Prompt: “Why has this theme remained popular since 1587?”

The theme in question is the idea of selling ones soul to Satan in order to obtain worldly benefits. The ideas of receiving things like power, riches, knowledge, sex, or happiness are ideas at the forefront of human want; and there are many people that would travel any length to fulfill that want. This is where demonic temptations can begin to look alluring. The story of Dr Faustus is one of the first documents on this topic. It tells the tale of a man rebelling against his Christian upbringing, and calling on the Devil to make a contract. In exchange for his soul, Faustus would receive 24 years of knowledge and luxury. He spoke with a demon named Mephistopheles. The demon deceived him, giving him misleading comforts and making him think hell wouldn’t be as bad as he previously thought. Of course these were lies, and at the end of the 24 years Faustus’s friends discovered his gory remains littering his home.

This idea of sacrificing your soul to gain of life of luxury has captivated people for millennia, and even today the concept has a grip on our culture. The reason people are still fascinated is because it tugs on our most basic desires. It appeals to our greed, our lust, our envy. Our most animalistic impulses, and the driving point: our sloth. Humans don’t want to put in the work to get what they want. We want to find the easy way out, so many of us cheat and lie and steal to get it. Ironically this is also what the Devil does. In the story of Faustus, Lucifer wasn’t using his dark magic to summon up the wealth. But instead he was simply stealing it from others. Like a common thief, no better than a rat. But Faustus wanted this. He would much rather Satan do his dirty work than put the effort in and do it himself.

This is why the topic has remained so popular over the centuries, its because sin is just as potent in man today as its always been. And so, by proxy, so is the Devil. Temptation and illusion, greed and sloth, these are what keep the wheels of evil turning. And until we collectively find the strength and willpower to face down these snares of seduction I imagine the topic will stay just as popular.

But that’s all these illusions are: snares. Because if you get down to the bottom line of it, Faustus was not living a life of luxury. In fact he was living just the opposite. Sure, he has all the wine and wealth he could ask for, but he also had all the depression and despair. He had to carry the weight of his fate every moment of those 24 years. He had to know that he would never find salvation, that he would spend eternity filled with anguish. He was bitterly afraid. The night before his sentence he called his friends to a meal, and he told them of his contract. Their advice was to plea for Gods mercy, to pray the night away and hold onto hope that his prayers would be answered. But when Faustus sat down to do just this he found that the guilt was far too much. He has promised himself to Satan, so much so that he couldn’t bring himself to ask God for salvation. His body parts were found flung around his house the next morning.

The moral of the story is that illusion is not the way to find happiness. Greed and sloth will not get you where you want to be, but will instead drag you down to despair. The only way to find happiness in this world is through hard work, dedication, and love for your fellow man. These are the only ways we can reach prosperity and satisfaction.

Question 1: What kinds of ideas were the “eutopians” promoting? Why is it perhaps not a coincidence that this desire to rethink the organization of society emerged in the sixteenth century in particular?

During the sixteenth century European societies were exploring lands foreign to them and the different peoples that came with those lands. They saw societies with politics, cultures and laws that were far different from England’s, and they noted that these societies were still able to prosper. Because of these discoveries many English thinkers of the day had a lot of new ideas to work with, and began critiquing and criticizing the cultural norms of England. The author Thomas More coined the term utopia, a word referring to a perfect society. He and other authors (such as Francis Bacon and Tommaso Campanella), explored in depth their takes on what a utopian society would be like. Many of the ideas centered around the upper and lower class, and how to abolish both and make everyone equal. One such idea was to make all privately owned land common wealth.  Another was to evenly split up labor. Instead of there being those who worked, and those on top who sat around and prospered off that work, this plan would make it so everyone works daily and evenly. It was introduced that if everyone worked all at once the amount of labor to individuals would be drastically reduced. Some even stated it could be cut down to no more than four hours a day.

 

Question 2:  What was the English Civil War all about?

The English Civil War occurred because King Charles was displaying more absolutist tendencies. He believed that he ruled with the Divine Right of Kings, a title passed down by God giving said king all of God’s rights. Charles also had a very shaky relationship with parliament. So shaky in fact that he actually dissolved parliament in January 1679. There was also suspicion among the people that Charles would bring Catholicism back to England. He had a Catholic wife, and his children with her were raised Catholic. This caused fear and distrust to breed among the people, and added to their dislike of their king.

Question 3: Who were the Levellers, and what did they believe?

The Levellers were a political movement during the time of the English Civil war. They emphasized religious equality, the rights to own private property, and extended suffrage. They expressed these belief’s and more in the manifesto “Agreement of the People”.

Prompt: Describe Bastiat’s concept of the politics of plunder.

Bastiat described plunder as a universal longing to live at the expense of someone else. He says this is the root of all evil, and that its extremely easy for man to succumb to this sin. So easy in fact that government is very likely to be buckle and give way to all sorts of legal plunder. Although one of governments primary goals is to do away with greed, opportunities of taking from one and redistributing to another can be very tempting. Bastiat’s quote on government is “Government is and ought to be nothing whatever but common force organized, not to be an instrument of oppression and mutual plunder among citizens; but, on the contrary, to secure everyone his own, and to cause justice and security to reign.”

Bastiat also talked about how we must not look to the state for our releif. The state is not the orgin of our success, therefor it cannot be the orgin of our releif. Looking at the state as if it were God and expecting as much from it only leads to manipulation of the people. It leads to tyrannical forms of governing. If the people put their utter trust in the government, looking to them for their answers and salvation, it can attract power hungry people who would happily take advantage of that blind trust. There needs to be a delicate balance of power between the state and the people, and the people need to keep a keen eye on the state. If the government were to lose its morality and began a legal plunder of the people, the people need to be strong enough to stand up for their own sense of legality and justice.

 

Prompt: Online education is bad for society because it puts classroom teachers out of work.

I disagree. Although it is true classroom teachers don’t gain a job when online schools are created, the creators of said online schools do get a job. Online school is very beneficiary for students who don’t think public school meets their requirements. There can be many reasons why this could happen, for example students can get bullied or harassed by their peers. They could have a disability that makes school extremely stressful. Or they could simply feel like they aren’t being taught as efficiently as they’d like to be. So for these students, myself as an example, online school can be extremely rewarding. Taking a student out of the classroom setting and allowing them to be more self taught can teach responsibility, time management and a lust for learning.

There will always be students who prefer public school, so there will always be a need for classroom teacher. But times are moving forward, and students should be able to take advantage of tools such as the internet to express themselves and their learning style. In conclusion, online schools may steal a few students away from classroom teachers. But giving a student a chance to sit down in a comfortable setting and actually learn, instead of trying to distract themselves from the stress of the classroom, can offer a brand new outlook on education the student never thought possible.

Prompt:  Describe family government in terms of the five institutional characteristics: sovereignty, hierarchy (authority), law, sanctions, and succession. Offer an opinion on what the source of the family’s sovereignty is.

Family is definitely a government, and should be classified and respected as one. It shares the five crucial characteristics needed for a government to work and function. The first is sovereignty. Most people think of parents, or any other legal guardian. They are respected as the highest authority of the household, and gain the sovereignty when they achieve the label of parents. But its not the label that makes them the sovereign, its the responsibility. The breadwinner of the family gains the power of sovereign, as they are the supporters of the home. I like to think of government as a pyramid, and sovereignty is the base. It needs to be stable and able to provide a steady income to hold up the rest of the household.

The next layer of the pyramid is hierarchy. Everyone in the household needs to understand the hierarchy of their own individual situation if the household is to function smoothly. In most family dynamics the hierarchy starts with the man, closely followed by the woman and farther down the chain the children. But times have changed so drastically that this isn’t always the case anymore. Sometimes the woman will have far more control than the man. Sometimes there’s only one parent, or no parents. This can lead to the older siblings of the children moving higher up the hierarchy chain. In some families the parents include the children in household decisions, giving them more of a say, and therefor a higher place on the chain. Different situations are so varied these days that hierarchies have become rather colorful, but there’s still always one in place if the household wants to have any order.

The next pyramid tier is law. Its held strong by the sovereign, the hierarchy deciding who makes the rules and who obeys the rules. Laws are crucial for a home to run smoothly, as without laws the little ones in the family will run rampant. Basic laws to prevent chaos are always needed to be enforced if a home is to run smoothly.

The next layer is sanctions. They are held up by law, and are the result of either obeying or disobeying said law. Sanctions can be good or bad, depending on if the sovereign in punishing or rewarding. Usually the children are the ones being affected by these, as they are the ones that need the household law enforced. They must learn the negative sanctions they’ll receive if they disobey the law, and the positive sanctions they’ll earn if they follow the law.

The very point of the pyramid is succession. Its what the parents want to grow tall and strong, and use the mentioned methods to advance. Its the child’s future, the ways they grow and prosper. Whether or not (as the name suggests) they’ll succeed, or end up another failure. The parents are the ones that mold and shape this, and they are also the ones who share in the success or failure of their child. Its the top point of the pyramid of family government, and its up to the parents and children if that point touches the stars, or simply crumbles into ruin.

Question 1: What were the causes and consequences of the Spanish revolt that occurred after Charles left to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor?

The Spanish revolt occurred because the Spanish people didn’t like being controlled by a foreign ruler. Charles didn’t even speak Spanish, and the people felt he was ill-suited to rule their territory. After Charles left to be crowned Holy Roman Emperor, the people revolted. This revolt greatly exhausted the people, so much so that when Charles returned he had a very easy time regaining authority over the people.

Question 2: What were the causes of the Dutch revolt? What was the “demonstration effect”?

The reasons for the Dutch revolt were all the intolerant acts King Phillip was executing against the protestants. He prosecuted thousands, intimidated them with a 10,000 man army, and under the Duke of Alba imposed a 10% sales tax. A full scale revolt was the response, and the Dutch defeated the Spanish and earned their independence in 1648.

The demonstration effect is when a country is inspired by another country that they think works effectively. In turn they adapt that countries methods into their own governing.

Question 3: Who were the contenting parties in the French wars of religion? What was the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre? What was the Edict of Nantes?

The French wars of religion were fought between the Catholics and the Protestants, also called Huguenots. The St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre was a large scale slaughter of over 10,000 Protestants. After that horror the two sides wrote the Edict of Nantes, a truce which guaranteed safety and tolerance to both religions.

Question 4: Describe the religious policy of Elizabeth I.

Elizabeth I seemed to be more of a grey area religious wise than many of her former monarchs. Her views and beliefs were a way for her to appeal to the people, so instead of choosing only one side she tended to stay more neutral. She appreciated many aspects of the Catholic church, but would not allow herself to be ruled by the papacy. Instead she remained absolute head of the church in England, and did her best to please both Catholics and Protestants.

Essay prompt: “Is the language of Foxe still compelling today?”

The writings of Foxe truly are a masterpiece. Throughout the centuries they have been lovingly read by families and pastors alike, at one point so lovingly they found themselves chained to church podiums. The stories of Lady Jane Grey, Latimer and Ridley and Thomas Cranmer are some of the most famous among them. They tales told of sophistication and defiance, faith and execution. Wonderfully written examples of protestants challenging the catholic church. But in this day of technology and internet, does this brilliant literature still compel people? Well, I had to read it, and after reading it I must to argue that yes it does.

Although the Catholic and Protestant flames of war have dimmed some since Foxe’s time, the human passion has not. Reading about these people, who they are and what they went through and fought for captures every part of the human spirit. The courage and determination it takes to fight for the things you believe in. The raw emotion, literacy and pride it takes to construct a debate for and about your faith. The fear, and yet the hope for a brighter tomorrow these people went through when they heard their execution date. Its just as inspiring now as it was when Foxe first placed ink to paper.

My personal favorite story is the tale of Lady Jane Grey. She was a pious protestant, and cousin to young king Edward VI. Edwards ambitious adviser, John Dudley, convinced the boy to write a will proclaiming Jane to inherit to the throne; for if he did not his catholic half-sister Mary would rule after his death. The boy died, and Jane was immediately married to Dudley’s son and whisked into queendom. But sadly, her rule would last no more than nine days. Mary Tudor, Edwards half-sister, very much wanted to steal the throne and had the popular vote to do so. Because she had the public support, she imprisoned Jane, her husband and her father in the Tower of London, proclaimed herself queen, and scheduled all of their public executions.

Jane was only seventeen at the time, and although she was young she was incredibly well spoken and educated. She was also very brave, and never once denounced her faith. She said this before her death, ‘I think that at the supper I neither receive flesh nor blood, but bread and wine; which bread when it is broken, and the wine when it is drunken, put me in remembrance how that for my sins the body of Christ was broken, and his blood shed on the cross. …I ground my faith upon God’s word, and not upon the church… The faith of the church must be tried by God’s word, and not God’s word by the church; neither yet my faith.’ With her faith in God sealed, she also sealed her fate and died with dignity.

That is only one example out of Foxe’s writings, but there are many more just as inspiring and human as this. The question was will this work still compel people, even with the destractions of modern day? My answer is as long as there are educated people reading these works and passing them down to students like me, us students will always take the time to become inspired and compelled by these works.

 

 

Question 1: What does John Locke mean by self-ownership? How does he think goods in the state of nature come to be owned by individuals?

John Locke description on the state of nature is of a time before government. A time where no one owned land, until someone mixed his labor with that land. By doing something like planting an orchard, or building a house a person can create a claim of ownership over that land they have labored on.

Question: How does the Age of Discovery provide an opportunity for Spanish thinkers to reflect on the idea of rights?

The Age of Discovery, or the Age of Exploration, was a time when Europeans began exploring the seas and other continents. They learnt new trade routes, cultures and knowledge previously unknown. With all these new peoples, and new ways of handling them, many philosophers began thinking of rights. They thought of the natural rights all humans have bestowed on them at birth, and that instead of invading and dehumanizing the natives they met they should treat them with the same respect they would treat a European. They acknowledged the human attributes, that being the ability to use logic, in the peoples Europeans came across. Many began believing that since these people of other cultures were still humans, they should be treated as such.

Essay prompt: “Was More risking persecution by the church because of this book?”

More’s Utopia, although beginning logically enough, soon devolves into obvious satire. More needed it to be obvious enough to be viewed as satire by the general audience reading it, otherwise the church persecuting him would be too much of a threat. He made the book so all of the more logical, not so revolutionary ideas were placed at the beginning.  There he talked of things like disbanding standing armies, for he saw them as tools of the king. He also said thieves should not be punished as badly as murderers, because if this were the case they’d be more likely to become murderers.

Only after these nonradical ideas were put into place did More begin his satire. The satire of destroying private property, gambling, pubs and recreational sports. This was so obviously satire that More named the teller of these opinions Raphael Hythloday, translated to talking nonsense. With the ability to claim complete satire, More gave himself a solid defense against the church persecuting him.

Question 1: How was the English Reformation different from the German Reformation?

The German reformation was centered on beliefs. Martin Luther’s passion and revolutionary ideas were what drove the reform forward. The English reformation was centered on politics, and the stability of a successor. King Henry VIII was worried his wife wouldn’t be able to produce a male a heir, and therefor looked to the scripture trying to find an acceptable way to have their marriage annulled.

Question 2:What do we learn about St. Francis Xavier’s missionary work in the letter you read for lesson 13?

Answer: St. Francis Xavier traveled the coast of India, doing his best to convert villages he came across to Christianity. He found the children were the easiest to convert, and the most confident and efficient at spreading the message. He would call all of them together each Sunday, and read the creed and commandments again and again until the children knew them by heart.  Then he would send them out to give the message of Christ to their parents, friends and neighbors. He also talked about the Brahmins, explaining in detail how poorly his view of them was. He said he could only find one Brahmin willing to listen wholeheartedly to his claims, and that by the end of their conversation the young man was practically begging St. Francis to convert him to Christianity.

Question 3:  What kind of impression are you left with by the Spiritual Exercises?  Why is Ignatius concerned about careless discussion of faith and good works?

Answers: He talks a lot about praising every part of the church and religious experience. He says to praise everything, from the priests to the church décor. He talks about fear, and says fear is just as important as love in the Christian church.  Ignatius is concerned about careless discussion of faith and good works because it takes away the humility. He thinks the good works we do should only be done for the love of God, and not to gain any sort of praise of reward in the mortal world. He thinks boasting about your good works almost cancels them out, as it steals any honest humility associated with that good act.