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:
Thomas a Kempis' Imitation of Christ is completely the oppoosite of Pico della Mirandola's Oration on the Dignity of Man. Their views of humankind and it's condition completely clash.
The first view, that of the Medieval time is from Thomas a Kempis. His view of humanity is basically that humans struggle with the battle between God and worldly possesions(things). This battle is won by finding God through turning inward and concentrating solely on God and then earthly things can no longer distract you. This is stated when Thomas a Kempis writes, "Learn to despise outward things and thou shalt see the kingdom come." He also states, "When thou hast Christ, thou art rich and it sufficeth thee." This is basically saying that you don't need worldly wealth because Christ will take care of your needs. Thomas sees humans in a state or condition of confusion. He states, "..to God belongeth to help and to deliver from all confusion." So humans to Thomas need God or they will remain lost in a state of confusion.
In the Imitation of Christ the word meek appeared six times in a single passage and that really jumped out at me. Meek is defined (by my handy dandy pocket Webster's Collegiete Dictionary) as enduring injury with patience and without resentment. I think that says alot about the time and the whole monastic life that Thomas was apart of. They just obediently obeyed God and were totally submissive to whatever they had to endure to get closer inwardly to God. It was all about the lifestyle of work and prayer and there wasn't time for anything else. Their lifestly never involved questioning authority or God. God was the only way of life and you just had to accept life as it was handed to you no matter what your social status. I think that is why Thomas can so easily write this piece because he knows all about accepting life as it is handed to you as he started out as a lowly peasant and ended up becoming a prior. Thomas' life motto was probably summed up in this line, "The meek man God defendeth and delivereth." His life was a prime example of that.
That is one of the major differences between these two pieces. Pico della Mirandola knew no humble beginnigs. He came from a wealthy family and was praised for being smart. He was the son of an Italian prince and because he was a child prodigy he studied at all of the finest schools during the renaissance era. Pico had the benefit of being exposed to the Aristolean tradition and was probably grealty influenced by some great literary works. His work the Oration on the Dignity of Man states another view of humanity. Pico's view of humanity isn't that humans are in a state of confusion and need guidance like Thomas states but they are in a battle with their own free will that God has given them. Pico's work gives humans the choice between good and evil and God and evil and through that we mold ourselves into the people we want to be by choosing which path we want ot follow. Pico states, "we may choose that which we will to be." So if we will to be good we will be good and so forth. Of course the opposite is true as Mirandola writes, "that freedom of choice He has given, make ourselves something harmful out of what is salutary." So basically that leaves the human condition with a battle to do what is right and an excuse not to. "We toil with all our strength to follow it." It also gives humans the freedom to do whatever they want; including enjoy life which is a huge change from the monastic life. That is kind of the central theme of the renaissance time period. Life was about enjoying the now. It was about this world and not worrying about the next world. People were finally allowed to be human and express themselves. That is what Pico's piece is all about the freedom to express yourself.
For this reason the church probably wasn't very happy with Pico because then there is room for disobedience to God. This has always been a huge debate between christians and non-christians alike, the idea of free will. If God is all knowing how can humans have free will? This is where the clash resides between these two pieces. Is Thomas right? Does Christ control all of human destiny and we are just lost souls? Or is Pico right? Do humans control their own destiny through free will? I'm sure we will never know but I think I tend to agree with Pico. I believe you can be whatever you want to be as long as you have the will to do it. It kind of goes along with that old saying if you put your mind to it you can accompish anything. I am a firm believer in making your own destiny not letting destiny run your life. But hey that's just me!
Obviously the characters in the Name of the Rose side with Thomas because they were from the same time as him so that is all they knew. But what do you think? Free will or are we pre-destined?
*Mary