The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire Part 35

[88] viii, 45.

[89] vii, 35.

[90] iii, 24. Cf. p. 222.

[91] viii, 35.

[92] viii, 63.

[93] viii, 12.

[94] vii, 68.

[95] viii, 24.

[96] i, 9, _Mithrais ka Sabadiois_.

[97] viii, 60. See note on ch. iii, p. 107.

[98] viii, 67.

[99] Cf. Tert. _de cor. mil._ 11, if a soldier is converted, _aut deserendum statim ut a multis actum, aut,_ etc. The chapter is a general discussion whether military service and Christianity are compatible. Cf. also Tert. _de idol._ 19, _Non convenit sacramento divino et humano, signo Christi et signo diaboli, castris lucis et castris tenebrarum ... quomodo autem bellabit immo quomodo etiam in pace militabit sine gladio quem dominus abstulit? .... omnem postea militem dominus in Petro exarmando discinxit_. Tertullian, it may be remembered, was a soldier's son.

[100] viii, 68. The Greeks used _basileus_ as Emperor.

[101] viii, 69. For this taunt against the Jews, cf. Cicero, _pro Flacco_, 28, 69.

[102] viii, 72.

[103] viii, 73.

[104] viii, 75.

[105] Cf. Clem. Alex. _Strom._ i, 55, who says that hardly any words could be to the many more absurd than the mysteries of the faith.

[106] Clem. Alex. _Protr._ 56 (on idols). _ou gar moi themis empisteusai pote tois apsychois tas tes psyches elpidas_.

[107] This was at all events the view of Clement, _Strom._ i, 19.

_oude katapsephixesthai ton h.e.l.lenon oion te psile te per ton dogmatiothenton autois chromenous phrasei, me synembrainontas eis ten kata meros achri syllnoseos ekkalypsin. pists gar eu mala ho met'

empeirias elegchos, hoti ka teleiotate apadeixis ehurisketai he gnosis ton kategnosmenon_.

[108] It is regrettable that Clement should have flung one of these against the school of Carpocrates, _Strom._ iii, 10.

{262}

CHAPTER IX

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA

Viderint qui Stoic.u.m et Platonic.u.m et dialectic.u.m Christianismum protulerunt.--TERTULLIAN, _de praescr. haeret._ 7.

No one can allege that the Bible has failed to win access for want of metaphysics being applied to it.--MATTHEW ARNOLD, _Literature and Dogma_, p. 121.

Though Celsus had much to say upon the vulgar and servile character of the members of the Christian community, he took the trouble to write a book to refute Christianity; and this book, as we have seen, was written from a more or less philosophical point of view. He professed himself doubtful as to whether his opponents would understand his arguments; but that he wrote at all, and that he wrote as he did, is evidence that the new faith was making its way upward through society, and was gaining a hold upon the cla.s.ses of wealth and education.

[Sidenote: The rise of the Church]

It is not hard to understand this. Though conditions of industry were not what they are to-day, it is likely that conversion was followed by the economic results with which we are familiar. The teaching of the church condemned the vices that war against thrift; and the new life that filled the convert had its inevitable effect in quickening insight and energy. The community insisted on every man having a trade and working at it. With no such end in view, the church must have numbered among its adherents more and more people of wealth and influence in spite of all defections, just as to-day Protestantism in France has power and responsibility out of all proportions to mere numbers. The Emperor Hadrian, is said to have made the observation that in Egypt, whether men worshipped Christ or Serapis, they all worshipped money.[1]

The remark had probably as much truth as such sayings generally have, but we may probably infer that many Christians were punctual in {263} their observance of the duty laid on them to be "not slothful in business."

The first four or five generations of Christians could not, on the whole, boast much culture--so far as their records permit us to judge.

"Not many wise," said Paul, and their fewness has left an impress on the history of the church. A tendency to flightiness in speculation on the one hand, and a stolid refusal to speculate at all on the other, are the marks of second century Christianity. The early attempts made to come to terms with "human wisdom" were not happy, either at the centre or on the circ.u.mference of the body. The adjustment of the Gospel story to Old Testament prophecy was not a real triumph of the human mind, nor were the efforts at scientific theology any better.

Docetism, with its phantom Christ, and Gnosticism with its ant.i.thesis of the just G.o.d and the good G.o.d, were not likely to satisfy mankind.

Simple people felt that these things struck at their life, and they rejected them, and began to suspect the intellect. The century saw the growth of ecclesiastical system, episcopal order and apostolic tradition. Men began to speak of the "old church," the "original church" and the "catholic church," and to cleave to its "rule of faith"

and "tradition of sound words." By 200 A.D. the church was no longer a new thing in the world; it had its own "ancient history" without going back to Judaism and the old covenant; it had its legends; and it could now speak like the Greeks of "the old faith of our fathers."

As it rose in the world, the church came into contact with new problems. As long as men were without culture, they were not troubled by the necessity of reconciling culture with faith, but the time had come when it must be done in earnest. Wealth was bringing leisure, and refinement, and new intellectual outlooks and interests. Could the church do with them? was the urgent question. Was it possible for a man to be at once a Greek gentleman of wealth and culture and a simple Christian like the humble grandfathers of his fellow-believers--or like his own slaves, the fuller and the cobbler of his household? We shall understand the problem better if we can make some acquaintance with the daily life and environment of these converts of the better cla.s.ses.

In the second and third books of his _Pedagogue_ Clement of {264} Alexandria deals with the daily round and deportment of Christians, for whom extravagance and luxury might be a real temptation. A few points, gathered here and there from the two books, will suffice. He recommends simplicity of diet with health and strength as its objects--the viands, which the Gospels suggest, fish and the honeycomb, being admirable for these purposes.[2] Wine provokes the pa.s.sions--"I therefore admire those who have chosen the austere life and are fond of water, the medicine of temperance." "Boys and girls should as a general rule abstain from the [other] drug"--wine.[3] Good manners at table--no noisy gulping, no hiccupping, no spilling, no soiling of the couch, no s...o...b..ring of hand or chin--"how do you think the Lord drank, when he became man for us?"[4] Vessels of silver and gold, furniture of rare woods inlaid with ivory, rugs of purple and rich colours, are hardly necessary for the Christian--"the Lord ate from a cheap bowl and made his disciples lie on the ground, on the gra.s.s, and he washed their feet with a towel about him--the lowly-minded G.o.d and Lord of the universe. He did not bring a silver foot-bath from heaven to carry about with him. He asked the Samaritan woman to give him to drink in a vessel of clay as she drew it up from the well,--not seeking the royal gold, but teaching us to quench thirst easily." "In general as to food, dress, furniture and all that pertains to the house, I say at once, it should all be according to the inst.i.tutions of the Christian man, fitting appropriately person, age, pursuits and time."[5]

[Sidenote: Christian manners]

Clement pa.s.ses from the table to a general discussion of manners and habits. Man is a "laughing animal," but he should not laugh all the time. Humour is recommended rather than wit (_charientisteon ou gelotopoieteon_, 45, 4). "The orderly relaxation of the face which preserves its harmony" is a smile (46, 3)--giggling and excessive laughter are perversions. Care should be taken in conversation to avoid low talk, and the scoff that leads the way to insolence, and the argument for barren victory--"man is a creature of peace," as the greeting "Peace with you" shows us. Some talkers are like old shoes--only the tongue left for mischief. {265} There are many tricks unfit for a Christian gentleman--spitting, coughing, scratching and other things; and he would do well to avoid whistling and snapping his fingers to call the servants. Fidgetting is the mark of mental levity (_symbolon kouphotetos_).[6]

In the care of one's person, oil may be used; it is a sign of the luxury of the times that scents and unguents are so universally applied to such various purposes. The heathen crowned their heads with flowers and made it a reproach that Christians gave up the practice. But, as Tertullian said, they smelt with their noses; and Clement urges that on the head flowers are lost to sight and smell, and chill the brain. A flower-garden in spring, with the dew upon all its colours, and all the natural scents of the open air, is another thing. The Christian too will remember--Tertullian also has this thought--that it was another crown that the Lord wore[7]--_ex spinis opinor, et tribulis_. The real objection was that the custom was a.s.sociated with idol-worship.

Silk and purple and pearls are next dealt with--and earrings, "an outrage on nature"--if you pierce the ear, why not the nose too?[8]

All peculiarity of dress should be avoided, and so should cosmetics--or else you may remind people of the Egyptian temple, outside all splendour, inside a priest singing a hymn to a cat or a crocodile.[9]

"Temperance in drink and symmetry in food are wonderful cosmetics and quite natural."[10] Let a woman work with her hands, and health will come and bring her beauty. She should go veiled to church, like aeneas'

wife leaving Troy.[11] Men may play at ball, take country walks, and try gardening and drawing water and splitting billets.[12]

Finger-rings are allowed for them--gold rings, to be used as seals for security against the slaves. {266} "Let our seals be a dove, or a fish, or a ship running before the wind, or a lyre, or a ship's anchor"--not an idol's face, or a sword or a cup or something worse.[13] Men should wear their hair short (unless it is curly), grow their beards and keep their moustaches trimmed with the scissors.[14]

Our slaves we should treat as ourselves, for they are men as we; "G.o.d"

(as a verse, perhaps from Menander, puts it) "is the same for all, free or slave, if you think of it."[15]

All these admonitions imply an audience with some degree of wealth.

The Christian artisan of Celsus had no temptation to use a silver foot-bath or to plaster himself with cosmetics. It may also be remarked that the man who gives the advice shows himself well acquainted with the ways of good society--and perhaps of society not so well gifted with taste. With all this refinement went education. The children of Christian parents were being educated, and new converts were being made among the cultured cla.s.ses, and the adjustment of the new faith and the old culture was imperative. The men to make it were found in a succession of scholars, learned in all the wisdom of Greece, enthusiastic for philosophy and yet loyal to the Gospel tradition.

The first of these, whose name we know, was Pantaenus; but beyond his name there is little to be known of him. Eusebius says that he began as a Stoic philosopher and ended as a Christian missionary to India.[16] His pupil, Clement, is of far greater importance in the history of Christian thought.

[Sidenote: His cla.s.sical training]

Of Clement again there is little to be learnt beyond what can be gathered from his own writings. He alludes himself to the death of the Emperor Commodus as being "194 years, 1 month and 13 days" after the birth of Christ (it was in 192 A.D.); and Eusebius quotes a pa.s.sage from a contemporary letter which shows that Clement was alive in 211 A.D., and another written in or about 215, which implies that he was dead.[17] We have also an indication from Eusebius that his activity as a teacher in Alexandria lasted from 180 {267} to 202 or 203.[18] We may then a.s.sume that Clement was born about the middle of the century.

Epiphanius says that Clement was either an Alexandrine or an Athenian.

A phrase to be quoted below suggests that he was not an Alexandrine, and it has been held possible that he came from Athens.[19] It also seems that he was born a pagan.[20] Perhaps he says this himself when he writes: "rejoicing exceedingly and renouncing our old opinions we grow young again for salvation, singing with the prophecy that chants 'How good is G.o.d to Israel.'"[21]