Renaissance to the Second Advent - Day 2

Good evening. Just to carry on where we left off yesterday, we were tracing God's providence from the Renaissance through to the Lawless Act to the Second Advent. At the moment, we're looking at the Renaissance. Yesterday, we were examining the impetus behind the Renaissance, why it started in Florence, and what conditions there enabled people to pursue beauty, truth, and goodness. The people in Florence were not any different from other human beings, but because of the external environment and situation, they had the opportunity to be creative. This spirit gradually spread throughout Tuscany, the Italian peninsula, and then throughout Europe. We looked at how it affected the development of science, noting the unity of science and religion; all the great scientists were people of profound faith, and the Church itself sponsored scientific discovery and endeavours. We also discussed Galileo and the conflicts he faced, not only with religion but also with other academic scholars due to his differing views.

Now, I want to carry on from that and look at Francis Bacon, who was a great scientist often called the father of empiricism. He developed what is now regarded as the scientific method. He emphasised the importance of careful observation; in other words, we need to observe the world in which we live. We then need to reflect upon all the things we observe. Bacon talked about something called inductive reasoning, which involves collecting together all the observations, information, facts, and data we've gathered to develop a theory about how things work. He stressed the importance of experimentation, which became the basis of what we now call modern science. Bacon took a very sceptical and methodical approach to his work, emphasising that observations might contradict what is found in Aristotle. This was the problem that Galileo faced; his observations led to conclusions that contradicted Aristotelian science.

Bacon, while being a scientist, was also a devout Anglican. He stated that God has written two books, not just one. The first is obviously the Bible, which we are all familiar with, but the second book is called Creation. This argument suggests that if you want to understand what God is like, you study the natural world. You can find God there; it is a very traditional and typical attitude. So, that's the end of the science part. Going back to the Renaissance, the word means rebirth or rediscovery, particularly of classical learning, which was rediscovered when much of it was brought over from Constantinople. The Renaissance took different forms in different places; in some areas, it was more artistically oriented, while in others, there was more focus on literature or science. It happened at different times, usually led by a few members of society interested in these ideas and approaches.

Over several hundred years, the Renaissance can be described as a renewal and a form of art. We looked at Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the whole school that developed there, as well as literature, science, commerce, and architecture. Tuscany was phenomenally wealthy due to merchants, commerce, business, accounting, and banking; the Italian bankers were among the first. Architecture saw extraordinary changes with the rediscovery of Greek texts on architecture, and sculpture also drew from the Greeks. Institutions began to be seen as needing reform; people felt that many institutions were based on tradition but required improvement and renewal. This desire for reform and improvement marked the birth of what we now call modernity, a continuous desire to make things better. For thousands of years, not much changed, but the Renaissance signified the birth of modernity, which we are still living in today, characterised by a desire for improvement and reform in education.

The Renaissance began during a time of religious turmoil. We discussed the state of the Catholic Church in Western Europe, how corrupt it had become, and the persecution of heretics. There was significant religious turmoil, with the papacy splitting into two and then three popes, alongside movements like the Lollards and Wycliffe. This context naturally influenced the desire for renewal and improvement, affecting not just the arts and sciences but also prompting people to think about renewing the Church, religion, and theology. They realised they could not continue living in the old-fashioned medieval world; reform was necessary. This had a huge impact on how people perceived the relationship between man and God.

In terms of literature, the Renaissance saw the emergence of influential works, such as Dante's 'Divine Comedy' and Petrarch's writings. In England, Geoffrey Chaucer, although living at the same time as Petrarch, was still rooted in the medieval world with his 'Canterbury Tales'. In Spain, Cervantes produced 'Don Quixote'. One of the most significant developments of this time was the invention of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg. The first thing he printed was a German poem, followed by the Bible. This innovation made it possible to print thousands of books relatively cheaply, allowing more people to acquire them. Before this, books were either handwritten manuscripts, which were time-consuming and expensive, or printed slowly. Gutenberg's movable type enabled quicker and larger quantities of printing, leading to a wider dissemination of literature than ever before.

The Renaissance also developed in England, particularly in literature. Sir Thomas More wrote 'Utopia' during the time of Henry VIII. This was followed by the Elizabethan author Sir Walter Raleigh, who was also a sailor. A group of writers around him included Christopher Marlowe, who wrote 'Dr. Faustus', and of course, one of the most famous playwrights, William Shakespeare. Shakespeare is renowned for his poetry, particularly his love sonnets. One interesting example is a sonnet where he writes, 'Coral is far more red than her lips' red, if snow be white, why then her breasts are dun.' Here, he is not being very complimentary about the lady he loves, contrasting her beauty with nature. He acknowledges that while he loves to hear her speak, music has a more pleasing sound. He admits he never saw a goddess go, yet he believes his love is rare, suggesting that true love transcends mere physical beauty.

After Shakespeare, another poet, Edmund Spenser, wrote 'The Faerie Queene', and John Milton produced 'Paradise Lost'. Milton's epic poem is based on the story in Genesis, exploring profound insights into human nature, the fall, and the mind of Lucifer. For example, Lucifer states, 'The mind is its own place and in itself can make a heaven of hell or a hell of heaven.' This exploration of despair and depression offers a deep insight into fallen nature. Milton also wrote 'Paradise Regained', which is more hopeful, stating, 'He who reigns within himself and rules passions, desires, and fears is more a king.' This reflects the Christian insight that to rule the universe, one must first rule oneself. Literature from this period is permeated by the Hebraic tradition and biblical thoughts, with Shakespeare's works infused with the Christian spirit. Milton, too, was not only an extraordinary poet but also a political philosopher and activist who argued for the freedom of the press, grounded in his theological understanding of God and human beings. He asserted that since God created us free, the state has no right to take away our freedom or censor what we publish. Thus, he stated, 'Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience above all liberties.'

He is not arguing for the freedom to libel or slander people; not at all. He is very much aware that freedom means being free within the law. You are free to say anything you want, but you are not allowed to slander or libel others because that is against the law. He wants freedom according to conscience. He states, "Thou cannot touch the freedom of my mind." Even though he was imprisoned several times, he realised that those who put him in prison could not touch the freedom of his mind. He maintained his inner freedom to think, pray, and worship God in the way he chose, and nothing could take that away from him. These insights resonate with later thinkers like Viktor Frankl and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who also understood the importance of inner freedom. He emphasised the absolute freedom of speech, stating that truth should be allowed to grapple with falsehood. He would have nothing to do with the cancel culture we see today, where people are offended and opinions are silenced. Instead, he advocated for reasoned argument against those we disagree with, rather than simply cancelling their opinions because they are offensive.

His passionate argument for the freedom of the press is rooted in the beauty of the Renaissance, which synthesised the Hebraic and Hellenistic traditions. He believed that killing a good book is akin to killing reason itself, as reason comes from God. Therefore, destroying good literature is tantamount to destroying the image of God in humanity. His entire argument for freedom is grounded in his understanding of God, the nature of human life, and the belief that human beings are created to be free. This political philosophy is echoed in the works of John Milton and John Donne. Donne's famous poem, "No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main," illustrates the interconnectedness of humanity. He argues that if a clod is washed away by the sea, Europe is diminished, just as any man's death diminishes us all. We are all involved in mankind, and thus we should feel the loss when someone dies.

This principle critiques selfish individualism. One should not think of oneself as an isolated island, free to do anything without regard for others. We are all connected, and when someone dies, we should feel that loss. This idea aligns with the principle of individual truth and connected truth, which can be expressed more poetically. Moving on to political philosophy during the Renaissance, we find three basic assumptions of the Western tradition identified by Isaiah Berlin, a Jewish political philosopher born in Russia. The first assumption is that man is conceivable only in social terms; anything not social is not human. This idea goes back to Aristotle, who stated that man is a social animal. We are shaped by our families, relationships, and the societies in which we live, as reflected in Donne's poem.

The second assumption is that all questions of value, particularly those concerning the meaning or purpose of life, are genuine questions that have one true answer, which is knowable. The third assumption is that all true answers to these questions are interrelated or at least not incompatible. There is one world, one humanity, and one set of answers to the central questions of life. This insight is significant for those involved in interreligious work, as it shows that while different religions may answer these questions differently, there is a substantial overlap in their understanding of right and wrong, and the meaning and purpose of life. This is the essence of the Western tradition, as articulated by Berlin.

Machiavelli, an influential Italian diplomat and political philosopher from Florence, offers a very different approach to political philosophy. He is known as the father of modern political philosophy and wrote a book called "The Prince," which provides practical advice for rulers. Berlin notes that Machiavelli's main achievement is uncovering an insoluble dilemma: the recognition that equally ultimate ends may contradict each other. This means that entire systems of values can collide without the possibility of rational arbitration. For example, in the clash between Antigone and Creon, both characters hold equally sacred values that cannot be reconciled. This situation is not merely exceptional; it is a normal part of the human experience. Machiavelli suggests that one does not need to agonise over such choices; one simply chooses what one wants and is ready to pay the price.

For Machiavelli, the choice is straightforward. He argues that one chooses based on personal desire rather than moral considerations. If others prefer solitude or martyrdom, he is indifferent. He believes that those who hold religious values should not interfere with politics or education, as their outlook is unsuitable for such tasks. If Machiavelli's beliefs are true, this undermines a major assumption of Western thought: that there exists a final solution to how men should live. If multiple equally valid answers exist, then the idea of a sole, true, objective human ideal becomes conceptually incoherent. This fragmentation leads to extreme individualism, where each person acts according to their desires without regard for ultimate moral values or standards. This perspective is significant in understanding the evolution of political philosophy during the Renaissance and its implications for modern thought.

I was asked to mention Nostradamus, who lived around this time. Although I have never been particularly interested in him, I looked him up and found that he allegedly prophesied that Father would be the Messiah. Depending on how one interprets his writings, some believe he suggested that the Messiah would come to Asia rather than Europe. Throughout history, people have often used Nostradamus to predict events relevant to their own times, with many of his prophecies based on biblical texts. The Renaissance, as I mentioned, led into the Reformation, driven by a desire to renew and modernise. The fall of Constantinople resulted in many Byzantine scholars migrating to Italy, bringing with them libraries and books, including Greek versions of the Bible that had not been seen for a long time.

Up until that time in Catholic Europe, there was one version of the Bible, called the Vulgate, which was in Latin. Everyone assumed that this was the Bible, as they had nothing to compare it with. When Byzantine scholars arrived with Greek texts, they discovered many different versions of the New Testament, each slightly different in various ways. As the Latin scholars began to study these texts, they realised that there was a variety of different manuscripts, and they were unsure which one was the oldest or most authentic. This led to the development of textual studies and close analysis of the language. They also noted differences between the Latin Vulgate and the Greek manuscripts, highlighting the challenges of translation. Every time a text is translated from one language to another, there is always an element of interpretation involved. Those who speak more than one language understand that achieving a perfect translation is often impossible due to differences in vocabulary and nuances between languages.

One of the greatest Renaissance scholars was Erasmus, a Christian humanist who lived in Rotterdam. He sought to produce an authoritative Greek New Testament by weighing up the various versions to find the earliest and most authentic text. Erasmus was also interested in church reform, believing there was significant corruption within the church. As scholars studied the New Testament, they began translating it, leading to the emergence of English translations. The earliest translation of the Bible into English occurred in the 7th century, initiated by Alfred the Great. However, it was John Wycliffe who translated most of the Bible into English, and he faced severe consequences for his work, as anyone found with a copy of Wycliffe's Bible could be put to death. By the 15th century in England, possessing an English Bible was a capital offence.

Later, in the 16th century, William Tyndale translated nearly the entire Bible, which angered Henry VIII. Tyndale fled to the continent, where he was arrested and executed in 1536 for his translation efforts. Meanwhile, in other parts of Europe, the Bible was already available in vernacular languages, with Martin Luther being one of the earliest to translate it into German. As people began to read the Bible in their own languages, they recognised a significant disparity between the lives of early Christians and the state of the church at that time. They observed the church's corruption, including the immense wealth of bishops and the opulence of monasteries, which led to a desire for a revival of early Christianity and ultimately sparked the Reformation.

The Divine Principle summarises the main impetus behind the Reformation, highlighting how humanism, advocated by Renaissance scholars like Erasmus, led to a rebellion against the ritualism and rules of the church that constrained personal devotion. People began to recognise their value as children of God and questioned why they should worship in prescribed ways dictated by the church. They resisted the extensive rules imposed by the church, which went beyond moral laws like the Ten Commandments. Additionally, they challenged the hierarchical feudal system and papal authority, which deprived them of autonomy. Many rejected the medieval notion that faith required unquestioning obedience to the church's dictates, asserting that faith should not necessitate blind submission.

The Divine Principle critiques this unquestioning obedience to the church. People began to feel that faith does not require them to obey priests or the pope without question. They started to ask why they should not question doctrines such as the Trinity or other church teachings. This movement developed alongside Luther and other Protestant reformers, who sought to study the Bible and worship God according to their interpretations and consciences. They also questioned the ascetic monastic ideal that devalued the natural world, which suggested that poverty was virtuous because it promised riches in heaven. This glorification of poverty was prevalent in many Catholic orders, where obedience, chastity, and poverty were seen as the highest virtues.

The grievances against the papacy led many medieval Christians to revolt against its rule. The papacy had become increasingly monarchical, autocratic, and dictatorial, prompting widespread discontent. In 1517, Pope Leo X offered indulgences for those who contributed to the rebuilding of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. The aggressive marketing tactics of Johann Tetzel provoked Martin Luther to write his 95 Theses, condemning what he perceived as the purchase and sale of salvation. In Thesis 28, Luther objected to Tetzel's saying, 'As soon as a coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs.' Luther denounced such transactions as worldly and denied the pope's right to grant pardons on God's behalf, asserting that only God has the authority to forgive sins.

Luther's critique highlighted that indulgences primarily benefited the church financially, increasing its wealth rather than providing genuine spiritual salvation. He argued that the Bible does not mention indulgences; instead, it speaks of justification by faith and trust in Jesus as the sole means of receiving salvation. This perspective positioned the Bible as the sole source of authority, contrasting with Catholicism, which recognised multiple sources of authority, including the pope, the magisterium, and church tradition. Luther's assertion that the Bible stands alone as a direct revelation from God was a radical departure from the Catholic view, which saw the Bible as part of a broader tradition.

The political situation also played a significant role in Luther's journey. The pope was displeased with Luther's challenge to his authority and sent him a letter inviting him to Rome. However, Luther, aware of the fate of Jan Hus, who had been executed after accepting a similar invitation, declined to go. The pope's emissary engaged in a lengthy debate with Luther, who insisted that he would accept any claims made as long as they could be substantiated by the Bible. This stance pushed Luther further into a radical position. The pope then demanded that Luther be sent to Rome by force, but many German princes, tired of papal interference in politics, sided with Luther. They supported him and refused to send him to Rome, which ultimately allowed him to survive when many other reformers faced execution.

While in hiding for his protection, Luther translated the Bible into German, creating a foundational text for the German language, much like the King James Version did for English. His translation was authoritative and beautiful, shaping the language significantly. Additionally, part of Luther's reforms included the dissolution of monasteries and convents, allowing monks and nuns to marry each other, which was a radical shift in the religious landscape of the time.

According to tradition, there was one nun whom nobody wanted to marry because she wasn't particularly pretty. However, Luca married her, and she became his very faithful and loving wife. They did not have any children, and he also expected and hoped that Jews would adopt Christianity. You can understand why Jews were reluctant to embrace Catholicism, but he thought they might be more interested in converting to Protestantism, which they were not. Consequently, he became incredibly anti-Semitic, writing long tracts denouncing Jews and advocating that they should be killed. Hitler, 400 years later, picked up many of Luther's ideas and used them.

Luther was one of several prominent reformers, including Calvin, who was French. France was a Catholic country, and Protestants in France, known as Huguenots, were regularly persecuted. Many of them fled to England for refuge. Calvin rejected Catholicism and moved to Switzerland, eventually settling in Geneva. He wrote a book called 'The Institutes of the Christian Religion,' published in 1536, in which he advocated for predestination. He discussed the absolute sovereignty of God, asserting that everything that happens is according to God's plan, including whether one goes to heaven or hell before they are born. The Divine Principle critiques Calvinist theology, particularly the concept of predestination.

Calvin was known for his prolific preaching, delivering thousands of sermons based on the Bible. He became very influential in Geneva, which some describe as a theocracy governed by clerics. He sought to reform the church and political life, aiming to align civil law with the moral law as revealed in the Bible. During this time, a Spanish polymath named Michael Servetus, who was critical of church corruption, encountered Calvin. Servetus wrote a critique of Calvin's ideas on the Trinity, which angered Calvin. He vowed that if Servetus ever came to Geneva, he would ensure he was put to death. When Servetus passed through Geneva, he was arrested, tried, and found guilty of heresy, ultimately being burned at the stake in 1553.

The Protestants were not advocates of freedom of religion; they wanted everyone to observe and practice their religion. Calvinism became an influential doctrine, with the Puritans, who were Calvinists, eventually migrating to America. Many English and Scottish Protestants sought refuge in Geneva, influenced by Calvin's teachings. After the death of Henry VIII, his son Edward VI, a Protestant, attempted to reform the Church of England. However, after Edward's untimely death, his sister Mary, a Catholic, tried to revert England back to Catholicism, leading to the persecution of many Protestants who fled to Switzerland and returned with Calvinist beliefs.

Another influential Protestant was Zwingli, a Swiss reformer based in Zurich, who also criticized church corruption and encouraged priests to marry. Like Calvin, Zwingli's preaching was Bible-based, marking a significant shift in Protestantism. In the Catholic Church, the Bible is read, but sermons are not typically based on it, leading to a very different role for the Bible in Catholic and Protestant traditions. As a result of the work of Calvin and Zwingli, Switzerland became divided along confessional lines, with some villages identifying as Protestant and others as Catholic.

Returning to the topic of God's providence, I traced it through the Germanic tribes and Anglo-Saxon England, observing how the liberal democratic tradition developed. I also looked at the Norman Conquest, where the Normans, originally Vikings, invaded England with the Pope's blessing. William the Conqueror felt justified in his actions, believing the Pope had the authority to decide who would be king. Following the conquest, all land became the property of the crown, establishing a feudal system that imposed absolute authority. This led to a struggle for English liberties over the next 800 years, as people sought to reverse the Norman Conquest.

About 100 years after the Norman Conquest, there was a pushback against absolute authority. The Constitutions of Clarendon aimed to bring the church under the law of the land, addressing the issue of dual legal systems—one for clerics and another for everyone else. This disparity meant that priests could evade punishment for crimes through confession, while common people faced execution for the same offenses. King Henry II was frustrated by this inequality and sought to unify the legal system. He appointed Thomas Becket as Archbishop of Canterbury, hoping to work together to reform the church. However, Becket took his duties seriously, defending the church's rights, which led to a conflict with Henry.

Henry II's frustration culminated in the murder of Thomas Becket by knights who believed they were acting on the king's wishes. Becket became a martyr and was canonized. This incident highlighted the ongoing struggle between church and state. Around the same time, the old Germanic understanding of justice was reaffirmed with the establishment of trial by jury, ensuring that only peers could decide if someone had broken the law. This was a significant development in the push for English liberties, which continued with the signing of the Magna Carta by King John, a notoriously bad king who resisted the law. The barons insisted that he sign the Magna Carta to protect their rights and ensure that the king was also subject to the law.

Parliament began to evolve from an absolute monarchy to a system where the king did not have the authority to rule alone. The king's role was to uphold the law, not to create it. Decisions affecting national affairs required the consensus of appointed advisers, a principle rooted in the Anglo-Saxon Witenagemot. This shift marked a significant pushback against the absolute rule exemplified by William the Conqueror. Over time, the establishment of regular parliaments, such as the provisions of Oxford, reinforced the idea that the king could not act without the authority of his advisers, a principle that persists in modern governance.

The first House of Commons emerged in 1265, initiated by Simon de Montfort, and represented the knights from various towns and villages. Edward I, known as the Hammer of the Scots, emphasised that matters concerning all should be approved by all, thus laying the groundwork for a more inclusive parliamentary system. This development can be traced back to Old Testament principles, particularly the Mosaic tradition from Mount Sinai, which advocated for rule by consensus and the rule of law. The political philosophy of the time was heavily influenced by biblical teachings, predating Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and David Hume.

The right of the Commons to impeach any servant of the crown who acted wrongly indicated that the crown was no longer above the law. This principle is echoed in contemporary discussions about impeachment, such as those surrounding Donald Trump. The evolution of parliamentary power meant that both houses were required to agree on changes to the law, ensuring that the interests of the common people were represented alongside those of the nobility. This gradual evolution of democracy highlighted the importance of public involvement in decisions affecting the nation.

The English Reformation was significantly influenced by Henry VIII, who sought a divorce from Catherine of Aragon, the sister of the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V. Henry was concerned about the succession of the throne, as he only had a daughter, Mary. His desire for a male heir led him to seek a divorce, but the Pope refused to grant it due to political pressures. This refusal prompted Henry to question why the Pope's political relationships should dictate England's stability.

In 1534, Henry VIII enacted the Act of Supremacy, which abolished the Pope's authority in England and declared him the Supreme Head of the Church of England. This shift was not a theological reform but rather a re-establishment of the relationship between church and state, asserting that the king should have authority over temporal matters. Although the Church of England retained its Catholic structure, the change in leadership allowed Henry to obtain a divorce from Catherine and marry Anne Boleyn, who bore him a daughter, Elizabeth.

Henry VIII's reign was marked by significant upheaval, including the dissolution of monasteries, which he used to secure his position by redistributing their wealth among his supporters. This act was one of the largest instances of cultural vandalism in English history, leading to the destruction of libraries and religious icons. The dissolution created resentment towards the Catholic Church, but it also ensured that the nobles who benefited from the land would support the Reformation, as reversing it would threaten their newfound wealth.

After Henry's death, his son Edward VI, raised as a Protestant, further reformed the Church of England. However, Edward died young, and Mary I, a devout Catholic, attempted to restore Catholicism, earning the nickname 'Bloody Mary' for her persecution of Protestants. Her marriage to the King of Spain brought England under foreign influence, a situation that Henry VIII had sought to avoid. Fortunately, Mary died without children, and her half-sister Elizabeth I, also raised as a Protestant, ascended to the throne and sought to establish a middle ground in religious practice, leading to further religious divisions within England.

A Catholic again, so I'll talk about the Puritans on Thursday. You have this whole huge conflict within England, with significant divisions and a lot of fighting. Elizabeth, the Anglican, tries to establish a settlement. She states, 'I don't want to make windows into people's souls.' In other words, she doesn't care whether you believe in transubstantiation—that when you take mass or communion or Eucharist, it is really the body and blood of Christ—or if you see it merely as a symbol. What matters to her is that you attend church; your beliefs can remain private. You will only get into trouble if you don't turn up for church. This was her attempt to accommodate both Protestants and Catholics within the same church.

The only qualification for being a member of the Church of England was that you had to be English. For many, this compromise was manageable. They could attend church, hold differing beliefs, and still participate in the rituals together. Most people felt this was a reasonable arrangement, but there were some who could not accept it: the Puritans, whom we will discuss on Thursday, and also the Catholics. Elizabeth sought to find a middle way with the Anglican settlement.

If you look at the Church of England, it is Catholic in structure, with archbishops, bishops, and priests, but Protestant in theology. Additionally, priests are allowed to marry, making it a sort of halfway house. The Catholics thought they could accept this because the apostolic succession was maintained; bishops and archbishops were appointed, and before that, by the Pope. They felt they could manage this arrangement as the Nicene Creed and all the confessions remained intact.

On the other hand, the Protestants believed they could manage the theology. This compromise is often referred to as a 'fudge.' You try to keep as many people happy as possible without being overly logical, accepting various contradictions, and living with them. Personally, I belong to the Church of England; it is my church, and I love it. I feel comfortable there. The only qualification is that you have to enjoy having tea and biscuits afterwards. The sermons are nice and short, lasting about 10 to 15 minutes, accompanied by beautiful hymns and lovely music. The service lasts around 15 minutes, never more, and afterwards, everyone shares tea and biscuits, chatting with one another before enjoying nice fates.