It was only in the slow course of time that the intrinsic incompatibility of the principles of Christianity and of the ideals of the Empire became obvious, (a) Christian theology came into collision with the confused polytheism of the Empire ; (i) Christianity as a personal religion conflicted with the collective or national religions of the Empire, (c) The lofty ethical ideal of Christianity, on its two sides of holiness and love, was antagonistic to paganism, on its two sides of worldliness and selfishness. The conflict between the two ideals grew in intensity as the truth of Christianity was unfolded in credal statement and moral character, for the ideals of the Empire were visible in the customs and practices of society. Christianity could not be itself without giving offence to the
Empire. In view of this intrinsic incompatibilitj', it wa.s inevitable that the Empire should attempt to put down Christianitj', or that Christianity should replace the ideals of the Empire by ita own ; but such a substitution of ideals is im- possible on a national scale, for Christianity works ujion society through the individual. There was a third alternative. The Empire and Christianity might come to an understanding lij' effecting a compromise of ideals. It is obvious that the Christianity which was adopted by the Empire was not the pure religion and uiidefiled of the Gospels and Epistles. The Roman Empire did not adopt a policy of persecution from the commence- ment. The attitude of Rome towards Christianity was foreshadowed in the attitude of Gallio to the arraignment of the Christian evangelists by their Jewish adversaries. Rome cared for none of these things. Christianity was simply a religious con- troversy within Juclaism, and for a considerable period no danger to the Empire was suspected. It was not of sufficient importance for historians like Tacitus (.dnn, xv. 44) and Suetonius (CYaMrfm*, 25) to ])ay any serious attention to it. They dis- missed it in a few contemptuous words as a ' pes- tilent ' or ' magical ' superstition. The desperate efforts which the Jews made to involve Christians in a charge of high treason prove that Rome would consider only the political possibilities of the new religion. But it soon became clear that Christi- anity was distinct from Judaism and even antagon- istic to it. The violent opposition which the Jews oH'ered to the new movement was sufficient evi- dence that Christianity was not an oHshoot of Judaism. It was also equally evident that Christi- anity inherited many of the outstanding character- istics of Judaism, especially its exclusiveness and intolerance — in other words, its claim to be the religion. Rome had recognized this peculiar feature of Judaism, and had made allowance for it, in the interest of peace and order, and also on the ground of its being an old national religion. Rome paid great deference to ancestral faiths ; in one sense the Imperial religion — apart from the worship of the Emperor — was a congeries of national cults.
Even when Christianity was seen to be an inde- pendent movement, Gentile as much as Jewish, it was for a time beneath Imperial notice. Persecu- tions of a kind there were from the time of Nero (A.D. 54-68), but they were not decreed by the Imperial authorities. They were isolated occur- rences, and generally the outcome of popular indignation aroused by local causes : and as Roman officials generally shared the popular hatred of Christians, they were not too careful to quell outbreaks of violence on the part of enraged mobs in various towns. The words of Suetonius — 'Juda?os impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit ' [viz. Claudius]— do not refer to the expulsion of Christians from Rome on account of their Christianity. The historian makes a blunder- ing reference to unseemly controversies among the Jews of the city with regard to the claim made by Christians that Jesus was the Messiah. They w'ere banished not because they had embraced the gospel, but as disturbers of the peace.
7. Persecution of Christians by the Roman Empire. — The persecution of Christians in the time of Nero (A.D. 54-68) is a noteworthy example of the cruel treatment meted out to them in ditt'erent parts of the Empire, with this difference, that the outbreak in Rome was due to the in- stigation of the Emperor, whereas similar violences elsewhere were possible through the connivance of the Imperial officials. The general hatred of Christians accounts for the readiness with which the populace accepted Nero's diabolical insinuation
PERSECUTION
PERSECUTION
179
that the Cliristi:ni.s were tlie uriyinators of the disastrous lire wliich deiiiolished iJuitions of tho city. We have already referreil to tlie superstitions fears of the masses. Cahiinities were evidence of the wrath of the gods, and it was a common l)elief that the .atheism of the Cliristians was one of the chief causes of misfiutunes. TortuUian has summed up the popular .altitude in the well-known words, 'They think the Christians to blame for every public calamity, for every loss that alllicts the people. If the Tiber rises to the walls, if the Nile does not rise over the lields, if the sky gives no rain, if the eartli quakes, if there is famine or plague, immediately the shout is raised, " To the lions with the Christians ! " ' * The words were written at a much later period, but they were true of the popular feeling from the beginning. W hen it was necessary to assuage the anger of the gods, victims were selected whose death gave as much satisfac- tion to the persons who ottered them as to the deities. It is evident that Nero when he realized the state of things turned popular attention from himself by fixing it on the Christian community. It was an astute move, for it was currently rumoured that Christians looked forward to the dissolution of the present order of things. Peter gave expression to the current belief when he wrote : ' The heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall be dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are tlierein will be burned up ' (2 P 3'"). Such instances of mob law are a lurid reflexion on the administration of justice, even in the heart of the Empire. But it may be urged that Nero is too exceptional a case to use for purposes of generalization. It is this outbreak of ferocity at the instigation of the Emperor that accounts for the marked difl'erence of tone between some of the Epistles, e.g. Ro 13', 2 Th 2'', 1 P 2", and the Apocalypse, where Rome is ' the woman drunken with the blood of the s.aints and with the blood of tlie martyrs of Jesus' (Rev 17^).