A Christian Defends His Religion Against Roman Persecution

The earliest Christians originated in the Near East, and the entire New Testament of the Christian Bible was composed in the koine (common) Greek spoken throughout eastern provinces of the Roman Empire. However, by the late second century, Christianity had attracted a number of converts in the western half of the empire as well. One of these converts, Tertullian (ca. 160–240), was the first Christian of note who wrote in Latin. His most famous work, the Apologia, presents a defense of Christianity against Roman persecution and is excerpted below. Tertullian would exert enormous influence on later Christians in the West, including Saint Augustine.

Magistrates of the Roman Empire! You who are seated for the administration of justice in almost the highest position of the state13 and under the gaze of everyone! If you are not allowed to conduct an open examination, face to face, into the truth regarding the Christians, if in this case alone you fear or are ashamed to exercise your authority to conduct a public investigation with the care that justice demands, if, finally, the extreme hatred shown this group (as happened recently in the domestic courts) has been raised to such a level that it inhibits their defense, then let the truth reach your ears by the secret pathway of silent literature. . . .

If it is certain that we are the most criminal of people, why do you treat us differently from others of our kind, namely all other criminals? The same crime should receive the same treatment. When others are charged with the same crimes imputed to us, they are permitted to use their own mouths and the hired advocacy of others to plead their innocence. They have full freedom to answer the charge and to cross-examine. In fact, it is against the law to condemn anyone without a defense and a hearing. Only Christians are forbidden to say anything in defense of the truth that would clear their case and assist the judge in avoiding an injustice. All that they care about (and this by itself is enough to arouse public hatred) is a confession to bearing the name “Christian,” not an investigation of the charge. Now, let us assume you are trying any other criminal. If he confesses to the crime of murder, or sacrilege, or sexual debauchery, or treason — to cite the crimes of which we stand accused — you are not content to pass sentence immediately. Rather, you weigh the relevant circumstances: the nature of the deed; how often, where, how, and when it was committed; the co-conspirators and the partners-in-crime. Nothing of this sort is done in our case. Yet, whenever that false charge is brought against us, we should equally be made to confess: How many murdered babies has one eaten? How many illicit sexual acts has one performed under cover of darkness? Which cooks and which dogs were there? Oh, how great would be the glory of that governor who should bring to light a Christian who has already devoured 100 babies!

To the contrary, we find that it is forbidden to hunt us down. When Pliny the Younger was a provincial governor and had condemned some Christians to death and had intimidated others to abandon the steadfastness of their faith, he was still concerned by their sheer numbers and worried about what to do in the future. So he consulted Trajan, the reigning emperor [ca. 98–117]. Pliny explained that, other than their obstinate refusal to offer sacrifice, he had learned nothing else about their religious ceremonies, except that they met before daybreak to sing hymns to Christ and God and to bind themselves by oath to a way of life that forbids murder, adultery, fraud, treachery, and all other crimes. Trajan then wrote back that people of this sort should not be hunted down, but, when brought to court, they should be punished.

What a decision! How inevitably self-contradictory! He declares that they should not be hunted down, as though they are innocent. Then he prescribes that they be punished, as though they are guilty. He spares them, yet he directs his anger upon them. He pretends to shut his eyes, yet he calls attention to them. Judges, why do you tie yourself up in knots? If you condemn them why not hunt them down? If you do not hunt them down, why not also find them innocent?

Throughout all the provinces, soldiers are assigned by lot to hunt down bandits. When it comes to traitors and public enemies each person is a soldier. Inquiry extends even to one’s associates and confederates. The Christian alone may not be hunted down, but he may be brought to court, as if hunting down led to anything other than being haled [hauled] into court. So, you condemn someone who is haled into court, although no one wished to seek him out. He has not merited punishment, I suppose, because he is guilty, but because, forbidden to be looked for, he was found! . . .

A person shouts out, “I am a Christian.” He says what he is. You want to hear what he is not. You preside to extort the truth, yet in our case alone you take infinite pains to hear a lie. “I am,” he says, “what you ask if I am. Why torture me to twist the fact around? I confess, and you torture me. What would you do if I denied?” Clearly when others deny you do not readily believe them. In our case, when we deny, you immediately believe us. . . .

Inasmuch as you treat us differently from all other criminals, which you do by concentrating on disassociating us from that name (for we are cut off from the name “Christian” only if we do what non-Christians do), you must know that there is no crime whatsoever in our case. It is only a name. . . .

So much for my preface, as it were, which is intended to beat into submission the injustice of the public hatred felt for us. Now I take the stand to plead our innocence. . . .

We are said to be the worst of criminals because of our sacramental baby-killing and the baby-eating that accompanies it and the sexual license that follows the banquet, where dogs are our pimps in darkness when they overturn candles and procure a certain modesty for our impious lusts.14 We are always spoken of in this way, yet you take no pains to investigate the charges that you have made against us for so long. If you believe them, investigate them. Otherwise, stop believing what you do not investigate. The fact that you look the other way suggests that the evil that you yourselves dare not investigate does not exist. . . .

You say, “You do not worship the [traditional Greek and Roman] gods, and you do not offer sacrifices for the emperors.” It follows logically that we do not offer sacrifices for others because we do not do so even for ourselves. All of this is a consequence of our not worshipping the gods. So we are accused of sacrilege and treason. This is the chief case against us. In fact, it is the whole case. . . . Your gods we cease to worship from the moment we recognize they are not gods. So that is what you ought to require us to prove — that those gods do not exist and for that reason should not be worshipped because they deserve worship only if they are gods.

READING AND DISCUSSION QUESTIONS