Chapter 3-4

Concepts

Islam (interactions with Christianity)

BACKGROUND:

• Monotheistic religion person practicing is called a Muslim

• It arose in the same lands as Judaism and Christianity which would have a traumatic impact

• They always wanted to expand and with it would be the religion

  • there was tolerant but created into militancy → there was no missionary, there was no separation between civil and religious faiths as this dominated very quickly

• THE FIRST YEAR OF ISLAM IS 622AD and the leader is Muhammad → they conquered Jerusalem

• Rise of Islam

  They follow Muhammad and they emerges in the same lands as Judaism and Christianity->also they had a lot of the same moral codes as the Judaism and Christianity -> tramatic impact

  ->there was initially tolerant but then a quick increase in militancy of the Muslims

  -> there was no real missionary activity as the STATE AND RELIGIO N was not Separate at all so as the state grew the military would "evavalize"->the civil and religious authority was the same

  ->the spread was very fast as they dominated -> this means that there was a great reduction on how much land the Eastern Empire had

  YEARS:622AD- this is year 1 of Islam as Muhammad moved the center to Mecca; 20 -got Isreal , 25- got Egypt

  ; they also conquered Jerusalem-> thus becoming an Islamic City (Forced conventions or the Christians leave or stay but become 2nd class citizens)-> very not unified

  Spread

  It continued till France which stopped it

  Conversion of France, the Franks

  There was just many trikes instead of one unifying leader

  The Franks were the first to convert to Catholicism (6th)-> Clovis (leader convert so does the people who follow)

  As the Church spread they had to take on temporal roles under the Visigoth ruling

  I there was no organized power then Islam would have run over Europe

  Even though the church was stable it was treated like Senators so very political,

  Europe and Spain 500AD

  Muslim took Spain and had it till the 1400 s

  There have always been Christians in Spain Since century I as St. Paul went there so this will starts some tension between Muslims and Christians->before the Church is stable and can adopt/continue the intellectual preservation-s thus this ends when the Muslims come

Byzantium

• this is the birth place of Christianity

• MOVE OF THE CAPITAL → weakens the influence of Rome, Pope stays there

• WEST: still unified under the pope BUT NOT AS UNIFYED WITH THE EAST

• EAST: there is “Caesaropapism” as there is is no real split of the Church and the State → THERE IS NO SEPERATION THE CHURCH IS A FUNCTION OF THE STATE

  • they are confused about the power of the Pope → does respect him as a bishop or patriarch but not really as a supreme leader

  • very geographical as there is a split with each patriarch leading their own part

• THIS MAKES A TENUOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE POPE AND THE EASTERN LEADER

Justinian I (527-565)

• was the only eastern emperor who came close to reunifying the full empire

  • uniformed law and codex Justinianus

• HE VEIWED HIMSELF AS HEAD OF STATE AND CHURCH

  • the Pope was being weak and so he “stepped in”

  • then he exiled the New Pope

• made monophysitism (the idea that Jesus only had one form, divine or man) very political which would then remain very influential

Iconoclasm

ICON: 2D image of a religious figure

There are such things as iconographers which are 2d Christian artists that are just writers → show stories

THEY ARE THINGS THAT ARE USED FOR PRAYER SINCE THE 5C → They are a tool to help focus your mind on Jesus NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED, they became a problem and tension between the Christians and Muslims/Jews as they though the icons were being worshipped like in pagan terms

ICONOCLASTS - prevent idolatry by destroying ICONS

1ST ONE EDICT AROUND ICONS (ALSO BREAKS A LOT OF THEM) IS IN THE 730AD by Emperor Leo III

• this is when there was a reemergence of the monophysitism and gnostic beliefs (the painting in this one would then up play the humanity of Jesus as theses heresies would down play it a lot, maybe too much)

• PROBLEM?

  • very much in the East more then the west

  • there was very political as there

    • Jews did not like it as it was problematic with the 1st commandment

    • Muslims just full out ban it and they were bordering with the Islam and they were pressing SO:

  • Emperor Leo III just full out ban the Icons as that is what “fixed” the problem (made more peace) → Not good for the Christian

• POPE GREGORY III - he was planned to be murdered as he was going against the Emperor → Tried to get the decree overturned → does not work, EVEN WHEN LEO III DIES THE ICONOCLASM REMAINS

• LEADS TO A TEMPERAL BREAK IN THE CHURCH

ICONOPHILES

• NEXT COUNCIL (2nd Council of Nicaea 787AD which confirmed that icons are allowed which reverses all other decrees)

  • affirmed veneration (Dulia and hyperdulia)

  • SHOWS THAT ITS NOT LATRIA (WORSHIP)

• Empress IRENE (took over after her husband died and her son was too young) allowed for icons to once again to be allowed (SECRET ICONOPHILE)

• Monks were very into Icons → they were persecuted severely because of their great support of the Icons → thus the Church supported it but the state did not → TENSION (EAST AND WEST)

2ND ONE THIS ONE IS IN 814 and goes to 843

• there is still a great worry about political crisis and UNITY as there is a military coup \

  • EMP. LEO V revives ICONOCLASM to try to keep unity → GOES AGAINST CHURCH DECREE

• The patriarch or Constantinople the confirmed the council so he was removed by the emperor → tries to depose Leo V

• THIS LEADS TO CONSTANT PERSECUTION of iconophiles

  • the pope tried to reach out but did not have a big affect as there

• There is a new EMPERESS THEODORA WHICH IS AGREE WITH THE CHURCH AS she deposits Iconoclast and shows a triumph of orthodoxy (Wife of Leo V)

• BEFORE THIS THERE IS STILL THE EASTERN EMPEROR VS THE POPE

Great Schism 1054

Starts with emerging differences

Also is because of the Filioque and the Photian Schism and many theological differences but the ultimatum is the primacy of the Pope → there was an extreme anti-Western sentiment in the East so at the end there is a mutual excommunication

• becomes the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church → everyone though the schism were going to be temporary

Also there were some very temperamental men (cardinal Humbert)

Filioque 589 (LOCAL COUNCIL IN TELEDO SPAIN)

• This was the controversy over the addition to the creed: “and the Son” (the original creed stopped before it) → was in the West

  • they did not think that they were changing anything but just clarifying something because of aranisms starting again → just though that there was nothing new and then it just become a practice (in Visigoth)

  • EAST DID NOT AGREE → they thought it was a full change to the Creed and thought that Rome and the West was overstepping so they did not accept it → this just adds to the list of dramas that was happening

Photian Schism(857-867)

• Patriarch refuses to accept Photius who was appointed by the new Emperor with out the consent of the Pope after the old emperor died → he was not even a bishop but just wanted someone loyal → SHOULD HAVE BEEN IGANTIUS

• Pope sends Legate which then are turned to the emperors side and says its fine → is excommunicated → Ignatius is the true one

• Was briefly Ignatius as the emperor changed and supported what the church though Photius was then reappointed by the next guy and excommunicated the west because of all the funny games

• There was also the Bulgarism that was then converted to the Latin version which split them even farther then what would have been

• The Photian Schism in the late 800s set the stage for the eventual split but didn’t lead to an immediate formal division because imperial politics, the role of the pope, and theological differences were still being worked out.

Feudalism

• this was the main structure of society in the middle ages after the fall of the Carolingian World

• The Landowner would give the land to the vassal for a promise of something in return → money, loyalty (called a fife)

  • the landowner would also be judge and jury of anything that may have happen

• THE CHURCH IS POWERFUL → has a lot of land as they were given by Charlemagne and was written into the law that it can not be taken away

  • This could lead to a lot of different ways that the Church could become corrupted → also with the people trying to get the Church as a Vassal as then they could control some decisions → CHURCH WAS VERY INFUENCAL

• There was no vertical stability and no vertical mobility → made people mad later which would lead to the heresy of:

  • Albigenianism: Mostly the rejection of material world goes back to the GNOSTICS → this is one of the things that the Inquisition was trying to root out (12-13C)

Simony/Nepotism

• THIS WAS A CONSQUENCE OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM AND THE FALL OF THE CAROLINGIAN WORLD/son after the death → between nobles and descendants → NOT AS MUCH UNITY

  • • there was a power struggle which would result in the collapse as there is new invaders → Islam and Vikings 2ND REASON

    • LEADS to DUCHIES (local Leaders)

• Church is absorbed into this system which leads to Simony and Nepotism and Lay Investiture → THERE WAS A LOT OF CORRUPTION

  • as there was a lot of money involved in this AND THERE WERE THEN TEMPORAL DUTIES AND SPIRITUAL

    • Simony: the buying and selling of the Church Positions

    • Nepotism: when you have children to hand down your money and power (Large problem when it comes to CLERGY CELIBACY (Greg VII)

    • Lay Investiture: a lay person invest somebody else with a church position (they are appointing someone who is a religious leader) → leads to the Church losing control of the Mission in the area

• Corruption in the Church when it comes to Papal Office and Feudalism

1. Political → some church leaders want to maintain temporal control and wealth

2. Jealous → there is both in the Church and outside of the Church which means that there would be a power struggle

3. Invasions → the Church need protection again as there is a collapse in the Carolingian Empire

• This all leads to the temporal people stepping into the religious roles → TEMPORAL leaders which leads to CLUNY

Cluny (Started in the 900, 10C) THE POPE AT THE TIME IS GREGORY VII

• This is a monastic reform in the Church → VERY IMPORTANT AS IT SHOWS THAT PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS STEP IN FOR A CHANGE IN THE CHURCH FOR THE BETTER (MOVEMENT OUT OF CHAO)

• There is a local ruler who appoints a very strict Abbot to a Monastery (CLUNY)

• they would do this to correct the religious aspect → full lead to the following of the Rule of St. Benedict very strictly and would lean more on prayer though

• ENFORCES CLERGY CELIBACY → leads to a norm as it started with the Monks but then they would expand to the Papacy → THIS IS HOW THE NEPOTISM WOULD BE TREATED WITH/FOR AS THIS WOULD CUT OUT ALL THE CHILDREN

  • The big thing he did was to connect the monastery with the Church from Rome so this kind of takes the Church out of the Feudal System → NOT INFLENCE ON THE BISHOPS AND ABBOTS FROM PEOPLE WOULD WANT TO CONTROL THEM

• This then created a web of connect monasteries to make sure that none of them became corrupt

• THIS IS HOW THEY WOULD THEN DEAL WITH MONASTERIES FROM NOW ON

Summary

1. Spirituality

   1. There is a strict “rule” that they all followed → they would focus on virtues and holiness more

   2. There then became more of prayer then work → had to hire outside people

   3. Renewed commitment to the Chastity and Celibacy → this become a mastery of the body which would lead to a resistance of temptations → FULLY TAKES OUT NEPOATISM

   4. Made simony illegal and focused on purity

2. Inspiration

   1. There is a lot of of expansion of this idea → there is a desire for the Church more but it is still not universal as there are a lot of different ways in the Eastern too → FOCUS IN THE WEST

   2. This answers TO Rome directly as they were trying to avoid Feudalism → PULLED OUT

   3. Created much more influential roles → monks turned into the Bishops or even popes

3. Problem?

   1. The holiness is what is thought to be only in the Monastery → SEPERATION OF ORDAINED AND NOT

   2. Thus the lay people have a very passive role in this religion → THEY ARE JUST RECEIVING THE RELIGION

   3. There is still a problem with the wealth as there is a lot of money given to the Church as a support

There then became a a series of pope that were weak but they moved out of it from the reform and monastic reform

Lay Investiture

Lay Investiture: a lay person invest somebody else with a church position (they are appointing someone who is a religious leader) → leads to the Church losing control of the Mission in the area, The main Emperors that were problematic were OTTO I (962), OTTO III (996), and HENRY IV and appointing popes (1070s to 1080s → main one)

ISSUE POINT NUMBER 1

Otto The great (OTTO I) → he was very close with the church and had to defend both the state and the church in Germany → they were very split in different sections

HE WAS CROWNED the leader of the Holy Roman Empire by the Pope → HAD A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP

There was then still a papal influence on temporal leaders yet it was different then Charlemagne as Otto I was very into EMPIRE BUILDING AND NOT THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH

There was main influences over the Church:

1. The Lay Investiture → there was then a taken way from the Church CHANGE POSSIBLE MISSION → takes power away from Bishops → UNITY IS BROKEN

   1. Church is in many regions which means that Church leader is in control and not the Pope

   2. they are Money making machines so they would have to make sure that the leader is for the mission and not political (like the lay people would want)

2. Assertion over property church and Church money → they have a lot of money and power

ISSSUE POINT NUMBER 2

With OTTO III → he has a lot of influence over Papal appointment (to much)

Wanted to elect the Pope →

• tried and worked as there was no real cardinal meeting to elect the pope

• he did appointed a smart and religious person yet they were very close (both the 2 Popes)

  • he appointed his friend Silvester II but he was actually good for the Church even though people thought he could be a political pawn

    • Otto wanted a central power over the Church

This just shows that there is still a very difficult blurry line between temporal concerns and Church affairs → who deals with what and can the state appoint Bishops and Popes? NO, Leo IX started the change in this Church reform

CHURCH REFORM THAT HAPPENED AFTER THIS

There was an extended of reforms to the Papacy which followed Cluny → LEAD BY LEO IX

There was a great focus on simony and celibacy

ISSUE NUMBER 3

This was mainly the Lay Investiture → try to figure out who was appoint the Bishops because there is a lot of political power that comes with this → problem? who gets to appoint them?

• Church → Apostolic Succession

• State → Secular rulers which wanted to appoint political rulers

ISSUE NUMBER 4

Next was the German Emperor at the time (Fredrick I, Barbarossa, 1152 -1190)

• He thought that he was appointed emperor directly from God → wanted to control the full Roman Empire which means that he would control the Pape states thus controlling the Pope and Church → FULLY IGNORED THE CONCORDAT OF WORMS as he wanted to appoint Bishops

• He tried to get Rome but kept getting beat somehow (disease…)

  • before there were legates which would try to get him to stop but he did not

• After he then fully back as Italy did not really like him

• CHURCH PREVAIL AND THIS IS A GREAT CHURCH TIME

Concordat of Worms (This was 1122 and is in-between issue number 2 and 4)

• this was a tried way to get more power and independence to the Church → tried to separate them → WAS VEYR TEMPORARY AND SHORT LIVED PEACE

• the agreement was that the Church would appoint the Bishops on Paper but the Emperor would have a veto vote as it was still a very big temporal role

There was still not too clear who had power and there was still a lot of tension

Cistercians/Carthusians

They were still both out of the idea of reform that is need in the Church

Crusades

Reasons: FOR THE 1st CRUSADE

1. Defense of the Byzantium Empire as there was a very real and serious threat from the Selijk Turks (END GAME WAS TO DEFENCE AND TRY TO DECREASE THE SPREAD)

2. They wanted to reclaim the Holy Land as they wanted to be allowed for Religious pilgrimages, this was to be reconciled (END GAME)

   1. Also the Crusaders though that this was a religious pilgrimage of their own

3. There was city that were being raided by the Turks and also Islamic Forces

ALL TOGETHER SHOWS THAT THERE IS A VERY BIG ISSUE WITH ISLAM FEAR SO MOVE AGAINST THEM

Who was a Crusader?

• nobility and wealthy as this was very costly to do

• There was a positive effect on the European Society

  • there was a growth in the feudal system and there was a reunion of Europe under one common threat → this was temporary though

What they did?

• they had scattered groups that they were attacking so some against Jews (on the walk to Constantinople)

• 1st meet in Constantinople and all the Western military as the expedition was a very popular movement

• Successfully sacked Jerusalem and they took no resources and they had the Christian state established in Palestine → THEY HAD A INDEPENDENT KINGDOM, many crusader just went home afterwards but they had to keep some as there would be counter attacks

• INITALLY SUCCESSFUL AND DISUNIFIED THE TURKS

Success

• They had to rule over various people but they did not persecute Muslims nor have forced conversions

  • there was a large sharing a cultures and faiths yet very few permanent settlers

• the territory was always under attack which means that there was a movement of soldiers and pilgrims

• Established a central authority

• THIS WAS VERY SHORT LIVED THOUGH

4th Crusade → under Innocent the III

Military Orders

they rose out of the need to protect the Holy Land and Pilgrims but THEY ALSO LIE A MONASTIC LIFE

3 types:

1. Knights Templar → helped protect pilgrims, in Jerusalem and have a good banking system started (would get a lot of money)

2. Knights Hospitallers → they would care for sick pilgrims and are the medics, they were in Jerusalem and Malta

3. Teutonic Knights → in Germany and helped with the Christian expansion to Eastern Europe and helped with pilgrims coming from Russia

EFFECT, CRITICISM AND OUTCOMES OF THE CRUSADES

Relationship with Byzantium

• there was a potential for the healing of the schism but this would die after the 4th crusade as the east and west fully split as the west attacked Constantinople

• the western armies were seen as a threat as they were not very close

There was some less violent crusades that were lead by St. Francis of Assisi, he attempted to convert people from the Holy land

OTHER OUTCOMES

• The holy land was lost to the Muslims at the end but they did have the ability to temporally halt the expansion of the Muslims

• Allowed for more Christian Unity

  • pilgrimages are allowed again

• there was an increase of knowledge, ideas, writing, lands, culture, money trade, and missionary expeditions as there was an opening of the world to the western world so there was many new views and religions

  • there was a new way of thinking that was introduced

• There was then a slow sharing of the faith with the east and MISSIONARY TRIPS

Inquisition

Excommunication/Interdict

Excommunication: this is a warning and means that you are disconnected from the Church, you can still be reconciled but warns

Interdict: basically a ruling of reconciliation, means that there are no sacraments that can practiced in a specific place (Pressure on the leader to change their moral ways)

People and Time

Charles Martel

• He is the leader of the Kingdom of the Franks

• STOPPED THE MUSLIM EXPANSION INTO THE WEST (mostly France) → when Rome need help and was not getting it from the East the Franks stepped in

  • this is the beginning of an alliance

  • this began the expectation that Franks would be protectors of the Church

• This leads to a great alliance and Pepin (Charles son) asks for a blessing and papal recognition which he receives but the Church has a lot of power → SLY MOVE

  • leads to him being anointed King by St. Boniface (bishop) with the blessing of the Pope

    • SHOWS THAT THE POPE HAS POWER OVER WHO TO APPOINT KING

• Papacy: concerned with the independence of Rome and Church → The state is working for the Church → GIVES IT LAND

• Defeats the Lombards so the Pope and Rome is then promised protection (SHOWN HERE)

  • because its protected ten they have the ability to go on more missionary trips as well as have land and geography

• ONLY CON: the pope becomes both spiritual and temporal administrator (can lead to abuse of power)

Charlemagne

• He is the grandson of Charles Martel, son of Pepin

• he was the most important leader of the Franks → LEADS TO THE REBIRTH OF THE HRE and UNIFICATION OF EUROPE MORE

• he acts in the best interest of the Church (very devote Catholic and he was using that to unify the empire) → CHURCH IS THE MESH OF SOCIETY

  • the state is working for the Church as they are equally respected and acknowledged → MANY OF THE COURTS HAD RELIGIOUS FIGURES WOULD LEAD TO LATER DIFFERENT EMPERORS PROBLEMS AS THE CHURCH HAD A LOT OF POWER (Feudal system)

  • Make sures to have good religious education

• He was known to interfere with the Church but really only in the best interest

  • Pope crowns him emperor → leads to more EAST V WEST AS THERE IS ALREADY AN EMPEROR (1880, on Christmas)

Pope St. Gregory VII (1073-1085) and Dictatus Papae

Started the Gregorian Revolution → which started the standards of the Church and what the mission and independence should be → TRIED TO CENTERALIZE THE CHURCH

• he was a Cluniac monk and people liked in as he was very interested in reform and wanted a strong unified church → he had the “right” stuff

• He wrote the Dictatus Papae: 4 main points to clarify the Church’s role and is very harsh to show that he means business

1. only the Pope can call a council

2. It is up to the Pope to have a final authority to define statements of Belief

3. ONLY THE POPE CAN APPOINT AND REMOVE BISHOPS (DELT WITH LAY INVESTITURE)

4. has influence over temporal rulers → he can remove them on a moral ground

• He was the Father of Canon law → which was a response and an attempt to change the state that the Church was in at the time

• Had many legate sent out to try to deal with Simony and Celibacy

Emp. Henry IV

One of the Main Problems when it comes to Lay investiture

• There was a debate about who would have the final say when it comes to Bishops and things that the Church is affected by

  • Greg VII says the Pope has final say as the Pope is the one to crown the Emperor so he has the final say as Pope when it comes to things that affect Church affairs

• Emp. tried to appoint bishop and ignores everything that Greg says but Gregory VII acts against it it and the Usurps Henry and excommunicates him

• They then have a fight, kidnaps, excommunication, Henry IV loses a lot of supports

  • He exiles the Pope and the Pope dies there then he appoints his own Pope with out doing it properly → this is an anti-Pope

King Henry II and St. Thomas Becket

King of England and really wanted Unity but does not like that the Church is powerful and has a lot of authority → appoints his own Bishop which is Thomas Becket

• is the Chancellor

• warns Henry II that he would do a good job if he is appointed

  • resigns when appointed and focuses on the CHURCH’S MISSION

• does not want to be a puppet so he becomes a good archbishop

• The bishop of Canterbury → Henry thought this would give him more power in the Church but different

• Constitution of Clarendon: document that Henry II made to try to curb the independence of the Church and put a lot more control of the clergy → King can appoint Bishops and Abbots

  • Becket and the Pope disagreed and resisted

  • Becket has to hide in France but then Pope threatens excommunication to Henry and Becket is let in

    • this becomes very tense as Becket is very popular which weakens Henry’s position

    • Becket is killed (possibly murdered)

• THUS THE CHURCH PREVAILS as Henry does penance for what happened and gives up on trying to get the Church’s Power

Pope Urban II

Called the First Crusade → he had a impassioned speech that got everyone to get the Holy Land back → he promised spiritual rewards such as the remission of sins to the Crusaders (1095, first crusade was in 1099)

He wanted to help the Byzantine empire to try to see if they could reconnect

He also wanted to see if they could get the Holy land back so there could be pilgrimages back to allow for people to go for their sins as the Muslims were attacking them

Pope Innocent III

He was the height of Papal Power → Supremacy

• he was the best example of altering authority with him and his successors which will remain independent

  • This then protects the Church and Christendom

  • THE KINGS BECOME SPIRITUAL VASSALS

• Used the term “Vicar of Christ” which was the exact role of Peter and is trying to remain the leader of the Church

  • Moon and Sun → Jesus is the sun and the moon is Pope as they are just reflecting the power that they have

• Shows that there is a absolute authority over spiritual matter which means that they have total control over spiritual affairs which counter balances the state and the Church which means that the Church is independent with moral things

  • allows for the maintenance of European balance of Power

  • THERE IS STRICT CRITICISM OF MOARL ACTIONS OF RULERS

    • they are informed by excommunication and interdicts

• Shows that this is how the proper leaders of the church should act and this style is what is necessary at the time where they want to try to de independent

• CALLED THE 4th CRUSADE → which was suppose to go to Egypt but ended up in the sacking of Constantinople which would fully spilt the East and West as they did not have enough money to pay for boats in Venice → THIS WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CHURCH TO GO TO CONSANTINOPLE and never go to Egypt

  • this would be a further trigger to the decline of Byzantium, PAlESTINE AS LOST IN 1291 and there was a very diminished Enthusiasm

St. John of Damascus

• He was a defender of Icons

• was a monk from Syria and wrote a lot of support with icons and tried to explain it to the East

  • argued that Jesus was already an icon of the Father (we can visually see him as he represents the divine)