Callia Rulmu, «Between Ambition and Quietism: the Socio-political Background of 1 Thessalonians 4,9-12», Vol. 91 (2010) 393-417
Assuming the Christian group of Thessalonica to be a professional voluntary association of hand-workers (probably leatherworkers), this paper argues that 1 Thessalonians in general, and especially the injunction to «keep quiet» (4,11), indicates Paul’s apprehension regarding how Roman rulers, city dwellers, and Greek oligarchies would perceive an association converted to an exclusive cult and eager to actively participate in the redistribution of the city resources. Paul, concerned about a definite practical situation rather than a philosophically or even theologically determined attitude, delivered precise counsel to the Thessalonians to take a stance of political quietism as a survival strategy.
401
BETWEEN AMBITION QUIETISM
AND
after his death seems to indicate that his decree had only a mild
impact on the actual situation. Tiberius and Gaius apparently did
not experience too much trouble with voluntary associations, but
Dio Cassius (60.6.6) reports a ban decreed by Claudius on the sale
of cooked meat and hot water in the streets of Rome. As Cotter
suggests, “these measures would have made it almost impossible
for any group to meet publicly for any length of time and escape
notice â€. The ban was therefore intended to keep revolutionary
groups from meeting under the form of a “social group†38.
Up to this point, it seems that voluntary associations were
considered troublesome and potentially dangerous only in Rome
and the Italian peninsula. However, it is logical to suppose that
Roman officials sent to administer the provinces carried with them
such a congenital distrust. Pliny, governor of Bithynia, had an
epistolary exchange with Trajan about the request of a city to form
a company of firemen limited to 150 individuals (Ep. X.33.3). He
felt compelled to inform the Emperor, who responded: “...we must
r e m e m b e r that it is societies like these which have been
responsible for the political disturbances in your provinces,
particularly in its towns. If people assemble for a common
purpose, whatever name we give them and for whatever reason,
they soon turn into a political association†(X.34.1) 39. Another
promulgation of the Senate before 136 CE and recorded in the
Roman Digest 47.22.1 denied soldiers the right to have clubs in the
camp and prohibited other citizens from organizing in illegal
societies. Only poor people were allowed to meet once a month for
the sake of religion and to gather contributions. The law apparently
applied to all the Provinces, but it was necessary to specify it later
on : the decree of the senate dates before 136 CE, since the edict is
mentioned in CIL XIV 2112 (= ILS 7212, Lanuvium, Italy, 136 CE).
and legitimate ones is rightly questioned by Ascough on the basis of CIL VI
2193 (= ILS 4966, Rome, early I CE): ASCOUGH, Voluntary Associations, 398,
n. 246.
COTTER, “The Collegiaâ€, 80-81.
38
For the texts of the letters see: Pliny the Younger. Correspondence with
39
Trajan from Bithynia, Epistles X (trans. W. Williams) (Warminster 1990). For
a c r i t i c a l comment on Pliny’s request and Trajan’s response see
A.N. SHERWIN-WHITE, The Letters of Pliny. A Historical and Social Com-
mentary (Oxford 1966) 606-610.