forget that, in many instances, the Roman police tolerated, perhaps encouraged, excesses which it might possibly consider as an innocent exercise of popular feeling, or as a part of a religious ceremony.

The evils which we have here noticed, or at least, the causes which produced them, were most prevalent in the earliest age of the religion, and seem gradually to have died away during the third century. For they were chiefly founded in ignorance of the real principles of Christianity, aided by contempt for the weakness of its professors; circumstances which were gradually removed as the members of the Church advanced in numbers and its ministers in learning. But this progress of the faith (as we have had occasion to observe) did not immediately reconcile or disarm its adversaries, but rather changed their character and their weapons. For instance, during the first ages we do not observe that the pagan priesthood were distinguished by any systematic exertions against the new worship, and they may possibly have despised and overlooked it; but presently their seeming indifference was changed into suspicious. jealousy, and then into active and persevering hatred †; and we may be assured that the influence which they possessed over the people (whatsoever that may have been) was exerted to the prejudice of the rival religion. In the next place, philosophy descended from the contempt with which she had professedly viewed the earliest efforts of Christianity, and proceeded to distinguish it from all other superstitions' by her malice and enmity; and she knew not in so doing how honourable a distinction she had conferred on it. This coalition of philosophy with paganism, though strange, was not unnatural; nor would any evil consequences have followed it, had it not engaged the concurrence, and advanced under the banners, of civil authority. And if it be true that from her numerous chastisements and inflictions our religion may have somewhat profited in purity, we must admit that she learnt one hateful lesson in the school of adversity, which in after ages she did not forget to practise; it was deeply ingrafted on her infancy by her sufferings, and it brought forth in her maturity the bitter fruits of crime and misery. However, the poisonous plant was not the native of her own vineyard, and it is now, for the most part, rooted up and cast away; and she accounts it the severest among the wrongs of her pagan oppressors that they instructed her in the maxims, and accustomed her to the spectacle, of persecution.

II. As an excuse for the rigour of the Roman government, it has been argued that the Christians were not punished for their worship of Christ,

* During the whole course of these persecutions, with the exception of those few in which the emperor pronounced his will by an express specification of the penalties, very much rested on the discretion of the magistrates, and, undoubtedly, many among these were guided by the common feelings of humanity. (Tertul. Apol., c. 27. Ad Scapulam, c. 4. Scorpiace, c. 1.) But the clamours of an importunate populace also demand more than common firmness, to be invariably resisted. Gibbon, in his endeavour to exaggerate the humanity of the Roman magistrates, has forgotten his own:- They were 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, they left the unhappy victims of their justice some reason to hope for a prosperous event-the accession, the marriage, or the triumph of an emperor, which might restore them by a general pardon to their former state."Chap. xvi.

+ See Mosh. de Reb. Christ. Ant, Const. Sæc. iv. sec. 1.

There seems reason to believe that this alliance was fortified by the powerful addition of the Roman bar; at least we are assured that the proconsuls felt themselves so interested in the defence of ancient laws, during Ulpian's time, as to endeavour to excite Alexander Severus against an illegal religion. This took place about 223. Baron. Ann. t. ii. p. 367, 369.

[Chap. IV but for their refusal to sacrifice to the gods of their ancestors and their government t*; and that the crime for which they suffered was not in fact their religion, but their contumacy; and some set great value on this argument. In our opinion it amounts to nothing more than this: the laws of Rome punished all religious dissent with death; openly to oppose those laws was sedition; and thus the punishment was inflicted on the sedition, not on the dissent. This is foolish and unworthy sophistry; and its utmost consequence could go no farther than to excuse the individual who executed the laws, and to throw the whole odium upon the system†. But to allow it even this weight is too much concession; for we perceive, by the very different manner in which the law was enforced by different emperors, that they possessed, in fact, an authority superior to it, and power to suspend or revise it; and that there was not one of whom it can be truly said that he was barbarous on compulsion. But on the other hand, if any will persist to justify the personal character of certain emperors at the expense of the religious policy of the empire, they give us only additional reason to rejoice at the triumph of Christian principles over the inherent depravity of the pagan system.

Another and a very fruitless dispute has been raised respecting the general virtues or vices or fortunes of those sovereigns who are most remarkable for severity towards the Christians; and while some have asserted that our persecutors are to be found only among the most odious and vicious of the emperors, and while others endeavour to establish a sort of temporal retribution which overtook, by violent or untimely deaths, all who were hostile to our name; there are again other writers who have been willing to insinuate that the wisest and most virtuous monarchs were those most sensible of the necessity to repress the growing religion. All these writers are almost equally remote from truth. The former are obliged to qualify the unrelenting injustice of Marcus Antoninus out of respect to his various virtues and his natural end; and the last must extenuate the outrages not of Nero only, or Domitian, or Maximin, but of Galerius and the stupid barbarian Licinius. But if the insinuation were really founded in fact, the only important conclusion which could be derived from it is one which we are not anxious to dispute; that the noblest human wisdom was not exempt from shameful folly, and that the highest principles of justice

The dialogue, which is supposed to have taken place during the reign of Severus (about 200) between Saturninus, proconsul of Africa, and Speratus, one of the famous Scyllitan martyrs, whether genuine or not, is very ancient and perfectly consistent with probability. You may hope for the pardon of the emperors our masters, if you come to your senses and observe the ceremonies of the gods.' 'We have never done any evil, nor partaken in injustice. We recollect not to have injured any one; on the contrary, when we suffer we render thanks to God: in which respect we obey our Emperor, who has ordained that rule for us.' 'We also have a very simple religion; we swear by the genius of the emperors, and make vows for their health; you must do as much.' If you will listen to me calmly, I will tell you the mystery of Christian simplicity.' 'Shall I listen to your insults on our ceremonies? Swear rather by the genius of the emperors our masters, that you may continue to live.' "I recognize not the genius of the emperor of this world, but I serve the God of Heaven, whom no man hath seen or can see. I have never committed any crime punishable by the laws. They were remanded, and on the following day brought up again. Do you persevere in being a Christian? Yes, I persevere: I call you all to witness-I am a Christian. All those who had been arrested with him heard him, and cried, We also are Christians. You will neither deliberate then nor receive pardon. We need no pardon with justice on our side; do what you will; we die with joy for Jesus Christ.' &c. &c. Art. Mart. Scyll. p. 77. Fleury, H. E., 1. v. sect. 2.

Precisely of the same value is another excuse, derived from the admission that it was difficult or impossible for a pagan to comprehend even the meaning of toleration, according to the latitude which we give to it. Its only effect can be to turn away our indignation from the individuals upon the system which made them tyrants and persecutors.

discoverable by man permitted the perpetration of revolting enormities. In the mean time, the truth appears to be nearly this: that, in the want of any fixed and substantial rule of action, the imperial character fluctuated between the extreme limits of depravity and (what was called) virtue; that the motives of all our enemies (except M. Antoniuus and Diocletian) and of many of our protectors are to be sought either in accidental circumstances or in their own caprices; and that in both those classes we may number princes of the highest moral and intellectual excellence and of the lowest imaginable turpitude*.

III. Without giving our universal assent to the popular paradox, that the effect of persecution is to nourish that which it seems to consume, we may admit that the pagan persecutions were not, perhaps, upon the whole unfavourable to the progress of our religion t. Among many reasons for this opinion, there are three which appear to us important.

(1.) The first of these is the nature of the persecutions themselves; which, in the first place, were usually of short duration, and relieved by longer intermissions, if not of security, at least of repose and hope, so that the survivors had space to refit their shattered vessel against the tempests which were still in the horizon; and which, in the next, were generally signalized by such extreme barbarity, and such obvious injustice as civil punishments, as not only to revolt whatever humanity might be found among the spectators, but to harden and fortify the obstinacy of the sufferers. (2.) The noble and devoted constancy with which martyrdom was generally endured, excited the admiration of the best portion of the Gentile world; and not their admiration only, for those who reflected on what they beheld were persuaded, first, of the piety of the sufferers, and next of their sincerity; and this persuasion led some among them to examine the foundation of those motives and principles which seemed to infuse an original energy into the human soul. If a new crime was invented for the affliction of the Christians, a new virtue appeared to be sent down to them for their support; and it became a serious question, whether that virtue could otherwise have sustained them, than by the direct interference of Heaven. (3.) Several driven from their country by persecution, carried with them into distant and barbarous exile the faith of the Christian, and the zeal of the missionary and the martyr. And thus the victims of man's blind and insensate impiety became instruments in the scheme of Providence for the advancement of his great purposes in the propagation of faith and knowledge.

* Another question has been raised concerning the probable number of the martyrs;" and this has led to wider difference, as it is less capable of accurate determination. (Dodwell, Dissert. in Cypr. XI. Ruinart, Pref. Act. Martyr.). The spirit of exaggeration or credulity on the one hand has excited that of disparagement or scepticism on the other; and the truth, if it could be ascertained at all, would be found to lie between them. It is certain, however, that when Gibbon estimates the whole number of Diocletian's victims throughout the provinces of the Eastern empire according to the trifling portion who perished in Palestine, he infers neither very fairly nor very consistently; for in other places he is forward enough to acknowledge the narrow limits and to extenuate the population of Palestine, and he was not ignorant that even the proportion of Christians in that country was less than in any other province. Semler (sec. 1. c. 6.) inclines to the opinion of Dodwell, admitting the difficulty of the question; and Bishop Kaye (Lect. on Tertull. p. 138.) remarks that though the number may have been greater than Dodwell was willing to allow, it is certain that his opinion approaches much nearer to truth than that of his opponents.' It has been one cause of the exaggeration, that the term martyr (witness) was in the early Church indiscriminately extended to all whose religion had exposed them to any infliction, as loss of property or liberty-a class of sufferers now usually called confessors." The same was the professed opinion even of Tertullian himself.

CHAPTER V.

On the Heresies of the three first Centuries.

Meaning of the word Heresy-Charges of immorality brought against Heretics-Their treatment by early Church-Number of early Heresies-Moderation of the primitive Church-Three classes of Heretics. (1.) Two kinds of Philosophy-Gnosticism-Origin and nature of that doctrine-its association with Christianity-Moral practice of the Gnostics-Their martyrs-Various forms of Gnosticism-Basilides-Carpocrates-Valentinus-Cerdo and Marcion-Tatian and the Encratites. (2.) The Ebionites-Eusebius's account of them-Conclusions from it-The Heresy of Artemon-revived by Paul of Samosata-his sentence and expulsion-how finally enforced-Heresy of Praseas-Doctrines of the Church stated by Tertullian-Sabellius-his opinions-Patropassians. (3.) Simon Magus-Montanus-his preaching and success-Controversy on the Baptism of Heretics-The Novatians-their schism and opinions-Conclusions respecting the general character of the early Heresies, and the manner of opposing them-On the Fathers of the primitive Church-Real importance of their writings-Shepherd of Hermas-Epistle of St. BarnabasIgnatius-Polycarp-Clement of Rome-Respecting their doctrine-Irenæus.

6

THE original meaning of the word heresy is choice; it was long used by the philosophers to designate the preference and selection of some speculative opinion, and in process of time* was applied without any sense of reproach to every sect—a term with which it thus became nearly synonymous. From philosophy it passed into the service of religion, and we find it applied both by St. Luke and Josephus to the Pharisees and Sadducees, with no imputation of censure or error. Next we observe, that it was employed by the Jews to distinguish the new opinions of the Christians; St. Paul is accused of being the ringleader of the heresy of the Nazarenes,' and confesses that he worships the God of his fathers, after the way which they call heresy'-an expression which indicates, that some reproach had been intended by the term. The word was then adopted by Christians; and though it still continued for some ages to be used, in its first and most general sense, to designate every denomination, not only of sects but of false religions, yet for the most part it was employed in speaking of those who, professing Christianity, had departed from the doctrine which was taught by the Apostles. In the mouth of an orthodox Christian it could not, in any of these senses, be a term of indifference; since, according to the necessary exclusiveness of our principles, the faith which was revealed through Christ and interpreted by his Apostles is alone truth; every other belief is error.

We next observe, that the notion of wilfulness and perversity (perhaps a much worse notion) was very early attached to it; and even by the writers of the New Testament it is sometimes so used, that a somewhat indefinite idea of evil appears to have been affixed to it. Some, indeed, have supposed that it was understood by early Christian writers to contain the imputation of immorality §, and thus we may partly account for the exceeding zeal with which

*Cicero. (Paradox I. vol. vii. p. 845. Ed. Oxon.) Philo Judæus. (Fragm. e lib. II. in Exod.) Burton, Bampt. Lect. Î.

Acts of Apostl. v. 17. xv. 5. Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5. 9.

# Epiphanius, in his Book on Heresies, mentions Βαρβαρισμός, Σκυθισμός, Ἑλληνισμός, Loudaïonòs, Zapaguropos, all under the name of heresy. Balsamon (Comment. 14th Can. Council of Chalcedon) expresses himself thus:-'Heretics are divided into two kinds: 1. Those who receive the Christian religion, but err in points, who, when they come over to the Church, are anointed with oil; 2. those who do not receive it at all, and are unbelievers, such as Jews and Greeks; and these we baptize.' See Burton's Bampt. Lect. I. § The argument amounts to this: heresy is opposed by St. Paul to faith, and is commensurate with it; and as faith comprehends as its essence and sends forth as its emanation purity of heart and excellence of conduct, so heresy must contain, of necessity, the contrary qualities.

many of them laboured for its extirpation, and the language which they applied to those who had deviated into it. Charges, indeed, or insinuations of the grossest impurities are sometimes thrown out by the orthodox writers against the early heretics; but we are bound to receive them with great caution; because the answers which may have been given to them are lost; and because they are not generally justified by any authentic records which we possess respecting the lives of those heretics. The truth appears to be this; that some flagrant immoralities were notoriously perpetrated by some of the wildest among their sects, and that these have given colouring to the charges which have been thrown upon them too indiscriminately. But whatsoever uncertainty may rest on this inquiry, it cannot be disputed, first, that the Apostolical Fathers, following the footsteps of the Apostles themselves, regarded with great jealousy the birth and growth of erroneous opinions; and next, that they did not authorize, either by instruction or example, any severity on the persons of those in error. They opposed it by their reasoning and their eloquence, and they avoided its contagion by removing from their communion those who persisted in it; but they were also mindful that within these limits was confined the power which the Church received from the Apostle who founded it over the spiritual disobedience of its members.

The heretics or seceders from the primitive Church were extremely various, at least in name, and there is no period in ecclesiastical history in which dissent has appeared under so many denominations as the earliest. But it seems doubtful whether many of those sects had very numerous adherents, or were at all generally dispersed over the surface of Christendom; some of them were merely local, scarcely extending beyond the spot which gave them birth, and others were chiefly confined to the controversial writers, as the difference was on points too abstruse to create much interest in those days among the body of the people. Many, again, have left behind them no traces of their existence, and their very names have only been preserved through the labours of their adversaries; so that we may fairly presume, in spite of the display and parade of denominations, that the great majority of the early Christians remained attached to the primitive faith. In the mean time, the mere fact of the existence of so many different forms of Christianity certainly proves, not only the zeal, but also the numbers of the early converts; for if these had been inconsiderable, we should have heard little either about dissenters from the orthodox body, or of their divisions among themselves. The paucity and weakness of the faithful would have been a sufficient guarantee for their unanimity.

That many of those errors gained footing at a very early period, long before the conclusion of the first century, has not been disputed with any probability*; and the fact is attributed with great appearance of truth to the twelve or perhaps fifteen years which intervened between the ascension of Christ and the departure of the Apostles from Judæa. During this period, partly through the dispersion of the converts after the martyrdom of Stephen, partly through the periodical religious communications of foreign Jews with their native country, some imperfect accounts of the history and doctrine of the Saviour were spread abroad, even before

*Tittman, De Vestig. Gnosticorum,' &c. has, in our opinion, entirely failed in his learned attempt to fix the origin of the Gnostic heresies in the second century. The passages which seem most in his favour are Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. vii. p. 764. Ed. Sylburg. Hegisipp. ap. Euseb. 1. iii. c. 32. But the general voice of history is on the other side.