This is a great series of posts. As a Christian who subscribes to the understanding of Mary as Theotokos and Chalcedon, discovering these texts years ago has altered my understanding of global Christianity. I still believe in both (Theotokos and Chalcedon), but how can one deny the legitimacy of the Church of the East who preached the Nicene faith in such a different context and had no need for either? I worshipped with them here in Chicago recently (the Church of the East) and just haven’t been the same since. I don’t know where I’d be without the Jesus Sutras. Merton (to my knowledge) had no idea about them. Did he? What gifts we’ve been given.
I doubt that Merton had any knowledge of it. I haven't seen any indication that he did, at least. I attended the Liturgy of Addai and Mari with a Church of the East congregation some years ago and had a similar reaction -- quite stunning, really.
I am encouraged to find that the author "highly recommends" Martin Palmer’s book "The Jesus Sutras" (2001) which I've cherished. I appreciate her reference. Meanwhile, what she gives us here is very helpful!
I really enjoyed Martin Palmer's book on this topic. However, I'm interested by the designation that the Tang gave to this Chinese Christian movement: the religion of light. Of course that makes sense, Christ is the light of the world, he has come to those who sat in darkness and even tells his disciples to become children of the light (John 12.36), but there's another religion that also referred to itself as "the religion of light" that enjoyed success not only in the Persian/Sassanian empire but also in China that explicitly borrowed from Gautama Buddhas teaching and Jesus': Manicheism.
I wonder what scholarship, if any, has been done to investigate whether the so-called Jesus Sutras are actually the result of Christian missionaries or of Manichaen origin, or perhaps Christian missionaries deeply influenced by Mani's teachings. I'm aware that the earlier Sutras pose a more "traditional" form of the Christian teaching (indicating their explicitly Christian origin) and that the later Sutras begin incorporating more Eastern metaphysics, but this question struck me deeply when I read Palmer's book and as I have done my own modest research on the Jesus Sutras themselves.
My guess is that the Nestorian missionaries were vaguely understood to be from Persia and therefore usually lumped in together with the Persians they were already familiar with.
This is a great series of posts. As a Christian who subscribes to the understanding of Mary as Theotokos and Chalcedon, discovering these texts years ago has altered my understanding of global Christianity. I still believe in both (Theotokos and Chalcedon), but how can one deny the legitimacy of the Church of the East who preached the Nicene faith in such a different context and had no need for either? I worshipped with them here in Chicago recently (the Church of the East) and just haven’t been the same since. I don’t know where I’d be without the Jesus Sutras. Merton (to my knowledge) had no idea about them. Did he? What gifts we’ve been given.
I doubt that Merton had any knowledge of it. I haven't seen any indication that he did, at least. I attended the Liturgy of Addai and Mari with a Church of the East congregation some years ago and had a similar reaction -- quite stunning, really.
Thanks for this!
I am encouraged to find that the author "highly recommends" Martin Palmer’s book "The Jesus Sutras" (2001) which I've cherished. I appreciate her reference. Meanwhile, what she gives us here is very helpful!
I really enjoyed Martin Palmer's book on this topic. However, I'm interested by the designation that the Tang gave to this Chinese Christian movement: the religion of light. Of course that makes sense, Christ is the light of the world, he has come to those who sat in darkness and even tells his disciples to become children of the light (John 12.36), but there's another religion that also referred to itself as "the religion of light" that enjoyed success not only in the Persian/Sassanian empire but also in China that explicitly borrowed from Gautama Buddhas teaching and Jesus': Manicheism.
I wonder what scholarship, if any, has been done to investigate whether the so-called Jesus Sutras are actually the result of Christian missionaries or of Manichaen origin, or perhaps Christian missionaries deeply influenced by Mani's teachings. I'm aware that the earlier Sutras pose a more "traditional" form of the Christian teaching (indicating their explicitly Christian origin) and that the later Sutras begin incorporating more Eastern metaphysics, but this question struck me deeply when I read Palmer's book and as I have done my own modest research on the Jesus Sutras themselves.
My guess is that the Nestorian missionaries were vaguely understood to be from Persia and therefore usually lumped in together with the Persians they were already familiar with.