Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by davehershey
Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 Ad by Peter Brown
4.0
Way back when I was in college, and first learning about the history of the Christian church, there was a common refrain I heard: Constantine converted to Christianity, gave the Church privileges and the Church took over. I've read and heard the same thing over the years since. Constantine and his conversion is a sort of bogeyman for all sorts of people, especially those who desire a simplistic understanding of history that confirms their own suspicions (or moral superiority?).
For example, because Constantine endorsed the Trinity, it became doctrine. Except it didn't. In the years after Nicea, the Arians were winning. Constantine's successors (some of them) even favored Arians. The barbarians who conquered the western empire were Arians (and for the record, lest anyone accuse me of hypocrisy, I recognize the barbarians were not as barbaric as we might think and that story too is more complex).
In this book, Peter Brown tells a complex story. The common story of wealth is that once Constantine converted, the churches became rich and privileged. Brown shows that for whatever privilege they got, riches did not immediately follow. It was a much slower process. Further, it was fraught with conflict. Many Christians would have argued that the only thing to do with wealth was to renounce it! How did the church handle its growing wealth? In telling this story, we also read the story of a transition from Late Antiquity into the Early Medieval era.
This is a thorough book. There is so much here. Its not the sort of book for people new to history; you probably want an elementary grasp of the era. The benefit here is that Brown shows that the "western empire" was not monolithic. Things were different, and how wealth was handled by Christians, was different from Rome to Gaul to Carthage. We take for granted that Augustine's theology, and view of wealth, triumphed. But in the background (or even foreground) of his battle with Pelagius was a battle over how to handle wealth.
Augustine's view won out. Brown shows that there was little concern with where the wealth came from. The question for the Christian was how to use the wealth. This echoes down to today as Christians are called to give generously. Until recently, there was not much concern in the Church with where your wealth came from (except for extreme cases). It'd be interesting to read a book, a sort of sequel, for when Christians began to show more concern for how one gets wealth. You don't have to be a Marxist to wonder about human trafficking in the global supply trade. The growing concern for fair trade and fair pay for workers might reveal a shift away from what took route after Augustine.
The other thing sticking in my mind was how the Roman mindset influenced the church. In Roman times not all poor were equal. There were the deserving poor, the people who were citizens of the city. We might call them something similar to middle class today. These were the people who received handouts from the government in Rome. Then there were the lower poor, the ones who might be kicked out of the city of Rome when things got tough. I did not realize there was such a division before, but it does strike me how this plays into how we read ancient sources. Find a text from 200-300 AD that speaks of helping the poor. Who were these poor? We can't take for granted we know exactly who they were speaking of.
Overall, this is a pretty great book for people into history and a Christian worldview.
For example, because Constantine endorsed the Trinity, it became doctrine. Except it didn't. In the years after Nicea, the Arians were winning. Constantine's successors (some of them) even favored Arians. The barbarians who conquered the western empire were Arians (and for the record, lest anyone accuse me of hypocrisy, I recognize the barbarians were not as barbaric as we might think and that story too is more complex).
In this book, Peter Brown tells a complex story. The common story of wealth is that once Constantine converted, the churches became rich and privileged. Brown shows that for whatever privilege they got, riches did not immediately follow. It was a much slower process. Further, it was fraught with conflict. Many Christians would have argued that the only thing to do with wealth was to renounce it! How did the church handle its growing wealth? In telling this story, we also read the story of a transition from Late Antiquity into the Early Medieval era.
This is a thorough book. There is so much here. Its not the sort of book for people new to history; you probably want an elementary grasp of the era. The benefit here is that Brown shows that the "western empire" was not monolithic. Things were different, and how wealth was handled by Christians, was different from Rome to Gaul to Carthage. We take for granted that Augustine's theology, and view of wealth, triumphed. But in the background (or even foreground) of his battle with Pelagius was a battle over how to handle wealth.
Augustine's view won out. Brown shows that there was little concern with where the wealth came from. The question for the Christian was how to use the wealth. This echoes down to today as Christians are called to give generously. Until recently, there was not much concern in the Church with where your wealth came from (except for extreme cases). It'd be interesting to read a book, a sort of sequel, for when Christians began to show more concern for how one gets wealth. You don't have to be a Marxist to wonder about human trafficking in the global supply trade. The growing concern for fair trade and fair pay for workers might reveal a shift away from what took route after Augustine.
The other thing sticking in my mind was how the Roman mindset influenced the church. In Roman times not all poor were equal. There were the deserving poor, the people who were citizens of the city. We might call them something similar to middle class today. These were the people who received handouts from the government in Rome. Then there were the lower poor, the ones who might be kicked out of the city of Rome when things got tough. I did not realize there was such a division before, but it does strike me how this plays into how we read ancient sources. Find a text from 200-300 AD that speaks of helping the poor. Who were these poor? We can't take for granted we know exactly who they were speaking of.
Overall, this is a pretty great book for people into history and a Christian worldview.