Clivedurdle

A new Pope has an interesting name! I am attempting to get some clarity about an institution within Christianity, and if it is an add on, an evolution of pre-existing ideas or a core part of Christianity.

A certain thread about Theraputae is relevant here!

I am unclear that Christianity did actually bring anything new, or if the institution described in for example Umberto Eco Name of the Rose is actually a threadbare remnant of the ancient temple complexes, with libraries, schools of philosophy and most importantly, centres of healing.

mountainman

Athanasius is the first Christian hagiographer and writes c.360 CE about Saint Anthony, the first Christian desert hermit and forerunner of the massive 4th century monastic movement which may have been responsible for the manufacture of the Nag Hammadi codices.

Which institution btw?






εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

Clivedurdle

The institution of monasticism! Before Henry VIII, the wealthiest monasteries were very technologically advanced for example in iron and early steel, very powerful in terms of farming, for example wool, the source of literacy and education and health care.



But these ideas and institutions are all pre - xian! Theraputae, libraries, temple complexes, schools of philosophy! Stuff like the Antikythera Mechanism were not built by a bloke or woman in a shed, there was a huge infrastructure to produce that!

Western Monasteries were cut off from ideas with the Islamic revolution, I wonder if Eastern went navel gazing - we only have several of Archimedes works because they were reused as prayers but we can still read the stuff underneath!


(Archimedes Palimpsest)

Are monasteries an evolution of temple complexes?

mountainman

Excellent question Clivedurdle!!

Business as usual within the temple complex activities was savagely curtailed in the empire c.324 CE which is the precise time that Pachomius, the father of the monastic movement, had "a vision", and left Alexandria (and its ancient temple complexes) to live way out of town. Within a decade tens of thousands of people had followed him.

Why? Is this chronology coincidental?



εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

Clivedurdle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eilmer_of_Malmesbury

I propose there is nothing new about monasteries and monasticism, they are the pre-existing temple, library, school, hospital complexes moved to wilderness locations and with a new fangled god.

Clivedurdle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serapeum

Why does there seem to be a general assumption that huge buildings to the gods were only one purpose? Surely they all had infrastructures?

mountainman

I'd also wonder if the temples put on a Saturday afternoon BBQ for the locals since they appear to have been inclined to perhaps also slaughter their own sacrificial animals (a bit like Julian, who's nick name was "Bull burner" on account of the number of pagan sacrifices he made of bulls).

Did Julian put on a BBQ after his pagan sacrifices at the temples?

Perhaps each temple had its butcher shop?

Hides were used for a variety of purposes.


Maybe we got pagan sacrifice all wrong?


Did the monastic movement keep animals?
Did they make codices?

When did this all start?

Clivedurdle

With the stories of eating communally and Paul admonishing people for not respecting the Lord's table, I wonder if an error in thinking has occurred. Maybe agape type meals were very common and the difference the xians brought in was to exclude those who had not agreed to a membership deal. Maybe the xians were not spreading co-operative ways but were actually anti-social.

Possibly it was not only a fall in sales of the merchants selling meat to the temples that Pliny was reporting, but actually the loss of eating communally. Maybe they were rightly called atheists, they were not operating with the common wealth in mind.

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Feast_day

mountainman

Has the Pachomian code has been decyphered yet?

Any progress reports?


I wonder why Pachomius had a secret code at Nag Hammadi?









εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

Clivedurdle

I wonder if we have misunderstood food in our understanding of this era. Christianity is based on bread and wine - body and blood.

Several of the sermons and parables are about food and wine.

Modern Sikh temples, and Hari Krishna give out food freely. Regents Park Mosque will feed and house Muslims. Nearly all Orthodox churches have large eating areas for the feast days, weddings, funerals etc.

Monasteries have a wondrous tradition of rules about food, you got more if you were ill.

The Persians had the most intricate rules, including suicide if you let off wind. I wonder if there was a social class reason behind that - the more refined food one eats the less gases are produced!


Rome had the most incredible multinational food distribution system.

The Spartans took truck loads of animals into battle with them to be sacrificed to work out the will of the gods - I cannot believe they just burnt them, they must have given them to the soldiers!

The obvious change of religion, from the true gods to the one god and his son and his breath, is probably a result of economic changes and especially changes in how food was shared. The rules against voluntary associations are important here. Maybe a voluntary organisation is basically selfish as it gives power to a small group, as against all the people being citizens.

The move to monasteries, to sharing food with like minded people, feel like defensive moves one does when being attacked. Institutions are being created - institutionalisation.