MARTTB
737
MA&TYft
everywhere reserved to those who had actually suf-
fered death for their faith. Heretics and schismatics
put to death as Christians were denied the title of
martyrs (St. Cyprian, *'De Unit,", xiv; St. Augustine,
Ep. 173; Euseb., *'Hist. Eccl.", V, xvi, xia), St.
CVprian lays down clearly the general principle that
"he cannot be a martyr who is not in the Church; he
cannot attain unto the kingdom who forsakes that
which shall reign there." St. Clement of Alexandria
strongly disapproves (Strom., IV, iv) of some here-
tics ^o gave themselves up to the law; they "banish
themselves without being martyrs".*
The orthodox were not permitted to seek martyr- dom. Tertullian, however, approves the conduct of the Christians of a province of Asia who gave them- selves up to the governor, Arrius Antoninus (Ad. Scap., v;. Eusebius also relates with approval the incident of three Christians of Csesarea m Palestine who, in the persecution of Valerian, presented them- selves to the judge and were condemned to death (Hist. Eccl., Vll, xii). But while circumstances might sometimes excuse such a course, it was generjuly held to be imprudent. St. Gregory of Nazianzus stuns up in a sentence the rule to be followed in such cases : it is mere rashness to seek death, but it is cow- ardly to refuse it (Orat. xlii, 5, 6). The example of a Christian of Smyrna named Quintus, who, in the time of St. Polycarp, persuaded several of his fellow be- lievers to declare tnemselves Christians, was a warning of what might happen to the over-zealous: Quintus at the last moment apostatized, though his compan- ions persevered. Breaking idols was condemnea by the Council of Elvira (30i5), which, in its sixtieth canon, decreed that a Christian put to death for such vandalism would not be enrolled as a martyr. Lac- tantius, on the other hand, has only mild censure for a Christian of Nicomedia who suffered martyrdom for tearing down the edict of persecution (De mort. pers., xiii). In one case St. Cyprian authorizes seek- ing martyrdom. Writing to his priests and deacons regarding repentant lapsi who were clamouring to be received oaclc into communion, the bishop after giving general directions on the subject, concludes by saying that if these impatient personages are so eager to get back to the Church there is a way of doing so open to them. "The stru^le is still going forward", he says, "and the strife is waged daily. If they (the lapsi) truly and with constancy repent of what tney have done, and the fervour of their faith prevails, he who cannot be delayed may bo crowned (Ep. xiii).
Legal Basis of the Persecutions. — Acceptance of the national religion in antiquity was an obligation incumbent on all citizens; failure to worship the gods of the State was equivalent to treason. This univer- sally accepted principle is responsible for the various persecutions suffered by Christians before the reign of Constantine; Christians denied the existence of and therefore refused to worship the gods of the state pantheon. They were in consequence regarded as atheists. It is true, indeed, that the Jews also re- jected the gods of Rome, and yet escaped persecution. But the Jews, from the Roman standpoint, had a national religion and a national God, Jehovah, whom they had a full legal right to worship. Even after the destruction of Jerusalem, when the Jews ceased to exist as a nation, Vespasian made no change in their religious status, save that the tribute formerly sent by Jews to the temple at Jerusalem was henceforth to be paid to the Roman exchequer. For some time after its establishment, the Chnstian Church enjoyed the religious privileges of the Jewish nation, but from the nature of the case it is apparent that the chiefs of the Jewish religion would not long permit without protest this state of things. For they abhorred Christ's religion as much as they abhorred its Founder. At what date the Roman authorities had their atten- tion directed to the difference between the Jewish and IX.~47
the Christian religion cannot be determined, but it ap«
pears to be fairly well es>tablishcd that laws proscribing
Christianity were enacted befoi^ the end of the first
centur>\ Tertullian is authority for the statement
that persecution of the Christians was insUiuium Ne-
ronianum — ^an institution of Nero — (Ad nat., i, 7).
The First Epistle of St. Peter also clearly alludes to
the proscription of Christians, as Christians, at the
time it was written (I, St. Peter, iv, 16). Domitian
(81-96) also, is known to have punished with death
Christian members of his own family on the charge of
atheism (Suetonius, "Domitianus", xv). While it is
therefore probable that the formula: " Let there be no
Christians " {Chridiani non sint) dates from the second
half of the first centuiy, yet the earliest clear enact-
ment on the subject of Christianity is that of Trajan
(98-117) in his famous lette|to the younger Pliny, nis
legate in Bithynia.
Pliny had been sent from Rome by the emperor to Restore order in the ProWnce of Bithynia-Pontus. Among the difficulties he encountered in the execution of his commission one of the most serious concerned the Christians. The extraordinarily large number of Christians he found within his iuriscfiction greatly sur- prised him: the contagion of their "superstition", he reported to Trajan, affected not only the cities but even the villages and country districts of the province (Pliny, Ep., x, 96). One consequence of the general defection from the state religion was of an economic order: so many people had become Christians that purchasers were no longer found for the victims that once in great numbers were offered to the gods. Com- plaints were laid before the legate relative to this state of affairs, with the result that some Christians were arrested and brought before Pliny for examination. The suspects were interrogated as to their tenets and those ot them who persisted in declining repeated invitations to recant were executed. Some of the prisoners, however, after first affirming tliat they were Christians, afterwards, when threatened wim punishment, qualified their first admission by saying that at one time they had been adherents of the pro- scribed body but were so no longer. Others again de- nied that they were or ever nad l^een Christians. Having never before had to deal with questions coiw ceming Christians Pliny applied to the emperor for instructions on three points regarding which he did not see his way clearly: first, whether the age of the ac- cused should be taken into consideration in meting out punishment; secondly, whether Christians who renounced their belief should be pardoned; and thirdly, whether the mere profession of Christianity should be regarded as a crime, and punishable as such, independent of the fact of the innocence or guilt of the accused of the crimes ordinarily associatecTwith suc^ profession.
To these inquiries Trajan replied in a rescript which was destined to have the force of law throughout the second century in relation to Christianity. After ap- proving what his representative had already done, the emperor directed that in future the rule to he ob- served m dealing with Christians should be the follow- ing: no steps were to be taken by ma^strates to ascertain who were or who were not Christians, but at the same time, if any person was denounced, and ad- mitted that he was a Christian, he was to be punished — evidently with death. Anonymous denunciations were not to be acted upon, and on the other hand, those who repented of oeing Christians and offered sacrifice to the gods, were to be pardoned. Thus, from the year 112, the date of this document, perhaps even from the reign of Nero, a Christian was ipso facto an outlaw. That the followers of Christ were known to the highest authorities of the State to be innocent of the numerous crimes and misdemeanors attributed to them by popular calumny, is evident from Pliny's testimony to this effect, as well as fraia
