The Emperor Marcus was prejudiced against the Chriftians, and in his own Book xi. 3. cenfures, very unreasonably, what he ought to have approved, their readiness and refolution to die for their religion.

d

2. By the ancient Roman laws it was not permitted to introduce any new reli

gion

Le Clerc hath examined and fully confuted those cenfures. Hift. Eccl. p. 693. See alfo Remarks on Eccl. Hift. vol. ii. p. 169.

d Tertullian and Eufebius fay that the Romans had an ancient law, which forbad the worship of new Deities without the permiffion of the Senate; ne quis confecraretur, nifi a Senatu probatus. Apolog. Tanaís vóμs xexeg]mnó μὴ ἄλλως τινὰ παρὰ Ῥωμαίοις θεοποιῆσαι, μὴ ἐχὶ ψήφω καὶ δόγματι συγκλήτε. Eccl. Η. II. 2.

Julius Paulus, who lived in the time of the emperor Alexander Severus, has preferved to us an ancient law relating to this fubject: Qui novas, et ufu vel ratione incognitas religiones inducunt, ex quibus animi hominum moveantur, boneftiores deportantur, humiliores capite puniuntur. Sentent. Receptar. L. V. Tit. 21.

Under the fame Title, he has another law against foothfayers and pretenders to inspiration, who are ordered to be beaten, banished, &c. ne humana credulitate publici mores ad fpem alicujus rei corrumperentur, vel certe ex eo populares animi turbarentur.

Si quis aliquid fecerit, quo leves hominum animi fuperftitione numinis terrerentur, Divus Marcus hujufmodi homines in infulam relegari refcripfit. Digeft. L. xlviii. Tit. xix. 30.

In

gion without the leave of the Magistrate, much less a religion which directly tended

to

In the Acts of the Apostles xvi. 21. fome of the inhabitants of Philippi bring this accufation against Paul and Silas: Thefe men teach customs which it is not lawful for us to receive neither to obferve, being Romans. Where fee Grotius.

Cicero de Leg. XI. 8. Separatim nemo habeffit Deos, neve novos; fed ne advenas, nifi publice adfcitos, privatim colunto. [In the fame book facra nocturna are accounted unlawful without particular leave.]

Plato has the fame law. Ἱερὰ μηδὲ ἧς ἐν ἰδίαις οικίαις ἐκλήθω. θύειν δ' ὅταν ἐπὶ νῦν ἵη γινὶ, πρὸς τὰ δημόσια 17w búowv• &c. Sacella nemo in privata domo habeat. Cum vero animum quis ad facrificandum induxerit, ad publica facrificaturus accedat, &c. and the tranfgreffors of this law are to be punished. De Leg. X.

The accufation againft Socrates was, d♪ine Zwnegτns, *ς μὲν ἡ πόλις νομίζει Θεὸς, ο νομίζων, ἕτερα δὲ καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσφέρων. Plato Apol. Xenophon Memor. Clericus Silv. Phil. cap. iii.

Porphyry fays of Ammonius, who, as he pretends, left Chriftianity for Paganifm, πρὸς τὴν κατὰ νόμος πολιτείαν μETECáneo, ad vivendi rationem legibus confentientem defcivit, whereas Origen (fays he) lived Xesiavis & macgvóμws. Eufeb. E. H. VI. 19. This was the common language of the Pagans.

See Bynkerbock's Opufcula 4. De Cultu religionis peregrinæ apud Romanos.

If Ulpian's Treatise on the duty of Proconfuls were extant, we should know what Edicts had been published against Christians by the Emperors, down to the time of Alexander Severus. Domitius [Ulpianus] de officio Proconfulis Libro VIII. Refcripta principum nefaria collegit, ut doceret quibus

pœnis

to overturn all the established rites and ceremonies.

The Romans were remarkably tenacious of their own religion. Dionyfius Halicarnassenfis obferves that though there were a multitude

с

pænis adfici oporteret eos, qui se cultores Dei confiterentur. Lactantius Inft. Div. V. II.

Pliny, in his memorable Epiftle to Trajan X. 97. inquires of him how he should proceed against the Chriftians.

Trajan, in his Rescript, fo far fpared the Chriftians, that he forbad them to be fought after, or to be condemned upon the evidence of nameless informations. But, if a profecutor appeared, he ordered them to be put to death, unless they recanted. Plin. Ep. X. 98.

However, as Pliny's Letter to Trajan did not fet the Christians in a bad light, fo the Emperor's reply was in fome measure favourable to them. He feemed willing to connive at them, and not to use them rigorously.

Afterwards Adrian gave a Refcript to Minucius Fundanus, [to be found in Euseb. IV. 9. and at the end of Juftin's first Apol.] which is obfcure. It doth not manifeftly exempt Chriftians from punishment; and yet it seems in fome degree to favour them, and might have been fo interpreted by a judge who was disposed to put the mildest construction upon it. The Christians often appealed to it.

• Ουδ ̓ ἂν ἴδοι τις παρ' αὐτοῖς, καίτοι διεφθαρμένων τῶν ἐθῶν ἤδη, ὦ θεοφορήσεις, ο κορυβαιλιασμός, ἐκ ἀγερμὲς, ἐ βακχείας καὶ τελεῖὰς ἀποῤῥήτες, ο διαπαννυχιασμὸς ἐν ἱεροῖς ἀνδρῶν σὺν γυναιξὶν, ἐκ ἄλλο τῶν παραπλησίων Τέτοις Ἱερατευμάτων ἐδὲν, ἀλλ ̓ ἐυλαβῶς ἅπαν]α πρατ τόμενα με καὶ λεγόμενα τὰ περὶ τες θεός, ὡς ἔτε παρ Ἕλλησιν, ἔτε παρὰ βαρβάροις. καὶ ὃ πάντων μάλισα ἔγωγε τεθαύμακα, καίπερ μυρίων ὅσων εἰς τὴν πόλιν

ἐληλυθότων

multitude of nations which in a manner had taken up their abode at Rome, each of which had its own facred rites, yet no foreign religion had been publicly received by the Romans, or not at least, till they had purged and corrected it, and made it conformable to their own.

3. The people and f the Governors of provinces fometimes perfecuted the Christians without any particular leave or order from the Emperor.

ἐληλυθότων ἐθνῶν, οἷς πολλὴ ἀνάγκη σέβειν τες παρείες θεὸς τοῖς ὅικοθεν νομίμοις, ἐδενὸς εἰς ζῆλον ἐλήλυθε τῶν ξενικῶν ἐπιληδευμάτων ἡ πόλις δημοσίᾳ, ὃ πολλαῖς ἤδη συνέβη παθῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἴλινα καλά χρησμός επιση γάγετο ἱερὸς τοῖς ἑαυτῆς αυτά λιμῷ νόμοις, ἅπασαν ἐκβάλλεσα Περθρείαν μυθικὴν Ῥωμαίων δὲ τῶν αὐθι γενῶν ἔτε μη αγυρτῶν τις, ἔτε κα]αυλόμενος πορεύεται διὰ τῆς πόλεως, ποικίλην ἐνδεδυκώς σόλην, ἔτε ὀργιάζων Τὴν θεὸν τοῖς Φρυγίοις ὀργιασμοῖς, κατὰ νόμον ἢ ψήφισμα βολῆς. ὅτως ευλαβῶς ἡ πόλις ἔχει πρὸς θὰ ἐκ ἐπιχώρια ἔθη περὶ θεῶν, καὶ πάντα ὀτεύεται γύρου, ὦ μὴ πείσες Τὸ ευπρεπές. II. 19. p. 88.

f See Sozomen. E. H. V. 11. Eufebius E. H. VI. 41. ΙΧ. 6. where it is faid that Peter of Alexandria ἀθρέως τω κι αλόγως, ὡς ἂν Μαξιμίνα προς άξαντος, Τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀπολέμνεται· which Valefius tranflates, fubito et abfque ulla probabili caufa, utpote Maximino jubente, capite truncatur. I think it should be, quafi jufisset Maximinus. The edicts against Christians were then repealed, and Maximinus at that time rather fecretly encouraged than openly commanded thofe cruelties.

Melito,

Melito, bifhop of Sardes, in the Apology which he dedicated to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, fays; "Pious g

men are

now perfecuted and harraffed through "all Afia by new Decrees, which was "never done before: for impudent fyco

phants, and fuch as covet the poffeffions

« of others, taking occafion from the "Edicts, rob without fear or fhame, and "ceafe not to plunder those who in nothing have offended.-And if these things are done by your order, it is enough, all is well; for a juft Prince " can never decree any thing that is unjuft; and we chearfully bear such a death, both as an honour and a reward. Only this favour we beg of you, that you would first inform yourself con".cerning

* Τὸ γὰρ ἐδὲ πώποτε γενόμενον, νῦν διώκεται τὸ τῶν θεοσεβῶν γένΘ, καινοῖς ἐλαυνόμενον δόγμασι καλὰ τήν Ασίαν· οἱ γὰρ ἀναιδώς συκοφάνται καὶ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἐραςαι, τὴν ἐκ τῶν διαταγμάτων ἔχοντες ἀφορμὴν, φανερῶς λης εύκσι, νύκτωρ και μεθημέραν διαρπάζοντες τις μηδὲν ἀδικένας. καὶ εἰ μὲν σὲ κελευσαντος ταῦτα πρότελαι ἔσω καλῶς γινόμενον· δίκαιος γδ βασιλεὺς ἐκ ἂν ἀδίκως βολεύσαλο πώποτε καὶ ἡμεῖς ἡδέως φέρομεν 18 τοιέτε θανάτε τὸ γέρας. Ταύτην δέ σοι μόνην προσφέρομεν δέησιν, ἵνα αὐτὸς πρότερον ἐπιγνες τις τῆς τοιαύτης

φιλονεικίας