World Affairs Board - View Single Post - Geographic Catalysts for Secularization in Western Europe

Ray · 02-09-2007, 12:03 PM

I have not read the works that you have quoted.

With all respect to the authors who must be experts in their fields and I am hardly a person to comment on their views, yet, I look at the whole issue as a political struggle with geography as a fait accompli. I maybe wrong.

As I see it, it was a mere struggle between two schools of thought within the realm of Christendom, even though culturally they appeared different. The intrinsic percepts were same. It was at the Peace of Westphalia that the divide came into absolute reality. Till then, in my opinion, the lines were blurred.

Just a point of interest.

The Holy See, as the central authority of all Christendom, had long been engaged in a mortal quarrel with the lay power of what was called "The Empire," that is, the Emperors of German origin who had general, but very complicated and varied authority, not only in the German-speaking countries, but over northern Italy and a belt of what is now eastern France, as also over the Low Countries and certain groups of the Slavs.

A lifetime before the Popes left Rome this struggle had been coming to a climax under one of the most intelligent men of Christendom, the Emperor Frederick II, whose power was the greater because he had inherited not only the old diversified rule over the German States and the Low Countries and what we call today eastern France, but also eastern and southern Italy. The whole of central Europe, except the States governed immediately by the Pope in the middle of Italy, were more or less under Frederick's shadow, under his claim to power. He challenged the Church. The Papacy won eventually but the Papacy as a political power had become exhausted in the struggle.

A third party benefited by a violent duel between two others. It was the king of France who now became the chief force, and for seventy years, that is, during all the bulk of the fourteenth century (from 1307 to 1377) the Papacy became a French thing, the Popes residing in Avignon (where their huge palace remains to this day) and the men elected to fill the office of Pope being, after the change, mainly French.

Thus, it will be observed that the Papacy was more of a regional entity depending on the political shifts.

Likewise, the Protestant movement, was also influenced with the political factors of the time and more so with the growth of vernacular literature which replaced Latin as the universal language. The history of England is a case in point of the struggles of the two sects of Christendom being churned by political jockeying.

National and racial feeling took advantage of the confusion in movements like that of the Hussites in Bohemia. Their pretext against the clergy was a demand for the restoration of the cup at Communion to the laity. In the same way opponents of central authority could point to the Papacy as a mere local thing, an Italian, southern thing. The Pope was becoming as much an Italian Prince as he was head of the Church. Grafted on to this quarrel were violent quarrels between laity and the clergy. The endowments of the Church were very large, and corruption, both in monastic establishments and among the seculars, was increasing. Endowment was beginning to be treated more and more as a revenue to be disposed of for rewards or any political programme.

Notwithstanding, I am also intrigued with the line of thought as to how geography influenced the events of Christendom.

All said and done, this subject is very complicated since history and contradictions that creep up on/ on any strain of thought one wants to pursue, makes it a project of very serious study and more so better addressed by academicians.

02-09-2007, 12:03 PM	#11 (permalink)
Ray Postmaster General *Military Professional* Join Date: 08-20-03 Posts: 28,276 Country:	I have not read the works that you have quoted. With all respect to the authors who must be experts in their fields and I am hardly a person to comment on their views, yet, I look at the whole issue as a political struggle with geography as a fait accompli. I maybe wrong. As I see it, it was a mere struggle between two schools of thought within the realm of Christendom, even though culturally they appeared different. The intrinsic percepts were same. It was at the Peace of Westphalia that the divide came into absolute reality. Till then, in my opinion, the lines were blurred. Just a point of interest. The Holy See, as the central authority of all Christendom, had long been engaged in a mortal quarrel with the lay power of what was called "The Empire," that is, the Emperors of German origin who had general, but very complicated and varied authority, not only in the German-speaking countries, but over northern Italy and a belt of what is now eastern France, as also over the Low Countries and certain groups of the Slavs. A lifetime before the Popes left Rome this struggle had been coming to a climax under one of the most intelligent men of Christendom, the Emperor Frederick II, whose power was the greater because he had inherited not only the old diversified rule over the German States and the Low Countries and what we call today eastern France, but also eastern and southern Italy. The whole of central Europe, except the States governed immediately by the Pope in the middle of Italy, were more or less under Frederick's shadow, under his claim to power. He challenged the Church. The Papacy won eventually but the Papacy as a political power had become exhausted in the struggle. A third party benefited by a violent duel between two others. It was the king of France who now became the chief force, and for seventy years, that is, during all the bulk of the fourteenth century (from 1307 to 1377) the Papacy became a French thing, the Popes residing in Avignon (where their huge palace remains to this day) and the men elected to fill the office of Pope being, after the change, mainly French. Thus, it will be observed that the Papacy was more of a regional entity depending on the political shifts. Likewise, the Protestant movement, was also influenced with the political factors of the time and more so with the growth of vernacular literature which replaced Latin as the universal language. The history of England is a case in point of the struggles of the two sects of Christendom being churned by political jockeying. National and racial feeling took advantage of the confusion in movements like that of the Hussites in Bohemia. Their pretext against the clergy was a demand for the restoration of the cup at Communion to the laity. In the same way opponents of central authority could point to the Papacy as a mere local thing, an Italian, southern thing. The Pope was becoming as much an Italian Prince as he was head of the Church. Grafted on to this quarrel were violent quarrels between laity and the clergy. The endowments of the Church were very large, and corruption, both in monastic establishments and among the seculars, was increasing. Endowment was beginning to be treated more and more as a revenue to be disposed of for rewards or any political programme. Notwithstanding, I am also intrigued with the line of thought as to how geography influenced the events of Christendom. All said and done, this subject is very complicated since history and contradictions that creep up on/ on any strain of thought one wants to pursue, makes it a project of very serious study and more so better addressed by academicians. __________________ "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination." I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to. HAKUNA MATATA Last edited by Ray : 02-09-2007 at 12:10 PM.