Justin, Saint, Martyr

JUSTIN, Saint, Martyr. - Apologist and philosopher, d. ca. 165.

I. LIFE

St. J. himself informs us about his life in the first place. Indeed (I Apol., 1, 1) he declares himself born in Palestinian Syria at Flavia Neapolis, today's Năbulus (Naplusa), which succeeded ancient Shechem, the capital of Samaria, to Priscus son of Bacchius, hence from a family that had probably immigrated in 72, when that city was founded there by Vespasian, and undoubtedly pagan (Dial., 28, 2). Giving himself to philosophy, but deeply disappointed in his first contacts with the teachers — the Stoic, the Peripatetic and the Pythagorean — he decided to follow the Platonists, taking advantage of an opportunity that presented itself by chance in his country; he made rapid progress and believed he had already reached that contemplation of God at which Platonic philosophy aims, when one day, on the seashore, an old man approached him and, opening for him the books of the prophets, converted him instead to the philosophy of Christ, «the only sure and salutary wisdom» (Dial., 2, 3-8, 3). This had happened before 135, since St. J. suggests (ibid., 1, 3) that that dialogue with the Jew Trypho had been held precisely in the time of the war (of Bar Kokhba). Born therefore in all likelihood in the early years of the 2nd century, a upright and sincere soul, with the noble ardor of a true teacher he felt himself called henceforth to do for the wisdom of Christ what so many were doing for the various schools of pagan doctrine; like them he put on the pallium, and wherever along the roads of the Empire he pleased to stop he opened a school, on his own authority and as a philosopher without any intervention of the Church. The acts of the martyrdom (P. Franchi de' Cavalieri, Note agiografiche [*Studi e testi, 8], Rome 1902, pp. 25-36 with the appendix [Studi e testi, 9], ibid. 1902, pp. 73-75), a document of rare and undisputed value, show among the companions of the execution a group of pupils, none of whom, however, had followed him as a catechumen. These acts, if they are silent about the wanderings of St. J., at least make known, besides that stay at Ephesus, two distinct periods of activity at Rome, and only a mutilation in the text has caused the loss of the indication of where he held school the second time; but above all they offer a description as sober as it is more trustworthy and truly moving of the heroic end of a life spent entirely for the one supreme wisdom. Confessing together with Chariton, Charito, Euelpistus, Hierax, Paeon and Liberianus the faith in Christ, the prefect of the City Junius Rusticus (163-67) pronounced sentence: «Those who do not wish to sacrifice to the gods and bow to the order of the Emperor shall be scourged and led to pay, in accordance with the laws, the capital penalty». There survived, besides this precious testimony, part of his writings, much used and read still for a long time (Athenagoras, Theophilus, Pseudo-Melito, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Methodius, Eusebius, Athanasius, Procopius of Gaza, John Damascene, Photius, etc.). The philosopher martyr soon received the honor of a cult in the East, legend attributing to him the death of Socrates, hemlock. On the same day, June 1, but with a clear distinction, the menaea also celebrate St. J. with companions, a sign that the reports of the acts arrived when that cult had already been introduced. In the West St. J. appears from the beginning with his companions, as in the acts, but only in the Martyrologies* of Usuard and Ado, and on April 13 Pope Leo XIII extended his feast (April 14) to the whole Church.

II. WORKS

The literary work of St. Justin is known only partially and, apart from the numerous citations, only from the Greek ms. 450 of the National Library of Paris, finished being written on Sept. 11, 1364. Certainly authentic are only those three sections of this volume that go under the names of I Apology (maior, ff. 201-38), II Apology (minor, ff. 193-201) and the Dialogue with the Jew Trypho (ff. 50-193). It is also certain that the ordering of the two apologetic texts is not that of the manuscript but that it must be reversed, as the editors have done; it is not equally certain, however, whether the II Apology of only 15 chapters was ever a separate work or whether it is rather part of the first, to whose 68 original chapters this appendix would have been added in order to include the events of the prefect Urbicus, a new illustration of what had already been said about the injustice of the persecution. It is nothing strange that there were then added to it still the discussion of some other current problem. The fact is that Eusebius, who indeed distinguishes (Hist. eccl., 4, 18, 1) two different apologies, the first dedicated to Antoninus Pius, to his sons and to the Senate and the second made for the successor Antoninus Verus, then attributes to the first also those texts that he cites from our second. Moreover, there is repeatedly referred to (II Apol., 4, 2; 5, 6; 8, 1), in the shorter text, a passage of the longer one with a simple προέρχων. Was it perhaps that there were two editions of the same work, dedicated to Antoninus Pius, one without and the other with the appendix, dedicated to Marcus Aurelius? Was it perhaps that Eusebius simply made a mistake with his second? Or perhaps also the second text stood on its own, certainly a little more complete than now, an apology occasioned perhaps by an attack of Fronto? It truly seems that this second text assumes a new attitude in the face of the thought of the Stoa, in vogue precisely with Marcus Aurelius. The redaction of this part seems, moreover, far more hurried.

The I Apology, dedicated to the emperor Antoninus Pius and his adopted sons Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, to the Senate and the Roman people, was written in Rome (cf. chaps. 26 and 58) ca. 153 (chaps. 41, 1: ca. 150 years A.D.; chaps. 26, 5; 58, 1: Marcion heretic; chap. 29, 2: L. Munatius Felix, prefect of Egypt, in office in Sept. 151, prefect probably in the years 150-54; cf. Oxyrh. Papyri, London 1899, II, p. 163). Addressing first the emperors in the name of the Christians and invoking their serene and impartial judgment (1-3), he rebels against an iniquitous method of persecution that condemns Christians only for the name without the support of any proof of crimes committed. If they are truly atheists, enemies of the State, criminals, why do they not renounce that name? They aspire to a most pure life in the sight of God, to that precisely of the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ (4-12). To demonstrate this life, rather than historical proofs, too subjective for him, he adduces the prophecies, unanswerable arguments, because they are revelation of God, source of every earthly truth, which the deceits of the demons will never be able to overcome (13-60). The participation of Christians in that life is realized in the mysteries of Baptism and the Eucharist and in the Sunday assemblies (61-67). Lastly St. Justin adduces a rescript, addressed by Hadrian to Minucius Fundanus, to avert calumnious accusations (68).

The II Apology, also written in Rome not much later (Q. Lollius Urbicus prefect in 144-60), illustrates the injustices committed by the prefect Urbicus in giving heed precisely to the sole calumny of the Christian name, no longer concerned about the truth than the cynic Crescens (1-4). To Christians truth matters more than life. They do not throw life away, but they do not renounce the truth for its sake. By sacrificing themselves they hope to free even the persecutors from their injustices (5). The Son of God became man to save the good from the hatred of the demons, but because man is free, struggle is needed; to the humblest the truth has been divulged and triumphs in death, in heroic spectacles the superiority of Christianity is manifested to the world (6-13).

The Dialogue with the Jew Trypho, which in the manuscript precedes the apologies but cites the first of them (chap. 120), was composed ca. 155-60 (perhaps at Ephesus?). Much more extensive (142 chaps.), it was originally divided into two books according to the two days that the conversation, placed by Eusebius at Ephesus, would have lasted, ca. 20 years earlier. The dedication, now lost, to Marcus Pompeius, otherwise unknown but called most dear (8, 3) and mentioned again (120, 6), may have given this information. A lacuna after chap. 74 has caused the end of the first and the beginning of the second day to disappear and with it the division of the work. The name of Trypho recalls the rabbi Tarphon, who in the times of St. Justin taught at Lydda. But of a rather quarrelsome character, he opposed Christianity and perhaps contributed to the dialogue only a sonorous name. It would certainly be arduous to see the truth always from the fiction.

Having posed the problem concerning God and philosophy, St. Justin narrates (2-8) his own conversion to Christianity. Thereafter, treated without rigorous order, one prophecy following another, with many interruptions and resumptions, are three groups of ideas: the substitution of the New for the Old Testament (9-47), the messiahship of Jesus Christ and his function as Word, intermediary of the Revelations, before the Incarnation (48-108), the calling of the gentiles to be the chosen people (109-42).

A writing against all the heresies that had arisen up to that time is mentioned in the I Apology (26). Perhaps Tertullian too had thought of it when (Adv. Val., 5) he considers St. Justin as the first assailant of the heresies. It would be very understandable that it was used by later heresiologists, but there is no proof of it, unless it must be identified, in whole, or better in part, with the Contra Marcioneum which St. Irenaeus cites twice (Adv. haer., 4, 6, 2; 5, 26, 2) and to which Eusebius also makes reference (Hist. eccl., 4, 18, 9; cf. 4, 11, 8-9).

Methodius of Olympus in his Dialogue on the Resurrection refers to St. Justin. Although the source is not specified, it is obvious to think that it is the De Resurrectione cited by Procopius of Gaza and by John Damascene in the Sacra Parallela, which without doubt Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., 1, 5) and Tertullian (De Resurrectione) had already used.

Eusebius further cites (Hist. Eccl., 4, 18, 3) a writing Ad Graecos where St. Justin would have made the comparison between Christian doctrine and Greek philosophy, treating of the nature of the demons, and (ibid., 4, 18, 4) another Ad Graecos that was also called Confutatio, and again (ibid.), a treatise De monarchia Dei, with proofs for the unity of God, all not from Sacred Scripture alone but also from the Greek authors.

On the other hand, there are found in the collection of the writings of St. Justin three works with a title analogous to these, cited by Eusebius: Oratio ad Graecos (PG 6, 229-40); Cohortatio ad Graecos (ibid., 241-312); De monarchia (ibid., 312-25). The first could be identified with the second of Eusebius, but, although it perhaps goes back to the 2nd century, the style forbids attributing it to St. Justin. The Hypomnemata that an Ambrosius made of it in the 3rd century in Greece are preserved only in Syriac (W. Cureton, Spicilegium Syriacum, London 1855, II, 38-42, 61-69); the second cannot be identical with the first of Eusebius, because it does not have the treatment on the demons; the second of Eusebius must be excluded for an analogous reason of style (R. V. Sellers now attributes it to Theodoret: Journ. theol. st., 46 [1945], pp. 145-60); the third does not agree with the third of Eusebius because it does not give the proofs from Sacred Scripture and the verses cited are fabricated later.

Two other writings cited by Eusebius (Hist. eccl., 4, 18, 5): the Psalmista and the De anima are not known at all. As for what St. Jerome reports (De vir. ill., 9) concerning a commentary on the Apocalypse, it seems it must be attributed to the Dialogue with Trypho. Two small fragments of an Ad Euphranium sophistam de providentia et fide appear to be spurious. Two others from a Contra Iudaeos, included by St. John Damascene in the S. Parallela, were easily attributed to St. J. through a simple mistake.

Certainly spurious among the writings of St. J. are: the Epistula ad Zenam et Serenum (PG 6, 1183-1204); the Expositio rectae confessionis (ibid., 1207-40); the Responsiones ad orthodoxos (ibid., 1249-1400); the Quaestiones Christianae ad Graecos (ibid., 1401-64); the Quaestiones Graecae ad Christianos (ibid., 1464-90); the Confutatio quorundam Aristotelis dogmatum (ibid., 1491-1564); and the Epistola ad Diagnetum.

III. THOUGHT

On the thought of St. Justin the present information necessarily remains very incomplete. Not only did St. Justin leave no systematic work, but unfortunately not even one has come down to us in which he sets out his ideas more precisely in comparison with the heretical currents of Christianity, and one must be content with the more or less occasional controversies with the pagans and the Jews. He wished to be a philosopher; not invested with any mission, he conscientiously puts on the pallium; but his philosophy is Christ, the divine Word who took flesh from the Virgin Mary. To call oneself a Christian, to feel oneself one of those hated and unjustly persecuted, this is his greatest, indeed his only boast. "There are those who declare themselves Christians and do not teach his doctrine; instead of venerating Jesus they acknowledge him only in name." But he, "as he has learned, wishes to speak; to teach what was taught to him." On doctrine there can be no real discussion; it is received from the Church, and there is no need to say much about it.

But more than one problem arises as soon as it is a matter of making it understood: when it is the philosopher's turn. One must nevertheless always keep in mind in this regard — it is not a simple autobiographical note — how suddenly a fire was kindled in the heart of the Platonist, who believed he had reached the contemplation of God, and the love of the prophets and of those who are the friends of Christ took possession of him (Dial., 8, 1). Philosophy now means love of prophecy. "Only the prophets have seen and expressed the truth to men"; "they speak through the Holy Spirit," above any demonstration; "what happened and happens compels assent to what was said by them" (ibid., 7). There are also the miracles and the life of the prophet that justify faith, but the strongest argument lies precisely in what happens according to what was foretold, and the argument will be all the more convincing the less it is suspected.

The demonstration is not made with a strictly logical method; one could more justly, also explaining the predilection for symbolic-typological exegesis, call it analogical. With the full revelation of God in the incarnate Word all other revelations are incommensurable, and all the more so human science. Certain incongruities should therefore not be too disconcerting. Thus a certain subordinationism may appear, when, treating of creation, St. Justin seems to compromise the eternity and necessity of the generation of the Son, and in speaking of the divine apparitions makes the Son the supreme servant of God. Yet it appears clear on the other hand that St. Justin did not doubt the true and adorable divinity of Christ. He is certainly believed orthodox when he professes millenarianism. As for the philosophical doctrines called to his aid, they are valid only insofar as they contain a distant prophecy, whether the philosophers drew from the Old Testament, or whether this is explained in the language of the Stoa with the λόγος σπερματικός.

A writer without great charm, in whom one seeks in vain for rhetorical technique, without compelling logic, he nevertheless earned the admiration of a very difficult pupil such as Tatian, nourished the dialectic of Tertullian and the theology of Irenaeus, gave suggestions to criticism and exegesis and most precious documents of doctrine, liturgy and life, but above all he gave the love of the supreme truth even to the shedding of blood.

Paolo Künzle

IN FOLKLORE

The city of Chieti in Abruzzo, which venerates St. Justin as its patron, celebrates him solemnly in the first ten days of May with great civil and religious festivities. An ancient substratum of rural propitiation rites common to the May festivals can be recognized in the most characteristic manifestations to which the "sagra di s. G." gives rise: palios and horse races, fireworks, singing and music competitions, processions in which the devotion and religiosity of the Abruzzese people are reaffirmed.

Paolo Toschi