OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 443 uses of the bishop himself, of his inferior clergy, of the C ll A P. poor, and of the pubhc worship ; and the abuse of this ' ' sacred trust was strictly and repeatedly checked . The patrimony of the church was still subject to all the public imi)ositions of the state. The clergy of Rome, Alexandria, Thessalonica, etc. might solicit and obtain some partial exemptions ; but the premature attempt of the great council of Rimini, which aspired to universal freedom, was successfully resisted by the son of Con- stantine ^ IV. The Latin clergy, who erected their tribunal on IV. Civil the ruins of the civil and common law, have modestly ^""^ accepted as the gift of Constantine % the independent jurisdiction which was the fruit of time, of accident, and of their own industry. But the liberality of the christian emperors had actually endowed them with some legal prerogatives, which secured and dignified the sacerdotal character'. 1. Under a despotic go- P See Thomassin, Discipline de I'Eglise, torn. iii. 1. ii. c. 13, 14, 15. p. 639 — 706. The legal division of the ecclesiastical revenue docs not appear to have been established in the time of Ambrose and Chrysostom. Simpli- cius and Gelasius, who were bishops of Rome in the latter part of the lifth century, mention it in their pastoral letters as a general law, which was al- ready confirmed by the custom of Italy. 1 Ambrose, the most strenuous asserter of ecclesiastical privileges, sub- mits without a murmur to the payment of the landtax. " Si tnbutum petit imperator, non negamus ; agri ecclesise solvunt tributum ; solvimus quse sunt Caisaris Cffisari, et qua; sunt Dei Deo : tributum Ceesaris est ; non ne- gatur." Baronius labours to interpret this tribute as an act of charity rather than of duty ; ( Annal. Kccles. A. D. 337 ;) but the words, if not the inten- tions, of Ambrose, are more candidly explained by Thomassin, Discipline de I'Eglise, torn. iii. 1. i. c. 34. p. 268. ■■ In Ariminense synodo super ecclesiarum et clericorum privilegiis trac- tatu habito, usque eo dispositio progressa est, ut juga qua; viderentur ad ec- clesiam pertinere, a publica functione cessarent inquietudine desistente : quod nostra videtur dudum sanctio repulsisse. Cod. Theod. 1. xvi. tit. ii. leg. 15. Had the synod of Rimini carried this point, such practical merit might have atoned for some speculative heresies.
- From Eusebius (in Vtt. Constant. I. iv. c. 27.) and Sozomen (1. i. c. 9.)
we are assured that the episcopal jurisdiction was extended and confirmed by Constantine ; but the forgery of a famous edict, which was never fairly inserted in the Theodosian Code, (see at the end, torn. vi. p. 303.) is de- monstrated by Godefroy in the most satisfactory manner. It is strange that M. de Montesquieu, who was a lawyer as well as a philosopher, should al- lege this edict of Constantine (Esprit des Loix, I. xxix. c. 16.) without inti- mating any suspicion. ' The subject of ecclesiastical jurisdiction has been involved in a mist of passion, of prejudice, and of interest. Two of the fairest books which have fallen into my hands are, the Institutes of Canon Law, by the abbe de Fleury, and tlie Civil History of Naples, by Giannone. Their moderation
