Tags
The visit by Pope Francis to Egypt offers a fresh hope in a part of the world where that is in short supply for Christians. Schism has played its part in that sad story. It is usual to date the Schism between what became the Oriental Orthodox and the Catholics and Eastern Orthodox to Chalcedon 451 (hence my pseudonym here), but in practice the next century and a half was marked by attempts to mend the rift, and attempts to enforce the Chalcedonian definition by imperial armies; neither method worked. The effect was to weaken the Empire in the east, and in the seventh century that made it ripe for invasion by the forces of Islam; indeed, initially, for Egypt and Syria, the new rulers were preferable to the old because they did not persecute them for their Christology. But Christianity did not thrive under Islamic rule, and whilst the Christian communities were able to maintain a presence, they were subject to discrimination interspersed with sporadic vicious persecution. Areas such as Cappadocia and Alexandria which had been centres of Christianity, dwindled into intellectual backwaters, and lands which had once been Christian became ones in which the Faith survived only because of the tenacity and courage of those who refused to apostasise; here Egypt’s Copts remain the outstanding example of that bravery, and it is good that the Pope has just paid a deserved tribute to them.
If disunion paved the way for Christian decline in what we call the Middle East, then it did the same in Eastern Europe. The division between Orthodox Christianity and Latin Christianity which historians mark with the schism of 1054, had been happening for centuries, and the break in that year really just symbolised a reality. As the forces of Islam in the form of the Ottoman Empire, came to dominate the area between the Danube and Constantinople, there were many chances for Christendom to unite, but it failed to, and in 1453 the great Imperial capital fell, and, outside of Russia, Orthodoxy entered into a long period of captivity. If it changed but little across the next few centuries, that was because it needed all its energy just to survive.
Western Europe was fortunate that the next schism, the Reformation, did not lead to a third wave of Islamic conquests, but thanks to John Sobieski the armies of Europe drove the Ottomans back from the gates of Vienna in 1683, and for the next three hundred years it was the turn of Islam to watch the tide turn against it.
There is, however, little sign that Christians have learned much from a history of which many of them seem ignorant, even though the Bible warns us of what happens to a house divided among itself. We hear much from the political Right about the dangers of immigration, but little, usually, about one of the reasons politicians encourage it – namely the failure of Europeans to reproduce themselves, and the hedonism of Europeans when it comes to sexual mores. There is a reluctance to marry or to have children, the right (especially of women) to choose to abort their babies is one which even many Rightist parties support, although who they think is going to look after them in their old age or work in care homes for a pittance is unclear. If the Right wish to complain that Muslim immigrants take their faith more seriously than most Westerners, and care more about family life, they might stop for a moment and ponder why the same criticism, if such it be, cannot be aimed at themselves?
By their fruits shall ye know them? Well, we know what the fruits of sin are, and however much modern society dislike the word ‘sin’ and dismisses it, its consequences are plain enough. Without a real evangelisation, without a real turning away from sin, there is nothing that is going to turn this around. But with God, all things are possible.
I believe the leading American in Crusades history–albeit being a Catholic–Thomas Madden wrote in his recent book Istanbul that if it wasn’t for concern over Islam, Charles V would have focused his energy on the eradication of Lutheranism much like the Albigensian Crusade.
It’s interesting assertion, the major break in Western Christianity survived because of Islam.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not untrue, although I would add that part of the reason that Charles V was able to do so was that the reformers, especially Luther were on side with stopping “the Turk”, so the intramural squabble could be put on hold. I suspect there is a lesson there for us.
LikeLiked by 2 people
quite so, Neo – a house divided …
LikeLiked by 2 people
Indeed, here we saw a house divided that could recognize a common enemy, that’s the lesson, in my mind.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is indeed.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Indeed, I think it’s high time to lay down the intramural squabbles again. Now We have two growing enemies: Fanatical Islam and Fanatical Secularism. The first looks to put Christians to the sword in Middle East, the latter seeks to put us to death culturally and legally in the West.
In the West, It reminds me of Endo’s Silence when the Shogun learned that it was more effective to destroy the faithful by creating Apostates rather than martyrs–especially the clergy.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Agreed, and completely.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s an interesting observation. I would speculate that if it weren’t for the focus Charles V had to give to the Islamic threat, and if he were able to devote his full energies to the eradication of Lutheranism, he would have failed. Reason being that Lutheranism seemed to appeal to a great many due to some spiritual need that ostensibly wasn’t being met elsewhere. I am convinced of this after my own reading of the Lutheran confessions and a cursory study of the rise and defeat of the Schmalkaldic League, wherein Charles V militarily crushed the political powers that enabled Lutheranism to take root in Germany. Though militarily defeated, devout Lutherans worked with great fervor to keep their movement alive, and the Church with the backing of the emperor were unable to negotiate the Lutheran movement out of existence as they seemed to have hoped.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Of course, It’s easy to speculate on historical what ifs and has made authors like Philip K. Dick wealthy.
Bishop Robert Barron speculates if Hus was never burned an understanding would have eventually been made of “Prima Gratia” rather than “Sola Fide. Sola Gratia, and “Sola Scriptura.”
I personally think he’s wrong after researching Luther’s position on the sacrament of Confession and his concerns with scrupulosity. Faith Alone is very much a core of Luther because of this reason.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Indeed, and the problem with my own speculation I offered is that I’m not imaginative enough to conceive of a historical timeline in which the variables that lead to the Reformation weren’t at play. I think what lead to Luther conceiving of Sola Fide also helped lead to his widespread appeal, which is why all other variables aside, I think Lutheranism was probably inevitable. My understanding of medieval church culture is that there tended to be a widespread pessimism in regards to salvation, and that it was generally believed the salvation of those who didn’t enter religious orders was a dubious affair. Laity generally shied away from receiving the Eucharist for fear of receiving unworthily and condemning themselves, is also my understanding. If this is the case, then it’s no surprise to me why Luther became popular–he opened to people a new future in which not only were they allowed to receive the Eucharist without worry over their internal dispositions or state of grace, but the baptized were commanded to receive as a matter of believing the gospel. Luther insisted that Christians are commanded by the gospel to firmly believe they are reconciled to the Father on account of Christ, rather than remaining in doubtful suspense about their salvation until they die. And I think that the Church made a mistake in thinking they could handle Luther with the same heavy-handed approach that seemed to work for them in the past, the result being that the Church, and half of Europe, got burned in part because of Rome’s careless handling of fire (not to mention the political situation and dissatisfaction of the empire). Now Hus is a subject of which I know nothing about. I’m interested to read Bishop Barron’s assessment of that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As a Catholic and married to a Lutheran, I can’t say that I necessarily disagree with your thoughts on Luther and Medieval Europe. There certainly was clericalism and the idea of pastoral care was lacking. In fact, there were positive arguments made by St. Thomas Aquinas, not necessarily a 100% guarantee, that one could be fairly confident about being in a state of Grace. In fact, this is much of the answer that I’ve heard presented in the current Catholic Church, at least in my local diocese. I acknowledge there is still a deep separation in doctrine, as my wife and I have had some disagreement on the topic. She’s said, “I just want you want to have peace.” To my reply, “I have peace, because if I don’t go to Heaven it will be in accord with God’s justice.”
Although, I think all historians in regards to the topic of the reformation must, and probably do, understand that it’s not simple topic. The German princes had much to gain politically from breaking with Rome, so that even with a more pastoral approach the split may have occurred.
The greatest error of the Rome, in my opinion, lies with the burning of Hus. I believe it to be the tipping point, as Luther was never going to simply “talk” about issues.
Bishop Barron made the comments a couple of months ago on his podcast, it’s titled under something 500th Anniversary of the Reformation. He also spoke very admirably of Luther having said he taught Luther in one of classes. He believes that had things tipped a different way in his words “Lutheranism would be an order in the Church.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
I find the study of Luther and his theology, particularly his take on the gospel and on sacramental theology, an interesting subject. I spent a couple of years as a Lutheran but ultimately became Catholic, largely due to issues of ecclesiology and historical authority. In speaking of the medieval Church and the issue of assurance, I find St. Francis de Sales to be a rather profound antidote to the pessimistic mentality. De Sales is becoming one of my favorite spiritual writers, whom my priest (a Salesian) has been introducing me to as part of my spiritual direction. Him and St. Faustina are the Catholic spiritual writers who resonate the most with me, and whose writings have helped me trust in the mercy of God more than probably anyone else. Whereas Luther is an intriguing man, and one whose writings I think the Church can still learn from, Francis de Sales seems to be the better option in my opinion. I’ll have to study up on Hus, sounds like he definitely got a raw deal from the hierarchy.
LikeLiked by 2 people
He only thing I’ve read from De Sales is his bit on the sign of the cross and it is brilliant. Any recommendations would be welcomed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I really like “The Art of Loving God”, as it’s not long but highly practical wisdom on daily living as a Christian. Right now I’m working on “The Spiritual Directory of St. Francis de Sales”. Both books are more or less geared toward the laity and his belief that everybody, regardless of station in life, is called to salvation and to sanctity. This is where I think him and Luther do a lot of overlapping, except Francis de Sales remained faithful to the Church. I admit I haven’t yet read “Introduction to the Devout Life” all the way through, as it is the heavier of the de Sales reading.
LikeLike
Hus is actually claimed by some to be the first protestant, he went to debate giving the Cup to the Laity and was burned for heresy instead as I remember in my history of Trent studies.
A lesson that Luther, a 100 years later, would remember.
LikeLike
Also, we with the mention of Jan Sobieski, I believe it prudent to examine Christianity within the Polish culture. Poland, being in the crossroads of east and west and the center stage in the struggle of Christianity and the 20th century new man and yet it didn’t just survive being cut off–it thrived!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It did, but largely because it was a way of expressing Polish nationalism in the period of the partition.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Interesting, that you use the term “expressing nationalism” as opposed to George Weigel’s thoughts on the same matter in his book City of Saints as “preserving Polish culture.”
Only An observation of term choices 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d be OK with Weigel’s formulation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Letters to the Seven Churches seem appropriate here: if we ask ourselves what Christ would have us do – well, He’s on the record. Funnily enough, our pastor was preaching on Acts 2 this morning. He was speaking to our particular congregation, to which the Lord in His grace has sent a new lease of life – but that new lease of life must be forward-looking. The strange thing about the Church is that it somehow marries the future and the past: in Christ all things are new, but He is the unchanging Rock upon which our faith is founded, the “author and perfector of our faith”.
LikeLiked by 3 people
We also have to realize that mainstream Protestantism and Catholicism are far more alike than different. Sure, our Liturgies and Prayers may look very different and our views about salvation. However, in regards to the Pope’s visit to Egypt, The Protestant and Christian Christologies are far more alike than Oriental Churches. Isn’t that at the heart of Christendom? The question of who Jesus Christ is? We both say that he is the incarnate Word of God. Fully Man and Fully Divine. Christianity is like no other movement in the manner that who Christ is matters more than his teachings. We are truly an Easter people, Christ’s resurrection is fundamental to it all.
Let us take to the world, like St. Paul, that Christ is Risen.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Should read “The Protestant and Catholic Christologies are far more alike than Oriental Churches”.– autocorrected, even Apple wants us to be united.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very good C. It’s hard to put into words how this Churchill speech goes along with your post but I think it does. We want to collectively kick the problem down the road as Churchill so states, and history has proven. Hopefully, Christianity will not be written about in 300-500 years as “gone with the wind.”
“If we study the history of Rome and Carthage, we can understand what happened and why. It is not difficult to understand and form an intelligent view about the three Punic Wars; but if mortal catastrophe should overtake the British nation and the British Empire, historians a thousand years hence will still be baffled by the mystery of our affairs. They will never understand how it was that a victorious nation, with everything in hand, suffered themselves to be brought low and to cast away all that they had gained by measureless sacrifice and absolute victory — ” gone with the wind.”
Now the victors are the vanquished, and those who threw down their arms in the field and sued for an armistice are striding on to world mastery. That is the position, that is the terrible transformation that has taken place bit by bit. I rejoice to hear from the Prime Minister that a further supreme effort is to be made to place us in a position of security: Now is the time at last to rouse the nation. Perhaps it is the last time it can be roused with a chance of preventing war, or with a chance of coming through to victory should our efforts to prevent war fail. We should lay aside every hindrance to endeavour by uniting the whole force and spirit of our people to raise again a great British nation standing up before all the world, for such a nation, rising in its ancient vigour, can even at this hour save civilisation.
Winston Churchill
March 24, 1938
Delivered in the House of Commons
https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/i-have-watched-this-famous-island.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
want to say to good brother Phillip that I wasn’t sure if you were the Mary worshiper said that the big Vatican dragon isn’t a dragon. It was said by this fellow…DXFC Or something close. The reason I thought it was good brother Phillip is cause the have the same kinda weirdo ideas. No different for both yall. Die calling out to a female diety.
LikeLike
Oh yes……(;-D that’s not a dragon. Its a furry little kitten. Said by dfxc.
Second commandment says god told us to make as many I ages as we want and bow to them. The Pope confirms this. Gold cup isn’t a gold cup. Purple isn’t purple.
LikeLike
Was it late when you wrote this?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Can we get this straight. The God you believe in commands us to make no images at all? I know that God, he’s the ones the Muslims worship. Are you a Muslim?
LikeLike