participation in such significant public events as spectacula,certamina,pompae, and
epula publica(Min. Fel. 12.5). Christians may also have been reluctant to rely on
the public distribution of grain, because of its connection to the cult of Ceres and
Annona. This distancing from the outside world allowed, and in fact rendered it
necessary, for the community itself to develop as such in a rapid and comprehensive
manner.
Instead of participating in pagan sacrifices and festivities, the Christians celebrated
the Eucharist on the first day of every week (1 Corinthians 16. 2; Acts 20. 7; Iustinus
Martyr, Apologia1.67.8); initially connected to a communal meal (Agape), which
was soon arranged separately. It had a charitable and social function, especially since
Christians avoided the public feasts. The Eucharist (“Thanksgiving”) continued to
be not only a sacrificial ritual, but a constant of caring for the poor every week, a task
which became centralized as early as during the second century (Iustinus Martyr,
Apologia 1.65.6 –7). Those responsible for both services and care were the bishop,
presbyters (“superintendents” presumably refers to both), and deacons (Iustinus
Martyr, Apologia1.65.5). Under bishop Soter (traditionally dated 166 –74) we hear
of a well-organized care system for the poor among the Roman congregation,
which extended well beyond the city itself (Eus. HE4.23.10). In the middle of the
third century the community was so prosperous that it was able to support a clergy
of over 155 individuals (bishop, presbyter, deacons, sub-deacons, and others) and
1,500 registered recipients of support (HE6.43.11).
Devotional Spaces in the City
The Christian Justin, a resident of Rome, wrote around 160 that all Christians who
lived in towns or in the country held a Eucharistic “congregation at the same place”
on a Sunday (Iustinus Martyr, Apologia1.67.3). This was surely meant to convey
to the pagans that the Christians did not engage in a conspiracy, moving from one
location to another. Rome’s particular problem lay more in its size than its multi-
ethnicity (we hear of dogmatic and discipline-related, not ethnic, divisions). It is most
likely that a number of meeting-places offered room for ritual and other acts of Christian
communal life. There were logistical reasons for always holding services at the same
time and same place every Sunday. It is unlikely that rented flats served as meeting-
places, more likely privately owned houses (domus; see Romans 16. 5), which were
not open to view from the outside and whose addresses were not made available to
the general public.
Probably Christians from surrounding quarters congregated in each of these, although
it is unlikely that there were fixed geographical divisions. Deacons carried the
Eucharist to the sick (Iustinus Martyr, Apologia1.65.5); apparently they were famil-
iar with their quarter and had access to corresponding lists of names. Even the social
tasks, which consisted mainly in distributing the goods that had been brought to
the Eucharist, required a stable organization and fixed bases. Therefore meetings did
not escape the attention of those outside. Rumors about severe irregularities spread,
but other “secret cults” faced similar accusations. In any case the Christians did not
The Romanness of Roman Christianity 407