|
| |||||
|
|
|
| ||
ROMAN EMPIRE AND CHRISTIANITY
LESSON 200
ROMAN EMPIRE AND CHRISTIANITY
Contents:
I. Outline of the Roman Empire
1. Roman Empire a Result of Social Conflict
(1) Julius Caesar
(2) Augustus
(3) Flavian Dynasty
(4) Adoptive or Antonine Emperors
(5) Changing Dynasties, 193-284 AD
(6) From Diocletian until Partition
(7) Final Partition
2. Coming of the Monarchy
(1) Exhaustion of Parties
(2) Inability of Either Aristocracy or Democracy to Hold Equilibrium
(3) Precedents
(4) Withdrawal from Public Life: Individualism
(5) Industrial
(6) Military
(7) Imperial Interests
(8) Influence of Orient
II. Preparation of the Roman Empire for Christianity
1. Pax Romana and the Unification of the World
2. Cosmopolitanism
3. Eclecticism
4. Protection for Greek Culture
5. Linguistically
6. Materially
7. Tolerance
8. Pattern for a Universal Church
9. Roman Jurisprudence
10. Negative Preparation
III. Attitude of the Roman Empire to Religions
1. Roman or State Religion
2. Non-Roman Religions: religiones licitae and religiones illicitae
(1) Judaism a "religio licita."
(2) Why Christianity Was Alone Proscribed
(3) Two Empires: Causes of Conflict
(4) The Roman Empire Not the Only Disturbing Factor
IV. Relations between the Roman Empire and Christianity
1. Beginning of Christianity until Death of Nero, 68 AD
2. Flavian Period, 68-96 AD
3. The Antonine Period, 96-192 AD
(1) Nerva and Trajan
(2) Hadrian
(3) Antoninus Pius (138-161)
(4) Marcus Aurelius (161-80)
4. Changing Dynasties, 192-284 AD
5. Diocletian until First General Edict of Toleration, 284-311 AD
6. First Edict of Toleration until Fall of Western Empire, 311-476 AD
V. Victory of Christianity and Conversion of the Roman Empire
1. Negative Causes
2. Positive Causes
LITERATURE
ROMAN EMPIRE AND CHRISTIANITY
I. Outline of the Roman Empire.
1. Roman Empire a Result of Social Conflict:
The founding of the Roman empire was the grandest political achievement ever
accomplished. The conquests of Alexander the Great, Charlemagne and Napoleon seem
small compared with the durable structure reared by Julius and his successor, Augustus.
In one sense Julius Caesar-the most wonderful man that Rome or any other country
produced-was the founder of the empire, and Augustus the founder of the principate.
But the Roman empire was the culmination of a long process of political, constitutional,
and social growth which gives a lasting interest to Roman history. The Roman empire
was the only possible solution of a 700 years' struggle, and Roman history is the story of
the conflict of class with class, patrician against plebeian, populus against plebs, the
antagonism of oligarchy and democracy, plutocracy against neglected masses. It is the
account of the triumphant march of democracy and popular government against an
exclusive governing caste. Against heavy odds the plebeians asserted their rights till they
secured at least a measure of social, political and legal equality with their superiors (see
ROME, I, 2-4). But in the long conflict both parties degenerated until neither militant
democracy nor despotic oligarchy could hold the balance with justice. Democracy had
won in the uphill fight, but lost itself and was obliged to accept a common master with
aristocracy. It was of no small importance for Christianity that the Roman empire-
practically synonymous with the orbis terrarum-had been converging both from
internal and external causes toward a one-man government, the political counterpart of a
universal religion with one God and Saviour.
(1) Julius Caesar.
For a couple of generations political leaders had foreseen the coming of supreme
power and had tried to grasp it. But it was Julius Caesar who best succeeded in
exploiting democracy for his own aggrandizement. He proved the potent factor of the
first triumvirate (60 BC); his consulship (59) was truly kingly. In 49 BC he crossed the
Rubicon and declared war upon his country, but in the same year was appointed Dictator
and thus made his enemies the enemies of his country. He vanquished the Pompeians-
senatorial and republican-at Pharsalia in 48 BC, Thapsus in 46 BC, and Munda in 45
BC. Between 46 and the Ides of March 44 no emperor before Diocletian was more
imperial. He was recognized officially as "demigod"; temples were dedicated to his
"clemency." He encouraged the people to abdicate to him their privileges of self-
government and right of election, became chief (princeps) of the senate and high priest
(pontifex maximus), so that he could manipulate even the will of the gods to his own
purposes. His plans were equally great and beneficent. He saw the necessity of
blending the heterogeneous populations into one people and extending Roman
citizenship. His outlook was larger and more favorable to the coming of Christianity
than that of his successor, Augustus. The latter learned from the fate of Caesar that he
had advanced too rapidly along the imperial path. It taught Augustus caution.
(2) Augustus.
Octavian (Augustus) proved the potent factor of the second triumvirate. The field of
Actiuim on September 2, 31 BC, decided the fate of the old Roman republic. The
commonwealth sank in exhaustion after the protracted civil and internecine strife. It was
a case of the survival of the fittest. It was a great crisis in human history, and a great
man was at hand for the occasion. Octavian realized that supreme power was the only
possible solution. On his return to Rome he began to do over again what Caesar had
done-gather into his own hands the reins of government. He succeeded with more
caution and shrewdness, and became the founder of the Roman empire, which formally
began on January 16, 27 BC, and was signalized by the bestowal of the title
AUGUSTUS (which see). Under republican forms he ruled as emperor, controlling
legislation, administration and the armies. His policy was on the whole adhered to by
the Julio-Claudian line, the last of which was Nero (died 68 AD).
(3) Flavian Dynasty.
In 68 AD a new "secret of empire" was discovered, namely, that the principate was
not hereditary in one line and that emperors could be nominated by the armies. After the
bloody civil wars of 68, "the year of the four emperors," Vespasian founded the IInd
Dynasty, and dynastic succession was for the present again adopted. With the Flavians
begins a new epoch in Roman history of pronounced importance for Christianity. The
exclusive Roman ideas are on the wane. Vespasian was of plebeian and Sabine rank and
thus non-Roman, the first of many non-Roman emperors. His ideas were provincial
rather than Roman, and favorable to the amalgamation of classes, and the leveling
process now steadily setting in. Though he accepted the Augustan "diarchy," he began
to curtail the powers of the senate. His son Titus died young (79-81). Domitian's reign
marks a new epoch in imperialism: his autocratic spirit stands half-way between the
Augustan principate and the absolute monarchy of Diocletian. Domitian, the last of the
"twelve Caesars" (Suetonius), was assassinated September 18, 96 AD. The soldiers amid
civil war had elected the last dynasty. This time the senate asserted itself and nominated
a brief series of emperors-on the whole the best that wore the purple.
(4) Adoptive or Antonine Emperors.
The Antonine is another distinct era marked by humane government, recognition of
the rights of the provinces and an enlargement of the ideas of universalism. Under
Trajan the empire was extended; a series of frontier blockades was established-a
confession that Rome could advance no farther. Under Hadrian a policy of retreat
began; henceforth Rome is never again on the aggressive but always on the defensive
against restless barbarians. Unmistakable signs of weakness and decay set in under
Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. This, the best and happiest period of Roman
imperial government, was the beginning of the end. In this era we detect a growing
centralization of authority; the senate practically becomes a tool of the emperor. A
distinct civil service was established which culminated in bureaucracy under Hadrian.
(5) Changing Dynasties, 193-284 AD.
On the death of Commodus, whose reign 180-93 AD stands by itself, the empire was
put up for sale by the soldiery and knocked down to the highest bidder. The military
basis of the empire was emphasized-which was indeed essential in this period of
barbaric aggressiveness to postpone the fall of the empire until its providential mission
was accomplished. A rapid succession of rulers follows, almost each new ruler bringing
a new dynasty. Those disintegrating forces set in which developed so rapidly from the
reign of Diocletian. The pax Romana had passed; civil commotion accentuated the
dangers from invading barbarians. Plague and famine depopulated rich provinces.
Rome itself drops into the background and the provincial spirit asserts itself
proportionally. The year 212 AD is memorable for the edict of Caracalla converting all
the free population into Roman citizens.
(6) From Diocletian until Partition.
In the next period absolute monarchy of pure oriental type was established by
Diocletian, one of the ablest of Roman rulers. He inaugurated the principle of division
and subdivision of imperial power. The inevitable separation of East and West, with the
growing prominence of the East, becomes apparent. Rome and Italy are reduced to the
rank of provinces, and new courts are opened by the two Augusti and two Caesars.
Diocletian's division of power led to civil strife, until Constantine once more united the
whole empire under his sway. The center of gravity now shifted from West to East by
the foundation of Constantinople. The empire was again parceled out to the sons of
Constantine, one of whom, Constantius, succeeded in again reuniting it (350 AD). In 364
it was again divided, Valentinian receiving the West and Valens the East.
(7) Final Partition.
On the death of Theodosius I (395), West and East fell to his sons Honorius and
Arcadius, never again to be united. The western half rapidly degenerated before barbaric
hordes and weakling rulers. The western provinces and Africa were overrun by
conquering barbarians who set up independent kingdoms on Roman soil. Burgundians
and Visigoths settled in Gaul; the latter established a kingdom in Spain. The Vandals
under Genseric settled first in Southern Spain, then crossed to Africa and reduced it.
Goths burst over Roman frontiers, settled in Illyria and invaded Italy. Alaric and his
Goths spared Rome in 408 for a ransom; in 409 he appeared again and set up Attalus as
king of the Romans, and finally in 410 he captured and sacked the city. It was again
sacked by the Vandals under Genseric in 462, and, lastly, fell before Odoacer and his
Germans in 476; he announced to the world that the empire of the West had ceased. The
empire of the East continued at Constantinople the greatest political power through a
chequred history down to the capture of the city in 1214 and its final capture by the
Turks in 1453, when its spiritual and intellectual treasures were opened to western lands
and proved of untold blessing in preparing the way for the Reformation of the 16th
century. The East conquered the West intellectually and spiritually. In the East was
born the religion of humanity.
2. Coming of the Monarchy:
(1) Exhaustion of Parties.
The Roman world had for two generations been steadily drifting toward monarchy,
and at least one generation before the empire was set up clear minds saw the inevitable
necessity of one-man government or supreme power, and each political leader made it
his ambition to grasp it. The civil wars ceased for a century with the death of Antony.
But the struggles of Tiberius Gracchus and Scipio Aemilianus, Caius Gracchus and
Opimius, Drusus and Philippus, Marius and Sulla, Pompey and Caesar, and lastly
Octavian and Antony had exhausted the state, and this exhaustion of political parties
opened the way for monarchy. In fact it was a necessity for the welfare of the
commonwealth that one should be elevated who could fairly hold the balance between
oligarchy and the commons and duly recognize the claims of all parties. Even Cato
Uticensis-the incarnation of republican ideas-admitted it would be better to choose a
master than wait for a tyrant. The bloody wars could find no solution except the survival
of the fittest. Moreover, the free political institutions of Rome had become useless and
could no longer work under the armed oppression of factions. If any form of
government, only supreme power would prove effectual amid an enfeebled, unpopular
senate, corrupt and idle commons, and ambitious individuals.
(2) Inability of Either Aristocracy or Democracy to Hold Equilibrium.
Events had proved that a narrow exclusive aristocracy was incapable of good
government because of its utterly selfish policy and disregard for the rights of all lower
orders. It had learned to burke liberty by political murders. Neither was the
heterogeneous population of later Rome disciplined to obey or to initiate just
government when it had seized power. This anarchy within the body politic opened an
easy way to usurpation by individuals. No republic and no form of free popular
government could live under such conditions. Caesar said of the republic that it was "a
name without any substance," and Curio declared it to be a "vain chimera." The law
courts shared in the general corruption. The judicia became the bone of contention
between the senate and the knights as the best instrument for party interests, and enabled
the holders (a) to receive large bribes, (b) to protect their own order when guilty of the
most flagrant injustice, and (c) to oppress other orders. Justice for all, and especially for
conquered peoples, was impossible. Elective assemblies refused to perform their proper
functions because of extravagant bribery or the presence of candidates in arms. In fact,
the people were willing to forego the prerogative of election and accept candidates at the
nomination of a despotic authority. The whole people had become incapable of self-
government and were willing-almost glad-to be relieved of the necessity.
(3) Precedents.
Besides, precedents for one-man government, or the concentration of supreme power
in one hand, were not wanting, and had been rapidly multiplying in Roman history as it
drew nearer to the end of the republic. Numerous protracted commands and special
commissions had accustomed the state to the novelty of obedience without participation
in administration. The 7 consulships of Marius, the 4 of Cinna, the 3 extraordinary
commissions of Pompey and his sole consulship, the dictatorship of Sulla without time
limit, the two 5-year-period military commands of Caesar, his repeated dictatorships the
last of which was to extend for 10 years-all these were pointing directly toward
Caesarism.
(4) Withdrawal from Public Life: Individualism.
On another side the way was opened to supreme power by the increasing tendency
for some of the noblest and best minds to withdraw from public life to the seclusion of
the heart life and thus leave the field open for demagogic ambition. After the conquests
of Alexander the Great, philosophy abandoned the civic, political or city-state point of
view and became moral and individual. Stoicism adopted the lofty spiritual teachings of
Plato and combined them with the idea of the brotherhood of humanity. It also preached
that man must work out his salvation, not in public political life, but in the secret agonies
of his own soul. This religion took hold of the noblest Roman souls who were conscious
of the weariness of life and felt the desire for spiritual fellowship and comfort. The
pendulum in human systems of thought generally swings to the opposite extreme, and
these serious souls abandoned public life for private speculation and meditation. Those
who did remain at the helm of affairs-like the younger Cato-were often too much
idealists, living in the past or in an ideal Platonic republic, and proved very unequal to
the practical demagogues who lived much in the present with a keen eye to the future.
Also a considerable number of the moderate party, who in better days would have
furnished leaders to the state, disgusted with the universal corruption, saddened by the
hopeless state of social strife and disquieted by uncertainty as to the issue of victory for
either contending party, held aloof and must have wished for and welcomed a paramount
authority to give stability to social life. Monarchy was in the air, as proved by the
sentiments of the two pseudo-Sallustian letters, the author of which calls upon Caesar to
restore government and reorganize the state, for if Rome perish the whole world must
perish with her.
(5) Industrial.
To another considerable class monarchy must have been welcome-the industrial
and middle class who were striving for competence and were engaged in trade and
commerce. Civil wars and the strife of parties must have greatly hindered their activity.
They cast their lot neither with the optimates nor with the idle commonalty. They
desired only a stable condition of government under which they could uninterruptedly
carry on their trades.
(6) Military.
Military conditions favored supreme power. Not only had the lengthened commands
familiarized the general with his legions and given him time to seduce the soldiery to his
own cause, but the soldiery too had been petted and spoiled like the spoon-fed populace.
The old republican safeguards against ambition had been removed. The ranks of the
armies had also been swollen with large numbers of provincials and non-Romans who
had no special sentiment about republican forms. We have seen the military power
growing more and more prominent. The only way of averting a military despotism
supported and prompted by the soldiers was to set up a monarchy, holding all the
military, legislative and administrative functions of the state in due proportion. This was
superior to a merely nominal republic always cringing under fear of military leaders.
(7) Imperial Interests.
Lastly, the aggression and conquests of the republic had brought about a state of
affairs demanding an empire. The East and the West had been subdued; many provinces
and heterogeneous populations were living under the Roman eagle. These provinces
could not permanently be plundered and oppressed as under the republican senate. The
jus civile of Rome must learn also the jus naturale and jus gentium. An exclusive selfish
senatorial clique was incapable of doing justice to the conquered peoples. One supreme
ruler over all classes raised above personal ambition could best meet their grievances.
The senate had ruled with a rod of iron; the provinces could not possibly be worse under
any form of government. Besides, monarchy was more congenial to the provincials than
a republic which they could not comprehend.
(8) Influence of Orient.
The Orientals had long been used to living under imperial and absolute forms of
government and would welcome such a form among their new conquerors. Besides,
residence in the Orient had affected Roman military leaders with the thirst after absolute
power. And no other form was possible when the old city-state system broke down, and
as yet federal government had not been dreamed of. Another consideration: the vast and
dissimilar masses of population living within the Roman dominions could more easily be
held together under a king or emperor than by a series of ever-changing administrations,
just as the Austro-Hungarian and the British empires are probably held together better
under the present monarchies than would be possible under a republican system. This
survey may make clear the permanent interest in Roman history for all students of
human history. The Roman empire was established indeed in the fullness of the times for
its citizens and for Christianity.
II. Preparation of the Roman Empire for Christianity.
About the middle of the reign of Augustus a Jewish child was born who was destined
to rule an empire more extensive and lasting than that of the Caesars. It is a striking fact
that almost synchronous with the planting of the Roman empire Christianity appeared in
the world. Although on a superficial glance the Roman empire may seem the greatest
enemy of early Christianity, and at times a bitter persecutor, yet it was in many ways the
grandest preparation and in some ways the best ally of Christianity. It ushered in
politically the fullness of the times. The Caesars-whatever they may have been or
done-prepared the way of the Lord. A brief account must here be given of some of the
services which the Roman empire rendered to humanity and especially to the kingdom of
God.
1. Pax Romana and the Unification of the World:
The first universal blessing conferred by the empire was the famous pax Romana
("Roman peace"). The world had not been at peace since the days of Alexander the
Great. The quarrels of the Diadochi, and the aggression of the Roman republic had kept
the nations in a state of constant turmoil. A universal peace was first established with the
beginning of the reign of Augustus and the closing of the temple of Janus. In all the
countries round the Mediterranean and from distant Britain to the Euphrates the world
was at rest. Rome had made an end of her own civil wars and had put a stop to wars
among the nations. Though her wars were often iniquitous and unjustifiable, and she
conquered like a barbarian, she ruled her conquests like a humane statesman. The
quarrels of the Diadochi which caused so much turmoil in the East were ended, the
territory of the Lagids; Attalids, Seleucids and Antigonids having passed under the sway
of Rome. The empire united Greeks, Romans and Jews all under one government. Rome
thus blended the nations and prepared them for Christianity. Now for the first time we
may speak of the world as universal humanity, the orbis terrarum, 1/2 ïkêïõìÝíç, heô
oikoumeñneô (Luke 2:1), the genus humanum. These terms represented humanity as
living under a uniform system of government. All were members of one earthly state; the
Roman empire was their communis omnium patria.
2. Cosmopolitanism:
This state of affairs contributed largely to the spread of cosmopolitanism which had
set in with the Macedonia conqueror. Under the Roman empire all national barriers were
removed; the great cities-Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, etc.-became meeting-places of
all races and languages. The Romans were everywhere carrying their laws and
civilization; Greeks settled in thousands at all important centers as professors,
merchants, physicians, or acrobats; Orientals were to be found in large numbers with
their gods and mysteries in Rome, "the epitome of the world." In the Roman armies
soldiers from all quarters of the empire became companions. And many thousands of
slaves of fine education and high culture contributed much to cosmopolitanism. Being in
many cases far superior in culture to their masters, they became their teachers. And in
every city of importance, East or West, large bodies of the Jewish Diaspora were settled.
3. Eclecticism:
This cosmopolitanism gave great impetus to a corresponding eclecticism of thought.
Nothing could have been more favorable to Christianity than this intermixture of all
races and mutual exchange of thought. Each people discovered how much it had in
common with its neighbors. From the days of the Diadochi, Stoicism had been preaching
the gospel of a civic and ethical brotherhood of humanity. In the fusion of different
philosophic systems the emphasis had shifted from the city-state or political or national
to the moral and human point of view. All men were thus reduced to equality before the
One; only virtue and vice were the differentiating factors. Men were akin with the
divine-at least the wise and good-so that one poet could say, "We are His offspring."
Stoicism did a noble service in preparation for Christianity by preaching
universalism along the path of individualism. It also furnished comfort and strength to
countless thousands of weary human lives and ministered spiritual support and calm
resignation at many a heathen deathbed. It may be declared to be the first system of
religious thought-for it was a religion more than a philosophy-which made a serious
study of the diseases of the human soul. We know of course its weakness and
imperfections, that it was an aristocratic creed appealing only to the elect of mortals, that
it had little message for the fallen and lower classes, that it was cold and stern, that it
lacked-as Seneca felt-the inspiration of an ideal life. But with all its failures it proved
a worthy pedagogue to a religion which brought a larger message than that of Greece. It
afforded the spiritual and moral counterpart to the larger human society of which the
Roman empire was the political and visible symbol. Hitherto a good citizen had been a
good man. Now a good man is a good citizen, and that not of a narrow city-state, but of
the world. Stoicism also proved tile interpreter and mouthpiece to the Roman empire of
the higher moral and spiritual qualities of Greek civilization; it diffused the best
convictions of Greece about God and man, selecting those elements that were universal
and of lasting human value.
» See:STOICS
The mind of the Roman empire was further prepared for Christianity by the Jewish
Diaspora. Greeks learned from Jews and Jews from Greeks and the Romans from both.
The unification effected by Roman Law and administration greatly aided the Diaspora.
Jewish settlements became still more numerous and powerful both in the East and West.
Those Jews bringing from the homeland the spiritual monotheism of their race combined
it with Greek philosophy which had been setting steadily for monotheism. With the
Jews the exclusively national element was subordinated to the more human and
universal, the ceremonial to the religious. They even adopted the world-language of that
day-Greek-and had their sacred Scriptures translated into this language in which they
carried on an active proselytism. The Roman spirit was at first essentially narrow and
exclusive. But even the Romans soon fell beneath the spell of this cosmopolitanism and
eclecticism. As their conquests increased, their mind was correspondingly widened.
They adopted the policy of Alexander-sparing the gods of the conquered and admitting
them into the responsibility of guarding Rome; they assimilated them with their own
Pantheon or identified them with Roman gods. In this way naturally the religious ideas
of conquered races more highly civilized than the conquerors laid hold on Roman minds.
» See:DISPERSION
4. Protection for Greek Culture:
Another inestimable service rendered to humanity and Christianity was the
protection which the Roman power afforded the Greek civilization. We must remember
that the Romans were at first only conquering barbarians who had little respect for
culture, but idealized power. Already they had wiped out two ancient and superior
civilizations-that of Carthage without leaving a trace, and that of Etruria, traces of
which have been discovered in modern times. It is hard to conceive what a scourge
Rome would have proved to the world had she not fallen under the influence of the
superior culture and philosophy of Greece. Had the Roman Mars not been educated by
Pallas Athene the Romans would have proved Vandals and Tartars in blotting out
civilization and arresting human progress. The Greeks, on the other hand, could conquer
more by their preeminence in everything that pertains to the intellectual life of man than
they could hold by the sword. A practical and political power was needed to protect
Greek speculation. But the Romans after causing much devastation were gradually
educated and civilized and have contributed to the uplifting and enlightenment of
subsequent civilizations by both preserving and opening to the world the spiritual
qualities of Greece. The kinship of man with the divine, learned from Socrates and Plato,
went forth on its wide evangel. This Greek civilization, philosophy and theology trained
many of the great theologians and leaders of the Christian church, so that Clement of
Alexandria said that Greek philosophy and Jewish law had proved schoolmasters to
bring the world to Christ. Paul, who prevented Christianity from remaining a Jewish sect
and proclaimed its universalism, learned much from Greek-especially from Stoic-
thought. It is also significant that the early Christian missionaries apparently went only
where the Greek language was known, which was the case in all centers of Roman
administration.
5. Linguistically:
The state of the Roman empire linguistically was in the highest degree favorable to
the spread of Christianity. The Greek republics by their enterprise, superior genius and
commercial abilities extended their dialects over the Aegean Islands, the coasts of Asia
Minor, Sicily and Magna Graecia. The preeminence of Attic culture and literature
favored by the short-lived Athenian empire raised this dialect to a standard among the
Greek peoples. But the other dialects long persisted. Out of this babel of Greek dialects
there finally arose a normal koineôñ or "common language." By the conquests of
Alexander and the Hellenistic sympathies of the Diadochi this common Greek language
became the lingua franca of antiquity. Greek was known in Northern India, at the
Parthian court, and on the distant shores of the Euxine (Black Sea). The native land of
the gospel was surrounded on all sides by Greek civilization. Greek culture and
language penetrated into the midst of the obstinate home-keeping Palestinian Jews.
Though Greek was not the mother-tongue of our Lord, He understood Greek and
apparently could speak it when occasion required-Aramaic being the language of His
heart and of His public teachings. The history of the Maccabean struggle affords ample
evidence of the extent to Which Greek culture, and with it the Greek language, were
familiar to the Jews. There were in later days Hellenistic bodies of devout Jews in
Jerusalem itself. Greek was recognized by the Jews as the universal language: the
inscription on the wall of the outer temple court forbidding Gentiles under pain of death
to enter was in Greek. The koineô became the language even of religion-where a
foreign tongue is least likely to be used-of the large Jewish Diaspora. They perceived
the advantages of Greek as the language of commerce-the Jews' occupation-of culture
and of proselytizing. They threw open their sacred Scriptures in the Septuagint and
other versions to the Greek-Roman world, adapting the translation in many respects to
the requirements of Greek readers. "The Bible whose God was Yahweh was the Bible
of one people: the Bible whose God was (êýñéïò, kuñrios, "Lord") was the Bible of
humanity." When the Romans came upon the scene, they found this language so widely
known and so deeply rooted they could not hope to supplant it. Indeed they did not try-
except in Sicily and Magna Graecia-to suppress Greek, but rather gladly accepted it as
the one common means of intercourse among the peoples of their eastern dominions.
» See:LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
Though Latin was of course the official language of the conquerors, the decrees of
governors generally appeared with a Greek translation, so that they might be
"understanded of the people," and Greek overcame Latin, as English drove out the
French of the Norman invaders. Latin poets and historians more than once complained
that Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit ("conquered Greece vanquished its stern
conqueror"). With the spread of Latin there were two world-languages side by side for
the whole Roman empire, but Greek was prevailingly the language of the eastern half of
the Roman empire which was the first soil for Christian churches and the first half of the
empire to be Christianized. Later when Christianity was able to extend her activity to the
West, she found Latin ready as the common means of intercourse. That Rome respected
Greek is greatly to her credit and much to the advantage of Christianity. For Christianity,
when it began to aim at universalism, dropped its native Aramaic. The gospel in order to
become a world-evangel was translated into Greek. The early Christian missionaries did
not learn the languages or patois of the Roman empire, but confined themselves to
centers of Greek culture. Paul wrote in Greek to the church in Rome itself, of which
Greek was the language. And while Christianity was spreading through the Greek East
under the unification of Roman administration, the Romans were Romanizing and
leveling the West for Latin Christianity (see LATIN). In the West it may be noted that
the first foothold of the Christian religion was in Greek-witness the church in Gaul.
6. Materially:
In material ways too Rome opened the way for Christianity by building the great
highways for the gospel. The great system of roads that knit then civilized world
together served not only the legions and the imperial escorts, but were of equal service to
the early missionaries, and when churches began to spring up over the empire, these
roads greatly facilitated that church organization and brotherhood which strengthened
the church to overcome the empire. With the dawn of the pax Romana all these roads
became alive once more with a galaxy of caravans and traders. Commerce revived and
was carried on under circumstances more favorable than any that obtained till the past
century. Men exchanged not only material things, but also spiritual things. Many of these
early traders and artisans were Christians, and while they bought and sold the things that
perish, they did not lose an opportunity of spreading the gospel. For an empire which
embraced the Mediterranean shores, the sea was an important means of
intercommunication; and the Mediterranean routes were safer for commerce and travel at
that period than during any previous one. Pompey the Great had driven the pirates off the
sea, and with the fall of Sextus Pompey no hostile maritime forces remained. The ships
which plied in countless numbers from point to point of this great inland sea offered
splendid advantages and opportunity for early Christian missionary enthusiasm.
7. Tolerance:
The large measure of freedom permitted by Roman authorities to the religions of all
nations greatly favored the growth of infant Christianity. The Roman empire was never
in principle a persecutor with a permanent court of inquisition. Strange cults from the
East and Egypt flourished in the capital, and except when they became a danger to
public morality or to the peace of society they were allowed to spread unchecked under
the eyes of the police. See below on non-Roman religions.
8. Pattern for a Universal Church:
Further, the Roman empire afforded Christianity a material and outward symbol for
its spiritual ambition. It enlarged the vision of the church. Only a citizen (Paul) of such a
world-empire could dream of a religion for all humanity. If the Roman sword could so
conquer and unify the orbis terrarum, the militant church should be provoked to attempt
nothing less in the religious sphere. It also furnished many a suggestion to the early
organizers of the new community, until the Christian church became the spiritual
counterpart of the Roman empire. The Christians appropriated many a weapon from the
arsenal of the enemy and learned from them aggressiveness, the value of thorough
organization and of military methods.
9. Roman Jurisprudence:
Roman law in its origins was characterized by the narrowest exclusiveness, and the
first formal Roman code was on Greek patterns, yet the Romans here as in so many other
respects improved upon what they had borrowed and became masters of jurisprudence in
the antique world. As their empire and conceptions expanded, they remodeled their laws
to embrace all their subjects. One of the greatest boons conferred by Rome upon the
antique world was a uniform system of good laws-the source of much of our European
jurisprudence. The Roman law played an equally important role with the Jewish in
molding and disciplining for Christianity. It taught men to obey and to respect authority,
and proved an effective leveling and civilizing power in the empire. The universal law of
Rome was the pedagogue for the universal law of the gospel.
» See:ROMAN LAW
10. Negative Preparation:
The Romans could offer their subjects good laws, uniform government and military
protection, but not a satisfactory religion. A universal empire called for a universal
religion, which Christianity alone could offer. Finally, not only by what Rome had
accomplished but by what she proved incapable of accomplishing, the way of the Lord
was made ready and a people prepared for His coming. It was a terrible crisis in the
civilization and religion of antiquity. The old national religions and systems of belief had
proved unable to soothe increasing imperious moral and spiritual demands of man's
nature. A moral bankruptcy was immanent. The old Roman religion of abstract virtues
had gone down in formalism; it was too cold for human hearts. Man could no longer find
the field of his moral activity in the religion of the state; he was no longer merely an
atom in society performing religious rites, not for his own soul, but for the good of the
commonwealth. Personality had been slowly emerging, and the new schools of
philosophy called man away from the state to seek peace with God in the solitude of his
own soul first of all. But even the best of these schools found the crying need of a
positive, not a negative religion, the need for a perfect ideal life as a dynamic over
ordinary human lives. Thus was felt an imperious demand for a new revelation, for a
fresh vision or knowledge of God. In earlier days men had believed that God had
revealed Himself to primitive wise men or heroes of their race, and that subsequent
generations must accept with faith what these earlier seers, who stood nearer God, as
Cicero said, had been pleased to teach of the divine. But soon this stock of knowledge
became exhausted. Plato, after soaring to the highest point of poetic and philosophic
thought about the divine, admitted the need of a demon or superman to tell us the secrets
of eternity. With the early Roman empire began a period of tremendous religious unrest.
Men tried philosophy, magic, astrology, foreign rites, to find a sure place of rest. This
accounts for the rapid and extensive diffusion of oriental mysteries which promised to
the initiated communion with God here, a "better hope" in death, and satisfied the
craving for immortality beyond time. These were the more serious souls who would
gladly accept the consolations of Jesus. Others, losing all faith in any form of religion,
gave themselves up to blank despair and accepted Epicureanism with its gospel of
annihilation and its carpe diem morals. This system had a terrible fascination for those
who had lost themselves; it is presented in its most attractive form in the verses of
Lucretius-the Omar Khayyam of Latin literature. Others again, unable to find God,
surrendered themselves to cheerless skepticism. The sore need of the new gospel of life
and immortality will be borne in upon the mind of those who read the Greek and Roman
sepulchral inscriptions. And even Seneca, who was almost a Christian in some respects,
speaks of immortality as a "beautiful dream" (bellum somnium), though tribulation later
gave a clearer vision of the "city of God." Servius Sulpicius, writing to Cicero a letter of
consolation on the death of his much-missed Tullia, had only a sad "if" to offer about the
future (Cic. Fam. iv.5). Nowhere does the unbelief and pessimism of pre-Christian days
among the higher classes strike one more forcibly than in the famous discussion recorded
by Sallust (Bel. Cat. li f) as to the punishment of the Catilinarian conspirators. Caesar,
who held the Roman high-priesthood and the highest authority on the religion of the
state, proposes life imprisonment, as death would only bring annihilation and rest to
these villains-no hereafter, no reward or punishment (eam cuncta mortalium mala
dissolvere; ultra neque curae neque gaudio locum esse). Cato next speaks-the most
religious man of his generation-in terms which cast no rebuke upon Caesar's
Epicureanism and materialism (ibid., 52). Cicero (In Cat. iv.4) is content to leave
immortality an open question. The philosophers of Athens mocked Paul on Mars' Hill
when he spoke of a resurrection. Such was the attitude of the educated classes of the
Greek-Roman world at the dawn of Christianity, though it cannot be denied that there
was also a strong desire for continued existence. The other classes were either
perfunctorily performing the rites of a dead national religion or wereseeking, some,
excitement or aesthetic worship or even scope for their baser passions, some, peace and
promise for the future, in the eastern mysteries. The distinction between moral and
physical evil was coming to the surface, and hence, a consciousness of sin. Religion and
ethics had not yet been united. "The throne of the human mind" was declared vacant, and
Christianity was at hand as the best claimant. In fact, the Greek-Roman mind had been
expanding to receive the pure teachings of Jesus.
III. Attitude of the Roman Empire to Religions.
1. Roman or State Religion:
The history of Roman religion reveals a continuous penetration of Italian, Etruscan,
Greek, Egyptian and oriental worship and rites, until the old Roman religion became
almost unrecognizable, and even the antiquarian learning of a Varro could scarcely
discover the original meaning or use of many Roman deities. The Roman elements or
modes of worship progressively retreated until they and the foreign rites with which they
were overlaid gave way before the might of Christianity. As Rome expanded, her
religious demands increased. During the regal period Roman religion was that of a
simple agricultural community. In the period between the Regifugium and the Second
Punic War Roman religion became more complicated and the Roman Pantheon was
largely increased by importations from Etruria, Latium and Magna Graecia. The
mysterious religion of Etruria first impressed the Roman mind, and from this quarter
probably came the Trinity of the Capitol (Jupiter, Juno, Minerva) previously introduced
into Etruria from Greek sources, thus showing that the Romans were not the first in Italy
to be influenced by the religion of Greece. New modes of worship, non-Roman in spirit,
also came in from the Etruscans and foreign elements of Greek mythology. Latium also
made its contribution, the worship of Diana coming from Aricia and also a Latin Jupiter.
Two Latin cults penetrated even within the Roman pomoerium-that of Hercules and
Castor, with deities of Greek origin. The Greek settlements in Southern Italy (Magna
Graecia) were generous in their contributions and opened the way for the later invasion
of Greek deities. The Sibylline Books were early imported from Cumae as sacred
scriptures for the Romans. In 493 BC during a famine a temple was built to the Greek
trinity Demeter, Dionysus, and Persephone, under the Latin names of Ceres, Liber, and
Libera-the beginning of distrust in the primitive Roman numina and of that practice, so
oft repeated in Roman history, of introducing new and foreign gods at periods of great
distress. In 433 Apollo came from the same region. Mercury and Asclepius followed in
293 BC, and in 249 BC Dis and Proserpina were brought from Tarentum. Other non-
Roman modes of approach to deity were introduced. Rome had been in this period very
broad-minded in her policy of meeting the growing religious needs of her community,
but she had not so far gone beyond Italy. A taste had also developed for dramatic and
more aesthetic forms of worship. The period of the Second Punic War was a crisis in
Roman religious life, and the faith of the Romans waned before growing unbelief. Both
the educated classes and the populace abandoned the old Roman religion, the former
sank into skepticism, the latter into superstition; the former put philosophy in the place
of religion, the latter the more sensuous cults of the Orient. The Romans went abroad
again to borrow deities-this time to Greece, Asia and Egypt. Greek deities were
introduced wholesale, and readily assimilated to or identified with Roman deities (see
ROME, III, 1). In 191 BC Hebe entered as Juventas, in 179 Artemis as Diana, in 138
Ares as Mars. But the home of religion-the Orient-proved more helpful. In 204 BC
Cybele was introduced from Pessinus to Rome, known also as the Great Mother (magna
mater)-a fatal and final blow to old Roman religion and an impetus to the wilder and
more orgiastic cults and mysterious glamor which captivated the common mind. Bacchus
with his gross immorality soon followed. Sulla introduced Ma from Phrygia as the
counterpart of the Roman Bellona, and Egypt gave Isis. In the wars of Pompey against
the pirates Mithra was brought to Rome-the greatest rival of Christianity. Religion now
began to pass into the hands of politicians and at the close of the republic was almost
entirely in their hands. Worship degenerated into formalism, and formalism culminated
in disuse. Under the empire philosophic systems continued still more to replace religion,
and oriental rites spread apace. The religious revival of Augustus was an effort to
breathe life into the dry bones. His plan was only partly religious, and partly political-
to establish an imperial and popular religion of which he was the head and centering
round his person. He discovered the necessity of an imperial religion. In the East kings
had long before been regarded as divine by their subjects. Alexander the Great, like a
wise politician, intended to use this as one bond of union for his wide dominions. The
same habit extended among the Diadochian kings, especially in Egypt and Syria. When
Augustus had brought peace to the world, the Orient was ready to hail him as a god. Out
of this was evolved the cult of the reigning emperor and of Roma personified. This
worship gave religious unity to the empire, while at the same time magnifying the
emperor. But the effort was in vain: the old Roman religion was dead, and the spiritual
needs of the empire continued to be met more and more by philosophy and the mysteries
which promised immortality. The cult of the Genius of the emperor soon lost all reality.
Vespasian himself on his deathbed jested at the idea of his becoming ****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
*********************************************************************
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************litary disasters, introduced non-Roman cults as
means of appeasing the numina. This generally meant that the cults in question could be
performed with impunity by their foreign adherents. It legalized the collegia necessary
for these worships from which Roman citizens were by law excluded. But, generally
speaking, any people settling at Rome was permitted the liberty of its own native
worship in so far as the exercise of it did not interfere with the peace of the state or
corrupt the morals of society. On one occasion (186 BC), by a decree of the senate, a
severe inquisition was instituted against the Bacchanalian rites which had caused
flagrant immorality among the adherents. But Rome was never a systematic persecutor.
These foreign rites and superstitions, though often forbidden and their professed
adherents driven from the city, always returned stronger than ever. Roman citizens soon
discovered the fascination of oriental and Greek mysteries, and devoted themselves to
foreign gods while maintaining the necessary formalism toward the religion of the state.
Very often too Roman citizens would be presidents of these religious brotherhoods. It
should not be forgotten that the original moral elements had fallen out of Roman
religion, and that it had become simply a political and military religion for the welfare of
the state, not for the salvation of the individual. The individual must conform to certain
prescribed rites in order to avert calamity from the state. This done, the state demanded
no more, and left him a large measure of freedom in seeking excitement or aesthetic
pleasure in the warm and more social foreign mysteries. Thus, while the Romans
retained the distinction of religiones licitae and illicitae, they seldom used severity
against the latter. Many unlicensed cults were never disturbed. In fact, the very idea of
empire rendered toleration of non-Roman religions a necessity. Practically, though not
theoretically, the empire abandoned the idea of religiones illicitae, while it retained it
upon the statute-book to use in case of such an emergency as the Christian religion
involved. Not only the government was tolerant, but the different varieties of religions
were tolerant and on good terms with each other. The same man might be initiated into
the mysteries of half a dozen divinities. The same man might even be priest of two or
more gods. Some had not the slightest objection to worshipping Christ along with
Mithra, Isis and Adonis. Men were growing conscious of the oneness of the divine, and
credited their neighbors with worshipping the One Unknown under different names and
forms. Hadrian is said to have meditated the erection of temples throughout the empire to
the Unknown God.
(1) Judaism a "religio licita."
An interesting and, for the history of Christianity, important example of a religio
licita is Judaism. No more exclusive and obstinate people could have been found upon
whom to bestow the favor. Yet from the days of Julius Caesar the imperial policy
toward the Jew and his religion was uniformly favorable, with the brief exception of the
mad attempt of Gaius. The government often protected them against the hatred of the
populace. Up to 70 AD they were allowed freely to send their yearly contribution to the
temple; they were even allowed self-governing privileges and legislative powers among
themselves, and thus formed an exclusive community in the midst of Roman society.
Even the disastrous war of 68-70 AD and the fall of Jerusalem did not bring persecution
upon the Jew, though most of these self-governing and self-legislating powers were
withdrawn and the Jews were compelled to pay a poll-tax to the temple of the Capitoline
Jupiter. Still their religion remained licensed, tolerated, protected. They were excused
from duties impossible for their religion, such as military service. This tolerance of the
Jewish religion was of incalculable importance to infant Christianity which at first
professed to be no more than a reformed and expanded Judaism.
(2) Why Christianity Was Alone Proscribed.
The question next arises: If such was the universally mild and tolerant policy of the
empire to find room for all gods and cults, and to respect the beliefs of all the subject
peoples, how comes the anomaly that Christianity alone was proscribed and persecuted?
Christianity was indeed a religio illicita, not having been accepted by the government as
a religio licita, like Judaism. But this is no answer. There were other unlicensed
religions which grew apace in the empire. Neither was it simply because Christianity
was aggressive and given to proselytism and dared to appear even in the imperial
household: Mithraism and Isism were militant and aggressive, and yet were tolerated.
Nor was it simply because of popular hatred, for the Christian was not hated above the
Jew. Other reasons must explain the anomaly.
(3) Two Empires: Causes of Conflict.
The fact was that two empires were born about the same time so like and yet so
unlike as to render a conflict and struggle to the death inevitable. The Christians were
unequivocal in asserting that the society for which they were waiting and laboring was a
"kingdom."
(a) Confusion of Spiritual and Temporal:
They thought not merely in national or racial but in ecumenical terms. The Romans
could not understand a kingdom of God upon earth, but confused Christian ambition
with political. It was soon discovered that Christianity came not to save but to destroy
and disintegrate the empire. Early Christian enthusiasm made the term "kingdom" very
provoking to pagan patriotism, for many, looking for the Parousia of their Lord, were
themselves misled into thinking of the new society as a kingdom soon to be set up upon
the earth with Christ as king. Gradually, of course, Christians became enlightened upon
this point, but the harm had been done. Both the Rein empire and Christianity were
aiming at a social organization to embrace the genus humanum. But though these two
empires were so alike in several points and the one had done so much to prepare the way
for the other, yet the contrast was too great to allow conciliation. Christianity would not
lose the atom in the mass; it aimed at universalism along the path of individualism-
giving new value to human personality.
(b) Unique Claims of Christianity:
It seemed also to provoke Roman pride by its absurd claims. It preached that the
world was to be destroyed by fire to make way for new heavens and a new earth, that the
Eternal City (Rome) was doomed to fall, that a king would come from heaven whom
Christians were to obey, that amid the coming desolations the Christians should remain
tranquil.
(c) Novelty of Christianity:
Again after Christianity came from underneath the aegis of Judaism, it must have
taken the government somewhat by surprise as a new and unlicensed religion which had
grown strong under a misnomer. It was the newest and latest religion of the empire; it
came suddenly, as it were, upon the stage with no past. It was not apparent to the
Roman mind that Christianity had been spreading for a generation under the tolerance
granted to Judaism (sub umbraculo licitae Judeorum religionis: Tert.), the latter of which
was "protected by its antiquity," as Tacitus said. The Romans were of a conservative
nature and disliked innovations. The greatest statesman of the Augustan era, Maecenas,
advised the emperor to extend no tolerance to new religions as subversive of monarchy
(Dio Cassius lii.36). A new faith appearing suddenly with a large clientele might be
dangerous to the public peace (multitude ingens: Tac. Ann. xv.44; ðïë˜ ðëyèïò, Clem.
Romans.; Cor. 1 6).
(d) Intolerance and Exclusiveness of the Christian Religion and Christian Society:
In one marked way Christians contravcned the tolerant eclective spirit of the
empire-the intolerance and absoluteness of their religion and the exclusiveness of their
society. All other religions of the empire admitted compromise and eclecticism, were
willing to dwell rather on the points of contact with their neighbors than on the contrast.
But Christianity admitted no compromise, was intolerant to all other systems. It must be
admitted that in this way it was rather unfair to other cults which offered comfort and
spiritual support to thousands of the human race before the dawn of Christianity. But we
shall not blame, when we recognize that for its own life and mission it was necessary to
show itself at first intolerant. Many heathen would gladly accept Christ along with
Mithra and Isis and Serapis. But Christianity demanded complete separation. The Jesus
cult could tolerate no rival: it claimed to be absolute, and worshippers of Jesus must be
separate from the world. The Christian church was absolute in its demands; would not
rank with, but above, all worships. This spirit was of course at enmity with that of the
day which enabled rival cults to co-exist with the greatest indifference. Add to this the
exclusive state of Christian society. No pious heathen who had purified his soul by
asceticism and the sacraments of antiquity could be admitted into membership unless he
renounced things dear to him and of some spiritual value. In every detail of public life
this exclusive spirit made itself felt. Christians met at night and held secret assemblies in
which they were reputed to perpetrate the most scandalous crimes. Thyestean banquets,
Oedipean incest, child murder, were among the charges provoked by their exclusiveness.
(e) Obstinatio:
Add to this also the sullen obstinacy with which Christians met the demands of
imperial power-a feature very offensive to Rein governors. Their religion would be left
them undisturbed if they would only render formal obedience to the religion of the state.
Roman clemency and respect for law were baffled before Christian obstinacy. The
martyr's courage appeared as sheer fanaticism. The pious Aurelius refers but once to
Christianity, and in the words øéëx ðáñÜôáîéò, psileôñ parañtaxis, "sheer obstinacy,"
and Aristides apparently refers to Christianity as ášèÜäåéá, authañdeia, stubbornness.
» See:PERSECUTIONS, 18
(f) Aggressiveness against Pagan Faith:
But the Christians were not content with an uncompromising withdrawal from the
practices of heathen worship: they also actively assailed the pagan cult. To the
Christians they became doctrines of demons. The imperial cult and worship of the
Genius of the emperor were very unholy in their sight. Hence, they fell under the
charges of disloyalty to the emperor and might be proved guilty of majestas. They held
in contempt the doctrine that the greatness of Rome was due to her reverence for the
gods; the Christians were atheists from the pagan point of view. And as religion was a
political concern for the welfare of the state, atheism was likely to call down the wrath of
divinity to the subversion of the state.
(g) Christianos ad leones: Public Calamities:
Very soon when disasters began to fall thickly upon the Roman empire, the blame
was laid upon the Christians. In early days Rome had often sought to appease the gods
by introducing external cults; at other times oriental cults were expelled in the interests
of public morality. Now in times of disaster Christians became the scapegoats. If
famine, drought, pestilence, earthquake or any other public calamity threatened, the cry
was raised "the Christians to the lions" (see NERO; PERSECUTIONS, 12). This view
of Christianity as subversive of the empire survived the fall of Rome before Alaric. The
heathen forgot-as the apologists showed-that Rome had been visited by the greatest
calamities before the Christian era and that the Christians were the most self-sacrificing
in periods of public distress, lending succor to pagan and Christian alike.
(h) Odium generis humani:
All prejudices against Christianity were summed up in odium generis humani,
"hatred for the human race" or society, which was reciprocated by "hatred of the human
race toward them." The Christians were bitterly hated, not only by the populace, but by
the upper********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************cannot find epithets strong enough. Tacitus reckons the Christian faith among the
"atrocious and abominable things" (atrocia aut pudenda) which flooded Rome, and
further designates it superstitio exitiabilis ("baneful superstition," Ann. xv.44), Suetonius
(Ner. 16) as novel and maletic (novae ac maleficae), and the gentle Pliny (Ep. 97) as vile
and indecent (prava immodica). Well might Justus say the Christians were "hated and
reviled by the whole human race." This opprobrium was accentuated by the attacks of
philosophy upon Christianity. When the attention of philosophers was drawn to the new
religion, it was only to scorn it. This attitude of heathen philosophy is best understood in
reading Celsus and the Christian apologists.
(4) The Roman Empire Not the Only Disturbing Factor.
Philosophy long maintained its aloofness from the religion of a crucified Galilean:
the "wise" were the last to enter the kingdom of God. When later Christianity had
established itself as a permanent force in human thought, philosophy deigned to consider
its claims. But it was too late; the new faith was already on the offensive. Philosophy
discovered its own weakness and began to reform itself by aiming at being both a
philosophy and a religion. This is particularly the case in neo-Platonism (in Plotinus) in
which reason breaks down before revelation and mysticism. Another force disturbing
the peace of the Christian church was the enemy within the fold. Large numbers of
heathen had entered the ecclesia bringing with them their oriental or Greek ideas, just as
Jewish Christians brought their Judaism with them. This led to grave heresies, each
system of thought distorting in its own way the orthodox faith. Later another ally joined
the forces against Christianity-reformed paganism led by an injured priesthood. At
first the cause of Christianity was greatly aided by the fact that there was no exclusive
and jealous priesthood at the head of the Greek-Roman religion, as in the Jewish and
oriental religions. There was thus no dogma and no class interested in maintaining a
dogma. Religious persecution is invariably instituted by the priesthood, but in the
Roman world it was not till late in the day when the temples and sacrifices were falling
into desuetude that we find a priesthood as a body in opposition. Thus the Roman
imperial power stood not alone in antagonism to Christianity, but was abetted and often
provoked to action by (a) popular hate, (b) philosophy, (c) pagan priesthood, (d) heresies
within the church.
IV. Relations between the Roman Empire and Christianity.
We have here to explain how the attitude of the Roman empire, at first friendly or
indifferent, developed into one of fierce conflict, the different stages in the policy-if we
can speak of any uniform policy-of the Roman government toward Christianity, the
charges or mode of procedure on which Christians were condemned, and when and how
the profession of Christianity (nomen ipsum) became a crime. We shall see the Roman
empire progressively weakening and Christianity gaining ground. For the sake of
clearness we shall divide the Roman empire into six periods, the first from the
commencement of the Christian era till the last of the Julio-Claudian dynasty.
1. Beginning of Christianity until Death of Nero, 68 AD:
At first the presence of the Christian faith was unknown to Roman authorities. It
appeared first merely as a reformed and more spiritual Judaism; its earliest preachers and
adherents alike never dreamed of severing from the synagogue. Christians were only
another of the Jewish sects to which a Jew might belong while adhering to Mosaism and
Judaism. But soon this friendly relation became strained on account of the expanding
views of some of the Christian preachers, and from the introduction of Gentile
proselytes. The first persecutions for the infant church came entirely from exclusive
Judaism, and it was the Jews who first accused Christians before the
| Site Tools |
|
|
|
|
|
Verse of the Day |
|
|
