Introduction
As of today, it has been well established that the practice of asceticism (defined as one’s conscious self-denial of its own animalistic urges) accounts for the integral part of Christian theological tradition. This point of view is thoroughly legitimate, since there are indeed many references in the Bible to the sheer beneficence of abstinence, as something that bring the affiliated individuals closer to God, such as the following one: “Love not the world, neither the things [that are] in the world.
If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that [is] in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world” (1 John 2: 15-16). Nevertheless, it would be quite inappropriate referring to Christian asceticism, as having been of a strictly religious nature, because there a number of reasons to think that the phenomenon in question has been predetermined by the objective laws of history. In this paper, I will explore the validity of above-stated at length.
History of Asceticism in Christianity
Even though that, as the way of life, asceticism is now being commonly associated with Christianity, it has its roots in Greco-Roman antiquity – something that can be easily illustrated, in regards to the term’s actual origins: “The word itself is rooted in the Greek word ascesis, emphasizing a disciplined lifestyle” (Poe 16). In this respect, one can well mention the ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes, who used to lead an extremely anti-social (ascetic) lifestyle, while believing that this was making him a better man.
The fact that asceticism is not something uniquely Christian can also be shown, in relation to the clearly defined elements of this lifestyle being present in the world’s other major religions, such as Buddhism, Judaism and Islam. Nevertheless, it was namely the theological framework of Christianity, within which the practice of asceticism was able to become thoroughly refined.
One of the reasons for this is that early Christianity can be well discussed in terms of a social reaction to the increasingly decadent way of the Romans, which at the time used to be considered the ‘masters of the world’. However, as time went on, they were becoming progressively deprived of those psychological qualities, the possession of which allowed their ancestors to build the Empire from scratch, with the main of them having been the sense of self-discipline.
After all, it does not make any secret that, throughout the period of the Roman Empire’s decline (3rd-5th centuries A.D.), the Rome’s non-Christian citizens have been effectively reduced to the crowd of socially irresponsible degenerates, solely preoccupied with experiencing sensual (animalistic) pleasures (Deems 563).
The newly emerged religion of Christianity, on the other hand, was promoting the idea that one’s indulgence in the ‘ways of the world’ was clearly counterproductive, as it was reducing the concerned person’s chances to be admitted to the ‘kingdom of heaven’. This, of course, created the objective prerequisites for early Christians to be considered ‘natural-born’ ascetics, whose life-aspirations were utterly inconsistent with that of the rest of Roman citizens.
Nevertheless, from the 3rd century A.D. onwards, the ascetic movement within Christianity started to become ever more distinguished, as this religion’s yet another interpretative branch. In its turn, this can be explained by the fact that, in the aftermath of having been proclaimed the Empire’s official religion by the Edict of Thessalonica (380 A.D.), Christianity began to grow increasingly ‘worldly’ – hence, causing the dissatisfaction of many faithful Christians.
As a result, many of them decided to sever just about all the links, connecting them with the society, and to become hermits. This marked the initial phase of the development of the ascetic movement within Christianity.
The movement’s conceptual premise has been provided by the Christian theologian Eusebius of Caesarea (260-339 A.D.), who in his works never ceased promoting the idea that there are two types of Christians – those who simply live in accordance with the provisions of the divine ‘law’, and those who take their commitment to God one step further.
It is not only that they remain thoroughly observant of the mentioned ‘law’ (Biblical Commandments), but these people also make a deliberate point in adopting self-denial, as their mode of existence, which in turn is supposed to win them yet additional favor with the Lord (Inowlocki 309). Essentially the same idea is being promoted in the works of another early apologue of asceticism Origen Adamantius (185 – 254 A.D.).
According to him, in order for just about any Christian to be able eventually to qualify for the title of a ‘saint’, he or she must strive to attain the so-called ‘higher virtuousness’. The latter is something that is being earned, as a result of one’s willingness to do deeds of which nothing has been mentioned in the Gospels, but the doing of which is nevertheless believed to be particularly pleasing to God. Among the affiliated activities are: martyrdom, voluntary poverty, childlessness and celibacy (Valantasis 809).
To justify such his point of view on the matter in question, Origen used to refer to the following Biblical provision: “When ye [believers] shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do” (Luke 17:10). This, of course, points out to the fact that the suggestion that asceticism is the ‘core of Christianity’ is indeed thoroughly legitimate – the reading of the Bible leaves only a few doubts, in this respect.
Nevertheless, as time went on, Christians began to come up with mutually contradicting interpretations, as to what proper asceticism should be all about. For example, some of them (Christian Gnostics) used to believe that, in order to be able to prove its loyalty to God, a person must become preoccupied with the gradual mortification of his or her body, by the mean of subjecting it to a variety of health-impending ‘treatments’, such as the consumption of polluted water.
This belief was in turn concerned with the people’s assumption that, since the ‘original sin’ took place because of the cravings of Adam and Eve’s bodies, one’s bodily flesh is necessarily ‘evil’. The adherents of what will later become known as Catholicism, on the other hand, used to point to out that a person’s physical body cannot be considered the actual source of evil, because: a) Jesus himself had such a body, b) Without having been born ‘physical’, Jesus would not be able to provide humanity with the prospect of salvation.
Therefore, according to them, one’s proper ascetic attitude should be concerned with applying a constant effort into keeping the desires of its body under control. Since the time when Christian Gnosticism was proclaimed ‘heresy’, the second outlook on the significance of asceticism became the only legitimate one.
Throughout the course of the early Middle Ages, there used to be three distinctive categories of Christian ascetics, who could be generalized as ‘teachers’, ‘pilgrims’ and ‘warriors’. The main agenda of ‘teachers’ was concerned with their commitment to popularize the ‘good news’ among people, while leading an extremely modest lifestyle. ‘Pilgrims’, on the other hand, used to be obsessed with the idea of visiting as many ‘holy places’, as possible, while experiencing constant hardships.
‘Warriors’ were also known for their commitment to the ascetic virtue of experiencing constant poverty. However, unlike the rest of the mentioned categories of Christian ascetics, they were also willing to fight the enemies of the Church in a combat.
It is specifically these ‘warriors’, who made it possible for the ascetic movement in Christianity to not only become fully legitimized in the form of monasticism, but also to begin exercising a strong influence on the geopolitical dynamics in the world – something that can be well illustrated in regards to the history of the Crusades, for example (Columba 260).
Even though that, as of today, the influence of Christianity has grown much weaker, as compared to what it happened to be the case even as recent back, as a hundred years ago, the virtues of Christian asceticism continue to appeal to many people, throughout the world.
Story of Adam and Eve
The fact that asceticism is indeed embedded into the essence of Christianity, as a monotheistic religion, can be confirmed, in relation to the earlier mentioned story of Adam and Eva in the Garden of Eden. After all, in the discursive sense of this word, this story is concerned with promoting the necessity of the ascetic practice of fasting.
The following quotation from the Bible is perfectly illustrative, in this respect: “LORD God commanded the man [Adam], saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:16-17). Even though God clearly demanded from Adam not to eat of the ‘tree of knowledge’, he nevertheless provided him with much liberty to decide on whether to obey God’s wish, in this respect, or not.
Adam, however, failed rather miserably, while resisting the temptation to try the ‘forbidden fruit’. This story, of course, can be interpreted as such that implies that it is crucially important for just about every Christian to be able not to become a slave its own animalistic (bodily) urges.
It is needless to mention, that this in turn justifies the validity of the idea that the practice of asceticism and the religion of Christianity are not merely interconnected – they effectively derive out of each other. Apparently, God deliberately intended to subject people to different ‘temptations of the flesh’, as they go through life – hence, allowing their religious spirit to grow increasingly purified.
Asceticism let human become true Christian, inspire their spiritual mind, bring them closer to the God
As it was mentioned in the Introduction, there are indeed only a few doubts, as to the full compliance of asceticism with not only Christianity, but with many other world’s religions, as well. In its turn, this can be seen as the proof that the practice in question reflects people’s innate longing to become elevated above their physiological nature of ‘hairless apes’ – regardless of what happened the particulars of the concerned individuals’ formal affiliation with any of these religions.
The actual significance of this suggestion can be revealed, once we take into consideration what accounts for the social function of just about any religion – namely, encouraging people to act in the socially appropriate manner, which in turn contributes to the measure of the affiliated society’s ‘evolutionary fitness’.
This explains why there is much similarity between the main commandments of the world’s major religions: ‘do not kill’, ‘do not steal’, ‘do not covet thy neighbor’s wife’, etc. Apparently, it is only when most of the society’s members act in the way consistent with the mentioned commandments, that the society in question is able to maintain its structural stability, which in turn increases the extent of its competitiveness.
Having been exposed as the integral part of Christianity, Christian asceticism cannot be discussed outside of how it contributes to the overall appeal of this religion. After all, while presented with the stories about how Christian ascetics used to address life-challenges; many Christians do in fact grow much stronger in their faith.
Therefore, just as it is being the case with the definition of a religion, one’s religious asceticism can be defined as in terms of ‘behavioral software’, deployed by the forces of evolution, in order to ensure that the representatives of Homo Sapiens species remain on the path of progress.
This explains the following paradox – if asceticism is indeed beneficial to the society’s well-being, then how come one of the main indication of a particular individual being ascetic, has traditionally been considered his or her commitment to the ‘virtue’ of celibacy? After all, a childless person can be hardly considered the society’s valuable member.
The answer to this question can be formulated as follows: even though ascetically-minded individuals do often refuse to concern themselves with spreading their ‘genetic seeds’, these people’s self-adopted ascetic posture nevertheless helps the rest to remain fully observant of the provisions of whatever happened to be the dominant code of behavioral ethics in the concerned society.
As Bronkhorst noted: “The ascetic instinct may indeed have slightly reduced the survival chances of its bearers, but this slight reduction was more than offset by the increased survival chances connected to the use of language” (413).
This partially explains why, as we are well aware from history, it is namely when a particular society happened to be in the state of crisis, that the ideas of asceticism become especially popular among people. Thus, one can only agree with the suggestion that asceticism indeed represents the pathway towards God, not on the strictly religious but also in the social sense of this word.
Conclusion
I believe that the provided insights into the history of asceticism in Christianity, and the deployed line of argumentation, as to why the concerned practice should be considered beneficial to the society’s well-being, are fully consistent with the paper’s initial thesis.
Apparently, it is indeed thoroughly appropriate to suggest that, in order to be considered a true Christian, one must be emotionally comfortable with the notion of asceticism; as such that contains clues to the discursive significance of Christianity – probably the world’s most ascetic religion.
Works Cited
Bronkhorst, J. “Asceticism, Religion, and Biological Evolution.” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 13.4 (2001): 374-418. Print.
Columba, S. “The Origins and Fate of Monasticism.” Spiritus: A Journal of Christian Spirituality 10.2 (2010): 257-264. Print.
Deems, M. “The Place of Asceticism in the Stabilization of the Church.” The Journal of Religion 10.4 (1930): 563-577. Print.
Inowlocki, S. “Eusebius of Caesarea’s ‘Interpretatio Christiana’ of Philo’s De Vita Contemplativa.” The Harvard Theological Review 97.3 (2004): 305-328. Print.
Poe, G. “Asceticism.” Encyclopedia of Religious and Spiritual Development. Eds. Elizabeth Dowling and George Scarlett. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2006. 16-17. Print.
The Holy Bible: King James Version. Iowa Falls, IA: World Bible Publishers, 2001. Print.
Valantasis, R. “Constructions of Power in Asceticism.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 63.4 (1995): 775-821. Print.