Meditations — Marcus Aurelius
24 mOGRAPIIICAL SKETCH. really not from the emperor, the Christians entreat him not to give them up to their enemies.1 We conclude from this that there were at least imperial rescripts or constitutions of M. Antoninus which were made the foundations of these perse- 1 Eusebius, lv. 26; and Routh's Reliquiae Sacrac, vol. I. and the notes. The interpretation of this Fragment is not easy.
Moshelm misunderstood one passage so far as to affirm that Marcus promised rewards to those who denounced the Christians; an interpretation -which is entirely falsi'. Melito calls the Christian religion " our philosophy," which began among barbarians (the Jews), and flourished among the Roman subjects in the time of Augustus, to the great advantage of the empire, for from that time the power of the Romans grew great and glorious.
He says that the emperor has and will have as the successor to Augustus' power the good wishes of men, if he will protect that philosophy which grew up with the empire and began with Augustus, which philosophy the predecessors of Antoninus honored In addition to the other religions.
He further says that the Christian religion had suffered no harm since the time of Augustus, but on the contrary had enjoyed all honor and respect that any man could desire. Nero and Domitian, he says, were alone persuaded by some malicious nun t<- calumniate the Christian religion, and this was the origin of the false charges against the Christians.
But this was corrected by the emperors who immediately preceded Antoninus, who often by their rescripts reproved those who attempted to trouble the Christians. Hadrian, Antoninus' grandfather, wrote to many, and among them to Fundanus the governor of Asia.
Antoninus Plus, when Marcus was associated with him in the empire, wrote to the cities that they must not trouble the Christians; among others, to Unpeople of Larlssa, Thessalonlca, the Athenians, and all the p. 25cutions. The fact of being a Christian was now a crime and punished, unless the accused denied their religion. Then come the persecutions at Smyrna, which some modern critics place in A. d. 167, ten years before the persecution of Lyon. The governors of the provinces under M.
Antoninus might have found enough even in Trajan's rescript to warrant them in punishing Christians, and the fanaticism of the people would drive them to persecution, even if they were unwilling. But besides the fact of the Christians rejecting all the heathen ceremonies, we must not forget that they plainly maintained that all the heathen religions were false.
The Christians thus declared war against the heathen rites, and it is hardly necessary to observe that this was a declaration of Greeks. Melito concluded thus: "We are persuaded that thou who hast about these things the same mind that they had, nay rather one much more humane and philosophical, wilt do all that we ask thee." — This Apology was written after a.d. 169, the year in which Verus died, for it speaks of Marcus only and his son Commodus.
According to Melito's testimony, Christians had only been punished for their religion in the time of Nero and Domitian, and the persecutions began again in the time of M. Antoninus, and were founded on his orders, which were abused, as he seems to mean. He distinctly affirms ''that the race of the godly is now persecuted and harassed by fresh imperial orders in Asia, a thing which had never happened before. But we know that all this is not true, and that Christians had been punished in Trajan's time.
p. 26hostility against the Roman government, which tolerated all the various forms of superstition that existed in the empire, and could not consistently tolerate another religion, which declared that all the rest were false and all the splendid ceremonies of the empire only a worship of devils.
If we had a true ecclesiastical history, we should know how the Roman emperors attempted to check the new religion ; how they enforced their principle of finally punishing Christians, simply as Christians, which Justin in his Apology affirms that they did, and I have no doubt that he tells the truth ; how far popular clamor and riots went in this matter, and how far many fanatical and ignorant Christians — for there were many such — contributed to excite the fanaticism on the other side and to imbitter the quarrel between the Roman government and the new religion.
Our extant ecclesiastical histories are manifestly falsified, and what truth they contain is grossly exaggerated ; but the fact is certain that in the time of M. Antoninus the heathen populations were in open hostility to the Christians, and that under Antoninus' rule men were put to death because they were Christians.
Eusebius, in the preface to his fifth book, remarks that in the seventeenth year of Antoninus' reign, in some parta of the world, the persecution of the Christians became more violent, and that it proceeded
24 mOGRAPIIICAL SKETCH. really not from the emperor, the Christians entreat him not to give them up to their enemies.1 We conclude from this that there were at least imperial rescripts or constitutions of M. Antoninus which were made the foundations of these perse- 1 Eusebius, lv. 26; and Routh's Reliquiae Sacrac, vol. I. and the notes. The interpretation of this Fragment is not easy.
Moshelm misunderstood one passage so far as to affirm that Marcus promised rewards to those who denounced the Christians; an interpretation -which is entirely falsi'. Melito calls the Christian religion " our philosophy," which began among barbarians (the Jews), and flourished among the Roman subjects in the time of Augustus, to the great advantage of the empire, for from that time the power of the Romans grew great and glorious.
He says that the emperor has and will have as the successor to Augustus' power the good wishes of men, if he will protect that philosophy which grew up with the empire and began with Augustus, which philosophy the predecessors of Antoninus honored In addition to the other religions.
He further says that the Christian religion had suffered no harm since the time of Augustus, but on the contrary had enjoyed all honor and respect that any man could desire. Nero and Domitian, he says, were alone persuaded by some malicious nun t<- calumniate the Christian religion, and this was the origin of the false charges against the Christians.
But this was corrected by the emperors who immediately preceded Antoninus, who often by their rescripts reproved those who attempted to trouble the Christians. Hadrian, Antoninus' grandfather, wrote to many, and among them to Fundanus the governor of Asia.
Antoninus Plus, when Marcus was associated with him in the empire, wrote to the cities that they must not trouble the Christians; among others, to Unpeople of Larlssa, Thessalonlca, the Athenians, and all the MARCUS AUBELIUS ANTONINUS. 25 cutions. The fact of being a Christian was now a crime and punished, unless the accused denied their religion. Then come the persecutions at Smyrna, which some modern critics place in A. d. 167, ten years before the persecution of Lyon. The governors of the provinces under M. Antoninus might have found enough even in Trajan's rescript to warrant them in punishing Christians, and the fanaticism of the people would drive them to persecution, even if they were unwilling. But besides the fact of the Christians rejecting all the heathen ceremonies, we must not forget that they plainly maintained that all the heathen religions were false. The Christians thus declared war against the heathen rites, and it is hardly necessary to observe that this was a declaration of Greeks. Melito concluded thus: "We are persuaded that you who have about these things the same mind that they had, nay rather one much more humane and philosophical, will do all that we ask you." — This Apology was written after a.d. 169, the year in which Verus died, for it speaks of Marcus only and his son Commodus. According to Melito's testimony, Christians had only been punished for their religion in the time of Nero and Domitian, and the persecutions began again in the time of M. Antoninus, and were founded on his orders, which were abused, as he seems to mean. He distinctly affirms ''that the race of the godly is now persecuted and harassed by fresh imperial orders in Asia, a thing which had never happened before." But we know that all this is not true, and that Christians had been punished in Trajan's time.
26 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. hostility against the Roman government, which tolerated all the various forms of superstition that existed in the empire, and could not consistently tolerate another religion, which declared that all the rest were false and all the splendid ceremonies of the empire only a worship of devils.
If we had a true ecclesiastical history, we should know how the Roman emperors attempted to check the new religion ; how they enforced their principle of finally punishing Christians, simply as Christians, which Justin in his Apology affirms that they did, and I have no doubt that he tells the truth ; how far popular clamor and riots went in this matter, and how far many fanatical and ignorant Christians — for there were many such — contributed to excite the fanaticism on the other side and to imbitter the quarrel between the Roman government and the new religion.
Our extant ecclesiastical histories are manifestly falsified, and what truth they contain is grossly exaggerated ; but the fact is certain that in the time of M. Antoninus the heathen populations were in open hostility to the Christians, and that under Antoninus' rule men were put to death because they were Christians.
Eusebius, in the preface to his fifth book, remarks that in the seventeenth year of Antoninus' reign, in some parta of the world, the persecution of the Christians became more violent, and that it proceeded
No commentary for this page under the selected tracks.
There is commentary on page 1.