Workmanlike, dense history of the first five or so centuries of the Christian church. The book could have been better structured and more engagingly written: it throws a lot at the reader without much organizational framework. But there's a lot to throw, which unfortunately makes this book more "one damn thing after another" history than well-told history. It will likely overwhelm (or worse, bore) most readers.
However! If you're genuinely curious about the origins of Christianity (and not easily overwhelmed) there's plenty to mine here. To such a reader, I would recommend pairing this book with biographies of any of the key Church figures who interest you. (In no particular order: Ambrose, Arius, Athanasius, Augustine, Boethius, John Cassian, John Chrysostom, Clement, Eusebius, Irenaeus, Jerome, Origen, Pelagius, Plotinus and of course many, many others).
It's also worth reading this book with an eye to how power structures are formed, and how the doctrines and ideologies of an institution are first developed, then solidified, and then later enforced--usually violently. Throughout this book there are many helpful fractals and analogies to help readers understand power structures and doctrine formation in our institutions today.
We can see how the Church culturally grafted itself onto a culturally and philosophically pagan rootstock, absorbing what fit in, but spitting out--and then stamping out--what didn't fit in. It is ironic how, in a relatively short period of time, the Church went from being persecuted to being a highly effective persecutor.
It's also depressing to see the Arian controversy--which started as a sincere theological dispute about the exact nature of Christ relative to God--used rather cynically by certain Church figures. No matter where you look, you can find people who will use any dispute to achieve their ends, and often those ends have nothing to do with the actual dispute itself. I'm reminded of the famous quote from American politics: "never let a crisis go to waste." And thus the Arian dispute offers us a chance to study yet another aspect of power structures: how a serious dispute can be employed to achieve political ends, to eliminate opposition, and to place one's own allies into positions of power. You see everything in this dispute, even the sophisticated use of abstruse theological "wedge issues" designed to foment division in the opposition. Everything is political; nothing is not political.
Finally, a thought about heresy: If you look across the history of the Church you can find any number of theological debates that seem bizarre to modern reader, but were literally life-or-death debates in their day. The Arian controversy was just one of many (and I mean many) where Church figures attacked, mutually excommunicated, even executed each other, for "heresy."
But what is heresy, really? Here is one way to define it: whatever the established power structure doesn't want you to believe. With this definition we have a lens to think about many of the increasingly effective efforts to mold, control and enforce our beliefs in today's era. As just one of a long list of possible recent examples, see what happens when, in 2021, your employer requires you to take an experimental injection, and you (quite reasonably) question that employer mandate. Heresy, and excommunication, can take many forms.
But now please indulge me while I contradict myself: Any institution--if it wants to retain power and ultimately survive, will--and often must--prevent contrary thinking at least to some degree. It is a feature, not a bug, of any robust power structure. Without some level of consensus thinking and consensus beliefs, an institution can't become unified in the first place. And any successful church, political party, or even nation state can only tolerate a certain degree of heterodox thinking, otherwise it will fragment. Or worse, be conquered by a more successfully unified organization.
For a sadly typical example here, see the Donatist schism that fragmented and weakened the Carthaginian archdiocese, then dominant across much of North Africa. After a much more unified Islam swept through the region, there weren't any Christians left in the region at all, neither Donatist nor Catholic! They didn't make it, and they were replaced.
It's an awful paradox: do you want a schismatic and weak church (or state, or any institution) with room for freethinkers and heterodoxy, or do you want an institution that survives?
[For God's sake, and I really mean it this time: PLEASE read no further unless you have unlimited time and an unlimited attention span. And even then, don't. Life is short!]
Notes:
Chapter 1: From Jerusalem to Rome
9ff On the strict continuity between the Jewish tradition and the first Christians: the same God, the same rules, this is something that remained integral to Christian thought thereafter. Jews were anti-pagan, Christians also inherited this trait too; discussion here on the Jewish dispersion in the second century BC and thereafter, with a penumbra of "devout gentiles" called "God-fearers" who tended to gather around Jewish communities, appreciating monotheism and other Jewish beliefs and practices, like chastity, as well as the Jewish scriptures.
11ff The septuagint (the version of the 70 translators): a Greek translation of the Jewish texts for Hellenized Jews outside Palestine, produced as early as the third century BC and Alexandria.
13 "At first Christianity must certainly have appeared only as one more sect or group within a Judaism that was already accustomed to considerable diversity in religious expression. Judaism was not monolithic." On Pharisees, who were theocratic and defied Hellenistic influences, versus Sadducees who held the Mosaic law but did not feel bound by "scribal" tradition and did not believe in an afterlife or the resurrection of the dead; see also the Essene Jews who were separatists.
15ff Christianity spread rapidly among various Jewish communities, not just in Jerusalem but all around Judea, as well as in Damascus and Antioch. The Jewish term was "the Nazarenes"; Roman Empire pagans called them "Christians"; note also the deep division of this church itself on what attitude to hold toward gentiles, could they be "Nazarenes/Christians" without already being Jewish? Interesting to learn here that this created such anxiety among Jews that it led to a counter movement led by Saul of Tarsus who acted as "a zealous persecutor of the infant Church." Upon Saul/Paul's conversion he led a Christian mission to the non-Jewish world.
17 We know about the Pauline letters and the Acts of the Apostles, but most of the twelve disciples simply disappear from history; also very little is known of the mother Church in Judea; discussion of James the Just, allegedly the brother of Jesus, who presided over the Jerusalem Church until he was murdered by Jews in AD 62; see also Peter, who had been given supreme authority in the church after the Ascension; Peter and Paul were martyred under Nero.
18ff On associations with pagan cults; on avoiding pork and uncircumcision; a major question here was should Christianity apply these same prohibitions to gentile converts? This represented a "cleavage between conservatives and universalists"; universalist won out in the general conference in Jerusalem, cited in Acts, Chapter 15.
21ff The Christians were a group within Judaism but as early as 80-50 and certainly by 80-85 rioting between Jews and Christians broke out on synagogue liturgy and in 85 a formal anathema was written, "May the Nazarenes and the heretics be suddenly destroyed and removed from the Book of Life."
22ff On the gradual divergence and ultimate separation of the original Jewish Christians with gentile Christianity.
23ff On Rome and its encounter with Christianity; note that Roman culture could not really assimilate the god of the Jews because it was monotheistic, exclusive (and thus by definition invalidated all other religions); note that the Jews "were treated with marked toleration" until the revolt in 66-70; Christianity should also have been tolerated by Rome, but after the major fire of 64 Nero scapegoated Christians and blamed them for starting it.
26ff Various waxings and wanings of toleration/persecution of Christianity, depending on the emperor: see examples like Domitian, who viewed himself not just as governing by divine right but believing himself divine, thus he suspected treachery in anyone who didn't subscribe to his "cult"; Trajan who eased tensions with Christians. The author cites letter from Trajan (98-117) to Pliny who had asked him precisely why and what crime Christians were being accused of as he (Pliny) was executing them; the letter makes clear that the empire did not regard Christianity or Christians as dangerous at this time; emperor Hadrian echoes this in 123, although many Christians were martyred in the second century; Marcus Aurelius directed Christians to be tortured to death. Many Roman people blamed various catastrophes on neglect of pantheism under the influence of Christian culture.
29ff "By the end of the second century Christianity was penetrating the upper classes of society." See also how persecution actually caused the church to grow: "Tertullian observed that 'the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.'" the author also cites acts of over-enthusiastic believers who would seek out martyrdom by provoking Roman authorities.
31 Interesting side point here about the Gnostics, who believed that pagan gods were not actual devils or satanic, so it didn't really bother them that offers of incense were made in honor of the emperor or meat offered in sacrifice to idols, etc. Also, until the third century the Roman Empire did not take Christianity seriously, even with some sporadic persecutions and this "gave the Church breathing space to expand and to deal with critical internal problems."
Chapter 2: Faith and Order
32ff Comments here on how the church had to formalize itself: to build sort of an ethical framework, a common way of life, a common form of worship, also addressing questions on "at what point intellectual deviation should lead to censure"; on Paul and his "delicate but firm correction" of the Corinthian Church who believed themselves essentially perfected and likewise believed other Christians to be inferior beings; see also Colossae, where "Paul met with graver heresy": the Colossians worshiped intermediate angelic powers, performed strict ascetic practices, drew feast days from the Jewish calendar, etc. Both the Corinthian and Colossian heresies were commonly labeled Gnosticism, "a phenomenon which became an immense problem and threat to the Church as the personal authority of the first generation of Christian leaders receded into the past."
34 On the complications involved in the word "Gnosticism" which refers to a dozen or more viable sects which broke with the early church between 80 and 150; the word is also used in a more vague sense to describe a "syncretistic religiosity diffused widely in the Levantine world, and existing independently of and prior to Christianity."
35ff Extended discussion of Gnosticism in its various flavors here.
38ff On Marcion, who argued that the contradictions in the Old and New testaments proved that the god of the Jews was quite different from the god of Jesus; this plus a number of other theological positions Marcion offered were ultimately seen as heretical (including rejecting the idea "that the divine redeemer could ever have been born of a woman"); Marcion was excommunicated from the church in 144. Interesting side note that Marcion was "the first person to draw up an exclusive canonical list of Biblical books," although it excluded the Old Testament and large parts of the New Testament.
41ff On various tools used to "defend orthodoxy" in the Church: on ministerial and Bishop-based authority; see Ignatius of Antioch insisting on the local Bishop as the focus of unity and giving sacraments, this was to "answer the problem of centrifugal movements" of the church. See also a revolution that happened in the Corinthian Church which deposed old clergy and put new clergy in its place, and then the Roman Church sent a letter of protest from Clement; Also a sort of continuity-based apostolic governance: the idea that there was a direct line of apostles (from the original apostles to later bishops) who imparted a true doctrine, which allowed the church to reject and deem heretical many of the proliferating gnostics sects (none of which agreed with another and which were constantly modifying their views). This was sort of the birth of a monolithic Church, with a type of apostolic continuity. Another defense of orthodoxy came from the formation of the New Testament Canon.
43ff On the various problems of having four "versions" of the Gospel; also on the lack of acceptance of St. John's Gospel.
46ff On the "two generations" period where the church transitioned from apostles and teachers to bishops, presbyters and deacons, a period "shrouded in obscurity"; "Evidently the churches established by the traveling missionaries soon came to have local, stationary clergy, subordinate to the general oversight of mobile apostolic authority. For a generation or more the apostles and prophets coexisted with this local ministry of bishops and deacons." See also the Didache, the teaching of the apostles, or instruction for missionaries, which may have been a late fiction, but it explained rules for choosing bishops and deacons, how to detect false prophets, how to build a local ministry, etc. This document itself has an interesting history because it was lost until 1883, when an Archbishop printed it from a manuscript in Jerusalem dated from 1056; it may have been revised or harmonized in its current form.
48ff Discussion here on deacons, presbyters, and then a later structure, headed up by a bishop, which sat above them and sat above regional churches; this formal structure grew out of the missionary Church system; note that from the middle of the second century onward the text of scripture began to be smoothed out, formalization of matters of liturgical practice, standardization of faith, all of these things began to harmonize and unify; many people also will idealize the apostolic age and therefore conclude that this period of systemization was a type of rigidity or even clerical authoritarianism. "The truth is not so simple."
51 By the third century the three-tiered system of a bishop in a city with presbyteries and deacons grew to where the bishop of major metropolises then served under the bishops of the great cities of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch; this is sort of a standard example of how a church makes a transition from distributed and "unregulated" to close-knit and centralized.
52 On the Montanist crisis in the 170 AD period; Montanus did a form of ecstatic speech that he considered the literal word of God; this split the churches in Asia Minor, some thinking these new prophecies were divine, others considered the entire thing diabolical.
Chapter 3: Expansion and Growth
54ff On the "causes of success" of the Church, some of which were highly improbable causes; see the pagan writer Celsus (c.180) who noted the close-knit structure and coherence of Christians as a social group, a major source of their strength, also a result of their persecution; also "the practical application of charity" (the author calls this the single most "potent" cause of Christian success); also on Tertullian's comment, "See how these Christians love one another."
56 Interesting comment here on Stoicism and how it has many parallels with Christianity: "The Christians found much that was congenial in Stoic ethics." Also Tertullian wrote "Seneca often speaks like a Christian."
58 Note that a law of Constantine in 321 legalized bequests to the Church, consequently a great increase in church endowment income occurred.
58 On women as a vehicle through which Christianity penetrated throughout Roman society.
59ff The Church was "conservative" about slavery in the sense that it considered the institution a part of state law, although Church resources were also spent on manumission of slaves, Paul encouraged Onesimus's owner (Philemon) to free him, etc.
60ff Geographical expansion of the church: rapidly to Syria, Asia Minor and Greece, note that the church did not expand to the northeast because there was an imperial frontier and a language barrier there; but later there was a church at Edessa. Also: "Third century legends in the Acts of Thomas (famous for its wonderful poem, 'The Hymn of the Soul') give probable evidence of the existence of Christians not only in Persia but even in India, perhaps on the Malabar coast." The main expansion of the church was westward, quickly throughout Italy, and more slowly through Gaul, Britain and Spain. "Christianity in Gaul seems to have begun with Paul's disciple Crescens (II Tim. iv, 10)." In Britain the church likely had little foothold until the middle of the third century. Note that there were three British bishops at the council of Arles in 314, but by 400 (around the time of the Saxon invasions) "Roman Britain was a broadly Christian province within the now orthodox Empire." See also Pelagius, the earliest surviving British writer of this epoch; also St. Patrick began his mission in Ireland around perhaps 432; note that the Saxons didn't begin conversion until Pope Gregory the Great in 597 and thereafter.
64ff Spread of Christianity in Egypt (which the author characterizes as "none too orthodox"); by the second century it had moved far up the Nile Valley; Re: the spread in Roman Africa, there was written evidence here as early as 180 from the book Acts of the Martyrs, by 200 there was a major presence in Carthage and north Tunisia.
66ff On theological debates in the church from its start: orthodox Jews occupying the attention of Christian thinkers, "...the most substantial extant work by a second century Christian is the Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, written by Justin Martyr about 160." Note that "orthodox Jews resented the church's assumption of its continuity with the past history of the elect people of God."
68-9 Intriguing blurb here on Cicero: "A sceptic like Cicero explicitly held that, since it is impossible to be certain of anything, one ought strictly to continue the age-old traditions and religious customs of antiquity."
69ff Author comments here on Justin Martyr's theological viewpoint: "the Church would make common cause with Platonic metaphysics and Stoic ethics," and reject pagan myth, calling it demonic and counterfeit; also: instead of making mileage out of Jesus's miracles he "regarded the fulfillment of ancient prophecy as the most cogent argument for Christianity."
71ff More comments here on the "embarrassing speed" of the expansion of Christianity; on how the religion had ideals of simplicity and humility, aimed at the common people, a religion meant to reach ordinary people, with hymns and songs for the illiterate to sing, etc. "There is no reason to think that the early Christian movement was ever a political revolution manqué [here the author means "unfulfilled"], or that the history of the church can be told in terms of bourgeois leaders taking over a proletarian uprising and diverting it into innocuous other-worldly mysticism. Such theories can only be maintained by violent and selective use of evidence."
72-3 On how on some level Christianity became a solution "to the empire's need for a universal religion with which it could identify itself." But note that this coincidence broke down because Christianity "had to be carried to the hostile barbarians as well, and partly because of a reassertion of the old tradition of a certain detachment and even indifference to the political structure of this transitory world."
Chapter 4: Justin and Irenaeus
74ff Justin Martyr: tangential comment here on Hippolytus who in his refutation of various heretical sects he ended up preserving a number of fragments of classical philosophers like Heraclitus [this is a good example of the poor organization of this book, as the author opens with a huge side-tangent here... at the beginning of a chapter that is supposed to be about Justin Martyr]; Justin Martyr, born in the early second century to Greek parents; he began with a stoic tutor, then an Aristotelian tutor, then a Pythagorean tutor, then a platonist tutor. Then he converted to Christianity, thanks to an old man he met on the seashore. He wrote an apology for Christianity, then reworked it and reissued it: now the work is commonly called his Second Apology, this is around the year 151 or thereafter after he had moved from Ephesus to Rome.
78ff On Justin Martyr incorporating Greek thought and the Greek philosophical tradition into Christianity, also he molded the thinking of Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons.
80ff On Irenaeus: "With Irenaeus the shape of Christian theology became stable and coherent." Two works of his have survived: On the Apostolic Preaching and five books of "Refutation and overthrow of the knowledge falsely so called" [This work today is usually called Against the Heresies]. The latter is a "remarkably fairminded" source of various sects of the second century; arguing against Marcionite theology, as well as against the followers of Valentinus; also on Irenaeus seeing that Marcion was right in that it was necessary to have a biblical canon, thus Irenaeus played a major role in selecting the New Testament canon; Irenaeus' central idea here was to accept certain books and not accept others following a reasoned argument.
82ff Interesting blurb here on how the author describes Irenaeus' views basically as you don't want originality out of a theologian, "Heresy was born of the itch for something new." In other words this means prying into matters the human mind has no authority on or even capacity to know; thus the implication here is the Church will need a clear succession of teachers and texts to create a long-lasting orthodoxy.
83 On Irenaeus' influence on Hippolytus of Rome and Tertullian of Carthage.
Chapter 5: Easter, the Monarchian Controversy, and Tertullian
84ff On controversies over the dating of Easter: the churches of Asia Minor celebrated it at the same time as Passover, whereas around 160 when Easter was introduced as a holiday at Rome, it was the Sunday following the Jewish Passover, which is likewise the Sunday after the full moon of the spring equinox (thus these are the so-called "Quartodecimans" who celebrated Easter on the 14th day). Then, in 190, Bishop Victor of Rome demanded uniformity across Christendom for the date of Easter, and the Church of Asia Minor saw this as autocratic and offensive; note also there was controversy about whether the Last Supper was or was not a Passover meal.
85 Interesting mention here of the famous Easter sermon from Melito of Sardis from c.160 AD, so popular that it was translated into Latin, Coptic, Cyriac, and Georgian. This sermon makes clear that "those who celebrated Easter on the same day as the Jewish passover were not motivated by special friendliness towards Judaism."
85ff On the Monarchian controversy: Monarchians held the theological view that there was no "first principal" other than God the Creator ("a single monarchia"), with no coequal devil, no coeternal matter, no separate and divine "logos", etc., and thus there is no difference between God and Jesus, they are incarnate in each other; the oppositional label was given the polemical name "Patripassianism" or the idea that the father suffers. Note that in modern theological doctrine this is called "modalism" implying the father, son and holy spirit are "modes" of the same being; see also Hippolytus who thought of the father and the logos as two distinct persons (note that as the Gospel of John gained authority in the second half of the second century, some of these modal views also gained traction). "The Monarchian controversy... in one form or another continue to disturb the church throughout the third century."
90ff Now the author moves on to Tertullian (c.155-c.220): prefatory comments here about North Africa at the time, where the landowners and administrative classes were Roman, it is unclear how Christianity came to this region, but it was probably around the middle of the second century; citing various examples of Christian persecution there at the time: in 180 twelve Christians of Scillium suffered martyrdom at Carthage; still more persecutions in 202, see also Perpetua and Felicitas, two martyrs who died at Carthage; note also the mention here of Perpetua's Diary of her imprisonment, which this author calls a "priceless document." On Tertullian as "brilliant, exasperating, sarcastic, and intolerant, yet intensely vigorous and incisive in argument, delighting in logical tricks and with an advocate's love of a clever sophistry if it will make the adversary look foolish, but a powerful writer of splendid, torrential prose."
91-92 "Some of Tertullian's most interesting writing is concerned with the proper behaviour for a Christian in a society pervaded by pagan customs. Tertullian demanded that Christians should keep themselves wholly unspotted from the world's idolatrous corruption." Christian life as "first and foremost as a battle with the devil." He was "indifferent to public approval," would argue fallaciously if it would give him victory over his adversary, etc.
Chapter 6: Clement of Alexandria and Origen
94 "The history of the church in Egypt is veiled in mist before the sudden emergence of Clement of Alexandria in the last decade of the second century." On Clement's works Protrepticus (Exhortation to Conversion, this is in the tradition of apology writing, attacking pagan cults), Pedagogous (The Tutor, this is "a guide to ethics and etiquette for a Christian moving in a cultivated society") and Stromateis (Miscellanies, never completed, but a rational method for attacking Gnosticism).
98 Interesting blurb here on Clement's discourse on how to help Christians confused about the right use of their money, and, specifically, their confusions about the "sell all you have" command from the Gospels; Clement saw it not "imposing legalistic obligations but rather as a statement of God's highest purpose for those who follow him to the utmost." "Clement laid down a guide for the wealthy converts to the Alexandrian church, which imposed the most strenuous standard of frugality and self-discipline. Clement passionately opposed any luxury or ostentation..."
100ff Origen (184-254): "a giant among the early Christian thinkers." A sterner and more austere writer than Clement; also Clement respected Plato's authority whereas Origen believed Plato had no authority whatsoever; Origen was a master of the key Greek philosophical schools: Stoic, Epicurean, Platonist, Aristotelian; he could move throughout all the various philosophical arguments; "living with little sleep and food" and "strenuously forcing himself to almost unending toil"; he saw the value of disputing with the Jewish theologians from a biblical text recognized by both sides and thus "compiled a vast synopsis of the Old Testament versions entitled the Hexapla, with parallel columns of Hebrew, the Hebrew translated into Greek characters, and also the four main Greek versions.
102ff On Origen's "dramatic correspondence" with Julius Africanus, debating among other things the canonicity of the history of Susanna in the Book of Daniel.
104ff Origen on the problem of evil, which lies in its apparent purposelessness; he looked to "Irenaes's idea that the world is intended to make strenuous demands on man who is called to overcome the difficulties confronting him." Also it is God's way not to use force but to respect freedom; thus we humans get to bumble around and screw things up on our journey towards becoming more divine. [This is quite an interesting argument: that evil is meant to challenge us, to test us, and it also gives us an opportunity to display our agency and our will in our response to it. Quite a compelling view.]
107 Origen debating Gnostic literalism with the Bible, see for example the four Gospels differed with their various accounts of Christ throwing the money changers out of the temple; but note that these weren't just factual records, they can't be read literally or historically but rather they make much more sense when thinking of the spiritual purposes of the evangelist telling each account. "Accordingly, Origen concludes that the prime purpose of scripture is to convey spiritual truth, and that the narrative of historical events is secondary to this." "Origen's doctrine of various levels of meaning became profoundly influential in both East and West." To Origen "it was almost accidental, theologically peripheral, that the Bible contain much true history."
109ff On Origen's voluminous output of commentaries on various books of the Bible, rewritten by others; see for example Origen's Commentary on Romans, which was rewritten and paraphrased by Rufinus of Aquileia; note many of these books were lost; also on Origen's conflict with Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria, who he thought was "a power-hungry prelate consumed with pride in his own self-importance."
110ff Origen's travels to help various churches with theological problems and heresy problems; to Transjordan, Athens, Palestine, etc. He came into conflict with the church in a debate on salvation where he argued that everyone had a chance at salvation, that even the devil did not lay beyond hope of redemption; this created an outrage, Origen lived the rest of his life in Caesarea in Palestine until his death at about 254 at Tyre. Interesting blurb here also about how the crusaders in the twelfth century were able to see his tomb.
111ff On some of Origen's other major works: a wealthy patron named Ambrose paid for stenographers to record Origen's sermons, to Ambrose Origen dedicated his work Exhortation to Martyrdom as well as his work On Prayer to argue against those who thought prayer made no difference; also on the "fascinating" work Contra Celsum, which offers both sides of a debate against the fellow Platonist Celsus; "one of the most fascinating among the early Christian writings." "The crucial question in Origen's eyes was whether, within a Platonic metaphysic, it is possible to speak of freedom in God or whether 'God' is only another name for the impersonal process of the cosmos rolling on its everlasting way. Because Celsus thought in the latter way, he was a religious conservative, shocked and alarmed by the new and potentially revolutionary forces released by Christianity."
112ff On the conflicted historical legacy of Origen: he was seen as tremendously influential throughout the Church, but later theologians like Epiphanius ("Even Epiphanius... who regarded Origen as a heretic who had corrupted Christianity with the poison of Greek culture, admitted that there was excellent stuff in his Bible commentaries"), Methodius, Jerome and emperor Justinian viewed him as heretical. "His most extreme enemies (Epiphanius, Jerome in his later period, and the emperor Justinian) explained the mixture of orthodoxy and heresy in his writings by the hypothesis that his real intentions were heretical, but that he had introduced orthodox ideas to confuse the simple."
113ff On Dionysus of Alexandria and Paul of Samosata; discussion here starts talking about the problems of the Trinity; Origen was opposed to Monarchianism, he didn't consider God or Christ unified but as two distinct realities; Dionysus was a pupil of Origen, he went on to hold the see of Alexandria; went so far as to call the Son and Father as not of one substance and "as different as a boat and a boatman"; this is "the first indication of a gulf, which soon became a yawning chasm, between East and West." Origenist theology looked like tri-theism to the West but it dominated in the East;
114: "The crisis over Paul of Samosata," who became bishop of Antioch in 260; he also adopted a theology of a sort of duality, with God and his Word as one, with Jesus as a "uniquely inspired man"; this was totally heretical to his church in Antioch, in 268, Paul was condemned but not expelled from the church, the other bishops didn't have the power to expel him as he had so many "enthusiastic supporters".
215 Note however, with Aurelian taking power [some backstory needed here as the author glosses over quite a bit of historical context: Aurelian united much of Rome and crushed the short-lived Palmyrene Empire, which was a breakaway state in Asia Minor; it was then reabsorbed into Rome], and because Paul of Samosata was favored by the now-fallen Palmyrene government, as soon as it fell to Aurelian, the other bishops of Antioch then appealed to Aurelian to get Paul out of power in Antioch: "It was the first time that an ecclesiastical dispute had to be settled by the secular power." This was the beginning of the "thorny problem" of the relation between Church and State "as a complicating factor in the internal doctrinal debates of the Church."
Chapter 7: Church, State and Society in the Third Century
116 Interesting comment here about stoicism: "In the third century Stoicism ceased effectively to exist as an independent philosophical school; it is one of the puzzles about the history of Stoicism that Marcus Aurelius was its last representative. The likeliest explanation is that the distinctively Stoic theses on the ethical side were taken over by the Church, while Plotinus (205-70) claimed to offer a philosophical synthesis in which Stoic ethics and Aristotelian logic were found a place within a broad Platonic metaphysic." Further discussion here of Plotinus and his treatise Enneads, also Porphyry (232-305), Plotinus' biographer, who became a formidable opponent of Christianity.
117 On how "the personal attitude of the emperor himself now became increasingly decisive in determining the church's fortunes." Note that Alexander Severus (222-235) was friendly to the church, his successor Maximin (235-238) was hostile, emperor Philip the Arab (244-9) was also sympathetic but never got involved in any policy decisions about the church, even though he was rumored to be a believer. Writing in 248, Origen observed that hostility to the church was rising sharply, c.249 the anti-Christian pogrom in Alexandria; in 250 the new emperor Decius (249-51) ordered systematic persecution of Christians. [Note that Maximin (Maximus Thrax) was the first of the many "barracks emperors" selected directly by the army, and his ascension came at the beginning of a long period of instability in Rome, the Crisis of the third century].
118ff Cyprian of Carthage; note during this period of persecution the bishops of Rome, Antioch and Jerusalem were all murdered; Cyprian and Dionysus of Alexandria both went into hiding, and then there was sort of a power struggle with different factions to gain control of these churches: Cyprian for one lost credibility as many other Christians suffered and went to prison during the persecution. When the Carthaginians elected a rival bishop, Cyprian wrote On the Unity of the Church advancing the argument that the Church cannot of its very nature be divided. [Obviously if you think about it, this is circular logic and it can be used to justify all kinds of misbehavior.]
119 On a debate in 251 between the church under the primitive/early church conception as a society of saints, and the now-growing view "that it should be a school for sinners." See Cornelius and Novation, leading competing factions for control of the Church of Rome after the martyrdom of the prior bishop; Cornelius won out with this broader view of a more scaled-up Church. Cyprian also had an extreme disagreement with Stephen (who became the next Bishop of Rome in 254) over the nature of baptism, this debate was settled as Stephen died in 256 and Cyprian was murdered in 258.
120 On the persecutions of the 250s under Valerian; then Gallienus granting toleration but yet seizing Church and cemetery lands; then mostly peace with the Church until 303; On Diocletian, who became emperor in 284, and salvaged Rome after the late third century crisis; under instructions from the Oracle at Miletus, Diocletian wrote an edict that all churches were to be destroyed, all Bibles surrendered, all meetings for worship forbidden among Christians [this was the "Great Diocletianic Persecution"]; Diocletian abdicated in 305.
122: On the death of Constantius in 306, the proclamation of Constantine as emperor by his soldiers; then in 312 Constantine invoked the Christian God for help during war. The author argues here that "The worst legacy of the persecution was once again schism" as the church differed to what extent they should resist state persecution [or should have resisted it after it was over: this is often what survivors argue about after a repressive regime collapses]. Some, like Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, basically laid low and handed over ersatz books of worship (books that were actually not Christian, but satisfied Roman authorities), he was bitterly criticized because plenty of other Christians went to their deaths to avoid these handovers.
123ff On the Donatist schism in the Carthage region: basically the Donatists were against the idea of making "token" handovers of texts as well as token repudiations of Christianity that other Christians would do to satisfy the emperor's persecutions; this dispute also had to do with the level of resistance to state demands and persecutions; ultimately this schism lasted until Islam swept away all Catholic and Donatist believers in the entire Carthage region. Note there was also a similar schism in Egypt but this "turned not on the surrender of books but on the possibility of submission to the edict forbidding meetings for worship." This may have actually given a platform to the future "heresiarch" Arius, although his views (that the Son was separate and inferior to the Father) did not become an issue until 318-320.
Chapter 8: Constantine and the Council of Nicaea
125ff On Constantine attributing his victory over Rome's rival emperor Maxentius to the Christian God in 312; The author says Constantine's "comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear." On the Chi-Rho monogram which appeared on Constantine's soldiers' shields as well as on coins from the era; this is a monogram of the name of Christ [see photo below]; this symbol was later abolished under Julian; the author frames Constantine's transition as moving from "solar monotheism" [sun worship, and what the author calls "the most popular form of contemporary paganism"] to Christianity.
127 Intriguing blurb here on how Constantine was clearly a believer, but was not baptized until he lay dying in 337. "It was common at this time (and continued so until about A.D. 400) to postpone baptism to the end of one's life, especially if one's duty as an official included torture and execution of criminals."; on Constantine's New Rome in Byzantium; the benefactions he made to the church, financing new copies of the Bible, building churches--especially the basilicas in Rome and in the holy land at Bethlehem-also many of his laws expressed Christian ideals, for example a 316 edict banning branding criminals on the face "because man is made in God's image."
129ff On the Council of Nicaea, the first world council of Christians; on Constantine bumping into dissension in the Greek churches upon moving the seat of Rome to Byzantium: an abstruse disagreement between Alexander of Alexandria and Arias; after some preliminary dramas at an inquiry held at Ancyra (modern day Ankara), where Eusebius of Caesarea was excommunicated as an attempt to prejudge the issue (more on him below); Constantine reacted by moving the council to Nicaea; this was a major event for the Church at the time; the council was sharply anti-Arian in that it condemned the idea that the Son could be in any way inferior to the Father; 218 out of 220 bishops signed the Nicene Creed, although terms were not understood precisely by all of the signatories; also this council throws "much light" on the power structure of the developing Church, formalizing rules on bishops changing sees, stabilizing power in the major cities of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch and Jerusalem.
Chapter 9: The Arian Controversy after the Council of Nicaea
133 "It was the misfortune of the fourth-century Church that it became engrossed in a theological controversy at the same time as it was working out its institutional organization. The doctrinal disagreements quickly became inextricably associated with matters of order, discipline, and authority. Above all they became bound up with a gradually growing tension between the Greek East and the Latin West." The author divides the Arian controversy after the Council of Nicaea into three stages: first, the death of Constantine in 337; second, the accession of the sons of Constantine in 361; and third, the accession of Julian and the suppression of Arianism under Theodosis I in 381.
133ff On Eusebius of Nicomedia, who was a key leader of the Arian movement and recovered much of the ground lost in 325 at the Council of Nicaea; a lot of this gets political as the "Eusebians" managed to get rid of the bishop of Antioch after he spoke disrespectfully of Constantine's mother Helena: Constantine sent him to exile; also Athanasius (an anti-Arian) had some local troubles in Egypt which led to his downfall as Bishop of Alexandria: basically Athanasius dealt violently with dissident Melitians and Coptic Christians, as he was completely against any form of schism, and Eusebius used this to get Athanasius "out of office"--and even to formally excommunicate him. [This is starting to sound like Republicans and Democrats scalp-hunting each other in the modern era of the United States.] Athanasius here blows it by threatening to call a dock strike at Alexandria, which would stop vital corn supply to Constantinople athanasius would have done this if the emperor failed to support him, and Constantine reacted by exiling him to Gaul; note also that "at no stage was there any doctrinal charge against Athanasius"; all of this was playing out on procedural and political grounds, not on the grounds of the theological issue itself [again just like American politics].
136 Note also by now Arius himself had been totally forgotten, "had become negligible" in this gigantic theological debate, another irony.
136ff Death of Constantine; he was baptized by Eusebius in 337 right before his death, and then the Arian controversy "took a sharper turn." "The second period of the Arian controversy coincides with the reign of Constantius (337-61), and is marked by political and ecclesiastical confusion." Note also there was infighting among Constantine's sons, who ended up literally going to war against each other, and this impacted church politics: Athanasius and Marcellus tried to return to their sees, both failed but then were welcomed to Rome, and this further fueled the conflict because Rome was recognizing clergy formally excommunicated by the Greek synods. Comments here on many other miscommunications and misunderstandings: issues of Greek being translated into Latin and sounding like tri-theism (see for example the word "hypostases" in Greek translated into "substantiae" in Latin); see also power struggles over who had jurisdiction over whom; then in 341 Eusebius died, leaving a Church succession struggle and power vacuum; a council held in Sophia in 342 resulted in mutual anathemas hurled between the Greek and Latin churches. Then, imperial pressure placed on both sides forced certain concessions: Athanasius was restored to Alexandria in 346, but then the emperor Constans was defeated in battle by Magentius in Gaul, but Constantius refused to recognize him, and then a bloody civil war followed, won by Constantius.
140 Hilarious footnote at the bottom of page 140 here that "many Western bishops had only the haziest idea of what the controversy was really about... How hazy is shown by the declaration of Hillary of Poitiers that he had been a bishop for many years before he had even heard of the Nicene creed." [!!]
140ff An actual military force ousted Athanasius from Alexandria, then the Arian faction put in a radical, George, in charge there, while Anthanasius fled to the desert, evading attempts to find him. Note here that is appears that George as well as others in his "wing" of this theological debate were kind of a radical, pozzed version of Arianism that "caused consternation" among more centrist/conservative bishops, their theological position was labeled Anomoean or "dissimilarian" theology: "that all derived being is substantially dissimilar from the underived First Cause; in short, that the Son's essence is unlike (anonmoios) the Father's."
141ff On Basil, the bishop of Ankara, who represented the "conservative" theological position of "homoiousios" (that the Son's "essence" is like the Father's), also on Valens, the "Arianizing" bishop of of Mursa. Basil and Valens competed for Constantius' ear; Valens wanted to use language like the Son is "like" the Father, more neutral language but yet that was basically Arian in doctrine. "As Jerome wrote of the council of Rimini, 'the world groaned to find itself Arian.'" Constantius merely wanted to find some formula which would enable the largest possible number to agree, he sought unification and wanted to avoid schism; but this defeat of Basil (and his stricter theological language focusing on the "essense") meant that many of his side were exiled and deposed from their sees. "The dissensions of the Christians... were a political and social problem which the government had the strongest interest in settling." At this point Constantius then had to persecute those who were unwilling to tolerate this "soft" Arianism, when believers like Athanasius or Basil believed being anywhere on the Arian spectrum was somehow fundamentally false, their conscience made them prefer exile or even martyrdom.
144ff "These considerations help to explain why it was only at this stage of the Arian controversy that the really serious and hard thinking began to be done." There was a rapprochement between Athanasius and Basil as they both recognized they were fighting for the same cause, although they disputed the term homoousios. But as they united their efforts, this contributed to the ultimate defeat of Arianism. "But the hour of triumph had to wait twenty years until there was an emperor in the East ready to carry it through."
145ff now on to the third and final [phew!] stage of the Arian controversy: from Emperor Julian (361) to Emperor Theodosius's suppression of Arianism in the East (380-81). Athanasius died in 373; he was perhaps the last survivor of those who had been present in Nicaea; in the last fifteen years of his life he was called on by a new generation; also under Julian all parties were tolerated, as Julian hoped that the controversy would consume Christianity itself to some level, but Julian had a very short reign and was succeeded by Jovian, who favored Athanasius and the Nicene cause; however Jovian died a few months later and was succeeded by Valentinian I, who restored the division of the empire, entrusting the East to Valens [note: Valentinian's brother, not Valens of Mursa (see p141 above), who was involved in the dispute with Athanasius and Basil a generation earlier]; at this point the government policy of having a unified "comprehensive church that included Arianism was becoming increasingly out of touch with the main movement of religious life and thought. The tide was running in the direction of the Nicene cause."
146ff Additional issues that came up, including a group that thought of the Holy Spirit as fully separate from God; a collection of terminological problems hinging on words like hypostasis and ousia; three separate rival bishops in Antioch with separate, competing congregations. [These all seem, interestingly, a lot like the modern USA political theater where various wedge issues could be used to either unite or divided certain shared interest groups as a mechanism of control.]
148 Finally on the debate about "physis," the single nature of God, but where the divine Word is the active subject of God's nature; this was the position of Apollinaris of Laodicea, whose views "provoked a storm" after Athanasius's death in 373.
149ff Death of emperor Valens in 378 at Adrianople against the Goths; Theodosius I takes over, and then summons a large council in 381 in Constantinople to hash out the wording of a Creed and also agree that the bishop of Constantinople will rank after the bishop of Rome. "...the doctrinal decisions of the council mark the end of the Arian attempt to capture the church of the empire. Arianism lived on among the Goths, who had been converted by Arian missionaries--especially by Ulfila (c.311-83)... But within the empire Arianism died unloved and unlamented. The surviving fragments of the Arian Philostorgius, who wrote an apology for Arianism about 425, show how the movement which had begun as a bold endeavor to reformulate Christian doctrine in a way more palatable to the educated public of A.D. 320, sadly ended in a superstitious repetition of antiquated slogans."
151 Interesting footnote here and discussion of Ulfila, who was an Arian missionary among the Goths, also translated the "Gothic Bible"; his maternal grandparents were taken prisoner in the third century Gothic raids on Cappadocia. "Prisoners were one of the ways in which Christianity penetrated the Northern barbarian tribes." This also sends the reader down a rabbit hole to learn all about this particular "Gothic" translation of the Bible, which turns out to be incredibly important, in that it is one of the first documents in a Germanic language.
Chapter 10: The Conflict of Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century
154 "Paganism was far from being moribund when Constantine was converted to Christianity, and probably remained the religion of the majority in the empire until well into the second half of the fourth century." On official Roman policy, which was to tolerate all religions, but Christians, from the time of Justin Martyr and Clement of Alexandria, while they upheld the best of Greek philosophy, were "vehemently opposed to pagan cult and myth."
155 On the arrival of Julian as emperor, educated by Christian tutors, but later he came under the influence of a Neoplatonic philosopher named Maximus and he then became a pagan. There's a decent summary of Julian's life condensed in this chapter: how he "defeated" Constantius (thanks to Constantious dying of fever before they were about to meet in war); on the accidental burning of the Temple of Daphne in Antioch, for which Julian held Christians responsible; on his reprisal to close the cathedral at Antioch; to encourage paganism Julian discriminated against Christians for appointments to high office; he ordered a number of Christian churches to be destroyed; he personified a polytheistic tradition in a revival of traditional Roman policy; and then embarked on a foolish campaign against Persia in which he was killed by a lance wound in 363, possibly thrown by one of his own soldiers. Julian's letters and religious discourses continued to circulate widely after his death to the point where Cyril of Alexandria felt it necessary to write a long response to Julian's tract "Against the Galileans." [For more on Julian the Apostate, see my review and notes here.]
Chapter 11: Church, State and Society from Julian to Theodosius
160ff On the emperor intervention in a papal succession event after Pope Liberius went into exile and then died in 366; bishops Ursinias and Damasus were the respective "candidates" elected by rival sides, "partisanship flared into an ugly riot in a church where 137 lost their lives." The city's government intervened, giving Damasus the possession of the papacy, but because of his weak hold on power he engaged in a tremendous works program, also funded the production of a new Bible translation from Jerome, which became the commonly accepted Vulgate Bible; additional discussion here of how senior Church officials also had municipal responsibilities; comments on how upper-class Romans could find it easy to become Christian in these days; this period was also sort of a throwback era of pride about the old Rome which was fused somehow with Christianity; also discussion here of various traditions; also on the birth of various terms and abstractions used to refer to the Pope and bishops: "most glorious," "your holiness," "papa"; also on various insignia and garments commonly worn at the time that later passed out of use in society, but yet were retained as "vestments" by the church's own conservatism.
164 On criticism of commentators at the time (such as John Chrysostom, or Ammianus, the pagan historian) on the wealth, power and worldly status of major city bishops compared to the frugal life of country bishops.
165ff Discussion of the emerging power structure of the church; as bishops would come from other churches to consecrate a new bishop in any given major city; gradually more power accrued to the major metropolitan Church leadership, and then centralization: "By 381 there appear clear beginnings of the concentration of power at a yet higher level than that of the metropolitan, mainly in the 'patriarchs' of the East, at Alexandria, Antioch and Constantinople..." Also on the major cities of Asia Minor wishing to retain their independence rather than cede it to the patriarchs of these major church power centers.
166ff On the gradual imposition of social advantages to Christians as over time "under the Christian emperors, to be a heretic or an infidel was to be suspected of being less than fully loyal." On Ambrose of Milan, who was "[t]he main architect of the concept of an orthodox Empire from which religious error would be excluded"; Brief bio here of Ambrose: rose rapidly to provincial governor at Milan; was chosen Bishop even though he had not yet even been baptized; on his excommunication of Theodosius in 390 [Theodosius had massacred "thousands" of citizens in Thessalonica after they had killed a barbarian army commander], by this excommunication Ambrose "enforced the point that the concern of the church extends to actions contrary to natural law and repugnant to humanity, not merely to its own private interests."
168 Interesting comments here about a gradual increase in pagan persecution, acts of destruction and various edicts against paganism; on encouraging pagan "temple-smashing" in various parts of the East; also interesting to think about why certain pagan churches were saved: for example, if it had artistic masterpieces inside, or had a great amount of popular attachment in a community "that was too great to break," it wouldn't be damaged, whereas a smaller temple might be converted into a tavern, or dismantled entirely. Others were converted into Christian churches and therefore survived, see for example the Parthenon in Athens.
169ff On Theodosius and his anti-heretical legislation; most harsh towards the Manichaeans; discussion here of Mani of Babylonia (216-76) who founded a dualistic religion drawing on Zoroastrianism, Buddhism and Gnostic Christianity to try to provide a universal religion valid in East and West; on the Manichean myth of the primeval conflict between light and dark which explained why life was a mix of both good and evil; also a discussion here on Jews and their status, Jews under Theodosian law and under the Christian emperors did experience sporadic persecution, but mostly they were left alone.
171-2 Off-hand reference here to the murder of Hypatia at the hands of a crowd of Christians, incited by Cyril, there will be more to come on this topic on page 194; various examples of important pagan figures and intelligentsia who converted to Christianity "sometimes by unusual routes."
Chapter 12: The Ascetic Movement
174ff On how "by the end of the fourth century the church had virtually captured society." It a huge landowner, bishops were expected to advocate for their people both on the secular as well as spiritual plane, "a substantial part of the surviving correspondence of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus and their pagan contemporary Libanius, consists of recommendations and requests to powerful officials on behalf of some individual in need."
175ff Along with this greater involvement in worldly affairs came a sort of "tiers of morality" among Church participants (and from this sprang debates on celibacy, on whether there was a possibility of repentance if one sinned after baptism, etc.), however there was an element of the church, a sort of group of elite combatants against evil who felt they could not do their work effectively as members of the world, thus the church developed a group of ascetics who "withdrew to live separately from ordinary congregations" while still performing their missions of caring for the sick and widows, etc; note also that the monastic movement was largely distrusted by many of the bishops: it seemed separatist and inappropriately individualistic to them.
177 Note there already was a theological substrate for the ascetic movement in the writings of Clement of Alexandria and of Origen; likewise there was a philosophical substrate in the tradition of Plato and Socrates, also in the Cynic principle of self-sufficiency and in Stoic doctrine, thus classical Greek influences helped this movement along as well. "Neoplatonic ideals of the 'flight of the alone to the alone' encouraged renunciation not merely of unnecessary bodily indulgences but even of human society."
178 On the deep intense respect popularly accorded to the hermit and the desert fathers in Egypt: "speak to me a word, father, that I may live."
178ff Early ascetics: Antony and Pachomius, Antony (made famous by Athanasius's biography), who sought solitude, whereas Pachomius started a community of ascetics with near-military obedience and discipline; two differing schools of thought about the hermit ideal; then on questions about what was the actual character of this movement: "Was the monk pursuing only his own salvation? Or had the movement social purpose?" See Basil's insistence on obedience as a means of restraining competition and ostentation of individual monks and in many ways "Basil anticipated the spirit of the Benedictine Rule."
179 Comments here on the bishops attempting to exert control over the monks, as the monks didn't just remove themselves from society, but also from religious participation; after the death of Basil and Athanasius some bishops would use peasant monks as "an ideal instrument for destroying pagan temples and for conflicts with heresy." Thus they could be used as tools of force of the church having absolutely nothing to do with the ascetic movement in the first place.
180ff The fifth century development of the Coenobium: an organized groups of monks in proximity to an outstanding leader in the Judean desert; note this group became divided by doctrinal controversy concerning the orthodoxy of Origen in the sixth century; on Symeon the Stylite, also Evagrius, who classified the root sins of gluttony, fornication, avarice, dejection, anger, weariness, vainglory, and pride; he also differentiated types of contemplation, and "Much in his language about the mystery of prayer entered permanently into the stream of Greek ascetical theology and, through John Cassian, passed to the West." On John Cassian who was a monk of Scythian origin, but who ultimately ended up in Marseilles where he organized monastic communities; "it would be hard to exaggerate how much later Western monastacism owed to Cassian's moderation and insight."
183 Interesting blurb here on Benedictine: "By the accidents of history the name Benedictine has become associated with austerity and learning. Benedict himself had no special interest in either matter. His rule was one of simplicity and self-discipline, not a penitential austerity and self-inflicted mortification."
Chapter 13: The Controversy about Origen and the Tragedy of John Chrysostom
184ff Discussion here of Epiphanius (c.315-403), Bishop of Salamis in Cyprus and his damaging and influential attack on Origen; the author describes Epiphanius as "a passionate puritan" and "His onslaught was not merely exhuming the dead for trial [Origen was dead by this time], but specifically mentions the living influence of Origen in his own time on certain Egyptian monks'." [The author is here referring to Ammonius and his three brothers, also Evagrius, who was "under Ammonius' direction." Evagrius' writings "became the principal medium for the diffusion of the group's theology" which required no images or pictures of God in human form in any way; this was difficult for simple believers who would reasonably see God as a sort of "superman in the sky." This was a controversy between "anthropomorphites" and "Origenists"; the Origenists appealed to John Chrysostom, who was the newly appointed Bishop in Constantinople; the author cites from Chrysostom's surviving sermons and it makes you want to read them: "they remain today the most readable and edifying of all discourses among those of the church fathers, and are also a vivid source for the social history of the age." The first thing John did was initiate much more discipline than his predecessor in Constantinople, earning him enemies; note also that Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria wanted his own candidate in John's place, also the Alexandrian Church wanted weak rather than strong bishops in Constantinople as well.
188ff Theophilus used John's efforts against him and tried to put him on trial; by this time John had also antagonized the emperor Arcadius and his wife Eudoxia; the emperor angrily exiled John, then reinstated him, and then John left for exile again after re-antagonizing the emperor and his wife; John died on route to this exile; the author talks about John Chrysostom as an example of the Church's independence in relation to the state: he also became a sort of metaphor for a split between East and West Churches because Pope Innocent refused to be in communion with John's enemies, this enhanced Roman prestige; John was not "rehabilitated" in Constantinople until 428, twenty-one years after his death, under the new bishop Nestorius of Constantinople. "Thereafter John exercised a mounting literary influence by the legacy of his admirable sermons, which were taken as models of vigorous style and teaching." [Interesting of course to think about how totalitarian regimes would re-use figures previously criticized or even executed by the state. They state first punished them for propaganda purposes, but when those propaganda purposes changes and are served by "rehabilitating" that same person, the state will do so.]
Chapter 14: The Problem of the Person of Christ
192ff On (still more) debates about the nature of Jesus: Diodore, who taught John Chrysostom and was the bishop of Tarsus in 378, believed that the incarnation was not as mythological as Church doctrine would have it, he also placed less emphasis on the Virgin birth; Theodore (350-428) developed Diodore's rejection of allegory, read the biblical book Song of Songs as a natural love poem, rather than an allegory for the union between Christ and the Church as Orthodox readings would have it; also he argued that Christ was essentially a man who suffered and died and that this truth had nothing to do with the divine nature of Jesus; Also on the opposing Apollinarian view was Diodore's take is totally wrong, and that Jesus had one nature not any implication of two.
194ff On Cyril who was Bishop of Alexandria from 412-444, he wrote a commentary criticizing Theodore and "the debate became mixed up in church politics." [As usual] Note here also that Cyril was deeply intolerant of paganism and of any theological dissent, and he even incited a riot in which led to the murder of Hypatia, a famous Neoplatonist philosopher, in 415. Next we have a multi-page discussion of Cyril's disputes with the new Archbishop of Constantinople Nestorius, including court dramas with emperor Theodocious II's sister and wife; also Cyril drew in Pope Celestine in Rome against Nestorius after Nestorian had received Pelagian heretics in Constantinople when this heresy had been condemned by Rome.
197 Theodosius II summoned a council at Ephesus in 431 to sort things out; Nestorius misjudge the political situation here, even though he had legitimate theological backing for his views, it resulted in Cyril excommunicating Nestorius; however the Syrian delegation later arrived after this Council and then deposed Cyril from his bishopric. Nestorius just wanted to go back to Antioch, essentially he was taken out of his position and later exiled to Egypt where he wrote his memoirs, the Bazaar of Heracledies (or the Book of Heracleides); note that the post-mortem on this whole theological dispute really sounds like hair-splitting, something that isn't even that interesting to a reader who really wants to geek out on this stuff.
200ff And then the next generation of theologians starts fighting out all this stuff all over again! Now we have a group of people arguing at a failed/unsuccessful council in Ephesus in 449, which led later to a much more historically significant council held in Chalcedon in 451; this council essentially undid all the decisions of Ephesus, essentially emasculated the "Monophysite" branch of the church, but also condemned Nestorius himself as a heretic. Nestorian Christianity actually spread to Syria and eastward throughout Kurdistan and all the way to China.
206ff The Chalcedon agreement basically lasted for another 36 years, although during this period some of the best Monophysite theology appeared under emperor Anastasius (491-518), expounded by Severus of Antioch, Philoxenus of Hierapolis for example, these guys appear to be moderates: they didn't hold the extreme Monophysite views that the physical body of Christ was incorruptible before the Resurrection.
208 "The possibility of reconciliation with the Monophysites haunted the long reign of Justinian (527-65) and his wife Theodora. Justinian's reign was marked by a largely successful military effort to reconquer the barbarian West as well as Vandal-controlled Africa; by a building program of magnificent churches some of which (like Sancta Sophia or SS Sergius and Bacchus at Constantinople) remain today; churches built to evoke the beholder's admiration and amazement; by a systemic codification of the laws; and by a continual dogmatic controversy in which the emperor himself played the unusual role of an expert theologian 'advising' the patriarchs how to act."
210 On the doctrine of one will; a "Monothelete" doctrine saying Christ had two natures but only a single "activity" or a single divine will. This was proposed as a conciliation with the Monophysites.
211 "The alienation of Egypt and much of Syria from the Chalcedonian government was a serious political matter, and gravely weakened those key provinces before the Moslem invasions (though the Monophysites were never so disaffected as actually to welcome the Arabs as deliverers). The Arabs took Jerusalem in 637, then Antioch (638), Egypt and Alexandria (641) and before many years passed they were threatening Constantinople itself, where they were only repelled by the use of 'Greek fire'. They had conquered North Africa by 707 and Spain four years later. By this rapid Islamic conquest many principal provinces were lost to the Christian empire. The shape of Christendom was transformed, and the process was initiated which would in time transfer its center of gravity to Western Europe."
Chapter 15: The Development of Latin Christian Thought
213ff On how the Western Latin church gradually developed its own theologians, starting with Ambrose, who mostly borrowed from the Greek East, then later Jerome, who had more of a Latin focus, then culminating in Augustine, who "came to tower not only over all his immediate contemporaries but over the subsequent development of Western Christendom." On Augustine's early days taking a concubine at age 17 (this was actually extremely common, according to the author, in fact "Pope Leo I thought monogamy preserved if a man left his concubine to contract a legal marriage"); on Augustine's exploration of Manicheanism; his conversion to Neoplatonism and Christianity at nearly the same time.
218ff Augustine returns to Africa and then in a visit to Hippo, in North Africa, in 391, is convinced to accept ordination, then becomes bishop; in 397 the book Confessions appears: "an original masterpiece of introspective autobiography." Extended discussion here of the Donatist/Catholic schism in Hippo, the various arguments and disputes the two groups had, having to do with giving up relics and bibles to Roman persecutors as well as other problems; this schism was already 85 years old by the time Augustine became bishop in Hippo; he inspired a series of church councils to try and unify the dissenters but ultimately consented to a policy of coercion that he viewed as a type of "paternal correction" to convert or reform the Donatists. "It was a fateful theoretical justification of the imperial policy." At the time the empire allowed very little personal freedom, limited social mobility by forcing sons into their father's occupations, there was a secret police, etc.
223ff 411 AD a great conference to try and unify Donatists with Catholics; it ultimately resulted in January 412 where emperor Honorius proscribed Donatism by edict, exiling their clergy and confiscating their church property; note that Arian Vandals invaded Africa in 429, "spared neither Catholic nor Donatist" and plundered the region. Augustine died in 430 before they broke through Hippo's defenses; note also that the Donatist community survived this period too, but then everybody fell to Islam a century later. Under "the flood of Islam" the Donatists "disappear from history."
225ff Back to 411 now: discussion of Augustine's book The City of God, note that in 410 the West was reeling under the barbarian sack of Rome by Alaric and the Goths; The City of God was Augustine's "immense apologia for Christianity" talking about how "[e]ven Christian Rome could claim no exemption from the chaos and destruction brought by the barbarians"; that the true "eternal city" was "beyond the rise and fall of all empires and civilizations." Then The City of God goes on to discuss the Christian's role within the state, taking influence from a Donatist theologian Tyconius and his books Rules (a book on interpreting scripture) and Commentary on the Apocalypse.
227ff On Pelagius and the Pelagian controversy; Pelagius basically believe that original sin is not inherited from Adam, basically that newborn infants were innocent, although still needing baptism and redemption in Christ. Basically the idea that it was monstrous to assume that unbaptized babies without sin would go to hell if there were a merciful god. This debate also got into free will, as well as politics as Pelagius was unfairly framed up as sort of a socialist, a potential threat to the social order. "He was much misrepresented in the course of the controversy." More and more aggressiveness and venom began to be injected into the controversy, beginning with courteous exchanges between Augustine and Pelagius, and then Jerome got involved; they convinced Pope Innocent to excommunicate Pelagius, but then Pope Innocent died and was succeeded by Pope Zosimus (417-19); Pelagius' very persuasive friend Celestius went directly to Zosimus to make a case for this doctrine. Zosimus first backed the Pelagians, but then had to change his mind after a huge outrage, both from the African churches, but also from the Emperor. Also it might be that Augustine reached out to the Roman government behind his back, no one knows.
231ff This is when Augustine began to articulate his theology of grace; basically mankind fell with Adam's fall. Humans are by definition polluted by sin, and are incapable of good behavior without redeeming grace, even babies go to hell if they die unbaptized (although it's a "very mild" form of damnation); Augustine later went even further, getting into ideas about the elect and how man can't even really do anything about his "end" if God hasn't already chosen him. This was upsetting to many in the church, this was essentially predestinarianism, and for many it was "hard extremism"; John Cassian for example responded by saying that men has the will to turn towards God and then will receive grace so thus free will does play more of a role.
235ff On Augustine's "great work" On the Trinity where he worked out his trinitarian doctrine; his was a more unified Trinity, he thought that the "three hypostases" idea was unsatisfactory because it had too much separateness in it, he also wanted to "eliminate every possibility of Arianism" from his doctrine. Much later (as in centuries later), as this doctrine took hold, it gave rise to the Filioque Clause ("and the Son") which was added to the Nicene Creed in the West; note that certain Western churches as well as the Greek Eastern Church didn't agree, didn't think this interpolation/addition was justified; this was yet another step that helped add to the division between the East and West Churches.
Chapter 16: The Papacy
237ff Rome rapidly became the preeminent center of the authority for the Western Church, beginning in the second half of the fourth century onward, note that the monuments to St. Peter and St. Paul were erected in 160; also in the second century the insistence from Pope Victor that all churches celebrate Easter on the same day as determined by the Roman Church; Jerusalem had an aura of holiness but the bishops there were not a force in church politics before the fifth century.
239ff On Pope Damasus; on how many bishops throughout Gaul or Spain would naturally write directly to Rome for guidance; it was a sort of metropolitan system and Damasus began to treat these requests just like questions sent to the emperor from provincial governors; he also saw the Roman see as the successor to Saint Peter, as a historical succession, this was interpreted further as a sort of inherited juridical authority, and on this basis "papal letters began to take the form of decretals."
242 Blurb here on a certain independence given to the bishop of Arles by Pope Zosimus in 417; the Arles Church "reached its peak of ecclesiastical authority early in the sixth century under Caesarius, bishop 502-42"; see in particular Caesarius' "admirable" sermons; the Arles Church declined under Frankish rule by the following century.
243 On Pope Leo I (440-61), "the greatest of all the fifth-century popes." On pope Gelasias I (492-6), then the schismatic rival popes Symmachus and Laurentius; then the Roman see under Byzantine control; then with the Lombard invasion in 568, which indirectly helped Pope Gregory the Great "to restore to the papacy a measure of independence of action and to direct his gaze away from the Byzantine world, which he cordially disliked, towards the missionary problems of the new barbarian kingdoms now dominating the west."
Chapter 17: The Church and the Barbarians
247ff On Rome using more and more Germanic/barbarian tribesman, both for soldiers as well as for important government offices; for a while the level of immigration (infiltration?) had been controlled, but then changed quickly in 375 and thereafter; under pressure of the Huns, an immigration/refugee crisis developed, where "Vandals, Alans, Suevi poured across into Gaul" and later even into Spain, then Vandals even invaded Africa, capturing Carthage. Comments here on migrations of "huge masses" of essentially stateless people "producing political and social disturbance." Note also that it was often local Catholic bishops who were stuck organizing local resistance. [I think we may see some analogies here for what Europe faced in and around the two world wars, as well as what it may face in the coming years in the modern era of pan-European mass immigration.]
249ff Many Goths were converted to Christianity, but to the "wrong" kind! Ulfila [discussed above, see p 149], brought Arian Christianity to the Gothic people. Note however that most of the barbarian tribes tended to become Christian after settling within the Empire within a few years: this happened with the Visigoths, Vandals Ostrogoths, Burgundians etc.; note how all of these were Arian dissenters, not Roman Catholic conversions; only the Franks were converted directly to Catholic orthodoxy; however, by the sixt century most of the tribes changed over to Catholicism from Arianism.
250 In Italy a "policy of collaboration with the barbarians kept at least a ghostly line of figurehead emperors in office until 476, though power was now in the hands of barbarian army commanders." Then, general Odoacer deposed emperor Romulus Augustulus in 476 and made himself king of Italy. Note that this is why history looks at "476" as the official collapse of the Western Empire, but it was not seen that way at the time, had nothing like the emotional effect of Alaric's sack of Rome in 410, and there was still a powerful Roman emperor in Constantinople [Zeno, if I have my history correct here!] claiming sovereignty over the West. "...at his [Zeno's] instigation Odoacer was attacked and killed by Theodoric the Ostrogoth" who settled in Ravenna and took the title "King," but at least with nominal acknowledgment of sovereignty to the emperor of Constantinople.
250ff Theodoric rules from 493-526, but then with the end of the brief schism between Rome and Constantinople in 519, Theodoric thought the Byzantine emperor would exploit this reunion for political purposes, and "the chief casualty" of Theodoric's suspicions was Boethius [author of The Consolation of Philosophy], who he imprisoned and executed under suspicion of dealing treasonously with Constantinople.
251ff On Justinian I, the Gothic Wars, 535-554; ultimately this conflict depopulated northern Italy and caused Constantinople to lose control and oversight of that part of the peninsula, although they kept control of Rome through the seventh century.
252 Benedict of Nursia; in 529 founded his [Benedictine] monastery in Monte Cassino in central Italy. This influenced Cassiodorus's (c 485-582) institution in Vivarium where a monastery could be an intellectual and educational center; furthermore in Cassiodorus's institution the monks were expected to know secular literature as well: Cicero, Aristotle, Galen, Porphyry, etc.
254ff On Pope Gregory the Great and his various policies; bridging the gulf with the "now barbarian society of the West." Giving relics to barbarian princes, making sure the church was for "regular mortals" without pretensions to high culture; encouraging pictures and images in churches, which functioned as the poor man's Bible; on taking over pagan temples and festivals and giving them a Christian meaning, etc.; also on Gregory understanding and accepting "that the barbarian kingdoms of the West were not just transitory armies of occupation" but were "a permanent social and political fact with which the church needed to come to terms." The Visigoths in Spain were now Catholic, the Franks had converted directly to Catholicism, and Gregory of Tours (c 540-594), "the historian of the Franks," saw them as a "divine deliverance sent to rescue a decadent imperial society and to safeguard it from the corrupting Arianism of Theodoric and the Ostrogoths."
255ff Discussion here Britain how communications had broken down during the sweep of barbarian tribes into Gaul and Spain during 407-9. They just "let" Britain fend for itself basically. "Britain ceased to be a province within the empire and was left to fend for itself against the invading Picts and Scots." Christian churches had survived in Britain, but they had sympathies with Pelagianism, also the separate Celtic Christians had their own ways of doing things too (see below page 256); Pope Celestine sends Palladius to be bishop to the Irish in 431; see also Patrick, who said he was criticized for his mediocre education in Ireland, implying perhaps Ireland already had Christians with a superior Latin culture at this time; see also "In 563 the Irish monk Columba founded a monastery on Iona which extended Christianity to the wild tribes in Scotland."
256ff At this point England and Wales under Saxon invasion experienced a sort of a moral decline; then by the end of the sixth century the pagan Kingdom of Kent dominated much of England; then Pope Gregory sent a mission of monks who baptized the Kentish king Ethelbert and many of his people. Brief discussion here of how the Celtic Christians had tension with the new "Kentish" Christians: disputes about when Easter was, about the form of the tonsure, etc.; but then a synod in 664 served to unify the British Isles with Easter dating and other aspects of Christian life.
Chapter 18: Worship and Art
258ff On certain key liturgical traditions, like worshiping on Sunday (the Lord's day); this is something customary for Christians as early as Saint Paul's time; certain days were kept for fasting: Wednesdays and Fridays in the end of the first century for Christians for example; also the Passion fast lengthened and then became a 40-day Lenten fast, introduced to the Greek churches in 337 by Athanasius after his exile to the West, and when "he was put a shame by the seriousness of Western austerity." The ceremonial structure of Holy week evolved beginning in the fourth century with Maundy Thursday, then by the sixth century Palm Sunday; although note the blessing of palms "is not found before the ninth century."
260ff Various versions of baptismal rights over time; on the evolution of aspects of the Eucharist over time; on Hippolytus and some of his liturgical precepts in his work Apostolic Tradition including certain prefab dialogues between the congregation and the bishop, followed by a Eucharistic prayer; long discussion on aspects of his Eucharistic prayer here.
266ff On the increasing elaborateness of Greek liturgy in the second half of the fourth century, when "Greek clergy began to wear ornate clothes, and the ritual acquired a high dramatic splendour."
268: "In the West liturgical elaboration proceeded considerably more slowly." On the switch from doing Eucharist in Greek in the city of Rome and over to Latin during the time of Ambrose; the basic elements of the Roman liturgy were fixed in the period from Damasus to Leo the Great. [I really wish the author would give some dates in here, it's not like we've all memorized everything throughout the book about who lived when! It would be very easy for him to include parenthetical dates to help moor the reader a bit here.]
269ff On the Kyrie Eleison, which by 500 was incorporated into the first part of the Latin Mass and "curiously" kept in Greek; also the Gloria in Excelsis which began to find its way into the mass also by 500, although wasn't universal until 1100; on the Apostles' Creed (or the "Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed") which became increasingly included in the Eucharist in the West; note the filioque clause in the Creed only became very important under Charlemagne. Also discussion here on other details like frequency of celebrating the Eucharist, what kind of bread to use (the Eastern Church used leavened bread, the West used unleavened bread), etc.
272ff On daily religious practices ("daily offices"), like daily private prayers at certain hours; note that in the ascetic communities the cycle of hours of prayer was an institutionalized obligatory system.
273ff On early church music: references in St. Paul's letters talking about singing and worship, chanting and singing already was a custom of the Jewish synagogue. "A passing hostile comment in the second century pagan critic Celsus shows that the chants used in Christian worship (which he seems to have heard) were not only unusual to his pagan ears but so beautiful that he actually resented their emotive effect as an instrument for dulling the critical faculty." "Clement of Alexandria is the earliest Christian writer to discuss what kind of music is appropriate for Christian use." On larger choirs with antiphonal singing which came into practice in the second half of the fourth century: it outraged conservatives, there's a letter from Saint Basil defending the practice in the face of conservatism. On Augustine in his book Confessions saying that it is excessive austerity to exclude music from church services; there survives only one specimen of early church music, a "mutilated" third century papyrus that was preserved; surviving Greek and Latin manuscripts with musical notation come from the medieval period; by the ninth century the Roman Christian chanting system came to be ascribed to Pope Gregory the Great, thus "Gregorian" chants.
277ff On Christian art; note that at first images and statues were thought of as "pagan" and also forbidden in the Second Commandment; thus the only second century images of Christ were from radical Gnostics; However before the end of the second century there was certain Christian iconography, like a dove, a fish, etc.; Early Christian paintings didn't appear in churches but as funerary decoration in Roman catacombs, usually it was pagan imagery reinterpreted through Christianity. By the time of Constantine's conversion churches became public buildings and we start to see mosaics, decoration and paintings of the symbols of Christianity.
280ff Debates on icons of Jesus; on the "Iconoclastics" who were horrified by images of Christ; on Epiphanius, who was horrified to find a picture of Christ in a church in Palestine and tore it down; but by 403 when Epiphanius died, portrayals of Christ and the saints were widespread; also this was contemporaneous with a rise in the veneration of the blessed Virgin ("Mariology").
282ff On fifth, sixth and seventh century Christian art; a lot survived fro this era, and it is of a very high quality of artistic achievement; see the "splendid mosaics" of Ravenna and Rome churches, the Syriac Gospel book written in 586, the Rossano codex of the gospels, this era was "an artistic renaissance of the first distinction"; see also a major icon controversy in the eight century, when "emperor Leo the Isaurian in 726 initiated by edict a full-scale programme of destroying all such pictures" which led to a major conflict for over a century about imagery between the Byzantine church and state; this further widened the gulf between Rome and Byzantium; the iconoclast position was that the imagery was associated with idolatry and images "owed too much to pagan precedents." However it was also argued on the other side that "frail mortals" needed "aids to devotion" and iconoclasm was an attack on this. [Note here that Empress Irene (780-90) restored the icons and condemned the iconoclasts, but then a resurgence of iconoclasm followed from 814-843, after which then again the icons were restored by Empress Theodora in 843. Imagine all that art, was irreparably destroyed with every cycle of iconoclasm. What a complete lack of second order-thinking: failing to recognize that any given decision will likely be reversed by a future administration... sounds a lot like modern American politics.]
Conclusion
285 On the continuity or discontinuity with the church with Israel as "the central questions of the apostolic age," solved by taking the middle road; "In consequence the church may never have felt completely at home with the Old Testament, but it has never been able to do without it."
285ff On the "sub-apostolic age" (roughly 70-140): vigorous Church expansion; Rome and the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, which basically ended the importance of the Jewish Christian congregations; then the Church's center of gravity passed to Antioch, Alexandria and Rome, where Peter and Paul died under Nero as martyrs; on the birth of embryonic creeds; the Canon of the New Testament was formed; early conflicts with the Gnostics.
287ff The next generation of Irenaeus and Tertullian saw a more coherent statement of Christian doctrine, by the middle of the third century the church was more "in the public eye" and had penetrated the educated and governing classes; the rise and fall of Christian persecution: brief declines under barbarian attacks of the middle third century, then rising under Diocletian; on the Donatist schism in North Africa.
287ff Fourth century: the conversion of Constantine (312) and then the establishment of the formal religion of the Empire by Theodosius; the fourth century rise of the great Greek churches; On Athanasius, Basil, Gregory, John Chrysostom, the great fathers of the established church; Julian's (very brief) pagan revival; the beginnings of the long Arian controversy; the rapid further growth of the church, the birth of the ascetic community; on the monks later becoming important preservers and transmitters (across time, that is) of culture and education during the chaos of the barbarian invasions; also on the disintegration of the Western Empire, which left the church as the only unifying institution in Europe; then Gregory the Great's understanding that the church lay more with Western barbarians than with the old Empire in Constantinople, and this widened the Gulf between Greek and Latin churches; then after Gregory the Great (c.540-604) in the West and John of Damascus (c.675-749) in the East "it is much more difficult to write the history of both Eastern and Western Christendom as if it were a single story."
Vocab:
Lustrations: ceremonial purifications; a transitional justice practice that removes public officials and judges who are associated with a previous repressive regime; from the Latin word lustratio, which means "purification by sacrifice"; in modern political usage: the official public procedure of scrutinizing a public official or a candidate for public office in terms of their history as a collaborator with or informant to former communist secret police
Eirenic: aimed or aiming at peace; a part of Christian theology concerned with reconciling different denominations and sects
Douceur: a financial inducement; a gratuity or bribe; a "sweetener"; "Pericles gave a handsome douceur to the Spartan commanders to withdraw without fighting"
Logomachy: a dispute over or about words
Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus: "what is everywhere, what is always, what is by all people believed"; a famous threefold test of Catholic orthodoxy, expressed by St. Vincent of Lérins in his Comonitoria: This triple norm of diffusion, endurance, and universality is used by Christians to distinguish religious truth from error
To Read:
***Palladius: Lausiac History
***W.R.W. Stephens: Saint John Chrysostom: His Life and Times
Irenaeus: On the Apostolic Preaching
Irenaeus: Against the Heresies (five books)
Perpetua: Prison Diary [this is one of the earliest martyr accounts]
Tertullian: Apology
Clement of Alexandria: Protrepticus (Exhortation to Conversion)
Clement of Alexandria: Paedagogus (Tutor)
Origen: On First Principles
Origen: Exhortation to Martyrdom
Origen: On Prayer
Origen: Contra Celsum
***Plotinus: Enneads
Porphyry: Life of Plotinus
Porphyry: Against the Christians
Augustine: On the Work of Monks
Augustine: City of God
Augustine: On the Trinity
Evagrius: The Praktikos
Evagrius: The Gnostikos
Evagrius: Kephalaia Gnostica (Problemata Gnostica)
John Cassian: The Conferences
John Cassian: The Institutes
Jerome: Principle Works of St. Jerome
John Chrysostom: Sermons
Nestorius: The Bazaar of Heracleides
Tyconius: Book of Rules
Tyconius: Commentary on the Apocalypse
Wolfgang F. Volbach: Early Christian Art
David Talbot: The Art of Byzantium
Berthold Altaner: Patrology
James Stevenson: A New Eusebius
Jean Daniélou: The Dead Sea Scrolls and Primitive Christianity
W.H.C. Frend: Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church
Hans Jonas: The Gnostic Religion
Eugene Portalié: A Guide to the Thought of St. Augustine
E.A. Thompson: A History of Attila and the Huns
Acts of Thomas (Third century text from the Apocrypha)
Justin Martyr: The Second Apology of Justin Martyr