CHAP. III. not mistake his meaning,-because he never explicitly owns the doctrine of Election; though, with happy inconsistency, like many other real Christians, he involved it in his experience, and implies it in various parts of his writings. But, the novelty, once admitted, was not easily expelled:-The language of the Church was silently and gradually changed, in this respect, from that more simple and scriptural mode of speaking used by Clement and Ignatius: Those primitive Christians knew the doctrine of the Election of Grace, but not the self-determining power of the human will:-We shall see hereafter the progress of the evil, and it's arrival at full maturity under the fostering hand of Pelagius, IV. A. D. 161. CHA P. IV. THE EMPEROR MARCUS ANTONINUS, AND HIS CHAP. HE succeeded Pius in the year 161, and appears very soon after to have commenced the persecution against the Christians, in which Justin and his friends were slain. It excites a curiosity, not foreign from the design of this History, to discover what could be the cause of so much enmity against a people, confessedly harmless, in a Prince so considerate, so humanc, and, in general, so well-intentioned as Marcus is allowed to have been.-Besides; he acted in this respect directly contrary to the example of his predecessor, whose memory he doubtless much revered, from whose intelligent and investigating spirit he must have derived ample information concerning the Christians, and whom in all other matters of government he imitated so exactly. The fact, however, is certainly so: Marcus Antoninus was, during all his reign, which continued 19 years, an implacable persecutor of Christians; and this not from mere ig norance of their moral character. He knew them,yet hated them, and showed them no mercy: He allowed and encouraged the most barbarous treatment of their persons; and was yet himself a person of great humanity of temper: just and beneficent to the rest of mankind: He was free from all reproach in his general conduct; and in several parts of it was a model worthy the imitation of Christians. I think it impossible to solve this phenomenon on any other principles than those by which the enmity of many philosophers of old, and of many devotees and exact moralists of modern times against the Christian religion, is to be explained. The Gospel is in it's own nature not only distinct from careless and dissolute vice, but also from the whole religion of philosophers: I mean of those philosophers who form to themselves a religion from natural and selfdevised sources, either in opposition to the revealed word of God, or with the neglect both of that word and of the influence of the Holy Spirit, who is the great agent in applying the Scriptures to the heart of man. In all ages it will be found that the more strenuously men support SUCH RELIGION, the more vehemently do they hate Christianity. Their religion is pride and self-importance: It denies the fallen state of man, the provision and efficacy of grace, and the glory of God and the Redeemer.-The enmity hence occasioned is obvious.-It must be considered also that Marcus Antoninus was of the Stoical sect, who carried self-sufficiency to the utmost pitch. He fancied that he carried God within him. Like most of the philosophers, he held the mystical doctrine of the To; but he held it in all its detestable impiety and arrogance. With him to be good and virtuous was the easiest thing in the world: It was only to follow nature, and to obey the dictates of the Deity,-that is, of the human soul, CENT. II. CHAP. IV. which was divine and self-sufficient. He could not with these views be humble; nor pray earnestly; nor feel his own internal wickedness and misery; nor endure the idea of a Saviour and Mediator.If, like his predecessor, Pius, he had been contented to be an ordinary person in religion, the humanity of his temper would PROBABLY have led him, as it did the emperor Pius, to have respected the excellent character and virtues of Christians; and he would have felt it his duty to have protected such peaceable and deserving subjects.--I say, PROBABLY; and I express myself with some reserve, because I much doubt, whether he possessed an understanding equally sound with that of Antoninus Pius.---But, be that as it may, the pride of Philosophy appears to have been wounded and exasperated. Whoever has attended to the spirit which pervades his twelve Books of Meditations, and duly compared them with the doctrines of the Gospel, must acknowledge a total opposition; and then he will not wonder that Christians suffered from a serious Stoic, what might have been expected only from a flagitious Nero.-Pride and licentiousness are equally condemned by the Gospel; and they equally seek revenge. If this be a true state of the case, the philosophic spirit, explained and stated as above, however differently modified in different ages, will always be inimical to the Gospel; and the most decorous moralists belonging to the class of which we are now speaking, will be found in union, on this subject, with the basest characters. "Beware of philosophy," is a precept which as much calls for our attention now as ever. Yet so fascinating is the power of prejudice and education, that many would look on it as a grievous crime to attempt to tear the laurels of virtue from the brows of Marcus Antoninus. Certainly, however, if his virtue had been genuine; or at all of a piece with that of the Scriptures, he could never have treated Christians so cruelly, as we shall see he did. Is this, then, the man, whom Mr. Pope celebrates in the following lines? Who noble ends by noble means obtains, -Providence seems however to have determined, to relate. It is remarkable that Gataker, the editor of Antoninus's Meditations, represents himself in the most humiliating terms, as quite ashamed to behold the superior virtues of this Prince as described in this book. To say and to do, are, however, not the same things; nor is there much reason to believe, that Marcus perforined in practice, what he describes in theory. But, exclusively of these reflections, suppose we were inclined to draw a comparison between the author and his commentator with respect to humility, such comparison would certainly be much to the disadvantage of the former. I pretend not to have studied the writings of Marcus Aurelius with so much anxious care as to be assured, that there appear in them no traces of this virtue in the empe-ror; but the GENERAL TURN of the whole book leads me to conclude, that the writer felt no abasing thoughts of himself. I have already defined in what sense I use the term philosopher, as contrasted with the humble follower of Jesus Christ; and in that ́ • Antoninus was called also Aurelius. CENT. II. CHAP. IV. sense I affirm that no philosopher made such a confession of himself as Gataker does.-Such is the natural effect of some knowledge of Christianity on the human mind! If we attend to the notices of history on the education and manners of Marcus, the account which has been given of his enmity against the Gospel will be amply confirmed. Adrian had introduced him among the Salian priests when eight years old, and he became accurately versed in the rituals of his priesthood. At twelve he began to wear the Philosopher's cloak: he practised austerities: he lay on the bare ground; and was with difficulty persuaded by his mother to use a mattress and slight coverlet. He placed in his private chapel gold statues of his deceased masters; and visited their sepulchral monuments; and there offered sacrifices, and strewed flowers. So devoted was he to Stoicisin, that he attended the schools after he became emperor; and the faith which he put in dreams sufficiently proves his superstitious credulity. From a man so much lifted up by self-sufficiency, bigotry, and superstition, an illiberal censure of the Christians is not matter of surprise. "This readiness," says he, "of being resigned to the prospect of death, ought to proceed from a propriety of deliberate judgment, not from mere unintelligent obstinacy, as is the case with the Christians; it should be founded on grounds of solid reason, and be attended with calm composure without any tragical raptures, and in such a way as may induce others to admire and imitate." If this emperor had ever attended to the dying scenes of Christians tortured to death by his orders, with any degree of candour and impartiality, he might have seen all these circumstances exemplified. Thousands of thein chose to suffer with deliberate judgment; preferred heavenly things to earthly; counted the cost; and made a reasonable decision; not doubtful, as the 11th B. Sect. 3. * |