repeal by subsequent emperors. And this question is so far at least connected with the preceding, that the mere existence of any general edicts against Christians as such, proves that the particular charge on which the persecution was founded had been gradually lost in more general accusations, which had been followed by general inflictions. But even in this case, it becomes a question, whether Nero's edicts proceeded any further than to enforce against Christians specifically the ancient statutes universally directed against religious innovation-whether it was not rather a precedent which that emperor established, than a law which he enacted-a precedent which would be followed or disregarded by his successors, as their character and religious policy might lead them to execute or suspend the standing statutes of the empire. At least it is strange that, when his other laws were repealed, that against the Christians should alone remain in force, unless we conclude that that alone had existed before his time, and had been applied or perverted, but not enacted, by him.

After this first affliction, the Christians passed about thirty years in the silent and undisturbed propagation of their religion. In the year 94 or 95, they again attracted the attention of the civil Domitian. power, by exciting, as it would seem, the political fears of the emperor. Domitian was no doubt acquainted with an ancient prophecy prevalent throughout the east, and probably an imperfect adumbration of the prophecies of the Old Testament, that the imperial sceptre was destined one day to pass into the hands of a Jew. This led to some inquiries into the actual condition of the royal family of Jerusalem; and the grandsons of St. Jude the Apostle, the brother of the Saviour, are said to have been brought before the throne of the tyrant but his jealousy was disarmed by their poverty and simplicity, their hands were hardened with daily labour,-and their whole property consisted in one small farm of about twenty-four acres. when the emperor inquired respecting the nature of their prophetic hopes, and the character of the monarch who was to rise up from among them, he was informed, 'that his kingdom was not of earth, but heavenly and angelical; and that in the completion of time he would come in glory to judge both the living and the dead, according to their merits.' They were dismissed without injury; and soon after this event, some severities,

And

* Some declare them to have been repealed by the Senate (Mosh. de R. Christ. ante Const. sæc. ii. sect. viii.), and Tertullian (lib. i. ad Nationes, c. 7.) asserts that while all Nero's other institutes were repealed, that against the Christians alone remained.

Tertullian (lib. i. ad Nationes, c. 7.) calls Nero's edict Institutum Neronianum, and in other places (as Apol. cap. 5, and 7,) speaks of laws existing, and occasionally enforced against Christians; still we suspect him of error, if he intended to attribute to Nero the invention of those laws-an error very naturally rising from the fact, that that Emperor was the first who applied them to Christianity. See, however, Bishop Kaye on this subject, (Lec. on Tertull. pp. 115, et seq.) Certainly Gibbon is rather presumptuous in his manner of concluding, that the effects, as well as the cause, of Nero's persecution were confined to the walls of Rome, and that the religious tenets of the Christians were never made a subject of punishment or even of inquiry.' (Chap. 16.) Still we are disposed to assent at least to the first of his conclusions, as we are aware of no express authority for the contrary opinion earlier than the fifth century. (Sulp. 1. ii. p. 146.; Oros. 1. vii. c. 7, &c.) And if, on the one hand, Tillemont enumerates a great variety of martyrs who perished in that persecution (tom. ii. p. 71, et seq.); on the other, Le Clerc has anticipated Gibbon in both his positions, and argues very plausibly in favour of them. (Hist. Eccles. ad ann. 64.)

Hegesippus apud Euseb. iii. 20. Le Clerc, who is generally and justly suspicious of the authority of Hegesippus, is persuaded of the truth of this narrative, by its simplicity and candour.-Hist. Eccl. ad ann. 96.

which had lately been exercised against the Christians, were suspended by the prudence or the death † of the emperor.

*

The celebrated epistle of Pliny to Trajan was written ten or twelve years afterwards, and proves that the Christians in Bithynia Trajan. (and probably in every province of the east) were subjected to many vexations and sufferings. The emperor's answer amounted to this- that the Christians are not to be sought for, nor molested on anonymous information; but that on conviction they ought to be punished.' From a comparison of these two documents, we collect, first, that the spirit of persecution in this instance originated rather in their heathen fellow-subjects than in the character of the emperor; and secondly, that the laws by which they were punished were not any recent edicts issued by an express act of legislation against Christians, but the original statutes of the republic continued and applied to them. The object of Trajan, in this rescript, was their mitigation; it is probable that he knew little respecting the nature and evidence of the new religion, but was desirous somewhat to soften the practical intolerance of his own; but the effect was not in the end favourable to the Christians, ¶ since it gave a sanction to legal persecution, and established on high authority the fatal maxim, that the mere profession of Christianity was a criminal offence. **

The truth of the first of the above conclusions is confirmed by the annals of succeeding reigns. About the year 120, Serenius Granianus, Proconsul of Asia, wrote to Adrian, that it seemed to him unreasonable that Christians should be put to death merely to gratify the clamours of the people, without trial and without any crime proved against them.' And there is a rescript of the emperor, addressed to Minucius Fundanus, in which this letter is noticed, and in which it is enjoined that Christians should not be sacrificed to the clamours of the multitude.

During the long reign of Antoninus Pius (from 138 to 161 A. D.), no deliberate injuries were inflicted upon the Christians; and it appears that they suffered much more from the violence of popular tumult than from the operation of the ancient laws. It became common about this time to attribute national calamities of every description to the contempt of the national religion exhibited by the Christians. If the Tiber has overflowed its banks,' (exclaimed Tertullian in the next generation,) or the

*Tertull. Apol. c. 5. This author is the rather to be believed on this point, because it does not go to support his favourite theory, that the only persecutors were the bad emperors-a fancy to which he has unfortunately sacrificed many indisputable facts. See also Heg. ap. Euseb. loc. cit.

Mosheim (Gen. Hist. c. i. p. i. ch. 5.) In another place, after adducing the authorities of Lactantius (cap. iii. De Hist. Persec.), and Xiphilinus in Nerva (De Reb. Christ. ante Const. sæc. i. sect. 36.), he leaves the question doubtful.-Gibbon follows the opinion which shortens the persecution.

Tertull. Apol. c. ii., exposes with great vehemence and reason the injustice and inconsistency exhibited in this rescript. If Christians deserved condemnation, they should be sought after; if not sought after, they should not be condemned.-Si damnas, cur non et inquiris; si non inquiris, cur non et absolvis ?

Euseb. H. E. lib. iii. c. 32., confirms this position.

From the moment that a precedent existed for the application of those statutes to the religion of the Christians, their condition would at all times be very precarious, as being dependent not only on the policy of the emperor, but on the caprice of the provincial governors; since it would naturally seem to rest at their discretion to enforce, or not, the standing laws against a sect which had already felt their severity.

Mosh. de Reb. Christ. ante Const. sæc. ii. sect. x.

**Illud solum expectatur, confessio nominis, non examinatio criminis. Tertull. Apol. c. ii.

*

Nile has not overflowed; if heaven has refused its rain; if the earth has been shaken; if famine or plague has spread its ravages, the cry is immediately raised-Away with the Christians to the lions." The emperor, influenced, as some have supposed, by the Apologies of Justin Martyr, published one, possibly two,† edicts for their protection against such outrage; and during this reign especially they grew and extended in dignity as well as number, and became more generally known by writings not devoid of energy and eloquence. Pius was succeeded by Marcus, of whom Gibbon has said, that during the whole course of his reign he despised the Christians as a philosopher, and punished them as a Sovereign.' It seems singular, that a historian, who makes great profession of candour and universal humanity, should almost have excepted from the number of persecutors the only name (as far at Marcus least as this part of our inquiry) to which that ignominious Antoninus. designation appears justly and certainly to belong: for

、

under all the preceding emperors, the injuries inflicted upon the Christians had either been occasional, as arising from some casual circumstance, or staining only a portion of their reign; or partial, as confined to a few provinces, or perhaps cities of the empire. Moreover, they had been sometimes excited, and generally encouraged, by popular irritation; they had been directed against a small and obscure and calumniated sect, through the operation, and according to the seeming intention, of the ancient statutes. And the efforts of individual emperors were, for the most part, turned rather to the suspension or mitigation of those statutes than to the rigid enforcement of them. In addition to this, let us not forget, that those individuals possessed little means or opportunity to inform themselves respecting the peculiar principles, doctrines, or habits of Christians; still less to examine the foundation of their belief, or even to understand that it had any foundation :-if they permitted the work of destruction to proceed, it was in ignorance and blindness. On the other hand, Marcus Antoninus undertook the task of punishment' or persecution among the earliest of his imperial duties, and he continued to fulfil it with unremitting diligence throughout the nineteen § years of his splendid administration. He acted on deliberate principles, and his principles were not of partial or local operation, but were equally applicable to every province of his empire. And thus he everywhere enforced the laws in their full severity; the lives || and the property of the convicted were forfeited by the most summary process of justice; and the search¶which was made after the suspected, and which

*Tertull. Apol. cap. 40.

That mentioned by Justin Martyr at the end of his 1st Apol., and by Eusebius, 1. 4, c. 13. (if it could establish its claims to be genuine) would, with much more probability, be ascribed to Pius than to M. Antoninus.

Mosh. de Reb. Ch. ante Const. sæc. ii. sect. xv., xvi.

§ From 161 A. D. to 180.

Euseb. H. E. lib. v. c. 1. 'The Emperor's edict was, that those who denied the charge of Christianity should be spared, but the rest put to death by torture.'

Moyle on Marcus Antoninus. We do not accuse him of promulgating any new laws against the Christians, though Melito tells us of a violent persecution in this reign 'by new edicts.' In fact, such a step was perfectly unnecessary, for the original statutes, to which the Christians were made liable, contained every penalty. His letter to the Assembly of Asia seems indeed to be a forgery. Moyle certainly makes out this point, and Jortin is of the same opinion. It is attributed by Eusebius to Antoninus Pius, and his rescript it must be, if it be genuine at all. We should add, that Moyle believes Adrian's letter to Fundanus to be 'as arrant a juggle as that of Antoninus, though the conveyance be a little more cleanly,' but he does not prove this opinion.

the uninformed humanity of Trajan had so nobly discouraged, sufficiently proves the activity of the pursuit, and the earnestness of the pursuer. But the most important point of distinction is probably this: Marcus Antoninus knew much better the nature of the evil which he was committing: he was acquainted, to a certain extent at least, with the opinions of the Christians, and the innocence of their character; and it is not likely that he had entirely neglected to examine the grounds of their faith. He watched the process of his own inflictions, and when he perceived the fortitude with which all endured, and the eagerness with which many courted them, he coldly reproved the unphilosophic enthusiasm of the Martyrs. And yet, perhaps, his own philosophy was not quite devoid of enthusiasm, or, at least, it was not strictly regulated by reason, when it led him to labour for the destruction of the most moral and loyal portion of his subjects, only because they disclaimed the very superstitions which he placed his pride in despising. Nor again was his practice consistent with his professed contempt of these: for it is said, and seemingly on good foundation, that Marcus Antoninus was frequent in consultation with the Chaldæan sages, deeply conversant with the mysteries of astrology, credulously attentive to oracular prophecy, obedient to the premonitions of dreams, which he believed to descend from Heaven-assertions not incredible, nor inconsistent with his studies or his principles; and there is ground to hesitate whether we should not rather convict him of superstition than hypocrisy. But it is certain that his understanding was of the broadest and most comprehensive description; that it was enlightened by every worldly knowledge, and fortified by frequent meditation; that his character was founded in excellent dispositions, confirmed by the best principles which were known to the Pagan world. His general regard for justice has never been questioned; even his humanity is commonly celebrated; and if the representations of history be not exaggerated, he reached as high a degree both of wisdom and of moral excellence as is attainable by the unassisted faculties of man-and yet this prince polluted every year of a long reign with innocent blood.

In our natural anxiety to honour every form of human excellence, we search for his excuse in the religious policy so long established in the empire. But we find that those of his predecessors who were disposed to soften or suspend its operation upon Christians, possessed the power to do so; and we cannot doubt that the despotic authority of Marcus would have enabled him to revise or repeal those oppressive statutes, if he had learnt from the books of his philosophers the virtue or the meaning of Toleration. This, indeed, is the real and only ground of his defence; and we shall regard his conduct with less indignation, if we reflect how feeble were the mightiest principles of conduct with which he was acquainted; on what a loose and shifting foundation they rested; how large was the class of virtues which they did not comprehend, and how imperfect were the motives which they proposed for the practice of any. And thus considered, we shall discover, perhaps, some trace of heavenly providence in the circumstance, that the imperial philosopher, flourishing in the maturity of his science, and deficient in nothing which nature or

*B. xi., sec. iii. He asserts that men should meet their death, not through mere ostentation as do the Christians, but considerately and with dignity, and without theatrical display. Μὴ κατὰ ψιλὴν παράταξιν, ὡς οἱ Χριστιανοὶ, ἀλλὰ λελογισμένως, καὶ σεμνῶς, xai argaywows. The word which we have rendered ostentation, parade (agárağı), is in this passage usually interpreted obstinacy.

man could bestow, was armed with the highest temporal authority and permitted to direct it against the infancy of our faith. From the splendid imperfection of Marcus Antoninus, from the perseverance of his powerful enmity, from its final failure, we may learn what narrow limits have been assigned to the virtue and wisdom and power of unassisted man; and we derive a new motive of gratitude for that heavenly aid, which has fixed our social happiness on a certain and eternal foundation.

The greatest prince of antiquity was succeeded by a son, who neither inherited his virtues, nor imitated his crime; so far from this, that we might almost imagine it to have been the object of Commodus to redeem his numerous vices by his humanity towards the Christian name.

*

Severus ascended the throne in the year 193, and is represented by Tertullian to have bestowed testimonies of approbation on several distinguished Christians, and openly to have withstood the popular fury which assailed the sect. But this account will apply only to the earlier part of his reign; for in the year 202 (about the time of the publication of Tertullian's Apology) he issued an edict, which indirectly occasioned a variety of inflictions, the most barbarous of which appear to have been perpetrated in Egypt. The professed object of that edict was only to prevent conversion either to Judaism or Christianity; for the fears of the emperor began to be awakened by the extraordinary progress of the latter. Its effect was to oppress and torture the most zealous ministers of the faith, and to inflame the prejudices of the people against all believers. This enactment continued in force for about nine years, until the death of Severus; and from that period, if indeed we except the injuries inflicted by Maximin † (from 235 to 238 A. D.), and directed chiefly against the instructors and rulers of the churches, the Christians, though occasionally liable to popular outrage, had not much reason to complain of the injustice of the government until the accession of Decius, in the year 249.

Decius, like Marcus Antoninus, is also ranked, and justly ranked, among the most virtuous of the emperors. The virtues of a pagan were usually connected with his philosophy, and his philosophy taught Decius. him to despise every form of worship. Perhaps, too, an imperial

eye might view with natural distrust the free and independent principles of Christianity, which were now spreading into more general operation and notice-principles which acknowledged an authority superior to the throne of man; and though they devoted the body to Cæsar, yet set apart the soul for God. It would be observed, too, with some jealousy, that the progress of that worship was rapid and universal, in spite of ancient law, popular opposition, and imperial edict. Its truth was seldom investigated, because it was not yet sufficiently distinguished from surrounding superstitions, which laid no claim to truth, nor even professed to rest on any evidences; and thus the prejudices of the schools at once assumed that the worship of Christ was no better founded than those of Jove and Serapis .

* Tertul. ad Scap., cap. iv. Sed et clarissimas feminas et clarissimos viros Severus sciens hujus secta esse non modo non læsit verum et testimonio ornavit, &c. His affection for the Christians is attributed to a cure formerly performed on him, by the application of cil, by a Christian named Proculus. We must be careful not to confound this medical use of oil with the practice of extreme unction, which did not then exist.

Euseb., H. E., lib. vi. c. 28. Tillem., tom. iii. p. 305.

In the entire pagan scheme (could we properly consider it as one scheme), religion and philosophy together professed to furnish that, which Christianity supplies to us: the

E