medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Dear George,
first of all, yes, you are right at least from a modern point of view (modern times in this case starting perhaps around the 11th or 12th century) and you're right, too that the different Toledo councils argue from different points of view.
But to complicate things (and methodology) further: It is my impression that the underlying problem was a politico-strategic one in all three cases: how best to maintain coherence in an ethnically and religiously very diverse kingdom (Goths/Sueves vs. Romans vs. Basques vs. Jews; christian orthodoxy vs. remains of arianism and perhaps priscillianism vs. remains of paganism vs. judaism). And here we might touch the heart of the matter: different poltical strategies found for themselves different theological (or sometimes perhaps pseudo-theological) solutions. We might as well keep in mind that the distinction between theology and politics is for the sake of analysis certainly necessary - but that theologians in early medieval times were part and parcel of the political elite as well. Their view of the world was a much more holistic one than ours is - after God had enlightened the Gothic kings to lead their fellow-Goths into the community of orthodoxy it was (in their view) or had to be obviously God's will to maintain the kingdom.
Again the logic of theology and the logic of power politics might be different from a modern analytical point of view, but not necessarily from an early medieval point of view: the world was one and theology and strategy were just two aspects of this one world - so their respective logics ‗coulđ‗ not possibly lead to different results.
Just as an aside: Happily human progress has overcome these dark ages. Nowadays, of course, nobody would even dream of ever mixing up the two ;-).
Best regards (sorry, but my Hungarian is simply non-existent)
Karl-Georg
-----Original Message-----
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions of medieval religious culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gyorgy Gereby
Sent: Mittwoch, 9. November 2005 10:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [M-R] Spread of Religion v i a Conquest - K-G Schon
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Dear Karl-Georg,
your point is certainly conceded, but it leads to very interesting further considerations.
The methodological problem here, I think, is, isn't it, whether a text would allow any sort of interpretation. If there would be no limit to interpretation, then I'm afraid the very meaning of a text would fall apart. Consider as an extreme that Hesiod's Theogonia is about the Trinity. (I'm not speaking about centos - like the Christos paschon created from Euripides, but original texts.) Then consider Rabbinic Judaism's (negative) attitude to proselytising: it has some scriptural and theological reasons, hasn't it?
But if there is a limit to liberties in interpretation than this is what I would be inclined to call 'objective'.
I admit that the limits of interpretation are often rather loose (see Geyler von Keysersberg's dictum about the waxen nose of the Holy Writ), and it changes in history, but a complacent scepticism about such restraints risks both the above mentioned danger of rendering basic concepts useless and being historically incorrect, since existing identities would evaporate. That is, there are things which the "collective interpretation" of a text would not allow, so to say (I'm thinking about e.g. Yerushalmi's Zachor).
The very interesting Visigothic case you describe does not contradict my original statement, however. I said: in the Latin West, and beginning rather late. Second: the 4th council of Toledo offers a theological point, while the 6th is clearly dictated by political logic. The policies of Sisebutus and Chintillianus found (many) followers in the Western hemisphere, but not universally. It was rather power politics, though, than anything else, I suppose. Think of the Roman bishops' initial resistance to the Frankish promotion of the Filioque - their resistence ebbed away, unfortunately, because of - I take it - power interests.
That is, I would differentiate between the 'logic of theology' and the 'logic of religious politics'.
My claim is that the forced conversions did not follow the 'logic of theology' (Xtian), but the 'logic of religious politics'.
How far can the two logics go apart? Well, to use a different example, few Western Marxists would accept that Camerade Dschougashvili's and Berija's activities are characteristic of Marxism tout cour, wouldn't they?
Therefore I think it is justified to investagate to conceptual content of founding scriptures on their own.
Mit vorzuglicher Hochachtung :))
Georg
G. Gereby
associate professor
Ancient and Mediaeval Philosophy Department, Eötvös Loránd University Budapest
recurrent associate professor
Medieval Studies Dept.
Central European University
Budapest V.
Nador u. 9.
H-1051 Hungary
[log in to unmask]
+ 36.1.3273046 office
>>> [log in to unmask] 05. 11. 08. 22:20 >>>
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
The question is not (in my view at least) whether conversion by force was
_objectively_ grounded in the text, the question ist rather whether
individuals or whole communities (subjectively) believed them to be
justifiable by the text.
An example in point is the forcible conversion of Jews to christianity in
the Visigothic kingdom. Under king Sisebutus (612-621) forcible conversion
was the law of the realm - to be repealed 633 under king Sisenandus (4th
council of Toledo, c. 66: "the holy synod prescribes that from now on no-one
shall be forced to believe"). And then - five years later - the 6th council
of Toledo thanks God that king Chintillanus "does not allow anyone to live
in his kingdom who is not a catholic" (c. 3).
Karl-Georg Schon
-----Original Message-----
From: medieval-religion - Scholarly discussions of medieval religious
culture [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gyorgy Gereby
Sent: Dienstag, 8. November 2005 21:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [M-R] Vá: Re: [M-R] Spread of Religion vi a Conquest
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
Conlegae doctissimi,
as long as more knowledgeable scholars do not intervene let me state that to
the best of my knowledge Xtianity was not spread by the sword in the Roman
Empire. To say the least until Theodosius it would have been theoretically
impossible (that is, until the 380s). By that time - even by the time of
Origen, even Tertullian, so latest by the 250s - Xtianity had been present
all around the oikoumene and beyond. It was only after this remarkable
success that it became a religio licita in the Empire after 313 (under
C'tine), and it only became "state religion" gradually, suffering in between
a substantial setback under the legislation of Julian between 360-3. But
even after Theodosius no systematic persecution of pagans existed as such
(yes, temples - and synagogues - were attacked and demolished, mobs roused
and local riots initiated, but these remained local events, to which the
central administration put an end, and no empire-wide physical enforcement
was legally established). Think of the Roman pagan elite in Augustine's
days, or the interesting cases listed by Bowersock in his Hellenism in Late
Antiquity.
Neither did SS Cyril and Methodius spread Christianity by the sword among
the Slavs, or the Apostle Thomas in India. This was the original situation.
Afterwards, especially in the Latin West different things happened.
But there is no such thing as finding a justification in the NT for the
spreading of the word by the sword. The order of Christ making all nations
his disciples Mt 28:19, Mk 13:10, Lk 24:47 is not tied to anything like
forcible conversion. That it had to be so is because the sacrifice of Christ
in Biblical terms is meant for all humankind leaving God for idols at some
point (most importantly at Babel). (Caveat: I must confess I haven't read
the Militia Christi of Harnack, which should be a good source for first
orientation.)
Observe that the point here is not about historical facts (yes, there were
forced conversions in the name of Xtianity), but whether these forced
actions were grounded in the text (the source of legitimacy) or not. This
was the reason why Las Casas could object to the practices of the Spanish
authorities as a _theologian_ (and not as a secular humanist).
Sometimes we need to think and speak about basics.
Valete,
George
G. Gereby
associate professor
Ancient and Mediaeval Philosophy Department, Eötvös Loránd University
Budapest
recurrent associate professor
Medieval Studies Dept.
Central European University
Budapest V.
Nador u. 9.
H-1051 Hungary
[log in to unmask]
+ 36.1.3273046 office
**********************************************************************
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
**********************************************************************
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
**********************************************************************
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
**********************************************************************
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
|
