The Most Powerful Man in the World: The Controversial Connection Between Paul, Seneca & Nero

Is it possible that Seneca, the great Stoic philosopher, played a pivotal role in Paul’s appeal to Caesar? Two important Saints who helped shape church history thought so, and the evidence is both more complicated and controversial than one might assume.

During the time of Jesus’ Passion, it was Pontius Pilate who was the governor of Judea. He served in that position from 26-36 AD. A couple decades later that position was held by Porcius Festus. He was the procurator from 59-62 AD. He was the one who presided over Paul’s trial in Acts 25. Paul says, “‘If then I am a wrongdoer and have committed anything for which I deserve to die, I do not seek to escape death; but if there is nothing in their charges against me, no one can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar.’ Then Festus when he had conferred with his council, answered, ‘You have appealed to Caesar; to Caesar you shall go’” (Acts 25:11-12).

The “Caesar” referred to here was the great-great grandson of Augustus, Emperor Nero. He was the first imperial villain to the growing church. His depravity knew no limit. As the Church’s best historian, Eusebius writes, “Once Nero’s power was firmly established, he plunged into nefarious vices and took up arms against the God of the Universe…he was the first of the emperors to be declared enemy of the deity” [1].

Tertullian, the 2^nd century Christian theologian (the man who originally coined the term “Trinity”) says, “Nero was the first to let his imperial sword rage against this sect [Christianity] when it was just arising in Rome. We boast that such a man was the originator of our pruning, for anyone who knows him can understand that nothing would have been condemned by Nero unless it were supremely good” [2].

This seems to suggest that Nero was so morally corrupt that in his Rome, vices were not only allowed but encouraged, while at the same time virtues were condemned. So why is it that Paul would appeal to such a man? On what grounds would Paul even begin to approach him? Well, it turns out there may have been a deeper connection between Paul and Nero than previously thought.

Earlier in the Book of Acts, we read of another time Paul stood accused. In 52 AD, the Jewish leaders brought him before a Roman Senator (a proconsul of Achaea) named Gallio, who dismissed the charges immediately as a religious matter of no concern to Roman law. But who was this Gallio who helped Paul? In his Natural History, Pliny the Elder confirms his identity. Lucius Junius Gallio Annaeanus was the older brother of Seneca the younger – Nero’s famous Stoic advisor and tutor.

So, to answer the earlier question, why would Paul appeal to Nero? – well, first, Paul used his privilege as a Roman citizen to appeal his case directly to Rome, because if he didn’t, he would have likely been killed there in Jerusalem. Furthermore, since the Roman senator Gallio had helped Paul in the past, one could imagine that Paul thought that Gallio’s younger brother Seneca might be of assistance to him this time.

The main question of this essay: Is there any reliable evidence that suggests that Seneca intervened on Paul’s behalf in his appeal to Nero?

Most modern historians claim that they are just fourth century forgeries, but there does exist over a dozen letters written back and forth between Paul and Seneca. It has been argued effectively that the language used in these letters suggests a poor imitation of Paul and Seneca’s writing styles without any of their real substance. The language of the letters is clumsy, there are historical anachronisms and inconsistencies, and most of all there is no mention of the letters prior to the fourth century. Nonetheless, the early church fathers didn’t dismiss the authenticity of these letters so quickly. As a matter of fact, Saint Jerome (the saint responsible for translating the Latin Vulgate) thought the letters were very much real. And even Saint Augustine (the scholar of scholars) mentions the letters in his 153^rd Epistle, albeit with more hesitancy than Jerome. Augustine writes “Seneca is said to have corresponded with the Apostle Paul” [3].

The use of the phrase “is said to have” suggests that Augustine had possible doubts about their authenticity.

Some might argue that there was no connection between Paul and Seneca because, after all, it was Nero who had Paul beheaded – and why would he do that to a close friend of his trusted advisor?

This is a poor argument against the authenticity of the Paul-Seneca correspondence, however, because Seneca and Nero had a major falling out, and Seneca was even implicated in the Pisonian conspiracy to have Nero assassinated. Many historians believe that Seneca was innocent in the matter. Nonetheless, in 65 AD he was forced to commit suicide for his “involvement.”

Under Nero’s rule, Rome was quite literally falling apart. A great fire broke out in Rome in 64 AD and about “a third of the city was left as smoking rubble” [4]. Nero was blamed for this fire – many would say rightly blamed. To turn the blame away from himself, however, he accused this new group he derogatorily called “Chrestiani” of setting the blaze [5]. He blamed it on their “hatred of mankind” [6]. This then became his justification to punish them as his cruelty saw fit – the original “Roman Candle” was when they would burn a Christian alive to illuminate the city. The beheading of Paul and the crucifixion of Peter are further examples of Nero’s absolute brutality at the time.

CONCLUSION

Did Paul have Roman connections through the Roman philosopher Seneca? And did Seneca, the great moralist and Stoic, have an affinity for Christianity? Even if the letters are indeed fourth century forgeries, one can at least understand why Saints Jerome and Augustine would at least want this connection to be true. It would mean Paul was respected by pagan philosophers, that Christianity had elite Roman admirers, and most of all that Stoicism and Christianity are compatible.

To that last point, the connection between Stoicism and Christianity, that is what is at the heart of this matter. The idea that a Stoic – with his emphasis on morality, virtue, and personal discipline – could serve as a bridge to Christianity is not only historically significant but theologically monumental. After all, Christianity represents the fully realized form of the Stoic moral vision. The Stoics understood the Logos as what held the world together. To them, however, the Logos was an impersonal force. Christians, on the other hand, see the Logos as the person of Christ, and it is He who holds everything together. Justin Martyr, writing in the second century, explains how the Logos holds together the moral order for both pagans and Christians alike:

“For not only among the Greeks did reason (Logos) prevail to condemn these things…but also among the Barbarians were they condemned by Reason (or the Word, the Logos) Himself, who took shape, and became man, and was called Jesus Christ; [6]

Justin Martyr continues by explaining that the Stoics who followed the Logos and His moral order are “Christians” for all intents and purposes:

“We have been taught that Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists” [7].  

In Henry Bettenson’s translation of Saint Augustine’s City of God, he refers to the substance of the Paul-Seneca letters as “unutterable banality” [8]. Nonetheless, what is incredibly fascinating in the letters is where Seneca says that he is going to read Paul’s writings to Nero, and he wants Paul to be present for the reading. This places Christian theology at the center of 1^st century Roman court. As amazing as that scene would be, the evidence seems to suggest that that is an historical impossibility. It was in 59 AD when Paul appealed to Caesar in Acts 25, and at that time Seneca’s influence in Nero’s court was already beginning to wane. There is, however, despite the thoroughly convincing arguments of modern historians, a chance (albeit slim to none) that Seneca really did appeal to Nero on Paul’s behalf. One could imagine, hypothetically, that this is why Paul was only given house arrest for two years after his appeal, where he was allowed to write letters and have visitors. Or perhaps, on the other hand, it’s why Seneca went from being one of Nero’s most trusted advisors to an enemy of the state seemingly overnight. One thing we can say for certain is that within less than three decades of Jesus’ Passion, those who followed his teachings were at the center of Roman debate and were a major obsession of Caesar – the most powerful man in the world.

NOTES:

1. Paul L. Maier, trans., Eusebius, The Church History (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1999), 74.

2. Ibid.

3. Augustine, Letter 153.4, in The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century,

Part II, Vol. 2: Letters 100–155, trans. Roland Teske, S.J. (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2003), 326.

4. Tom Holland, Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World (New York: Basic Books, 2019), 102.

5. Ibid., 103.

6. Justin Martyr, First and Second Apologies, trans. Robert Kingswell (Middletown, DE: 2021), 4.

7. Ibid., 37.

8. Augustine, The City of God, trans. Henry Bettenson (London: Penguin Classics, 2003), 248.

RELATED VIDEO:

https://youtu.be/8nO0usErNPg