The Acts of St Phileas record the events of 305 AD during the Great Persecution under Diocletian. An ancient Latin translation exists, but in the 20th century two Greek versions of the Acts were discovered. These are in the Bodmer papyrus 20 (= Bo), and a different version in the Chester Beatty papyrus 15 (= Be).
The Bodmer version Bo begins as follows. The translation us by H. Musurillo, The Acts of the Christian Martyrs (1972), pp. 330-1:
1. The defence speech of Phileas, bishop of Thmuis and ruler of Alexandria, when he appeared for the fifth time in court and was thenceforth consummated.
Now at the time of his first defence, after many insults on the part of the prefect, much disturbance, and rackings by the legionaries even beyond the fourth peg, he was cast [into prison? ] at Thmuis for two days. Then going about in chains and with bare feet . . . he came to Alexandria and was cast into prison…
2. Though insulted and beaten, he did not flinch. Similarly at his third and fourth appearances, after many insults and blows, Phileas was told: ‘You have killed many men by not sacrificing. Pierius saved many by submitting.’ (Πιέριος πολλοὺς ἔσωσεν ὑποταγείς.)
Summoned for a fifth time, together with the clergy who were with him to the number of twenty, Phileas was asked by the prefect: ‘Can you now be reasonable?’
Phileas answered: ‘I am always reasonable, and I exercise myself in good sense.’
‘Sacrifice to the gods,’ said the prefect.
‘I will not,’ said Phileas.
Culcianus said: ‘Why? .. .’
Now Jerome tells us of a famous biblical scholar of the name of Pierius in his De Viris Illustribus c.76:
Pierius, presbyter of the church at Alexandria in the reign of Carus and Diocletian, at the time when Theonas ruled as bishop in the same church, taught the people with great success and attained such elegance of language and published so many treatises on all sorts of subjects (which are still extant) that he was called Origen Junior. He was remarkable for his self-discipline, devoted to voluntary poverty, and thoroughly acquainted with the dialectic art. After the persecution, he passed the rest of his life at Rome. There is extant a long treatise of his, On the prophet Hosea which from internal evidence appears to have been delivered on the vigil of Passover.
Eusebius in his Church History book 7 c. 32 mentions him:
Among those nearest our times, we have known Pierius, of the presbyters in Alexandria, and Meletius, bishop of the churches in Pontus, – rarest of men. The first was distinguished for his life of extreme poverty and his philosophic learning, and was exceedingly diligent in the contemplation and exposition of divine things, and in public discourses in the church. Meletius, whom the learned called the “honey of Attica,” was a man whom every one would describe as most accomplished in all kinds of learning; and it would be impossible to admire sufficiently his rhetorical skill. It might be said that he possessed this by nature; but who could surpass the excellence of his great experience and erudition in other respects? For in all branches of knowledge had you undertaken to try him even once, you would have said that he was the most skillful and learned. Moreover, the virtues of his life were not less remarkable. We observed him well in the time of the persecution, when for seven full years he was escaping from its fury in the regions of Palestine.
He is also mentioned by Photius (Bibliotheca 119), who had ten of his homilies before him, and who quotes him. There is also something among the fragments of Philip of Side. Palladius in the Lausiac History cc. 12 and 143 tells us that the hermit Ammonius, in the Nitrian desert recited numerous passages of his writing, and St Silvia of Aquitaine on her pilgrimage to the Holy Land studied his commentaries.
Further details can be found in the article by G. Fritz in the old Dictionaire de théologie catholique 12.2 (1935), col. 1744-6 (Online here). This suggests that Pierius may indeed have spent his final years at Rome, either to avoid the very long and severe persecution at Alexandria, or else to avoid the “decidedly anti-Origenist” Patriarch Peter I, who had succeeded the more tolerant Theonas in 300 and who travelled rather than be martyred. When the DTC article was written, the Bodmer papyrus was still unknown, so it is interesting to see this opinion.
The discovery of the Bodmer papyrus therefore alters our perception of this man. In Barns and Chadwick, “A letter ascribed to Peter of Alexandria” JTS NS 24 (1973) 443-455 (JSTOR), we find:
It was natural for the church to remember with pride the names and ‘birthdays’ of the martyrs who had died in the great persecution, and equally natural that the names of apostates were not recorded. Lapse, whether by preference or by weakness, had taken them out of the community, and there could be nothing but grief and embarrassment in the later recall of their concession to diabolical forces. No one had a motive for advertising their number or even existence. There was every reason to hush up the awkward facts, especially if the apostate had been a divine of some eminence like Pierius.2 Poor Pierius had to leave Alexandria and spend the rest of his days in quiet obscurity somewhere in Rome, which was a large enough place to get lost in.
The footnote reads:
2. His lapse is now certain from the Bodmer papyrus of the Acts of S. Phileas. At his trial Phileas was told ‘You have killed many men by not sacrificing: Pierius saved many by submitting’. See Herbert Musurillo, The Acts of the Christian Martyrs (1972), pp. 330-1. Jerome (de vir. inl. 76) says that ‘after the persecution Pierius lived the rest of his life in Rome’. In view of Pierius’ lapse it is remarkable that there was a church named after him at Alexandria, mentioned in the list given by Epiphanius (Panarion 69. 2. 4. Ill p. 153 Holl). Perhaps the existence of this church (perhaps a house-church that was originally the private property of Pierius himself?) may have made possible the later legend that Pierius was martyred in the persecution, attested in the Latin martyrologies of Ado (PL vol. 123, col. 390, for 4 Nov.) and Usuard (p. 335 Dubois) and also in Photius (Bibl. cod. 118 and 119).
That sounds rather plausible, but does the evidence stack up? Reducing the claim to bullet-points, we end up with this:
- One version – only – of the Acts of Phileas says a certain Pierius “conformed”. We may reasonably assume this means “sacrificed.”
- This Pierius must be the famous one.
- Jerome tells us that the famous Pierius left Alexandria and spent the end of his life in Rome.
That’s a wee bit feeble for my liking.
Everything depends on whether we think that the “Pierius” must be the exegete, and whether the editor of the Acts had this information, or whether it was inserted for other reasons. I find it hard to think of Jerome endorsing someone who sacrificed without mentioning it. The bitter Origenist disputes, which started from 400 onwards, might put Pierius, as “Origen the Younger”, very much in the cross-hairs. Jerome was an anti-Origenist. The editor of the Bodmer version of the Acts of Phileas may have been also, depending on when this version was created.
I suspect that a single word in a single edition of a later hagiographical text is perhaps not enough evidence to show that Pierius did sacrifice.