Thoughts Of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus - Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (novels to read for beginners .TXT) 📗

    This Effect: "The Christians Are Attacked By The Jews As If

    They Were Men Of A Different Race,  And Are Persecuted By The

    Greeks; And Those Who Hate Them Cannot Give The Reason Of Their

    Enmity."

 

    [B] And In Eusebius (E.H. Iv. 8,  9). Orosius (Vii. 13) Says

    That Hadrian Sent This Rescript To Minucius Fundanus,  Proconsul

    Of Asia After Being Instructed In Books Written On The

    Christian Religion By Quadratus,  A Disciple Of The Apostles,

    And Aristides,  An Athenian,  An Honest And Wise Man,  And Serenus

    Granius. In The Greek Text Of Hadrian's Rescript There

    Is Mentioned Serenius Granianus,  The Predecessor Of Minucius

    Fundanus In The Government Of _Asia_.

 

    This Rescript Of Hadrian Has Clearly Been Added To The Apology

    By Some Editor. The Apology Ends With The Words: [Greek: Ho

    Philon Tô Oeô,  Touto Genesthô]

 

    [C] Eusebius (E.H. Iv. 12),  After Giving The Beginning Of

    Justinus' First Apology,  Which Contains The Address To T.

    Antoninus And His Two Adopted Sons,  Adds: "The Same Emperor

    Being Addressed By Other Brethren In Asia,  Honored The Commune

    Of Asia With The Following Rescript." This Rescript,  Which Is

    In The Next Chapter Of Eusebius (E.H. Iv. 13) Is In The Sole

    Name Of Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus Armenius,

    Though Eusebius Had Just Before Said That He Was Going To Give

    Us A Rescript Of Antoninus Pius. There Are Some Material

    Variations Between The Two Copies Of The Rescript Besides The

    Difference In The Title,  Which Difference Makes It Impossible

    To Say Whether The Forger Intended To Assign This Rescript To

    Pius Or To M. Antoninus.

 

    The Author Of The Alexandrine Chronicum Says That Marcus,  Being

    Moved By The Entreaties Of Melito And Other Heads Of The

    Church,  Wrote An Epistle To The Commune Of Asia In Which He

    Forbade The Christians To Be Troubled On Account Of Their

    Religion. Valesius Supposes This To Be The Letter Or Rescript

    Which Is Contained In Eusebius (Iv. 13),  And To Be The Answer

    To The Apology Of Melito,  Of Which I Shall Soon Give The

    Substance. But Marcus Certainly Did Not Write This Letter Which

    Is In Eusebius,  And We Know Not What Answer He Made To Melito.

 

In The Time Of M. Antoninus The Opposition Between The Old And The New

Belief Was Still Stronger,  And The Adherents Of The Heathen Religion

Urged Those In Authority To A More Regular Resistance To The Invasions

Of The Christian Faith. Melito In His Apology To M. Antoninus Represents

The Christians Of Asia As Persecuted Under New Imperial Orders.

Shameless Informers,  He Says,  Men Who Were Greedy After The Property Of

Others,  Used These Orders As A Means Of Robbing Those Who Were Doing No

Harm. He Doubts If A Just Emperor Could Have Ordered Anything So Unjust;

And If The Last Order Was Really Not From The Emperor,  The Christians

Entreat Him Not To Give Them Up To Their Enemies.[A] We Conclude From

This That There Were At Least Imperial Rescripts Or Constitutions Of M.

Antoninus Which Were Made The Foundation Of These Persecutions. 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

Story 1 (Biographical Sketch Of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus) Pg 11

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 Maintain 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 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.

 

    [A] Eusebius,  Iv. 26; And Routh's Reliquiae Sacrae,  Vol. I,  And

    The Notes. The Interpretation Of This Fragment Is Not Easy.

    Mosheim Misunderstood One Passage So Far As To Affirm That

    Marcus Promised Rewards To Those Who Denounced The Christians;

    An Interpretation Which Is Entirely False. 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 Men To 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 Pius,

    When Marcus Was Associated With Him In The Empire,  Wrote To The

    Cities That They Must Not Trouble The Christians; Among Others,

    To The People Of Larissa,  Thessalonica,  The Athenians,  And All

    The 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.

 

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

Story 1 (Biographical Sketch Of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus) Pg 12

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

Embitter 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 Parts Of The World,  The Persecution Of The Christians Became More

Violent,  And That It Proceeded From The Populace In The Cities; And He

Adds,  In His Usual Style Of Exaggeration,  That We May Infer From What

Took Place In A Single Nation That Myriads Of Martyrs Were Made In The

Habitable Earth. The Nation Which He Alludes To Is Gallia; And He Then

Proceeds To Give The Letter Of The Churches Of Vienna And Lugdunum. It

Is Probable That He Has Assiged The True Cause Of The Persecutions,  The

Fanaticism Of The Populace,  And That Both Governors And Emperor Had A

Great Deal Of Trouble With These Disturbances. How Far Marcus Was

Cognizant Of These Cruel Proceedings We Do Not Know,  For The Historical

Records Of His Reign Are Very Defective. He Did Not Make The Rule

Against The Christians,  For Trajan Did That; And If We Admit That He

Would Have Been Willing To Let The Christians Alone,  We Cannot Affirm

That It Was In His Power,  For It Would Be A Great Mistake To Suppose

That Antoninus Had The Unlimited Authority Which Some Modern Sovereigns

Have Had. His Power Was Limited By Certain Constitutional Forms,  By The

Senate,  And By The Precedents Of His Predecessors. We Cannot Admit That

Such A Man Was An Active Persecutor,  For There Is No Evidence That He

Was,[A] Though It Is Certain That He Had No Good Opinion Of The

Christians,  As Appears From His Own Words.[B] But He Knew Nothing Of

Them Except Their Hostility To The Roman Religion,  And He Probably

Thought That They Were Dangerous To The State,  Notwithstanding The

Professions,  False Or True,  Of Some Of The Apologists. So Much I Have

Said,  Because It Would Be Unfair Not To State All That Can Be Urged

Against A Man Whom His Contemporaries And Subsequent Ages Venerated As A

Model Of Virtue And Benevolence. If I Admitted The Genuineness Of Some

Documents,  He Would Be Altogether Clear From The Charge Of Even Allowing

Any Persecutions; But As I Seek The Truth And Am Sure That They Are

False,  I Leave Him To Bear Whatever Blame Is His Due.[C] I Add That It

Is Quite Certain That Antoninus Did Not Derive Any Of His Ethical

Principles From A Religion Of Which He Knew Nothing.[D]

 

    [A] Except That Of Orosius (Vii. 15),  Who Says That During The

    Parthian War There Were Grievous Persecutions Of The Christians

    In Asia And Gallia Under The Orders Of Marcus (Praecepto Ejus),

    And "Many Were Crowned With The Martyrdom Of Saints."

 

    [B] See Xi. 3. The Emperor Probably Speaks Of Such Fanatics As

    Clemens (Quoted By Gataker On This Passage) Mentions. The

    Rational Christians Admitted No Fellowship With Them. "Some Of

    These Heretics," Says Clemens,  "Show Their Impiety And

    Cowardice By Loving Their Lives,  Saying That The Knowledge Of

    The Really Existing God Is True Testimony (Martyrdom),  But That

    A Man Is A Self-Murderer Who Bears Witness By His Death. We

    Also Blame Those Who Rush To Death; For There Are Some,  Not Of

    Us,  But Only Bearing The Same Name,  Who