Plautus: Pseudolus — When Rome’s Cleverest Liar Meets the Only Truth-Teller

In April of 191 BC, at the newly dedicated Temple of Magna Mater on the Palatine Hill, Roman audiences roared with laughter at a slave who bragged that he would out-scheme his own master. Plautus named his hero Pseudolus, “the Liar” or “Lie-man,” and the playwright built an entire comedy around the premise that deception, cunning, and fraud are not merely permissible but praiseworthy when performed with enough style. Calidorus needs twenty minae to buy his beloved Phoenicium from the pimp Ballio before a Macedonian officer claims her first. Pseudolus, the household slave, vows to supply both the money and the girl through pure trickery, and the play crowns him for succeeding. Scripture gives believers an entirely different vantage point from which to read this comedy. The God of Israel and the church is a God who “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2), and He calls His people to a life of truthful speech that mirrors His own character. Reading Pseudolus as a Christian, then, is not an exercise in nostalgia for a distant world of Roman festival theater. It is an opportunity to see, in sharp relief, exactly what the gospel rescues humanity from.

Literary Backgrounds: Greek and Roman Connections

Pseudolus belongs to the fabula palliata, the distinctly Roman genre that adapted Greek New Comedy—chiefly the work of Menander, Philemon, and Diphilus—into Latin dress for Roman civic festivals. Plautus inherited the stock cast of Greek domestic comedy: the clever slave, the lovesick young man, the greedy pimp, the anxious father, the boastful soldier. Yet he Romanized these figures thoroughly, embedding them in Roman legal and social categories such as patria potestas, the stipulatio contract, and the institution of the leno. The play’s most striking literary achievement is its constant reach for epic grandeur. Pseudolus compares his scheme against Ballio to the Greek sack of Troy, casting himself as a new Ulysses storming the gates of an enemy city. He even describes himself, in his own Act One monologue, as a poet who takes up blank tablets and calls into being what did not exist before. Plautus is having his slave-hero claim the authority of Homer’s warrior-kings and the creative power of the poet himself, all in service of a scheme to steal a prostitute and swindle a pimp. The comedy works precisely because the gap between epic pretension and squalid content is so enormous.

▶ Play on YouTube

Theological and Ethical Analysis

Beneath the laughter lies a worldview worth examining soberly. Pseudolus does not present deceit as a regrettable necessity; it presents deceit as the highest form of human excellence. The slave’s lies are not merely tolerated by the plot, they are celebrated as artistry, and the play’s final act rewards Pseudolus with wealth, freedom of movement, and even authority over his own master. Human beings fare no better than the truth does. Phoenicium is a commodity throughout, purchased, deposited upon, and fought over by men who never once ask what she herself desires. The early church recognized this danger in Roman theater with remarkable clarity. Tertullian warned believers away from the spectacula precisely because such entertainments trained the soul to delight in what God condemns, and Augustine confessed in his own retrospective grief that as a young man he wept at fictional sorrows on the Carthaginian stage while remaining hard toward his own sins. Clement of Alexandria likewise cautioned that the theater shapes the imagination toward vice even when no literal crime is committed by the viewer. Christians reading Pseudolus today can appreciate its craftsmanship while refusing, with the fathers, to let its inverted values reorder the conscience.

Old Testament Analysis and Critique

The contrast between Pseudolus and the Old Testament could hardly be sharper. Israel’s covenant God is defined by אֱמֶת, emet, unshakable truthfulness, and Proverbs 12:22 states plainly that lying lips are a תּוֹעֵבָה, a to’evah, an abomination to the LORD, while those who deal in truth are His delight. Proverbs 12:17 sets the righteous witness who speaks truth directly against the false witness who speaks שֶׁקֶר, sheker, deceit, and the wisdom tradition treats truthful speech as the very foundation of a functioning community. Plautus builds his comedy on exactly the value Proverbs condemns. The Law is equally direct about the human trafficking that structures Ballio’s entire household. Exodus 21:16 prescribes death for anyone who kidnaps and sells a person, and Leviticus 25:39-43 forbids an Israelite master from ruling over a servant with be-pharech, harshness, because every Israelite ultimately belongs to the LORD who redeemed them from Egypt. Phoenicium’s fate as an object of sale and rental is precisely the abuse the Torah moved to restrain. Where Pseudolus rewards the schemer and commodifies the vulnerable, the Old Testament binds truthful speech and human dignity together as reflections of the character of God Himself.

The Skeptic

The Skeptic
“…But the new rebel is a Skeptic, and will not entirely trust anything.
 He has no loyalty; therefore he can never be really a revolutionist.
 And the fact that he doubts everything really gets in his way when he wants to denounce anything. For all denunciation implies a moral doctrine of some kind; and the modern revolutionist doubts not only the institution he denounces, but the doctrine by which he denounces it.

Thus he writes one book complaining that imperial oppression insults the purity of women, and then he writes another book (about the sex problem) in which he insults it himself.

He curses the Sultan because Christian girls lose their virginity, and then curses Mrs. Grundy because they keep it.

As a politician, he will cry out that war is a waste of life, and then, as a philosopher, that all life is waste of time.

A Russian pessimist will denounce a policeman for killing a peasant, and then prove by the highest philosophical principles that the peasant ought to have killed himself.

A man denounces marriage as a lie, and then denounces aristocratic profligates for treating it as a lie.

He calls a flag a bauble, and then blames the oppressors of Poland or Ireland because they take away that bauble.

The man of this school goes first to a political meeting, where he complains that savages are treated as if they were beasts; then he takes his hat and umbrella and goes on to a scientific meeting, where he proves that they practically are beasts.

In short, the modern revolutionist, being an infinite skeptic, is always engaged in undermining his own mines. In his book on politics he attacks men for trampling on morality; in his book on ethics he attacks morality for trampling on men.
 Therefore the modern man in revolt has become practically useless for all purposes of revolt.
 By rebelling against everything he has lost his right to rebel against anything…”
G. K. Chesterton

Natural and Moral Authority

Natural and Moral Authority

Natural authority is controlled by natural laws that cannot be violated because all actions have consequences. Human beings have the freedom and power to choose, so they have power over the rest of creation.

Moral authority is the principled use of our power to choose, so that we tap into nature when we follow principles in our actions and relationships.

Natural laws (like gravity) and principles (like respect, honesty, integrity, kindness, service and fairness) control the consequences of our choices. We choose our actions but we don’t choose the consequences of those actions; they are determined by natural laws and principles. By the principled, humble use of freedom and power, the humble person obtains moral authority.

Values are social norms, and are personal, emotional, subjective and arguable. The question we must ask ourselves is, “Are my values based on principles?”

Consequences are governed by principles; behavior is governed by values; therefore, value principles.

Moral vertigo occurs when your values are not based on principles, resulting in a loss of what is true and important. You must take the time and effort to center yourself and anchor your values on changeless principles.

The key task is to determine where “True North” is and then align everything with that. Otherwise, you will live with the inevitable consequences of bad choices. Moral authority requires the sacrifice of short-term selfish interests and the exercise of courage in the subordinating social values to principles.


From Steven Covey, The 8th Habit.

Personality vs. Character Ethics

The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People
by Stephen R. Covey
New York: Simon & Schuster, 1989


Personality vs. Character Ethics

There have been two dominant theories of achieving success in the literature of the past 200 years, the personality ethic and the character ethic. The personality ethic has been in the forefront since World War I. Previously, the character ethic was dominant. According to the character ethic, it is most important to focus on integrating the principles of effective living into one’s character. This may be a long-term process, but working on the character, including an effective view of the world, is getting at the root from which behavior flows and so is fundamental. The character ethic sees individual development as a long-term process bearing results according to the law of the harvest.

According to the personality ethic, there are skills and techniques one may learn and a public image, personality and attitudes one may develop that result in success. The problem is, eventually we may be discovered as insincere and shallow. These ideas may be helpful when they flow naturally from a good character and the right motives, but they are secondary.

A paradigm is a model, theory or explanation of something else. It is the “lens” of our preconceived notions through which we view the world. If our paradigm is not close to reality, our attitudes, behaviors and responses will not be effective or appropriate. We will be as lost as a person trying to function in Chicago with a map of New York. We can only accomplish quantum improvement in our lives if we accomplish a paradigm shift resulting in a more accurate paradigm shift resulting in a more accurate paradigm shift and effective view of the world. Some paradigm shifts may be fast (a blinding fl ash of the obvious), some are more slow (a change in character). The Seven Habits is a principle-centered paradigm. Principles are guidelines for human conduct that are proven to have enduring, permanent value — they are fundamental.

Loving the Good

St. Augustine said, "The good man is not he who knows what is good, but loves it." And when one truly loves what is good, he does what is good out of desire not duty. Only this kind of love is able to overcome the errors of human love.

When we love God, not for what he has done for us, but for who he is, holy, righteous, merciful, kind, etc., and we love our neighbor with this divine love, we will do what is right. St. Augustine said, "Love and do what you will." When we love in this way our will is conformed to the will of God, so that all we will to do is according to God's will. In this way, the law is fulfilled in us.

God' Politics

Jim Wallis, founder to Sojourners magazine and national Christian speaker has written a powerful call to American Christians to evaluate their position on social issues in his book, God's Politics: Why the right gets it wrong and and left doesn't get it.

The way the church can be the most effective is to not be ideologically partisan or tied to one political party. When we raise issues of moral rights and justice we will challenge both parties. Religion is not rooted in rights but in the image of God.

A biblical understanding of evil and the fallenness of man will make us wary of concentrated political or economic power. The abuse of such power is something we should speak out against.

Our faith should exude compassion and justice. These are values that should drive the education of our children as well.

Our religious congregations are not meant to be social organizations that merely reflect the wider culture's values, but dynamic counter-cultural communities whose purpose is to reshape both lives and societies.

In recent history there has been a rise in secular fundamentalism in response to the growth on religious fundamentalism. But both religious and secular fundamentalism are dangerous they deny the foundations of a democratic society. Religious fundamentalists try to force a theocracy on everyone else while secular fundamentalists try to eradicate morals and values from public life, destroying the very foundation of democracy.

"No one gets to heaven without a letter of reference from the poor." How you treat the poor determines the genuineness of your faith. Jesus himself said he would judge the world based on their treatment of the poor, hungry, homeless, imprisoned and needy.

How should Christians respond to the terrorist attacks of 9/11? What do Jesus' words, "Bless those who hate you, and pray for those who persecute you" have to do with our response to terrorism? To say that THEY are evil while WE are good is both bad theology and leads to dangerous foreign policy. Loving your enemies does not mean submitting to their terrorism or hostile intentions. But it does mean we must treat them as human beings who have been created in the image of God. The threat of terrorism does not overthrow Christian ethics. We must respond biblically and not give in to anger, revenge or expediency. The "Myth of Redemptive Violence" has taken over much of our political discourse. We actually believe that violence can save us. As Christians, we cannot buy into this ideology.

Evangelical Christians then to be selective on their moral and ethical issues, picking and choosing those issues which are helpful for our political agenda while ignoring those that harmful for our political ends. Sexual and family issues are only one part of morality and ethics; there is also the issues of social justice that need to be taken into account. Questioning the religious right does not make you a religious leftist.

We cannot change our society by merely replacing one politician who is swayed by the wind of public opinion by another politician who also is swayed by the wind of public opinion. We can change society, not by changing the politicians, but by changing the wind. We need to change the social context in which political decisions are being made. Societies have been changed by movements with a spiritual foundation.

Poverty and social unrest is the result of a lack of vision. Where there is no vision, the people perish because they cast off restraint. Until we have a clear vision of social justice we will never defeat poverty and social injustice.

God is personal but never private. Private religion tries to avoid the consequences of public faith. Affluent nations tend to mainly Christians who have only a private faith because the public expression of faith would put the rich person in a dangerous social and economic position.

Today, religion serves to silence the politics of God than to announce it to the nations. In the Old Testament, however, the prophets publicly announced the Word of the Lord to the nation. What was the content of their message? Quite secular topics really. Land, labor, capital, wages, debt, equity, taxes, homes,courts, prisons, immigrants, other races and peoples, economic divisions, social justice, war and peace. This is the stuff of politics. To whom were the prophets often speaking? Usually to rulers, kings, judges, employers, landlords, owners of property and wealth, and religious leaders. The powerful were most often the prophets' target audience. The prophets most often spoke on behalf of the dispossessed, the poor, the widows, the orphans, the homeless and the helpless.

God does not call for class warfare, but only desires the common good, equality and justice.

God is personal, and without a personal God there is no personal dimension to faith, and thus, no spiritual transformation. However, this personal God is never private. God is very public, and to deny the public God is to deny biblical faith itself. Exclusively private faith degenerates into a very narrow religion, and its adherents become obsessed with sexual morality to the exclusion of public social justice. Private faith then becomes merely a cultural religion focusing almost exclusively on assurance of self-righteousness.

Week after week we pass by the poor and needy, yet in our congregations and fail to offer a searing indictment of our society which has become a nation of endangered souls that is governed by values that are quite foreign to our religious convictions. We are failing to be a prophetic voice in our nation and have fallen far short of what God intends for us to be, no matter how religious we like to think we are. We merely have a religiosity that is characterized by privatized belief systems, void of the prophetic and social witness of Jesus and the prophets, offering nothing more than small "s" spirituality, that is really no more than ad hoc wish-fulfillment or a collection of self-help techniques we use to take the edge off our materialistic lives. What if we made the values expressed by Jesus and the prophets a litmus test for our political candidates, social agendas, and foreign policy? A personal God demands public justice as an act of worship.

Protests are not enough. We must offer a better alternative. Protests must be instructive to succeed. They must illuminate and educate society about the ills one is protesting. Protests must not be destructive but constructive, not merely complaining but offering creative alternatives. Protests should not only denounce what is but open the way for change by offering constructive and useful alternatives. When protest is both instructive and constructive society must deal with it.

We must not underestimate the power of evil and the brutality of evil people. When the peace movement is soft on the problems it will be seen as weak. To avoid war we must have realistic plans to deal with the real problems and solve the underlying issues. These peaceful alternatives must be more effective than war.

Just decrying the facts of poverty is not enough to end poverty. In a global economy it is easy to overlook the poor because we really don't need them. But God calls us to care for the poor because they are made in his image. The question is not whether faith should influence society but how faith should influence society.

For a social movement to succeed it must be spiritually based and politically independent. It will attempt to change political structures while not being tied to one political party or system. The focus needs to be on grassroots outside the political system and working towards the inside instead of trying to get political power and work from the inside out. We need to persuade the general public by moral argument that is lived out instead of trying to force a political agenda from the top down.

Many politicians use scripture and biblical phrases to gain support from Christians. But it is dangerous to use biblical prooftexting to support a political ideology. Don't ask if God is on your side but if you are on God's side.

Much of religion today is driven by fear, especially fear of losing the faith. Much rhetoric coming from religious leaders is histrionic and tries to motivate Christians to support a particular political agenda out of fear. However, the best response to bad religion is not to get rid of religion or secularism but to replace it with good religion. While there are many bad interpretations of the Bible, the answer is not to get rid of the Bible but to promote better interpretations.

Not only are there religious fundamentalists in America, but now there is a growing number of secular fundamentalists. Biblical faith is not merely to comfort believers but to transform the world. Such transformation must always be done in a way that enhances democracy and personal freedom. Religious faith should serve the common good.

Biblical Christianity has always had difficulty with the concept of empire. Until the time of Constantine, the church was persecuted by the empire and the church critiqued and sought to change the empire. However, when the church became equated with the empire Christianity changed and became the persecutor and resistant to critique and change. Today, as we once again embrace the concept of empire, it is easy to vilify the enemy and claim to be on the side of good, but repentance is much better.

Blessed are the peace-MAKERS not the peace-LOVERS. Christians need to develop new and creative systems of non-violent resistance patterned after those which have proven to be effective in the past. Humility is essential for peacemaking, while self-righteousness is politically destructive.

Is there a Christian alternative to empire? Peace and security are not found in military supremacy and economic dominance. The prophet Isaiah proclaimed that peace and security come from social justice and economic fairness. If you want peace, work for justice. There is no global security apart from local and common security. No one will be secure until everyone is secure. There is no national security without global security and there is no individual security apart from collective security. Fear leads to violence; take away the fear and you will take away the violence.

Taking care of the poor and needy is central to the Bible. As Christians, we must be committed to helping the poor and downtrodden.

Politicians find a problem and publicize it, then they make the public afraid of it, blame the problem on their opponent, then use it to win an election. After they get elected, they ignore the problem and do nothing about it.

Poverty is a spiritual and religious issue, not a left-wing political issue. Economic poverty is often associated with spiritual poverty. However, affluence often masks moral and spiritual poverty. This is clearly demonstrated in the many school shootings around our country where white, suburban,middle class students from two parent homes perpetrated horrible violence against their peers. So, the problems of poverty are not just political but also spiritual and religious.

Ignoring the poor has distorted the theology of the church in affluent nations. This neglect and distortion has made any prophetic role for these churches impossible.

Budgets are moral documents.

Bill Gates Sr. said, "I believe that one's obligation to society grows in proportion to how much one has benefitted."

We have the knowledge, expertise, technology and resources to solve the problems of poverty and poor health of the world; the problem is that we simply don't want to. The political will does not exist. In the nineteenth century you could argue that it was inadequate science, knowledge, technology and resources, but that is not true of today. The real barrier is indifference.

Racism isn't natural; it must be taught. Racism serves a purpose; it keeps certain people down so other people can succeed, and it also is an effective way to blame one's social and economic problems on a different group. While racism originally had an economic motive it touches every part of our lives and society.

As Christians, we must be separate from our culture. If the culture around you doesn't work, don't buy it; create your own.

Change is a real prospect. We can experience change in our lives, families, communities, nations, and the world. That's the promise of faith, and that's what makes change possible.

The prophets always start out with condemnation and social critique but end with hope. Hope is not a feeling but a choice. Hope is a decision that is based on your deepest beliefs. Hope is not a naive wish but a choice with your eyes wide open.

It is important to remember to enjoy the world while you are out changing it. God has given us life as a gift and he wants us to enjoy it and help others enjoy it. That is what drives us to bring social change to to the world.

The Illusionist

The Illusionist was a well made, well performed movie with a stirring ending. It was a romantic story, with a near epic struggle between a man of ignoble birth, Eisenheim, and the crown prince, Leopold, for the love of a duchess, Sophie. Eisenheim’s strong love for Sophie drive him to use his magic in some very creative ways to fool the crown prince and escape with his life-long love. The magic he performs seems almost impossible given the historical setting, but a man with extreme ingenuity possibly could have pulled it off. The death scene reminded me more of a modern Hollywood style trick than a possible maneuver by a nineteenth century magician. The gullibility of people was much greater since they had not been exposed to so much modern special effects as we have.

In the end, the hero wins the maiden and the evil villain is thwarted, ruined and commits suicide. The death of the crown prince is portrayed in such a positive light, I found myself unconsciously applauding his demise. But after some reflection, I had to ask myself a few questions. Did Eisenheim know that the crown prince would commit suicide? Probably not. Is Eisenheim in some way responsible for his death? Probably. As a Christian, can I agree that his actions were noble and righteous? No. Would it be ethical for me to do a similar thing? No. While the crown prince was evil and threatened the happiness of both Sophie and Eisenheim, resorting to fraud and deception that ends in suicide is questionable at best.

So, I was reminded that I must be careful whenever watching a movie to evaluate my responses to the story and not just let the producer sway my thinking and feeling unchallenged. This is especially important for movies since film is such a emotional medium that has incredible power to influence our thinking. It is often not the rational arguments of teachers and preachers that shape our worldview and mindset but the popular culture, through music and videos. It is imperative that we challenge the messages we are receiving from our culture and subject them to scrutiny by the Word of God.