Martyrdom’s Impact on the Early Christian Church: Insights from the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles

Introduction

In her book The Myth of Persecution, Candida Moss asserts that the church often used martyrs as tools to promote orthodox and proto-orthodox beliefs and to combat heresy. Moss cites the rhetoric that Eusebius employs when discussing the Martyrdom of Polycarp in his book Church History (fourth century). More specifically, Moss tracks and highlights passages from Eusebius that showcase the scholar’s use of rhetoric and alteration of the martyrdom account to condemn the Marcionites and other heretical groups.^[1] Moss also utilizes Eusebius’ presentation of the Martyrs of Lyons to showcase the portrayal of bishops as martyrs and persecutors as heretics.^[2] Moss’s argument, which does not directly engage with the role of the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles, sheds light on the church’s manipulation of different martyrdom accounts and stories to combat heresy. Furthermore, while Eusebius altered the text and employed various rhetorical strategies, Moss highlights a more subtle condemnation of the Marcionites throughout the unaltered martyrdom account of Polycarp.^[3]

Using Moss’s research as a foundation, I turn to the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles as found in the texts of the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (AAA) to suggest these accounts similarly solidified the early Christian church by championing proto-orthodoxy, supporting a shared Christian identity, reinforcing church hierarchy, and increasing conversions. Additionally, I examine the historical legacy of these martyrdom accounts and their impact during both the Middle Ages and the European Renaissance. This article expands on previous scholarship by elevating the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles, as portrayed in the AAA, and reveals the impact these narratives had on the early Christian church.

The Martyrdom of the Apostles in the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles

The word “apocrypha” or “apocryphal” comes from the Greek word ἀπόκρυφος (apokryphos), which translates to “hidden” or “concealed.”^[4] The term apocrypha can denote several different meanings; in some cases, it can refer to texts, like the ones discussed in this article, that do not appear in any biblical canons, but the term can also be used to reference certain biblical books that remain in some biblical canons but are excluded from others.^[5] The AAA references a very specific genre of apocryphal texts focusing on the Apostles, their miracles, and their travels. The most notable of the AAA typically includes the Apocryphal Acts of Peter, John, Thomas, Paul, Andrew, and Thecla. While these texts contain an expanded version of the works of the Apostles and thus differ from the canonical book of Acts, many scholars note that there are numerous similarities between the AAA and the canonical book of Acts, especially in terms of genre.^[6] According to scholars, the AAA appear to be written by independent authors but pull from the same framework as the earlier writers. While these texts have some variance in date, this collection of texts was largely thought to be written sometime in the late second century. The AAA also typically includes a martyrdom account for each of the Apostles at the end of the Acts describing how they were killed. The martyrdom accounts present within the AAA are specifically interesting because they showcase the ways in which violence and suffering were utilized by early Christian writers. While some scholars suggest that the martyrdom accounts were added later, other scholars assert that the martyrdom accounts were original and were later reproduced independently due to their popularity.^[7]

The AAA were very popular throughout the Christian world; they were later translated from the original Greek into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic, and Arabic.^[8] These translations alone suggest immense popularity as the texts were not only regionally popular but read throughout the Christian world. Furthermore, speaking specifically to the popularity of the Acts of Paul, C.H. Roberts asserts, "together with the Shepherd [of Hermas], it must rank as the most popular work of Christian literature outside of the canon."^[9]In her book chapter, “The Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles on Papyrus: Revisiting the Question of Readership and Audience,” Kim Haines-Eitzen also explores the popularity of these texts. One significant conclusion she highlights is the reference to some of the recovered papyri of the AAA as “miniatures” or “pocket codices.” Essentially, these papyri were small pocket-sized copies of the text as opposed to large church documents for public use. The presence of the AAA as miniature codices suggests personal readership, which, in turn, further supports their popularity.^[10]

However, while the historical evidence does seem to prove (at least to some extent) the popularity of these texts, it is important to remember that the popularity these texts has been critiqued by some scholars. In other words, citing both the aristocratic nature of the texts along with the limited literacy rates in late antiquity, some scholars have questioned the extent to which these texts were actually read. Regardless, these stories appear to have been known throughout the Christian world as they are both referenced in other texts and depicted in numerous pieces of art.^[11]

Martyrs as Champions of Proto-Orthodoxy

As discussed in the introduction, martyrdom accounts were often altered in various ways. Sometimes the textual alterations merely amplified the underlying messages of the martyrdom account. For example, Moss points out that while Eusebius altered the text of the Martyrdom of Polycarp to explicitly condemn the Marcionites, the unaltered text still subtly condemned the Marcionites.^[12] This idea of these martyrdom accounts subtly being used to promote proto-orthodox ideals — or at least proto-orthodox beliefs being subtly included in martyrdom accounts — can be expanded to include the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles presented within the AAA. While there were many different groups operating that were considered to be heretical, it is important to note that the term heretical was a label often placed on one ancient group by different groups; furthermore, while there were many different groups being labeled as heretical, this article primarily focuses on the Ebionites. In the following sections, I provide two examples from the martyrdom accounts found within the Acts of Peter and the Acts of John. In both of these narratives, Jesus is referred to specifically as divine. This language aligns with theological discussions occurring within early Christian communities during the period that these texts were written. The article shows that these texts align with early Christian proto-orthodox theology, showing that Jesus is fully human and fully divine.

The martyrdom account of Peter, which is a part of the Acts of Peter, includes one potential example of this theology. At the very end of this martyrdom account, right before Peter dies, he speaks to Jesus. When addressing him, Peter uses very specific language, such as λόγε ξωῆς, which translates to “O word of life.”^[13] Furthermore, Peter uses the ancient Greek word for king, βασιλεύς (basileus), to refer to Jesus. Similarly, in the martyrdom account presented within the Acts of John, Jesus is referred to as ὁ μόνος σωτὴρ καὶ δίκαιος, which translates to “the only savior and just one.” While these phrases only minorly touch on the divinity of Jesus, both texts also include other more direct references to Jesus’s divinity. For example, within the martyrdom account of Peter, Peter describes Jesus stating, σὺ τὸ πᾶν καὶ τὸ πᾶν ἐν σοί, which translates to “you are the all and the all is in you.” The martyrdom account of John also includes a very similar phase, with John describing Jesus as “encompassing all and filling all,” (τὰ πάντα περιέχων καὶ πληρῶν τὰ πάντα). Overall, these phrases and references specifically address and present Jesus as divine. This specific word choice could potentially be purposeful to condemn certain heretical groups that questioned the divinity of Jesus, such as the Ebionites.^[14] However, even if not intentional, these phrases promote proto-orthodox beliefs. Thus, there does seem to be a subtle condemnation of the Ebionites within the Acts of Peter and the Acts of John. Therefore, Moss’s argument regarding the use of martyrs to combat heresy could potentially be expanded to include the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles.

Apostolic Tradition and the Formation of Church Hierarchy

One of the primary ways that the martyrdom accounts within the AAA helped to support and bolster the early church is by supporting the doctrine of apostolic succession.

Apostolic succession is the doctrine or theory that the legitimacy of the Catholic Church, and the justification of the church structure, stems from the continuous succession of bishops back to the time of the Apostles. David Brattston and Mark Ryman conclude in their book, Apostolic Succession that it is this legacy that “gives him [the Bishop or Pope] key authority over public worship, rulership of the church, and ordaining presbyters, deacons, and other bishops.”^[15] At its core, apostolic succession is largely the reason for church’s authority and why the Pope is God’s representative on Earth. While this doctrine first appeared in the First Epistle of Clement, Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons wrote much more extensively on apostolic succession. Writing in the late second century, Irenaeus stated:

“What if there should be a dispute about some matter of moderate importance? Should we not turn to the oldest churches, where the apostles themselves were known, and find out from them the clear and certain answer to the problem now being raised? Even if the Apostles had not left their writings to us, ought we not to follow the rule of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they committed the churches?”^[16]

Throughout his book, Against Heresies, Irenaeus not only supports the church hierarchy by drawing on the tradition of apostolic succession, but he also argues that the church relies on hierarchy and bureaucracy to preserve the wisdom and judgment of the Apostles. However, this belief was not unanimously agreed upon. For example, some very popular works, such as the Didache, instead argue for churches and congregations to appoint their own presbyters and deacons.^[17] Brattston and Ryman state, “In the Didache, Apostles are wanderers and possess no powers beyond what the individual congregations are willing to give them.”^[18] Essentially, this work directly argued against the idea of apostolic succession. Despite the immense popularity of the Didache, the idea of apostolic succession continued to form and eventually gave the church extensive powers over local congregations. Given the popularity of the Didache, how did the concept of apostolic succession continue to grow and give both the church structure and church bureaucracy legitimacy?

One reason for the idea of apostolic succession persevering was the immense popularity and significance of the Apostles, a reputation that was continually bolstered by the ever-popular AAA and their martyrdom accounts. Building on the section discussing the question of popularity and readership, it was this popularity that lent support to the concept of apostolic succession.

These accounts were full of sensational and dramatic storylines that attracted both readers interested in scripture and also people looking for the Christian alternative to the very popular Greek novels. Moss stated, “these stories have a sensational dramatic character to them: they include miracles, shipwrecks, talking animals, prodigious infants, Harry Potter-like battles of wits and powerful magicians…The Gospels look dry and plodding by comparison.”^[19] Nevertheless, Moss acknowledges that these novel-like writings tend to replace the happy endings often prevalent in Greek novels with asceticism and death.^[20] Overall, due to the interesting and dramatic nature of the AAA (along with their serious martyrdom accounts), the stories and legacy of the Apostles were very popular. The popularity of these accounts and the corresponding martyrdom stories led to rumors circulating regarding the final resting place for the Apostles and which churches held the remains of an Apostle. Of course, the emphasis on the Apostles in a more serious way (such as their role in the New Testament) contributed to this popularity, but this does not negate the impact of the AAA. Thus, it can be concluded that the AAA, along with their martyrdom stories, supported and strengthened the concept of apostolic succession, which in turn provided legitimacy to the early church.

Cohesion and Identity

Another way the martyrdom accounts present within the AAA bolstered and grew the early church was through their support of a shared Christian identity centered around martyrdom and suffering. These and other martyrdom accounts paint the scene of a battle between good and evil. They also showcase the Roman Empire’s oppression of Christians. Moss, overall, disputes whether this persecution portrayed in the martyrdom accounts actually occurred in history, making a distinction between persecution and prosecution.^[21] That is not to say isolated events of persecution did not occur, but this narrative overall does not stand up to scrutiny. Still, this idea of persecution, along with the emphasis on martyrs in early Christian literature, successfully created a shared Christian identity at least to a certain extent. Similar to Eusebius’ characterization of bishops as martyrs and heretics as persecutors, these martyrdom accounts paint Christians as good and Romans as evil.^[22] This battle between good and evil is then expanded to create a shared identity. Elizabeth Castelli, in her book, Martyrdom and Memory, discusses the formation of a shared Christian identity through the lens of both martyrdom and collective memory. Essentially, Castelli views the emphasis on martyrdom in early Christianity as both a cause and an outcome of a Christian identity rooted in collective memory. More specifically, due to the large number of martyrdom texts (including the martyrdom accounts present within the AAA) and tangible instances of religious persecution, the Christian identity became “marked by the collective memory of the religious suffering of others.” Subsequently, martyrdom became a critical building block of Christian culture.^[23]

While Castelli attributes the formation of this identity to the collective memory of religious suffering, Judith Perkins, in her book Roman Imperial Identities in the Early Christian Era, instead asserts this identity was formed more from a “corporate enterprise.” Perkins argues that both the martyrdom accounts and the AAA demonstrate that martyrdom and identity-building were more deliberate than previously thought. She then attributes this identity formation to a redirection of violence, a process that occurred through the circulation of martyrdom accounts. In these accounts, instead of violence and martyrdom being seen as demoralizing, they were viewed in a more positive light.^[24] This redirection of violence focused on the idea of everlasting life and victory over death, where death was no longer seen as defeat because Christians had conquered death. These martyrdom accounts, along with the actual martyrs, not only symbolized Christians’ triumph over death but also showcase that Christians would not yield to earthly powers. Furthermore, Perkins builds on this narrative, describing how martyrs often promoted unity and social cohesion. She states, “In many cases, martyrs facing death frame their martyrdom to empower their community’s unity and internal concord.”^[25] In her book, Perkins describes how martyrdom accounts often included narratives that promoted Christian harmony, which helped early Christians to heal internal divisions and prepared them to challenge external threats similarly to the way that martyrs champion proto-orthodoxy. Moreover, the ever-present martyr literature and the tangible but sporadic instances of religious persecution strengthened this identity and social cohesion.

Fundamentally, martyrdom accounts, such as the ones present in the AAA, both helped to create and fuel an identity centered around death and violence, which in turn strengthened the early church through a shared sense of social cohesion. This argument is largely encapsulated by Perkins stating, “… Christian social identity was never to be viewed from the perspective of the individual human body but in the enlarged perspective of the body social. On the basis of their martyrs, Christians claimed their identity as sufferers and persecuted persons and used this identification for their growth.”^[26] While Perkins’ argument that a shared Christian identity centered around martyrs and suffering supported the early church encompasses martyrdom accounts in a generalized sense, it can be reasonably concluded that the popular and widespread martyrdom accounts of the AAA helped to form, or at the very least supported, this identity that bolstered the early church.

Conversions

The last major way that these martyrdom accounts supported the early church was by promoting conversions. Historians and scholars of religious studies naturally do not have actual statistics regarding the number of converts to Christianity in the second and third centuries, let alone statistics regarding how many people converted due to the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles. However, much can be said about the persuasive nature of the martyrdom accounts, which most likely persuaded a large number of converts. To begin, the willingness of the Apostles to accept death is one of the major points that even modern Christian apologetics cite. The martyrdom stories of the Apostles portray this willingness to die throughout the texts. One of the most notable examples is from the Acts of John, where the text reads, “After he had signed himself all over with the cross, John drew himself up and said, ‘Be with me Lord Jesus Christ,’ and lay down in the ditch where he had spread out his garments. He then said, ‘Peace be with you, sisters and brothers,’ and gave up his spirit, rejoicing.”^[27] Death is similarly embraced in the Acts of Peter, where Peter willingly goes to Rome to face his death, despite the fact that he could have easily avoided being captured. This embrace of death and willingness to die for their beliefs evokes, at the very least, the question of why these men would be willing to die if what they were preaching was not true. Speaking to this question, Moss stated, “presumably, they not only knew whether the resurrection was a sham; they would have been the ones to fabricate it. Why would this group of men have risked torture and death if Jesus were not really resurrected from the dead? Surely their martyrdoms are proof of the veracity of Christianity.”^[28] This article does not assert that ancient readers of these texts believed these accounts to be accurate or completely true, as ‘truth’ often took a different form in the ancient world. Nevertheless, the belief that the Apostles were martyred, even if not in the same form presented by the AAA, would remain persuasive in nature and is only bolstered by the popularity of the AAA. Ultimately, while there are no statistics regarding conversions, it is reasonable to conclude that these martyrdom accounts most likely encouraged conversions.

The Legacy of the AAA in the Middle Ages and the European Renaissance

Readership and Circulation

While the popularity and influence of the AAA and their martyrdom accounts decreased in the Middle Ages, the AAA continued to circulate. Scholars recovered (at least partly) two distinct Latin translations of the AAA dated to the Middle Ages. The earlier of the two, the Actus Vercellenses (the Vercelli Acts), is a translation of the Greek Acts of Peter into Latin. This specific Latin translation is thought to have been completed no later than the early fourth century. It is thought to be a truncated version of the original Acts of Peter.^[29] The later translation, the Virtutes Apostolorum, is not a translation of a specific section of the AAA, but it is instead a collection of different apocryphal works concerning the Apostles (including sections from the AAA) translated into Latin. While the traditional AAA encompasses only the Acts of Peter, John, Thomas, Paul, Andrew, and Thecla, the Virtutes Apostolorum contains a section encompassing all twelve Apostles along with different stories.^[30] Evidence suggests that this collection of manuscripts was translated during the eighth century. Furthermore, Els Rose, in her article “Virtutes Apostolorum: Origin, Aim, and Use,” highlights specific references by Aldhelm and Bede in Anglo-Saxon England that appear to both uphold the dating of the Virtutes Apostolorum and to suggest widespread circulation of the text at least in monastic and evangelical settings.^[31] While the influence of these Latin translations of the AAA is difficult to track, to some degree, the translations themselves suggest readership.

Artwork

In addition to the circulation of the AAA during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, the corresponding martyrdom accounts heavily influenced artwork during this period. Numerous works of art completed during the Middle Ages and Renaissance directly depict the martyrdom scenes from the AAA. Most notably, in his martyrdom account, Peter is depicted as being crucified upside down due to his belief that he was unworthy to die in the same manner as Christ. The text states, “I ask you, public executioners, to crucify me [with my] head down – no other way. I’ll explain why to those who will listen.”^[32] This scene of Peter being hung upside down was recreated by numerous artists during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, including Michelangelo’s painting, The Crucifixion of St. Peter, which dates to the mid-sixteenth century.^[33] Furthermore, Giotto’s Crucifixion of St. Peter (1320) and Lorenzo Monaco’s The Crucifixion of Saint Peter (c. 1390) also depict this scene.^[34] Peter’s martyrdom account was far from the only one depicted in Medieval Art. The martyrdom account present within the Acts of Thomas depicts Andrew being stabbed by soldiers on the order of King Misdaeus. Various medieval and Renaissance artists recreated this martyrdom scene, the most famous being Peter Paul Rubens’s early seventeenth-century painting titled Martyrdom of Saint Thomas.^[35] Rubens’s depiction showcases five angels circling the sky while five Brahmins attack Thomas (who is clothed in black) with spears, daggers, and rocks.^[36] Stefan Lochner’s Martyrdom of St Thomas also depicts this same scene.^[37] It remains unknown whether these two paintings depicting the martyrdom of Thomas were directly influenced by the Acts of Thomas or by a hagiography influenced by the Acts of Thomas.^[38] Regardless, the AAA clearly inspired these two works in some form. Overall, taking both the art described in this section and the evidence of widespread circulation into account, the AAA and their corresponding martyrdom accounts clearly continued to influence Christianity during the Middle Ages and Renaissance.

Conclusion

Drawing on the research of scholars such as Candida Moss, Judith Perkins, and Elizabeth Castelli, this article synthesizes and expands on existing scholarship to suggest the AAA and their corresponding martyrdom accounts helped to grow the early Christian church. The text and subtle references to proto-orthodox beliefs and ideals potentially aided in the spread of proto-orthodox Christianity and perhaps even stopped the growth of groups like the Ebionites and the Marcionites. More concretely, the veneration of the Apostles’ martyrdom, as demonstrated by the popularity of the texts, helped to lend vital support to the doctrine of apostolic succession, a doctrine from which the church still derives its legitimacy today. The spread of martyrdom stories, and specifically the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles within the AAA, helped to form a shared Christian identity during a chaotic time of both internal divisions and, to some extent, external challenges. Lastly, the material evidence and artwork demonstrate that these accounts also continued to be discussed and read throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance.

Exploring the impacts of texts like the AAA and their martyrdom accounts can expand our knowledge of how these texts relate to the history of the church and shed light on the beliefs of modern-day Christians. In short, many more questions remain regarding these accounts and their impacts. For example, while this article concludes that the martyrdom accounts of the Apostles lent vital support to the tradition of apostolic succession, one might question whether the doctrine would have persevered without this support? One might also question whether or not these texts circulated in regions led by heretical groups such as the Ebionites. While more scholarship is necessary to fully understand the impacts of these martyrdom accounts, this article attempts to fill a gap in this lesser-acknowledged area of focus.