Christianity and Islam in Spain, A.D. 756-1031 - LightNovelsOnl.com
You're reading novel online at LightNovelsOnl.com. Please use the follow button to get notifications about your favorite novels and its latest chapters so you can come back anytime and won't miss anything.
(_c._) That the application of the term _Servant_ to Christ, besides being authorised by texts from Scripture, is countenanced in two pa.s.sages from the Koran:
(_d._) That Leo III., speaking of, Felix's return to Spain, and his relapse into error, implies that it was due to his renewed contact with infidels who held similar views:
(_e._) That in a pa.s.sage, quoted by Enhueber, Elipandus is said to have lost his hold on the truth in consequence of his close intercourse with the Arabs:
(_f._) That Elipandus accused Etherius of being a false prophet, that is, for giving, as has been conjectured, a Mohammedan interpretation to the Beast in the Revelation of St John.
Something must now be said of one more doctrine, which, though it did not arise in Spain, nor perhaps much affected it, yet was originated by a Spaniard, and a disciple of Felix,[2]--Claudius, Bishop of Turin. Some have seen in this doctrine, which was an offshoot of Iconoclasm, traces of Adoptionism, a thing not unlikely in itself.[3]
Of the relations of Claudius to the Saracens we have the direct statement of one of his opponents, who said that the Jews praised him, and called him the wisest among the Christians; and that he on his side highly commended them _and the Saracens_.[4] Yet his tendency seems to have been against the Judaizing of the Church.[5]
[1] Fifty years later Alvar ("Ind. Lum.," sec. 9), accuses certain Christians of dissembling their religion under fear of persecution:--"Deum Christum non aperte coram eis (_i.e._ Saracenis) sed fugatis sermonibus proferunt, Verb.u.m Dei et Spiritum, ut illi a.s.serunt, profitentes, suasque confessiones corde, quasi Deo omnia inspiciente, servantes."
[2] Jonas of Orleans (Migne, cvi. p. 330) calls him so, and says elsewhere, "Felix resuscitur in Claudio."
[3] Neander, vi. 119.
[4] Fleury, v. 398.
[5] Neander, vi. 125.
The great Iconoclastic reform, which arose in the East, undoubtedly received its originating impulse from the Moslems. In 719 the Khalif destroyed all images in Syria. His example was followed in 730 by the Eastern Emperor, Leo the Isaurian. He is said to have been persuaded to this measure by a man named Bezer, who had been some years in captivity among the Saracens.[1] In 754 the great council of Constantinople condemned images. Unfortunately neither the great patriarchates nor the Pope were represented, and so this council never obtained-the sanction of all Christendom; and its decrees were reversed in 787 at the Council of Nicaea. In 790 appeared the Libri Carolini, in which we rejoice to find our English Alcuin helping Charles the Great to make a powerful and reasonable protest against the wors.h.i.+p of images.[2] In 794 this protest was upheld by the German Council of Frankfurt. But the Pope, and his militia,[3] the monks, made a strenuous opposition to any reform in this quarter, and the recognition of images became part and parcel of Roman Catholic Christianity.
Claudius was made bishop of Turin in 828.[4] Though placed over an Italian diocese, he soon shewed the independence, which he had imbibed in the free air of Spain, where the Mohammedan supremacy had at least the advantage of making the supremacy of the Pope impossible. Finding that the people of his diocese paid wors.h.i.+p to their images, Claudius set to work to deface, burn, and abolish, all images and crosses in his bishopric. In respect to the crosses he went further than other Iconoclasts, in which we can perhaps trace his Adoptionist training.[5]
These new views did not, as might be expected, find favour with the Catholic party, whose cause was taken up by Theodemir, abbot of Nimes, a friend of Claudius', by Jonas of Orleans, and Dungal, an Irish priest.
But, as in the case of Felix, the heresiarch was more than a match for his opponents in argument.[6]
[1] Fleury, xl. ii. 1, says he was an apostate. See Mendham, Seventh General Council, Introd., pp. xii. xiv.
[2] "Adorationem soli Deo debitam imaginibus impertire aut segnitiae est, si utc.u.mque agitur, aut insaniae, vel potius infidelitatis, si pertinaciter defenditur."--III. c. 24.
"Imagines vero, omni cultura et adoratione seclusa, utrum in basilicis propter memoriam rerum gestarum sint, nullum fidei Catholicae afferre poterunt praeiudicium, quippe c.u.m ad peragenda nostrae salutis mysteria nullum penitus officium habere noscantur."--III. c. 21.
[3] Prescott.
[4] Neander says 814, Herzog 820.
[5] Neander, v. 119. The Spanish Christians were not free from the charge of adoring the cross, as we can see from the answer of the Khalif Abdallah (888) when advised to leave his brother's body at Bobastro: shall I, he said, leave my brother's body to the mercy of those who ring bells and adore the cross. Ibn Hayyan, apud Al Makk., ii. 446.
[6] Fleury, v. 398, confesses that the case of the image-wors.h.i.+ppers rests mainly on tradition and the usage of the Church--meaning that they can draw no support from the Bible. He might have remembered Matt. xv. 7--"Ye make void the Word of G.o.d because of your tradition."
Claudius' own defence has been lost, but we gather his views from his opponents' quotation of them.
Briefly expressed, they are as follows:--
_(a.)_ Image-wors.h.i.+p is really idol-wors.h.i.+p:
_(b.)_ If images are to be adored, much more should those living beings be adored, whom the images represent. But we are not permitted to adore G.o.d's works, much less may we wors.h.i.+p the work of men:[1]
_(c.)_ The cross has no claim to be adored, because Jesus was fastened to it: else must we adore other things with which Jesus was similarly connected; virgins, for example, for Christ was nine months in a virgin's womb; mangers, a.s.ses, s.h.i.+ps, thorns, for with all these Jesus was connected. To adore the cross we have never been told, but to bear it,[2] that is to deny ourselves. Those generally are the readiest to adore it, who are least ready to bear it either spiritually or physically.[3]
Claudius also had very independent views on the question of papal supremacy.[4] Being summoned before a council, with more wisdom than Felix, he refused to attend it, knowing that his cause would be prejudged, and contented himself with calling the proposed a.s.sembly a congregation of a.s.ses. He died in 839 in secure possession of his see, and with his Iconoclastic belief unshaken.
Such were the heresies which connect themselves with Spain during the first three hundred years of Arab domination, and which seem to have been, in part at least, due to Mohammedan influence. One more there was, the Albigensian heresy, which broke out one hundred and fifty years later, and was perhaps the outcome of intercourse with the Mohammedanism of Spain.[5]
[1] Jonas of Orleans, apud Migne, vol. cvi. p. 326.
[2] Luke xiv. 27.
[3] Jonas, apud Migne, vol. cvi. p. 351.
[4] See Appendix B, pp. 161-173.
[5] So Blunt. It found followers in Leon. See Mariana, xii. 2, from Lucas of Tuy.
CHAPTER X.
SOCIAL INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIANITY.
Having considered the effects of Mohammedanism on doctrinal Christianity (there are no traces of similar effects on doctrinal Mohammedanism), it will fall within the scope of our inquiry to estimate the extent to which those influences were reciprocally felt by the two religions in their social and intellectual aspects; and how far the character of a Christian or a Mohammedan was altered by contact with a people professing a creed so like, and yet so unlike.[1] This influence we shall find more strongly manifested in the action of Christianity on Islam, than the reverse.
It is well known that Mohammed, though his opinion as to monks seems to have varied[2] from time to time, is reported to have expressly declared that he would have no monks in his religion.[3] Abubeker, his successor,--if Gibbon's translation may be trusted,--in his marching orders to the army, told them to let monks and their monasteries alone.[4] It was not long, however, before an order of itinerant monks--the faquirs--arose among the Moslems. In other parts of their dominions these became a recognised, and in some ways privileged, cla.s.s; but in Andalusia they did not receive much encouragement,[5] though they were very numerous even there. Most of them, says the Arabian historian,[6] were nothing more than beggars, able but unwilling to work. This remark, however, he tells us, must not be applied to all, "for there were among them men who, moved by sentiments of piety and devotion, left the world and its vanities, and either retired to convents to pa.s.s the remainder of their days among brethren of the same community, or putting on the darwazah, and grasping the faquir's staff, went through the country begging a scanty pittance, and moving the faithful to compa.s.sion by their wretched and revolting appearance." That Moslem monkeries did exist, especially in rather later times, we can gather from the above pa.s.sage and from another place,[7] where a convent called Zawiyatu l'Mahruk (the convent of the burnt) is mentioned. On that pa.s.sage De Gayangos[8] has an interesting note, in which he quotes from an African writer an account of a monastic establishment near Malaga.[9] The writer says: "I saw on a mountain, close to this city, a convent, which was the residence of several religious men living in community, and conversant with the principles of Sufism: they have a superior to preside over them, and one or more servants to attend to their wants. Their internal regulations are really admirable; each faquir lives separately in a cell of his own, and meets his comrades only at meals or prayers. Every morning at daybreak the servants of the community go round to each faquir, and inquire of him what provisions he wishes to have for his daily consumption.... They are served with two meals a day. Their dress consists of a coa.r.s.e woollen frock, two being allowed yearly for each man--one for winter, another for summer. Each faquir is furnished likewise with a regular allowance of sugar, soap to wash his clothes, oil for his lamp, and a small sum of money to attend the bath, all these articles being distributed to them every Friday....
Most of the faquirs are bachelors, a few only being married. These live with their wives in a separate part of the building, but are subject to the same rule, which consists in attending the five daily prayers, sleeping at the convent, and meeting together in a lofty-vaulted chamber, where they perform certain devotions.... In the morning each faquir takes his Koran and reads the first chapter, and then that of the king;[10] and when the reading is over, a Koran, previously divided into sections, is brought in for each man to read in turn, until the whole is completed. On Fridays and other-festivals these faquirs are obliged to go to the mosque in a body, preceded by their superior....
They are often visited by guests, whom they entertain for a long time, supplying them with food and other necessaries. The formalities observed with them are as follows:--If a stranger present himself at the door of the convent in the garb of a faquir, namely, with a girdle round his waist, his kneeling-mat suspended between his shoulders, his staff in his right hand, and his drinking vessel in his left, the porter of the convent comes up to him immediately, and asks what country he comes from, what convent he has resided in, or entered on the road, who was the superior of it, and other particulars, to ascertain that the visitor is not an impostor.... This convent was plentifully endowed with rents for the support of its inmates, for besides the considerable revenue in lands which was provided by its founder, a wealthy citizen of Malaga, who had been governor of the city under the Almohades, pious men are continually adding to the funds either by bequests in land or by donations in money."
The resemblance between these faquirs and Christian monks is sufficiently obvious, and need not be dilated upon: and though this particular convent was established at a later time, we cannot doubt that the influence, which produced such a modification of the very spirit of Islam, must have made itself felt much earlier. This is apparent in the a.n.a.logous case of Moslem nuns, as a pa.s.sage from an Arab writer seems to shew,[11] where it is said that the body of the Moorish king, Gehwar (1030-1043), was followed to the grave even by the damsels who had retired into solitude.
[1] Mohammedanism is even called a _heresy_ by a writer quoted by Prescott, "Ferdin. and Isab.," p. 244.
[2] Kor. v. 85--"Thou shalt find those to be most inclinable to entertain friends.h.i.+p for the true believers who say, We are Christians. This comes to pa.s.s, because there are priests and monks among them." Kor. lvii. 27--"As to the monastic state (Deus loquitur), the Christians inst.i.tuted the same (we did not prescribe it for them) only out of desire to please G.o.d, yet they observed not the same as it ought truly to be observed."
See also Kor. ix. 34--"Verily many of the priests and monks devour the substance of men in vanity, and obstruct the way of G.o.d;" and Kor. xxiii. 55.
[3] Kor. v. 89. Sale's note.
[4] So Almanzor spared the monk of Compostella. Al Makkari, ii.
209.
[5] See the interesting account, _ibid._, i. 114.
[6] Al Makkari.
[7] Al Makkari, i. 115.