SUICIDE: A THEOLOGICAL APPROACH. Part 3

 A Historical Theology of Suicide

Suicide in the Patristic period (AD 100 to 500)

There was no sustained theological reflection on suicide during the early patristic period. One proposed reason for this silence is the assumption that suicide was fundamentally incompatible with the Christian moral framework. As such, it was not initially treated as a pressing ethical or theological issue requiring explicit engagement. The act was implicitly regarded as untenable for a believer.

This changed with the work of Lactantius (c. 240–320), who, in his apologetic writings against pagan philosophy, offered a more explicit condemnation of suicide. He characterized it as not merely a sin, but a greater crime than homicide. Lactantius argued that the person who dies by suicide is guilty of murder and, more significantly, of usurping the divine prerogative, since God alone is the giver and taker of life (Roberts et al., 2022). In Divine Institutes, he writes:

“For if a homicide is guilty because he is a destroyer of man, he who puts himself to death is under the same guilt, because he puts to death a man. Yea, that crime may be considered to be greater, the punishment of which belongs to God alone. For as we did not come into this life of our own accord; so, on the other hand, we can only withdraw from this habitation of the body… by the command of Him who placed us in this body…”

Similarly, in The Epitome of the Divine Institutes, he continues:

“…he who put himself to death is guilty of murder, according to the divine right and law… Therefore, it is to be considered impious to wish to depart from it without the command of God… And if anyone shall apply impious hands to that work and shall tear asunder the bonds of the divine workmanship, he endeavours to flee from God, whose sentence no one will be able to escape, whether alive or dead.”

Lactantius’ view became formative for the early Church, and subsequent theologians largely followed his logic. The orthodox consensus that emerged maintained that suicide was incompatible with Christian discipleship, primarily because Scripture prohibits murder—and self-killing was understood as a form of murder.

However, prior to Augustine, there was at least one noteworthy exception. Church Fathers such as Jerome (c. 347–420), renowned for translating the Latin Vulgate, and Ambrose of Milan (c. 340–397), permitted suicide in limited cases. Specifically, they affirmed that virgins or married women who died by suicide to avoid sexual violation could be seen as acting virtuously (Amundsen, 1989). In these rare instances, suicide was framed not as sinful, but as a tragic form of martyrdom or self-preservation of spiritual purity.

The zenith of patristic teaching on suicide came in the work of St. Augustine (Blázquez, 1985). Although some have suggested that Augustine did not extensively treat suicides motivated by cowardice, despair, or contempt for life—what we might now call psychological suicides—he decisively rejected the concept of the so-called noble suicide often valorised in classical literature (Adamiak & Dohnalik, 2023; Chabi, 2020). His most extended discussion of suicide appears in The City of God, where he explores five common justifications for suicide, drawn from both pagan and Christian contexts: to escape temporal suffering (e.g., torture, poverty, illness), to prevent another’s sin (e.g., sexual assault), out of despair for past sins, to attain a better afterlife, or to avoid future sin. Augustine ultimately rejects them all (Schaff, 1890; Blázquez, 1985; Amundsen, 1989; Ortiz, 2019; Blázquez, 1985).

Contrary to many of his contemporaries, Augustine did not regard the suicide of Christian women—who believed death preferable to sexual assault—as virtuous or heroic. Although he showed considerable understanding of the psychological distress that may drive such actions and treated this as a mitigating factor in moral judgment (Ortiz, 2019), he held that:

“…a woman who has been violated by the sin of another, and without any consent of her own, has no cause to put herself to death; much less has she cause to commit suicide in order to avoid such violation, for in that case she commits certain homicide to prevent a crime which is uncertain as yet, and not her own”

Thus, her virtue, Augustine maintained, remains intact regardless of the violence she has suffered. Therefore, suicide even to prevent such an act was not justified, since that would be sinful. 

While maintaining a strict theological position, Augustine nonetheless displayed a degree of pastoral insight and psychological understanding. He acknowledged that the weight of affliction can cloud judgment and contribute to desperate decisions, even while insisting that such suffering does not excuse taking one’s own life. His willingness to engage this complexity suggests a nuanced moral framework—one that holds firmly to Christian doctrine while recognizing the human burden of anguish.

In other writings, Augustine confronted the Donatists, a contemporary Christian sect that appeared to conflate suicide with martyrdom. This concern was not entirely new; Clement of Alexandria had earlier drawn a clear distinction between suicide and true martyrdom, asserting that genuine martyrs do not actively pursue death but submit to it in obedience when divinely called (Amundsen, 1989). Augustine affirmed this distinction in several of his letters, emphasizing that martyrdom must be an expression of love (caritas) and patient endurance (patientia), not despair or defiance. 

He viewed suicide—particularly when ideologically framed as martyrdom—as a profound moral and theological error. Drawing on core theological principles, Augustine insisted that God alone is sovereign over life and death, and that to take one’s own life is to usurp divine prerogative. Suicide, he argued, was a form of murder and thus a direct violation of the divine commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” (Exod. 20:13). In his view, this applied universally—even to oneself—because life is not ours to dispose of. Against the Donatists, Augustine maintained that such acts distorted the Church’s witness, placing ideology above obedience and schism above unity. 

Suicide in the Medieval period (500 to 1500)

Following in the Augustinian tradition, in the medieval Church, suicide was met with strict censure. The Synod of Braga (536) denied full burial rites to those who died by suicide. The Council of Auxerre (578) forbade the Church from receiving offerings made on their behalf. The Synod of Toledo (693) ruled that those who attempted suicide should be excluded from church practices. Later, the Synod of Nîmes (1284) prohibited burial in consecrated ground for such individuals. As a result, suicides were often buried just outside churchyard walls, a stigma for the family they left behind. (Stein, 2025). It appears however that there were some considerations given for those who “lost their mind because of a temptation or they killed themselves out of madness”. In this case, mass which otherwise was prohibited for victims of suicide can be said (Adamiak and Dohnalik, 2023).

Thomas Aquinas, one of the foremost theologians of the medieval period, reaffirmed Augustine’s view by emphasizing God’s exclusive prerogative and sovereignty over life and death. Accordingly, Aquinas regarded suicide as a mortal sin directly against God. A key insight from Aquinas is his recognition that suicide is also a sin against the human community. He highlighted the profound negative impact suicide has on society, as it disrupts the social order and wounds those left behind. Furthermore, Aquinas extended the theological discussion by classifying suicide as a mortal sin—that is, a grave sin that, without repentance, results in the loss of divine grace and is unforgivable (Aquinas, 1947).

Suicide in the Protestant period (1500 to 1700)

The Protestant Reformation did not bring about a significant shift in views on suicide. While the Reformers, particularly Martin Luther, sought to recover what they saw as a more biblically faithful Augustinian soteriology and ecclesiology—correcting perceived distortions in medieval theology—the moral stance toward suicide remained largely consistent with earlier Christian tradition. 

A Dutch theologian, K Exalto in his review of the reformation period noted that while certain reformation theologians such as John Bunyan ( of Pligrim’s progress fame) asserted unequivocally that those who die by suicide are eternally lost, many leading figures —deliberately refrained from issuing definitive judgments on the eternal fate of those who died by suicide (Bilkes, 1988). Their pastoral hesitation reflected a theological humility before the mystery of divine judgment and an awareness of the complex spiritual and psychological afflictions that could lead someone to such an act.

Martin Luther did not classify suicide as a mortal sin in the Roman Catholic sense, primarily because he believed that those who died by suicide were overcome by the devil, like a man overpowered and murdered by a robber in the forest. In such cases, Luther saw the act less as a wilful rebellion and more as a tragic defeat and an example of the devil’s power.

Despite this pastoral sympathy, Luther still upheld the prevailing social and legal customs regarding the treatment of the bodies of those who died by suicide. He also supported the enforcement of existing legal penalties against those who survived suicide attempts, hoping that such deterrents might prevent others from following suit. Nevertheless, Luther did not presume the eternal damnation of those who died by suicide. Instead, he left their final judgment to the mercy of God, allowing for the possibility that such individuals might yet be saved despite the tragic circumstances of their death.

John Calvin generally held similar views, although he did not speak explicitly about suicide. In his seminal work, Institutes of the Christian Religion, while reflecting on the hope of the life to come, he emphasized that believers should long for heaven yet not despise this present life. Rather, they are to live joyfully and gratefully, remaining at their post like faithful soldiers until the Lord calls them home (Calvin, 1996).

A note from John Calvin, dated January 23, 1545 preserved at the International Museum of the Reformation in Geneva, records his visit to a man who had twice stabbed himself in the stomach. Calvin describes questioning the man about his motives, urging him to repent, entrust himself to God’s grace, and accept medical care—all while offering pastoral admonition (International Museum of the Reformation, 2025).

Suicide in the Modern period (1700 till present day)

By the nineteenth century, Émile Durkheim published the first systematic study of suicide. In his seminal work Le Suicide, he used statistical methods to demonstrate that suicide rates varied across Germany, with lower rates in Catholic regions compared to Protestant ones. This trend had already been noted by Morselli in 1881 and was later confirmed by Durkheim (Stein, 2025). Although neither Morselli nor Durkheim were theologians, their research highlighted that many individuals who died by suicide were likely suffering from mental illness at the time of the act.

In the modern period, Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer have been identified as particularly clear and thoughtful voices on the subject of suicide (Creedy, 2015). Bonhoeffer(2012), in particular, emphasized the futility of addressing suicide through legal or moral prohibition—whether imposed by the secular state or by framing it solely as a mortal sin. He observed that individuals contemplating suicide are often beyond the reach of such appeals to personal strength or dutyas these only worsen their despair. Instead, he pointed to the necessity of the gracious call of God—the invitation to faith and the promise of a new life no longer sustained by one’s own resources, but entirely by God’s sustaining grace.

He also recognized the deep complexity of suicide and warned against hasty moral judgments. He opposed suicides driven by what he viewed as self-centered motives—where the act serves to preserve the self rather than protect another, seeing them as a failure to trust the God who can redeem even a broken or seemingly wasted life. Yet he also acknowledged the silent despair of believers wearied by unfulfilled lives. In such cases, he believed that no law—human or divine—can ultimately prevent the act. Only the sustaining grace of God, accompanied by the prayers of fellow Christians, can offer true comfort and hope (Pietsch, 2023). 

Karl Barth, in his Church Dogmatics affirmed the historic Christian view of suicide as incompatible with Christian ethics. Grateful to Bonhoeffer for his earlier work in this area, Barth reiterates the usurpation of the divine prerogative that underlies suicide, and like Bonhoeffer disagreed with the medieval view of suicide as an unforgiveable sin. He held that people are not defined in the eyes of God by their final moments, but by the entire lives that they lived. And God’s judgement according to Barth is according to his own righteousness, which is mercy. Nevertheless, he felt that God’s forgiveness should not be an excuse or a justification for suicide which he maintains is a sin.

In addition, Barth recognised that those who die by suicide are often deeply afflicted and overwhelmed. In such a condition, typical deterrents—moral arguments, biblical injunctions, or social and cultural norms—lose their power. For the person in despair, from whom “God is hid as his God,” such appeals ring hollow. They cannot withstand the temptation to act as sovereign over their bleak existence. However, Barth believed that only the Gospel—the grace of God, the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and God’s sovereign “Yes” to human life—can meet this darkness. This divine affirmation, which overrules all human “Nos,” in his view makes suicide impossible where it is truly heard and received.

Disclaimer

Suicide is a very sensitive topic. If you or someone you know is struggling, please reach out for help immediately.

In Nigeria: SURPIN (Suicide Research and Prevention initiative). 08000787746/ https://www.surpinng.com/

ASIDO Foundation: sms:+2349028080416/ tel:+2349028080416/ asidofoundation.com

MANI (Mentally Aware Nigeria Initiative): https://mentallyaware.org/contact/

In other parts of the World, please contact your local mental health or emergency service providers