Tales of Roman Emperors Feeding Christians to the Lions Are Titillating to Christians…

[Lordquinton]

And wholly made up

Early Christian writers made up the entire narrative, starting in the second century A.D.

Call it persecution porn. Plus ça change…

You don’t have to take it on Wisniewski’s say-so. There’s ample academic proof for Cracked‘s claim, most notably in Candida Moss‘s 2013 book The Myth of Persecution: How Early Christians Invented A Story of Martyrdom. Moss, an Oxford- and Yale-educated professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame (of all places), writes that

“…the prosecution of Christians was rare, and the persecution of Christians was limited to no more than a handful of years.”

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/07/10/tales-of-roman-emperors-feeding-christians-to-the-lions-are-titillating-to-christians-and-wholly-made-up/

[trotsky]

1. "persecution porn"

Perfect description.

[Jim Lane]

31. Commenters suggest "martyrbation" and "snuff theology". (n/t)

[trotsky]

44. BWAH!

Both also excellent!

[Warren Stupidity]

2. So what if it never actually happened?

Historicity is far less important to religions than the message. Religions are chock full of shit that never happened. So much so that when there is a reference to something that really did happen the faithful jump up and down screaming and pointing at an actual fact.

However getting outraged over discussions of fictional events seems to be ridiculous.

Should I be outraged about the horrendous slaughter of the wildlings in the last episode of game of thrones?

[Lordquinton]

4. Then we compare the made up atrocities

To real ones.

I'm always reminded of the archatects sketch:

[bravenak]

28. I was outraged by the number of Wildlings killed myself.

It was a horrible event and much more real to me. I screamed, cried.

[Act_of_Reparation]

33. It almost certainly happened.

Pliny the Younger wrote a series of letters to Emperor Trajan while he served as governor of Bithynia-Pontus. In these letters, he inquired as to what considerations he should make when prosecuting Christians. His policy, as indicated in his letters, was to give Christians three chances to recant before imposing the death penalty.

[Major Nikon]

61. Actually his letters offer evidence it most certainly didn't happen

If a Roman governor was asking what to do with Christians, it shows there was no uniform policy for persecution.

His letters also don't say whether or not the Christians were being put to death for simply being Christian or for sedition, which is the more likely explanation. Claiming that anyone or any god was above Roman rule or Roman deities was viewed as sedition, which is exactly why Jesus was put to death.

[rug]

62. So the execution of Christians by Rome had nothing to do with religion?

[Major Nikon]

64. The only relevant question is whether or not they were treated differently

...because they were Christians.

[rug]

65. No, the relevant qestion is whether they were executed because they were Christians.

More precisely, because they were Christians who would not recant their religion.

[Major Nikon]

66. Which can't be answered from the available information regardless

[struggle4progress]

69. What Pliny says in his letter is that he has not only executed a few people

who obstinately refused to renounce Christianity but he has also, just to be on the safe side, tortured a few women; he then begs for more detailed guidance from Trajan

You may be right, in a certain sense, that Pliny regarded their obstinance as seditious, but it's not sedition in any modern sense: it's sedition only in that members of the lower class are refusing to do absolutely everything a member of the ruling class demands

The question of "uniform policy for persecution" is somewhat misleading. Communicating any uniform policy was complicated in the era before printing; and communication was much slower in the era before the railroad or telegraph. So Roman governance delegated enormous discretion to local governors, whose behavior was then determined by cultural understandings or by personal inclination. That the absence of a recorded "uniform policy" does not prevent a general brutal consensus can be seen in our own recent US history, in which southern klansmen murdered blacks with almost complete impunity for more than a century after the end of the civil war, despite the fact that inspection of official laws on the books would not have revealed that impunity

[Major Nikon]

70. Christian or not, refusing the orders of the ruling class was a good way to get yourself executed

The Romans were actually pretty tolerant of other religions by necessity. They ruled vast expanses of territories with numerous local religions. They couldn't have done so by being absolutely intolerant of them. What they wouldn't tolerate is open dissent of Roman edicts. In other words, pray to any god you want, but if you openly claim your gods are above official Roman gods or Roman rulers, you probably weren't going to keep breathing for very long.

Whatever Pliny's discretion was, he was explicitly told by Trajan not to round up Christians for simply being Christians.

Roman governmental communication actually was pretty good through their networks of roads, shipping, and trade routes, but they did offer a good amount of autonomy to local leaders. However, just saying that it's possible that Christians were persecuted is not the same thing as saying they were persecuted. That takes evidence which is quite lacking. What Moss challenges is the actual evidence for such persecution and how reliable it was.

[Act_of_Reparation]

71. I don't think "Uniform Policy" is necessary for persecution

There's no federal law mandating police officers harass, entrap, and kill black males, but it happens nonetheless. It's disorganized, sure, but organization isn't necessarily a quality of persecution.

Also, it's worth pointing out that in Pliny's letters, he's asking Trajan how he should deal with Christians, specifically. If Christianity weren't a matter of some concern to the Empire, why would Pliny have bothered to write these letters? If these Christians were criminals, and if their religion was of no concern to the Roman Empire, they would have been treated simply as criminals. No questions need be asked of the highest office in the Empire. But Pliny asked. So, either the religion of Christians was of some concern to Rome, or Pliny wasn't as smart as we think he is.

[Major Nikon]

72. It's just one more fact that negates the case for widespread persecution

All religions except the official ones were a concern to the Romans. In ancient times (and to a large extent today), religion and government were one and the same. Many believed the power to rule only came from the almighty. As such religion was the primary source of sedition, which was always the primary concern of the Romans.

[exboyfil]

3. I wonder if you put on one side

of a scale all the persecutions done to Christians on one side and the other all the persecutions done by Christians on the other - how would the scale tip? My guess is that Christians have persecuted more than have been persecuted. Not sure how to handle competing Christian theologies though.

[bvf]

5. Let's not bicker and argue...

http://m.

[msongs]

6. how odd that the roman empire did not fall until after christians became legalized nt

[tanyev]

7. That was an interesting book.

I did indeed have a lot of "plus ca change" moments reading it, especially about those who those who actively encouraged others to seek out martyrdom while they themselves were safely ensconced far, far away from areas of trouble.

[struggle4progress]

8. Damnatio ad bestias was a genuine Roman practice:

... Strabo witnessed the execution of the rebel slaves' leader Selur. The bandit Lavreol was crucified and then devoured by an eagle and a bear, as described by the poet Martial in his Book of Spectacles. Such executions were also documented by Seneca the Younger (On anger, III 3), Apuleius (The Golden Ass, IV, 13), Titus Lucretius Carus (On the Nature of things) and Petronius Arbiter (Satyricon, XLV). Cicero was indignant that a man was thrown to the beasts to amuse the crowd just because he appeared ugly. Suetonius wrote that when the price of meat was too high, Caligula ordered prisoners, with no discrimination as to their crimes, to be fed to circus animals. Pompey used damnatio ad bestias for showcasing battles ...

By the time of Seneca, damnatio ad bestias seems to have been practiced almost daily for entertainment purposes:

... The other day, I chanced to drop in at the midday games, expecting sport and wit and some relaxation to rest men's eyes from the sight of human blood. Just the opposite was the case. Any fighting before that was as nothing; all trifles were now put aside - it was plain butchery ... In the morning men are thrown to bears or lions, at midday to those who were previously watching them. The crowd cries for the killers to be paired with those who will kill them, and reserves the victor for yet another death. This is the only release the gladiators have. The whole business needs fire and steel to urge men on to fight. There was no escape for them. The slayer was kept fighting until he could be slain. "Kill him! Flog him! Burn him alive!" (the spectators roared) "Why is he such a coward? Why won't he rush on the steel? Why does he fall so meekly? Why won't he die willingly?" Unhappy as I am, how have I deserved that I must look on such a scene as this? Do not, my Lucilius, attend the games, I pray you ...

Considerable engineering was sometimes needed to produce an appropriate spectacle:

... “See where a semicircular slice has been chipped out of the wall?” he said, resting a hand on the brickwork. The groove, he added, created room for the four arms of a cross-shaped, vertical winch called a capstan, which men would push as they walked in a circle. The capstan post rested in a hole that Beste indicated with his toe. “A team of workmen at the capstan could raise a cage with a bear, leopard or lion inside into position just below the level of the arena. Nothing bigger than a lion would have fit.” He pointed out a diagonal slot angling down from the top of the wall to where the cage would have hung. “A wooden ramp slid into that slot, allowing the animal to climb from the cage straight into the arena,” he said ...

[Lordquinton]

9. Interesting historical facts

But not what is being talked about in the article. We know they had games where people fought lions, but they didn't persecute Christians by feeding them to lions. Ere is hardly historical evidanve that christians were persecuted by romans as a group.

[struggle4progress]

48. Assessing historical claims may involve examining the period under discussion

[ChristianGrey]

56. +1

[struggle4progress]

10. Persecution under Nero

Tacitus: Annals, Book 15
... Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed ...

[Lordquinton]

11. You didn't read the article, did you.

There has been much discovered about ancient rome since Tacitus, and none of it supports that passage.

[struggle4progress]

15. Tacitus was alive during the reign of Nero

[Lordquinton]

17. Barely

[Lordquinton]

16. This was written a year after nero died at least

The collusseum hadn't even been built yet.

[struggle4progress]

20. There were other amphitheatres in Rome then, such as that of Statilius Taurus

or the wooden one erected by Nero himself

[Lordquinton]

21. So, speculation now?

Your posting ancient texts which prove nothing, esp. when i follow them and they are on religious sites.

[struggle4progress]

22. ?

CASSIUS DIO : ROMAN HISTORY
... while Caesar was still in his fourth consulship, Statilius Taurus both constructed at his own expense and dedicated with a gladiatorial combat a hunting-theatre of stone in the Campus Martius ...

Suetonius: Life of Nero
... a wooden amphitheatre, erected in the district of the Campus Martius within the space of a single year ...

[Lordquinton]

25. I can't keep up with your gallop right now

Have fun posting the first thing google horks up.

[struggle4progress]

54. Hmmm

Maybe my #34 will help

[Lordquinton]

57. It would help

If you read this post.

[struggle4progress]

63. I read it and all the linked material before I began posting in this thread

Then I began to provide some easily accessible material on Roman history related to the claims there. such as tales of Roman emperors feeding Christians to lions are wholly made up

In fact, the Roman empire could be extraordinarily callous and cruel to its subjects, a fact that can be overlooked only by those who do not know the actual history and therefore rather carelessly assume that Romans held more modern attitudes. Under classical Roman law, for example, fathers could not be prosecuted for murdering their children, even when adult, the theory being that the father, in some sense, always owned his children. And under the emperors, no one was really safe: Nero's 62 AD execution of his old friend Marcus Caius involved a long whipping, after which the fellow was placed inside a bronze bull and roasted to death by a fire lit underneath the vessel. We only know the name of the executed here because he was a prominent citizen. Such government often leads, understandably, to a society that "kisses up and kicks down," so the status of lower class persons, such as slaves, could be even more precarious -- except, of course, that the names and numbers of most victims simply wasn't recorded

Whether individuals were savaged by bears, boars, bulls, dogs, or lions; or decapitated or hacked by gladiators; or drowned in re-enactments of sea-battles or were burned alived or were crucified as entertainment; whether this occurred in Nero's gardens or the Flavium Amphitheatre or the Circus Maximus; or in some provincial arena -- the morbid blood-sports recurred almost daily

Candida Moss is quite correct to point out that the Roman overlords and any of their Christian victims had different views of situation: the Roman ruling class certainly believed it was upholding law and the natural order of things, whereas its victims regarded the whole set-up as persecutory. But perhaps the ruling class did not reckon with the effect on others, just as the British in India did not really comprehend the public effect of their own reaction to Gandhi's salt-march or as the Southern segregationists did not really comprehend the public effect of their dogs and firehoses, or of their church-bombings and lynchings. This would lend both sense and credibility to certain features of various martyrdom accounts, such as the Acts of Perpetua and Felicitas: They were stripped therefore and made to put on nets; and so they were brought forth; but the audience was horrified to see a young girl together with a mother whose breasts still dripped milk; so the two were recalled and clothed in loose robes

[struggle4progress]

12. Domitian

Cassius Dio, Roman History LXVII 14
... And the same year Domitian slew, along with many others, Flavius Clemens the consul, although he was a cousin and had to wife Flavia Domitilla, who was also a relative of the emperor's. The charge brought against them both was that of atheism, a charge on which many others who drifted into Jewish ways were condemned. Some of these were put to death, and the rest were at least deprived of their property. Domitilla was merely banished to Pandateria. But Glabrio, who had been Trajan's colleague in the consulship, was put to death, having been accused of the same crimes as most of the others, and, in particular, of fighting as a gladiator with wild beasts. Indeed, his prowess in the arena was the chief cause of the emperor's anger against him, an anger prompted by jealousy. For in Glabrio's consulship Domitian had summoned him to his Alban estate to attend the festival called the Juvenalia and had imposed on him the task of killing a large lion; and Glabrio not only had escaped all injury but had despatched the lion with most accurate aim ...

Suetonius, Life of Domitian, 15
... Finally he put to death his own cousin Flavius Clemens, suddenly and on a very slight suspicion, almost before the end of his consulship; and yet Flavius was a man of most contemptible laziness and Domitian had besides openly named his sons, who were then very young, as his successors, changing their former names and calling the one Vespasian and the other Domitian ...

Eusebius, Church History, Chapter XVIII.—The Apostle John and the Apocalypse
... in the fifteenth year of Domitian Flavia Domitilla, daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement, who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome, was exiled with many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ ...

[struggle4progress]

13. Trajan

Pliny to Trajan
... I have never been present at the examination of the Christians, on which account I am unacquainted with what uses to be inquired into, and what, and how far they used to be punished; nor are my doubts small, whether there be not a distinction to be made between the ages and whether tender youth ought to have the same punishment with strong men? Whether there be not room for pardon upon repentance? or whether it may not be an advantage to one that had been a Christian, that he has forsaken Christianity? Whether the bare name, without any crimes besides, or the crimes adhering to that name, be to be punished? In the meantime, I have taken this course about those who have been brought before me as Christians. I asked them whether they were Christians or not? If they confessed that they were Christians, I asked them again, and a third time, intermixing threatenings with the questions. If they persevered in their confession, I ordered them to be executed ...

[Lordquinton]

14. Still not reading the article?

[struggle4progress]

40. Candida Moss thinks this letter relevant to her thesis

See my #39 infra

[struggle4progress]

18. Septimius Severus

... Historia Augusta ... is a late Roman collection of biographies, in Latin, of the Roman Emperors, their junior colleagues and usurpers of the period 117 to 284 ... Major problems include the nature of the sources it used, and how much of the content is pure fiction. Despite these conundrums, it is the only continuous account for much of its period ...

Historia Augusta: Life of Septimius Severus
On the murder of Didius Julianus, Severus, a native of Africa, took possession of the empire ... He forbade conversion to Judaism under heavy penalties and enacted a similar law in regard to the Christians ...

[Lordquinton]

19. So you include a known unreliable source?

Your desperation is quite obvious.

[Goblinmonger]

23. You realize this is, hypothetically, how you sound

SchmordSchminton: Hey, you know that we now know evolution is a real thing.

Schmuggle4Schmogress: Garden of Eden

Schmord: Um, yeah, but that was written a long time and we know things scientifically now.

Schmuggle: Noah

Schmord: Sure, but that doesn't address at all what we know about evolution today.

Schmuggle: Turtles all the way down

----------------------------------------------------

But, hey, keep up the Google-Fu. It's making you look "awesome."

[struggle4progress]

26. ?

We have repeatedly discussed the interpretation of Genesis here; and I have repeatedly pointed out that not everyone subscribes to a literal reading: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=174944

When we are discussing Christianity in the Roman empire, however, the interpretation of Genesis is not at issue: what one wants, instead, is first to understand something about the cultural context

[Goblinmonger]

27. It was an allegory.

Well, not really, because it wasn't long enough.

You are using old looks at what happened when we seem to know a lot more now, as the article in the OP says. Keep Googling and you might get to the article that is in the OP. Or you could just read it.

I wonder which you'll do? No, I don't really wonder.

[struggle4progress]

49. Oh ... well, maybe you could get a doc to prescribe you some antihistamines

[struggle4progress]

24. Decius

Christians in a Pluralistic Society: Papyrus Evidence from the Roman Empire
Alanna Nobbs
Macquarie University
... A major test for the Christian communities took place in AD 249 with the accession of the emperor Decius ... To show the solidarity of all Romans behind their ancestral gods and sacrifices, every household was obliged to appear on a fixed day, veiled and crowned, and submit a libellus (certificate) declaring participation in the sacrifice. The requirement to produce documentary witness to the act of sacrifice was novel. The obligation to retain a personal copy indicated that this proof of religious piety had ongoing significance and implications for the civil identity of those concerned ... Below are reproduced very literal translations of two of the surviving libelli:

To those chosen (to be) over the sacrifices of the Oxyrhynchites’ city, from Aurelius Gaion, (son) of Ammonius, (his) mother being Taeus. Always of course to sacrifice and pour (the libation) and revere the gods having been my custom, in accordance with what was ordered by the divine judgement now too in front of you (pl.) (am I) sacrificing and pouring (the libation) and (have I) tasted of the offerings, along with Taos (my) wife (?) and Ammonius and Ammonianus (my) sons and daughter Thecla (?) (acting) through me, and I ask (you) to certify (this)
for me below. Year 1 of the Imperator Caesar Gaius Messius Quintus Traianus Decius Pius Felix Augustus, Epeiph 3. I, Aurelius Gaion, have handed (it) in. I, Aurelius Sarapion who is also (known as) Chaeremon wrote for him, (due to
his) not knowing letters.

To those over the offerings and sacrifices of the city (of?) from Aurelius L(?) [...] -thion, son of Theodorus, his mother (being) Pantonymis, from the same city. Always of course in sacrificing and pouring (libations) to the gods did I persist, and since now too in front of you (pl.) in accordance with what was ordered, I poured (libations) and sacrificed and tasted of the offerings, along with my son Aurelius Dioscorus and my daughter Aurelia Lais, I ask you to certify (this) for me below. Year 1 of the Imperator Caesar Gaius Messius Quintus Traianus Decius Pius Felix Augustus, Payni 20.

[struggle4progress]

29. Let us now review a bit about our knowledge about the Roman empire

The empire's delegates, in its far-flung possessions, had authority to torture or execute people, without much protection for the victims, and for reasons that now seem to us extraordinarily inadequate (such as obstinacy in the face of authority)

Amphitheatres were build across the empire for the purposes of entertainment; and a large number were built in the capitol city itself. The Romans did condemn people to be torn apart by wild animals, often on what we would regard as very slight pretexts (such as physical unattractiveness of the human victim, or the fact that the animals were hungry and needed something to eat). At the time of Seneca, such "spectacles" had become an almost daily event in Rome, which implies hundreds or even thousands of people were then dying in such manner in the city itself annually; one can only crudely guess the numbers thus dispatched across the empire during the period when such "games" were common. We don't have many records of who died thus, because they were usually powerless nobodies, consigned to death and oblivion by the authorities. Such gruesome "entertainment" must have played a complex role in Roman society, by thrilling the upper class with its own power, by terrorizing opponents of the ruling regime, and by stupefying the lower classes with the "consolation" that others were even worse off than they themselves were

[rug]

30. But you didn't refute #3 in the list from Cracked!

[struggle4progress]

34. (1) There were various amphitheaters in Rome itself, other than the Coliseum

(aka Amphitheatrum Flavium) during the empire period, such as the Theatrum Pompeium, Amphitheatrum Statilii Tauri, Amphitheatrum Neronis, and the Amphitheatrum Castrense

(2) Well over 200 amphitheaters are known to have existed in the empire outside of Rome

(3) There's really no question that Roman entertainment in the empire period included (say) setting animals on folk


(4) Such entertainment clearly predates the Amphitheatrum Flavium

(5) It was also not confined to the city of Rome: In these details from a third-century AD mosaic in the Museum of El Djem (Tunisia), criminals, themselves made beasts by their crimes, are offered up to wild animals in the arena. The images are similar to those of the Zliten mosaic, where the victims are wheeled in on small, chariot-like carts


(6) When such practices were at their peak, the number of annual victims across the empire must have been substantial

(7) We cannot, of course, know who most of those victims were, since they were ignominiously slaughtered simply for the entertainment values of their deaths; and, as the ruling class did not carefully record their names or crimes for posterity, other sources must be sought

(8) The church histories recount that large numbers of people distanced themselves from the church during periods of official persecution and that there were extensive debates afterwards on questions such as whether those who had sacrificed to the idols of the empire could later be readmitted to the church and its community: this seems quite credible, since the empire could terrorize its subjects by gruesome threat, and we might naturally expect many people to be affected by such threats

(9) The problems of oral tradition only much later recorded are obvious; and it is appropriate, if one is interested in careful history, to try to sift the surviving accounts carefully; but imperfect sources may not be completely wrong. Thus, if Eusebius (not regarded as a very accurate historian) reports a century and a half after the the fact, that Ignatius, third bishop of Antioch, was taken in captivity to Rome and there torn apart by wild beasts in the time of Trajan, one might wonder whether the Romans would really bother to cart him that far away or would let him write continually to his sympathizers on that journey; but it is certainly credible that, as a highly visible person refusing to sacrifice to the Roman gods, Ignatius was arrested and carried away to a gruesome death, to serve as a demonstrative warning somewhere, even if Eusebius perhaps did not have every detail completely correct

[rug]

47. .

[Leontius]

32. But that's just google something what about the untold tens of thousands burned by the

Spanish Inquisition, What about that huh?

[ChristianGrey]

50. And how many died during the Moorish occupation of Spain?

Context matters.

[Warren Stupidity]

51. "Moorish occupation"?

It is difficult to call a 700 year time span an "occupation". Do you consider the Israelis to be occupying Palestine? or perhaps you consider the Palestinians to be occupying Judea? Are we occupying america? Shall we evict those occupying scots from northern ireland?

In general the islamic rulers of al-andalus were far more benign toward non-muslims than the christian Spanish kings were to non-christians.

[ChristianGrey]

52. I'm not sure how mass murder and slavery could be considered "benign"

But anyway yes, I do consider the Israelis to be occupying Palestine. Many people here do in fact argue that we are occupying America.

You can't have it both ways. The Spanish Inquisition didn't happen in isolation, there were other events that led up to it. Whether you want to call it an "occupation" or something else, it doesn't matter. It's just wordsmithing.

[Leontius]

53. My post was a scarcastic jab at the OP.

I was pointing out another "myth" that has become common knowledge.

[Yorktown]

68. It was an occupation as Moors were the small ruling minority

Had it not been the case, the Reconquista would have been impossible.

In the same way,
the French had to leave Algeria even though they made up a higher % of the population than the Moors in Spain.

[shenmue]

67. Diane Moczar said

the Inquisition killed about 4,000 people over 250 years. It exiled many more than it killed.

[Lordquinton]

35. Please read the article before responding

Roman history is fun and all, but keep it relevant.

[struggle4progress]

55. "Don't confuse me with facts! My mind is made up!"

[Lordquinton]

58. Why did you put that in quotes?

You're just showing you didn't read it.

[struggle4progress]

36. Christian martyrdom and modern identity: Against Candida Moss and Salman Rushdie

Michael Jensen
ABC RELIGION AND ETHICS
5 APR 2013

... In 180 AD, a small group of Christians - named Speratus, Nartzalus, Cittinus, Donatus, Secunda and Vestia - were brought to the council-chamber at Carthage to stand trial before the proconsul Saturninus. The scrap of dialogue that has been recorded for posterity is not much more than an official court report. Saturninus comes across as a reluctant persecutor bewildered by the obstinacy of the Christians. He begins the interrogation by suggesting to the group that "if you return to a right mind," the imperial favour is still available. For the Roman official, the defiance of this little group, when given a clear choice for freedom, is evidence not so much of sedition but of some kind of lunacy.

The Christians, however, insisted on their innocence of any crime and even cite their exemplary citizenship. But it was Speratus who demonstrated that a higher loyalty was at issue for the Christians. "I do not recognize the empire of this world," Speratus said. "But rather I serve that God, whom no man has seen, nor can see with these eyes." They would not swear by the genius of the Emperor. Instead, they claim for themselves a different allegiance - in fact, a different identity. Hence Vestia declares, "I am a Christian," and Secunda says, "I wish to be what I am." They even reject an offer of thirty days' reprieve to "think it over." They repeat "I am a Christian" - a statement which they felt was enough to explain their willingness to face execution rather than sacrifice to Caesar. When the whole group is condemned to die at the point of the sword, upon the reading out of the verdict they all shout, "Thanks be to God!"

In this sparse account we see two views of the world that come into collision. The Roman governor is by no means demonized in the report - he acts, if anything, with the utmost restraint and civility. Neither is he an object of derision from the anonymous scribe. Nevertheless, it is clear that the Christians see themselves as subjects of another Lord and so as citizens of another realm, a realm that encompasses the one in which the proconsul Saturninus operates.

But it is Secunda's reported testimony that I find most interesting: "I wish to be what I am." It is not merely her allegiance to God, but her very self-understanding that draws her to this point. She can do nothing other than to accept the verdict of Saturninus because she understands her own self in this way - that is, as a Christian, as a follower and imitator of Christ. What we have are two different and at this point rival understandings of what it is to be a self. Though both have notions of transcendence, allegiance to authority and membership of community, it is possible neither for the Roman to acquit the Christian nor for the Christian to say she is other than what she is ...

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2013/04/05/3730971.htm

[beam me up scottie]

37. "The Myth of Persecution": Early Christians weren't persecuted

"The Myth of Persecution": Early Christians weren't persecuted
The Romans did not target, hunt or massacre Jesus' followers, says a historian of the early church

Moss, professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame, challenges some of the most hallowed legends of the religion when she questions what she calls “the Sunday school narrative of a church of martyrs, of Christians huddled in catacombs out of fear, meeting in secret to avoid arrest and mercilessly thrown to lions merely for their religious beliefs.” None of that, she maintains, is true. In the 300 years between the death of Jesus and the conversion of the Emperor Constantine, there were maybe 10 or 12 scattered years during which Christians were singled out for supression by Rome’s imperial authorities, and even then the enforcement of such initiatives was haphazard — lackadaisical in many regions, although harsh in others. “Christians were never,” Moss writes, “the victims of sustained, targeted persecution.”

...

Christians wound up in Roman courts for any number of reasons, but when they got there, they were prone to announcing, as a believer named Liberian once did, “that he cannot be respectful to the emperor, that he can be respectful only to Christ.” Moss compares this to “modern defendants who say that they will not recognize the authority of the court or of the government, but recognize only the authority of God. For modern Americans, as for ancient Romans, this sounds either sinister or vaguely insane.” It didn’t help that early Christians developed a passion for martyrdom. Suffering demonstrated both the piety of the martyr and the authenticity of the religion itself, and besides, it earned you an immediate, first-class seat in heaven. (Ordinary Christians had to wait for Judgment Day.) There were reports of fanatics deliberately seeking out the opportunity to die for their faith, including a mob that turned up at the door of a Roman official in Asia Minor, demanding to be martyred, only to be turned away when he couldn’t be bothered to oblige them.

Moss cannot be called a natural or fluent writer, but she is thorough, strives for clarity and is genuinely fired up in her concern for the influence of the myth of martyrdom on Western societies. “The idea of the persecuted church is almost entirely the invention of the 4th century and later,” she writes. This was, significantly, a period during which the church had become “politically secure,” thanks to Constantine. Yet, instead of providing a truthful account of Christianity’s early years, the scholars and clerics of the fourth century cranked out tales of horrific, systemic violence. These stories were subtly (and not so subtly) used as propaganda against heretical ideas or sects. They also made appealingly gruesome entertainment for believers who were, personally, fairly safe; Moss likens this to contemporary suburbanites reveling in a horror film.

...

Where she is less shrewd is in her belief that by exposing the “false history of persecution,” we can somehow purge this paranoid approach to political differences. One of the most enlightening aspects of “The Myth of Persecution” is Moss’ ability to find contemporary analogies that make the ancient world more intelligible to the average reader, such as the Cassie Bernall story. But that story has an additional lesson to offer, about the true believer’s imperviousness to unpalatable facts. Bernall’s family and church are unmoved by the schoolmates who were present at the shooting and who have debunked the “She said yes” legend. “You can say it didn’t happen that way,” the Bernalls’ pastor told one reporter, “but the church won’t accept it. To the church, Cassie will always say yes, period.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/the_myth_of_persecution_early_christians_werent_persecuted/

Goodness gracious, I thought somebody was being fed to the lions in here. Looks like a simple patheos article touched a bunch of fee fees.

Unlike some other posters, I actually read the op and decided to add something relevant to the erm, "discussion".

[struggle4progress]

38. The Passion Of The Scillitan Martyrs (180 AD)

... Saturninus the proconsul said: "Be not partakers of this folly."
Cittinus said: "We have none other to fear, save only our Lord God, who is in heaven."
Donata said: "Honour to Caesar as Caesar: but fear to God."
Vestia said: "I am a Christian."
Secunda said: "What I am, that I wish to be."
Saturninus the proconsul said to Speratus: "Dost thou persist in being a Christian?"
Speratus said: "I am a Christian." And with him they all agreed ...
Saturninus the proconsul read out the decree from the tablet: "Speratus, Nartzalus, Cittinus, Donata, Vestia, Secunda and the rest having confessed that they live according to the Christian rite, since after opportunity offered them of returning to the custom of the Romans they have obstinately persisted, it is determined that they be put to the sword" ...
http://web.archive.org/web/20090523211400/http://users.drew.edu/ddoughty/christianorigins/persecutions/scilmart.html

This is reported from the year when Marcus Aurelius died and his son and co-emperor Commodus began emperor. Commodus liked to portray himself as Hercules. After a fire damaged Rome in 191, Commodus declared himself the new Romulus and renamed the city after himself. He was murdered in 192

[struggle4progress]

39. Candida Moss debunks the ‘myth’ of Christian persecution

By Lauren Markoe
Religion News Service
May 14, 2013

... A: He’s the first Roman official to actually talk about Christians. He writes to the Emperor Trajan and says, “What am I supposed to do about them? They’re not doing anything wrong, but when they’re in the courtroom they’re very stubborn.” Those charges could get you killed in the Roman world. And Pliny has other concerns: Christians were not purchasing the meat associated with the Roman temples. And he thinks of Christians not as a religious group, but prone to superstition, which the Romans considered a kind of madness that could spread like a disease.

Pliny and Trajan agree that there will be no seeking out of Christians, but if they do end up in courtrooms and are stubborn, he will give them three chances to curse Christ and make a sacrifice in the Roman temple. If they don’t, they will be killed ...

A: Is it persecution? I’d say it comes fairly close to the line. I’m not saying it’s just. But it was illegal to be part of a secret club at the time. It was illegal to be stubborn toward a Roman judge. So it’s not that they’re being persecuted for having a Trinity. They are being executed for breaking the law ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/candida-moss-debunks-the-myth-of-christian-persecution/2013/05/14/1b903b24-bcc7-11e2-b537-ab47f0325f7c_story.html

[beam me up scottie]

41. From your article:

Growing up Catholic in England, Candida Moss felt secure in life, yet was told in church that Christians have been persecuted since the dawn of Christianity. Now, as an adult and a theologian, she wants to set the record straight.

Too many modern Christians invoke, to lamentable effect, an ancient history of persecution that didn’t exist, Moss argues in her newly published book, “The Myth of Persecution: How Early Christians Invented A Story of Martyrdom.”

...

We asked Moss, professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame, to talk about the travails of early Christians, and how they are misappropriated in the public sphere today.

...


Q: Who is capitalizing on the myth of Christian persecution?

A: When people talk about being persecuted in modern America, I think it’s dangerous. I’m talking about everyone from Rick Santorum to Mitt Romney to Catholic bishops, and Bill O’Reilly talking about a war on Easter. The problem with this is that it destroys dialogue. Persecutors don’t have legitimate complaints so you can’t really have productive discussions.

...


Q: So how are you going to convince someone like Bill O’Reilly to quit claiming that American Christians are persecuted?

A: What I try to do in the book is to not talk about the issues but to talk about the rhetoric. So I give examples of people from the religious left who are doing it. I’m critical of them, too.

We’ve all got to take a look at our own causes and say, “I’m not going to use this language. I’m going to see that other people have good intentions.” That’s how you really have productive discussions with people.

...

Q: But you believe there is real persecution of Christians in the world today?

A: Yes, there is. It’s a “boy who cried wolf” situation. One of the reasons we are not hearing about them is because of all of the cries of persecution here — and local cries about persecution overshadow the global ones. We do need to hear those stories about Christians in other parts of the world, but we need to make sure that instead of talking about the global war on Christianity — which a lot of Christian and Catholic reporters have done — that we tell the story in a way that doesn’t do violence to other persecuted groups.

When you miss the point you really miss the point.


Are you completely incapable of understanding such a simple concept or are you trying to derail discussion of the op?

[struggle4progress]

42. I think I largely share her attitude towards the religious right

but do not entirely share her views towards the uses of history for interpretation of the present

That is, I regard the radical rightwing appropriation of the martyr tales as bizarre and paranoid in style, and I do not regard all the martyr tales as credible. But I do find some of those not only credible in context but also quite edifying

[beam me up scottie]

43. Couldn't you have led with that?

And then posted some short excerpts to emphasize the point you're trying to make?

If you don't discuss the op and only post a bunch of Google research you're just talking past everyone else.


Give people a chance to listen to your pov, s4p, they might just surprise you.

[struggle4progress]

46. Facts first, interpretation afterwards

[trotsky]

45. Based on the response count, it looks like your post hit a nerve!

Since I can't see most of them, it allows me to confirm my ignore list is still working well.

[Lordquinton]

59. Oh yea, toes have been trampled on

If i didn't already know how to do basic google searches I'd be learning all kinds of unrelated Roman histories

[Yorktown]

60. Imaginary martyrdom was one of the mythical sources of beatification

There are some others:

• being killed as a missionary

Why being killed makes the missionary better is a mystery
but one can imagine why being a missionary would be a bonus point: gaining religious market share.

• being the relative of someone already a saint

Example: Saint Richard the Pilgrim.
- his brother-in-law,Boniface, was made a Saint
- his first son, Willibald, was made a Saint
- his second son, Winibald, was made a Saint
- his daughter, Walburga, was made a Saint