April 02, 2003
John Scotus Eriugena
John Scotus Eriugena (from Orthodox Christianity in the British Isles)
Some Excerpts:
John Scotus Eriugena stands as a remarkable figure in the spiritual history of the Christian West. His native Ireland was insula sanctorum — the "Isle of the Saints," where Orthodox Christianity, planted by Saint Pádraig in the fifth century, had taken such root that it had created an entire monastic culture and produced countless thousands of glorified saints. By the ninth century, however, the Apostolic and Patristic Tradition of glorification which had transformed Ireland was coming under an attack which would ultimately prove more devastating than those of the Vikings who were by now violently raiding monastic settlements along the Irish coasts.
In the Carolingian Frankish kingdoms of Western Europe, a new and very different form of Christianity was taking shape as a result of the Franks' desire to distance themselves from the centre of Orthodox Christianity at Constantinople-New Rome: the Franks, rejecting the East Romans as "Greeks" and "heretics" in the infamous Libri Carolini and at synods in Frankfort and Aachen, created a new Franco-Latin church based largely upon excesses in the theology of Augustine of Hippo and an ecclesial polity founded on feudalism. Over the following centuries, this Franco-Latin faith would come entirely to supplant Orthodox Christianity in the West, by take-over (the Patriarchate of Rome in the 11th century) and invasion (the Norman Conquests of 1066 and 1170). Yet in the mid-ninth century, Orthodoxy was far from appearing as a lost cause in the West: the Frankish innovations were opposed by Irish monastic foundations throughout the continent as well as (with the exception of during the Schism of Pope Nicholas I) by the Patriarchate of Old Rome itself, especially after the Eighth Oecumenical Synod of 879.
It is during this period that we find the Irishman, John Scotus Eriugena, coming among the Franks as schoolmaster at the court of Charles the Bald, the grandson of Charlemagne himself, and presenting to them the theology of the Irish monastic tradition within which he was raised. In order to defend the spiritual experience of glorification (theosis), he turned naturally to the East, reading as much as possible of the Greek-speaking Fathers.[1] Indeed, despite the prejudices of the Frankish society in which he found himself, "all his sympathies were with the East."[2] An "enthusiastic student of Byzantine Christianity,"[3] Eriugena dedicated himself to "finding the authentic Christian truth in Greek sources."[4] Inevitably, though, his approach and his teaching brought him into conflict with Franco-Latin scholastic theologians, and he ended up being condemned for his "heretical" views.
Posted by Dienekes at April 2, 2003 12:58 AM | PermaLink If racially motivated politics (as a whole) are phylosophycally wrong, shouldn't it be wrong aswell (and perhaps more futile) to have racially motivated theologycal possitions on Christianity? Greek-Orthodoxism against "Franco-Norman-Latin Catholicism"?
Yes, I understand "race" has made different peoples to stress (and confuse) their views about the origin of the universe with their own's, e.g.Judaism for jews,Hinduism in India, animism wherever,etc. This fact (pure race) still influences THOSE cultures directly in their UNILATERAL cosmovision of things. But isn't there a difference when we are dealing with a universal religion, which sees theologycal truth far beyond its racial origin ? (e.g. judaic origins of Christianity).
Yes, there are fundamental theologycal differences between Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants . And it seems very natural to see that, respectively, these religious standpoints were very much FAVOURED by local Latin, Greek and Germanic different ideosyncracies in their acceptance and survival of these possitions through history.
But another thing is to say that the present Roman Catholic Church structure was originated by some racial groupings's social-political conception of dominance (feudalism) such as in the Norman or Franckish cases. Sounds a bit like another racially based conspiracy theory. The real cause of the Church's actual political structure is in its dogma and the perfectioning of its understanding throughout historycal times.
Posted by: Fernando Salas at April 2, 2003 08:55 PMshouldn't it be wrong aswell (and perhaps more futile) to have racially motivated theologycal possitions on Christianity? Greek-Orthodoxism against "Franco-Norman-Latin Catholicism"?
These are not racial divisions. They are theological-ecclesiastical divisions that arose partly because of different interpretations of Christianity in different cultures, that subsequently spread (sometimes) to accommodate political interests.
But another thing is to say that the present Roman Catholic Church structure was originated by some racial groupings's social-political conception of dominance (feudalism) such as in the Norman or Franckish cases.
Of course, general agreement on these issues is not likely. However, I think it's worth giving a hearing to the theory that the feudal re-organization of Western Europe by its non-Roman conquerors played a role in the evolution of the Roman Catholic Church.
Posted by: Dienekes at April 2, 2003 11:48 PMYour discussion of the theological and other differences between the Orthodox and the Roman-Catholic and other Churches is quite good. The explanation of the role of JSE in the dynamic of the era also is quite accurate. What you should mention is however, that JSE's theology and philosophy is not acceptable to the Byzantine and Contemporary Orthodox Theology and Philosophy. You should enlarge on the differences between JSE and Orthodox Theology and Philosophy, in order to avoid misunderstandings...
Posted by: Constantinos Athanasopoulos at September 17, 2003 05:44 AMThank you very much for this helpful information about John Scotus Eriugena (ca 810-880) remarkable Irish Christian mystic, scholar and translator. I am searching for images of him for a book. If you can provide any, I would be interested. I am doing this research for my Buddhist teacher, Alan Wallace, for a future publication - saints & Sages; cultural fusion; Buddhist civilization and the west. If you can help me, I would enjoy to hear back from you. Wishing you the best this winter solstice and the year to come. Sincerely, Carol
Posted by: carol lingham at December 19, 2003 10:14 PMIn his mail of September 17, 2003, Mr Constantinos Athanasopoulos is pointing out the fact that "JSE's theology and philosophy is not acceptable to the Byzantine and Contemporary Orthodox theology and philosophy".
This is quite true and all the more interesting : the Eight Oecumenical Synod that you are rightfully mentionning did not only create the conditions of the 1054 shism ; furthermore, it killed the esoteric Grail Christianity that had been promoted by the (Frankish) family of Sainte Odile, daughter of Eticho-Adalric, duke of Alsace since the year 666.
John Scotus Erigena was not only "condemned for his heretical views", he was also assassinated in an attempt by the Church of Rome to take control of the Irish christianity of Iona.
If I am right, the VIIIth Oecumenical Synod did not take place in 879, under the papacy of John the VIII (the allegedly she-papess Jane, victim of a calomny), but rather in 869, under the papacy of Pope Nicholas the First.
Officially, the dispute was about the legitimate theological question of the "Filioque" ; in fact, upon some decretals falsely attributed to Saint Isidore, it denied the possession of a free spirit to man who was, from then on, considered by both the Church of Rome and that of Constantinople, as merely a body and a soul.