PART I.

FROM THE TIMES OF THE APOSTLES TO THE ACCESSION OF CONSTANTINE CHAPTER I.-The Propagation of Christianity.

It is our object in this chapter to state what is material in the early history of such of the Churches of Christ, whether founded by the apostles themselves, or their companions, or their immediate successors, as were permitted to attain importance and stability during the first two centuries. For this purpose we have not thought it necessary to describe the circumstances which are detailed in the sacred writings, and are familiar to all our readers. The Churches which seem to claim our principal attention are eight in number, and shall be treated in the following order :— Jerusalem and Antioch, Ephesus and Smyrna, Athens and Corinth, Rome and Alexandria; but our notice will be extended to some others, according to their connexion with these, their consequence, or local situation. It is thus that we shall gain our clearest view of the progress made by infant Christianity, and the limits within which it was restrained.

(1.) The converts of Jerusalem naturally formed the earliest Christian society, and for a short period probably the most numerous; but the Mosaic jealousy which repelled the communion of the Gentile world, and thus occasioned some internal dissensions, as well as the increasing hostility of the Jewish people and government, no doubt impeded their subsequent increase. The same causes operated, though not to the same extent, on the Churches established in other parts of Palestine, as in Galilee and Cæsarea, and even on those of Tyre, Ptolemais, and Cæsarea. About the year 60 A.D., James, surnamed the Just, brother of the Saviour, who was the first President or Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem, perished by a violent death*; and when its members † subsequently assembled for the purpose of electing his successor, their choice fell on Symeon, who is also said to have been a kinsman of Jesus. Shortly after the death of St. James an insurrection of the Jews broke out, which was followed by the invasion of the Roman armies, and was not finally suppressed until the year 70, when the city was overwhelmed by Titus, and utterly destroyed. During the continuance of this war, as well as through the events which concluded it, the Holy Land was subjected to a variety and intensity of suffering, to which no parallel can be found in the records of any peopleț.

* Le Clerc, H. E. (vol. i. p. 415) ad ann. 62, in which year he places the death of St. James, and affirms that nothing is known respecting its manner. The state of the question is this: Eusebius (lib. ii. cap. 23), on the authority of Hegesippus (a Jewish convert who wrote under the Antonines) gives a very long and circumstantial narration of the Bishop's martyrdom; of the circumstances many are clearly fabulous, and all may be suspected; but the leading fact, that St. James was killed in a tumult of the Jews, it would not be safe to reject. His violent end, with some variation in particulars, is confirmed by Josephus, Antiq. b. xx. chap. 9.

Eusebius (lib. iv. cap. 11) places the election of Symeon (ws óyos nariu) after the destruction of Jerusalem, which he makes immediately subsequent to St. James's martyrdom; the Jewish rebellion probably was so. In the same book (cap. 32) he relates the martyrdom of Symeon during the reign of Trajan, at the age of 120-again on the authority of Hegisippus. This author wrote five books of ecclesiastical history. Such a work by a judicious writer of that age would have been invaluable, but the fragments preserved to us by Eusebius persuade us that Hegisippus was not so.

It is sufficient to refer to the history of Josephus.

that the

A short time before the Roman invasion, we are informed Christian Church seceded from a spot which prophecy had taught to hold devoted, and retired to Pella, beyond the Jordan. From this circumstance it becomes at least probable, that the Christians did not sustain their full share of the calamities of their country; but though their proportion to the whole population may thus have been increased, their actual numbers could not fail to be somewhat diminished, since they could not wholly withdraw themselves from a tempest directed indiscriminately against the whole nation.

During the next sixty years we read little respecting the Church of Jerusalem, except the names of fifteen successive presidents, called Bishops of the Circumcision;' fourteen of these only belong to the period in question, since they begin with James: and they appear to end at the second destruction of the city by the emperor Adriant. But the times of these successions are extremely uncertain, as the first Christians had little thought of posterity‡, nor were any tabularies preserved in their Churches, nor any public acts or monuments of their proceedings. The Church over which they presided seems to have perished with them; but there is still reason to believe that it was not numerous, and we may attribute its weakness partly to the continued action of the two causes abovementioned, and partly to the absolute depopulation of the country. Yet it would appear from Scripture that some sort of authority was at first exercised by the Mother Church over her Gentile children; and that the decrees ordained by the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem §' found obedience even among distant converts.

On the summit of the sacred hill, out of the ruins which deformed it, Adrian erected a new city, to which he gave the new and Roman title of Elia Capitolina, thinking perhaps that he should erase from all future history the hateful name of Jerusalem, or that a city with a more civilized appellation would be inhabited by less rebellious subjects, or that the contumacy of the Jews was associated with the name of their capital. A new Church was then established, composed no longer of Jews, but of Gentiles only, and was governed by a new succession of bishops, as obscure and as rapid as that which we have mentioned. Their names are also transmitted to us by the diligence of Eusebius ¶, but none with any distinction except Narcissus, the fifteenth in order, who flourished about the year 180, and of whom some traditionary miracles are recorded.

米米

*Euseb. lib. iv. c. 5. Le Clerc places this secession in the year 66. Semler (sect. 1) fixes the beginning of the Jewish war in 64. The Christians probably retired, as the war became more obstinate, and advanced nearer to Jerusalem.

Euseb. lib. iv. c. 5.

This is the complaint of Le Clerc, ad ann. 135. And in fact the two most prominent features in the histories of Christians, during the three first centuries, are their divisions and their persecutions. These subjects we shall examine in separate chapters, and all that can be confidently asserted on other points we are contented to glean from Eusebius and some writers of ambiguous anthority who are quoted by him, from the apologies, epistles, and treatises of the early fathers, and from a few fragments of profane antiquity. § Acts xvi. 4.

Ecclesiastical writers differ about the date of this event. Semler (cent. ii.) places it in the year 119. Fleury (liv. iii. sect. 24.) mentions Elia Capitolina as existing previous to the rebellion of Barcochabas, but still as the work of Adrian. Le Clerc (ad ann. 119) seems to waver-(ad ann. 134) decidedly fixes the foundation for that year, and attributes the commotions of the Jews to that cause. Those commotions certainly broke out in 132, and were soon quelled; but both Mosheim and Basnage (Ann. Polit. Eccles. AD. 132, vol. ii. p. 72) consider the foundation of the new city to have been immediately subsequent to the rebellion. Probably Le Clerc is right, as he admits too that the city was finally established in 174, after the insurrection (ad ann, 174),-See Euseb. H. E. lib. vi. c. 6. **Euseb. II. E. lib. vi. c. 9.

TH. E. lib. v. c. 12.

Such are the imperfect accounts which remain to us respecting the early history of the Church in Palestine; but, imperfect as they are, we are enabled to collect from them that the progress of Christianity in that stubborn soil was slow, and its condition uncertain and fluctuating. And this conclusion is confirmed by the direct assertion of Justin Martyr, a Samaritan proselyte of the second century, our best authority for that age and country, who expressly assures us that the converts in Judæa and Samaria were inferior, both in number and fidelity, to those of the Gentiles. We behold the desolation of Judæa, and some from every race of men who believe the teaching of Christ's Apostles, and have abandoned their ancient customs in which they fell astray. We behold ourselves, too, and we perceive that the Christians among the Gentiles are more numerous and more faithful than among the Jews and Samaritans.' He then proceeds to account for the fact, that none of these have believed excepting some few,' by appeal to the prophetic writers*.

6

(2.) From the spectacle of the infidelity and devastation of Palestine, foretold by so many prophecies, and truly designated by Jortin as an ' event on which the fate and credit of Christianity depended,' we turn to the more grateful office of tracing its advance, and celebrating its success. We may consider the neighbouring Church of Antioch to have been founded about 40 A. D.† by St. Paul and St. Barnabas. It was there that the converts first assumed the name of Christian, and the first act which is recorded respecting them was one of charity to their suffering brethren in Judæa. In a mixed population of Greeks, and natives unfettered by the prejudices of Judaism, our holy faith made a rapid and steady progress. In the residence of the Prefect of Syria, under the very eye of the civil government, it is probable that the infant society was protected against the active hatred of the Jews; and there can be no doubt that its early prosperity was greatly promoted by the zeal of its second bishop, Ignatius. This ardent supporter of the faith, the contemporary, and, as we are informed, the friend of some of the Apostles, presided over the Church of Antioch for above thirty years, and at length was led away to Rome, and perished there, a willing and exulting martyr. He fell in the persecution of Trajan, in the year 107. During his journey through Asia to Rome he addressed epistles to some of the Christian Churches, in which we may still discover the animated piety of the author, through the interpolations with which the party zealots of after times have disfigured them.

The fourth bishop in succession from Ignatius was Theophilus, a learned convert from paganism, more justly celebrated for his books to Autolycus in defence of Christianity, than for his attack on the heresies of Marcion and Hermogenes. Under such guidance the Church of Antioch became numerous and respectable; and from the ordinary course of events we may reasonably infer, that the religion which was popular in the capital of Syria obtained an easy and general reception throughout the province§.

* Apol. i., ch. 53.

Le Clerc, Hist. Eccl. t. i., p. 347 (ann. 40). Semler places the foundation of the Church in 39. In spite of Scripture (Acts xi. 21, 22, &c.) Baronius claims the honour for St. Peter, and is confuted by Basnage, vol. i., p. 502. (ad ann. 40).

Le Clerc (Sæc. Sec. ann. 116) fixes this event after the earthquake in 116, which destroyed a great part of the city, and was attributed by the heathen priesthood to the 'impiety of the Christians. Pearson, Pagi, and Fabricius are of the same opinion. But that of Tillemont, Du Pin and Cave, which we follow, is more probable, and is confirmed by Lardner (p. ii., c. v.) But Basnage, after all, is right, when he candidly places the year of Ignatius's death among the obscurities of chronology.'-Hist. Polit. Eccles., ann. 107, sect. 6.

Even before his journey to Macedonia we read that 'Paul went through Syria, and Cilicia, confirming the churches.'-Acts xv. 41.

A correspondence between our Saviour himself and Abgarus, a prince of Edessa in Mesopotamia, is delivered to us at the end of the first book of Eusebius, as copied from the public records of the city. The genuineness of the correspondence has long ceased to find any advocate, and this is probably among the earliest of the many pious frauds which have disgraced the history of our Church; but the existence of the forged record in the archives of Edessa has never been disputed; and, as it is clearly the work of a Christian intending to do honour to the founder of his religion, it proves at least how early was the introduction of that religion into the province of Mesopotamia.

(3.) The seven Churches of Asia mentioned in the Revelation are, Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamus, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea. Of Pergamus and Thyatira little subsequent mention is made in history; the other five, and especially the two first, are distinguished among the most fruitful of the primitive communities. The Church of Ephesus, which was founded by St. Paul and governed by Timothy, was blessed by the presence of St. John during the latest years of his long life. Of him it is related, on sufficient authority, that when his infirmities no longer allowed him to perform the offices of religion, he continued ever to dismiss the society with the parting benediction, My children, love one another and there is nothing in the early history of this Church to persuade us that the exhortation was in vain. In fact, Ignatius, during his residence at Smyrna, addressed an Epistle to the Ephesians, bearing testimony to their evangelical purity, and to the virtues of their bishop Onesimus. And it is important to add, that two other Epistles addressed at the same period to churches at Magnesia and Tralles (or Trallium), of more recent foundation, prove the continued progress of our faith in those regions, even after the last of the apostles had been removed from it. At the end of the second century we find that Ephesus still remained at the head of the Asiatic churches, and we observe its bishop, Polycrates, conducting them in firm but temperate opposition to the first aggression of the Church of Rome.

(4.) It would appear from the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnæans, that some in that communion were tainted with heresies, which appeared unpardonable to that zealous bishop, and which perhaps might be attended with some danger to an infant society. But when he designates those schismatics as 'beasts in the shape of men*,' we may doubt whether his exertions in this matter were calculated to restore the union of the Church. A pious bishop named Polycarp at that time presided over the Church of Smyrna: he had been appointed to his office by St. John, and continued faithfully to discharge it until his aged limbs were affixed to the stake by the brutality of Marcus Antoninus. Eighty and six years have I served Christ, and he hath never wronged me,' was his reply to the inquisitorial interrogations of the Roman proconsul; and it will not be out of place here to transcribe his last beautiful prayer, which has reached us from the pen of those who witnessed his martyrdomf.

Father of thy beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, through whom we have knowledge of thee; God of angels and powers and of all creation, and of the whole family of the just who live in thy presence! I thank thee that thou hast thought me worthy of this day and this hour, that I may take part in the number of the martyrs in the cup of Christ for the resurrection of eternal life, soul and body, in the incorruptibility of the

Ignat. Epist. Smyrn. sect. 4.

Epistle of the Church of Smyrna to that of Philomelium. Euseb. iv. 15.

Holy Spirit-among whom may I be received in thy presence to-day in full and acceptable sacrifice, as thou hast prepared, foreshown, and fulfilled, the faithful and true God. For this, and for everything, I praise thee, I bless thee, I glorify thee, through the eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ, thy beloved Son.' The martyrdom of Polycarp took place about 166 A.D.*

The Church of Sardis, whose imperfect faith is rebuked by St. John, may have profited by the reproaches of its founder, for about the year 177 A.D., we again discover it under the government of a learned and eloquent bishop, named Melito. To this writer we are indebted for the first catalogue of the books of the Old Testament compiled by any Christian authort, and it may be useful as well as curious to quote from Eusebius the titles of some of his works:-'Two Books concerning Easter-Rules of Life of the Prophets-A Discourse of the Lord's Day-Of the Nature of Man-Of the Obedience of the Senses to Faith-Of Baptism-Of Truth and of Faith, and the Generation of Jesus Christ--Of ProphecyOf Hospitality-Of the Devil-Of the Revelation of St. John.' And least of all should we omit to mention the Apology for Christianity,' which he addressed to M. Antoninus.

Before we take leave of the Asiatic Churches, we must remark that the early establishment of Christianity was not confined to the shore of the Egean§, or to places little removed from it. Hierapolis, an important city of Phrygia, contained a Christian society, over which Papias presided in the beginning of the second century. Papias was an industrious collector of all reported acts and sayings of the Apostles, and has been justly designated the Father of Traditions; he may have been a feeble and credulous man, but it is enough that his mere existence as Bishop of Hierapolis proves the very early progress of our religion towards the interior of Asia. Claudius Apollinaris was bishop of the same church, in the reign of M. Antoninus, a man of great reputation,' as says Eusebius, and celebrated for his Apology for Christianity, and his 'Books against Jews and Pagans.'

The province of Bithynia was situated at the south-western extremity of the Euxine Sea. We have no record of any Apostolical Church here founded; but we are accidentally furnished with proof that, in the very beginning of the second century, a great portion of the population were Christians-proof which has never been disputed, because it is derived from the annals of Pagan history.

Pliny the younger, a humane and accomplished Roman, was governor of Pontus and Bithynia for about eighteen months, during the persecution

This is the opinion of Du Pin, Tillemont, Archbishop Usher, Lardner (p. ii. 1. 6.) and others. Eusebius and Jerome also place the event in the time of M. Antoninus. Bishop Pearson (Op. Post. Diss. 2. c. 15, 16, 17) however, argues that it took place under Antoninus Pius in 148. Le Clerc advocates as late a year as 169, vol. i. p. 724-730.

Fleury, lib. iv. sect. 3, xi. Melito was, by many ancient Christians, accounted a prophet-in the sense, no doubt, of an inspired teacher. See Jortin. Rem. Eccl. Hist. book ii. part i. end.

Fragments of this are preserved by Eusebius. H. E. lib. iv. c. 26. He boldly censured the Emperor's decree against the Christians, as one which ought not to have been promulgated even against barbarous enemies.' And, therefore, he expressed a loyal doubt whether it really proceeded from the councils of the Emperor. Le Clerc supposes the Apology to have been published in 169; Fleury (1. iv. 1.), in 170.

We know from certain documents that the Christian religion was firmly established among the Arabs' in the second century. Semler, sect. ii. c. ii.

Fleury, H. E. 1. iv. sect. 4.