Archives: Book Chapters

HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL BACKGROUND

MISSIONARIES WORK

REASON FOR PERSECUTION

The occasion of Ranavalona I, who succeeded Radama I in 1828, soon brought out the ambiguities produced by the situation. The Queen was put on the throne by a conspiracy of the commoners who in this way were able to join forces with the Andriana aristocracy more favorable to Christianity and very sensitive to the possibilities of modernization which it offered. The Queen was led to maintain the royal protection of the missionaries but exercised stricter control over their activities because she was afraid of seeing Christianity become the focus of opposition. To obtain popular support and to make people forget the doubtful origins, of her power, the Queen relied on the soothsayers (ombiasy), and restored to power the sacred foundation of the Monarchy

MANNER OF PERSECUTION AND DEATH OF CHRISTIANS

After several years, the fragile balance was broken, and Ranava lona chose to follow a strict policy of limiting Christianity. She forbade missionaries to preach, and then banned the baptism of soldiers and children. Finally in 1835 March 1st the Queen proclaimed:

"I have to tell you that I will not pray to the ancestors of the Europeans but to God and my ancestors. It is thanks to this custom that the twelve kings reigned and that I have reigned myself. Your own ancestors respected this custom. My people, I shall put to death anyone who practiced the new religion, because I am the heiress of twelve kings."

She applied to the missionaries the rule laid down by Radama I limiting the presence of Europeans to ten years. Reduced to inactivity, in 1836 the missionaries decided to leave the kingdom and took refuge on the East coast, at Tamatave. They left behind them a small group of about fifty Christians. The Christians went on to make a permanent reappraisal of their situation on the basis of the OT and NT in the conviction that they wear believing the history of the Hebrews and the first Christians. They also kept in contact with the missionaries by letter and today this correspondence gives us direct evidence of this first wave of persecution and the way in which it was experienced. The correspondence shows the central place occupied in the community, outside the Bible by the pilgrims progress. This story became the guideline by which those who were being persecuted understood their trial as a painful but victorious journey. The Christians after the persecutions were almost 3000 of them. Some went into exile beyond Madagascar when the threat became too strong like Mary Rafaravary, daughter of a court dignitary, the first to organize prayer meetings in her home. Arrested in July 1836 and condemned to death, she escaped execution thanks to a providential fire which caused panic among the soldiers and allowed her to get to Tamatave. There she took a ship for Mauritius with a group of Christians. The whole adventure was immediately likened to the adventures of the ‘pilgrim’ with whom Mary is identified. She thought of Christians crossing the valley of the shadow of death, but recalled that it is through numerous tribulations they must enter the kingdom of heaven. During the same year, 1837, the martyrdom of another woman, Rafavavy Rasalana, became the symbol of answering and edifying determination. But it was in 1849 that the persecution reached its height.

On one occasion and in one place thirty-seven Christians, guilty of having explained the word of God to those around them, were condemned to slavery with their wives and children. Elsewhere, forty-two convicted of having a bible in their possession, saw all their goods confiscated...2,055 people had to pay a fine of around 5 francs, others were condemned, some to be burned, others to be cast down from the summit of a rock 300 feet high to the level of the plain. This last collective martyrdom held a special place in the memory of the protestant churches of Madagascar. They still consider that the martyrs are their ancestors in the faith, and in a way the real founders of the church.

THE 1849 MARTYRS

On March 1849, the officer, before whom the Christians were being examined, put to them this question: ‘Do you worship the sun, the moon or the earth?’

One of the Christians replied: ‘I do not pray to them, because the hand of God made them’. "Do you worship the twelve sacred mountains?" ‘I do not worship them, because they are only mountains’. "Do you pray to the idols which preside over the consecration of kings?" ‘I do not pray to them, because the hand of man made them’. "Do you pray to the ancestors of the rulers?" ‘Kings and governors are given to us by God so that we obey them and pay them homage, but they are only men like us. When we pray, it is God alone whom we address’. "Do you distinguish other days and do you observe the sabbath?" ‘It is the day of the great God, for in six days the Lord made all his works, then he rested on the seventh day and declared that day holy. That is why we rest and keep that day holy.’ (Bruno Chenu, The Book of Christian Martyrs, p. 148.)

All the other Christians replied in the same way. One man, who hitherto had stood apart, seeing a woman confess God and recalling that those who denied him would regret it, came forward and spoke in turn as the other’s had done. And when these brothers and sisters had been bound, the husband of one of them who had heard their confession approached them and said to them, ‘Do not be afraid, for it will be a good thing for you to die for such a cause’. This man was a soldier who lived in quite a remote place, and he was not among the number of the accused, but then he was interrogated, and as he made the same confession, he was bound like the rest. Then they fastened the bonds of these brothers and sisters very tightly, led them off and shut each one of them in a separate house. On 22 March 1849, when one of the Christians said, ‘Yahweh alone is God above any other’s name that can be named, and Jesus Christ is also God’, the people who were there uttered great cries and mocked at them. Then the officer said to another. "Rabodonampoinimerina (that is the sacred name of the queen) is our God and not yours." Thereupon the Christian replied, ‘the God who made me is my God, but Rabodo is my queen and my sovereign. And when he would not make any other response but that, the people who were there said, ‘perhaps this is an idiot or a lunatic. But he cried out ‘No, I am not an idiot and I have not lost my mind.’ Then there was great tumult among the people, and they cried out ‘Take him away’ and he was led away to prison.

The following day, before daybreak, the people gathered at Analakely. They took the eighteen brothers, and sisters who had chosen for their part to confess God and inherit eternal life by becoming his sons and daughters, they bound their hands and feet, they attached them to posts surrounded with mats and they put them with the other prisoners. Ten of these eight brothers and eight sisters were united by the faith. When the officers, the soldiers and the Judges arrived, they read out the names of each of the prisoners. Set them apart all together, put soldiers aimed with spears and muskets around them, and then read out the sentences pronounced on them. Some were condemned to fines and the confiscation of their goods, others to be flogged, and eighteen to be put to death, four to be burned and fourteen to be hurled from a great rock and then burned to ashes. The eighteen condemned to death, sitting on the ground and surrounded by soldiers, began to chant hymn 137 (according to the Malagasy hymn book then in use).

When the sentences had been pronounced, and at the moment when the officer was preparing to return to the superior authorities, the four Christians condemned to be burned begged him, asking to be put to death before being burned, but this request was not granted.

When the officers had left, they took the eighteen condemned to death and led them to the place of execution. The fourteen who were to be hurled down were tied by hands and feet to long poles which men put on their shoulders. And as they were carried in this way, these brothers prayed and spoke to the people, and those who saw them close by said that their faces were like the faces of angels. When they arrived at the summit of Amapamarinana they were hurled down and their bodies were then dragged from the other side of the capital to be burned with the bodies of those who were to perish at the stake.

While the four Christians who were condemned to be burnt alive were on their way to the place of execution, they sang the hymn which begins, ‘when our hearts are troubled’, and of which all the verses end with the words ‘Remember’. All along the road they sang like this. When they arrived at Taravihitra, firewood was fastened to the posts to burn them. And at that moment there was a rainbow in the clouds, not far from the place of their execution. Then they sang hymn 158.

They were still singing this hymn when they were in the fire. Then they prayed, saying ‘Lord receive our spirits. it is because of your love that this is happening to us. Lord, lay not this sin to their charge’. (Bruno Chenu, The Book of Christian Martyrs, p. 149-51.)

And they prayed like this as long as life remained in them. Then they died gently and in peace.

REFLECTION

The missionaries’ work and life are appreciable. Because of the Christian missionaries work, the Madagascar people turned against the Monarchy rule of Madagascar. They introduced a lot of development work for the upliftment of the people of Madagascar. They introduced education system in Madagascar; through these schools also served to train the modern officers which King needed to form an army, capable officers for conquering the island and reinforcing the instruments of state whose authority was subject to much opposition. In the name of missionary work, the missionaries produced capable leaders for conquering. Another important criticism about missionaries is that the Madagascar people were disturbed by the hostile attitude of the missionaries towards their ancient religious customs. In a pluralistic society like India how can we neglect other faiths and religious customs?

Bibliography

Chenu Bruno and Others, The Book of Christian Martyrs, London SCM Press, 1990.

Barett, World Christian Encyclopedia, Oxford.

Freeman and Johns, The Persecution of the Christians of Madagascar.

Introduction

Paul Ni Tsiong-Hoi was one of the leading martyrs of the 19th century. Not only he sacrificed his life because of Christ, but his brother and Sisters also, who were the victims of the first persecution in 1801. Still, his family, even though a high class in its origin, lost all its possessions, and he had to do manual work to survive. His lifestyle, behavior and piety acquired considerable influence over the small number of Christians in Seoul, now the capital-city of South Korea.

Paul Ni rendered his tireless efforts to train catechists to copy books and pictures and to collect the funds needed for sending messengers to the Bishops of Peking. While he was enjoying his life with those of his personal works, a new persecution broke out in 1827, and he was one of the first to be denounced and brought before the tribunals.

Unfortunately, we have very less account of Paul Ni. Most of the sources we can get are from his own letters written from prison, where he died at the age of 36. His letters allow us to follow him into the last moments of his life and to hear the words with which he confessed his faith.

The Context

The Koreans had their first contact with Christianity in 1777 through two little books written in Chinese. One of these two books was written by Father Ricci and was about the Existence of God, and the second one by another community formed in Seoul and in the country essentially among the literate. That community was completely isolated and faced fierce opposition both internally and externally under the leadership of Peter Hoon.

As various small autonomous communities were established around some lay people, men and women, which maintained links through their authorities and their catechists, at the end of 1800, the growth of Christianity was enough to disturb the political authorities and in 1801, provoked the first persecution. This caused the death of 300 people, mostly among the nobility and the literate. The families concerned lost their goods and were exiled. By seeing these, many intellectual people melted away into society, became artisans and instructors and spread Christianity through the villages by instructing ordinary people. Interestingly, the Korean Christianity invented the ministry of the Copyists within each community. The Copyists produced books, guaranteed evangelization and put Christians in contact with one another. So, because of their central role, the Copyists became the chief targets of the persecution.

Martyrdom of Paul Ni

Paul Ni’s regular words to himself was "Could I hope to offer satisfaction for all my sins, at least by Martyrdom".

On the twenty-first day of April, 1827 the fourth moon, at dusk, Kim Seng-tsip-i and a dozen retainers from the province and the capital, came and seized Paul Ni and put him in one of the police stations. They asked him if it was true that he had drawn religious pictures. Paul Ni said, "It is true". The next day, the great criminal judge called him and said to him, "Is it true that you follow the religion of the Master of heaven?" Paul Ni said, "Yes".

Judge "By whom have you been instructed?"

Paul Ni: "My older brother died for this religion, and from childhood I had heard it talked of a little. But then I was associated with Tsio-siuk-i, who was also killed for the same doctrine: I spent several years with him, and my heart is full".

Judge : "Now if you are willing to desist, I will save your life".

Paul Ni: "I cannot".

Judge : "Is what you have stated here true ?"

Paul Ni :"Yes, it is true".

From the following day, he was sent to six retainers for 28 day-journey. Everyday they journeyed 100 lys, (10 leagues) and on the evening of the 28th day of their journey, he was taken to the police station of Tsien-tsiu, where after some moments of rest, he was brought before the judge who asked only his name. In the prison, they put his feet and his hand between two iron bars and fixed great hoop around his neck, and he spent a sleepless night.

The next morning, he was taken to the tribunal and judge asked different questions:

Judge :"How many pictures have you painted ? How many books do you have and who are your accomplices ?"

Paul Ni :"Several pictures. As to accomplices, I have none. I have been abandoned by my kinsfolk and all my friends. Even the common folk scorn me and spit in my face. As to books, I received only oral instruction, and my books are written only in my heart. I have no others."

Judge :"You are deceiving me. Among you, even the common and ignorant folk have thirty or forty volumes. Do you not have any ?"

Paul Ni :"Even though I die under the blows,

I have neither accomplices nor books".

The Judge then went to the Governor, and after a while, he was taken to a room next to the court. While he was waiting, the thought of his sister who was judged and martyred in 1801, in the same city, came to his mind. So he told himself, "I shall follow her and truly is it not she who is drawing me after her ?" At the same time, joy mingled with sadness arose in his heart. Soon he was taken to the Governor again who put several questions to him to which he answered as on the previous day.

Governor : "So have you decided to remain a Christian?" Paul Ni "I have"

Governor :"What is God ?"

Paul Ni : "He is the king and supreme Father of all the universe. He alone has created heaven, earth, the spirits, men and all that is.’

Governor :"How do you know ?"

Paul Ni :"On the one hand, by looking at our body, and on the other, by considering all creatures, can one say that there is not a creator of these things ?"

Governor: "Have you seen him ?"

Paul Ni: "Can one believe only after seeing ? Did the mandarin see the workman who made this court? What we call the five senses only make us perceive sounds, colors, smell, tastes and the like, but it is the spirit which makes them distinguish the principles, reason and all immaterial things".

Governor: "Do you not fear death ?"

Paul Ni: "Why should I not fear it ?"

Governor: "If that is so, why do you not abandon this religion?"

Paul Ni :"I have just given you the reason, please do not interrogate me again. I AM READY TO DIE."

The next morning, the mandarin took Paul Ni right up to the bar and he said to him in a very gentle voice, "You are the child of a noble man, you are not like others. Besides, you are a fine man. So, how can you persevere in following this evil religion?" Paul Ni said, "When it came to matters of principles, no one is superior or inferior, noble or commoner, with a more or less advantageous appearance, only the soul can draw a distinction".

After that the mandarin of Tong-pak asked him to say what the dogmas of Christianity were. Paul Ni told him briefly. Then, while Paul Ni was outlining the Decalogue, the mandarin of Tsien-tsiu asked some questions.

Mandarin: "These are all follies. There is no soul, there is neither heaven nor hell, there is not even God. And then you do not offer sacrifices to ancestors. Among you, goods and women are held in common. Can there be a more degenerate and impious doctrine?"

Paul Ni : "It is true that among us, we do not offer sacrifices. But it is not true that among us, goods and women are held in common. Sacrifices to ancestors are a vain thing, which a right doctrine rightly prohibits. At the moment of death, the souls of the good go to heaven and the souls of the bad to go to hell. As for goods which are said to be held in common among us, if there were no sharing of riches in the world, how would the poor live ? And regarding women, what is imputed to us is formally prohibited in the commandments and is repugnant to all natural feelings. We are forbidden even to covert our neighbor’s wife".

Mandarin :"They say that you still have a mother, and moreover a wife and children, now say just one word, and you can go out and regain your mother, your wife and children. Would that not be pleasant ?"

Paul Ni : "Do you want me to aspotasize to regain my mother? But since God is the great king and the creator, and my mother herself was created by him, how could I deny the Creator for one of his creatures?"

After numberless attempts, having nothing else to try, they made him sign his condemnation. Day and night, they continued to torment him singularly. He thanked God and realized that how great was that grace. He did not know how to thank God and how to respond to it except by giving his life.

On the sixth day of the fifth moon, he was taken to the criminal tribunal where they tempted him to deny his faith so that they could spare his life. But they failed and each one said to another, "It is useless to go on talking to him". Again he was put on the plank where he suffered several blows. At every blow, he said that he invoked Jesus and Mary. After about twenty blows, he felt that he was losing his consciousness and said, "My God, into your hands, I commend my spirit". When he regained his consciousness, he found his limbs in bandages and blood flowing from all the parts where the blows had fallen. He thought of Jesus who underwent scourging, carried his cross and walked more than a thousand paces, up to the summit of a high mountain, and so on. The more he went forward, the more divine grace and favor increased. Hardly had the meal time passed than his pains had disappeared. It is true that he could not use his limbs, and a heavy hoop weighed him down, yet he took some food and his heart was very calm. He asked himself a question, "If that is not the help of God and Mary, how can my strength alone achieve this, I, who cannot even bear an insect bite ?"

On the fifteenth day, they sent express to the King of which they expected the reply around the twentieth. According to Paul Ni’s words, "I await it anxiously, I have put all my trust in God alone, but I am without merit and covered in sin. What will be the order about me? The nearer the end, the more I fear death and the more I tremble at being rejected". To conclude his letter, Paul Ni wrote the following lines:

ALL YOU CHRISTIANS, PLEASE IN MY STEAD THANK THE LORD, AGAIN AND AGAIN. I HAVE A THOUSAND OTHER THINGS TO SAY, BUT TIME FAILS ME. WE SHALL MEET AGAIN IN ETERNITY.

Theological Reflection

Paul Ni’s story is very challenging. It is very beneficial both for personal knowledge and for strengthening faith. Time and again, it reminds one of the mighty salvific act of Christ. Unlike Paul Ni, many a time one never thinks of Jesus who underwent scourging who carried his cross and walked more than a thousand paces to the summit of a high mountain. But the study of this story reminds one to recollect again and again about Jesus’ suffering.

Secondly, Paul Ni does not deny that he really feared death, yet he said, "1 am ready to die". He was ready to die for his Savior. This is very challenging. Are we ready to die for our Savior like Paul Ni, is the question that all of us have to ask ourselves. We may be ready to follow Jesus as a priest, as a pastor, as a bishop, as a teacher and so on, but are we ready to follow Jesus till death?’

Thirdly, Paul Ni’s honesty to his Master is wonderful. Different means had been employed to him so that he might deny his Master. He was tormented, he was threatened, he was encountered with a gentle voice and soon. But all attempts failed to make him recant. WHAT IS THE CONDITION OF OUR HONESTY TO Christ in our daily life, among our friends, among our relatives more than the Creator God ? De we hate our fellow human beings whom God loves?

Observation

Going through Paul Ni’s story is a very happy experience for one. But since there is very limited source, it is unpleasant to say that we do not know the exact date, month and year of his birth. Moreover, the source does not tell us in which year he died. All we know about this is that he died in prison at the age of 36. We do not know how he died. Was not his death a martyr’s death?

The second thing we would like to point out is about Paul Ni’s sentence, "... the souls of the good go to heaven and the souls of the bad go to hell". Who are the good and who are the bad in today’s context?

Questions for discussion

1. If goods are held in common among those who are staying in the same hostel, will it create a better relationship among them?

2. Is it true to say for a good Christian, "I fear death".

Bibliography

Chenu, Brimo et.al, The Book of Christian Martyrs.

INTRODUCTION

Thomas Muentzer was born on Dec 20 or 21, 1488 in Stolberg, a small town in Saxony He continued his elementary education in Quedlinburg. And he entered the University of Leipzig in 1506 at a time when humanism was the philosophy of the day. He entered the University of Frankfurt in 1512. Perhaps it was here that he learnt the classical Hebrew and Greek which he later used in the extensive study of the Bible. Between 1511-1521, Muentzer drew a stipend from a prebend in Halberstadt. He inherited also large legacies after 1520 and acquired expensive books. Thus, contrary to the claims of socialist communist historians, Muentzer did not come from a poor proletarian family nor did he have the financial struggles of a young revolutionary. He was ordained fully in 1513 or 1514. And he chose to go to Frohse, a small monastery outside Halle, a good place for study and meditation, Muentzer was a secular priest at the monastery of St. Cyriacus near Ascherleben. He took interest in improving liturgy Luther’s publication of ninety five theses on Oct. 31, 1517 undoubtedly influenced Muentzer ‘s decision to leave Frohse, Probably in the Fall of 1518. After a brief stay in Wittenberg he went on to Leipzig. He took the pulpit of St. Nicolai in the April of 1519 and attacked papal authority and called for a general assembly which he esteemed above the papacy. He did not stay there long. He went to Leipzig and learnt there more about Luther’s movement. At Benditz, Muentzer studied church history He was particularly attracted to the mysticism of Suso and Tanlee. All these did not help resolve his religious uncertainty. From here Muentzer went to St. Mary’s Church in Zwickau as substitute Pastor for John Egramus on the recommendation of Luther in May 1520. He was still a seeker, restless and curious, driven by the desire to meet divine reality in a direct and personal way. At this time in the early years, the relationship between Luther and Muentzer seemed to have been congenial. He was a supporter of the young movement of Luther in Zwickau but was not a student or disciple of Luther. Thomas Muentzer has been a controversial figure in the religious controversies of the 16th Century. His ideas and his historical significance have been debated and judged differently by different historians. Luther’s view that Muentzer is a fanatic in religion and a rebel in politics seems to have been the verdict of practically all historians until recent times.

Luther regarded Muentzer as the incarnation of the devil; the oppressed peasants saw him as a prophet pointing to a new age of freedom. Communist historians claim him to be the forerunner of Marxist cause. In the midst of differing claims and assessments, Gritsch tries to fill a void in historical research, for the historical Muentzer has been buried too long in the grave of a legend. His assessment of Muentzer is in terms of the problem of the word and the spirit. The word means the Bible as an historical revelation, a source of religious truth.

The Pastor of Zwichau: Zwickau, because of its strategic geographic location with Leipzig, belonged to Germany’s most important trade centers. Grain, beer and textiles were the major products of the city. Zwickau was famous for schools too. It had eight Churches, four hospitals and even a Printing Press. The last probably helped put Zwickau, on the verge of becoming a center of Humanism.

The Church usually took the side of the rich and the common people resented the rich citizens in town. When Muentzer arrived in Zwickau, he attacked the Franciscans. He was supported by members of the city council and, common people mostly weavers, sided with Muentzer. In this fight against monks, Muentzer sought support from Luther. Thus, by the end of the summer Muentzer emerged as the leader of a basically ‘Lutheran’ reform movement in Zwickau. He and Luther were now fighting the same enemy, the papal church with the same weapon, the word of God. Nevertheless Muentzer became more and more attracted to Storch and his followers. In the class struggle that ensued due to the introduction of ideas from Wittenberg, Muentzer emerged as a spokesman of the common people.

Since Muentzer found it difficult to share the pulpit at St. Mary’s with Egranus, he moved to St. Catherine’s church across the town. He was welcomed there with great enthusiasm by the weavers and miners who constituted the membership of St. Catherine Church. Thus he became the Pastor of the lower classes. After sometime Muentzer left for Bohemia probably due to some private reasons.

The Prophet of Prague: The kingdom of Bohemia was the right place where Muentzer expected support for reform program more radical than Luther. Muentzer undoubtedly felt that Bohemia might become the center of the Reformation. He returned to Saxony. In several letters written in June 1521 Muentzer began calling himself the "messenger of Christ" and servant of the elect and found called to a higher ministry than that of the Parish. On Nov 1, 1521, the All Saints day, Muentzer posted a manifesto later to be called "The Prague Manifesto" perhaps at the doors of various churches. The manifesto was written in German addressed to common people, in Latin, aimed at Bohemian intelligentia, and Czech. The Prague manifesto contained as theological sketch Muentzer’s revolutionary program. His words disclosed a Prophetic self consciousness.

Muentzer argued that the Holy Spirit is given directly to those who are of a simple mind undistorted by the burden of complicated reason. The highest authority for Christians was not the written word of the Bible nor the spoken word of the priest but the inner experiencing of the Holy Spirit. Such extreme spiritualism centered in the concept that there are no external media whereby the Holy Spirit is received, became the basis for Muentzer’s reflections about the past. Muentzer warned the Bohemians of the coming day of Judgment, foreshadowed by the evils of the papacy, he advised them to elect their own Pastors who in turn should elect delegates to a General Council. The only practical suggestion Muentzer made in the Manifesto. Muentzer wrote the manifesto hoping to revive the Bohemian nationalism aroused a century earlier by John Hus. The Prague manifesto was more a radicalization of Lutheran theology.

Like Luther, Muentzer used the authority of the Bible to point at the Heresy of Clericalism. There is no longer a radical difference between Priest and laymen; both are equal before God. Muentzer insisted upon the inner certainty of salvation as the basis for his argument. The cross is no longer the experience of historical Jesus of Nazareth who effected salvation through his historical death but a spiritual experience, mediated through the Holy Spirit. Muentzer called upon the Bohemians to build a renewed Apostolic Church, a mirror reflecting the advent of the kingdom of God. Thus reformation movement was to become a political movement under Muentzer, designed to eliminate all evil particularly that of the old ecclesiastical and political order manifesting itself in clericalism and feudalism. Still Muentzer was not yet ready to identify his religious ideas with a definite political goal.

By March 1523 Muentzer was penniless. He was too proud to ask his friends for money. Instead he used his situation to propagate the idea that advent of the Holy Spirit must always be preceded by suffering and despair. Muentzer adopted a change in his tactics. He lived with growing conviction that he should offer himself as a living example of that which was to come. The transformation of human existence into a perfected, divine kingdom of God. Therefore he began to use a new approach. Instead of threatening his audience with the judgment of God, as he did in the Prague manifesto, Muentzer used the language of humility and personal experience to communicate his thoughts.

The Reformer of Allstedt: Allstedt was a small and insignificant town in electoral Saxony. On the Easter Sunday 1523, Muentzer descended on the town preaching the first of many fiery sermons that were to transform it from an obscure hinterland community into a launching site for a social revolution.

The Rebel of Muehlhausen: The peasants war (1524-25) was the culmination of the persistent tensions between the prince and the common man. Muehlhausen, the place Muentzer reached from Allstedt, was to become one of the centers of the peasants war. There, rich merchants were exploiting the weavers and farmers in the best fashion of medieval capitalism. The Common man had no opportunity to participate in the local Government. Nepotism, unfair employment practices and political corruption, the traditional immorality of the priesthood were the order of the day. Muentzer arrived in the midst of such a situation on or before August 15. Muentzer saw in the rebellion the dawn of a new age in which God would rule through the sword of the elect. There Muentzer with Pfeiffer supported the rebellion and they presented eleven additional articles. Muentzer and Pfeiffer were banned from the city. Muentzer turned next to Swiss border. There were reasons to go there. A movement later known as "Ana baptism" has begun to spread throughout the Northern part of the country. It stressed adult baptism. Muentzer returned to Muehlhausen in February 1525 and before that he was arrested and held in Fulda for sometime. When he returned, he was made a preacher of St.Mary’s church and took a leading role in the of development of a military program for the peasants and helped in the election of an "eternal council." When the peasants war’s reached its apex, Muentzer was ready for it. On Apr. 26 Muentzer and Pfeiffer led about 6000 Muehlhausen citizens to Langensalza. The battle of Frankenhausen turned into a meaningless blood bath, 5000 were killed and 600 captured. Muentzer disappeared only to be found in bed, pretending to be sick. He was arrested by Mansfeld. He was tortured and made to admit. On May 26 Muentzer received the host, without wine according to Catholic rites and on Sat. May 27, Muentzer with Pfeiffer was beheaded and their heads were exhibited on stakes as a warning to the living

The Defender of the Lost Cause

a) Revolt against Wittenberg: Muentzer ‘s theological reflection culminating in a theology of society and political action received its first impetus from Luther’s opposition to medieval ecclesiastical authority. The problem of the interpretation of biblical authenticity became a primary concern, Muentzer pursued in this direction. He supported Luther’s denunciation of Rome. He was the first who tried to come to grips with the relationship between that inner faith Luther had referred to and the external norms especially the authority of the Bible. Muentzer came to insist that the consciousness of the Holy Spirit in the believer rather than the Bible constituted the ultimate authority for Christian faith and life. Muentzer argued that the Bible is only the historical record of those who had this" spiritual consciousness" and that any post- Biblical man can have the same experience as Biblical man. What Muentzer attacked was faith in the "outer word" of the Bible and called it invented, historical, sophistic and external. Muentzer, although he quoted often Bible to justify his reasoning, maintained that the Bible is not a witness to the revelation of God given once and for all in the historical Jesus. The Bible itself neither generates faith nor causes the rebirth of a sinful man. The Bible therefore has only pedagogical value. It makes the children of God fear and tremble in the face of God’s radical demand for obedience.

b) Theology of social and political action: Muentzer was led not only to a new concept of religious authority, the prophetic proclamation of the elect but also to a new understanding of man’s nature and destiny Luther saw man utterly sinful and can be saved only through complete trust in the grace of God as revealed in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Whereas Muentzer saw the process of salvation as cooperation between human nature and divine spirit.

c) The measure of man: Muentzer ‘s significance, according to Gritsch, for the Protestant reformation, lies in the theological reflection upon the relationship between the Christian faith and the plight of the common man in the 16th century. Muentzer created a theology of social and political action. That is, the dynamic vitality of religious experiences, changing and transforming not only the personal life of the believer, but also existing order of the society. But what Luther stressed was personal aspect of faith. He was never fully concerned with the question of how the personal witness of God’s revelation affects the growth of personality and social order. On the other hand, Muentzer tried to answer the question of how the historical revelation in Christ was related to individual religious experiences and social change. Muentzer became aware of the needs of the walls around him. Words of faith had to become deeds. It was out of his pastoral concern for the plight of the common man in the context of his evaluation of history that Muentzer ‘s personal faith developed into a revolutionary zeal. Muentzer reminds that the world is often intolerant of those whose vision will stay fixed within narrow confines. He was a victim of such a world, a "Christian world".

Evaluation:

The work done by Gritsch was published in 1967. He has tried to do a good job by giving us a lot of details about the life and work of Thomas Muentzer. And it is written with eminent scholarship and available historical data. Muentzer’s theological convictions are well highlighted. But socialistic, communistic claims are rejected by the author to a greater extent. Muentzer was a theologian and revolutionary. After reading about the life and work of Muentzer I was deeply moved by the way he really worked for the peasants and the others who were exploited. His faith was built not only upon words but was strongly reflected through action. He was a person who lived for the cause of the society where people were being deprived of their basic needs. Muentzer’s life has been an inspiration to millions of people, though he is not present physically, his words call us to remember him. As I was reflecting deeply, I was thinking when my day comes, would I be able to give my life for the upliftment of the poor; the marginalized and the oppressed? Would I be able to fight against the social evils of the society which still prevail in my country?

Bibliography

Gritsch, Eric, The Reformer Without a Church.

Friesen, Abraham, Reformation and Utopia.

William, George. Radical Reformation.

Balasundaram, F.J. "The Reformer without a Church", a paper based on Archive Reformation, University of Hamburg, 1986, (Unpublished).

Introduction

Thomas More was born in a solidly prospering London family in 1478, and educated at St.Antony’s School and Oxford. In 1494 he began the study of law at New Inn. As More continued his legal studies in London, other interests engaged his attention. During this time he met Erasmus, a Dutch scholar and philosopher and became his life-long friend. It was during these years More firmly established himself as a leader among the group of humanists, whose activities were then centering in London. About Nov. 1504, he married Jane Colt and four children were born to them before Jane’s death in 1511. In 1510 he became the Sheriff of London. And then his activities centered on the life of the King Henry’s court. In 1523 he became the speaker of the House of Commons. Then in 1529 he was honored as the Lord Chancellor. Later in some religio-political developments, he disagreed with the King on his divorce issue and he refused to take the oath to the Act of Supremacy. Then More was sent to London Tower. He was tried under a new act, the Act of Treason for refusing to the King his titles. He was tried on 1st July 1535 and executed -- five days later. The Roman Catholic church canonized him in 1935.

More’s Political Life

More’s political life may be said to have begun almost at the same time as the reign of Henry VIII. (Hutton William Holden, Sir Thomas More, London: Matheun & Co., 1895, p. 143.)

More proved himself to be an extremely able member of the council, acting on occasion as a secretary who transmitted reports to or from Cardinal Wosley, the kings chancellor, and king. During the 1520s More participated in the campaign against Lutheran literature which was beginning to flood England.

In 1527 Henry VIII informed his wife that they were not truly husband and wife and could not continue to live together. Since the two had been married for seventeen years; this was astounding news for Catherine of Aragon. Henry’s quest for a divorce was to overshadow for the next half a decade the foreign and domestic affairs of England and eventually led to the detachment of the English church from its Roman matrix.

Cardinal Wolsey, thought too self-confidently that Henry’s request would encounter no complication in Rome. But after Henry realized that he could expect no help from that quarter, in Oct. 1529 Wolsey was indicted for violation of the law and he lost the chancelorship, to be succeeded by Thomas More. (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol.9, p. 1138.) Henry VIII had consulted More as early as 1527 with regard to his proposed divorce from Catherine of Argon; and after a long study of the problem More had told the King that he could not support this case.

Since More opposed the King’s divorce, Henry permitted that he would not have to be involved. Thereby the King’s highest official remained aloof from the major political issue of the day. In 1530 the attorney general filed charges against the English clergy for their recognition of foreign authority in the pope. The clergy were stunned, but in convocation they quickly regained their equilibrium. Subsidies were offered as grants to the king in gratitude for his defense of the faith. In plain language, these grants were meant as bribes. Henry wanted the clergy to acknowledge their guilt and the king’s position as protector and the only supreme head of the English church and clergy This acknowledgement of royal headship was in a way nothing more than the extension of existing trends involving the ever greater political control over the church. In 1532 when parliament passed the conditional restraint of Annates, which prohibited the payment of Annates to Rome, Henry meant to tighten the financial screw and deprive the people of his English revenue. When the clergy agreed to obtain royal assent for all new constitutions, cannons and ordinances, Thomas More pleaded ill health and resigned from his office as Chancellor. (Hillerbrand J. Hans, The World of the Reformation, p.118.)

More’s Religious Life and Theological Thinking

During his legal studies, an intense spirituality emerged, in More that was later a fundamental feature of his personality. For about four years he lived with Carthusian monks at the London Charter house. (New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 1136.) It was during More’s time the Lutheranism and Tyndalism prevailed in England. And Thomas More was asked to respond to Luther’s argument. More recognized that some of Luther’s complaints were just, but an entirely different threat to the faith came when Luther went further and questioned the validity of sacraments and later developed his doctrine of justification by faith alone.

More had, three or four years earlier, predicted that Luther’s teaching must result in a disruption of the church and later we find that it was true; when Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote "one wonders how it was Luther’s action led to consequences which were the direct opposite of what he intended. He decided a real unity for the church and for western Christendom, but the consequence was the ruin of both. He sought the freedom of Christians and the consequence was apathy and barbarism. He hoped to see the establishment of a genuine social order free from clerical privilege and the outcome was the peasant’s war and soon afterwards the gradual dissolution of all cohesion and order in society." (Book of Christian Martyrs, p. 112.) More argued against Luther that scripture and tradition cannot be opposed to each other He thought that without the authority of the church the Christian left to scripture alone would fall into error. More emphasized that the church was established before the Gospels were written and it was the church that fixed the Canon of the scripture without denying humanism and the rights of critical reason. More justified the authority of the church instituted around Pope by appealing to the tradition of universal Christianity. In his eyes the authority of the visible church was derived from the authority of Christ to teach the meaning of scripture and demonstrate the doctrine. More was fearful of the private interpretations that the unlearned would read into the Bible. More says that all readers can find spiritual nourishment in the scriptures. His charge against Lutherans and Tyndalists was that in their pride of intellect, they had discarded the traditional teaching and interpretation of the church and had colored their translations to support their doctrines.

More declared that faith was before scripture chronologically as well as logically. More’s criticism of the reformers translation is extremely bitter. He distrusted the spirit in which it was undertaken and pointed out many instances in which new readings of words had been adopted for the purpose of concealing the meaning of the original. Turning to argument with heretics, More cited a number of examples to prove that images were not forbidden to Christians. On the marriage of the clergy, More says that the church binds no man to chastity against his will, for men only take sacred orders by their own desires.

Thomas More, an Eminent Humanist

More’s ideologies and teachings are very clearly dug out from his literary work. Especially from his main work Utopia. (Paraphrase -- Sir Thomas More -- Utopia a Critical Study, M.A. English I Year Paper I, Modern Literature 1, Annamalai University, pp. 68-72.) More wrote many pamphlets against those who attacked the Catholic religion. In Utopia More discussed certain important social, political and religious questions, with great insight. He had dealt with various areas such as agriculture, old soldiers, public health, war treaties, capitalism, capital punishment, coinage, communism, land, old age pensions, divorce, artificial insemination, slaughter houses, reformation of criminals, tramps money, over population and others. Utopia is written in two parts. The first Book of Utopia is mainly introductory. More invents a sailor called Hytholoday who had visited the land of Utopia. The first book gives main emphasis to two topics.

Why do men become thieves and, would a philosopher take service under a prince. The first reflects More’s experience as an Undersheriff or magistrate in London during the previous five years when he had to deal summarily with the rogues and vagabonds of the city. The second was an immediate problem as following More’s success in an embassy to the low countries.

The discussion in the first book of Utopia probably reflected More’s conversations with Erasmus who was strongly opposed to More concerning himself with the busy trifles of princes as this would interfere with his contributing to human knowledge as philosopher. In the first book he narrates the talk of cardinals’ table; they discussed the problems of thieves and meaninglessness of giving death punishment for stealing. They went to the root of the problem and asked the question how people become thieves. Luxurious living of the rich produced a number of poor who become thieves. Instead of hanging these men for stealing, the state could benefit much by using them in war, because these men must by their very decision to become thieves, be brave men. Another reason for the increase in the number of thieves was the extension of pasture and promotion of wool trade much to the disadvantage of agriculture. Farm laborers out of work become thieves. In spite of the increase in the wool production the prices did not come down because much of the wool went into the hands of the rich who were not in a hurry to sell until the prices went up owing to scarcity.

Hanging of thieves was condemned by Hytholday and others even from a religious point of view. Loss of money should not cause loss of life. All the goods in the world would not equal to human life. Added to this was God’s command against killing. Thieves could be condemned to do forced labor. They need not be locked up at all unless their crimes were very heinous. More asked Hytholday to become an adviser to some king and Hytholday spoke of the disadvantage in such a position. He said how kings often forget that for the sake of the kings, they often fought wars out of vanity and brought misery on the people with their own wars. Hytholday in the course of his talk stressed the need for abolishing private property. If it continued, a large number of people would be poor and wretched and, charity would not be the way to end poverty.

During the conversation Hytholday praised the Utopians and their form of government. More asked him to describe in detail those people’s government, customs and manners. And he continued his narration: the Island of Utopia was named after its king Utopus. There were in the island fifty four cities all speaking the same language, having the same manners, institutions and laws. The Utopians chose their magistrate by secret election. The prince continued for life unless he was deposed for tyranny. Law suits were quickly disposed of. Almost every person knew farming and science. The Utopians were similarly dressed.

Animals were slaughtered at the outskirts of the city. There were community kitchens where the food was prepared and given to families. But first the old and sick were attended to. They enjoyed harmless pleasures. The Utopians avoided war by all means. They did not consider hunting a sport at all. They wanted everyone to enjoy the gifts of nature.

The Utopians believed in one God for all called Mithea. They also welcomed Christianity. They condemned religious intolerance. The king gave his subjects full liberty to practice religion. There was a separation of politics and religion. There were women priests. Hytholday ended his narrative and More wished that many of our countries today would follow many of the good things found in Utopia.

Martyrdom of Thomas More: Trial and Execution

A year after More’s resignation as the chancellor, the king obtained divorce and married Anne Boleyn and he forced his subjects to take an oath recognizing the children to be born from the new union as the legitimate heirs. But Thomas More refused it, he abstained from the coronation of Anne Boleyn. For this reason he was summoned on 13 April 1534. He refused to take the oath, explaining that his opposition was not to the legitimacy of the succession but to the recognition of the king as the supreme head of the church of England. (Book of Christian Martyrs, p. 116.) And he was imprisoned in the Tower of London.

His real trial began in earnest, although the formal legal proceedings against him were not conducted until July 1535. The indictment opened with a recital of the relevant parts of the Acts of Supremacy and Treasons. Parliament had enacted that the King, his heirs and successors should be accepted as the only supreme Head of the church in England and to deprive him of this or of any of his other titles in word or writing was high treason.

In conclusion it is stated that the aforesaid Jurors declared Thomas More falsely, traitorously and maliciously by craft imagined, invented, practiced and attempted wholly to deprive our sovereign Lord and king of his dignity, supreme head in earth of the Church of England, to manifest contempt of the king and in derogation of his royal crown..

The charges were supported by four statements of evidence. It is called as counts: (E. Reynolds, The Field is Won, London,: Burn & Oates, p. 360.)

After the reading of the indictment, which More now had heard for the first time, Audley Lord Chancellor offered him the King’s pardon. But it was not accepted. More was voicing his fundamental objection to being compelled to accept the king’s new title of being the supreme head: it was an invasion of prerogative of conscience of that in part of the divine law of God since it applied man-made law to the deeply held religious conviction of the individual.

When the verdict was delivered More at last uttered his mind in a great speech, declaring that he had all the councils of Christendom, and not just the council of one realm to support him in the decision of his conscience. (New Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 1140.) He was returned to the Tower until July 6. On that day he was beheaded in the great square in front of the Tower and he had said before execution that the people there should pray to God for him and he would pray for them. Afterwards he exhorted them, earnestly beseeching them to pray to God for the king, so that he would give him good counsel, protesting that he died his good servant but God’s first.

Conclusion

The religio-socio-political life of Thomas More was the milestone of the history of the State as well as the Church of England. He was a man of real commitment and conviction towards his offices and personal beliefs. We have seen that on this commitment and conviction he simply gave up many respectful and worthy positions of his career. He was bold enough to reject the King’s request and many a time More was very critical towards the king for his unethical and unjust ambitions. His work and words were always pointed towards the weakened and oppressed mass of the community, which is very much clear in his great work ‘Utopia’. In short this personal commitment and conviction led Thomas More to his martyrdom.

In an immediate impression especially when one analyzed the trial and execution, one could see More’s martyrdom in a narrow sense. In one sense he was a Catholic fanatic. His personal commitment and conviction were fully surrendered to the Catholic church. To a great extent, for the sake of upholding the customs, beliefs and traditions of the Catholic church he opposed the king’s second marriage, which was the immediate reason for More’s execution. More was not open to other Christian Churches. In his writing itself we can find out the inconsistency between what he wrote and the way he acted in real life. He wrote of the religious tolerance of the Utopians and their human treatment with Tyndale and Luther. But he vehemently criticized that new development in the Church of England. In other words, he was intolerant towards other Christian Churches.

But in fact the reason for his martyrdom cannot be confined only to the refusal of recognizing the king as the head of the Church of England. As a humanist his words and deed were the main reason for his martyrdom. More was always critical towards the King for his autocracy For that matter he did not care for his positions and material benefits. He stood for the upliftment of the downtrodden and weakened section of the society For this reason his word utopia has been very much appreciated by socialist propaganda. More protested against new economics of the enclosure of lands by great landlords. This led to the breakdown of the old law and customs and, earlier common field agriculture was destroyed. Many of the reform visualized as ideal by More have been either sincerely implemented or at least considered very much needed to be effected for human welfare. In this light we can see More’s case as a protest against the increasing powers assumed by the King and parliament to regulate people’s inmost beliefs. When the States go beyond the limits, the Christian has a duty to follow his conscience in obedience to God and the Church. In short, Thomas More was a great man who always stood for his religion as well as his society and was martyred.

Bibliography

Chenu, Bruno, The Book of Christian Martyrs, London: SCM Press Limited, 1970.

Hillerbrand J. Hans, The World of the Reformation, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1973.

William Holden Hutton, Sir Thomas More, London: Mathuen & Co. 1895.

Reynolds, E.E., The Field is Won, London: Burn & Oates, 1968.

M.A. English I Year -- Modern Literature Annamalai University -- Directorate of Distance Education. Lesson 20- Sir Thomas More -Utopia - A Critical Study pp. 67-79.

Introduction

Throughout history women and men have fought bravely for noble causes and Joan is one among them. Because of this, it can be said, without doubt, that Joan is among one of the richest personalities, and a representative of the end of the Middle Ages. She was promoted to be the heroine of French history for her bravery in leading the French army against the English like any modern general and driving the English away from the French territory. This she did in obedience to ‘her voices’ she received from St.Michael, St.Catherine and St.Margaret. But, as was exceptional, she was regarded by some of her contemporaries as a sorceress possessed by Satan and therefore put to death at the stake at a very young age.

Historical Background

It was the time when The Hundred Years War was going on and the English occupied Northern France. The War was continuing between the French and English monarchs, Charles of France and Henry VI of England respectively Because of this, the village of Domremy, where Joan lived was often exposed to the fighting between the French and the English, who freely looted the countryside. Also both French and English soldiers raided villages and carried away whatever they could lay their hands on, be it cattle or grain and this resulted in the poverty of the farmers who were not able to even enjoy the fruits of their hard labor and toiling.

Also, the English army was joined by the French Duke of Burgundy and this amalgamation posed a serious threat for the French king. The king’s eldest son, known as the Dauphin was camping in the country at Vaucouleurs as they were still loyal to the king. It was Joan’s mission to crown the Dauphin, Charles VII in Rheims’ Cathedral after clearing the French territory from the English hand. But since Rheims was in the enemy’s hand, the Dauphin could not be crowned even five years after his father’s death.

Joan

Joan, also called ‘The Maid of Orleans’ or ‘The Girl Soldier’ was born in 1412 to a poor farmer’s family in the village of Domrey-lapucelle in Northern France. Joan was illiterate because there were no education facilities in the village. Moreover, her parents were unable to send her to a distant place just for the sake of schooling. Her father Jacques worked in his own small holding. Her mother, though uneducated was a deeply religious person and so brought up Joan in the Church’s faith and taught her to say her prayers. Because of this, Joan had a special appeal towards the lives of holy men and women. As she did not go to school, Joan helped her parents in the home and in the field. Though they were poor there is no evidence to say that they lived in utter poverty or that Joan worked as a hired servant having no time to attend Church services regularly which she enjoyed very much. Also there is no evidence to say that she did not find time to go to confession or wait for vision and listen to the Church’s bells when she wanted, in order to hear voices. Joan spent her childhood years in the open air and she was a strong and sturdy girl. Nature for her was her teacher. She liked listening to the birds sing and lambs bleating which she used to watch grazing on the hill-slopes. Her piety and faith were strengthened in the quietness of the farmlands in which she was able to feel the Unseen’s power and presence. Joan was utterly honest, simple and straight forward, humble and earnest. (M.J.Sargunam, A Galaxy of Heroes, [Coimbatore, Palaniandavar Printers, 1981], p. 23.)

Joan’s Voices and Visions

Joan’s voices and visions and played many tricks with her reputation. They had been held to prove that she was sad, that she was a liar and imposter, that she was a sorceress for which she was burnt, and finally a saint. They do not prove any of these things; but the variety of the conclusions reached show how little our matter of fact historians know about other people’s minds, or even about their own. (Bernard Shaw, Saint Joan, (Calcutta: Orient Longman Ltd., 1979), p. 10.)

As Joan’s village was frequently exposed to fighting between the French and the English, with her growth in age, Joan also grew more and more sensitive to her village community’s suffering. She also came to understand that poverty was a result of the wars. She spent many a night in prayer for her people. Then at the age of 13 during her vigil and prayer, she heard voices. Her devotion and godliness grew stronger day by day as these voices taught her self-discipline. She was conscious in her prayer of the presence of St. Michael, St. Catherine and St. Margaret, the patron saints, whose voices directed and fashioned her life. She therefore without any word obeyed their word of guidance and was getting ready to obey the voices when the time came, voices of saints which spoke from heaven above. It was to the unseen world that her mind and spirit were tuned. She then received a message asking her to go to Charles, the heir to the throne of France and to help him in the war against the English. (M.J. Sargunam, Ibid., p. 22.) Though being a simple, immature, peasant girl, never been trained in the art of fighting, never having ever learnt to ride a horse or wield a sword, yet she was called to serve France.

Joan’s Response to Her Voices and Visions

Joan, after receiving the call to save France, boldly set out to meet the French king. Even though she was not successful to have personal contact with the king in her first attempt, she did not lose hope but made another trip the following year when she was just 17 years of age. Though the captain did not take her seriously, Joan insisted and was successful after weeks to an interview with the king. It was her firmness and piety which helped her in the end. Although people scoffed at her claim to have received orders from heaven, she was resolved to fulfil her purpose, believing that God wanted her to drive the enemy from France. She then dressed like a man, putting on the armor of a soldier and rode a horse. Though her unwomanly way drew much prejudice and opposition, she refused to give in, but instead said, "It is better to obey the voice of Heaven than that of man." (Ibid., p. 23.) It was her passionate love for freedom that made her ready to even sacrifice her life.

Joan also sought to instill pride, self respect and the spirit to fight for the king in her fellowmen. Though mocked, rebuked and disbelieved by the army officers, priests and the king, she was firm in her stand to her mission and was determined to do or die. It was her childlike trust in Heavenly Vision and burning zeal which finally overcame the king’s officers and she was allowed to meet the king. It is said that the king unwilling to meet a rustic teenager played a trick on her by dressing like one of his courtiers. But Joan, though never having ever met or seen the king or any of the nobles before, was not confused when she entered the big hall. She instead, to the surprise of all, went straight to the disguised king and said, "God grant you life, sire." (Ibid., p. 23.) It can be said that it is the Spirit alone who could have guided her.

She then told the king that he should be crowned in Rheims’ Cathedral after the English army was routed. (Ibid., p. 23.) Joan became impatient in the delay, for the king took time to consult his officers and supporters. But after much hesitation, the king permitted her to lead the French army against the English.

Joan, The Girl Soldier

Joan was then allowed by the king to lead the French army against the English as the city of Grisans held by the French was under heavy siege, on the point of losing the battle. A banner was made for her and she had her standard painted. She declared that a sword for her would be found in the church of St.Catherine and it was so. In spite of all the frightening inquiries of the church, Joan, like an experienced warrior boldly took to the battle field.

On May 4th she suddenly sprang up while resting. Being apparently inspired, she ordered an attack and took one fort and another the next day after which the French army crossed the river. The English army taken by surprise, with the view to reforming the ranks, evacuated the fort. The victory roused the French and the rallying point for the army now became Joan. Joan was acclaimed the victorious Maid of Orleans in the battle. She moved ahead of the soldiers with great speed. Though she fought on tenaciously, she was wounded in the next encounter at Tuileries.

Joan then asked Charles, the king, to go to Rheims to be crowned, but he hesitated. Joan promised great victory for France when the two armies, the French and the English met at Rheims. When it was so, it brought great honor and renown for her. She then promised pardon to the citizens of Rheims if they surrendered, and a Friar was sent to meet her. (M. J. Sargunam, op. cit. p. 24) But her promise was not believed in spite of the Friar’s positive report. Joan then ordered an attack and the city surrendered. The impossible, defeating the English army, took place and her mission was successful. Then on 17th July, 1429 the Dauphin was crowned Charles VII in the stately Cathedral at Rheims. (Ibid., p. 24.) Joan then knelt before him and for the first time, called him "My Lord, the king." (Ibid., p. 24.)

Her Capture

Joan was alone and unhappy after the victory. Her advice to march against Paris was not heeded by the king and moreover her enemies were active. Also her request to the king to be allowed to retire to her village to lead a quiet life was not granted either. She had to instead stay around the king’s court to face charges of the priests against her faith. (Ibid., p. 25.) As the king did not pay heed to Joan’s advice, he began to lose his power day by day. Then the English came back to fight. Joan once more bravely took to the battle field without enough support. She being fearless of danger or death led a small platoon against the English who had now surrounded Paris. Though wounded in the fight, she urged her followers not to give up. She then fell from her horse and taken prisoner, being led to the enemy’s camp. There was no attempt made to get her exchanged. Her courage and sacrifice were in vain. (M.J. Sargunam, op.cit., p. 25.) She had to suffer cruelty and shame for her love of her country and devotion to the king.

Reason for Persecution

It was a view held by the priests and church leaders that none other than them could and must convey the Voice of God and God’s will. But here was Joan, who was just a poor country girl, illiterate, defying the social norm by dressing up as a man and affirming that she had received orders from ‘her voices’ to fight against the English. These, they could not tolerate for, they were certain that she was in touch with evil spirits and not with the Voice of God. Therefore, they wanted to defeat her. They felt that she was wrong. She was also accused of being an agent of Satan, possessing magical powers and must be put to death. The French and English joined together in their attack against her motives for action.

Another reason for Joan’s persecution it can be said that the Church in the Middle Ages was narrow minded and burnt those who did not accept its way. (Ibid., p. 24.) and here was Joan claiming to receive voices telling her to do things according to them, voices she believed to be directly coming from God.

The Trial

After being captured by the English, Joan was taken to Beaurevoir, but her soul was at Campaign, still fighting with all her heart for the king who had abandoned her.

The English, after capturing Joan, were in for a sorry state, for they not only failed to recapture Louviers, but also lost Chateaugaillard. They, therefore, tried all possible ways to check their rapid decline. It was then decided that the trial of Joan and the coronation of the king be held together, for they were regarded as one. Then Charles VII, the French king could be dishonored as being anointed by a witch and in his place Henry VI of England could be crowned, whose coronation would be the Lord’s whereas Charles’ of the devil.

Cauchon, who had only recently secured permission for persecution in its diocese from the chapter of Rouen Cathedral, was then called by an order issued by Winchester on January 3, 1431 to open the trial of Joan, who was only to be loaned for trial to the ecclesiastical judge "reserving the right to take her back again in case she was not convicted." (Jules Michelet, Joan of Arc, [The University of Michigan Press, 1974], p. 72.) The English took no risk in making sure that she did not escape death. They were firm to use the sword if fire failed.

Cauchon then opened the trial on January 9, 1431 at Rouen. He started with a sort of consultation with the eight doctors, licentiates and masters of arts of Rouen with information he had collected about Joan. Though this information which was gathered in advance by Joan’s enemies appear insubstantial to Rouen legal expert’s minds but they were so adamant to put her to death that the flimsy accusation of witchcraft was changed to heresy.

But in order to proceed, the first step was to win over the monk who was representative of the inquisition. Though the monk argued and pleaded, saying that until he was absolutely sure and convinced that his powers were sufficient another be appointed. But all were in vain and he could not escape but be the judge. Also he was bribed by Winchester who gave him gold for all the trouble he had gone through.

Joan was then brought to trial before the judges on 21 February 1431. She was admonished with gentleness and charity by the bishop of Beauvais who urged her to answer any question truthfully in order that the trial would be shortened and her conscience be unburdened without subterfuges. Joan answered, "I do not know what you propose to question me about; you might ask me things which I would not tell you." (Ibid., p. 74.) Questions about anything, which are not connected with her visions, she agreed to swear to tell the truth. But she said, regarding her visions, they would have to cut off her head first.

On the following day, 22nd February and once more on 24th February she was urged to pledge herself unconditionally. Yet she still resisted by saying. "Even little children repeat that often times people are hanged for having told the truth". (Ibid., p. 74.) But due to weariness, she finally agreed that if it can have a bearing on her trial she would tell everything she knew.

They then questioned her about her age, name and so on. They then asked her about the term ‘the Maid’ by which she was called by the people. To this, she eluded the difficulty with a white lie which may be due to reluctancy of feminine modesty and instead said, "As to what they call me, I know nothing about it". (Ibid., p. 75.) When she complained that she had been fettered, the bishop replied that it had been necessary to shackle her since she had repeatedly attempted to escape. She then said, "It is true, I have tried. Any prisoner has the right to do so. If I did escape, no one could accuse me of having broken faith, for I have promised nothing." (Ibid., p. 75.)

May be because of superstition, they then ordered her to recite the prayers Pater Noster and the Ave Maria in order to catch her, for they believed that if she was a thrall of the devil she would not be able to do so and this would give them the chance to condemn her. But she replied "I shall be glad to say them, if only my Lord the bishop of Beauvais consents to hear me in confession." (Ibid., p. 75.) This was a clever and touching request, to take her judge, her enemy into her fullest confidence, for this would have compelled him to bear witness to her innocence and made him her spiritual father. But Cauchon refused, and instead adjourned the session for the next day and turned the task over to one of his successors.

A strange quickening of her spirit was manifested at the fourth session of her trial. She did not conceal the fact that she had heard ‘her voices’. She instead said, "They woke me up. I folded my hands and begged of them to advise me; they said to me: Ask our Lord" -- "And what else did they say?" "That I should answer you without fear. (Ibid., p. 75-76.)

When she told them that she was not free to speak everything out, not because of fear of answering them, but instead fear of offending ‘her voices’, the bishop insisted by saying. "But Joan it is then possible to offend God by telling what is true?" (Ibid., p. 76.) But she answered, "My voices have told me certain things that are not meant for you, but for the king." (Ibid., p. 76.) Her sayings were mingled with naive words, but at the same time with sublime meanings like, "I was sent by God, from whom I came ..." Her words, "You tell me you are my judge; ponder with great care over what you mean to do, for in very truth I was sent of God, and you are putting yourself in great jeopardy," (Ibid., p. 76.) must have irritated the judges for they asked her, "Joan, do you believe that you are in a state of grace?" (Ibid., p. 76.) Which is an insidious and perfidious question, sinful to ask any living human creature. Also because with this question they thought that they would catch her with a snare that could not be loosened by anything for if she said no, it would be confessing her unworthiness to be God’s instrument. But if she said Yes, she would be labeled as proud and presumptuous, one among who are farthest from grace. But with heroic and Christian simplicity she cut the knot by saying, "If I am not, may it please God to bring me into it; If I am, may He preserve me in it." (Ibid., p. 77.)

After all her heroism, according to Jules Michelet, Joan still being a woman relapsed, grew soft, even doubting her state and striving to reassure herself by saying, "Ah! If I knew I was not in God’s grace, no one in the world could be more afflicted... But if I were in a state of sin, surely the voices could not come to me... I wish everyone could hear them as I do..." (Ibid., p. 77.) These words became a weapon for the judges against her who, after a long pause attacked her anew with fiercer hatred, asking her questions in quick succession. Questions like, "Did not the voices tell her to hate the Burgundians? Did she not go, as a child, to the tree of the fairies?" (Ibid., p. 77.) With a hope to find out which might have led to her undoing for they wanted to burn her as a witch.

She was attacked on a delicate perilous point, that of the apparitions at the fifth session, where she was even asked whether St.Michael was naked when he appeared to her. But she answered this question with heavenly purity, not even aware of its nastiness by saying, "Do you think our Lord did not have the wherewithal to clothe him?" (Ibid., p. 78.)

More bizarre questions like, "This St.Michael these sainted women, did they have a body, limbs? (Ibid., p. 78.) were asked on 3rd March in order to make Joan confess to some devil’s work. She instead replied, "Yes, I believe it is firmly as I believe in God." (Ibid., p. 78.) And this was carefully noted down.

As the trial was not progressing as expected, Cauchon thought it more prudent to proceed as quietly as possible with only a few men he could trust. The number of assessors also varied from session to session, for while some left, others came. There was also variation in the place of the trial, for Joan was on trial in the hall of Rouen’s castle, but later in her prison, where Cauchon in order ‘not to bother others’, (Ibid., p. 79.) went there on March 10-17 with only two assessors and two witnesses. This bold secret step taken by Cauchon may be due to the reason of knowing that the Inquisition was in support of him and due authority was received on March 12 by the vicar from the Inquisitor General for France, Win-chester, to jointly judge with the bishops.

Joan was then pressed only with few points in these fresh examinations which was indicated by Cauchon in advance. With questions like -- "Do you believe you did rightly in leaving your parents without their permission ? Should not one’s father and mother be honored?" (Ibid., p. 80.) But Joan answered all these questions with simplicity and honesty for which they could not find fault. The judges at last reached proper ground for their accusation to their question whether she will be saved or go to hell ? Joan replied that ‘her voices’ told her to "accept everything with a willing heart; be not dismayed at the thought of martyrdom, for it will lead you at last to the Kingdom of heaven," (Ibid., p. 82.) and that she firmly believed that she was saved already.

They then closed their preliminary examination, asking her if she would let the church be the final judge. But to this she replied, "I love the church, and I want to uphold her with all my strength. As to the good works I have wrought, I must refer them to the king of Heaven, who sent me." (Ibid., p. 83.) Even when the question was repeated, she gave no answer, but added, "the church and the Lord are one." (Ibid., p. 83.)

Manner of Martyrdom

It was nine o’clock in the morning of May 30, 1431. Joan was clothed in her woman’s garb and put into a cart. Brother Martin I’Advenu, the confessor and Massieu, the usher stood on both her sides. She was carried in the cart through the street into the fish market in Rouen amidst a quivering multitude, under the guard of hundred Englishmen armed with swords and spears. Though she did not weep and mourn, she did not accuse her king nor her saints. She was only able to whisper, "O Rouen, Rouen is it here that I must die?" (Ibid., p. 116.) Three platforms had been erected. The first was for the Episcopal and royal chair where the English cardinal and his prelates were to be seated. The second was meant for the preacher, judge, the bailiff who were the figure characters in the somber drama and for the condemned Joan. The third was a high platform heaped with firewood meant for pyre. This was meant in order that the executioner would not be able to reach its base and shorten Joan’s torture and dispatch her as done usually, but instead that she would literally burn alive for everyone present in the market place to see, above the encircling spears and swords. (Jules Michelet, op.cit., p. 117)

Master Nicholas Midy, one of the lights of the University of Paris began the horrible ceremony with a sermon on the edifying text, "when one limb of the church is sick, the whole church is sick", and the church could only be healed by cutting that sick limb. He concluded with the formula: "Joan, go you in peace, the church could no longer defend thee." (Ibid., p. 117.) Then the bishop of Beauvais who was the ecclesiastical judge exhorted her with benignity to care for her soul and to remember all her transgressions so as to rouse herself to contrition. (Ibid., p. 117.) The bishop omitted the reading of her abjuration of her which was according to the assessors law for fear that she would raise a protest by saying that he was lying. But Joan’s mind was thus far from trying to save her life, but fixed on different things. Instead, she fell on her knees, invoking God, the Virgin, St. Michael and St. Catherine to forgive all as she has forgiven them. She also begged the crowd to pray for her and entreated all the priests present to say a mass for her soul. All present were so moved by her humble gesture that some began weeping and others in tears, even those who had condemned her to the stake.

Then the bishop of Beauvais after wiping his eyes, began reading the sentence which he had rehearsed for the culprit all her crimes-schism, idolatry, invoking demons; how after being admitted to penitence, she was

Thus Joan, the Maid, committed herself in full confidence to God after being rejected by the church. She asked for a cross and was given a wooden one made out of stick by an Englishman. Though she received it devoutly, placing it under her garments next to her skin, she wanted a regular church crucifix to be placed before her eyes. This was done only after such pleading by the kind usher Massieu and Brother Lambert and the cross was brought from the parish church of St. Saviour.

She was roughly handled and brought down from the platform by the English soldier and because of this rough handling, Joan cried anew, "O Rouen, so thou art to be my last abode! . . ." She said not more and did not sin with her lips, in this hour of terror and agony (Ibid., p. 120.) She neither did accuse her king nor her saints.

She was tied under the placard of infamy: a miter placed on her head with the words" "Heretic, backslider, apostate, idolater…" (Ibid., p. 120.) Then the executioner lit the fire. As the flames rose and reached her she shivered and because of agony cried for holy "water; water". (Ibid., p. 121.) But she soon conquered herself and had only the names of God, her angels and her saints on her lips. Finally, her head dropped, and she uttered a great cry: "Jesus!" (Ibid., p. 122.) and surrendered her life to her God by being burnt at the stake, at a young age of just 19 years.

Reflection

Though a number of articles and stories have been written about Joan, I could not help but write again on the life and martyrdom of Joan, so I am and continue to be inspired by her. A girl, who was still young, full of life and may be with plans for the future, but was willing to give her all, even her life for what she believed to be true and felt called to death.

I would not go into all the details of her history, but concentrate on the few realities which have time and again struck and inspired me.

Joan can be said as one who really believed in the fact of God speaking to human beings, directing our life from ‘her voices’ which she obeyed without any word. The voices can be questioned as to whether they were really genuine or not. Here I would like to mention that it can vary from person to person. For some it can be like the voices which Joan may have heard directly. But at the same time, it can also be said as the word which was heard in our hearts/minds directing our consciences in the wrong and right. But also in order to respond to the voice, one important factor necessary is faith in God. For without faith, we cannot hear or follow the voice of God. Joan obeyed the voice in action in going to the king to ask him to grant her permission to go to battle, which was possible because of her faith in God. This faith in Joan is what I feel very important in our response to the voice of God. It must also be like Joan’s which was in action.

Joan’s firmness is another aspect which really struck home in me. Though being just a poor, illiterate country girl, she was firm to the mission to which she was called, even though the officers and the king did not at first take her seriously. But because of her firmness to her mission, they also had to give in to what she wanted in the end -- leading the French army in battle in obedience to ‘her voices’. Like Joan, we too, in our present day context need to be firm in our stand to work for humanity in response to what all are called by God.

Then comes Joan’s "obedience to God alone" in spite of being condemned by all, even the church which is supposed to be the people of God. But as Joan was sure that what she was doing was in obedience to God, she did not go back on her word despite the fact of being rejected and condemned by all. She fully committed herself to the mission to which she has been called against all the accusations and condemnations. She did not accuse anyone, her king who had abandoned her, the judges who had condemned her nor ‘her voices’ who guided her. Instead she forgave and prayed for all her accusers, giving up even her life to be burnt alive in the most humiliating and brutal manner in front of a large crowd in the market place. We too, like Joan, must not condemn anyone in our sufferings, but instead like Jesus Christ and Joan forgive and pray for them which is obedience to God.

Besides all these, it is clear enough without even mentioning what torture and degradation of her dignity, what Joan must have gone through during her imprisonment. Yet she did not react in the same manner, defending herself against false accusations in order to defend herself. Instead she underwent everything without going back on her commitment which I feel is very important for us in our everyday life. We must be true to our commitment against all false accusations and inhuman treatment.

One very strong argument I want to make is in relation to the view held by Jules Michelet where it is said that Joan relapsed, even, doubting her faith because she was still a woman though dressed in man’s clothing and who fought bravely in the battle. What I want to say here is that, to me it is not a person’s sex that makes one grow soft or passive, but one can relapse after much torture and psychological shock, that one is not even sure of what one is doing. So to me it seems that Joan also relapsed due to all torture and inhuman treatment she underwent, that she was not clear about what she was doing and not because she was a woman.

Lastly, I feel that like Joan, we too must be firm and be able to stand up against all forces that are against God’s concern for human liberation and justice, even the church if we are to be in obedience to God, for though the church is God’s many a times, the churches have and tend to practice things which are against God’s idea of church, like possessing wealth. Also the church, as in the Middle Ages, tends to be narrow-minded, showing indifferent attitude to one who does not go along with it in its sway.

Bibliography

Chenu, Bruno, et. al., The Book of Christian Martyrs. London: SCM Press, Ltd., pp. 98-105.

Michelet, Jules, Joan of Arc, The University of Michigan Press, 1974.

Shaw, Bernard, Saint Joan, Calcutta: Orient Longman Ltd., 1979.

Sargunam, M.J., A Galaxy of Heroes, Coimbatore: Palaniandavan Printers, 1981.

The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, p.536.

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, p. 728.

The Westminster Dictionary of the Church History, p. 456.

Historical and Political Background

Politically Bohemia was brought still closer to England, when King Richard II married a Bohemian princess in 1382. So, that is where the ideas of Wycliff emigrated. When persecuted in England, coupled with the nationalistic sentiments of Czechs, Wycliff’s revolutionary ideas found an echo in the hearts of the people and took deep root in Bohemia. Moreover the Prague university had been founded in 1348 and has established cultural relations with Paris and Oxford.

On the basis of language and traditions, the people of Bohemia were sharply divided from their German neighbors. The movement which Hus initiated became a Bohemian movement. His first desire was to remove the scandal of the papal schism. King Wenceslas of Bohemia had sought the help of the University of Prague in getting neutrality between the claims of the rival popes at the forthcoming Council of Pisa. (C. Mahony, p. 32.)

His Life

He was a Bohemian reformer, born of a peasant family at Husina about 1374. He entered the university of Prague in 1390. His parents were poor. In spite of the humble origin, he was able to attend the university where he had distinction and he became the dean of philosophical faculty in 1401. Hus also came to be known as a popular preacher, especially in the Bethlehem chapel, where he preached against the corrupt life of many of the clergy Though it is clear that he was influenced by the writings of Wycliff, he did not show any interest to become an imitator like Wycliff before him, Luther afterward, he began as a pillar of the Church, gradually moved towards an over heretical position.

Different movements and councils were held at Pisa in 1409, in Constance from 1414 till 1418 and in Basle from 1431 to 1449. During this whole period the questions of dominant authority was the important one.

The one main cause of the first council was the existence of schism.

The second cause was reform movement in Bohemia, from 1400 onwards by John Hus.

Three different movements emerged. The movement inspired by Wycliff in England, Gerard Grant in the Netherlands and by John Hus in Bohemia. The Council of Constance dealt with all three movements.

"Hus’ character was strong on the morals rather than the intellectual sides." (H. Bainton, pp. 58-59.) Like Wycliff he denounced the claim of the papacy to the overlordship of the Church, the worldliness of the clergy, and the sin of simony. Hus declared that Church could not try heresy cases. Hus also emphasized the idea of Wycliff’s doctrine. That dominion belonged only to those who kept God’s laws, emerged at times into the position that dominion belonged only to God’s elect. So, the Husites challenged, like the Lollords, all extra biblical rites, institutions and customs, and they laid special emphasis on the withdrawal of the cup from the laity as non-biblical. Hus became a nationalist leader of the Slav party in the empire.

The university of Paris urged on the French king that Christ had submitted to the authority of his mother and Joseph, and pope. No greater than Christ, might well submit to his mother, the Church. Let cardinals, archbishops, bishops, the heads of the monastic, mendicant and military orders be called, let factors of theology and law from the university and the representatives of the Civil power be summoned, and let such a council and the schism, condemn heretics and reform the Church.

The Council met at Constance on 1 November 1414. It was presided over by an emperor called Sigismund and this meeting became a place for the national interest of Europe. The Council was divided ecclesiastically between reformers and conservatives. The latter wished merely to end the schism. Conservatives taught that the Council had authority superior to the pope, and should carry out reforms, but they feared the doctrines of Wycliff and Hus as much as the Conservatives. The Council achieved the ending of schism, the vindication of the Brethren of the common life, and the condemnation of Hus but it failed to reform the Church. (M. Dearnesty, pp. 232-34.)

After considering the whole question of Hus and heresy, they elected Cardinal odo Colonza as Pope V and Europe received the news of the ending schism with enthusiasm. The Council had hoped to proceed with reform after the election. They had already discussed such matters as the reorganization of the Curia, and the college of cardinals. Papal dispensations and indulgences, the suppression of provision and annates.

The Trial and Death of John Hus

Hus’ triumph earned popularity in Bohemia but also bitter dislike in clerical circles outside his own country, coupled with growing hostility in Germany In spite of demonstrations in Hus’ favor, the archbishop burned a large number of Wycliff’s books in the courtyard of his own place and finally ex-communicated Hus.

The attitude of John Hus to the fathers gathered at Constance was based on a common sense observation. How could they accept the authority of a council called by a pope John XXII who was immediately accused and finally deposed from his throne. When the papacy collapsed to the point that it was no longer possible to discern the legitimate pope, when the bishops and most prestigious abbots took contrary decisions, fidelity to Christ and surrender to the spirit became the only entailing refuge for the preservation of the faith. (Ibid. p. 235.)

A letter from John Hus to two of his friends

"Christianity has remained faithful, without a pope who is only a man, but having Jesus Christ, its head, who guides it perfectly, the heart which gives it life by the life of grace the fountain which waters it with the seven gifts of the Holy spirit, the bosom from which torrents of grace flow, the unfailing and sufficient refuge. It is to him, wretched I am, that I have resort in the firm hope that he will not deprive me of his guidance of the communication of his life and his help. I hope that he will deliver me from my sins and from my wretched present life, and that he will reward me with infinite joy"

John Hus realized that he had fallen into a trap and been condemned in advance. But he refused to compromise when the truth seemed to him to be at stake, and he found the meaning of his struggle in meditating on the passion of Christ.

"I have found great comfort in meditating on the word of the Savior. Blessed are you when men hate you and cast you out from society and torture you and reject your name as evil. For the son of man’s sake rejoice and sing with joy, for your reward will be great in heaven. To rejoice in one’s tribulations is a good, an excellent consolation not so much hard to understand as to realize folly". (Ibid., pp. 135, 237-238.)

He quotes James from the Canonical epistle: "Happy the man who suffers temptation for when he has tried he will receive the crown of life.". "He firmly believed that God will grant him this crown, and grant it to you, most fervent zealots. For the truth, along with all those who love firmly and with perseverance the Lord Jesus Christ who suffered for us and has left us an example so that we may follow in his footsteps. He had to suffer, as he himself said, and he must suffer, so that as his members we may take part in the suffering of the head. For he has said if anyone would follow me, let him forsake himself, take up his cross and follow me. O most merciful Christ, lead us weak as we are, offer you, for unless you lead us we cannot follow you. Give us a courageous spirit, so that it may be ready, and if the flesh is weak, may the grace go before it, accompany it and follow it for without you we can do nothing and above all without you we cannot face cruel death. Give us a bold courage, and upright faith, a firm hope and perfect charity, that we may give our life for you in all patience and all joy."

From the depths of his prison, he drew the lessons of his experience; he made a host of recommendations to his friends to remain faithful to the gospel, and put it into practice in their daily life. (L.W. Spitz, p.34.)

"I ask and expect you to love God, to honor his word to bear it readily and to observe it. I ask you to hold to the Divine truth that I have explained in writing and that I have preached according to the holy scriptures and the discourses of the fathers. I also ask that if anyone has heard me say in private or in my preaching anything contrary to the divine truth, or if I have written anything of this sort, that takes no account of it. I also asked that if anyone has noted any lightness in my words or my actions, he does not imitate that but prays God to pardon me. I ask you to love, praise and honor the priests of good morals, above all those who preach the word of God. I ask you to be benefactors of the poor and to treat them justly. Just servants should be faithful to their masters and their mistresses. I ask masters to lead an honest life and to educate their pupils with diligence. Above all they should love God, and should give themselves over to study For the increase of his glory, the service of the city and their own salvation and not to satisfy their cupidity or their thirst for human glory."

On the eve of his condemnation Hus expressed his determination to his friends for the last time.

In his last letter to his closest companions to whom he makes individual recommendations and asks them to pray to God for him.

The last act was played out on 6 July 1415.

The bishop of Laoli gave a sermon heavy with allusions on the pretext of commenting on Paul’s phrase, "may the body of sin be destroyed" (Rom. 6:6) since for the Council, Hus had become the cause and the, visible sign of the misfortunes of the church and its divisions, he had to die as an expiatory victim and to serve as an example to dissuade all the heretics. Another bishop read out the charges. Several times the accused protested vainly and tried to make himself heard. The cardinal of Florence brutally made him keep silent. Hus cried out his innocence: "I beg you, for God’s sake hear me, so that the people around us may not believe that I have professed these errors. Then you may do with me what you will". Unable to explain himself, the condemned man then began to pray publicly. Reciting the litany of accusations went on, regularly interrupted by his protests. When the reading was over, Hus made a short prayer: "Lord Jesus. pardon all my enemies, I pray you of your great mercy you know that they have accused me falsely that they have produced false witnesses and that they have made false articles. Pardon out of your great mercy". Then he was made to undergo the ceremony of public degradation. Having been dressed in his liturgical vestments as though he were about to celebrate the Eucharist, the condemned man had to watch the chalice and the ornaments removed one by one. Then it was the turn of the tonsure which was defaced with scissors. Finally they put on his head a paper crown with three demons on it and the explanation "This man is a heresiarch" (Bruno Chenu, p. 108.)

Hus then left the church dressed like this, passed close to a stake on which his books were burning and praying all the time, went through the crowd to his own stake, which was set up at the gates of the city. While he was being stripped and attached to a post, he continued to pray, "Lord Jesus Christ, it is for the sake of the gospel and the preaching of the word that I undergo with patience and humility their terrifying, ignorant and cruel death." To the two lay officers responsible for asking him to abjure before the fire was lit, Jan Hus replied: "God is my witness that I have never taught nor preached what is attributed to me by the depositors of false witnesses. I am ready to die with joy in the truth of the Gospel, which I have written, taught and preached according to the tradition of the holy doctors."

While the flames were mounting, Hus’ voice rang out a last time. "Christ, son of the living God have mercy on us." (Ibid., p. 109.)

When the pyre was entirely consumed and it was possible to see what remained of Hus’ body suspended by the chain which was attached to his neck, the soldier pulled down the great post collected in a pile. What remained of the bones of their victim, they relit it, having added a new cartful of wood and straw. They seized the skull, broke it with their mattocks and threw it on the fire. One of them held the heart of Jan Hus in the fire at the end of a pointed stick. They even threw his tunic and his other vestments upon it. The incarceration was complete. His friends from Bohemia were not to be allowed to come and gather relics from the place of execution. When only ashes were left, they carefully put them on a cart and dipped them into the Rhine. The will of the Council was that nothing should be left of poor Master Jan of Husiric. (Ibid., pp. 110-111)

His Teaching

It mainly consists of two elements: First regarding the indulgence controversy, secondly his teaching on the church.

Indulgence controversy: In this Hus found that papal agents seemed to sell forgiveness for money -- Hus and his supporter Jerome of Prague publicly preached against indulgences. They questioned the existence of purgatory and protested against church collecting money to spill the Christian blood. Hus called Pope as the money grabber and as an anti-Christ. Many others supported his views. (Lefever, p. 81.)

When Pope heard this, he excommunicated John Hus. This threat continued to John Hus. Finally, on the advice of the king, Hus left Prague and remained in rural seclusion for two years. During these years he wrote his major works; some in Latin and some in Czech, all inspired by Wycliff. His writing cited anticlericalism, he rejected image worship, he condemned priests for taking fees for baptism, confirmation, masses, marriages and for the burials. (Mahony, p. 33.)

The Church: During his retirement period (1412-1414) he wrote De ecclesia (concerning the Church). In this he applied Wycliff’s teaching on the Church to the actual circumstance of the Church in Bohemia. He taught that head of the Church is Christ who is the rock on which the Church is built. Rome by its long history is the principal regional Church, but it is not by any means the whole or even the center of the Church. It is to be esteemed only so long as its Pope and the cardinals follow Christ. If they do not follow Christ then they belong to anti-Christ.

The Pope or priest cannot forgive sins. He can only declare God’s forgiveness and real forgiveness depends partly on the penitence of the sinner and on the true Christian character of the priest. God’s word is the standard of truth and the Pope and cardinals are to be obeyed only insofar as their decisions are in accordance with it. (Durant, pp. 104-5; Lefever, p. 35.)

Conclusions

1. Hus had the national consciousness and the political involvement with the Reformers.

2. The reformation was not from the rich people but from the common people and peasants.

3. Following Hus as an example we may be able to live a faithful life.

4. One of the important teachings was his emphasis on the scripture. All through his time he was known as the "morning star of reformation".

Chenu Bruno, et. al, The Christian Martyrs, pages, 107-118.

O. Mahony Christopher, Church History (Courage -- Institute of Theology and Philosophy, 1974), pp. 32-34.

Bainton, H. The Context of the Reformation, Hutchinson Edward Ltd., in 1968, pages 58-62.

M. Dearnesty, History of the Medieval Church, pages 270-338.

Spitz, L.W, The Renaissance and Reformation Movements, 1971, pages 34-35.

Durant Will, The Reformation. New York, Simon, 1959, pages 104-105.

Lefever, H.C., The History of the Reformation, pgs 31, 34, 35.

Political, Economic and the Ecclesiastical Context

Wycliff was born in about 1324. The Pope was then living in Avignon, which placed him under the domination of the king of France. England being in a state of chronic hostility to France, Wycliff was naturally not unwilling to take an anti-papal attitude. The Avignon papacy created so much unrest in Ecclesiastical circles and in later years, the still more unsettling Great schism. Also at this time England suffered the ravages of the Black Death (1343-80). This was a kind of bubic plague, brought from China and India along the trade route. It was extremely contagious. Those whom it attacked died within a matter of hours and there was no known remedy for it. Not a country of Europe escaped from it. The total effect of this sudden sweeping pestilence was, that in a matter of less than two years, it destroyed some four million people in western Europe. (Philip Hughes, A Popular History of the Catholic Church, London [N.d], p.125.) This Black death had made labor scarce in England and the Serfs were demanding more and more from their lords. A period of unrest followed as the peasants strove often with great violence for their freedom. (Christopher O. Mahony, Church History, Alwaye: Pontifical Institute of Theology and Philosophy, p. 105.)

His Life and Work

Little is known of his early life except that he gained a reputation at Oxford of being a brilliant student and was even called ‘the greatest scholar of his time’. He soon distinguished himself for his zeal for the welfare of the Church. He was distressed at the sad condition of the Church of his day, the money shown by so many of the clergy from the pope himself to parish priest and he had been influenced by Franciscan spirituals and similar groups. In 1374, he became Rector of Lutterworth in England and from that time, until his death in 1384, he divided his time between his academic work and his parish.

There are two major factors that led England to rehearse Reformation. The first major irritant was the flow of wealth from English Church to Pope i.e. to France and this money was spent for the war against England. In 1333 Edward III refused to pay any longer the tributes that King John of England had pledged to Popes in 1213, in 1351 statute of provisions sought to end papal control over the personnel or revenues of English beneficence. Wycliff supported this view. Thus he gained the support and the protection from John of Gaunt who was the fourth son of Edward III and became the most powerful man in the kingdom. The secondary cause of the reformation in England was the low moral life of the clergy. Wycliff became a noted teacher at Oxford, where he made a great reputation as a preacher and as a theologian. His teaching mainly consisted of three elements: first, the doctrine of lordship, secondly, the supreme authority of the scriptures, and thirdly his conception of the church and the Eucharist. (Will Durant, The Reformation, New York, Simon & Schuster 1957, p.30.)

The Doctrine of Lordship

His doctrine of lordship was contained in two Latin treatises De Domino Divine (Concerning Divine Lordship) and De Civili Domine (Concerning Civil Lordship). His theory is all lordship, whether in the sense of political authority or of individual property, derives ultimately from God. It is a trust from God. (H.L. Lefever, The History of Reformation, Madras: CLS, 1954, p. 25.) Abuse and authority or possession is a breach and a divine trust. Obviously God’s trustees must be honorable men and therefore he argues that the dishonor proves a man unworthy of God’s trust.

The righteous man thus must be said to be the lord of all things which are to be held in common by those who are "in grace as in the case of Christ and His disciples and the early Church after his ascension. On the other hand, the unrighteous man who is in mortal sin has no right to possess anything. His lordship is invalidated by his sin, therefore can’t be said to possess it. (James Mackinnon, The Origins of the Reformation, London: Longmans, 1939, p. 84.) However, Wycliff was not so careful in his remarks concerning the Church. He maintained that if Church misuses its property then it is left to the state to confiscate all its property, if necessary diverting them to the maintenance of the poor and to other good objects. (H.C. Lefever, p.26.) This teaching aroused bitter opposition of the clergy. Wycliff was sum-moned to appear before an ecclesiastical court and it was only due to the forceful protection of the Duke of Lanchester, he escaped condemnation. The Pope issued a number of bulls against him demanding his arrest and committal to prison. But John of Gaunt from motive of self interest, also the enemy of the hierarchy, was powerful enough to afford his protection to Wycliff. He was ready to do so in view of the fact that the persecutors of Wycliff were his political enemies.

Supreme Authority of the Scripture

Wycliff’s acceptance of the scriptures as the rule of life finds expression in nearly all his works but especially in his treatise De Veritate Sacrae Scriptures (on the truth of the Holy Scriptures) published in 1378, the year in which the papacy ranked to its lowest ebb, with the ‘Great schism’, when a new pope was elected in Rome in opposition to the pope of Avignon. This event sharpened his antagonism to the papal system and led him still further to seek the basis of all authority in the Bible. ‘Holy Scriptures’ he said, is the highest authority for every Christian and the standard of faith and all human perfection. The Bible is unique above all the tradition, and decrees of the Church and it is absolutely and literally true, because it is divinely inspired knowledge of the word of God which alone was necessary to salvation and not to know scripture is not to know Christ. (Ibid., p. 27) The reading and preaching of the word of God are therefore more important than any sacrament. The Bible needs the accessories such as masses, fasting, prayers to saints, tradition and papal decretals to make its message valid. (Gordon Leff, Heresy in the middle ages, Vol. II, [New York: Barnes and Nobles Inc. 1969], p. 519.)In this Wycliff stated clearly the later reformation principle of the supreme authority of scripture and as a consequence of this, he sought to make the knowledge of the scripture more general. Though ignorant himself of both Greek and Hebrew, he collected a number of Latin versions of the Bible and with the aid of commentaries by the Fathers and other scholars sought to prepare an accurate English version. This further alienated him from the papacy and he was accused of Vulgarizing the gospel which Christ gave only to clergy and doctors of the Church.

Church and the Sacraments

His appeal to the scripture of the Holy authority led him to denounce all those sacraments and other institutions which had no scriptural warrant. On this basis, he disapproved of penance and confession (ear- whispering), but most of all, he denounced the mass, the doctrine of Transubstantiation.

Under the influence of Augustine, he disapproved the visible Church in the name of invisible Church. He said that Church as a body of predestined existed independently of space and time, it owed allegiance to no one except to Christ, who according to him is the chief Abbot. (Roysdale G. William, History of Christianity in the Middle Ages, Vol. II, [New York: Abingdon Press, 1960], p. 519.)

He created an alliance between individual and the apostolic tradition against present hierarchy with far reaching results. He said the first duty of the priest as Christ’s disciple was to understand and to expound it. This was more important than sacrament or lord’s prayer. (Ibid.) Since God eternally decided who was to be saved and who was to be damned, so nothing remained to agency of intermediaries over prayer. He charged against the authority of pope, cardinals, Church hierarchy and against the material wealth and corruption of the Church. He was even considered as a militant moralist who was prepared to use force to reform the Church. He rejected the pope as anti-Christ. He blamed Constantine for inaugurating the papacy. He exalted the supremacy of king over all mankind, His power fashioned in the image of Christ; the Pope also was subject to the royal power. He denounced the doctrine of Transubstantiation. According to this view, the bread and wine after the prayer of consecration became the body and blood of Christ. This doctrine was considered as the pillar of medieval priestly power and sacramental teaching.

Wycliff is not very clear in his explanation on Eucharist. In the year 1381 Wycliff published twelve conclusions against the doctrine of Transubstantiation. This doctrine is based on a distinction which the scholastic philosophers drew between the ‘substance’ of essence of a thing and its accident’s, its material form and qualities which were not found in the bible; therefore he challenged them and it was at this period that the authorities began their serious attempts to suppress his teaching as heretical. (Margaret Dearnesty, A History of the Medieval Church, 590-1800, [London: Methu Ltd., 1973], p. 226.) The theological implication of the view would be to deny that it is not at all possible for the sacramental bread to lose its ‘bread nature’ (substance and yet for the qualities accident) shape, taste, color, etc. to remain. It would be impossible on this view for the substance to be transferred to a completely different group of qualities, as when the substance of the Lord’s body is said to be transformed to the qualities of bread. (Lefever. op.cit. p. 28.) He argued that it is blasphemy of associating Christ’s body with corruptibility of host’s physical elements and so subject him to any physical indignities which it might undergo. (Lefever, Ibid., p. 552.)

Wycliff denied that the accidents of the bread could remain without the substance or essence of bread and since the accidents manifestly do remain, he was positive that the bread remained bread. On the other hand, he hesitated to say that the consecrated bread was ‘mere symbol’ of the body of Christ. (Ibid., p. 28.)

So he said that the bread and wine are ‘active symbols’, really conveying what their symbolism are, without losing their original material nature. In the consecrated elements, he said Christ is really present and, they really become that which they ‘habitually represent’. So, he seems to have held a view very similar to that later view brought forward by Luther and generally known as ‘Consubstantiation’, the doctrine that Christ is present in, with and under the element. Luther, however, held that the body and blood of Christ are literally and materially present alone with the element, whereas Wycliff could get no further than rather ambiguous expression ‘this sacrament is the body of Christ in the form of bread’. (Ibid., p. 29.) The king and the university condemned this doctrine and requested him not in preach this doctrine, but he refused to comply and instead published a lengthy treatise in defense and amplification of his teaching. Thus he lost the support of the king and the noblemen.

The Lollards and the Peasants revolt

Wycliff’s teachings created much disturbance in England. From 1377 onward he began to send out itinerant preachers of his views all over the country These people known as Lollards, preached chiefly evangelical poverty against the rich, luxurious life of many churchmen. (Christopher O’Mahony, op.cit., p.32.) Since it was a time of much unrest among the underprivileged, many thought that this preaching contributed to the peasant uprising of 1381. On the occasion of a new government tax, thousands of peasants marched on London from all over the country and burned the palace of the duke of Lancaster and also murdered the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Wycliff himself supported the peasants with a pamphlet called ‘peasants and lords’. Since Wycliff had now lost the support of highly placed personages, the new Archbishop of Canterbury took strong action against his doctrine in a special national synod in l382. (Ibid., p. 33.) However he was allowed to end his days in peaceful retirements at his Lutterworth presbytery. When Henry IV became the king of England, he suppressed the Lollards. So the Wyclifites had to transfer their activities to Bohemia where they were known as Hussites. (James Mackinnon, op.cit., p. 184.)

Reflection

Wycliff’s life is a great lesson to us. Usually people treat Reformation as one of the past historical events. But it is not so. It is an ongoing process and has a constant impact upon the people of the present. Today’s Church is almost packed with so many evils, like caste discrimination, poverty, racism, etc. In this situation we must rethink what is Reformation in relation to the existing unjust social order. So we need today people like Wycliff in our society.

Wycliff’s life is very much an inspiration to people in our society. Reformation is a fact to be accepted, not a notion to be discussed. We should also restate what is theology and what is theologizing. If theology is to be vital, it has to be responsive to the social, political, economic and cultural realities which are ‘real’ to that society. In order to do so, we are expected even to reconstruct some of the theological concepts in relation to, but different from traditional understanding of theology as we have seen in the life of Wycliff. The chief subject of all our theological thinking and decision making are people for whom I believe, Jesus came to demonstrate his self-giving love over against the pentateuchal law.

Wycliff is considered as the morning star of Reformation. He initiated and shown forth a bright light of moral and doctrinal reform of the church and society in a time of darkness. Many of the ideas of the later Reformers were reflected in these predecessors. Their national consciousness and their preaching made a great impact among the common people who faithfully carried their reformers’ work throughout the following centuries.

As in Wycliff’s time in the present context, we have to reform the theology and theologizing. We have to make contextual Theology. As per the context, several theologies had emerged: Black theology, Liberation theology, Minjung theology, Feminist theology and Dalit theology are some of the emerging theologies.

In India we have inherited western theology which imposes white theology. How is the bible relevant to us in a pluralistic context of India? How is the church responding to caste system? These are some important issues to deal with.

The New Economic Policy of India has badly affected the poor people. In the New Economic Policy, only 10% of the elites are the real beneficiaries. Recent price hike in the petroleum goods hit the poor people very badly. So the church and the leaders have to conscientise common people about the bad effects of all these things. So we need to reform the present unjust social order. Since the members of the church are mostly the oppressed, marginalized dalits, the Church has to safeguard the interests of the poor and create an awareness among them of their rights and obligation.

Brinton, Henry, The Context of the Reformation, London: Hutchinson Education Ltd.. 1968.

Cannon William Roysdale, History of Christianity in the Middle Ages, New York Abingdon Press, 1960.

Durant, Will. The Reformation, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1957.

Fasber, K, ‘Catherine of Siena’ in New Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. III, New York McGraw Hill Book Co., 1966.

Hughes, Philip. A Popular History of the Catholic Church, London: Surns and Babel; n.d.

Lefever, H.C., The History of Reformation, Madras: CLS, 1984. Leff Gordon. Heresy in the Litter Middle Ages, Vol. II, New York: Barnes and Nobles Inc., 1967.

Macdonald Shirley, They Chose to Belong, Melbourne: Dove Communication Ltd., 1978.

Mackinnon James, The Origins of Reformation, London: Longmans, 1939.

McNeil John, T., Makers of Christian Tradition, New York: Harper & Row, 1935.

O. Mahony Christopher, Church History, Alwaye: Pontifical Institute of Theology and Philosophy. 1974.

Introduction

Christians have met with martyrdom throughout their long history. The regularity of martyrdom confirms a certainty that the earliest apostles had from Christ himself who warned them that the choice they make will expose them to death and this is how it would always be. And also it is not just because of an unfortunate combination and turn of events.

Martyrdom arose quite naturally out of the work of proclaiming Christ as the only Lord and Savior and none beside him. It is therefore, specifically for this reason that the Christians died and in turn imitated Christ’s passion of suffering and through it teaching a lesson.

Historical Background

The Martyrdom of Crispina occurred during the last persecution period of the Roman Empire, under the emperor- ship of Galerius Vaerius Maximianus, who was of humble stock and a native of Illyricum. Galerius was invested with the title Caesar in 293 AD. by Diocletian whose daughter he married and was given responsibility for the Danube frontier. When Diocletian decided on measures against the Christians, the serenity with which this decision was implemented in the series of edicts after 303 AD. was due largely to the influence of Galerius. (J.D. Douglas, et.al. The International Dictionary of the Christian Church [revised Edition], Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, p. 399.) Galerius’ power increased as the emperor’s health failed and he persuaded both the Augusti to abdicate. He then became the Augustus of the East in 305 AD. and Constantine became Augustus in the West. While the Church in the West, under Constantine enjoyed comparative peace, the policy of persecution was continued in the east by Galerius and his Caesar, Maximian. There was remission only after 307 A.D. when Galerius’ own health failed and moreover because he was under the threat of Constantine and Maxetius who were in alliance. It was also the same year that Galerius died, but not before he published the Edict of Toleration from Nicomedia.

This period of martyrdom was the last desperate attempt of the state against the new religion and therefore it was the most terrible of all the persecutions.

Reason for Persecution

The reason for the persecution of Crispina is in no way different from that of the other martyrs of the early centuries, i.e. to renounce her faith in Christ and submit to the laws issued by the emperor of offering sacrifices to all their gods for their welfare to which she did not oblige, but instead firm in her faith in Christ in spite of all attempts made, to try and persuade her to renounce her faith. Moreover she showed no fear at all even to die, by being thrown to the wild beasts or be killed by the sword.

Crispina

Crispina came from a noble family of Toura in North Africa. She was married and was the mother of several children. Her sincerity, her proud assurance and her repartee triumphed over the dryness of her judge. (Bruno Chenu, et.al., The Book of Christian Martyrs, London: SCM Press Ltd., 1990, p. 91.)

The Trial and Manner of Martyrdom

The trial took place on 5th December in the ninth consulate of Diocletian Augustus and the eighth of Maximian Augustus. Sitting in judgement on the tribunal of his council-chamber was the proconsul Anullinus. The court clerk then announced that Crispina, a lady of Toura was to be tried at his good pleasure for she had spurned the law of their lords, the emperors.

After she was brought in, the proconsul asked her whether she was aware of what was commanded by the sacred decree. Crispina replied that she did not know what has been commanded.

Then Anullinus said that the decree was that she should offer sacrifice to all their gods for the welfare of their emperors. But Crispina replied, "I have never sacrificed and I shall not do so save to the one true God and to our Lord, Jesus Christ, his Son, who was born and died." (Herbert Mururilo, The Acts of Christian Martyrs, London: Oxford University Press, 1972, p. 303.)

Then Anullinus said to her to break with her superstition and to bow her head to the sacred rites of the gods of Rome. But again Crispina replied, "Every day I worship my God almighty. I know of no other God besides Him" (Ibid., p. 303.)

Anullinus again then said, "You are a stubborn and insolent woman and you will begin to feel the force of our laws against your will." (Ibid., p. 303.) But to this also, Crispina did not waver but replied, "Whatever happens I shall be glad to suffer it on behalf of the faith which I hold firm". (Ibid., p. 303.)

Though Anullinus tried in various ways to force her to renounce her faith and offer sacrifice to their gods, Crispina was firm in her stand of faith in Jesus Christ and that she has never offered sacrifice to any other gods other than the one true God who has made the heaven and earth, the sea and all things that are in them and who alone is to be feared which is also said by Appollonius.

As she was not willing to give in to their laws of offering sacrifice to their gods and even prepared to undergo any torture, Anullinus then ordered that she be completely disfigured first before being killed. Her hair was cut and her head shaved with a razor in order to bring shame to her beauty. After this, even when the execution order was given she was still indifferent to their demand and moreover showed no fear. She instead said, "I shall thank my God if I obtained this. I should be very happy to lose my head for the sake of my God. For I refuse to sacrifice to these ridiculous deaf and dumb statues. Thanks be to God !". (Ibid., p. 307.) She then made a sign of the cross on her forehead and willingly put her neck out. She was then beheaded by the sword for the name and sake of the Lord Jesus Christ whom she refused to renounce despite many threats and persuasions.

Reflection

One really feels touched in reading about the martyrdom of Crispina. Moreover because she was a woman, for women being the weaker sex are often considered to relapse faster to abuses and threats than men. But it is not so as we can clearly see from Crispina, who stood firmly to her belief and faith in Jesus Christ in spite of all threats and persuasion. Courage, as from Crispina’s life is not mere physical strength, but firmness in standing for a just and right cause.

On the other aspect of Crispina that really touches one is that even when it was ordered that she first be disfigured before her execution by cutting her hair and shaving her head with a razor, she did not give in though it is really a shame and humiliation for a woman to have her hair cut, moreover her head shaved without one’s consent for hair is considered as a woman’s pride and beauty. Crispina was humiliated and put to shame first even before being executed, yet, as mentioned above, Crispina did not waver in her stand of faith in Jesus. Moreover when the time for her execution came, she without any hesitation willingly put her neck out as if she wanted everything to be done with quickly. Her boldness, I found noteworthy for it seems that she was clear of God whom she believed and knew where she was going, to heaven, which is the promise of God to all who believed in Him in and through Jesus Christ.

Crispina’s strong stand in her faith also showed that God alone is to be feared and worshipped above all else. But who is this God ? According to the Christian belief and tradition, God is the father, to whom we can have access only by believing in faith through Jesus Christ, His Son, whom he sent to redeem the world from eternal death and sin. But in today’s context of religious pluralism it can be argued that Christianity alone cannot be said as the one true religion and this is not what I mean to say Instead what I want to say is whether we like Crispina or not, her words are clear about the God whom we are worshipping, the God of Jesus Christ too and who can be reached only through faith in Jesus Christ.

Also, Crispina in spite of being a mother did not give in to the attempts made in order to persuade her. it is not that she would have no love for her children, for a mother’s love for her children cannot be measured and a mother is one who is willing to sacrifice her all for her children, but her love for Christ, comes above all else, that she was willing to even give up her life with her children for Christ’s sake.

Above all these, I would like to go a little further and raise a question -- "Do we like Crispina, really know who our God and Savior is ? Are we prepared to stand firm in our faith in working for the people in their struggle for justice, liberation and so on in spite of all accusations and threats ? Leaving aside the physical death of martyrdom, are we ready to become living martyrs ? for especially in our present-day context, in order to stand up against injustice, oppression and so on, one has to be prepared to be a living martyr, working for and with the people for the upliftment and betterment against all evil forces. And this is the task to which all are called. It is also the teaching of all religions. I would not like to limit the idea of martyrdom to the Christian circle alone, but to all who worship God. For me, anyone who stands up and suffers for the people in their struggle, whether dead or living, is a martyr.

Bibliography

Chenu, Bruno, et. al. The Book of Christian Martyrs, London: SCM Press, 1990.

Mururilo, Herbert, The Acts of Christian Martyrs, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

The International Dictionary of the Christian Church, Grand Rapids: Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House (Revised edition).

Introduction

St. Cyprian, an early Christian martyr of the third century is still living in the hearts of each and every Christian. As an inspired martyr and a zealous ecclesiologian and a theologian he very much influences the Christian world. His life time is not specifically mentioned in any book. The approximate life time is around AD. 200. After inspired by the teachings of Christ he became ready to accept the words of Christ.

I have done this by the help of secondary sources. I am not claiming that I could put forward tremendous materials in order to write this paper. Nevertheless I could give a portrayal of St. Cyprian through my words. I mainly depended upon the encyclopedia of the History of Christianity and the Christian Church.

CARTHAGE -- THE CHRISTIAN CITY

Roman city in North Africa is Carthage. Carthage known to early Christianity originated as a Roman colony established on the mines of the Panic city destroyed in 146 BC. by Scipio Africanus. The colony was not successfully established until BC. 29 under Augustus, who named it Colonia Julia Carthage. It was a carefully planned city, the dwellings were set out on a good system and streets were remarkable in antiquity for their breath. Throughout the first and second centuries AD. the city grew steadily and eventually came to be recognized as the greatest city in the western part of the empire, after Rome.

Before the legalization of Christianity, Christians around burned grounds outside the city. After the peace established by the Emperor Constantine, Christians were able to build churches. Agrippanus is the first bishop to be attested. He summoned a Consul to Carthage ca. 220 to debate the issue of the rebaptism of heretics, on which he took a hardline. Indeed, Carthaginian Christianity was for centuries characterized by rigid political attitudes towards moral and doctrinal issues.

Cyprian was bishop from 248-258, he brings the Carthaginian church sharply into view through his considerable correspondence and his treatises. By mid-century, the church was not only popular but also relatively wealthy, and during the persecution of Decius (250 AD), which threatened loss of property, Carthage assumed a position of primacy among African churches in Council. Carthage was really a Christian country.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

It is probable that Cyprian was born in Carthage into a family of some social standing and wealth around AD. 200. He became a distinguished rhetorician widely known in the city, and acquired friends of political power. He was converted (ca. 245-246) under the influence of the aging Carthaginian presbyter Concilius. With his conversion, he resolved on a life of celibacy and, selling his considerable estates, he gave the proceeds (or most of the proceeds) to the needy. He was soon made a presbyter, and probably within a year -- sometime between May 248 and May 249 -- was elected bishop of Carthage, with the strong approbation of the Christian people but with opposition from at least five presbyters who apparently envied his rapid rise to ecclesiastical power. (Rev. Dr. Mar Aprem, Sabha Christian Nijords (Martyrs), Tiruvalla: CLS, 1986)

CYPRIAN AS BISHOP OF CARTHAGE

In January 250, shortly after the edict of Becins demanding the universal acknowledgement of the gods through sacrifice, Cyprian went into hiding in an unspecified place near Carthage, believing that as a man of distinction he would, if he remained in the city, provide a focus for pagan hostility to the Christians. He endeavored to rule his church from his hiding place by letters sent through faithful emissaries. In these letters, we witness the persecution waxing and waning over a few months. Within weeks apparently vast numbers of Christians had lapsed and soon began to seek reconciliation. At first Cyprian resolved that peace should not be extended to the lapsed until an appropriate response had been determined by the church in council. His position, however, was undermined by laxist presbyters who began to offer peace to those which procured certificates from confessors and martyrs, and further undermined by a letter from the Roman clergy to the church of Carthage highly critical of Cyprian as a ‘hurling’ who had abandoned the flocks. As Cyprian movement tried for control, he gradually modified his position on the lapsed. Probably by early June, he had agreed that those who became severely ill and had done penance, could be accepted provided they secured certificates from the confessors and martyrs, receive reconciliation from presbyters and deacons, and by midsummer he had accepted the Roman position that all who had done penance could in the face of sickness be reunited. By late summer he had received a letter of support from the Roman clergy, and began making supportive clerical appointments at Carthage.

During the fall and winter, however, positions hardened, excommunication of the lapsed followed, and feelings ran so high that Cyprian was unable to return to Carthage until after Easter 251. Shortly thereafter, the council of 251 adopted the position that peace should be granted only in severe illness to those who had by some means acquired certificates from the pagan authorities attesting that they had sacrificed, although in fact they might be admitted to communion at once.

Eventually, under the threat of a new persecution, Cyprian was prepared to grant reconciliation to all who sought it. Unfortunately, his efforts to make accommodation and at the same time maintain integrity resulted in the disruption of the unity of the Catholic Church. By 252, two splinter groups each had its own bishop in Carthage, the rigorists who took the position of Novation, the schismatic bishop of Rome, and the laxists, who chose the presbyter Fortunasus as bishop.

MARTYRDOM

The persecution had tested Cyprian’s relations with Rome. If in 250 the Roman clergy had been slow to support him, in 251 he was cautious in recognizing Cornelius as the legitimate bishop of Rome, and only after careful investigation did he support Cornelius in opposition to the claims of Novation. Cyprian’s relations with Stephen I, elected bishop of Rome in 254 became strained. In the same year, Spanish bishops appealed to Cyprian from a decision of Stephen I and a Gaelic Bishop sought his help to secure from Stephen a judgement against Marcion, who as bishop, had declared himself as a Novationist. From 255, over the course of two years, Cyprian was engaged in a bitter quarrel with Stephen I concerning the rebaptism of heretics and schematics; Stephen accepted the baptism of heretics and schematics as valid. But Cyprian denied it any efficacy whatever. But the end was near. Caught by the edict of Valerian, requiring pagan sacrifice, Cyprian was exiled to Cumbis.

Under Valerian, the successor of Decius, the persecution ceased. This successor indirectly practiced a policy of tolerance, but this was abruptly interrupted in 257 under the influence of Marxian, minister of finance. A pagan mystic, he abhorred Christianity, and moreover he saw a resumption of persecution as a way of reflecting the finances of the empire, which were disastrous at the time. High ranking clergy were the object of his last pillaging.

The persecution was a bloody one. A first edict in 257 for the first time banned Christian worship. Cyprian was exiled, but that did not prevent him from still keeping watch on his church, by sending letters and material comforts. A year later, a second edict called for the death penalty for all clergy who refused to make Roman sacrifices. The measure immediately affected Cyprian.

Paternoster ordered the blessed Cyprian to be banished. Cyprian stayed a long time in exile. Paternoster was succeeded by Galeins Maximnon who ordered the holy bishop Cyprian to be recalled from banishment and brought before him. So Cyprian, the holy martyr chosen by God, returned from the city Cumbis which had been assigned as his place of banishment by command of Asparius their proconsul. A sacred command authorized him to live on his own land. There he daily expected a summons, as had been shown him in a dream. While he still awaited these, suddenly on 15 September, in the consulship of Tinans and Bassns, two high officials came to him. They put him in a carriage and Maximus ordered to bring him next day. Then he read the verdict from his table. "It is our pleasure that Cyprian should be executed by the sword. (Bruno Chenu, The Book of Christian, Martyrs, London: SCM, 1990, p. 89.) Cyprian was happy after hearing this verdict. He was beheaded.

WRITINGS OF CYPRIAN

Among the writings of Cyprian, the corpus of his letters must be ranked of primary significance as source for the history of a decade otherwise poorly documented. The majority of these writings find occasion in persecution and its aftermath, above all the persecution of Decius and Valerian and in an anticipated persecution by Trebonranns Gallus. Nine letters document the rebaptism controversy, and a handful offer a glimpse into other aspects of life in the mid-third century, such as scandals among virgins and the devastation caused by barbarous raids.

Of two apologetic works, one an appeal to Donatus is clearly early before 250; a second, to Quisnnus a compendium of scrip-hire texts useful as testimonies, should also be dated before 250. The scandal among virgins apparently elicited the treatise on the dress of Virgins (before 250). Out of the problems arising from the Decian persecution, Cyprian in the course of 251 wrote the treatises: On the lapsed, on the unity of the church and probably also on the Lord’s prayer, which stresses the importance of unity. (James Hardy, p. 248.) He had written a lot of things other than these.

REFLECTION

When we learn about early martyrs, we can see their honesty, sincerity, zeal and courage to face persecution. They were loving God, human beings and the church. They were very much courageous and willing to face the persecution and death for the growth of the church. The blood of the martyrs is indeed the seed of the church.

Cyprian lived on in memory for centuries as a figure of vital importance, especially to Christianity in Africa, which regarded him as a distinguished, it not always satisfactory, apologist both donatists and Catholics appealed to his authority. In the fourth century, at least three churches were built to his memory at Carthage. Under Demasus (368-384), Rome acknowledged his greatness by including him in its festal calendar.

Today St. Cyprian is living in our hearts. He was a well-known theologian and he had his own stand in the time of controversies. He was ready to give his life for the growth of the church. His martyrdom is enriching us and inspiring us to live like him.

His attitude and sympathetic approach towards the poor and needy is highly appreciable or considerable. In his earlier days he was criticizing Christianity and spoke against Christianity. But at his 46th year of age, as the result of the attempt of a presbyter, he took baptism and became a converted Christian. The teachings of Jesus Christ very much inspired him and he started to live accurately to the words of Christ. He has given all his properties to the poor and needy. This is a good lesson for us, especially those who are speaking about sharing. We are pseudo evangelicals and pseudo liberals. We should be real liberal evangelicals. It can be seen from the teachings of St. Cyprian. Cyprian took the side of the poor and the oppressed. So I feel that St. Cyprian is one of the most inspiring early church fathers especially in his martyrdom and theological knowledge.

Bibliography

White Edward Benson, Cyprian - His Life-His Times-His Works, Macmillan & Co., 1897.

Chenu, Bruno, The Book of Christian Martyrs, London: SCM, 1990.

Mar Aprem, Sabha Christian Nijords (Malayalam), Tiruvalla, CLS, 1986.

The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, Michigan, Zondervan, 1985.

James, Teaching of the Apostolic Church, Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915.

Introduction

"You shall be my witness ... to the ends of the earth". This was the basis of the early churches to accept the real meaning of witnessing in the act of dying for the faith. The secular meaning of the Greek word ‘martyr’ is a witness one who bears testimony. This is more than suffering death for the faith. According to the origin, a martyr is the one who of his own free choice chooses to die for the sake of religion. In the New testament it means giving testimony in words, preaching and also suffering death for Christian faith. In this write up I deal with one of the early Christian martyrs St. Cyprian of Carthage.

It is believed that Cyprian was born in Carthage into a family of some social standing and wealth around AD. 200. (Peter Hinchliff, Cyprian of Carthage, p. 20.) He was highly educated and well known in Carthage as a rhetoric and acquired friends of political power. Later he was converted to Christianity under the influence of the aging Carthaginian presbyter Ceaecilius in 246 AD. He had been on the anti-Christian side for a long time, but had gradually been converted by the agreements and frequent debates. It has been said that he was familiar with public affairs and was of senatorial rank. With his conversion, he resolved to lead a life of celibacy and, selling his considerable estate, he gave it to the needy. His dedication to the celibacy, poverty, scriptures and native ability quickly led to the presbyterate and within a year around AD 248 he was elected as the Bishop of Carthage. (Ibid., p. 20) Though there was a strong opposition for electing him as Bishop he had the strong support of the Christian community. He was a great Bishop as well as an administrator. He was also a famous writer. With the exception of Tertullian, Cyprian was the first Latin Christian writer.

Historical Context -- Socio-economic & Political

Cyprian lived during the time of Emperors Decius and Valerian in Carthage. This city grew and developed and through an expanding network of subordinate city colonies, sea trade and territorial expansion, it became one of the richest cities in the western Mediterranean by 3rd cent. BC. This growth resulted in bitter conflicts with other rivals for the control of Mediterranean trade routes. The greatest threat for Carthage came from Rome. This bloody conflict destroyed the city and Romans took over the control. However the geographical advantages and economic possibilities inherent in the location led to the re-establishment of Carthage as a Roman colony in 44 BC. (Donald Dubley, Roman Society, p. 115) Under the Roman rule Carthage experienced an economic bloom, becoming the largest city in the West after Rome. Mainly on account of its monopoly over the corn trade and control over the exports of marble, woods, precious stones, gold dust, etc.

These developments resulted in the Carthage of Cyprian’s time being a vibrant metropolis, highly unbound in cross cultural outlook and behavior. This policy of colonization and territorial expansion resulted in the growth of flourishing centers of urban civilization all along the North African coastal belt by the 3rd cent. ND. Colonies were quickly inter-connected by road system and trade and commerce grew. (‘Africa Roman’ in The Oxford Classical Dictionary, pp. 22-23.)

Though Carthage was economically rich, the whole Roman empire went through a period of economic crisis. It was a time of short reigns and rival emperors, one man succeeded another with bewildering rapidity. (Peter Hinchliff, Cyprian of Carthage, p. 27.) The administration was not so sound. Political events were very disastrous for Africa. In 235 Maximus, a Goth, made himself emperor. Roman culture and civilization, had little appeal for him and sheer naked force seems to have been his favorite political tool. There was a rebellion, and the rebels proclaimed the proconsul Gordia, joint emperor with his son. Maximus was defeated in this and lost his throne. So the public works were not properly maintained; taxes were high; Municipal office was avoided. (Ibid., p. 28.) Politically there was a real crisis in Africa.

The natives of Carthage panicked. Due to the Roman invasion, Roman Latin ethnic element was added to Carthage. There was a widespread belief in the demonic powers among the people. Cyprian believed in a real literal and vivid hell and in the de Idoloum, he mentioned that Christ and Christian power over the forces of evil is the proof that the true God is the Lord of all things. Black magic seems to have been widely practiced. Cyprian therefore lived in a world when demonic forces, evil spirits and magic were considered as real things. Also in the Roman world dreams were counted as portentous, in the strict sense. (Ibid., p. 25.) Before Cyprian’s conversion, he practiced all these things. Cyprian’s decision to become a Christian seems to have been the result of a disgust with the world in which he lived. It would certainly seem that Cyprian turned to Christianity in revulsion against a decline in the standard of the society.

So there was a strong cruelty to those who threatened to challenge these systems. So Decius who reigned at that time ruled with an unrelenting conservation aimed at restoring the lost stability of an idealized Roman past. But the Christian church was rapidly expanding during this time.

Persecution Under Roman Government

Before going into the details of the 3rd century persecution, I would like to present some of the general reasons for the persecution in the Early Church. One of the important reasons for the persecution of the early church was the universal claim of the Christians for their religion. It is true that Christians were intolerant to other religions. Roman history states that there were many pagan religions in Rome besides the state religion and Rome allowed other religions to persecute Christianity. It is true that other religions were absorbing and assimilating the best necessary elements from the state religion and introduced them into their religions. This attitude of syncretism saved them from Roman destruction, on the other hand the early Christians stood firm in their faith in Jesus Christ alone. And they also mentioned that they alone had the truth, that all other religions were false. They said "we know that no idol is anything in the world, and there is no good but one." (H.B. Workman, Persecution in the Early Church, p. 86.) This claim of Christians aroused the anger of heathens and as a consequence of it they began to hate the Christians and persecute them. Another reason for the persecution is that Christians were called as atheists and charged with sacrilege because they did not worship the gods of the state. It was essential that all citizens of Rome worshipped their national gods as well as the imperial religion because only tho~e who worshipped the national gods and emperor were patriots and the others were considered as traitors. For Christians, worshipping their national gods was against the Christian belief and they proclaimed that they will worship no other god except Jesus Christ. Christians not only refused to worship, they also mocked at other images "that the gods raided Apollo, the savior Aesenlapius, even Jupiter Capitolimus himself -- were malignant ‘demons’ ensconced behind wood and stone." To quote Tertullian "that they might obtain their favorite food of flesh forms and blood". (Ibid., p. 25.) They not only mocked at other gods as demons but also despised their temples as dead houses and mocked at the sacred things. So Christians were charged as atheists. This charge of atheism led the heathens to their unconquerable superstitious beliefs. They believed that if they won’t worship properly, the wrath of gods will fall upon the people in the form of famine, flood etc. So Romans believed that Christians had no gods. This was one of the reasons for the persecution of Christians.

Another charge was against the practice of magic acts. Heathens believed that Christians were meeting secretly to use magic arts in order that they might undo the oracles which they used to consult often. They also believed that by their superior exorcism the Christians could reduce oracles to silence which hitherto had proved to be the fortune of the whole country. This was strengthened when emperor Valerian consulted the oracle before he went to war; he did not receive any reply. The chief priest told the emperor that this is because of the fact that some Christians showed the sign of cross and made the oracle a failure. So Christians were persecuted for this. Another reason, the Christians had to suffer under Roman government was because they thought Christianity was a denigrating factor upon family. Christians did not encourage inter-marriage with others especially heathens. This is simply to avoid tension in the family. For example, in some families, women were converted to Christianity and the husbands remained as heathens. Being a heathen, he won’t allow his Christian wife to go with her Christian friends. Moreover he won’t permit her to be out all night for worship, nor to kiss with one of the brethren. Due to this, women asked for divorce. So Christians did not encourage inter-marriage with heathens. Also they encouraged divorce for the Christian wives in order to take part actively in the Christian ministry. This caused separation of many families. So heathens made up their mind to destroy Christianity.

Another reason was that Christians were always opposed to the Roman law. According to Roman law, every religion had to get permission to exercise its religion from the government and it should be recognized by the state. But Christianity was not. They met secretly in houses for meetings which was considered to be illegal. Also in the Roman law one has every freedom to practice his religion but one was not free either to change his/her religion or to attempt to persuade other people to change their religion. So in order to stop conversion the state adopted the policy of persecution. Another law was the emperor worship. Like other Roman subjects, Christians did not worship the image of Caesar; neither they were willing to sacrifice. So Romans thought that in their secret meetings they were planning to rebel against Caesar, and were disloyal to the emperor also. These were some of the reasons why Christians were persecuted.

Persecution during the time of St. Cyprian

The second persecution started from the early years of the 3rd century. In this period, the Church was called upon to meet a real test of its faith and take a more cruel and terrible suffering. The persecution of the second period was different from the first. 1) In the 1st and 2nd centuries it was the people who took active part in the persecution of the Church, but now the state had determined to destroy the Church. The state saw that the Church was increasing enormously, numerically as well as in its power. As Ward says "The Christian society had become that terror of the state and empire within the empire." (J.W.C. Ward, A History of the early Church, p. 99) In this period the Church not only grew numerically, but also strengthened itself in its organization and power by creating a monarchical bishop who had the sole authority over the Church and who really became the emperor of the Church. So the Roman hierarchy feared the growth of the Church and they thought that if they would not control the growth, the supremacy of the Roman emperor would be no more and pope would become the monarch of the state as well as the Church. 2) The second difference is that this persecution was more organized and systematic than that of the first. The state used all the resources to destroy the Church. It also called upon to her aid, able philosophers such as Celsius, Porphyry to defeat the Church with their criticism of the claim of new faith. 3) The state also passed several edicts to destroy the foundation of the Church such as conversions, worship, destroying Churches and bishops. 4) This persecution was universal, not confined to one particular province but throughout the whole Roman empire.

Persecution under Septimius Severus (193-211 AD)

Septimius Severus was the emperor during the period of 193-211 AD. In the beginning he was lenient to Christianity but later when he saw the growth of Christianity, he thought it would be dangerous for his kingdom. Therefore to stop conversion he passed an edict in 202 AD. forbidding to be made Jews or Christians. So conversion was not possible according to this law. But Christians did not fear this because they knew that Christ called them to be the Ambassadors and to be witnesses for Christ. So they continued preaching the gospel. So a terrible persecution started in the East and North Africa. The two important Churches of Alexandria and of Carthage received severe blows. At Carthage great execution was done among the catechumens. Though the catechumens suffered severely, the sword could not stop conversion.

Persecution under Decius Trajan (249-251)

After the death of Severus, Church enjoyed peace for some time. But by the coming of Decius this situation was changed. He wanted to revise and to enforce the observance of the National Religion in which all the citizens of the Roman Empire, including Christians, should worship the national gods as well as Caesar. Christians were rapidly growing during this period and they discussed the possibility of converting the whole Roman empire. So Decius started a most systematic, planned and deliberate attempt to stamp out the Church. His method of persecution was different from others. His aim was not to martyr Christians but to reconvert them into paganism, and to make them Apostates. For this he specially aimed at Bishops and leaders of the Church thinking that if those shepherds were destroyed the folk would abandon Christianity and would worship national religion. So he included Christians on a fixed day and see to it that they would sacrifice to the national gods and to the genius of the emperor. He also commanded to see that all should taste the sacrifice and a special attention to be diverted to the bishop and Church leaders. This was really an inescapable test to detect sincere Christians and to punish them. The Christians had only two alternatives; either they had to sacrifice to the gods or to die. Many Christians fearing death denounced Christ and became apostates and worshipped national gods. But many good Christians who refused to sacrifice were tortured and put to death. The persecution was so severe in Carthage that the whole Church became apostatized and that even some of the bishops and clergy denied the faith. Bishop Dionysus says: "This edict is a new terror ensured sufficient to scandalize if it were possible over the elect". (Charles Bigg, The Origin of Christianity, 1909, p. 350.)

Persecution Under Valerian

Though Valerian was favorable to Christians in the beginning later he turned against because of the constant calamities of the empire which were attributed to their atheism and also he was influenced by his governor who took vengeance upon Christians. Like Decius, he also aimed at Bishops and leaders and he added two more things for persecution: (1) Method of confiscation of property, (2) abolishing Church meetings and worship. He passed the first edict in 257 AD. specially directed against the bishops and priests to which he empowered the magistrates to seize and to compel them to sacrifice to gods, if they would not do that, they were to be punished. The second edict says that the Christians should not assemble together for worship nor hold meetings. They were also forbidden to enter the cemeteries where Christians used to celebrate the anniversaries of the dead, especially of the martyrs. The edict was passed mainly to destroy the worship system and meetings. The penalty for this edict was death. Many Christians were arrested and put to death or sent to the mines. Several others were exiled. When he saw that the first edict was not sufficient to torture Christians, he passed another edict in 258 AD. which says that all bishops, priests and deacons should be put to death. Many Christians lost their property and the Christian members of the emperor’s domestic or official household were sent in chains to work as slaves on the imperial estates.

Cyprian and Persecution

Cyprian lived during this time of persecution. During the Decian persecution, the Christian Church suffered a lot especially the Church in Carthage. Many flew from the city including the bishop Cyprian. This was one of the Cyprians’ actions which is very difficult to understand. Cyprian’s stand was that the Church in Carthage would only survive if his hand remained at the helm, even if from a distance. Cyprian believed that Church needed a man with some considerable abilities. One of his main reasons for withdrawing had been to preserve the government of the Church. His letters of that period are full of instructions about all sorts of things. Cyprian devoted himself to the complex business of running his diocese from his hiding place. But he was not quite happy in his hiding place. He was so worried about the flock he left behind especially the poor Christians who depended on the bishop’s charity. During the exile he found time to write, encouraging others suffering under the edict, by being made to undergo forced labor in the mines. He also sent them material/financial help. It is probable that during the exile, he wrote his treatise Ad Fortunatum, a collection of Biblical passages with commentary on martyrdom. Not only the persecution from outside, there was also a lot of problems inside the Church regarding the hierarchy during this time.

The slackening of the persecution allowed Cyprian to return home. Not only the persecution was less fierce but also the opposition within the Church was also much less active. He was so much concerned about the unity of the Church. De Ecclesia Catholicae Unitate was one of his famous writings. He says that this unity stems from God. He said the Church is one as the Trinity is one. Though there was some kind of peace for a short period, Valerian caused more persecutions to Christians. Many people lost their lives. Cyprian himself was waiting with certainty of his end. On August 258, Cyprian returned to his own estate to await trial under the power of the new edict promulgated by Valerian. According to Dontius, eminent and influential people visited him and urged him to escape and even offered him several hiding places. But this time he refused their offers and he was firmly set on the course of martyrdom. He thought he could serve God and the Church better by martyrdom than by going into hiding as he had gone during the first persecution. His last letter to the presbyters and deacons, to all other people, comes from this period explaining why he chose temporarily to withdraw from his estate to avoid being taken by agents of the imperial government to Utica for trial, since he lectured that it was proper for a bishop to confess his faith and suffer the consequences in his own city in the midst of his own people. (Peter Hinchliff, Cyprian of Carthage, p. 126.)

Trial of Cyprian

On 13th Sept, 1258, Cyprian was arrested and brought before the proconsul Galerius Maximus who was trying to recover his wealth in the estate of Sixtus. The proconsul ordered that Cyprian be placed under house arrest that night at the home of one of his staff officers and fixed date of trial for morrow. That night mobs thronged the street before the gate of the officer’s house and Cyprian issued instructions that no harm should come to the young girls who formed part of the crowd. (Mururilo Herbert, Acts of Christian Martyrs, P. 172.) The next day, 14th Sept, the trial proceeded as follows:

Are you Tharcius?

Bishop replied Yes, I am

Galarius: The revered emperors ordered you to perform the religious rites.

Bishop : I will not

Galarius : Take care

Bishop : Do as you have been ordered. There is no need for deliberation.

Then Galarius consulted with his colleagues and said: "Since you have set yourself as an enemy of the gods of Rome and of our religious practices, the emperors could not be able to bring you back to the observance of their sacred laws and also you are an instigator and leader for most atrocious crime. Tharsius Cyprian was sentenced to die by the sword."

Bishop Cyprian said: ‘Thanks be to God’.

The large Christians gathered there said: ‘Let us also be beheaded with him’.

Then Cyprian was let out to the grounds of Sextus’ estate. After removing his outer cloak, he spread it on the ground so that he could kneel on it. When the executioner came, he told his friends to give the man twenty five gold pieces. (Ibid., p. 173.) The blessed Cyprian then touched his eyes with his own hands, and he went to his death by the sword. His body was laid out nearby to satisfy the curiosity of the pagans. In the night it was taken from there by his friends with prayer in great triumph to the cemetery of Macrobius Caandidianus, the Procurator, which lies on the Mappalian way near the fish ponds, and was buried there.

Cyprians’ Theological Writings on Martyrdom

In his theological writings, we can see a clear awareness, rooted in experience and in the gospel. In one of his writings, he says "No wonder we suffer constant persecutions, for the Lord has foretold that this must occur". (Cyprian, Preparation of Martyrdom, pp. 637-85.) Persecution is seen as an opportunity to testify their faith and hope, a wellspring of the highest example of generous devotion, love and freedom. He says "the Lord has willed that we rejoice and exult in it. This is the path that the Lord himself had followed for the deliverance of all. What he has instructed us to do, this he has done before us, and what he had exhorted us to suffer, he has first suffered for us. (Ibid.) Cyprian says that righteous had suffered from the foundation of the world itself. "It has been ordained from the beginning of the world that this same justice should struggle in the worldly conflict, since indirectly in the very beginning, Abel, the just, was killed and therefore all the just men and prophets, apostles Who were sent forth"? (Ibid.) Cyprian in his treatise De lapsis calls for an act of repentance. "If you in this faithless and corrupt age are ashamed of me and my doctrine, the son of man will be ashamed of him" (Mk. 8.38), Cyprian reminds us -- How can you consider yourself a Christian when you are ashamed or afraid to be a Christian? How can you be with Christ if you fear; and feel it to be dishonorable, to belong to Christ? (Ibid.) For Cyprian, it is not enough to confess Christ before the authorities but one must have the faith not only in prison and in state but throughout one’s life. "We are still in the world battle; we fight daily for our lives.. you have been an example to the rest of the brethren for whose living your life and action ought to be a stimulation". (Cyprian, Letters No. 2, p. 37)

Reflection

"Martyrdom is a gift of god, not available to all; but God sees our inner thoughts and for those who have not had the opportunity of martyrdom, he nevertheless crowns the desire and happiness." (Henri Gonzel, p. 238) Early Christians believed that their death was a second baptism through which one was not yet "perfected in Jesus Christ" could at last become a true disciple. We can see from the history how much they were honest in their witnessing. Their boldness, firmness in the face of trial and how they answered to the judges in the name of their faith is very touching: Their well being is not the ultimate satisfaction but seeing others in painful situation caused them pain; they were willing to undergo difficulties and were totally oriented to others. Even in the midst of calamities, such as plagues, it was Christians who went with help whereas the attitude of pagans was very negative. They had no fear of death and suffering. I do not think it was a fanaticism but it was an expression of their commitment, an act of love to their maker and savior. But today most of our mission is to safeguard our own position. It comes more from our well being than risking our life for others except in a few cases.

They also challenged the power structures in order to be freed. For that they were willing to lose their life. Christians challenged the idol worship. More than that they opposed the exploitation behind this, because that was a period where slave trade was prevalent. It was the temple they used for selling and buying the slaves. The story behind the conversion of St. Cyprian states that it was a revulsion against a decline in the standard of the society. Christianity stood as a corrective force in the midst of a demoralized society. This caused the death of many Christians.

It Is true that Christians were intolerant to other religious traditions. Because, many a times, these religions were very exploitative in their nature. It was the temples they used for buying and selling the slave. The slave trade was very much prevalent in those times. To a certain extent, Christianity could resist these kinds of evil structures; so it was not a denial of other religions, but the denial of evil practices which were exploitative, oppressive and dehumanizing. Martyrdom of St. Cyprian is a model for us, calling us to renew our own faith.

Bibliography

White Edward Benson, Cyprian: His Life and Work, London: MacMillan, 1892.

Clark, G. N. Translation and Annotation of the Letters of Cyprian of Carthage, Vol. I & Vol. II, Letters 1-54, New York, Newman Press, 1984.

Cunningham Agnes, The Early Church and State, Fortress Press, 1982,

Frend, W.H.C. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, Oxford:

Basel Blackwell, 1905.

Mururilo, Herbert, The Acts of Christian Martyrs, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.

Lesbaupin Ivo, Blessed are the Persecuted, New York: Orbis Books, 1987.

Peter Hinchliff, Geofrey Chapman, 1974.

Dudley, Donald, Roman Society, Penguin Hooks, 1978.

Workman, H.B., Persecution of the Early Church.

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., Chicago 1989, Carthage Vol.2, 908.

The Oxford Classical Dictionary, second ed., Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970.