of Trajan; and on that subject, in the year 107*, A.D., he addressed to the Emperor his celebrated Epistle. This being justly considered as the most important document remaining to us in early Christian history, we shall here transcribe some portion of it, the more willingly as we shall have occasion hereafter to refer to it.

After mentioning the difficulty of his own situation, and his perplexity in what manner to proceed against men charged with no other crime than the name of Christian, the writer proceeds as follows:- Others were named by an informer, who at first confessed themselves Christians, and afterwards denied it; the rest said they had been Christians, but had left them, some three years ago, some longer, and one or more above twenty years. They all worshipped your image, and the statues of the gods; these also reviled Christ. They affirmed that the whole of their fault or error lay in this-that they were wont to meet together on a stated day before it was light, and sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ, as to God, and bind themselves by an oath, not to the commission of any wickedness, but not to be guilty of theft, or robbery, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge committed to them when called upon to return it. When these things were performed, it was their custom to separate, and then to come together again to a meal, which they ate in common without any disorder; but this they had forborne since the publication of my edict, by which, according to your commands, I prohibited assemblies.

After receiving this account, I judged it the more necessary to examine, and that by torture, two maid servants, which were called ministers; but I have discovered nothing beside a bad and excessive superstition. Suspending, therefore, all judicial proceedings, I have recourse to you for advice, for it has appeared to me matter highly deserving consideration, especially upon account of the great number of persons who are in danger of suffering, for many of all ages, and every rank, of both sexes likewise, are accused, and will be accused. Nor has the contagion of this superstition seized cities only, but the lesser towns also, and the open country; nevertheless, it seems to me that it may be restrained and corrected. It is certain that the temples which were almost forsaken begin to be more frequented; and the sacred solemnities, after a long intermission, are revived. Victims likewise are everywhere bought up, whereas for a time there were few purchasers. Whence it is easy to imagine what numbers of men might be reclaimed if pardon were granted to those who repent.'

So fewt and uncertain are the records left to guide our inquiries through the obscure period which immediately followed the conclusion of the labours of the Apostles, that the above testimony to the numbers and virtues of our forefathers in faith becomes indeed invaluable. No history of our Church can be perfect without it; and its clear and unsuspected voice will be listened to by every candid inquirer in every age of truth and history. At present our only concern is with the concluding paragraphs, which show us how extensively our religion was disseminated within seventy-five years from the death of its founder, in a province very distant from its birthplace, and where no apostle had ever penetrated; and certainly it is not unfair to infer that in other provinces more favour

*Lardner, Test. of Anc. Heathen.

Ecclesiastical history discovers to us no important event between the death of St. Peter and St. Paul, and that of St. John, excepting the rise of the Gnostic heresy, which Le Clerc places in the year 76.

ably situated, and more industriously cultivated, as rich a harvest may have grown up of faith and piety, though unnoticed by the pen of the Roman officers, whose mere duty required nothing more from them than its extirpation.

(5.) From the churches of Asia we proceed to the description of those of Greece, and among these our first notice shall be directed to Athens. A vain, and light, and learned city, the theatre of lively wit and loose and careless ridicule, the school of intellectual subtlety and disputatiousness, the very Pantheon of Polytheism, where the utmost efforts of human genius had been exhausted to celebrate a baseless and gaudy superstition -such, assuredly, was not a place where the homeliness of the Gospel could hope to find favour. More curious in the pursuit of theories than in the investigation of facts, the Athenian philosopher (of whatever sect) would not readily embrace a faith which required him to believe so much and allowed him to speculate so little; and, we may add, that he would bring to the inquiry a mind either hardened by previous habits of universal scepticism, or fraught with some sort of theistical notions inconsistent with the truths he was called upon to receive. For these, and similar reasons, Christianity made, for some years, very trifling progress at Athens. We read, indeed, of a succession of bishops, beginning with Dionysius the Areopagite, the convert of St. Paul. But it appears that Quadratus, on his accession in Adrian's time, found the church in a state verging on apostacy*, and to him, perhaps, may belong the honour of restoring, if we should not rather say, of establishing it. After that period we find it more flourishing; and we have the authority of Origen, in his second book against Celsus, for believing that, about the middle of the second century, the Christians of Athens were eminent for their piety; and their industry, if not learning, is attested by the publication of three apologies for their faith. Two were written by Quadratus † and a contemporary philosopher named Aristides, and were presented or dedicated to Adrian. The third was published several years afterwards, by another philosopher, named Athenagoras, and is still extant.

To the Philippians an epistle was addressed by Polycarp, about 108, A.D., attesting, at least, the permanency of that apostolical Church; and that that of Thessalonica had also been perpetuated, and another subsequently established at Larissa, is proved by the circumstance that Antoninus Pius addressed copies of his Order of Toleration' to the governors of those cities.

(6.) Tracing the footsteps of the apostle of the Gentiles from Athens, we proceed to Corinth. We still find ourselves surrounded by graceful temples and statues, consecrated to the deities of Paganism. We observe thesame elegance of opulence, the same abandonment to fastidious luxury, but there is this difference, that the character of the people, with less renown for wit, vanity, and ambitious pretension, is even more distinguished for immorality. Not so warmly attached to the keen and fruitless contests of the schools, the Corinthians rather sought their happiness in

Dionys. apud Euseb. iv. 23. The age of Quadratus is well discussed by Le Clerc, H. E. ad ann. 124.

These Apologies, certainly that of Aristides, were extant in the time of Eusebius (1. iv. c. 3) and St. Jerome (Catal. Script. Eccles.).—See Fleury, lib. iii. sect. 22. Athenagoras dedicated his Apology to M. Aurelius and L. Verus, in the year 166, calling it an 'Embassy for the Christians.' See Le Clerc, ad ann. 166 (vol. i. p. 702-710), and Fleury, lib. iii. sect. 47. Bayle (vie Athenag.) mentions with surprise that that writer was unknown to Eusebins, Jerome, and most of the ancient fathers. He appears to have held some erroneous opinions, and is noticed by Epiphanius, Adv. Hær. num. 64, p. 544, t. 1.

the vulgar excitements of sensuality. It is easier to remove many moral imperfections, than to convince the self-sufficiency of wit. And this may have been one of the reasons which decided St. Paul to select Corinth as his principal residence in Greece. The early years of this Church are not free from reproach; but we observe that they are distinguished rather by the spirit of dissension and contumacy than by that of immorality-it retained the vices* of the Greek character after it had thrown off those of the Corinthian. Cephas and Apollos divided the very converts of the apostle, and, about fifty years afterwards, the disunion had so far increased as to call for the friendly interference of the Church of Rome. About 95, A.D., St. Clement, the bishop, addressed to them his first and genuine Epistle, which has fortunately been preserved to us, and is probably the most ancient of uninspired Christian writings. The author is related to be the same Clement whom St. Paul mentions as one of his fellowlabourers whose names are in the Book of Life' The dissensions of the Corinthians seem to have entirely regarded the discipline, not the doctrine of the Church; they had dismissed from the ministry certain presbyters, as St. Clement asserts, undeservedly, and much confusion was thus introduced. For the purpose of composing it, five deputies were sent from Rome, the bearers of the Epistle.

We should here observe, that the epistle is written in the name of the Church sojourning at Rome,' not in that of the Roman bishop; that its character is of exhortation, not of authority; and that it is an answer to a communication originally made by the Church of Corinth. The episcopal form of government was clearly not yet here established, probably as being adverse to the republican spirit of Greece. This spirit, naturally extending from political to religious affairs, may have acted most strongly in the most numerous society; and to its influence, so dangerous to the concord of an infant community, we may, perhaps, attribute the evils of which we have spoken. At what precise moment the converts of Corinth had the wisdom to discover that their unity in love would be better secured by a stricter form of Church government, we are not informed, but, about seventy years after these dissensions, we find them flourishing under the direction of a pious and learned bishop, Dionysius. This venerable person is chiefly celebrated for his seven Epistles called, by Eusebius, Catholic,-two of these were addressed to the Churches of Rome and Athens, two other to those in Pontus and Bithynia, two to those of Gortyna and Gnossos in Crete, and one to that at Lacedæmon. It is thus, incidentally, that we are furnished with our best evidence of the gradual growth of Christianity. From Athens we proceed to Corinth, from Corinth to Lacedæmon; established in the capital, we advance into the towns and villages; and we doubt not that, at that early period, the wild mountaineers of Taygetus received that faith which they have through so many centuries so devotedly preserved, and which is, at length, confirmed to them for ever.

(7.) In the Annals of the historian Tacitus (xv. 44), after the descrip

* They are thus enumerated by St. Clement, c. 35, ἀδικία, ἀνομία, πλεονεξία, έρεις, κακοήθειαι τε καὶ δόλοι, ψιθύρισμοι καὶ καταλάλιαι, θεοστυγία, ὑπερηφανία, ἀλαζονεία καὶ κενοδοξία.

† There are very wide differences among historians respecting this date. Lardner (part i. ch. 2.) appears to us to have selected the most probable opinion. Perhaps we should except the Epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas. Ancient writers, without any doubt or scruple,' assert this. H. E. 1. iv. c. 23.

p. ii. 1. 2.

Lard. Cred. G. H.

tion of a terrible fire at Rome, we read with sorrow and indignation the following passage:-" To suppress the common rumour, that he had himself set fire to the city, Nero procured others to be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishments upon those people who were held in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the name of Chris tians. They had their denomination from Christus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate. This pernicious superstition, though checked for a while, broke out again, and spread not only over Judæa, the source of this evil, but reached the city also, whither flow from all quarters all things vile and shameful, and where they find shelter and encouragement. At first those only were apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast multitude was discovered by them, all of whom were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. Their executions were so contrived as to expose them to derision and contempt. Some were covered over with the skins of wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; some were crucified; and others having been daubed over with combustible materials, were set up as lights in the night time, and thus burnt to death. Nero made use of his own gardens as the theatre upon this occasion, and also exhibited the diversions of the Circus, sometimes standing in the crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a charioteer, at others driving a chariot himself, till at length these men, though really criminal and deserving exemplary punishment, began to be commiserated, as people who were destroyed, not out of regard to the public welfare, but only to gratify the cruelty of one man.' This passage, which will scarcely be deemed creditable to the philosophy of its author even by those who most extol it, and which is most deeply disgraceful to his historical accuracy, to his political knowledge, and to his common humanity, was written at the end of the first century, about thirty-six years after the persecution* which it so vividly describes. It was in the midst of this awful scene, that St. Peter and St. Paul† are believed to have suffered. We shall not pause to investigate very deeply the truth of this opinion, but rather confine our attention to the testimony here afforded as to the number of Christians existing at Rome even at that very early period. A vast multitude was discovered' by the eye of persecution, and the compassion excited by their sufferings would naturally awaken an attention, which had never before been directed before to them. The assault of Nero was furious and probably transient; and such is precisely the method of aggression, which fails not in the end to multiply its objects; and if it be thus probable that, before the end of the first century, the Church of Rome surpassed every other in power and consideration, we may rest assured that these were rather augmented than diminished during the century following. To this

* That event is placed in the year 64, by a general consent of Christian antiquity. It is also commonly agreed, that St. Peter, as well as St. Paul, suffered martyrdom under Nero. (Euseb. I. ii. c. 25, on the authority of Caius an Ecclesiastic, and Dionys. Epist. to Romans.) But there are differences as to the exact time of that suffering. Le Clerc (vol. i. p. 447, a.d. 68) places it at the end of Nero's reign in the year 68; but the general opinion refers it to the persecution. The doubt as to fact rests rather on the martyrdom of St. Peter than of St. Paul, but the authority appears to us sufficient historically to establish the violent end of both.

Eusebius asserts that these two apostles were joint founders of the church of Rome, and thus the order of their three immediate successors has been most warmly disputed. The difficulty is not removed by the supposition that the Church was originally divided,one apostle (or bishop) presiding over the Jewish, the other over the Gentile converts. According to this distribution, St. Peter, of course, had the charge of the former.

belief we are persuaded, partly by the greater facility of conversion offered by the size of the city, and the number of the inhabitants; partly by consideration that the force of opinion would naturally lead the feeble Christian societies throughout the empire to look for counsel and protection to the capital, as we know the church of Corinth to have done; and partly by the fact, that frequent pecuniary contributions were transmitted by the faithful at Rome, to their less fortunate brethren in the provinces*. In this, then, consisted the original superiority of Rome; in numbers, in opinion, in wealth: to these limits it was entirely confined, and it was not until quite the conclusion of the second century that we hear of any claim to authority.

The circumstances of that claim arose from a very early difference in the Church respecting the celebration of Easter. It was shortly this: the Christians of Lesser Asia observed the feast at which the Paschal lamb was distributed, in memory of the Last Supper, at the same time at which the Jews celebrated their passover; that is, on the 14th day of the first Jewish month; and three days afterwards they commemorated the resurrection, without regard to the day of the week. The western churches confined the anniversary of the resurrection to the first day of the week, and kept their Paschal feast on the night preceding it. Hence arose some inconveniences; and we find that Polycarp had visited Rome about 100, A.D. for the purpose of arranging the controversyt. He was not permanently successful; and about ninety years afterwards (A.D. 196, Fleury, 1. iv. c. 44), Victor, Bishop of Rome, addressed to the Asiatics an express order to conform to the practice of Rome. They convoked a numerous synod, whose feelings of independence, and disdain of the assumed authority of the Roman, were temperately expressed in the answer of Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesust. The insolence of Victor was irritated by the refusal, and he published an edict of excommunication against the churches of Asia. This was the first aggression of a Roman bishop on the tranquillity of the Church of Christ; and we may reasonably believe that it was disapproved by the best Christians of the West, since we know that it provoked the remonstrance of Irenæus, Bishop of Lyons. The churches of Palestine and Alexandria§ appear to have united with those of Asia in an affair so highly inflamed by the arrogance of Victor, that it advanced from a controversy to a schism, which was not finally healed till the Council of Nice in 325.

Our earliest knowledge of the existence of Christianity in France is derived from its calamities. During the persecution of Marcus Antoni

* Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, thus addresses the Roman Church, about the year 156:— This is your custom from the beginning to confer benefits on all brethren, and to send relief to various churches in every city. By which means, while you assist the indigent, and sustain the brethren who are in the mines, and while you continually persist in such donations, you preserve the national custom of Romans-that which your excellent Bishop Soter has even carried further than usual by making generous donations to the Saints, and edifying by excellent discourse (as a loving father his children) the brethren, who visit him from abroad.'-Euseb. lib. iv., c. 23.

† Euseb. H. E. lib. v., c. 23. See Tillem. vol. iii., p. 102, &c.

It contains these words: I, my brethren, who have lived five and sixty years in the Lord, who have conversed with my brethren dispersed over the whole world, who had read through the whole Scriptures, am nothing moved by the terrors (of excommunication) which are held over us. For I know that it has been said by those who are far my superiors, that it is better to obey God than man.'-See Le Clerc, vol. i. p. 800.

Euseb. v., 23 and 25. The church of Alexandria agreed with that of Rome on the rights of the question, but opposed the overbearing insolence with which they were asserted.