Humanities & Classics 1002
|
|
Renaissance Forum
Humanities & Classics 1002 |
    |
|
In Reply to: PLEASE POST YOU FIRST REQUIRED POSTING AS A REPLY TO THIS posted by TOM BACIG on December 13, 1998 at 19:30:06:
:
The views concerning humankind and the nature of humankind and also the views about humans relationships with others and with God differed greatly form the Medieval times to the Renaissance. When reading Thomas a Kempis' Imitaion of Christ and Pico della Mirandola's Oration on the Dignity of Man we can see these contrasting views.
Thomas a Kempis' views are those of the Medieval period. According to a Kempis man should be meek and inward. Only the meek and inward man could experience all that God had to offer. Man was not to rely on others for comfort, friendship, help, or love. These were all services God would provide if man was deserving. In order to be deserving of CHrist one must "despise outward things," put all one's trust in God, pray and work hard "aura and labora," and suffer as Christ did. Basically, God only loved those who gave up all comfort, love, and happiness and who worked, prayed, and were meek servants to Christ.
With the change in times from the Medieval period to the Renaissance period, views on humankind and man's relationship with God changed drastically. Pico della Mirandola's Oration of the Dignity of Man is one place we can look to find the beliefs of the time. According to Mirandola, the creation of man was a great miracle. "man is rightly both called a great miracle and judged a wonderful being indeed." God created free will which means that humankind could chose his "abode" and a "form" and could possess "functions" he desires. In Mirandola's views man is not required to live a life of solitude or a life of fear of God. Rather, man can be happy, make choices, and stil love God. The difference is God loves the diversity and freedom of man and does not expect all men to live the lives of monks. Also interesting is the portion where Mirandola says "...we may understand that we may become that which we will to be. We should have especial care to this, that it should never be said against us, that although born to a privileged position, we failed to recognize it and became like unto wild animals and senseless beasts of burden...". I think this quote is almost the exact opposite of the views of Thomas a Kempis.
In the Name of the Rose one character that holds true (or at least appears to_ to the views of a Kempis is Jorge. He has no room in his life for happiness or laughter. He (supposedly) lives a life of solitude, honoring God by praying and working. On the other hand, William of Baskerville is more Renaissance in his lifestyle. WHile he is still a monk, he makes his won choices and allows himself to laugh and share in the company and trust of other men, particularly the young Edgil.
It is interesting how in roughly one hundred years the views on such matters changed so drastically.