Yes, in this context I did mean "very early" church (and had meant to follow Ste Croix in saying so). The immediate issue was whether Kautsky's point (via Joanna) was correct: that the asceticism of Christianity was a reaction to the "extreme overindulgence" of the (core) Roman culture. I think Shane will agree that this asceticism finds its roots in the rural culture of Palestine (viz de Ste Croix, Class Struggle in the Ancient World) like the other contemporaneous religious movements...and was later continued in Egypt, Asia Minor and North Africa (which may be the part Shane was pointing out). But in those places too Christianity was largely in social strata outside the "core" of Roman culture (sometimes initially involving the Jewish diaspora in these locations) and for local reasons similar to what happened in Palestine. At this time, Christianity was not necessarily a movement of "the poor", but it certainly found its base among the disaffected and politically despondent.
The point here is that the extremist religious philosophy of early (very early?) Christianity was a reaction to tangible Imperial oppression, along with the perceived "sell out" by local elites, and the apparent failure of political action to achieve anything. This is a very different process than an aesthetic reaction to "overindulgence".
Of course I am spending LBO's time on this partly because there is an obvious analogy to the Middle East and South Asia of today (not to overdo analogies).
[Shane may have thought I was alluding to a different debate -- just how "Jewish" was early Christianity. I was not going there and don't know the debate very much. Sorry if I wasn't clear. I agree with Shane that the second wave of pre-Constantine Christianity was largely outside Palestine although I gather there is much debate and interpretation about the early interactions with Palestine and with Jewish diaspora communities.]
Paul
Shane M. writes:
>"Paul" wrote:
> >
> >After Kautsky wrote, I think we learned much more about the
> >extraordinary *Palestinian* context of early Christianity. AFAIK,
> >today's knowledge shows that early Christianity was very much a
> >product of its Palestinian context...
>
>Unless "early" is taken in the absolutely strictest of senses this is
>precisely opposite to the reality. What *all* Christians regard as
>"early Christianity" is not the entirely Jewish movement comprising
>the direct followers of Jesus as Davidic Messiah (=King), led by his
>brother and heir James and known now as the "Jerusalem Church,"
>but the whole complex of Orthodox, Heretical, and Gnostic sects
>deriving from the activities of that police agent-swindler-religious
>genius Saul of Tarsus--not a Palestinian but a *Roman* citizen. The
>Jerusalem Church as such was crushed in the Roman suppression of the
>67-70 uprising, though its successors, known as the "Ebionites" (poor
>people) continued on for another century or so. The gentile
>Paulinistic Church, fraudulently posing as successor to Jesus the
>Jew, modeled
>itself on the hierarchichal structure of the Roman Empire so closely
>that it was ready-made to serve as the main armature of a shaken
>Empire in the 4th century CE and, alas, for the rest of history to date.