The Christian Re-Adoption Of Rome
How Early Christians Turned Early Romans into Proto-Christians
Introduction
In late antiquity and medieval times, Christian scholarship had a crisis. Much of the best philosophical ideas and writings came from Rome and Greece. However, these Grecco-Roman writings all came from Pagans. How could these pagans write good books, treatises, and poems without Christ? How could someone like Seneca write true philosophical ideas without having Christ, the Logos Of God, the way the truth, and the light? Tertullian best exemplifies this controversy in his famous quote:
“He had been at Athens, and had in his interviews (with its philosophers) become acquainted with that human wisdom which pretends to know the truth, whilst it only corrupts it, and is itself divided into its own manifold heresies, by the variety of its mutually repugnant sects. What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church? what between heretics and Christians? Our instruction comes from "the porch of Solomon," who had himself taught that "the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart." (Against Heresies Ch. 7)
This controversy existed in other religions, such as Judaism1, however, this article will focus on a specific way that certain Christians answered this controversy. Many Christians would turn pagan thinkers into Christians, either through reinventing pagan thinkers or reinterpreting them. This article will bring a case study of this strategy being applied to the stoic philosopher Seneca.
Seneca, Often Our Own
The stoic philosopher Seneca was quite popular amongst early Christians. Even Tertullian was a fan of Seneca. In Tertullians 20th chapter of “A Treatise on the Soul” Tertullian quotes the words of Seneca. When Tertullian quotes Senca, he calls him “Seneca saepe noster” or “Seneca, often our own”2. This already shows an attempted reinvention of Tertullian into someone who Christians can call their own. Tertullian therefore gets around answering the question of what Athens and Jerusalem have to do with each other by removing Seneca from being a Pagan thinker and making him more Christian.
It’s somewhat humorous that this is happening to Seneca in particular. Seneca would go on to become the tutor to the emperor Nero. The same Nero who would eventually persecute Christians during the great fire of Rome. This led to Nero becoming something of a famous villain in early Christian spaces. This is best seen in The Book Of Revelation3. Thus it’s ironic that early Christians would so adore the teacher of Nero.
This reinvention of Seneca is taken to the next level with 14 letters. These letters were between the Christian Paul and the Stoic Seneca. There are good reasons to doubt these letters' authenticity. Even in the Renaissance the philologist Lorenzo Valla noted that the writing styles of both authors are unusual here4. Further, the letters are written in Latin. Although it’s not impossible that Paul learned Latin we don’t see any evidence in his writings that he knew Latin. Also, Seneca seems to know about a compilation of the letters of Paul. He writes in letter 1
“your book, that is the one with letters to various cities or provincial capitals containing admirable words of encouragement, was a constant source of moral edification to us.”5
The reference to a collection of the Pauline epistles is annocrynistic to Paul’s time. Therefore it’s clear these letters can’t teach us about Seneca and Paul; but they can teach us about the author of this work, his world, and his approach to Seneca. Specifically, we can see an attempt to turn Seneca into a viable Christian.
Consider all the praising that occurs. Seneca praises Paul a lot. In Letter 1 Seneca praises Paul’s epistles
“your book, that is the one with letters to various cities or provincial capitals containing admirable words of encouragement, was a constant source of moral edification to us.”
And
“So great is their majesty and so resplendent their nobility that I think that there will hardly be enough to be instructed and perfected by them. My dear brother, please accept my best wishes.”
In Letter 5 Seneca laments Paul’s distance:
“We are distressed by your long absence. What is the matter? What keeps you so far away ?”
Letter 7 has even more praise
“I must admit that I am well pleased with your letters to the Galatians, Corinthian and Achaeans. For it is the Holy Spirit in you and above you that expresses lofty, sublime and extremely venerable sentiments. Since you produce such exalted thoughts”
In letter 11 Seneca refers to Paul as my dearest Paul when he says:
“Hail, my dearest Paul, if you, so great and utterly beloved a man, while perhaps not joined to me and my name, but are certainly an intimate acquaintance, your Seneca is well pleased”
It’s clear that the author of these epistles wanted us to view Seneca as someone who views Paul very highly. We also see the other side. Paul accepts Seneca. In Letter 2 Paul is
“pleased to receive your letter, to which I could have replied immediately if I had had a servant6 to deliver the letter.”
He also says
“I have great respect for you. Since you write that you are happy to receive my letters, I consider myself favoured by the opinion of such a great man. I feel sure that such a wise judge and master of so important a prince”
The fourth letter is just Paul saying how much he wants to see Seneca. Here is it’s text in full
“Whenever I hear your letters, I think of your presence and keep thinking that you are here with us. When you finally do come, we will see you in the flesh. Best wishes”
Paul takes it quite far in letter 14 saying:
“Few people are granted as much divine revelation as you in your meditations.”
The message we’re supposed to get here seems to be that Seneca approved of the Christian Paul, and Paul accepted him as well. If you are still not convinced that the author wants you to view Seneca as more Christian look to Letter 7 which is “written” by Seneca
“For it is the Holy Spirit in you and above you that expresses lofty, sublime and extremely venerable sentiments.”
In this letter, Seneca invokes the Holy Spirit. It seems clear that the author is trying to bring Seneca closer to Christianity. This is reflected into the reception history. Jerome even saints Seneca because of these letters. He writes in De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men) XII
“Lucius Annæus Seneca of Cordova, disciple of the Stoic Sotion and uncle of Lucan the Poet, was a man of most continent life, whom I should not place in the category of saints were it not that those Epistles of Paul to Seneca and Seneca to Paul, which are read by many, provoke me. In these, written when he was tutor of Nero and the most powerful man of that time, he says that he would like to hold such a place among his countrymen as Paul held among Christians. He was put to death by Nero two years before Peter and Paul were crowned with martyrdom.”
Notice that Jerome explicitly brings these letters as the reasoning for why Seneca is enough to be in the category of saints.
Therefore what we see is Tertullian and the author of these letters of correspondence reinvention Seneca into a Christian and later writers like Jerome accepting this reinvention. In doing this they are able to do two things at once. They can enjoy and use the works.
The Maimonidean controversy acts as an example
Catholic Library, and Tertullian. “Tertullian, a Treatise on the Soul .” Catholiclibrary.org, catholiclibrary.org/library/view?docId=/Synchronized-EN/anf.000065.Tertullian.ATreatiseontheSoul.html&chunk.id=00000043. Accessed 3 June 2024. This translation from the Catholic Library translates Saepe Noster as “Who is Often on our side.”
The number 666 acts as an example of this. I discuss it in this article
Briones, David E.; Dodson, Joseph R. (2017). "Introduction". Paul and Seneca in Dialogue. Leiden: Brill. p. 1–21. ISBN 9789004341357.
Alcock, Anthony. “Correspondence between Seneca and St Paul.” Www.academia.edu. Academia.edu, www.academia.edu/110821202/Correspondence_between_Seneca_and_St_Paul. Accessed 4 June 2024. This is the translation I’ve used for the entirety of this article. Consider reading it for free here: https://www.academia.edu/110821202/Correspondence_between_Seneca_and_St_Paul.
It’s interesting that it’s assumed Paul has a servant considering we don’t see this in his epistles. Perhaps this means servant of God but I see no reason to think so