CENTURY SECOND. PART I. THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE CHURCH. CHAPTER I. THE PROSPEROUS EVENTS OF THE CHURCH. 1. Most of the Roman emperors of this century were of a mild character. Trajan (A.D. 98—117), though too eager for glory and not always sufficiently considerate and provident, was humane and equitable. Adrian (A.D. 117-138) was more severe, yet not absolutely bad and tyrannical; his character was a compound of virtues and vices. The Antonines (Pius, A. D. 138 -161, Marcus Aurelius the Philoshpher, A.D. 161-180, with Verus, A.D. 161—| 169, and Commodus, A.D. 169-192) were models of excellence and benignity. Even Severus (A.D. 193-211), who afterwards assumed another character, was at first oppressive to no one, and to the Christians mild and equitable. 2. Through this lenity of the emperors, Christians living in the Roman empire suffered far less than they would have done if they had been under severer rulers. The laws enacted against them were indeed sufficiently hard; and the magistrates, excited by the priests and the populace, often made considerable havoc among them, and went frequently much beyond what the laws required. Yet for these evils some relief was commonly attainable. Trajan would not have the Christians to be sought after; and he forbade any complaints being received against them without the names of the accusers annexed.' And Antoninus Pius even decreed that their accusers should be punished. Some in one way and others 2 1 See Pliny's Epistles, lib. x. ep. 98. 2 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. lib. iv. cap. xiii. [where the law of Antoninus is given at length fron. the Apology of Melito. Some indeed have supposed that it was Marcus Antoninus, and not Antoninus Pius, who issued this decree. (So Valesius in loc.) But this is contrary to the express testimony of Eusebius, and to the contents of the edict itself. For we know from history that the earthquakes, mentioned in the edict, happened under Pius. See Capitolinus, Vita Antonini Pii, cap. iii. Besides, if Marcus himself had published this addict, Melito could have had no occasion by this Apo in another, protected them against the evil designs of the populace and the priests. Hence the Christian community increased and became vastly numerous in this century. Of this fact we have the clearest testimony of the ancients, which some have in vain attempted to call in question.3 3. On what particular countries, both within the Roman empire and beyond it, the light of heavenly truth first shone in this century, the paucity of ancient records will not allow us to state with precision. There are unexceptionable witnesses who declare that in nearly all the East, and among the Germans, the Spaniards, the Celts, the Britons, and other nations, Christ was now worshipped as God. But if any inquire, which of these nations received Christianity in this century and which in the preceding, it is not in my power to answer. Pantænus, master of the school in Alexandria, is said to have instructed the logy, to implore the grace of the emperor in favour of the Christians. See Mosheim, De Reb. Christ. ante C. M. p. 240.- Schl. 3 See Moyle, On the Thundering Legion; a Latin translation of which, with notes, I have annexed to my Syntagma Diss. ad sanctiores disciplinas pertinent. pages 652-661. See also an additional passage in Justin Martyr, Dial. cum Tryphone, p. 341. 4 Irenæus, Adv. Hæres. lib. i. cap. x.; Tertullian, Adv. Judeos, cap. vii. [The testimony of the former is this: "Neither do those churches which are established among the Germans, believe or teach otherwise; nor do those among the Heberii, or among the Celts; nor those in the East; nor those in Egypt; nor those in Libya; nor those established in the central parts of the world." The language of Tertullian is rhetorical, and the statement, undoubtedly, somewhat too strong. He says: "In whom. but the Christ now come, have all (but yours, the Jews) confide? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocia, and inhabitants of Pontus, and Asia, and Pamphylia; the dwellers in Egypt, and inhabitants of the region beyond Cyrene; Romans and strangers; and in Jerusalem both Jews and proselytes, so that the various tribes of the Getull and the nume rous hordes of the Moors; all the Spanish clans, and. the different nations of Gauls, and the regions of the Britons inaccessible to the Romans but subject to Christ, and of the Sarmatians, and the Dacians, and Germans, and Scythians, and many unexplored nations and countries, and islands unknown to us and which we cannot enumerate: in all which places, the name of the Christ who has already come, now reigns."— Mur. nations believed? For, in whom do all other nations 1 Indians in Christianity. But these In- Lucius sought and obtained Christian teachdians appear to have been certain Jews, ers from Eleutherus the Roman pontiff, in living in Arabia Felix. For Pantanus this second century and during the reign found among them, according to the testimony of Jerome, the Gospel of St. Matthew which they had received from their first teacher Bartholomew. 4. From Gaul, it would seem, the Christian religion must have spread into Germany on the left of the Rhine, which was subject to the Romans, and also into Britain opposite to Gaul. Yet certain churches in Germany have been accustomed to deduce their origin from the companions and disciples of St. Peter and other apostles ;3 and the Britons, following the account given by Bede would fain believe that their king of Marcus Antoninus. But these ancient accounts are exposed to much doubt, and are rejected by the best informed persons. pages 603, 604. 1 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. lib. v. cap. x. Jerome, De Scriptoribus Illustr. cap. xxxvi. [According to Euse bius, the zeal of Pantænus prompted him to undertake a voluntary mission among the Indians. But according to Jerome (De Scriptor. Illustr. cap. xxxvi. and ep. lxxxiii. Opp. tom. iv. par. ii. p. 656, ed. Bened), he was sent out by Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria, in consequence of a request made by the Indians for a Christian teacher. As it is well known that the Greek and Latin writers give the name of Indians to the Persians, Parthians, Medes, Arabians, Ethiopians, Libyans, and many other nation slittle known to them: the learned have inquired who were the Indians visited by Pantænus? Many think they were those we call the East Indians, inhabiting the country about the river Indus. Jerome so thought, for he represents him as sent to instruct the Brahmans. Valesius and Holster nius and others suppose they were the Abyssinians or Ethiopians, who are often called Indians and were near, and always had intercourse with, the Egyptians. See Basnage, Annal. polit. eccles. tome ii. p. 207; Valesius, Adnotat. ad Socratis Hist. Eccles. p. 13. Others incline to believe them Jews, resident in Yemen or Ara-pal reliance has been on the reported application of bia Felix, a country often called India. That they were not strangers to Christianity is evident from their having Matthew's Gospel among them, and from their desiring some one to expound it to them. Their applying to the Bishop of Alexandria shows that Egypt Was to them the most accessible Christian country; and their having the Gospel written in Hebrew, as Jerome testifies, is good proof that they were Jews; because no other people understood that language. Besides Bartholomew had formerly been among them, the field of whose labours has been supposed to be Arabia Felix. See Tillemont's life of Bartholomew, in his Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire de l'Eglise, tome i. pages 1160, 1161. See Mosheim, De Reb. Christ. ante C. M. p. 206, 207.-Mur. 2 On the origin of those German churches mentioned by Tertullian and Irenæus as existing in this century, Ursinus, Bebelius, and others have written; and still better, Liron, Singularitès historiques et littéraires, tome iv. Paris, 1740, 8vo. The common and popular accounts of the first preachers of the Gospel in Germany, are learnedly impugned by Calmet, Histoire de Lorraine, tome 1. Diss. sur les Evêques de Treves, pages 3, 4; Bolland, Acta Sanctorum, January, tom. ii. 922; Hontheim, Diss. de ara episcopat. Trevirensis; in Historia Trevirensis, tom. 1. 3 It is said St. Peter sent Eucherius, Valerius, and Maternus into Belgic Gaul; and that they planted the churches of Cologne, Treves, Tongres, Liege, and some others; and presided over them till their death. See Brower, Annales Trevirenses, lib. ii. p. 143, &c.; and Acta Sanctor. Antwerpien. 29th of January, p. 918. But Calmet, Bolland, and Hontheim (ubi supra), have proved satisfactorily that these pretended founders of the German churches did not live earlier than the third or fourth century, and were first represented as being legates of the apostles in the middle ages. See Mosheim, De Reb. Christ. &c. p. 212.-Mur. 4 See Ussher, Eccl. Britannicar. Prinordia, cap. i. p. 7; Godwin, De Conversione Britann. cap. i. p. 7; ad Clementis Rom. epist. ad Corinth. in Patribus Apos. Rapin, History of England, vol. i.; [Burton, Adnotat. tom. 1. p. 470; Stillingflect, Antiquit. of the Eng. Church. cap. i.; Spanheim, Historia Eccles major. sæcul. ii. The first publication of the Gospel in Britain has been attributed to James, the son of Zebedee, whom Herod put to death (Acts xii. 1); to Simon Zelotes, another apostle; to Aristobulus (mentioned Rom. xvi. 10); to St. Peter, &c. some few legendary writers who are cited by Ussher, Eccl. Britann. Priof Malmesbury, and after him many other monks, mainmordia, cap. i. But, rejecting these accounts, William tained that Joseph of Arimathea, with twelve others, were sent from Gaul by St. Philip, into Britain, A.D. 63; that they were successful in planting Christianity; spent their lives in England, had twelve hides of land assigned them by the king at Glastonbury, where they first built a church of hurdles, and afterwards established a monastery. By maintaining the truth of this story, the English clergy obtained the precedence of some others, in several councils of the fifteenth century, and particularly that of Basil, A.D. 1434. (Ussher's Primordia, cap. ii. pag. 12-30.) Since the Reformation, this story has been given up by most of the English clergy. But as Eusebius (Demonstrat Evang. lib. iii. cap. v.) and Theodoret (Græcar. Curatio Affectionum, lib. ix.) name the Britons among others, to whom the apostles themselves preached the Gospel, some have maintained that St. Paul must have visited that country, and they urge that Clemens Rom. says, that this apostle travelled ἐπὶ τὸ τέρμα της δύσεως, 10 the utmost bounds of the west. They also urge that among the many thousand Romans who passed over into Britain in the reign of Claudius and his successors, there were doubtless some Christians, who would spread the knowledge of Christ there. But the princiKing Lucius to Pope Eleutherus for Christian teachers, about A.D. 150, or rather 176. (Ussher, Primordia, cap. iv. p. 44, &c.) On all these traditions Mosheim passes the following judgment: Whether any apostle or any companion of an apostle, ever visited Britain, cannot be determined; yet the balance of probability rather inclines towards the affirmative. The story of Joseph of Arimathea might arise from the arrival of some Christian teacher from Gaul, in the second century, whose name was Joseph. As the Gauls, from Dionysius, Bishop of Paris, in the second century, made Dionysius the Areopagite to be their apostle; and the Germans made Maternus, Eucherius, and Valerius, who lived in the third and fourth centuries, to be preachers of the first century, and attendants on St. Peter; so the British monks, I have no doubt, made a certain Joseph from Gaul in the second century, to be Joseph of Arimathea. As to Lucius, I agree with the best British writers in supposing him to be the restorer and second father of the English churches, and not their original founder. That he was a king, is not probable; because Britain was then a Roman province. He might be a nobleman, and governor of a district. His name is Roman. His application I can never be lieve was made to the Bishop of Rome. It is much more probable, he sent to Gaul for Christian teachers. The independence of the ancient British churches on the see of Rome, and their observing the same rites with the Gallic churches, which were planted by Asiatics, and particularly in regard to the time of Easter, show that they received the Gospel from Gaul, and not from Rome. See Mosheim, De Reb, Christ. &c. p. 213, &c.-Mur. [This subject has been subsequently investigated, but with no new results-first by Dr. Hales, in his Essay on the Origin and Purity of the Primitive Church in the British Isles. Lond. 1819, 8vo; next by Thackeray, in his Researches into the Eccles. and Polit. State of Anc. Britain under the Rom. Emperors. 5. Transalpine Gaul which is now called France, perhaps received some knowledge of the Gospel before this century, either from the apostles or from their friends and disciples. But unequivocal proofs of the existence of churches in this part of Europe first occur in the present century. For in it Pothinus, a man of distinguished piety and devotedness to Christ, in company with Irenæus and other holy men, proceeded from Asia to Gaul, and there instructed the people with such success, that he gathered churches of Christians at Lyons and Vienne, of which Pothinus himself was the first president or bishop' Lond. 1843, 2 vols. 8vo; and still more recently by Smith, in his Religion of Ancient Britain. Lond. post Of Paul's presumed visit to Britain, see 8vo, 1844. Burton's Lect. on Ecc. Hist. &c. i. 284-6.-R. 1 Peter de Marca, Epistola de Evangelii in Gallia initiis, published among his dissertations, and also by Valesius, subjoined to Eusebii Historia Eccl.; Launol, Opuscula, in his Opp. tom. ii. Histoire Littéraire de la France, tome i. p. 223.; Liren, Singularitès historiques et littéraires, the whole fourth volume. Paris, 1740, 8vo, and others. [The most eminent French writers have disputed about the origin of their churches. Three different opinions have been advanced. The first is that of Launoi (ubi supra), whom many writers of eminence at this day follow. It is, that if we except the Asiatic colonists of Lyons and Vienno among A.D. 150; the first propagation of Christianity among the Transalpine Gauls, was by missionaries from Rome about A.D. 250. This hypothesis is founded chiefly on the testimony of three ancient writers; viz. Sulpicius Severus, Historia Sacra, lib. ii. cap. xxxii. where, speaking of the persecution at Lyons and Vienne under Marcus Antoninus (A.D. 177), he says: These were the first martyrs among the Gauls; for the Divine religion was not received till late beyond the Alps. The next testimony is that of the author of the Acts of Saturninus, Bishop of Toulouse, who suffered under Decius. The author is supposed to have written in the beginning of the fourth century. He says: Scattered churches of a few Christians arose in some cities of Gaul in the third century. See Ruinart, Acta Martyr. sincera, p. 130. The third testimony is that of Gregory of Tours, the father of French history (in the Historia Francor. lib. i. cap. xxvii. and De Gloria Confessorum, cap. xxx ed. Ruinart, p. 399.) He says: Under Decius (A.D. 248251), seven missionaries were sent from Rome to preach in Gaul. Now these seven missionaries are the very persons who are said to have been sent thither by St. Paul and St. Peter; viz. Trophimus Bishop of Arles, Stremonius Bishop of Clermont, Martial Bishop of Limoges, Paul Bishop of Narbonne, Saturninus Bishop of Toulouse, Gratian Bishop of Tours, and Dionysius Bishop of Paris. The second opinion is that of the strenuous advocates for the apostolic origin of the Gallic churches, Peter de Marca (ubi supra), Natalis Alexander (Hist. Eccl. Sæcul. 1. diss. xvi. xvii. vol. iii. pages 356-420, ed. Paris, 1741, 4to), and others. They consider St. Paul and St. Peter as the fathers of their church. Paul, they suppose, travelled over nearly all France in his journey to Spain; and also sent St. Luke and Crescens into that country. For the last they allege, 2 Tim. iv. 10, "Crescens to Galatia;" or rather to Gaul, according to Epiphanius and others, who, for Γαλατίαν, would read Γαλλίαν. St. Peter, they conceive, sent Trophimus, his disciple, into Gaul. St. Philip, they also suppose, laboured in Gaul. And the seven bishops above-mentioned, they say, were sent by the apostles from Rome. Very few at this day embrace the opinion entire. The third opinion takes a middle course between the first and the second, and is that which is maintained by Liron, Dissertation sur l'establissment de la religion Chrétienne dans les Gauls; in the fourth volume of his Singularitès historiques, whom there were Christian churches formed about 6. This rapid propagation of Christianity is ascribed by the writers of the second century almost exclusively to the efficient will of God, to the energy of Divine truth, and to the miracles wrought by Christians. Yet human counsels and pious efforts ought not to be wholly overlooked. Much was undoubtedly effected by the activity of pious men, who recommended and communicated to the people around them the writings of Christ's ambassadors, which were already collected into one volume. All people indeed were not acquainted with the language in which these divine books were composed; but this obstacle was early removed by the labours of translators. As the language of the Romans was extensively used, many Latin translations, as we are informed by Augustine,2 were made at an early period. Of these, that which is called the Italic Version 3 was preferred to all others. The Latin version was followed by a Syriac, an Egyptian, an Ethiopic, and some others. But the precise dates of these several translations cannot be ascertained.1 7. Those who wrote apologies for the Christians, and thus met the calumnies and slanders by which they were unjustly assailed, removed some obstacles to the progress of Christ's religion, and in this way contributed not a little to the enlargement of the church. For very many were prevented from embracing Christianity, solely by those detestable calumnies with which ungodly men aspersed it. Another support to the Christian cause was furnished by the writers against the heretics. For &c. It admits what Launoi, Sirmond, and Tillemont have fully proved, that Dionysius, the first Bishop of Paris, was not Dionysius, the Areopagite mentioned Acts xvii. 34, but a man who lived in the third century. It also gives up the story of St. Philip, and of most of the pretended apostolic missionaries to Gaul. But it maintains the probability of Paul's travelling over Gaul on his way to Spain; and of his sending Luke and Crescens to that country; and affirms that in the second century, there were many flourishing churches in Gaul, besides those of Lyons and Vienne. See Mosheim, De Reb. Christ. ante C. M. p. 208, &c.; Tillemont. Mémoi res pour servir à l'hist. de l'Egl. vol. iv. p. 983.-Mur. 2 Augustine, De Doct. Christ. lib. il. cap. xi. xv. 3 See Carpzov, Critica Sacra, V. T. p. 663, [and the Introductions to the New Test. by Michaëlis, Horne, and others.-Mur. 4 Basnage, Hist. de l'Eglise, livr. ix. chap. i. tome i. 450. 5 Nothing more injurious can be conceived than the terms of contempt, indignation, and reproach, which the heathens employed in expressing their hatred against the Christians, who were called by them atheists, because they derided the heathen polytheism; magicians, because they wrought miracles; self-murderers, because they suffered martyrdom cheerfully for the truth; haters of the light, because, to avoid the fury of the persecutions raised against them, they were forced, at first, to hold their religious assemblies in the night; with a multitude of other ignominious epithets employed by Tacitus, Suetonius, Celsus, &c. See Bingham, Orig. Eccl. book 1. chap. ii. p. 5.-Macl. [See on this subject, Turner's Calumnies on the Primitive Christians accounted for.-R. the doctrines of these sects were so absurd to perish with thirst. But the reality of or so abominable, and the morals of some this miracle is a subject of controversy of them so disgraceful and impious, as to among the learned; and those who think induce many to stand aloof from Christia- that the Christian soldiers erred, in regardnity. But when they learned from the ing that sudden and unexpected shower by books against the heretics, that the true which the Roman army was saved as a mifollowers of Christ held these perverse men raculous interposition, are supported not in abhorrence, their feelings towards them only by very respectable authorities, but by were changed. arguments of no little weight.2 8. It is easier to conceive than to express 10. It is certain that the Roman army, how much the miraculous powers and the when reduced to the greatest straits, was extraordinary Divine gifts which the Chris-relieved by a sudden fall of rain; and that tians exercised on various occasions, contributed to extend the limits of the church. The gift of foreign tongues appears to have gradually ceased, as soon as many nations became enlightened with the truth, and numerous churches of Christians were everywhere established; for it became less necessary than it was at first. But the other gifts, with which God favoured the rising church of Christ, were, as we learn from numerous testimonies of the ancients, still everywhere distributed.1 9. I wish we were fully authorized to place among the miracles what many ancient writers have recorded concerning a certain legion of Christian soldiers in the army of Marcus Antoninus, in his war against the Marcomanni (A.D. 174), which by its supplications procured a shower of rain when the Roman troops were ready 1 Collections of these testimonies have been made, by Pfanner, De Donis miraculosis; and by Spencer, in his Nota ad Origenem contra Celsum, pag. 5, 6; but the most copious is by Mamachius, Orig. et Antiq. Christiana, tom. i. p 363, &c. [The principal testimonies of the second and third centuries, are Justin Martyr, Apol. ii. cap. vi.; Dial. cum Tryph. cap. xxxix. and Lxxxii; Irenæus, lib. ii. cap. xxxi. and lib. v. cap. vi.; and in Euseb. H. E. lib. v. cap. vii.; Tertullian, Apolog. cap. xxiii. xxvii. xxxii. xxxvii; Ad Scap. cap. I.; Origen, contra Cels. lib i. p. 7; and lib. vii. p. 334, ed. Spencer; Dionys. Alex. in Euseb. H. E. lib. vi. cap. xl.; Minutius Felix, Octar. p. 361, ed. Paris, 1605; Cyprian, De Idol. l'anit. p. 14, Ad Demetriam, p. 191, ed. Brem. Scc Mosheim, De Reb. Christ. ante C.M. p. 221. Very candid remarks on this subject may also be found in Schroeckh, Kirchenges. vol. iv. p. 380, &c.; and in Jortin's Remarks on Ecc. Hist. vol i. p. 247. Mur. [The question regarding the existence and extent of miraculous powers in the early ages of the church was discussed in the last century, with great keenness, in consequence of the publication, in 1749, of Middleton's Free inquiry into the miraculous powers of the Christian Church. He limited their exercise to the apostles, and repudiated the alleged miracles of the sccond and third centuries, but on grounds which appeared designed to convey a covert attack on the Scripture miracles. Answers appeared, by Church, Brooke, Dodwell, and others, who maintained extreme opinions in favour of the protracted continuance of these powers. Bishop Kaye, a most competent and judicious critic, has recently given this opinion on the question:-"I may be allowed to state the conclusion to which I myself have been led, by a comparison of the statements in the book of Acts with the writings of the fathers of the second century. My conclusion then is, that the power of working miracles was not extended beyond the disciples, upon whom the apostles conferred it by the imposition of their hands."-Kaye s Tertullian, p. 98.-R. this shower was regarded, both by the pagans and the Christians as extraordinary and miraculous: the latter ascribed the unexpected favour to Christ's being moved by the prayers of his disciples; while the former attributed it to Jupiter, or Mercury, or to the power of magic. It is equally certain, I think, that many Christians were then serving in the Roman army. And who can doubt that these, on such an occasion, implored the compassion of their God and Saviour? Further, as the Christians of those times looked upon all extraordinary events as miracles, and ascribed every unusual and peculiar advantage enjoyed by the Romans to the prayers of Christians, it is not strange, that the preservation of the 2 The arguments on the two sides of the question may be seen in Witsius, Diss. de Legione fulminatrice, subjoined to his Ægyptiaca. He defends the reality of the miracle; and Dan. Laroque, Diss. de Legione fulminat. subjoined to the Adversaria Sacra of his father Matthew Laroque, opposes the idea of a miracle; but best of all in the controversy concerning the miracle of the thundering legion, between Peter King [rather the Rev Richard King of Topsham-Mur.] and Walter Moyle, which I have translated into Latin and published with notes, in my Syntagma Dissertationum ad disciplinas sanctiores pertinentium. See also Jablonski, Spicilegium de Legione fulminatrice; in the Miscellan. Lipsiens. tom. viii. p. 417, [and in his Opuscula, vol. iv. p. 3, &c.-R.] where, in particular, the reasons are investigated which led the Christians improperly to class this rain among the miracles. [See also Mosheim, De Reb Christ. &c. p. 249, &c. The most important among the ancient accounts of this matter are, on the side of the pagans, Dion Cassius, Historia Romana, lib. lxxi. cap. viii.; Julius Capitolinus, Vita Marc. Antonin. cap. xxiv.; Elins Lampridius, Heliogabali vita, cap. ix.; Claudian, Consulat. vi. Honorii v.: and on the side of the Christians, Tertullian, Apologet. cap. v. Ad Scapulam, cap. iv.; Eusebius, Hist Eccles. lib. v. cap. v. and Chronicon. pages 82-215; Xiphilinus, on Dion Cassius, lib. lxxi. cap. ix. x.-Mur. [Against the existence of any miracle in this case, see Bishop Kaye's Tertullian, &c. p. 106; Burton's Lect. on Ecc. Hist. vol. ii. p. 166; and Milman's Hist. of Christ. vol. ii. p. 190, &c. with the Note in p. 175, in which he says: "The miracle of the thundering legion, after having suffered deadly wounds from former assailants, was finally transfixed by the critical spear of Moyle." Little did he think that soon after, a learned Fellow of Oxford would rush into the field to break a lance in defence of this slaughtered miracle. The well-known Mr. Newman, when in his state of transition between the churches of England and Rome, published in 1842, an Essay on the Miracles recorded in Ecclesiastical History, in which he not only defends in general the miracles of the Nicene Church, but specially that of the thundering legion, together with several others which had long been rejected by every critic competent to apply the simplest rules of evidence.-R. Roman emperor and his army should be cessor Nerva. But it had become a complaced among the miracles which God mon custom to persecute the Christians, wrought in answer to the prayers of Chris-and even to put them to death, as often as tians. But as all wise men are now agreed the pagan priests, or the populace under that no event is to be accounted a miracle, the instigation of the priests, demanded if it can be adequately accounted for on natural principles, or in the common and ordinary course of Divine Providence; and as this rain may be easily thus accounted for, it is obvious what judgment ought to be formed respecting it. their destruction. Hence under the reign of Trajan, otherwise a good prince, popular tumults were frequently raised in the cities against the Christians, which were fatal to many of them.1 When therefore such tumults sprang up in Bithynia, under the 11. The Jews, first under Trajan (A.D. proprætor Pliny the younger, he thought 116), and afterwards under Adrian (A.D. proper to apply to the emperor for instruc132), led on by Bar-Chochebas who pre- tions how to treat the Christians. The emtended to be the Messiah, made insurrec-peror wrote back that the Christians were tion against the Romans and again suffered not to be sought after; but if they were the greatest calamities. A vast number regularly accused and convicted, and yet were put to death; and a new city, called refused to return to the religion of their Elia Capitolina, was erected on the site of fathers, they were to be put to death as bad Jerusalem, which not an individual of that citizens." miserable race was allowed to enter. This overthrow of the Jews confirmed, in some measure, the external tranquillity of the Christian community. For that turbulent nation had previously been everywhere the accusers of the Christians before the Roman judges; and in Palestine and the neighbouring regions, they had themselves inflicted great injuries upon them, because they refused to aid them in their opposition to the Romans. But this new calamity rendered it not so easy for the Jews, as formerly, to do either of these things. 12. The philosophers and learned men who joined the Christians in this century, were no inconsiderable protection and ornament to this holy religion, by their discussions, their writings, and their talents. But if any are disposed to question whether the Christian cause received more benefit than injury from these men, I must confess myself unable to decide the point. For the noble simplicity and the majestic dignity of the Christian religion were lost, or at least impaired, when these philosophers presumed to associate their dogmas with it, and to bring faith and piety under the dominion of human reason. CHAPTER II. THE ADVERSE EVENTS OF THE CHURCH. 1. In the beginning of this century there were no laws in force against the Christians, for those of Nero had been repealed by the senate, and those of Domitian by his suc 1 Justin Martyr, Dial. cum Tryph. p. 49-278. [Dion Cassius, Hist. Rom. lib. lxix, cap. xil. xiv.-Mur. • 2 Justin Martyr, Apolog. I. p. 72.-Schl. 2. This edict of Trajan being registered among the public laws of the Roman empire, set bounds indeed to the fury of the enemies of the Christians, but still it caused the destruction of many of them, even under the best of the emperors. For whenever any one had courage to assume the odious office of an accuser, and the accused did not deny the charge [of being a Christian], he might be delivered over to the executioner unless he apostatized from Christianity. Thus by Trajan's law, perseverance in the Christian, religion was a capital offence. Under this law, Simeon, the son of Cleophas and Bishop of Jerusalem, a venerable old man, being accused by the Jews suffered crucifixion. According to the same law, Trajan himself ordered the great Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, to be 3 Bishop Kaye has shown that these conclusions of the excellent remarks of Milman on this celebrated letter |