FREE ESSAY ON A NEW AND MALEVOLENT SUPERSTITION

A NEW AND MALEVOLENT SUPERSTITION

A new and malevolent superstition
The first instance of the Roman State taking action against Christians arose in the reign
of the Emperor Claudius
(41-54 A.D.). The historians Suetonius and Dio Cassius tell us that Claudius had to expel
the Jews because they were
continually arguing among themselves about a certain Chrestos. Here we have first mention
of the response to the
Christian message in the community of Rome, comments Karl Baus.
The historian Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus (70- ca.140) was a high-ranking official at the
imperial courts of Trajan and
of Hadrian. He was a scholar and counsellor of the emperors. He justified this and future
actions of the State against
Christians defining them as a new and malicious superstition; very harsh words.
As a superstitio, Christianity was linked to magia. For the Romans it was the same as the
irrational practices
which magicians and witches of evil character used to deceive the ignorant populace who
had no training in
philosophy. Magic was against reason and was common knowledge as opposed to philosophical
knowledge. The
accusation of magia (witchcraft), as well as that of insanity was a weapon with which the
Roman State branded and
suppressed new and suspect groups in society, such as Christianity.
The word malefica (=bringer of evil) caught the popular and suspicious imagination of the
populace which viewed this
(and everything new) as intrinsically dangerous. It was therefore the cause of evil and
inseparable from plague, flood,
famine and invasion by the barbarians.
A group at the same time open yet inward looking and suspicious 
The Roman Empire was (as it showed itself especially in its persecution of Christians) a
great open body, disposed to
absorbing every new people that forsakes its characteristics, but also a closed and
suspicious group. By the words
etnia, ethnic group (in Greek ethnos), we mean a social group marked by the same language
or culture and one
suspicious of every other group. Rome, with its social organisation of free people
enjoying all rights and slaves with
none, of rich patricians and poor ordinary people (plebs), with the centre exploiting and
the outlying areas exploited,
considered itself as the realisation of the dream of Alexander the Great: to unify
mankind, to make every free person a
citizen of the world, and the empire a universal assembly (oikumene) which coincided
exactly with human
civilisation.
Those who wished to live outside of this, to maintain their own identity and not to be
absorbed with it, cut themselves
off from human civilisation. Rome had a great fear of these strangers and dissidents who
might upset its security.
Since this universal accord had been established by the ferocious efficiency of its
legions, Rome intended to
maintain it by the strength of the sword, of crucifixions, of condemnations to forced
labour and by exile.
In a word, Rome used ethnic cleansing as a method of protecting the undisturbed peace of
the civilised world. 
Nero and the Christians as seen by the historian Tacitus.
In the year 64 a fire destroyed 10 of the 14 wards of Rome. The emperor Nero, accused by
the people of being the
instigator of the fire, threw the blame on to the Christians. He began the first great
persecution which lasted until 68
and saw perish, among others, the apostles Peter and Paul.
The great historian Tacitus Cornelius (54-120), senator and consul, described these
events when, in the reign of
Trajan, he wrote his Annals. He accused Nero of having unjustly attacked the Christians,
but declared himself
convinced that they merited the most severe punishments because of their superstitions
from which sprang every
nefarious deed. Thus he
Did not even share in the compassion experienced by many people in seeing them tortured
.. Here is the famous
quotation from Tacitus:
To cut short the public outcry, Nero had to find someone guilty, and blamed a race of men
despised for the perversity
of their rites and commonly called Christians. The name comes from Christus (Christ), who
was put to death when
Pontius Pilate was pro-Consul and Procurator of Judea. Now, this pernicious superstition
has broken out anew, not
only in Judea, the place of origin of this scourge, but even in Rome, where all that is
shameful and abominable comes
together and is accepted.
At first were arrested those who openly confessed their belief. Then, after their
accusation, a great multitude were
imprisoned not just accused of having caused the fire, but because they were regarded as
being burning with hatred
against the human race.They were put to death with refined cruelty, and Nero added scorn
and derision to their
sufferings. Some were clad in the skins of wild beasts and thrown to the dogs to be
devoured; others were nailed to
the cross, others burned alive, and still others covered with inflammable material which
was then set on fire to serve as
torches after sunset. Nero allowed his gardens (on the Vatican hill) to be used for this
spectacle, which also included
circus games. As he proclaimed the opening of the circus games, he himself, driving a
chariot and dressed as a
charioteer, mingled with the crowds.
Although these punishments were against a blameworthy people who merited such original
torments, there arose a
sense of pity, since they had been sacrificed not for the common good but from the
cruelty of the tyrant. (XV,44)
Thus the Christians were believed by Tacitus as well to be a despicable people, capable
of horrendous crimes. The
worst evil doings attributed to Christians were ritual infanticide (they spoke of the
Lord's Supper, the Eucharist, as the
killing and eating of a child !) and incest (clearly a travesty of the kiss of peace
between brothers and sisters which
occurred in the celebration of the Eucharist). These accusations, based on popular
gossip, were thus sanctioned by
imperial authority which persecuted and condemned Christians to death.
From this time on (Tacitus maintains) there was added to the burden of Christians, the
accusation that they hated the
human race. Pliny the Younger, ironically, writes that with a similar accusation anyone
could from now on be
condemned.
The accusation of atheism
We have scarce references of the persecution which struck the Christians in the year 89
under the emperor Domitian.
Of particular importance is the information given by the greek historian Dio Cassius, who
became a praetor and
consul in Rome. In book 67 of his Roman History, he tells us that under Domitian they
were accused and condemned
for atheism (ateotes) the consul Flavius Clemens and his wife Domitilla, and with them
many others who had
adopted the practices of the Jews.
The accusation of atheism, at this time, was thrown at those who did not consider as
supreme deity, the imperial
majesty. Domitian, strictest restorer of centralised authority, arrogated to himself the
highest worship, as centre and
guarantor of human civilisation. 
It is worth noting that an intellectual like Dio Cassius designated as atheism the
refusal to worship the emperor. It
meant that in Rome there was no concept of God separate from that of the imperial
majesty. Those who thought
differently were regarded as gravely dangerous to human civilisation.
An Illegal but Harmless Association
In 111 Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia on the Black Sea, was returning from an
inspection of his rich and
well-populated province when a fire devastated his capital, Nicomedia. Much could have
been saved, had there been
firemen.Pliny reported to the emperor Trajan (98-117): It is up to you to decide whether
it is necessary to create a
150-strong association of firemen. For my part, I will make sure that such an association
will accept only firemen. . .
Trajan replied rejecting the proposal: Do not forget that your province is prone to
societies of this kind. Whatever their
name or purpose, I do not wish to have people united in a body, who then, for whatever
reason quickly become an
eterie. The fear of the eterie (the greek name for associations) prevailed over the
fires.
This was a phenomenon of ancient times. Associations of any type, which transformed
themselves into political
groups, had pushed Caesar into forbidding all associations in 7 B.C.: Whoever establishes
an association without
special authorisation, is liable to the same penalty as those who, with armed forces,
attack public places and
temples. The laws were still in force, but the associations continued to flourish; the
boatmen on the Seine, the doctors
of Avenches, the wine merchants of Lyons, the buglers of Lamesi. They all defended the
interests of their members
putting pressure on the public authorities.
Pliny was not slow to apply the interdict on eterie to a particular case presented to him
in 112. Bithynia was full of
Christians. They are a crowd of people of all ages, and conditions, dispersed throughout
the cities, in the villages and
the countryside, he wrote to the Emperor. He goes on to tell of a complaint received from
the makers of religious
amulets upset by the Christians who preached about the uselessness of such nicknacks. He
had set up a special
inquiry and found out that they had the habit of gathering on a fixed day, before sunrise
to sing a hymn to Christ as
though to a god. They try to live justly, they oblige themselves by oath not to commit
crimes, theft or robbery or adultery
or deceit with words. They have the custom of dining together, and in spite of what
others may say, the food is ordinary
and harmless. The Christians had not ceased having these meetings even after the governor
had reissued the
interdict against eterie. Continuing the letter (10,96), Pliny assures the Emperor that
he saw no malice in what they are
doing. However, the refusal to offer incense and wine before the statue of the Emperor
seemed to him an act of public
sacrilege. The obstinacy of these Christians seemed unreasonable and foolish.
From the letter of Pliny it appears clear that the accusations of ritual infanticide and
incest had been droped out as
absurd. There still remained the accusation of refusing to worship the Emperor (i.e. high
treason) and of establishing
an eteria.
The Emperor replied, The Christians ought not to be sought out by the authorities. If,
however, they are denounced
and found guilty, they will have to be condemned. In other words: Trajan encourages
turning a blind eye to them: they
are a harmless eteria like the boatmen on the Seine or the wine merchants of Lyon. But
since Christians are
practising an unreasonable and foolish superstition (as Pliny and other intellectuals of
the time such as Epictetus
said) and continued to refuse to do emperor worship (and thus were considered outcasts
from civic life), Pliny
should not pretend as if nothing happened. If they are denounced, they are to be
condemned. Thus there continued the
policy (even if in less rigid form) of It is not legal to be Christians. Certainly victim
in this period were Simeon, the
Bishop of Jerusalem, crucified at the age of 120, and Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch,
carried to Rome as a roman citizen
and executed there. The same policy towards Christians came to be adopted by the emperors
Hadrian (117-138) and
Antoninus Pius (138-161).
Marcus Aurelius: Christianity is folly
Marcus Aurelius (161-180), philosopher emperor, spent 17 of the 19 years of his reign
fighting. In his Memoirs, which
he wrote each night in his military tent, he recorded his thoughts for himself. He
greatly despised Christianity. He
considered it folly since it proposed to the common, ignorant people a certain manner of
conduct (universal love,
forgiveness, sacrifice for others without waiting for reward) which only philosophers
such as himself could understand
and practise through long meditation and discipline. 
His rescript of 176-7 prohibited fanatical sects, and the introduction of new cults so
far unknown which might threaten
the state religion. The situation for Christians, always grave, became even worse under
him.
The flourishing communities of Asia Minor founded by the Apostle Paul were liable day or
night to robbery and plunder
by the mob. At Rome, Justin and a group of Christian intellectuals were condemned to
death. The flourishing Christian
community of Lyon was destroyed by accusations of atheism and immorality. (There perished
under severe torture the
very young Blandina and the fifteen year old Ponticus).
We realise that public opinion was hardening against the Christians. Great public
calamities (such as war and plague)
had raised the conviction that the gods were angry with Rome. When it became known that
the Christians did not take
part in the expiatory ceremonies ordered by the Emperor, popular wrath tried to find
pretexts for raging against them.
This situation continued even into the first years of the emperor Commodus, son of Marcus
Aurelius.
THE OFFENSIVE OF THE INTELLECTUALS AGAINST CHRISTIANS
In the reign of Marcus Aurelius, the offensive of the intellectuals of Rome against the
Christians reached its peak.
Frequently and erroneously - writes Fabio Ruggiero - it is believed that the ancient
world had combated the new faith
with the weapons of law and order, in a word, with the persecutions. If this is true (and
only in part) for the first century
of the Christian era, it was no longer so in the second half of the second century. Both
the gentile (=pagan) world and
the Church understood, about the same time, the necessity of discussion and dialogue on
the level of philosophical
and theological argumentation. Ancient culture, trained for centuries in the subtleties
of reasoning, could bring very
sophisticated arguments against Christian teaching. Soon enough the Church itself, taking
account of the force which
classical thought could exert as a brake on the spread of the Gospel, understood the
necessity of developing
genuinely Christian philosophical and theological thought. At the same time this must be
expressed in a language and
in cultural categories intelligible to the graeco-roman world in which the Church was
becoming more deeply involved.
The lines of argument used by antichristian intellectuals
The arguments of Marcus Aurelius (121-180), Galenus(129-200), Lucian, Pellegrinus Proteus
and especially Celsus
(all of whom wrote their works in the second half of the second century) can be
summarised as follows:-
?Salvation from the insignificance of life, from disorder of events, from the
annihilation of death, from sorrow, can be
found only in a philosophical wisdom on the part of a highly intelligent elite. 
The answer which Christians gave to this salvation as faith in a man crucified (like a
slave) in Palestine (a border
province) and declared to be risen, was folly. The fact that Christians believed in the
message of this crucified one,
adopting a preference for the outcasts and poor (the dregs of humanity) and preaching
brotherly love for everyone (in
a society tightly built in a pyramid and considered the 'natural order') was another
intolerable folly, which everyone
rejected. Christians had to be eliminated as the adversaries of human civilisation.?
The criticism of antichristian intellectuals was marked by the same idea of revelation
from above, not based on
philosophical wisdom; on Christian scriptures, which had contradicted history, and logic;
on the irrational
teachings; on the actions of the LOGOS of God that became man (Gospel of John) and
submitted himself to death as
a slave; on Christian morality (fidelity to marriage, honesty, respect for others, mutual
help) which could be accepted
by a small number of philosophers, but certainly not by the vast number of ignorant
poor.
All of Christian teaching, for these intellectuals, was folly, since the claim of
resurrection is folly (i.e. the claim of life
after death), the preference God gave to the poor, and universal brotherly love. It.is
all irrational.
The greek philosopher Celsus, in his True Discourse, wrote: ?Accepting ignorant people,
joining the vilest population,
the Christians bring down the honourable and the noble, and finally go as far as calling
everyone brother and sister
without distinction. . . 
The object of their veneration is a man on whom the most severe punishment was inflicted,
and from the fatal wood of
the cross is made an altar, as it is suited for depraved and criminals?
The measured response of Christians
For decades the Christians remained silent. They spread with the quiet force of the
forbidden. With love and
martyrdom they answered the most infamous accusations. It was in the second century that
their first apologists
(Justin, Athenagoras, Tatian) refuted with proofs the more outrageous of the charges, and
sought to explain their faith
(born in the Semitic lands and couched in stories) in terms culturally acceptable to a
world imbued with
graeco-roman philosophy. The bricks well suited to the message of Jesus Christ began to
be organised into an
architectural structure which could be regarded as Graeco-roman. It would be Tertullian
in the West and Origen in the
East (in the third century) who would impose systematic form on Christian wisdom. With
the building bricks of the
message of Jesus Christ they would attempt to create the harmony of the roman basilica.
With the passage of
centuries, it would become the daring of the Gothic cathedral, the solid calmness of the
romanesque , the pomp of the
baroque. . .
THE GRAVE CRISIS OF THE THIRD CENTURY (200-300)
The Third Century saw Rome in very deep crisis. The relationship between Christianity and
the roman empire
changed (even though not all noticed it).
This great crisis is described by the greek historian Herodian: ?In the previous 200
years, there never was such a
quick succession of rulers, of civil wars, of wars against tribes on the borders and of
great migrations of peoples.
There were innumerable attacks on cities within the Empire and in many barbarian
countries, earthquakes and
pestilence, rulers and usurpers. Some were in charge for a long time, others held power
for the briefest of periods.
Some were proclaimed emperor and crowned one day and overthrown the next.?
The Roman Empire had been gradually extended by the conquest of new provinces. This
continuing expansion
allowed the exploitation of ever new and greater territory (Egypt was the granary of
Rome, Spain and Gaul were its
vineyards and olive groves). Rome had seized ever newer mines (Dacia was conquered for
its gold mines). The wars
of acquisition produced countless multitudes of slaves (prisoners of war), unpaid
manpower. 
Towards the middle of the 3rd century (ca 250) the party was over. In the East was formed
the mighty Sassanid
empire which launched strong attacks on the Romans. In 260, the emperor Valerian and his
whole army of 70,000
men were captured and the provinces of the East laid waste. Plague devastated the
surviving legions and overflowed
the empire. In the North was formed another alliance of strong peoples: the Goths spread
over Malaya and Dacia. The
Emperor Decius and his army were massacred. The Goths spread devastation from the North
as far as Sparta,
Athens and Ravenna. The piles of rubble they left were terrible. Most of the people of
culture lost their lives or were
taken into slavery, and could not be replaced. Life returned to a primitive and savage
state. Agriculture and commerce
were wiped out.
In this time of great uncertainty, the security guaranteed by the State collapsed. Now
were the gentiles (=pagans) to
become irrational, no longer having confidence in the imperial order but in the
protection of the strangest and most
mysterious gods. On the Quirinal rose a temple to the Egyptian goddess Isis. The emperor
Elagabulus imposed the
worship of the sun-god, the people had recourse to magical rites to drive away plague.
Yet even in the Third Century
there were terrible persecutions of the Christians. No longer was it because of their
irrationality (in a sea of people
confiding in magical rites, Christianity was the only rational system) but in the name of
renewed ethnic cleansing.
Many emperors (although barbarians by birth) saw in a return to centralised unity the
only hope of salvation. So they
decreed the extermination of the ever more numerous Christians so as to expel from the
roman ethnic group, this
extraneous body which was more and more seen as a different ethnic group ready to take
over the empire founded
on force of arms, robbery and violence and now in decline.
Septimius Severus, Maximin the Thracian, Decius and Gallus.
With Septimius Severus (193-211), founder of the Syriac dynasty there seemed to be
announced for Christianity a
phase of undisturbed development. Christians occupied influential positions at court.
Only in the tenth year of his reign
(202) did the emperor radically change his stance. In 202 appeared an edict of Septimius
Severus which prescribed
grave penalties for those who became converts to Judaism or to Christianity. The
emperor's sudden change can only
be understood by assuming that he realized that in striving strongly for religious unity
for the whole of society
throughout the world. They were therefore suspect.
The damage was most obvious in the abolition of the celebrated Christian School of
Alexandria and the Christian
communities of North Africa.
Maximin the Thracian (235-238) reacted violently and coarsely against the friends of his
predecessor Alexander
Severus, who had been tolerant towards Christians. He threw the Church of Rome into
confusion with the deportation
to the mines in Sardinia of the two leaders of the Christian community, bishop Pontian
and the presbyter Hippolytus.
The attitude of the mob towards Christians had not changed. There was launched in
Cappadocia a true and proper
hunt for Christians when they seemed to be to blame for an earthquake. This popular
reaction tells us that the
Christians were still considered in general as strangers and malefactors (cf. K Baus, Le
origini, p 282-287).
Under the emperor Decius (249-251) there was let loose the first systematic persecution
of the Church, aimed at
finally wiping them out. Decius (successor of Philip the Arab who was very favourable to
Christians and may even
have been one himself), was originally a senator from Pannonia, and was very attached to
roman traditions. Being
deeply conscious of the pollitical and econbmic break up of the empire, he believed that
would restore unity by
gathering all the energies of the protectors of the state. All the inhabitants were
required to sacrifice to the gods, after
which they would receive a certificate. Those who refused this act of submission were
arrested, tortured and executed.
At Rome at Rooe were executed bishop Fabian and with him many priests and laity. At
Alexandria there was a
persecution accompanied by plundering. In Asia the martyrs were numerous: the bishops of
Pergamum, Antioch and
Jerusalem. The great scholar Origen was subjected to inhuman torture and survived the
sufferings for four years
(reduced to a mere human shell).
Not all Christians endured suffering. Many agreed to sacrifice. Others, by bribes,
secretly obtained the famous
certificates. Among them, according to letter 67 of Cyprian, there were two Spanish
bishops. The persecution which
had seemed the death blow for the Church, ended with the demise of Decius in battle
against the Goths on the plains
of Dobrugia (Romania). (cfr. M Clevenot, I Cristiani e il potere, p. 179s). The next
seven years (250-257) were ones of
tranquillity for the Church, disturbed only at Rome by the outbreak of persecution when
Trebonianus Gallus (251-253)
had the head of the Christian community arrested and exiled to Centum Cellae
(Civitavecchia). The conduct of Gallus
was probably a giving in to the mood of the people, who blamed the Christians for the
outbreak of disease
devastating the empire. The Christians were still seen as superstitious, strange and
malicious! (cf. K. Baus, Le
Orgini, p 292).
Valerian and the financial state of the empire.
In the fourth year of the reign of Valerian (257) something unforeseen occurred, a severe
and bloody persecution of
the Christians, However, it was not due to religion but rather to money. Because of the
precarious situation of the
Empire, the imperial counsellor (and later usurper) Macrianus persuade Valerian to
confiscate the goods of wealthy
Christians. There were illustrious martyrs (from bishop Cyprian and pope Sixtus II, to
the deacon Lawrence). However,
it was simply robbery under the pretext of ideological motives, and ended with the tragic
death of Valerian. In 259 he
and all his army fell prisoners to the Persians. He was reduced to life as a slave and
died.
The forty years of peace which followed, favoured the internal and external development
of the Church. Several
Christians reached high office in the State and proved themselves capable and honest.
Financial disaster falls into the lap of Diocletian
In 271, the emperor Aurelian ordered his soldiers and roman citizens to abandon to the
Goths the vast province of
Dacia with its gold mines. The defence of this territory would cost by then too much
blood.
Since there were no more provinces to conquer and despoil, all attention was focused on
the ordinary citizen. On them
fell taxes, the ever-more onerous chores (maintenance of aqueducts, canals, sewers,
roads, public buildings. . .). They
literally did not know how they would manage to survive and pay the taxes. In 284, after
a brilliant military career,
Diocletian, of Dalmatian origin, was proclaimed emperor. Now the taxes would have to be
paid per testa (head)and
per jugero i.e. for each individual and for each unit of land under cultivation.
The collection was entrusted to a shrewd and lumbering bureaucracy, which ensured it was
impossible to avoid the
payment. It punished inhumanly those who tried and was very costly to the state.
The taxes were so heavy that they took away all incentive to work. Remedy: it was
forbidden to abandon one's job, the
piece of soil one cultivated, the workshop or military service.
?This was just the beginning - wrote F. Oertel, professor of ancient history at the
University of Bonn - of the oppressive
measures of the State which squeezed the last drop from the population. . . Under
Diocletian, a complete socialist
state was brought into being: terrorism by officials, severe limitation of individual
freedom, progressive state
interference, heavy taxation.?
Persecution by Galerius in the name of Diocletian.
In the first twenty years of the reign of Diocletian we see no molesting of Christians.
In 303, with a change of scene, the last great persecution of Christians began. ?It was
the work of Galerius, the
Caesar of Diocletian - wrote F. Ruggiero - in 303 he put an end to the prudent policies
of Diocletian, which were
restrained although he held to traditional feelings, and went over to intransigent and
intolerant acts.? Four consecutive
edicts (February 303 - February 304) imposed on Christians the destruction of their
churches, confiscation of their
goods, the handing over of sacred books, torture and even death for those who would not
sacrifice to the emperor.
As always, it is difficult to determine what motives induced Diocletian to approve a
policy of this kind. We suppose it
was pressure from the fanatical pagans who supported Galerius. In a situation of
widespread anguish (as Dodds
calls it), only return to the ancient faith of Rome, according to Galerius and his
friends, could save the people and
persuade them to make such sacrifices. It required a return to the vetera instituta, i.e.
to the ancient laws and
traditional roman discipline.
The persecution reached its greatest intensity in the Orient, especially in Syria, Egypt
and Asia Minor. To Diocletian
who abdicated in 305, there succeeded as Augustus Galerius and as Caesar Maximin Daia who
showed himself
more fanatical than his leader.
Only in 311, six days before he died of cancer of the throat, did Galerius grudgingly
issue a decree ending the
persecution. With this document (which finally signalled the freedom to be Christian),
Galerius deplored the obstinacy
of Christians who mostly refused to turn to the religion of ancient Rome. He declared
that to persecute Christians any
more was futile, and he exhorted them to pray to their God for the health of the
emperor.
Commenting on this decree, F. Ruggiero, wrote: ?The Christians had been an extremely
anomalous enemy. For more
than two centuries, Rome had sought to absorb them into its social fabric. . . Physically
within the civitas Romana, but
in many ways outside of it? they had finally brought about ?a radical transformation of
the civitas itself into something
Christian?.
The Profound Revolution
The final systematic persecutions of the Third and Fourth Centuries were as ineffective
as the sporadic ones of the
First and Second Centuries. The ethnic cleansing invoked and upheld by the Graeco-roman
intellectuals was never
achieved. Why not ?
Because the indignant accusations of Celsus (?Gathering ignorant people, belomging to the
vilest population, the
Christians bring down the honourable and the noble, and finally go so far as to call
people brother and sister without
distinction. ?) in the long run became the best eulogy for Christians. It recalled the
dignity of each individual, even the
lowliest and their equality before God (the most revolutionary point in the Christian
message). This had imperceptibly
made its way into the consciousne