We know about the "bad" and "contradictions" inherent in religion and the Catholic religion in particular.
But as I've discussed in the past, Christianity has been a force of good and clarity as well as this video from Wind Rose Hotel expresses.
In many ways, our Western intellectual heritage wouldn't exist - or at least wouldn't develop - without Christianity.
The video is a complete travesty to any student of western history. The church plunged Europe into a Dark Ages for centuries before getting the shit back to shoe-level.
ReplyDeleteSchools, hospitals, science... all of these were eradicated by the Church early in its history. Plato's Academy, temples to Aesclepius, and the countless forms of pagan philosophy were all quashed by the church, and it was only remnants left in the Byzantine empire to the East that survived the cultural purge. Europe didn't get their shit together again until they came into contact with Muslims who conquered the Byzantines and spread the works of Aristotle and countless others that the Renaissance was was able to cmmence.
I'm sorry, but the Catholic Church set Europe back over a millenium. We would probably have visitted Mars centuries ago had it not been for the rise of Christianity.
You must have read a different version of history.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, it's been debated whether there was a dark age at all. Some break the MA into different parts.
I'm of the opinion it wasn't as deep or lasted as long as claimed. For example, many great works were still being published - Chaucer, St.Augustine for instance. Merchant trading between the Russians (East) and Italians on the Volga took place as early as the 11 century.
Art through mosaics were flourising, Giotto is considered "dark age" and Gothic art has become classical in its own right.
In other words, it was a dynamic, cyclical, transistional period.
But, the main reason why the lights dimmed on Europe was because of the fall of Rome. To not grasp this is to not understand the widespread stability Rome brought to Europe.
Once that happened all knowledge collected to that point ceased to be traded and remained within a restricted area: Rome. It wasn't "lost" per se, although Greek texts and the use of Greek did disappear.
The rest of Europe was busy "forming" itself through various tribes while it fought off invading tribes - notably Moors. And yes, once they gained a foothold it did bring with it renewed knowledge which Europe wasn't ready to digest at that point.
It is here countries like France were formed and soon established the Holy Roman Empire to "ressurect" Rome's greatness as a stablizing entity.
Once secured, the starting point of the 'Renaissance' with the birth of Petrarch kicked off and religion - despite the secular humanistic approach - played a vital role for Renaissance thinkers (even though the Church was indeed hostile to science whenever it challenged its authority but it never stopped the flow of knowledge as it hard as it tried).
The Enlightenment questioned Christianity but it rarely, as a whole, denigrated it. That's a 20th century thing to think that.
To single out the Church as the main reason is too simplistic in my view.
The collapse of an empire and state and result "chaos" had far more implications that stretched across Europe and Asia. The Church consolidated its power but it onto itself did not plunge an entire peoples into darkness.
And this is just a very, very superificial explanation. So many things were happening at the same time between 476-1304 it's impossible to discuss here. Studying the Middle Ages is one of the most interesting things I've ever done and I'm still trying to make sense of it. It was like a tsunami.
I'm just trying to disspell the notion the Church did what you argueit did.
There's NEVER one entity to blame, Bret.
I forgot. Here's a link to science in the middle ages.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/culture/scitech/index.html
@Bret "Ginx" Alan
ReplyDeleteI am not a big fan of the Catholic Church, but what you have said seems exaggerated and a bit simplistic to me.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTC, your link to middle ages technology is quite enlightening and seems to synch up nicely with how I understood things: the only major advancements for hundreds of years were to plow technology, with a few military developments (most of which were borrowed from invaders like the Huns and "Moors").
ReplyDeleteWith the fall of the Roman empire and the fragmentation of Europe in the 4th and 5th centuries (a fall brought on not by pagan invaders, but by Christian popes and emperors fighting Christianized warlords like Alaric), Byzantium and the Eastern Roman empire became the sole place that Western Civilization was not censored through mass scroll burnings.
There isn't that much going on in Europe during the Middle Ages, unless you are only concerned with military history. Europe went from being one of the centers of culture to being plunged into a tribal society. Ideas were transmitted so rarely that languages diverged several times. There's really no way of looking at it than to call it "the dark ages," in the same way that the Middle East has been experiencing a similar situation since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
Read about the middle ages, and let me know when you decide to agree with my view (or find something that shows me why I'm wrong). Even if you see the fall of Rome as some magical point in time when the development of knowledge will cease, you can't ignore the damage Christian zealots did in destroying the established intellectual heritage of Europe. There wasn't a pagan temple that went undefaced, not a single great philosopher above suppression.
Look at the Romans and their technological achievements. It would be over a millenium before Europe saw running water again.
Bret, again, you bring up some valid points and I appreciate the debate (we don't have enough history debates) but it's not sufficient evidence to conclude it was only the Church. You're not considering the entire maginificent scope of the Middle Ages - even if you think you are.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't a scientific period, true, but it wasn't devoid of any either. And for the record, every society in world history borrows so I wouldn't focus on it too much.
I'm not interested in changing your view because there isn't a major historian of the Middle Ages who would make such a summation. I've never read one and doubt I never will. I certainly am not prepared to make that conclusion. It betrays too many other factors.
I find it intriguing you would conclude the fall of the Roman empire was because of the Church. It's a specious argument to make to say the least.
Historians (professional and amateur alike) have been debating the many cause of its eventual downfall. Guicciardini, Machiavelli, Gibbons etc. have all offered their thoughts and none conclude anything as forcefully as you seem to.
I could go on into Jerome, Augustus, Ambrose, Aquinas and the lot since in their writings we delve into a complex world view (as Russell so amazingly recounts) but, I maintain that your assertion the Church ALONE 1) hastened the fall of Rome and 2) put Europe in a Dark Age is tenuous at best.
It's like blaming the Crusades square on the Church. It simply wasn't the case.
If there's anyone who knows Roman history it's Prof. Man of Roma - a real Roman as he proudly tells!
Let me clarify:
ReplyDeleteI think the causes of the fall of Rome itself were multitudinous (there were economic and political reasons completely independent of Christianity). What I meant to imply in my comments regarding the role of Christians in the fall of Rome is that often, a mythology is constructed painting heathen barbarians as over-running Rome and leaving it in ruins.
This is simply not true, as it was Christian tribes that were formerly allied with Rome. Tribute was paid by Rome to many bordering groups in order to create peaceful buffer zones on the frontier, and when Rome could not pay up or a ambitious tribal leaders made demands Rome would not meet, they would attack. These were often groups that had previously fought alongside the Romans, and in some cases Romans all but welcomed these barbarians. As Rome crumbled and conditions grew worse, invaders were... pardon the cliche... welcomed as liberators.
Another sad thing is, if you ever visit Rome, you will find that temples were toppled or completely deconstructed to be used to build churches. Some of the more impressive pagan temples were just converted into churches (like the Parthenon).
When Rome fell, the largest organized power structure was the papacy and his vast network of bishops. Once they had the reins, this is when Christianity took an active role in Europe's era of amnesia. This is what it was, because a vast amount of information was essentially forgotten, only to be remembered a thousand years later.
What I am trying to imply by mentioning that so much technology was borrowed is not that it never happens in other societies (I mean, even "Arabic numbers" are actually from India and China). Rather, every culture borrows, but some go through periods of markedly little development. There are certain conditions under which technology can be developed, and Christianity either stifled or did not foster it for centuries (however you choose to look at it).
The clarification did add texture to your position.
ReplyDeleteIt is unfortunate about the pagan temples.
I am no fan of the Roman sect, but seriously, history does help explain its rise, its failings, and what good it contributed too.
ReplyDeleteWhat could have been? Speculation. Nothing wrong with speculating on what could have been had the great schism never occurred, nor the wrongs of religious persecutions and wars in the name of the God who is love, but we build on the past, we do not live in it.
Ah, I knew I left something out.
ReplyDeleteThe schism(s) were the best thing to happen to Christianity. The monolithic nature of the church is part of the problem. Before the fall of Rome, dozens of philosophical schools of thought competed for primacy. The church enforced a stifling monopoly on thought, and this contributed greatly to stagnation in development.
If the church had not slaughtered apostates and allowed the growth of competing ideologies, Europe would have bounced back. Not only did the church of Rome stifle pagan thought, it stifled Christian thought, as well.