QUESTION 1

Part One: Renaissance Ideas

As Islam spread across large regions, Muslim scholars began to adopt ideas from Ancient philosophers. In the following passages, we read some thoughts about the role of Aristotle in Muslim and Renaissance Italian political thought. The first passage was written by Muslim scholar Mohammed Al-Farabi.

Now when one receives instruction.., if he perceives their ideas themselves with his intellect, and his assent to them is by means of certain demonstration, then the science that comprises these cognitions is philosophy. Therefore, according to the ancients [Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates], religion is an imitation of philosophy. Both comprise the same subjects and both give an account of the ultimate principles of the beings. For both supply knowledge about the first principle and cause of the beings, and both give an account of the ultimate end for the sake of which man is made - that is, supreme happiness - and the ultimate end of every one of the other beings. In everything of which philosophy gives an account based on intellectual perception or conception, religion gives an account based on imagination. In everything demonstrated by philosophy, religion employs persuasion. It follows, then, that the idea of Imam, Philosopher and Legislator is a single entity. ~ Al-Farabi (ca. 870-950)

The following passage comes from medieval thinker Roger Bacon:

The next consideration from effects is taken by comparing our state with that of the ancient Philosophers; who, though they were without that quickening grace which makes man worthy of eternal life, and where into we enter at baptism, yet lived beyond all comparison better than we, both in all decency and in contempt of the world, with all its delights and riches and honors; as all men may read in the works of Aristotle Seneca, Tully [Cicero], Plato, Socrates, and others; and so it was that they attained to the secrets of wisdom and found out all knowledge. But we Christians have discovered nothing worthy of those philosophers, nor can we even understand their wisdom; which ignorance of ours springs from this cause, that our morals are worse than theirs. For it is impossible that wisdom should coexist with sin. But certain it is that, if there were so much wisdom in the world as men think, these evils would not be committed. And therefore, when we see everywhere (and especially among the clergy) such corruption of life, then their studies must needs be corrupt. Many wise men considering this, and pondering on God's wisdom and the learning of the saints and the truth of histories have reckoned that the times of Antichrist are at hand in these days of ours. ~ Roger Bacon ca. 1271

Paul Halsall (1996) Medieval Sourcebook: Roger Bacon: Despair over Thirteenth Century Learning

Question: Based on these words, what can we say about the relationship between religion and philosophy in Islamic circles? In Christian Renaissance circles? Since both passages are drawing from the same ancient philosophers, what does this tell us about the origins of the Renaissance?

QUESTION 2

Part Two: Reformation and Political Authority

The following passage was written in the twelfth century by a Dominican Priest named John of Paris. Read this and consider what it tells us about the later dispute between the political power of Church versus State.

Secular power is more diverse, because of the diversity of climates and physical constitutions. Secondly, because one man alone cannot rule the world in temporal affairs as can one alone in spiritual affairs. Spiritual power can easily extend its sanction to everyone, near and far, since it is verbal. Secular power, however, cannot so easily extend its sword very far, since it is wielded by hand. It is far easier to extend verbal than physical authority. Third, because the temporalities of laymen are not communal...; each is master of his own property as acquired through his own industry. There is no need therefore for one to administer temporalities in common since each is his own administrator to do with his own what he wishes. On the other hand, ecclesiastical property was given to the [Christian] community as a whole... (pp. 85-6).

The next passage was written by Marsilius of Padua in 1324. It is part of a longer list of "truths" about the nature of authority. Consider again what it tells us about disputes of power during the later Reformation.

There can be only one supreme ruling power in a state or kingdom.

The number and the qualifications of persons who hold state offices and all civil matters are to be determined solely by the Christian ruler according to the law or approved custom [of the state].

No prince, no partial council, nor single person of any position, has full authority and control over other persons, laymen or clergy, without the authorization of the legislator.

No bishop or priest has coercive authority or jurisdiction over any layman or clergyman, even if he is a heretic.

The prince who rules by the authority of the "legislator" has jurisdiction over the persons and possessions of every single mortal of every station, whether lay or clerical, and over every body of laymen or clergy.

No bishop or priest or body of bishops or priests has the authority to excommunicate anyone or to interdict the performance of divine services, without the authorization of the "legislator."

Paul Halsall. (1996). Medieval Sourcebook: Marsiligio of Padua: Conclusions from Defensor Pacis, 1324

Question: Both of these works enjoyed a resurgence during the religious conflict of the sixteenth century. How would these arguments be used to support or challenge a break between the political king and the spiritual center in Rome? Be sure to mention which passage would support Catholic goals and which would support Protestant reforms.