medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>>> 2) Where then does the millenialism come from that was so clearly
>>> voiced around
>>> Y1K in documents such as 'Wulfstan's Address to the English?' Why
>>> did
>>> they
>>> think that there was something likely to fulfill prophecy in the year
>>> 1,000?
>>
>> wulfstan's address is not millennial it's apocalyptic. he, in good
>> augustinian fashion, did not expect the millennium in the year 1000,
>> but the end of the [invisible] millennium as augustine argued in the
>> city of god -- antichrist, armaggedon, last judgment, not heaven on
>> earth. if you want further on this, i recommend two new books on
>> apocalyptic and the year 1000, one by me, one by Michael Frassetto.
>>>
> VKI: I agree that Wulfstan saw the Christian Church Age as the
> Millennium and
> saw it as coming to a close about 1000 AD not at all beginning in
> 1,000 AD as
> present day premillenialists saw the possibility of a millennium
> beginning in
> 2,000 AD. But why does this make him apocalyptic and not millennial?
> This is
> hair splitting.
i beg to differ. historians, anthropologists, even the church fathers
who denounced the subversive ideology, understand "millennial" only to
refer to expectations of collective salvation on this earth, in the
flesh, a messianic kingdom traditionally lasting 1000 years (hence,
millennialism, of which messianism is a subset of millennial movements
led by a messianic figure).
i have suggested using the term "apocalyptic" to mean that one believes
the great transformation is imminent -- cd be millennial (as i think
the peace of god is) or eschatological (as is wulfstan's). apocalyptic
also refers to the scenario whereby we get from this world (ruled by
evil and injustice) to the full manifestation of god's justice, whether
on a cosmic or an earthly plane.
almost all formal church writing, hence our documentary base, is
carefully cleansed of any explicit millennialism. not until joachim
did it re-enter formal discourse, and then with explosive results.
if you think this is splitting hairs, you need to re-enter a world
where ecclesiastical authorities held millennialism as taboo, with
grave consequences for those who broke that taboo.
> They were being apoclyptic specifically because they were
> millenialists--today they would be called post-millenial by those who
> classify
> various millenialists.
as one of those who classifies these movts, i permit myself to correct
you. the pax dei was post-millennialist -- ie the millennial kingdom
is built by divinely inspired human agents and only after
(post-millennium) does xt come again. wulfstan, aelfric, other
churchmen who believed they lived at the apocalyptic moment and who's
writings are preserved, are careful to be eschatological (last
judgment, heaven and hell, no earthly salvation). not millennial of
any variety.
somewhere, i'm not sure where, i have suggested that the pax dei of
1033 was an early manifestation of post-millennialism and the
mass-pilgrimage to jerusalem of the same year was either eschatological
or pre-millennial (jesus is coming back, be at the center of the cosmos
for the resurrection of the dead). the desire of pilgrims not to
return is a good sign of such motivations.
> Please e-mail me the titles of the two books you talk
> about.
one edited by me, Andrew Gow and David Van Meter, the other by Michael
Frassetto, both called The Year 1000, both with excellent articles.
r
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|