It would be unjust to infer that the Christian soldiers who were not martyred Avere necessarily of inferior quality to their fellows. The Romans were not a persecuting people. Except on special occasions + of popular fury, they did not as a rule force the issue even on civilian Christians, and in the army, particularly on active service in the provinces, where men held together in face of a common enemy, there would seldom be any occasion or desire to throw a legionary into difficulties by raising the question of his religious beliefs. The enforcement of even an imperial edict depended largely on the local authorities. It was not uni- formly put into execution throughout the army, and this explains partly why some soldiers sufl'ered while others seem to have been exempted. How far Christian soldiers even acted as missionaries of the faith we can only surmise. The devotees of Mithra in the legions certainly carried their wor- ship with tliem, and Mithrieums were erected all over the Empire where the army had their head- quarters. Did Christian soldiers push the propa- ganda of their faith also ? Was it to them, or to traders, that the early introduction of Christianity
* The 18th Homilij of Basil (' in Gordium Martyreni ') is on a centurion who withdrew from the army rather than soil his faith by offering sacrifice. But he was not martyred for that.
t In a general persecution, e.g., like that of Decins (a.d. '.^50), soldiers as well as civilians are expressly said to have suffered at Alexandria (Eus. HE vii. 11. 20).
into Britain was due — the introduction of which Tertullian speaks so proudly by the end of the 2iid cent. {ado. Jud. 7)? In our jnesent state of know- ledge, this is a question which can only he asked. I'rohabilities are not evidence, and there are no reliable data to support even inferences tliat might serve as an answer.
8. The practical solution of the problem. — It is only upon a generous estimate of the scope of this Dictionary that the survey has been carried down even this length; but for the sake of completeness a word may be added upon the final solution of the problem, so far as it was finally settled, for the early Church. The open adhesion of Constan- tino to Christianity, after his defeat of Licinius, entirely altered the focus of the problem. When the head of the army had become a Christian, and especially when he used the nails which were alleged to have been used for the cross to fix his armour (Socrates, HE i. 17 : tous tJXoks Se, ot raU X^P<^i- ■roij XpLarou Kara, rbv (jravphv ^vcTrdyrjaav, 6 Kojf- arai'TLVos Xa^uiv , . . x^^^^'Ot'S re /cat ir€piK€(pa.\alav ■noi-quas, iv Toh iroK^pi.oi^ ^A'exp^ro), a whole series of dilliculties was removed ; theoretically, a number of the objections urged during the pagan regime fell to the ground. Tlie army had received a semi- consecration. Christians were no longer exposed to pagan seduction in the army. A passing wave of reaction might alter the situation under Julian,* liut this was temporary, and the position after Constantine was in the main established. The only scruple which Christians could now feel about military service was with regard to bloodshed. Was war, even^ under the auspices of a Christian Emperor, and in defence of the State, permis.sible or advisable for members of the Church ? The question had reduced itself to this. Yet, at the same time, it was soon to broaden out : for, when the Church and the State were allied, their common interests were sometimes bound to make war assume the position of a holy war.
As early as 314 a Council of the Church in the West seems to have been anxious to prove the loyalty of Christians to the army, in view of Constantine's sympathies. The third canon of the Council of Aries runs thus : ' De his qui anna projiciunt in pace, placuit abstineri eos a coni- inunione.' The difficulty of the phraseology was felt at an early period, as is plain from the v. I. proelio, which would mean that soldiers who proved cowards in face of the enemy were to be excommunicated. But would they have lived to be excommunicated ? The army would surely have dealt with them before ever the Church could. The canon does not refer either to this or, as even Hefele thought, to gladiators. It appears to be a repudiation of Christian soldiers who gave way to their scruples about war ; since the Church now enjoyed ' peace,' t under Constantine, there was no reason for this desertion, and all such persons were debarred from communion. The adhesion of the Church to the State is complete, on tliis inter- pretation of the canon. It is all the more likely that the declaration of Aries is to be read in this
•'Militiae cinfjulura non dari nisi immolantibus iubet' (Rufinus, Eus. HE x. 33). Martin of Tours left the army rather than accept a dotialivitm before battle ag;ainst the Gauls (Sulpicius Severus, Vita S. Maitini, 4). He also used army disni]iline once to enforce the artrument for celibacy. An ex- soldier who had become a monk desired to have his wife beside him, pleading that she had vowed as well as he to be a soldier of Christ, i.e. to abstain from sexual relations. Martin asked if he had ever seen women standins: in the ranks of an army drawn up for battle. The ex-so]<iier blushed at the reproof, and admitted that this was unheard of. Well, said Martin, in the Christian army the soldiers must keep separate from the women too (Sulp. Severus, Dial. ii. 11).