I. IDENTIFICATION
1. Ulfilas
Ulfilas (311-383) was from Dacia. He was an Arian Bishop of the Goths of Germany. The 4th century is characteristic of the rencounter of the Romans with the tribal peoples of northern Europe. Following the decline of Rome, areas of the empire became increasingly independent. Rome was frequently sacked, invaded, and pillaged by nomadic people. These encounters often provided the contact between the Christian Church and the pagan invaders. Characteristic of this period were mass conversions of entire tribes of people in contrast to the previous history of individual conversions in the urban settings of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch. Here entire populations of peoples were converted. Irvin and Sunquist note, “for the first time an entire cultural-linguistic community unit, a tribe, converting as a whole.” (p.180) Philostorgius in his account On Ulfilas Among the Goths from the Internet Medieval Sourcebook describes how the tribal people became Christians. They had crossed into Roman territory, over running much of Europe, pillaging and taking prisoners, including clergy. These pious prisoners witnessed to the Gauls, and were responsible for their conversion. Among them was Ulfilas, who was later appointed Bishop on a diplomatic visit to Constantinople. Auxentius’s account On Ulfilas, also available online at the Medieval Sourcebook web site, describes more of the character of Ulfilas. He is shown upholding the beliefs of Arius, despising and trampling on the “odious and abominable, depraved and perverse confession of the Homoousians,” as well as deploring and sunning the “error and impiety of the Homoiousians.” The document notes that he preached in Greek, Latin and the Gothic tongue. Ulfilas is responsible for the establishment of the Gothic written language, and for the translation of the Scriptures into Gothic.
2. Benedict of Nursia
Benedict (480-540) was born in Nursia, Italy and is known for being the father of western monasticism. In the beginning, he chose to leave the wealth and prosperity of his family, shunning education, and live an ascetic life in a cave in Subiaco, much like the desert monastics of the previous centuries. Likewise, his fame spread and eventually he was asked by a local community of monks in Monte Cassino to become their Abbot and draft a rule for them. He modeled the rule after the Rule of the Master and Cassian’s Conferences and Institutes. His goal was to establish a rule that was not burdensome, that anyone could follow. He described a way of life, characterized by communal living under and Abbot (cenobite), poverty, celibacy, and stability. He emphasized the virtues of humility, silence, and obedience. The rule also established as normative, hospitality, prayer, lectio divina, opus dei. Simply put the life consisted of a three-fold division of work, reading and praying. The excerpts from the Rule read in class provide some insight. In the prologue, Benedict says he is attempting to found “a school for the Lord’s service,” he intends “nothing severe, nothing burdensome.” His guiding principle is the “amending of vices and charity.” In the remaining excerpts he described various aspects of the way of life, including how a monk should live, eat, drink and sleep. He says cenobites should stay in one place, living under an Abbot. They should “sleep clothed and girt with belts or with ropes; and they shall not have their knives at their sides when they sleep.” He restricts their food to a vegetarian diet, but allows for the infirm, they should “abstain from meat except for the sick and weak.”
3. Abbot Suger
Abbot Suger (1081-1151) was the Abbot of St. Denis in France. During this period the French monarchy was establishing itself over the local nobles, a sense of nationalism was rising, and the abbey of St. Denis stood at the center, with the position of abbot being highly influential and powerful in the kingdom. The monastery of St. Denis was founded in the 7th century by the King in honor of St. Denis the patron saint of France. It became the royal abbey of France, and many of its monarchs were buried there. The renovations of Suger were undertaken as an expression of the power of the french monarchy and was seen as a both a political and religious event. The renovations were on a grand scale, with gems being inlaid everywhere, and gold covering everything. The choir consecration in 1144 had five french archbishops, and thirteen bishops in attendance. The gothic architecture that evolved out of the renovations served as a milestone in architectural history and ushered in a new era of church building. The renovations cannot be understood outside their connection to its patron St. Denis. The 3rd century french martyr-missionary in Gaul was roasted, attacked by beasts, baked in an oven and finally beheaded. But he didn’t die until he has picked up his head and carried it to the present site of the monastery. In the minds of the 11th century french, their patron saint was also associated with Dionysius the Areopagus of Acts 17:34 and pseudo-Dionysius, a Syrian theologian who claimed to be the Areopagus. Pseudo-Dionysius wrote on the theology of light which became the basis for the gothic architecture style implemented by Suger.
4. Charlemagne
Charlemagne (742-814) was the French King who became the Basileus like Emperor of the West who revived the roman imperial past in new Germanic garb. (IS p.334) He was responsible for ushering in a new distinct political and cultural European identity. His military victories helped to unify Europe. His campaign against the Saxons marks the first time in history military force was used to compel conversion to Christianity (IS p.335-336). He executed thousands of prisoners and imposed capital punishment on people convicted of everything from celebrating pagan rituals to eating meat on Fridays in Lent. He was crowned Imperator Romanorum in 800 by Leo II. This event was another first, the first time in history a Pope assumed the authority to bestow the title of emperor, historically this was the function of the army, and usually the Popes were expected to be approved by the emperor not the other way around. Charlemagne is credited with the Carolingian Renaissance. He called men of learning to himself and the capitol such as Albin of Britain who taught him rhetoric, dialectics, and astronomy. Einhard remarks, “he was not satisfied with command of his native language merely, but gave attention to the study of foreign ones, and in particular was such a master of Latin that he could speak it as well as his native tongue.” He cultivated the liberal arts, holding them in high esteem. Einhard notes, “He also tried to write, and used to keep tablets and blanks under his pillow, that at leisure hours he might accustom his hand to form letters.” As emperor he was the protector of western Christendom. Thus, he was to promote Christian culture, enforce the Christian way of life. Like the Basileus of the East, he assumed teaching authority, and called councils together. He is noted for the addition of the filoque to the Creed. He was also responsible for the establishment of schools to promote learning based on the seven liberal arts. In the Letter to Baugaulf of Fulda, he remarks that he has “concern for people under his care,” that he wants his subjects to live rightly. Since he holds that knowledge precedes conduct, he concludes his people need to be educated. Therefore, he orders the bishoprics and monasteries, “to be zealous in their teaching whomever can learn,” “to not neglect their own study so that what pious devotion dictates to the mind may be expressed by the tongue without error.” He commands them to study in order that “the mysteries of the Scriptures may be more correctly penetrated.” He is also noted for several legal reforms, of note are the marriage reforms which put an end to the practice of polygamy and emphasized a celibate priesthood. He uniformly imposed the rule of St. Benedict as the norm for all monasticism.
5. Bruno of Toul
Bruno of Toul (d. 1054) of the man who was to become Pope Leo IX. Pope Leo IX was the first in a line of reforming Popes. The papal court had been weakened due to the rise of the Italian political families. At the time of his appointment to the Papacy by Henry III emperor of Germany, the investiture controversy was at its peak. The controversy stemmed from the question of the relationship between the Church and the political society, the sacred versus the secular. Traditionally local ruling authorities appointed bishops and presbyters. But the Church was asserting its right over the local rulers which brought in into tension with the political leaders. The question was one of allegiance: who does one owe his allegiance to, the Pope or the King? Ultimately the answer is whomever appointed you. Leo IX upon becoming Pope, broke the influence of the Italian families in the Papal court by appointing several nonromans to the position of cardinal: including his friends Humbert and Hildebrand who later became Pope Gregory VII. Then he asserted the authority of the Pope over secular authorities, stating that the emperor did not have a voice in spiritual matters. Thus begins the struggle between the Popes and the Emperors. He even went so far as to assert the primacy of the Roman pontiff over the other Churches and Patriarchs, which ultimately led to the Great Schism of 1054. He had the audacity to send Humbert to place the Bull of 1054 on the altar of Hagia Sophia excommunicating the Patriarch. Leo IX is also credited with great clerical reforms, resembling monasticism. He promoted celibacy, ended simony, nepotism and clerical marriage.
II. The Cathars (Albigensians) and Waldensians are frequently linked in the history of the reform movements sweeping Western Europe in the Middle Ages. Describe the challenges they represented to the Roman Church. Was the impetus for the two movements similar or different? How did they differ on doctrine and cosmology?
The impetus for the Cathar and Waldensian movements was in both cases the issue of repristination. Repristination was the desire to return to the original purity of the Church, characterized by the Apostolic Church of the Acts of the Apostles. The modern Church was seen as corrupt and in need to renewal. Parish priests were poorly educated, ill-prepared, and badly supported, while the Church hierarchy lived in luxury. Both movements had the support of local secular authorities because they considered the Roman Church to have apostatized under Pope Sylvester with the Donation of Constantine and wanted the removal of the Church from temporal affairs.
The Cathars, from the Greek katharoi meaning “pure ones” followed a similar cosmology as Manichaeism. The believed in a dualist principle of good versus evil. The material world was considered evil, the point was to purify oneself and rejoin the spiritual divine realm. They rejected the Trinity and Sacraments because they were associated with the material. They had a two tier hierarchy, with the elect at the top. Their baptism was not a baptism by water, because water was material, but by the word, spirit and imposition. Once baptized, they became the ‘elect’ and lived a strict asceticism. They promised not to own property, communicate with the outside world, live celibately, not eat meat, and be truthful no matter what the cost. They preached in pairs and read the scriptures in the vernacular. Their main challenge to the Church was to the hierarchy. They receive support from local nobility who wished to diminish support for the Catholic Bishops. They were separatist who considered their leadership to be an alternative to the Catholic hierarchy. They preached to the laity of the evil of the clerics and prelates of the Roman Church, pointing out “their pride, cupidity, avarice and uncleanness of life.” (Bernard Gui, On the Albigensians) Ultimately, their actions lead to the Inquisition and the establishment of ecclesial offices for the investigation and punishing of heretics. Many were burned at the stake.
Peter Waldo (1140-1218) was a wealthy merchant in Lyons, France who wanting to live like Christ. He sold everything, gave the proceeds to the poor, and lived a life of poverty (Matt 19:16-22, Mk 10:17-22; Lk 18:18-22). His followers, calling themselves the “Poor in Spirit” desired repristination as did the Cathars. They were particularly concerned with the restoration of the earlier, simpler apostolic Church. They believed all Christians should live a life of poverty, not just the monks. The saw themselves as an order of preachers, fashioned after Bernard of Clairveaux. Unlike the Cathars, they were not initially separatists and sought approval from Rome but were denied. Their theology resembles that of many of the Protestant reformed groups 300-400 years later. They held to the canon of Scripture, and accepted it alone as authoritative, similar to the Reformation notion of sola scriptura. The denied the status of Mary and did not believe in the communion of saints, in their opinion there was no other mediator with God than Christ. They believed in Heaven and Hell, but not in purgatory, or reincarnation as did the Cathars. The creed was fundamental to their faith, anything outside of the creed was considered an invention of men having proceeded from the antichrist. They rejected many of the sacraments, not because they were material as the Cathars did, but because the only divinely appointed ones, contained in Scripture, were Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. They tended to respect secular powers and were pacifists. They were not celibate like the Cathars. And they were known for letting women preach and the use of the vernacular. As with the Cathars, they challenged the Church’s authority. The notion of scripture as the only rule undermined the teaching authority of the Church. They wanted the surrender of Church temporal power and asserted that clergy should not have possessions.
III. What was the effect of the proscription of the Nestorians and Monphysites (at Ephesus, 431 and Chalcedon, 451 respectively) on the Eastern Empire and the lands beyond it?
The effect of the proscription of the Nestorians and Monophysites at the councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon was to banish them from the empire, and spread them outward, to the east, outside the empire, along the silk road, and into Persia, Syria, India, China and even Japan. There they encountered tension, persecution, but in many instances they flourished and established themselves for many years outside the range of view of the Roman and Orthodox Churches.
Nestorius argued against the term Theotokos. He held that it was improper to say the divine logos was born of a human mother, nor to say that the divine logos has human attributes. He proposed a Christ with two natures in one person, with a distinction of natures such that the human Jesus suffered and died while the divine logos indwelling in him did not. The incarnation was seen as the indwelling of the logos which caused the human Jesus to function, and ultimately lead to the human nature being adopted by the Father. Nestorianism was condemned at the council of Ephesus in 431.
The Monophysites, following the monk Eutyches, held that there were two natures before the incarnation, but only one after. They formed a new united nature, a mingling or mixing of substance, like Tertullian’s tertia quid. Much of the division between the Monophysites and the Chalcedonians were drawn on geographic lines, between Alexandria and Antioch. Many Alexandrians were angered by the disposition of Bishop Dioscorus, and the Council furthered the rift between the two great cities. Eventually, Egypt and Syria split away from the Chalcedon Church. Monophysitism was condemned at Chalcedon in 451.
The rejection of the two groups left them subject to ecclesial and imperial authority, which effectively banished them from the empire, discarding them to the outside hinter regions. Rather than containing the heresy, it spread out, along the silk road, in areas outside the control of the orthodox Church, in areas like China, India, and Japan. In many of these lands, they were receive with the warmth of Diocletian. They were considered a threat to local established religions, and bloody persecutions followed. This is evident in the early encounters with Zoroastrianism. But in some cases they were able to establish themselves.
The silk road, established by Alexander the Great, was a great melting pot of commerce, communication and culture. Goods as well as ideas were freely exchanged by people traveling across the continents of Europe and Asia. Persians, Indians, Greeks all mingled together. Nestorians traveling East encountered Manichaeism, Gnosticism, and diaspora Judaism as well as Hinduism and Buddhism. In many places the result was a cross fertilization of religions. Many Manichaean temples resemble Buddhist shrines and Mani is often depicted as the Budda. (Mani from Chinese Manichaean Temple Carving Handout p.9, Temple in Huabiaoshan Handout p.10) The sides of the roads were literally littered with chapels of every sort for the multitude and diversity of traveler. Within this context Nestorians served as missionaries, converting the people the encountered to their particular brand of Christianity. Marco Polo recorded finding Christian Churches in China. (Nestorian Tablet, East Asian History Sourcebook) The Nestorian Tablet from the 8th century commemorates the of Nestorian missionaries who propagated the “luminous religion.” The Tablet tells how the Nestorians came, met with the Chinese officials who approved of their religion as “having excellent principles” and thus being accepted the faith flourished. (Nestorian Tablet, E. Asia Sourcebook) The Chinese inscriptions indicate that there was a sizeable Nestorian Christian population in China by the 8th century. (Handout p.16) The Tablet states, “When the pure, bright Illustrious Religion was introduced to our Tang Dynasty, the Scriptures were translated, and churches built.” And how, “the true doctrine was clearly announced, Overseers [Bishops] of the church were appointed in due form.” In this respect the Nestorian missionaries appear to be similar in activity to the Roman missionaries in Gaul and Ireland, they were busy teaching the local indigenous peoples about the Christian faith, transcribing the Scriptures into the native language, and setting up a Church hierarchy.
IV. The desire for purity or a time of purity was a recurrent theme among reforming groups during the Middle Ages, although this desideratum characterizes the history of Early Christianity as well. Using documents from both periods, define purity for each group you discuss and discuss its effects on the history of the Roman Church.
The biggest difference I can see between the two periods of desire for purity would be that in the early period of the Church, the desire for purity dealt with the issue of right Christian practice, it was tied to Baptism, concerned with its relationship to the world and other Christians. Later in the Middle Ages, concern for repristination, or return to a pure, simpler, more authentic Church provided the impetus for the Cathar and Waldensian movements. In both periods individuals expressed this desire for purity in monasticism. The early Church monastics entered the desert to get away from the cities, and purify their hearts through vigilance, prayer, and fasting. The monks of the Middle Age, similarly strove for the monastic ideal, but that ideal was expressed as a reform, a return to the charism of their founders, Benedict in particular.
The Early Christian church was certainly influenced by pre-Christian notions of purity. The desire is clearly common to many cultures, religions, and philosophies. The Essenes for instance practiced ceremonial purity associated with frequent washing and they paid careful attention to the Law specifically to those aspects of the Law concerning levitical defilement. The Stoics, Epicureans, and Neo-Platonists strove to purify their souls, the resist desire and the material world which they saw as a prison. These groups provided the context by which the early Church attempted to understand itself and struggle with how to be Christian in the world. The North Africans were notoriously rigorist in their interpretation of Christianity, and the question of what to do about people who apostatized or sinned after Baptism was taken seriously. Baptism wiped away, purified one from sin, and therefore one should not defile oneself by returning to former ways. One divergent group in the early period who referred to themselves as “the Pure” were the Donatists. They arose out of the context of the Christian persecutions. They were critical of religious authorities who in their opinion had betray fellow Christians and their faith by siding with imperial authorities. They were concerned for the purity of the Church, mingling with imperial and secular powers and culture. Therefore the separated themselves, went off and founded their own communities. Once the Church became socially acceptable in the empire, once it began to mix and mingle with the local culture, was it defiled, impure, did Christians need to separate themselves to be worthy of being Christian? In the same early Church period, another group concerned for purity, the Gnostics, stands in contrast to the separatism of the Donatists. The Gnostics maintained a flesh-spirit dichotomy. They saw the material order, the flesh, as evil. The realm of the spirit was good. They strove for purity, from detachment from the material world, as a way toward retaining their original divine identity. Their cosmology was rooted in Neo-Platonism. They maintained a 3-fold social hierarchy: the elect, the psychics, and the hylics.
The impulse to leave the world, enter the desert, and become a monk was a curious phenomenon that gained tremendous popularity in the post-persecution period. Men and women, seeking to authentically respond to the Gospel, sold everything they had, gave the money to the poor and entered the desert to follow Jesus. “Blessed are the pure of heart for they shall see God” (Matt 5:8) “If you wish to be perfect go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven; then come follow me.” (Matt 19:21) These desert monks, hermits, or anchorites (brigands) moved out of the great cities into the rugged and unwanted lands. Their great asceticism attracted large groups of followers who considered them holy inspired men. Before long, there were whole new cities of monks, living outside the cities. The archetypal figure of this period was Anthony the Great who was raised in a wealthy family, but upon hearing the Gospel parable of the rich young man, sold everything he had and entered the desert. Those who entered the desert were not only men. Many women, such as Mary of Egypt, were known to have entered the deserts.
Pacomius is credited as the first cenobitic monk. He established a rule for living in a community. Before long, a thriving monasticism was in place in the Christian church characterized by men and women who had a hatred of the flesh and the world, who entered the desert to engage temptation and evil as Jesus in the wilderness, that by trial they may be purified. The strove to subjugate their passions by obedience, poverty, chastity, fasting and prayer. They were characterized by their perseverance, vigilance, endurance and holiness. However they were a challenge to the burgeoning Christian church. Their tremendous popular support undermined ecclesial authority.
The Middle Ages saw in increase in the Church’s political power and authority as well as material wealth and prosperity. The Church became entangled with political concerns and key positions were often bought and sold. The Roman Pontiff was tied heavily to the emerging wealthy Italian merchant class and their struggles for power. Monasteries had flourished in the West under the Rule of St. Benedict, and now possessed enormous wealth and land. The money and political power stood in sharp contrast to the Gospel ideals of Christianity. Many groups such as the Cathars and Waldensians angered by the luxury of the Church hierarchy, the ill-suitedness of the local priests, considered repristination or return to the original purity of the Apostolic Church to be the answer. The Cathars, like the Gnostics saw the material order as evil and strove to distance themselves from anything associated with matter, including the sacraments and many of the accepted theological teachings. Like the Donatists, the Cathars separated themselves from the Church as their solution to the problem of how to relate to the world. They challenged the Church’s authority.
Monasticism during this period experienced significant reform as well. The Benedictine order had flourished over the preceding centuries, Charlemagne had made the Rule normative in Europe, but the observance had become lax. Many monasteries were wealthy, and the monks no longer maintained the dietary restrictions, and in place of the manual labor specified in the Rule they substituted longer hours of liturgy. Within this context the monastery of Cluny was established. Cluny was created in an attempt to reform the Benedictine observance. William II donated the land and everything in it to the monastery and put it under the patrimony of Peter and Paul, reminiscent of the donation of Constantine. The Charter declared the monastery to be independent, even of the Roman Pontiff: “those same monks there congregated shall be subject neither to our yoke, nor to that of our relatives, nor to the sway of the royal might, nor to that of any earthly power...no one of the secular princes, no count, no bishop whatever, not the pontiff of the aforesaid Roman see, shall invade the property of these servants of God.” (Charter of Cluny) The first Abbot, Berno, was given several goals. First to observe the rule of St. Benedict in its entirety. Second, to keep the hours Benedict established for the liturgy of the hours. Third, to engage in manual labor as proscribed by the Rule. And fourth, to offer hospitality to the poor and to pilgrims. The reform spread, taking over other monasteries. However Cluny’s reputation lead to bequests and gifts increasing their wealth. Before long the houses were so rich, the chapels decorated in gold and gems, the focus once again shifted to long ours of prayer. In 1098 Robert and a group of monks including Robert and Alberic left Molesme and founded a new monastery at Citeaux. The new order, called the Cistercians, were a reform of the Benedictine rule. They “did not see themselves as starting a new system of monastic life but rather as restoring the pure form of the Benedictine life.” (Handout) They interpreted the rule quite literally, and rejected income from churches and lived by manual labor. Their churches were not richly decorated. These monastic reforms, characterized by Cluny and Citeaux had an impact on the reform of the Papacy. The striving for purity, in strict adherence to the purity of the original founding of the order, lead the reform monks who became Popes, Leo IX and Gregory VII to reform the papacy influenced by their monasticism. Monastic practices and ideals became the norm by which the clergy were judged. Celibacy was imposed and clerical marriage was ended.
V. Compare and contrast these two Gothic churches. What are the different theologies affecting their construction and decoration? (Pontigny, France, Cistercian 1160-1180) (St. Denis, Paris, 1136-1144).
The two churches can be characterized by their different interpretation of the theology of light. As mentioned before, Suger’s renovations of St. Denis reflected Pseudo-Dionysius’ theology. The Syrian theologian was heavily influenced by Neo-Platonism and the notions of ascension and descension, the beautiful, the One, the source of all being that overflows itself and communicates its being on various levels. He states, “We must lift up the immaterial and steady eyes of our minds to that outpouring of Light which is so primal, indeed much more so, and which by way of representative symbols, makes known to us the most blessed hierarchies among the angels. But we need to rise from this outpouring of illumination so as to come to the simple ray of Light itself.” (Pseudo-Dionysius, Celestial Hierarchy 1.2) According to Pseudo-Dionysius, the aim of Hierarchy is the “greatest possible assimilation to and union with God,” to become like Him by contemplating Him in His most Divine Beauty. (Pseudo-Dionysius, Celestial Hierarchy 3.157) Suger included three main architectural devices to open up the inside of St. Denis and allow greater in pouring of light: pointed arches, cross-ribbed vaulting, and external flying buttresses. The Romanesque style rounded arches tended to buckle under weight, so the walls had to be think. With the pointed arches and cross-ribbed vaulting the weight was transferred support columns which were countered by the external buttressing allowing the walls to be thinner and room for more stained glass to let in refracted light. Suger made ample use stained glass. “The church shines with its middle part brightened. For bright is that which is brightly coupled with the bright, and bright is the noble edifice which is pervaded by the new light.” (Abbot Suger, Handout p.31) On the doors he inscribed a verse that proclaimed that this light “lifted the mind from the material world and directed it toward the true light coming from Christ, the door.” (Handout)
Whereas Suger had emphasized refracted light, Cistercian architecture emphasized pure light. This architecture of light was simple, elegant and restrained. It emphasized worship in spirit and truth, with no distraction. The outpouring of natural golden light was a reminder of God’s presence. Cistercian architecture refrains from the excessive use of stained glass, instead opting for grisaille style windows that let in a more pure light. The architecture is still Gothic style, making use of the pointed arches and cross-ribbed vaulting, but restricting the use of decoration and stained glass. The overall effect is much more sober and reminiscent of the simpler Romanesque style but with significant added light. Bernard of Clairveaux thought monastic life should be austere, disciplined, and simple. In his Apology, directed at Cluny, could be applied to the adaptations of Suger. He calls them minor abuses, describing the church as having “enormous height, extravagant length and unnecessary width.” In his opinion the decorations and paintings “catch the worshiper’s eye and dry up his devotion.” His theology of matter is very different from Pseudo-Dionysius. For Bernard, matter is useful for arousing the devotion of “carnal people because they cannot do so by spiritual means.” But for monks, who have abandoned the world, they should hold “all bodily delights–as so much dung.” He criticizes architecture such as St. Denis, saying “people are inspired to contribute rather than pray.” While the church is “resplendent in her walls” she is “wanting in her poor.”