The word martyr actually comes from the Greek word martys/μάρτυς – often translated as witness. This is the Greek word used in Acts 22:20 when Paul recounted the martyrdom of Stephen. By the end of the second century, the word martyr had become increasingly associated with death. While the term still held on to its legal connotations, martyr quickly became a word that almost exclusively referred to a blood witness: a person who paid the ultimate price for their faith.
Though the persecutors of the early church were typically easy to identify, the early Christians soon found that their doctrine of martyrdom needed some adjustments. At the time, the simple act of becoming a Christian almost guaranteed suffering from persecution. As commonplace as Christian martyrdom had become, early Christian writers were keen to eulogize and slightly embellish their deaths. These writings of public admiration strongly affected the public mind, and an association had formed between conversion to Christianity and the assured glory of suffering under persecution. In fact, some theologians began to wonder if Christians were a bit too willing to die for the faith.
One such theologian was Clement of Alexandria. In book four of The Stromata, he praises those who have died for the faith—calling the testimony of these martyrs “examples of conversion gloriously sanctified.” And yet, despite his high regard for such a sacrifice, he also offers a reproof.
When, again, He says, ‘
Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata – Book IV, chapter 10When they persecute you in this city, flee to the other,’Matthew 10:23 He does not advise flight, as if persecution were an evil thing; nor does He enjoin them by flight to avoid death, as if in dread of it, but wishes us neither to be the authors nor abettors of any evil to anyone, either to ourselves or the persecutor and murderer. For He, in a way, bids us take care of ourselves.
With this addition, the theology of martyrdom became inseparable from the theology of self-preservation. Suffering would undoubtedly come to the Christian (Psalm 34:19, 1 Peter 3:19), but he had no right to seek it out. In this way, Christians who neglected their duty to care for themselves were excluded from the accolades of Christian martyrdom.
As time progressed, it also became clear that the doctrine of martyrdom was inseparable from political theology. The sword of persecution has a wielder, and whether directly or indirectly, that wielder is the state. John Foxe shows just how entwined these doctrines are in his Book of Martyrs. Though his work was famous for its straightforwardness and objectivity, Foxe had no choice but to devote large sections to explaining the egregious bloodshed under Roman Catholicism. It seemed obvious enough that martyrdom would occur at the hands of God-hating pagans. However, Foxe was also sure to include the persecuted saints under nominally Christian regimes. Foxe’s book was a defining moment in protestant political theology. The state had a duty to protect the church and defend true religion, but when it fails in these duties, the state becomes a persecutor of the church and an enemy of true religion. In this way, the doctrine of martyrdom proved to be inseparable from our political theology and, in many cases, defined it.
Over time, it became apparent that evangelicals had adopted a nearly unrecognizable bastardization of historic protestant political theology. Radical forms of two-kingdom theology had become mainstream, echoing the culture’s affinity for political atheism. Naturally, the theology of martyrdom also began to suffer, especially as it related to this strange system of liberalism. We knew what martyrdom was–in theory–but identifying it in the context of a constitutional-liberal-republic-democracy proved to be a task too difficult for most theologians.
Puritanism: The New Catholicism?
When researching this subject, one of the first things to catch my eye was several discrepancies in the various editions of Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. While Foxe himself died in 1587, there are multiple editions from different publishers that attempt to continue his work, documenting even the most recent stories. If you have a copy of this classic work in your home, it is quite likely that you possess a version of the abridgment, edited by William B. Forbush and published in 1926. From this copy, dozens of different editions have sprung up, each making their own edits. But one particular edit that caught my attention–present, even in the 1926 edition–was the inclusion of the early American Quakers. Mary Dyer, for example, a Quaker woman executed in Boston in 1660, was included in the version edited by William Forbush. While the story of Mary Dyer is fascinating, including her story in the Book of Martyrs was a sure indication of a poorly constructed political theology. Mary Dyer was a Quaker, and the Boston Puritans had branded them as heretics. Due to the various laws suppressing these heresies, Mary was quickly accused as such and subsequently banished. In defiance of her banishment, Mary returned to Boston multiple times. Though the Boston colony had little interest in carrying out the execution and had shown her mercy on more than one occasion, it was obvious that Mary would not cease her heretical proselytization. Mary was informed that she would be executed the following day, to which she replied, “I came in obedience to the will of God the last General Court, desiring you to repeal your unrighteous laws of banishment on pain of death; and that same is my work now, and earnest request, although I told you that if you refused to repeal them, the Lord would send others of his servants to witness against them.” 1Rogers, Horatio (1896). Mary Dyer of Rhode Island, the Quaker Martyr That Was Hanged on Boston Common, June 1, 1660 To clarify, Mary’s status as a martyr does not rely on whether or not Mary was actually a heretic because, even in her final words, Mary made it perfectly clear her motives were political in nature–that she had intended to preach until the law was changed. Questions about self-preservation aside, Dyer’s actions were in no way compatible with the doctrine of martyrdom.
Though the story of Mary Dyer is not explicitly addressed, an uncommon version of Forbush’s classic, edited by Joshua Schwisow and Kevin Swanson, intentionally omits her death from the record. In the preface, they note: “We removed some chapters from Forbush’s edition that covered certain figures in church history who, while historically significant, did not give their lives in martyrdom.” 2John Foxe, Book of Martyrs, published by Generations Intentional or not, martyrdom theology had found a breaking point in the Puritans. Either the sentence of capital punishment was just, or it was persecution. There was no middle ground.
And yet, modern organizations that attempt to document persecution seem all too unaware of their own political theology, propagating Forbush’s errors to another generation. Puritan doctrines on the civil magistrate were mocked, sometimes even reduced to “Reverse Catholicism.” In this way, the 21st century had developed its own doctrine of martyrdom, one that tied faith itself to the “middle ground” of liberalism.
Documenting Persecution Today
Over 50 years ago, Voice Of The Martyrs (VOM) was founded by Richard Wurmbrand, a pastor who suffered under communism in Romania firsthand. Today, the Voice of the Martyrs shop carries a number of items, including an updated edition of Foxe’s book of martyrs. Like so many of the abridged editions, this book also includes Forbush’s martyrs for liberalism. So, when it comes to documenting persecution, it is nearly impossible to understand the organization’s work without viewing it through the lens of human rights. Voice Of The Martyrs uses three labels in its prayer guide, indicating the different levels of hostility a Christian might experience in that country. The most severe, “restricted nation,” indicate government-sanctioned circumstances or anti-Christian laws that lead to persecution. But when documenting these anti-Christian political actions, Voice Of The Martyrs goes to great lengths to avoid political action. Their website shows no trail of Amicus briefs, no civil action items for societal change, and no international law recommendations. When a Christianity Today reporter asked VOM for the rationale behind India’s “restricted nation” status, the organization’s response merely confirmed its desire to remain uninvolved.
“There may be those in government or leadership who see or reference this information, but VOM is not an advocacy organization and influencing governments or other leaders has never been our goal.
Rather, VOM’s goal is fellowship between members of the global body of Christ. VOM’s primary audience is followers of Jesus in free nations, and our goal is to enable them to better understand and more knowledgeably pray for persecuted Christians in more than 70 nations around the world—including India—where Christians regularly face persecution for the activity of their faith.”
Todd Nettleton (VOM spokesperson, United States), “Does Naming and Shaming Help the Cause of Indian Christians?”3https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2024/february-web-only/voice-martyrs-india-persecution-restricted-nation.html
My own suspicions had been confirmed. Not only was Voice Of The Martyrs disinterested in changing these laws, but much of their material and prayer guides were tailored to Christians in “free nations.” But finding out what any martyrdom network considered a “free nation” is a lot harder than it looks.
Every year, Open Doors–a similar organization–releases a yearly “World Watch List,” documenting the 50 countries most hostile to Christianity. But unlike Voice Of The Martyrs, Open Doors has a more robust political advocacy system. Along with the watch list report, the organization releases country dossiers and advocacy resources.4“Our global advocacy teams operate locally, offering legal support and human rights training for persecuted Christians; nationally, through legislatures and governments; and internationally, with representation at the United Nations and European Union.” – https://www.opendoors.org/en-US/research-reports/advocacy-resources/ As an example of this activism, we can see Open Doors at work during Germany’s never-ending refugee crisis.
In 2021, Open Doors Germany released a report titled: “Disregard of the human dignity of refugees in Germany.” Citing increased Christian persecution in Iran, report author Ado Greve urged the German immigration services to take this threat into account and to treat refugees with “upmost humanity.” But, given the broader picture, one could see his actions in an entirely different light. Germany had been rocked by migrants, and that year, Iranian asylum applicants had doubled from the previous year.5“In 2021, BAMF counted a total of 2,693 asylum applications of Iranian nationals, while this year the tally stood at already 5,447 by the end of November — more than twice the number registered the previous year.” – https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/45508/number-of-iranian-asylum-seekers-in-germany-doubles-as-unrest-continues Then, at the start of 2023, Open Doors Germany came face-to-face with their own data. Citing Open Doors data on the persecution of Christians, one legislator from the Alternative für Deutschland (also known as AfD, a right-wing political party) proposed the adoption of an International Day Against the Persecution of Christians. In his proposal, the legislator clearly identified Islam as a key player in the origin of that persecution, stirring up a visceral reaction from the dissenting parties. Some members even “accused the AfD of using the plight of persecuted Christians to stir up hate or suspicion against Muslims.”6James Thompson, “Open Doors Gets Dragged into Germany’s Debate Over Christian Persecution,” Christianity Today, 2/22/2023 – https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/february/open-doors-germany-afd-alternative-deutschland-persecution.html When confronted about the usage of their data, Open Doors Germany denied any form of collaboration with the right-wing lawmaker and even suggested that their data had been improperly used.
“In general, Open Doors rejects the instrumentalization of the suffering of persecuted Christians for political purposes.”
Ado Greve, Open Doors Germany7Ibid.
It seemed as if activism was a one-way street. The modern concept of “human rights” had become the inevitable conclusion of true Christian politics. Any other conclusion was absurd.
In 2012, Open Doors made significant revisions to its methodology. Now, the organization boasts an independent auditing process through the International Institute for Religious Freedom (IIRF) and academic-level standards. But when the very definition of persecution is at stake, some might see the shift toward academia as a shift toward liberalism. Though Open Doors tries to avoid using a sociological definition of persecution,8“There is no international, legal definition of persecution. Situations can be defined as persecution where persons experience the denial of the rights listed in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, the WWL methodology has opted for a theological rather than a sociological definition, and defines persecution as ‘any hostility experienced as a result of one’s identification with Christ. This can include hostile attitudes, words and actions towards Christians’.” – https://www.opendoors.org.za/christian-persecution/world-watch-list-methodology/ the primary direction of their advocacy efforts has been undeniably human-rights oriented. Open Doors UK, for example, regularly appeals to article 18 of the infamous Declaration of Human Rights, a UN proclamation created to justify globalist meddling. One such occasion was the promotion of a new statement condemning gendered violence and condoning freedom of religion–a “Declaration of Humanity.”9https://www.opendoorsuk.org/news/latest-news/declaration-humanity-jacqueline-isaac/ From refugee rights to gender equality, Open Doors advocacy efforts always seem to perfectly align with liberal values.
The Inevitable Conflict
With the rise of Christian Nationalism, the assumption of liberal values is no longer a given. The Right largely despises democracy, and talk of “human rights” is automatically assumed to be the work of the globalists. Regardless of their intentions, it is clear that persecution networks are not only falling behind but — in many cases — are working to create martyrs for democracy all over the world.
While things worsen in the US, organizations continue to pour resources overseas. Some people can see the small picture–the degenerating culture or the societal hurdles to keep Christians out. Some people can see the larger picture–state-sanctioned violence or weaponization of the civil system against Christians. But persecution networks are none of them. Like a fish that cannot see the water around him, these global networks are blinded to the struggles of those who don’t see the United Nations as the sole pundit of peacemaking. Yet, as far as the immediate context is concerned, it may be more advantageous for these organizations to drift into irrelevancy. From what I have seen, politically callous organizations–such as Voice of the Martyrs–will be far more useful twiddling their thumbs on the sideline than trying to develop a political theology robust enough to handle the persecution of a democracy. Given their propensity for liberalism, organizations that decided to start monitoring anti-Christian hostility in a “free nation” would likely find themselves supporting the wrong side. An incapable nonprofit is bad, but a regime nonprofit is worse.
Today’s politics are as heartless as they are overwhelming. Leftists, in particular, are quick to consecrate the blood of any victim they can find, and a network dedicated to such a task would only accelerate it. Christians watched in disbelief as the social justice movement canonized violent anarchists right before their eyes. In the blink of an eye, Leftists began to venerate their infamous negro martyr, George Floyd, while Evangelicals argue to this day about the motives of the transgender terrorist, Audrey Hale. In a late-stage democracy such as this one, no Christian ever dies a politically insignificant death.
A sleeping giant has awoken. People are talking about discipline for Sabbath-breaking, re-instituting capital punishment, punishment for blasphemy, and justice for the adulterer. We are retrieving the same political theology that saw fit to punish the disseminators of flagrant heresy, to remind the magistrate of his duty to defend true religion. Now, the dominant political theology that so universally denounced the Puritans is now losing the debate. When the pot finally boils over and the issue comes to a head, each side will have its martyrs, but only one of them will be Christian.
Sources:
- 1Rogers, Horatio (1896). Mary Dyer of Rhode Island, the Quaker Martyr That Was Hanged on Boston Common, June 1, 1660
- 2John Foxe, Book of Martyrs, published by Generations
- 3
- 4“Our global advocacy teams operate locally, offering legal support and human rights training for persecuted Christians; nationally, through legislatures and governments; and internationally, with representation at the United Nations and European Union.” – https://www.opendoors.org/en-US/research-reports/advocacy-resources/
- 5“In 2021, BAMF counted a total of 2,693 asylum applications of Iranian nationals, while this year the tally stood at already 5,447 by the end of November — more than twice the number registered the previous year.” – https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/45508/number-of-iranian-asylum-seekers-in-germany-doubles-as-unrest-continues
- 6James Thompson, “Open Doors Gets Dragged into Germany’s Debate Over Christian Persecution,” Christianity Today, 2/22/2023 – https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/february/open-doors-germany-afd-alternative-deutschland-persecution.html
- 7Ibid.
- 8“There is no international, legal definition of persecution. Situations can be defined as persecution where persons experience the denial of the rights listed in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, the WWL methodology has opted for a theological rather than a sociological definition, and defines persecution as ‘any hostility experienced as a result of one’s identification with Christ. This can include hostile attitudes, words and actions towards Christians’.” – https://www.opendoors.org.za/christian-persecution/world-watch-list-methodology/
- 9
Leave a Reply