Whilst Christianity gradually roused the sus- picion of the Emperors and their representatives, it evoked the contempt and the hatred of the people at large. The educated classes looked with contempt upon what Tacitus described as a ' pesti- lent superstition,' and this was the attitude of Rome even to many national cults which, for political reasons, it allowed conquered nations to continue, but especially to the Christian religion. The upper classes, with all their scepticism, would hold in respect the traditional religion of Rome, for everything that was characteristically Roman appealed to their patriotism, but there were many things connected with the Christian religion for which the typical Roman would entertain no feel- ing except contempt. The Christian ideal would not make any appeal to the Roman temperament.
• Workman, Persecution in the Early Church, p. 100. t Octavins, 8.
} Tert. Apol. 31, 42; Ep. ad Diogn. 6-T. VOL. II. — 12
The stoical ideal was more to the taste of the typical Roman. The symbol of Christianity is the Cross, which stands for self-sacrilice and self- renunciation. That would make little iiii|)ression in Rome, where self-assertion and self-aggraiulize- ment were the dominant virtues. The Roman was a horn ruler. He was the superman of the ancient world. The gospel of the Cross would not be likely to make a deep impression on the average Koman. His contempt for it would be greatly increased when the constitution of the churches was observed. For some time they consisted entirely of the lower classes. 'Not many mighty, not numy noble,' were enrolled among the followers of the liazarene (1 Co l*"'-**). It was not simply rhetorical exaggeration on the part of Celsus (t-. A.D. 178) when he wrote: 'If a man be educated let him keep clear of us Christians ; we want no men of wisdom, no men of sense ; we account all such as evil. No ; but if there be one who is in- e.xperienced, or stupid, or untaught, let him come with good heart' ; 'they are weavers, shoemakers, fullers, illiterate clowns.' * ' Men collected from the lowest dregs of the people ; ignorant, credulous women,' is the description given in the Apology of Minucius Felix by the spokesman of paganism.t The upper classes would despise a superstition which seemed to attract only their slaves.
Many so-called persecutions, as we shall see, were popular outbreaks, and reveal the deep hatred which the populace felt towards Christians ; and the reasons for this unpopularity are not far to seek. We can see from Acts that the preaching of the gospel interfered with 'vested interests' and provoked violent opposition. The fortune-tellers in Philippi (Ac 16'^) and the silversnuths in Ephesus (19^) had no ditticulty in creating a riot, but they were careful to conceal their true motive. In Philippi the ringleaders appealed to the patriot- ism of the city, whUst in Ephesus they took advan- tage of the superstitious propensities of the masses.
We have already suggested that Christianity involved a new principle of division. To the Roman who believed in a united Empire, Christi- anity was a divisive force, and as such fraught witli danger to the Empire. In the case of families this was peculiarly distressful. Jesus Christ had already warned His disciples that the preaching of the gospel would produce family quarrels. Christianity would set a man at vari- ance with his father, and the daughter with her mother (Mt 10'°). It was in this connexion that our Lord used the words, ' I came not to send peace, but a sword.' His forecast was literally fulfilled, and this introduction of strife into family life was undoubtedly a fruitful cause of many violent outbreaks ; and the representatives of Roman law and order were not always disposed to quell such disorder, as they shared in this widespread contempt and hatred.
But what roused the hatred of all classes more than anything else was the seemingly super- cilious aloofness of Christians from the life of society. Jesus Christ had said before Pilate that the Kingdom He represented was spiritual, and therefore not a rival kingdom to the Empire which the proconsul represented (Jn IS'"). Paul and Peter maintained that it was possible to be citizens of the Roman Empire and members of the King- dom of Heaven. Nevertheless the two kingdoms sometimes clashed, and their ideals came into violent conflict. The consistent Christian found (hat it was not possible to be a citizen of the Kingdom of which Jesus »as the Founder, and
• Oripen. c. Cetntm, lil. 44, 66.
t .1. H. Newman, Grammar of Assent, London, 1870, p. 462, quoted by W. E. Addis, Christianity and the Roman Empire, \>. 5T.
l:
PERSECUTION
rEKSECUTION
participate in all the activities and frivolities which were enjoined bj' the representatives of the Empire of Cii'sar. Not many years had elapsed when the followers of Jesus perceived the full force of His words — ' because ye are not of the world, therefore the world hatuth you ' (Jn 15'"). The Christian witnessed every day inruiy things which were opposed to tlie gospel which he had embraced. He was in duty bound to stand aloof. He was exhorted to live at peace with all men — 'as much as in you lietk' (Ko 12"). The words involved a signilicant reminder. The modification arose, not from the weakness of human nature, but from the uncompromising nature of the gospel. There were limits beyond which com- pliance with the requirements of the Empire im- plied disloyalty to the Christian ideal. The Christian believer was permitted — and urged — to submit to all the laws of the Empire provided such submission did not involve any violation of the principles of the Kingdom. When the ideals and interests of the two Empires clashed, to doubt on the part of the Christian would be disloyalty, and to falter would be sin. The Edict of Toleration extended freedom of belief and worship, provided respect for the established laws of the Empire was preserved. The gosjiel permitted to the Christian community the right to discharge their duties freely as subjects of Kome provided due respect to the principles and ideals of the Kingdom was preserved. The Christian believer was primarily a citizen of the Kingdom, and only secondarily a subject of the Empire. His first concern was to seek the Kingdom of God. When the Empire transcended these limits which his gospel defined for the Christian, there was no alternative for him but that attitude which Marcus Aurelius described as 'sheer obstinacy.' The Empire of Caesar did not understand religious conviction, or else it would not recognize its right to exist. But con- science has reasons of which political expediency knows nothing. During this dark and tragic period the Christian Church defended ' the libert3- wherewith Christ had made men free.' Christi- anity had brought within men's reach another Kingdom than that of Rome. The Christian believer could see the ' new Jerusalem coming down from above ' — near enough to earth for him to enrol himself as a member of it. It was a Kingdom of superb ideals, and it was a Kingdom that would not perish. Nineveh and Babylon had been buried in tlie dust of the desert. Jerusalem was in ruins. The same fate would overtake Rome. But the Christian ' looked for the city which hath the foundations, whose builder and maker is God' (He 11">). Inspired by this hope the Christian stood aloof from the life of the town in which he lived. He abstained from many of the ordinary duties of citizenship. He was hated for his ' hatred of the human race,' in other words, for his rejection of the aims and ideals of Rome as embodied in society and religion.