This is our last encounter with Peter in this Gospel and what a horrible end it is. Of course, we know the other side of the story, but in the Gospel traditionally credited as being Peter’s recollections he makes no effort to paint himself as a great hero of the faith or to restore his reputation–instead, it paves the way to tell the greater story of the One who did not fail and led the Greater Exodus promised by Isaiah. As we finish up chapter 14 this week, we are going to come face to face with our own frailty as well as his, and especially as it compared to the parallel account of Yeshua’s/Jesus’s trial.
If you can’t see podcast player, click here.
66 And as Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came, 67 and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, “You also were with the Nazarene, Jesus.” 68 But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you mean.” And he went out into the gateway and the rooster crowed. 69 And the servant girl saw him and began again to say to the bystanders, “This man is one of them.” 70 But again he denied it. And after a little while the bystanders again said to Peter, “Certainly you are one of them, for you are a Galilean.” 71 But he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear, “I do not know this man of whom you speak.” 72 And immediately the rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had said to him, “Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.” And he broke down and wept.
If we don’t feel a strong kinship with Peter at this moment, then we probably think more of ourselves than wisdom and past failures would advise. Do you remember my telling you that this is our last Markan sandwich? It began all the way back in verse 54 “And Peter had followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest. And he was sitting with the guards and warming himself at the fire.” That was followed by Yeshua’s/Jesus’s trial and now we pick back up with Peter for the rest of Chapter 14, which we will finish up this week, and move on to Chapter 15 and the trial with Pilate and the crucifixion. What happened with Yeshua is going to be contrasted with what happens here with Peter. And truly it couldn’t possibly be any more different if they had tried. Now, traditionally this Gospel has been seen as the one authorized by Peter himself, based on his own experiences, and not a slam by anyone else. I do believe that this is the cautionary confession that Peter wanted out there and especially with Peter’s position in the early church and the miracles he worked, he would have been wise to make it very clear that he was neither infallible nor particularly admirable except for grace.
Hi, I am Tyler Dawn Rosenquist, and welcome to Character in Context, where I teach the historical and ancient sociological context of Scripture with an eye to developing the character of the Messiah. If you prefer written material, I have six years’ worth of blogs at theancientbridge.com as well as my six books available on amazon—including a four-volume curriculum series dedicated to teaching Scriptural context in a way that even kids can understand it, called Context for Kids—and I have two video channels on YouTube with free Bible teachings for both adults and kids. You can find the link for those on my website. Past broadcasts of this program can be found at characterincontext.podbean.com and transcripts can be had for most broadcasts at theancientbridge.com. If you have kids, I also have a weekly broadcast where I teach them Bible context in a way that shows them why they can trust God and how He wants to have a relationship with them through the Messiah.
All Scripture this week comes courtesy of the ESV, the English Standard Version but you can follow along with whatever Bible you want. A list of my resources can be found attached to the transcript for Part two of this series at theancientbridge.com. We are finishing up chapter 14 of the Gospel of Mark today.
Well, I for one am very relieved that I haven’t ever made big claims or promises about my own behavior, abilities and faith before falling flat on my face. I am so glad that I have never said, in a movie, “Oh my gosh why did that person run! Stay and fight!” Or, “Make sure he’s dead, don’t just assume—haven’t you ever watched a movie before??? The bad guy always gets back up!” Or, “Why are they leaving all those supplies behind?” Or, “Don’t just stand there in fear, do something!” Or, my personal favorite, “I would never deny Yeshua.” Only to find myself doing or almost doing a lot of these things—including almost denying Yeshua back in 2014 when an acquaintance secretly turned anti-missionary and started chatting me up with what I, in my inexperience, thought were genuine questions. Let me tell you, it doesn’t take long to really move along that path to denial once you start entertaining treason against your King. If He hadn’t stepped in at the last minute and asked me, “What will you have to choose to forget in order to deny me,” I’d possibly be one of those folks actively trying to convert people away. Yeah, I honestly think it was within seconds of my being lost. So, I don’t go bragging anymore and if you want my testimony on that, I will link that broadcast in the transcript. And honestly, I was a lot older than Peter when it happened. I was in my forties—possibly over twice his age. So, my ribbing and critique of Peter here is in all humility and love because I see myself in him. And honestly, I am grateful for my “Peter” moment because now I know how easy it really is to do—and I wasn’t even scared at the time like he was. My world hadn’t just been turned upside down. I haven’t lived under an oppressive regime that could decide to nail me to a Cross on a whim. In essence, I almost did by free choice what Peter had to be terrified into doing. I was and am rightly ashamed and put in my place, thank you very much.
Now, credit where credit is due. Peter followed behind an armed crowd sent by some really powerful people—chief priests who were former high priests and Temple administrators—and educated men like the scribes—and respected men like the elders (and the group was headed right to them). Imagine a young, small-town fisherman not being intimidated. And yet, he truly did love Yeshua enough to care about what happened. He had to know. Likely he was already deeply ashamed for running and we know from John that he was the man who cut off the ear of the High Priest’s servant and although it was dark, there was a full or near full moon out and someone might just recognize him. But he is entering into enemy territory when he has wounded one of them. This was very dangerous. Let’s give him the props he deserves before the text really eviscerates him.
66 And as Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls of the high priest came,
So, right here, Peter is approached by a really dangerous and powerful person. And if I sound a bit facetious and demeaning it is because this was written in such a way as to provoke that sort of eye-rolling. And this is one of the reasons that people believe this account came from Peter—only a person who has been deeply humbled could go here in the very first written account of the ministry of Yeshua. I know because this is how I write about my past failures—with no excuses, nothing to make a hero out of myself when I have been ridiculous. I want people to see my failure without making it look noble. I see that all over this account. Peter was a big deal in the early Church and I have to imagine that he was used to needing to deflate his own reputation so that people would follow the master instead of the disciple. It’s a real thing. Remember the words of the Master—whoever exalts himself shall be humbled and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. It’s a real thing and Peter believed and lived it.
I am going to point out something else that occurred to me this morning—this account, and especially when compared to the trial account before it, reads very much like a parable. A parable of the brash young boaster who cannot withstand the scrutiny of a servant girl. I personally think that this was a story that Peter had told often and had crafted it into this form in order to teach an object lesson, and so when the author of Mark was putting this together, I don’t think he had to divert from how Peter related the story in the early church. Just my theory, totally unprovable.
So, Peter is in the courtyard of the High Priest’s home which would have been more like a complex with a common courtyard surrounded by buildings. If you think about an open atrium sort of situation, like if you have ever been in a fancy hotel where the sides go up and up and you can see all the floors from the central lobby and there are skylights? Well, imagine something like that with no roof. A gathering place between these rooms that all empty out onto the common area. Many early synagogues and church groups would meet in these semi-private locations where people could come inside and sit and listen. Now, Peter is specifically “below in the courtyard” which means that Yeshua is being tried in an upper room—one big enough to hold elders, scribes, chief priests, and guards. The job paid well and the family of Annas had become monstrously wealthy. If you are ever interested in knowing what his home looked like, you can check out the archaeological digs of the Herodian Quarter in Jerusalem—the Wohl Archaeological Museum has put out an excellent little book on it by Israeli archaeologist Nahman Avigad. You won’t believe how much has been uncovered and preserved. It’s out of print but sometimes you can find a used copy somewhere if you get lucky. It was uncovered because of damage during the Six-Day War, of all things and you can visit the museum or find pictures online. I will include some links in the transcript.
From the doorway (according to John who says she was a doorkeeper, thyroros which in old English translates to my name, Tyler) a servant girl notices Peter. And the doorkeeper was a very important position in a household, to be trusted with the keys at night. She was a valued servant, but she was still just a servant. And a female within a patriarchal culture—I mean, you could hardly be further from the authority and danger posed by the men interrogating witnesses and Yeshua in those upper rooms. She had authority and watch over who got in and out of the house, backed by the muscle of the guards outside. Other than that, she doesn’t pose much of a legal threat and certainly no physical threat. Such is the ridiculous nature of this picture. She doesn’t even qualify as a bouncer!
67 and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, “You also were with the Nazarene, Jesus.”
What’s the job of the doorkeeper? To keep watch over who is around and might try to come inside. The girl notices a stranger by the fire—the text says that she sees him, using the generic word for noticing something. But then it uses the rarer word emblepo, she’s really looking at him hard. This is also the word used by Yeshua when He is directing people to really pay close attention. And more than that, this is a word that shows up three times within six verses in the Greek Isaiah 51 when Yahweh is commanding His people to really do some serious soul-searching—“Listen to me, you who pursue righteousness, you who seek the Lord: look to the rock from which you were hewn, and to the quarry from which you were dug. 2 Look to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you; for he was but one when I called him, that I might bless him and multiply him. 3 For the Lord comforts Zion; he comforts all her waste places and makes her wilderness like Eden, her desert like the garden of the Lord; joy and gladness will be found in her, thanksgiving and the voice of song. 4 “Give attention to me, my people, and give ear to me, my nation; for a law will go out from me, and I will set my justice for a light to the peoples. 5 My righteousness draws near, my salvation has gone out, and my arms will judge the peoples; the coastlands hope for me, and for my arm they wait. 6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look at the earth beneath; for the heavens vanish like smoke, the earth will wear out like a garment, and they who dwell in it will die in like manner; but my salvation will be forever, and my righteousness will never be dismayed.” Did you catch the Messianic imagery? The commandments to blind and deaf Israel to look and listen? The references to the Arm of the Lord who is identified as Messiah in Greek Isaiah? The irony here is too much to miss—and it will get more intense than that. This servant girl is looking carefully and we will see that she is also listening.
She says something odd, “You also were with the Nazarene, Jesus.” Also? Could she have previously met Judas when he came to make the offer to sell out Yeshua? She’s the doorkeeper so it is quite likely. And we should actually read this as a second informal trial—as they couldn’t condemn Yeshua upstairs but could only interrogate in search of material to use against Him, she doesn’t really have any power either but she is questioning him as a good doorkeeper should. Her words aren’t very friendly, either. In fact, they are definitely accusatory. Judeans weren’t exactly impressed with people from Judea and even Galileans weren’t impressed by people from Nazareth. Her remark was likely dripping with contempt. And at this point, it was humiliating on more than just one level because this has turned out to be an unmitigated disaster, from the way things look on the ground right now. It couldn’t hardly be worse, to have the group under such extreme public shame. But it will get far worse. The irony is that the servant girl is paying more attention than the disciples and the leadership and really, everyone else.
68 But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you mean.” And he went out into the gateway and the rooster crowed.
As we see in the Mishnah Shevuot 8.3, concerning oaths, the phrase “I neither know nor understand what you mean” is actually a legal form of denial of a charge. In fact, “I do not know what you mean” would have been sufficient but he also adds that he doesn’t understand what she is talking about and this will turn out to have been a mistake to even open his mouth—in more ways than one. First of all, of course, he is lying. No one just accidentally stumbles into the courtyard of the High Priest, in the affluent Herodian Quarter of Jerusalem. He stuck out like a sore thumb because (1) he was a stranger and (2) he obviously wasn’t a wealthy man, and (3) it is the early morning hours, before daybreak, of the first day of unleavened bread when people were either still socializing after the seder or were in bed. He was the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time. He really couldn’t have been more obviously out of place. There was only one reason for him to be there and she was the kind of person who had to notice such things.
Now, the first century being the first century, his answer was very dismissive. After all, he was a free Jewish man and this was a servant girl, possibly even a slave. A man in a patriarchal society would not be accustomed to being challenged by a woman at all. But, his dialect almost certainly gave him away—as Judeans and Galileans did not sound the same in conversation. After denying his identity, he moves to the gateway of the courtyard, distancing himself both verbally and physically from Yeshua who is still in the upper room. This is the second time tonight that Peter has distanced himself from his Master out of fear of being in danger. As he enters the gateway, the entrance to the courtyard, the rooster crows. Now, we talked a few weeks back about the three possibilities for the identity of this rooster, be it man or bird, and the meaning Is uncertain despite people saying it is definitely this or that. You’ll hear that this couldn’t have been a rooster because of m. Baba Kava 7.7, which reads–“No cocks or hens must be raised in Jerusalem (even by laymen), because of the voluntary offerings (the meat of which may be eaten in any part of the city, and as the habit of the named fowls is to peck with their beaks in the rubbish, they may peck into a dead reptile and then peck in the meat of the offerings). In all other parts of Palestine priests only must not raise them, as they use leave-offerings for their meals, and they must be very careful about cleanliness.” However, they fail to mention the ruling from the Jerusalem Talmud that clearly states that a chicken had once killed an infant by pecking the soft spot on top of the child’s head (y.Eruv.10.1.5). So, clearly the idea that there were no fowl raised in the city was not universal. And actually, sound carries. When I was living out in the boonies, I could hear roosters that were a long ways away and some of them would sound off long before dawn and even in the middle of the night. I have one across the street in my neighborhood now, actually.
The two theories that play on this supposed ban on poultry involve either the Roman soldiers or the Temple guards sounding different calls. With the Romans, this was called the gallicinium and would have probably been referring to the blasts at around midnight and three in the morning. With the priests, it would have been a call involved with rousing the Temple priests much later in the morning—but there would need to be two of them. But there is a linguistic problem with this—although the English translations generally say “the rooster” there is no definite article in the Greek, (instead it simply reads “rooster crowed”) as we would expect to see if it was referring to a scheduled and otherwise named event. In any event, we can theorize but what we cannot do is give any definitive answer.
69 And the servant girl saw him and began again to say to the bystanders, “This man is one of them.”
Same girl, sees him again, probably that he only retreated but didn’t leave and she begins to up the ante. Now, Peter denied his own identity when it was just a girl confronting him—what is he going to do when the guards and other bystanders are alerted? After all, it is likely that there are people standing around who were there when the armed mob came and arrested Yeshua and when Peter cut off that ear. These are going to be people with clubs and swords, and guards who can probably take care of Peter without having to resort to using weapons at all. Peter, as a fisherman, is going to be very strong but he is not a professional guard trained to fight. Peter said he was willing to die for Yeshua even if everyone else bailed—not even twelve hours earlier, as this entire proceeding probably happened at around 2-3am.
Her words must have been chilling, “Hey, this guy is one of THEM.” Big emphasis on them. “The troublemakers, the guys who follow that crazy wannabe Rabbi who has been disrespecting our boss and making a ruckus at the Temple. Remember how angry the whole family has been after he insulted them earlier in the week? He overturned tables and embarrassed the entire family of Annas—shame to them is shame on all of us! And one of them chopped off Malchus’s ear! Like, duh, guys, he’s a stranger here on Passover, what the heck?” Of course, she didn’t say that, but she didn’t have to, at this point every eye in the courtyard is on Peter. These people owed their prestige to the household that they served and what Yeshua had done reflected on all of them, it downgraded all of them. Honor/shame cultures are no place to insult an entire house and especially when you tell a parable that says they are on their way out and will be replaced.
But Peter, God love him, he still doesn’t leave. He is determined to stay and see how things turn out. Unbelievable. Peter is like this pillar of strength and weakness all rolled into one. He’s a complicated guy but then we are all more complicated than we like to admit. And so are our friends and so are our enemies.
70 But again he denied it. And after a little while the bystanders again said to Peter, “Certainly you are one of them, for you are a Galilean.”
This word translated as “denied” is arneomai and it is the same word used back in verse 68 for his first denial but it doesn’t just have the meaning of “nah”—it’s the word used to actually disown someone or something. This is the word used for “whoever denies me before men, I will deny him before the father.” So, this is a serious word. First time, his denial was in private to one person but this time it is publicly to the group. And he still doesn’t leave. But the bystanders have now noticed his accent because they point out that he is a Galilean and there is no reason on this planet for a foreigner to be where he is at right now in the middle of the night when he doesn’t know anyone there and shouldn’t even be in that part of the city. And now it isn’t just the girl confronting him as the first two times but the group.
About the accent, let’s look at b.Eruv 53b “The Gemara returns to the people of the Galilee, who are not precise in their speech. What is the meaning of this? The Gemara cites examples: As it was taught in a baraita that there was a certain person from the Galilee who would walk and say to people: Who has amar? Who has amar? They said to him: Foolish Galilean, what do you mean? Galileans did not pronounce the guttural letters properly, so it was unclear whether he sought a donkey [ḥamor] to ride, or wine [ḥamar] to drink, wool [amar] to wear, or a lamb [imar] to slaughter. This is an example of the lack of precision in the Galileans’ speech” and Meg 24b “Apropos the previous discussion, Rav Asi said: A priest from Haifa or Beit She’an may not lift his hands to recite the Priestly Benediction, as he does not know how to properly pronounce the guttural letters. This is also taught in a baraita: One may not allow the people of Beit She’an, nor the people of Beit Haifa, nor the people of Tivonin to pass before the ark in order to lead the service because they pronounce alef as ayin and ayin as alef, and they thereby distort the meaning of the prayers.”
See? Pronunciational snobbery is nothing new and isn’t confined to internet arguments about the tetragrammaton. And it may have also been the case that his clothing was different because different regions will make different kinds and patterns of cloth or wear their clothes differently. Just think of how someone from anywhere other than New York would stick out like a sore thumb in New York. In every way—from whether or not they make eye contact to their dialect.
71 But he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear, “I do not know this man of whom you speak.”
This is a bit more complex because some words are added to the text of the ESV and some others not because it is automatically wrong but because the wording in Greek is challenging. The words in question are “on himself” because it is not entirely clear who he was calling down a curse on. Was it on himself, or on Yeshua or on the crowd? William Lane thinks that the wording is unprecise because he was calling down a curse on himself if he was lying and on them if they were lying about him. It is extreme but in a situation where someone is terrified of discovery, they might well believe that being willing to curse oneself is a good way to promote the idea of innocence. Or, when we remove the “on himself” from it entirely, it could read that he was cursing Yeshua as a part of swearing not to know Him in order to prove his lack of affiliation. Either way, Peter has now gone just as far as someone can possibly go in verbally disowning another person. He denied it legally, then before an entire crowd, and then cursed whoever and took an oath. Whoever he was cursing, he was cursing in the name of God and so this really is shocking behavior. The word for curse here is anathematizo from which we get the word anathema—it is the Greek word for devoting something to destruction. We see that in the book of Joshua a lot as the Hebrew word cherem. That’s the word for things going under the ban.
Peter says, “I do not know this man of whom you speak.” And he won’t even say Yeshua’s name. He refers to Him impersonally as “this man.” This is the oath he swore. Peter fell asleep three times. Now he has denied knowing Yeshua three times.
72 And immediately the rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had said to him, “Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.” And he broke down and wept.
Three very important words here. Peter remembered. Peter broke down. Peter wept. Peter’s final three actions before never being mentioned again in this Gospel. Peter’s witness here, his personal witness, is actually at an end. He ends it all on a very low note. No honor reversal. No redemption. No chance to redeem his shredded reputation as the leader of the three and the twelve. And I will tell you that it’s a very bold way to end your own story in this very first of the Gospels to be written down and the only one penned during Peter’s lifetime. This ends here with him as a failed leader, a failed follower, a failed friend. He who boasted and trusted in his flesh the most fell the farthest. But it’s like that, right? It seems that whoever God wants to use most, He has to be the hardest on and those who get the most revelation and giftings and access have to be torn down before they destroy others. Goodness knows that when it doesn’t happen, it can be devastating. But of course, we know that Peter’s story is long from over but right then it must have felt like the world had come to an end.
On the other hand, as Yeshua is inside the High Priest’s home being accused, interrogated, and beaten, He is, through Peter’s actions, passing the Deuteronomy 13 test for true prophets—for the third time that night. First, Yeshua said that one of the Twelve would betray Him, which of course Judas did. Then He prophesied that all of them would be scattered and would abandon Him, and that happened too. And then He revealed the details of Peter’s denial. Yeshua has proven Himself to be the true prophet of whom Moses spoke—while the religious elites are blind, deaf and otherwise oblivious to it. The Irony couldn’t be more pronounced.
“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. 5 But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.” (Deut 13:1-5)
Israel’s history makes it plain that they needed this warning and badly—having gone astray after false prophets and false gods almost continuously throughout the history of both the united and divided kingdoms. They were always following after the dazzling and comfortable and especially when they felt the slightest impatience in or distrust of Yahweh. They were absolutely an adulterous nation and we aren’t all that terribly different except we put our trust in our money, our physical appearance, our health, our knowledge, and whatever internet personality is thrilling us by tickling our ears with teachings that tell us that we are the remnant and they—well they aren’t. We would rather binge watch Netflix than read the Bible all the way through. We would rather talk than listen. We would rather divide over technicalities than do the hard work of loving and serving the unlovable and ungrateful. And yet, God still sent us the Messiah to save our unlovable ungrateful behinds anyway, at great personal cost.
And Moses prophesied about Yeshua, the One who would lead a greater Exodus for all nations and not just the smallest on the planet at that time. The prophet like Moses and don’t get me wrong—Yeshua needed to be tested but tested honestly. What He was claiming—well, nothing more important or controversial had ever been claimed by anyone on the face of the earth. But what He faced wasn’t a test of the validity of His claims. It was an agendized hearing convened for the purpose of making an execution happen. What did Moses say about Yeshua?
15 “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen— 16 just as you desired of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ 17 And the Lord said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.” (Deut 18:15-22)
Yeshua claimed divine authority and demanded allegiance as a condition of relationship with Yahweh. If He lacked that authority, then He was a false prophet. Yahweh could have stopped every miracle, every deliverance and healing and resurrection. Every word Yeshua spoke could have fallen to the ground but not one did. Yahweh didn’t just vindicate Yeshua in the resurrection but with every single miracle. Of course, Yeshua never led anyone away from Yahweh but instead made it possible for more to have access to Him. He satisfied all those prophesies of the nations coming to worship at Mt Zion in the prophets.
A little addendum here—in Epistles 10.96, which contains a letter to the Emperor Trajan, Pliny the Younger made this report about the threefold cursing and denial required of suspected Christians:
“…Having never been present at any trials of the Christians, I am unacquainted with the method and limits to be observed either in examining or punishing them. Whether any difference is to be made on account of age, or no distinction allowed between the youngest and the adult; whether repentance admits to a pardon, or if a man has been once a Christian it avails him nothing to recant; whether the mere profession of Christianity, albeit without crimes, or only the crimes associated therewith are punishable in all these points I am greatly doubtful.
In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have been denounced to me as Christians is this: I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For whatever the nature of their creed might be, I could at least feel no doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved chastisement. There were others also possessed with the same infatuation, but being citizens of Rome, I directed them to be carried thither.
These accusations spread (as is usually the case) from the mere fact of the matter being investigated and several forms of the mischief came to light. A placard was put up, without any signature, accusing a large number of persons by name. Those who denied they were, or had ever been, Christians, who repeated after me an invocation to the Gods, and offered adoration, with wine and frankincense, to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for that purpose, together with those of the Gods, and who finally cursed Christ. None of which acts, it is said, those who are really Christians can be forced into performing these I thought it proper to discharge. Others who were named by that informer at first confessed themselves Christians, and then denied it; true, they had been of that persuasion but they had quitted it, some three years, others many years, and a few as much as twenty‑five years ago. They all worshipped your statue and the images of the Gods, and cursed Christ.
They affirmed, however, the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind. Even this practice, however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations. I judged it so much the more necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition.
I therefore adjourned the proceedings, and betook myself at once to your counsel. For the matter seemed to me well worth referring to you, especially considering the numbers endangered. Persons of all ranks and ages, and of both sexes are, and will be, involved in the prosecution. For this contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread through the villages and rural districts; it seems possible, however, to check and cure it. ‘Tis certain at least that the temples, which had been almost deserted, begin now to be frequented; and the sacred festivals, after a long intermission, are again revived; while there is a general demand for sacrificial animals, which for some time past have met with but few purchasers. From hence it is easy to imagine what multitudes may be reclaimed from this error, if a door be left open to repentance.”
True believers held fast because of the Testimony of Peter as to his failure.
