I think that is because things are taken to the extreme by men. What it brought to the world was bad because what was better was being abandoned. The good in the Renaissance was inherited from what preceded it, as in Anglicanism or Puritanism. Yes, but we don’t try to suggest that nominalism was “under God”…it was aversion to the truth that already was known and taught, as I’d argue the Renaissance was. For example, Scholasticism was distorted and twisted by the nominalists. Parts of it were secular, but as a whole, no. They, like Dante, were transitional figures.Īny good thing can be distorted by Satan for his ends, too hence, the Renaissance might be seen as good but later distorted and taken in a secular / atheist direction.
Yes, there are exceptions like Thomas More and Erasmus, but they are not representative of the spirit of the age. The problem is that the “renaissance man” who was the measure of all things was already leaning away from God. The first is the Renaissance the second the “Enlightenment” and classical Marxism leading to Communism. No you can have “man is the measure of all things” but under God, as a steward of His creation, which is entirely Christian, or “man is the measure of all things” without a God, which is wicked and leads to Communism, Nazism, and abortion-on-demand.
I’d argue that they were equally anti-Christian, only that one was nearer to the point of departure than the other, like Harvard in 1860 and Harvard in 1960. The Renaissance was within a Christian framework for the most part, whereas the “Enlightenment” was not at all: it was violently anti-Christian and anti-science also. I don’t know how any Catholic can’t clearly see that as the turning point. I will go to my grave blaming the post-Christian West on Bacon. The “New” Method, replacing the “Old” Method (Aristotle) named “man the measure of all things” after the classical relativism was strangled nearly to death by the Christians. not to mention socialism / Communism.įrancis Bacon freed thought from religion and tradition. If we have to trace it back hundreds of years, it’s the so-called “Enlightenment” (300 or so years after the Renaissance) and theological liberalism afterwards, that started the ball in motion, slowly. First you pervert sexuality by this insane separation, then by separating it from childbirth: by slaughtering children. The Pill also brought us abortion, as the legal precedent of the so-called “right to privacy.” It all goes back to that. The Founding Fathers had no original ideas.Ĭhecks and balances was semi-original. This is all the fruit of the Renaissance, come on. The Pill wasn’t conceived (haha) and designed by the people who used it. So we’re there now, and see the crumbling walls all around us. It took another generation for it to fully cause society and Christian civilization to break down. That and taking God out of the schools, combined with legal abortion in 1973, and welfare laws that decimated families, is all it took to set the ball well in motion. I say the cause is the sexual revolution: especially starting with widespread use of the Pill in 1960. If it was the fault of the Constitution, it took 175 years for the cause to kick in. This country preserved Christian morality in law for the most part till 50 years ago. What do you expect from the Constitution? Christian morality? These laws all flow from the movement that produced a religion-free Constitution, through which human society has regressed. We’re not supposed to be exhausting our energy in politics and when we do, the result is moral regression. The danger of all of the Christian energy wasted on political action is that, eventually, it leads to a let-down, as the Crusades led to the Renaissance. Michael (words in blue): I think he is a fellow Catholic.
This is from a little Facebook dialogue from March 2013, with William C.
0 kommentar(er)
