Lactantius devotes several sections of the Divine Institutes (6.11-12) to an analysis of Roman benefaction and to a sketch of a Christian alternative. He writes that it is “a great work of justice to protect and defend orphans and widows ho are destitute and stand in need of assistance; and therefore that divine law prescribes this to all.” In the Roman empire, “all good judges deem that it belongs to their office to favour them with natural kindness, and to strive to benefit them.”
Yet the care of orphans and widows is especially incumbent on Christians “since we have received the law, and the words of God Himself giving us instructions.” Pagans “perceive that it is naturally just to protect those who need protection, but they do not perceive why it is so.” God wants everyone, no matter how destitute, to face life and death “with promptitude and boldness,” knowing that God will care for him.
Romans gave benefits to one another for advantage, and thus did not see the use of “burying of strangers and the poor,” since they “measured all their duties by utility.” Though they had an “inkling of the truth,” the could not see “any advantage” in a benefit to the dead. Death was the impenetrable boundary of benefaction.
To care for the poor is, for Lactantius, a form of worship: “to undertake the care and support of the sick, who need some one to assist them, is the part of the greatest kindness, and of great beneficence; and he who shall do this will both gain a living sacrifice to God.” God promises to make good on the offering: “that which he has given to another for a time he will himself receive from God for eternity.”
Peter Leithart
Peter J. Leithart is President of Theopolis Institute. He is the author of numerous books on theology, literature, and culture, including Theopolitan, Defending Constantine, and Baptized Body.
More from History
Continue reading related articles

Realness of Things Past
Greg Anderson began thinking about the thesis of his Realness of Things Past while working on a book on the “state” in classical Greece. He discovered there was no such thing as an Athenian “state,” and that conclusion led him to question the way historians do history. Instead of running…

The Power of the Margins
David Martin (1929-2019) was a secularization skeptic. He acknowledged that modern societies typically undergo a process of "differentiation," in which various sectors of social and political life free themselves from the oversight of religious authority. He acknowledged that in many modern societies religious institutions and values are "marginalized." But he…

Zwinglian Symbolism
Nathan Mitchell (writing in the Oxford History of Christian Worship , 324) denies that Zwingli taught a "mere symbolist" according to which the Supper "simply served to remind believers of the great benefits bestowed on them through Christ's passion and death." Zwingli wasn't a symbolist "in any modern sense." Mitchell…
In Medias Res
Your weekly digest for all things Theopolis.