How and Why Polycarp's Circle Became So Productive Within Christianity

When developing a HISTORICAL picture of how Christianity developed (and leaving out all the fiction in the Acts of the Apostles) two events stand out in the historical black hole that is the second century. The first is the circumstances surrounding Polycarp's historical martyrdom (c. 161 CE), the second is that an inner circle of followers of this 'Polycarp' end up gathering around the young - but eminently WICKED - Roman Emperor Commodus (c. 180 CE).

Let's label these two 'events' (a) and (b).

There are a handful of other vague historical remembrances of course. Ignatius coming to Rome, Marcion coming to Rome, Polycarp coming to Rome, Tatian coming to Rome, Valentinus coming to Rome, Marcellina coming to Rome. Does anyone else notice a pattern?

Nevertheless these all don't have something that (a) and (b) have going for them. Multiple historical witnesses or in the case of (b) the witness of the lead player (Irenaeus) acknowledging the historical circumstance of his age.

Now I am the first to admit that after (b) there are a number of other historical witnesses which start to emerge from the darkness which surrounds Christian origins. Nevertheless (a) and (b) are the real beginnings of anything real in the development of what we call 'the Catholic Church.'

If we are trying to draw a straight line from 'the primitive Church' that emerges from the naive portrait that traditional scholarship likes to develop for us, we immediately find ourselves at a loss. While Polycarp appears at first glance to have a lot of apostolic 'credentials' - i.e. he is said to have followed John, he looked like a wandering Christian ascetic, he claimed to adhere to a very strict interpretation of 'apostolic truth' etc. - a closer examination reveals an under reported motivation to Polycarp's activities.

Polycarp clearly pandered his message to the highest ranks of Roman society. I am not the only one to have noticed this pattern. Charles Evan Hill has argued persuasively that Polycarp was the author of the Letter to Diognetus.

We should only notice who Hill identifies the letter to Diognetus as, namely "an address given at the request of a non-Christian man named Diognetus, who must have been a man of some social standing, very likely a public official, who had shown an interest in Christianity.' (p. 168)

Of course Hill also makes a very convincing case that Polycarp is the unnamed 'presbyter' in many of the passages in Irenaeus' AH. The question he does not answer is why Irenaeus avoids naming him. This has been answered by me in an article linking Polycarp to Lucian of Samosata's crazy Christian martyr Peregrinus at Detering's website.

The point which emerges from the letter to Diognetus, the anonymous teachings of Irenaeus' 'presbyter' in Against the Heresies and a comparative study of the Martyrdom of Polycarp with Lucian's Death of Peregrinus is that Polycarp was ACTIVELY promoting his version of Christianity to the highest ranking officials in the Empire right down to the day of his death. Indeed his self-inflicted martyrdom was an attempt to create a 'spectacle' which would encourage the spread of his brand of Christianity right to the top of the Imperial social ladder.

The point of course is that Polycarp ultimately succeeded. Eusebius reports that these followers of Polycarp who end up in Commodus' inner council chambers were indeed rich, powerful and influential men who sought to reshape Christianity according to Polycarp's ideals (even if they disagreed as to what Polycarp's message was - viz. Irenaeus and Florinus).

Yet as successful as Polycarp's efforts were this chapter in the history of Christianity is never taught in any university.

Can you imagine? 'From the beginning of the second century until its end a crazy but charismatic ascetic preacher of no fixed name and no fixed address attempted to bring Christianity into line with normative Roman social values and the tastes and mores of its leading men. Eventually this man succeeded by attracting a number of wealthy courtiers to the wicked Emperor Commodus who around c. 180 CE encouraged a promulgation of a new canon of the New Testament made up of four gospels, the Acts of the Apostles and the letter of Paul a number of other men and the writings of John slapped onto the back of the Old Testament. This was ultimately 'helped' by an official persecution of the original Markan Church in Alexandria, which used to be the seat of Christianity before it was effectively transferred by these men to Rome ...'

I can just see it now!