The Early Christian Church and Its Ties to

Judaism
This lesson will explore the early Christian Church and its close connection to Judaism. It will
highlight the similarities of these two faiths in reference to the Holy Scriptures while also exploring
their disagreement over the person of Jesus Christ.
Early Church Defined
If you look up information on the history of Christianity, you may find things like, 'During the first
century CE, Rome was rocked with the formation of a new religion. Its name was Christianity, and
from its inception, the world has been radically changed.' Although parts of this statement are ery true,
there is one item that's a bit misleading. Christianity was not a new religion. In fact, the early Christian
Church was firmly planted with !udaism at its ery root structure. "o to be more accurate, we should
really say, 'Rome was rocked by a group of !ewish belieers who followed !esus Christ # another
!ewish man # and spread his message throughout the world.'
$o e%plore this a bit further, we're going to discuss the early Christian Church's ties to Judaism, or in
other words, the faith of the &ebrew people. In order to do this, we will find ourseles diing into the
Christian &oly "criptures of the 'ew and (ld $estaments, the words held sacred by the Christian faith.
$o get things started, let's take a look at the beliefs of Christianity.
At the cornerstone of the early Christian Church is the belief that !esus Christ is the )essiah promised
throughout the pages of the (ld $estament "criptures. $he Church beliees that he gae himself as a
sacrifice for the sins of humanity, and that he rose from the grae to con*uer sin and death for all who
beliee on his name.
$he 'ew $estament book of I Corinthians sums up this by saying, '+or what I receied I passed on to
you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the "criptures, that he was buried,
that he was raised on the third day according to the "criptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and
then to the $wele.' ,sing this one single passage from the 'ew $estament, we can see how ery
closely Christianity is tied to !udaism.
Biblical Authors
+or starters, the author of this passage is the Apostle -aul. 'ot only did he pen these words, he penned
oer half of the books of the 'ew $estament. In writing these books, he often reminded his audience
that he himself was a !ew. In the book of Philippians, he penned these words about himself. 'If
someone else thinks they hae reason to put confidence in the flesh, I hae more, circumcised on the
eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of /en0amin, a &ebrew of &ebrews.' In short, the Apostle
-aul, credited for penning oer half the books in the Christian 'ew $estament, was a !ew.
$he early Christian Church's ties to !udaism don't end with -aul. In fact, almost all the authors of the
Christian /ible 1sae perhaps the te%t credited to the Apostle 2uke3 are held to be written by !ewish
men. +urthermore, the entire (ld $estament is the history of the !ewish or &ebrew nation, and
Christianity holds its content 0ust as sacred as that of the 'ew $estament. $his is plainly seen in the te%t
from Corinthians we started out with. 2et's take a look at it again. 'otice how it reads, 'that Christ died
for our sins according to the "criptures.' $he scriptures this passage refers to are none other than the
(ld $estament !ewish "criptures.
Christian Authors
Christianity's ties with !udaism go beyond their holy te%ts to their &oly 4od. Christians firmly beliee
the 4od of the !ewish (ld $estament writings is the ery same 4od of the 'ew $estament. &e is the
4od who offered reconciliation to himself through his son, !esus Christ. $his is clearly stated in the
'ew $estament book of Romans, written again by -aul, a !ewish man. It reads, '+or I am not ashamed
of this 4ood 'ews about Christ. It is the power of 4od at work, saing eeryone who beliees # the
!ew first and also the 4entile.'
Jesus and Christianity
-erhaps the largest tie that binds Christianity to !udaism is the ery fact that !esus Christ was a !ewish
man who practiced the laws and customs of !udaism. &is followers een called him Rabbi on seeral
occasions. In addition, the Christian 'ew $estament acknowledges Christ's connection to !udaism in
the Book of Matthew, which records !esus saying, 'Do not think that I hae come to abolish the 2aw
or the -rophets5 I hae not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaen
and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, nor the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear
from the 2aw until eerything is accomplished.'
Ironically, !esus Christ, the cord that tied the early Christian Church to !udaism, is also the point that
diided them. As we hae already mentioned, Christianity at its inception held the writings of the (ld
and 'ew $estament to be their sacred te%ts. &oweer, !udaism does not recogni6e the 'ew $estament
as sacred. Also, the early Christian Church belieed that !esus Christ was the fulfillment of the (ld
$estament promise for a )essiah. !udaism did not and does not.
-erhaps most important, the early Christian Church at its cornerstone belieed that !esus Christ was
4od come to earth. In other words, the Christian Church holds that 4od has three facets. 4od the
+ather, 4od the "on, and 4od the &oly "pirit, all of which are 4od. $his is known as the Trinity.
!udaism did and does deny the e%istence of the $rinity, or the triune 4od.
/uilding on the belief in the $rinity, the early Christians belieed, and the !ewish faith did not, that
!esus Christ came to earth to fulfill the (ld $estament promises of salation for anyone who beliees
on his name.
esson !ummary
$he early Christian Church was not a new religion that simply sprung up out of nowhere in first
century Rome. Instead, the early Christian Church was firmly planted with !udaism at its ery root
structure. $he early Christian Church was begun and spread by !ews who belieed in the message of
!esus Christ.
+urthermore, the early Christian Church held the !ewish writings of the (ld $estament as sacred. In
fact, almost the entire Christian /ible was written by !ewish men. In addition, the early Church held the
!ewish 4od of the (ld $estament and their !esus of the 'ew $estament to be part of the $rinity, which
made up one &oly 4od. Instead of calling the early Christian Church a new religion, it 0ust might be a
better bet to call it 'a group of !ewish belieers who followed !esus Christ # another !ewish man # and
spread his message of salation throughout the world.'
Judaism and Christianity in the "oman Empire
This lesson looks at how two major religions dealt with the prolem of !oman persecution. The lesson
notes how these two religions weren"t as similar as they seem# examines how one was driven to violent
resistance while the other followed a course of nonviolent resistance# and compares the struggle of
these two religions to that of two civil rights leaders.
Two Persecuted "eli#ions$ Judaism and Christianity
In the year 778 CE, the Roman emperor $ra0an had e%panded his empire to its greatest e%tent. $he
Roman Empire was the ultimate authority in the 9est. Amid all this military e%pansion, $ra0an was in
the middle of repressing two dangerous religions. Christianity and !udaism.
!udaism was an ancient religion, far older than Rome itself. It had an established hierarchy and a racial
and national identity. /y contrast, Christianity was a new, wild heresy followed by a relatiely small
group and effectiely indistinguishable from the wide ariety of mystery cults of the time.
If you were to place bets on which religion would come out on top, most people's money would be on
!udaism. :et within less than ;< years, the Romans had effectiely shattered !udaism. $he !ews had
been drien from their land, their temples destroyed, and their property sei6ed.
/y comparison, Christianity *uickly consolidated its influence. (er the ne%t two centuries, it would
spread across much of the Empire, and in =7; CE, Christianity became the official religion of the
Empire. 9hen the Roman Empire collapsed in the 9est, Christianity supplanted it. $he Roman
Catholic Church became the highest authority of its time, while the !ews remained a tiny minority
scattered across the world, bereft of rights and reiled by many.
$oday, oer a third of the world's population is Christian, making Christianity the most popular religion
on Earth. /y contrast, !udaism comprises less than >.;? of the world's population, making it one of the
least popular religions on Earth.
"ince both religions were systematically persecuted by the Roman Empire, why did
Christianity thrie and eentually come out ictorious while !udaism was reduced to
centuries of persecution@ $he answer to this *uestion lies in some rather significant
differences between these two faiths.
Essential Differences
-erhaps the most obious reason why Christianity spread while !udaism did not was that
Christianity wanted to spread while !udaism did not. Christianity is an inclusi%e religion.
It seeks to con%ert people to the faith. In fact, the conersion of non#belieers, or
eangelism, is a central tenet of many forms of Christianity. /y contrast, !udaism is an
e&clusi%e religion. It does not seek to conert anyone.
$his difference arises from the fact that !udaism is both a reli#ion and a racial identity. !ews
consider themseles to be 4od's chosen people. $hey trace their ancestry all the way back to the
patriarch of their religion, Abraham. According to !ewish myth, Abraham formed a coenant with 4od
# that he and all his descendants would en0oy a special relationship with 4od. $hus, !udaism is a
religion meant e%clusiely for the descendants of Abraham. )oreoer, part of 4od's coenant with his
)ap of the
Roman
Empire
chosen people was their promised land, located in modern#day Israel. $hus, the !ewish religious and
racial identity was combined with the political identity of their land' Judea.
/y contrast, Christianity was open to e%ery person of e%ery race and had no nation of its own. $he
impact of these differences cannot be oerstated. /y combining their religious identity with their racial
and political identity, !ews offered the Roman Empire an easy target in the form of the nation of !udea.
Romans were good at con*uering and sub0ugating nations5 after all, they'd spent centuries doing little
else.
/y contrast, Christians were not associated with any particular race or land. $ry as the Romans might,
and they tried ery hard at times, the Romans could not manage to destroy Christianity. It had no state,
no center of power to strike at.
$he racial and political identification of the !ewish religion had a cultural side effect as well. !ews hae
always been easy to differentiate from their non#!ewish neighbors. $hey hae their own holy days,
their own uni*ue rituals, their own special diet, and they een hae their own language. )oreoer, their
holy te%t e%plicitly forbids them to try to adopt the customs and beliefs of their non#!ewish neighbors.
Indeed, 'don't try to fit in' could be considered the moral of at least a *uarter of the stories in the $orah.
+urthermore, !ews are forbidden to marry 4entiles, or non#!ews. $his further emphasi6es their
separation from the rest of the world.
$his separation from the rest of society only grew more
pronounced once the Emperor &adrian droe the !ews
from !udea in 7=< CE, an act now referred to as the
(reat Diaspora. 9ith their uni*ue, e%clusie culture
and no home to call their own, the !ews became
outsiders eerywhere they went.
+urthermore, since the !ews wrote and communicated
in their own special lan#ua#e' )ebrew, no one
besides !ews really knew what was happening to them.
And since the !ews held themsel%es aloof from the
culture and practices of their nei#hbors , few non*
Jews were inclined to care what happened to them.
/y contrast, Christians hae historically sou#ht to inte#rate themsel%es with non#belieers. Early
Christians adopted -latonic ideals to make their 4od more appealing and understandable to people of
the time. $hey borrowed traditions, beliefs, and rituals from all oer the Empire. Een once
Christianity had achieed supremacy, Church leaders often chose to integrate pagan religions into the
Church and redefine them rather than attempting to stomp them out.
:et perhaps the greatest adantage Christianity had oer !udaism was the fact that Christians
communicated with one another in (reek, which had been an international language since the time
of Ale%ander the 4reat. $hus, when the Roman Empire did something horrible to Christians, the whole
world knew what was happenin# to them within a few months. And since the Christians had
absorbed so many of the beliefs' ideals' and practices of their time , e%en non*Christians were
likely to %iew their pli#ht with sympathy.
Different +aiths' Different !trate#ies
$hese differences between Christianity and !udaism affected the ways in which these two religions
Christianity presently is the most popular
religion in the world
dealt with the Roman Empire. /y combining their religion with their race and nationality, the !ews had
to fight two battles at once. they had to fight for their right to practice their religion and they had to
fight to protect their homeland from inading infidels. $hese two battles merged. $he resulting conflict
was the sort of holy war, complete with 6ealots and suicidal warriors, that modern#day Israel is fighting
against today.
Indeed, the term '6ealot' ac*uired its negatie connotation during this ery conflict between Romans
and !ews. A couple thousand years ago, it was the !ews who were the 6ealots, fighting a losing war
against a superior force with far more adanced weapons and technology.
)oreoer, because the !ews chose iolent resistance, the Empire could 0ust label these !ewish freedom
fighters as iolent political dissidents. $he !ews' iolent approach, combined with their e%clusie
religion, cultural separateness, and priate language, meant that no one else in the Empire really knew
or cared what the Romans did to the !ews e%cept other !ews. +or all these reasons, !udaism's choice of
%iolent resistance failed.
/y contrast, Christianity's struggle was not a fight for
political independence on the field of battle but rather
something purely religious and thus harder to defeat. A
Christian gained no brownie points with 4od for
killing someone, but he could gain eternal salation for
being killed. Martyrdom, or dying for one's faith, was
the one guaranteed way to get to &eaen, and the /ible
is full of stories of Christians enduring horrific
persecutions.
Christians did not seek to oercome their Roman
persecutors by strength of arms but by the strength of
their conictions. $he ery fact that Christians were willing to die for their beliefs made people wonder
what was so great about this new religion. Christians might be fed to lions in the arena or coered with
pitch and burned alie for an emperor's entertainment 1this practice of 'ero's is actually where we get
the term 'Roman candle'3.
:et the more horrific the death, the greater the testament to the strength of their faith. And since
Christians communicated in 4reek, eeryone knew about these atrocities. Een non#Christians could
not help but wonder at the coniction of these people to their faith. +or all of these reasons,
Christianity's choice of non%iolent resistance succeeded.
A !ide*By*!ide Comparison
In short, !udaism was a religion, but it was also a racial and national identity. $his made !udaism an
e%clusie religion with its own uni*ue ideals and its own language. $he !ews did not want to be a part
of the Roman Empire5 they sought to break away from it. $he !ews sought to resist the Roman Empire
through iolence and lost.
$he world was largely unaware of the suffering of the !ews as they did not read &ebrew, and they were
indifferent to this suffering anyway, since the !ews held themseles aloof. As a result, the !ews were
easily labeled as iolent, religious e%tremists to be attacked and dispersed. Anyone who bothered to
think on their plight would assume that they had gotten what they desered.
/y contrast, Christianity was not concerned with race or nationality, making it an inclusie religion. It
$his e%pulsion of !ews from !udea is called the
4reat Diaspora
shared many of its ideals and rituals with the people of the time and communicated in a common
language. Christians would happily be a part of the Roman Empire5 they 0ust wanted it to stop
persecuting them. Christians sought to resist the Roman Empire's persecution through non#iolence,
and they won.
$he world was moed by the steadfastness of their faith in the face of such cruel oppression. Eery
martyr murdered by the Empire adanced the cause of Christianity. Indeed, oer a few centuries,
Christians eentually took control of the ery empire that had once oppressed them.
It is worth noting that while Christianity used pacifism
and the free e%change of ideas on its rise to the top, it
would abandon these noble practices and greatly
restrict the flow of information once it gained the
authority and backing of the Roman Empire.
A Modern Parallel
+or those of you who still don't *uite understand the
differences between these two religions and their
tactics for oercoming oppression, we can see a clear
modern parallel to this struggle in the American Ciil Rights )oement. 9e need only 0u%tapose
)alcolm A to )artin 2uther Bing, !r.
2ike our two religions, crushed beneath the yoke of the Roman Empire, both men faced iolence and
oppression from a society that hated and feared them and their followers. $he differences arise in how
they dealt with that persecution.
2ike !udaism, )alcolm A's positions were based on racial identity and were therefore e%clusie.
)alcolm A spoke in terms of racial struggle and radical Islam and used ideas that e%acerbated racial
boundaries. &e preached black supremacy and sought to break away from oppressie white culture.
)alcolm A re0ected non#iolence, spurring his followers to take any and all means to defend
themseles.
As a result, )alcolm A was labeled as a iolent e%tremist. And when )alcolm A was assassinated, a
lot of Americans, including many of his own followers, thought he had simply gotten what was coming
to him.
'ow let's contrast that with )2B. 2ike Christianity, )artin 2uther Bing, !r.'s positions were based
purely on religious and social ideals and were therefore inclusie. Bing spoke in religious terms that
were familiar to his society and used ideas that transcended racial boundaries. Bing sought integration
and fought segregation, but most importantly, Bing practiced non#iolence.
As a result, Bing was considered a great man by his enemies as well as his supporters. 9hen )artin
2uther Bing, !r. was assassinated, the public outcry was deafening. )ore importantly, Bing's cause was
adanced by his death. !ust a few days after Bing's assassination, Congress passed the Ciil Rights Act
of 7CDE. And four decades later, /arack (bama became the first African#American president of the
,nited "tates.
'ero burned Christians coered with pitch for
his entertainment
The Con%ersion of Constantine and the Ascent
of Christianity
This lesson will explain the conversion of Constantine and the ascent of Christianity. In doing this# it
will highlight the $dict of %ilan and the famous Council of &icaea.
Con%ersion E&perience
$here are moments in time that hae changed the world, standing out as turning points in history. +or
the ,nited "tates, there's 2e%ington's shot heard 'round the world5 for Europe, the crowning of
Charlemagne as &oly Roman Emperor. Although these eents shaped continents, many historians gie
them a back seat to the conersion of Constantine, an eent which eleated Christianity to political
prominence and power. Ironically, such a profound eent is belieed to hae begun with a ision and a
dream.
$o e%plain, tradition holds that Constantine conerted to Christianity after an odd e%perience in the =7;
CE battle of Mil%ian Brid#e. 9hile warring against )a%entius, his co#heir, Constantine began praying
for assistance. In the midst of such prayer, he saw a beaming cross bearing the words. in hoc signo
vinces 1translated 'by this sign you will con*uer'3. 9hen he had a dream that ery night in which 4od
reaffirmed this ision, Constantine was sold.
'ow, whether Constantine's conersion was heartfelt or whether he used his new found
faith as an e%aggerated good luck charm is still fodder for great debate among historians
and theologians. &oweer, eeryone agrees on one point. Constantine's conersion caused
the political ascent of Christianity.
e#ali,ation and e#islation
+or starters, Constantine wasted little time promoting his new found faith. In =7=, his
reign saw the issue of the Edict of Milan, which legali6ed Christianity and freed its
followers from the icious, state#instituted persecutions e%perienced under emperors like
'ero and Diocletian.
'ot content with merely legali6ing Christianity, Constantine had no problems mi%ing
church and state. In fact, the integration of church and state is often referred to as
Constantinism. In other words, he enacted legislation that acted like fertili6er for the
faith. &e declared "unday as an official Roman holiday, making getting to church much
easier for his sub0ects. &e also offered ta% e%emption to the church and many of its clergy.
Adding to this, Constantine changed December ;<th from a celebration of a pagan 4od to a celebration
of Christ's birth, giing Christianity and kids all oer the world ChristmasF
Corruption
It must be mentioned that although these things definitely aided the ascent of Christianity, many
historians also credit them with its corruption. "eeing the faor Constantine showered on the church
and its members, it's belieed many flocked to the faith for political gain and personal adancement.
After haing
his ision
reaffirmed
in a dream,
Constantine
was
conerted
:es, their hearts may hae been a bit tugged but their pocketbooks were downright sucked in.
$his trend only increased as Constantine became more and more intolerant of the pagan faiths
throughout his reign. Anyone wanting to climb the social ladder would hae been a fool not to conert.
-icaea and the Bible
-erhaps the most well#known and lasting piece of Constantine's political portfolio is the =;< Council
of -icaea, a gathering of about =>> bishops issuing an official statement affirming !esus Christ as
completely diine. $his statement of faith is known as the precursor to today's still famous 'icene
Creed. 9ithout a doubt, Constantine put his political weight behind this creed, and the world still feels
his influence. +or instance, I lie in a rather small town, but I wouldn't hae to go ery far on a "unday
morning before I'd run into a Christian church displaying the 'icene Creed or *uoting it as a
congregation.
Constantine also played a role in alidating the /ible. 9anting Christendom to rally
around the sacred te%ts, he led the Council of 'icaea to begin the process of formal
acceptance, or canoni,ation, of scripture. "ince the word cannon actually means
measuring stick, this was an official proclamation saying these books measure upF $hey
are inspired by 4od.
In short, Constantine and the Council sort of put their rubber stamp of agreement onto the
words actually found in ; $imothy of the /ible itself, which reads, 'All "cripture is 4od#
breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so
that the serant of 4od may be thoroughly e*uipped for eery good work.' 1; $imothy
=.7D,783
esson !ummary
$he conersion of Constantine is an eent that eleated Christianity to political
prominence and power. Although it began with a ision, Constantine's faith permeated his
reign. +lying directly in the face of the modern separation of church and state, Constantine
integrated the Christian faith into the political arena. $oday, this integration is een gien
the name Constantinism.
'ot merely content with his personal coniction, Constantine's reign saw the legali6ation of
Christianity through the Edict of Milan. It also saw the establishment of "unday as a Roman holiday
and December ;<th as the official celebration of Christ's birth.
Adding to this most impressie list, Constantine also called and presided oer the famous Council of
-icea, which officially proclaimed !esus Christ as diine and led to Christian church#goers all oer the
world *uoting the -icene Creed.
$he Council
of 'icaea
affirmed
!esus Christ
as diine,
leading to
the 'icene
Creed
!t. Au#ustine/s City of (od
This lesson explores the life of St. 'ugustine and one his most famous works# the City of (od. 's we
explore this work# we"ll highlight !ome"s disdain for the Christian faith and 'ugustine"s argument
against !ome"s religious position.
Intro to Au#ustine
$hroughout time, there hae been a pieces of writing that captured the hearts and minds of generations.
$here's (one with the )ind, The (rapes of )rath, and perhaps most famous, the /ible. $oday we'll be
discussing a famous work that in many ways has come to be a companion read to the /ible. It's known
as the City of God. Although this work isn't found in most households or lining most bookstore walls,
its content molded modern Christianity, and its author, !t. Au#ustine of )ippo' is reered as one of the
preeminent sculptors of modern#day Christianity.
/ecause the work is so comple%, we could take days studying the City of (od, a work that flew in the
face of the 4reek philosophies of men like -lato and the pagan philosophers of Rome. In order to
condense these ast writings, we're going to break it down into his three main points. +irst, Augustine
wrote the City of 4od to refute the Romans who blamed the Christians for Rome's troubles. "econd,
Augustine wanted people to know that internal peace could be found here on earth. $hird, Augustine
wanted people to know that hell is real.
/efore we 0ump into his works, let's take a look at "t. Augustine. /orn in =<G CE in a Roman 'orth
African proince, Augustine was an educated and well#traeled man, spending time in places like
Africa, Carthage, and Italy. Although he wasn't always the most upstanding of gents 1for e%ample, he
had some real issues with promiscuity and mistresses3, Augustine is heralded as one of the most
influential figures in Christianity, an influence that really began to take shape around the year =ED CE.
$radition tells us it was in this year that Augustine heard a oice telling him to read the /ible. ,pon
picking up his /ible, it fell open to the book of Romans, which reads, *et us ehave decently# as in the
daytime# not in carousing and drunkenness# not in sexual immorality and deauchery# not in dissension
and jealousy. 9ith this, his heart was conicted and changed.
Christians Blamed
After his conersion and baptism, Augustine moed back to 'orth Africa to become a
preacher. Around =C< CE he became the /ishop of the Algerian region of &ippo Regius,
hence his name, "t. Augustine of &ippo. As bishop, Augustine sought to guide his people
through a turbulent time in Roman history, a time when the empire was being inaded and
destroyed by a 4ermanic tribe known as the Hisigoths. 9hen Rome was captured in the
year G7> CE by the 4ermanic king, Alaric I, the future of the empire was bleak. 2ooking
for someone to blame for their woes, many Romans turned to the Christian faith, saying it
was their fault that the empire was in such turmoil.
9anting to refute such claims, Augustine picked up his *uillIpen and began the City of
(od sometime around G7= CE. 9ith this we come to our first main point. 'ugustine
hoped to silence !omans laming the Christians for the fall of their empire.
$he City of
4od refutes
the belief
that
Christians
caused the
gods to
abandon
Rome
As Rome was ransacked and its people brutally murdered and raped, the rest of the empire was left
wondering how the Eternal City of Rome could hae fallen. 'eeding some way to make sense of it,
they blamed the Christians, their argument being that the gods of Rome had abandoned the empire
because the Christian monotheists, or worshipers of only one god, had insulted them by refusing to pay
them homage. /eing ticked off, the gods had allowed the Hisigoths to destroy the city.
Completely disagreeing, Augustine used the City of (od to lay out a logical refutation of this argument.
+irst, he reminded the people that bad things happen to eeryone. 'e%t, he gae a list of horrible things,
like plagues, that happened while almost all of Rome actiely worshiped the old gods and Christianity
wasn't een on the scene. "imply put, he asked, '9here were your gods then@' &e then took the gloes
off by stating Rome fell because it was spiritually corrupt and morally bankrupt. $he Christians had
nothing to do with it.
Peace is Possible
(nce he dealt with all the blamers, Augustine got to our second point. -eace can be ac*uired here on
earth by those who choose the city of 4od, oer the city of man.
Concerning peace, Augustine e%plains there are two cities, one that is temporal, called the City of the
9orld, and one that is eternal, the City of 4od. In his writings, the City of the 0orld represents the
natural, sinful world 1for e%ample, Rome3. /y doing this, he encouraged his fellow Christians that
Rome was neer their true city. (n the contrary, heaen is their true home and it alone will last. It will
neer be con*uered. 9ith this truth, he told his fellow belieers that peace could be e%perienced on
earth by those who follow the guidelines of the &oly "criptures. $his is the highest good.
)ell is "eal
9ith the blamers dealt with, and how to ac*uire peace e%plained, Augustine moed on to last point,
eternal punishment is real and waiting for those who belong to the City of the 9orld. (biously, this
one didn't make him a crowd faorite, but it does gie us our last point. Augustine told the people of his
age that the 0udgment described in the &oly "criptures is true. &e wholeheartedly belieed the words of
the /ible, which read.
If this is so# then the *ord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for
punishment on the day of judgment. This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desires of
the flesh and despise authority.
$aking it a step further, Augustine encourages his audience to lie as citi6ens of the City of 4od, for not
only will they escape 0udgment, they will be welcomed into heaen, a place of eternal rest and
happiness with 4od. &mm, I'm thinking that sounds like a much better option.
esson !ummary
"t. Augustine was an educated bishop who wrote during a tumultuous time in the Roman Empire. As
Rome was being pillaged by foreign inaders, many were looking for someone to blame. $hey found
their scapegoat in the monotheistic belieers of the Christian church. In order to refute such claims,
Augustine wrote the City of (od.
Although these writings are ast, we can highlight three of their main points. +irst, the Christians were
not to blame for the sacking of Rome. Rome, like eeryone else, just had prolems. "econd, internal
peace can be had by those who follow the guidelines set out in scripture. And last by not least, hell is
real and waiting for those who choose the City of the 9orld oer the City of 4od.
Charlema#ne/s )oly "oman Empire and the
Di%ine "i#ht to "ule
This lesson will explore the rule of Charlemagne and his exercise of the divine right of kings. It will
highlight his reign as Holy !oman $mperor# focusing on his military con+uests and his cultural
reforms.
Introduction to Charlema#ne
$hroughout history, many characters hae been celebrated as larger than life. $here's "amson of the
/ible, !oan of Arc of +rance, Bing &enry HIII of England, and of course, the star of our lesson,
Charlema#ne of the )oly "oman Empire, whose name actually means 'Charles the 4reat.'
/orn around the year 8G;, he began as +rankish Bing, then became the first &oly Roman Emperor. &e
was a man of influence and power, who pulled a continent from chaos, and resurrected the concept of a
king's diine right to rule.
/efore we get to the details of his accomplishments, let's bring some of his humanity to light by
listening to the physical description gien of him by one of his contemporaries. &e was 'broad and
strong in the form of his body and e%ceptionally tall without, howeer, e%ceeding an appropriate
measure. &is appearance was impressie whether he was sitting or standing.'
'ow that we hae a picture of him in our mind's eye, let's e%plore his accomplishments by
breaking them down into his military con*uests, his diine right to rule, and his cultural
adancements.
Military Con1uests
$o recount his military con*uests, we first need to understand that much of 9estern
Europe had been in chaos since the <th century fall of Rome. As king of the +ranks, of
modern#day +rance, Charlemagne went to work bringing the 4ermanic tribes of 9estern
Europe under his rule and the blanket of Christianity. &e did this by con*uering the
2ombards of modern#day Italy, the Aars of Austria and &ungary, the areas of /aaria, the
4ermanic "a%ons, and many others.
Although most of Charlemagne's rule was filled with military campaigns, his dealings
with the "a%ons really highlight his ruthlessness and his determination to rule supreme.
Against them, he waged a three decade long campaign, deastating their people. In fact, at
the 8E; Massacre of 2erden, it is belieed that he ordered the slaughter of some G,<>> "a%ons. $hose
who suried his tyranny were eentually forced to be bapti6ed into Christianity or face death.
$his leads us to his 6ealous faith. As a ruler, he was obiously e%treme in his desire to unite his lands
under the Christian faith. 'ot only did he kill those who refused to comply, he ardently supported the
)ap
showing the
military
con*uests of
Charlemagn
e
church. &e did this not only through the giing of money and lands, he also took it upon himself to
protect the Papacy, or the office of the -ope. +or e%ample, when -ope 2eo III found himself actually
attacked in the streets of Rome, Charlemagne rode upon the city and restored order. 9hen -ope 2eo III
regained his power, he awarded Charlemagne with the crown of &oly Roman Emperor. $his famous
crowning occurred on Christmas day in the year E>> CE.
Di%ine "i#ht of 3in#s
9ith this, we come to Charlemagne and the diine
right of kings. As a ruler, Charlemagne's word was
pretty much law. &e had the final say in legislatie and
0udicial matters, as well as social and military rule. In
other words, he stood on his own as large and ery in
charge. &oweer, when the -ope crowned him
emperor, Charlemagne's power went from being seen
as earthly to being endorsed by 4od himself, which
brings us to the concept of the diine right of kings.
$he Di%ine "i#ht of 3in#s is a political and religious
ideology, which recogni6es a monarch as free from
earthly authority, since his right to rule has come directly from 4od. +or this reason, a king is not
sub0ect to the people, the nobility or any other earthly institution. "horing up matters een more for the
king, the doctrine holds that any attempt to remoe a king from the throne or to restrict his power is in
direct iolation of 4od's will. $alk about a powerful endorsementF $he origins of the theory are rooted
in the medieal idea that 4od had bestowed earthly power to the king, 0ust as &e has gien spiritual
power and authority to the -ope.
)aking this doctrine een more powerful for Charlemagne, we need to remember he was not only a
king5 he was made emperor by the -ope himselfF 'ot only had 4od willed him to be a king, but 4od's
mouth piece # the -ope # had made him emperorF 'ow, who would dare argue with that@ 4iing
Charlemagne een more alidity, the /ible was also used 1or misconstrued, depending on your point of
iew3 to push this doctrine, specifically "omans 45$4*6 which reads,
*et everyone e suject to the governing authorities# for there is no authority except that which (od
has estalished. The authorities that exist have een estalished y (od. Conse+uently# whoever reels
against the authority is reelling against what (od has instituted# and those who do so will ring
judgment on themselves.
In other words, it'd be a really, really bad idea to go up against Bing Charlemagne, let alone Emperor
CharlemagneF $o do so would be to contradict the will of 4od.
Cultural "eform
,sing this position of power, Charlemagne continued
to unify the empire through cultural reform. /elieing
literacy could help in the process, he brought scholars
to his realm to encourage education. Also, his rule saw
the formation of monastic schools throughout the
-ope 2eo III gae Charlemagne the crown of
&oly Roman Emperor
$his standardi6ed form of writing deeloped
during the Carolingian Renaissance
empire. 9ith this emphasis on education, came a flowering of culture, known as the Carolin#ian
"enaissance, a period of renewed emphasis on scholarship and learning. During this period the
Carolin#ian minuscule, or a standardi6ed form of writing, came into being. $his form of writing
would set the groundwork for the modern European printed alphabet, yet another success attributed to
Charlemagne.
9hen we stop to consider all this man did in terms of con*uest, rule, and culture it's no wonder he was
a legend in his own time # and almost seen as a god after his death. -erhaps nothing dries this point
home more, than the 77th century !on# of "oland, an epic, yet rather fictional, poem highlighting the
rule of Charlemagne. In it Charlemagne, the &oly Roman Emperor, was eleated to near god status, as
a man beyond mortal wisdom. In short, a )edieal "uperman, or perhaps illain, depending on which
side of the fence you stand.
esson !ummary
/orn around the year 8G;, Charlema#ne began as a +rankish king, but rose to the heights of &oly
Roman Emperor. &e was a man of influence and power, who used military con*uest, his diine right to
rule, and cultural reform to pull a continent from chaos.
In order to unify Europe under his rule, much of his rule was spent at war, reigning in the scattered
lands of 9estern Europe. ,sing his position of &oly Roman Emperor, he ruled under the di%ine ri#ht
of kin#s, a political ideology that recogni6es a monarch as free from any earthly authority. 9ith such
power, Charlemagne not only waged war, he enacted social reform, bringing education and the
Carolin#ian "enaissance to his people and foreer changing the face of Europe.
The (reat Crusades$ )istory and Timeline
This lesson examines the utter failure of the later crusades. )e look at some of the factors that led to
this failure. )e then have a glimpse at each of the major crusades aroad# as well as the political and
heretical crusades in $urope.
The +ailure of the ater Crusades
$he +irst Crusade had accomplished a miracle of sorts. A few thousand knights had taken the &oly
2and by storm and established a series of Crusader states. $hese were $he County of Edessa, $he
County of $ripoli, $he -rincipality of Antioch, and $he Bingdom of !erusalem.
:et, if the Crusaders belieed their miraculous success during the +irst Crusade would set the tone of
all future crusades, they were sadly mistaken. Eery subse*uent crusade would proe a dismal failure.
$hose counted as successes by western kings and popes achieed little more than a maintenance of the
status *uo.
(ne by one, the Crusader states would fall back into the hands of the infidel, and the hard won city of
!erusalem was in constant need of rescue. As Christian Crusaders grew eer more frustrated with their
failure against their )uslim foe, they began to turn the crusading spirit against their fellow Christians.
In the +ourth Crusade, they con*uered the (rthodo% Christian city of Constantinople. And by the turn
of the 7=th century, -opes were sending Christian kings on crusade against other Christian kings.
The +ailures of Crusaders
"o, how do we e%plain the failure of the later Crusades@
9ell, to begin, we must remember that the success of the +irst Crusade was something of a fortuitous
fluke. It was not won by the superior arms and tactics of the Crusaders, but rather by the
disorgani6ation of the Arabs. $he once#united Arab nations had recently been shattered by inading
$urks and internal strife.
$he Crusaders were able to take adantage of this chaos in the +irst Crusade. In the later Crusades, the
&oly 2and was prepared for the Crusaders, and the many failings of the crusading moement led to a
series of unmitigated disasters. $he gross ignorance of the Crusaders combined with their lack of clear
leadership and failure to commit all combined to doom the later Crusades.
$he Crusaders had no real notion of the geography, climate, or political structure of the 'ear East.
Crusaders often failed to een make it to the &oly 2and. 'orthern Europeans, in their full armor,
sweltered in the heat of )editerranean summers. $he shifting political power of the )iddle East meant
that a Crusader would sign a peace treaty with one leader, only to hae that peace treaty iolated by
another. $he Crusaders also had no clear leadership. 2ords and kings s*uabbled among themseles, and
popes struggled to keep the crusading armies pointed in the right direction.
$he Crusaders neer seem to hae made a real commitment to retaking the &oly 2and. $he kings of
Europe had more important matters to deal with, like e%panding their territory and maintaining the
dynasties at home. &ad Europe turned its full power on the )iddle East, they ery well might hae
held on to the &oly 2and. Instead, the efforts of 9estern kings in the &oly 2and became eer more
half#hearted. 4oing on crusade became something of a moral obligation. It was 0ust something one was
e%pected to do.
)any leaders simply went through the motions, bringing a small fraction of their armies on a sort of
armed pilgrimage to the &oly 2and. $hey'd engage in some minor skirmishes, slaughter a few handy
)uslims, and then head back to Europe, to bask in unearned praise for their piety and braery. "o, let
us take a look at the tales of incompetence and treachery that made up the later Crusades.
Crusades to the )oly and
The !econd Crusade
$he !econd Crusade seemed off to a good start. ,nlike the +irst Crusade, which was led by a few
lords, this crusade was led by two kings. 2ouis HII of +rance and Conrad III of 4ermany, who led their
armies east to rescue !erusalem. $hough neither of these kings were particularly great leaders, and
though neither had ery large armies at their disposal, they must hae set out with a fair e%pectation of
success. 2ouis een brought his wife, Eleanor of A*uitaine, with him. 2ouis and Conrad neer een
made it to !erusalem. $heir armies were cut to pieces in Asia )inor. 9ith what remained, they
attempted a failed siege of Damascus, before finally heading home with their tails between their legs.
/y the end of this crusade, the county of Edessa had fallen from Christian hands, neer to be reclaimed.
The Third Crusade
$hinking that perhaps three kings would succeed where two kings had failed, three monarchs led the
Third Crusade. /arbarossa of 4ermany, -hilip Augustus of +rance, and Richard the 2ionhearted of
England. $his was an uneasy alliance of old rials. 'eertheless, these three kings might hae en0oyed
some degree of success, if the )iddle East had not been united under the rule of the powerful "ultan of
Egypt. "aladin the 4reat. $hough /arbarossa could not een stay on his horse and died early in the
crusade, and -hilip Augustus seemed simply to be going through the motions, Richard the 2ionhearted
was fully committed to the crusading spirit.
&oweer, this crusading spirit was not enough to accomplish much. After a few skirmishes and some
inconclusie battles, the $hird Crusade ended with no real progress made. Richard's strange
combination of blood thirst and piety made him unpopular among his fellow rulers. $he three kings
s*uabbled almost the entire trip, and Richard managed to antagoni6e his allies to such a degree that he
found his return trip to Europe blocked by hostile 4ermans, who captured Richard and held him for
ransom.
The +ourth Crusade 74686*4689:
$he +ourth Crusade marked Europe's first real ictory since the +irst Crusade. &oweer, it was a
ictory oer Christians, rather than )uslims. $hough -ope Innocent III had called this crusade to
rescue !erusalem, the Henetian traders who proided the funding and ships for this crusade had a
different idea. &oping to undermine one of their greatest trading rials, the Henetians persuaded the
Crusaders to attack Constantinople, the capitol of the /y6antine Empire.
In 7;>G, Constantinople, which had stood up to countless Eastern inaders and sered as Europe's
shield in the East, was betrayed and sacked by misguided Crusaders. $he Crusaders would hold
Constantinople for about D> years before the 4reeks finally took their kingdom back. 'eertheless, the
deathblow had been dealt to the /y6antine Empire, though it would take the massie /y6antine
bureaucracy another two centuries to reali6e it.
The Children/s Crusade 74646:
As if the /y6antine betrayal were not bad enough, the ne%t crusade, or Children/s Crusade, was a
truly shameful affair. $housands of young people from across Europe tried to make their way to the
&oly 2and, thinking that their youthful innocence would succeed where their elders had failed. )any
died trying to cross the Alps, but most neer made it further than )arseilles, where they were sold as
slaes.
The +ifth Crusade 7464;*4664:
Reali6ing that this abuse of crusading was beginning to make Christianity look really bad, Innocent III
called the fourth 2ateran council, and redirected the Crusaders toward Egypt, which he considered to
be the heart of )uslim resistance. $hough the Crusaders were able to take a town or two, they were
forced to surrender their gains after a deastating defeat at the hands of "ultan Al#Bamil, who had
succeeded "aladin as "ultan of Egypt.
The !i&th Crusade 7466<*466=:
$he last crusade to end with something aguely resembling of ictory was the !i&th Crusade. :et, it
was a ictory of diplomacy rather than a ictory of warfare. ,nlike preious crusading kings, +rederick
II of 4ermany actually bothered to learn Arabic. $his allowed him to negotiate the return of !erusalem
with the Egyptian "ultan Al#Bamil. ,nfortunately, this peace was short lied, and by 7;GG, !erusalem
was once again in the hands of )uslims.
$he "eenth, Eighth and 'inth Crusades barely desere mention. $hey were unmitigated failures. +or
the "eenth and Eighth Crusade, 2ouis IA of +rance led his armies in a suicidal attack on Africa. &is
soldiers sweltered in the African heat, and were neatly defeated at eery turn. +or the 'inth Crusade,
-rince Edward of England, who was supposed to 0oin 2ouis on the Eighth Crusade to Africa, instead
led his armies on a failed inasion of "yria.
Crusades in Europe
)eanwhile, back in Europe, arious popes had called for more crusades, not against the infidel in the
East, but against their Christian enemies at home. At first, these crusades were called against heretics.
In 7;>E, -ope Innocent III led a crusade against the &eretical Cathars of +rance. In 7;=;, -ope 4regory
IA declared a crusade against Dutch peasants who refused to pay their tithes to the church. And no
fewer than fie crusades were declared against the heretical followers of !an &us. As the Crusader
moement grew, soon popes were declaring crusades against Christian kings.
A crusade was called against Bing -eter III of Aragon. $wo crusades were called against &enry III of
England, and no less than three popes would call for crusades against +rederick II of 4ermany and his
successors. $hough these domestic crusades were couched in religious terms, in truth they were 0ust a
case of the -ope declaring a crusade against his political enemies.
9hy did the papacy, which had struggled for centuries to keep Christians from killing one another,
reerse its position@ 9e're not sure. -erhaps the morality of the papacy had slipped. -erhaps the popes
hoped to play a larger political role in Europe. 9hateer the reason, the misuse of crusades at home,
combined with their failure abroad, led to a steady decline in the power and authority of the papacy.
$his decline would come to a head in the protestant reformation of the 7Dth century.
esson !ummary
$o reiew, despite the da66ling success of the +irst Crusade, the later crusades were marked by
incompetence and treachery. $he Crusaders were grossly ignorant of the geography, climate and
politics of the )iddle East. $hough at their height, the Crusades drew seeral great kings to their cause,
a lack of clear leadership and an unwillingness to commit fully doomed each of the Crusades to failure.
(f the eight Crusades that followed the first, only the fourth and si%th met with anything een
resembling success, though the fourth was success oer 4reek (rthodo% Christians, and the si%th was a
success of diplomacy rather than warfare. /ack at home, popes declared crusades against heretics, and
their political enemies. $his abuse of crusading at home, combined with the utter failure of crusading
abroad, undermined the authority of the pope, and would play a key role in the adent of the protestant
reformation.
The (reat !chism Between the East and
0estern Churches
This lesson will define and explain the (reat Schism# which led to the formation of )estern
Catholicism and $astern ,rthodoxy. In doing so# it will highlight the political and cultural factors that
led to the the great divide.
Definition of (reat !chism
I hae a pastor friend who sered at a church that actually split oer the color of carpet. (ne group
wanted blue, the other brown, and unable to compromise, they actually went their separate ways.
Although splitting oer carpet might be a bit uncommon 1and rather ridiculous3, church splits aren't.
$hey'e been happening for generations and generations, beginning with the 4reat "chism.
$he (reat !chism of 48>9, also known as the 'East#9est "chism,' diided Christianity, creating
9estern Catholicism and Eastern (rthodo%y. Although 7><G is the official date of this diide, tensions
between the East and the 9est had been brewing for years. $o understand what caused the final split,
we're going to take a look at the political upheaal and cultural differences of the East and the 9est.
9e'll then tackle the straw that broke the camel's back. Papal authority, or in other words, the 'power
of the -ope.' +or the medieal church, this was their 'color of the carpet' issue # the one thing they 0ust
couldn't compromise on and the one thing that led to the official split.
Political and Cultural Disunity
In around the year ==>, Constantine moed the political capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to
Constantinople. +rom there, he managed to rule the entire empire. &oweer, this was no easy task, and
soon the empire broke down into 9estern and Eastern Empires, each with their own emperors. In fact,
Theodosius, who died in =C< CE, was the last emperor to rule oer both hales. Although the two
hales seemed to be separated politically, the Christian Church still tried to maintain its power, a task
which was e%tremely difficult at bestF
9ith their own emperors, and being separated by geography, the two hales grew further
and further apart. )aking matters worse, the 9estern Empire 1Rome and its surrounding
areas3 were continually inaded by the barbarians from the 'orth, while the Eastern
Empire 1now known as the /y6antine Empire3 thried.
Adding to the disunity, the Church cultures of the East and 9est had become astly
different. 9hile the 9estern Empire clung to 2atin, the Eastern Church adopted 4reek.
/efore long, een the Eastern /ishops no longer spoke 2atin, and the 9estern Church had
neer used 4reek in its ceremony. As the language barrier grew, so did the differences in
church practices. +or instance, the two couldn't agree on which type of bread to use in
communion.
$he Eastern Church also ehemently disagreed with the addition of the +ilio1ue clause,
which dealt with the authority of the $rinity # 4od the +ather, 4od the "on and 4od the
"pirit # into the 'icene Creed, or the Church's statement of faith. Although it was
$heodosius
was the last
emperor to
rule before
separate
empires
were
created.
eentually added, the East refused to accept it. Although this issue wasn't as big of a deal as the power
of the -apacy, it caused some real tensions and was a precursor of things to come. $his leads us to the
biggest point of contention. the power of the -apacy.
Power of the Papacy
$o e%plain, from the beginning of the Church, three bishops were recogni6ed as the head guys in
charge. $hey were the /ishops of Rome, Ale%andria and Antioch. Although these three were all ery
powerful, eeryone knew and accepted that the /ishop of Rome 1a.k.a the -ope3, was the main man,
being known as 'the first among e*uals.'
'ow, in around G<7, these three were 0oined by the /ishops of Constantinople and !erusalem. $his
made sense, as the political capital of the Empire had been moed from Rome to Constantinople oer a
hundred years before. After all, if the East claimed political power, they should also hae a few
bishops. &oweer, the religious power was still considered to be in the 9est, and the -ope was still
considered to be the head honcho.
,nfortunately, the Eastern /ishops didn't *uite see it this way. 9hen the -ope tried to fold them into
his robes of authority, the Eastern /ishops gae a stern, ''o, thank youF' Instead, they told the -ope
they'd respect his position as the honorary head of the Church, but when it came to real decision
making, they would take it from here. $he East een went as far as calling their /ishop of
Constantinople the ecumenical patriarch, meaning 'uniersal patriarch.' As you can guess, the -ope
and his 9estern cronies were highly insulted and ready for a fightF
!chism ?fficially ?ccurs
9ith no compromise in sight, things went from bad to worse. Diided by language and entrenched in
separate cultures, the frustration of who was in charge was too much. In 7><G, the power struggle
bubbled oer when the Patriarch of Constantinople, )ichael Cerularius, dared to condemn some of
the religious practices of the 9estern Church. &e een went as far as to close down Eastern churches
that followed the same practices. 'ow these were fighting actions, and soon the office of -ope 2eo IA
and the -atriarch of Constantinople e%communicated each other.
In other words, they said to each other, 'I'm in charge, and to proe it, I'm going to kick you out of the
church.' ,nwilling to compromise, and definitely unwilling to step aside, the two parties took their
proerbial toys, their proerbial carpets and went home. $hus, the 4reat "chism officially occurred,
forming two distinct Churches within Christianity. 9estern Catholicism and Eastern (rthodo%y.
esson !ummary
$he 4reat "chism, also known as the 'East#9est "chism,' was the official split of the Christian Church
into Eastern (rthodo%y and 9estern Catholicism. Although 7><G is the official date of this occurrence,
tensions between the two parties had been brewing for centuries. "eparated by geography, language and
culture, the Eastern and 9estern Roman Empires grew more and more distant from one another.
)aking it een harder to remain unified, the 9estern Empire was under constant barbaric inasion
while the Eastern Empire flourished. $his only added to the diide.
9hen arguments arose oer the power of the -apacy, the tenuous relationship between the East and the
9est could stand no more. In 7><G, the office of the -ope and the -atriarch of Constantinople went
head to head, each e%communicating each other and bringing about the 4reat "chism, foreer giing
the world two distinct Churches, 9estern Catholicism and Eastern (rthodo%y.
)ow Thomas A1uinas !a%ed the +aith from
"eason
This lesson examines Thomas '+uinas" place in )estern Civili-ation. It examines the threat
'ristotelian logic posed to ./th century Christianity. It then shows how '+uinas used the very logic
that was threatening the church to defend the church.
Meet !t. Thomas A1uinas
)eet "t. $homas A*uinas. &e may not look like much5 in fact, his school mates called him the Dumb
(%. :et, a teacher of his knew that young $homas was destined for great things.
'9e call him the dumb o%,' his teacher said, 'but in his teaching, he will one day produce such a
bellowing that it will be heard throughout the world.'
9hile $homas was busy studying at seminary, an old threat to the church had reemerged in Europe, an
ancient eil that would bring the church to the brink of crisis. logic.
Dan#erous Ideas
In the 7=th century, a dangerous new form of thinking was *uickly spreading across the uniersities of
Europe. $he ideas of Aristotle 1long lost to the 9est3 had been reintroduced to Europe by an Islamic
scholar named Ibn "ushd. Europeans did not know how to pronounce this name, so they called him
A%erroes and the 'new' ideas he'd introduced A%erroism.
Aerroes claimed that there were two paths to the truth. one through diine reelation, like religion,
and the other through the more mundane truths of logic. $his sort of separation may seem natural to
you and me, but we grew up in a world that distinguishes between scientific facts and religious beliefs.
$here was no such distinction in 7=th century Europe. "o, what were these two paths to truth@ And why
did the church find this concept so alarming@
Two +orms of Truth$ Plato %s. Aristotle
$o understand their concern, we need to take a *uick trip back in time 1about 7,<>> years3 to classical
Athens. $here, two great thinkers had put forward ery different iews of the unierse. (n the one
hand, there was -lato, the father of 9estern philosophy. (n the other hand was Aristotle, -lato's upstart
student. $heir conflict centered around the nature of truth.
+or -lato, the truth was something abstract. -lato insisted that if something is true, it must always be
true. :ou could not find truth in the world because the world is full of change and chaos. +or -lato,
truth resided in another place altogether # a place he called the Realm of +orms, a place where
eerything is perfect and nothing eer changes.
$here, you might find the perfect cat foreer napping in the branches of the perfect tree. According to
-lato, eerything in our world is 0ust a poor copy of that perfect place. Eery cat we see is a 0ust an
imitation of the perfect form of cat. All the different arieties of trees we see are the result of imperfect
matter trying to fill the perfect form of tree. $herefore, whateer truth we might find in the world is
bound to be 0ust as imperfect as the world itself.
Aristotle begged to differ. +or Aristotle, truth was something concrete. "omething doesn't always hae
to be always true to be true in a particular. +or e%ample, when a person says, 'I'm hungry,' he's telling
the truth. &e's not telling the truth for all time. &e's not always hungry. /ut at that particular place and
that particular time, that particular person is hungry. $his sort of truth wasn't in some abstract realm of
forms, it was right here in the world all around us. 9here -lato wanted big truths # like the perfect form
of cat or the perfect form of 0ustice, or een the perfect form of goodness # Aristotle preferred to collect
little truths # like I fell out of bed, the cat fell out of the tree, or the rock fell down the mountain. $hen,
Aristotle could use those little truths to come up with bigger truths, like things fall.
"o, what does a spat between two Athenian philosophers hae to do with the church's
crisis centuries later@ Eerything.
Christianity/s ?bsession with Plato
:ou see, when early Christians were establishing their own philosophical grounding, they
borrowed heaily from -lato. $he idea that the truth was something inaccessible to the
senses had obious religious applications.
-lato's distaste for the material world was well#suited to the Christian mindset, while the
realm of forms must hae sounded kind of like heaen. And so the church bound itself
tightly to -latonic philosophy at an early age.
$o gie you some concept of how entwined -latonism had become with Christianity, let's
hae a look at the scholarship of medieal Christians. If you were to ask a medieal
scholar, why is the rose red and why does it hae thorns, the scholar would reply that the
rose is red for the blood of Christ and the thorns are there to remind us of our 2ord's crucifi%ion. &ere
we can kind of see how the Christians co#opted -lato's notion of perfect forms being reflected in the
material world. $hey'd 0ust replaced perfect forms with perfect !esus.
The Aristotelian Threat
'ow, let's throw Aristotle back into the world as Ibn Rushd did. &ow would Aristotle answer our
*uestions about the rose@ &e'd tell us to use our heads. $he rose is red for the same reason all flowers
are brightly colored. to attract bees. $he thorns are there to keep predators away. DuhF
Imagine the fear the church must hae felt at the return of this practical, no nonsense way of looking at
the world. $he church had been in charge of the truth for centuries. $hey were the sole authority on
what was true and what was not. And then, here comes Aristotle back from the dead, telling people that
the truth is all around them. If they 0ust take the time to obsere and reflect on the little truths, they can
reach higher truths all on their own.
$he church was not 0ust frightened, it was terrified. 9hat if Christian doctrine could not stand up to the
scrutiny of Aristotelian logic@ 9orse yet, what if someone used this new sort of logic to proe that 4od
didn't e%ist@
-lato and
Aristotle had
ery
different
iews of the
unierse
A1uinas !a%es the +aith from "eason
$hese were the *uestions that kept church fathers up at night. $hey need not hae worried, for $homas
A*uinas was there to sae them.
A*uinas belieed that 0ust because Aristotle was incompatible with -lato didn't mean that Aristotle had
to be incompatible with Christianity. A*uinas knew that the same logic that could be used to proe that
4od didn't e%ist could also be used to proe that 4od did e%ist. Rather than trying to refute Aristotle's
logic, A*uinas used it. In fact, he improed it.
A*uinas wasn't intimidated by Aristotle's logic. Indeed,
Aristotelian logic was rather shoddy by A*uinas'
standards. A*uinas came up with seeral improements
to Aristotelian logic, including the theory of
supposition and the theory of conse*uences. $hese
theories laid the foundations for the first order logic we
use today. 9ith this new, refined logic at his disposal,
A*uinas went about proing the e%istence of 4od, as
well as defending many of the most contested aspects
of Christian faith, including the diinity of Christ and
the nature of the $rinity.
A*uinas' two greatest works, the Summa Theologica 1the Collection of $hings $heological3 and the
Summa Contra (entiles 1the Collection of Arguments Against 'onbelieers3 became the new pillars
that held Christianity aboe the challenges of skeptics and scholars. 9e haen't the time to e%plore all
of A*uinas' logical defenses of Christianity. &oweer, a single e%ample should suffice.
In his Summa Contra (entiles, A*uinas makes an argument regarding the gradation of intellect. &e
notes that stupid people often doubt what intelligent people say is true, not because the stupid people
hae arguments to the contrary but because they do not understand what the intelligent person is talking
about. A*uinas compares this to mortal men talking about 4od5 0ust as an intelligent person is much
smarter than an idiot, so too, 4od is astly more intelligent than een the smartest man. !ust as it would
be incredibly foolish for an idiot to insist that what an intelligent person proposes is false simply
because he cannot understand it, so too, it is the acme of stupidity for a man to call diine reelation
false simply because he cannot understand it.
9ith arguments like this at hand, the church didn't need hot irons and pincers to conert the
nonbelieer. A*uinas' arguments were so thorough, so logical, so conincing that any *uarrelsome
scholar with a logical bone to pick could be handed a copy of A*uinas and emerge fully coninced of
the error of his ways.
esson !ummary
$o reiew5 A*uinas was a Christian scholar who protected the church from the threat of Aristotelian
logic. $he church was afraid that scholars would use this logic to disproe Christianity, 0ust as Aristotle
had used the same logic to disproe -lato centuries earlier.
$his panic was only heightened by the fact that so much -latonic philosophy had found its ways into
Christianity. -lato's lofty idealism, which had proided the church with its philosophical foundation,
now proed a liability against the common sense approach of Aristotelian logic.
$homas A*uinas used the same logic as
Aristotle to proe the e%istence of 4od
A*uinas turned this threat on its head. Rather than refuting Aristotelian logic, he used it and een
improed upon it. Essentially, A*uinas took the sword of logic from the throat of the church and placed
it firmly in her hand.
Martin uther' the => Theses and the Birth of
the Protestant "eformation
This lesson covers the start of the 0rotestant !eformation. It egins y comparing the vast array and
peacefulness of Christian denominations in modern days to the limited choices and violence of the
past. Then it goes into the story of %artin *uther# from his 12 Theses through the 3iet of )orms up to
the eginning of the (erman 0easant !evolt.
"eli#ious Tolerance Then and -ow
9hen you ask a Christian, '9hat is your religion@' their answer probably will not be 'I'm a
Christian.' $hey are much more likely to say 'I'm a /aptist' or 'I'm a -resbyterian' or 'I'm a
,nitarian.' In general, most Christians identify themseles with a certain denomination,
or sect of their religion.
$his ariety is not uni*ue to Christianity. $here are seeral denominations of Islam,
!udaism, /uddhism, and all of the other religions out there. &oweer, none can match
Christianity for sheer numbers. $here are appro%imately G7,>>> different denominations
of Christianity. "ome of these denominations differ on fundamental notions # the 4reek
(rthodo% Church does not try to conert non#belieers, whereas Eangelicals do little
else. (thers denominations differ in terms of practice # compare the staid ceremony of
Anglicans to the tongue#speaking spectacle of Charismatics.
(thers are so similar, only initiates can discern one from the other. $he only real
difference between the 'Christian Church' and the 'Church of Christ' is that the former uses
musical instruments in their worship, while the latter prefers to sing a capella. And yet,
with all of these differences, these denominations coe%ist peacefully. Churches of arious
denominations can be found within walking distance of one another.
9ith all of these arieties liing together in peace, it is easy to forget that about a thousand years ago,
there was only one sort of Christianity allowed in 9estern Europe, and that was the Roman Catholic
Church.
+ollowing the 4reat East#9est "chism of 7><>, which diided the (rthodo% East from the Catholic
9est, the Roman Catholic Church held unchallenged sway oer the hearts and minds of 9estern
Europe. (h, they might hae spats from time to time. Another country might elect its own pope, but by
naming a pope, een those usurpers were still operating within the constraints of the Roman Catholic
faith. $hey were 0ust fighting oer who would be at its head.
'o one who challenged the supremacy of the Roman Catholic Church was allowed to draw breath for
long. Anyone who tried to start their own church, or come up with their own take on Christianity, was
labeled a heretic. $heir property was sei6ed, and they and their followers died in the most horrible
$he Catholic
Church
allowed no
other form
of worship
in 9estern
Europe.
manner aailable at the time.
The 95 Theses$ Martin uther Challen#es the Church
$he dominance of the Roman Catholic Church remained unchallenged for nearly <>>
years. $hen, in 7<78, a 4erman priest shook the Catholic Church to its ery foundations.
&is name was )artin 2uther. 2uther was not a rebel. &e wasn't trying to destroy the
Catholic Church or een start his own religion. All 2uther was trying to do was to stop the
Church from engaging in some practices that he considered unchristian.
2uther's problem was with the Church's practice of selling indulgences. An indul#ence is
a remission of punishment for sins. :ou can think of an indulgence as a 'get out of hell
free' card. $he church had been in the practice of granting indulgences in e%change for
good works and acts of piety for centuries, eer since -ope ,rban II offered indulgences
to Crusaders in 7>C<.
2uther *uestioned whether the church had the authority to grant such indulgences. &e
belieed that the only true path to salation lay through faithfulness to Christ and his
teachings, not through adherence to the ideologies and dogmas of the Catholic Church. :et
2uther probably would not hae made a fuss if it weren't for the fact that these 'get out of
hell free' cards weren't actually free.
Earlier that year, in 7<78, -ope 2eo A had made an unconentional moe. 2eo wanted to rebuild "t.
-eter's /asilica in Rome, but he didn't want to spend his own considerable wealth to do so. $his is not
surprising, as 2eo was a member of the wealthy )edici banking family, which dominated +lorence.
$he man was more of a banker than a priest.
2eo's solution was to begin offering indulgences in e%change for donations to the /asilica's renoation.
9hile these donations technically counted as pious works, 2uther saw them as simple payment. $o
2uther's eyes, the Church was essentially selling salation. &e witnessed poor peasants giing up their
life saings to buy an indulgence for a dead relatie, in the hope of saing their loed ones from the
tortures of purgatory. All the while the Church grew eer richer.
$his was too much for 2uther. 2uther had read the /ible, something most people of his age could not
do, since the only aailable translations of the /ible were in 2atin and 4reek. 2uther saw nothing in the
/ible that gae the Church the right to charge people for their salation. $he church was supposed to be
a spiritual sanctuary, not a marketplace.
"o, 2uther set about writing C< complaints with the Church's greedy behaior. $hese complaints are
now called the 95 Theses. (n (ctober =, 7<78, 2uther nailed his 12 Theses to the door of the Church of
9ittenberg and sent copies to the higher authorities of the Catholic Church.
$he posting of the 12 Theses is considered by many the beginning of the Protestant "eformation.
&oweer, it is important to remember that 2uther was not trying to undermine the Church. &e was 0ust
trying to get them to stop making money off the business of salation.
2uther's 12 Theses spread across Europe like wildfire. 9ithin two months, they were being read in
cities across the continent. $he ne%t year, they were translated into 4erman and printed on a massie
scale, further fueling the controersy. 2uther suddenly found himself at the center of the greatest
conflict of his age.
)artin
2uther
*uestioned
the practice
of selling
indulgences.
The Diet of 0orms$ The Church
!trikes Back
$he -ope was not happy at haing his scam with the
indulgences e%posed. &e had 2uther accused of heresy.
A couple of years later, in 7<;>, the -ope wrote a letter
to 2uther in which he banned any further distribution
of 2uther's 12 Theses and demanded that 2uther recant
his heresy or face e&communication, or being cut off
from the Church and its sacraments.
$his threat of e%communication was a big deal, since pretty much eeryone belieed that the only way
to get to heaen was to receie the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church. "ince 2uther did not
think he needed the papacy to achiee salation, he did not care if he was e%communicated. 2uther
publicly burned the -ope's letter and thereby broke all ties with the Roman Catholic Church.
:et the Church was not done with 2uther. $he Church decided to hand 2uther oer to the greatest
secular authority in 4ermany, the &oly Roman Empire. In 7<;7, )artin 2uther was summoned to the
Diet of 0orms, a conference of both religious and secular leaders held in 9orms, 4ermany. (nce
again, 2uther was commanded to recant his heresy. &e refused.
$he upshot was that 2uther was condemned. $he &oly Roman Emperor, Charles H, published the Edict
of 9orms, calling for 2uther's immediate arrest. :et 2uther's supporters would not let him be
imprisoned. Instead, they spirited him away and hid him in 9artburg Castle.
The Protestant "eformation (ains Momentum
'ot content to hide on the sidelines, 2uther made good use of his e%ile. &e spent his year at 9artburg
writing arious letters and treatises attacking the Catholic Church. &is greatest achieement of the time
was his translation of the /ible into 4erman.
2uther held the /ible as the highest authority, higher
een than the papacy. &e reali6ed that so long as
people could not read the /ible, they would continue to
fall for the lies and deceptions of Catholic ideology.
2uther's supporters smuggled his translation out, and
soon printing presses across 4ermany were cranking
out copies of 2uther's /ible. $he publication had the
desired effect.
All across 4ermany, people started reading the /ible
and began challenging the authority of the Church. In
fact, things started getting a little out of hand.
9hen 2uther returned to 9ittenberg in 7<;;, he found the populace in nearly full#scale reolt. $he
mob was being whipped up by a set of radical 6ealots known as the @wickau Prophets. 2uther droe
the Jwickau out of 9ittenberg and settled down to reestablish law and order. &e founded his own
2utheran Church in 9ittenberg in 7<;D.
$he Diet of 9orms was conened to confront
and 0udge )artin 2uther.
2uther translated the /ible into 4erman, thus
allowing more people the opportunity to read it.
)eanwhile, the Jwickau spread across 4ermany, burning churches, monasteries, bishop's palaces, and
libraries, often in 2uther's name. $he Jwickau were determined to use 2uther's treatment by the Church
and state as a rallying point for their reolution, regardless of 2uther's feelings on the matter.
$his uprising, which became known as the Peasants/ "e%olt, was but the beginning of about fie
centuries of nearly unending bloodshed. $he -rotestant Reformation swept across Europe, spreading
first to the 'etherlands, then to +rance and England. "oon all of 'orthern Europe was in the throes of
religious warfare as -rotestants fought Catholics for the soul of Europe.
esson !ummary
$o reiew. in 4>4;, Martin uther published his 95 Theses in an attempt to get the Roman Catholic
Church to stop selling indul#ences, or 'get out of hell free' cards. 2uther did not think the Church had
the authority to grant such indulgences, especially not for money. 2uther belieed that salation could
be achieed through faith alone. $he Church responded by labeling 2uther a heretic, forbidding the
reading or publication of his 12 Theses, and threatening 2uther with e&communication. 2uther refused
to recant his beliefs.
$he ne%t year, in 7<;7, 2uther was summoned to appear at the Diet of 0orms, where the leaders of the
&oly Roman Empire would decide his fate. 9hen 2uther once again refused to recant his positions, the
&oly Roman Emperor, Charles H, ordered his arrest. 2uther's supporters hid 2uther in 9artburg castle,
where he completed a translation of the /ible into 4erman, as well as publishing a ariety of treatises
against the Church. /y the time 2uther returned from his e%ile, 4ermany was in the grip of a Peasant
"e%olt, as peasants burned and destroyed all things Catholic. 2uther calmed the reolt in his hometown
of 9ittenberg and established his own 2utheran Church in 7<;D.
"eli#ious "eform in !wit,erland$ Cal%in A
@win#li/s Teachin#s in the "eformation
The 0rotestant !eformation resulted in many people splitting from the Catholic Church. This lesson
explores the effect of the !eformation in Swit-erland under the leadership of 4wingli and Calvin.
The Protestant "eformation
In the 7Dth century, a 4erman monk named )artin 2uther became increasingly
dissatisfied with the actions and beliefs of the Catholic Church. At this time, Catholicism
was the dominant religion. )ost national churches were Catholic and reported to the -ope
in Rome.
Catholic clergy issued indul#ences to laypeople as a pardon for sins. Indulgences could be
bought by paying the clergy member. 2uther belieed this led to insincerity in the
laypeople and was an abuse of power. &e belieed the church held too much authority
oer its laypeople, and that each person should rely on the /ible for guidance rather than
clergy.
2uther
nailed his C<
theses to the
door of a
9ittenberg
church
2uther, angry with the corruption in the church, wrote C< theses regarding indulgences and nailed them
to the door of the Castle Church in 9ittenberg. 2uther's actions and thoughts spread through 4ermany
and began a moement that nearly coered Europe. Christians, who would soon be called -rotestants,
began splitting from Catholicism in faor of haing more authority oer their religion, rather than
surrendering it to the Catholic clergy.
The "eformation !preads to !wit,erland
)any people in "wit6erland were also dissatisfied with corruption in the church. $he selling of
indulgences led to wealth that contributed to demorali6ation in the clergy. (fficial duties were
delegated to others who had not been educated. As the ideals of 2uther spread, the unhappy laypeople
of "wit6erland 0oined in the demand for reform and discipline. At the forefront of this moement was
)uldrych @win#li.
@win#li
Jwingli agreed with 2uther that the Catholic Church emphasi6ed the administration of sacraments,
which were rituals that would affect 4od's grace on a person. &oweer, while 2uther said that church
tradition was not oertly contrary to the /ible, Jwingli said that eery ritual that was not mentioned
specifically in the /ible should be abolished. $his included fie of the seen sacraments currently
practiced by Catholics. Jwingli upheld the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist.
2uther and Jwingli also disagreed on the interpretation of the Eucharist 1or communion3. $hey both
agreed the sacrament should be practiced and disagreed with the Catholic idea that the bread and wine
turned into !esus' blood and body during the ritual. 2uther belieed that !esus was physically present in
all things and, therefore, already present in the bread and wine used. Jwingli, on the other hand,
belieed this was practiced simply as a memorial, and that physical ob0ects could not hold the presence
of a holy being like !esus.
Jwingli and 2uther did both agree the sacrament of
baptism was necessary. Jwingli belieed baptism was
needed in infancy and only needed once for salation.
$his was in conflict with a group called the
Anabaptists. Anabaptists belieed children should not
be bapti6ed and allowed adults who had been bapti6ed
as children to be re#bapti6ed. Jwingli belieed the
claims of the Anabaptists had no scriptural basis and
that they were adding to the scripture. Jwingli held that
baptism was a coenant with 4od rather than a promise
to lie without sin, as the Anabaptists belieed.
Jwingli also belieed that the church and the state should goern together because all were under the
rule of one god. &e belieed the goernment could help a person lie honorably but could not make a
person righteous in 4od's eyes. $his was why, according to Jwingli, the church is needed along with
the goernment.
Jwingli's iews were popularly accepted by many in places like Jurich and /asel, but some places
remained predominantly Catholic. $he disagreement between these areas would eentually lead to ciil
war. Jwingli died on the battlefield in 7<=7.
$he beliefs of Jwingli grew popular in cities
like /asel and Jurich
Cal%in
Another leader in the reformation moement in "wit6erland was a +rench 0urist named !ohn Calin. &e
was banished from -aris because of his beliefs. &e traelled to 4enea, where he met other -rotestant
leaders. Calin was responsible for spreading another form of -rotestantism called Cal%inism.
Calin strongly belieed in predestination, which is the idea that 4od has already determined the
eternal fate of each person before birth. Calin belieed the actions people took had no weight on
whether they would go to heaen or hell. $his eliminated the need for Catholic practices such as
confession and performing sacraments. Despite this belief, Calin did support the act of infant baptism
as a coenant with 4od.
Calin also supported the practice of the Eucharist.
&oweer, his beliefs were somewhere between those of
2uther and Jwingli. Rather than !esus' body and blood
being physically present during the Eucharist or being
completely absent, he belieed !esus was spiritually
present in these elements # meaning when a person
receied the physical bread, that person was receiing
the spiritual body of Christ.
Calinism became popular in "wit6erland. Calin
created a strict system of discipline and enforced it
heaily. &e also worked to separate the church from
politics in an attempt to return to purity within religion. Rather than supporting church and state under
one supreme ruler 14od3 as Jwingli did, Calin belieed there should be a strict goerning body within
the church.
Church discipline was maintained by the consistory, which was a council of preachers and laypeople
elected in each district. $he consistory's power was limited to church#related punishment. +or e%ample,
serious offenders could be e%communicated from the church. &oweer, the council was able to suggest
ciil punishments to the city's goernment. $he suggestions were often followed.
esson !ummary
$he -rotestant Reformation was born out of a growing distaste for corruption in the Catholic Church.
)any Europeans 0oined the moement. In "wit6erland, Jwingli became a huge adocate for the spread
of -rotestantism, although he disagreed with some of 2uther's beliefs. As more "wiss people adopted
-rotestant practices, Calin's ideas also became popular with many.
Calinism was popular in "wit6erland during
the Reformation
The Council of Trent$ The Catholic Church
!ur%i%es the "eformation
The 0rotestant !eformation was a movement of Christians who disagreed with some of the teachings
and actions of the Catholic Church. This article explores the effect of the !eformation on the Church.
The Protestant "eformation
$he Protestant "eformation was a moement against some of the beliefs of the Catholic
Church. $he Reformation can mostly be attributed to )artin 2uther, a 4erman monk who
belieed each person should hae authority oer his religion rather than relying on clergy.
(ne of 2uther's biggest concerns was the giing of indul#ences 1official pardons for sins3
for money. &e wrote C< theses regarding indulgences and nailed them to the Castle
Church in 9ittenberg. $he moement e%ploded from its origins in 4ermany, spreading
across Europe. It found popularity in places like England, "cotland, and +rance, while it
was less popular in southern areas like "pain, Italy, and -ortugal.
"eli#ious ?rders
Aside from the -rotestants, there were also many people who upheld ideas of Catholicism
but were still unhappy with political influence and abuse of power within the Church.
Religious orders focused on educating and helping the needy in their local areas. "ome of
the more well#known orders are the +ranciscans 1originally known as the Capuchins3 and
the !esuits. Religious orders helped encourage reform without breaking from the Catholic
Church.
The Council of Trent
It's hard to imagine such a massie moement from the -rotestants and Catholic reformers did not
completely destroy the Catholic Church, but Catholicism managed to surie. +rom December 7=,
7<G<, to December G, 7<D=, an ecumenical council 1councils where Church officials are allowed to
ote on decrees that are considered binding to all Christians3 conened to address concerns of the
Catholic Church. $his council is known as the Council of Trent.
$he Council of $rent met to define the doctrines of the Catholic Church. $he idea was to
lessen corruption of clergy members and abuses of power and finances. $he council
determined that the Church's interpretation of the /ible was the final word but that the
/ible had e*ual authority with the Church. Rituals like indulgences, pilgrimages, and
eneration of saints were upheld. Although the structure of the Church saw little change, a
greater emphasis was placed on discipline and education in the clergy.
$he
-rotestant
Reformation
spread
throughout
Europe after
2uther wrote
his C< theses
on
indulgences
$he Council
of $rent
formed to
address
concerns of
the Catholic
Church
The Counter*"eformation
$he Council of $rent marked the beginning of the period known as the Counter*"eformation. $he
Council of $rent inspired a moement of reform and reial within the Catholic Church. Religious
orders gained popularity and support from the -ope during this time. $he Church worked to keep their
organi6ational structure while preenting political and financial abuses. Catholicism's popularity grew
in light of these changes.
esson !ummary
$he forces of the -rotestant Reformation and Catholic reformers created a lot of pressure on the
Catholic Church in the 7Dth century. $he answer was the Council of $rent, which made definitie
0udgments on issues presented by reformers and -rotestants. $he resulting reforms created a renewed
interest in Catholicism and a growing support for the Church.