First published in: Moscow: Tip. Volchaninova, 1885; 2nd ed. - 1897; 3rd ed. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the Bookseller I.L. Tuzov, 1904.

Lebedev Alexei Petrovich (1845 - 1908) - a well-known historian of the church, professor of the Moscow Theological Academy and Moscow University, compiler of a huge course in the history of the Eastern Church.

ru ExportToFB21, FictionBook Editor Release 2.6 08.06.2012 OOoFBTools-2012-6-8-16-26-43-584 1.0

Part One

Introduction. On the Causes of the Persecution of Christians in the II, III, and Early IV Centuries

These causes are of three kinds. 1) State: pagan ideas of the state; the state considered itself entitled to sovereignly dispose of the entire life of citizens; both religion and everything concerning it were subordinated to the state power; the open desire of Christians to escape from state control in their religious life and beliefs; statements in this sense by Christian writers (Tertullian, Origen, Lactantius); the clash of this kind of views – pagan with Christian – and the persecution of Christians. 2) Religious, or religious-political: obstacles to the establishment of Christianity among the so-called Roman citizens proper, the zealous preservation by the Roman government of the exclusive rights of the native religion, the impossibility for Christianity to establish itself among Roman citizens on the terms on which alien religions penetrated here; The cult of the Caesars" and its most dangerous consequences for Christians; Why could Christianity not take advantage of the tolerance enjoyed by the religions of foreign peoples? 3) Social: the dissatisfaction of the (Roman) emperor as the first member of society with Christians; the hatred of pagan philosophers and scientists, and administrative classes, the enmity of the pagan masses towards them; In what was the above-mentioned public dislike of the pagans towards Christians expressed? — Summary: On the Causes of the Persecution of Christians. — The Plan and Objectives of the Study of the Persecution of Christians

The attitude of the Roman government to the Christian society spreading among the Empire was expressed in the second, third, and early fourth centuries, as is well known, in the persecution of Christians. In order to properly understand the characteristics and nature of these persecutions, it is necessary to study the very causes of them more rigorously beforehand.

These reasons are of three kinds: 1) State. The government noticed the incompatibility of Christianity with the ideas of state power, which lay at the basis of the Roman state. Christianity's requirements ran counter to what constituted the essence of the ideas about state power and its relations to all aspects of the life of citizens. 2) Religious causes, although not in their pure form. It is precisely the incompatibility of Christianity with the established relations of the Roman government with its own religion and the cults of foreign peoples. Christianity could not expect to be tolerated by the Roman government, because it was hostile to the interests of the Roman religion of its country, and in its essence stood outside the circle of peace-loving factual relations in which the government placed itself with regard to religions other than the Romans. 3) Public. Incompatibility of Christianity with the social requirements of pagan Rome. The Christians did not want to accept any of the social demands of the government as obligatory for themselves, and the government could not excuse such a evasion of social demands on the part of the followers of the new religion.

I. Christianity with its principles was incompatible with the prevailing pagan ideas about state power. What does that mean? This means that the view of pagan state power established over the centuries regarding its unconditional domination in all spheres of human activity was opposed from Christianity by a view by virtue of which a whole sphere of human activity, the sphere of man's religious life, was rejected from under the aegis of this power. Pagan antiquity was alien to the ideas of freedom of belief in matters of religion and conscience, of freedom to choose the kind and manner of religious worship in accordance with one's inclinations. The pagan idea of the state contained the right to sovereignly dispose of the entire life of citizens. Everything that did not closely connect itself with this idea, everything that wanted to live and develop without serving the goals of the state — all this was incomprehensible to antiquity, alien to its spirit. Hence, religion and everything religious were subordinated to the interests of the state. The greatest minds of antiquity knew nothing of religious independence, of religion and religiosity not subordinate to the state. Plato, in his Ideal State, resolutely declared that in the state everyone has the opportunity to fulfill his purpose and to attain the full measure of his happiness and well-being, and in consequence Plato gives the state such power over man that there is no room for either personal or religious freedom. In the opinion of another great thinker of antiquity, Aristotle (in his Politics), man is an exclusively political being, and the life of the state is everything for him. The most remarkable Roman thinker, Cicero, also says: "The state gave birth to us and brought us up in order to use the best and highest powers of our soul, reason and intellect for its own (state) benefit, and to leave for our personal benefit as much as will remain for the satisfaction of its own needs." The Roman state was only the realization of these ideas of antiquity. For the Romans, the state was the center from which all thoughts and feelings, beliefs and convictions, ideals and aspirations of the people revolved and to which they inevitably returned. It was the only supreme ideal and guiding star, which, as the highest rock (Fata Romana, Dea Romana), gave direction to all the forces of the life of the people and imparted a definite meaning and character to the inclinations and actions of the individual. It was, as it were, a deity, and everything that stood outside of relation to the state was useless, illegal. Therefore, the most sacred thing – religion – was one of the functions of state power. Power was in charge of religion as peace and war, as taxes and duties, as administration and police. In the Roman state, the conduct of religious affairs and the supervision of the religious status of the people were first entrusted to the Senate, and then joined the attributes of imperial power. All the emperors of Rome, beginning with Augustus, were at the same time supreme high priests; the emperor was at the same time called Pontifex maximus. In short, religion in the Roman Empire did not have the slightest independence, it was under the strict control of state power. Hence, the religious system was part of the state system, and religious law — sacrum jus — was only a subdivision of the common law — publicum jus. For this reason Varro distinguishes between theologia philosophica et vera, then theologia poetica et mythica, and finally theologia civilis. Characteristic of the last expression that determines the position of religion in the Roman state is theologia civilis. It must be translated into our language by the expression: state theology.

______________________

* De republ. I, 4.

** Augustin. De civitate Dei, VI, 5.

______________________