342 - The Christians As the Romans Saw Them

The Christians As the Romans Saw Them
By Robert L. Wilken
New Haven, Yale University Press, 1984. 214 pp. $17.95.

The author, Professor of the History of Christianity at the University, of Notre Dame lucidly presents paganism's case against early Christianity. Relying chiefly on the works of five pagan statesmen and intellectuals (Pliny, Galen, Celsus, Porphyry, and the emperor Julian), Wilken unpacks the pagans' arguments in a sympathetic manner, enabling

344 - The Christians As the Romans Saw Them

readers to view the burgeoning Christian movement through the eyes of its critics.

Of course. not all of the pagans' remarks were pejorative. Christianity could be described in language appropriate to a political club or a philosophical school and could be praised for leading ordinary people to lives of heroic virtue. But more often, we hear the criticisms: Christianity was a private enthusiasm that contributed nothing to social solidarity or political order, it referenced a deity whose actions were capricious and limited to particular groups, times, and places; its adoration of a human being compromised its monotheistic profession.

Wilken is particularly adept at tracing the progressive sophistication of the pagans' arguments. Thus while Pliny, writing about A.D. 112, knew little about specific Christian beliefs and practices, Galen by mid-century could comment on the Genesis account of creation. Celsus, writing about the same time, used his more complete knowledge of the Gospels to attack the Virgin Birth stories. Late in the third century, the philosopher Porphyry revealed his extensive knowledge of both Hebrew and Christian Scripture in his criticism of Christianity. And from the emperor Julian who reigned from A.D. 361-363, we have the trenchant critique of a former Christian who "converted" to paganism. As an "insider." Julian was able to deal Christianity, a devastating blow.

Wilken argues that Christianity's most vulnerable point, its apostasy from Judaism, was cleverly seized upon by, Julian as the focus of his attack. Julian's plan to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple is thus considered his "coup de grace" against Christianity (p. 194), for if Jews could add Temple sacrifice to the other practices of their still-flourishing religion, they would have the means to prove false Christianity's claim that it had superseded Judaism and inherited its time-honored traditions. Wilken styles Julian's attempt "the final, and most brilliant, stroke in the ancient conflict between paganism and Christianity" (p. 195).

Since Wilken directs his work to an educated but non-specialized audience, he is careful to paint the historical background of each figure, to remind readers of differences between their worldviews and those of the ancient writers. His sensitive handling of the sources helps us appreciate the critics' point of view. He also suggests ways in which Christian intellectuals were prompted to clarify their positions and develop the implications of their beliefs through the attacks on Christianity. In this respect, we learn how early, Christianity achieved its "self-definition" from its confrontation with critics without, as well as with dissidents within the church.

Some puzzles and problems remain. First, it is noteworthy that many of the key Christian responses were composed decades after the attacks were levelled: Origen wrote Contra Celsum nearly eighty Nears after Celsus composed his True Doctrine; Porphyry's critiques, written in the late third century, were answered by fourth-century theologians, and the fullest rejoinder to Julian's Contra Galilaeos and other works (namely, Cyril of Alexandria's Contra Julianum were composed in the mid-fifth

346 - The Christians As the Romans Saw Them

century. Thus we cannot hold that the Christian responders were "in dialogue" with the pagans, at least not with the pagans they name. Moreover, when we consider that the main audience for the theologians' works was surely other Christians, we must question to what extent the treatises were part of a living debate, to what extent products of a rhetorical tradition. It may well be that the debate became more "literary" and less existentially urgent with the passage of time.

The same point can be made regarding Wilken's reading of Julian's attack upon Christianity. Although Jews continued to flourish and undoubtedly attracted some Christians to their services and festivals (as Wilken has admirably shown in his recent book, John Chrysotom and the Jews), it is possible that later Christian replies to Julian were more literary exercises than tracts for the times. Just as Prudentius' Perisiephanon leads no one to posit pagan persecution of Christians in his era, no more do Cyril's blasts against Julian suggest that Christianity was suffering serious onslaught from either paganism or Judaism in his day. By the middle fourth century, the debate was largely inner-Christian, and from then on, the notable changes were in the casts of Christian characters: Arians, Donatists, Pelagians, Nestorians. Monophysites. Despite the fulminations of bishops, Christians and pagans appear to have lived together more easily, in late antiquity, than we might expect.

Wilken's book is a useful summary of the pagan critique and a welcome addition to the growing literature (and continuing debate) on paganism and Christianity in late antiquity.

Elizabeth A. Clark
Duke University
Durham, North Carolina