Reflecting on the Martyrdom of Polycarp
I teach a class on cultural anthropology. I like to use case studies. Paul and Frances Hiebert wrote a book Case Studies in Missions. I find it very useful. (Another good book is Alan Neely’s Christian Mission: A Case Study Approach.) One of cases in the book by the Hieberts had to do with a woman evangelizer in a religiously (semi-) closed country. The police sent a message to the Christians in the community to tell this woman to report in to the interrogated. I asked my students what she should do. Some say she should run away or hide. Others would say that she should boldly walk immediately down to the nearest police station and report in. Some seem to take the argument that Christians should obey the law of the land as much as possible. Others seem to be opposed running and hiding since they deem it to be cowardly or perhaps even sinful. Seeing that Jesus ran (or perhaps walked fast?) away from those seeking to kill him on two occasions— once in Nazareth and once in Jerusalem— I don’t see how one can see hiding or running away as inherently sinful. But it is still hard to say what the BEST option is.
I do tend to think that the The Martyrdom of Polycarp describes an ideal balance of sorts.
-The Pagans of Smyrna sought Polycarp to be executed.
-The Christians of Smyrna helped Polycarp hide from the authorities. This worked for awhile.
-The authorities started going after other members of the church.
-Polycarp revealed himself to the authorities.
-The authorities gave Polycarp the opportunity to recant his faith publically.
-Refusing to recant, Polycarp was executed.
The figure above shows a way of looking at the Great Commandment. One circle is the first part of the Great Commandment— loving God. The other circle is the second part of the Great Commandment— loving others. One can think of the overlap as Christian ministry. (If this sounds too simplistic… I would not disagree.)
Polycarp hid at first. This allowed him to love God but also continue to minister to the people. To me, this is the correct response under those conditions based on the Great Commandment.
However, when the government started going after other members of the church, because they could not find Polycarp, the correct response had to change. Polycarp could not minister effectively to the people while still demonstrating love for them. Therefore, he turned himself in.
When in custody, Polycarp was asked to recant. Doing so, he could have continued to live, but he would be rejecting God… and he would be sabotaging his ministry to the people. Instead, he stayed true to his faith. He was then killed. This left him faithful to God to the end… and ministering to the people as a witness (“martyr”) to God and his faith.
I do think that when one is looking at proper responses to rather extreme situations as this— it is really not about bravery— it is about the Great Commandment. What action best expresses Love for God and Love for Man, AND effectively carry’s out God’s ministry to the people. The correct action may vary as the situation changes.
It seems like the early church knew this. They began to discount acts of martyrdom where the individual intentional sought out being martyred— blaspheming pagan gods or tempting the authorities to carry out an arrest. St. Ignatius of Antioch seems a little too excited about being martyred. A more nuanced response as we find with Polycarp seems more commendable, to me at least.
