## The surgeon who doesn't know
In 1088, students in Bologna organized themselves into a universitas — a legal corporation with elected rectors and the right to grant degrees. The model spread to Paris, Oxford, Cambridge. Every one was a Church institution. The faculty were clergy. The logic was Aristotelian because Islamic scholars — al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd — had translated and transmitted the Greek texts Christian Europe had lost.
A surgeon at Johns Hopkins scrubs in under fluorescent lights in a building whose ancestor is the bimaristan — the Islamic hospital, invented in Baghdad in the eighth century, which introduced treating the sick regardless of ability to pay. The surgeon does not know this. The scientific method she uses descends from Ibn al-Haytham's eleventh-century insistence on experimental verification, filtered through Roger Bacon, a Franciscan friar. She considers herself secular. She considers the Enlightenment her inheritance. The Enlightenment considered itself a rebellion against the Church. The Church built the institutions the Enlightenment rebelled inside of.
## The fight underneath the history
The trace a direct line from Aquinas to the Enlightenment and consider the secular erasure of that lineage culturally dangerous. They point to the meaning crisis in post-Christian societies: you cannot run the software without the operating system.
The reply that the "Christian roots" narrative is retroactive branding. You cannot claim credit for the university while disclaiming the Inquisition. If you insist on the lineage, you accept the full inheritance.
A medievalist at the Sorbonne has spent thirty years showing both stories are fairy tales. The hold that "the West" is a composite — Greek logic, Roman law, Jewish monotheism, Christian theology, Islamic science, Norse governance — and any single-origin story requires amputating most of the evidence.
Then claims the debt is real, unpayable, and forgotten for reasons partly the creditor's fault. The Church built Western humanism and then gave secularism its strongest arguments through its own failures.
## The empirical crux
Nobody seriously disputes that monasteries preserved texts, Islamic scholars transmitted Greek philosophy, or the first universities were ecclesiastical. The argument is whether that origin is load-bearing today — whether a civilization can run indefinitely on moral capital whose source it has disavowed. The answer may arrive through observation: watch what happens to societies that cut the root and keep the fruit, and check back in a generation.
Where do you stand?
Join the conversation →