Martyr

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

The Greek wordmartus signifies a witness who testifies to a fact of which he hasknowledge from personal observation. It is in this sense that the term first appears inChristian literature; the Apostles were "witnesses" of all that they had observed in the public life ofChrist, as well as of all they had learned from His teaching, "inJerusalem, and in allJudea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8). St. Peter, in his address to the Apostles and disciples relative to the election of a successor toJudas, employs the term with this meaning: "Wherefore, of these men who have accompanied with us all the time that theLord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from thebaptism of John until the day he was taken up from us, one of these must be madewitness with us of hisresurrection" (Acts 1:22). In his first public discourse the chief of the Apostles speaks of himself and his companions as "witnesses" who saw the risen Christ and subsequently, after themiraculous escape of the Apostles fromprison, when brought a second time before the tribunal, Peter again alludes to the twelve as witnesses toChrist, as the Prince and Saviour ofIsrael, Who rose from the dead; and added that in giving their public testimony to the facts, of which they were certain, they must obeyGod rather than man (Acts 5:29 sqq.). In his First Epistle St. Peter also refers to himself as a "witness of thesufferings of Christ" (1 Peter 5:1).

But even in these first examples of the use of the wordmartus inChristian terminology a new shade of meaning is already noticeable, in addition to the accepted signification of the term. The disciples of Christ were no ordinary witnesses such as those who gave testimony in a court ofjustice. These latter ran no risk in bearing testimony to facts that came under their observation, whereas the witnesses of Christ were brought face to face daily, from the beginning of their apostolate, with the possibility of incurring severe punishment and even death itself. Thus, St. Stephen was a witness who early in the history ofChristianity sealed his testimony with his blood. The careers of the Apostles were at all times beset with dangers of the gravest character, until eventually they all suffered the last penalty for their convictions. Thus, within the lifetime of the Apostles, the termmartus came to be used in the sense of a witness who at any time might be called upon to deny what he testified to, under penalty of death. From this stage the transition was easy to the ordinary meaning of the term, as used ever since inChristian literature: a martyr, or witness ofChrist, is aperson who, though he has never seen nor heard the Divine Founder of theChurch, is yet so firmly convinced of thetruths of theChristian religion, that he gladly suffers death rather than deny it. St. John, at the end of the first century, employs the word with this meaning; Antipas, a convert frompaganism, is spoken of as a "faithful witness (martus) who was slain among you, whereSatan dwelleth" (Revelation 2:13). Further on the same Apostle speaks of the "souls of them that were slain for the Word ofGod and for the testimony (martyrian) which they held" (Revelation 6:9).

Yet, it was only by degrees, in the course of the first age of theChurch, that the term martyr came to be exclusively applied to those who had died for thefaith. The grandsons ofSt. Jude, for example, on their escape from the peril they underwent when cited beforeDomitian were afterwards regarded as martyrs (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl", III, xx, xxxii). The famous confessors ofLyons, who endured sobravely awful tortures for theirbelief, were looked upon by their fellow-Christians as martyrs, but they themselves declined this title as of right belonging only to those who had actually died: "They are already martyrs whom Christ has deemed worthy to be taken up in their confession, having sealed their testimony by their departure; but we are confessors mean and lowly" (Eusebius, op. cit., V, ii). This distinction between martyrs and confessors is thus traceable to the latter part of the second century: those only were martyrs who had suffered the extreme penalty, whereas the title of confessors was given toChristians who had shown their willingness to die for theirbelief, bybravely enduringimprisonment or torture, but were notput to death. Yet the term martyr was still sometimes applied during the third century topersons still living, as, for instance, bySt. Cyprian, who gave the title of martyrs to a number ofbishops,priests, andlaymen condemned to penal servitude in the mines (Ep. 76).Tertullian speaks of those arrested asChristians and not yet condemned asmartyres designati. In the fourth century,St. Gregory of Nazianzus alludes toSt. Basil as "a martyr", but evidently employs the term in the broad sense in which the word is still sometimes applied to aperson who has borne many and grave hardships in the cause ofChristianity. The description of a martyr given by thepagan historian Ammianus Marcellinus (XXII, xvii), shows that by the middle of the fourth century the title was everywhere reserved to those who had actually suffered death for theirfaith. Heretics and schismaticsput to death asChristians were denied the title of martyrs (St. Cyprian,Treatise on Unity 14;St. Augustine, Ep. 173; Euseb.,Church History V.16, V.21).St. Cyprian lays down clearly the general principle that "he cannot be a martyr who is not in theChurch; he cannot attain unto the kingdom who forsakes that which shall reign there."St. Clement of Alexandria strongly disapproves (Stromata IV.4) of someheretics who gave themselves up to thelaw; they "banish themselves without being martyrs".

Theorthodox were not permitted to seek martyrdom.Tertullian, however, approves the conduct of theChristians of a province ofAsia who gave themselves up to the governor, Arrius Antoninus (Ad. Scap., v).Eusebius also relates with approval the incident of threeChristians of Cæsarea in Palestine who, in thepersecution ofValerian, presented themselves to the judge and were condemned todeath (Church History VII.12). But while circumstances might sometimes excuse such a course, it was generally held to be imprudent.St. Gregory of Nazianzus sums up in a sentence the rule to be followed in such cases: it is mere rashness to seek death, but it is cowardly to refuse it (Orat. xlii, 5, 6). The example of aChristian ofSmyrna named Quintus, who, in the time ofSt. Polycarp, persuaded several of his fellow believers to declare themselvesChristians, was a warning of what might happen to the over-zealous: Quintus at the last momentapostatized, though his companions persevered. Breaking idols was condemned by the Council of Elvira (306), which, in its sixtieth canon, decreed that aChristianput to death for such vandalism would not be enrolled as a martyr. Lactantius, on the other hand, has only mild censure for aChristian ofNicomedia who suffered martyrdom for tearing down the edict ofpersecution (Do mort. pers., xiii). In one caseSt. Cyprian authorizes seeking martyrdom. Writing to hispriests anddeacons regarding repentantlapsi who were clamouring to be received back into communion, thebishop after giving general directions on the subject, concludes by saying that if these impatient personages are so eager to get back to theChurch there is a way of doing so open to them. "The struggle is still going forward", he says, "and the strife is waged daily. If they (thelapsi) truly and with constancy repent of what they have done, and the fervour of theirfaith prevails, he whocannot be delayed may becrowned" (Ep. xiii).

Legal basis of the persecutions

Acceptance of the national religion in antiquity was anobligation incumbent on all citizens; failure to worship the gods of the State was equivalent to treason. This universally accepted principle is responsible for the various persecutions suffered byChristians before the reign of Constantine;Christians denied the existence of and therefore refused to worship the gods of the state pantheon. They were in consequence regarded asatheists. It istrue, indeed, that theJews also rejected the gods ofRome, and yet escapedpersecution. But theJews, from the Roman standpoint, had a national religion and a nationalGod,Jehovah, whom they had a full legal right to worship. Even after the destruction ofJerusalem, when theJews ceased to exist as a nation,Vespasian made no change in their religious status, save that the tribute formerly sent byJews to the temple atJerusalem was henceforth to be paid to the Roman exchequer. For some time after its establishment, theChristian Church enjoyed the religious privileges of the Jewish nation, but from the nature of the case it is apparent that the chiefs of theJewish religion would not long permit without protest this state of things. For they abhorredChrist's religion as much as they abhorred its Founder. At what date the Roman authorities had their attention directed to the difference between the Jewish and theChristian religion cannot be determined, but it appears to be fairly well established thatlaws proscribingChristianity were enacted before the end of the first century.Tertullian is authority for the statement thatpersecution of theChristians wasinstitutum Neronianum — an institution ofNero — (Ad nat., i, 7). The First Epistle of St. Peter also clearly alludes to the proscription ofChristians, asChristians, at the time it was written (I, St. Peter, iv, 16).Domitian (81-96) also, is known to havepunished with deathChristian members of his ownfamily on the charge ofatheism (Suetonius, "Domitianus", xv). While it is therefore probable that the formula: "Let there be noChristians" (Christiani non sint) dates from the second half of the first century, yet the earliest clear enactment on the subject ofChristianity is that ofTrajan (98-117) in his famous letter to the younger Pliny, hislegate in Bithynia.

Pliny had been sent fromRome by the emperor to restore order in the Province of Bithynia-Pontus. Among the difficulties he encountered in the execution of his commission one of the most serious concerned theChristians. The extraordinarily large number ofChristians he found within hisjurisdiction greatly surprised him: the contagion of their "Superstition", he reported toTrajan, affected not only the cities but even the villages and country districts of the province (Pliny, Ep., x, 96). One consequence of the general defection from the state religion was of aneconomic order: so many people had becomeChristians that purchasers were no longer found for the victims that once in great numbers were offered to the gods. Complaints were laid before thelegate relative to this state of affairs, with the result that someChristians were arrested and brought before Pliny for examination. The suspects were interrogated as to their tenets and those of them who persisted in declining repeated invitations to recant were executed. Some of theprisoners, however, after first affirming that they wereChristians, afterwards, when threatened with punishment, qualified their first admission by saying that at one time they had been adherents of the proscribed body but were so no longer. Others again denied that they were or ever had beenChristians. Having never before had to deal with questions concerningChristians Pliny applied to the emperor for instructions on three points regarding which he did not see his way clearly: first, whether the age of the accused should be taken into consideration in meting out punishment; secondly, whetherChristians who renounced theirbelief should be pardoned; and thirdly, whether the mere profession ofChristianity should be regarded as a crime, and punishable as such, independent of the fact of the innocence or guilt of the accused of the crimes ordinarily associated with such profession.

To these inquiriesTrajan replied in arescript which was destined to have the force of law throughout the second century in relation toChristianity. After approving what his representative had already done, the emperor directed that in future the rule to be observed in dealing withChristians should be the following: no steps were to be taken by magistrates to ascertain who were or who were notChristians, but at the same time, if anyperson was denounced, and admitted that he was aChristian, he was to be punished — evidently with death. Anonymous denunciations were not to be acted upon, and on the other hand, those who repented of beingChristians and offered sacrifice to the gods, were to be pardoned. Thus, from the year 112, thedate of this document, perhaps even from the reign ofNero, aChristian was ipso facto an outlaw. That the followers of Christ were known to the highest authorities of the State to be innocent of the numerous crimes and misdemeanors attributed to them by popularcalumny, is evident from Pliny's testimony to this effect, as well as fromTrajan's order:conquirendi non sunt. And that the emperor did not regardChristians as a menace to the State is apparent from the general tenor of his instructions. Their only crime was that they wereChristians, adherents of an illegal religion. Under this regime of proscription theChurch existed from the year 112 to the reign ofSeptimius Severus (193-211). The position of the faithful was always one of grave danger, being as they were at the mercy of every maliciousperson who might, without a moment's warning, cite them before the nearest tribunal. It istrue indeed, that the delator was an unpopularperson in the Roman Empire, and, besides, in accusing aChristian he ran the risk of incurring severe punishment if unable to make good his charge against his intended victim. In spite of the danger, however, instances are known, in thepersecution era, ofChristian victims of delation.

The prescriptions ofTrajan on the subject ofChristianity were modified bySeptimius Severus by the addition of a clause forbidding anyperson to become aChristian. The existing law ofTrajan againstChristians in general was not, indeed, repealed by Severus, though for the moment it was evidently the intention of the emperor that it should remain a dead letter. The object aimed at by the new enactment was, not to disturb those alreadyChristians, but to check the growth of theChurch by preventing conversions. Some illustrious convert martyrs, the most famous being Sts. Perpetua and Felicitas, were added to the roll of champions of religious freedom by this prohibition, but it effected nothing of consequence in regard to its primary purpose. Thepersecution came to an end in the second year of the reign ofCaracalla (211-17). From this date to the reign ofDecius (250-53) theChristians enjoyed comparative peace with the exception of the short period when Maximinus the Thracian (235-38) occupied the throne. The elevation ofDecius to the purple began a new era in the relations betweenChristianity and the Roman State. This emperor, though a native ofIllyria, was nevertheless profoundly imbued with the spirit of Roman conservatism. He ascended the throne with the firm intention of restoring the prestige which the empire was fast losing, and he seems to have been convinced that the chief difficulty in the way of effecting his purpose was the existence ofChristianity. The consequence was that in the year 250 he issued an edict, the tenor of which is known only from the documents relating to its enforcement, prescribing that allChristians of the empire should on a certain day offer sacrifice to the gods.

This new law was quite a different matter from the existing legislation againstChristianity. Proscribed though they were legally,Christians had hitherto enjoyed comparative security under a regime which clearly laid down the principle that they were not to be sought after officially by thecivil authorities. The edict ofDecius was exactly the opposite of this: the magistrates were now constituted religious inquisitors, whoseduty it was to punishChristians who refused toapostatize. The emperor's aim, in a word, was to annihilateChristianity by compelling everyChristian in the empire to renounce hisfaith. The first effect of the new legislation seemed favourable to the wishes of its author. During the long interval of peace since the reign ofSeptimius Severus — nearly forty years — a considerable amount of laxity had crept into theChurch's discipline, one consequence of which was, that on the publication of the edict ofpersecution, multitudes ofChristians besieged the magistrates everywhere in their eagerness to comply with its demands. Many other nominalChristians procured by bribery certificates stating that they had complied with thelaw, while still othersapostatized under torture. Yet after this first throng of weaklings had put themselves outside the pale ofChristianity there still remained, in every part of the empire, numerousChristians worthy of their religion, who endured all manner of torture, and death itself, for their convictions. Thepersecution lasted about eighteen months, and wrought incalculable harm.

Before theChurch had time to repair the damage thus caused, a new conflict with the State was inaugurated by an edict ofValerian published in 257. This enactment was directed against theclergy —bishops,priests, anddeacons — who were directed under pain of exile to offer sacrifice.Christians were also forbidden, under pain of death, to resort to their cemeteries. The results of this first edict were of so little moment that the following year, 258, a new edict appeared requiring theclergy to offer sacrifice under penalty of death.Christian senators,knights, and even the ladies of theirfamilies, were also affected by an order to offer sacrifice under penalty of confiscation of their goods and reduction to plebeian rank. And in the event of these severe measures proving ineffective thelaw prescribed further punishment: execution for the men, for thewomen exile.Christian slaves and freedmen of the emperor's household also were punished by confiscation of their possessions and reduction to the lowest ranks of slavery. Among the martyrs of thispersecution werePope Sixtus II andSt. Cyprian of Carthage. Of its further effects little is known, for want of documents, but it seems safe to surmise that, besides adding many new martyrs to theChurch's roll, it must have caused enormous suffering to theChristian nobility. Thepersecution came to an end with the capture (260) ofValerian by thePersians; his successor,Gallienus (260-68), revoked the edict and restored to thebishops the cemeteries and meeting places.

From this date to the lastpersecution inaugurated byDiocletian (284-305) theChurch, save for a short period in the reign ofAurelian (270-75), remained in the same legal situation as in the second century. The first edict ofDiocletian waspromulgated atNicomedia in the year 303, and was of the following tenor:Christian assemblies were forbidden; churches and sacred books were ordered to be destroyed, and allChristians were commanded toabjure their religion forthwith. The penalties for failure to comply with these demands were degradation and civil death for the higher classes, reduction to slavery for freemen of the humbler sort, and for slaves incapacity to receive the gift of freedom. Later in the same year a new edict ordered theimprisonment ofecclesiastics of all grades, frombishops toexorcists. A third edict imposed the death-penalty for refusal toabjure, and granted freedom to those who would offer sacrifice; while a fourth enactment, published in 304, commanded everybody without exception to offer sacrifice publicly. This was the last and most determined effort of the Roman State to destroyChristianity. It gave to theChurch countless martyrs, and ended in her triumph in the reign of Constantine.

Number of the martyrs

Of the 249 years from the firstpersecution underNero (64) to the year 313, when Constantine established lasting peace, it is calculated that theChristians sufferedpersecution about 129 years and enjoyed a certain degree of toleration about 120 years. Yet it must be borne in mind that even in the years of comparative tranquillityChristians were at all times at the mercy of everyperson ill-disposed towards them or their religion in the empire. Whether or not delation ofChristians occurred frequently during the era ofpersecution is not known, but taking into consideration the irrationalhatred of thepagan population forChristians, it may safely be surmised that not a fewChristians suffered martyrdom through betrayal. An example of the kind related bySt. Justin Martyr shows how swift and terrible were the consequences of delation. Awoman who had beenconverted toChristianity was accused by her husband before a magistrate of being aChristian. Through influence the accused was granted the favour of a brief respite to settle her worldly affairs, after which she was to appear in court and put forward her defence. Meanwhile her angry husband caused the arrest of the catechist, Ptolomæus by name, who had instructed the convert. Ptolomæus, when questioned, acknowledged that he was aChristian and was condemned todeath. In the court, at the time this sentence was pronounced, were twopersons who protested against the iniquity of inflicting capital punishment for the mere fact of professingChristianity. The magistrate in reply asked if they also wereChristians, and on their answering in the affirmative both were ordered to be executed. As the same fate awaited the wife of the delator also, unless she recanted, we have here an example of three, possibly four,persons suffering capital punishment on the accusation of a man actuated by malice, solely for the reason that his wife had given up theevil life she had previously led in hissociety (St. Justin Martyr, II, Apol., ii).

As to the actual number ofpersons who died as martyrs during these two centuries and a half we have no definite information. Tacitus is authority for the statement that an immense multitude (ingens multitudo) wereput to death byNero. The Apocalypse of St. John speaks of "thesouls of them that were slain for the word ofGod" in the reign ofDomitian, and Dion Cassius informs us that "many" of theChristian nobility suffered death for theirfaith during thepersecution for which this emperor is responsible.Origen indeed, writing about the year 249, before the edict ofDecius, states that the number of thoseput to death for theChristian religion was not very great, but he probably means that the number of martyrs up to this time was small when compared with the entire number ofChristians (cf. Allard, "Ten Lectures on the Martyrs", 128).St. Justin Martyr, who owed hisconversion largely to the heroic example ofChristians suffering for theirfaith, incidentally gives a glimpse of the danger of professingChristianity in the middle of the second century, in the reign of so good an emperor asAntoninus Pius (138-61). In his "Dialogue with Trypho" (cx), theapologist, after alluding to thefortitude of his brethren in religion, adds, "for it is plain that, though beheaded, and crucified, and thrown to wild beasts, and chains, and fire, and all other kinds of torture, we do not give up our confession; but, the more such things happen, the more do others in larger numbers become faithful. . . . EveryChristian has been driven out not only from his ownproperty, but even from the whole world;for you permit noChristian to live."Tertullian also, writing towards the end of the second century, frequently alludes to the terrible conditions under whichChristians existed ("Ad martyres", "Apologia", "Ad Nationes", etc.): death and torture were ever present possibilities.

But the new régime of special edicts, which began in 250 with the edict ofDecius, was still more fatal toChristians. The persecutions ofDecius andValerian were not, indeed, of long duration, but while they lasted, and in spite of the large number of those who fell away, there are clear indications that they produced numerous martyrs.Dionysius of Alexandria, for instance, in a letter to theBishop ofAntioch tells of a violentpersecution that took place in theEgyptian capital, through popularviolence, before the edict ofDecius was even published. TheBishop of Alexandria gives several examples of whatChristians endured at the hands of thepagan rabble and then adds that "many others, in cities and villages, were torn asunder by theheathen" (Eusebius,Church History VI.41 sq.). Besides those who perished by actualviolence, also, a "multitude wandered in thedeserts and mountains, and perished of hunger and thirst, of cold and sickness and robbers and wild beasts" (Eusebius, l. c.). In another letter, speaking of thepersecution underValerian, Dionysius states that "men andwomen, young and old, maidens and matrons, soldiers and civilians, of every age and race, some by scourging and fire, others by the sword, have conquered in the strife and won their crowns" (Id., op. cit., VII, xi). At Cirta, in North Africa, in the samepersecution, after the execution ofChristians had continued for several days, it was resolved to expedite matters. To this end the rest of those condemned were brought to the bank of a river and made to kneel in rows. When all was ready the executioner passed along the ranks and despatched all without further loss of time (Ruinart, p. 231).

But the lastpersecution was even more severe than any of the previous attempts to extirpateChristianity. In Nicomedia "a great multitude" wereput to death with theirbishop, Anthimus; of these some perished by the sword, some by fire, while others were drowned. InEgypt "thousands of men,women and children, despising the present life, . . . endured various deaths" (Eusebius,Church History VII.4 sqq.), and the same happened in many other places throughout the East. In the West thepersecution came to an end at an earlier date than in the East, but, while it lasted, numbers of martyrs, especially atRome, were added to the calendar (cf. Allard, op. cit., 138 sq.). But besides those who actually shed their blood in the first three centuries account must be taken of the numerous confessors of the Faith who, inprison, in exile, or in penal servitude suffered a daily martyrdom more difficult to endure than death itself. Thus, while anything like a numerical estimate of the number of martyrs is impossible, yet the meagre evidence on the subject that exists clearly enough establishes the fact that countless men,women and even children, in that glorious, though terrible, first age ofChristianity, cheerfully sacrificed their goods, their liberties, or their lives, rather than renounce thefaith they prized above all.

Trial of the martyrs

The first act in the tragedy of the martyrs was their arrest by an officer of thelaw. In some instances the privilege ofcustodia libera, granted toSt. Paul during his firstimprisonment, was allowed before the accused were brought to trial;St. Cyprian, for example, was detained in the house of the officer who arrested him, and treated with consideration until the time set for his examination. But such procedure was the exception to the rule; the accusedChristians were generally cast into the publicprisons, where often, for weeks or months at a time, they suffered the greatest hardships. Glimpses of the sufferings they endured inprison are in rare instances supplied by the Acts of the Martyrs. St. Perpetua, for instance, was horrified by the awful darkness, the intense heat caused by overcrowding in the climate of Roman Africa, and the brutality of the soldiers (Passio SS. Perpet., et Felic., i). Other confessors allude to the various miseries ofprison life as beyond their powers of description (Passio SS. Montani, Lucii, iv). Deprived of food, save enough to keep them alive, of water, of light and air; weighted down with irons, or placed in stocks with their legs drawn as far apart as was possible without causing a rupture; exposed to all manner of infection from heat, overcrowding, and the absence of anything like proper sanitary conditions — these were some of the afflictions that preceded actual martyrdom. Many naturally, died inprison under such conditions, while others, unfortunately, unable to endure the strain, adopted the easy means of escape left open to them, namely, complied with the condition demanded by the State of offering sacrifice.

Those whose strength, physical and moral, was capable of enduring to the end were, in addition, frequently interrogated in court by the magistrates, who endeavoured by persuasion or torture to induce them to recant. These tortures comprised every means that human ingenuity in antiquity had devised to break down even the mostcourageous; the obstinate were scourged with whips, with straps, or with ropes; or again they were stretched on the rack and their bodies torn apart with iron rakes. Another awful punishment consisted in suspending the victim, sometimes for a whole day at a time, by one hand; while modestwomen in addition were exposed naked to the gaze of those in court. Almost worse than all this was the penal servitude to whichbishops,priests,deacons,laymen andwomen, and even children, were condemned in some of the more violent persecutions; these refined personages of both sexes, victims of mercilesslaws were doomed to pass the remainder of their days in the darkness of the mines, where they dragged out a wretched existence, half naked, hungry, and with no bed save the damp ground. Those were far more fortunate who were condemned to even the most disgraceful death, in the arena, or by crucifixion.

Honours paid the martyrs

It is easy to understand why those who endured so much for their convictions should have been so greatlyvenerated by their co-religionists from even the first days of trial in the reign ofNero. The Roman officials usually permitted relatives or friends to gather up the mutilated remains of the martyrs for interment, although in some instances such permission was refused. Theserelics theChristians regarded as "more valuable than gold or precious stones" (Martyr. Polycarpi, xviii). Some of the more famous martyrs received special honours, as for instance, inRome, St. Peter andSt. Paul, whose "trophies", ortombs, are spoken of at the beginning of the third century by the Romanpriest Caius (Eusebius,Church History II.21.7). Numerouscrypts andchapels in theRoman catacombs, some of which, like thecapella grœca, were constructed in sub-Apostolic times, also bear witness to the early veneration for those champions of freedom ofconscience who won, by dying, the greatest victory in the history of thehuman race. Special commemoration services of the martyrs, at which the holy Sacrifice was offered over theirtombs — the origin of the time —honoured custom of consecrating altars by enclosing in them therelics of martyrs — were held on the anniversaries of their death; the famousFractio Panis fresco of thecapella grœca, dating from the early second century, is probably a representation (see s.v.FRACTIO PANIS;SYMBOLS OF EUCHARIST) in miniature, of such a celebration. From the age of Constantine even still greater veneration was accorded the martyrs.Pope Damasus (366-84) had a speciallove for the martyrs, as we learn from the inscriptions, brought to light by de Rossi, composed by him for theirtombs in theRoman catacombs. Later on veneration of the martyrs was occasionally exhibited in a rather undesirable form; many of the frescoes in thecatacombs have been mutilated to gratify theambition of thefaithful to be buried near thesaints (retro sanctos), in whose company they hoped one day to rise from the grave. In theMiddle Ages the esteem in which the martyrs were held was equally great; no hardships were too severe to be endured in visiting famous shrines, like those ofRome, where theirrelics were contained.

CONTACT US |ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT