IMAGINING
OTHER
POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY - A
PRIMER
5, 890 words @ 080808
Links:
Extracts from Luther and Calvin
Luther,
Calvin, Thomas More: Summary
Political
Philosophy Contents Page
Main Sources:
Bowle, John: Western
Political Thought, from the origins to Rousseau,
Mackenney,
Richard; Sixteenth Century
Oberman, Heiko A.:
Luther, Man Between God and the Devil,
Sabine, G.H. & Thorsen, T.L. – History of Political
Theory – 4th edn. Holt, Reinhart & Winston/Dryden Press 1973.
0-03-
910283.
Skinner, Quentin:
The Foundations of Modern Thought, Vol Two; The Age of Reformation,
Thomson, David
(ed): Political Ideas, Penguin 1986. 0 14 021054 7.
*************************
The Reformation: an attempt to restore the spiritual purity of Christianity,
which led to a radical split in Western Christianity between Protestantism and
Catholicism.
OUTLINE:
1. General
Introduction: Why look at religious beliefs at all? What connections are
there between:
1.2
religious and political thought?
1.2 religious
and political conflict?
1.3
social conditions and religious beliefs?
2. The Protestant
Reformation:
Origins and ideas of
Protestantism: against the corruption of the Church; for the individual conscience
(against external authority) - for “faith” rather than “deeds”; the
democratisation of the church; spiritual purity and the “inner policeman”.
3. The Reformation,
Renaissance, and Humanism (see also notes on Thomas More)
Some mediaeval aspects
together with modernisation (Luther believed he was fighting the Devil),
because marked end of an era of Christian domination; a violent age: peasant
uprisings, mutual persecution of Catholics and Protestants; science, printing,
exploration, the universities; trade and new social classes, economic and
political freedom; anthropocentric, humanistic; growth of monarchy, as against
power of the Pope, bourgeoisie supports monarchy; national conflict and
religious conflict; consequences of decline in papal power.
4. Luther and Calvin
Luther: “justification by
faith” – “95 theses” – “priesthood of all believers” - obedience to the state –
hostility to peasant uprisings (anabaptists) – aimed to free the individual Christian,
but Lutheranism became a state church.
Calvin: theocracy (
5. More detail on
effects of the Reformation.
Religious toleration
(eventually); problematised relation between church and state - and
nation-state strengthened; social contract theory (state answerable to
the people); secularism, individualism, and thereby liberalism; growth
of science; the "right to resist" and, in opposition, the
"divine right of kings"; radical non-conformism and early
forms of communism/socialism; the Protestant work ethic, and thereby
support for capitalism.
Notes:
1. Why look at religious beliefs at all?
1.1
religions/cosmologies influence politics/political thought (Marxism – by rejection; Confucianism - through its moral
code; Islam today etc) - especially as religions and politics define values,
ethics, right behaviour, the purpose of life… in other words the same questions
as are addressed by philosophy - and by comparing the two sets of ideas we can
try to find links between them
1.2 but usually there is no
logical sequence from a particular religion to a particular political view… And
not only does a
religion such as Christianity
not lead to one political view, in practice different theological points
were selected by
different (Protestant and
Catholic) parties to support political doctrines they needed (Sabine). Often
religious
differences are used as a
pretext in what is really a political conflict
1.3 it is possible that
social/political conditions affect not only political beliefs, but religious
beliefs also (not a
view that all would accept,
since religion is often seen as about absolute truths)
2. Overview of the Protestant
Reformation:
2.1 The Catholic Church had become corrupt (power à corruption?). There was – especially as seen by
Luther – a lack of sincerity, seriousness (Luther was shocked by the bad
behaviour, bad language and licentiousness of priests in Rome). More seriously,
Luther and others protested against the buying of indulgences: these brought
finances into the church, but seemed a cynical way of trying to promote
repentance of ones sins!
2.2 The “protesters”, who came to be known as Protestants, hence
stressed: the internal authority of the individual conscience, rather than the
external authority of the Church. That is, they stood for faith (internal)
rather than deeds (external).
2.3 Since they believed that the individual conscience determines the
truth, there was less emphasis on the need for a church hierarchy as an
intermediary between the individual and God - i.e. democratisation took place
within the church.
2.4 There was also less concern with rituals - more direct contact
individual and god (Quakers, Shakers) - though this was a fearful experience…
2.5 Finally, the stress on "right thoughts and right deeds"
led to feelings of guilt: the conscience became an “internal policeman”.
3. The Reformation, Renaissance, and Humanism (see also
notes on Thomas More)
The period (roughly, the 16th century) is important because
it marked a significant step in the transition from the traditional to the
modern world. However, such changes take a long time… (Skinner)
In other words, such ‘modern’ ideas as: individualism, democracy,
rationalism, secularism, science, the nation-state, kings as answerable to the
people, the right to resist – all have their beginnings in this period (though
some can be traced to earlier times, e.g. the ‘appointment’ of kings).
The Reformation occurred at same time as the Renaissance and Humanism,
and the different changes were closely interwoven.
3.1
The period marked the end of an
era: viz. unity of Christian empire, which had held for nearly 1,000 years!
However, this change took around 100 years, and bitter wars, before it was generally
acknowledged. Bowle (1961) argues that Christian thinking had become static,
and it couldn't handle the changing reality of the world. Natural law theory –
and therefore Christian theory - looks for laws of social order etc that are as
reliable, fixed and unchanging, as physical (scientific) laws. (Blackstone,
Political Philosophy, 1973). The mediaeval period was also “indifferent to
practical knowledge”, and fatalistic about famine, disease etc – so until
thinking changed, science and medicine could not progress (Bowle). And yet the
world was changing, with the growth of exploration, science, production etc,
and so thinking about the world also had to change. When splits occurred in the
church, the repression of heresy was not enough – in fact it was a dead end.
(Pun intended – sorry!).
As an indicator of the slowness of change, note that some medieval
elements remain in the thinking and practices of this time: Luther believed the
devil was a real force (he saw himself as ‘between the Devil and God…‘
(Oberman) There was widespread superstition, alongside the growth of scientific
rationalism (see below) – for example the persecution of ‘witches’.
Moreover, (see below) some key political ideas were derived from the
middle ages – and it is important not to look on the middle ages as a
primitive, ‘dark’ period (the building of the great cathedrals of Europe for
example).
However, Christian political theory did not match the political
reality: Pope was fighting Emperor, and both had their proponents. Bowle’s view
is that both were asking for the impossible: “This ideal of hierarchy under
God, in which clerical and lay power harmoniously pursued their proper ends,
implied no definition of sovereignty [supreme power] in the modern sense. Yet
the exigencies of politics demanded an ultimate authority; Pope and Emperor
both claimed such authority, and neither achieved it. In the end the defined
sovereignty of lesser rulers proved the second best rallying point in the
resulting breakdown.” And cf. Sabine, quoted elsewhere already: “whoever lost,
the kings won.”
3.2
This was also a violent age (the historian Huizinga talks of ‘the
violent tenor of life’) – there was widespread war, famine, the plague, and on
a more domestic level, executions for what we would now see as small crimes
such as theft (see the notes on Thomas More).
The condition of the peasantry was very difficult, and peasant
uprisings were common (Luther took a hostile stance towards these). Mackenney
writes of the persecution of the stateless.
As the split between them grew, both Protestants and Catholics
persecuted and killed each other (religious wars in France lasted from 1562 –
1598).
3.3
An agricultural revolution had led to better-fed peoples, and freed
some to go to live in the towns. Thus there was a new workforce for the
factories that were designed during the industrial revolution: this involved
mechanisation to turn the newly-imported cotton etc into finished products.
Despite the superstition, there was a tremendous growth in knowledge:
the invention of printing (by 1500 there were printing presses in 200 towns)
which led to the ability to publish translations of texts – including the Bible
- in the vernacular (previously religious texts were only available in Latin).
Above all, the development of science can be traced to both the
Renaissance – through re-examination of classic Greek authorities who had
written on astronomy (the earth was no longer seen as the centre of the
universe as the church had claimed) - and to humanism, through a new freedom to
examine the human body (previously disallowed by the church), and a new
confidence in the powers of man. The very basis of scientific method is that
the individual can test and check another individual’s experiments.
With better, scientifically designed devices for navigation,
exploration led to the ‘discovery’ of India and America. In turn, this led to
the examination of new ways of life, new materials and plants, better standards
of living, and more knowledge.
The growth of universities was remarkable: St Andrews 1411, Glasgow 1451, Edinburgh 1582. In 1600 there were
7,000 students at Salamanca, and 3,000 at Cambridge.
3.4
The impact of the growth of trade, and consequently the new class of
traders, was felt in political and economic ideas, since a new class of traders
required freedom of individual movement (see more on the bourgeoisie below).
3.5
A good way of describing the period is to say there was an
anthropocentric view of world: writers and thinkers stressed the dignity of
humans - Rabelais, da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael, Titian.... But humanistic
artists such as da Vinci and Albrecht Durer nevertheless expressed pessimistic
views about the future of mankind (Mackenney p 121). And we can see similar
ideas in Shakespeare, when he advises us to “gather rosebuds while ye may” –
for life is short... Mackenney suggests that the enthusiasm for the infinite
diversity of man consoles for the finite nature of life itself.
(In 1564 Shakespeare was
born, and in the same year Michelangelo died. In 1558, Elizabeth I had become
queen of England).
3.6
The monarchy gained more power, as the struggle between rival barons
resulted in the rise of the nation-state. The decline of the Holy Roman Empire
contributed to this new world outlook on political organisation, but also the
cities lost their autonomy.
Later, as the bourgeoisie grew in strength it supported and
strengthened the monarchy (especially against radical peasant movements - see
Luther on anabaptists).
3.7
Whilst the power of the Papacy declined, it consolidated territorial
power in Italy. This undermined its universalist claims and contributed to
nationalist reactions (Mackenney). As Bowle outs it: the theory of
Papal/Imperial power didn't correspond to reality any longer:
"This ideal of
hierarchy under God, in which clerical and lay power harmoniously pursued their
ends, implied no definition of sovereignty in the modern sense. Yet the
exigencies of politics demanded an ultimate authority: pope and emperor both
claimed such authority, and neither achieved it. In the end the defined
authority of lesser rulers provided the second best rallying point in the
resulting breakdown."
3.8
So, the transition involved much conflict: both religious and secular
authorities were in crisis and were taking on new forms: the church was
fragmenting, there were conflicts of nation against nation, and nation against
Empire or Pope - and all used religious difference as a pretext in their
struggles.
Thus, new religious movements needed a monarch, or similar powerful
figure, to protect them (Luther and Saxony, Henry VIII); whilst in other places
the old religion used the monarchy to stamp out a new religious minority
(Protestants in France and Spain). (Sabine). An important treaty was the Peace
of Augsburg, 1555, which determined that territorial sovereign should determine
whether subjects would be Lutheran or Catholic.
As Sabine puts it:
"Whoever lost, the kings won". The monarch was the only force strong
enough to hold society together.
4. LUTHER AND CALVIN
Martin Luther(1483 - 1546)
His Early Life:
In 1505, at age 22, he was,
whilst a student, literally (!) struck by lightning on his way back from school
(in Erfurt). In terror he prayed to St Anne (the patron saint of his father's
trade, mining) and vowed he would become a monk if he survived.
Two weeks later he joined the
Augustinians, and stayed with them for 15 years. As a novitiate he swept the
floors, and then he was set the task of learning the Scriptures by heart
(because he showed an interest). Soon he came across St Paul’s words: "The just shall live by faith".
At his Ordination he felt (he
recalled later) a sense of fear: "I, ashes...speak with the living God.
This cannot but cause one to tremble."
Luther’s Beliefs and his
conflict with the church:
These were similar view to St
Augustine, who stressed the sinfulness of man (QS p 6), and the helplessness of
man in face of God who created an order we cannot understand, and who has
predestined us. Predestination was a harsh view – roughly, that God must by
definition know all about us, and must know therefore who will deserve to be
saved. There is nothing we can do to save ourselves.
The psychological stress
resulting from this belief led to a crisis for Luther, which was solved by his
realisation of the mercifulness of God (at least he forgives some!!). This
thought then led to the belief in ‘Justification by Faith’ - i.e. the
individual must admit to their helplessness before God and put their faith
God's willingness to save them. Faith is the essential starting-point, not
deeds, not outward ritual, not Church authority. "Who knows if it is
true?" (i.e. it involves a relegation
of reason...). Augustine himself said ‘nisi crederis noli intelligeris’
[see below: vs. Aristotle]
This stance soon led to
Luther’s confrontation with the Church over the sale of indulgences: these
promised to shorten the soul's stay in purgatory... they were a fund-raising
device for the church.
At a deeper level, Luther did
not want to allow the church any role in directing or regulating Christian life
(QS) "it would be a good thing if
canon law were completely blotted out". He rejected the doctrine of
“transubstantiation” (the wafer and wine in the communion service become the
body and blood of Christ); hence he rejected the role of the Church in
forgiving sin, and the Mass itself. (book-burning he supervised)
He is perhaps best know for
his "95 theses" – a series of commentaries and attacks on established
practice that he nailed to the door of the church at Wittenburg in 1517 – the Wittenburg Theses. The Pope is alleged
to have said "Luther is a drunken German. He will feel different when he
is sober."
Luther then took part in a
debate with the cathedral authorities at Heidelberg – he had support of prince Frederick
of Saxony and two other academics.
He visited Rome and was
shocked by the lack of seriousness and what he felt was blasphemy there. Luther
clearly sought perfection, and this can perhaps be traced to his monastic
background - though he also attacked the errors (as he saw it) of monastic
life, i.e. the belief that deeds could bring salvation.
On the other hand perhaps strangely, he defended the institution of
marriage.
Secular and Religious
Authorities:
Another indication of his
opposition to the institution of the church is in his view that the church has
no authority over temporal affairs. There are for Luther "two
kingdoms", and by this he meant a spiritual kingdom and a temporal one.
Nevertheless, temporal authority must be obeyed, as all power comes from God.
In 1518 the Church ordered
Frederick to banish him, but Frederick refused. After more challenges, and with
more support, Luther had to appear before the Emperor (Charles V) [at Diet of
Worms] 1521, (Quotes)*. As the authorities were so hostile to him, he had to be taken into hiding by Frederick in
Wartburg castle – there he suffered constipation, piles, and insomnia! But he also developed his ideas. He distanced
himself from upheaval or rebellion. He did however lean on Frederick’s
arguments, and called on others to accept them. In doing this he implicitly
recognised the right of secular authority to speak on religious matters...
though he stressed Frederick could only be voluntarily accepted. (See the
Extracts).
NB – there are two
(complementary?) sides to Luther in these quotes: (a) his own position – he
couldn't envisage rebellion; and (b) when faced with rebellious others, he then
felt they should be crushed. At a later
date, he was able to argue that Catholic persecutors of Lutherans were
"rebels" and should be resisted.
From all this, the state
gained in power, especially when he accepted that princes had a right to banish
unbelievers. Lutheranism is now a state church in e.g. Finland.
Luther on Rebellion; the
Beginnings of Protestantism:
Another aspect of his view
about secular power, and ordinary people is expressed in: (**) "the
princes of this world are gods, the common people are Satan, through whom God
sometimes does what at other times he does directly through Satan, that is,
make rebellion as a punishment for the peoples' sins.” And: “I would rather
suffer a prince doing wrong than a people doing right." (Sabine) (Thomson)
His view does not always seem
consistent, since at first he believed so strongly in the power of the
"word" that he said: [see below vs. Aristotle]
(***) "Heresy cannot be kept off by force. For that another tool
is needed, and it is another quarrel and conflict than that of the sword. God's
word must contend here. If that avail nothing, temporal power will never settle
the matter, though it fill the world with blood."
[Is this inconsistent
with the view that secular powers have the right to punish heresy etc? After
all, as we know
(perhaps!) from the
failure of torture to ‘convert’ terrorists, human belief cannot be forced by
outside pressure.
In 1529, at the Diet of Speyer,
the Emperor withdrew all concessions to the would-be reformers, and this led to
a break-away group of six princes and 14 cities "Protesting" this.
Hence Protestants. "Though the term is identified with a set of religious
beliefs, it derives from a refusal voiced by secular rulers in a secular
assembly against their secular superior - in the matter of religion"
(Mackenney).
(In 1534, Henry VIII was to
make himself head of the English Church. Thomas More was executed in 1535).
The Force and Impact of
Luther's ideas:
There is a strong
anti-clericalism in Luther: (Quotes) - the "priesthood of all
believers" - note how he verges on saying that the social order should be
dissolved, but backs away from this. (See also above, on abolishing all laws).
He attacked the Pope, but as
an institution, not as an individual (Quotes from preface to Freedom of a
Christian pp 45 -6).
Note the power of his
language!
He believed (as with early
Christians) that the "end of the world is nigh" - something in common
with those who in the 13th century believed the end of the world would come
imminently, because Revelations the day
of Judgement will come "when 1,000 years are expired" (that is, 1,000
years after the time of the early Church). Hence
"millenarian"/"chiliastic". BUT Luther did not believe in
the possibility of establishing God's City on earth - all that could be done
was to try to ensure the world survives long enough to reach Judgement Day: it
is so evil!
He has therefore an ethics:
we should work together now to preserve the world, but not fool ourselves that
works will bring us salvation. Works especially serve to (i) keep the body
under discipline/control (ii) "be an example to others who also need to
keep their bodies under control. There is also the statement that you should
“submit your will to that of others in the freedom of love." (Freedom of a
Christian p 78).
In philosophical terms, he
took a different view to Aristotle, since he rejected the possibility that
philosophy could explain God (something mystical here).
[Luther also belongs to
medieval debate: nominalists vs realists:
- realists (Aquinas, Duns
Scotas) argued that universal concepts such as “man” are more real than
specific experienced
phenomena i.e. individuals.
Individuals only exist because "man" exists…
- nominalists (Occam) argued
that universals derive from abstract thought, and abstract thought derives from
observation. Consequently,
universals are names only, devoid of reality. Universals can be seen as models
requiring
adjustment in the light of
(sensory) experience.
Nominalism leads on to
science. Luther’s ideas contributed to this, since for him religion is to be
verified by
individual experience (of the
Scriptures). (Though faith must come first, to open the possibility of
understanding).
Ironies:
Luther saw
"Reformation" as the work of God; Adam and Eve's work is to try for
"betterment" - in practice, though, he had a strong impact on secular
as well as religious life. We might even say that the changes his ideas brought
about were revolutionary (not just a reform/reformation).
Luther aimed to free the
individual Christian, rather than attempting to set up an alternative Church
(contrast Calvin, below) - in practice, in Lutheranism, state and churched
became fused. Lutheranism is now a state religion.
Puritanism and Capitalism:
Calvin was less
"quietist" than Luther: he put less emphasis on inner spirituality,
and more on outward observances.
One curious result of this is – Max Weber and others argue – capitalism
itself: Calvin’s followers thought (roughly!) that God would not have chosen
the ‘elect’ (predestined to be saved) and allow them then to lead dissolute
lives; and, conversely, surely someone who wants to work hard for the good must
be motivated by an inner goodness that indicates they are ‘chosen’. The notion
of a ‘calling’ is very much a Protestant, and specifically Calvinist idea in
its origin.
However, luxurious living is
not ‘holy’, and if as a result of your hard work you earn a lot of money, it
doesn’t mean that you can then spend it and excesses. Consequently, early
Protestants saved their earnings. The investment that this led to helped the
newly growing industry to get off the ground – as Max Weber argued, thus
playing an important part in the beginnings of capitalism.
Like Luther, Calvin therefore
sought spiritual purity among believers, and where his ideas gained the support
of the civil powers (Geneva, Netherlands, and the Puritan community in
Massachusetts) the result was a kind of theocracy, with Church elders/gentry
monitoring and even spying on the citizens to ensure their morality (Sabine).
Calvinist church leaders would, for example, inspect brides and grooms before
marriage to ensure there was no sign of venereal disease. The power of the
Calvinist church was hence strengthened. (See below for the effect on the role
of temporal powers).
Geneva, which was described
as a “city of glass", acted as a ‘model’ for Protestants throughout
Europe: it represented, says Mackenney, a myth of stable perfection in a world
of frightening uncertainty.
In 1536 Farel – who had
actually initiated reforms in Geneva before Calvin - asked Calvin to stay
there. Frightened by Farel's zeal, he agreed, only to be expelled two years
later. Calvin returned to authority in Geneva (though reluctantly) when the
council changed, in 1541.
(In 1545 the Council of Trent
opened, marking the start of the Counter-Reformation).
Calvin’s Writings and Impact:
He wrote a constitution for
Geneva – the Ecclestiastical Ordinances. Calvin himself insisted on obedience
to secular powers, even if they were wicked. If they are wicked, God (not men)
will punish them. Secular powers are an
"external means" to salvation. The ruler has a duty to God:
“It is the purpose of temporal rule, so long as we live among men, to
foster and support the external worship of God, to defend pure doctrine and the
standing of the church, to conform our lives to human society, to mould our
conduct to civil justice, to harmonise us with each other, and to preserve to
common peace and tranquillity.”
Magistrates are ‘vicars of
God’. But he was perhaps unclear on the separation of civil and religious
powers (Quotes) (Mackenney) and, (see below) his followers interpreted his
thinking on this in a radically different way.
Note that this meant for
Calvin that – as for Luther - conscience is not subject to civil laws (which
are “external”). This, incidentally, is contrary to what St Paul said: "ye
must be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake".
Following the Constitution,
the Council and the Church were to meet in a Consistory; deacons were to look
after the poor, pastors to preach, doctors to teach. "Ministers should, at
appointed times of year, go round all the wards of the city accompanied by an
elder and a deacon to instruct the people and examine every individual briefly
as to his faith" (Mackenney).
There were laws against
swearing; some names were abolished because they were "not
harmonious" or "absurd and stupid"; there was censorship of
plays by Calvin.
There were a number of
printing presses at Geneva, which helped the spread of Calvinism – many were
set up by refugee printers from France (fleeing religious conflict): there were
7,000 immigrants in 12 years. John Knox (1505 – 1572, a Scottish churchman of
similar ideas to Calvin) described Geneva as "the most perfect school of
Christ that ever was on the earth since the days of the apostles".
1559: The Institutes are a
reflection on the Reformation, and demonstrate a synthesis of humanism and
scholasticism:
"Unchangeable, the Word
abides everlastingly one and the same with God, and is God Himself" – that
is, human experience is an expression of the divine purpose.
Calvin’s ideas led to the
‘right to resist’ – how could this be?
(i) Calvinist churches
developed in areas where they could not win the support of the state (France,
Scotland), so his followers (e.g. John Knox) changed the line (using minor
points about powers of officers of the church). Minorities of either faith were
faced with a dilemma, and Calvinists – believing fervently that their ideas
were correct – developed the view that they had a right to resist the monarch
if the latter was hostile to their faith.
(ii) There is an
ambiguous passage at end of The Institutes where Calvin says that magistrates
can defend people's freedom against princes: "Let the princes hear and be
afraid..." (and this was taken to mean “hear the voice of the people” –
though it could mean “hear the voice of God”).
(iii) There is also a
clue to this development in the constant imagery of soldiering that Calvin
uses, writing of: "military service [which] ends only at death", and:
[we are struggling] "against an enemy who is the embodiment of rash
boldness, of military prowess, of crafty wiles, of untiring zeal and haste, of
every conceivable weapon and of skill in the science of warfare..." and:
"hasten to rally round the banner which the Son of God holds out for
us". Farel's printing emblem was the ‘sword of the true word’, so Word and
sword are never far apart!
(iv) The psychology of
"predestination/election" has, as noted above, some surprising
effects: it is argued that God has elected who will be saved, and we do not
know who these are, and the rest will be damned; but there are manifestations
of election i.e. a "calling" (e.g. to preach the word) and good deeds
can be seen as "justification" (an effort to escape the filth of the
world). This is a call for self-discipline and self-control, and it can be
taken so far as to suggest that it is a sign of God's grace if you are
persecuted. This would strengthen the resolve to resist.
In fact, as noted in
the points about capitalism, the psychological effect of Calvinism was to
galvanise people not only to hard work, but to action (though not, of course,
for the enjoyment of goods in this life). Sabine calls the set of beliefs a "cosmic
system of quasi-military discipline".
5. More detail on the (long-term) effects of the reformation.
(i) religious toleration:
Protestantism grew in
Germanic and Scandinavian countries (why? Some have even suggested that the
cold weather and harsher life lends itself to a more pessimistic religious
outlook!). Other (‘Latin’) areas stayed Catholic. However, this led to serious
consequences for Protestant believers living in a Catholic country, and vice
versa. After practically a century of bloody conflict, it became clear that
toleration was the only answer.
NB, as noted, some medieval
elements remained in Protestantism (Luther as between Devil and God) and too
many (still) saw their opponents as not just wrong but wicked (including
Luther...). But eventually the principle of religious tolerance, and freedom of
belief, was established.
(ii) the relationship of secular to religious authorities:
In such situations, where
there is a ‘dual authority’ (here, secular and religious) there is a clear
problem of defining what is the sphere of authority o each. Even when there is
a clear definition, how can interference of one in the other’s sphere be
avoided? Who should one obey if the authorities conflict? The Middle Ages never
really solved this, as we saw with the Two Cities formula.
In practice, the new
relationship led to both more co-operation/involvement, and to more conflict.
Thus, where the authority of the Catholic Church was undermined, the civil
authorities found they had to maintain the (new) faith. More common, probably,
was intense conflict between church and state. There were 8 separate wars of
religion in France alone between 1582 and 1598; and a Calvinist King of France,
Henry of Navarre, was assassinated by Jesuits (during the Counter-Reformation).
(In 1598 the Edict of Nantes
marked the end of religious wars in France, and guaranteed liberty of worship
to Protestants).
(iii) new political theories:
McClelland suggests that
the new, more questioning, attitudes to law and authority, raised questions
such as: why obey this law, this ruler? In looking to justify a
ruler’s power, citizens argued they were entitled to expect something in return
– citizens would obey, in return for protection by the ruler. Eventually this
led to the social contract theories of Hobbes, Locke and others in the 18th
century.
(iv) the growth of secularism:
NB the Protestant Reformation
was clearly not a secular movement: the main parties came to agree that
religious authority needed the backing of secular power, and that political
order needed religious ‘cement’ (Sabine). Yet the Reformation did contribute to
secularisation. How could that happen? There were many reasons, and among them
are:
- the "specialisation" of religion: when we have a ‘choice’
between religions, are we not tempted to reject them all?
- turning to the individual’s conscience: again, if an individual is
free to decide for him/herself, they might decide not to believe in God at all
- religious views are not subject to empirical testing, and so science
eventually undermined belief (an ongoing conflict!!!) (Blackstone).
(v) individualism:
The modern, western view, is
that individual self-determination is at the basis of liberal democracy. The
origins of this clearly lie in the stress on the individual conscience in
Protestantism, together with the growth of the bourgeoisie and the merchant
class, and, as noted, science itself has an individualistic approach.
(vi) the "right to resist":
Luther stressed it was not
the secular authorities' role to interfere in religious matters, and both
Luther and Calvin advocated passive obedience to secular rulers rather than
resistance (see below). This was a ‘leftover’ from the earlier ‘natural law’
theories: it is a law of nature that we should have, and obey, kings…
Their followers, and
historical reality, changed the picture and raised question of passive
obedience (because earthly powers established by God) vs. resistance (where
conflict of religion).
This led to a split between
the theories of:
- the divine right of kings
(though this was not new to the 16th c., it was becoming more
"specialised" (Sabine)); the idea can be derived both from the
passive obedience trend in Protestantism, and from Jesuit thinking
- and: that power originates
from the people, and hence resistance is seen as a religious duty. NB this idea
came down from two features of the Middle Ages:
(a) the right to
challenge a heretical Pope, since respect was due to the office and not to the
person holding it. (A view I have heard from modern Catholics). This idea also
derived from the view that Church affairs affected all, and all (ecclesia)
should therefore have a say in decisions, [quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus
approbetur].
and (b) feudal traditions of
(local) rights and duties which applied to both ruler and subject; NB from here
originates the idea of "elections": the leader of a war-band would be
chosen and carried (elected = lifted up) on shields (on shoulders) - which put
limitations on the power of the leader (even the Emperor was constrained by
this belief, despite Roman law defining the emperor [legibus absolutus - not
bound by law] as above the law [quidquid principi placuit legis habet vigorem].
(Mackenney).
Eventually the latter view
(power from the people) loses all its religious undertones, and becomes an
anti-monarchical position; i.e. with the growth of scientific outlook people
come to expect empirical proof, testable, verifiable etc, rather than revealed/scriptural
authority; similar process affected "natural law" concept: political
thought shifted to be more like physical/scientific law, cf. Hobbes.
(vii) radical Protestantism:
It is important to note that whilst
Luther and Calvin had the most widespread influence, there were other
Protestant groups, many of whom were more radical, viz. Quakers (whose pacifism
and ideals of social service have had a tremendous influence – e.g. Quaker
businesses, prison reform), the Anabaptists and Doukhabors (kinds of Christian
anarchist, advocating free love, nakedness, and communal property even with
wives! Calvin condemned the Anabaptists as “those who live pell-mell like rats
in the straw’ and see Luther’s calling on “everyone who can [to] smite, slay
and stab rebels such as the Anabaptists], secretly or openly…” (see the
Extracts), also Presbyterians and Independents. The latter paved the way for
the Levellers and Diggers in the 17th century (they played an
important role in the English Civil War, and in the growth of democracy) etc.
(viii) capitalism:
The most significant
consequence of the Reformation, if Weber was right, is capitalism itself.
REFERENCES:
Bowle, J.: Western
Political Thought: University Paperbacks 1961
McLelland chapter 10
(on social contract theory)
Mackenney, R.:
Sixteenth Century Europe: Macmillan 1993
Oberman, H.: Luther,
Man Between God and the Devil: Fontana 1993
Sabine and Thorson
chapter 19
Skinner, Q.: The
Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Vol II, Cambridge 1978 (reprinted
1996)