{"id":31,"date":"2020-06-29T01:36:18","date_gmt":"2020-06-29T01:36:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/?page_id=31"},"modified":"2020-09-03T05:06:56","modified_gmt":"2020-09-03T05:06:56","slug":"posts","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/posts\/","title":{"rendered":"Posts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

On Page 2<\/strong> you can find the Course Essay<\/em>. This Course Essay (Position Paper) expands upon the debate between Pelagius and Augustine in regard to free will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Page 3<\/strong> you can find the Current Events Series; where we tie culturally and religious trends identified in the literature to events within the distant past, in order to better contextualize history. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Page 4<\/strong> you can find the Analysis Series; where we more deeply examine Diarmaid MacCulloch’s book Christianity: The First 3000 Years<\/em>. This is where specific phenomena that I had found interesting while reading the text is expanded upon and analyzaed more deeply. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Augustine & Pelagius: The Battle over Free Will<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There seem to be many controversial and perpetual points of contention within the Christian faith in regard to philosophy. The concept of the Trinity and the idea of Original Sin has fractured coalitions, and shifted the realm of theological debate. One of these themes that had been of the utmost importance at the time was Augustine\u2019s concept of Original Sin. Augustine, while a late adherent to the Church, made consequential contributions to the ethos of charitability in the Western Church, the interpretation of the Trinity, and the idea of Original Sin. Original Sin was not his only revolutionary idea, in fact he seemed to be at the center of many of these revolutionary ideas. Augustine reformed the idea of the Trinity around the logos; substituting the Father, Son & Holy Spirit with Memory, Understanding, and Will (MacCulloch, 310). Augustine too played a part in arguing to the rich that by giving to the poor, they themselves could earn goodwill to get themselves into heaven (MacCulloch, 297). Perhaps in fact, Augustine\u2019s most pivotal contribution to Christianity was his idea of Original Sin. It was this idea of Original Sin, and subsequently free will, that led to the major debate between the Pelagians.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The theory of Original Sin is that the original sin of Adam and Eve is inherited by every person and therefore inescapable. This idea, while extreme at the time, would become central to Christianity in later generations. Augustine\u2019s idea of Original Sin would be the basis for the Lutheran and Calvinist doctrine of \u201cTotal Depravity,\u201d giving credence to the idea that humans are born with sin, and need God to alleviate it (Ables, Thematic Lecture, Week 3). This too can be seen in Romans 13, in which in verses 13-14 it is asked that followers embrace the God in order to be free from sin. These two verses seem to signify that in order to absolve from sin (\u201cno provision for the flesh\u201d), embracing God is imperative (\u201cput on the Lord Jesus Christ\u201d (Coogan, et al., eds., 2031)). As MacCulloch notes that these verses Augustine read during his internal struggle with sin and sexuality (MacCulloch, 303).  While Original Sin would become prominent in later generations, that did not mean that it was without pushback at the time. Pelagius, a theologian whose theology might have been the antithesis to original sin, wrote extensively at the time in rebuke of Augustine\u2019s theory (Bettenson, 58). Pelagius\u2019s philosophy shows the enormous philosophical shift that Augustine pushed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, Augustine\u2019s views on Original Sin seem to have caused the most outrage and debate, both for and against his position. As written in The Council of Carthage, the African Church rebuked the views held by the Pelagians and came to the defense of Augustine\u2019s views. They believed that in declaring Adam, a mortal man, to have died from natural causes rather than from sin would have been preposterous; The Council of Carthage went so far as to say that anyone who might believe that must be cast as anathema (Bettenson, 64). The Synod of Arles attempted to take a middle-road approach and believed that free will was not attainable as Augustine might suggest but was rather severely weakened through the sins of Adam, and therefore still must embrace God (Betterson, 66). While various denominations have adapted different balances between the Augustine and Pelagian philosophies of will, there is no doubt that Augustine challenged the prevailing orthodoxy in ways still felt today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It seems that while both were arguing about the same topic, their philosophies were critical to other areas of the human experience. Free will in Pelagian philosophy seems palatable for a social and political philosophy, but makes a tough theological case to reconcile. Meanwhile, Augustine\u2019s case on free will was more easily reconcilable within the Church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is interesting that Augustine would go on to win this debate, because centuries later the ideals and philosophy of the enlightenment seem to have many Pelagian elements to them. Perhaps most important of the Pelagian ideals was that humans are not inherently evil and are capable of living up to their highest ideals. Augustine was a firm denier of this Pelagian belief and believed that humans are fallible and in need of God to attain a higher purpose. Pelagius further rebuked Augustine by emphasizing that free choice is a gift from God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps it is a product of the American lens through which we see Pelagianism, that gives it the charitable view that it does. This philosophy has much in common with the American idea that one has free will over their own actions and their own future. Pelagianism is certainly still a force in American society as senator Josh Hawley notes the Justice Anthony Kennedy drew from Pelagian philosophy in his 1992 Planned Parenthood <\/em>opinion. \u201cAt the heart of liberty is the right to define one\u2019s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life,\u201d writes Justice Kennedy in his opinion (Hawley, 2019). Justice Kennedy\u2019s opinion sounds like the identical twin of the American ethos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is however not hard to see how the Pelagian philosophy led to the ousting of Pelagius and his teachings labelled as heretical. From a religious perspective, to have free will to achieve perfection can be seen as negating the need for God. If one can use free will to attain perfection, God is not only no longer the singular perfect being, but his work is unnecessary. Augustine holds that God is perfect, and evil is a result of original sin and inherent human nature. According to Augustine, evil exists due to the abuse of free will by people. Both Augustine and Pelagius\u2019s philosophies bring them to polar opposite ends of eachother. Where Pelagius states that free will is the vessel to perfection and betterment, Augustine argues that the human exercise of free will inevitably leads to evil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During their lifetimes, Augustine won the debate over free will, but in the modern-day there are still plenty of traces of Pelagianism within our societies. While there are no Pelagians here anymore today, there are still those that argue for, and argue against, Augustine\u2019s implications of free will. Both of these figures were indeed revolutionary in their own ways, one perhaps made the more easily reconcilable theological argument.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Current Events<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July 2nd<\/sup>, 2020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have stumbled across an article entitled \u201cChurches Join In Effort to Halt Racial Injustices In Religion.\u201d It was written on July 7th,  1962 by Louis Cassels, in the Tri-State Defender newspaper. The article has essentially two (possible three) separate stories within it. The most pertinent of them that I am highlighting is the interfaith attempt to fight racial injustice from within the institution of the church. The interlinked story is the retaliatory pressures from Southern Baptists that \u201cliberal theology has reared its head in some southern Baptist seminaries (Tri-State Defender, 1962).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the early 1960s, perhaps with the incoming pressures of the Civil Rights Movement in the United States, a number of religious organizations began working together on a multilateral campaign to fight racial injustice in the United States and abroad. The organizations working together met in Chicago in 1962, and represented the Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant faiths. In doing this, the many denominations of the Judeo-Christian faith had a goal of morphing the institutions that they had previously worked within in order to promote civil liberties regarding race.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The reasoning for the interfaith meeting in Chicago was stated to \u201c\u2019bring the joint moral forces of the churches and synagogues to bear on the problem of racial segregation\u2019 and to highlight \u2018the distinctive role that religious institutions have to play\u2019 in removing racial barriers from American life (Tri-State Defender, 1962).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The story underlying this article, one that we see throughout history, is that institutions are always subject to change; there is often a parallel force that acts in opposition to the same change within an institution. We see this in the Tri-State Defender article, where the conglomerate of faith attempted to restructure their respective religious institutions. Concurrently, the Southern Baptists were recommitting themselves to their \u201cfundamental\u201d values. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

July 16th<\/sup>, 2020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For our analysis of (relatively) Current Events this week, I stumbled upon an article relating to Pope Francis and his views on various modern political issues; mainly in the ways that he has shifted from his predecessors. The article I have found was written in the Wall Street Journal and is entitled \u201cThe Politics of Pope Francis; Perhaps America and the pope can learn from eachother.\u201d In the article, the author argues that the popularity of the pope in American progressive circles has risen due to Pope Francis\u2019s more progressive economic philosophy, even though the Catholic Church is still very much socially conservative. The author makes the point that by \u201cbear-hugging\u201d a certain political agenda, \u201c[the Pope] will come to be seen as a seeker of political popularity more than a speaker of hard and eternal truths (WSJ, 2015).\u201d Irrespective of social issues, as one purpose of religion is to instill a social code, I might argue that the political positions of Catholic leadership might differ so drastically (as Pope Francis does with his predecessor) due to the societies they lived in and were elected from. That is to say that the ideologies of Catholicism are not set in stone, but rather differ drastically from within the regions that they are established.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July 30th<\/sup>, 2020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This week in our Current Events series,  I have chosen an article written by Yaakov Kornreich in the New York Jewish Week in August, 1984. In the article, Kornreich writes about the dispute within various sects of the Jewish community over a conversion program in Denver, CO. The Orthodox community had qualms with the Rerom movement in Judaism and objected to the Denver conversion program upheld by the Reformists. This topic falls within the Course Themes of Conversion and Resistance. The article suggests that while the program would eventually dissolve due to internal disputes, it gave hope that perhaps interdenominational disagreements could be solved together without the further polarization of religious and national communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In essence, The Reformists seemed to have more relaxed standards that the Orthodox community was comfortable with in relation to conversion of non-Jewish people, one Orthodox rabbi was noted as stating he was \u201c\u2019uncomfortable signing a (conversion) certificate for people with whom [he] did not have a personal relationship (Kornreich, 1984).\u2019\u201d In this joint, interdenominational program, many leaders of the Orthodox community felt that the rules of convergence were too relaxed, while many leaders of the Reform movement felt that the rules were too strict. What I find most interesting about this article is that in this instance, the goal in dealing with this interdenominational schism was to unite and compromise, as opposed to breaking off from one another even further.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August 13th<\/sup>, 2020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This week we are diving into Armenian affairs. I chose an article in the Armenian Reporter International entitled \u201cAbp. Vatche Hovsepian, Primate of Western Diocese, Discusses the Issue of Church Unity.\u201d In this article, the leader of the Western Diocese speaks about the unity of the Armenian church, and speaks to a problem that arose at the time that was in \u201ccontravention to Canon law.\u201d The dispute in question in question was in regard to an administrative transfer of the Patriachate of Jerusalem to the Sea of Cilicia, to which a new seat had been added. Regarding the law however, there was contention regarding the power the actions of the See of Cilicia had over other Diocese within the region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hovsepian first declared that he was not the cause of the division, also stating that he actively attempted to avoid a inter-factional disputes. Hovsepian believed that the problem did not arise from an overabundance of jurisdiction from the See of Cilicia, but rather the intricate relationship between the Tashnag party in both the See of Cilicia and the Prelacy of the Western Diocese.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article has proven interesting to me because it shows that these situations of dissent in religious administration still have occurred in recent history, and in reading about the schism of the Catholic Church, the theme of interdenominational dissent can be seen repeated (to a lesser extent) from the 11th century throughout the 20th.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August 27th<\/sup>, 2020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In searching for our final installment of the Current Events series, I came across an article written in the Oakland Post in 1979, entitled \u201cSouthern Baptist Identity Crisis.\u201d In the article, the author points out that the Southern Baptist Convention was looking for a president of the church that was \u201ccommitted to Biblical inerrancy and willing to ferret out alleged liberals from the denomination\u2019s seminaries.\u201d This effort by the churches more conservative members, has led the more moderate and liberal members to feel uneasy as they feel the theological credentialism that the conservative flank pushes threatens \u201ctraditional Baptist policy \u2013 church government structure \u2013 of autonomous but cooperating congregations\u2026\u201d and essentially blurs the line between various Southern Baptist Churches and local communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I find this situation very interesting because in essence the liberal and conservative factions of the Southern Baptist church are arguing over different visions of the fundamental principles of the Church as an organization. The conservatives were of the belief that the importance of the church organization was to preserve traditional values and a historically traditional morality; the liberals were most interested in conserving the administrative and structural integrity of the church. Both factions seemed to be okay with the deterioration of their counterparts and the integrity of their own preferences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think this article ties in well with the theme of religious malleability and within the United States. As professor Scott Ables has stated, \u201cresilience of Christianity in always adapting, always reforming, has allowed it to both influence and be influenced by whatever culture it finds itself, no less in Europe and the Americas.\u201d You can see this I think within the example provided, as the Southern Baptist Convention in 1979 struggled to find its way in a shifting American culture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Analyzing Christianity: The First 3000 Years<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

June 28th (Chapter 6)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reading chapter 6 of Christianity: The First 3000 Years<\/em> (MacCulloch, 189-222), and supplemental materials, the themes are many, but mostly encapsulate both the institutionalization and imperialization of Christianity. With the help of Constantine, Rome became a Christian empire and shifted dramatically. Constantine went so far as to create a new capital city named Constantinople, and helped foster tolerance for Christians throughout Rome. With the major changes in the Roman empire came important Christian symbology. The Chi-Rho was adopted as the symbol of Christianity, and the city of Constantinople itself was to be representative of a new Rome, one in which the Church and State worked together (MacCulloch, 192). Monasticism too became increasingly popular in the age of Constantine, as many regional populations were unhappy with the Church as a large, overarching institution. In reading this week, it is hard to overlook the overarching omnipresence of the Church as a variable in the creation of different sects of Christianity, both in theology and in practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The institutionalization of the Church can be substantiated by reading the sources provided this week. In MacCulloch\u2019s Christianity<\/em>, there are many pages that note this phenomenon. MacCulloch notes that bishops, people who had typically led \u201csmall, intimate grouping[s]\u201d were now becoming extensions of the State and magistrates to the community as the Church became an extension of the Roman Empire (MacCulloch, 197). The State\u2019s involvement in the affairs of Church can be seen in the case of Caecilian, Diocese of Carthage. Caecilian made efforts to restrain certain behaviors in his locality. These restraints were challenged until the State eventually allowed and promulgated Caecilian\u2019s duties as it pertained to upholding religion (Bettenson, 19). During this time as well the idea of what it meant to even be a Christian was up for debate, some believed that to be Christian meant to be aligned with the Roman Church, while others believed that to be Christian meant to create an imitation of God onto oneself (Meister, 112). As professor Scott Ables points out in his thematic lecture, the institutionalization of Christianity had to many the effect of \u201cwatering-down\u201d their religion, as they did not want to adapt to the Roman Empire\u2019s interpretation of Christianity (Ables, Thematic Lecture, 6:20). These factors all played into the shifts to and from Christianity in the age of the Roman Church, and would have lasting impacts for centuries to come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

July 12th (Chapters 9 & 10)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The main theme in reading chapters 9 & 10 in Diarmaid MacCulloch\u2019s book Christianity: The First Three Thousand <\/em>Years (MacCulloch, 2011), seems to be the natural precursor to the last unit; the institutionalization of Christianity. The theme for this section examines the centralization of authority in the Christian religion, especially within the Roman empire. These main themes include how the Latin roots of Christianity were slowly adapted and sometimes changed as the religion evolved into the Western world. From there, we look at Augustine\u2019s record in how he shifted the populations that supported Christianity and gained support for the Roman aristocrats. The last and overarching theme of this week is how the new relationship between church and state exist, and from there how missions worked on behalf of the state in order to spread the message of faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In reading these chapters and analyzing the historical themes of this time period; it seems that there was no theme more influential than Augustine of Hippo\u2019s transformation of the Church, and just as importantly, those that the Church reached. Perhaps Augustine\u2019s most pivotal contribution to Christianity was his idea of Original Sin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the idea that the original sin of Adam and Eve is inherited by every human being and is inescapable. This idea, while extreme at the time, would become central to Christianity in later generations. Augustine\u2019s idea of Original Sin would be the basis for the Lutheran and Calvinist doctrine of \u201cTotal Depravity,\u201d which gave credence to the idea that humans are born with sin, and need God to alleviate it (Ables, Thematic Lecture, Week 3). This too can be seen in Romans 13, \u201clet us live honorably as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarrelling or jealousy. Instead, put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires (Coogan, et al., eds., 2031).\u201d These two verses seem to signify that in order to absolve from sin (\u201cno provision for the flesh\u201d), one must embrace God (\u201cput on the Lord Jesus Christ\u201d). As MacCulloch notes, these are the verses Augustine turned to during his internal struggle with sin and sexuality (MacCulloch, 303).  While Augustine\u2019s idea of Original Sin would become prominent in later generations, that did not mean that it was without significant pushback at the time. Pelagius, a theologian whose theology might have been the antithesis to original sin, wrote \u201cevery good and everything evil,  in respect of which we are either worthy of praise or worthy of blame is done by us<\/em>, not born with us<\/em> (Bettenson, 58).\u201d Pelagius\u2019s philosophy would ultimately not play out, but does show the enormous philosophical shift that Augustine pushed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

July 22nd<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The overarching theme in the readings for this week in the Christianity: The First 3000 Years<\/em> (MacCulloch, 428-468), seem to be in painting the picture of the time period that was the precursor to the East-West Schism of 1054. Beginning in the second half of the first millennium, major outgrowths of established Christianity began to challenge one another, ranging from Orthodox Christianity in eastern Europe and the emergence of Islam in the Middle East. The accelerant to this even seems to be the fall of the Roman empire and  the subsequent Byzantine empire. It seems to be that the overextension of the Roman church eventually led to its own downfall, as various other denominations questioned the Papal authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Chapter 13 of Augustine Casiday\u2019s Christianity<\/em>, it is noted that many primary sources outside of the Roman empire note that both the Roman empire itself, as well as the Roman Church both held an unusually close relationship (Casiday, 285). The influence of the Church-State relationship extended beyond Byzantine borders, that even churches in varying parts of the world were based on the \u201ccanons and creeds\u201d of the Western Church (Casiday, 286). The Roman Church as an institution in some cases grew in power due in part to the needs of the Church to maintain order in various regions. In the Western states, the Roman Church ended up with a monopoly on administrative order, and was one only entity capable of maintaining it at the time (Church & State, Encyclopedia Britannica). In part because of the ability of the Church to administer order within these states, it also was able to influence power within these regions. As time progressed the Church became involved in an increasing portion of the lives of both local and distant communities. One of the ways in which it did that was through the religious institutionalization of Marriage (Mengal & Wolverton, 12-13). The Church legitimized marriage based on its own rules and built up rules and procedures around the institution itself. One of the famous effects of this was King George XIII\u2019s divorce and creation of the Anglican church.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

August 23rd<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For our analysis of Christianity: The First 3000 Years<\/em> this week, the themes in chapters 19 and 20 seem to be the growing internal strife and friction caused by varying visions regarding the Church\u2019s future and direct; the other main theme seems to be the examination of the role Christianity played as it entered the New World. The New World served as a blank canvas for varying religious denominations to make their claims for conversion, and various denominations developed strategies that played off eachother.There were elements of strategy to the spread of religion, Protestants were friendlier to Jews in part because Jewish scholarship was helpful to the Protestants in the fight against Catholicism (MacCulloch, 684). Religion followed trade in many instances, or vice versa, as had occurred with Alessandro Valignano (MacCulloch, 708). King Phillip II of Spain during this time backed the Spanish Inquisition largely as a strategy to achieve his desired ends (MacCulloch, 672).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps the biggest overarching theme of this time period is the relationships that different denominations had with each other and how they used them strategically to their advantage. John Winthrop, though not trying to strategically succeed over other religions,  he dreamt up the idea of a separation between Church and State, in some part to weaken King Charles I as he made attempts to silence non-Anglican religious views (Barry, 2012). The Jesuit-Franciscan tension occurred in the New World as well, where the \u201cstrategic importance\u201d of Detroit had been vital to trade, and expanding on that, conversion (Handy, 2012). Changing to a new environment is not new to the Church, John Owen of England had led three different congregations throughout the course of his life, all three congregations varying wildly from one another. This too suggests that the clergy in different ways employ strategy to adapt to changing forces (Davies, et. al., 2019). Religious institutions of all denominations have been known to adapt to changing environments and situations; this too was the case in the New World and syncretized and introducing religions to each other like they never had been before.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On Page 2 you can find the Course Essay. This Course Essay (Position Paper) expands upon the debate between Pelagius and Augustine in regard to free will. On Page 3 you can find the Current Events Series; where we tie … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10676,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-31","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/31","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10676"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/31\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":129,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/31\/revisions\/129"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.oregonstate.edu\/tuthillrhst326\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}