Quote: Dan Brown (Author of "The Da Vinci Code")

When asked if Dan Brown is a Christian:

“Yes. Interestingly, if you ask three people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must accept the Bible as absolute historical fact. Still others require a belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal savior are doomed to hell. Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious–that is, that we are all trying to decipher life’s big mysteries, and we’re each following our own paths of enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress. “

After researching for my resource post, I came across this quote taken directly from Dan Brown’s website. Reading this quote makes it a little easier to understand why he thinks the way he does. He says that his book is purely fiction and not meant to upset anyone, in fact, he says that he is Christian. After reading about him on the website, I wonder how many people would call themselves “Christian”, if they actually knew what it meant. This is all the more evidence that our calling at Southwestern is needed now more than ever. According to Brown, his spiritual quest is life long. I hope that he hears the truth soon, because we know not who holds tomorrow.

Boethius – One of the most influencing people for the Middle Age

The time from about A.D. 500 to 1400, which is known as the Middle Age, was influenced by some important men. Boethius, an Italian statesman, philosopher, and theologian, was one of those. Although the name of Boethius is not very popular today, he was very well known in the Middle Age. The Consolation of Philosophy and the Theological Tractates as well as his commentaries and translations of logical writings by Aristotle, are Boethius’ most significant contributions to the initiation and development of thought in the Middle Age.

Boethius was born in the year 480 in Rome, Italy. Actually, his real name is Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius. The last name indicates that he belonged to the great Anicii family. His father, a consul in Italy, died when Boethius was still very young. That, however, brought him into an even better family, as Symmachus adopted him. This family was considered as one of the richest and most illustrious families in the Roman Empire. Symmachus was the head of the Senate and a pillar of the Catholic Church at that time. He became the personal guard of Boethius. Later Boethius even became his son in law, when he married the daughter of Symmachus. Growing up in the household of Symmachus he gained an excellent education. He was taught in Greek, in Latin, philosophy, and theology. The Greek studies had a big impact on Boethius. Later in his life he had one of the biggest private libraries of that time. He had a passion for learning. As his father was the Roman consul in 487, he also became consul in 510 at the age of 30. His sons became consuls as well, when they were still children, seen as a reward for Boethius.

Even though Boethius’ main writing deals with philosophy, his writings can be divided into four major groups: the mathematic writings, whereas music, astronomy, arithmetic, and also geometry were included in this group (Quadrivium), translations from Greek into Latin and commentaries on logic, theological works, and the earlier mentioned Consolation of Philosophy. Through his early studies Boethius became a magister oficiorum, which was one of the highest state offices in the ancient west. The politics brought Boethius big success in a very short time. However, they made him fall as well in a very short time, as he was involved in the Roman Senate.

The Roman senator Albinus was accused of treason against the ruling east Gothic king Theodoric. As a consequence, the entire senate was charged of treason. Apparently, Boethius tried to protect the senate and put himself in charge of this accuse. During the trial he lost the support from the senate and got in charge of the Gothic King Theodoric.

Finally, Boethius was put to death charged of treason in a trial, which was not worthy to be called one, for he did not have the chance to defend himself. Before he received his penalty he was imprisoned for a long time. Obviously, he had the time and the material to write, because it was in his imprisonment time that he penned his greatest work; the Consolatio Philosophiae (Consolation of Philosophy). This work had a huge influence in the following years and decades and became one of the most read writings in the Middle Ages. Eventually, Boethius had to die. There are not a lot of details known about his death. Symmachus was executed with Boethius at the same time. Their deaths were seen as martyrdom for Christendom and consequently Boethius was recognized as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church later. After his death he became more and more famous.

Rightly, Boethius was acknowledged as the first scholar, since he also wrote on doctrines of the Catholic Church. He was also considered to be the founder of the Middle Age, for his influence was growing incredible during this time. Boethius authored a number of works, which explains why he had such a huge influence. Together with Aristotle and Augustine, Boethius was probably most influencing in Europe. The majority of the people did not know Greek in that time. Thus, even his translations of Greek works written by Aristotle and Porphyry were very significant for scholasticism. However, the most influencing writing is the Consolation of Philosophy. A lot of scholars referred to this work and used it for their own works.

Even though other writings of Boethius became less and less important in the beginning of the second millennium, they were still studied and regarded very well in the earlier Middle Age. They helped establishing twelfth-century thinking. The Consolation, however, enjoyed a longer acceptance in universities and schools even after 1200. This work was to read and study carefully for every scholar. The influence of it was evident throughout the Renaissance and early modernity.

Especially in England and Great Britain Boethius Consolation of Philosophy seemed to have a good reputation among the nation. King Alfred, Queen Elizabeth, and Geoffrey Chaucer translated the Consolation into English, because they were convinced of the significance of this work for everyone. They wanted the English nation to profit from this great work.

Helen M. Barrett tried to explain why his works had such a huge influence especially in the Middle Ages and clarified it best with this statement: “In those troubled centuries, the Dark and Middle Ages, during which the Consolation was most widely read, there were often periods when over great areas chaos and brute force prevailed rather than the ordered ways of civilized life. There must have been, many then to whom the questions which Boethius raised and tried to answer were of no mere academic interest, but came home with the poignancy of direct personal application.” (Barrett, Boethius – Some Aspects of his Times and Work)

The name and person of Boethius underwent great popularity and admiration throughout the Middle Age. However, he lost a lot of his popularity. There is just a minority of people today, who would know about him and his contribution to the process of humanity.

The Paradox of the Will

Saint Augustine of Hippo began work on The City of God in 413 A.D., after the fall of Rome. This book was one of the first doctrinal works to discuss in print many of the complex questions of the Christian faith. Augustine’s initial goal in writing the book was first to show that it was not Christianity but the paganism of Rome itself that was responsible for its fall. Second, he also defines and distinguishes between the “city of God” and “the city of Man”. Despite the fact that the book was originally intended to apply to this Roman situation, due to the description of the cities of God and man, The City of God discusses many subjects that are still argued, debated, and disagreed upon today. Three such topics are addressed in books XI and XII. Augustine discusses how creatures created by a perfect God became imperfect, what purpose an all-knowing God has in allowing evil to remain on the earth He created good, and how all of God’s creations give glory, even in their twisted imperfection, to their Creator. Augustine covers these topics thoroughly; however there is one hard question that does not seem to be answered.

Augustine maintains that since God is completely good, everything He creates must be good; therefore man was created good but his will was twisted to do evil. Augustine argues against all those who would say that God did not create man completely good by pointing out that God Himself “looked at everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good.” (Gen.1:31) In explaining how man is no longer perfect, as he was created, Augustine says that “the flaw of wickedness is not nature, but contrary to nature, and has its origin, not in the Creator, but in the will.” (XI.17) He says that man’s nature was originally good—that nature in itself is good, therefore it is not man’s nature but vice which does evil and opposes God. It is vice that twisted man’s pure will to do evil. At first, Adam and Eve existed in a perfect state of fellowship with God, and that is how God created man to be. Vice is the serpent that flattered and tempted Adam into sinning and twisted his will to do evil. Therefore, Augustine tells us, “Even the vice which by force of habit and long continuance has become second nature, had its origin in the will.” (XII.3) So Augustine asserts that our perfect God created a perfect man whose will was then corrupted by vice.

Augustine replies to those who would ask what use or purpose an all-knowing, all-powerful God has in allowing sin to remain and harm His people, by speaking of the concept of antithesis. For “God would never have created any… unless He had equally known to what… good He could turn him, thus embellishing the course of ages, as it were an exquisite poem set off with antithesis.” (XI.18) Webster, in his 1828 Dictionary of the English Language, defines antithesis as “opposition of opinions; controversy. In rhetoric, an opposition of words or sentiments; contrast.” In literature an antithesis would be something or someone who provides a contrast by which you see the qualities—usually good—of another. Artists such as Rembrandt and Thomas Kincaid use shadows as an antithesis to better bring out the light and the colors in their paintings. Augustine shows antithesis as God using evil to bring out the goodness of the good. This is why James tells believers to “count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience.” (Ja.1:2-3) There are many other examples that prove this theory of antithesis reasonable.

One example of antithesis, or “God using evil to bring out the goodness of the good,” is persecution of the church. It would seem that the church actually grows larger and stronger under persecution. An example of this would be the early church in Ancient Rome, where Christianity was considered a radical and dangerous sect that should be wiped out. Many were arrested, crucified, fed to the lions, etc, and yet “the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith.” (Acts6:7) Peter and John were called before the Sanhedrin and told to stop preaching the gospel or be punished, and as opposed to praying for safety, the believers prayed that God would “enable [His] servants to preach [His] word with great boldness.” (Acts4:29) Another example is the modern church in China, which is underground due to widespread persecution of Christianity in that country. An underground church leader stated that Christians in other countries should “stop praying for persecution in China to end,” adding that “it is through persecution that the church has grown.” (World Magazine, Praying for Persecution, by Gene Edward Veith) The Chinese church leader also stated that Chinese Christians are praying that the churches of other countries “might taste the same persecution so revival would come to [them] like we have seen in China.” So, in fact, it is during times that are hardest for the church and the believer individually that the Christian grows stronger and surer in their faith. This is one example of antithesis at work.

Another example of antithesis, which Augustine covers, is the fact that controversy over doctrine and the interpretation of Scripture, while it does stir up strife and divide believers, causes Christians to study and meditate on God’s Word, to discover for themselves its meaning. Augustine says that “this obscurity is beneficial, whether the sense of the author is at last reached after the discussion of many other interpretations, or whether, though that sense remain concealed, other truths are brought out by the discussion of the obscurity.” (XI.19) So, although it took argument to cause the study, every time a person reads the Bible they can learn something new, whether it’s relevant only to themselves, or to all. So through antithesis believers can come to a new and more extensive understanding of the Scriptures.

Augustine also states that not only is that which is not good used to give glory to God by showing the goodness of that which is good, but it itself gives Him glory. All things in creation, even that which is not perfect, give Him glory. Augustine speaks of “all natures… [which] have a rank and species of their own, and a kind of internal harmony… places assigned to them by the order of their nature…” (XII.5) The simple fact that all created things have a place and a purpose in the order of nature glorifies God. Every plant, every animal, every person has a reason and a calling to exist, through which they give glory to their Creator, whether they are aware of it or not. Augustine stresses th
at despite the fact that man’s perfection has been marred by sin, still God has a purpose for him and still He uses man for His glory. Augustine says that the sinful will, “though it violated the order of its own nature, did not on that account escape the laws of God, who justly orders all things for good. For as the beauty of a picture is increased by well-managed shadows, so, to the eye that has skill to discern it, the universe is beautified even by sinners.” (XI.23) In Romans, the apostle Paul says that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom.3:23) As Augustine points out, despite the fact that God’s creation is peopled with sinners, still it points to and gives glory to the One who created it.

Augustine’s coverage of the topics of the will, of antithesis, and of God’s glory is impressive. However, through it all there is one question that begins on the subject of the will, and so affects the rest, and does not seem to be clearly addressed. On the subject of the will, Augustine says that “vice… had its origin in the will,” (XII.3) yet he also says that man’s nature is good, because he was created by a God that cannot create anything that is not good. Surely the will is a part of the created man. If this is so, a question arises of how a perfect will can make a decision for evil. If every man were born with a perfect will, he would naturally make decisions for good; or so it would seem. Yet humans begin to make wrong, sinful decisions from the moment they are born. There must be an explanation for this if man is created good, just as God uses even evil for good, even though it seems questionable that an evil will could do good. However, Augustine does not seem able to supply this explanation. He attempts to, yet the question is not satisfied. When Augustine points out that even a sinner brings glory to God, he says that that sinful will “violated the order of its own nature.” (XI.23) This statement seems to address the issue of how a completely good will could make a decision that was not good, yet the question still remains: how can a man’s will violate its own nature? To this question Augustine offers no answer.

It would seem that Saint Augustine experienced firsthand the antithesis of the obscurity of God’s Word. Aside from the question that presents itself and seems impossible to answer, it is obvious that through constant, detailed study of the Scriptures, Augustine has come to satisfactory conclusions. He explains in detail his conclusions about the corruption of the will, how God uses evil, and how the corrupted will can bring glory to God, and these are only three of the many investigations into the Word of God that Augustine speaks of in his City of God. Augustine concludes that God created man good, as is confirmed in Genesis where it says “behold, it was very good,” (Gen.1:31) then man allowed his will to become polluted by vice. God uses evil to provide a contrast by which the good can be seen to be very good, and He uses everything in His creation, now marred by sin, to point to and to bring glory to Him as creator.

Essay

Of all the things I’ve learned in this Church and Empires class, the things I have found the most interesting of all is the process of canonization and creating the doctrines we have today. It’s amazing all the councils and debates the church fathers went through to come to the unified beliefs we have today. Of all the church fathers though, Athanasius was one of the most interesting.

Athanasius was born around AD 300 in the city of Alexandria, Egypt. Little is known about his youth, except that he was raised in a Christian home. He was not taught in a Christian school, but it is said that when Athanasius was a boy, the bishop Alexander once noticed him and his friends playing a game of church outside. As the bishop watched them perform pretend ceremonies, he noticed Athanasius attempt to baptize one of his friends. When Alexander asked the boy what he had said, it turned out that he performed a true baptism. Realizing his potential, Alexander took Athanasius as his secretary and gave him an excellent bible education. It’s said that he actually studied the whole bible better than anyone had ever studied even one book. Athanasius was sure to do great things.

During this time, Diocletian was persecuting Christians more than ever before, but by AD 324 Constantine became the sole ruler of the Roman Empire and began to unify the empire around Christianity. Now that Christians were no longer being attacked for their faith, “everyone from the emperor to the common man was debating Christian doctrine”. This might have been better than being burned at the stake or torn apart in the coliseum for believing in Christ, but it still presented some problems. With Christian doctrine being such a popular topic it began to develop some inconsistencies. A leading preacher of Alexandria by the name of Arius started a following with the idea that Jesus was not the same as God. That Jesus was created and was the highest of God’s creation which made him “the instrument of all the rest of creation”. This idea bothered Alexander who really liked Arius, but knew that this view was not correct. Alexander, along with Athanasius, held to the truth of the unity of Father and Son. When both sides began to gain support it threatened the unity of the empire around Christianity, so Constantine summoned together all the bishops of the empire so that each side could come to an agreement.

This council, which became known as the Council of Nicaea, had over two hundred bishops in attendance. Most of these bishops disagreed with the views of Arius, but could still not agree completely on what they did believe. By the end of the council, Arius had been excommunicated by Alexander and the bishops adopted the word homoousios, meaning “of the same substance”, into the Creed of Nicaea. It was agreed, the Son was the same as the Father. Three years after the Council of Nicaea, Alexander died and at almost thirty years old, Athanasius was declared the new Bishop of Alexandria. Even though the council had come to an agreement, the debate was far from over. While exiled, Arius gained more followers and eventually Constantine began to lean toward Arianism, ordering Athanasius to readmit Arius. Athanasius refused. He did not believe that Arius really accept the council’s agreement of homoousios. So when Constantine called together another council, Athanasius was now on the losing side. Yet he would not budge. He stood firm against these beliefs and defended the unity of Father and Son. For this he was sent into exile five times over the span of sixteen years.

Of all the things I’ve learned in this Church and Empires class, the things I have found the most interesting of all is the process of canonization and creating the doctrines we have today. It’s amazing all the councils and debates the church fathers went through to come to the unified beliefs we have today. Of all the church fathers though, Athanasius was one of the most interesting.

Athanasius was born around AD 300 in the city of Alexandria, Egypt. Little is known about his youth, except that he was raised in a Christian home. He was not taught in a Christian school, but it is said that when Athanasius was a boy, the bishop Alexander once noticed him and his friends playing a game of church outside. As the bishop watched them perform pretend ceremonies, he noticed Athanasius attempt to baptize one of his friends. When Alexander asked the boy what he had said, it turned out that he performed a true baptism. Realizing his potential, Alexander took Athanasius as his secretary and gave him an excellent bible education. It’s said that he actually studied the whole bible better than anyone had ever studied even one book.[1] Athanasius was sure to do great things.

During this time, Diocletian was persecuting Christians more than ever before, but by AD 324 Constantine became the sole ruler of the Roman Empire and began to unify the empire around Christianity. Now that Christians were no longer being attacked for their faith, “everyone from the emperor to the common man was debating Christian doctrine”.[2] This might have been better than being burned at the stake or torn apart in the coliseum for believing in Christ, but it still presented some problems. With Christian doctrine being such a popular topic it began to develop some inconsistencies. A leading preacher of Alexandria by the name of Arius started a following with the idea that Jesus was not the same as God. That Jesus was created and was the highest of God’s creation which made him “the instrument of all the rest of creation”[3]. This idea bothered Alexander who really liked Arius, but knew that this view was not correct. Alexander, along with Athanasius, held to the truth of the unity of Father and Son. When both sides began to gain support it threatened the unity of the empire around Christianity, so Constantine summoned together all the bishops of the empire so that each side could come to an agreement.

This council, which became known as the Council of Nicaea, had over two hundred bishops in attendance. Most of these bishops disagreed with the views of Arius, but could still not agree completely on what they did believe. By the end of the council, Arius had been excommunicated by Alexander and the bishops adopted the word homoousios, meaning “of the same substance”, into the Creed of Nicaea. It was agreed, the Son was the same as the Father. Three years after the Council of Nicaea, Alexander died and at almost thirty years old, Athanasius was declared the new Bishop of Alexandria. Even though the council had come to an agreement, the debate was far from over. While exiled, Arius gained more followers and eventually Constantine began to lean toward Arianism, ordering Athanasius to readmit Arius. Athanasius refused. He did not believe that Arius really accept the council’s agreement of homoousios. So when Constantine called together another council, Athanasius was now on the losing side. Yet he would not budge. He stood firm against these beliefs and defended the unity of Father and Son. For this he was sent into exile five times over the span of sixteen years.


A Bit of Early Scholasticism

A great period of change sometimes alluded to as the intellectual revival swept through Europe beginning in the 11th century. This change would greatly effect and impact the way that people thought and taught in regard to scripture. Unprecedented or new ideas and techniques were utilized in a way that challenged young students to grow like never before. This movement or shift was known as Scholasticism and had a tremendous impact on the critically thinking believers.
Scholasticism refers to the movement that attempted to harmonize faith and reasoning. It was ultimately created to show that faith in God and His inerrant and authoritative Word was a rational and logical belief. Also, Scholasticism sought to reconcile the ideas of the ancient classical philosophers with that of medieval Christian theology. So what exactly is scholasticism though? To properly define what exactly scholasticism was, it is important to look at several important constituents of it as mentioned in the “Church History” book. The fundamental components of Scholasticism are attitude, method, content, and form. To elaborate some, the attitude commonly associated with Scholastic thinkers was that of a faith and an assurance in reasoning and its immense power. Scholastics were positive of the fact that faith and reason were in no way at odds with each other. They firmly believed that any problems between the two could be reconciled or that faith and reason could coexist within a believers mind. The method associated with Scholasticism was generally dialectal reasoning. This approach involved selecting a text, which was generally the Bible. Before proceeding, it is important to note that although this method was primarily used for interpreting biblical passages that is it is not limited or restricted to the Bible. After selection of the text, then came the thorough examination. They would explore the text probing it in search of just about any apparently contradictory points that could be debated or argued about. Typically a passage was chosen and presented by the facilitator and then a problem was posed. Next, the person expounding upon the text would argue not only his/her side but would also present information that would seem to oppose their case. They would always weigh both sides of the argument before formulating their verdict concerning the “controversy”. An expert opinion was also to be factored into the equation, and then arguments were to be reconciled and resolved.
There are many elements to the question of what prompted the arrival of Scholasticism as defined in the previous paragraph. Some of the main factors included the “expansion of trade and commerce” which subsequently sparked the increase of urban life, “political stabilization” which resulted in increased peace and simpler communication, and “increased prosperity” which enabled the proper copying and translating of manuscripts. Monastic schools, which were formerly restricted to those entering the monastery, were opened to the public which provided people with skills to read and write in Latin. With this came the arrival of the Cathedral Schools. Around A.D. 1000 Cathedral schools, designed specifically for clerics, began stressing the importance of logic and philosophy. The Bishop asserted that they were essential components of religion. Around A.D. 1100 Universities began popping up. The Universities had slowly evolved from the Cathedral schools. The University of Oxford was created around 1200 A.D. which taught primarily theology. The old approach to teaching, before the existence of these schools, was largely based on the “personal moral authority” of the educator and was generally orally transmitted to the pupils. The new method of teaching put an enormous emphasis on the student’s capacity or ability to reason as the lessons were usually based in text. The primary text used, which was considered vital to the proper education of the students, was the Bible. Courses on correct exposition and expounding of the Bible were labeled imperative and frequently taught in these schools. The Bible was not the only book labeled as divinely inspired in these circles however. Significance was also given to commentaries, the words from Aristotle, and the writings of the great church fathers as they were considered authoritative.
One of the most, if not the most, noteworthy and prominent figures of the early Scholasticism period was St. Anselm. St. Anselm or Anselm of Canterbury did some superb and outstanding things during the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries. St. Anselm, commonly referred to as the “Father of Scholasticism”, provided the slogan for the era which was “faith seeking understanding”. St. Anselm, in his reasoning, asserted that for life to begin, there first had to be a figure of independent existence. Also, our life, as humans are dependent, is a result of the self-existent figure first creating us. This theory is consistent with Aristotle’s concept of a prime mover which caused the initiation of the process of life. St. Anselm equipped defenders of the faith with a number of arguments. The most popular and still wide known one today is the ontological argument. This argument, for the existence of God, states that the highest, most perfect being of which our minds can conceive has to exist in reality. This argument basically presupposes or assumes a belief in a creator God is innately wired within humans. It is also a little deep for me to fully grasp if I am being honest. Other esteemed men such as John Erigena, Peter Abelard, and Thomas Aquinas were noted as important Scholastic philosophers and theologians of the Scholastic period.
The era of Scholasticism marks a time in history when education was highly supported and advocated. It became a coveted or desired thing. Reasoning was employed in order to advance the belief in God and became known as an inseparable constituent of believing in God. Men and women began to think critically about faith, scrutinizing dogmas, and seeing what was clearly biblical. This time is proof that belief in our Creator, Savior, and Redeemer God can withstand all the scrutiny and testing that is thrown at it and that a logically, even critically, thinking individual can still hold a belief in Him and the Bible.

One of the things that interested me the most in the Church and Empires class was the process in which our early church fathers created the ideas and doctrines we value today. The counsils and th

Christian Jihad book report

The opening of the Christian Jihad by Ergun and Emir Caner opens the first few chapters with the controversy of pacifism. This concept of Christians not making war is very foreign to the average Christian who is taught loyalty to God and then their country. However, the book progresses to another idea of the Holy wars shortly afterwards, and changes the perspective of a righteous war completely. This shift from pacifism based on religious standards to extreme warfare because of religious beliefs is an intriguing and often frightening paradigm shift.

Pacifism in today’s culture is considered weak and unchristian. This attitude is not to be confused with the radical Muslim concept of war where it is a means of furthering their religion and punishing those who refuse to believe as they do. Instead it is considered to be a part of taking care of the orphans and widows in an attempt to end tyranny in other countries and given oppressed people the opportunity to choose what they believe for themselves. However, this idea of it being the Christians’ job to liberate others from political oppression was in no way a part of the first Church’s agenda for the spreading of the gospel. Instead, they “beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks” (Isaiah 2:4) in hopes that this first step into peace would set the example for the world just as Christ had set a peaceful example for them. The simple issue with war was that they could be killing someone who might have a chance of getting into the kingdom of heaven if their life continued, it would contradict their martyrdom lifestyle, and many of the characteristics of warfare were considered sinful. Justin of Rome even went as far as to correlate war with fornication, greed, and arrogance (Caner 29). At the time of pacifism in the Church, Christian persecution was running rampant, and so this outlook was not only acceptable, but a healthy world view. When a person’s dearest friends, family, and mentors are being killed for their beliefs, or any other reason, a person can either lean towards pacifism or complete revenge. Since the Christians leaned towards pacifism instead, they were able to preserve their integrity and win more people to the Lord because of their remarkable example.

The question must now be asked when the status quo for the Christian view on war changed. The Caners illustrate this paradigm shift very clearly in their chart found on page fifty. They predict that there were four stages in the relationship between Church and State. The first has just been discussed in the previous chapter. The second is titled The Courtship that occurred from 175 to 324 A.D. In this time period, Christians, who were no longer being persecuted, began serving in the military in preferential occupations. They were then able to “do God’s work” in the military, such as holding service, praying for soldiers, medical care, and diplomacy. By not participating in the violence of war they were still able to keep their “we spill no blood but our own “(Caner 21) motto that they claimed to have. However, desensitization to war began to take effect and war began to be seen as noble, not just to the secular world, but in Christian circles as well.

The third stage was called the “unholy matrimony” because Christians now believed that God’s work was accomplished through the state. They began participating in war in order to fulfill God’s will. This participation went further than the previous enactment in war to the actual killing of the enemy. Christians who died in warfare are now considered martyrs for the cause. This stage begins to evolve and slowly grow into the fourth stage, which was where the church controlled the state. In this stage was where the crusades began to occur. After being used by the state for too long, the Church began to take control of what was going on. They created a Holy army under the guidance of the Pope as commander and Chief. The first crusade was successful to military standards, but destroyed the Christian ethics in the Faith. In a thousand years, the Church had experienced persecution, reluctant service, Just Wars, and finally a full blow Jihad (Caner 104). As the Crusades continued, the Christian faith began to suffer a complete moral breakdown. The Pope had a more and more difficult time recruiting soldiers for his bloody cause and so in effect began offering salvation for anyone who would serve. This eventually meant that the soldiers held to no standards. They raped, killed, plundered, and so many more unimaginable crimes because it didn’t matter how they lived this life. They were automatically promised salvation.

If history is stopped here, a Christian in war sounds contradictory, however, so much has changed since the Crusades. Many Christians have returned to the Just war criteria to judge when and when a war is not worth fighting. Christians help with the makings of “smart weapons” to insure that as few a people are killed as possible. In the past one hundred years many Christians have been given many opportunities to decide what a just war is. For example, WWII is generally considered a just war, while Vietnam is often debated. The important thing though is that it is no longer an issue of the Church controlling the State or being used by the State. More and more often people are educating themselves on the issues and are choosing for themselves when to fight for a cause.

Quote

You only get shot at when you’re close to the target -Mark Aderworthy

Throughout the Early Church and Western Empires, being a Christian meant persecution. This quote by Aderworthy represents their faith in Christ even if their life was ended because of their belief. They stood strong for Jesus, thus they got shot at by the world.

On Christian Doctrine

Essentially, On Christian Doctrine is an introduction to the interpretation and explanation of the Bible. For Saint Augustine interpretation was not something to be controlled exclusively by scientific techniques of philological and historical analysis; these were but adjuncts to the task whose purpose could be met only through a knowledge of philosophical principles implied or stated by authors of the New Testament. St. Augustine was pre-eminent among those Christian writers in the West who set before themselves the task of elaborating the new philosophy, and On Christian Doctrine offers abundant evidence of an intellectual acumen which had a large share in creating the pattern of a culture which endured in the West throughout the thousands of years we rather unjustly call “Middle Ages.”

Translator’s Introduction to On Christian Doctrine

Bad Behavior has blocked 40 access attempts in the last 7 days.