Non-Violent Enemy-Love Sampler From Tertullian

Tertullian wrote roughly around 200 AD.  He was an eloquent author.  We will see that the case he makes is consistent with the other writings we have considered.

I will let him do most of the talking. I include limited comments or clarifications along the way.  Some comments are embedded in the excerpts, noted by brackets and italics.  Bold-fonted emphases will isolate important phrases not to miss.  The translations used are those provided by George Kalantzis in Caesar and the Lamb, with some rewordings by me where the wording was stiff (the book could stand a re-editted edition).  Older translations of this and virtually all other ancient materials are available online. 

Some think it madness that, although we could offer the sacrifice right here and now and then go away unharmed, even preserving our mental reservation [the Romans didn’t mind if Christians performed the Roman sacrifices “without meaning it in their hearts”], we prefer to be obstinate rather than safe; that is to say, you [Rome] give us advice on how to cheat you [by faking piety to Rome].  But we recognize the origin of these suggestions, and who it is that prompts all of this – how sometimes by cunning deception, and sometimes by cruel rage, he [Satan] works to throw us off our constancy.  Apology 27:2-3

Moreover, it is clearly unjust to force free persons to sacrifice against their will, for under all other circumstances, a willing mind is required for discharging one’s religious obligations [yet recall how the self-empowered Church itself abandoned this conviction after achieving the status of State Religion by the Fifth Century]…  You are led by necessity [i.e., by edict] to force us [to sacrifice], just as much as it is our duty to face the danger.  Apology 28:1

While we spread ourselves before God, let the hooks pierce us, the crosses suspend us, the flames engulf us, the swords slash our throats, the beasts leap upon us. They very posture of the Christian at prayer is preparation for any punishment.  Apology 30:7

In the emperors, we respect the judgment of God, since He has set them over the people. We know that in them is that which God has willed, and so we wish that what God has willed be safe and sound; and we consider this a great oath.  We are under obligation to respect [the emperor] as the one chosen by our Lord. So I might well say, “Caesar belongs more to us, since he has been appointed by our God.” As he is mine, I do more for his welfare…because I pray for it to Him who can truly grant it….  Also, because I set the majesty of Caesar below that of God, I commend him all the more to God to whom alone I subordinate him.  Apology 32:1 – 33:2

If then, as we have said above, we are expressly commanded to love our enemies, whom have we to hate? And if when someone injures us we are forbidden to retaliate, so that the action may not make us [and you] alike, whom then can we injure?  Apology 37:1

How often without your authority has the hostile mob of their own mere motion [beat down our door intending us harm and] invaded us with showers of stones and fire!  …But in all of this conspiracy of evils against us, in the midst of these mortal provocations, what one evil have you observed to have been returned by Christians?  …Away with the thought that those who are taught by God should either revenge themselves with human fire or resent the fire that is sent to refine them.  Apology 37:2-3

For what kind of war would we not be fit and ready (despite our inferior numbers), we who willingly submit to the sword, if it were not for the fact that according to our doctrine we are given the freedom to be killed rather than to kill?  Apology 37:5

There is for us a battle, because we are called to trial in court so that we may fight there for the truth while our life hangs in the balance. And the victory is to hold fast to that for which we have fought. This victory has attached to it the glory of pleasing God and the reward of eternal life. We have won the victory when we are killed; we escape at last when we are led forth [to execution]….  Carry on good magistrates; you will become much better in the eyes of people if you sacrifice the Christians for them. Crucify us, torture us, destroy us! Your injustice is the proof of our innocence. That is why God permits us to suffer all of this….  [Do you see the parallels with the lessons of 4 Maccabees?]  Apology 37:2-3,12

In this world we have exposed our very life and our very body to all manner of injury, and we endure this injury with patience. [There is no sign of turning the other cheek only to a point, is there?]  Shall we, then, be hurt by the loss of lesser things?  …If one attempts to provoke you by manual violence, the admonition of the Lord is at hand: “To him,” He said, “who strikes you on the face, turn the other cheek likewise.”  Let [their] outrageousness be wearied out by your patience. [You defeat them by loving not your life even unto death, remember?]  Whatever that blow may be, conjoined with pain and humiliating treatment, it shall receive a heavier one from the Lord. You wound [your enemy] more by enduring; for he will be beaten by Him for whose sake you endure. If the tongue’s bitterness break out [against you] in malediction or reproach, look back at the saying, “When they curse you, rejoice!”  …Let us servants, therefore, follow our Lord closely, and be cursed patiently, that we may be able to be blessed.   Patience 8:1-3

But how will a Christian go to war? Indeed, how will he serve even in peacetime without a sword which the Lord has taken away?  [Matthew 26:52  Then Jesus said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.  John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm."]  For even if soldiers came to John and received advice on how to act, and even if a centurion became a believer, the Lord, by taking away Peter’s sword, disarmed every soldier thereafter. We are not allowed to wear any uniform that symbolizes a sinful act.  [I will suggest a parallel here with "Thus He declared all foods clean." His magnificent actions in both cases subsume into Himself the old commandments against foods and for war.]    Idolatry 19:3

Is it right to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who takes the sword shall perish by the sword? Will a son of peace take part in battle when he should not even go to court?  The Crown 11:2

To be sure, the case is different for those who are converted after they have been bound to military service. John admitted soldiers to baptism;  next were the two most faithful centurions: the one whom Christ praised, and the other whom Peter instructed. But, once we have embraced the faith and have been baptized, we either must immediately leave military service, as many have done, or we must resort to all kinds of excuses in order to avoid any action which is also forbidden to civilian faithful, lest we offend God.  Or last of all, for the sake of God we must suffer the fate which a mere faithful civilian was no less ready to accept [prison or execution].  For military service offers neither exemption from punishment of sins, nor relief from martyrdom. The Gospel is one and the same for the Christian at all times whatever his occupation in life.  The Crown 11:4-5

In his Letter to Scapula, Tertullian makes two points that I really wish to not permit us to miss. Considering the darkness of my own heart, I sense that our innate, normative, and routine resistance to seriously following the Christlike example of non-violent, sacrificial enemy-love arises from the reality that, simply but profoundly put, we do not trust God. Not like Job. Not like Joseph. Not like Daniel. Not like Jesus. And I think a substantial reason for that is because "what we were won with is what we were won to":  fire insurance, best life now, better friends, more parties, hundred-fold returns.  How many of us had self-sacrificial enemy-love really emphasized and placed clearly before us on the day we were saved?  Exactly.  Note, however, a couple of points Tertullian makes with little fanfare concerning his day:

For us, the things we suffer at the hands of ignorant men are not a source of great fear or dread. When we joined this sect we plainly undertook to accept the conditions this involved.  [The majority of comfortable western casual Christians who join the church today begin, continue, and end clueless to this; it is never made plain that this is what is involved, and hence suffering and persecution are a huge demotivator for those who depart. What else should we expect when these self-empowered members of self-empowered churches come to find out that they had no real power after all?]   To Scapula 1:1

It is the teaching of our faith that we are to love even our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. Here lies the perfection and distinctiveness of Christian goodness.  [How can you know if the Holy Spirit is working in you? Ask yourself how this is working out for you.]  Ordinary goodness is different, for all men love their friends, but only Christians love their enemies. We are moved with sorrow at your ignorance, and with pity for the errors of men’s ways;  and as we look to the future, we see the signs of impending distress every day. In such circumstances, we have no choice but to take the initiative and openly and publicly lay before you those things which you refuse to listen to.  To Scapula 1:

In a way, this is what I am doing here. I am laying out before you, and before me, things that we all have refused to listen to.

Celsus And Origen: Inverting The Order (part four)

Celsus was a Roman philosopher who opposed Christianity.  Among his many points of attack, he accused Christians of a lack of patriotism toward Rome.  He wrote his work, called The True Doctrine in 177 AD.

Ambrose requested to Origen that he write a response to Celsus. Origen did so in 248 AD, quoting Celsus extensively.

The first thing to note is that Origen wrote in response to arguments, not to a man, since Celsus was likely long dead.  But six decades after it was written, Celsus' book was deemed problematic enough by Ambrose that he requested Origen to write a response.

The second thing to note is that the defense of Christianity that Origen wrote in 248 AD was consistent with the faith that Celsus had hated enough to write against in 177 AD.

Therefore, be sensitive both to the practices of second century Christians that Celsus was trying to refute, and the defense offered by third century Origen.  By doing so, we will see a consensus between second and third century Christians on the topic that follows.

To begin our present purposes, Celsus argued that if Christians will not honor the Roman gods (and Caesar was among them), then he wished Christians would not grow up to marriageable age, nor get married, nor have children, nor do anything else except to depart the world with no posterity so that Christianity will cease to exist.

Nasty, eh?  But it reminds me of the self-empowered preacher who made the news by saying that all homosexuals should be locked in pens until they all died off.  And the world frequently reminds us all about that preacher, and uses him as part of their apologetic; and because of him many people were led to mock and blaspheme Christ.

Back more strictly on topic, here are several chapters, or parts of chapters, from Book 8 of Origen's book Against Celsus. Numbers in brackets denote chapters:

[56] Even though by his words Celsus dismisses us utterly from life in order that, as he supposes, this race of ours may entirely cease to exist on earth, yet we who are concerned with the business of our Creator will live according to the laws of God....  For we worship the Lord our God, and serve Him only, praying that we may become imitators of Christ....  That is why we do not render the customary honor to the beings whom, Celsus says, earthly things have been entrusted -- because "no one can serve two masters."  We cannot at the same time serve God and mammon, whether the name refers to any one particular thing or to many....  It is preferable for us to dishonor mammon by the transgression of the law of mammon in order to pay honor to God by keeping God's law, rather than to dishonor God by the transgression of the law of God in order to pay honor to mammon by keeping the law of mammon.... 

[65] We ought to despise the kindly disposition of men and of emperors if to propitiate them means not only that we have to commit murders and acts of licentiousness and savagery, but also that we have to blaspheme the God of the universe or make some servile and cringing utterance....

Celsus argued that if every Roman followed the example of Christians, then the emperor would be "abandoned, alone, and deserted" and would not be able to stand against enemies:

[68] Celsus goes on to say: "We must not disobey the ancient writer, who said long ago, 'Let one be king, whom the son of crafty Saturn appointed;'" and adds: "If you set aside this maxim, you will deservedly suffer for it at the hands of the king. For if all [Romans] were to do the same as you [Christians], there would be nothing to prevent his [the king] being left in utter solitude and desertion, and the affairs of the earth would fall into the hands of the wildest and most lawless barbarians; and then there would no longer remain among men any of the glory of your religion or of the true wisdom...." 

But we are far from setting aside the notion of a providence, and of things happening directly or indirectly through the agency of providence. And the king will not "inflict deserved punishment" upon us, if we say that it wasn't the son of crafty Saturn who gave him his kingdom, but He who "removes and sets up kings." And I wish that all were to follow my example in...maintaining the divine origin of the kingdom, and observing the precept to "honour the king"! In these circumstances the king will not "be left in utter solitude and desertion," neither will "the affairs of the world fall into the hands of the most impious and wild barbarians." For if, in the words of Celsus, "they do as I do," then it is evident that even the barbarians, when they yield obedience to the word of God, will become most obedient to the law, and most humane; and every form of worship will be destroyed except the religion of Christ, which will alone prevail. And indeed it will one day triumph, as its principles take possession of the minds of men more and more every day.

Christians in 177 AD, and their brotherly defenders in 248 AD, will not war at all:

[70] But if all the Romans, according to the supposition of Celsus, embrace the Christian faith, they will, when they pray, overcome their enemies; or rather, they will not war at all, being guarded by that divine power which promised to save five entire cities for the sake of fifty just persons. For men of God are assuredly the salt of the earth: they preserve the order of the world; and society is held together as long as the salt is uncorrupted: for "if the salt have lost its savour, it is neither fit for the land nor for the dunghill; but it shall be cast out, and trodden under foot of men. He that has ears, let him hear" the meaning of these words. When God gives to the tempter permission to persecute us, then we suffer persecution; and when God wishes us to be free from suffering, even in the midst of a world that hates us, we enjoy a wonderful peace, trusting in the protection of Him who said, "Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world." And truly He has overcome the world. Therefore the world prevails only so long as it is the pleasure of Him who received from the Father power to overcome the world; and from His victory we take courage. Should He even wish us again to contend and struggle for our religion, let the enemy come against us, and we will say to them, "I can do all things, through Christ Jesus our Lord, which strengthens me." For of "two sparrows which are sold for a farthing," as the Scripture says, "not one of them falls on the ground without our Father in heaven." And so completely does the Divine Providence embrace all things, that not even the hairs of our head fail to be numbered by Him.

Christian refusal to go to war is in response to a higher calling, from obedience to be crucified with Christ, from citizenship not of this world, with love for their enemies. It is not a rejection of a State's right to bear the sword: 

[73] In the next place, Celsus urges us "to help the king with all our might, and to labour with him in the maintenance of justice, to fight for him; and if he requires it, to fight under him, or lead an army along with him." To this our answer is, that we do, when occasion requires, give help to kings, and that, so to say, a divine help, "putting on the whole armour of God." And this we do in obedience to the injunction of the apostle, "I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority;" and the more any one excels in piety, the more effective help does he render to kings, even more than is given by soldiers, who go forth to fight and slay as many of the enemy as they can. And to those enemies of our faith who require us to bear arms for the commonwealth, and to slay men, we can reply: "Do not those who are [pagan] priests at certain shrines, and those who attend to certain gods, as you account them, keep their hands free from blood, that they may with hands unstained and free from human blood offer the appointed sacrifices to your gods; and even when war is upon you, you never enlist the [pagan] priests in the army. If that, then, is a laudable custom, how much more so, that while others are engaged in battle, Christians too should engage as the priests and ministers of God, keeping their hands pure, and wrestling in prayers to God on behalf of those who are fighting in a righteous cause, and for the king who reigns righteously, that whatever is opposed to those who act righteously may be destroyed!" And as we by our prayers vanquish all demons who stir up war, and lead to the violation of oaths, and disturb the peace, we in this way are much more helpful to the kings than those who go into the field to fight for them. And we do take our part in public affairs, when along with righteous prayers we join self-denying exercises and meditations, which teach us to despise pleasures, and not to be led away by them. And none fight better for the king than we do. We do not indeed fight under him, although he require it; but we fight on his behalf, forming a special army— an army of piety— by offering our prayers to God.

[74] And if Celsus would have us to lead armies in defence of our country, let him know that we do this too, and that not for the purpose of being seen by men, or of vainglory. For "in secret," and in our own hearts, there are prayers which ascend as from priests in behalf of our fellow citizens. And Christians are benefactors of their country more than others. For they train up citizens, and inculcate piety to the Supreme Being; and they promote those whose lives in the smallest cities have been good and worthy, to a divine and heavenly city, to whom it may be said, "You have been faithful in the smallest city, come into a great one," where "God stands in the assembly of the gods, and judges the gods in the midst;" and He reckons you among them, if you no more "die as a man, or fall as one of the princes."

Wrestle with the following, as I do as well. Origen and the earlier Christians whom Celsus was condemning refused not just going to war but also refused serving in public office:

[75] Celsus also urges us to "take office in the government of the country, if that is required for the maintenance of the laws and the support of religion." But we recognise in each state the existence of another national organization, founded by the Word of God, and we exhort those who are mighty in word and of blameless life to rule over Churches. Those who are ambitious of ruling we reject; but we constrain those who, through excess of modesty, are not easily induced to take a public charge in the Church of God. And those who rule over us well are under the constraining influence of the great King, whom we believe to be the Son of God, God the Word. And if those who govern in the Church, and are called rulers of the divine nation— that is, the Church— rule well, they rule in accordance with the divine commands, and never suffer themselves to be led astray by worldly policy. And it is not for the purpose of escaping public duties that Christians decline public offices, but that they may reserve themselves for a diviner and more necessary service in the Church of God— for the salvation of men. And this service is at once necessary and right. They take charge of all— of those that are within, that they may day by day lead better lives, and of those that are without, that they may come to abound in holy words and in deeds of piety; and that, while thus worshipping God truly, and training up as many as they can in the same way, they may be filled with the word of God and the law of God, and thus be united with the Supreme God through His Son the Word, Wisdom, Truth, and Righteousness, who unites to God all who are resolved to conform their lives in all things to the law of God.

We will continue to pursue the position of Christian non-violence in the next post.

The Wisdom of Sirach for Healing

The Wisdom of Sirach is a book of the Jewish Apocrypha, written in Hebrew by Jesus ben Sirach around 175 BC, and published later in Greek by his grandson.  It is a book of wisdom similar to Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, and in Roman Catholic Bibles it is commonly known as Ecclesiasticus.  The book is intended to support a life devoted to Scripture, not to be a book of Scripture.  The grandson wrote a prologue in which he says:

Many great teachings have been given to us through the Law and the Prophets and the others that followed them, and for these we should praise Israel for instruction and wisdom. Now, those who read the scriptures must not only themselves understand them, but must also as lovers of learning be able through the spoken and written word to help the outsiders. So my grandfather Jesus, who had devoted himself especially to the reading of the Law and the Prophets and the other books of our ancestors, and had acquired considerable proficiency in them, was himself also led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom, so that by becoming familiar also with his book those who love learning might make even greater progress in living according to the law. You are invited therefore to read it with goodwill and attention, and to be indulgent in cases where, despite our diligent labor in translating, we may seem to have rendered some phrases imperfectly. For what was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language. Not only this book, but even the Law itself, the Prophecies, and the rest of the books differ not a little when read in the original.... I have applied my skill day and night to complete and publish the book for those living abroad [Greek-speaking Jews of the Diaspora, living outside of Israel] who wished to gain learning and are disposed to live according to the law. 

With that introduction, I want to quote a small section of this book, with extreme Pentecostalism in mind -- whether the kind that handles snakes and drinks poisons, or the kind that forbids medicine as an act of "faith" (which is really self-empowerment and self-authentication).  I do so because around the same time the dead snake-bitten pastor was in the news, so were the parents of a young child who died for a lack of simple medical treatment because the parent's church forbids the use of medicine and even the wearing of seatbelts -- and tragically this was the second young child of theirs to die for the same reasons in recent years.

So what does Sirach have to say?

Sirach 38:9-11  9 My child, when you are ill, do not delay, but pray to the Lord, and he will heal you.  10 Give up your faults and direct your hands rightly, and cleanse your heart from all sin.  11 Offer a sweet-smelling sacrifice, and a memorial portion of choice flour, and pour oil on your offering, as much as you can afford.

Certainly, an extreme Pentecostal will have no problem with that. Pray for healing and repent of sins and offer up a sacrifice of praise!  Yet look at the very next verses as Sirach continues his wisdom on the topic:

Sirach 38:12-15   12 Then give the physician his place, for the Lord created him; do not let him leave you, for you need him.  13 There may come a time when recovery lies in the hands of physicians,  14 for they too pray to the Lord that he grant them success in diagnosis and in healing, for the sake of preserving life.  15 He who sins against his Maker, will be defiant toward the physician.

Martyr cross racing is laying down your own life (actual, financial, reputation) to save another, not laying down another's life to save face.  Make your own application.

(Disclaimer: "Make your own application" is a helpful charge borrowed from the Phoenix Preacher blog)

Aborting an Abortion: A Martyr's Life

There is a certain blog I occasionally visit because it is sometimes good, sometimes troubling, and always very honest.

A few years ago, I was troubled by one post and its subsequent discussions. Seems a seasoned, well-known mega-pastor in the western U.S. took a call on his radio program from a young woman seeking advice on going through with an abortion. She was carrying conjoined twins who shared the same body but had two heads. The doctors had advised abortion because of the high risk of complications and because such children rarely live for more than a day outside the womb. After hearing the situation, the pastor assured the woman that if she were to choose abortion the Lord would not condemn her. Something of an online war ensued about the pastor's counsel.

Some commenters on that particular blog thread claimed "This abortion can be justified using the self-defense argument," while others made strict pro-life arguments that condemned the woman and pastor, while still others had nothing more to say than "The Bible is silent here."

One pastor commenting in the discussion thread wrote something like, "Given the difficulty of her plight, I have no specific Biblical counsel to offer her." But he went far enough to say that if she were in his congregation, he promised "love and compassion" and he wouldn't permit anyone to condemn her for having an abortion. When I read that, I felt that he was probably using the term "condemn" with little if any differentiation from "rebuke" and "reprove." I marvel that the notions of Biblical rebuke and reproof are often presented as the opposites of love and compassion. Yes, we all know that church can be notorious for self-righteous judges and prideful condemnations. But this commenter was a pastor who would have nothing to do with loving her enough to rebuke and reprove her in Christ. Much more needs to be done to correct the "fire-at-will" crowd than to command a congregation to say nothing at all in opposition to her choice. But that issue is not what I am treating here. (But for future reference, that same pastor in the comments section is known to have a particular doctrinal affinity for theologian Ben Witherington, whom I plan to quote in a future post).

Back on topic, I think the comments in that discussion are partly a symptom of our overt short-sightedness as a whole. Part of what helped me to see it that way were some statements I read a short time later in William Gurnall's devotional, "The Christian in Complete Armor." For example:

Temptation is never stronger than when relief seems to dress itself in the very sin that Satan is suggesting.  [As in "abort the twins" or "eat the pork" or "curse the name"?]

And again,

 Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Of all his plots, this is perhaps the most dangerous to the saints, when he appears in the mantle of a prophet and silver-plates his corroded tongue with fair-sounding language. In this manner, he corrupts some in their judgment by interpreting gospel truth in such a way that God appears to condone questionable behavior. These Christians get caught up in the world's morality under the disguise of Christian liberty....  How we need to study the Scriptures, our hearts, and Satan's wiles, that we may not bid this enemy welcome and all the while think it is Christ who is our guest!  [Christ has no rebuke of your abortion. Your circumstances exempt you. Divine justice will excuse you for fearing the doctor when you are under compulsion (4 Maccabees 8:22).]

And again,

Some martyrs have confessed that their hardest work was to overcome the prayers and tears of their friends and relatives. Paul himself expressed those same feelings when he said, "What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? For I am ready, not to be bound only but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus!"  [I am ready, not only to live destitute for this child, but also to die in the hospital for him as a demonstration of the grace of the Lord Jesus!]

What I saw was that the twins' mom wasn't thinking, "Dying (figuratively or literally) for these twins is the most Christlike and God-rewardable thing I can do, as a testimony to the greatness of the name of Him whose love compels me."  The commenters on that blog weren't thinking this way either. And I don't think this way either.  That must change!

Can you, can I, can the twins' mom say,

"O Lord God Almighty, I bless You because You have considered me worthy of this needy child by whom I will likely be exhausted of everything I am and have, so that I might receive a place of 'martyrdom' in the cup of Your Christ"?

Or say,

"God has judged me worthy to be found with this child. It is good to be setting from this world to God, in order that I may rise to Him"?

Or say,

"I know that many have lived destitute lives so that they might ransom others. I will do so for my baby"?

If God works all things together for the good of His people, and if He works all of our weakenings together for our strength, then all things should be viewed as happening for our faith. And suffering with faith is suffering for your faith:  a daily martyrdom grounded in loyal adoration of our sovereign God, even in the bitter providences. Especially in the bitter providences. Call it a martyr's life.