Pulse
6 February 2023

One of the persistent mythologies spun by modern liberalism is that the 18th century Enlightenment must be credited for championing one of the most cherished of the virtues of our day, namely, religious freedom.

This narrative continues to hold sway and is advanced by writers such as Robert Kegan, who in a March 2019 op-ed in the Washington Post argues that ‘Only with the advent of Enlightenment liberalism did people begin to believe that the individual conscience, as well as the individual’s body, should be inviolable and protected from the intrusions of state and church.’

This tale, which has been rehearsed again and again by numerous writers, can be summarised thus.

In the sixteenth century, the Reformation brought about serious disruptions to religion and society in Europe, and spawned many different confessions that resulted in the persecution of Christians by Christians. The ensuing decades saw the confrontation between Catholics and Protestants in the battlefield that led to half a century of bloody conflicts which historians have dubbed the wars of religion.

Thanks to the arrival of some influential philosophers in the eighteenth century, the religious conflicts that had eroded the fabric of European society were brought to an end. As Robert Wilken describes it in his insightful history of the idea of religious freedom entitled, Liberty in the Things of God (2019):

Armed with notions of the superiority of reason over faith, sceptical of received truth, and distrustful of religious institutions, these enlightened thinkers forged a new set of ideas about toleration and religious freedom. Through their efforts the modern idea of liberty of conscience was born.

This narrative puts Christianity in the worst possible light as a religion of unconscionable intolerance and violence. It was the enlightened philosophers of Europe who broke the shackles of the superstition and authoritarianism of the religion which had kept the continent in its grip for almost two millennia.

In recent decades, however, a number of historians and scholars such as Robert Wilken have challenged this narrative as evidently false.

Their research has shown that in fact the reverse is true: it was Christianity that first emphasised the importance of freedom as an expression of the dignity with which human beings are endowed by their Creator.

And – unbeknownst to many secular scholars – it was a second century Christian theologian and apologist who used the phrase ‘religious liberty’ (libertatis religionis) for the very first time in the history of Western literature.

In this brief article, we examine the writings of two ancient Christian writers – Tertullian (155 – 220) and Lactantius (250 – 325) – to glean from them the earliest Christian reflections on freedom in general, and religious freedom in particular.

TERTULLIAN

Our first writer is Tertullian, one of the most important theologians in the early Latin Church who not only wrote learned theological treatises, but also reflections on the moral aspects of the Christian life such as marriage, modesty, steadfastness under persecution, military services and the courage of the martyrs.

Tertullian, whose parents were pagans, had a superior education in Latin grammar and rhetoric. He was trained as a lawyer and used his gifts as a skilled rhetorician and writer in the service of the Church, especially in defending the Christian faith against attacks by pagan philosophers and rulers.

Tertullian is known for many ‘firsts.’

He was the first Christian theologian to write a treatise on patience in the history of Christian literature. He was the first theologian to coin the word ‘Trinity’ to describe the Christian belief in the one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And, he was the first in the history of the West to use the expression ‘religious liberty’ (libertatis religionis) in his discussion on human freedom.

Tertullian’s reflections on religious freedom are found in the Apology, which is principally his response to Roman policies against Christians which often resulted in unjust persecutions.

The main charge made against Christians had to do with their refusal to participate in the religious rituals of the Roman Empire. In particular, Christians refused to worship and venerate the gods of the Romans, but participated instead in some secret rites of their own.

In response to this charge, Tertullian asks if everyone must worship in the same way. He argues that freedom must be given to each individual to express his devotion to the deity of his choice. He writes:

Let one man worship God, another Jupiter; let one lift suppliant hands to the heavens, another to the altar of Fides; let one – if you choose to take this view of it – count in prayer to the clouds, and another that of a goat (Apology 24).

It is not that Tertullian was a religious pluralist or that he did not believe that there is only one God who has revealed himself in Jesus Christ. His point is quite simply that the religious beliefs and practices of an individual cannot be coerced by any group, including the State. Thus, he adds:

For see that you do not give a further ground for the charge of irreligion, by taking away religious liberty (libertas religionis), and forbidding free choice of deity, so that I may no longer worship according to my inclination, but am compelled to worship against it.

Tertullian’s understanding of human freedom is grounded in the biblical revelation that human beings are made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26-27). As bearers of the divine image, Tertullian asserts, human beings are created free, with the power to choose and to act. He writes:

… it was proper that (he who is) the image and likeness of God should be formed with a free will and a mastery of himself; so that this very thing – namely, freedom of will and self-command – might be reckoned as the image and likeness of God in him.

Human freedom is also underscored in the giving of the divine law. As Tertullian asserts in his polemic against the heretic, Marcion:

… in the Creator’s subsequent laws also you will find, when he sets before man good and evil, life and death, that the entire course of discipline is arranged in precepts by God’s calling men from sin, and threatening and exhorting them; and this on no other ground than that man is free, with a will either for obedience or resistance.

Tertullian’s ideas were as radical as they were revolutionary. They insist that all human beings are by nature free because God has made them such.

For Tertullian, freedom is thus the naturalis potestas of the creatures created in God’s image. The power to make choices is innate and universal. Freedom is an endowment that all human beings possess from birth.

Freedom is thus a human right (humanum ius), according to Tertullian. In the context of the discussion of religious liberty, this means that every human being has the right to choose which religion they wish to embrace and which deity they wish to worship.

In his letter to Scapula, the Proconsul of Carthage, Tertullian explains that ‘it is a human right (humani iuris) and a natural power or natural privilege (naturalis potestatis) that one should worship whatever he intends; the religious practice of one person neither harms nor helps another.’

Timothy Samuel Shah summarises the contributions of Tertullian thus:

… [Tertullian] was the first to argue that all human beings possess a natural right to believe and practice a religion of their choice without coercive interference. This was the crucial move that made it possible for a recognisably ‘modern’ doctrine of religious liberty to emerge, especially when we recognise that Tertullian was the first to use the concept and very phrase ‘religious liberty.’

LACTANTIUS

The great theologian and historian Jerome (342-420), who is best known for his translation of the Bible into Latin (later known as the Vulgate), has nothing but admiration for the next early Christian writer whose writings on religious liberty we will be briefly discussing.

In particular, Jerome appreciated the elegance of the writings of Lactantius, which he describes as a ‘river of Ciceronian eloquence.’ Lactantius was indeed an accomplished Latin stylist whose prose would be imitated by later Christian writers.

Most significantly, Lactantius was a Christian apologist who wrote the Divine Institutes (Institutiones Divinae) between 303 and 311, to provide an exposition of Christian teachings and to defend them against their learned pagan critics.

Pagan philosophers had accused Christians of atheism because of their refusal to worship the Roman gods. For example, the neo-platonic philosopher Porphyry of Tyre, a student of the great Plotinus and Lactantius’ contemporary, denounced Christians because they ‘had abandoned the customs of our fathers, which sustain every people and city, and are impious and atheistic.’

Lactantius was not only aware of the venom of the pen of pagan philosophers who tried to discredit Christianity. He was also an eyewitness of the Diocletian persecution and the atrocities it brought in its wake.

These experiences shaped Lactantius’ reflections on religious liberty, a topic which he addressed eloquently in the middle of the Divine Institutes. Following Tertullian, whose work he was familiar with, Lactantius insists that religion has to do with inner convictions, which can never be brought about by coercion or force.

Thus, in the 10th chapter of Book Five of the Divine Institutes, Lactantius famously writes:

There is no occasion for violence and injury, for religion cannot be imposed by force; the matter must be carried on by words rather than by blows, that the will may be affected.

To compel anyone to give their allegiance against their will to certain deities – as the Romans were attempting to do to Christians – is contrary to the ‘law of humanity and divine justice,’ asserts Lactantius.

Because religion is a matter of the heart, State laws to compel citizens to worship certain deities and perform this or that ritual have limited effectiveness. In the Epitome of the Divine Institutes, Lactantius puts this across eloquently and succinctly: ‘Laws are able to punish offences, they are unable to punish the conscience.’

In a similar vein, Lactantius argues that because the true seat of religion is the soul, external rituals are only of secondary importance. Religion is not essentially about rites and ceremonies. Rather, it is about a mind that is turned to God, which results in a pure heart and the virtuous life.

Lactantius’ view that religion is a matter of the heart which cannot be manipulated or forced by external pressure implies that a Christian state should also promote a policy of religious liberty. Even though the Christian emperor does not approve of the traditional cults and rituals of paganism, he should nonetheless exercise forbearance. For people need liberty (libertas) to choose virtue and correct belief, Lactantius argues.

Consistent with his view that people should be persuaded ‘by words rather than by blows’, Lactantius believes that the Church should never resort to force to convert pagans to Christianity. She should instead patiently explain the faith to all who are open to receive it. ‘We teach, we prove, we explain,’ he writes.

Strictly speaking, Lactantius was a man of letters and not a theologian. But his writings on religious liberty – together with Tertullian’s – have had a truly enduring impact.

In her erudite article which discusses how Lactantius’ writings on religious liberty have influenced Constantine, Elizabeth DePalma Degeser writes:

We can thus detect Lactantius’s fingerprints on the edict that Constantine and Licinius issued, which is a paradigmatic statement of religious liberty. It states that Christians and all other have liberty (libera potesta) – literally, unhindered power – to follow the type of religion that appears best to them. Rather than assuming that Christians naturally repress religious freedom and that Constantine was restrained from acting against polytheism only by the pressure of his coruler, the pagan Licinius, we see now that Constantine had access to a principled point of view.

CONCLUSION

In the introduction to a book on Christianity and human rights, the eminent legal scholar from Emory University, John Witte, writes that ‘We [Christians] must retrieve these ancient sources and reconstruct them for our day.’

Witte is of course right. The modern discourse on religious liberty will be somewhat lacking unless the religious (i.e., Christian) roots of the concept is honestly acknowledged and fully appreciated.

---

Dr Roland Chia is Chew Hock Hin Professor at Trinity Theological College (Singapore) and Theological and Research Advisor of the Ethos Institute for Public Christianity.