English Conferences of Ernest Renan: Rome and Christianity. Marcus Aurelius — Themes and Context

The Roman Contribution to Christian Unity

Renan’s first lecture establishes his central claim: “Christianity is a Roman work” not because Romans invented its theology, but because Rome supplied the conditions for its universal expansion. He points to the Roman road system, the common language of Greek and Latin, and the legal concept of a universal empire as prerequisites for a universal church. The Roman genius for organization, administration, and law gave Christianity a model for ecclesiastical hierarchy. Renan notes that the very term “Catholic” implies a universality that mirrors Roman imperial ideology. He argues that without Rome, Christianity might have remained a collection of scattered Jewish and Gentile communities, never coalescing into a single authoritative body.

The Legendary Reconciliation of Peter and Paul

In the second lecture, Renan examines how the early church constructed a harmonized tradition around the apostles Peter and Paul. He observes that historical evidence suggests sharp conflict between Paul’s Gentile mission and the Jewish-Christian faction associated with Peter. Yet by the late first century, Christian writers began to depict the two apostles as co-founders of the Roman church, united in doctrine and martyrdom. Renan calls this process an “instinctive travail” that reshaped history to match communal desire. He draws a striking analogy to modern Italy, where portraits of Victor Emmanuel and Pius IX were hung side by side, creating a retrospective legend of harmony. The legend of Peter and Paul, Renan argues, served to legitimize Roman ecclesiastical authority by grounding it in a dual apostolic foundation.

The Formation of Ecclesiastical Authority in Rome

The third lecture traces how Rome became the center of ecclesiastical authority. Renan emphasizes the practical advantages of the Roman church: its location in the imperial capital, its relative wealth, and its reputation for orthodoxy. He notes that the Roman church’s claim to apostolic foundation by both Peter and Paul gave it a unique prestige. Renan describes a process of “concessions” in which Paul’s followers gradually absorbed Peter’s, while the Jewish-Christian Ebionite communities grew poorer and more isolated. The money of the Pauline churches, he writes, supported “glorious poor men” who preserved the primitive spirit. Over time, the distinction between parties faded, and a unified Catholic Church emerged, with Rome as its undisputed head. Renan’s analysis is materialist in its attention to resources and organization, not just ideas.

Readers approaching this volume should note that Renan writes as a critical historian, not a believer. His lectures were delivered to a liberal Protestant audience in London and reflect the intellectual currents of the 1880s: comparative religion, historical criticism, and a confidence in scientific method. The lecture on Marcus Aurelius, though shorter, offers a counterpoint: the Stoic emperor represents the best of pagan virtue, yet his reign saw the consolidation of the church he opposed. Renan’s style is elegant and occasionally ironic, and his analogies—such as the Victor Emmanuel–Pius IX parallel—reveal his willingness to apply critical methods to contemporary as well as ancient history.