The historic martyrs of the primitive church

Front matter

i

~

i

Chapter I The Martyrs Of The Apostolic Age

Our Lord warned His disciples that they would be made to suffer for His sake, as He Himself suffered. He told them that they would be delivered into prisons and brought before kings and rulers, that some of them would be scourged in the synagogues and persecuted from city to city, some of them killed and crucified. He said that they would be hated of all men ; that they would be betrayed by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolk, and friends ; that people would think to serve God by putting them to death. He exhorted them not to fear those who killed the body, and, after that, had no more that they could do. He promised that, when they were brought to trial, He would give them a mouth and wisdom which all their adversaries would be unable to gainsay or resist. He promised that the Holy Ghost Himself should speak by their lips. He said that whosoever confessed Him before men, He in turn would confess them before God and before the angels. The New Testament tells us something of the sufferings by which these predictions of our Saviour A began to be fulfilled in the lives of His earliest followers. It tells us of the dauntless courage of the first martyr, St. Stephen— g

“ As through the rushing shower of stones He saw the open’d heaven.”

It contains St. Paul’s terrible list of the sufferings which he had gone through for the sake of the Gospel— sufferings which were far from ended when he wrote: “Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day have I been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of rivers, in perils of robbers, in perils from my countrymen, in perils from the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in labour and travail, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness.” The New Testament tells us of the beating of the apostles by authority of the Jewish rulers, and of the imprisonment of St. Peter, and of the death of St. James the brother of St. John by the sword of Herod.

It may be one of the joys of the world to come to be allowed to learn more in detail about the history of those great saints than we at present know, and especially about the sufferings by which their devotion to Christ was tested. Fictitious stories about them were made up at a later date, to supply the lack of better information. But a few precious anecdotes have been preserved by good authorities, which deserve to be known by all Christian people. We must here gather up some of those fragments with the same reverence with which the early Christians gathered up the relics of their brethren who were torn for Christ’s sake by wild beasts or burned in the fire.

A very ancient writer records, on the authority of still earlier tradition, a touching incident in the martyrdom of St: James thé son of Zebedee: how the man who had given information against him, and so had brought him to his death, as soon as he heard the apostle’s brave confession of Christ, was deeply moved, and acknowledged himself also to be a Christian. The two men were led away together to execution ; and, as they went, the accuser turned to St. James and asked his forgiveness. The apostle did not immediately answer. It seems as if the Son of Thunder had schooled himself no longer to speak on the impulse of the moment, either in rebuke or in the ardour of love. He “considered for a little while,” we are told, “and then said, ‘Peace be to thee,’ and kissed him.” And so the two were beheaded together.’

The Jewish Christians of Jerusalem preserved among them an account of the martyrdom of St. James’s namesake—‘ the Lord’s brother,” as he is called by St. Paul. It is as follows :—

St. James was a very strict observer of the Jewish law. He had been a Nazarite from childhood, drinking no wine or strong drink, and eating no animal food. No razor ever touched his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, nor use the luxury of the bath. He was always clothed in linen, and never wore wool. So frequent was he in prayer and intercession for his people, that by constant kneeling his knees had become dried up like the knees of a camel. He was known among the Jews as “James the Just”; and they called him by a title, “Oblias,” which seems to have meant

1 Clement of Alexandria in Eusebius, 2st. Zcc/. ii. 9.

“the bulwark of the people.” It is even said, though it is difficult to believe, that because of his sanctity he Was permitted to share the privilege of the priests and to go into the Holy Place in the temple. i

After the death of Festus, the governor of Judza, who is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, and before the arrival of his successor, James and some other Christians were arraigned before the Jewish Sanhedrin, and condemned to be stoned. The crime was, it seems, averted for a while by the action of some of the most respected of the Jews, who secretly appealed to Herod Agrippa and to the incoming Roman governor to stop the action of the high priest. But at a later time an opportunity was found. At the season of the Passover, the scribes and Pharisees carried James up to the “pinnacle of the temple,” and begged him to use his influence with the assembled people not to believe in our Lord. The saying of Jesus about the “door” was in their minds, and they asked James to explain to the multitude “what the door of Jesus is.” “Why do you ask me about the Son of Man?” was the saint’s reply —using in his last moments, like Stephen, that title which elsewhere is only used by our Lord Himself in speaking of Himself—‘ He is sitting in heaven at the right hand of mighty power, and will come on the clouds of heaven.” At this testimony, the believers among the crowd raised the shout of ‘“‘ Hosanna to the Son of David”; but the Pharisees and scribes seized James, and flung him down from the “pinnacle,” and stoned him where he lay. James had still sufficient strength to kneel for the last time, and prayed, like his divine “Brother” before him, “I beseech Thee, O Lord God our Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” While they were stoning him, one of the descendants of Jonadab the son -of Rechab, mentioned by the prophet Jeremiah, who, according to this account, were now reckoned as priests, cried aloud to them, “Stay; what do ye? the Just ne is praying for you.” Then a fuller who was present seized the bat or club which he used in the work of his trade, and brought it down upon the head of the Just one. So he died. It was believed by many that the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian, which began soon after, was a judgment upon the Jews for this murder.’

There are one or two other notices of members of the family of our Lord.

In the time of Domitian, the son of Vespasian, the descendants of Judas the brother of St. James were brought into danger. Domitian was extremely suspicious and jealous of any possible rivals to his sovereignty; and as the ancient story goes, some members of a heretical sect denounced the grandsons of Judas to him, as being of the royal house of David, and kinsmen of Christ. They were brought before the emperor. He asked them if they were descended from David, and they said they were. He asked them what property they had. They told him that they had between them nine thousand denarii, which means about £320. They said that it was not in money, but that it represented the value of thirty-nine acres of land, which they cultivated themselves and lived upon the proceeds. Domitian looked at their hands, and saw that they were horny with the labour of the field. He then went on to ask them about Christ and His kingdom, its nature, its situation, and the time of its appearance. They replied that it was no earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and

1 The story is found in Eusebius, Hist. Zeci. ii. 23.

angelic one, which was to take form at the end of the world, when Christ would come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and to give to every man according to his deserts. Even the jealousy of Domitian could find no cause of alarm in these obscure and lowly men. Although as a rule he was very severe with Christians, he dismissed the two men to their homes, where the churches received them with great honour, and they lived until the times of Trajan.

In those same times of Trajan died, by a martyr’s death, an aged relative of theirs, named Symeon. He was the son of Clopas, who is generally supposed to be the same as Alpheus; and the ancient author who relates the story describes Clopas as being the uncle of our Lord. Symeon therefore would be His first cousin. On the death of St. James, Symeon was appointed bishop of the church of Jerusalem in his stead. Against him, as against his kinsmen, certain heretics laid information before the Roman authorities that he was a Christian and a member of a family which claimed to be royal. It so happened that the informers themselves were afterwards apprehended for the same reason, because of their supposed connexion with the house of David. Symeon had by that time attained the patriarchal age of a hundred and twenty years; but for many days he was subjected to indignities and rough usage. He showed a power of endurance under it which astonished the Roman magistrate and all beholders, and was finally condemned to the death by which his blessed Kinsman had died, by crucifixion.”

These martyrdoms took place at Jerusalem. At Rome, meanwhile, many had been called to suffer for their faith. The first persecution of any large and

1 Eusebius, Wzs¢. Eccl. iii, 20. 2 Lbid. iii. 32.

public proportions broke out under Nero. Up to that time the Roman government had supposed that the Christians were only a sect of the Jews; and as the Jewish religion was allowed by the State, the Christians had profited by its protection. It was in the time of Nero that this condition of things came to an end, and the Christians stood out in the eyes of the Roman authorities as a separate and dangerous body of men. The heathen historian, Tacitus, relates that when the city of Rome was destroyed by fire (in the year 64), the report was everywhere circulated and believed that the emperor himself had caused the conflagration, or had at least hindered it from being extinguished. “To stifle the report,” he says, “Nero provided others to bear the accusation, in the shape of people who were vulgarly called ‘Christians,’ in detestation of their abominable character. These he visited with every refinement of punishment. First some were arrested who confessed” that they were Christians ; “then, on information given by them, an immense number were convicted, not so much on the charge of incendiarism as on that of ill-will towards mankind at large. Their deaths were turned into a form of amusement. They were wrapped in the skins of wild beasts to be torn in pieces by dogs, or were fastened to crosses to be set on fire, and, when the daylight came to an end, were burned for an illumination at night. Nero threw open his own gardens for the spectacle, and made it the occasion of a circus exhibition, mingling with the populace in the costume of a driver, or standing in his chariot.

Sympathy was at length felt for the sufferers, although the objects of it were guilty persons who deserved the extremest punishment: people felt that they were being destroyed not for the benefit of the public but to serve the cruel purpose of one man.” } : Such is the account given by a heathen writer. A Christian who had lived through those terrible days wrote some years later to the Corinthian church, and spoke of the sufferings through which the Christians at Rome had passed. This was the great St. Clement, the third Bishop of Rome. Warning the Corinthian church against the factious spirit which still prevailed in it, he gave instances of the mischief which it had caused in the ancient world: He traced the persecution of the Christians to the same cause. “Let us come,” he says, “‘to the champions nearest to our own time, and take the noble example set in our own generation. Through jealousy and envy the greatest and most righteous pillars were persecuted, and were called upon to contend even unto death. Let us set before our eyes the good apostles— Peter, who through unrighteous jealousy endured, not one or two, but many troubles, and so went by a martyr’s death to the place of glory which was his due. Through jealousy and strife Paul showed us what is the reward of patient endurance. Seven times he was imprisoned; he was driven into exile ; he was stoned ; he preached both in the east and in the west, and gained a noble renown for his faith, having taught the whole world righteousness and having come to the very bounds of the west : and when he had borne his witness before the rulers, he was set free from the world and passed into the holy place, the greatest pattern of endurance. To these men of holy life was gathered a great multitude of elect souls, who were made the victims of jealousy, and under many indignities and torments showed the noblest

1 Tacitus, Aznals, xv. 44.

example among ourselves.” Like Tacitus, St. Clement bears witness to the way in which the martyrdoms of Christians, even of Christian women, were turned into an amusement. They were dressed up to represent various characters in heathen mythology who had died horrible deaths or were condemned to dreadful sufferings in the world below. Some, like Dirce in the Greek mythology, were tied between wild bulls and torn in pieces ; others, like the daughters of Danaus, were worn out with the fatigue of being made to fetch and carry water, without a moment's rest, night or day, to fill great vessels of which the bottom had been pierced. “And so,” says St. Clement, “weak as they were in body, they succeeded in running the sure race of faith and received a noble reward.” *

All ancient tradition is agreed that the two great apostles whom St. Clement mentions perished at Rome during the reign of Nero. St. Peter, before his own death, had the pain of witnessing what must have been worse than death to him. We know, from what St. Paul tells us, that St. Peter’s wife accompanied him on his missionary travels; and it is probable that she was still with him when he went to Rome, and there preceded him to martyrdom. She may even have been one of those women of whom St. Clement speaks as undergoing so fantastic a death for the amusement of the Roman populace. A very ancient story relates that St. Peter saw her led away to death, and that as he watched her going he was glad at heart “ because she had been called and was going home.” “He lifted up his voice,” so the story runs, “and addressed her in a very encouraging and comforting manner, speaking to her by name ”__the name had been for-

1 Clement of Rome, 5, 6.

gotten ; some late legends give it as Concordia—“ and saying, ‘Remember the Lord, Concordia,’”’ or whatever her name was. “Such,” says the old narrator, “was the marriage of the saints, and their disposition at the last to those whom they loved so dearly.”?

Outside the gate of Rome, upon the Appian Way, stands a little chapel known by the name of Domine, quo vadis— Lord, whither goest Thou?” It is said—and though the story is told only by a late writer, the great Bishop Lightfoot was inclined to believe that it was true—that the Christians at Rome came to St. Peter at the outbreak of the persecution and besought him to fly from the city. St. Peter yielded to their importunity. When he reached the spot where the chapel stands, Jesus Christ met him in the darkness of the night. The apostle once more asked Him, as he had done before, “Lord, whither goest Thou?” The Lord answered him, “I go to Rome, to be crucified again.” St. Peter understood the meaning of the rebuke. He returned and told the brethren what he had seen, and soon after glorified God by his death, as the Lord had foretold that he should, when He said, “ Another shall gird thee and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.” ?

The ancient tradition of the Church is that St. Peter was crucified, and, at his own desire, crucified head downwards. It was quite in keeping with Nero’s conduct in the Roman persecution to crucify him in that grotesque position, and St. Peter, in his humility, might very likely welcome the indignity, so that the form of his death might not look too like that of his Master. The place of his martyrdom was by the

? Clement of Alexandria in Eusebius, Hés¢, Eccl. iii. 30. 2 Ambrose, Zfzst¢. 21. ® Origen in Eusebius, Hist. Zecl. iii. 1.

Vatican road, on the other side of the Tiber from the city of Rome, where the great church of St. Peter now stands. St. Paul, who was a Roman citizen, received the more honourable death of beheading, near the Ostian Way.

The policy which was begun by Nero was continued under later emperors. It was taken for granted that all Christians were enemies to society. The First Epistle of St. Peter, which in all probability was written at Rome itself, shows what was the popular opinion about Christians. Again and again the apostle mentions the way in which they were “spoken against as evildoers,” and in which “their good conversation in Christ was falsely accused.” ‘Let none of you,” he says, “suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or an evildoer ’—-which were the kind of things which the heathen expected of them— “Cor,” he adds, “as a busybody in other men’s matters ; but if any suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this name.” If at first the emperor and his magistrates persuaded themselves that crimes were proved against the Christians, and put them to death for these crimes, they soon came to put them to death just because they were Christians, without asking any further questions. If a man acknowledged that he was a Christian, and refused to give it up, they no longer endeavoured to find out what particular evil deeds he was guilty of ; that he was a Christian was enough. No positive law was passed making Christianity illegal—that was not necessary ; but they were suppressed as a danger to mankind at large.

It was only to be expected that the Church should suffer more than usual under so cruel and suspicious an emperor as Domitian. He even put to death as a Christian his cousin Flavius Clemens, who was consul at the time ; while Flavius’ wife, Domitilla, was banished for life to a little island in the Mediterranean. A yet loftier personage than the Roman consul felt the hand of Domitian. The aged St. John had for many years been living at Ephesus, keeping watch over the churches of Asia, and teaching his “little children” to love one another. Many beautiful anecdotes are told of his life and labours there—at one time going into the dangerous mountains to reconvert a young brigand who had fallen away from the faith; at another fleeing out of the public baths because a heretical teacher happened to come in ; sometimes solacing himself in hours of recreation by playing with a tame partridge, because, as he said, the bow could not always be kept strung. Men who had been his disciples there spoke afterwards of their recollection of him as of some great high priest, who wore upon his head the sacred mitre, with its inscription of “holiness to the Lord.” From these peaceful and fruitful ministrations he was carried away to Rome under Domitian, according to an ancient account, to answer for his faith. There he was cast into a vat of boiling oil, near the Latin Gate of the city. It was a kind of punishment which the philosopher Seneca speaks of as suitable for a slave convicted of heinous crime. Though St. John was wonderfully preserved from death, he, like Domitilla, was banished to an island, which was probably the island of Patmos, where the great Revelation was vouchsafed to him.

1 Tertullian, De Praescr. Haer. 36.

~~

Chapter II

PERSECUTION, as has been already mentioned, broke upon the Church in the time of a very different emperor from Nero or Domitian—the upright and generous Trajan. A letter of extraordinary interest is still preserved in which the younger Pliny, who was at the time governor of Bithynia, asks Trajan for instructions how to deal with cases of Christianity that are brought before him.

“T have never taken part,” he says, “in the trial of a Christian, and therefore I do not know what it is that they are commonly punished for, and with what degree of allowance, nor what direction the investigation should take. I have been much perplexed to know whether any distinction should be made between one age and another, or whether the weak and tender should be treated in exactly the same way as the strong; whether those who repent should be pardoned, or whether if a person has once been a Christian he should gain nothing by ceasing to be so ; whether the very name of Christianity is liable to punishment, apart from disgraceful conduct, or the disgraceful conduct which is attached to the name.” This is evidently Pliny's way of suggesting that perhaps, after all, there might be nothing to punish in Christianity itself, and that no harm would be done by allowing it to be practised.

“Meanwhile,” he continues, “this is the method x3 which I have followed with those who were brought before me as Christians. I have asked them directly whether they were Christians. If they confessed, I have asked them a second and a third time, with threats of punishment ; if they persisted I have ordered them to be taken to execution. I had no doubt that whatever the thing which they confessed amounted to, their obstinacy at any rate, and their inflexible stubbornness, deserved to be punished.” Whether Christianity were or were not in itself a pernicious thing, to refuse to do as the governor bade them was an act of insubordination which could not be tolerated for an instant.

“Others there were,” Pliny says, ‘(as mad as these, who possessed the right of Roman citizenship, and for that reason I have marked them to be sent for trial to the capital. By-and-by, as often happens, the charge of Christianity grew more frequent as a direct consequence of these proceedings, and several different kinds of cases came up. An anonymous paper was laid before me containing many names. In the case of those who said that they were not Christians and never had been, when they had repeated after me a form of address to the gods, and had offered incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought into court for the purpose, along with the statues of the deities, and when, in addition to this, they had cursed Christ—none of which things it is said that real Christians can be induced to do—I thought that I might let them go. Others who were named by the informer said first that they were Christians and then that they were not. They said that they had been so, but had left it off—some three years ago, some a good many years, one or two as many as twenty. All these, likewise, both worshipped your effigy and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.”

Now follows a passage of the deepest interest. Every word of it deserves to be carefully studied. It is the earliest description of Christian ways given by one who was not himself a Christian, but earnestly and sincerely desirous of doing what was right in the discharge of his duties. “Yet they affirmed,” says Pliny, “that their fault or their error came to no more than this—that it was their custom to assemble on a _ fixed day before daylight, and to repeat alternately amongst themselves a song to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by an oath—not to any crime,” as conspirators against social order would have done, “but that they would not commit theft or robbery or adultery, that they would not break their word, and that when called upon to produce a thing entrusted to them they would not repudiate the trust. When this was done, they said that it had been their habit to depart and then come together again later to take a meal, but an ordinary harmless meal, and this they had ceased to do after the issue of my edict forbidding the existence of organised associations, as you commanded.”

The first of these two gatherings, which took place before daylight, was, without doubt, the gathering for the weekly Eucharist. Even the apostate Christians of whom Pliny is speaking did not tell him of the central action of those early assemblies. It was too sacred to be mentioned to a heathen. They only told him of the worship which accompanied their Communion, and of the moral discipline which preserved it from profanation. Christ was their God, and no one was allowed to receive Him without pledging himself to a holy life.

The later gathering in the day was the “ love-feast,” or Agapé. No commandment of the Lord had instituted the love-feasts, and the Christians felt no difficulty about giving them up; but it was otherwise with the Holy Communion, To give that up would have been to abandon Christianity itself.

When Pliny first heard of the meal which the Christians shared in common, he doubtless thought that it was possible that he might find that it was a meal of some horrible character, such as popular calumny attributed to the Christians. They were supposed to be cannibals, and to drink the blood of children. This was what heathen ill-wishers made out, from such reports as came through to them about the sacred food of the Lord’s Table. Pliny was much struck when he learned how harmless was the social meal of which he was informed, and how readily it had been dropped. “This,” he says, “made me think it the more necessary to find out from two female slaves, who were called ministrae (or deaconesses), how far the account was true. I did so by torture,” without which the evidence of slaves was not accepted in Roman law. “I discovered nothing,” he concludes, “beyond a degraded and extravagant superstition. So I adjourned the hearing and had recourse to you. The matter seemed to me worth troubling you about, particularly because of the number of those imperilled. Many of every age and every rank, and of both sexes too, are and will be in danger. It is not only the cities, but even the villages and the country, that are penetrated by this catching superstition. Yet it looks as if it might be stopped and corrected. At any rate, it is quite proved that the temples, which were almost deserted, have begun to be filled, and that sacred rites long disused are again resorted to, and that on every side there is a sale for animals for sacrifice,’—-or, perhaps, “‘a sale for fodder for sacrificial animals,’—‘“‘ whereas up to the present it has been a rare thing to find a purchaser. From this it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people may be put in the right way, if only a place of repentance is allowed.”

Trajan had no wish to push matters to an extreme. It probably never entered his head to permit the exercise of Christianity—at any rate he took no steps to permit _it ;—-but he did not wish to go out of his way to repress our religion. He wrote back to Pliny, approving of his course of action. He said that it was impossible to lay down any hard and fast rule for dealing with such cases. He said that Christians were not to be sought out as ordinary criminals were sought out, though, if accused and convicted, they were to be punished. If any gave such satisfactory proofs of renouncing Christianity as Pliny had mentioned in his letter, he was to receive a free pardon, however strong a suspicion might lie against him because of the past. _ Trajan strongly condemned the receiving of anonymous informations, which he said offered “a pernicious precedent, and was unworthy of the age.” ’

The most illustrious victim of the persecution under Trajan was the great Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch in Syria. Of his earlier life little is known to us; but seven Epistles of Ignatius remain, which show us abundantly the character of the man. Ignatius was no reserved Roman or philosophical Greek. He had all the passionate fervour of an Oriental, and he was endowed besides with the Christian spirit of prophecy. These Epistles were all written while Ignatius was on