![]() Christians, well-known for bucking the religious pluralism of the empire and denying the existence of all gods but their own, might have been uncomfortable in such a setting.īeyond this general religious diversity, a Christian recruit would also have faced mandated religious practices in the army. The name of Jupiter Dolichenus is recorded on a surviving papyrus fragment as the cohors XX Palmyrenorum’s password for the morning of May 28, 239 CE-suggesting that the god’s name was familiar enough to be easily memorable for all the soldiers in the unit. Jupiter Dolichenus, a fusion of Hittite and Roman gods, was venerated in one such mystery cult. The army thus became a melting pot of ethnicities and religions, with everything from traditional polytheistic religious practices to mystery cults venerated within its ranks. The army, and particularly its auxilia units, drew recruits from across the empire and beyond. Christians might have found some of these aspects of army life disagreeable.īased on the surviving writings of church leaders, however, the most distasteful aspect of the army for Christians would have been its religious character. In this capacity, soldiers did everything from chasing bandits to executing criminals to arresting Christians during periods of persecution. Roman soldiers had always been used in a law enforcement capacity, but in the second and third centuries detachments of soldiers were increasingly posted among civilians to maintain order. Since most provinces did not have any force that we would equate with law enforcement, soldiers might also be assigned duties that we would classify as “policing” today. There were other aspects of army life that Christians opposed. The emerging Christian faith, in general, remained opposed to violence church leaders taught that Christians should avoid a career that entailed killing, even in war. First, serving in the army involved the possibility of warfare, though the likelihood of a soldier experiencing violence varied-some border provinces along the Rhine and Danube were always ripe for violence, while troops stationed in Egypt or Africa might have enjoyed relatively peaceful careers for much of the imperial era. Rather, Origen argued that Christians benefited the empire through their prayers and their holy lives.Ĭhristian aversion to the army sprang from several factors. ![]() ![]() Origen, an early Christian theologian and scholar, attempted to counter Celsus tellingly, Origen did not dispute the accusation. Celsus, a 2 nd-century Greek philosopher, wrote an anti-Christian treatise which included the charge that Christians shirked their civic duty by refusing to participate in public life and serve in the army. What drove this complicated relationship between the early church and the Roman army? Christians and ViolenceĬhristian hostility toward the army was probably always the majority view. Many (though not all) Christian leaders spoke negatively of the army and discouraged Christians from serving in the ranks, yet there is abundant evidence that Christians did serve in the army. In fact, the first Christians displayed a complicated relationship with the army. With this beginning, we might expect the churches that sprang up after Jesus to shun violence-and particularly to shun the Roman army which was responsible for his death. Jesus is said to have discouraged his followers from violence when he was arrested and executed by Roman soldiers ( Luke 22:47-53). According to the canonical gospels, Jesus taught his followers to love their enemies and to acquiesce to a violent person instead of resisting ( Matthew 5:38-45). Reconstructing the worldview of Jesus has proven challenging for historians, though many agree that nonviolence was a core component of Jesus’ teaching. The Christian faith evolved from the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish teacher who was executed by the Romans around 33 CE.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |