The predecessors of the 4th and 5th century orators and writers presented a solid foundation upon which their successors could build. The early Apologists of the first and second Post-apostolic generations were presented with the unique challenges of defining what the Christian faith looked like without the inaugural Jesus-group leaders and teachers. They were also responsible to defend that definition, along with its beliefs and practices. The Christian community was not neutral with regard to the culture in which it found itself. Its stances and positions had to be clearly articulated and supported. In this article, we will again work back from the late 3rd century, beginning with Cyprian and ending with Athenagoras in the mid to late 2nd century.
Cyprian (200/210-258)
Cyprian, a 3rd century writer, indirectly addresses the issue of abortion with his mention of Novatian’s assault of his wife which resulted in a miscarriage. Here is what he wrote:
“The womb of his wife was smitten by a blow of his heel; and in the miscarriage that soon followed, the offspring was brought forth, the fruit of a father’s murder. And now he dares to condemn the hands of those who sacrifice, when he himself is more guilty in his feet, by which the son, who was about to be born, was slain?”
The killing of a child in utero is described by Cyprian as “a father’s murder.” He emphasizes that the fetus was, in fact, “the son” of Novatian. Cyprian’s stance infers that the fetus in the womb of Novatian’s wife was a human life… a life that was taken via first degree murder.
Origen (185-254)
Regarding the position of Origen on abortion, Gorman’s statements are illustrative:
“Origen was a teacher, theologian and biblical scholar. Unfortunately, however, his homily on the important text of Exodus 21:22–25 reveals less of Christian teaching and practice than it might. Origen’s allegorical method of interpretation makes it difficult to ascertain the specifics of his actual position. Nevertheless, working with the Septuagint, Origen distinguishes between the abortions of unformed and formed fetuses with their corresponding penalties of a fine or a life. That he accepts this fetal distinction as valid is probable but not certain, since he goes on to apply the passage not to abortion but to spiritual harm done to the unformed (catechumens) and formed (baptized persons).”
He comments further that in Origen’s Homily 10, ““On the pregnant woman whom two men, while fighting, cause to abort.” [Origen’s] Hexapla lists yeladēyah, progenies ejus, to paidion, and embryon as names for what was aborted according to Exodus 21:22.”
While his position on abortion is not explicitly stated, Origen upholds the notion that the abortion of a fetus—be it unformed or formed—is an act worthy of penalty.
Minucius Felix (170-225)
Minucius Felix’s address of abortion is stated via his defense against accusations of child sacrifice/infanticide as a Christian initiation ritual. Gorman describes his defense in this way:
“He [Minucius Felix] protests that no one could kill a “tender and so tiny” baby, and that whoever thinks someone could do such a deed must be capable of it himself. Minucius Felix proceeds to accuse the pagans of infanticide and abortion:
And there are women who swallow drugs to stifle in their own womb the beginnings of a man to be—committing infanticide before they give birth to the infant.
The Latin word translated “infanticide” is parricidium, the Roman legal word for intentional killing, especially of a relative. Abortion, of course, was not considered parricide in Roman law; Minucius opposes his culture’s legal view of abortion. His subsequent assertion that Christians do not procure abortions is necessarily apologetic, but it must have been an accurate generalization of Christian practice to have been of any value to his defense of Christianity.”
Gorman’s observation here is important. That Minucius Felix, and other apologists, would insist that abortion is anathema among the Christian community, indicates that it was the orthodox view on the practice during the 3rd century.
Hippolytus (170-236)
Hippolytus was a voice against Roman cultural influence on the Christian community. In a correspondence with Callistus, the Bishop of Rome during the reigns of Emperors Elagabalus and Alexander Severus, Hippolytus writes:
“Women, reputed believers, began to resort to drugs for producing sterility, and to gird themselves round, so to expel what was being conceived on account of their not wishing to have a child either by a slave or by any paltry fellow, for the sake of their family and excessive wealth. Behold, into how great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by inculcating adultery and murder at the same time!”
Hippolytus took issue with Callistus’ approval of a Roman law which allowed concubine marriages, a practice that resulted in unwanted pregnancies and, consequently, abortions. Gorman comments on Hippolytus’ stance:
“In the face of growing immorality, especially among wealthier believing women, Hippolytus continued to hold forth the orthodox belief that abortion is murder.”
Tertullian (160-240)
Tertullian is one of the most well-known Apologists of the early Christians, second only to Augustine.
Tertullian’s main objective was defending Christianity against accusation. Similar to Minucius Felix, Tertullian had to address claims of ritual child sacrifice/infanticide. He states that “we are accused of observing a holy rite in which we kill a little child and then eat it” to which he comments further:
“That I may refute more thoroughly these charges, I will show that in part openly, in part secretly, practices prevail among you which have led you perhaps to credit similar things about us.”
Gorman comments on Tertullian’s defense:
“After citing mythological and historical cases of child sacrifice and exposure in the Greco-Roman world, Tertullian claims:
In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the foetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in the seed.
His comparison of the seed and the fruit conveys with imagination the universal Christian concern for life. It also has a parallel, probably independent but coming from the same ethical roots, in Philo’s comparison of the embryo to a statue ready to be removed from the artist’s studio.”
Tertullian holds the belief that abortion is “a speedier man-killing.” He takes a novel and contrary approach to Roman culture by addressing the mother, arguing:
“In this matter the best teacher, judge, and witness is the sex that is concerned with birth. I call on you, mothers, whether you are now pregnant or have already borne children; let women who are barren and men keep silence! We are looking for the truth about the nature of woman; we are examining the reality of your pains. Tell us: Do you feel any stirring of life within you in the fetus? Does your groin tremble, your sides shake, your whole stomach throb as the burden you carry changes its position? Are not these moments a source of joy and assurance that the child within you is alive and playful? Should his restlessness subside, would you not be immediately concerned for him?”
While Gorman spends much more time on Tertullian’s apology with regard to abortion, it is clear from the citations above that, like Augustine after him, Tertullian held the position that abortion was murder and the fetus in the womb was a human life worth protecting.
Clement of Alexandria (150-215)
Clement of Alexandria makes a compelling and interesting case against abortion. In his Prophetic Eclogues, a commentary on earlier Christian writings, he quotes from the Apocalypse of Peter, “noting again that both exposed and aborted children will be delivered to safety by a caretaking angel but that the parents will suffer punishment because of their sins.”
Clement argues that the fetus has a soul and is a living human. His argument is unique among the “apologists” in that its use of the Apocalypse of Peter emphasizes the idea that an angel places the soul in the womb at the moment of conception and the new embryo is ensouled with immediate effect.
Gorman comments that “Clement continues the main themes of the Christian community: abortion is killing human life that is under God’s care, design and providence.”
He further notes:
“That he considered the unborn to be a human being is clear from the clause “if we do not kill (kteinō)” and is also implicit elsewhere in his thoughts on childbirth and the immortality of the soul. Clement was greatly influenced by the Stoics, but his concern for the child itself goes beyond the Stoic concern for doing what is right and in accord with nature. Clement’s own personal and sensitive contribution to the Christian position can be seen in his last clause, where he speaks of the aborting of human feeling (philanthrōpia).”
Athenagoras (133-190)
Athenagoras was a Greek Christian Apologist who addressed one of the most famous emperors of Rome, Marcus Aurelius, and his son Lucius Aurelius Commodus. Like other apologists of the Post-apostolic era, Athenagoras had to defend Christianity against a number of accusations. The most pertinent being: atheism, incest, and cannibalism. Gorman describes Athenagoras’ defense against cannibalism as follows:
“To the charge of cannibalism, stemming from a misunderstanding of the Eucharist, Athenagoras responded that cannibalism implied murder and that Christians would not even watch a murder (for example, a gladiator fight), much less perform one. His defense continues:
What reason would we have to commit murder when we say that women who induce abortions are murderers, and will have to give account of it to God? For the same person would not regard the fetus in the womb as a living thing and therefore an object of God’s care [and then kill it].… But we are altogether consistent in our conduct. We obey reason and do not override it.”
Gorman rightly observes that as Athenagoras states his positions, they are in keeping with the standard Christian position. Gorman states that “if it were not the accepted practice, his argument would lose all its force.”
From Athenagoras’ statement, Gorman observes that:
“The three important elements in the Christian position appear already in explicit form in this late second-century document: (1) abortion is considered murder; (2) the guilty must give account to God (a milder form of the apocalyptic imagery); (3) the fetus is a living being, the object of God’s care. Athenagoras’s contribution is to set the issue of abortion in an argument for Christian practice based on the Christian view of the sanctity of life. He writes that Christians have renounced murder in all its forms—mentioning the common Roman practices of gladiator contests, animal fights, exposure and abortion—in order to avoid becoming polluted and defiled. It is this absolute abhorrence of bloodshed in any form which drives them away from even looking at practices such as gladiator fights and criminal executions. This view stood in stark contrast to the prevailing Roman lifestyle.”
Conclusion
What we have demonstrated in this brief overview is that the anti-abortion position, as well as the value and protection of human life in the womb, was very much a concern for the 2nd and 3rd century Christians. The Post-apostolic generation held to the positions of their predecessors. What the earliest defenders, Clement of Alexandria and Athenagoras (especially Clement), reveal is a reliance on consistent orthodoxy to support their apologies and positions. Clement’s use of the Apocalypse of Peter in his defense of the Christian position against abortion, and for the fetus as an ensouled human, elucidates the fact that his stance, and that of those that followed, was considered orthodox by those that preceded him.