tradition regarding this emperor, that he caused temples to be dedicated to Christ, is the more improbable, because he entertained very erroneous and unfavourable notions of the Christians.3 Under Antoninus Pius, the Christians were disturbed afresh once and again (138—161). But the reign of Marcus translated into Greek by Eusebius (h. e. iv. 9). Rufinus (hist. eccl. iv. 9) has probably preserved the Latin original (cf. Alexii Symmachi Mazochii disquisitio in Gallandii biblioth. vett. Patr. T. i. p. 728): Exemplum epistolae imperatoris Adriani ad Minucium Fundanum Proconsulem Asiae: Accepi literas ad me scriptas a decessore tuo Serenio Graniano clarissimo viro: et non placet mihi relationem silentio praeterire, ne et innoxii perturbentur, et calumniatoribus latrocinandi tribuatur occasio. Itaque si evidenter provinciales huic petitioni suae adesse valent adversum Christianos, ut pro tribunali eos in aliquo arguant, hoc eis exsequi non prohibeo: precibus autem in hoc solis et acclamationibus uti, eis non permitto. Etenim multo aequius est, si quis volet accusare, te cognoscere de objectis. Si quis igitur accusat, et probat adversum leges quidquam agere memoratos homines, pro merito peccatorum etiam supplicia statues. Illud mehercle magnopere curabis, ut, si quis calumniae gratia quemquam horum postulaverit reum, in hunc pro sui nequitia suppliciis severioribus vindices. Cf. F. Balduinus ad edicta vett. Princip. Rom. de Christianis, p. 72.

3 Lampridius in vita Sev. Alexandri, c. 43. Christo templum facere voluit, eumque inter deos recipere. Quod et Adrianus cogitasse fertur, qui templa in omnibus civitatibus sine simulacris jusserat fieri, quae ille ad hoc parasse dicebatur. On the other hand, Spartianus in vita Hadriani, c. 22: Sacra Romana diligentissime curavit, peregrinea contempsit. Flav. Vopiscus in vita Saturnini, c. 8, from a work of Phlegon, a freedman of Hadrian: Hadrianus Augustus Serviano Cs. S. Aegyptum, quam mini laudabas, Serviane carissime, totam didici levem, pendulam et ad omnia famae momenta volitantem. Illi, qui Serapin colunt, Christiani sunt, et devoti sunt Serapi, qui se Christi episcopos dicunt. Nemo illic archisynagogus Judaeorum, nemo Samarites, nemo Christianorum presbyter, non mathematicus, non haruspex, non aliptes. Ipse ille patriarcha cum Aegyptum venerit, ab aliis Serapidem adorare, ab aliis cogitur Christum. Unus illis Deus nullus est. Hunc Christiani, hunc Judaei, hunc omnes venerantur et gentes, etc.

Dionysius Corinth. ap. Euseb. iv. p. 23, concerning a persecution in Athens, in which Bishop Publius, the predecessor of Quadratus, sufferred. Melito in apolog. ad Marc. Aurel. ap. Euseb. iv. c. 26, § 5: ò dè πατήρ σου—ταῖς πόλεσι περὶ τοῦ μηδὲν νεωτερίζειν περὶ ἡμῶν ἔγραψεν· ἐν οἷς καὶ πρὸς Λαρισσαίους, καὶ πρὸς Θεσσαλονικεῖς καὶ ̓Αθηναίους, καὶ πρὸς πάντας Ἕλληνας. This writing may have given rise to the opinion that the Edictum ad commune Asiae proceeded from Antoninus, although it is manifestly spurious. This edict has been appended by a later hand to Justini apol. i. c. 70, and has been communicated in a different text by Eusebius, iv. c. 13, with a reference to Melito (probably to the above passage, which he misunderstood). All that can be said with plausibility in defence of that edict may be secn in T. G.

Aurelius (161-180) was still more unfavourable to them, for in it the frequent misfortunes that befell the empire caused many outbursts of the popular fury against them; while the emperor himself endeavoured right earnestly to maintain the ancient reputation of the state religion.5 Hence the Christians in Asia. Minor suffered persecutious, to which even Polycarp (167)7 fell a sacrifice, while Justin (166) became a martyr at Rome.s

Hegelmaier comm. in edictum Imp. Ant. P. pro Christianis. Tubing. 1767. 4. The spuriousness of it, before asserted by J. J. Scaliger, Moyle, Trirlby, has been convincingly proved by Is. Haffner de edicto Antonini Pii pro Christianis ad commune Asiae. Argentor 1781, 4. Cf. Eichstädt exercitatio Antoniniana v. in the Annales acad. Jen. i. 286. The edict contains an explanation of the edict issued by Hadrian, which had arisen among the Christians. They believed that the expression adversus leges quidquam agere should not be referred to the exercises of Christian worship, and accordingly this edict was explained as an èπì Th ἡγεμονίαν Ρωμαίων ἐγχειρεῖν. From this, therefore, it followed that who ever accused a Christian as such, without being able to prove against him such a crime, was liable to punishment as a false accuser.

5 Modestinus (Dig. lib. xlviii. Tit. 19, 1. 30): Si quis aliquid fecerit, quo leves hominem animi superstitione numinis terrerentur, Divus Marcus hujusmodi homines in insulam relegari rescripsit. Julii Pauli sententt. receptt. lib. v. Tit. 21, § 2: Qui novas, et usu vel ratione incognitas religiones inducunt, ex quibus animi hominum moveantur, honestiores deportantus, humiliores capite puniuntur. On the religious views of Marcus Aurelius and his sentiments towards the Christians, see Neander's KG. i. i. 177.

Melito in apolog. ad Marc. Aurel. ap Euseb. iv. 26: Tò yàp ovdè πώποτε γενόμενον, νῦν διώκεται τὸ τῶν θεοσεβῶν γένος, καινοῖς ἐλαυνόμενον δόγμασι κατὰ τὴν ̓Ασίαν· οἱ γὰρ ἀναιδείς συκοφάνται καὶ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων ἐρασταὶ, τὴν ἐκ τῶν διαταγματων ἔχοντες ἀφορμὴν, φανερῶς λῃστεύουσι νίκε τωρ καὶ μεθημέραν διαρπάζοντες τοὺς μηδὲν ἀδικοῦντας.—εἰ δὲ καὶ παρὰ σοῦ μὴ εἴη ἡ βουλὴ αὕτη καὶ τὸ καινὸν τοῦτο διάταγμα,—δεόμεθά σου, μὴ περιϊδεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐν τοιαύτῃ δημώδει λεηλασίᾳ. Neander, KG. i. i. 184, is of opinion that this diarayua was certainly issued by the emperor, and is preserved in the Actis Symphoniani apud Ruinart, p. 69. But the very inscription, Aurelius Imp. omnibus administratoribus suis atque rectoribus, throws suspicion on the law there given. The emperor could not open his proclamation with the name Aurelius. See Semisch in the Theol. Studien u. Kritiken, 1835, iv. 934; administratores is not an official designation of the governors, and the emperor could not call them administratores suos. The emperor could have issued no edict against Christians before 177. See Semisch, 1. c. S. 935 ff.

7 Ecclesiae Smyrnensis de martyrio Polycarpi epistola encyclios, ap. Euseb. iv. c. 15, first published by Ussher 1647, in a form somewhat longer, then printed in Cotelerii patr. apost. and in Ruinart. On the relation of the two recensions, see Danz de Eusebio, p. 130 ss.

8

Acta martyrii Justini Philos. apud Ruinart, nova interpretatione,

the recently formed churches at Lyons and Vienne (177)9 suffered most. The supposed miracle of the legio Melitina (kepavvoẞóλos fulminatrix) (174) could have had the less influence on the emperor in favour of the Christians, since so many parties ascribed the merit of it to themselves. 10 Under the barbarous Commodus (180-192), the Christians lived in peace."

annotationibus atque disquisitionibus illustrata ab A. S. Mazochio in Gallandii bibl. vett. patr. T. i. p. 707 ss. Semisch on the year of Justin Martyr's death in the theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1835, iv. 907.

9 Ecclesiarum Viennensis et Lugdunensis epistola ad ecclesias Asiae Phyrygiaeque de passione martyrum suorum, ap. Euseb. h. e. v. 1-3. To what a height the rage of the heathen proceeded, is proved, c. i. § 6, by the violation of the ancient law, de servo in dominum quaeri non licere, Cic. pro Dejot. c. 1. Tacit. anal. ii. 30. Digest. lib. xlviii.

Tit. 18, de quaestionibus.

10 The heathen writers ascribe the phenomenon partly to the conjurations of the Aegyptian Arnuphis (Dio Cassius in excerpt. Xiphilini lxxi. 8. Suidas s. v. 'Ioviavós), partly to the prayer of Marcus (Capitolinus in vita Marc. Aurel. c. 24. Themistius, in orat. xv. p. 191, ed. Harduini). The emperor himself expresses his opinion on a coin on which Jupiter is represented hurling his lightning against the barbarians. lying on the ground (Eckhel numism. iii. 61). Cf. Claudianus de sexto consulatu Honorii, v. 342. Similar occurrences are related of Alexander, Curt. iv. 7, 13; of Marius, Orosii hist. v. 15; and Hosidius, Dio Cass. lx. § 9. The Christians, in like manner, ascribed the merit to their deity, c. Claudius Apollinaris, ap. Euseb. v. 5. Tertulliani ad Scapul. c. 4, and especially Apologet. c. 5. At nos e contrario edimus protectorem, si litterae M. Aurelii-requirantur, quibus illam Germanicam sitim, Christianorum forte militum praecationibus impetrato imbri, discussam contestatur. Qui sicut non palam ab ejusmodi hominibus poenam dimovit, ita alio modo palam dispersit, adjecta etiam accusatoribus damnatione, et quidem tetriore. This writing, falsely ascribed to M. Aurelius, was afterwards annexed to Justin Martyr's apolog. i. In it all accusation of the Christians is forbidden under punishment of death by fire. The same thing is found in Edictum ad commune Asiae, note 3.

τάς.

11 Marcia, concubine of Commodus, was favourable to the Christians (Dio Cassius, lxxii. 4). On the martyrdom of Apollonius, see Euseb. h. e. v. 21; Hieron. catal. c. 42. According to Jerome, he was betrayed by a slave Severus; according to Eusebius, his accuser was immediately put to death, ὅτι μὴ ζῆν ἐξὸν ην κατὰ βασιλικὸν ὅρον τοὺς τῶν τοιῶνδε μηνυM. de Mandajors (histoire de l'acad. des inscript. tom. 18, p. 221) thinks that the slave was put to death as the betrayer of his master, according to an old law renewed by Trajan; but that the occurrence had been misunderstood by the Christians, and had given rise to the tradition which is found in Tertullian, and in the Edictum ad comm. Asiae (see above note 10), that an emperor at this period had decreed the punishment of death for denouncing a Christian. So also Neander, KG. i. i. 201. Certainly such a law against the denunciation of Masters

SECOND CHAPTER.

HERETICS.

§ 43.

JEWISH CHRISTIANS.

(COMP. $ 32,)

Gieseler's Abhandl. v. d. Nazaräern u. Ebioniten, Stäudlin's v. Tzchirner's Archiv. Bd. 4, St. 2, S. 325 ff.

The Jewish Christians in Palestine were severely persecuted by Bar Cochba (§ 38), because they would not attach themselves to him; and they must afterwards have suffered similar oppression as his followers generally, from whom they were not externally distinguished. These circumstances caused many of them, now that a church of heathen converts had been collected in Jerusalem, where they were forbidden to remain, to separate themselves entirely from Judaism, and to join the Christian community.2 Still, however, the different parties of Jewish Chris

by slaves was passed under Nerva (Dio Cassius, lxviii. p. 769. Cf. Capitolinus in vita Pertinac. c. 9. Digest. lib. xlix. tit. 14, 1. 2, § 6): on the contrary, it was also a law (Julius Paulus sententt. receptt. tit. 16, § 4): servo, qui ultro aliquid de domino confitetur, fides non accommodatur (cf. Digest. lib. xlviii. tit. 18, l. 1. § 5 u. § 16, 1. 9, § 1): and though the case of high treason (causa Majestatis) was excepted, yet then the punishment of the slaves also was remitted, if they had made a well grounded accusation (Cod. Justinian. lib. ix. tit. 2, 1. 20). Comp. on all these laws, Gothofredus in comm. ad Cod. Theodos. lib. x. tit. 10, c. 17. J. A. Bachii D. Trajanus, sive de legibus Trajani Imp. Lips. 1747, 8, p. 73 ss. According to these principles of law, therefore, either Apollonius only, or his slave only, could have been put to death, but in no case both. Jerome does not say either that Severus was the slave of Apollonius, or that he was executed; and since Eusebius grounds this execution expressly on a superstitious law, it may have belonged only to the oriental tradition, which may have adduced this instance in support of the alleged law.

1 Justin. apol. i. c. 31. Euseb. in chronico. Hieron. catal. c. 21. 2 Euseb. iv. 5 enumerates down to this time fifteen bishops of Jerusalem belonging to the circumcision. Probably during the dispersion of the church several of them were contemporary. Ibid. c. 6. Cf. Sulpic. Sever. hist. sacr. ii. 31. Militum cohortem (Hadrianus) custodias in

tians continued down to the fourth century, and even later. In what way the Nazarenes and the Gentile Christians still looked upon one another as orthodox, is evident from the explanations of Hegesippus on his journey to Rome, whither he arrived under bishop Articetus (157-161). But since the Gentile Christians looked upon the Nazarenes as weak Christians, on account of their adherence to the Mosaic law,5 the connection between them became always less intimate, the knowledge of their creed more indistinct; but, at the same time, since they did not keep pace with the progressive development of doctrine in the catholic church, the actual difference between the two parties was greater, until at length Epiphanius (about 400) went so far as to include the Nazarenes in his list of heretics (haer. xxix.)

§ 44.

GNOSTICS.

SOURCES. Irenaeus adv. haereses (especially against Valentinus). Tertullianus adv. Marcionem, libb. v. ; de praescriptionibus haereticorum; adv. Valentinianos; contra Gnosticos scorpiacum. Epiphanius adv. haereses. Clemens Alex and Origen in many passages. The work of the neo-Platonic Plotinus #gos Tous YvwσTIxos, i. e. Ennead. ii. lib. 9. (ed. G. A. Heigl. Ratisbonae 1832, 8, Comp. Creuzer in the theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1834, ii. 337. Baur's Gnosis, S. 417.) Isaac de Beausobre histoire critique de Manichée et du Manichéisme. Amsterd. 1734-39, 2 T. 4. J. L. Moshemii de rebus Christian. ante Const. M. comm.

perpetuum agitare jussit, quae Judaeos omnes Hierosolymae aditu arceret. Quod quidem christianae fidei proficiebat, quia tum pacne omnes Christum Deum sub legis observatione credebant. Nimirum id Domino ordinante dispositum, ut legis servitus a libertate fidei atque ecclesiae tolleretur. Ita tum primum Marcus ex gentilibus apud Hierosolymam episcopus fuit.

3 See respecting them above, § 32.

Eusebius, iv. 22. Hegesippus had conferred with many bishops, particularly with Primus in Corinth and Anicetus at Rome, and testifies on this point: ἐν ἑκάστῃ δὲ διαδοχῇ καὶ ἐν ἑκάστῃ πόλει οὕτως ἔχει, ὡς ὁ νόμος κηρύττει καὶ οἱ Προφῆται καὶ ὁ Κύριος. The Nazarenes might find the life of the Gentile Christians conformed to the law, because the latter observed the precepts of Noah, see § 17, note 7, § 26, note 6. An Ebionite would have required the observance of the Mosaic law. Against Baur (Tübinger Zeitschr. 1841, iv. 171) and Schwegler (Montanismus, S. 276), who think that he was an Ebionite, see Schliemann's Clementinen, S. 428.

Justin. dial. cum Tryphone, c. 47.