Conduct of the Roman government towards the Christians, from the reign of Nero to that of Constantine
Christianity persecuted by the Roman emperors
IF we seriously consider the purity of the Christian
religion, the sanctity of its moral precepts, and the
innocent as well as austere lives of the greater number of
those who during the first ages embraced the faith of the
Gospel, we should naturally suppose that so benevolent a
doctrine would have been received with due reverence even
by the unbelieving world; that the learned and the polite,
however they might deride the miracles, would have esteemed
the virtues of the new sect; and that the magistrates,
instead of persecuting, would have protected an order of men
who yielded the most passive obedience to the laws, though
they declined the active cares of war and government. If, on
the other hand, we recollect the universal toleration of
Polytheism, as it was invariably maintained by the faith of
the people, the incredulity of philosophers, and the policy
of the Roman senate and emperors, we are at a loss to
discover what new offence the Christians had committed, what
new provocation could exasperate the mild indifference of
antiquity, and what new motives could urge the Roman
princes, who beheld without concern a thousand forms of
religion subsisting in peace under their gentle sway, to
inflict a severe punishment on any part of their subjects
who had chosen for themselves a singular but an inoffensive
mode of faith and worship.
The religious policy of the ancient world seems to have assumed a more stern and intolerant character to oppose the progress of Christianity. About four-score years after the death of Christ, his innocent disciples were punished with death by the sentence of a proconsul of the most amiable and philosophic character, and according to the laws of an emperor distinguished by the wisdom and justice of his general administration. The apologies which were repeatedly addressed to the successors of Trajan are filled with the most pathetic complaints that the Christians, who obeyed the dictates and solicited the liberty of conscience, were alone, among all the subjects of the Roman empire, excluded from the common benefits of their auspicious government. The deaths of a few eminent martyrs have been recorded with care; and from the time that Christianity was invested with the supreme power, the governors of the church have been no less diligently employed in displaying the cruelty, than in imitating the conduct, of their Pagan adversaries. To separate (if it be possible) a few authentic as well as interesting facts from an undigested mass of fiction and error, and to relate, in a clear and rational manner, the causes, the extent, the duration, and the most important circumstances of the persecutions to which the first Christians were exposed, is the design of the present chapter.
Inquiry into their motives
The sectaries of a persecuted religion, depressed by fear,
animated with resentment, and perhaps heated by enthusiasm,
are seldom in a proper temper of mind calmly to investigate,
or candidly to appreciate the motives of their enemies,
which often escape the impartial and discerning view even of
those who are placed at a secure distance from the flames of
persecution. A reason has been assigned for the conduct of
the emperors towards the primitive Christians, which may
appear the more specious and probable as it is drawn from
the acknowledged genius of Polytheism. It has already been
observed that the religious concord of the world was
principally supported by the implicit assent and reverence
which the nations of antiquity expressed for their
respective traditions and ceremonies. It might therefore be
expected that they would unite with indignation against any
sect of people which should separate itself from the
communion of mankind, and claiming the exclusive possession
of divine knowledge, should disdain every form of worship
except its own as impious and idolatrous. The rights of
toleration were held by mutual indulgence: they were justly
forfeited by a refusal of the accustomed tribute. As the
payment of this tribute was inflexibly refused by the Jews,
and by them alone, the consideration of the treatment which
they experienced from the Roman magistrates will serve to
explain how far these speculations are justified by facts,
and will lead us to discover the true causes of the
persecution of Christianity.
Rebellious spirit of the jews
Without repeating what has been already mentioned of the
reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple
of Jerusalem, we shall only observe that the destruction of
the temple and city was accompanied and followed by every
circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the
conquerors, and authorise religious persecutions by the most
specious arguments of political justice and the public
safety. From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius,
the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of
Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious
massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the
recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the
cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt
in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives;(1)
and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which
was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of
fanatics whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to
render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman
government, but of human kind.(2) The enthusiasm of the Jews
was supported by the opinion that it was unlawful for them
to pay taxes to an idolatrous master, and by the flattering
promise which they derived from their ancient oracles, that
a conquering Messiah would soon arise, destined to break
their fetters, and to invest the favourites of heaven with
the empire of the earth. It was by announcing himself as
their long-expected deliverer, and by calling on all the
descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of Israel, that
the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army, with
which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor
Hadrian.(3)
Toleration of the Jewish religion
Notwithstanding these repeated provocations, the resentment
of the Roman princes expired after the victory, nor were
their apprehensions continued beyond the period of war and
danger. By the general indulgence of Polytheism, and by the
mild temper of Antoninus Pius, the Jews were restored to
their ancient privileges, and once more obtained the
permission of circumcising their children, with the easy
restraint that they should never confer on any foreign
proselyte that distinguishing mark of the Hebrew race.(4) The
numerous remains of that people, though they were still
excluded from the precincts of Jerusalem, were permitted to
form and to maintain considerable establishments both in
Italy and in the provinces, to acquire the freedom of Rome,
to enjoy municipal honours, and to obtain at the same time
an exemption from the burdensome and expensive offices of
society. The moderation or the contempt of the Romans gave a
legal sanction to the form of ecclesiastical policy which
was instituted by the vanquished sect. The patriarch, who
had fixed his residence at Tiberias, was empowered to
appoint his subordinate ministers and apostles, to exercise
a domestic jurisdiction, and to receive from his dispersed
brethren an annual contribution. (5) New synagogues were
frequently erected in the principal cities of the empire;
and the sabbaths, the fasts, and the festivals, which were
either commanded by the Mosaic law or enjoined by the
traditions of the Rabbis, were celebrated in the most solemn
and public manner. (6) Such gentle treatment insensibly
assuaged the stern temper of the Jews. Awakened from their
dream of prophecy and conquest, they assumed the behaviour
of peaceable and industrious subjects. Their irreconcilable
hatred of mankind, instead of flaming out in acts of blood
and violence, evaporated in less dangerous gratifications.
They embraced every opportunity of over-reaching the
idolaters in trade, and they pronounced secret and ambiguous
imprecations against the haughty kingdom of Edom.(7)
The Jews were a people which folowed, the Christians, a sect which deserted, the religion of their fathers.
Since the Jews, who rejected with abhorrence the deities
adored by their sovereign and by their fellow-subjects,
enjoyed, however, the free exercise of their unsocial
religion, there must have existed some other cause which
exposed the disciples of Christ to those severities from
which the posterity of Abraham was exempt. The difference
between them is simple and obvious, but, according to the
sentiments of antiquity, it was of the highest importance.
The Jews were a nation, the Christians were a sect: and if
it was natural for every community to respect the sacred
institutions of their neighbours, it was incumbent on them
to persevere in those of their ancestors. The voice of
oracles, the precepts of philosophers, and the authority of
the laws, unanimously enforced this national obligation. By
their lofty claim of superior sanctity the Jews might
provoke the Polytheists to consider them as an odious and
impure race. By disdaining the intercourse of other nations
they might deserve their contempt. The laws of Moses might
be for the most part frivolous or absurd yet, since they had
been received during many ages by a large society, his
followers were justified by the example of mankind, and it
was universally acknowledged that they had a right to
practise what it would have been criminal in them to
neglect. But this principle, which protected the Jewish
synagogue, afforded not any favour or security to the
primitive church. By embracing the faith of the Gospel the
Christians incurred the supposed guilt of an unnatural and
unpardonable offence. They dissolved the sacred ties of
custom and education, violated the religious institutions of
their country, and presumptuously despised whatever their
fathers had believed as true or had reverenced as sacred.
Nor was this apostasy (if we may use the expression) merely
of a partial or local kind; since the pious deserter who
withdrew himself from the temples of Egypt or Syria would
equally disdain to seek an asylum in those of Athens or
Carthage. Every Christian rejected with contempt the
superstitions of his family, his city, and his province. The
whole body of Christians unanimously refused to hold any
communion with the gods of Rome, of the empire, and of
mankind. It was in vain that the oppressed believer asserted
the inalienable rights of conscience and private judgment.
Though his situation might excite the pity, his arguments
could never reach the understanding, either of the
philosophic or of the believing part of the Pagan world. To
their apprehensions it was no less a matter of surprise that
any individuals should entertain scruples against complying
with the established mode of worship than if they had
conceived a sudden abhorrence to the manners, the dress, or
the language of their native country.(8)
Christianity accused of atheism, and mistaken by the people and philosophers
The surprise of the Pagans was soon succeeded by resentment,
and the most pious of men were exposed to the unjust but
dangerous imputation of impiety. Malice and prejudice
concurred in representing the Christians as a society of
atheists, who, by the most daring attack on the religious
constitution of the empire, had merited the severest
animadversion of the civil magistrate. They had separated
themselves (they gloried in the confession) from every mode
of superstition which was received in any part of the globe
by the various temper of Polytheism: but it was not
altogether so evident what deity or what form of worship,
they had substituted to the gods and temples of antiquity.
The pure and sublime idea which they entertained of the
Supreme Being escaped the gross conception of the Pagan
multitude, who were at a loss to discover a spiritual and
solitary God, that was neither represented under any
corporeal figure or visible symbol, nor was adored with the
accustomed pomp of libations and festivals, of altars and
sacrifices.(9) The sages of Greece and Rome, who had elevated
their minds to the contemplation of the existence and
attributes of the First Cause, were induced by reason or by
vanity to reserve for themselves and their chosen disciples
the privilege of this philosophical devotion.(10) They were
far from admitting the prejudices of mankind as the standard
of truth, but they considered them as flowing from the
original disposition of human nature; and they supposed that
any popular mode of faith and worship which presumed to
disclaim the assistance of the senses would, in proportion
as it receded from superstition, find itself incapable of
restraining the wonderings of the fancy and the visions of
fanaticism. The careless glance which men of wit and
learning condescended to cast on the Christian revelation
served only to confirm their hasty opinion, and to persuade
them that the principle, which they might have revered, of
the Divine Unity, was defaced by the wild enthusiasm, and
annihilated by the airy speculations, of the new sectaries.
The author of a celebrated dialogue, which has been
attributed to Lucian, whilst he affects to treat the
mysterious subject of the Trinity in a style of ridicule and
contempt, betrays his own ignorance of the weakness of human
reason, and of the inscrutable nature of the Divine
perfections.(11)
It might appear less surprising that the founder of Christianity should not only be revered by his disciples as a sage and a prophet, but that he should be adored as a God. The Polytheists were disposed to adopt every article of faith which seemed to offer any resemblance, however distant or imperfect, with the popular mythology; and the legends of Bacchus, of Hercules, and of Aesculapius had, in some measure prepared their imagination for the appearance of the Son of God under a human form.(12) But they were astonished that the Christians should abandon the temples of those ancient heroes who, in the infancy of the world, had invented arts, instituted laws, and vanquished the tyrants or monsters who infested the earth; in order to choose for the exclusive object of their religious worship an obscure teacher, who, in a recent age, and among a barbarous people, had fallen a sacrifice either to the malice of his own countrymen, or to the jealousy of the Roman government. The Pagan multitude, reserving their gratitude for temporal benefits alone, rejected the inestimable present of life and immortality which was offered to mankind by Jesus of Nazareth. His mild constancy in the midst of cruel and voluntary sufferings, his universal benevolence, and the sublime simplicity of his actions and character, were insufficient in the opinion of those carnal men, to compensate for the want of fame, of empire, and of success; and whilst they refused to acknowledge his stupendous triumph over the powers of darkness and of the grave, they misrepresented, or they insulted, the equivocal birth, wandering life, and ignominious death, of the divine Author of Christianity.(13)
The union and assemblies of the Christians considered as a dangerous conspiracy.
The personal guilt which every Christian had contracted, in
thus preferring his private sentiment to the national
religion, was aggravated in a very high degree by the number
and union of the criminals. It is well known, and has been
already observed, that Roman policy viewed with the utmost
jealousy and distrust any association among its subjects;
and that the privileges of private corporations, though
formed for the most harmless or beneficial purposes, were
bestowed with a very sparing hand. (14) The religious
assemblies of the Christians, who had separated themselves
from the public worship, appeared of a much less innocent
nature: they were illegal in their principle, and in their
consequences might become dangerous; nor were the emperors
conscious that they violated the laws of justice, when, for
the peace of society, they prohibited those secret and
sometimes nocturnal meetings. (15) The pious disobedience of
the Christians made their conduct, or perhaps their designs,
appear in a much more serious and criminal light; and the
Roman princes, who might perhaps have suffered themselves to
be disarmed by a ready submission, deeming their honour
concerned in the execution of their commands, sometimes
attempted, by rigorous punishments, to subdue this
independent spirit, which boldly acknowledged an authority
superior to that of the magistrate. The extent and duration
of this spiritual conspiracy seemed to render it every day
more deserving of his animadversion. We have already seen
that the active and successful zeal of the Christians had
insensibly diffused them through every province and almost
every city of the empire. The new converts seemed to
renounce their family and country, that they might connect
themselves in an indissoluble band of union with a peculiar
society, which everywhere assumed a different character from
the rest of mankind. Their gloomy and austere aspect, their
abhorrence of the common business and pleasures of life, and
their frequent predictions of impending calamities, (16)
inspired the Pagans with the apprehension of some danger
which would arise from the new sect, the more alarming as it
was the more obscure.
" Whatever," says Pliny, "may be the principle of their conduct, their inflexible obstinacy appeared deserving of punishment." (17)
Their manners calumniated
The precautions with which the disciples of Christ performed
the offices of religion were at first dictated by fear and
necessity; but they were continued from choice. By imitating
the awful secrecy which reigned in the Eleusinian mysteries,
the Christians had flattered themselves that they should
render their sacred institutions more respectable in the
eyes of the Pagan World. (18) But the event, as it often
happens to the operations of subtle policy, deceived their
wishes and their expectations. It was concluded that they
only concealed what they would have blushed to disclose.
Their mistaken prudence afforded an opportunity for malice
to invent, and for suspicious credulity to believe, the
horrid tales which described the Christians as the most
wicked of human kind, who practised in their dark recesses
every abomination that a depraved fancy could suggest, and
who solicited the favour of their unknown God by the
sacrifice of every moral virtue. There were many who
pretended to confess or to relate the ceremonies of this
abhorred society. It was asserted,
"that a newborn infant, entirely covered over with flour, was presented, like some mystic symbol of initiation, to the knife of the proselyte, who unknowingly inflicted many a secret and mortal wound on the innocent victim of his error; that as soon as the cruel deed was perpetrated, the sectaries drank up the blood, greedily tore asunder the quivering members, and pledged themselves to eternal secrecy, by a mutual consciousness of guilt. It was as confidently affirmed that this inhuman sacrifice was succeeded by a suitable entertainment, in which intemperance served as a provocative to brutal lust; till, at the appointed moment, the lights were suddenly extinguished, shame was banished, nature was forgotten; and, as accident might direct, the darkness of the night was polluted by the incestuous commerce of sisters and brothers, of sons and of mothers." (19)
Their imprudent defence
But the perusal of the ancient apologies was sufficient to
remove even the slightest suspicion from the mind of a
candid adversary. The Christians, with the intrepid security
of innocence, appeal from the voice of rumour to the equity
of the magistrates. They acknowledge that, if any proof can
be produced of the crimes which calumny has imputed to them,
they are worthy of the most severe punishment. They provoke
the punishment, and they challenge the proof. At the same
time they urge, with equal truth and propriety, that the
charge is not less devoid of probability than it is
destitute of evidence; they ask whether any one can
seriously believe that the pure and holy precepts of the
Gospel, which so frequently restrain the use of the most
lawful enjoyments, should inculcate the practice of the most
abominable crimes; that a large society should resolve to
dishonour itself in the eyes of its own members; and that a
great number of persons, of either sex, and every age and
character, insensible to the fear of death or infamy, should
consent to violate those principles which nature and
education had imprinted most deeply in their minds. (20)
Nothing, it should seem, could weaken the force or destroy
the effect of so unanswerable a justification, unless it
were the injudicious conduct of the apologists themselves,
who betrayed the common cause of religion, to gratify their
devout hatred to the domestic enemies of the church. It was
sometimes faintly insinuated, and sometimes boldly asserted,
that the same bloody sacrifices, and the same incestuous
festivals, which were so falsely ascribed to the orthodox
believers, were in reality celebrated by the Marcionites, by
the Carpocratians, and by several other sects of the
Gnostics, who, notwithstanding they might deviate into the
paths of heresy, were still actuated by the sentiments of
men, and still governed by the precepts of Christianity.(21)
Accusations of a similar kind were retorted upon the church
by the schismatics who had departed from its communion,(22)
and it was confessed on all sides that the most scandalous
licentiousness of manners prevailed among great numbers of
those who affected the name of Christians. A Pagan
magistrate, who possessed neither leisure nor abilities to
discern the almost imperceptible line which divides the
orthodox faith from heretical depravity, might easily have
imagined that their mutual animosity had extorted the
discovery of their common guilt. It was fortunate for the
reposes or at least for the reputation, of the first
Christians, that the magistrates sometimes proceeded with
more temper and moderation than is usually consistent with
religious zeal, and that they reported, as the impartial
result of their judicial inquiry, that the sectaries who had
deserted the established worship appeared to them sincere in
their professions and blameless in their manners, however
they might incur, by their absurd and excessive
superstition, the censure of the laws.(23)
Idea of the conduct of the emperors towards the Christians
History, which undertakes to record the transactions of the
past, for the instruction of future ages, would ill deserve
that honourable office if she condescended to plead the
cause of tyrants, or to justify the maxims of persecution.
It must, however, be acknowledged that the conduct of the
emperors who appeared the least favourable to the primitive
church is by no means so criminal as that of modern
sovereigns who have employed the arm of violence and terror
against the religious opinions of any part of their
subjects. From their reflections, or even from their own
feelings, a Charles V. or a Louis XIV. might have acquired a
just knowledge of the rights of conscience, of the
obligation of faith, .and of the innocence of error. But the
princes and magistrates of ancient Rome were strangers to
those principles which inspired and authorised the
inflexible obstinacy of the Christians in the cause of
truth, nor could they themselves discover in their own
breasts any motives which would have prompted them to refuse
a legal, and as it were a natural, submission to the sacred
institutions of their country. The same reason which
contributes to alleviate the guilt, must have tended to
abate the rigour, of their persecutions. As they were
actuated, not by the furious zeal of bigots, but by the
temperate policy of legislators, contempt must often have
relaxed, and humanity must frequently have suspended, the
execution of those laws which they enacted against the
humble and obscure followers of Christ. From the general
view of their character and motives we might naturally
conclude: I. That a considerable time elapsed before they
considered the new sectaries as an object deserving of the
attention of government. II. That in the conviction of any
of their subjects who were accused of so very singular a
crime, they proceeded with caution and reluctance. III. That
they were moderate in the use of punishments; and IV. That
the afflicted church enjoyed many intervals of peace and
tranquillity. Notwithstanding the careless indifference
which the most copious and the most minute of the Pagan
writers have shown to the affairs of the Christians,(24) it
may still be in our power to confirm each of these probable
suppositions by the evidence of authentic facts.
They neglected the Christians as a sect of Jews
I. By the wise dispensation of Providence a mysterious veil
was cast over the infancy of the church, which, till the
faith of the Christians was matured, and their numbers were
multiplied, served to protect them not only from the malice
but even from the knowledge of the Pagan world. The slow and
gradual abolition of the Mosaic ceremonies afforded a safe
and innocent disguise to the more early proselytes of the
Gospel. As they were for the greater part of the race of
Abraham, they were distinguished by the peculiar mark of
circumcision, offered up their devotions in the Temple of
Jerusalem till its final destruction, and received both the
Law and the Prophets as the genuine inspirations of the
Deity. The Gentile converts who by a spiritual adoption had
been associated to the hope of Israel, were likewise
confounded under the garb and appearance of Jews;(25) and as
the Polytheists paid less regard to articles of faith than
to the external worship, the new sect, which carefully
concealed, or faintly announced, its future greatness and
ambition, was permitted to shelter itself under the general
toleration which was granted to an ancient and celebrated
people in the Roman empire. It was not long, perhaps, before
the Jews themselves, animated with a fiercer zeal and a more
jealous faith, perceived the gradual separation of their
Nazarene brethren from the doctrine of the synagogue: and
they would gladly have extinguished the dangerous heresy in
the blood of its adherents. But the decrees of Heaven had
already disarmed their malice; and though they might
sometimes exert the licentious privilege of sedition, they
no longer possessed the administration of criminal justice;
nor did they find it easy to infuse into the calm breast of
a Roman magistrate the rancour of their own zeal and
prejudice. The provincial governors declared themselves
ready to listen to any accusation that might affect the
public safety, but as soon as they were informed that it was
a question not of facts but of words, a dispute relating
only to the interpretation of the Jewish laws and
prophecies, they deemed it unworthy of the majesty of Rome
seriously to discuss the obscure differences which might
arise among a barbarous and superstitious people. The
innocence of the first Christians was protected by ignorance
and contempt; and the tribunal of the Pagan magistrate often
proved their most assured refuge against the fury of the
synagogue.(26) If, indeed, we were disposed to adopt the
traditions of a too credulous antiquity, we might relate the
distant peregrinations, the wonderful achievements, and the
various deaths of the twelve apostles: but a more accurate
inquiry will induce us to doubt whether any of those persons
who had been witnesses to the miracles of Christ were
permitted, beyond the limits of Palestine, to seal with
their blood the truth of their testimony. (27) From the
ordinary term of human life, it may very naturally be
presumed that most of them were deceased before the
discontent of the Jews broke out into that furious war which
was terminated only by the ruin of Jerusalem. During a long
period, from the death of Christ to that memorable
rebellion, we cannot discover any traces of Roman
intolerance, unless they are to be found in the sudden, the
transient, but the cruel persecution, which was exercised by
Nero against the Christians of the capital, thirty-five
years after the former, and only two years before the
latter, of those great events. The character of the
philosophic historian, to whom we are principally indebted
for the knowledge of this singular transaction, would alone
be sufficient to recommend it to our most attentive
consideration.
The fire of Rome under the reign of Nero
In the tenth year of the reign of Nero the capital of the
empire was afflicted by a fire which raged beyond the memory
or example of former ages.(28) The monuments of Grecian art
and of Roman virtue, the trophies of the Punic and Gallic
wars, the most holy temples, and the most splendid palaces
were involved in one common destruction. Of the fourteen
regions or quarters into which Rome was divided, four only
subsisted entire, three were levelled with the ground, and
the remaining seven, which had experienced the fury of the
flames, displayed a melancholy prospect of ruin and
desolation. The vigilance of government appears not to have
neglected any of the precautions which might alleviate the
sense of so dreadful a calamity. The Imperial gardens were
thrown open to the distressed multitude, temporary buildings
were erected for their accommodation, and a plentiful supply
of corn and provisions was distributed at a very moderate
price.(29) The most generous policy seemed to have dictated
the edicts which regulated the disposition of the streets
and the construction of private houses; and, as it usually
happens in an age of prosperity, the conflagration of Rome,
in the course of a few years, produced a new city, more
regular and more beautiful than the former. But all the
prudence and humanity affected by Nero on this occasion were
insufficient to preserve him from the popular suspicion.
Every crime might be imputed to the assassin of his wife and
mother; nor could the prince who prostituted his person and
dignity on the theatre be deemed incapable of the most
extravagant folly. The voice of rumour accused the emperor
as the incendiary of his own capital; and, as the most
incredible stories are the best adapted to the genius of an
enraged people, it was gravely reported, and firmly
believed, that Nero, enjoying the calamity which he had
occasioned, amused himself with singing to his lyre the
destruction of ancient Troy.(30) To divert a suspicion which the power of despotism was unable to suppress, the emperor resolved to substitute in his own place some fictitious
criminals.
Cruel punishment of the Christians, as the incendiaries of the city.
"With this view (continues Tacitus) he inflicted the most exquisite tortures on those men who, under the vulgar appellation of Christians, were already branded with deserved infamy. They derived their name and origin from Christ, who, in the reign of Tiberius, had suffered death by the sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate. (31) For a while this dire superstition was checked, but it again burst forth; and not only spread itself over Judaea, the first seat of this mischievous sect, but was even introduced into Rome, the common asylum which receives and protects whatever is impure, whatever is atrocious. The confessions of those who were seized discovered a great multitude of their accomplices, and they were all convicted, not so much for the crime of setting fire to the city as for their hatred of human kind. (32) They died in torments, and their torments were embittered by insult and derision. Some were nailed on crosses; others sewn up in the skins of wild beasts, and exposed to the fury of dogs; others again, smeared over with combustible materials, were used as torches to illuminate the darkness of the night. The gardens of Nero were destined for the melancholy spectacle, which was accompanied with a horserace, and honoured with the presence of the emperor, who mingled with the populace in the dress and attitude of a charioteer. The guilt of the Christians deserved indeed the most exemplary punishment, but the public abhorrence was changed into commiseration, from the opinion that those unhappy wretches were sacrificed, not so much to the public welfare as to the cruelty of a jealous tyrant." (33)
Those who survey with a curious eye the revolutions of mankind may observe that the gardens and circus of Nero on the Vatican, which were polluted with the blood of the first Christians, have been rendered still more famous by the triumph and by the abuse of the persecuted religion. On the same spot (34) a temple, which far surpasses the ancient glories of the Capitol, has been since erected by the Christian Pontiffs, who, deriving their claim of universal dominion from an humble fisherman of Galilee, have succeeded to the throne of the Caesars, given laws to the barbarian conquerors of Rome, and extended their spiritual jurisdiction from the coast of the Baltic to the shores of the Pacific Ocean.
But it would be improper to dismiss this account of Nero's persecution till we have made some observations that may serve to remove the difficulties with which it is perplexed, and to throw some light on the subsequent history of the church.
Remarks on the passage of Tacitus relative to the persecution of the Christians by Nero
1. The most sceptical criticism is obliged to respect the truth of this extraordinary fact, and the integrity of this celebrated passage of Tacitus. The former is confirmed by the diligent and accurate Suetonius, who mentions the punishment which Nero inflicted on the Christians, a sect of men who had embraced a new and criminal superstition.(35) The latter may be proved by the consent of the most ancient manuscripts; by the inimitable character of the style of
Tacitus; by his reputation, which guarded his text from the interpolations of pious fraud; and by the purport of his narration, which accused the first Christians of the most atrocious crimes, without insinuating that they possessed any miraculous or even magical powers above the rest of mankind.(36) 2. Notwithstanding it is probable that Tacitus was born some years before the fire of Rome,(37) he could derive only from reading and conversation the knowledge of an event which happened during his infancy. Before he gave himself to the public he calmly waited till his genius had attained its full maturity, and he was more than forty years of age when a grateful regard for the memory of the virtuous Agricola extorted from him the most early of those historical compositions which will delight and instruct the most distant posterity. After making a trial of his strength in the life of Agricola, and the description of Germany, he conceived, and at length executed, a more arduous work, the history of Rome, in thirty books, from the fall of Nero to the accession of Nerva. The administration of Nerva introduced an age of justice and prosperity, which Tacitus had destined for the occupation of his old age;(38) but when he took a nearer view of his subject, judging, perhaps, that it was a more honourable or a less invidious office to record the vices of past tyrants than to celebrate the virtues of a reigning monarch, he chose rather to relate, under the form of annals, the actions of the four immediate successors of Augustus. To collect, to dispose, and to adorn a series of four-score years in an immortal work, every sentence of which is pregnant with the deepest observations and the most lively images, was an undertaking sufficient to exercise the genius of Tacitus himself during the greatest
part of his life. In the last years of the reign of Trajan,
whilst the victorious monarch extended the power of Rome
beyond its ancient limits, the historian was describing, in
the second and fourth books of his Annals, the tyranny of
Tiberius;(39) and the emperor Hadrian must have succeeded to the throne before Tacitus, in the regular prosecution of his work, could relate the fire of the capital and the cruelty
of Nero towards the unfortunate Christians. At the distance of sixty years it was the duty of the annalist to adopt the narratives of contemporaries; but it was natural for the philosopher to indulge himself in the description of the origin, the progress, and the character of the new sect, not so much according to the knowledge or prejudices of the age of Nero, as according to those of the time of Hadrian. 3. Tacitus very frequently trusts to the curiosity or reflection of his readers to supply those intermediate circumstances and ideas which, in his extreme conciseness, he has thought proper to suppress. We may therefore presume to imagine some probable cause which could direct the cruelty of Nero against the Christians of Rome, whose obscurity, as well as innocence, should have shielded them from his indignation, and even from his notice. The Jews, who were numerous in the capital and oppressed in their own country, were a much fitter object for the suspicions of the emperor and of the people: nor did it seem unlikely that a vanquished nation, who already discovered their abhorrence of the Roman yoke, might have recourse to the most atrocious means of gratifying their implacable revenge. But the Jews possessed very powerful advocates in the palace, and even in the heart of the tyrant; his wife and mistress, the beautiful Poppaea, and a favourite player of the race of Abraham, who had already employed their intercession on behalf of the obnoxious people.(40) In their room it was
necessary to offer some other victims, and it might easily be suggested that, although the genuine followers of Moses were innocent of the fire of Rome, there had arisen among them a new and pernicious sect of GALILEANS, which was capable of the most horrid crimes Under the appellation of GALILEANS two distinctions of men were confounded, the most opposite to each other in their manners and principles; the disciples who had embraced the faith of Jesus of Nazareth, (41) and the zealots who had followed the standard of Judas the Gaulonite.(42) The former were the friends, the latter were the enemies, of human kind; and the only resemblance between them consisted in the same inflexible constancy which, in the defence of their cause, rendered them insensible of death and tortures. The followers of Judas, who impelled their countrymen into rebellion, were soon buried under the ruins of Jerusalem; whilst those of Jesus, known by the more celebrated name of Christians, diffused themselves over the Roman empire. How natural was it for Tacitus, in the time of Hadrian, to appropriate to the Christians the guilt and the sufferings which he might, with far greater truth and justice, have attributed to a sect whose odious memory was almost extinguished! 4.Whatever opinion may be entertained of this conjecture (for it is no more than a conjecture), it is evident that the effect, as well as the cause, of Nero's persecution, were confined to
the walls of Rome ; (43) that the religious tenets of the Galilaeans, or Christians, were never made a subject of punishment, or even of inquiry; and that, as the idea of their sufferings was, for a long time, connected with the idea of cruelty and injustice, the moderation of succeeding princes inclined them to spare a sect oppressed by a tyrant whose rage had been usually directed against virtue and innocence.
Oppression of the Jews and Christians by Domitian
It is somewhat remarkable that the flames of war consumed
almost at the same time the Temple of Jerusalem and the
Capitol of Rome ; (44) and it appears no less singular that
the tribute which devotion had destined to the former should
have been converted by the power of an assaulting victor to
restore and adorn the splendour of the latter. (45) The
emperors levied a general capitation tax on the Jewish
people; and although the sum assessed on the head of each
individual was inconsiderable, the use for which it was
designed, and the severity with which it was exacted, were
considered as an intolerable grievance. (46) Since the
officers of the revenue extended their unjust claim to many
persons who were strangers to the blood or religion of the
Jews, it was impossible that the Christians, who had so
often sheltered themselves under the shade of the synagogue,
should now escape this rapacious persecution. Anxious as
they were to avoid the slightest infection of idolatry,
their conscience forbade them to contribute to the honour of
that daemon who had assumed the character of the Capitoline
Jupiter. As a very numerous though declining party among the
Christians still adhered to the law of Moses, their efforts
to dissemble their Jewish origin were detected by the
decisive test of circumcision; (47) nor were the Roman
magistrates at leisure to inquire into the difference of
their religious tenets. Among the Christians who were
brought before the tribunal of the emperor, or, as it seems
more probable, before that of the procurator of Judaea, two
persons are said to have appeared, distinguished by their
extraction, which was more truly noble than that of the
greatest monarchs. These were the grandsons of St. Jude the
apostle, who himself was the brother of Jesus Christ.(48)
Their natural pretensions to the throne of David might
perhaps attract the respect of the people, and excite the
jealousy of the governor; but the meanness of their garb and
the simplicity of their answers soon convinced him that they
were neither desirous nor capable of disturbing the peace of
the Roman empire. They frankly confessed their royal origin,
and their near relation to the Messiah, but they disclaimed
any temporal views, and professed that his kingdom, which
they devoutly expected, was purely of a spiritual and
angelic nature. When they were examined concerning their
fortune and occupation, they showed their hands hardened
with daily labour, and declared that they derived their
whole subsistence from the cultivation of a farm near the
village of Cocaba, of the extent of about twenty-four
English acres,(49) and of the value of nine thousand drachms,
or three hundred pounds sterling. The grandsons of St. Jude
were dismissed with compassion and contempt.(50)
Execution of Clemens the consul
But although the obscurity of the house of David might
protect them from the suspicions of a tyrant, the present
greatness of his own family alarmed the pusillanimous temper
of Domitian, which could only be appeased by the blood of
those Romans whom he either feared, or hated, or esteemed.
Of the two sons of his uncle Flavius Sabinus,(51) the elder
was soon convicted of treasonable intentions, and the
younger, who bore the name of Flavius Clemens, was indebted
for his safety to his want of courage and ability.(52) The
emperor for a long time distinguished so harmless a kinsman
by his favour and protection, bestowed on him his own niece
Domitilla, adopted the children of that marriage to the hope
of the succession, and invested their father with the
honours of the consulship. But he had scarcely finished the
term of his annual magistracy, when on a slight pretence he
was condemned and executed; Domitilla was banished to a
desolate island on the coast of Campania ;(53) and sentences
either of death or of confiscation were pronounced against a
great number of persons who were involved in the same
accusation. The guilt imputed to their charge was that of
Atheism and Jewish manners; (54) a singular association of
ideas, which cannot with any propriety be applied except to
the Christians, as they were obscurely and imperfectly
viewed by the magistrates and by the writers of that period.
On the strength of so probable an interpretation, and too
eagerly admitting the suspicions of a tyrant as an evidence
of their honourable crime, the church has placed both
Clemens and Domitilla among its first martyrs, and has
branded the cruelty of Domitian with the name of the second
persecution. But this persecution (if it deserves that
epithet) was of no long duration. A few months after the
death of Clemens and the banishment of Domitilla, Stephen, a
freedman belonging to the latter, who had enjoyed the
favour, but who had not surely embraced the faith, of his
mistress, assassinated the emperor in his palace.(55) The
memory of Domitian was condemned by the senate; his acts
were rescinded; his exiles recalled; and under the gentle
administration of Nerva, while the innocent were restored to
their rank and fortunes, even the most guilty either
obtained pardon or escaped punishment.(56)
Ignorance of Pliny concerning the Christians
II. About ten years afterwards, under the reign of Trajan,
the younger Pliny was intrusted by his friend and master
with the government of Bithynia and Pontus. He soon found
himself at a loss to determine by what rule of justice or of
law he should direct his conduct in the execution of an
office the most repugnant to his humanity. Pliny had never
assisted at any judicial proceedings against the Christians,
with whose name alone he seems to be acquainted; and he was
totally uninformed with regard to the nature of their guilt,
the method of their conviction, and the degree of their
punishment. In this perplexity he had recourse to his usual
expedient, of submitting to the wisdom of Trajan an
impartial, and, in some respects, a favourable account of
the new superstition, requesting the emperor that he would
condescend to resolve his doubts and to instruct his
ignorance.(57)The life of Pliny had been employed in the acquisition of learning, and in the business of the; world. Since the age
of nineteen he had pleaded with distinction in the tribunals
of Rome,(58) filled a place in the senate, had been invested
with the honours of the consulship, and had formed very
numerous connections with every order of men, both in Italy
and in the provinces. From his ignorance therefore we may
derive some useful information. We may assure ourselves that
when he accepted the government of Bithynia there were no
general laws or decrees of the senate in force against the
Christians; that neither Trajan nor any of his virtuous
predecessors, whose edicts were received into the civil and
criminal jurisprudence, had publicly declared their
intentions concerning the new sect; and that, whatever
proceedings had been carried on against the Christians,
there were none of sufficient weight and authority to
establish a precedent for the conduct of a Roman magistrate.
Trajan and his successors establish a legal mode of proceeding against them.
The answer of Trajan, to which the Christians of the
succeeding age have frequently appealed, discovers as much
regard for justice and humanity as could be reconciled with
his mistaken notions of religious policy. (59) Instead of
displaying the implacable zeal of an Inquisitor, anxious to
discover the most minute particles of heresy, and exulting
in the number of his victims, the emperor expresses much
more solicitude to protect the security of the innocent than
to prevent the escape of the guilty. He acknowledges the
difficulty of fixing any general plan; but he lays down two
salutary rules, which often afforded relief and support to
the distressed Christians. Though he directs the magistrate
to punish such persons as are legally convicted, he
prohibits them, with a very humane inconsistency, from
making any inquiries concerning the supposed criminals. Nor
was the magistrate allowed to proceed on every kind of
information. Anonymous charges the emperor rejects, as too
repugnant to the equity of his government; and he strictly
requires, for the conviction of those to whom the guilt of
Christianity is imputed, the positive evidence of a fair and
open accuser. It is likewise probable that the persons who
assumed so invidious an office were obliged to declare the
grounds of their suspicions, to specify (both in respect to
time and place) the secret assemblies which their Christian
adversary had frequented, and to disclose a great number of
circumstances which were concealed with the most vigilant
jealousy from the eye of the profane. If they succeeded in
their prosecution, they were exposed to the resentment of a
considerable and active party, to the censure of the more
liberal portion of mankind, and to the ignominy which, in
every age and country, has attended the character of an
informer. If, on the contrary, they failed in their proofs,
they incurred the severe and perhaps capital penalty, which,
according to a law published by the emperor Hadrian, was
inflicted on those who falsely attributed to their
fellow-citizens the crime of Christianity. The violence of
personal or superstitious animosity might sometimes prevail
over the most natural apprehensions of disgrace and danger;
but it cannot surely be imagined that accusations of so
unpromising an appearance were either lightly or frequently
undertaken by the Pagan subjects of the Roman empire.(60)
Popular clamours
The expedient which was employed to elude the prudence of
the laws affords a sufficient proof how effectually they
disappointed the mischievous designs of private malice or
superstitious zeal. In a large and tumultuous assembly the
restraints of fear and shame, so forcible on the minds of
individuals, are deprived of the greatest part of their
influence. The pious Christian, as he was desirous to
obtain, or to escape, the glory of martyrdom, expected,
either with impatience or with terror, the stated returns of
the public games and festivals. On those occasions the
inhabitants of the great cities of the empire were collected
in the circus or the theatre, where every circumstance of
the place, as well as of the ceremony, contributed to kindle
their devotion and to extinguish their humanity. Whilst the
numerous spectators, crowned with garlands, perfumed with
incense, purified with the blood of victims, and surrounded
with the altars and statues of their tutelar deities,
resigned themselves to the enjoyment of pleasures which they
considered as an essential part of their religious worship,
they recollected that the Christians alone abhorred the gods
of mankind, and, by their absence and melancholy on these
solemn festivals, seemed to insult or to lament the public
felicity. If the empire had been afflicted by any recent
calamity, by a plague, a famine, or an unsuccessful war; if
the Tiber had, or if the Nile had not, risen beyond its
banks; if the earth had shaken, or if the temperate order of
the seasons had been interrupted, the superstitious Pagans
were convinced that the crimes and the impiety of the
Christians, who were spared by the excessive lenity of the
government, had at length provoked the Divine justice. It
was not among a licentious and exasperated populace that the
forms of legal proceedings could be observed; it was not in
an amphitheatre, stained with the blood of wild beasts and
gladiators, that the voice of compassion could be heard. The
impatient clamours of the multitude denounced the Christians
as the enemies of gods and men, doomed them to the severest
tortures, and, venturing to accuse by names some of the most
distinguished of the new sectaries, required with
irresistible vehemence that they should be instantly
apprehended and cast to the lions. (61) The provincial
governors and magistrates who presided in the public
spectacles were usually inclined to gratify the
inclinations, and to appease the rage of the people, by the
sacrifice of a few obnoxious victims. But the wisdom of the
emperors protected the church from the danger of these
tumultuous clamours and irregular accusations, which they
justly censured as repugnant both to the firmness and to the
equity of their administration. The edicts of Hadrian and of
Antoninus Pius expressly declared that the voice of the
multitude should never be admitted as legal evidence to
convict or to punish those unfortunate persons who had
embraced the enthusiasm of the Christians.(62)
Trials of the Christians.
III. Punishment was not the inevitable consequence of
conviction, and the Christians whose guilt was the most
clearly proved by the testimony of witnesses, or even by
their voluntary confession, still retained in their own
power the alternative of life or death. It was not so much
the past offence, as the actual resistance, which excited
the indignation of the magistrate. He was persuaded that he
offered them an easy pardon, since, if they consented to
cast a few grains of incense upon the altar, they were
dismissed from the tribunal in safety and with applause. It
was esteemed the duty of a humane judge to endeavour to
reclaim, rather than to punish, those deluded enthusiasts.
Varying his tone according to the age, the sex, or the
situation of the prisoners, he frequently condescended to
set before their eyes every circumstance which could render
life more pleasing, or death more terrible; and to solicit,
nay to intreat them, that they would show some compassion to
themselves, to their families, and to their friends.(63) If
threats and persuasions proved ineffectual, he had often
recourse to violence; the scourge and the rack were called
in to supply the deficiency of argument, and every art of
cruelty was employed to subdue such inflexible, and, as it
appeared to the Pagans, such criminal obstinacy. The ancient
apologists of Christianity have censured, with equal truth
and severity, the irregular conduct of their persecutors,
who, contrary to every principle of judicial proceeding,
admitted the use of torture, in order to obtain, not a
confession, but a denial, of the crime which was the object
of their inquiry. (64) The monks of succeeding ages, who, in
their peaceful solitudes, entertained themselves with
diversifying the deaths and sufferings of the primitive
martyrs, have frequently invented torments of a much more
refined and ingenious nature. In particular, it has pleased
them to suppose that the zeal of the Roman magistrates,
disdaining every consideration of moral virtue or public
decency, endeavoured to seduce those whom they were unable
to vanquish, and that by their orders the most brutal
violence was offered to those whom they found it impossible
to seduce. It is related that pious females, who were
prepared to despise death, were sometimes condemned to a
more severe trial, and called upon to determine whether they
set a higher value on their religion or on their chastity.
The youths to whose licentious embraces they were abandoned
received a solemn exhortation from the judge to exert their
most strenuous efforts to maintain the honour of Venus
against the impious virgin who refused to burn incense on
her altars. Their violence, however, was commonly
disappointed, and the seasonable interposition of some
miraculous power preserved the chaste spouses of Christ from
the dishonour even of an involuntary defeat. We should not
indeed neglect to remark that the more ancient as well as
authentic memorials of the church are seldom polluted with
these extravagant and indecent fictions.(65)
Humanity of Roman magistrates
The total disregard of truth and probability in the
representation of these primitive martyrdoms was occasioned
by a very natural mistake. The ecclesiastical writers of the
fourth or fifth centuries ascribed to the magistrates of
Rome the same degree of implacable and unrelenting zeal
which filled their own breasts against the heretics or the
idolaters of their own times. It is not improbable that some
of those persons who were raised to the dignities of the
empire might have imbibed the prejudices of the populace,
and that the cruel disposition of others might occasionally
be stimulated by motives of avarice or of personal
resentment.(66) But it is certain, and we may appeal to the
grateful confessions of the first Christians, that the
greatest part of those magistrates who exercised in the
provinces the authority of the emperor or of the senate, and
to whose hands alone the jurisdiction of life and death was
intrusted, behaved like men of polished manners and liberal
education, who respected the rules of justice, and who were
conversant with the precepts of philosophy. They frequently
declined the odious task of persecution, dismissed the
charge with contempt, or suggested to the accused Christian
some legal evasion by which he might elude the severity of
the laws. (67) Whenever they were invested with a
discretionary power,(68) they used it much less for the
oppression than for the relief and benefit of the afflicted
church. They were far from condemning all the Christians who
were accused before their tribunal, and very far from
punishing with death all those who were convicted of an
obstinate adherence to the new superstition. Contenting themselves, for the most part, with the milder chastisements of imprisonment, exile, or slavery in the mines,(69) they left the unhappy victims of their justice some reason to hope that a prosperous event, the accession, the marriage, or the triumph of an emperor, might speedily restore them by a general pardon to their former state. Inconsiderable number of martyrs The martyrs, devoted to immediate execution by the Roman magistrates, appear to have been selected from the most opposite extremes. They were either bishops and presbyters, the persons the most distinguished among the Christians by their rank and influence, and whose example might strike terror into the whole sect;(70) or else they were the meanest and most abject among them, particularly those of the servile condition, whose lives were esteemed of little value, and whose sufferings were viewed by the ancients with too careless an indifference. (71) The learned Origen, who, from his
experience as well as readings, was intimately acquainted with the history of the Christians, declares, in the most express terms, that the number of martyrs was very inconsiderable.(72) His authority would alone be sufficient
to annihilate that formidable army of martyrs, whose relics, drawn for the most part from the catacombs of Rome, have replenished so many churches, (73) and whose marvellous
achievements have been the subject of so many volumes of holy romance.(74) But the general assertion of Origen may be explained and confirmed by the particular testimony of his friend Dionysius, who, in the immense city of Alexandria,
and under the rigorous persecution of Decius, reckons only ten men and seven women who suffered for the profession of the Christian name.(75)
Example of Cyprian bishop of Carthage
During the same period of persecution, the zealous, the
eloquent, the ambitious Cyprian governed the church, not
only of Carthage, but even of Africa. He possessed every
quality which could engage the reverence of the faithful, or
provoke the suspicions and resentment of the Pagan
magistrates. His character as well as his station seemed to
mark out that holy prelate as the most distinguished object
of envy and of danger. (76) The experience, however, of the
life of Cyprian is sufficient to prove that our fancy has
exaggerated the perilous situation of a Christian bishop;
and that the dangers to which he was exposed were less
imminent than those which temporal ambition is always
prepared to encounter in the pursuit of honours. Four Roman
emperors, with their families, their favourites, and their
adherents, perished by the sword in the space of ten years,
during which the bishop of Carthage guided by his authority
and eloquence the councils of the African church. It was
only in the third year of his administration that he had
reason, during a few months, to apprehend the severe edicts
of Decius, the vigilance of the magistrate, and the clamours
of the multitude, His danger and flight. who loudly demanded that Cyprian, the
leader of the Christians, should be thrown to the lions.
Prudence suggested the necessity of a temporary retreat, and
the voice of prudence was obeyed. He withdrew himself into
an obscure solitude, from whence he could maintain a
constant correspondence with the clergy and people of
Carthage; and, concealing himself till the tempest was past,
he preserved his life, without relinquishing either his
power or his reputation. His extreme caution did not however
escape the censure of the more rigid Christians, who
lamented, or the reproaches of his personal enemies, who
insulted, a conduct which they considered as a pusillanimous
and criminal desertion of the most sacred duty. (77) The
propriety of reserving himself for the future exigencies of
the church, the example of several holy bishops,(78) and the
divine admonitions which, as he declares himself, he
frequently received in visions and ecstacies, were the
reasons alleged in his justification. (79) But his best
apology may be found in the cheerful resolution with which
about eight years afterwards, he suffered death in the cause
of religion. The authentic history of his martyrdom has been
recorded with unusual candour and impartiality. A short
abstract therefore of its most important circumstances will
convey the clearest information of the spirit and of the
forms of the Roman persecutions.(80)
A.D. 257. His banishment.
When Valerian was consul for the third, and Gallienus for
the fourth time, Paternus, proconsul of Africa, summoned
Cyprian to appear in his private council chamber. He there
acquainted him with the imperial mandate which he had just
received,(81) that those who had abandoned the Roman religion
should immediately return to the practice of the ceremonies
of their ancestors. Cyprian replied without hesitation that
he was a Christian and a bishop, devoted to the worship of
the true and only Deity, to whom he offered up his daily
supplications for the safety and prosperity of the two
emperors, his lawful sovereigns. With modest confidence he
pleaded the privilege of a citizen in refusing to give any
answer to some invidious and indeed illegal questions which
the proconsul had proposed. A sentence of banishment was
pronounced as the penalty of Cyprian's disobedience; and he
was conducted without delay to Curubis, a free and maritime
city of Zeugitana, in a pleasant situation, a fertile
territory, and at the distance of about forty miles from
Carthage.(82) The exiled bishop enjoyed the conveniences of
life and the consciousness of virtue. His reputation was
diffused over Africa and Italy; an account of his behaviour
was published for the edification of the Christian world;(83)
and his solitude was frequently interrupted by the letters,
the visits, and the congratulations of the faithful. On the
arrival of a new proconsul in the province the fortune of
Cyprian appeared for some time to wear a still more
favourable aspect. He was recalled from banishment, and,
though not yet permitted to return to Carthage, his own
gardens in the neighbourhood of the capital were assigned
for the place of his residence.(84)
His condemnation.
At length, exactly one year (85) after Cyprian was first
apprehended, Galerius Maximus, proconsul of Africa, received
the imperial warrant for the execution of the Christian
teachers. The bishop of Carthage was sensible that he should
be singled out for one of the first victims, and the frailty
of nature tempted him to withdraw himself, by a secret
flight, from the danger and the honour of martyrdom; but,
soon recovering that fortitude which his character required,
he returned to his gardens, and patiently expected the
ministers of death. Two officers of rank, who were intrusted
with that commission, placed Cyprian between them in a
chariot, and, as the proconsul was not then at leisure, they
conducted him, not to a prison, but to a private house in
Carthage, which belonged to one of them. An elegant supper
was provided for the entertainment of the bishop, and his
Christian friends were permitted for the last time to enjoy
his society, whilst the streets were filled with a multitude
of the faithful, anxious and alarmed at the approaching fate
of their spiritual father. (86) In the morning he appeared
before the tribunal of the proconsul, who, after informing himself of the name and situation of Cyprian, commanded him to offer sacrifice, and pressed him to reflect on the consequences of his disobedience. The refusal of Cyprian was firm and decisive, and the magistrate, when he had taken the opinion of his council, pronounced, with some reluctance, the sentence of death. It was conceived in the following terms:
"That Thascius Cyprianus should be immediately beheaded, as the enemy of the gods of Rome, and as the chief and ringleader of a criminal association, which he had seduced into an impious resistance against the laws of the most holy emperors Valerian and Gallienus." (87)
The manner of his execution was the mildest and least painful that could be inflicted on a person convicted of any capital offence: nor was the use of torture admitted to obtain from the bishop of Carthage either the recantation of his principles or the discovery of his accomplices.
His martyrdom.
As soon as the sentence was proclaimed, a general cry of "We
will die with him" arose at once among the listening multitude of Christians who waited before the palace gates. The generous effusions of their zeal and affection were neither serviceable to Cyprian nor dangerous to themselves. He was led away under a guard of tribunes and centurions, without resistance and without insult, to the place of his execution, a spacious and level plain near the city, which was already filled with great numbers of spectators. His faithful presbyters and deacons were permitted to accompany
their holy bishop. They assisted him in laying aside his upper garment, spread linen on the ground to catch the precious relics of his blood, and received his orders to bestow five-and-twenty pieces of gold on the executioner. The martyr then covered his face with his hands, and at one
blow his head was separated from his body. His corpse remained during some hours exposed to the curiosity of the Gentiles, but in the night it was removed, and transported, in a triumphal procession and with a splendid illumination, to the burial place of the Christians. The funeral of
Cyprian was. publicly celebrated without receiving any interruption from the Roman magistrates; and those among the faithful who had performed the last offices to his person and his memory were secure from the danger of inquiry or of punishment. It is remarkable that, of so great a multitude of bishops in the province of Africa, Cyprian was the first who was esteemed worthy to obtain the crown of martyrdom.(88)
Various incitements to martyrdom.
It was in the choice of Cyprian either to die a martyr or to
live an apostate, but on that choice depended the
alternative of honour or infamy. Could we suppose that the
bishop of Carthage had employed the profession of the
Christian faith only as the instrument of his avarice or
ambition, it was still incumbent on him to support the
character which he had assumed,(89) and, if he possessed the
smallest degree of manly fortitude, rather to expose himself
to the most cruel tortures than by a single act to exchange
the reputation of a whole life for the abhorrence of his
Christian brethren and the contempt of the Gentile world.
But if the zeal of Cyprian was supported by the sincere
conviction of the truth of those doctrines which he
preached, the crown of martyrdom must have appeared to him
as an object of desire rather than of terror. It is not easy
to extract any distinct ideas from the vague though eloquent
declamations of the Fathers, or to ascertain the degree of
immortal glory and happiness which they confidently promised
to those who were so fortunate as to shed their blood in the
cause of religion. (90) They inculcated with becoming
diligence that the fire of martyrdom supplied every defect
and expiated every sin; that, while the souls of ordinary
Christians were obliged to pass through a slow and painful
purification, the triumphant sufferers entered into the
immediate fruition of eternal bliss, where, in the society
of the patriarchs, the apostles, and the prophets, they
reigned with Christ, and acted as his assessors in the
universal judgment of mankind. The assurance of a lasting
reputation upon earth, a motive so congenial to the vanity
of human nature, often served to animate the courage of the
martyrs. The honours which Rome or Athens bestowed on those
citizens who had fallen in the cause of their country were
cold and unmeaning demonstrations of respect, when compared
with the ardent gratitude and devotion which the primitive
church expressed towards the victorious champions of the
faith. The annual commemoration of their virtues and
sufferings was observed as a sacred ceremony, and at length
terminated in religious worship. Among the Christians who
had publicly confessed their religious principles, those who
(as it very frequently happened) had been dismissed from the
tribunal or the prisons of the Pagan magistrates obtained
such honours as were justly due to their imperfect martyrdom
and their generous resolution. The most pious females
courted the permission of imprinting kisses on the fetters
which they had worn, and on the wounds which they had
received. Their persons were esteemed holy, their decisions
were admitted with deference, and they too often abused, by
their spiritual pride and licentious manners, the
pre-eminence which their zeal and intrepidity had acquired.
(91) Distinctions like these, whilst they display the exalted
merit, betray the inconsiderable number, of those who
suffered and of those who died for the profession of
Christianity.
Ardour of the first Christians.
The sober discretion of the present age will more readily
censure than admire, but can more easily admire than
imitate, the fervour of the first Christians, who, according
to the lively expression of Sulpicius Severus, desired
martyrdom with more eagerness than his own contemporaries
solicited a bishopric. (92) The epistles which Ignatius
composed as he was carried in chains through the cities of
Asia breathe sentiments the most repugnant to the ordinary
feelings of human nature. He earnestly beseeches the Romans
that, when he should be exposed in the amphitheatre, they
would not, by their kind but unseasonable intercession,
deprive him of the crown of glory; and he declares his
resolution to provoke and irritate the wild beasts which
might be employed as the instruments of his death.(93) Some
stories are related of the courage of martyrs who actually
performed what Ignatius had intended, who exasperated the
fury of the lions, pressed the executioner to hasten his
office, cheerfully leaped into the fires which were kindled
to consume them, and discovered a sensation of joy and
pleasure in the midst of the most exquisite tortures.
Several examples have been preserved of a zeal impatient of
those restraints which the emperors had provided for the
security of the church. The Christians sometimes supplied by
their voluntary declaration the want of an accuser, rudely
disturbed the public service of paganism,(94) and, rushing in
crowds round the tribunal of the magistrates, called upon
them to pronounce and to inflict the sentence of the law.
The behaviour of the Christians was too remarkable to escape
the notice of the ancient philosophers, but they seem to
have considered it with much less admiration than
astonishment. Incapable of conceiving the motives which
sometimes transported the fortitude of believers beyond the
bounds of prudence or reason, they treated such an eagerness
to die as the strange result of obstinate despair, of stupid
insensibility, or of superstitious frenzy. (95)
"Unhappy men!" exclaimed the proconsul Antoninus to the Christians of Asia, "unhappy men! it you are thus weary of your lives, is it so difficult for you to find ropes and precipices?" (96)
He was extremely cautious (as it is observed by a learned and pious historian) of punishing men who had found no accusers but themselves, the imperial laws not having made any provisions for so unexpected a case; condemning therefore a few as a warning to their brethren, he dismissed the multitude with indignation and contempt. (97) Notwithstanding this real or affected disdain, the intrepid constancy of the faithful was productive of more salutary effects on those which nature or grace had disposed for the easy reception of religious truth. On these melancholy occasions there were many among the Gentiles who pitied, who admired, and who were converted. The generous enthusiasm was communicated from the sufferer to the spectators, and the blood of martyrs, according to a well-known observation, became the seed of the church.
Gradual relaxation.
But although devotion had raised, and eloquence continued to
inflame, this fever of the mind, it insensibly gave way to
the more natural hopes and fears of the human heart, to the
love of life, the apprehension of pain, and the horror of
dissolution. The more prudent rulers of the church found
themselves obliged to restrain the indiscreet ardour of
their followers, and to distrust a constancy which too often
abandoned them in the hour of trial.(98) As the lives of the
faithful became less mortified and austere, they were every
day less ambitious of the honours of martyrdom; and the
soldiers of Christ, instead of distinguishing themselves by
voluntary deeds of heroism, frequently deserted their post,
and fled in confusion before the enemy whom it was their
duty to resist. There were three methods, however, of
escaping the flames of persecution, which were not attended
with an equal degree of guilt: the first indeed was
generally allowed to be innocent; the second was of a
doubtful, or at least of a venial, nature; but the third
implied a direct and criminal apostasy from the Christian
faith.
Three methods of escaping martyrdom.
I. A modern Inquisitor would hear with surprise, that,
whenever an information was given to a Roman magistrate of
any person within his jurisdiction who had embraced the sect
of the Christians, the charge was communicated to the party
accused, and that a convenient time was allowed him to
settle his domestic concerns, and to prepare an answer to
the crime which was imputed to him.(99) If he entertained any
doubt of his own constancy, such a delay afforded him the
opportunity of preserving his life and honour by flight, of
withdrawing himself into some obscure retirement or some
distant province, and of patiently expecting the return of
peace and security. A measure so consonant to reason was
soon authorised by the advice and example of the most holy
prelates; and seems to have been censured by few, except by
the Montanists, who deviated into heresy by their strict and
obstinate adherence to the rigour of ancient discipline.(100)
II. The provincial governors, whose zeal was less prevalent
than their avarice, had countenanced the practice of selling
certificates (or libels as they were called), which attested
that the persons therein mentioned had complied with the
laws, and sacrificed to the Roman deities. By producing
these false declarations, the opulent and timid Christians
were enabled to silence the malice of an informer, and to
reconcile in some measure their safety with their religion.
A slight penance atoned for this profane dissimulation.(101)
III. In every persecution there were great numbers of
unworthy Christians who publicly disowned or renounced the
faith which they had professed; and who confirmed the
sincerity of their abjuration by the legal acts of burning
incense or of offering sacrifices. Some of these apostates
had yielded on the first menace or exhortation of the
magistrate; whilst the patience of others had been subdued
by the length and repetition of tortures. The affrighted
countenances of some betrayed their inward remorse, while
others advanced with confidence and alacrity to the altars
of the gods. (102) But the disguise which fear had imposed
subsisted no longer than the present danger. As soon as the
severity of the persecution was abated, the doors of the
churches were assailed by the returning multitude of
penitents, who detested their idolatrous submission, and who
solicited with equal ardour, but with various success, their
re-admission into the society of Christians.(103)
Alternatives of severity and toleration.
IV. Notwithstanding the general rules established for the
conviction and punishment of the Christians, the fate of
those sectaries, in an extensive and arbitrary government,
must still, in a great measure, have depended on their own
behaviour, the circumstances of the times, and the temper of
their supreme as well as subordinate rulers. Zeal might
sometimes provoke, and prudence might sometimes avert or
assuage, the superstitious fury of the Pagans. A variety of
motives might dispose the provincial governors either to
enforce or to relax the execution of the laws; and of these
motives the most forcible was their regard not only for the
public edicts, but for the secret intentions of the emperor,
a glance from whose eye was sufficient to kindle or to
extinguish the flames of persecution. As often as any
occasional severities were exercised in the different parts
of the empire, the primitive Christians lamented and perhaps
magnified their own sufferings; The ten persecutions. but the celebrated number of
ten persecutions has been determined by the ecclesiastical
writers of the fifth century, who possessed a more distinct
view of the prosperous or adverse fortunes of the church
from the age of Nero to that of Diocletian. The ingenious
parallels of the ten plagues of Egypt, and of the ten horns
of the Apocalypse, first suggested this calculation to their
minds; and in their application of the faith of prophecy to
the truth of history they were careful to select those
reigns which were indeed the most hostile to the Christian
cause.(104) But these transient persecutions served only to
revive the zeal and to restore the discipline of the
faithful; and the moments of extraordinary rigour were
compensated by much longer intervals of peace and security.
The indifference of some princes and the indulgence of
others permitted the Christians to enjoy, though not perhaps
a legal, yet an actual and public toleration of their
religion.
Supposed edicts of Tiberius and Marcus Antoninus.
The Apology of Tertullian contains two very ancient, very
singular, but at the same time very suspicious instances of
Imperial clemency; the edicts published by Tiberius and by
Marcus Antoninus, and designed not only to protect the
innocence of the Christians, but even to proclaim those
stupendous miracles which had attested the truth of their
doctrine. The first of these examples is attended with some
difficulties which might perplex a sceptical mind.(105) We
are required to believe that Pontius Pilate informed the
emperor of the unjust sentence of death which he had
pronounced against an innocent, and, as it appeared, a
divine person; and that, without acquiring the merit, he
exposed himself to the danger, of martyrdom; that Tiberius,
who avowed his contempt for all religion, immediately
conceived the design of placing the Jewish Messiah among the
gods of Rome; that his servile senate ventured to disobey
the commands of their master; that Tiberius, instead of
resenting their refusal, contented himself with protecting
the Christians from the severity of the laws, many years
before such laws were enacted or before the church had
assumed any distinct name or existence; and lastly, that the
memory of this extraordinary transaction was preserved in
the most public and authentic records, which escaped the
knowledge of the historians of Greece and Rome, and were
only visible to the eyes of an African Christian, who
composed his Apology one hundred and sixty years after the
death of Tiberius. The edict of Marcus Antoninus is supposed
to have been the effect of his devotion and gratitude for
the miraculous deliverance which he had obtained in the
Marcomannic war. The distress of the legions, the seasonable
tempest of rain and hail, of thunder and lightning, and the
dismay and defeat of the barbarians, have been celebrated by
the eloquence of several Pagan writers. If there were any
Christians in that army, it was natural that they should
ascribe some merit to the fervent prayers which, in the
moment of danger, they had offered up for their own and the
public safety. But we are still assured by monuments of
brass and marble, by the Imperial medals, and by the
Antonine column, that neither the prince nor the people
entertained any sense of this signal obligation, since they
unanimously attribute their deliverance to the providence of
Jupiter, and to the interposition of Mercury. During the
whole course of his reign Marcus despised the Christians as
a philosopher, and punished them as a sovereign.(106)
State of the Christians in the reigns of Commodus and Severus. A.D. 180..
By a singular fatality, the hardships which they had endured
under the government of a virtuous prince immediately ceased
on the accession of a tyrant; and as none except themselves
had experienced the injustice of Marcus, so they alone were
protected by the lenity of Commodus. The celebrated Marcia,
the most favoured of his concubines, and who at length
contrived the murder of her Imperial lover, entertained a
singular affection for the oppressed church; and though it
was impossible that she could reconcile the practice of vice
with the precepts of the Gospel, she might hope to atone for
the frailties of her sex and profession by declaring herself
the patroness of the Christians. (107) Under the gracious
protection of Marcia they passed in safety the thirteen
years of a cruel tyranny; and when the empire was
established in the house of Severus, they formed a domestic,
but more honourable connection with the new court. The
emperor was persuaded that, in a dangerous sickness, he had
derived some benefit, either spiritual or physical, from the
holy oil with which one of his slaves had anointed him. He
always treated with peculiar distinction several persons of
both sexes who had embraced the new religion. The nurse as
well as the preceptor of Caracalla were Christians; and if
that young prince ever betrayed a sentiment of humanity, it
was occasioned by an incident which, however trifling, bore
some relation to the cause of Christianity.(108) Under the
reign of Severus the fury of the populace was checked; the
rigour of ancient laws was for some time suspended; and the
provincial governors were satisfied with receiving an annual
present from the churches within their jurisdiction, as the
price, or as the reward, of their moderation. (109) The
controversy concerning the precise time of the celebration
of Easter armed the bishops of Asia and Italy against each
other, and was considered as the most important business of
this period of leisure and tranquillity. (110) Nor was the
peace of the church interrupted till the increasing numbers
of proselytes seem at length to have attracted the
attention, and to have alienated the mind, of Severus. With
the design of restraining the progress of Christianity, he
published an edict, which, though it was designed to affect
only the new converts, could not be carried into strict
execution without exposing to danger and punishment the most
zealous of their teachers and missionaries. In this
mitigated persecution we may still discover the indulgent
spirit of Rome and of the Polytheism, which so readily
admitted every excuse in favour of those who practised the
religious ceremonies of their fathers.(111)
Of the succession of Severus.A.D. 211-249
But the laws which Severus had enacted soon expired with the
authority of that emperor; and the Christians, after this
accidental tempest, enjoyed a calm of thirty-eight years.
(112) Till this period they had usually held their assemblies
in private houses and sequestered places. They were now
permitted to erect and consecrate convenient edifices for
the purpose of religious worship ;(113) to purchase lands,
even at Rome itself, for the use of the community; and to
conduct the elections of their ecclesiastical ministers in
so public, but at the same time in so exemplary a manner, as
to deserve the respectful attention of the Gentiles.(114)
This long repose of the church was accompanied with dignity.
The reigns of those princes who derived their extraction
from the Asiatic provinces proved the most favourable to the
Christians; the eminent persons of the sect, instead of
being reduced to implore the protection of a slave or
concubine, were admitted into the palace in the honourable
characters of priests and philosophers; and their mysterious
doctrines, which were already diffused among the people,
insensibly attracted the curiosity of their sovereign. When
the empress Mamaea passed through Antioch, she expressed a
desire of conversing with the celebrated Origen, the fame of
whose piety and learning was spread over the East. Origen
obeyed so flattering an invitation, and, though he could not
expect to succeed in the conversion of an artful and
ambitious woman, she listened with pleasure to his eloquent
exhortations, and honourably dismissed him to his retirement
in Palestine.(115) The sentiments of Mamaea were adopted by
her son Alexander, and the philosophic devotion of that
emperor was marked by a singular but injudicious regard for
the Christian religion. In his domestic chapel he placed the
statues of Abraham, of Orpheus, of Apollonius, and of
Christ, as an honour justly due to those respectable sages
who had instructed mankind in the various modes of
addressing their homage to the supreme and universal Deity.
(116) A purer faith, as well as worship, was openly professed
and practised among his household. Bishops, perhaps for the
first time, were seen at court; and, after the death of
Alexander, when the inhuman Maximin discharged his fury on
the favourites and servants of his unfortunate benefactor, a
great number of Christians, of every rank, and of both
sexes, were involved in the promiscuous massacre, which, on
their account, has improperly received the name of
Persecution.(117)
Of Maximin, Philip and Decius.
Notwithstanding the cruel disposition of Maximin, the
effects of his resentment against the Christians were of a
very local and temporary nature, and the pious Origen, who
had been proscribed as a devoted victim, was still reserved
to convey the truths of the Gospel to the ear of monarchs.
(118) He addressed several edifying letters to the emperor
Philip, to his wife, and to his mother, and as soon as that
prince, who was born in the neighbourhood of Palestine, had
usurped the Imperial sceptre, the Christians acquired a
friend and a protector. The public and even partial favour
of Philip towards the sectaries of the new religion, and his
constant reverence for the ministers of the church, gave
some colour to the suspicion, which prevailed in his own
times, that the emperor himself was become a convert to the
faith;(119) and afforded some grounds for a fable which was
afterwards invented, that he had been purified by confession
and penance from the guilt contracted by the murder of his
innocent predecessor.(120) The fall of Philip introduced,
with the change of masters, a new system of government, so
oppressive to the Christians, that their former condition,
ever since the time of Domitian, was represented as a state
of perfect freedom and security, if compared with the
rigorous treatment which they experienced under the short
reign of Decius. (121) The virtues of that prince will
scarcely allow us to suspect that he was actuated by a mean
resentment against the favourites of his predecessor; and it
is more reasonable to believe that, in the prosecution of
his general design to restore the purity of Roman manners,
he was desirous of delivering the empire from what he
condemned as a recent and criminal superstition. The bishops
of the most considerable cities were removed by exile or
death: the vigilance of the magistrates prevented the clergy
of Rome during sixteen months from proceeding to a new
election; and it was the opinion of the Christians that the
emperor would more patiently endure a competitor for the
purple than a bishop in the capital.(122) Were it possible to
suppose that the penetration of Decius had discovered pride
under the disguise of humility, or that he could foresee the
temporal dominion which might insensibly arise from the
claims of spiritual authority, we might be less surprised
that he should consider the successors of St. Peter as the
most formidable rivals to those of Augustus.
Of Valerian, Gallienus, and his successors. A.D. 253-260..
The administration of Valerian was distinguished by a levity
and inconstancy ill suited to the gravity of the Roman
Censor. In the first part of his reign he surpassed in
clemency those princes who had been suspected of an
attachment to the Christian faith. In the last three years
and a half, listening to the insinuations of a minister
addicted to the superstitions of Egypt, he adopted the
maxims, and imitated the severity, of his predecessor
Decius.(123) The accession of Gallienus, which increased the
calamities of the empire, restored peace to the church; and
the Christians obtained the free exercise of their religion
by an edict addressed to the bishops, and conceived in such
terms as seemed to acknowledge their office and public
character.(124) The ancient laws, without being formally
repealed, were suffered to sink into oblivion; and
(excepting only some hostile intentions which are attributed
to the emperor Aurelian(125) ) the disciples of Christ passed
above forty years in a state of prosperity, far more
dangerous to their virtue than the severest trials of
persecution.
Paul of Samosata, his manners. A.D. 260.
The story of Paul of Samosata, who filled the metropolitan
see of Antioch while the East was in the hands of Odenathus
and Zenobia, may serve to illustrate the condition and
character of the times. The wealth of that prelate was a
sufficient evidence of his guilt, since it was neither
derived from the inheritance of his fathers, nor acquired by
the arts of honest industry. But Paul considered the service
of the church as a very lucrative profession. (126) His
ecclesiastical jurisdiction was venal and rapacious; he
extorted frequent contributions from the most opulent of the
faithful, and converted to his own use a considerable part
of the public revenue. By his pride and luxury the Christian
religion was rendered odious in the eyes of the Gentiles.
His council chamber and his throne, the splendour with which
he appeared in public, the suppliant crowd who solicited his
attention, the multitude of letters and petitions to which
he dictated his answers, and the perpetual hurry of business
in which he was involved, were circumstances much better
suited to the state of a civil magistrate(127) than to the
humility of a primitive bishop. When he harangued his people
from the pulpit, Paul affected the figurative style and the
theatrical gestures of an Asiatic sophist, while the
cathedral resounded with the loudest and most extravagant
acclamations in the praise of his divine eloquence. Against
those who resisted his power, or refused to flatter his
vanity, the prelate of Antioch was arrogant, rigid, and
inexorable; but he relaxed the discipline, and lavished the
treasures of the church on his dependent clergy, who were
permitted to imitate their master in the gratification of
every sensual appetite. For Paul indulged himself very
freely in the pleasures of the table, and he had received
into the episcopal palace two young and beautiful women, as
the constant companions of his leisure moments.(128)
He is degraded from the see of Antioch. A.D. 270.
Notwithstanding these scandalous vices, if Paul of Samosata
had preserved the purity of the orthodox faith, his reign
over the capital of Syria would have ended only with his
life; and had a reasonable persecution intervened, an effort
of court might perhaps have placed him in the rank of saints
and martyrs. Some nice and subtle errors, which he
imprudently adopted and obstinately maintained, concerning
the doctrine of the Trinity, excited the zeal and
indignation of the Eastern churches.(129) From Egypt to the
Euxine Sea, the bishops were in arms and in motion. Several
councils were held, confutations were published,
ex-communications were pronounced, ambiguous explanations
were by turns accepted and refused, treaties were concluded
and violated, and at length Paul of Samosata was degraded
from his episcopal character by the sentence of seventy or
eighty bishops who assembled for that purpose at Antioch,
and who, without consulting the rights of the clergy or
people, appointed a successor by their own authority. The
manifest irregularity of this proceeding increased the
numbers of the discontented faction; and as Paul, who was no
stranger to the arts of courts, had insinuated himself into
the favour of Zenobia, he maintained above four years the
possession of the episcopal house and office. The victory of
Aurelian changed the face of the East, and the two
contending parties, who applied to each other the epithets
of schism and heresy, were either commanded or permitted to
plead their cause before the tribunal of the conqueror. This
public and very singular trial affords a convincing proof
that the existence, the property, the privileges, and the
internal policy of the Christians, were acknowledged, if not by the laws, at least by the magistrates of the empire. As a Pagan and as a soldier, it could scarcely be expected that Aurelian should enter into the discussion, whether the sentiments of Paul or those of his adversaries were most agreeable to the true standard of the orthodox faith. His determination, however, was founded on the general principles of equity and reason. The sentence is executed by Aurelian. A.D. 274. He considered the bishops of Italy as the most impartial and respectable judges among the Christians, and, as soon as he was informed that they had unanimously approved the sentence of the council, he acquiesced in their opinion, and immediately gave orders that Paul should be compelled to relinquish the temporal possessions belonging to an office, of which, in the judgment of his brethren, he had been regularly deprived. But while we applaud the justice, we should not overlook the policy of Aurelian, who was desirous of restoring and cementing the dependence of the provinces of the capital, by every means which could bind the interest or prejudices of any part of his subjects.(130)
Peace and prosperity of the church under Diocletian.A.D. 284-303
Amidst the frequent revolutions of the empire the Christians still flourished in peace and prosperity; and notwithstanding a celebrated era of martyrs has been deduced from the accession of Diocletian, (131) the new system of policy, introduced and maintained by the wisdom of that prince, continued, during more than eighteen years, to breathe the mildest and most liberal spirit of religious toleration. The mind of Diocletian himself was less adapted indeed to speculative inquiries than to the active labours of war and government. His prudence rendered him averse to any great innovation, and, though his temper was not very susceptible of zeal or enthusiasm, he always maintained an habitual regard for the ancient deities of the empire. But the leisure of the two empresses, of his wife Prisca, and of Valeria his daughter, permitted them to listen with more attention and respect to the truths of Christianity, which in every age has acknowledged its important obligations to female devotion.(132) The principal eunuchs, Lucian(133) and
Dorotheus, Gorgonius and Andrew, who attended the person, possessed the favour, and governed the household of Diocletian, protected by their powerful influence the faith
which they had embraced. Their example was imitated by many
of the most considerable officers of the palace, who, in
their respective stations, had the care of the Imperial
ornaments, of the robes, of the furniture, of the jewels,
and even of the private treasury; and, though it might
sometimes be incumbent on them to accompany the emperor when
he sacrificed in the temple, (134) they enjoyed, with their
wives, their children, and their slaves, the free exercise
of the Christian religion. Diocletian and his colleagues
frequently conferred the most important offices on those
persons who avowed their abhorrence for the worship of the
gods, but who had displayed abilities proper for the service
of the state. The bishops held an honourable rank in their respective
provinces, and were treated with distinction and respect,
not only by the people, but by the magistrates themselves.
Almost in every city the ancient churches were found
insufficient to contain the increasing multitude of
proselytes; and in their place more stately and capacious
edifices were erected for the public worship of the
faithful. The corruption of manners and principles, so
forcibly lamented by Eusebius, (135) may be considered, not
only as a consequence, but as a proof, of the liberty which
the Christians enjoyed and abused under the reign of
Diocletian. Prosperity had relaxed the nerves of discipline.
Fraud, envy, and malice prevailed in every congregation. The
presbyters aspired to the episcopal office, which every day
became an object more worthy of their ambition. The bishops,
who contended with each other for ecclesiastical
pre-eminence, appeared by their conduct to claim a secular
and tyrannical power in the church; and the lively faith
which still distinguished the Christians from the Gentiles
was shown much less in their lives than in their
controversial writings.
Progress of zeal and superstition among the Pagans.
Notwithstanding this seeming security, an attentive observer might discern some symptoms that threatened the church with a more violent persecution than any which she had yet endured. The zeal and rapid progress of the Christians
awakened the Polytheists from their supine indifference in the cause of those deities whom custom and education had taught them to revere. The mutual provocations of a religious war, which had already continued above two hundred years, exasperated the animosity of the contending parties. The Pagans were incensed at the rashness of a recent and obscure sect, which presumed to accuse their countrymen of error, and to devote their ancestors to eternal misery. The habits of justifying the popular mythology against the
invectives of an implacable enemy, produced in their minds some sentiments of faith and reverence for a system which they had been accustomed to consider with the most careless levity. The supernatural powers assumed by the church inspired at the same time terror and emulation. The followers of the established religion intrenched themselves behind a similar fortification of prodigies; invented new modes of sacrifice, of expiation, and of initiation;(136) attempted to revive the credit of their expiring oracles; (137) and listened with eager credulity to every imposter who flattered their prejudices by a tale of wonders.(138) Both parties seemed to acknowledge the truth of those miracles which were claimed by their adversaries; and while they were contented with ascribing them to the arts of magic, and to the power of daemons, they mutually concurred in restoring
and establishing the reign of superstition.(139) Philosophy, her most dangerous enemy, was now converted into her most useful ally. The groves of the Academy, the gardens of Epicurus, and even the portico of the Stoics, were almost
deserted, as so many different schools of scepticism or impiety;(140) and many among the Romans were desirous that the writings of Cicero should be condemned and suppressed by
the authority of the senate.(141) The prevailing sect of the new Platonicians judged it prudent to connect themselves with the priests, whom perhaps they despised, against the
Christians, whom they had reason to fear. These fashionable philosophers prosecuted the design of extracting allegorical wisdom from the fictions of the Greek poets; instituted mysterious rites of devotion for the use of their chosen disciples; recommended the worship of the ancient gods as the emblems or ministers of the Supreme Deity, and composed against the faith of the Gospel many elaborate treatises, (142) which have since been committed to the flames by the prudence of orthodox emperors.(143)
Maximian and Galerius punish a few Christian soldiers.
Although the policy of Diocletian and humanity of
Constantius inclined them to preserve inviolate the maxims
of toleration, it was soon discovered that their two
associates, Maximian and Galerius, entertained the most
implacable aversion for the name and religion of the
Christians. The minds of those princes had never been
enlightened by science education had never softened their
temper. They owed their greatness to their swords, and in
their most elevated fortune they still retained their
superstitious prejudices of soldiers and peasants. In the
general administration of the provinces they obeyed the laws
which their benefactor had established; but they frequently
found occasions of exercising within their camp and palaces
a secret persecution, (144) for which the imprudent zeal of
the Christians sometimes offered the most specious
pretences. A sentence of death was executed upon
Maximilianus, an African youth, who had been produced by his
own father before the magistrate as a sufficient and legal
recruit, but who obstinately persisted in declaring that his
conscience would not permit him to embrace the profession of
a soldier.(145) It could scarcely be expected that any
government should suffer the action of Marcellus the
centurion to pass with impunity. On the day of a public
festival, that officer threw away his belt, his arms, and
the ensigns of his office, and exclaimed with a loud voice
that he would obey none but Jesus Christ the eternal King,
and that he renounced for ever the use of carnal weapons,
and the service of an idolatrous master. The soldiers, as
soon as they recovered from their astonishment, secured the
person of Marcellus. He was examined in the city of Tingi by
the president of that part of Mauritania; and as he was
convicted by his own confession, he was condemned and
beheaded for the crime of desertion.(146) Examples of such a
nature savour much less of religious persecution than of
martial or even civil law: but they served to alienate the
mind of the emperors, to justify the severity of Galerius,
who dismissed a great number of Christian officers from
their employments and to authorise the opinion that a sect
of enthusiasts, which avowed principles so repugnant to the
public safety, must either remain useless, or would soon
become dangerous subjects of the empire.
Galerius prevails on Diocletian to begin a general persecution.
After the success of the Persian war had raised the hopes
and the reputation of Galerius, he passed a winter with
Diocletian in the palace of Nicomedia; and the fate of
Christianity became the object of their secret
consultations. (147) The experienced emperor was still
inclined to pursue measures of lenity and though he readily
consented to exclude the Christians from holding any
employments in the household or the army, he urged in the
strongest terms the danger as well as cruelty of shedding
the blood of those deluded fanatics. Galerius at length
extorted from him the permission of summoning a council,
composed of a few persons the most distinguished in the
civil and military departments of the state. The important
question was agitated in their presence, and those ambitious
courtiers easily discerned that it was incumbent on them to
second, by their own eloquence, the importunate violence of
the Caesar. It may be presumed that they insisted on every
topic which might interest the pride, the piety, or the
fears, of their sovereign in the destruction of
Christianity. Perhaps they represented that the glorious
work of the deliverance of the empire was left imperfect, as
long as an independent people was permitted to subsist and
multiply in the heart of the provinces. The Christians (it
might speciously be alleged), renouncing the gods and the
institutions of Rome, had constituted a distinct republic,
which might yet be suppressed before it had acquired any
military force; but which was already governed by its own
laws and magistrates, was possessed of a public treasure,
and was intimately connected in all its parts by the
frequent assemblies of the bishops, to whose decrees their
numerous and opulent congregations yielded an implicit
obedience. Arguments like these may seem to have determined
the reluctant mind of Diocletian to embrace a new system of
persecution: but though we may suspect, it is not in our
power to relate, the secret intrigues of the palace, the
private views and resentments, the jealousy of women or
eunuchs, and all those trifling but decisive causes which so
often influence the fate of empires and the councils of the
wisest monarchs.(148)
Demolition of the church of Nicomedia. A.D. 303. 23rd Feb.
The pleasure of the emperors was at length signified to the
Christians, who, during the course of this melancholy
winter, had expected, with anxiety, the result of so many
secret consultations. The twenty-third of February, which
coincided with the Roman festival of the Terminalia,(149) was
appointed (whether from accident or design) to set bounds to
the progress of Christianity. At the earliest dawn of day
the Praetorian praefect, (150) accompanied by several generals, tribunes, and officers of the revenue, repaired to the principal church of Nicomedia, which was situated on an
eminence in the most populous and beautiful part of the
city. The doors were instantly broken open they rushed into
the sanctuary and as they searched in vain for some visible
object of worship, they were obliged to content themselves
with committing to the flames the volumes of Holy Scripture.
The ministers of Diocletian were followed by a numerous body
of guards and pioneers, who marched in order of battle, and
were provided with all the instruments used in the
destruction of fortified cities. By their incessant labour,
a sacred edifice, which towered above the Imperial palace,
and had long excited the indignation and envy of the
Gentiles, was in a few hours levelled with the ground.(151)
The first edict against the Christians. 24th Feb.
The next day the general edict of persecution was published;
(152) and though Diocletian, still averse to the effusion of
blood, had moderated the fury of Galerius, who proposed that
every one refusing to offer sacrifice should immediately be
burnt alive, the penalties inflicted on the obstinacy of the
Christians might be deemed sufficiently rigorous and
effectual. It was enacted that their churches, in all the
provinces of the empire, should be demolished to their
foundations; and the punishment of death was denounced
against all who should presume to hold any secret assemblies
for the purpose of religious worship. The philosophers, who
now assumed the unworthy office of directing the blind zeal
of persecution, had diligently studied the nature and genius
of the Christian religion; and as they were not ignorant
that the speculative doctrines of the faith were supposed to
be contained in the writings of the prophets, of the
evangelists, and of the apostles, they most probably
suggested the order that the bishops and presbyters should
deliver all their sacred books into the hands of the
magistrates; who were commanded, under the severest
penalties, to burn them in a public and solemn manner. By
the same edict, the property of the church was at once
confiscated; and the several parts of which it might consist
were either sold to the highest bidder, united to the
Imperial domain, bestowed on the cities and corporations, or
granted to the solicitations of rapacious courtiers. After
taking such effectual measures to abolish the worship and to
dissolve the government of the Christians, it was thought
necessary to subject to the most intolerable hardships the
condition of those perverse individuals who should still
reject the religion of nature, of Rome, and of their
ancestors. Persons of a liberal birth were declared
incapable of holding any honours or employments; slaves were
for ever deprived of the hopes of freedom; and the whole
body of the people were put out of the protection of the
law. The judges were authorised to hear and to determine
every action that was brought against Christian. But the
Christians were not permitted to complain of any injury
which they themselves had suffered; and thus those
unfortunate sectaries were exposed to the severity, while
they were excluded from the benefits, of public justice.
This new species of martyrdom, so painful and lingering, so
obscure and ignominious, was, perhaps, the most proper to
weary the constancy of the faithful: nor can it be doubted
that the passions and interest of mankind were disposed on
this occasion to second the designs of the emperors. But the
policy of a well-ordered government must sometimes have
interposed in behalf of the oppressed Christians; nor was it
possible for the Roman princes entirely to remove the
apprehension of punishment, or to connive at every act of
fraud and violence, without exposing their own authority and
the rest of their subjects to the most alarming dangers.(153)
Zeal and punishment of a Christian.
This edict was scarcely exhibited to the public view, in the
most conspicuous place of Nicomedia, before it was torn down
by the hands of a Christian, who expressed at the same time,
by the bitterest invectives, his contempt as well as
abhorrence for such impious and tyrannical governors. His
offence, according to the mildest laws, amounted to treason,
and deserved death. And if it be true that he was a person
of rank and education, those circumstances could serve only
to aggravate his guilt. He was burnt, or rather roasted, by
a slow fire; and his executioners, zealous to revenge the
personal insult which had been offered to the emperors,
exhausted every refinement of cruelty, without being able to
subdue his patience, or to alter the steady and insulting
smile which, in his dying agonies, he still preserved in his
countenance. The Christians, though they confessed that his
conduct had not been strictly conformable to the laws of
prudence, admired the divine fervour of his zeal; and the
excessive commendations which they lavished on the memory of
their hero and martyr contributed to fix a deep impression
of terror and hatred in the mind of Diocletian.(154)
Fire of the palace of Nicomedia imputed to the Christians..
His fears were soon alarmed by the view of a danger from
which he very narrowly escaped. Within fifteen days the
palace of Nicomedia, and even the bedchamber of Diocletian,
were twice in flames; and though both times they were
extinguished without any material damage, the singular
repetition of the fire was justly considered as an evident
proof that it had not been the effect of chance or
negligence. The suspicion naturally fell on the Christians;
and it was suggested, with some degree of probability, that
those desperate fanatics, provoked by their present
sufferings, and apprehensive of impending calamities, had
entered into a conspiracy with their faithful brethren, the
eunuchs of the palace, against the lives of two emperors
whom they detested as the irreconcilable enemies of the
church of God. Jealousy and resentment prevailed in every
breast, but especially in that of Diocletian. A great number
of persons, distinguished either by the offices which they
had filled or by the favour which they had enjoyed, were
thrown into prison. Every mode of torture was put in
practice, and the court, as well as city, was polluted with
many bloody executions. (155) But as it was found impossible
to extort any discovery of this mysterious transaction, it
seems incumbent on us either to presume the innocence, or to
admire the resolution, of the sufferers. A few days
afterwards Galerius hastily withdrew himself from Nicomedia,
declaring that, if he delayed his departure from that
devoted palace, he should fall a sacrifice to the rage of
the Christians. The ecclesiastical historians, from whom
alone we derive a partial and imperfect knowledge of this
persecution, are at a loss how to account for the fears and
danger of the emperors. Two of these writers, a prince and a
rhetorician, were eyewitnesses of the fire of Nicomedia. The
one ascribes it to lightning and the divine wrath, the other
affirms that it was kindled by the malice of Galerius
himself.(156)
Execution of the first edict.
As the edict against the Christians was designed for a
general law of the whole empire, and as Diocletian and
Galerius, though they might not wait for the consent, were
assured of the concurrence, of the Western princes, it would
appear more consonant to our ideas of policy that the
governors of all the provinces should have received secret
instructions to publish, on one and the same day, this
declaration of war within their respective departments. It
was at least to be expected that the convenience of the
public highways and established posts would have enabled the
emperors to transmit their orders with the utmost despatch
from the palace of Nicomedia to the extremities of the Roman
world; and that they would not have suffered fifty days to
elapse before the edict was published in Syria, and near
four months before it was signified to the cities of Africa.
(157) This delay may perhaps be imputed to the cautious temper
of Diocletian, who had yielded a reluctant consent to the
measures of persecution, and who was desirous of trying the
experiment under his more immediate eye before he gave way
to the disorders and discontent which it must inevitably
occasion in the distant provinces. At first, indeed, the
magistrates were restrained from the effusion of blood; but
the use of every other severity was permitted, and even
recommended to their zeal; nor could the Christians, though
they cheerfully resigned the ornaments of their churches,
resolve to interrupt their religious assemblies, or to
deliver their sacred books to the flames. The pious
obstinacy of Felix, an African bishop, appears to have
embarrassed the subordinate ministers of the government The
curator of his city sent him in chains to the proconsul. The
proconsul transmitted him to the Praetorian praefect of
Italy; and Felix, who disdained even to give an evasive
answer, was at length beheaded at Venusia, in Lucania, a
place on which the birth of Horace has conferred fame.(158)
This precedent, and perhaps some Imperial rescript, which
was issued in consequence of it, appeared to authorise the
governors of provinces in punishing with death the refusal
of the Christians to deliver up their sacred books. There
were undoubtedly many persons who embraced this opportunity
of obtaining the crown of martyrdom, but there were likewise
too many who purchased an ignominious life by discovering
and betraying the Holy Scripture into the hands of infidels.
A great number even of bishops and presbyters acquired, by
this criminal compliance, the opprobrious epithet of
Traitors; and their offence was productive of much present
scandal and of much future discord in the African church.
(159)
Demolition of the churches.
The copies as well as the versions of Scripture were already
so multiplied in the empire, that the most severe
inquisition could no longer be attended with any fatal
consequences; and even the sacrifice of those volumes which,
in every congregation, were preserved for public use,
required the consent of some treacherous and unworthy
Christians. But the ruin of the churches was easily effected
by the authority of the government and by the labour of the
Pagans. In some provinces, however, the magistrates
contented themselves with shutting up the places of
religious worship. In others they more literally complied
with the terms of the edict; and, after taking away the
doors, the benches, and the pulpit, which they burnt as it
were in a funeral pile, they completely demolished the
remainder of the edifice. (160) It is perhaps to this
melancholy occasion that we should apply a very remarkable
story, which is related with so many circumstances of
variety and improbability that it serves rather to excite
than to satisfy our curiosity. In a small town in Phrygia,
of whose name as well as situation we are left ignorant, it
should seem that the magistrates and the body of the people
had embraced the Christian faith; and as some resistance
might be apprehended to the execution of the edict, the
governor of the province was supported by a numerous
detachment of legionaries. On their approach the citizens
threw themselves into the church with the resolution either
of defending by arms that sacred edifice or of perishing in
its ruins. They indignantly rejected the notice and
permission which was given them to retire, till the
soldiers, provoked by their obstinate refusal, set fire to
the building on all sides, and consumed, by this
extraordinary kind of martyrdom, a great number of
Phrygians, with their wives and children.(161)
Subsequent edicts.
Some slight disturbances, though they were suppressed almost
as soon as excited in Syria and the frontiers of Armenia,
afforded the enemies of the church a very plausible occasion
to insinuate that those troubles had been secretly fomented
by the intrigues of the bishops, who had already forgotten
their ostentatious professions of passive and unlimited
obedience.(162) The resentment, or the fears, of Diocletian
at length transported him beyond the bounds of moderation
which he had hitherto preserved, and he declared, in a
series of cruel edicts, his intention of abolishing the
Christian name. By the first of these edicts the governors
of the provinces were directed to apprehend all persons of
the ecclesiastical order; and the prisons destined for the
vilest criminals were soon filled with a multitude of
bishops, presbyters, deacons, readers and exorcists. By a
second edict the magistrates were commanded to employ every
method of severity which might reclaim them from their
odious superstition, and oblige them to return to the
established worship of the gods. This rigorous order was
extended, by a subsequent edict, to the whole body of
Christians, who were exposed to a violent and general
persecution.(163) Instead of those salutary restraints which
had required the direct and solemn testimony of an accuser,
it became the duty as well as the interest of the Imperial
officers to discover, to pursue, and to torment the most
obnoxious among the faithful. Heavy penalties were denounced
against all who should presume to save a proscribed sectary
from the just indignation of the gods and of the emperors.
Yet, notwithstanding the severity of this law, the virtuous
courage of many of the Pagans, in concealing their friends
or relations, affords an honourable proof that the rage of
superstition had not extinguished in their minds the
sentiments of nature and humanity.(164)
General idea of the persecution.
Diocletian had no sooner published his edicts against the
Christians than, as if he had been desirous of committing to
other hands the work of persecution, he divested himself of
the Imperial purple. The character and situation of his
colleagues and successors sometimes urged them to enforce,
and sometimes inclined them to suspend, the execution of
these rigorous laws; nor can we acquire a just and distinct
idea of this important period of ecclesiastical history
unless we separately consider the state of Christianity, in
the different parts of the empire, during the space of ten
years which elapsed between the first edicts of Diocletian
and the final peace of the church.
in the western provinces under Constantius and Constantine;.
The mild and humane temper of Constantius was averse to the
oppression of any part of his subjects. The principal
offices of his palace were exercised by Christians. He loved
their persons, esteemed their fidelity, and entertained not
any dislike to their religious principles. But as long as
Constantius remained in the subordinate station of Caesar,
it was not in his power openly to reject the edicts of
Diocletian, or to disobey the commands of Maximian. His
authority contributed, however, to alleviate the sufferings
which he pitied and abhorred. He consented with reluctance
to the ruin of the churches, but he ventured to protect the
Christians themselves from the fury of the populace and from
the rigour of the laws. The provinces of Gaul (under which
we may probably include those of Britain) were indebted for
the singular tranquillity which they enjoyed to the gentle
interposition of their sovereign. (165) But Datianus, the
president or governor of Spain, actuated either by zeal or
policy, chose rather to execute the public edicts of the
emperors than to understand the secret intentions of
Constantius; and it can scarcely be doubted that his
provincial administration was stained with the blood of a
few martyrs.(166) The elevation of Constantius to the supreme
and independent dignity of Augustus gave a free scope to the
exercise of his virtues, and the shortness of his reign did
not prevent him from establishing a system of toleration of
which he left the precept and the example to his son
Constantine. His fortunate son, from the first moment of his
accession declaring himself the protector of the church, at
length deserved the appellation of the first emperor who
publicly professed and established the Christian religion.
The motives of his conversion, as they may variously be
deduced from benevolence, from policy, from conviction, or
from remorse, and the progress of the revolution, which,
under his powerful influence and that of his sons, rendered
Christianity the reigning religion of the Roman empire, will
form a very interesting and important chapter in the second
volume of this history. At present it may be sufficient to
observe that every victory of Constantine was productive of
some relief or benefit to the church.
in Italy and Africa, under Maximian and Severus;
The provinces of Italy and Africa experienced a short but
violent persecution. The rigorous edicts of Diocletian were
strictly and cheerfully executed by his associate Maximian,
who had long hated the Christians, and who delighted in acts
of blood and violence. In the autumn of the first year of
the persecution the two emperors met at Rome to celebrate
their triumph; several oppressive laws appear to have issued
from their secret consultations, and the diligence of the
magistrates was animated by the presence of their
sovereigns. After Diocletian had divested himself of the
purple, Italy and Africa were administered under the name of
Severus, and were exposed, without defence, to the
implacable resentment of his master Galerius. Among the
martyrs of Rome, Adauctus deserves the notice of posterity.
He was of a noble family in Italy, and had raised himself,
through the successive honours of the palace, to the
important office of treasurer of the private demesnes.
Adauctus is the more remarkable for being the only person of
rank and distinction who appears to have suffered death
during the whole course of this general persecution.(167)
under Maxentius;
The revolt of Maxentius immediately restored peace to the
churches of Italy and Africa, and the same tyrant who
oppressed every other class of his subjects showed himself
just, humane, and even partial, towards the afflicted
Christians.: He depended on their gratitude and affection,
and very naturally presumed that the injuries which they had
suffered, and the dangers which they still apprehended, from
his most inveterate enemy, would secure the fidelity of a
party already considerable by their numbers and opulence.
(168) Even the conduct of Maxentius towards the bishops of
Rome and Carthage may be considered as the proof of his
toleration, since it is probable that the most orthodox
princes would adopt the same measures with regard to their
established clergy. Marcellus, the former of those prelates,
had thrown their capital into confusion by the severe
penance which he imposed on a great number of Christians
who, during the late persecution, had renounced or
dissembled their religion. The rage of faction broke out in
frequent and violent seditions; the blood of the faithful
was shed by each other's hands; and the exile of Marcellus,
whose prudence seems to have been less eminent than his
zeal, was found to be the only measure capable of restoring
peace to the distracted church of Rome.(169) The behaviour of
Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, appears to have been still
more reprehensible. A deacon of that city had published a
libel against the emperor. The offender took refuge in the
episcopal palace, and, though it was somewhat early to
advance any claims of ecclesiastical immunities the bishop
refused to deliver him up to the officers of justice. For
this treasonable resistance Mensurius was summoned to court,
and, instead of receiving a legal sentence of death or
banishment, he was permitted, after a short examination, to
return to his diocese. (170) Such was the happy condition of
the Christian subjects of Maxentius, that, whenever they
were desirous of procuring for their own use any bodies of
martyrs, they were obliged to purchase them from the most
distant provinces of the East. A story is related of Aglae,
a Roman lady, descended from a consular family, and
possessed of so ample an estate that it required the
management of seventy-three stewards. Among these Boniface
was the favourite of his mistress and, as Aglae mixed love
with devotion, it is reported that he was admitted to share
her bed. Her fortune enabled her to gratify the pious desire
of obtaining some sacred relics from the East. She intrusted
Boniface with a considerable sum of gold and a large
quantity of aromatics, and her lover, attended by twelve
horsemen and three covered chariots, undertook a remote
pilgrimage as far as Tarsus in Cilicia.(171)
in Illyricum and the East under Galerius and Maximin.
The sanguinary temper of Galerius, the first and principal
author of the persecution, was formidable to those
Christians whom their misfortunes had placed within the
limits of his dominions; and it may fairly be presumed that
many persons of a middle rank, who were not confined by the
chains either of wealth or of poverty, very frequently
deserted their native country, and sought a refuge in the
milder climate of the West. As long as he commanded only the
armies and provinces of Illyricum, he could with difficulty
either find or make a considerable number of martyrs in a
warlike country which had entertained the missionaries of
the Gospel with more coldness and reluctance than any other
part of the empire. (172) But when Galerius had obtained the
supreme power and the government of the East, he indulged in
their fullest extent his zeal and cruelty, not only in the
provinces of Thrace and Asia, which acknowledged his
immediate jurisdiction, but in those of Syria, Palestine,
and Egypt, where Maximin gratified his own inclination by
yielding a rigorous obedience to the stern commands of his
benefactor.(173) The frequent disappointments of his ambitious views, the experience of six years of persecution, and the salutary
reflections which a lingering and painful distemper
suggested to the mind of Galerius, at length convinced him
that the most violent efforts of despotism are insufficient
to extirpate a whole people, or to subdue their religious
prejudices. Desirous of repairing the mischief that he had
occasioned, he published in his own name, and in those of
Licinius and Constantine, a general edict, which, after a
pompous recital of the Imperial titles, proceeded in the
following manner:
Galerius publishes an edict of toleration
"Among the important cares which have occupied our mind for the utility and preservation of the empire, it was our intention to correct and re-establish all things according to the ancient laws and public discipline of the Romans. We were particularly desirous of reclaiming into the way of reason and nature the deluded Christians who had renounced the religion and ceremonies instituted by their fathers, and, presumptuously despising the practice of antiquity, had invented extravagant laws and opinions according to the dictates of their fancy, and had collected a various society from the different provinces of our empire. The edicts which we have published to enforce the worship of the gods having exposed many of the Christians to danger and distress, many having suffered death, and many more, who still persist in their impious folly, being left destitute of any public exercise of religion, we are disposed to extend to those unhappy men the effects of our wonted clemency. We permit them, therefore, freely to profess their private opinions, and to assemble in their conventicles without fear or molestation, provided always that they preserve a due respect to the established laws and government. By another rescript we shall signify our intentions to the judges and magistrates, and we hope that our indulgence will engage the Christians to offer up their prayers to the Deity whom they adore for our safety and prosperity, for their own, and for that of the republic." (174)
It is not usually in the language of edicts and manifestos that we should search for the real character of the secret motives of princes; but as these were the words of a dying emperor, his situation, perhaps, may be admitted as a pledge of his sincerity.
Peace of the church.
When Galerius subscribed this edict of toleration, he was
well assured that Licinius would readily comply with the
inclinations of his friend and benefactor, and that any
measures in favour of the Christians would obtain the
approbation of Constantine. But the emperor would not
venture to insert in the preamble the name of Maximin, whose
consent was of the greatest importance, and who succeeded a
few days afterwards to the provinces of Asia. In the first
six months, however, of his new reign, Maximin affected to
adopt the prudent counsels of his predecessor; and though he
never condescended to secure the tranquillity of the church
by a public edict, Sabinus, his Praetorian praefect,
addressed a circular letter to all the governors and
magistrates of the provinces, expatiating on the Imperial
clemency, acknowledging the invincible obstinacy of the
Christians, and directing the officers of justice to cease
their ineffectual prosecutions, and to connive at the secret
assemblies of those enthusiasts. In consequence of these
orders, great numbers of Christians were released from
prison, or delivered from the mines. The confessors, singing
hymns of triumph, returned into their own countries, and
those who had yielded to the violence of the tempest,
solicited with tears of repentance their readmission into
the bosom of the church.(175)
Maximin prepares to renew the persecution.
But this treacherous calm was of short duration; nor could
the Christians of the East place any confidence in the
character of their sovereign. Cruelty and superstition were
the ruling passions of the soul of Maximin. The former
suggested the means, the latter pointed out the objects, of
persecution. The emperor was devoted to the worship of the
gods, to the study of magic, and to the belief of oracles.
The prophets or philosophers, whom he revered as the
favourites of Heaven, were frequently raised to the
government of provinces, and admitted into his most secret
councils. They easily convinced him that the Christians had
been indebted for their victories to their regular
discipline, and that the weakness of polytheism had
principally flowed from a want of union and subordination
among the ministers of religion. A system of government was
therefore instituted, which was evidently copied from the
policy of the church. In all the great cities of the empire,
the temples were repaired and beautified by the order of
Maximin, and the officiating priests of the various deities
were subjected to the authority of a superior pontiff
destined to oppose the bishop, and to promote the cause of
paganism. These pontiffs acknowledged, in their turn, the
supreme jurisdiction of the metropolitans or high priests of
the province, who acted as the immediate vicegerents of the
emperor himself. A white robe was the ensign of their
dignity; and these new prelates were carefully selected from
the most noble and opulent families. By the influence of the
magistrates, and of the sacerdotal order, a great number of
dutiful addresses were obtained, particularly from the
cities of Nicomedia, Antioch, and Tyre, which artfully
represented the well-known intentions of the court as the
general sense of the people; solicited the emperor to
consult the laws of justice rather than the dictates of his
clemency; expressed their abhorrence of the Christians, and
humbly prayed that those impious sectaries might at least be
excluded from the limits of their respective territories.
The answer of Maximin to the address which he obtained from
the citizens of Tyre is still extant. He praises their zeal
and devotion in terms of the highest satisfaction, descants
on the obstinate impiety of the Christians, and betrays, by
the readiness with which he consents to their banishment,
that he considered himself as receiving, rather than as
conferring, an obligation. The priests as well as the
magistrates were empowered to enforce the execution of his
edicts, which were engraved on tables of brass; and though
it was recommended to them to avoid the effusion of blood,
the most cruel and ignominious punishments were inflicted on
the refractory Christians.(176)
End of the persecutions.
The Asiatic Christians had everything to dread from the
severity of a bigoted monarch who prepared his measures of
violence with such deliberate policy. But a few months had
scarcely elapsed before the edicts published by the two
Western emperors obliged Maximim to suspend the prosecution
of his designs: the civil war which he so rashly undertook
against Licinius employed all his attention; and the defeat
and death of Maximin soon delivered the church from the last
and most implacable of her enemies.(177)
Probable account of the sufferings of the martyrs and confessors.
In this general view of the persecution which was first
authorised by the edicts of Diocletian, I have purposely
refrained from describing the particular sufferings and
deaths of the Christian martyrs. It would have been an easy
task, from the history of Eusebius, from the declamations of
Lactantius, and from the most ancient acts, to collect a
long series of horrid and disgusting pictures, and to fill
many pages with racks and scourges, with iron hooks and
red-hot beds, and with all the variety of tortures which
fire and steel, savage beasts, and more savage executioners,
could inflict on the human body. These melancholy scenes
might be enlivened by a crowd of visions and miracles
destined either to delay the death, to celebrate the
triumph, or to discover the relics of those canonised saints
who suffered for the name of Christ. But I cannot determine
what I ought to transcribe, till I am satisfied how much I
ought to believe. The gravest of the ecclesiastical
historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he
has related whatever might redound to the glory, and that he
has suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of
religion.(178) Such an acknowledgment will naturally excite a
suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of
the fundamental laws of history has not paid a very strict
regard to the observance of the other; and the suspicion
will derive additional credit from the character of
Eusebius, which was less tinctured with credulity, and more
practised in the arts of courts, than that of almost any of
his contemporaries. Of some particular occasions, when the
magistrates were exasperated by some personal motives of
interest or resentment, when the zeal of the martyrs urged
them to forget the rules of prudence, and perhaps of
decency, to overturn the altars, to pour out imprecations
against the emperors, or to strike the judge as he sat on
his tribunal, it may be presumed that every mode of torture
which cruelty could invent, or constancy could endure, was
exhausted on those devoted victims.(179) Two circumstances,
however, have been unwarily mentioned, which insinuate that
the general treatment of the Christians who had been
apprehended by the officers of justice was less intolerable than it is usually imagined to have been. 1. The confessors who were condemned to work in the mines were permitted by the humanity or the negligence of their keepers to build chapels, and freely to profess their religion in the midst
of those dreary habitations. (180) 2. The bishops were obliged to check and to censure the forward zeal of the Christians, who voluntarily threw themselves into the hands of the magistrates. Some of these were persons oppressed by poverty and debts, who blindly sought to terminate a miserable existence by a glorious death. Others were allured by the hope that a short confinement would expiate the sins of a whole life; and others again were actuated by the less honourable motive of deriving a plentiful subsistence, and perhaps a considerable profit, from the alms which the charity of the faithful bestowed on the prisoners.(181) After the church had triumphed over all her enemies, the interest as well as vanity of the captives prompted them to magnify the merit of their respective suffering. A convenient distance of time or place gave an ample scope to the progress of fiction; and the frequent instances which might be alleged of holy martyrs whose wounds had been instantly healed, whose strength had been renewed, and whose lost
members had miraculously been restored, were extremely convenient for the purpose of removing every difficulty, and of silencing every objection. The most extravagant legends, as they conduced to the honour of the church, were applauded by the credulous multitude, countenanced by the power of the clergy, and attested by the suspicious evidence of ecclesiastical history.
Number of martyrs
The vague descriptions of exile and imprisonment, of pain and torture, are so easily exaggerated or softened by the pencil of an artful orator, that we are naturally induced to inquire into a fact of a more distinct and stubborn kind; the number of persons who suffered death in consequence of the edicts published by Diocletian, his associates, and his successors. The recent legendaries record whole armies and
cities which were at once swept away by the undistinguishing
rage of persecution. The more ancient writers content
themselves with pouring out a liberal effusion of loose and
tragical invectives, without condescending to ascertain the
precise number of those persons who were permitted to seal
with their blood their belief of the Gospel. From the
history of Eusebius it may however be collected that only
nine bishops were punished with death; and we are assured,
by his particular enumeration of the martyrs of Palestine,
that no more than ninety-two Christians were entitled to
that honourable appellation.(182) As we are unacquainted with
the degree of episcopal zeal and courage which prevailed at
that time, it is not in our power to draw any useful
inferences from the former of these facts: but the latter
may serve to justify a very important and probable
conclusion. According to the distribution of Roman
provinces, Palestine may be considered as the sixteenth part
of the Eastern empire: (183) and since there were some
governors who, from a real or affected clemency, had
preserved theirs hands unstained with the blood of the
faithful,(184) it is reasonable to believe that the Country
which had given birth to Christianity produced at least the
sixteenth part of the martyrs who suffered death within the
dominions of Galerius and Maximin; the whole might
consequently amount to about fifteen hundred, a number
which, if it is equally divided between the ten years of the
persecution, will allow an annual consumption of one hundred
and fifty martyrs. Allotting the same proportion to the
provinces of Italy, Africa, and perhaps Spain, where, at the
end of two or three years, the rigour of the penal laws was
either suspended or abolished, the multitude of Christians
in the Roman empire, on whom a capital punishment was
inflicted by a judicial sentence, will be reduced to
somewhat less than two thousand persons. Since it cannot be
doubted that the Christians were more numerous, and their
enemies more exasperated, in the time of Diocletian than
they had ever been in any former persecution, this probable
and moderate computation may teach us to estimate the number
of primitive saints and martyrs who sacrificed their lives
for the important purpose of introducing Christianity into
the world.
Conclusion.
We shall conclude this chapter by a melancholy truth which
obtrudes itself on the reluctant mind; that, even admitting,
without hesitation or inquiry, all that history has
recorded, or devotion has feigned, on the subject of
martyrdoms, it must still be acknowledged that the
Christians, in the course of their intestine dissensions,
have inflicted far greater severities on each other than
they had experienced from the zeal of infidels. During the
ages of ignorance which followed the subversion of the Roman
empire in the West, the bishops of the Imperial city
extended their dominion over the laity as well as clergy of
the Latin church. The fabric of superstition which they had
erected, and which might long have defied the feeble efforts
of reason, was at length assaulted by a crowd of daring
fanatics, who, from the twelfth to the sixteenth century,
assumed the popular character of reformers. The church of
Rome defended by violence the empire which she had acquired
by fraud; a system of peace and benevolence was soon
disgraced by the proscriptions, wars, massacres, and the
institution of the holy office. And as the reformers were
animated by the love of civil as well as of religious
freedom, the Catholic princes connected their own interest
with that of the clergy, and enforced by fire and the sword
the terrors of spiritual censures. In the Netherlands alone
more than one hundred thousand of the subjects of Charles V.
are said to have suffered by the hand of the executioner;
and this extraordinary number is attested by Grotius,(185) a
man of genius and learning, who preserved his moderation
amidst the fury of contending sects, and who composed the
annals of his own age and country at a time when the
invention of printing had facilitated the means of
intelligence and increased the danger of detection. If we
are obliged to submit our belief to the authority of
Grotius, it must be allowed that the number of Protestants
who were executed in a single province and a single reign, far exceeded that of the primitive martyrs in the space of three centuries, and of the Roman empire. But if the improbability of the fact itself should prevail over the weight of evidence; if Grotius should be convicted of exaggerating the merit and sufferings of the reformers; (186) we shall be naturally led to inquire what confidence can be placed in the doubtful and imperfect monuments of ancient credulity; what degree of credit can be assigned to a courtly bishop and a passionate declaimer, who, under the protection of Constantine, enjoyed the exclusive privilege of recording the persecutions inflicted on the Christians by the vanquished rivals or disregarded predecessors of their gracious sovereign.
End Of The First Volume
| « NEXT » | « Fall In The West » | « Fall In The East » | « Comments on the Fall » | « Decline and Fall » |