The Lost History of Christianity: The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia--and How It Died PDF
Preview The Lost History of Christianity: The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia--and How It Died
The Lost History of Chris tianity The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia—and How It Died Philip Jenkins Contents List of Illustrations iv A Note on Names and -isms v 1. The End of Global Chris tian ity 1 2. Churches of the East 45 3. Another World 71 4. The Great Tribulation 97 5. The Last Chris tians 139 6. Ghosts of a Faith 173 7. How Faiths Die 207 8. The Mystery of Survival 227 9. Endings and Beginnings 247 Notes 263 Acknowledgments 299 Index 301 3 About the Author Credits Cover Copyright About the Publisher Illustrations Maps 1.1. Nestorian Metropolitans 12 1.2. Chris tian Expansion 21 1.3. The Three-Fold World 23 2.1. The Sassanian Persian Empire 51 2.2. The Heart of the Chris tian Middle East 59 Tables 4.1. Chronology of Early Islam 101 5.1. Muslims in Contemporary Southeastern Europe 144 5.2. Chris tians in the Middle East Around 1910 153 5.3. The Chris tian World Around 1900 155 A Note on Names and -isms Throughout this book, I refer to the Eastern Christ ian churches that are commonly known as Jacobite and Nestorian. Both names raise problems, and some historical explanation is useful at the outset. At the risk of ignoring subtle theological distinctions, though, a reader would not go far wrong by understanding both terms as meaning simply “ancient Christ ian denominations mainly active outside Europe.” Chris tian ity originated in the Near East, and during the fi rst few centuries it had its greatest centers, its most prestigious churches and monasteries, in Syria, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. Early East- ern Chris tians wrote and thought in Syriac, a language closely re- lated to the Aramaic of Jesus and his apostles. These churches became involved in passionate debates that divided Chris tians into several leading schools or factions, which often fought each other with distinctly un-Chris tian violence. One great divide happened in the fourth century, when the Council of Nicea (325) reasserted the doctrine of Christ’s divinity. But over the coming decades, the main- stream Chris tians who accepted that doctrine were divided over ad- ditional issues, especially concerning the Person of Christ. Yes, Christ was in some sense both human and divine, but what was the exact relationship between the two elements? How could someone say that Jesus was both man and God? According to the Catholic or Orthodox, who eventually tri- umphed within the Roman Empire, Christ had two natures, which vi The Lost History of Christianity were conjoined and commingled. Many Easterners followed the Patriarch Nestorius, who accepted the two natures but held that these were not absolutely united in the mystical sense taught by the Orthodox. This meant that the Virgin Mary could not rightly be called the Mother of God. Following bitter struggles, these Nestori- ans were cast out of the fold at Ephesus in 431. Most Egyptians and Easterners, however, held that Christ had only one nature, so that the divine overwhelmed the human. They thus became known as Monophysites, believers in “one nature.” In 451, the ecumenical council at Chalcedon defeated the Monophysites and declared them heretical. I am oversimplifying the differences between the various teachings, which in fact were much less stark than is suggested here: modern historians stress that the different schools had much more in common than their enemies suggested. The Council of Chalcedon left the Orthodox in command of the empire and the mainstream church apparatus, and over the next two centuries they excluded and persecuted the newly defi ned heretics, although these probably formed majorities in many of the empire’s eastern regions. In Egypt and Syria, Monophysites were so common- place that they were known simply as Egyptians (Copts) and Syrians (Suriani ), respectively. In the sixth century, a Syrian leader named Jacobus Baradaeus organized the Monophysites into an underground parallel church that became known as the Jacobites. By the time of the Arab conquests in the seventh century, the Jacobites probably held the loyalty of most Chris tians in greater Syria, while the Nestorians dominated the eastern lands, in what we now call Iraq and Iran. The West Syrian church was Jacobite; East Syrians were Nestorian. Using these sectarian labels is misleading if it paints these churches as anything less than authentically Christ ian. Not surpris- ingly, modern adherents resent the names, just as much as a Roman Catholic would hate to be described as a papist or a Romanist. Jaco- bite was a dismissive name devised by their foes; while to themselves, the Nestorians were simply, and properly, “the Church of the East.” Both faithfully accepted the Council of Nicea, both clung to a faith A Note on Names and -isms vii that had been handed down to them from the apostles via the Great Church, and indeed both had an even more conservative approach to the canon of scripture than did the European-based churches. Around 800, the great Nestorian patriarch Timothy listed the fun- damental doctrines that were shared by all the different groups— Nestorian, Monophysite, and Orthodox: all shared a faith in the Trinity, the Incarnation, baptism, adoration of the Cross, the holy Eucharist, the two Testaments; all believed in the resurrection of the dead, eternal life, the return of Christ in glory, and the last judg- ment.1 We must never think of these churches as fringe sects rather than the Chris tian mainstream in large portions of the world. Among African and Asian Christ ians, these two strands of Chris- tian ity would certainly have outnumbered the Orthodox. Having said this, the bodies in question are so central to the story that they must be described somehow, even if the terms used were originally negative. Any history of Chris tian ity that fails to pay due attention to these Jacobites and Nestorians is missing a very large part of the story. Nor are the official names used by the heirs of these churches themselves any less controversial. Technically, the modern heirs to the Jacobites are “Syrian Orthodox,” which is con- fusing if we apply the Orthodox name retroactively to medieval conditions. The Nestorian church evolved into the Assyrian Church of the East, with a questionable emphasis on the Assyrian racial heritage. Some scholars prefer “West Syrian” for Jacobite and “East Syrian” for Nestorian, but neither term has entered common usage. While recognizing the limitations, then, I will use the older labels. Other issues arise with names drawn from African and Asian lan- guages, which are transliterated in various ways. The Mongol ruler whom I call Hulegu has in various sources been referred to as Hulagu, Holaaku, and Hülâgû, while Genghis Khan is more cor- rectly called Chinggis. Older sources refer to the Uygur people as Uighurs, and to the Ongguds as Onguts. I have tried to achieve con- sistency, but in doing so I may not always have fulfilled the most precise linguistic standards, which change quite rapidly.
The list of books you might like
