With the confinement of Paul, a new and important era commenced not only in his life and ministry, but also in the development of the churches founded by him, for in proportion as Christianity spread more widely, a number of heterogeneous mental elements were brought into action, many important phenomena became conspicuous, while the divine word operated among them in an independent manner, and they were deprived of the apostle's personal oversight and guidance.

the continued propagation of Christianity, instead of travelling to those regions of the West, where nothing had yet been done for making known the gospel? This is explicable only on the supposition, that he remained so long a time at Rome under constraint.

According to the account in the Acts, we may receive it as an established fact, that Paul lived two years in Rome as a prisoner, a fact which can be overturned by nothing that we know of the course of Roman justice in the case of such appeals; even without waiting to examine how both could be reconciled to one another.

Meanwhile, from what is known of the legal processes in the time of the first Cæsars, it can by no means be proved, what is in the highest degree improbable, that all the causes which, in consequence of an appeal, were brought to Rome for decision, were decided in the course of five or ten days. It was one thing to decide on the admissibility of the appeal, and another thing to decide on the point of law respecting which the appeal was made. My respected colleague, Professor Rudorff, who has had the goodness to make me a written communication on this subject, concludes with the statement, that the term of five or ten days related not to the duration of the judicial proceedings, but to the lodging of the appeal, and to the apostoli (= literæ dimissoriæ), that it gave no prescription relative to the term of the transaction itself, and that the accused remained under arrest till the decision of the emperor. Thus, in the Sententia Recepta of Julius Paulus, lib. v. tit. 34, it is said expressly of the apostoli, "Quorum postulatio et acceptio intra quintum diem ex officio facienda est." In a law enacted by the Emperor Constantine in 314, according to which we are not justified in determining the legal process in the times of the first Cæsars, is the express provision that the appellator should be free from arrest only in causæ civiles, but of criminales causæ it is said, "In quibus, etiamsi possunt provocare, eum tamen statum debent obtinere, ut post provocationem in custodia perseverent." Cod. Theodos. lib. xi. tit. 30, c. 2.

CHAPTER IX.

PAUL DURING HIS FIRST CONFINEMENT AT ROME, AND THE DEVELOPMENT DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF THE CHURCHES PREVIOUSLY FOUNDED BY HIM.

IN examining this portion of Paul's history, we must fix our attention on three principal points; his relation to the Roman state, to the Church at Rome,—and to the Churches in other parts.

With respect to the first, the main thing to be considered is, from what point of view the charge under which he was detained as a prisoner is to be viewed? Christianity was not yet denounced as a religio illicita, therefore Paul could not, like the later teachers of Christianity, be accused of violating the laws of the state, on account of his exertions in propagating this religion. Christians appeared only as a sect proceeding from Judaism, who were accused by Paul's Jewish adversaries of adulterating the original doctrines of their religion; so that at Rome no attention was paid to disputes that merely concerned the religious institutions of the Jews. This charge against Paul might therefore be considered as altogether foreign to Roman judicature, and he would soon regain his liberty; in this manner, the affair would soon be brought to a close; but it cannot be shown, that it would be viewed under this aspect, the most favourable for the apostle. The Jews might accuse him as being a disturber of the public peace, who interfered with the privileges guaranteed to them by the Roman government, as their advocate Tertullus had already attempted to prove. Hence an additional allegation might be made, which from the standing-point of the Roman law would tend much more to Paul's injury-that he had caused among other Roman subjects and citizens in the provinces, and in Rome itself, movements which were detrimental to the good order of the state; that he had tempted them to apostatize from the state religion, by propagating a religion at variance with the ancient Roman institutions, in which religion and politics were

intimately blended.' If the church at Rome, consisting mainly of Gentile Christians, gave the impression in its whole appearance of being unjewish, in short, a genus tertium; this view of Paul's conduct would be formed so much the more easily. The existence of this new religious sect in the capital, would be made an object of public attention by the proceedings against Paul. We may suppose, that his fanatical and artful adversaries among the Jews would leave no artifice untried to set his conduct in the worst possible light to the Roman authorities. Thus the investigation of his cause, with the accusation and defence, might be protracted, and his prospects might by turns become favourable or unfavourable. During the first period of his residence at Rome he underwent no public examination. His situation justified the most favourable expectations, and he proposed when set at liberty, before he extended his sphere of labour towards the West, according to the plan he had previously formed, to visit Lesser Asia, where his personal exertions seemed to be very necessary to counteract many influences that were operating injuriously on the churches. He intimated to the overseer of the church at Colossæ, Philemon, that he intended to take up his abode with him.

2

At a later period of his imprisonment, when he had already undergone a public examination, he had no such favourable prospect before him; the thought of martyrdom became familiar to his mind, yet the expectation of being released from confinement was predominant, so that he wrote to the church at Philippi that he hoped to come to them soon. But if the view we have taken of the origin and

66

1 The point of view as a Roman statesman from which Cicero formed his model of law. 'Separatim nemo habessit Deos neve novos sive advenas, nisi publice adscitos privatim colunto. Ritus familiæ patrumque servanto." Cicero de Legibus; and in the Commentaries, c. x., against the confusio religionum, which arose from the introduction of foreign new religions. This was the point of view from which a Tacitus and the Younger Pliny formed their judgment of Christianity.

2 Whether this term embraced the whole of the first two years of his confinement we cannot with certainty determine, for the silence of Luke in the Acts is not a sufficient proof that, during the whole of this period, there was nothing memorable to be narrated respecting the situation of the apostle.

3 As appears from his Epistle to the Philippians.

original constitution of the church at Rome be correct, a close connexion and intimate communion may be presumed to have existed between its members and the individual whom they might regard mediately as their spiritual father, and whose peculiar form of doctrine prevailed among them. Now if the epistles which Paul wrote during his first confinement at Rome bore evidence against such a supposition, they might also be adduced against our views. If these epistles make us acquainted with any difference existing between the Roman church and Paul, this fact would be very decisive, and we should be forced to conclude that a strongly marked Judaizing element predominated in that church. But the Roman Christians had already, even before he arrived at Rome, evinced their sympathy, since several of their number travelled a day's journey, as far as the small town of Forum Appii, and some a shorter distance to the place called Tres Taberna, in order to meet him. In the Epistle to the Philippians he sends salutation from the whole church (Távtes di ayio) which is a proof of the close connexion in which he stood with them. As to his giving special salutations from the Christians in the service of the imperial palace (the Caesariani), we are not to infer that these persons were more in unison with him than the rest of the church, but rather that they were better acquainted, and on more intimate terms with the church at Philippi. At all events, it is an arbitrary supposition that these Gentile Christians were those who, in distinction from the rest of the church, consisting of Jewish Christians, were in closer connexion with Paul. 1 It might indeed be expected, that if these Cæsariani were more allied by their Gentile origin to the church at Philippi, he would have mentioned this circumstance as the reason for presenting their special salutations. It is not at all inconsistent with this view, if these epistles contain undeniable marks, that in the Roman church Judaizers were found hostile to Paul, and who occasioned him much vexation; for we ourselves have pointed out a Judaizing tendency in a smaller part of this church sufficient to account for such an appearance. As the Gentile Christians who advocated the Pauline principles, now found so important a support in his

1 See Schneckenburger, p. 123.

personal presence, and cooperated with him in publishing the gospel among the Gentiles, the opposition of the Judaizing antipauline party must have been excited by it and rendered still more violent. The whole tone of the Epistle to the Philippians testifies of the conflicts he sustained in his intercourse with the Judaizers. His excited feelings cannot be mistaken; his displeasure was called forth by anxiety for the purity of the gospel against those who, where the soul appeared in a fit state for receiving the gospel, sought to take advantage of it for gaining adherents for their Jewish ceremonies and doctrine of meritorious works. And Paul himself distinguishes those among the Roman Christians who, with friendly feelings towards himself, were active in cooperating with him for the spread of the gospel, from those who, animated with jealousy at his success, endeavoured to form a party against him, and to “add affliction to his bonds," Philip. i. 15—18; and among the Jewish Christians he could only point out two who laboured with him for the kingdom of God, and contributed to his comfort; Col. iv. 11.

During his confinement, anxiety for the extension of the kingdom of God, and for the prosperity of the churches he had founded, occupied him far more than the care of his personal welfare. As all persons had free access to him, he thus enjoyed opportunities for preaching the gospel. By the soldiers who relieved one another in standing guard over him, it became known among their comrades, (among the cohortes prætorianæ, in the castra prætoria, in the prætorium;) and hence to a wider extent in the city, that he was put in confinement, not on account of any civil offence, but for his zeal on behalf of the new religion; and this tended to promote it, since a cause for which its advocate sacrificed everything was certain of attracting attention. By his example also many of the Roman Christians were roused to publish the truth zealously and boldly. But while some cooperated with Paul in a oneness of heart and mind, others came forward who belonged to the antipauline Judaizing party, in opposition to his method of publishing the gospel. The manner in which he expresses hirusclf respecting these his opponents is worthy of notice on wo accounts. We here see a man who could entirely forget his own person when the cause of his Lord was concerned,-who could even rejoice in