It ie further highly improbable that any other of the apoetlee properly ao called had planted it. For not only are there no traces of any tradition connecting it with any apoetlee but Peter and Pa.ul, but also the absence of allusion to any apostle in St. Paul's Epistle ie strongly against the supposi- tion. It is true that St. Paul's original agreement with Jamee, Cephas, and John (Gal. ii. 9), and hie a.vowed principle of not building on any other man's foundation (eh. xv. 20; 2 Cor. x. 13--16), cannot properly be preeeed ae affording a conclusive argument. For if his way of addressing the Roman Ohurch be considered, it will be seen that he carefully avoids 88 suming personal jurisdiction over it, such ae we find him distinctly claiming over Churches of his own foundation. In virtue of hie general apostleship to the Gentiles, he is bold to admonish and demand a hearing; but he does not propose in hie letter to take the reins, or set things in order among them when he comes, but rather to be "filled with their company " with a view to mutual refreshment and edification, during a. short stay with them on hie way to Spa.in. Such a mode of address, accompanying a doctrinal treatise meant doubtless £or the edification, not of the Romans only, but of the Church a.t large, is consistent with the supposition of even an apostle having first founded the Church addressed. Still, £or the reasons above given, a.ny personal agency of any of the apostles themselves in the first planting of the Roma.n Church is, to say the least, highly improbable. Who had first planted it we have no means of determining. There a.re many possibilities. The large number of people from a.II parts of the empire who resorted to Rome woni.d be likely to include some C~tians; and wherever believers went, they preached the gospel "Strangers from Rome" were present at Pentecost, a.nd some of them may have been con- verted, and so, having, perhaps, partaken of the Pentecost.a.I gift, carried the gospel to Rome. Among those who were scattered. a.broad after the martyrdom of Stephen, and "went everywhere preaching the Word," some may have gone to Rome. For though in Acts viii. 1 they a.re said only to have been scattered through the regions of J udrea and Samaria, so as to lead up to the account of Philip's preaching in S&maria, yet some of them are mentioned afterwards as travelling as far as Ph<Bnice and Cyprus and Antioch, and there preaching; and others may have travelled a.s fur as Rome. Further, though we have seen sufficient reason for concluding that no apostle, properly so ca.Iled, had visited Rome, yet evangelists and persons endowed with prophetic gifts may possibly have been sent from the com- pany of the apostles. Among the Christians at Rome greeted in the Epistle a.re Andronious a.nd Junie. (or Junie.a), "of note a.mong the apostles," who had been in Christ before St. Paul. These may be supposed to have belonged to the oirole of the twelve, and ma.y have been instrumental in planting the gospel in Rome. Again, among others saluted, se,eral are spoken of as known to St. Paul elsewhere, and fellow-workers with him, so INTRODUCTION TO
tb.t. some of hie own lllJBociatee had evidently contributed to the result; among whom were notably Aquila and Priscilla., in whose houso a. congrega.- tion llllllembled (eh. xvi. 5). In fact,. from ma.ny sources, a.nd through va.rious 1lle&DII, Ohristia.nity Wllll likely to get an early footing e.t Rome; a.nd it would have been rather remarkable if it ha.d. not been so. Te.oitns, it may be obearved, testifies to the fa.et; for, speaking of the Neronian persecution (.1..n. 64), he says of the Christiane, " Auctor nominis ejus Ohristns, Tiberio imperit&nte, per procura.torem Pontium Pile.tum eupplicio e.dfeotus erat : repressaque in pnesens exitia.bilis superstitio rursus erumpebe.t, non modo per Judaea.m, originem ejus ma.Ii, sed per Urbem etiam, quo cuncte. undiqne &trooia. ant pudenda. confl.nunt celebra.ntnrque" (' Ann.,• xv. 44). This implies a.n ea.rly as well as extensive sprea.d of Christianity in Rome.
§ 5. EXTENT 01' RoJU.N CHURCH. Against the supposition, which is thus probable, and which the Epistle confirms, of the Christi&DS in Rome being at that time numerous or important, has been alleged the fact that, when St. Paul actually arrived there, "the chief of the Jews" whom he called to him seem to have known little about them. They only say of them contemptuously, " As con- cerning this sect, we know that everywhere it is spoken age.inst,. (Acts xrriii. 22). But this really proves nothing as to the actual extent or con- dition of the Church at Rome. It only shows that it was apart from the synagogue, e.nd that the members of the le.tter scouted it. Their words only express the prevalent prejudice age.inst the Christians, such e.s Tacitns intimates when he says, "Quos per fl.agitia. invisos, vulgus Christianos ,ppellabe.nt," a.nd when he speaks of their religion as "eritie.bilis super- ,rtitio;" and, at any rate, notoriety is implied, from which extent may be inferred.. Bodies of men a.re not usne.lly " everywhere spoken against" till they have atta.ined a position which is felt. Further, what is said in Acts :n:viii. of St. Paul's intercourse with the Christians themselves when he went ta Rome suggests the idea. of a numerous and zealous community rather than the contrary. Even at Puteoli, before reaching Rome, he found bretmen, who entertained him for a week; and at Appii forum Christians ea.me from Rome to meet him, so that he thanked God, and took courage (A.clB :a:viii. 13-15).
§ 6. 0BG.UrIZATIOB 01' RolUN CHURCH,
The Church at Home being supposed to have grown up through various a.genci.es, and not to ha.ve been form.ally constituted e.t first by any apostle, the question hae been ra.ised whether it was likely to possess, at the time of the writing of the Epistle, a regular ministry of presbyters, e.s other Ob:urohes did, so as to be fully organized. There is no conclnsivo reason against the suppoRition: though in the a.dmonitions 11-nd greetings of the THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. vii