand. Paris, 1963.
Davids, J. A. De Orosio et Sancto Augustino Priseillianistarum Adversarii. Nijmegen, 1930.
Davis, H. F. "The Early Christian Attitude to War." Blackfriars, 30 ( 1949 ), 477-482.
Delaruelle, E. "La Conversion de Constantin." BLE, 54 (1953), 3754, 84-100.
. A. Latreille, and J.-R. Palanque. Histoire du Catholicisme en France, I, Des ortgines h la Chr~tient~ m~diwale. Paris, 1957.
Delehaye, H. Etude sur le L~gendier romain, les Saints de Novembre et de D~cembre. Brussels, 1936.
. "Le Culte des Quatre Couronnés ~ Rome." AB, 32 (1913), 64-71.
. Les L~gendes grecques des Saints militaires. Paris, 1909.
. Les Passions des Martyrs et les Genres litt~raires. Paris, 1921.
	. "Saint Martin et Sulpice Sevére." AB, 38 (1920), 5-136. 	. "Saints de Thrace et de Mésie." AB, 31 (1912), 161-300. 	Demougeot, E. "Remarques sur 1'Emploi de 'Paganus.' " Studi in

34A
Onore dt H. Caldertnt p ti. Partbent. 2 vols. Milan, 1956-1957, I, pp. 337-350.
. La Théorte du Pouvotr impérial au Début du V a Stécle. Mélanges de la Societe toulousaine d'Etudes classiques, I. Toulouse, 1946.
Dibelius, M. "Rom and die Christen im ersten Jahrhundert." In his Botschaft ~und Geschtchte: Gesammelte AufsBtze, ed. Giinther Bornkamm. 2 vols. TQbingen, 1953-1956, II, 177-228.
Diehl, E. Inscriptiones lat~nae christianae veteres. Revised edition by J. Moreau and H. I. Marrou. 4 vols. Dublin-Zurich, 19671970.
D8lger, F. J. "Sacramentum Militiae." In his Antike and Chrfstentum: Kultur- and religtonsgeschtchtltche Studien, II. Monster, 1930, pp. 268-280.
Dõrries, H. Constantine the Great. Transl. R. H. Bainton. New York, 1972.
Domenach, J.-M. "Les pacifismes et la guerre." Esprit, 22 (1954), 161-175.
Downey, G. "Education in the Christian Roman Empire: Christian and Pagan Theories Under Constantine and His Successors." Speculum, 32 (1957), 48-61.
Dubois, J. "Dasius." Catholicisme, III (1952), cols. 470-471. Duchesne, L. Early History of the Christian Church. London, 1922. . L4ber ponttficalts, I. Paris, 1886.
Dumas, A. "L'Eglise d'avant Constantin et la violence." Esprit, 39 ( 1961 ), 308-319.
Dupraz, L. Les Passions de S. Maurice dAugaune: Essat sur l'historieité de n tradition et contribution h l'étude de l'armée prédtoclét4enne (260-286) et des canonisattons tardtUes de la fin du IV esiécle. Studia Friburgensia, n.s., XXVII. Fribourg, 1961.
Durry, M. Les Cohortes prétortennes. Paris, 1938.
Dvornik, F. "The Authority of the State in the Oecumenical Council." The Christian East, 14 (1934), 95-107.
. Byxance et la Primauté romaine. Paris, 1964.
Edmonds, H. "Geistlicher Kriegsdienst: Der Topos der militia spiritualis in der antiken Philosophie." In O. Casel, ed., Heilige Uberldeferung, suppl, vol. to BeitrBge zur Gesch4chte des alien M~nchtums and des Benedtktinerordens. Ml~nster, 1938. Re
printed in A. von Harnack, Mtlitict Christi. Darmstadt, 1963, pp. 133-162.
Eger, H. "Kaiser and Kirche in der Geschichtstheologie Eusebs von Casarea." ZNW, 38 (1938), 97-115.
Ehrhardt, H. "Some Aspects of Constantine's Legislation." SP, 2 (Berlin, 1957), 114-121.
Fabre, P. Saint Paultn de Nole et l'Amitté chrét4enne. Paris, 1949. Fast, H. A. Jesus and Human Conflict. Scottdale, Pa., 1959.
Flon, O. "Le principe de la non-résistance au mal par la force, étude historique." Unpublished thesis, Protestant School of Theology Montauban, 1906.
Flores, A. La Conversion de Constantin le Grand. Memoire de dipl8me de 1'Ecole pratique des Hautes Etudes. Paris, 1948 (mimeo. ed. ).
Florovsky, G. "Eschatology in the Patristic Age." SP, 2 (Berlin 1957), 235-250.
Foakes-Jackson, F. J. Eusebius Pamphtlt. Cambridge, 1933. Fontaine, J. "Christians and Military Service in the Early Church.'' Concildum, 7 (1965), 58-64.
. "Une cle litteraire de la Vita Martini de Sulpice Sevére: la typologie prophetique." In Mélanges Mohtmctnn. Utrecht-Antwerp, 1963, pp. 84-95.
. "Sulpice Severe a-t-il travesti S. Martin de Tours en martyr militaire?" AB, 71 (1963), 31-58.
. "Verite et Fiction dans la chronologie de la Vita Martini.'' StudtaAnselmtana, 46 (1961), 189-236.
Frend, W. H. C. "The Persecutions: Some Links Between Judaism and the Early Church." JEH, 9 (1958), 141-158.
Fritz, G. "Service militaire." DTC, XIV (1941), cols. 1972-1981. Gage, J. "Le'Signum' astrologique de Constantin et le Millenarisme de 'Roma aeterna.' " RHPR, 31 (1951), 181-223.
. "Stauros nikopoios, La Victoire imperiale dans 1'Empire chretien," RHPR,13(1933),370-400.
Gagnier, P. Review of EL. Bulletin du CPED (Centre protestant d'Etudes et de documentation), n.s., 53-54 (Aug. - Oct., 1960) 5-6.
Gaiffier, B. de. "Saint Marcel de Tanger ou de Leon." AB, 61 (1943), 116-139.

350
. "Sub Juliano Apostata dans le martyrologe romain." AB, 74 ( 1956 ), 5-49.
Galletier, E., ed. Panégyrtques latins, II, Les Panégyriques constantiniens. Paris, 1959.
Ganshof, F.-L. "Saint Martin et le Comte Avitianus." AB, 67 (1949), 203-223.
Gaubert, H. Les Saints sur les Champs de Bataille. Paris, 1941. Gaudemet, J. L'Eglise daps l'Empire romain (IV a - V a siécles). In Histaire du Drott et des Institutions de l'Eglise d'Occident, ed. G. Lebras, III. Paris, 1958.
. "Elvire." DHGE, XV (1963), cols. 317-348.
Gavillet, M. "Un Probléme á revoir." Le Lien de l'Eglise évangélique du Canton de Vaud, November 24, 1960.
Génier, R. Vie de Saint Euthyme le Grand (377-473). Paris, 1909. Gerest, R.-C. "Les premiers chrétiens face ~ leur monde." LV, 12, no. 73 ( 1963 ), 3-24.
Giannelli, G. "La Primitiva Chiesa cristiana di Fronte alle Persecuzioni a el Martirio." Nuovo Didaskaleion, 3 (1949), 5-22. Giet, S. Les Idées et l'Action de Saint Basile. Paris, 1941.
Giocarinis, K. "An Unpublished Late Thirteenth-Century Commentary of the Nicomedian Ethics of Aristotle." Traditio, 15 ( 1959 ), 299-317.
	Goguel,M.The Birth of Christianity.Transl.H.C.Snape (London,1953). 	. Les Chrétiens et l'Empire romain d l'époque du Nouveau 	Testament. Paris, 1905.
. Jésus. 2nd ed. Paris,1950.
. The Life of Jesus. Transl. O. Wyon. London, 1933.
. "Juifs et Romains dans 1'Histoire de la Passion." RHR, 62 (1910), 165-182, 295-322.
Greenslade, S. L. Church and State from Constantine to Theodosius. London, 1954.
Gregg, R. B. The Power of Nonviolence. 2nd ed. London, 1960. Grégoire, H. "L'Authenticité et 1'historicité de la 'Vita Constantini' attribuée á Eusébe de Césarée." BARB, 39 (1953), 462-478.
. "La'conversion' de Constantin." Revue de l'Université de Bruxelles, 36 (1930-1931), 231-272.
. "Les inscriptions hérétiques d'Asie Mineure." Byx, 1 (1924), 695-710.
. "Notes bibliographiques." BARB, 34 (1947), 224-235. . "Notes epigraphiques, IV." Byx, 8 (1933), 65-69.
. "Nouvelles Observations sur le Nombre des Martyrs." BARB, 38 (1952), 37-60.
. "Nouvelles Recherches constantiniennes." Byz, 13 (1938), 551-588.
P. Orgels, J. Moreau, and A. Maricq. Les Persécutions Bans l'Empireromain. Brussels, 1951.
. "Travaux récent sur Constantin le Grand." Byz, 7 (1932), 645-652.
Griffe, E. "La Chronologie des années de feunesse de Saint Martin." BLE, 63 (1961), 114-118.
. La Gaule chrétienne d l'époque romaine. Paris-Toulouse, 1947. 2nd ed., Paris, 1964.
. "Saint Martin et le monachisme gaulois." Studia Anselmiana, 46 ( 1961 ), 3-24.
Guérin, D. Jeunesse du soeialisme libertaire. Paris, 1959.
. La Lutte des classes sons la Premiére R~publique. 7~h ed. 2 vols. Paris, 1946.
Guey, J. "La Date de la Pluie miraculeuse (172 aprés J.-C. ) et la Colonne aurélienne." MAH, 60 (1948),105-127; 61 (1949), 93-118.
. "Encore la Pluie miraculeuse." RPh, 23 (1948), 16-62. Guignebert, C. Tertullien. Paris, 1901.
Halkin, F. "Faux martyrs et inscriptions hagiographiques." AB, 67 (1949), 88-96.
. "Une Nouvelle vie de Constantin dans un Legendaire de Patmos." AB, 77 (1959), 63-107, 370-372.
Hall, D. E. "La Conversi6n del Emperador Constantino." Pensiamento Crtstiano, 6 (1958), 149-169.
Halphen, L. Les Barbares. 3rd ed. Paris, 1936. Hamman, A., ed. La Geste du Sang. Paris, 1953.
Hanke, L. U. The Spanish Struggle for Justice in the Conquest of America. Philadelphia, 1959.
Hanssens, J. M. La Liturgie d'Hippolyte, ses documents, son titulaire, ses ortgines et son charactére. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 155. Rome, 1959.
. "La Liturgie d'Hippolyte, assentiments et dissentiments." Gregorianum, 42 (1961), 290-302.

352
Harnack, A. von. Militia Christi: Die chrtstliche Religion and der Soldatenstand in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten. Ttlbingen, 1905; repr., Darmstadt, 1963.
. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. 2 vols. London, 1908.
Hartke, W. Rgmische Kinderkaiser. Berlin, 1951.
Heering, G. J. The Fall of Christianity: A Study of Christianity, the State and War. Transl. J. W. Thompson. New York, 1943. Hefelé, C. J. von. BeitrAlge zur Ktrchengeschichte, Archllologie and
Liturgik. 2 vols. Tt~bingen, 1874.
	. Conciliengeschichte. 9 vols. Freiburg/Breisgau, 1855-1890. 	. Histoire des Conches d'apr~s les documents originaux. 2nd 	Fr. ed. l l vols. (vol. l-10, transl. H. Leclercq). Paris,1907-1952.
Heggelbacher, O. Vom R~mischen zum Christlichen Recht: Juristische Elemente in den Schriften des sog. Ambrosiaster. Freiburg/Breisgau,1959.
Hegnauer, R. Le Combattant non-violent. Lausanne, 1960.
Heiland, F. Die astronomische Deutung der Vision Konstantins. Lecture, Zeiss Planetarium, Jena, October 1948.
Hershberger, G. F. The Way of the Cross in Human Relationships. Scottdale, Pa., 1958.
Herval, R. "La Province ecclésiastique de Rouen aux IV a et V '~ siécles." MSR, 16 (1959), 47-70.
Hildesheimer, E. "Les Clercs et 1'exemption du service militaire il 1'~poque franque." RHEF, 29 (1943), 5-18.
Hobhouse, W. The Church and the World in Idea and in History. London, 1910.
Homo, L. Les Empereurs romains et le Chrtstianisme. Paris, 1931. Honigmann, E. Patristic Studies. Vatican City, 1953.
Horner, G. The Statutes of the Apostles or Canones Ecclesiastict. London, 1904.
Hornus, J.-M. "Christianisme et désordre établi." CS, 74 (1966), 662-673.
. "Du c6té des Mennonites." CS, 69 (1961 ), 698-701.
. "Dieu et la Guerre dans la Théologie de Karl Barth." CS, 63 ( 1955 ), 580-590.
. "Etude sur la pensée politique de Tertullien." RHPR, 38 ( 1958 ), 1-38.
. "L'Excommunication des Militaires dans la Discipline chrétienne." Communio Viatorum, 3 (1960), 41-60.
. "L'Imposture des Croisades." Communio Viatorum, 6 (1963), 143-166.
. "Les Péres de 1'Eglise et la non-violence." Cahters de la R~coneiliation, March 1962, 1-17; repr, in Paix et Coexistence, 3(1962),6-12.
. Review of L. Dupraz, Les Passions. RHPR, 48 (I968), 285288.
. Review of Sulpicius Severus, Vita Martini, ed. J. Fontaine, SCH. RHPR, 50 ( 1970), 77-79.
Hiinermann, G. L'ApBtre des Gaules. Transl. E. Saillard. Paris, 1964.
Isaac, J. La Dispersion d Israel, Fait historique ou Mythe th~ologique? Algiers, 1954.
Jaff~, P. Regesta Pontificum Romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum 1198. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1885-1888. Jardel, M. Le Soldat du Christ, Saint Martin de Tours. Paris, 1967. Jaubert, A. La Date de la Céne. Paris, 1957.
Jolif. J.-Y. "Pourquoi la Guerre?" LV, 7, no. 38 (1958), 5-30.
Jones, A. H. M. The Later Roman Empire, 284-602. 3 vols. Oxford, 1964.
. "Notes on the Genuineness of the Constantinian Documents in Eusebius' 'Life of Constantine.' " JEH, 5 (1954), 196200.
Jong, K. H. de. Dienstweigering bid de oude Chrtstenen. Leiden, 1905.
Journet, C. "Les Trois Cites (de Dieu, de 1'Homme et du Diable)." Nova vetera, 33 (1958), 25-48.
Juster, J. Les Juifs Bans l'Empire romain. 2 vols. Paris, 1914. Kaufmann, C. M. Handbuch der altchristlichen Epigraphie. Freiburg/Breisgau, 1917.
Knopf, D. R., ed. Ausgewdfhlte Martyrerakten. 3rd ed. Tiibingen, 1929.
Kraft, H. "Kaiser Konstantin and das Bischofsamt." Saeculum, t5 ( 1957 ), 32-42.
. "Zur Taufe Kaiser Konstantins." SP, 1 (Berlin, 1957), 642648.

354
" bl,~oou~a~o~ :" ZKG, 66 ( 1955 ), 1-24.
Kyriakides, S. P. "Konstantinos ho Megas kai he autokratike latreia", Hell~nika, XV I I,17, pp. 220-270.
Labhardt, A. "Tertullien et la Philosophie ou la Recherche dune Position pure." Museum Heloeticum, 7 (1950), 159-180. Laboulaye, E. Journal des d~bats, October 2, 1860.
Labriolle, P. Histoire de la Litt~rature Latine Chr~tienne. 3rd ed., rev. G. Bardy. 2 vols. Paris, 1947.
. "Paroecia." ALMA, 3 (1927), 196-205.
. " fjapo~x~a, Paroecia." RSR, 18 (1928), 60-72. . Saint Ambroise. Paris, 1908.
Lacombrade, C. Synésios de Cyr~ne, Helhne et chr~tien. Paris, 1951.
Lanversin, P. de. "Une belle dispute: Hippolyte est-il d'Occident ou d'Orient?" Proche-Orient chr~tien, 6 (1956), 118-122.
Laquer, R. Eusebius als Historiker seiner Zeit. Berlin-Leipzig, 1929.
Lasserre, J. War and the Gospel. Transl. O. Coburn. Scottdale, Pa., 1962.
Latourette, K. S. A History of the Expansion of Christianity, I, The First Five Centuries. New York, 1937.
Laufer, F. "O Triunfo da Cruz no tempo de Constantino." Estudios ( Brazil ), 19, no. 73 ( 1959 ), 81-95.
Le Blant, E. Inscriptions chr~tiennes de la Gaule, I. Paris, 1856.
. Manuel d'Epigraphie Chr~tienne d'apr~s les marbres de la Gaule, accompagn~ dune bibliographie sp~ciale. Paris, 1869. Lebreton, J., and J. Zeiller. De la Fin du 11 a Si~cle d la Paix constan
tinienne. In Fliche et Martin, Histoire de l'Eglise, II. Paris, 1935.
. The History of the Primitive Church. Transl. E. C. Messenger of vols. I-II of Fliche et Martin, Histoire de l'Eglise. 4 vols. London, 1942-1948.
Leclercq, H. "Accusations contre les Chretiens." DAL, I (1907), cols. 265-307.
. Les Martyrs, I. Paris, 1902.
. "Militarisme." DAL, XI (1933), cols. 1108-1181.
Leclercq, J. "Un document sur les debuts des Templiers." RHE, 52 ( 1957 ), 81-91.
Lecoy de la Marche. Saint Martin. 3rd ed. Tours, 1890.
Leenhardt, F. Le C'.)~r~tien dolt-il seroir l'Etat? Geneva, Switzerland, 1939
. "Le Christianisme primitif et la Guerre." CS, 43 (1930), 331-337.
Lietzmann, H. "Der Glaube Konstantins des Grossen." SAB 29 (1937), 263-275.
. A History of the Early Church. Transl. B. L. Woolf. 4 vols. London, 1961.
. "Der Prozess Jesu." SAB, 23 (1931), 313-322. Lightfoot, J. B. "Eusebius of Caesarea." DCB, II, cols. 308-348. Lods, M. "L'Eglise du III a Siécle devant le Service de 1'Etat."
Bulletin de la Faculty fibre de Th~ologte protestante de Paris, 13, no. 35 (1950), 13-26.
Lopuszanski, G. "Les Chrétiens dans 1'armee romaine." Unpublished PhD thesis, Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres, Brussels University, 1949.
Lorson, P. Defense de tuer. Paris, 1953.
Lortz, J. Tertulltan als Apologet. 2 vols. Milnster, 1928.
Lot, F. Nouvelles Recherches sur l'Impot fonc`ier et la Capitation personnelle soul le Bas-Empire. Paris, 1955.
Lovsky, F. Antis~mitisme et Myst~re d'IsraL~l. Paris, 1955. MacMullen, Ramsay. Soldier and Civilian in the Later Roman Empire. Harvard Historical Monographs, 52. Cambridge, Mass., 1963.
Malone, E. E. "Martyrdom and Monastic Profession as a Second Baptism." In A. Mayer, J. Quasten, and B. Neunheuser, eds., Vom Christlichen Mystertum (Festschrift O. Casel). Dl~sse1dorf, 1951, pp. 115-135.
Mansi, J. D. Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio. 35 vols. Florence, 1759 (facsimile reproduction, Paris-Leipzig, 1901-1902 ).
Marrow H. I. "Civitas Dei, Civitas terrena: num tertium quid?" SP, 2 (Berlin, 1957), 342-350.
. "La Fin du Monde nest pas pour Demain." LV, 2, no. I1 ( 1953 ), 77-99.
. Review of D. van Berchem, Le Martyre. RHR, 152 (1957), 236-240.

356
Martimort, A. G. "La Tradition Apostolique d'Hippolyte et le rituel baptismal antique." BLE, 60 (1959), 57-62.
Martin, C. Review of EL. Nouvelle Revue Theologique, 84 (1962), 1000-1001.
Marucchi, O. "Lavori nelle catacombe romane." Nuova Bullettino di Archeologia Crtstiana, 6 (1900), 337-344.
Mascaux, A. "Les Martyrs militaires en Afrique ~ la Fin du III a siecle." Thesis, Faculty of Protestant Theology, Paris, 1925. Mattingly, H. "The Later Paganism." HThR, 35 (1942), 171-179. Maurice, J. Constantin le Grand, L'Origine de la civilisation chretienne. Paris, 1924.
. Numismatique constantinienne. 3 vols. Paris, 1908-1912. Mehl, R. "Le Christianisme primitif et le probleme de la guerre." Le Monde, December 26, 1961.
Menard, P. "Profil de Saint Martin." Revue de l'Universite de Laval, 8 (1953), 3-19, 115-138.
Menoud, P. H. L'Evangile de Jean. 2nd ed. Neuchatel-Paris, 1947. Mercurelli, C. "Il sarcofago di un centurione pretoriano cristiano a la diffusione del cristianesimo nelle coorti pretorie." Riviste di Archeologia Cristiana, 16 (1939), 73-99.
Meslin, M. Review of EL. Archives de Sociologic des Religions, 10 (1960), 184-185.
Meyendorff, J. Introduction d l'~tude de Gregoire Palamas. Paris, 1959.
Mihailov, G. Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae. Academia Litterarum Bulgarica, Institutum Archaeologicum, Series Epigraphica, IX. Sofia, 1966.
Milburn, R. L. P. Early Christian Interpretations of History. New York, 1954.
Misset, E. Pourquoi Sairet Martin refusa-t-il de combattre: Pugnare mihi non licet et le 74 a Canon d'Hippolyte. Paris, 1907.
Moffat, J. "War." In J. Hastings, ed., Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edinburgh, 1915-1918, II, pp. 644-673.
Mohrmann, C. "Encore une Fois 'Paganus.' " VC, 7 (1952), 109122; repr: in her Etudes sur le Latin des Chr~tiens, III. Rome, 1965, pp. 277-289.
. "Epiphania." RSPT, 37 (1953), 644-670; repr. in her Etudes sur le Latin des Chretiens, I. 2nd ed. Rome, 1961, pp. 245-275.
. "Sacramentum Bans les plus anciens textes chretiens." HThR, 47 (1954), 141-152; repr. in her Etudes sur le Latin des Chretiens, I. 2nd ed. Rome, 1961, pp. 233-244.
. "Statio." VC, 7 (1953), 221-245; repr. in her Etudes sur le Latin des Chretiens, III. Rome, 1965, pp. 307-330.
Moln4r, A. "L'Eschatologie contre 1'Imperialisme romain." Unpublished lecture given at the pastoral meeting of the Union of Czech Brethren, January 30-February 3, 1955. Reported in Protestant Churches in Czechoslovakia, 2, no. 2 (1956), p. 13.
Monceaux, P. "Etude critique sur la Passio Tipasii." Revue archeologique, 4, no. 4 (1904), 267-274.
. Histoire litteraire de l'Afrlque chretienne. 2 vols. Paris, 1901-1902.
. "La Question du Priscillianisme." JS, n.s., 9 (1911), 70-75, 104-113.
. "Saint Augustin et la Guerre." In P. Batiffol, et al., L'Eglise et la Guerre. Paris, 1913.
. Saint Cyprten. Paris, 1914.
. La Vraie Legende doree. Paris, 1928.
Monod, G. "L'Histoire." In F. Thomas, ed., De la methode daps les Sciences. Paris, 1909.
Moreau, E. de. "Le Nombre des Martyrs des Persécutions romaines." NRTh, 73 (1951), 812-832.
. "Nouvelles Observations sur le Nombre des Martyrs." BARB, 38 (1952), 62-70.
Moreau, J. "Eusebe de Cesaree." DHGE, XV (1963), cols. 14371460.
. "Les Litterae Licinii." AUS, 2 (1953), 100-105. "Notes d'Histoire romaine." AUS, 2 (1953), 89-99.
. La Persécution du Christianisme daps l'Empire romain. Paris, 1956.
. "Verite historique et Propagande politique chez Lactance et dans la Vita Constantini." AUS, 4 (1955), 89-97.
. "Zur Religionspolitik Konstantins des Grossen." AUS, 1 (1952), 160-168.
Mulders, J. "Vitricius van Rouan, Leven en leer." Bijdragen, 17 (1956), 1-25; 18 (1957), 270-289.
Musurillo, H., ed. The Acts of the Christian Martyrs. Oxford, 1972.

358
Nautin, P. Hippolyte et Josipe. Contribution d l'histoire de la littérature chrétienne du 3e siécle. Paris, 1947.
Neill, S. A History of Christian Missions. London, 1964.
Néve, F. "Constantin et Thcodose devant les Eglises orientales." In his L'Arménie chrétienne et sa littérature. Paris, 1886. Newman, J. "Modern War and Pacifism." Irish Theological
Quarterly, n. s. , 28 ( 1961 ), 181-206.
Nielsen, E. "La guerre considérEe comme une religion et la religion comme une guerre." Studies Theologica, 15 (Aarhus, 1961), 93112.
Opitz, H.-G., ed. Athanasius Werke, III, i, Urkunden zur Geschichte des Arianischen Streites. Berlin-Leipzig, 1934.
Orgels, P. "A propos des erreurs historiques de la Vita Constantini." In Mélanges H. Grégoire, Revue Internationale de Philosophie. Brussels, 1963, pp. 575-611.
Ortroy, F. van. "Saint Ambroise et 1'Empereur Théodose." AB, 23 (1904), 417-426.
Ostrogorsky, G. History of the Byzantine State. Transl. J. Hussey. Oxford, 1956.
P. M. (initials). Review of EL. Feuille d'Avis de Lausanne. Nov. 15, 1960.
Palanque, J.-R. "Un anniversaire." Le Monde, March 30, 1966. . Le Chrtstianisme et l'Occident barbare. Paris, 1945.
. "Constantin, Empereur chrétien, d'aprés ses Récents Historiens." In Etudes médiévales offertes d M. le Doyen Fliche. Paris, 1952, pp. 133-142.
. "Constantin Ie~ le Grand," DHGE, XIII (1956), cols. 593608.
. "A propos du Prétendu Edit de Milan." Byz, 10 (1935), 607616.
G. Bardy, P. de Labriolle, G. de Plinval, L. Brehier. The Church in the Christian Roman Empire. Transl. E. C. Messenger. 2 vols. London, 1949-1952.
Paredi, A. S. Ambroglio a la sues Eta. 2nd ed. Milan, 1960.
Parker, T. M. Christianity and the State in the Light of History. London, 1955.
Pasquali, G. Stories delta Tradizione a Critics del Testo. Florence, 1934.
Peterson, E. Le Mystére des Jutfs et des Lentils daps l'Eglise. Paris, n.d.
. Der Monotheismus als politisches Problem. Leipzig, 1935.
. "Das Problem des Nationalismus im alten Christentum." ThZ, 7 (1951), 81-91.
Petit, P. "Libanius et la 'Vita Constantini.' " Histories, 1 (1950), 562582.
Peyer, E. de. "Chronique théologique: L'Eglise en son chemin vers la fidélité." Journal de Genéve, June 28, 1960.
Pflaum, H. G. Review of D. van Berchem, Le Martyre. RELA, 34 (1956), 410-413.
Philip, A. Le Christianisme et la Paix. Paris, 1933.
Piganio], A. "Bulletin historique, Histoire romaine, 5." RH, 219 (1959), 129-139.
. L'Empereur Constantin. Paris, 1932.
. L'Empire chrétien, 325-395. Paris, 1947.
. "L'Etat actuel de la Question constantinienne, 1930-1949." Histories, 1 ( 1950 ), 82-96.
Pichon, ft. Lactance, Etude sur le Mouvement philosophique et religieux sous le Régne de Constantin. Paris, 1901.
Plinval, G. de. "Tertullien et le Scandale de la Couronne." In Mélanges de Ghellinck. Gembloux, 1951.
Preuschen, E. Analekta, I, Staat and Christentum bis auf Konstantin. 2nd ed. T1~bingen, 1909.
"Problemidinonviolenza." Protestantismo,1967, pp.186-187. Profillet, C. Les Saints militaires, Martyrologe, Vies et Notices. 6 vols. Paris, 1891.
Puech, A. "Les Origines du Priscillianisme et 1'Orthodoxie de Priscillien." BALAC, 2 (1912), 81-95, 161-213.
. Saint Jean Chrysostome et les Moeurs de son temps. Paris, 1891.
Pury, R. de. La Maison de Dieu. Cahiers théologiques, 14. Neuchatel, 1946.
Quasten, J. Patrology. 3 vols. Utrecht-Brussels, 1950-1960.
Rahner, H. L'Eglise et l'Etat dans le Christianisme primitif. Transl. G. Zinck. Paris, 1964.
. "Pompa Diaboli." ZkTh, 55 (1931 ), 239-273.
Ramsay, W. M. "The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia." Journal of

360
Hellenic Studies, 4 (1883), 370-436.
. The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia. 2 vols. Oxford, 1891. Regamey, P. R. "La conscience chretienne et la guerre." Cahiers St. Jacques, no. 27 (1962).
Regnier, A. Saint Martin. 6th ed. Paris, 1925.
Regout, R. La Doctrine de la Guerre juste de Saint Augustin h nos fours. Paris, 1935.
Richard, M. "Bibliographie de la Controverse: Hippolyte-Josipe." PO, 27, ii ( 1954 ), 271-272.
. "Bulletin de Patrologie." MSR, 5 (1948), 273-308.
. "Comput et chronographie chez S. Hippolyte." MSR, 7 ( 1950 ), 237-268; 8 ( 1951 ), 19-50.
Richardson, C. C. "The Date and Setting of the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus." Anglican Theological Review, 30 (1948), 38-44. Richard-Molard, G. Review of EL. R~forme, October 15, 1960. Ricoeur, P. Etat et Violence. Geneva, 1957.
. "L'homme non-violent et sa presence ~ 1'histoire." Esprit, 18 ( 1949 ), 224-234.
. "La merveille, 1'errance, 1'enigme." Esprit, 28 (1960), 16651676.
Riedel, W. Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien. Leipzig, 1900.
Robert, J., and Louis Robert. "Bulletin epigraphique." Revue des Etudes Grecques, 75 (1962), 130-226.
Robert, L. Noms indigenes daps l'Asie-Mineure gréco-romaine. Bibliotheque archeologique et historique de 1'Institut Fran~ais d'Archeologie d'Istanbul, 13. Paris, 1963.
. "Seance du 4 Mai 1962."Comptes-rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres pour 1962. Paris, 1963, p. 115. Roques, R. Review of EL RHR, 164 (1963), 239-242.
Rordorf, W. "Tertullians Beurteilung des Soldatenstandes." VC, 23 (1969), 105-141.
Rossi, G. B. de., ed. Inscrtptiones Christianae Urbis Romae septimo saeculo antiquiores. 2 vols. Rome, 1861, 1888.
Roth, C. Review of D. van Berchem, Le Martyre. Revue Suisse d'Histoire, 1957, pp. 511-514.
Rouget, j. Review of EL. Vie Protestante, December 2, 1960. Rouquette, R. Review of EL. Etudes, 308, i (1961), 424.
Runciman, J. C. S. A History of the Crusades. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1952-1954.
Ryan, E. A. "The Rejection of Military Service by Early Christians." TS, 13 (1952), 1-32.
. Review of EL. Erasmus, 15 (1963), cols. 453-454. Sabatier, P. Vie de S. Franrois d'Assise. Paris, n.d.
Salles, R. "La Tradition apostolique est-elle un temoin de la liturgie romaine?" RHR, 148 (1955), 181-213.
. Trots antiques rituels du bapt~me. SCH, LIX. Paris, 1958. Schatz, W. "Studien zur Geschichte and Vorstellungswelt des fruhen abendl~ndischen Mt3nchtums." Unpubl. thesis, University of Freiburg/Breisgau, 1957.
Schilling, R. La religion romaine de Vrsnus depuis les origines jusqu'au temps d'Auguste. Paris, 1954.
Scott, E. F. Man and Society in the New Testament. New York,1946. Secretan, H. F. "Le Christianisme des Premiers Siécles et le Service militaire." RTP, 2 (1914), 345-365.
Seston, W. Diocl~tien et la T~trarchie, I. Paris, 1946.
. "L'Opinion paienne et la Conversion de Constantin." RHPR, 16 (1936), 250-264.
. "A Propos de la Passio Marcelli Centurionis." In P. Benoit, et al., Aux Sources de la Tradition chretienne, Melanges offerts d M. Goguel. Neuchatel, 1950.
Setton, K. M. Christian Attitude Towards the Emperor in the Fourth Century. New York, 1941.
Simon, M. Venus Israr3l. Paris, 1948.
Sirinelli, J. Les Vues Histortques d'Eusrjbe de Crssaree durant la Periode Prenicéenne. Universite de Dakar, Faculte des Lettres et Sciences Humaines, Publications de la Section des .Langues et Litteratures, 10. Dakar, 1961.
Soras, A. de. "Le Probleme de 1'Objection de Conscience." Revue de l'Action populaire, 36 (1950), 241-254.
Spanneut, M. "Eusebe de Nicomedie." DHGE, 15 (1963), cols. 1466-1472.
Stauffer, E. Christ and the Caesars: Historical Sketches. Transl. K. and R. Gregor Smith. London, 1955.
Straub, J. "Kaiser Konstantin als episkopos ton ektos." SP, 1 (Berlin, 1957), 678-695.

362
Sturzo, L. Church and State. Transl. B. B. Carter. Notre Dame, Indiana, 1962.
Tanquerey, A. "Synth~se de la doctrine théologique sur le droit de guerre." In P. Batiffol, et al., L'Eglise et la guerre. Paris, 1913. Thamin, R. Saint Ambroise et la Morale chr~tienne au IV a Si~cle. Paris, 1895.
Treu, K. Synesios von Kyrene, Ein Kominentar zu seinem "Dion." TU, LXXI. Berlin, 1958.
Treu, U. "Etymologie and Allegorie bei Klemens von Alexandrien." SP, IV (TU, 79 [Berlin, 1961]), 191-211.
Turmel, J. "L'Eschata1ogie ~ la fin du IV a siécle." RHL, 3 (1900), 97-127, 200-232, 289-321.
. Histoire den Dogmes. 6 vols. Paris, 1931-1936.
Vacandard, E. "La Question du Service militaire chez les Chr~tiens den Premiers Siécles." Etudes de Critique et d'Histoire religieuse, 2nd ser., Paris, 1910, pp. 127-168.
. Saint Victrtce, Ev~que de Rouen. Paris, 1903.
Vanderpol, A. La Doctrine scolastique du Droit de Guerre. Paris, 1925.
. "Le 'Droit de Guerre' de Franqois de Victoria." In P. Batiffol, et al., L'Eglise et la Guerre. Paris, 1913.
. "Le traits 'De Indis' de F. de Victoria." In P. Batiffol., et al., L'Eglise et la Guerre. Paris, 1913.
Verseils, P. Review of EL. Etudes wang~liques, 20 (1960), 120. Vicaire, M. H. Review of EL. RHE, 56 (1961), 391-392.
Villemain, A. F. Tableau de l'~loquence chrétienne au IV a si~cle. Paris, 1849,
Villey, M. Review of EL. RHDF, 40 (1962), 267-268.
Viollet, L. "L'Objection de Conscience." L'Ami du Clergy, 60 (1950), 369-376.
Vischer, L. Review of EL. ThZ, 17 (1961), 66-68.
Visser, A. J. "Christianus sum, non possum militare, Soldatenmartyria uit de derde eeuw." lVederlandsch archief voor kerkelijke geschiedenis, 48 (1967), 5-19.
Vittinghoff, F. "Eusebius als Verfasser der Vita Constantini." RhM, 96 ( 1953 ), 330-373.
Vogt, J. "Die Vita Constantini den Eusebius fiber den Konflikt zwischen Constantin and Licinius." Historic, 2 (1953-1954), 463-471.
and H. Last. "Christenverfolgung." RACK, II (1954), cols. 1159-1228.
Vog1~é, A. de. La Communaut~ et l'abb~ daps la R~gle de St. Basile. Paris, 1961.
Waszink, J. H. "Pompa Diaboli." VC, 1 (1947), 15-41.
Weinel, H. Die Stellung des Urchrtstentums zum Staat. TUbingen, 1908.
Wilhelm, A. "Griechische Grabinschriften aus Kleinasien." Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 27 (1932), 792-865.
Willamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von. "Die Hymnen den Proklos and Synesios." SAB, 14 (1907), 272-295.
Wilmart, A. "Le texte latin de la Paradosis de Saint Hippolyte." RSR, 9 (1919), 62-71.
Windass, S. Christianity Versus Violence: A Socfal and Historical Study of War and Christianity. London, 1964.
	. , with a rejoinder by J. Newman. "The Early Christian At	titude to War." Irish Theological Quarterly, 29 (1962), 235-248. 	. "Saint Augustine and the Just War." Blackfriars, 43 	(November, 1962), 460-468.
Wurm, H. Studien and Texte zur Dekretalensammlung den Dionysius Exiguus. Bonn, 1939.
Zahn, T. Der Hirte den Herman. Gotha, 1868.
Zeiller, J. Origines chr~tiennes daps les provinces danubiennes. Paris, 1918.

Secondary Sources (Supplement)
Aland, Kurt. "The Relation Between Church and State in Early Times: A Reinterpretation." Jourrutl of Theological Studies, 19 (1968), 115-127.
Auer, Joan. "Militia Christi." DS, X (1979), cols. 1210-1223.
Barclay, W. "Church and State in the Apologists." Expository Times, 1 (1937-1938), 360-362.
Baynes, N. H. "Constantine the Great and the Christian Church." Proceedings of the British Academy, 15(1929), 341-442.
Beskow, P. Rex Glortae: The Kingship of Christ in the Early Church. Stockholm, 1962.
Bienert, W. Krieg, Kriegsdienst and Kriegsdienstverweigerung nach der Botschaft des Neuen Testaments. Stuttgart, 1952.
Brock, P. Pacifism in Europe to 1914. Princeton, 1972.
Cadbury, H. J. "The Basis of Early Christian Antimilitarism." Journal of Biblical Literature, 37 (1918), 66-94.
Chadwick, H. Prtscillian of Avila. Oxford, 1976.
Crescenti, G. Obiettori di coscienza a martin militari dei prima cinque secoli del Cristianesimo. Palermo, 1966.
Delehaye, H. Mélanges d'hagiographie grecque et latine. Subsidia Hagiographica, 42. Brussels, 1966.
Dignath-Diiren, W. Kirche, Krteg, Krlegsdienst. Hamburg, 1955. Dolbeau, F. "A propos du texte de la 'Passio Marcelli Centurionis.' " AB, 90 (1972), 329-335.
Materials which Dr. Hornus did not use in this study, either because he was unaware of them, or because they have appeared since 1970. They have been collected by Alan Kreider, who has edited this volume.
Dubois, D. Anntutire de l'Ecole pratique des hautes Etudes, 19711972. Paris, 1972.
Eppslein, John. The Catholic Tradition of the Law of Nations. London, 1935.
Fears, J. R. Princeps a Diis Electus: The Divine Election of the Emperor as a Political Concept at Rome. Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome, 26. Rome, 1977.
Ferguson, J. "The Nature of Early Christian Pacifism." Hibbert Journal, 55 (1957), 340-349.
. "The Pacifism of the Early Church." In his The Politics of Love: The New Testament and Non-Violent Revolution. Cambridge, 1974, pp. 55-67.
Fontaine, J. "Chrétiens et barbares: un aspect éclairant du débat entre Tertullien et la cité romaine." Romano-barbarlca, 2 (Rome, 1977), 27-57.
. "Romanité et hispanité dans la littérature hispano-romaine des IV a et V a siécles." Assimilation et resistance h la culture greco-romaine Bans le Monde ancien, VI a Congrés international d'Etudes Classiques, Madrid, September 1974. Paris, 19'7, pp. 301-322.
Gábri~, K. "The Question of Militarism at the Time of the Apostolic Fathers." Communio Viatorum, 20 (1977), 227-232.
Gaudemet, J., ed. Conches Gaulois du I V a Sit3cle. SCH, CCXLI. Paris, 1977.
Gero, Stephen. "Miles Gloriosus: The Christians and the Military Service." Church History, 39 (1970), 285-298.
Gollwitzer, H. "Krieg and Christentum." In K. Galling, ed., Die Religion in Geschichte and Gegenwart. 3rd ed. Tilbingen, 1960, IV, 66-74.
Grant, R. M. Early Christianity and Society. San Francisco, 1977.
. "Sacrifices and Oaths as Required of Early Christians." In P. Granfield and J. Jungmann, eds., Kyriakon: Festschrift Johannes Quasten, 2 vols. Mi7nster, 1970, pp. 12-17.
Helgeland, J. "Christians and Military Service, A.D. 173-337." Unpublished PhD thesis, Divinity School, University of Chicago, 1973.
. "Christians and the Roman Army, A.D. 173-337." Church History, 43 (1974), 149-163, 200.

366
Hoppenbrouwers, H. A. M. Recherches sur la terminologie du martyre de Tertullien d Lactance. Latinitas Christianorum Primaeva, 15. Nijmegen, 1961.
Hornus, J.-M. "Les Inscriptions funéraires militaires chrétiennes anciennes." Archiv fiirPapyrusforschung, 22/23 ( 1974), 223-228. Isichei, E. Political Thinking and Social Experience: Some Christian
Interpretations of the Roman Empire from Tertullian to Salvian. Christchurch, 1964.
Jones, A.H.M. Constantine and the Conversion of Europe. London, 1948.
Karpp, H. "Die Stellung der alten Kirche zu Kriegsdienst and Krieg." Evangelische Theologie, 17 (1957), 496-515.
Klein, R. Tertullian and das rgmische Reich. Heidelberg, 1968. Kretschmar, G. "Der Weg zur Reichskirche." In Verkilndigung and Forschung, TheologischerJahresbericht,l3(Munich,1968),3-44.
Lopuszanski, G. "La Police romaine et les Chr~tiens." L'Antiquit~ Classique, 20 (1951), 5-46.
MacMullen, Ramsay. Constantine. London, 1970.
Messineo, A. "L'Objection de Conscience devant la Morale." Givilta cattolica, February 18, 1950. Also in Documentation catholique, 45 (1950), cols. 525-532.
Minn, H. R. "Tertullian and War: Voices from the Early Church." Evangelical Quarterly, 13 ( 1941 ), 202-213.
Molland, Einar. "De kristne og militaerjenesten i gen gamle kirke." Norsk Teologisk Tidsskrift, 60(1959), 87-104
Molnár, A. A Challenge to Constantinianism: The Waldensian Theology in the Middle Ages. Geneva, 1976.
Nock, A. D. "The Roman Army and Roman Religious Year." HThR, 45 ( 1952 ), 187-252.
O'Reilly, D. F. "The Theban Legion of St. Maurice." VC, 32 (1978), 195-207.
Pietri, C. Roma Chrtstiana: Recherches sur l'Eglise de Rome, son organisation, sa politique, son td~ologie, de Miltiade d Sixte III (311-440). 2 vols. Rome, 1976.
Pietri, L., ed. Saint-Martin, textes de Sulpice Swore. Lettre de Ligug~, nos. 172-173 (July-October, 1975), Supplement.
Regibus, Luca de. "Milizia a Cristianesimo nell' Impero romano." Didaskaleion, n.s., 2 (1924), 41-69.
SchBpf, B. Das Tõtungsrecht bei den frilhchrtstlichen Schriftstellern bis zur Zest Konstantins. Regensburg, 1958.
Siniscalco, P. Massimiltano: un obiettore de coscienza del tardo impero. Historica, Politica, Philosophica, 8. Turin, 1974. Spanneut, M. "Geduld." RACK, IX (Stuttgart, 1976), cots. 243-294.
. "La non-violence chez les Peres africaines avant Constantin." In P. Granfield and J. Jungmann, eds., Kyriakon: Festschrift Johannes Quasten, 2 vols. Munster, 1970, I, pp. 3639.
. Tertullien et les premiers moraltstes africains. Paris, 1969. Venditti, R. 1 read contro il servizio militare a contro la diseiplina militare. Milan, 1968.
Watson, G. R. "Christianity in the Roman Army in Britain." In M. W. Barley and R. P. C. Hanson, eds., Christianity in Britain, 300-700. Leicester, 1968, pp. 51-54.
Winowski, L. Stosunek chrxe~cija~stwa pierwszych wiekbw do wojny. Lublin, 1947.
Yoder, John H. The Original Revolution: Essays on Christian Pacifism. Scottdale, Pa., 1971.
Zampaglione, G. The Idea of Peace in Antiquity. Transl. R. Dunn. London and Notre Dame, Indiana, 1973.

The Christian Peace Shelf
The Christian Peace Shelf is a selection of Herald Press books and pamphlets devoted to the promotion of Christian peace principles and their applications. The editor (appointed by the Mennonite Central Committee Peace Section) and an editorial board from the Brethren in Christ Church, the General Conference Mennonite Church, the Mennonite Brethren Church, and the Mennonite Church, represent the historic concern for peace within these constituencies.
For Serious Study
Christ and Violence by Ronald J. Sider (1979). A sweeping reappraisal of the church's teaching on violence.
The ChrIst~Ian and Warfare by Jacob J. Enz (1972):The roots of pacifism in the Old Testament.
It Is Not Lawful for Me to Fight by Jean-Michael Hornus (1980). Early Christian attitudes toward war, violence, and the state. Jesus and the Nonviolent ftevoluttort by André Trocmé (1973). The
social and political relevance of Jesus.
Mission and the Peace Witness edited by Robert L. Ramseyer (1979). Implications of the biblical peace testimony for the evangelizing mission of the church.
Nevertheless by John H. Yoder (1971). The varieties and shortcomings of Christian pacifism.
No King but CaesarP by William R. Durland (1975). A Catholic

370
lawyer looks at Christian violence.
The Original Revolution by John H. Yoder (1972). Essays on Christian pacifism.
Preachers Present Arms by flay H. Abrams (1969). The involvement of the church in three modern wars.
War and the Gospel by Jean Lasserre (1962). An analysis of Scriptures related to the ethical problem of war.
War, Peace, and Nonresistance by Guy F. Hershberger (Third Edition, 1969). A classic comprehensive work on nonresistance in faith and history.
What Belongs to Caesar? by Donald D. Kaufman (1969). Basic arguments against voluntary payment of war taxes.
Yahweh Is a Man of War by Millard C. Lind (1980). The theology of warfare in ancient Israel.
For Easy Reading
The Christian Way by John W. Miller (1969). A guide to the Christian life based on the Sermon on the Mount.
The Tax Dilemma: Praying for Peace, Paying for War, by Donald D. Kaufman (1978). Biblical, historical, and practical considerations on the war tax issue.
The Upside-Down K4ngdom by Donald B. Kraybill (1978). A study of the synoptic gospels on affluence, war-making, status-seeking, and religious exclusivism.
The Way of Peace by J. C. Wenger (1977). A brief treatment on Christ's teachings and the way of peace through the centuries.
For Children
Coals of F4re by Elizabeth Hershberger Bauman (1954). Stories of people who returned good for evil.
Henry's Red Sea by Barbara Claassen Smucker (1955). The dramatic escape of 1,000 Russian Mennonites from Berlin following World War II.
Peace Treaty by Ruth Nulton Moore (1977). A historical novel involving the efforts of Moravian missionary Christian Frederick Post to bring peace to the Ohio Valley in 1758.
Jean-Michel Hornus was born ins Montauban, Tarn-etGaronne, France, on October 10, 1926. He has earned degrees in philosophy, Syriac, and theology from universities and theological colleges in Toulouse, Lyon, Paris, and Montpellier, and from Union Theological Seminary in New York.
In 1952 Hornus was ordained as a minister in the French Reformed Church. Since then he was held several pastorates, including one (from 1953 to 1958) in the French-speaking evangelical church in Beirut, Lebanon. The contacts which he established at that time led to his being recalled to that region in the late 1960s by the Association for Theological Education in the Middle East. Between 1967 and 1970 he served as its first Executive Secretary.
From 1957 to 1961 Hornus was a fellow of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, which supported his researches into the history of early Christian thought. Subsequent academic assignments have included lecturing in philosophy at the Free Protestant "College Cévenol" at Le Chambon-sur-Lignon and serving as associate professor of church history and missiology at the Faculté réformée de thCologie, Aix-en-Provence. For three years he was also university chaplain at the University of Strasbourg.
Hornus has been a member of the French Fellowship of

Reconciliation since its reorganization in 1945. From 1974 to 1976 he edited its periodical Cahiers de la Récortcildatiort. He was one of the founding members of the Parti Socialiste unifié (PSU), for which he was a candidate in the 1973 national elections.
In the autumn of 1979 Hornus began his present assignment as Lecturer in the Theology of Mission and Ecumenism at the Selly Oak Colleges, Birmingham, England, in succession to Bishop Lesslie Newbigin.