Brown,
Peter. The Rise of Western Christendom, 2nd Edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008.
In an extensive revision to his 1996 work, Peter Brown attempts a
synthesis of the growth of Christianity in the Mediterranean world, and the
radical changes it underwent over the course of almost a century. Rather than limit his work to a discussion of
Western Europe, Brown examines the spread of Christianity from the British
Isles to China. The breadth of the coverage
is surprising, as are the reasons and motives Brown attributes as explanations
for changes in theology.
The strength of Brown’s work is the presentation of Christianity
as an organic, changing, and, sometimes, extremely local religion that served the
distinct needs and mindsets of local inhabitants. He does this by moving the focus of the
discussion away from the province of the papal hierarchy in Rome to the
dispersed localities of individual practitioners. These local practices are labeled micro-Christendoms,
and included Ireland’s unique practices, the development of a unique Armenian
monophysite doctrine, and the theology of the Axumite Church. In addition to these examples of Christian
diversity, Brown pays special attention to the devolution of Christian
religious practice from a formal Church supervised doctrine to a kind of folk
Christianity brought on by the withdrawal of clergy and “Romanized” elites from
beyond the Danube at the retraction of the Roman Empire.
Although
Popes play a diminished role on Brown’s estimation, he still argues that the
heroes of Christian theology such as Augustine, Bede, Benedict, and Columbanus
provided important theological grounds for Christianity’ growth and evolution
in late antiquity and early medieval Europe.
The self-conscious diversity thus presented provides a refreshing break
from the idea of Christianity dominated by individual great thinkers and a
rigid papal bureaucracy. The depiction
of a highly individualized and variegated Christianity also provides a useful
counter to the idea of a monolithic Church that ruthlessly stamped out heresy
and competing ideologies until the advent of the Reformation.
However,
there are some troubling issues to contend with in Brown’s narrative. Early on, he argues that “barbarian”
influences on the Roman Empire were not of a destructive nature because peoples
on both sides of the frontier shared common culture with barbarians striving to
become Romanized, and Romans adopting some cultural and behavioral aspects of nomadic
peoples. Roman military weakness is
blamed on civil wars, with little attention given to Arther Ferrill’s
counter-argument that the settling of barbarian peoples in enclaves within the
boundaries of the Empire under their own laws and rules led to a lessening of
discipline in the Roman legions, and a resulting gradual decline in their
martial effectiveness. Similarly, when
discussing the spread of Christianity among Scandinavian peoples, Brown ignores
the resistance of Scandinavian noble women to the new religion. In contrast, James
Reston, Jr., argued that they believed that they would lose their rights as
rulers and independent political figures as soon as they adopted Christianity
or it became dominant in their locales.
While
Brown makes a persuasive argument that deserves additional attention, his
inability or refusal to deal with these important issues weakened its
affect. Rather than ignoring or brushing
these counter-arguments aside, they should be addressed head-on to more clearly
illustrate why they do not matter to his thesis, or how other evidence
contradicts them. Barbarian peoples did
Romanize, and Romans became more like their neighbors, but Brown ignores the
potential effects on security and stability presented by contact between Romans
and Germans. His refusal to address this
issue calls his thesis that the change in the European economy was a retraction
rather than a fall of Empire into question, and with it, much of his
understanding of the spread of Christianity in Europe.
No comments:
Post a Comment