n

pose, many others would join themselves who had a zeal for the prevailing religion. But learned men seem to forget that Pliny himself, our proprætor, was a priest, and that the emperor, to whom he writes, was high-priest, pontifex maximus. We need not, we ought not, to impute to Pliny any thing mean and sordid. He was above such things, which must have been far from his temper. But I think we may reasonably suppose that he was sincerely concerned for the honour of the gods and the priesthood; that he was desirous the sacred solemnities should be upheld in all their splendour, and that the priests should continue to enjoy their usual emoluments and perquisites without diminution. I should think, therefore, that it is not at all unreasonable to suppose that Pliny himself was not a little moved at the above mentioned complaints, when made to him.

Some learned men have of late said that° what Pliny did against the christians was done by him unwillingly, and not without some sort of compulsion. But I cannot discern any the least reason for this persuasion in his letter.

I am unwilling to advance any thing without ground and reason; and therefore I forbear to say that, very probably, the arrival of this proprætor, who was augur in the province, a man well known for his exactness in all the solemnities of the ancient religion, raised great expectations in the minds of many in the province, zealous for the established rites; and encouraged accusations and persecutions against the christians. However, I must say that this severe persecution under Pliny is a strange phenomenon; and would appear still stranger, and almost unaccountable, if it had no encouragement from him.

6

Though great numbers of men had embraced the christian religion, or, as Pliny's expressions are, though the contagion of this superstition had seized many;' he was of opinion that it might be restrained and corrected.' For this end he proposeth that pardon should be granted to those who repent.' And says, it is easy to imagine what numbers of men might' then be gained.'

Every one should judge for himself: but to me it seems

a Cum his sociabat sese innumerabilis varii generis turba, cui superstitiones publicæ quæstui erant, mercatores, qui thura, bestias, aliaque vendebant Deorum cultoribus necessaria, architecti, caupones, aurifices, Act. xix. 25. fabri lignarii, statuarii, sculptores, tibicines, citharœdi, et alii, quibus omnibus dii, corumque ministri, templa, ceremoniæ, dies festi magnas afferebant ad vitam beate ducendam opportunitates. Moshem. ut supr. p. 103.

• Certum est ex hac epistolâ, Plinium ipsum christianos non aggressum fuisse, sed invitum a delatoribus et accusatoribus coactum, ut eos in jus vocaret, et puniret. Moshem. ib. p. 232.

that in all this there is no indication of favour to the christian religion, or good will to the professors of it. I think that Pliny proposes these measures to the emperor, as the most likely to secure the interests of the old religion. He really thought this method the most likely and most effectual to abolish what he calls an absurd superstition,' and to reduce, and gradually extirpate, the professors of it. And I suppose that from our remarks upon his epistle it may appear that Pliny himself had found the benefit of this scheme, and he had too much success in drawing men_off from the open profession of the christian doctrine. The earl of Orrery, p. 431, has already said the same that I now do. For he allows that Pliny expresses a detestation of christianity, calling it amentia, superstitio prava et immodica. And the proposal,' he says, which Pliny made to the emperor, to give room for repentance, seems rather an act of policy than of good nature.'

6

6

Having now gone over this letter, I beg leave to say, it seems to me that there is a remarkable omission. Pliny fails not to tell Trajan that the christians worshipped Christ, as a God,' and that they refused to worship his image. He should also have told Trajan, they assured him, however, that they offered supplications to the God of the universe, for the health and long life of the emperor, and for the peace and prosperity of the empire, and that God would grant him wise counsellors, and faithful servants and officers: and that they were obliged by the rules of their religion so to do.' These things do so often occur in ther ancient apologists, and other christian writers, that it may be reckoned certain, and taken for granted, that some of the christians who pleaded before Pliny, whether Roman citizens or others, did sufficiently assure him of their dutiful respect for the emperor, and other magistrates, and of their love toward all mankind, even enemies as well as others. This one omission alone, so far as I am able to judge, is enough to persuade us there was some defect of equity and candour in Pliny's treatment of the christians.

6

It has been said, that Pliny's letter throughout is an

℗ Oramus etiam pro imperatoribus, pro ministris eorum, ac potestatibus, pro statu seculi, pro rerum quiete, pro morâ finis. Tertull. ap. c. 39. Conf. c. 31. Colimus ergo et imperatorem sic, quomodo et nobis licet, et ipsi expedit, ut hominem a Deo secundum; et, quicquid est, a Deo consecutum, et solo Deo minorem. Itaque et sacrificamus pro salute imperatoris, sed Deo nostro et ipsius, sed quomodo præcepit Deus, purà prece. Non enim eget Deus, conditor universitatis, odoris aut sanguinis alicujus. Ad Scap. c. 2. Vid. et Athenag. Leg. sub fin. et Origen. contr. Cels. 1. 8. et passim.

Apologia enim christianorum est, quod facile patet, totâ Plinii epistolà,

apology for the christians.' If so, is it not also his own condemnation? He had received many testimonies to the christian innocence. These he reports to the emperor. Nor could he do less. In this report the christian principles, worship, and manners, appear in a good light. But then, is not Pliny blameable who inflicted death, and other penalties, upon such men, and that without any express law ?

I am willing to make allowances for prejudices. And I believe that the Supreme Judge, when he shall take the final cognizance of human affairs, will pass an equitable sentence upon all, according to the advantages and disadvantages of their condition in their state of trial. The farther vindication of Pliny I leave to those who are pleased to undertake it. And I am very willing that my readers should observe and consider what is said by such advocates as are favourable to him.

Having done this, I must applaud the steadiness of those Roman citizens, and others in Pontus and Bithynia; who, when interrogated by the proprætor a second and a third time, persevered in their first confession of the name of Christ, unmoved by his fair promises and cruel threatenings. Who can forbear to think that those christians were mindful of what St. Peter had written to them? 1 Ep. iv. ver. 12, to the end.

To them, and other such men, I humbly conceive it is owing that there is now any such thing as virtue in the world. To them, and others like them, it is owing that many great men so apprehensive of inquisitiveness in things of religion, have been at length awakened, and induced to examine, and consider, and also to embrace, the christian doctrine, and then to adorn it by the practice of all the virtues becoming their reasonable nature, and their high stations.

V. We now come to Trajan's Rescript, which is short

quâ calumnias, quibus illi premebantur, convellere studet, et mentem Trajani ad lenitatem et clementiam erga homines, quos ille a Romanorum quidem re ligione alienos, verum sceleris puros cognoverat, inclinare. Moshem. ut supr. p. 147.

The earl of Orrery, in his Preface to the tenth book of Pliny's Epistles, Vol. 2. p. 323, expresseth himself in this manner: Such a correspondence ⚫ between a sovereign and a subject is no less curious than extraordinary. But, if we are to pass an impartial judgment upon the two correspondents, the emperor's epistles will certainly outshine those of Pliny, to which they are answers. The conciseness and sagacity which run through Trajan's style ' and manner of writing, show him an artist, if I may use the expression, in the epistolary science.'

and concise, written in the style best becoming lawgivers: and which is now to be rehearsed by us, with notes and observations.

• You have taken the right method, my Pliny, in your proceedings with those who have been brought before you 'as christians.'

Pliny's proceedings, as I suppose, had been in some respects extraordinary, and unsupported by express law: and yet Trajan declares his approbation of them. And hereby he also ratifies and confirms the proceedings of other governors of provinces, if any of them had acted in a like manner, without express law: as very probably several had.

For it is impossible to establish any one rule that shall hold universally.'

This, as seems to me, relates more especially to Pliny's first question: whether the young and tender, and the 'full grown and robust, ought to be treated all alike.' And Trajan seems to leave this very much to the discretion of governors, to do as they thought best. Accordingly, as we well know, many, in succeeding times, both young people and women, did suffer as christians.

With regard to Pliny's second question, whether 'pardon 'should be granted to those who repent,' he allows of it, if good proof be given of repentance.

t

As to the third question, Trajan peremptorily decides that the name is punishable without any crime annexed. But he says they should not be sought for.'

I shall now recite the very words of this part of the rescript.

They are not to be sought for. If any are brought be'fore you, and are convicted, they ought to be punished.

s 'Actum, quem debuisti,' &c. Actum vocat extraordinariam Plinii quæstionem. Extraordinarium hoc crimen, de quo agebatur, erat. Nulla enim de eo lex certa erat. Trajanus esse etiam debere hoc judicium extraordinarium, hoc est, magistratuum cognitioni et imperio relinquendum esse putat. Balduin. ut supr. p. 63.

t Cum Trajanus simpliciter rescribit, christianos esse puniendos, neque aliam causam pœnæ requirit, satis significat, nomen ipsum puniri. Et Tertullianus in Apolog. ostendit, nihil fuisse, quod in christianis puniretur, præter nomen. Fr. Balduin, ut supr. p. 36. Quæsiverat Plinius, nomen ipsum christianorum, etiamsi flagitiis careat, an flagitia cohærentia nomini punienda sint? Trajanus dum rescribit simpliciter, si deferantur christiani, et arguantur, id est, ejus esse sectæ convincantur, puniendos esse, nec aliam pœnæ causam requirit; quod nomen ipsum debeat puniri, satis indicat. Atque sic confirmat nominis illud prælium, quod præter jus omne et fas sustinuisse fideles, ex queribundo tot veterum ore supra, ad Plinii consultationem, audivimus. Kortholt. ut supr. p. 194.

6

However, he that denies his being a christian, and makes it evident in fact, that is, by supplicating to our gods, though he be suspected to have been so formerly, let him be pardoned upon repentance. But in no case, of any 'crime whatever, may a bill of information be received 'without being signed by him who presents it.' And what follows. This last clause is very reasonable, as will be allowed by all. The rest we must consider.

6

6

As I said just now, Trajan allows pardon to be granted, if good proof be given of repentance; If he makes it evident in fact, by supplicating to our gods.' It has been said by some commentators, that here is a sign of Trajan's modesty, in that he does not add, and by sacrificing to our image;' and that here is a proof of his moderation, in not adding, and by reviling the name of Christ.' But I cannot persuade myself to think that such observations are at all material. Trajan" knew very well that the governors of provinces would not fail to supply those articles, though omitted by him. Trajan approves of Pliny's method, and what had been his, would be the method of other governors, and actually was so, as is well known.

V

Tertullian has ridiculed this decree of Trajan as inconsistent and contradictory. He forbids the christians to be sought for, supposing them to be innocent; and he ' orders them to be punished as guilty. If they are criminal, why should they not be sought for? If they are not to be sought for, why should they not be absolved?'

However, for certain, here is fresh proof of the christians' w innocence. If they had been criminal; if Trajan had not known, and been well satisfied, that they were guilty of no great crimes, he would not have forbid inquiring after them. And since they were guilty of no offences contrary to the peace of society, they should have been protected; and Trajan's rescript should have been very different from what it is. It should have been to this effect: You have well done, my Pliny, to inquire into the principles and conduct • of the christians. As you have detected no crimes com• mitted by them, and you recommend pardon upon repent

" Satis interim sciebat provinciarum præsides hac parte non defore suo officio. Voss. Comment.

▾ Tunc Trajanus rescripsit, hoc genus inquirendos quidem non esse, oblatos vero puniri oportere. O sententiam necessitate confusam! Negat inquirendos, ut innocentes, et mandat puniendos, ut nocentes. Parcit, et sævit. Dissimulat, et animadvertit. Quid temetipsum censurâ circumvenis? Si damnas, cur non et inquiris? Si non inquiris, cur non et absolvis? Ap. cap. 2.

▾ Ex his iterum liquet, nullius criminis reos factos fuisse christianos, nisi deorum minime cultorum. Cleric. ib. n. xiv.