Absentee Fathers

Looking beyond the stories of female martyrs who reject their families, it becomes clear that the rejection of family is not an especially feminine concern.^[588] Perpetua’s actions inaugurate a trend in later martyr acts in which male martyrs frequently disavow knowledge of their wives and chil­dren.

“We have a law (praeceptum) from our Lord Jesus Christ,” replied Irenaeus who said, “He who loves his father or his mother or his wife or his siblings or his parents more than me, is not worthy with me.” For this reason, looking to God in the heavens and bearing in mind his promises and despising all else, Irenaeus insisted that he neither had nor knew any other kin.^[589]

Irenaeus’s rejection of his family is grounded in scripture and biblical exe­gesis. The scriptural precept is taken from Matt 10:37IILuke 14:25 and its citation starkly sets family against martyrdom. Just as the martyr Euplius interprets the command to take up the cross as “law,” Irenaeus interprets the words of Jesus as a precept, a command.^[590] The use of the legal term praeceptum here alludes to the Diocletian edict and juxtaposes it with the command of God.

The same motif reappears in the fifth century Latin version of the Acts of Phileas.^[591] Early in the account, Phileas’s treatment of his family is fore­shadowed by his reference to Socrates who, as Phileas notes, “when he was being led to his death, even with his wife and children present, he did not turn back but eagerly embraced death.”^[592] In his interrogation by the prefect Culcianus, the prefect refers to the presence of Phileas’s wife, in an attempt to appeal to his emotions and sense of familial duty. The martyr responds in the nonchalant tone typical of martyrs, stating his concern for salvation: “The Lord Jesus Christ is the redeemer of the souls of us all. It is he whom I serve in chains. And he who has called me to the inheritance of his glory can also call her.”^[593] It is unclear whether Phileas’s wife is her­self a Christian, as the reference to “being called” could refer either to conversion or martyrdom. The second possibility is supported by the sub­sequent use of inheritance language in the account. As he goes out to the place of execution, one of Phileas’s brothers requests a stay of execution on his behalf. Phileas is irritated by his family’s unsolicited efforts on his behalf. He states that he “owes a great thanks to the emperors and prefect that [he] has been made a coheir of Christ Jesus.”^[594] In this instance the language of inheritance clearly refers to his imminent execution. Once again there is a symbolic contrast, only this time it is between earthly and divine siblings. Whereas previously Phileas was a co-heir with his biologi­cal earthly brother now shares an inheritance with his new brother, Christ. This new familial status is acquired through death for Christ.

Phileas’s rejection of his family is more complicated than a symbolic re­fusal of worldly concerns. His biological family is abandoned in prefer­ence for a new family of super-Christians:

The lawyers, the clerks, together with the curator and all of Phileas’s relatives, embraced his feet and begged him to have regard for his wife and concern for his children. But it was like water wearing away at a rock. He rejected what they said, claiming that the apostles and martyrs were his kin.^[595]

The image of Phileas’s family clutching his feet and the appeal to his emo­tions and sense of familial duty is similar to the depiction of the father in Perpetua. Just as with Socrates, Perpetua, and Irenaeus, Phileas is immune to such emotional manipulation. From these two brief examples, it is clear that the rejection of children theme in the martyr acts is not peculiar to the presentation of female martyrs. To be sure the account of Perpetua giving up her child is more emotive and descriptive, but this observation can be made of any part of Perpetua, which is longer and more elaborate than most other martyr acts.^[596]

The appeal to the martyr’s emotions and love of family does not dis­suade him. The act of supplication and the appeal to recall his wife and children is reminiscent of both Socrates and iconic episodes in Greek myth and history. Hermes advises Priam to persuade Achilles to return Hector’s body by supplicating him on his knees and invoking the memory of his fa­ther, mother, and child.^[597] Appeals to remember one’s family, therefore, have proven effective on Greek heroes. It is with Socrates that we see a shift towards the rejection of family. As Phileas explains, Socrates es­chews family for the good death. Familial abandonment in these later mar­tyrdom accounts is tied both to the interpretation of Matt 10:37IILuke 14:25 and to the example of Socrates. In the case of the former, the scrip­tural proof texts are used to subvert the conventional Roman ideas of fa­milial responsibility.

An interesting aspect of Phileas’s rejection of his family is that he iden­tifies the martyrs and apostles as his kin. This notion is similar to - alt­hough more elitist than - the idea of the “Christian family” so common in the early church. Through the shedding of blood Phileas believes that he will acquire a new family, a family of apostles, martyrs, and Christ. Phile- as’s statement gestures towards a previously overlooked aspect of the mar- tyrological attitudes to family - martyr acts deconstruct the notion of fami­ly in order to reconstruct it. It is to an exploration of this new family that we now turn.

D.