ion, to a scheme of ethics founded on utility, its place is soon cliallenged by the spirit of iionois. I'aley, who de- grades the spirit of honor into a mere club-law among the higher classes, origijiating in seltisli convenience, and enforced by tlie penalty of excommunication from the society which liabit had rendered indispensable to the happiness of the individuals, has misconstrued it not less than Shaftesbury, who extols it as the noblest influ- ence of noble natures. The spirit of honor is more, in- deed, than a mere conventional substitute for honesty ; but, on the other hand, instead of being a finer form of moral life, it may be more truly described as the shad- ow or ghost of virtue deceased ; for to take the word in a sense which no man of honor would acknowledge may be allowed to the writer of satires, but not to vlie moral philosopher. Honor implies a reverence for the invisible and supersensual in our nature, and so far it is virtue ; but it is a virtue that neither understands it- self nor its true soiu-ce, and therefore often unsubsLin- tial, not seldom fantastic, and often more or less cajni- cious. Abstract the notion from the Uvcs of lord Her- bert of Cherburj', or Henrj' the Fourth of France, and then compare it with 1 Cor. xiii and the Kiiistle to I'hi- lemon, or, rather, with the realization of this fair ideal in the character of St. Paul himself. This has struck the better class even of infidels. Collins, one of the most learned of our English deists, is said to have de- clared that, contradictory as miracles appeared to his reason, he would believe in them notwithstanding if it coidd be proved to liim that St. Paul had asserted any one as having been worked by himself in the modern sense of the word miracle ; adding, ' St. Paul was so j>erfect a gentleman, and a man of honor ." I know not a better test. Nor can I think of any investigation that would be more instructive where it would be safe, but none, likewise, of greater delicacy from the proba- bility of misinterpretation than a history of the rise of honor in the European monarchies as connected Avith the corruptions of Christianity, and an inquiry into the specific causes of the inefficacy which has attended the combined efforts of divines and moralists against the practice and obligation of duelling." Of the mere- ly worldly sense of honor, Carlyle remarks, sharply enough, that it '• reveals itself too clearly as the daugh- ter and heiress of our old acquaintance. Vanity" {Essays, ii, 74). INIontescpiieu remarks that wliat is called honor in Europe is unknown, and of course unnamed, in Asia; and that it would be difficult to render the term intelli- gible to a Persian." See Jlontesquieu, Sjririt of Laws, bk. iii, ch. viii ; Coleridge, Friend, p. 377.
Honoratus, St., a Manicha'an, and archbishop of Aries, was born, according to Baillet, in Belgian Gaul, in the second half of the 4th century. He belonged to a noble family who were pagans; and when he and his brother Venantius became Christians, they left their country and parents, and travelled through Achaia, and afterwards founded a monastery on the island of Scrino, opposite Cannes, which acquired great celebrity. Some of the most eminent bishops and theologians of the otli : and 6th centuries came out of this convent. Honoratus himself became archbishop of Aries A.D. 426, and died A.U. 429. See Hocfer, Xoin: Bioy. Generale, xxv, 78.
Honoratus, St., liishop of jMarseiUes, was bora about 420 or 425, and is said to have been educated at the school of Lerins. He was the successor of the cele- brated Tillemont in the episcopacy (probably in 475), but of his works very little is known at present. Some ascribe to him the authorship of a life of St. Hilariiis, which other critics suppose to be the production of Vi- ventius. He died about 492, comiting pope Gelasius I among his admirers. — Hoefer, Noui: Bioy. Gener. xxv, 78.
Honorius, Roman emperor, son of Theodosius I, was born in 384. He was named Augustus Nov. 20, 393, and succeeded his father Jan. 17, 395, as first em- peror of the Western empire, with Rome as its capital,
HOXORIUS
324
IIONORIUS
while the Eastern fell to the lot of his brother Arcadius. llonorius was at this time only ten years of age, and he was therefore put under tlie guardianship of Stilicho, a Vandal, who had aided him in ascending the throne, and whose daughter JIaria lie mari-ied. Honorius, soon after his accession, renewed and even rendered more stringent his father's enactments against heathen- ism ; but the weakness of his government, together with the fears or heathenish tendencies of some of the gov- ernors, rendered these regidations almost of no eifect in several provinces. It having been represented to Ho- norius that the continued existence of heathen temples kejit up the heathen spirit among the people, he ordered^ (399) that all such temples should be rpaickly destroyed," so that tlie people should no longer have this tempta- tion before them. As the heathen laid great stress on a prediction that Christianity woidd disappear in its 3G5th year, the destruction of their own temples at that time made great impression on them. Yet in some dis- tricts of Northern Africa the heathen still remained nu- merous enough not only to resist, but even to oppress the Christians. After the death of Stilicho, Honorius modified his severe course against heathenism: a law was promulgated for the Western empire in A.D. 410 — " ut libera voluntate quis cultum Christianitaiis excij^eirt'" — by which the penalties pronounced by preceding laws against all who participated in any but Christian wor- ship were suspended. This law, however, remained in force but a short time, and the old enactments came again into use. An edict of 416 excluded the heathen from civil and military offices, yet we are told by Zozi- mus (v, 46) that such was the weakness of Honorius that at the request of a heathen general, who declined continuing in his service on any other terms, the edict was at once taken back. This vacillating, irresolute prince Avas also led to take part in discussions on the points of doctrine then agitating the Church. In 418 he promulgated an edict against Pelagius and the Pela- gians and Ccelicola', which was framed more in a theo- logical than an imperial style. He acted in the same manner towards the Donatists. The envoys of the North African Church succeeded in obtaining from the emperor a rule that the penalty of ten pounds of gold to which his father Theodosius had condemned heretic priests, or the owners of the places where heretics as- sembled to worship, should only be enforced against those Donatist bishops and priests in whose dioceses vi- olence had been offered to the orthodox priests. In an edict Honorius issued against the Donatists (405), he condemned them as heretics, and this with more severity even than the Council of Carthage demanded. Later he appointed a council, to be held at Carthage (411), to decide the difficulty between the Donatists and the orthodox jiarty. The imperial commissioners, of course, decided for the latter, and new edicts were published exiling Donatist i^riests, and condemning their followers to be fined. The fanaticism of the op- pressed party was excited by these measures, and the heresy only spread the more rapidly. While the reign of Honorius is thus of great importance in the history of the Church, the emperor himself showed the greatest want of energy in all his dealings, and his death, which occurred in August, 423, cannot be said to have been a loss to either the State or the Church. — Herzog, Bral- A'>n-i/l-l(ip. vi, 251 ; Mosheim, Ch. History, vol. i ; (iibbon, DicUne and Fall, chaj). xxix-xxxiii ; Sozomen, Hist. Ec- cles. chap, viii-x ; Scliaff, Ch. Hist, ii, 66 sq. ; Lea, Sacer- dotal Celihaqi, p. 54, 72, 83 ; Christ. Remembrancer, July, 1868, p. 237. See Donatists.