Question 85 · How Christians lived

May the state put a criminal to death?

What the sources show

Athenagoras c. 177 · Tertullian c. 211 · Lactantius c. 313Christians abstain

Early Christians would not take part: Athenagoras says they cannot bear to watch an execution, "though just"; Tertullian and Lactantius forbid Christians to judge or accuse on capital charges. ¹²³

Augustine of Hippo c. 413 · Church of England 1571 · Swiss Brethren (Anabaptist) 1527 · Catechism of the Catholic Church (2018 revision) 2018

Augustine held that public authority punishing criminals by death does not break "You shall not kill". The churches kept this, except the Anabaptists, until the Catholic Church in 2018 called the death penalty inadmissible. ⁴⁵⁶⁷

The answers given:

ApostolicBefore NicaeaNicaea and afterMiddle AgesReformation to today

Scroll through the centuries, or tap a dot. J K move between witnesses.

Before Nicaea

150–325

177c. AD

Christians abstain

Athenagoras fl. c. 177 ADPlea for the Christians 35.1

Who could accuse of murder or cannibalism people who, as they know, cannot bear even to see a man put to death, though justly?

"Though justly": even lawful execution. Christians stayed away from the gladiatorial games for the same reason.

Full English of this work is being translated

211c. AD

Christians abstain

Tertullian c. 155–c. 220 ADOn the Crown 11.1–2

Shall it be lawful to make one's living by the sword, when the Lord declares that he who uses the sword will perish by the sword? Shall the son of peace take part in battle, when it is not fitting for him even to go to law? Shall he administer chains, prison, torture and punishment, when he does not avenge even his own wrongs?

A Christian cannot administer "chains, prison, torture and punishment".

Full English of this work is being translated

313c. AD

Christians abstain

Lactantius c. 250–c. 325 ADDivine Institutes 6.20.15–17

It will not be lawful for a just man ... to accuse anyone of a capital crime, for it makes no difference whether you kill with the sword or with a word, since killing itself is forbidden.

Lactantius forbids even bringing a capital charge.

Full English of this work is being translated

Nicaea to Chalcedon

325–451

413c. AD

Lawful

Augustine of Hippo 354–430 ADCity of God 1.21

The same divine authority has made certain exceptions to the rule that it is not lawful to kill a man. Except those whom God orders to be killed, either by a law given or by an express command for a particular person at a particular time (and he does not kill who owes his service to the one who commands, as a sword is the instrument of the one using it); so those did not act against the commandment "You shall not kill" who waged wars at God's command, or who, acting as public authority according to its laws, that is, the command of most just reason, punished criminals with death.

Augustine often pleaded with judges to spare criminals, but held that the state's sword is lawful.

Full English of this work is being translated · Source text

Reformation

1500–1700

1527AD

Christians abstain

Swiss Brethren (Anabaptist)Schleitheim Confession Article VI

The sword is ordained of God outside the perfection of Christ. It punishes and puts to death the wicked, and guards and protects the good. In the Law the sword was ordained for the punishment of the wicked and for their death, and the same (sword) is (now) ordained to be used by the worldly magistrates. In the perfection of Christ, however, only the ban is used for a warning and for the excommunication of the one who has sinned, without putting the flesh to death.

The Anabaptists accept the sword as ordained by God outside Christ's perfection, but Christians do not wield it.

Read the full text →

1571AD

Lawful

Church of EnglandThirty-Nine Articles Article XXXVII

The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian men with death, for heinous and grievous offences.

The Reformation churches kept the lawful sword.

Read the full text →

Modern churches

1700–today

2018AD

Inadmissible

Catechism of the Catholic Church (2018 revision)Catechism of the Catholic Church 2267 (2018)

Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good. Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption. Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

The Catholic Church changed its teaching in 2018: the death penalty is inadmissible.

Read the full text →

Witnesses not in the library yet

These writers also matter for this question. Their texts will join the timeline above once they are translated.

385
Ambrose of Milan, Letter 25 to Studius
A Christian judge may impose death, but mercy is better.

How this page was made

Every early quote was read in its Greek or Latin and translated for this page by Claude (Opus 5.5) on 13 October 2026. Each line names the printed edition it was read from. A quote marked indirect does not state the answer outright; read its note. A writer's silence is never counted as an answer.