When Decimus Magnus Ausonius, a historical figure, has confirmed that Gratillonius is a Mithraist, he responds:
"'Well, I'm Christian myself, but hold that to be no grounds for scorning the ancients or any upright contemporaries who believe otherwise. Surely God is too great to be comprehended in a single creed, and we mortals do best simply to pay our due respects and cultivate our gardens.'" (p. 98)
Is this speech anachronistic? We are familiar with this kind of tolerance but do not expect it from a Christian of that period. Ausonius' speech goes against the beliefs that Christianity is a unique revelation, that it is the only way to salvation and that Christians are obliged to try to convert everyone else. He reduces Christianity to a single creed, all of them comprehending some aspect of God.
3 comments:
As Poul's narrative voice notes, Ausonius was deeply steeped in traditional Roman culture, and gave Christ the sort of formal respect that his great-great-grandfather would have given Jupiter as head of the Roman state cult.
In other words, he was a Christian because it was necessary for political reasons. In his actual 'emotional' orientation and worldview, he was more of a traditional Roman aristocrat.
(This is born out by Ausonius' surviving writings, btw.)
Right on. Glad the Andersons got this right.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
While I agree with Ausonius' tolerance, I would disagree with how "lightly" he seemed to have regarded Christianity. Because I believe it to be the final and definitive revelation from God.
And not all Roman patricians were like Ausonius, there were aristocrats who were sincerely devout. Anicius Manlius Severerinus Boethius (480-525) was not only a patrician steeped in Greco-Roman culture, but also a sincerely devout Catholic. Besides his famous CONSOLATION OF PHILOSOPHY, Boethius also wrote tractates on theological subjects.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment