The imperial administration template vs the Christian thesis of the single god
At the beginning of the 3rd century to counter relativist argumentations, Origen[1] fell back on Babel and the « angels of the nations »
. Diversity, to him, is of necessity secondary, it comes about after humans, remote from the East and « its light »
chose in their pride to climb the heavens by building a clay tower that soon collapsed. In this context, the angels take up the role devolved by Symmachus to the genii of towns and cities. But angels are not gods. The list of gods provided by Celsus is revealing of the way in which he shifts from a classical analysis of the diversity of customary norms to a different type of analysis for the apportioning or allocation of the divine entities within a global geographic and geopolitical space.
In the framework of a theologico-political polemic belonging to the first half of the 20th century, Erik Peterson compiled the record of Pagano-Christian propensities towards a metaphor of the divine in terms of imperial administration. On the Christian side, the object, notably in the wake of Philo of Alexandria[2] (Decalogue 61) and Origen (Contra Celsum VIII, 35) is as much to resolve the problem of the status of angels in their relation to the Single God as to attack non-Christian gods. Peterson quotes the Pseudo-Clementine Writings X 14,2 that provide the theory for this approach: « For as there is one Caesar, and he has under him many judges, for example prefects, consuls, tribunes and other officers, - in like manner, we think, that while there is one god greater than all, yet still that these gods are ordained in this world, after the likeness of those officers of whom we have spoken, subject indeed to that greater God, yet ruling us. »
Half a century later, Arnaldo Momigliano showed how this line of thought arose in the context of a pagan reaction to the Christian ideology of a sovereign single god: the idea of Augustus[3]' empire as a providential preparation to the dissemination of Christianity was an idea developed by early Christian thinkers at a time when Christians were still the victims of persecutions. This idea appeared in a work by Saint Justin which has been lost, it was developed by Origen then reprised notably by John Chrysostom[4] and Ambrose. Momigliano notes Celsus' position and his vision of an empire protecting diversities and nuances, that is both religious pluralism and the nations' particularities. This idea was to be developed and systematically updated by Julian[5]: in Against the Galilaeans, his unnamed and unnameable god had deputed the Sun to be universal sovereign whereof all the other gods were subordinated features. According to Momigliano, this pagan theology of the empire could arise only from a reaction to Christianity.
The nub of the problematics of apportionment of protecting gods between cities and nations did not originate first in the Greco-Roman tradition. Only when up against Christianity's claims did polytheist thinkers end up constructing « supra-national »
pantheonic models. Or, more simply put, only then did this most dubious assumption took shape according to which Christianity and its contemporary paganisms were culturally autonomous and brutally conflicting phenomena.