New Evidence: Early Christian Soldiers?
A few months ago, as I was heading into the second
Pacifist Fight Club event which was called Round 2 – “The Means War”, I received
an email with links to an article which claimed that my position regarding
the non-participation of the early Christian church in the military was
inaccurate.
The main piece of evidence supplied to me at that time was the
discovery of an historical (second century) document which detailed the actions of
several Christians who were part of the army of Marcus Aurelius.
Second to that was a response by Tertullian (a second century church father) who
claimed that the prayers of those Christian soldiers were instrumental in the
victory of that army.
Since our event was only a few days away, I shared it with
fellow presenter Thomas Crisp and we both did mention this evidence briefly during the
discussion sessions following the presentations, but until now I've held off sharing a detailed resopnse.
About a month ago another brother in Christ (Herb
Montgomery) contacted me because he had come across this same information and,
like myself, was a bit crest-fallen to have discovered evidence that suggested the early Christian
church actually did participate in military actions much earlier than we had
come to believe.
I shared the research I had done up to that point with him and
we corresponded a little back and forth. As a result of Herb’s continued
research there is much to discuss regarding this apparent contradiction between
Christian pacifists and those Christians who hold to redemptive justice.
Here’s a little more background
information and a summary of what we found. (And by “we” I mostly mean Herb
Montgomery).
The Rain Soldiers
The event which informs this discussion occurred when Roman General
Marcus Aurelius was preparing to go to battle with barbarian forces in what we
now call Germany. His men were exhausted and suffering from heat exposure. The
forces ahead of them were fresh and they were outnumbered. After praying to his
own pagan gods (and finding no help), Marcus summons the Christians in his army
and after they pray (“simultaneously”) water began to pour from the sky –
refreshing them with cool water which they caught and drank from their shields
– and pelting the barbarian horde with giant hailstones. As a result, the
Romans won the battle.
When I first read of this account it stunned me. I
immediately searched online for the source and found only one (a single book)
and was immediately skeptical. Mostly because I’ve been reading about this
topic and debating it with people for years and no one has ever (not once)
brought up this as evidence that Christians were involved in military service
before the time of Constantine.
Keep in mind, the Christian pacifist holds that the early
Christian church was anti-war and anti-violence up until the corruption of the
church by the Emperor Constantine in the mid 3rd century. How could it be that
Christians were engaging in violence so much earlier than this? Well…hang on a
minute and you’ll see the whole truth.
I continued to research and I did find an article on
Wikipedia (a most reliable source of trust-worthy information, I know), which
backed up the claims of the email and of the book that was quoted. Furthermore,
there was a quote by Tertullian who not only referenced the “Rain Soldiers”
event but also appeared nonplussed by the fact that Christians were serving in
this army.
The quote (taken out of its context, by the way), says:
“You will see this by examining the letters of Marcus
Aurelius, that most serious of emperors. For, in his letters, he bears witness
that the Germanic drought was removed by the rains obtained through the prayers
of the Christians, who happened to be fighting under him.” - (Tertullian, Apology.)
In addition to this, we also have two other quotes by
Tertullian referenced which also appear to contradict his many other
non-violent, anti-military quotes, for example:
“Looking up to Him (God), we Christians with hands
extended…constantly beseech Him on behalf of all Emperors. We ask for them long
life, undisturbed power, security at home, brave armies, a faithful senate . .
.” - (Tertullian, Apology)
“We (Christians) are sailors along with yourselves; we
serve in the army; we engage in farming and trading…” - (Tertullian, Apology)
Now, again, you have to remember that Tertullian is the
same guy who famously said:
“When Christ disarmed Peter, He disarmed every
soldier." – (Tertullian, Apology; Appendix to Part 9)
So, you can see this appears quite contradictory,
especially when added to the many, many other anti-military quotes by
Tertullian that many Christian Pacifists hold up as evidence that the early
followers of Christ did not stand for violence or condone participation in the
military. However, when you peel back the layers and actually read all of the
quotes in their entirety what you learn is that, (yes Virginia), the Christian
Pacifists were right all along.
For example, when you read Marcus Aurelius’ entire
epistle regarding this instance what you see is that those Christians in his
army were non-combatants. And he even goes further to explain that the reason
why they were non-combatants is due to their faith in Christ. Here’s the full
quote with emphasis on the sections left out by our pro-military friends.
The Epistle of Marcus Aurelius to the Roman Senate reads:
“Having then examined my own position, and my host, with
respect to the vast mass of barbarians and of the enemy, I quickly betook
myself to prayer to the gods of my country. But being disregarded by them, I
summoned those who among us go by the name of Christians. And having made
inquiry, I discovered a great number and vast host of them, and raged against
them, which was by no means becoming; for afterwards I learned their power.
Wherefore they began the battle, not by preparing weapons, nor arms, nor
bugles; for such preparation is hateful to them, on account of the God they
bear about in their conscience. Therefore it is probable that those whom we
suppose to be atheists, have God as their ruling power entrenched in their
conscience. For having cast themselves on the ground, they prayed not only for
me, but also for the whole army as it stood, that they might be delivered from
the present thirst and famine. For during five days we had got no water,
because there was none; for we were in the heart of Germany, and in the enemy’s
territory. And simultaneously with their casting themselves on the ground, and
praying to God (a God of whom I am ignorant), water poured from heaven, upon us
most refreshingly cool, but upon the enemies of Rome a withering hail. And
immediately we recognized the presence of God following on the prayer —a God
unconquerable and indestructible.”
The quote
continues by arguing for the end to Christian oppression and the punishment of
those who persecute them.
If we examine the Tertullian quote in its entirety
(without removing all the annoying pacifist bits) we find out that he (believe it
or not) was consistently non-violent in his theology.
For context, Tertullian
was writing to show the Emperor that Christians were no threat to the Roman
government and that they actually prayed for their Emperor as Christ commanded
all Christians to do:
"Thither we lift our eyes, with hands outstretched,
because free from sin; with head uncovered, for we have nothing whereof to be
ashamed; finally, without a monitor, because it is from the heart we
supplicate. Without ceasing, for all our emperors we offer prayer. We pray for
life prolonged; for security to the empire; for protection to the imperial
house; for brave armies, a faithful senate, a virtuous people, the world at
rest, whatever, as man or Cæsar, an emperor would wish. These things I cannot
ask from any but the God from whom I know I shall obtain them, both because He
alone bestows them and because I have claims upon Him for their gift, as being
a servant of His, rendering homage to Him alone, persecuted for His doctrine,
offering to Him, at His own requirement, that costly and noble sacrifice of
prayer dispatched from the chaste body, an unstained soul, a sanctified spirit,
not the few grains of incense a farthing buys — tears of an Arabian tree,— not
a few drops of wine,— not the blood of some worthless ox to which death is a
relief, and, in addition to other offensive things, a polluted conscience, so
that one wonders, when your victims are examined by these vile priests, why the
examination is not rather of the sacrificers than the sacrifices. With our
hands thus stretched out and up to God, rend us with your iron claws, hang us
up on crosses, wrap us in flames, take our heads from us with the sword, let
loose the wild beasts on us, - the very attitude of a Christian praying is one
of preparation for all punishment. Let this, good rulers be your work: wring
from us the soul, beseeching God on the emperor's behalf." – (Tertullian,
Apology, Chapter 30)
See that? Tertullian is saying that Christians are
praying for God to bless their Emperor even while they are being tortured and
killed for their faith. This sounds more like the Tertullian that Christian
Pacifists know and love.
Many have tried to say that Tertullian and Origen were
not against military involvement because of any non-violent Christian pacifism
but mainly because of the participation in pagan rituals and swearing
allegiance to the Roman Emperor as a Deity. However, the following quote from
Tertullian demolishes that argument soundly:
“I think we must first inquire whether warfare is proper
at all for Christians. What sense is there in discussing the merely accidental,
when that on which it rests is to be condemned? Do we believe it lawful for a
human oath to be superadded to one divine, for a man to come under promise to
another master after Christ, and to abjure father, mother, and all nearest
kinsfolk, whom even the law has commanded us to honour and love next to God
Himself, to whom the Gospel, too, holding them only of less account than
Christ, has in like manner rendered honour? Shall it be held lawful to make an
occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword
shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle
when it does not become him even to sue at law? And shall he apply the chain,
and the prison, and the torture, and the punishment, who is not the avenger
even of his own wrongs?” …”Touching this primary aspect of the question, as to
the unlawfulness even of a military life itself, I shall not add more, that the
secondary question may be restored to its place. Indeed, if, putting my
strength to the question, I banish from us the military life..." -
(Tertullian, The Chaplet or De Corona; chapter 11)
So, it’s fairly clear that Tertullian did not want any
follower of Christ to engage in military action or warfare and that his reasons
were directly related to obedience towards Christ’s commands against using
violence. In this same work, he also argues that:
“Of course, if faith comes later, and finds any
preoccupied with military service….when a man [already in the military] has become a believer, and faith
has been sealed, there must be either an immediate abandonment of it (military
service), which has been the course with many, or all sorts of quibbling will have to be resorted to in
order to avoid offending God, and that is not allowed even outside of military
service;”
In this document, Tertullian urges those who are already
serving in the military to cease involvement and, if necessary, suffer a
martyrs death (as was often the case).
Finally, let’s end with a look at how Tertullian handles
the common objection we often hear from pro-military Christians regarding the
Old Testament use and acceptance of warfare as an argument for why Christians
should be free to go to war today:
“But now inquiry is made about this point, whether a
believer may turn himself unto military service, and whether the military may
be admitted unto the faith, even the rank and file, or each inferior grade, to
whom there is no necessity for taking part in sacrifices or capital punishments
[Note: he’s talking about an exception whereby a Christian in the military
might not have to take the offensive oaths to Caesar as “Lord and Savior”,
etc.]. There is no agreement between the divine and the human sacrament, the
standard of Christ and the standard of the devil, the camp of light and the camp
of darkness. One soul cannot be due to two masters—God and Cæsar. And yet Moses
carried a rod, and Aaron wore a buckle, and John (Baptist) is girt with leather
and Joshua the son of Nun leads a line of march; and the People warred: if it
pleases you to sport with the subject. [Sound familiar?] But how will a
Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which
the Lord has taken away? For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had
received the formula of their rule; albeit, likewise, a centurion had believed;
still the Lord afterward, in disarming Peter, disarmed every soldier.” – (Tertullian,
Apology, Chapter 19)
So, in spite of
so-called “evidence” that appears to contradict the claim that the early Church
was peaceful and non-violent, the truth is still evident: The followers of
Jesus did not approve of warfare nor engage in violence until the time of
Constantine in the mid third century.
For those of us who desire to follow Christ with all our
hearts, we cannot appeal to the Old Testament to support a belief in redemptive
violence. At the very heart of this issue is one single fact: Our Lord Jesus
commanded us to love our enemies, do good to those who hate us, and bless those
who curse us. He disarmed Peter and he forbid His disciples to work violence
against others. We cannot serve both God and Caesar. Our Lord Jesus has given
us our marching orders. We cannot do less than obey His every word.
-kg
*SPECIAL THANKS to Herb Montgomery for his diligent
research in this area. You can read his extensive treatment of this subject
(with longer quotes and a discussion of Origen’s position) here>
