University Foundations

Martyrdom is popularly understood as a selfless act, an act of self-sacrifice. In contrast, I argue that martyrdom is first an act of self-formation. To make this claim, I propose two theses. The first is that the most ubiquitous and yet, paradoxically, most overlooked difference of the martyr is the death. The second is that, in keeping with the qualitative difference of the death, martyrdom is a violent action. Connecting these two theses, I represent the martyr as autothanatos, one who enacts self-death. Autothanatos represents a move toward recognition of the martyr’s agency and of the ubiquity of death and violence, not only in the martyr’s actions, but in the discourse of those who remain. An aim of this study, through establishing the function of death and violence in the Western Christian tradition, is to minimize violence as a decisive factor in distinguishing religious traditions.

The martyr is a potent symbol of sacrifice in Western cultural discourse. Understanding martyrdom as sacrifice, however, blunts the potency of the martyr's action. It obscures the violence by which the martyr's death becomes, paradoxically, a means to define institutional life. In this article, I propose an analogous relationship between the early Christian martyr and Giorgio Agamben's enigmatic homo sacer. Like homo sacer, the Christian martyr provides an “other” against which to organize institutional life. Read as a sacrifice, the martyr also exemplifies the threat of biopolitics that Agamben describes, where mere existence can be isolated from political life and made subject to sovereign violence. Distinguishing the martyr from their institutional appropriation is a step toward exposing the modes of violence inherent in sovereign power. It provides the possibility of reconceptualizing the martyr as an autonomous figure of resistance, not as homo sacer but as homo profanus.

This syllabus is for a central course in the Foundational Studies Program at Boise State University. The course asks three primary questions. What do I believe? Why do I believe it? What am I going to do about it? Through exploring ethical frameworks, the components of one's social identity, and global issues, students learn to connect their understanding of ethical behavior with a sense of their position in the world and their responsibilities to the various communities they inhabit.

Scholars once predicted the decline of religion in modern society. While religious affiliation has decreased in many countries, religious traditions have continued to flourish and new expressions of religion have evolved. Religion is not going away, yet while some laud religious values as the font of societal morals, others condemn religion as the source of society's violence. In light of these conflicting claims, this course asks the following questions: What is the role of religion in our past? What will it be in our future? If we critically engage the rich complexity of religion in our collective history, we can begin to address pressing questions about the role of religions in our global future.

The only constant in our world is that things change. Today's society is changing faster than ever, from civil rights to social media, from education to the environment. But why does it happen? How does an idea, a person, or a belief transform society? This course explores those questions. When we think change "just happens,” we are passive observers, surprised (or dismayed) at the changes around us but powerless to respond. But, if we grasp the what, why, who, and how of change, if we understand change as a process that people create, together, we are empowered to impact our communities as informed advocates for a different (and hopefully better) world.

Partly in response to an earlier 'pathological approach' that seemingly stigmatised early Christian martyrdom, recent scholarship has adopted an 'identity approach' that explains martyrdom as a normative discourse of self-construction. This explanation of martyrdom as Christian identity-making, not willing death, is insufficient for three reasons. First, this approach implicitly reaffirms the theological claim that religious identity alone makes martyrs. In doing so it reduces the complexity of the individual martyr to 'Christian.' Second, this approach excises the existential phenomenon of the martyr from martyrdom. Third, the term 'identity' has become ubiquitous, and its use to mark both sameness and difference has mitigated its value. As a result, the identity approach cannot answer a critical question: what makes the martyr different? Given the early Christian martyr's pride of place in cultural understandings of martyrdom and the present-day persistence of martyrdom across ideologies with tragic results, relevant scholarship must continue to address the impetus of the martyr-agent in addition to exploring martyrdom's identity-making functions. A multidisciplinary approach is required to avoid apologetics for early Christian narratives and to understand the complex psychosocial dynamics of martyrdom, whether in the ancient past or the present.

Religion is a central phenomenon of human existence. Religion is often seen as separate or different from the rest of culture, but religion (and religions) cannot be fully understood without examining the ways they interact as cultural institutions. One critical concept for analyzing institutions is power-institutions build and maintain power for the benefit of their members. Thus, religions as institutions can be fruitfully examined using the concept of power.

'Identity' has become a primary means for engaging in public discourse. We classify according to racial, gender, religious, and political identities (among others) and use these identities to grasp complex social issues-and understand ourselves. Answers along identity lines, however, are often contentious in a liberal democratic society. For example, should certain religious traditions receive political privilege because of their historical legacy? Should greater material resources be directed toward geographic areas on the basis of a predominant racial demographic? Should people be "cancelled" on social media because they express ideas critical of a particular identity? In short, is engaging in 'identity politics' the best way to achieve justice and equality in a democratic society?

This book argues that we have been mistaken about the fundamental assumption that Christianity is the key to understanding the “Christian” martyr. Examining martyrdom in early Christian history, Matt Recla argues that the violent deaths of martyrs, real and imagined, were appropriated for Christian institutional life. Through deconstructing martyrdom and appreciating the complexity of the martyr, we recognize martyrdom not as a socio-historical phenomenon inherent to particular ideologies, and not as a religious “identity” but as the institutional co-optation of violence. The Christian apologist Tertullian argued that the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the Church, but while the seed may be the key to martyrdom, the blood is the key to the martyr.

The book shows how martyrs exceed the bounds of institutional narrative. Centering analysis of martyrdom first around the martyr's existential difference and the complex biological, psychological, and socio-cultural factors that lead to willing death, this book sheds new light on the motivations of martyrs, our fascination with them, and the parasitic relationship of religion to violent death.

In challenging long-held beliefs about the praiseworthiness of martyrdom, this book is of interest to scholars of religion as well as those concerned about the relationship between religion and violence.