rebelled against the emperor Verus, and was slain. In a short time afterwards, Clodius Albinus in one part of the world, and Pescenninus Niger in another, rebelled against the emperor Severus, and both were slain likewise. Now suspicion fell, as it always did in these times, if any thing went wrong, upon the Christians, as having been concerned upon these occasions. But Tertullian, in his Discourse to Scapula, tells us that no Christians were to be found in these armies. And yet these armies were extensive. Crassus was master of all Syria with its four legions, Niger of the Asiatic and Egyptian legions, and Albinus of those of Britain; which legions together contained between a third and a half of the standing legions of Rome. And the fact, that no Christians were then to be found in these, is the more remarkable, because, according to the same Tertullian, Christianity had reached all the places, in which these armies were.

A second species of evidence, as far as it goes, may be collected from expressions and declarations in the works of certain authors of those times. Justin the Martyr and Tatian make distinctions between soldiers

and

and Christians; and the latter says, that the Christians declined even military commands. Clemens of Alexandria gives the Christians, who were contemporary with him, the appellation of "Peaceable," or of "the Followers of Peace;" thus distinguishing them from the soldiers of his age. he says expressly, that "those, who were the followers of peace, used none of the instruments of war."

And

A third species of evidence, which is of the highest importance in this case, is the belief, which the writers of these times had, that the prophecy of Isaiah, which stated that men should turn their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruninghooks, was then in the act of completion.

Irenæus, who flourished about the year 180, affirms that this famous prophecy had been completed in his time; "for the Christians," says he, "have changed their swords and their lances into instruments of peace, and they know not now how to fight." Justin Martyr, who was contemporary with Irenæus, asserted the same thing; which he could not have done if the Christians of his time had engaged in war. "That the

prophecy,"

prophecy," says he, "is fulfilled, you

have good reason to believe; for we, who in times past killed one another, do not now fight with our enemies." And here it is observ

:

able, that the word "fight" does not mean to strike, or to beat, or to give a blow, but to fight as in war* ; and the word "enemy" does not mean a common adversary, or one who has injured us, but an enemy of the State and the sentence, which follows that which has been given, puts the matter out of all doubt. Tertullian, who lived after these, speaks in these remarkable words: "Deny that these (meaning the turning of swords into ploughshares) are the things prophesied of, when you see what you see; or that they are the things fulfilled, when you read what you read: but if read: but if you deny neither of these positions, then you must confess, that the prophecy has been accomplished as far as the practice of every individual is concerned, to whom it is applicable." I might go from Tertullian even as far as Theodoret, if it were necessary, to show that the prophecy in question was con

πολεμέμεν.

† ἐχθρες.

sidered

ŝidered as in the act of completion in those times.

The fourth and last proof will be found in the assertions of Celsus, and in the reply of Origen to that writer. Celsus, who lived at the end of the second century, attacked the Christian religion. He made it one of his charges against the Christians, that they refused in his time to bear arms for the emperor, even in the case of necessity, and when their services would have been accepted. He told them further, that if the rest of the empire were of their opinion, it would soon be overrun by the Barbarians. Now Celsus dared not have brought this charge against the Christians, if the fact had not been publicly known. But let us see whether it was denied by those, who were of opinion that his work demanded a reply. The person, who wrote against him in favour of Christianity, was Origen, who lived in the third century. But Origen, in his answer, admits the fact as stated by Celsus, that the Christians would not bear arms, and justifies them for refusing the practice, on the principle of the unlawfulness of war.

་

And as the early Christians would not

VOL. III.

E

enter

enter into the armies, so there is good ground to suppose that, when they became converted in them, they relinquished their profession. Human nature was the same both in and out of the armies, and would be equally worked upon in this new state of things in both cases. Accordingly we find from Tertullian, in his Soldier's Garland, "that many in his time, immediately on their conversion, 'quitted the military service." We are told also by Archelaus, who flourished under Probus in the year 278, that many Roman soldiers, who had embraced Christianity after having witnessed the piety and generosity of Marcellus, immediately forsook the profession of arms. We are told also by Eusebius, that, about the same time, “Numbers laid aside a military life, and became. private persons, rather than abjure their religion." And here it may not be unworthy of remark, that soldiers, after their conversion, became so troublesome in the army, both on account of their scruples against the idolatrous practices required of the soldiery, and their scruples against fighting, that they were occasionally dismissed the service on these accounts.

SECTION