« Empiricism and the Supernatural |
Home
| Music, Culture and the Early Church »
Plundering the Pagans
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Church and culture. It has been an uneasy and complex relationship. The church must contextualize the gospel to communicate it to the culture without distorting its message. The culture influences the forms of worship and the discourse of the church. In many ways this second interaction has caused the larger disagreements of the two within the church. It has touched everything from styles of music to language to feasts and festivals. It began with the creation of the church and continues today.
The church developed within the cultural context of the Graeco-Roman world even as its religious origins are Jewish in nature. The music, language, and philosophy of the time were inherently pagan given their roots. The church needed these, though, as it worked out its theology and worship. This created an obvious tension between the desire to use the intellectual and artistic fruits of the Classical Greeks and yet not be overly influenced by the ideals of that society. This tension can be illustrated through the rhetorical question of Tertullian in the early 3rd century: “What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem?” The answer for Tertullian is that the church does not and should not depend on classical thought.
This changed quickly for in the 4th century the Arian controversy erupted. It was eventually settled in the Nicene Creed through the use of the Greek word homoousious which comes from Greek philosophy. Along with other causes, this motivated leaders in the church to consider what could be used from the ancient wisdom and how to appropriately integrate it into Christian thought. Jerome and Augustine both developed (or at least popularized) arguments for the use of the Greek intellectual resources within the church.
Jerome used a passage in Deuteronomy 21 that speaks to the issue of marrying women captured in warfare. The women were to have their heads shaved and their other adornments removed so as to remove the temptation of mere beauty. The analogy according to Jerome is that the church could safely assimilate Greek thought as long as they removed the aspects that provided dangerous attractions to classical and pagan learning.
Augustine's justification was driven by more pragmatic reasoning. He thought that just as the Israelites plundered the treasures of the Egyptians when Moses lead them out of captivity so the church should plunder the wealth of ancient wisdom to satisfy the needs of the church. Of course, neither Jerome's nor Augustine's solution to this tension was the final verdict for the church. The discussion has continued through the medieval period, Reformation, Renaissance and up to our own day.
Post a comment
Comments
Two quick comments: one of the larger, related controversies today in the church is what to do with post-modern thought - questions like does it even have a place in today's church and if so, what.
I'm thinking that my next entry could be about the early church's response to music. It parallels what happened with philosophy in many ways.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Maybe this is too cut and dry, but tell me what you think. The problem I see that Jerome and Augustine do not seem to face in reaching their conclusions is this: "Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" (1 Cor. 1:20). This problem was faced by the Corinthians in Scripture. They were glorying in men and the world's wisdom and philosphy. Paul reminds them of the cross of Christ--not the death of Christ, but the cross of Christ. For in the cross we see that the "wisdom of this world" came face to face with the Son of God ("Lord of glory, 1 Cor. 2:8), labelled Him an impostor, and condemned Him to die the death of the worst kind of criminal (though ignorantly). The cross, therefore, exposes man's wisdom as bankrupt. And yet the Corinthians were employing this wisdom in the church of God. Paul had to severely correct them! In essence, he was saying, "The so-called wisdom of this world took the Lord of glory and hung Him upon a cross. So much for man's wisdom!"
This is a good question to grapple with though--the church should not only care that she goes about doing things, but also how she does them--that is, the means by which she goes about her activities.
Posted by: David on Thursday, September 14, 2006
I have two different topics that I would like to comment on so I'll divide them into two comments. My view is that Paul is talking about revealed wisdom here that can only be apprehended through the work of the Spirit. It is only through this revealed wisdom that we can truly understand who we are, who God is, and what we need to do about it. The world's wisdom won't get us there. I would argue that Romans 1:20 is talking about the inadequacy of man's wisdom towards this purpose. The Corinthians have received this wisdom but are now judging it with worldly wisdom. But God reveals things and does things in ways that don't match our expectations (God's thoughts are not our thoughts...).
I would then say man's wisdom does have value, just not in a bring to salvation sort of way. I guess I won't fully develop this thought here, but doesn't Daniel say that all of man's wisdom comes from God? I just think we have to be aware of the consequences of the fall when evaluating it. Sorry about the jumpiness of this last paragraph. I am trying to moderate the "man's wisdom is bankrupt" perspective. If it were, we would be totally dependent on revealed wisdom for everything. Maybe part of the disconnect is the different ways the Bible talks about wisdom and knowledge and how we go about obtaining it.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Thursday, September 14, 2006
In this second comment, I need to do a better job representing Augustine's view. He wrote this justification for using pagan philosophy in a book on studying the bible (De Doctrina Christiana). He draws a distinction between two types of human wisdom - one that is instituted by man and the other that is instituted by God or observations of the past (I would guess that he means history). He says that we should root out the first kind. Augustine then describes how this other type of human wisdom can be used in the study of the Scripture and gives warnings about its use.
The plundering the Egyptians comments comes in a section on philosophy. He says that it is through God's providence that man is able to develop worthwhile wisdom but that we tend to misuse it. Our job is then to take what is valuable (the gold and silver), leave the rest, and use the good stuff for the right purpose. Augustine finishes up the analogy by saying that we must remember that knowledge puffs us up. It is not the gold and silver that made Israel safe that night in Egypt, but the passover sacrifice. The application he gives is that we are not saved through human wisdom but through the sacrifice of Christ. The wealth of the Egyptians and the passover sacrifice both serves as types for Augustine.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Thursday, September 14, 2006
1 Cor. 1 speaks of the "wisdom of this world," the "wisdom of the wise," and the "wisdom of words" (instead of what I said--"man's wisdom") so I should have been more precise in phrasing my response. The question in 1 Cor. 1:20 still needs to be addressed though. What are your thoughts? In my thinking the Spirit of God links the "wisdom of this world" with these men (in 1:20), and thus is challenging the philosopher (lover of wisdom), the scribe (man of letters) and the debater (the one who can argue a point with great skill). In light of the cross God asks these men to stand up, please...They can't.
I am not saying that God asks the Christian to throw away his brain, but as we have the "mind of Christ" (2:16) we are to submit to the Spirit's guidance. What do you think? I think 1 Corinthians is the place Biblically to discuss this matter...
Posted by: David on Friday, September 15, 2006
I think that Paul is looking at wisdom with respect to salvation in the beginning of 1 Corinthians. I do not believe that the censures of wisdom by Paul in those chapters should be applied universally to all of man's wisdom. To do so ignores the good that happens through man's wisdom (all through the grace of God). Can man's wisdom lead to God in any meaningful and acceptable way? No. I think that is Paul's point. The wisdom of the world will not make us wise unto salvation.
Do you see the distinction that I am drawing between wisdom from the perspective of salvation and wisdom in a general sense? I think 1 Cor 1:20 deals with the first case.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Friday, September 15, 2006
I think I understand the distinction you're trying to make, CJ. But the wisdom that led me repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus is the same wisdom I am to use now as a believer. Maybe "wisdom" needs to be defined here. If it is the basis by which we make decisions in the church, then world philosophy is out (Col. 2:8). If the wisdom of the world doesn't make us wise to salvation, then it also won't lead us as believers to please God. I guess I'm struggling to find out what you mean by "wisdom."
Posted by: David on Saturday, September 16, 2006
Wisdom - proper application of knowledge, an understanding of the world, the ability to discern what is good, the ability to make good choices and follow through on those.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Saturday, September 16, 2006
It seems that there are different ways to cut the wisdom pie. I have already referred to revelation as one dividing factor. I think you are talking about a natural versus spiritual distinction. I am not sure whether those are identical. Another cut would be between true and false wisdom.
I don't understand comments like "If it is the basis by which we make decisions in the church, then world philosophy is out (Col. 2:8)". Are you using a natural/spiritual distinction (so world philosophy really means natural wisdom here)? If so, are you implying that we should throw away natural wisdom (at least within the church)?
Posted by: CJ Costello on Monday, September 18, 2006
Maybe an example would help. For instance, the Lord says, "Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church" (1 Cor. 14:34-35). This is the "wisdom" of God as to a woman's role in the church. God has given His judgment concerning how this aspect of the church is to function. Yet today the world (and even Christianity at large) would say this is narrow-minded and discrimination against women (and even hateful!), for there are gifted Christian women who can preach (speak) better than many men. Women are just as "good" as men, for there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3). And so the reasoning goes...
Thus, the wisdom of the world is exalted over God's wisdom. Call it what you will--"natural" wisdom, or "spiritual" wisdom. God though has revealed how He wants women believers to "learn" if they have a question (v.35) and how they are to function in the church. God said it, but we rationalize or reason this wisdom away with our own apparent wisdom.
Posted by: David on Tuesday, September 19, 2006
I'm not sure that this was helpful for me. Both of the examples that you have given so far are presented as against _______ (insert term here: natural wisdom? pagan wisdom? worldly wisdom? man's wisdom?). It seems like we are still understanding wisdom in different ways or at least using different terms. Are there any positive examples?
I'll offer another example to see if it can help. The Bible does not have anything explicit to say about the morality of slavery. The OT gives some regulations concerning it. The NT gives some instructions for living with it. It was only when the philosophy of the Enlightenment ("created equal") combined with Protestant theology that a strong abolitionist movement developed. Revealed wisdom (the Bible) was used previously to justify the claim that people were not created equally (or at least they were not created to enjoy the same positions in life). Is this a positive example of "plundering the pagans"?
Posted by: CJ Costello on Wednesday, September 20, 2006