follow a route of secrecy and explained the sequence of their meetings to a willing
public in an easily intelligible manner (Iustinus Martyr, Apologia1.65– 67; Min.
Fel. 9). The inclination of the Roman Christians toward openness to the public is
illustrated by the fact that Justin appeared as teacher in the gown of a philosopher
(pallium), gave public lessons, and claimed the freedom of speech accorded to
teachers.
Our understanding of Rome’s first centers for services and the first house
churches (domus ecclesiae) is limited (cf. Hist. Aug. Alexander Severus 49.3). It is
uncertain whether they were absorbed into the so-called titulary churches of the fourth
and fifth centuries. Even if these titulary churches may often be connected to pri-
vate domuswe can only suspect that their predominant usage was liturgical (S. Clemente,
Ss. Giovanni e Paolo, S. Crisogono). It is also unknown whether in pre-Constantine
Rome any churches were owned communally, that is, meeting-houses established
specifically for services, which could be recognized as such by pagans (cf. Porphyry,
Contra Christianos frag. 76). It is, however, reasonable to assume that spacious
centers for the cult existed despite the fact that not even an episcopal church is
known; it is telling that the Lateran church built by Constantine did not continue
any earlier Christian building on the same spot.
This sobering archaeological situation means that we cannot conclude from the
later titulary churches that Christians were divided into factions, with at first only
isolated groups of them living in Rome as if on islands (Lampe 1989: 301–7).
A strong sense of unity stood against any separation. Paul already wrote without
reservation “to all that be in Rome... called to be saints” (Romans 1. 7), which
presupposes a community unified in principle and able to hear his letter at its meet-
ings. In Rome there were not only individual Christians but the “church in the area
of the Romans” (cf. Ignatius, Ad Romanos proemium). The exclusion of splinter groups
in the middle of the second century (Marcion, Valentine, etc.) proves that the Roman
congregation was in effect already unified at that time. Other instances are the dis-
pute around the Easter celebrations under bishop Victor (189–98), the establish-
ment of a parish cemetery probably under bishop Zephyrinus (198 –217) (Catacomb
of Callixtus), and the notable organizational differentiation of the community in the
middle of the third century. This real unity and social effectiveness explain the strong
action taken by the authorities during the Decian and Valerian persecutions of
the Christians, which resulted in special consequences in Rome, culminating in the
execution of the reigning bishops.
Suburban Funerals and Obsequies
Pietas toward the ancestors had already been a fundamental aspect of traditional Roman
culture, and the Christians emulated this. Their care for the dead was based in the
first instance on the family as in the Roman tradition. In those cases where family
connections had been disrupted as a consequence of converting to Christianity, for
example with slaves, foreigners, or the persecuted, the community also became involved
(Aristides, Apologia14.3; 15.6; Tert. Apol.39.6). In so far as honoring the dead408 Stefan Heid