Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T07:29:07.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward a Social Interpretation of Early Christian Apologetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Robert L. Wilken
Robert L. Wilken
Affiliation:
Mr. Wilken is assistant professor of the history of Christianity inFordham University, Bronx, New York. A revised form of his article will appear in The Catacombs and the Colosseum: The Early Roman Empire as Background of Primitive Christianity edited by S. Benko and J. O'Rourke, to be published in 1971 by Judson Press
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

How did Christianity appear to men and women of the GrecoRoman world when it first began to emerge into public view? What ideas and conceptions were present within Roman “social thought” to identify and define a new phenomenon such as Christianity? What did men “see” when they looked at the Christians? In antiquity no one subjected the Christian movement to a social analysis or took a Gallup poll of popular opinions, but there is some evidence from which to gain an impression of how Christianity appeared to outsiders. As a methodological guideline I take the suggestion made by James Gustafson in his Treasure in Earthern Vessels.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , December 1970 , pp. 437 - 458
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Gustafson, James, Treasure in Earthern Vessels (New York: Harper and Bros., 1961), pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

2. Most discussion of Christianity as a collegium, for example, has been concerned with the legal status of Christianity as a corporate body. See Krueger, Gerda, Die Rechtstellung der vorkonstantinischen Kirchen (Stuttgart: F. Enke, 1935)Google Scholar; Bovini, G., La proprietà ecclesiastica (Milan: A. Giuffre, 1948)Google Scholar; de Robertis, F., Il diritto associativo romano (Bari: Lateraza, 1938)Google Scholar.

3. Most recently see Barnard, L. W., Justin Martyr (Cambridge: University Press, 1967)Google Scholar; and Hyldahl, Niels, Philosophie und Christentum. Eine Interpretation der Einleitung zum Dialog Justins (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1966).Google Scholar

4. Pliny, , Natural History 5.70Google Scholar; he does mention the Essenes (5.73).

5. Tacitus, , Annales 15.44Google Scholar; Suetonius, , Claudius 25.3Google Scholar; Nero 16.3; Pliny, ep. 10.96, 97. On pagan attitudes toward the Christians see de Labriolle, Pierre, La Reáction paienne (Paris: L'Artisan du Livre, 1934)Google Scholar; Freudenberger, Rudolf, Das Verhalten der roemischen Behoerden gegen die Christen im 2. Jahrhundert (Muenschen: Beck, 1967)Google Scholar; Fuchs, Harold, “Tacitus ueber die Christen,” Vigiliae Christianae. 4 (1950), 5–93Google Scholar; Dodds, E. H., Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety (Cambridge: University Press, 1964).Google Scholar

6. See Cicero, , de natura deorum 2.72Google Scholar; de legibus 2:15; de clem. 2.3.1: “religio deos colit, superstitio violat.” On superstitio see the matrial collected in Freudenberger, pp. 189–199; also Vogt, Joseph, Zur Religiositaet der Christenverfolger im roemischen Reich (Heidelberg, 1962)Google Scholar; Kaufmann-Buehler, D., in article on Eusebeia in Reallexikon fuer Antike und Christentum, VI, 1016–1020.Google Scholar

7. Plutarch, , de superstitione 169–170a, 168a–b, 171b–fGoogle Scholar (ed. Babbit, pp. 483–5, 473, 591–5). Also Philo. “In the same way too if one adds anything small or great to the queen of virtues piety or on the other hand takes something from it, in either case he will change and transform its nature. Addition will beget superstition and substraction will beget impiety (asebeia) and so piety too is lost to sight, that sun whose rising and shining is a blessing we may well pray for. …” (Spec. leg V, 147–8Google Scholar; ed. Colson, pp. 99–101).

8. Porphyry, , Ad Marcellam 18Google Scholar. On the artistic representation of eusebeia see Klauser, Theodor, “Studien zur Entstehungsgeschichte der christlichen Kunst,” Jahrbuch fuer Antike und Christentum, Vols. I-Ill (Muenster: Aschendorffsehe Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1958.)Google Scholar

9. Seneca, ep. 90.3.

10. De natura deorum 1.3; de legibus 2.15.

11. Minucius, , Octavius 11.6.Google Scholar

12. Contra Celsum 1.9.

13. Justin, , Apol. I, 16.8Google Scholar; Origen, , Contra Celsum 4.27Google Scholar. “But such things [vices] do not exist among Christians, if you examine strictly who is a true Christian or if such sins were to be found, yet at least it would not be among those who assemble for worship and come to the common prayers and are not excluded from them. I admit that perhaps some one of this sort might occasionally be found among the multitude.” (trans. Chadwick, p. 202); Epiphanius, , Panarion I, 2.26Google Scholar; especially 26.4; on the Epiphanius texts concerning gnostic sexual rites see Benko, Stephen, “The Libertine Gnostic Sect of the Phibionites according to Epiphanius,” Vigiliae Christianae, 21 (1967), 103–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Doelger, F. J., “Sacramentum Infanticidii,” Antike und Christentum, IV, 188–228Google Scholar, notes that certain gnostic practices may have given rise to rumors of irnmoraiity among Christians; on opportunists and charlatans see Lucian, , Peregrinus 12–16.Google Scholar

14. Dialogue with Trypho 2. 1–7. For parallels see the preface to the letter of Thessalus to emperor Claudius (or Nero), ed. Boudreaux, Peter, Catalogus codicum astrologorum Graecorum, VIII, 3 (Brussels, 1912), pp. 134–6Google Scholar; also Lucian, , Menip pus 4ffGoogle Scholar. For dim cussion of these passages see Hyldahl, , Philosophie, pp. 148ff.Google Scholar

15. On philosophy during this period see Nock, A. D., Conversion (London: Oxford University Press, 1933)Google Scholar; Rabbow, Paul, Seelenfuehrung. Methodik der Exerzitien in der Antike (Muenchen: Kosel Verlag, 1954)Google Scholar; Malingrey, Anne-Marie, ‘Philosophia.’ Étude d'un groupe de mots dans la littérature grecque des Présocratiques an lVe siécle aprés J.-C. (Paris: Klincksieck, 1961).Google Scholar

16. Persius, 3, 66ff. (Nock, p. 183).

17. Capelle, W., “Diatribe,” Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum III, 990–997.Google Scholar

18. Seneca ep. 90.3 (ed. Gummere II, 395–7); on other philosophers see Nock, pp. 164ff.; Rabbow, pp. 25ff.

19. Rabbow writes. “Der Eingang zum philosophischen Bios war ein schweres inneres Kaempfen zwischen dem alten und dem neuen Leben. Der Weg zur Seelenruhe und zum sittlichen Heil fuehrte durch tiefe Ruhelosigkeit und Leiden, die oft auch ueber die Krisen des Anfangs hinweg dauerten.” (p. 261; also pp. 260–279.) Seneca, ep. 6.1; 90.28.

20. Nock, p. 167; Lucian, , Menippus 3–4Google Scholar; Philoeophies for Sale 20.

21. Bardy, Gustave, “‘Phiosophie’ et “philosophe’ dans le vocabulaire chrétien des premieres siécles,” Revue d'Ascetique et de Mystique, 25 (1949), 97–108Google Scholar. As a result, however, of the apologists the term philosophein sometimes was used to mean “live as a Christian” (Tatian, , Orat. 32–33Google Scholar; Melito, in Eusebius, , Ecclesiastical History [H.E.] 4.26.7)Google Scholar; see Hyldahl, , Philosophie, pp. 235ffGoogle Scholar; and Malingrey, Anne-Marie, Philosophia, p. 120.Google Scholar

22. Dialogue with Trypho 2.3; 3.4; 8.1–2. Justin's phrase is strikingly close to Lucian's “plain solid path in life.” Interestingly Plutarch uses a similar expression when he speaks of escaping from superstition to a life of piety. “But there is no infirmity comprehending such a multitude of errors and emotions, and involving opinions so contradictory, or rather antagonistic, as that of superstition. We must try, therefore to escape it in some way which is both safe and expedient (asphalōs te kai sumpher-ontōs),” de superst. 171f. (ed. Babbit, p. 495).Google Scholar

23. Dial. 110.3.

24. Also Apology I, 21.1Google Scholar; 12.5; II, 15.5; see Kaufmann-Buehler, D., “Eusebeia,” RAC VI, 1014Google Scholar. The preface to Justin's first Apology asks that Christians be examined “with piety” and in a “philosophical fashion.” “Reason requires that those who are truly pious and philosophers should honor and cherish the truth alone, scorning merely to follow the opinions of the ancients if they are worthless. … Since you are called pious and philosophers and guardians of justice and lovers of culture at least give us a hearing and it will appear if you are really such. For in these pages we do not come before you with flattery, or as if making a speech to win your favor, but asking you to give judgment according to strict (akribē) and exact (ekstastikon) inquiry—not moved by prejudice or respect for superstitious men, or by irrational impulse and long established evil rumor, giving a vote which would really be against yourselves.” (I Apol 2.1–3; also Tatian, Or. 42).

25. On Galen see Walzer, Richard, Galen on Jews and Christians (London: Oxford University Press, 1949).Google Scholar

26. According to Eusebius there was a tiny group of Christians centered around Theodotus, a cobbler, and this group was excommunicated because they interpreted the Scriptures philosophically; they “dealt treacherously with the rule of the primitive faith” and “laboriously set out to find a form of syllogism to support their godlessness.” They pursued the study of geometry, admired Aristotle, Theophrastus, and Euclid and “some of them almost worship Galen.” They “corrupt the simple faith of the divine Scripture. …” (H.E. 5.28.13–14; see Walzer, pp. 75ff.)

27. Galen, , de pulsuum differentiis 3.3Google Scholar; 2.4, and fragments from Galen's work on Aristotle's theology and his summary of Plato's Republic. The texts can be found in Walzer, pp. 14–16. On the term diatribē for philosophical school see Lucian, Alexander 5 (Harmon, IV, 182): “You see what sort of school (diatribē) the man I am describing comes from.” On accepting the beliefs of a philosophical school on faith, see Lucian, , Hermotinus 7.Google Scholar

28. Walzer, p. 15.

29. For a discussion of superstition see Contra Celsum 3.29, 79; 4.5. Andresen, Carl, Logos und Nomos (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar shows that Celsus' True Word is, in large measure, a response to Justin.

30. The literature on associations is endless. Still fundamental is Waltzing, Jean, Étude historique sur les corporations professionelles chez les Romains, 4 vols. (Brussels: F. Hayez, 1895–1896)Google Scholar, including texts of the relevant inscriptions. For a more recent discussion with extensive bibliography see de Roberts, F. M., II Fenomeno Associativo nel Mondo Romano (Naples: Liberia Scientifica Editrice, 1955)Google Scholar. For associations in the Eastern provinces of the Roman Empire see Poland, Franz, Geschichte des griechischen Vereinswesens (Leipzig, 1909).Google Scholar

31. Text in Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Vol. XIV, 2,112Google Scholar; trans. Lewis, Napthali and Reinhold, Meyer, Roman Civilization (New York: Harper and Row, 1955), II, 274–5Google Scholar; see also the minutes from the Bacchic society in Athens in 178 A.D. in Inscriptiones Graecae, II 2, 1638Google Scholar; discussed in Tod, M. N., Sidelights on Greek History (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1932), pp. 71ff.Google Scholar

32. Waltzing, p. 332.

33. Pliny, ep. 10.96. See Freudenberger, Das Verhalten for an exhaustive commentary on the letter. Sherwin-White's, A. N. commentary, The Letters of Pliny (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966)Google Scholar, adds nothing new on the question of hetaeria, except to reiterate the point that the legal base for persecutions could not have been the prohibition of illicit collegia.

34. Pliny, ep. 10.33–34.

35. Contra Celsum 1.1; also 8.17, 47. Celsus' phrase, as quoted by Origen, is a translation of collegia illicita as used in Digest 47.22.2Google Scholar; see Krueger, , Rechtssteflung, p. 73Google Scholar, n.l. For a summary of the evidence on Christianity as a collegium, see de Robertis, , II Fenomeno, pp. 99ff.Google Scholar

36. Vita Alex. 49. See the somewhat obscure passage in Tertullian, de ieiunio ad psychicos 13 as well as further evidence in de Robertis, pp. 116ff.

37. Apologeticum 39. On this chapter see especially Krueger, pp. 91ff.; de Robertis, pp. 112ff; Waltzing, J., “Collegia” in Dictionnaire d 'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, III, 2107–40Google Scholar; and Waltzing, J., Tertullian. L'Apoiogetique (Paris, 1919)Google Scholar, ad loo.

38. The key sentence reads: “Edam iam nunc ego ipse negotia Christianae factionis. Corpus sumus de conscientia religionis et disciplinae unitate et spei foedere.” There is no careful commentary on this sentence, and until there is such the three aspects mentioned by Tertullian will remain ambiguous. Factio and corpus, pose no problems; they are regular terms for associations (Krueger, pp. 86, 92ff.). For similarities between Apol. 39 and Digest 47.22.1 see Monti, G. M., La corporarione nell'eve antico e nell'alto medio evo (Bari: G Laterza and figli, 1934), I, 284–85Google Scholar; also Hardy, E. G., Christianity and the Roman Government (London: Longmans, Green, 1894), p. 145Google Scholar. Conscientia probably refers to moral sense, as in Apol. 9.6; 15.7; 29.1; 39.6, but conscientia religionis is ambiguous, unless religio here means “scrupulous”in the sense of scrupulously carrying out duties. On disciplina see Morel, V., “Disciplina. Le Mot et 1'ideé representée par lui dans les oeuvres de Tertullien,” Revue d 'Histoire Ecciesiastique, 40 (1944–1945), 5–46Google Scholar; idem, “Diseiplina” in RAC III, 1224–1229Google Scholar. The term seems here to have the connotation of “teaching,” i.e. in connection with a philosophical school as a teaching accompanied by a way of life, and perhaps “order” in sense of regulated. Perhaps this phrase might be translated: “with a disciplined union.” Spes is the only theological term, but with foedus the meaning is again unclear. Whether Tertullian means anything more by foedus than “bond” is doubtful. I am indebted for some of my remarks here to a seminar paper on chapter 39 of the Apologeticum written by W. Harrington at Fordham University.

39. Gage, Jean, Les Classes Sociales dans 1 'Empire Romain (Paris: Payot, 1964), p. 308Google Scholar. Also de Robertis, , II Fenomeno, pp. 119ffGoogle Scholar. E. G. Hardy, Roman Government, writes. “To casual observers at any rate the Christian communities must have presented many external resemblances to the numerous thiasoi or religious associations with which the Eastern provinces more especially were honeycombed, and must, indeed, have been ranked among them.” (p. 130). The idea that Christianity took the form of a collegium goes back to the study of Mommsen, T., De collegiis et sodaliciis Romanorum (1843)Google Scholar and the archaeological investigations of De Rossi, Giovanni Battista, La Roma sootteranea cristiana (1864–1877).Google Scholar

40. Apol. 7.3; 21.27. Collegia often celebrated the day of founding (Waltzing, I, 362–3). At Lanuvium: “In the consulship of Marcus Antonius Hiberus and Publius Mummius Sisenna (A.D. 133), January 1, the benevolent society of Diana and Antonious was founded. …“ (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, XIV, 2112)Google Scholar. Apol. 40.7: “Christianne sectae origo.” For the term “censum” in sense of origin (Apo1. 7.3), see Cicero, , pro Flacc. 22.52.Google Scholar

41. Apol. 3.6; 38.5. In 39.6 he uses the phrase Dei sectae.

42. See de Robertis, , II Fenomeio, p. 8Google Scholar; Krueger, , Rechtstellung, p. 85Google Scholar; Dittenberger, , Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones, II, 712Google Scholar; Corpus Inscrptionum Graccarum, III, 4315Google Scholar; Poland, , Vereinswesen, p. 55.Google Scholar

43. Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, U. v., “Die Philosophensehulen und die Politik,” and “Die reehliche Stellung der Philosophensehulen,” in Antigonos von Earystos in Philologsohe Uutersuchnitgen, IV (1881), PP. 232–306Google Scholar; Poland, pp. 154,509. A society of philosophers is mentioned in Strabo 17.1.8 in connection with the Museion in Alexandria.

44. Rabbow, , Seelenfuehrung, pp. 260ff.Google Scholar

45. Carcopino, Jerome, La Basilique Pythagoricienne de la Porte Majeure (Paris: L'Artisan du Livre, 1927).Google Scholar

46. Apol. 39.19, 21.

47. Apol. 46.2, 5, 18; 47.9, 14.

48. MacMullen, Ramsay. Enemies of the Roman Order (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), pp. 46–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

49. Contra Celsum 1.9. Minucius, , Octavius, 11.6Google Scholar. For divination among Christians, see Origen, , Commentary on Genesis 31Google Scholar (Gen. 1:16) in Phllocalia 23.1; also Hom. in Joshua 5:8 (Joshua, 4:loff.; Sources Chrétiennes 71, 174Google Scholar). On magic, see Contra Celsum 1.6.

50. On rewards and punishments see Wilken, Robert L., “Justification by Works: Fate and the Gospel in the Roman Empire,” Concordia Theological Monthly, 40 (1969), 379–392.Google Scholar

51. See Contra Celsum 5.25 and Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica 1.2.lffGoogle Scholar. for Celsus and Porphyry. Peterson, Erik, Der Monotheismus als Politieches Problem (Leipzig: Jakob Hegner, 1935)Google Scholar, observed over a generation ago that the idea of eusebeia demanded a monograph because of the role it plays in the anti-Christian polemic of Porphyry (p. 133, n. 112). Such a study is still lacking though the long article by Kaufmann-Buehler, D., “Eusebeia” in RAC, VI, 895–1052Google Scholar has filled in some of the gaps in the knowledge of the general history of eusebeia in antiquity. The passage cited from Origen is in Contra Celsum 8.76 (trans. Chadwick, p. 511).