In order to view Work Cited or either Images:
Please just enter- Work Cited, Dunhuang Caves or Nestorian Stele in the search bar 
Conclusion
It is difficult to pin point the exact reasons why the Assyrian Church did not manage to set up a lasting diocese in China in the 7th century. Whether it had to do with the syncretic nature of the Nestorian sect, or of the three formal religions already co-existing in China at the time is hard to say. The turnover from the T’ang dynasty definitely affected the young diocese, and the eventual Muslim conquest seemed too much to survive. In the end the most interesting aspect of the Nestorian Church in China is not why it didn’t survive. Looking back upon the Stele and Dunhuang documents we see evidence of how a small branch of a foreign religion interacted with three of China’s most long lasting and prominent religions. It, in the end did not last, but by looking at the use of language, terms and imagery we see in the Chinese Nestorian texts we can glimpse an always pervasive and syncretic nature that we can also note along the Silk Road and its history. Faced with the struggle of assimilation, language and foreign lifestyles this is a perfect example of the how the Silk Road dealt with its constant foreign and distinct cliental.
The Assyrian Church Today
The Syrian or Assyrian Church existed at least 400 years before the Nestorian Schism. During the times where Christians were being persecuted abroad, including Rome, there remained a sect of Christianity that resided in Persia. In 424, after the Council of Patriarch Mar Dadeesho the Persian Church declared independence from the Roman Empire (Aprem 29). Not long after the Nestorian Schism ensued and the Nestorius and his followers were forced to leave Antioch. It was at this point in time we see the amalgamation of the two Christian sects as “the Assyrians became known as Nestorians, because of their hospitality and Christian service which they rendered to the Christian refugees to Persia who were condemned as heretics and banished from the Roman Empire” (Emhardt 49). The Assyrians, although they took no part in the schism, sided with Nestorius and his dualist theology.
Eventually the Nestorians began to separate themselves from their Antioch roots. It was during the Formula of Reunion in 433, as earlier mentioned, that John of Antioch, in hopes of a peaceful resolve, agreed to use the title Theotokos and lost much of his support. In 489 the school of Edessa was closed and “by 498, at the Council of Seleucia, the Nestorians severed forever their ties with the patriarchate of Antioch” ( Jones 6480). After the closure of the school and the move into Persia the Nestorians enjoyed the protection of their new home and eventually became fully affiliated with, and known as, the Persian church.
Since this time the Assyrian Church has spread throughout the world. It has dioceses in Australia, New Zealand, Persia, Canada, America and elsewhere. Although, originally viewed as a ‘heretical sect’ the Assyrian Church today has made efforts to work together with the Catholic Church, even with their distinct ideologies. They continue to support the idea of Mary as Mother of Christ, as shown in a recent Appendice to the Chaldean Catholic Church: “Therefore, we call upon all of our sons and daughters…under the patronage of the Virgin Mary, Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ…” (Aprem 243).
Where did they go?
After enjoying the protection of T’ai Tsung, his reign eventually came to an end. Nestorianism continued to survive in China, although it endured much hardship. In 841 leadership fell to Wu Tsang, a Taoist with little patience for Buddhism. In 845, after taking control he released a bolt stating, “Let the Buddhist monasteries be destroyed throughout the empire, and let the monks and nuns all return to the ways of common life” (Legge 49). This was a great hardship for the Buddhists and Nestorians alike. Land and money was confiscated and the Nestorians lost the grace of the Empire. Even though the edict was reversed not long afterwards, due to a change in Monarchy, the Nestorians never fully recovered; however, they did sustain themselves.
Nestorianism continued to exist in China and there are intermittent references to it throughout the history books. Marco Polo writes that he came across some Nestorians throughout his travels, but they were few and far between. Eventually the “Muslim conquest on the Nestorian church in countries lying between Persia and China [resulted in] the early blossoms of Christianity d[ying]” (Jones 6480). However, what seems most confusing is why Christianity was able to enter back into China at a later date, in a different form and survive.
In the end many have blamed the flexible, syncretic nature of the Nestorian Christians in China with their downfall. James Legge suggests that one of reasons behind the disappearance of Nestorianism is that “so far as we can judge…the Nestorian work in China was directed more to propitiate and conciliate the emperors …than to enlighten and convert the people” (Legge 53). If this is true, than the Nestorians attempt to satiate their host country resulted in them failing in their duties as missionaries.
David Bundy points out that, “the active cooperation with Buddhism and Manichaesim appear to have been closer than tolerance or mere politeness would have required” (Bundy 20). This tame or apologetic attitude, of the Nestorian missionaries is hard to guess at. It seems fair to argue that the Nestorians in China were more interested in finding a foothold in their new surroundings, rather than expanding and conquering. In their quest to move into new lands the Nestorians failed to set up a solid and accessible home base. While the Nestorian missionaries stationed themselves in China, they were still considered part of the Mesopotamian church. The distance between the two dioceses, however, did not aid in communication and the young Chinese Nestorian branch was left to fend for itself (Bundy 21).
Christianity in Chang’an
Christianity in Chang’an was refered to as the ‘Luminous Religion’ or the ‘Illustrious Religion of Ta Ts’in’ (Legge 39). By the time it entered into China there were already three distinct formal religions being practiced. Taoism and Confucianism were the two oldest religions followed by Buddhism. By allowing Alopen free range, T’ai Tsung was introducing a fourth national religion. It is unclear exactly how much these religions interacted with one another however, “[h]istorians do know that under the Tang emperor Christianity spread across China, borrowing beliefs and ideas from Buddhism and other Eastern religions” (Moore 23).
This apparent syncretism of the Nestorians in China is evident in the two official documents linking Nestorianism to Chang’an and the Tang dynasty. These two documents are: the Nestorian Stele, discovered in Chang’an in 1625, and the ‘Lost Sutras of Jesus’ found by Pierre Pelliot amongst the documents ‘recovered’ for the Dunhuang Caves in the early 1900s.
It was the discovery of the Stele in 1625 that reminded history of the Christian presence in China long before the Jesuit and Catholic missionaries. Erected in 781, the “monument is the only extant “history” of the Nestorian Christianity in China before the Mongol period” (Bundy 17). It gives an overview of the Nestorian Church in China and allows us to date their arrival to the year AD 635. What is most interesting about the Stele is the presence of Toaist, Confucian and Buddhist imagery, it is “topped by a Maltese cross resting on a Taoist cloud with a Buddhist lotus flower beneath it” (Wood 118). This obvious syncretism gives rise to questions regarding how these Nestorians adapted themselves to compete and or co-exist within their surroundings.
In Ray Riegert and Thomas Moore’s book titled “The Lost Sutras of Jesus” they delve further into the notion that as Nestorianism developed in China it became distinct from its Persian roots. The Sutras discussed Christianity in a way more accessible to the people it was addressing using familiar language and terms. However, it also goes as far as weaving together the teachings of Jesus and the Buddha, “[t]o the Pope this was heresy, but even among Persian Christians the Sutras would have seemed alien” (Moore 14). This depicts not only the constant growth and development of the Nestorians, from where they started, but also the integration of relatively Chinese or eastern attitudes and assimilation of the Nestorians as they became Chinese Nestorians.
The Move to Chang’an
By the end of the 5th century Nestorianism had become an independent Christian body. The prominent Christian school in Edessa (Urfa, Turkey), would eventually aid in promoting the new sect as it began to turn out numerous Nestorian supporters and theologians. Around 489 the Nestorians began to loose support and face persecution and they were forced to leave Edessa and make their way to Persia (Jones 6480) It was not until the 7th century that we can officially prove there was a Nestorian presence in Chang’an.
In 635 Alopen, a Nestorian missionary sometimes referred to as Olopun, brought Nestorianism into western China, from Messopotamia. This was amidst the Tang dynasty and it was Emperor T’ai Tsung who welcomed the foreigners and their religion. Intrigued by Alopen’s message he ruled that, “Olopun and his associates should be allowed to have free course in his dominions” (Legge 46).
The Nestorian Schism
In the year AD 431 at the Council of Ephesus, Cyril, bishop of Alexandria accused Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople of demeaning the status of Mary and preaching heresy in regards to the divine status of Jesus Christ. The heresy he was accused of would eventually become known as Nestorianism, however, before this Nestorius represented a school of thought associated with the Antiochs. Although the ensuing divide between the Catholic Church and Nestorian Christian would include a number of theological and dogmatic differences, not all of which can be traced back to Nestorius, he has always been regarded as the figure head of the movement.
The Council of Ephesus was called together to discuss rumors that claimed Nestorius was refusing to give Mary the title of Theotokos and instead was referring to her as Christokos. What this means is that Nestorius did not believe that Mary was the Mother of God, but simply the Mother of Jesus Christ. This distinction, while it may seem subtle, calls into the question the divine nature of Jesus Christ. The later title implies a dualist nature, stating that the Jesus of earth was not divine; instead he was mortal and that he has a separate divine nature located in heaven.
Distinctions regarding Jesus’ divinity and status as the son of God have always been theologically and scholarly hard to grasp, and therefore debated. The Catholic Church often refers to the issue as one of its Mysteries, as demonstrated in the Trinity; three parts but only one God. However, when Nestorius made the claim that, “retaining Christ’s human nature as distinct and separate from his divine nature was essential to ensure complete salvation” (Wessel 2), he placed Cyril and the Alexandrians in peril. Since the Alexandrians believed that participating in the Eucharist was their means to salvation, dividing Christ’s nature would have meant that they would be unable to access his divine nature through the human nature of the Eucharist after the act of Transubstantiation (when the Eucharist becomes Christ’s body and blood). Nestorius argued that it was through ‘emulating’ Christ and not ‘participating’ in him that one can obtain salvation. Therefore, the subtle change of title drew a sharp line dividing two very distinct theologies.(Wessel 2).
There were to be a number of official Church gatherings to further discuss the issue of Nestorious and the Antioch dogma. One would take place in 433, known as the Formula of Reunion. In 436 Nestorius was forced to flee to Egypt, and in 451, at the Council of Chalcedon, he was titled a heretic.
Hello world!
Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!
