THE BAPTISM OF SENECA

Lucius Annaeus Seneca (3 BC-65 AD) was a famous Roman Stoic of Spanish origin, better known for his noble principles and a magnificent quasi-Socratic death, epitomizing the appropriation of the Greek Stoic virtues by Rome, than for his fabulous, uncharacteristically non-Stoic wealth (although some say that the allegations about his riches were spread by his detractors), or for his stern, unsympathetic persona, highly unlikely to have any real friends, but only admirers, preferring to admire from a certain emotional distance. (I suspect this to have been the deserved lot of all Stoics.) The following passage from his Moral Epistles bears testimony to that:

“I enclose a copy of the letter which I wrote to Marullus at the time when he had lost his little son and was reported to be womanish in his grief, a letter where I have not observed the usual form of condolence: for I did not believe that he should be handled gently, since, in my opinion, he deserved criticism, rather than consolation. When a man is stricken and is finding it most difficult to endure a grievous wound, one must humor him for a while; let him satisfy his grief or at any rate work off the first shock; but those who have assumed an indulgence in grief ought to be rebuked, and ought to learn that there are certain follies even in tears.”

Seneca was and is highly regarded as a Stoic philosopher, although he was by no means original, but rather a popularizer. It is probably due to the fact of learning many Stoic doctrines from Seneca’s epistles, and his other writings, that he has been so highly revered.

Returning to the question of his exorbitant wealth, there are several pieces of evidence which make unlikely that the charges have been concocted. According to Dio Cassius, much of this money was acquired through the practice of unscrupulous usury, his victim being Britain. He adds that Seneca’s horrendous interest rates had caused a massive revolt in Britain, led by the legendary Queen Boadicea.

Now, do not get me wrong, talking so much about Seneca’s negative sides, and so little about his admirable qualities. The latter can be ascertained from any of his biographies, whereas, his philosophy being entirely unoriginal, there is too little to say of it, either. The reason why I concentrate on Seneca’s flaws is because he would somehow become a poster boy righteous pagan for the early Christians. Somewhat surprisingly, Dante does not consider him a Christian, but places him, with Diogenes, in the pleasant First Circle. The reason for my surprise is that several Christian Fathers did insist on him being a Christian convert! Even St. Jerome honestly believes in the story how Seneca had a meeting with Apostle Paul and was baptized by the great Saint personally.

It is acceptable of course for the Christian Church to embrace certain principles of pagan Stoicism as their own, and there is no reason to protest too much against the story of Seneca’s Baptism, although it has to be false. But the choice of the interesting figure of Seneca as a heroic Christian convert tells something about the Church herself, by transferring Seneca’s obtruding traits on the character of his admirer.