Mercy in its Biblical Context

Frankly, I'm fed up with people complaining about how "harsh," "judgmental" and "merciless" the Church is towards people living in objectively sinful situations, e.g. fornicators, adulterers, sodomites, etc.

Let's view the issue in its proper biblical context.

In the time of the Prophets, adultery was a capital crime punishable with death (cf. Leviticus 20:10), as was sodomy (Leviticus 20:13). If we still lived under the Law, millions around the world would be on death row right now. And they would deserve it, because they have committed nothing less than an abomination in the eyes of God. That is God's justice in action.

Under Christ, her Head, the Church requires that one guilty of adultery confess his sin, discontinue the objectively sinful behavior and make a firm purpose of amendment. The same goes for sodomites. That is God's mercy in action.

I'll repeat it, just so it sinks in: Adulterers and sodomites still deserve the death penalty according to the Law. It is only by the mercy of Christ that they are given the chance to repent and mend their ways. If they repent, the Lord will forgive all their transgressions, and welcome them into His Father's house. But if they don't, if they continue in the way of sin without repenting, the Good Lord will most certainly cast them into a lake of everlasting fire - because that is the just punishment for their sin.

The day of God's mercy has already dawned. If you can't see it, it's because you've chosen to remain in the dark.

Synod 2015: German Language Group Report (English)

Moderator: Card. SCHÖNBORN, O.P. Christoph

Relator: S.E. Mons. KOCH Heiner

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn

In the German group under the leadership of Christoph Cardinal Schönborn, O.P., we deliberated over and worked through the first part of the Instrumentum laboris in a very open and positive atmosphere. The various viewpoints of the participants were enriching and perceived accordingly. In my opinion, the work in this group demonstrates yet once again: Diversity enriches.

The overarching style of the text received unanimous approval. We are also very much in agreement with the order - that is, with the ordering of the three chapters - given in the Instrumentum laboris. It hearkens back to the structure of the documents of earlier Synods and Conferences, which progress from seeing to judging, and finally to acting.

We have also, however, introduced elements which are important to us. Thus, we propose and request the introduction of a section at the start of the first chapter which describes the beauty of marriage and the mission of marriages and families, to take up again the matter of the meditations of Pope Francis. With thankfulness and awe, we observe that marriage is called to participate in the creative power of God and His work of salvation. Marriage is not only a topic germane to the Catholic Faith, but rather manifests itself, in its deepest meaning, as a fundamental desire of man. It reveals itself, far beyond cultural and religious boundaries and above all social transformations, as a remarkable constant. Man longs to be loved and to love. Love is the most all-encompassing and unconditional 'Yes' to another human being - for his own sake, without ulterior motives and without reservation. It is also a basic feature of humanity that love constantly desires to give of itself. In this way, marriage develops in the love felt towards children and other family members. In this way, family grows out of marriage and radiates into society and the Church. The Christian marriage is thus a part of the living Church.

As part of these introductory thoughts, we also propose to thank married couples and families for their tremendous service to one another, to our society and to our Church. We also want to specifically thank those who have remained together through difficulties and have thus become living signs of the fidelity of God.

We would also like for this introduction to mention why it is that we as bishops comment upon the issues of marriage and family: we come from families, live as a family and participate in the life of the family. We concern ourselves with the life of marriage and families in our capacity as shepherds. But we also wish to listen to the circumstances of their lives and their challenges, to accompany and strengthen them with the loving vision of the Gospel.

In another addendum, we would like to take up the topic of kinship as an example. In their respective cultural contexts, the relationships of kin offer many possibilities of support in the rearing of children and in familial cohabitation which go far beyond those of the nuclear family. They are particularly important wherever not only migration, catastrophe and taking flight, but also the effects of labor mobility or the results of broken human relationships have made the life of the nuclear family difficult, complicated or even impossible. It is precisely in such situations that a broad network of kinship proves itself to be a valuable source of aid.

These two examples show how we have adopted the text before us positively, but also tried to develop and supplement it.

I would like to make an additional remark in regards to the perception and evaluation of varying cultural realities. A synodal document must take proper account of respective cultural peculiarities and differences - especially when dealing with elements of today's cultural reality which are ambivalent or problematic from the perspective of the Church. A differentiated analysis and evaluation is absolutely necessary here in order to contribute to a proper and nuanced ecclesiastical-intercultural exchange. I would like to clarify this by way of an example: In the first chapter, individualism is spoken of frequently. As a fundamentally egotistical characteristic, it is, without a doubt, a great danger to the life of man. However, it cannot be allowed to be confused with the individuality of man. Each individual human being is uniquely and magnificently created by God, and each deserves respect and the protection of his personal dignity. Our text speaks often of individualism, but the positive signs of our times, which flow from the respect of the individuality of the human person, are undervalued. If we fail to differentiate our perception, we arrive at divergent evaluations of our society and, as a result, divergent pastoral suggestions. Our group requests that we refrain from putting too much stock in a rather pessimistic perception of our society.

Finally, there is a two-fold problem regarding translation: that of the literal translation of the Italian text and that of the cultural translation of the content.

The German translation follows the Italian text quite closely, which, however, sometimes makes the German text difficult to understand. Reasons for this include the overlong sentences, which require shorter sentences in German. Also, the nested structure presents difficulties. In this regard, shorter sentences and an improved structuring of the content is desired. In the translation of the final texts, good style, easy readability and a clear flow of thoughts should be sought after. The translation should not be strict [interlinear], but rather capture the gist of the original [sinngemäß].

During the composition of the text, attention should be paid to ensuring that ecclesiastical and theological positions are not only internally understandable, but also accessible to the secular environment. This calls for a "cultural translation" - an "inculturation," as it were. This will effect the editing of the entire document as to whether negative-limiting and normative-judgmental language is used (forensic style), or positive language which both develops the Christian position and implicitly reveals which positions are incompatible with the Faith. This includes the willingness (cf. Gaudium et Spes) to seize upon positive developments in society. Perhaps we require a kind of "Hermeneutic of Evagelization" for the overarching style, which then considers the subject under examination "in light of the Gospel."

We look forward to further fraternal collaboration, and we thank everyone for their many efforts towards a harmonious progression and conclusion of the Synod.

[01665-DE.01] [Original language: German]

Charges Dropped Against Swiss Bishop

His Excellence Vitus Bishop Huonder

Giuseppe Gracia, Media and Communications Coordinator for the Diocese of Chur, reported today that the charges of public incitement of violence made against Swiss Bishop Vitus Hounder by homosexual activists have been found without legal merit by the state prosecutor. His communiqué, published on the official webpage of the Diocese, reads as follows:

The state prosecutor for the Canton of Graubünden has issued an order for the withdrawal of prosecution on 8.10.2015 in regards to the charges mades by "Pink Cross" and others. As expected, the accusations made against Bishop Vitus Huonder have thus proven themselves as foundless, and the same is hereby acknowledged with satisfaction. The Diocese of Chur reserves the right to revisit the issue once the legal matter has been formally resolved, at the earliest in ten day's time.

As reported on August 9, the good Bishop had been accused of inciting Catholics to acts of violence against sodomites by homosexual activists due to his having publicly quoted two passages from Sacred Scripture (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13) which state that homosexual activity is considered an abomination before God.

What Should Our Bishops Do?

Boniface over at Unam Sanctam Catholicam has just published a very good piece on the subject of the general failure of the conservative - one should rather simply say orthodox - forces in the Church to defend the same from the attacks of the progressives. While I recommend that you read the whole article, I'd like to highlight the counter-strategies he proposes, as I think they deserve a wide readership - particularly among our Priests and Bishops:

• Vigorously punish heresy in their own dioceses. Keep strict watch on the activities of certain priests and suspend, dismiss or defrock those who clearly dissent from Church teaching.
• Preach the truth boldly, including explicit condemnations of particular groups or ideologies, even condemning heterodox teachers or priests by name when necessary. Go beyond the typical non-offensive, wishy-washy bishop-speak.
• Use the resources of a diocese to publish actual informative and instructional materials, not the sort of nonsense most dioceses put out.
• Actually issue liturgical directives to promote tradition. The contemporary Church documents offer considerable leeway in how liturgy can be done; the upside of this is that the bishop is given the final call on all of these options. A bishop could easily say, "No guitars and drums at any diocesan Mass", or mandate sacred chant, or compel every parish to offer at least a monthly Traditional Latin Mass. Novus Ordo Masses must at least incorporate Latin and be said ad orientam.
• Dismiss lay persons or members of subversive religious orders from their diocesan committees.
• Actually use the tool of excommunication against dissident theologians and dissenting Catholic politicians.
• Use resources of the diocese for meaningful (I stress meaningful) social activism. Example: One priest told me there used to be a scummy motel near his parish that was frequented by prostitutes. He raised some money, bought the motel, and had it torn down. What if the millions raised by our diocesan appeals were used for such uses?
• Organize at the regional level and use their weight to push through appointments within the USCCB or elsewhere that were favorable to them while simultaneously using their influence to keep out liberal appointments.
• Host guest-speakers friendly to tradition and forbid those who are not.
• Forbid Catholic schools and hospitals from engaging in activities harmful to the Catholic faith and actually back up these directives with the appropriate force.
• Fire all Catholic school teachers who are in immoral relationships.
• Actually celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass and require all seminarians to know it and be comfortable with Latin.
• Publicly censure books and films hostile or dangerous to the Catholic faith.
• Mandate traditional arrangements in the architecture of sanctuaries and churches; stipulate that no parish has the right to undertake any renovations unless personally approved by him.
• Promote priests who cooperate with this agenda and punish those who don't.
• In short, never, never miss an opportunity to promote tradition and actively punish and repress liberalism. Speak the truth boldly but also use the weight of the office to silence, retard, dismiss or dispirit the liberal opposition.

Of course, actions such as these can only be carried out by those with the actual power to effect positive change, i.e. Priests and Bishops. Nonetheless, Catholic journalists and bloggers could accomplish a great deal if they were to focus more of their energies on helping inform their readership as to problematic areas requiring concrete action, and by encouraging and coordinating lay action and directing the same towards those responsible for bringing about the changes that need to happen. At the very least, we should not cease in heaping praise upon those Priests, Bishops and Cardinals with the guts to stand up for the Catholic Faith in the public square.

His Excellence Salvatore Bishop Cordileone

Sexual Instruction for the Young

Eleventh in a Series on Catholic Marriage and Parenthood

 by

 Fr. Thomas J. Gerrard

When the question is asked point blank whether children should be taught at least the chief facts of the sexual life, the answer is hard to give. Nearly everybody's instinct shrinks from saying, "Yes." All right-minded parents and teachers feel a reticence in speaking to children on a matter which from its very nature is so private. Yet, on the other hand, nearly everybody's reason declares that children should have such instruction. The great majority of young girls who go wrong do so simply out of ignorance of the tendencies, dangers, and responsibilities of the sexual life. Moral depravity in boys, too, arises chiefly from the fact that they acquire their first information from older boys already depraved. What must parents do in the face of this dilemma? A universal healthy instinct counsels silence, whilst a universal healthy reason counsels speech. Evidently there must be a compromise. And the compromise is this: there must be speech, but it must be reticent and discreet.

The mind and the senses, the brain and the nerves, are so related to each other that they act and react on each other. So intimate and organic is this relationship that conversation or reading about sexual matters tends to excite the sexual functions. Even though the conversation and the reading may be justified and done with a right Intention, it is, nevertheless, fraught with certain dangers. It emphasizes images in the imagination which may become temptations to sin, when the brain is tired or the mind off its guard.

There can, therefore, be only one reason for enlightening children with sexual knowledge. There can be only one reason for adults discussing sexual topics amongst themselves. There can be only one reason for the writing of this and similar chapters. And the reason is necessity.

In 1905, a conference on the subject was held at Mannheim. An almost unanimous vote declared that the chief laws of sex should be taught to boys in the higher classes of secondary schools. But the widest diversity of opinion was expressed as to the manner in which the instruction should be given; and also as to the extent of the matter; nor yet was there any unanimity as to who should give the instruction. In Germany, experiments have actually been made. But the result has not been satisfactory to the Catholic conscience. Complaints have been raised both as to the information given and the way of giving it. Indeed, very little reflection is wanted to show that, in a matter so personal and private, class instruction is not the desirable thing.

The first principle that may be laid down with safety is that the duty of giving the first instruction in these matters belongs to the parents of the children. Even in the more general parts of education, the school is but a supplement to the family. The school teacher is only supposed to do what the parents cannot efficiently do themselves. But the parent can teach the laws of sex, and ought to be able to do so even more efficiently than the school teacher. Moreover, the teacher has a right to presuppose such knowledge if in the course of his lessons questions involving sexual laws should incidentally arise.

It has been frequently said that the mother should teach the girls and the father the boys. This rule becomes more appropriate as the children grow older. Girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen would more naturally turn to their mother, whilst boys of the same age would more naturally turn to their father. Parents may take this as a healthy instinct and use their judgment accordingly to direct it.

But questions begin to arise in the child mind long before the age of thirteen. As the mother is occupied almost entirely with the children during their earlier years, it is her duty rather than the father's to watch for the signs of awakening intelligence. Knowledge should never be thrust into the child's mind before it is asked for. The state of innocence or ignorance, whichever we like to call it, is better kept untouched as long as possible. If a boy or girl can be kept in a state of innocence, without fear of being smirched by other and more precocious children, say up to the age of thirteen or fourteen, he will be all the better for it both in health of mind and health of body. To put sexual images into a child's mind before due time is to start a tendency towards precocity and moral depravity. The arrival of a new baby is best explained by saying that it is a present from God, and has come in God's good way.

Together with this protection from the unripe fruit of knowledge there should be a corresponding observance of sexual hygiene. Irritation due to uncleanliness, or to tight and hot clothing, may easily cause undue sexual development and so become the source of moral difficulty in the future. If any signs of abnormal sexual development appear, a doctor should be consulted. Under no circumstances whatever should children be allowed the taste of alcohol. It leads both to drunkenness and impurity.

There comes at length a time when explicit knowledge is in order and must be given. The dawn of a more intelligent interest begins to glimmer. It comes so innocently, so naively, that it is just as likely to express itself in the presence of the mother as in the presence of other and older children. That is the mother's opportunity. Then, and not until then, may she give the information. If, as is frequently done, she silences the question by saying that it is one that ought not to be asked, or if she ignores it by talking of something else, then she has missed the opportunity given to her by God through nature. The child's interest has not been crushed, but has even been accentuated and probably directed into a dangerous channel. He will ask the question again, and perhaps when he does get an answer it will be adorned with the attractions of vice. The impression will come to him that somehow the facts of sex are very wicked, but at the same time very alluring.

No! When the right moment has arrived, when the mother judges that if she does not speak some one else will, then she must say the word solemnly and plainly. The fact of sex is something holy and mysterious. If the child wants to know anything about it, it must ask mother and not other people. Children grow in the mother's body and, when the time comes, they are born.

If the matter be thus solemnly but openly treated there will be no need to go too much into details. The child will make its own inferences, which will be substantially correct. At any rate, they will be enough for the time being. As the child grows older it will want to know more. Here, again, no exact rule can be laid down. The parents will be guided by their judgment, which will partake rather of the nature of an instinct. As more details are required, so will the mother speak to the girls, and the father to the boys. To the parents and not to the schoolmaster, nor still less to boys and girls, belongs the duty of explaining what is meant by being born.

This knowledge is sought for, and possessed, long before the knowledge of how children are begotten. The latter is one of the most difficult things to teach. Parents are inclined to be too reticent about it, with the result that children invariably get their first knowledge from undesirable sources. Let reason, then, decide that the parents shall say what is essential, and at the same time let instinct decide that they shall not say more than is essential.

There is no need, whatever, for a full and particular description of the sexual act. Much less is there need of diagrams and pictures of the human body.

The best way is to begin with the lower forms of life. The description of the fertilization of a plant is most admirable. The plant excites no harmful images in the imagination. The poultry yard, too, may be taken as a convenient object lesson. If plants and poultry are understood, then the parent may go further and say that in the higher animals and in human beings the young are produced in a similar way.

The manner of giving this information is more important than the matter. There must, on the one hand, be no tendency to laugh and joke about it, whilst there must, on the other, be no attempt to suppress it as if it were something wicked. The inquiring mind at this stage is alert and receptive. Moreover, it works in harmony with a natural instinct. Thus, of its own nature, it readily makes the right inferences and draws the necessary conclusions. The aim of the parent is to keep these conclusions as ideal as possible, and to prevent them from becoming topics of conversation and reading. The more they act on the senses so much the more likely are they to induce an indulgence of the senses, and thus lead to acts of impurity.

After the age of thirteen or fourteen, the boys will claim more particularly the attention of their father, and the girls that of their mother. Now is the time for explicit teaching on certain well-defined matters.

If the boy has been encouraged to look to his father rather than to his own playfellows for information of this kind, he will sooner or later ask in anxiety about the relief of nature in the night. He may be told that so long as this does not arise from any tampering with himself, it is perfectly natural and nothing to be distressed about. The father may also take the occasion to warn him against the sin of self-abuse. This sin is so prevalent amongst boys that the father need hardly be afraid of giving the warning too soon. Let it be said solemnly and plainly that the boy has certain powers given to him by God, for the purpose of begetting children in lawful marriage, and that if those powers are abused in boyhood they will be damaged for their function in manhood.

Strong motives will be required by the boy to keep him straight. At this age, natural motives are very powerful, but they are more powerful if spiritualized and raised to a supernatural plane. Tell the boy first, then, that this is a sin against God. The body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, and sins against the body, therefore, have a special malice in them and bring after them a special punishment. The law of nature is broken and nature will exact a heavy toll. But what is the law of nature except a reflex of the divine mind? And what is the retribution of nature except a fulfillment of the divine Will? Tell the boy, then, that self-abuse impairs the brain and shatters the nerves, that it dulls the intelligence and weakens the will, and that these are the effects ordained by God to follow on the violation of His law.

As the boys get older, they may be warned against venereal disease. The terrible natural effects may be pointed out, but always these natural punishments should be associated with the divine law, and shown to be but a portion of the punishment due to such sins.

A proposal has been made, and in European countries partly put into practice, to enlighten young minds concerning the many extreme forms of sexual perversion. This instruction I hold to be decidedly pernicious. If the boy is warned against the more common sins, he will at once recognize the less common and more heinous ones if the temptation should arise. Whereas, if the idea is put into the boy's head unnecessarily, temptation is put in his way. Nay, I would go further and say that books dealing with the extreme forms of sexual perversion should not be read even by adults, unless their profession obliges them to deal with such cases. Obviously the doctor, the lawyer, and the priest should know all about these things. But the ordinary layman can only read them to his own disadvantage. And if this is true of scientific works, how much more true must it be of certain novels and pictures? The policy of reading and seeing all things is sure to work disaster on those who adopt it without sufficient reason. Where there is reason in this matter there is also grace.

Together with reverence for the divine law, there should be instilled into boys a profound reverence and respect for womankind. This will be directed, in the first instance, towards their own mother and sisters. The habit of mind and heart thus formed in early youth will be of the utmost service to them when in later years they have to associate with and move amongst women not of the family.

The mother will give corresponding instruction to the girls. Directions concerning the first signs of womanhood must be explicit. Our Lady's Virginity may well be taken as an occasion to explain the nature of virginity and its importance to young girls. There is a bodily virginity and a spiritual virginity. Bodily virginity is usually taken to be the sign of spiritual virginity. It is certainly a most important protection of the same, and as such must be guarded with the utmost care. Bodily virginity may be lost either through sin or through ignorance, or through accident, or through necessary surgical operation. Such a misfortune therefore may imply sin or it may not. And if it does not imply sin, it may give rise to needless distress and scruples. Mothers, therefore, can do much both to protect their daughters' chastity, and to preserve their peace of mind, by explaining to them clearly these circumstances of womanhood.

The question has been asked: Who is to instruct those children who have no parents, or whose parents are unfitted for the task? For those who have no parents, the duty devolves upon the guardian. For those whose parents are unfitted, the task may be undertaken by the schoolmaster or the priest. But, generally speaking, it is not advisable that children should associate such instruction with the priest. In the confessional, he never speaks of it unless he is asked or unless he has reason to suppose that there is something wrong. It is not right, therefore, for parents or guardians to relegate instruction to the confessional, for it is their duty to anticipate the wrong by giving instruction before the wrong has been done.

With regard to children at boarding schools, there should be some arrangement between parent and teacher. The parent will endeavor to take the lead either before the child is sent to school or during the holidays, and then communicate with the head teacher accordingly.

The time of going out from home to earn a living is an occasion for special warning. Again, there is no need to go into all the details of the dangers of the streets. It will be sufficient to say that grave dangers do exist and that the chief occasion of these dangers is the accepting of acquaintance with unknown men or women. If good relationships have already been established between mother and daughter, then the girl will willingly tell her mother of any new friendship she may have made.

Whenever there is a question of a girl leaving home for a distant town, and more especially for a foreign country, the mother may well inform her child of the existence of the White Slave Traffic. There are, though, I believe, large numbers of mothers even who do not know of its existence. Let it be said here then that this terrible business is spread all over the world. It consists of tricking young women into houses of ill fame under pretense of finding them situations. The two chief means of enticing girls away are chance acquaintanceships whilst traveling, and advertisements in the newspapers.

Provision has been made for the protection of Catholic girls by the International Catholic Society for Girls. Whenever, therefore, a girl thinks of taking a situation away from home, and especially if she be going to a foreign country, she should first put herself in communication with this society.

German Bishop Bode: Let's Keep Things Ambiguous

Bishop Franz-Josef Hermann Bode

On Moday, Bishop Franz-Josef Hermann Bode of Osnabrück, Germany - one of the members of the Circulus Germanicus at the 2015 Synod - expressed his hope that the final document, expected from Pope Francis some time after the conclusion of the Synod in three weeks time, would retain the ambiguous and even duplicitous character of the Instrumentum Laboris by "simply letting things remain juxtaposed." Making things clear - speaking in "black and white" terms, as Bishop Bode described it - would be counterproductive, as it would fail to allow a sufficient degree of differentiation in each individual case.

Readers will recall the bombshell admission by Cardinal Walter Kasper two years ago (L'Osservatore Romano, April 12, 2013) regarding the intentional ambiguities left in the documents of Vatican II:

In many places, [the Council Fathers] had to find compromise formulas, in which, often, the positions of the majority are located immediately next to those of the minority, designed to delimit them. Thus, the conciliar texts themselves have a huge potential for conflict, open the door to a selective reception in either direction.

Bishop Bode justified his hope for a continuation of this policy of ambiguity by doling out progressive catchphrases such as "unity in diversity" and appealing to what he termed "asynchronicities" (Ungleichzeitigkeiten) between various cultures, a rather transparent attempt at whitewashing the widening gulf between faithful Catholics around the world and the general apostasy in the West as the product of differing levels of cultural "development." He finished by offering the most strained of theological foundations:

Our God is not a monad; therefore, our community cannot be monolithic in the sense of a unified party.

Goodbye, Unity of Faith and Morals. Hello, Rainbow of Diversity.

The Emperor Trajan

Reading N°36 in the History of the Catholic Church

 by

 Fr. Fernand Mourret, S.S.

Emperor Trajan (AD 53-117)

The peace policy that allowed St. John the Apostle to return to Ephesus, publish his Gospel, and die in peace in a steadily growing Christian community, continued throughout the reign of the Emperor Nerva. The coming of Trajan in AD 98 seemed at first to consolidate the religious policy of his predecessor. The new ruler's first act was a long letter to the senate promising not to put to death any righteous man.^[1] It was with marked friendliness that Rome received this soldier, son of a soldier, who had won military glory at the age of forty-two, a man of austerity in spite of certain hidden weaknesses,^[2] whose speech was clear, precise, and forceful, notwithstanding his lack of literary culture.^[3] The old senatorial aristocracy saw itself in this prince, who possessed a robust but short-spoken good sense, a devoted but narrow patriotism, a conservative but not discerning mind, ready to sacrifice everything to the Roman order and the unity of the Empire, but having no care for things of the soul or respect for inner liberties or sense of the delicacies of conscience; in a word, capable of interpreting in a spirit of judicious tolerance the duty of giving to Caesar what is Caesar's, but unable to respect or perhaps even to comprehend the duty of giving to God what is God's. Such was Trajan. Pliny praises him because, after the fifteen years of Domitian's assertion of divinity, he refused to call himself God.^[4] If he had a god, it was that of Roman unity, and as he considered this unity to rest upon the unity of religious worship, it could be foreseen at the outset of his reign that the Christians had every reason to dread the narrowness of his patriotism.

A broader and deeper mind would have understood that Christianity, instead of weakening the necessary foundations of the Empire, was able to strengthen them. Although the Christians were not disposed to give their sovereigns a homage of adoration, they prayed for them with sincere heart and obeyed them loyally. We have already seen the beautiful prayer for the emperor which Pope St. Clement sent to the Christians of Corinth right after Domitian's persecution,^[5] and we are acquainted with the lessons of obedience which St. Paul gave to the Christians of Rome during the tyranny of Nero.^[6] Trajan was not keen enough to see in the Church the "great school of respect"^[7] which might perhaps have saved the Empire's unity against more real dangers. Like Nero, he saw an enemy where there was an ally; for him Christianity was the odium generis humani.

It is probable that there were martyrs in the first years of Trajan's reign;^[8] but the rescript in which the Emperor's policy toward the Christians is expressed was written in AD 111 or 112. We must pause to consider this imperial act and the principles of which dominated the whole religious policy of the Antonines.

Pliny the Younger
Cathedral of S. Maria Maggiore, Como

In the fall of 111,^[9] Trajan received from the legate of Bithynia, who was then Pliny the Younger, a long letter, setting forth the embarrassing situation in which the emperor's representative found himself on account of the considerable development of Christianity, and asking of the emperor a regulation for his guidance. The germs of faith sowed in the various provinces of Asia Minor by the preaching of St. Peter and St. Paul had grown extraordinarily. The Christian communities, profiting by the Roman legislation regarding hetairiae, or professional and religious corporations, increased everywhere, driving back paganism before them. The temples were deserted; the sale of animals intended for the sacrifices suffered a crisis. Hence arose repeated complaints, which were taken to the legate. Nearly everywhere, in his tours through his province, Pliny found himself in the presence of some of these Christians, of whose doctrine he knew nothing and, furthermore, cared little to know. But he did know that "they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up."

As an upright magistrate, careful to prosecute only crimes enumerated in the law of his country, Pliny judged it not proper to proceed with rigor against such people. But informers intervened, some of them anonymously, in such numbers and so insistently, that the legate had to do somethingabout the matter. Pliny's letter continues:

I judged it so much the more necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition. I therefore adjourned the proceedings, and betook myself at once to your counsel.^[10]

In reply to the lengthy communication of the accomplished scholar, Trajan writes with that "imperial brevity"^[11] which came to him from his military character and was suited to the giving of commands:

The method you have pursued, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those denounced to you as Christians, is extremely proper. It is not possible to lay down any general rule which can be applied as the fixed standard in all cases of this nature. No search should be made for these people; when they are denounced and found guilty, they must be punished; with the restriction, however, that when the party denies himself to be a Christian, and shall give proof that he is not (that is, by adoring our gods), he shall be pardoned. [...] Informations without the accuser's name subscribed must not be admitted in evidence.^[12]

Tertullian points out the illogical part of this decision. He says:

It forbids the Christians to be sought after as innocent, and yet it commands them to be punished as guilty.^[13]

Its unreasonableness is patent if it is looked at from the point of view of morality. But Trajan, as a jurist of ancient Rome, was scarcely aware of this point of view when reasons of state seemed to be involved. It is true that the Christians did not commit any crime in common law; but simply by not performing certain religious ceremonies touching the State gods, they were disturbing the "Roman order." This is precisely why a simple "adoration of the gods" will bring them complete pardon. The "Roman order" does not require search to be made for Christians: this would involve a commotion not demanded by the situation. The crime of being a Christian will become punishable only if it is made manifest by a precise denunciation.

This, at any rate, is Trajan's view. From this principle many of his successors drew more severe consequences; they did not alter it essentially. The reasons of State, so unjustly appealed to against the Christians, were advanced, now by the jealousy of Jewish sects, now by the monstrous calumnies which the pagans invented about the Christian mysteries. But, even when the decrees of persecution seem forced upon the emperors by the rage of the people, the final reason for the attack on Christianity will remain this principle which, through Trajan, goes back to the first persecution by Nero: the Christian is the enemy of the Roman civilization, understood after the pagan manner; he is an object of "hatred for mankind."^[14] Thus are we to explain this curious anomaly, puzzling at first glance, namely, that the fiercest persecutors of the Church are not always the most detestable from the moral point of view. Often they have but little care for the Roman unity, whereas those most devoted to the State are at times led to make a sort of divinity of it, to which they sacrifice all.[15]

This was so in the case of Emperor Trajan. His reign was glorious in many respects, but it was stained by the blood of three holy pontiffs: the head of the Church of Rome, the head of the Church of Jerusalem, and the head of the Church of Antioch: St. Clement, St. Simeon, and St. Ignatius.

The account of the condemnation, exile, and death of the great Pope St. Clement is preserved in the Passio Clementis,^[16] which is quoted by Gregory of Tours,^[17] and seems to be known to the writer of the note on Clement I in the Liber Pontificalis.^[18] The plainly legendary details of this document were pointed out long ago. But even in the most incorrect histories, there is usually some basis of truth.^[19]

According to the best critics, the following are the historical elements contained in this document. On the occasion of a popular uprising in Trajan's reign, Pope Clement was exiled to the Chersonesus. There he found two thousand Christians who had been condemned to the hard labor of the marble quarries long before. Clement consoled and encouraged them. Many conversions took place in the district. With the building material of the abandoned temples and with the wood of the forsaken sacred groves, churches were constructed. These facts reached the ears of the Emperor, who spared the multitude of the Christians, but ordered the aged Pope to sacrifice to the gods, under pain of death. When Clement refused to obey this command, the judge gave orders that an anchor be fastened to his neck and he be thrown into the sea. "There is nothing incredible in this account," says Allard,^[20] and Duchesne proves that the tradition of St. Clement's martyrdom was current in Rome as early as the end of the fourth century.^[21]

The Martyrdom of Pope St. Clement I
Pier Leone Ghezzi (1684-1755)

There is no historic document that enables us to determine the date of St. Clement's martyrdom. But we know the date of the death of St. Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem, and of St. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch. It was the year 107.^[22]

The story of the last days of the holy Bishop of Jerusalem is told by Eusebius, who takes the details from Hegesippus' account. This latter, a converted Jew of the second century, was well situated to be exactly informed. Simeon, son (or grandson) of Cleophas and cousin of our Lord, was 120 years old. He was denounced by Jews and by Judaizing Christians, both as a Christian and as a descendant of King David. The accusation was received by the consular legate of Palestine, Tiberius Claudius Atticus, who had the venerable old man tortured. The holy Bishop's courage aroused the admiration of all present. At last he was put to death on a cross. Hegesippus adds that, as the search for David's descendants was further prosecuted, those very ones who had denounced their pastor were arrested and put to death after being found to belong to the number of the Savior's relatives. God's justice was thus exercised even in this world upon the vile informers.^[23]

The Martyrdom of St. Simeon of Jerusalem

Footnotes

[1] Xiphilinus, in Champagny, Les Antonins, I, 227.

[2] Tillemont, Histoire des empereurs, II, 118.

[3] Dio Cassius, LXVII, 7; Aurelius Victor, Epitome, 13.

[4] Pliny, Letters, X, 25, 97.

[5] Cf. Reading N°31: Pope St. Clement

[6] Cf. Reading N°20: Epistle to the Romans

[7] This phrase is Guizot's. "The principles of Christianity, if graven on the heart, would be incomparably more powerful than this false honor of monarchies, these human virtues of republics, and this servile fear of despotisms." (Montesquieu, Esprit des lois, bk. 24, chap. 6.)

[8] Allard, Histoire des persécutions, I, 142.

[9] Some authors say 112. From the standpoint of general history, the date is of little importance.

[10] Formerly there was a lengthy controversy between scholars with regard to the authenticity of this letter. It has been denied by Aube (Histoire des persécutions, p. 219), Desjardins ("Les Antonins d'après l'épigraphie," in the Revue des Deux Mondes, December 1, 1874), and Havet (Le Christianisme et ses origines, IV, 425 ff.). But the authenticity of the letter is now universally acknowledged. See Boissier, in the Revue archéologique, 1876, p. 114; Renan, Les Evangiles, p. 476, note; Allard, Histoire des persécutions, I, 116 ff.; Harnack, Geschichte der altchristlichen Litteratur, II, 866; Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, part 2, I, 51.

[11] "lmperatoria brevitate," says Tacitus, referring to Galba. Tacitus, History, bk. I, chap. 18.

[12] Pliny, Letters, X, 97.

[13] Tertullian, Apology, 2.

[14] Allard, in his Ten Lectures on the Martyrs (pp. 120 ff.), and more fully in the Revue des questions historiques (July, 1912), clearly shows that the liberty accorded to Christianity, far from being a cause of weakness for the Roman Empire, was, from the time of Nero, an element of peace and security.

[15] On the causes of the persecutions, see Allard, op. cit., pp. 109-125, and "La Situation légale des chrétiens pendant les deux premiers siècles," in the Revue des questions historiques, 1896, pp. 5-43; Callewaert, "De la base juridique des premières persécutions," in the Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique, 1911, pp. 5-16, 633-651.

[16] See this document in Leclercq, Les Martyrs, I, 189 ff.

[17] St. Gregory of Tours, De gloria martyrum, 35 f.; cf. Missale gothicum, in Mabillon, De liturgia gallicana, p. 218.

[18] Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, I, 124, note.

[19] Cf. Tillemont, Mémoires, II, 139. Tillemont makes this remark in connection with the Acts of SS. Nereus and Achilleus. And he does not pass a definite judgment on the authenticity of the Passio Clementis. He says: "We would wish that these things were as certain as they are famous." (Ibidem, p. 174.) But the difficulties which made the learned critic hesitate, have, it seems, for the most part been removed by Allard, Histoire des pers., I, 170 ff., and by de Rossi, Bullett. di archeol. crist., 1864, p. 5.

[20] Allard, op. cit., p. 170.

[21] Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, I, 124; cf. ibidem, p. xci. Duchesne observes that neither St. Irenaeus nor Eusebius nor St. Jerome speaks of the martyrdom of this great Pope. So true is it that silence by the very best informed writers on an event of the highest importance cannot be regarded as a conclusive proof against the historical reality of that event.

[22] Eusebius places St. Simeon's martyrdom in the tenth year of Trajan, i. e., 107. On the date of St. Ignatius' martyrdom, see Allard, op. cit., pp. 189-192.

[23] Eusebius, H. E., III, xxxii, 1-4; cf. Acta sanctorum, February, III, 53-55.

***

Join the discussion at: