Teaching history in an Orthodox context

[Adrian Martin]

Christ is risen!

This Fall, I am going to start teaching History to the upper grades at a certain Orthodox private school. So, I'm a little concerned with teaching my classes (which includes Ancient, Modern European and US History) in a Christian and especially Orthodox context. How should we as Orthodox read history? Why should we study history?

Thanks in advance.

-John

[Owen Jones]

This is an extremely good, important, tough question. The first question is: what is history? And the best definition I have found is that it is a symbolic form of existence. It is certainly not a set of facts laid out on a timeline culminating in the present. There is a plurality of histories, not just one history. So historical consciousness is really the issue, and not something called history that can somehow be objectively ascertained. This is not to say that history is a certain set of facts that happen to be subjectively decided on by the historian, to the exclusion of other facts. It isn't.

The dominant history today is secular history, which says that mankind has progressed over time from a long period of primitive knowledge and superstition, from a Dark Age to a New Age, and with his new-found knowledge of science he now has the power to control his own destiny, either individually or collectively. This progressivist bias to history is a myth, not in the sense that it is false, but rather it mythically represents consciousness, which is the only we we can do it. One might say it is a true myth in that it accurately represents modern consciousness, but false in the sense that modern consciousness is deformed. The progressivist theory is false, of course, because there will be an end to history some day, and the end will be just like the beginning: nothing. So where is the progress?

So what is Christian history? This is a problem since this is not adequately articulated in our own day, and much of what we now are told in the "West" about history comes to us from a refutation in the 18th century of St. Augustine's theory of history -- in which he makes the distinction between sacred and secular history. Secular history of the world is a time of senility, and sacred history is a time of waiting for the end.

Modern secular history has, essentially tried to immanentize the Christian eschaton, so it is unthinkable apart from Christian history.

It would be helpful if we had some patristic sources on this, but I am unaware that anyone has ever laid out a Christian theory of history as such, in the manner of Augustine in The City of God, since the Orthodox Church Fathers are not systemizers as such.

The Fathers saw the history of the Jews as a typology for the journey toward a heavenly Jerusalem, a pilgrimage of the soul, but not just for one's own soul, but for the whole of creation. Christian history is a passage from this world to the next, prefigured in the passage of the Jews from bondage in Egypt (sin), through the Red Sea waters (baptism), through a time of trial and testing in the desert (Christ's temptations), to the Promised Land. Mundane events were all understood in this context. Today, with the victory of scientific naturalism, we tend to look at mundane events that are not specifically religious as having little or nothing to do with the sacred. We know, for example, natural patterns that cause hurricanes or earthquakes or volcanoes. And we look at political social events as simply the result of power plays, with no sacred cause or implications of God working His will. And in this situation there are many Christians who assert that the Second Coming is fast approaching, so that any meditations on history are irrelevant.

I suppose the bottom line is that history has no meaning in and of itself, apart from God.

[Owen Jones]

This book, Meaning In History, by Karl Lowith, provides good background for you -- not as a text for high school students, unless they are very smart.

Editorial Reviews
Product Description
Modern man sees with one eye of faith and one eye of reason. Consequently, his view of history is confused. For centuries, the history of the Western world has been viewed from the Christian or classical standpoint—from a deep faith in the Kingdom of God or a belief in recurrent and eternal life-cycles. The modern mind, however, is neither Christian nor pagan—and its interpretations of history are Christian in derivation and anti-Christian in result. To develop this theory, Karl Löwith—beginning with the more accessible philosophies of history in the nineteenth and eighteenth centuries and working back to the Bible—analyzes the writings of outstanding historians both in antiquity and in Christian times. "A book of distinction and great importance. . . . The author is a master of philosophical interpretation, and each of his terse and substantial chapters has the balance of a work of art."—Helmut Kuhn, Journal of Philosophy

[Owen Jones]

One of the problems in addressing the question of a Christian history is the phenomenon of Empire. You really do not have Christians trying to write "history" until you have an empire. And so you have Eusebius writing a "Christian history" that is really a justification for Christian empire as a kind of fulfillment of history. With the fall of Christian empire you have a kind of crisis in Christian thought which has not yet, in my opinion, been adequately addressed by theologians. Typically what you have on the one hand is a kind of appropriation of secular history with a Christian patina, or you have apocalyptic.

These are all complex issues for high school students to ponder, and yet, that's what a good teacher is for.

My own view is that Orthodox is, in a sense, a historical, even anti-historical, because it is mystical religion par excellence. When you read St. Maximos, he never really feels required to even address the question, as if history as such is really over for the Christian. And yet, this is not the same as positing an end of history, which all modern ideologies attempt to do. Maximos is writing about an in-between world and an in-between time, viz. his meditations on the 8th day.

To be sure, theologians are influenced by the politics of the day. Augustine was writing during a period of decline and destruction of the Roman Empire and he was trying to explain what that might possibly mean in Christian terms, with a comprehensive theory of history that no longer rested on empire.

One question to ask students: what is their idea of history? We absorb from the intellectual environment without knowing it, until we are asked what we truly think and believe. Is it nihilistic to the core? Do they believe that history is some inexorable march toward human perfection? Is it just a bunch of uninteresting facts?

Don't assume that your students look at things from a Christian perspective, even though it is a Christian school and they come from Christian families.

[Rick H.]

I thought I was detecting a German influence--although from another Karl [viz. Barth]-- in the first response. But, I would say, first, within your method as a teacher, try to communicate, by whatever means possible, in a way that does not instill in the student a consciousness of history as "a philosophy of crisis." And, second, in order to provide a balanced approach, make use of the two eyes referred to above, and introduce as well a third eye, so to say, the eye of contemplation which does not place an emphasis on bare facts. While the intellect is not the enemy of history any more than the intellect is the enemy of faith, there must be a balanced approach to avoid a poisonous pedagogy which inadvertently teaches that authority relieves us of the responsibility of independent action and thought. Finally, from a Christian perspective, as we may consider eschatology and history, the Church remembers what has already taken place and in this sense the Alpha is the Omega.

In Christ,
Rick

[Matthew Namee]

What a great subject... One of my great aspirations is to find an approach to history which is authentically Orthodox.

As to the question "What is history?" I would answer that history is the interpretation of evidence about the past. The past itself no longer exists (as St. Augustine himself so wonderfully notes in Confessions); only evidence from the past existing in the present. The historian is the one who draws conclusions from the evidence. These are necessarily interpretive; there is no way for anyone besides God to be truly "objective" and see things entirely as they are. Even the types of evidence we consult, or the questions we put to it, are influenced by our own biases. This is not to argue for relativistic history, that is, relativistic truth, but rather for humans as being incapable of rising to the level of the absolute.

Anyway, one then asks, why do we study history? What is the purpose of historical inquiry? This is a vast subject, but I would suggest that the purpose of studying history is to attain self-identity. For an individual to be healthy, he should have a proper understanding of his own past. So too for the Church, for groups of people, socieities, and the human race in general. If we have amnesia or delusion about our past, we will be unable to mature as a society. I want to learn about the past because it helps me to understand human beings, myself, and the Church.

This is a weak answer to a good and strong question, but I thought I would throw it out there for a start.

[Adrian Martin]

Thanks for your erudite comments. I'll give a brief reply:

Owen, I completely agree with you that history is meaningless apart from God, but it seems to me that we have very limited knowledge of what the "big picture" is; the hand of God can be difficult to see in events that take place in the world. What do you think about the much more humble goal of figuring out what moral lessons can be learned from historical events, as subjective as that can be?

Rick, your warning against making history seem like "a philosophy of crisis" is interesting. Would you like to elaborate?

Matthew, the quest for self-identity is important, and the study of history, including the history of cultures other than one's own, is important in formulating that identity. The trouble is that so many histories written today are written from a perspective rather foreign to a Christianity, much less Orthodox Christianity. So, in order to help cultivate Orthodox identities (my own as well as my students') I think I have my work cut out for me.

[Michael Stickles]

Adrian,
I've been off for a while and rarely check the posts here anymore but this was brought to my attention and since I've been homeschooling as a Christian parent for 11 years I thought I would borrow Mike's account and reply.

History and Literature are the subjects I stress most in my homeschooling because these form the interpretive framework through which the kids come to understand the world around them. The problem with secular history is that history is presented as a series of disconnected events. Somehow or other we must help our kids to see at least in part that history itself is His Story, planned by God for the redemption of the human race. Events have no meaning apart from this.

Veritas Press and Greenleaf press (http://www.greenleafpress.com/) are Protestant Christian publishers who have put a lot of thought into what it means to teach history from a Christian perspective. Although their materials are from a purely Western perspective on history (the former in particular is from a heavily reformed perspecitve and a lot of their material would not be suitable for an Orthodox understanding of history, the latter is much better and more balanced, especially for jr and sr high) they may be worth checking out so that you can get an idea of their approach. I'll try to summarize.

First the history of the Church is at the center. Sacred and secular history are not separated, but rather the events of a given time period are studied together. The focus is on what God is doing in the Church. Secular events are studied in reference to how they fit into the overall picture of what God is doing with His people. Thus in the Veritas elementary program for studying ancient history the kids study important events starting with the 7 days of creation, then the fall, the flood , the tower of Babel, then the unification of upper and lower Egypt, the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Call of Abraham, etc.

Second I think in Orthodoxy the lives and writings of the saints are a good indicator of what God is doing in any given time. History in reality is a battle between Satan and God for the human race. It is the story of the coming of the Kingdom and rule of God. What are the key turning points in this battle? How does God correct our tendency to stray and bring us back to Him while still allowing us freedom? A good topic to discuss is the beneficial effects of suffering and disasters such as the fact that the Babylonian captivity completely got rid of idol worship in Israel. Moral lessons can be incorporated as kids are challenged with the question, what character qualities and actions have had the most impact. I think about the fact that the power of Egypt, of Bablyon, of Rome is fallen but the obedience of Abraham, Joseph and the early disciples have left an eternal impact on our society. The Prophets in the Bible can be fodder for discussion. What brings God's wrath on nations? The themes of of cultures falling when moral and religious corruption start to run rampant can be discussed. How has the Church responded in the midst of moral decline? In what ways has it often been the core of a cultural renewal?

History is best, especially for High schoolers who are just beginning to ask about who they are, when it is used to teach universal truths about how we as human beings interact with each other and with God and as I said above how God is always taking the initiative to correct our strayings and bring us back to Him.

You have my sympathy if you have to cover all three of those subjects in one year to one class. But just some practical tips. I try to give my kids an overall view of the periods of history, then cover important events picked from those periods that highlight the themes I am trying to teach. Ideally what we want is to have some overall feel for the flow of history so that each event can fit into its context. My goal, which I have not yet managed for any of my kids, (I have a lot more theory then practice) is to develop in the elementary years a feel for the overall flow of history so that by the HS years we can study given things more in depth. We read a lot of historical fiction, especially in the elementary years too. It might be well to check into what the kids have already learned by the time they reach your grade to see how much backround context you will need to provide.

These are a lot of disconnected thoughts, and I don't practice what I preach, but maybe some of it has been helpful.

In Christ, Anna Stickles

[Michael Stickles]

Just a PS to the last post since we are on this subject.

Converting to Orthodoxy has opened my eyes to how inadequate and prejudiced a lot of my current Church history sources are. Mike did some searches for me and found two possiblities for what I could use to teach history next year and I am wondering if anyone is familiar with either of these and could give me some feedback.

"The First 800 Years" (http://store.orthodoxed.org/product_info.php?products_id=148)or


The Orthodox Church: A Well Kept Secret, by George Nicozisin

In Christ, Anna

[Mary]

First the history of the Church is at the center. Sacred and secular history are not separated, but rather the events of a given time period are studied together. The focus is on what God is doing in the Church. Secular events are studied in reference to how they fit into the overall picture of what God is doing with His people. Thus in the Veritas elementary program for studying ancient history the kids study important events starting with the 7 days of creation, then the fall, the flood , the tower of Babel, then the unification of upper and lower Egypt, the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Call of Abraham, etc.

Second I think in Orthodoxy the lives and writings of the saints are a good indicator of what God is doing in any given time. History in reality is a battle between Satan and God for the human race. It is the story of the coming of the Kingdom and rule of God. What are the key turning points in this battle? How does God correct our tendency to stray and bring us back to Him while still allowing us freedom? A good topic to discuss is the beneficial effects of suffering and disasters such as the fact that the Babylonian captivity completely got rid of idol worship in Israel. Moral lessons can be incorporated as kids are challenged with the question, what character qualities and actions have had the most impact. I think about the fact that the power of Egypt, of Bablyon, of Rome is fallen but the obedience of Abraham, Joseph and the early disciples have left an eternal impact on our society. The Prophets in the Bible can be fodder for discussion. What brings God's wrath on nations? The themes of of cultures falling when moral and religious corruption start to run rampant can be discussed. How has the Church responded in the midst of moral decline? In what ways has it often been the core of a cultural renewal?


I'm not so sure... I'm sort of uncomfortable with this idea. How can we know what God is doing in the lives of all peoples? To judge what God's plan is by the events that we see happening, seems to be shaky ground to me. We know what God wanted for Israel, because it's recorded for us. The prophesies pertaining to other nations, are minimal in the Bible.

It is true that God raised up Babylon, and strengthened it to overcome Israel. But some years earlier, He had raised up Israel too. However, He dwelt among the Israelites, but He did not dwell amongst the Babylonians. See? Two nations, being raised up for a purpose, being strengthened to defeat and conquer other nations, and yet... not the same.

Also, how can we say for sure, what a nation is being judged for? Are all nations judged by the same standards? Israel was told how to live, but the other nations weren't, not in the same way... Not all are given the same amounts of the same things, so how can all be judged equally? How can a lawless nation be judged by the law? It may be true that History is a battle between Satan and God, but we do not know the details. Only in the story of Job, are the details given to us. To stretch that to cover all of history, seems to me, to be a bit of a large stretch.

Personally, I think Church History should be studied separately but in parallel to secular history. I find it quite interesting to see which of our saints lived during what historical times. But other than that... I don't know in what way my christian life benefits from knowing which kingdom was doing what during the lifetime of St Someone or Other. That, of course, is only because I never really understood the practical application of the study of History. That could be because I studied it in a secular way, as a bunch of disconnected events that I needed to memorize in the right order.

Since I like practical stuff, I find it more practical to evaluate where we're at right now, and work backwards to see where we got it from, how it changed, when it changed, what was it like before? Why did it change? Stuff like that. But that may not be classified as History. And it'll probably not work for school.

Oh well. I shouldn't even talk. I'm neither a teacher nor a homeschooler!

Please forgive me.

Mary.