The Dividing of Christendom

The Dividing of Christendom.  By Christopher Dawson, Sheed and Ward, 1965.

 

The respected historian Christopher Dawson wrote extensively on all sorts of subjects connected to the Christianity, and it is not surprising that one of his most famous books covers the fracturing of Christian Europe from the rise of Protestantism up through the growing trends of nineteenth-century secularism.  The Dividing of Christendom.  This book was written when Dawson served as the Charles Chauncey Stillman Chair of Roman Catholic Theological Studies at the Divinity School of Harvard University, the first Catholic studies chair at a United States Protestant-founded theological seminary.  

 

Douglas Horton, the dean of the school and the man who picked Dawson for the position, wrote in his introduction to this volume that, “This is a book for all, but I hope that Protestants will not fail to read it– and I cannot think they will, when I remember the reception they have accorded the author’s previous writings.  This cannot but be of special interest to them, since it tells their story as a wise and honest Catholic understands it and so initiates dialogue at the highest level.” (viii).

 

The historiography of the schisms that split Christian Europe, as well as the impact of the theological divisions between different branches of Christianity, is fascinating.  There have been many studies of the time period, many of which are sympathetic to the Protestants and the anti-Christian revolutionary forces, and another branch that strongly defends the Catholic position.  Dawson is clearly in the pro-Catholic camp, but in contrast to more bellicose defenders of the faith such as Hilaire Belloc, Dawson strives to maintain a moderate and balanced tone throughout the his book.  While his title talks of division, his recurring theme is one of reconciliation amongst all aspects of Christianity, and the healing of long-held historical grudges and rifts brought about by false impressions and distorted histories.  Early in his book, Dawson writes:

 

“Of all divisions between Christians, that between Catholics and Protestants is the deepest and the most pregnant in its historical consequences.  It is so deep that we cannot see any solution to it in the present period and under existing historical circumstances.  But at least it is possible for us to take the first step by attempting to overcome the enormous gap in mutual understanding which has hitherto rendered any intellectual contact or collaboration possible.  From this point of view the problem is not to be found so much in the sphere of theology, strictly speaking, as in that of culture and historical tradition.  For the changes that followed the Reformation are not only the work of the Churches and the theologians.  They are also the work of the statesmen and the soldiers.  The Catholic and Protestant worlds have been divided from one another by centuries of war and power politics, and the result has been that they no longer share a common social experience.” (3).

 

Dawson covers several critical eras of schism and change, such as the continental development of Protestantism, the English break with Rome, the Catholic Counter-Reformation, American Wesleyanism, “Enlightenment” thought, and the French Revolution.  Since many of these time periods overlap, the narrative at times jumps a bit chronologically, but Dawson’s writing is always clear and detailed.  When reading this book, it may be helpful to have at least a basic knowledge of these time periods, but it is not necessary to be extensively educated in the theological and historical details of the time period.  Similarly, there are many more extensive histories of the time period, but there are not many scholars with the prose skills that Dawson possesses.

 

Interestingly, Dawson largely writes his book as a history without villains.  There are a few mentions here and there of people who did not behave as they should have.  Dawson shows some unmistakable disappointment at the fact several ecclesiastical figures and positions had become largely secularized.  There are a few figures that are targeted for particular criticism.  When discussing the growth of Lutheranism, Dawson writes, “It must be admitted that viewed externally the German Reformation was above all the work of the princes, and a more worthless collection of individuals has never controlled the fate of mankind.” (74).  This “worthless collection” is painted a conglomerate of petty, power-obsessed rulers with only a minimal interest in anything God-related.  A similar expression of disapproval can be found in his assessment of the aristocrats who plundered the resources of the Catholic Church in England when Henry VIII broke with Rome.

 

In his introduction, Douglas Horton writes that “we can thank Christopher Dawson not only for these words but for innumerable others which will help to heal the division of Christendom.” (viii).  Indeed, there is a ecumenical aspect to this work that most other histories, written with a Protestant, Catholic, or even an anti-religious perspective, totally lack.  While Dawson may have avoided writing a book with villains, he has indeed managed to write a book with heroes, namely those individuals from all walks of life who strove to liven in a decent, virtuous, and Christian manner, namely the many clergymen and anonymous laymen whose efforts have often gone overlooked amongst the machinations of power-hungry monarchs and nobles.

 

The purpose of this book is to trace the roots of the political and ideological forces that split Europe along lines based in culture and temporal power, as well as to gain a better understanding as to why secularism gained traction in European culture.  Many other Catholic writers use argument and strong rhetoric when attempting to win over opponents by proving them wrong, or at least misguided.  There is much to be said for such an approach.  Dawson, in contrast, intends to win over his readers by calling for conciliation through education and understanding, not capitulation through abandonment of principles, or even the abandonment of all religion altogether.  Too often, contemporary pundits call for people to come together through airy declarations of human unity and shallow desires to prevent conflict by simply destroying religion and anything else that might divide people.  This last perspective is, quite simply, creating a desert and calling it peace.  Dawson’s path to unity is through something richer and more fertile: the use of history to understand why peoples were brought apart in the first place.

 

The last words should go to Dawson, who states his belief that true peace can only come to Europe through better education into the forces that led to the wars and corrosive ideologies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.  It seems that knowledge of true Christian history and Christianity are fairly scarce nowadays, and false knowledge has a stronger impact on cultural and political forces than the truth.  Dawson writes:

 

“Yet as an historian I am convinced that the main sources of Christian division and the chief obstacle to Christian unity have been and are cultural rather than theological.  Consequently, I believe that it is only by combining the study of the history of Christian culture with the study of theology that we can understand the nature and extent of the problem with which we have to deal.” (17).

 

 

–Chris Chan