sucram@cat.de (Marcus Halbe) (03/11/91)
Hi! We're having a controversial discussion here in Germany whether there has been the concept of cyclic reincarnation of the soul through several physical bodies at sometime in christianity. Some here state that this was so and that at some time during the 8th or 9th century, during some convent, this was abolished. I would be grateful for information. Greetings, Marcus --- Marcus Halbe (sucram@cat.de) C.A.T. Kommunikations-System, Frankfurt, Germany
cms@gatech.edu (03/19/91)
In article <Mar.11.02.52.02.1991.5528@athos.rutgers.edu>, sucram@cat.de (Marcus Halbe) writes: > Hi! > > We're having a controversial discussion here in Germany whether > there has been the concept of cyclic reincarnation of the soul > through several physical bodies at sometime in christianity. > > Some here state that this was so and that at some time during > the 8th or 9th century, during some convent, this was abolished. > > I would be grateful for information. I know of at least one professor at my university who sincerely believes in reincarnation today; he is a self-professed Christian. I had a conversation with him about this once, and he said that early Christianity had a strong belief in reincarnation and he has simply gone back to the primitive church. I seem to recall that his theory is based on some kind of gnosticism but I'm not sure. I think he mentioned that the passage in the NT (Corinthians, I think) in which Paul references "baptizing on behalf of the dead" but I'm not sure what that has to do with reincarnation. For my part, reincarnation seems illogical on its own merits. After all, once there were millions of people on earth; now there are billions. Where did all those extra souls come from? > Greetings, > Marcus -- Sincerely, Cindy Smith _///_ // SPAWN OF A JEWISH _///_ // _///_ // <`)= _<< CARPENTER _///_ //<`)= _<< <`)= _<< _///_ // \\\ \\ \\ _\\\_ <`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\ <`)= _<< >IXOYE=('> \\\ \\ \\\ \\_///_ // // /// _///_ // _///_ // emory!dragon!cms <`)= _<< _///_ // <`)= _<< <`)= _<< \\\ \\<`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\ GO AGAINST THE FLOW! \\\ \\ A Real Live Catholic in Georgia Although not a Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's court, I am: A Real Live Southern Catholic in the Anglican Communion.
haskell@acsu.buffalo.edu (william w haskell) (03/20/91)
>In article <Mar.11.02.52.02.1991.5528@athos.rutgers.edu>, sucram@cat.de (Marcus Halbe) writes: >> Hi! >> >> We're having a controversial discussion here in Germany whether >> there has been the concept of cyclic reincarnation of the soul >> through several physical bodies at sometime in christianity. >> >> Some here state that this was so and that at some time during >> the 8th or 9th century, during some convent, this was abolished. >> >> I would be grateful for information. > There was a sect of the Catholic Church at one time around the fourth or fifth century A.D. that believed in reincarnation. This sect was primamrily in France, where the Pope of the Catholic Church was located at that time. ( I may have my timetable off a bit on this, but otherwise the information is correct. ) At the time when the Catholic Church called together a council to amass the New Testament from all the books which had been written since the birth of Christ, this sect was not invited. The rest of the Catholic Church in Europe did not accept the concept of reincarnation. There had been some books that had been written that the French Sect of the Catholic Church would likely have tried to include in the New Testament that alluded to things that the Church as a whole did not want taught. Two of these are the book of Enoch and the Gospel of St. Thomas, but there are many more. Because of the absence of the Pope from this convention, the New Testament was not cannonized until later on. It would be interesting to see what the Bible would have looked like if the Sect from France had been there, eh? ...wildy
mls@sfsup.att.com (Mike Siemon) (03/20/91)
In article <Mar.18.23.26.08.1991.28622@athos.rutgers.edu>, emory!dragon!cms@gatech.edu writes: > In article <Mar.11.02.52.02.1991.5528@athos.rutgers.edu>, sucram@cat.de (Marcus Halbe) writes: > > We're having a controversial discussion here in Germany whether > > there has been the concept of cyclic reincarnation of the soul > > through several physical bodies at sometime in christianity. > I know of at least one professor at my university who sincerely > believes in reincarnation today; he is a self-professed Christian. I > had a conversation with him about this once, and he said that early > Christianity had a strong belief in reincarnation and he has simply > gone back to the primitive church. I seem to recall that his theory > is based on some kind of gnosticism but I'm not sure. I think he As far as I know, there is NO evidence of a belief in reincarination by any early Christian group, gnostic or otherwise. People who make this claim seem to me to be confusing it with a rather different kind of belief about souls that *was* moderately common (especially in the gnosticizing groups, but also in heavily neo-platonic circles within orthodoxy -- Origen is a principle figure often cited in this context.) Some idea of reincarnation was known to the Greeks, and the Pythagorean school seems to have held this as a doctrine (called "metempsychosis" -- "transfer of souls"). There was also a rather DIFFERENT notion, stemming from Platonic philosophy (and not inconceivably *influenced* by Pytha- goreanism) that each soul is pre-existent from eternity and becomes incarnate in a human being. Neo-platonism tended to emphasize this as a *separation* between the material and spiritual, a severe tribulation for the soul. This dualistic aspect was made much of, with lots of mythical machinery, by the gnostics, and despite some sympathy with the doctrine by some early fathers, pre-existence of souls was eventually anathematized as heterodox (mostly, because of its dualism and because of its suggestion that souls were coeternal with God and thus were not created -- contradicting the credal statements about Creation.) Literally ALL of the evidence that I have seen cited by advocates of reincarnation is a MISREADING of the neo-platonic evidence as if it were neo-pythagorean. This shows either ignorance of the ideas of the time, or a wilful "forcing" of the data to "fit" their own idee fixe. -- Michael L. Siemon "O stand, stand at the window, m.siemon@ATT.COM As the tears scald and start; ...!att!attunix!mls You shall love your crooked neighbor standard disclaimer With your crooked heart."
conan@wish-bone.berkeley.edu (David Cruz-Uribe) (03/22/91)
In article <Mar.20.03.39.49.1991.9276@athos.rutgers.edu> haskell@acsu.buffalo.edu (william w haskell) writes: > There was a sect of the Catholic Church at one time around the fourth >or fifth century A.D. that believed in reincarnation. This sect was primamrily >in France, where the Pope of the Catholic Church was located at that time. >( I may have my timetable off a bit on this, but otherwise the information >is correct. ) At the time when the Catholic Church called together a council >to amass the New Testament from all the books which had been written since the >birth of Christ, this sect was not invited. The rest of the Catholic Church in >Europe did not accept the concept of reincarnation. There had been some books >that had been written that the French Sect of the Catholic Church would likely >have tried to include in the New Testament that alluded to things that the >Church as a whole did not want taught. You seem to have a lot of things off. The only time the papacy was in France was during the "Babylonian Captivity" of the Avignon Papacy in the 14th century, about 1000 years after the canon of the New Testament was set. Further, though my knowledge is far from complete, I know of no sects, in either the medieval or the patristic period, that believed in reincarnation. I do recall, however, that Shirley Maclaine advanced this (or a similar theory) in one of her books. I don't think she is a reliable source on this subject. Can anyone add anything further on this? Yours in Christ, David Cruz-Uribe, SFO [There were certainly heretics in France, some of whom used apocryphal books, e.g. the Priscillianists. However this account does seem garbled. Certainly decisions such as the canon were made over considerable periods of time with lots of discussion. There had been lists of books of various kinds for centuries before the "final" decision. The presence or absence of one person at one meeting is unlikely to have had much effect. --clh]
mls@sfsup.att.com (Mike Siemon) (03/22/91)
Someone writes: > There was a sect of the Catholic Church at one time around the fourth > or fifth century A.D. that believed in reincarnation. This sect was > primamrily in France, where the Pope of the Catholic Church was located at > that time. I'm going to sound obnoxious as hell, but NO ONE who could write something so out of contact with historical reality has any business pretending to offer historical information. > ( I may have my timetable off a bit on this, The papacy was in Avignon (and moved there under a French pope somewhat beholden to the French crown, but although this is now French territory, it was NOT then under French rule) in the 14th century. You are not only a thousand years wrong, but could not possibly know anything about the 4th or 5th centuries (or the medieval church) and write such a thing. There is far too much pure invention running around in garbled form as "history" -- just because you've heard something or read something does NOT mean it makes sense. I'm sure the person I quoted was trying honestly to convey something interesting he'd come across -- but my advice is to *seriously* doubt all such bits of "historical lore" you hear (even from primary and secondary school "history" teachers, or non-historians at higher levels) UNLESS you yourself have are pretty widely-read in the period at issue, or have SOME good reason to trust the HISTORICAL creden- tials of the source. (One may trust people firmly on other grounds with- out necessarily trusting them as historians!) -- Michael L. Siemon "O stand, stand at the window, m.siemon@ATT.COM As the tears scald and start; ...!att!attunix!mls You shall love your crooked neighbor standard disclaimer With your crooked heart."
ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) (03/27/91)
In article <Mar.20.03.44.15.1991.9308@athos.rutgers.edu>, mls@sfsup.att.com (Mike Siemon) writes: > As far as I know, there is NO evidence of a belief in reincarnation > by any early Christian group, gnostic or otherwise. People who make > this claim seem to me to be confusing it with a rather different kind > of belief about souls that *was* moderately common (especially in the > gnosticizing groups, but also in heavily neo-platonic circles within > orthodoxy -- Origen is a principal figure often cited in this context.) Not to contradict a word of this, but I'd like to quote a few things from Reincarnation Mark C. Albrecht InterVarsity Press, 1982 ISBN 0-87784-378-3 The US price when I bought it was about US$6. Chapter 4 is about "Reincarnation and the Early Church". p44 (emphasis mine): There was no such action [of anathematizing the doctrine of reincarnation] at any church council in the entire first millenium: the subject was not even broached at the ecumenical councils. The only time a similar problem came up was in reference to the third-century theologian Origen, whose speculations concerning the pre-existence of the soul were anathematized at the Council of Constantinople in 553. However, Origen SPECIFICALLY DENIED REINCARNATION in his later writings. p46 The greatest debate on the subject of reincarnation in the early church has raged around Origen (185--254). Head and Cranston state categorically "That Origen taught the pre-existence of the soul in past world orders of this earth and its reincarnation in future worlds is beyond question." One of the great thinkers of early Christianity, Origen won by his speculative brilliance both admirers and antagonists within the church. Strongly influenced by Greek philosophy, Origen (at least in his earlier works) did teach the doctrine of pre-existence of the soul, that is, that humans were formerly angelic creatures whose good or bad deeds in the heavens resulted in a favourable or not-so-favourable birth on earth. His writings on pre-existence, however, specifically denied transmigration after the initial incarnation of the soul. Even many Christian scholars are unsure as to whether or not Origen held to reincarnation, but it would seem that they have simply not read Origen thoroughly on this subject. In his commentary on Matthew, he directly considers this under the title "Relation of John the Baptist to Elijah---the Theory of Transmigration Considered": In this place, it does not appear to me that by Elijah the soul is spoken of, lest I should fall into the dogma of transmigration, which is foreign to the Church of God and not handed down by the Apostles, nor anywhere set forth in the Scriptures. For observe, [Matthew] did not say, in the "soul" of Elijah, in which case the doctrine of transmigration might have some ground, but "in the spirit and power of Elijah". In another place, he says Let others who are strangers to the doctrine of the Church assume that souls pass from the bodies of men into the bodies of dogs. We do not find this at all in the Divine Scriptures. His commentary on Matthew was written toward the end of his life (about 247), when he was over sixty years of age, and it most likely records his final opinions on the subject. His comments on John the Baptist and Elijah are followed by a length refutation of the doctrine of transmigration. I (R.A.O'K) have not yet got my hands on a copy of this commentary. Some other quotations from that book: p47: Irenaeus devoted the entirety of chapter 33 of "Against Heresies" to transmigration; his chapter title sets the tone: "Absurdity of the Doctrine of Transmigration of Souls". ... Tertullian ..., writing in his "Apology", traces the doctrine of reincarnation to Pythagoras and opines that "the doctrine of transmigration is a falsehood which is not only shameful, but hazardous. It is indeed manifest that dead men are formed from living ones; but it does not follow from that, that living men are formed from dead ones." p48: Even Augustine, despite the fact that he was a Manichaean Gnostic for nine years before his conversion, and was well versed in Platonic thought, only mentions reincarnation in passing. In his letter to Optatus, he writes "for it is impossible that you should hold to the opinion that it is for deeds in a former life that souls are confined in earthly and mortal bodies." Someone mentioned the book of Enoch in connection with this. I've read the book of Enoch, but I must have missed the reference. (When I listen to Shostakovitch's "The King of the Stars" it reminds me of 1 Enoch as much as it does of Revelation.) Anyone know which verses? -- Seen from an MVS perspective, UNIX and MS-DOS are hard to tell apart.
sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Mark Sandrock) (03/27/91)
emory!dragon!cms@gatech.edu writes: >... For my part, reincarnation >seems illogical on its own merits. After all, once there were >millions of people on earth; now there are billions. Where did all >those extra souls come from? This objection to reincarnation is easily explained once one realizes that the number of human souls incarnated upon the earth at any time is but a small part of the overall number of human souls existing in the "world". For instance, the regions we know of as "hell", and as "purgatory" contain vast numbers of human souls. According to God's Will, souls from the darker regions of the "beyond" should not be able to incarnate on the earth (where they only cause harm), but for a long time now mankind has not lived according to God's Will, hence the terrible judgment described in the Revelation. Regards, Mark Sandrock -- BITNET: sandrock@uiucscs Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Internet: sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu Chemical Sciences Computing Services Voice: 217-244-0561 505 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801