who refused to wear a military chaplet, as savouring of idolatry and inconsistent with the Christian profession. In this treatise, he asserts the unlawfulness of a military life and of wearing a soldier's chaplet. The Christian ought rather to wear his Master's crown of thorns, in order thereby to obtain the crown of life.

It is related of a young man in Numidia, before the persecution. under Dioclesian, A. D. 296, that he refused to take the military oath: "Strike off my head; I fight not for this world, but for my God." "Who has advised you thus?" said the proconsul. "My heart and He that called me." "But you must take the soldier's badge." "I bear the badge of Christ, my God." "I will soon send you, then, to your God." "Would that you might; but that will reflect no honour upon you." The proconsul then attempted by force to invest him with the soldier's badge. "I cannot wear it; I have taken the badge of the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, whom you know not, who died for our salvation, an offering for our sins. Him we Christians serve as the Prince of life, the Captain of our salvation." "Enlist in this service, that you die not miserably." "I shall not die; my name is with the Lord." "But there are Christians in Cæsar's army, good and faithful soldiers." "They know what they ought to do, and must judge for themselves; but I am a Christian, and cannot consent to do evil." "What evil do soldiers commit?" "You know well what they do: but I shall not die; when I leave this world, my soul will be with the Lord." As he received the sentence of death, he exclaimed, "God be praised!" and begged his father, standing by, to present the military uniform which he had prepared for him to his own executioner.

The military service often compelled the Christian soldier either to disobey orders or to violate his conscience by sacrificing to false gods, or by turning his arms against his fellow-christians in times of persecution. Under Caius Galerius Maximian, son-in-law of Dioclesian, a legion of six hundred and sixty-six men, on being required to sacrifice to the gods and turn their arms against the Christians, quietly withdrew and remonstrated. Upon which every tenth man throughout the legion was put to death without resistance. The commander of the legion, with his sword dyed in the blood of his soldiers who had been slain at his side, exhorted the survivors to remain steadfast, and these, in answer to the renewed order of Cæsar, acknowledged their readiness to obey where the laws of Christianity did not forbid, and concluded by saying,

"Know thou that we all are Christians: our bodies we yield subject to your power; our souls we reserve entire for Christ, the Author and the Saviour of them."

Enraged by this reply, he immediately ordered a second decimation. The surviving officers then returned answer: “We, O emperor, are your soldiers, but withal the servants of God. To you we owe military life; to him, innocency. From you we have received wages for our service; from him, our being and our lives. We cannot obey the emperor so as to deny God, the Author of our lives and of yours. It is not despair that sustains our resolution. We have arms, but offer no resistance, choosing rather to die innocent than live rebellious and revengeful. If you appoint us to greater sufferings, we are ready for them. Christians ourselves, we cannot persecute them that are also Christians. The bravery of our legion you must acknowledge. We lay down our arms, and bend our necks to the sword of the executioner. He will find our right hands disarmed, but our breasts armed with a true Christian faith." They were immediately devoted to death, and died without resistance, with their arms at their feet.

§ 7. OF UNDESIGNED ENCOMIUMS FROM ENEMIES.

THIS rapid and imperfect sketch of the social and civil character of the primitive Christians may, with propriety, be concluded with the tribute undesignedly paid to them by two Roman emperors.

Alexander Severus, A. D. 222-235, observing the excellence of their conduct in every condition of public and private life, on inquiring into their religion, had a bust of Christ placed in his private chapel among the images of others whom he honoured as superior beings; and learning that one of the ruling principles of Christians was to do to others as they would that others should to them, he was so charmed with it that he was continually repeating it, and caused it to be written upon the walls of his palace and upon all his public buildings, that, in every street and on all occasions, his subjects might be admonished by this admirable precept.1 The emperor Julian, A. D. 362, one of the bitterest enemies of Christians, unconsciously commended them for their charity, in supporting, not only their own poor, but all who needed assistance; for their hospitality, for their attentions to the sick, the infirm, the aged; and for their pious care for the dead, as well as for their brotherly love, and their purity of character, so opposed to pagan

licentiousness. The imitation of these virtues Julian urges upon Arsacius, the supreme pontiff of Galatia, as the most efficient means of promoting paganism; and then adds, "Establish hospitals in every town for the care of the sick and the entertainment of strangers, and for extending the cares of humanity to all that are poor. I will furnish the means. For it is a shame for us that no Jew ever begs, and that the impious Galileans should not only keep their own poor, but even many of ours, whom we leave to suffer." To another, he writes thus: "The impious Galileans, having observed that our priests neglect the poor, have applied themselves to that work; and have gained many from us, as they who steal our children attract them by offering cakes; and so they have led our faithful ones into infidelity, by commencing with charity, hospitality, and the service of tables; for they have many names for these works, which they practise abundantly." This testimony is of great value in showing the customs of Christians in those days, and the nature of that teaching by example which not only commanded the admiration of an enemy, but compelled an emperor to follow it in pure defence, lest the hearts of his subjects should be stolen from him.

Reference has already been made to the persuasive power of women in the conversion of men. This engaged the notice of the enemies of the Christian religion. The men of Antioch, admiring the splendid talents of Chrysostom, bitterly lamented that his mother had alienated him from them. Libanius, his instructor, reproached the Antiochians of rank, because they suffered themselves to be governed by those whom they ought to govern-meaning their Christian wives and mothers.

The same orator, contemporary also with Julian, in the fourth century, apologizes for those Christians who, after their apostasy to paganism, again returned to Christianity, by ascribing this perversion, as he regarded it, to the influence of Christian women at home. "They are recalled by the women at home, and by their tears are again withdrawn from the altars of the gods." It was such examples of the constraining power of female piety which extorted from pagan enemies the reluctant encomium already cited: "What women these Christians have!"-a noble testimony to the refining, elevating power of woman, and the most beautiful tribute to the gentle, persuasive influence of her piety, which all antiquity, heathen or Christian, furnishes.

CHAPTER VI.

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH, AND THE PECULIARITIES OF THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.

THE first formation of the Christian church was essentially different from that which it afterwards assumed; so that the history of the constitution of the church embraces two epochs, in which the primitive and the episcopal constitution of the church appear in direct contrast with each other. These two opposite systems of church government must be carefully distinguished in all archæological inquiries into the government, offices, and religious rites of the church. But, preparatory to a right understanding of the constitution of the primitive church, we must take into view the Christian idea of a universal spiritual priesthood.

§ 1. OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANS.

THE grand characteristic of the Christian religion, in distinction from the Jewish-of the religion of the New Testament contrasted with that of the Old Testament-was, that it utterly excluded all idea of a mediating priesthood in the worship of God. When the new and nobler order of the Christian dispensation began, the veil was rent which shrouded in mysterious darkness the awful presence of our God; the sacred altar and the consecrated priest, which barred the approach of the suppliant, were put away; Christ himself had in his own person broken down the middle wall of partition between us and our God, abolishing the Jewish ritual of ordinances and commandments which hedged up our way to the mercy-seat, and opening out a free access whereby all might come near with full assurance of hope. Christ, the Prophet and High-priest, had appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, and had entered, not into the holy places made with hands, the figures of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.

Christians, all alike, had accordingly now become-what the Jews

had been, but were no more- -God's chosen people. They were all a "royal priesthood," and might come with equal boldness to his throne of mercy. By virtue of their relations to God, they viewed themselves as a spiritual people consecrated to him. The entire life of all was to be the service of a continual priesthood, a perpetual worship of him in spirit and in truth; a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto him. It was their reasonable service.

Whatever could be done for the service of Christ by the preaching of the gospel and the diffusion of Christianity, or for the edification of believers, was accordingly the duty, not of a select class of Christians alone, but was equally the duty of all, according to the peculiar qualifications and gifts of each.

These natural endowments and qualifications, sanctified by grace, were, in the age of the apostles, supernaturally quickened by peculiar spiritual gifts, which, according to his own ability given unto him, each was required to exercise for the edification of the church. This duty of Christians in the use of their spiritual gifts, the apostle Paul fully expounded to the Corinthian church, (1 Cor. xii. ;) which exposition Neander paraphrases as follows: "Once, when you were heathen and were led blindfold by your priests to dumb idols, ye were as dead and dumb as they. Now that through Christ ye serve the living God, ye no longer serve such guides, drawing you along blindfold by leading-strings; ye yourselves have for a guide the Spirit of God that enlightens you. Ye no longer dumbly follow; he speaks out of you: there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit."

Although the right and the duty implied in the office of a teacher were common to all, it does not follow that all were equally qualified to teach, or that they actually assumed this prerogative. Then, as now, there were different members of the same body; and these members had not all the same office, but each his own peculiar office, according to his ability. They who, by natural ability, by mental culture, or spiritual gifts, were qualified to teach, would give themselves to this work. To this office they were commonly ordained or set apart; and in this manner the office of teacher and of presbyter, elder, or bishop became closely connected and ultimately identified.

This idea that the whole church constituted a spiritual priesthood, that each believer was entitled to exhort, to teach, and to preach, continued for some time in the church, as may appear in the extracts below. But it is important to our present purpose, as an explana