The Shepherd, October 2004
SAINT PAUL’S VISIT TO ATHENS, 3
St Paul and the Philosophers
Among those listening to St Paul in the Agora were philosophers of the Epicurean and Stoic schools. The essence of Greek philosophy had been the spirit of enquiry, asking deep questions about the meaning of life. At the time of the Roman Empire, although the schools of philosophy founded by Plato and Aristotle still existed, the most important philosophies of the day were Epicureanism and Stoicism.
The Epicureans were virtually atheists, the scientific humanists of their day. They believed that the world came into being by chance, by an accidental concourse of atoms. The universe could explain itself without any need to refer to a creator. If there actually were gods - as distinct from mere impressions and phantoms originating in the mind - they enjoyed a life of untroubled tranquillity in heaven and did not concern themselves with the world of men. A man’s life ended completely at his death, so he need fear no punishments beyond the grave. Man was the master of his own fate, “the measure of all things.” Happiness was the chief “good” of man, - originally meaning an inner repose that could not be disturbed by outward circumstances. At its best, the pursuit of happiness meant seeking also the happiness of others, and therefore exercising self-denial, but inevitably, with no creator who required moral behaviour from his creatures, and no fear of judgment in a future life, it degenerated into a refined selfishness, with expediency dictating actions, or worse still (particularly under its Roman followers) gross sensuality and un-checked self-gratification. By the law of unintended consequences, Epicureanism ended up as - “Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” These, or very similar words were often inscribed on funeral stones. St Paul would write to the Corinthians, “If the dead rise not, ‘let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.’” If there was no resurrection, then the Apostle’s own sufferings had been in vain.
St Paul, “the Jew of Tarsus,” a “citizen of no mean city” would have been no stranger to Stoic philosophy. Tarsus was a renowned centre of Stoic philosophy, which exercised a strong influence on the intellectual life of its citizens. St Paul must have listened to many a discourse in the porches and market place of Tarsus. The founder of the system in the fourth century BC was Zeno, a native of Cyprus, who had taught in the Stoa Poikilé, the Ornamental Stoa (or Porch) inAthens, hence the name. If the Epicureans were to all intents and purposes atheists, the Stoics were, in some sense at least, pantheists. They believed that the universe was meticulously ordered in accordance with a Supreme Reason, the Logos, which existed in all things and thereby “made the whole world kin.” This Supreme Reason organised and laid down law and order for matter, but did not create it, because matter was inseparable from the Supreme Reason - in fact it was part of himself. By living in harmony with reason - or the voice of conscience - a man could rise above all the difficulties of life and acquire “apatheia,” that is, “passionlessness” or “detachment,” so that he could endure all things in silence and with dignity. If life became too unbearable, he could escape the disgrace of falling below his Stoic ideals by committing suicide.
“Good” was not identified with happiness in the Epicurean sense. Wealth, health, success, all the things valued by most men were “things indifferent.” Duty, Justice, Fortitude and Temperance were virtues. True religion was not sacrificing bullocks to the gods, but acting justly, which echoed the Hebrew prophets, especially Isaiah (Esaias). The Stoics practiced self-examination at the end of each day in order to be aware of their moral state, since they believed it was both a man’s duty and his happiness to approach ever more closely to the ideal of the perfect man, one who viewed life with austere indifference and stern endurance. Perhaps we can trace something of this studied and controlled philosophy in the Apostle’s Letters. We feel awe before the great courage and fortitude with which St Paul faced and accepted constant opposition, grievous hardships and severe physical punishment. “For I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, to be content. I can bear either abasement or abundance. In all these things and amongst all men I have been taught the secret (literally: Ihave been initiated) to be be full or to be hungry, to suffer need or to abound,” he would write to the Philippians from his Roman prison. But we know St Paul as a warm-hearted and compassionate man, whereas the Stoic ideal was never to feel human emotion. And unlike the Stoic, who believed he could justly feel pride and satisfaction in self-conquest and in his superiority to the casualties of life, St Paul readily attributed his victories to the Grace of God, and admitted his weaknesses and need for help - “I can do all things in Him (Christ) Who strengthens me.”
He would remind the Galatians that in Baptism there is “neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor freeman, neither male nor female.” If the Epicureans practiced individualism, the Stoics held to the idea of community. They constantly appealed to the greatest of all philosophers and moral heroes, Socrates. Echoing his “I am a citizen of Athens but also of the world,” the Stoics taught, “There is no difference between Greeks and barbarians; the world is our city.” Seneca urged the far treatment of slaves, not out of pity, but because it was reasonable, since they too were men. The Stoics took their public duties seriously and practiced beneficence, including the forgiveness of injuries. Some of the noblest men in ancient history were guided by Stoic philosophy. The philosophers were not only lecturers but also preachers. Among the Romans some also acquired the status of “father-confessors.” Wealthy Roman citizens maintained a philosopher to guide them, much as barons in the Middle Ages had their family chaplain.
With its strong moral tone and ethical teaching, Stoicism appeared in some ways to approximate to Christianity. But in other ways it was the enemy. It has been said that if Christianity is the School of Humility, then Stoicism is the School of Pride. To be untroubled by human emotion, unmoved by circumstances, was cause for pride. A man had to rely solely on his own will-power. There was no place for a Saviour Who had made atonement for sin and was ever ready to aid those who called on Him in their human weakness. A man might be “a fragment of God” or “His offspring,” but there was no clear concept of a personal God with Whom one could have a relationship either here or hereafter. At Athens we see St Paul facing two of the most constant enemies of Christianity - atheistic materialism and pride. He dealt with both philosophies by putting forth what was true in the them and showing where they were lacking or in error.
…To be completed in the next issue. 
|
