Tag Archives: religion

Gladstone’s Points of Supposed Collision Between the Scriptures and Natural Science

Posted on by

Author: John Hall Gladstone was a British chemist born in 1827. He was privately educated at home and went on to attend University College, London where he received a gold medal for original research, and publishing a paper on guncotton and xyloidine. In1847 he attended Giessen University, where he studied under Liebig and graduated with a Ph.D. in philosophy. In 1848 he lost his wife along with his eldest daughter and only son, ostensibly only pausing his endeavors in science and social life. From 1850 to 1852 he was lecturer on chemistry at St. Thomas’s Hospital. He served as President of the Physical Society (which he founded) from 1874-76, and then as President of the Chemical Society from 1877-1879. Gladstone published work on bromination of rubber and commenced innovative efforts towards/in optics and spectroscopy. As an advocate and activist of education, he was an innovator in establishing practical and physical direction as well as the education of science to elementary school students. Gladstone was also involved  in Christian efforts, arranging religious meetings and bible classes among educated men and women. He was a member of the Royal Society. He died in 1902.

Context: Published in 1872, Gladstone initially gave this work as a lecture at the request of the Christian Evidence Society in order to defend Christianity and the influence of the bible from the incursion of New Science.

Language: The tone Gladstone uses is informative, he uses reasoning and scientific fact to prove his points. He gives his lecture from an educated point of view.

Audience: Christians and those who had doubts due to the increase of scientific knowledge. (the Christian Evidence Society)

Intent: Gladstone’s intent in this lecture was to convince his audience that science could explain and even verify religious beliefs and Christian sentiments. Gladstone addresses the skeptics view of controversy between science and religion. He also confronts Christian indignation and declaration of the irreligiousness of Darwin’s ideas.

Message: Gladstone’s message in this lecture was that science could support and maintain the historical beliefs of Christianity. He gave examples of earth structure change as well as fossils from beings that did not appear in the modern era, and related this to the Biblical story of Noah and the flood. He addressed the belief that the six days of creation were demonstrative of six different periods in history and concluded that Scripture could be proved by geology to be true and therefore the controversy over Genesis was mute. Gladstone professed interest in Darwin’s work and that although he did not agree with Darwin on the exact point at which evolution began, he respected the ideas Darwin had. Gladstone understood that religious individuals felt Darwin’s ideas attacked their beliefs of God’s active presence in the universe and their ideas on creation stemming from the Bible. He offered a different view of the matter, using textual evidence from the bible to prove that the idea of evolution did not negate the comprehension of the bible’s story of creation.

The Domostroi, Chapters 35-49

Posted on by

The Domostroi clearly sets out each person’s role in a household. It is very clear on how one should carry themselves and how to act in various situations. In chapter 35, the focus is on how servants should conduct themselves while running errands. They are supposed to be very conservative and follow every instruction given. They are told not to gossip at any point, and to give the utmost respect to whoever they are sent to. This includes not coughing, sneezing, or taking any interest in a household’s possessions.  For women, The Domostroi also lays out a very conservative lifestyle. They are not supposed to eat or drink at any point without their husband’s knowledge, have strangers in their household without the husband knowing, and cannot drink any type of alcohol other than light beer or kvass. This of course also means that no woman should ever drink alcohol to the point of drunkenness. The man’s role is primarily focused on maintaining the order of things and enforcing the rules set forth. It states that if a man does not structure his household in the way shown, “he will be destroyed now and forever. His house will also be destroyed.”

The Domostroi’s rules all follow the same religious trend. Everything that is said carries the force of God which could mean that it was either followed very closely or possibly very leniently. Some of the roles stated seem to be close to impossible to follow such as not being allowed to do normal bodily functions like coughing or sneezing in front of a master. Like many of the codes written before its content is very religiously skewed. If Christianity was widely accepted at the time then these texts may have been very valid. However, without a strong central authority that would strictly enforce these rules, I find it hard to believe that most people could follow such a strict and contextual code.

Chapters 37 and 38 discuss the proper ways in which to care for clothing and organize the house. Clothing should be kept neatly stored, and free from all stains. The author of The Domostroi takes careful consideration when outlining appropriate dress for a variety of occasions: work should be performed in old clothes, and the very best clothes should be worn to church and when going out in public. Chapter 38, entitled How to Keep {Dishes in Good Order and} Arrange the Domestic Utensils. {How to Keep Rooms} Neat and Clean. {How the Housewife should Punish Her Servants, How her Husband Should Supervise Her, Punish Her, and Save Her with Fear} outlines the proper ways to maintain the kitchen, prepare and save food and clean the house. The author places an emphasis on organization and clean hygiene practices (especially when handling/storing food), and says that entering an organized area “is like entering Paradise” (143).

Chapter 38 also touches upon the issue of enforcing organization and the maintenance of ‘Paradise.’ Wives should be punished with a beating, but should also be forgiven for their transgressions. Children and servants should be punished in a similar fashion, and no one should ever be struck out of anger or hatred. Chapter 39 says that a failure to correctly teach and enforce the mistress, servants and children would result in judgement from God. Alternatively, a master who could teach the other members of the household and maintains an organized house received mercy from God.

The Domostroi puts a strong emphasis on the importance of being clean and keeping an organized house. The author’s decision to use God’s judgement as punishment highlights the religiosity of the time period. Such punishment would have had no bearing on a society which wasn’t devout. The attention to cleanliness is also an indicator that people were not dirty and unhygienic, but rather that dressing nicely and keeping a clean, organized house was a matter of pride. The hierarchal nature of society can be seen especially well in the doling out of punishments: the master is responsible for teaching and discipling his wife, children and servants.

Chapters 40, 48, and 49 mainly talk about the role of the steward in the household. The steward runs the kitchens and all that encompasses, from planning meals to making sure thing are clean in the morning.. They are entrusted by the master with this task, so that the master can attend to other things. Part of the job is to check to make sure the house has enough foodstuffs and arrange for more to be bought if it is running low. There is advice included as to who should be trusted to buy from and how to attempt to even make some money with excess supplies. They should also walk through the kitchen every morning to make sure that everything is in it’s place and in good repair. After the husband and wife talk about the meals they want it is the stewards job to make sure they get what they want. He has buy and give  to the cooks and bakers the proper ingredients, then make sure the food is prepared properly. Afterwards he is in charge of dealing with leftovers and making sure everything is cleaned.

The position of steward is not too dissimilar to a position you might see in modern times in a large household. Now and assumably then it was the type of thing that a fairly rich family would have. To have your own bakers, cooks, and other serving people that you need someone to watch over them it would be a lot of people. The rules and instructions are quite strict for how they should act which makes sense due to the amount of money they would handle and opportunities for them to steal. It is interesting that a man must consult his wife before determining what the meals for the day will be but it makes sense. Food is stereotypically the women’s job and it keeps her from being unhappy with what she is eating. Overall these rules are very similar to the description of a modern job which is interesting for text over 500  years old.

The Domostroi, or “Household Order” in English arguably aligns itself very similarly to many seemingly basic ‘codes of conduct’ – especially when referring to property. For instance, people of fifteenth century Russia valued guarantees the same way present-day society does. With regards to servants and their handling of artifact property, the Domostroi places a target on said servant’s back, making sure the servant – if delivering goods – holds himself accountable every step of the way. The Domostroi also lays out codes for how people should conduct themselves as guests in others’ homes, codes that arguably everybody – regardless of a person’s culture – should follow. Some of these codes include not wandering about aimlessly and picking up objects without permission.

On a similar note, the Domostroi states that guests should always bring gifts to their respective hosts. Hosts are also required to make sure their stock (food, drink, utilities, etc.) is always full (The Domostroi explicitly states, a “sensible household should contain everything that will be used in the house during that year”)(152). One element of conduct in the Domostroi that is a debatable form of conduct (religion aside) is how women should behave. Chapters 35-49 of the Domostroi state that women shouldn’t drink – ever. It also places (arguably) too much responsibility on the husband with regards to what women can and cannot eat. The Domostroi states that wife’s must ask their husbands about what they can and cannot eat. The code also advocates for self-sufficiency, by teaching it’s readers how to cook, farm, and preserve stock for year-long consumption.

 

Domostroi Chapters 19-34

Posted on by

The Domostroi focused heavily on religion and obedience and how it is relevant in all aspects of life regardless of social class. Everything in a true Russian Christian’s life must be blessed or prayed on so that God will bless their work. This how-to also instructed men on how to look for a good wife and what made a good wife. A good wife must have all the qualities of a hard worker, a good mother, and is one who puts her family before herself. However the key is that a good woman must be devout and loyal. The next chapter discussed the hierarchal system of the household. The man of the house teaches all, and the power trickles down from the wife to children then to servants. There were heavy religious overtones that described obedience as being extremely important in a servant or a slave in the context that they must be religious and God-fearing, but masters should not abuse their power or position. The Domostroi also instructs good Christians on how to hire people, the requirements for a good servant being a God fearing individual as well as being handy in their respected craft, never have sinned, prone to good deeds. Overall one should be a good Christian; slave should use master’s goods. Another requirement is for servants to save their better clothes for holy days and when public, never when doing work, clean when done.

The Domostroi is quick to claim that God doesn’t discriminate based on class. In order to protect oneself from illnesses, one must stay away from sorcerers, Jews and pagan rituals. If one is ill, the only cure is to pray away the sick, essentially be a good Christian and God will heal all illnesses, God sends diseases to punish sinners. If one does not obey the commandments one will go to hell. It reverts back to the golden rule of do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Another way to live as a good Christian is to not live outside one’s means and to buy and use what one can afford to. If one lives beyond their worth they will be scorned and ridiculed. If one lives outside their means, no one will help them because it is considered a major sin because it does not please god to live outside one’s means. This is especially shown if one has slaves but cannot afford them. The fear is that the slaves will not be obedient and as a result they will rob, steal, drink, if owned by foolish people.

Role of women was greatly discussed. The overall theme was that men must teach women, but be gentle and civil and not cruel, wives should always be obedient and devout. A good housewife is intelligent, frugal, gentle, generous and devout. A way to keep frugal is to save scraps from cloth used to make clothes to save to use for later. It is important to create a good workspace for each distinct craft, so as to prevent clutter to keep a good and clean household. Another way to keep a good household is to not gossip or entertain gossip. It is also the mistress’ duty to oversee servants’ work, to reward servants for good work, and if the servants do not do their work well, to punish them. Above all, a wife must be loyal and obedient, knowledgeable and social, ask their husband’s advice on everything, obey husband regardless of where she is, do not drink, and behave properly.

Domostroi (Chapters 1-18)

Posted on by

The Domostroi represents the many facets of life for the “fortunate few” in Muscovy’s social hierarchy.  Those living under this social system were subjected to strict and detailed standards of behavior and expectations.  We have determined that at the crux of this system was a “culture of fear” that was responsible for ensuring proper social conduct.  This means that this group of people followed the Domostroi‘s guidelines not because it was necessarily beneficial but because they were motivated by fear of consequences.  These consequences were social, political, and most strikingly, religious.  There is a heavy emphasis on how one should appear to God and to his peers, as he represented his family’s name and place within the religious and social hierarchy.  It seems then, that the household was not restricted to its physical space, but extended into the city, society, and religion of Moscow.

There were many expectations for Christians at this time. Specifically, the head of the household was expected to “Do God’s will faithfully and keep His commandments” (65).  If one did not, he would “…answer for [himself] on Judgement Day” (65). In turn, he was expected to teach these values not only to his wife and children, but also to his servants. However, these values were not to be taught through abuse or violence, but rather through love and by example. Throughout the document there was an emphasis on maintaining the social hierarchy already imbedded within the culture, especially with the emphasis on the importance of both priests and the Tsar. The Domostroi notes to “Always approach bishops eagerly and offer them the honor that is due… Fall at their feet and obey them in everything, as God commanded” (69). Regarding the Tsar, one was expected to “Fear the Tsar and serve him faithfully… Do not say anything false to him, but tell the truth, deferentially, as though you [speak] to God Himself” (71). Throughout the document, explicitly stated within each section were the expectations for Christian individuals and then subsequently the rewards and punishments for adhering to or disobeying these mandates. In addition, another way this order was maintained was through the emphasis on helping others less fortunate than oneself. By encouraging people to donate what they could to the poor, there was no emphasis on rising socially, but rather on staying where you were, and helping those poorer than you. By applying this mentality to the social hierarchy, this document allowed the nobility to maintain order. The culture of fear emphasized not only applied to God and His wrath, but also to the clergy and Tsar.

Another part of the Domostroi lays the rules of savoir vivre attached to hosting events. This section possessed two main parts. The first described the manner in which a priest should be received on holy days. The host was the master of his home and in charge of preparing, inviting, and offering food, while the guests had to show humility and respect. The priests invited were supposed to perform the ritual appropriate for the occasion. The priest had to pray for the Tsar and the Tsaritsa, the members of the clergy and finally “all that is profitable to the man of the house, his wife, children, and servants” hinting the role genders played in the society. It is also interesting to point out that the host had to invite as many priests as possible; it might suggest that such actions were also used to show one’s wealth as well as nobility. The second section regarded the behavior to possess should one invite guests. It demonstrated that not only the host was in charge of the preparation, and conducting the gathering, but that it was also his role to respect God through the evening’s interactions. It was the host’s responsibility that guest behaved appropriately, eat and drink enough to honor God, but not too much. This chapter also used fear as the method of choice to convince its reader. Shall you guest misbehave or utter blasphemy and food will turn into dung in their mouths, angels will report your actions to the Devil as opposed to God and “such deeds will stand on Judgment Day.”

Similarly latter passages of The Domostroi bring that culture of fear to the daily religious lives of the people. Men were told that they should attend church services daily. And women should go as they are able and have their husbands permission. Church goers were instructed to stand like pillars while praying “with fear and trembling, with sighs and tears, {turning the eyes of your body towards the abyss}”(13). Fortunately there were ways to make amends, unceasing prays for long periods of time was said to allow the holy spirit to enter your body. A good priest was also considered an acceptable remedy. A priest was to be held in fear when you come to him in love to confess your sins. This fear was doubtlessly preached throughout Russia and was a significant part of every true christian’s life. The father was taught by the church and he taught his family what they said. That adulterers, homosexuals, thieves, drunkards, swindlers and slanderers will not possess the kingdom of God.

The discussion of daily life and family relationships shows the importance of children in families and society.  Parents were expected to care for and protect their children or be ridiculed by their neighbors.  These relationships were also highly gendered, as mothers were responsible for their daughter’s instruction in female crafts and fathers were responsible for teaching their son a specific trade.  Education was considered important because it made the daughter or son more marriageable, thus enabling families to improve their social position through their children.  The same concept applies for the establishment of a dowry, which was considered a father’s responsibility.  The culture of fear began early in children’s education, even before the children started learning themselves.  Parents that failed to instruct their children away from sin would pay the price on Judgment Day and be publicly shamed, possibly having their house dishonored and paying a fine to the government.  As part of their education, children were taught to fear God, but they were also taught to fear their parents.  The Domostroi references biblical passages that advised fathers beating their sons so that they might behave properly, and there is little mention of affection between parents and children (96).  Even the discussion of caring for parents in old age is framed in terms of cleansing sins instead of familial love.  It is clear from these chapters that the level of respect between family members was a means of establishing social position and proving one’s religiosity and merit to the community.

Societal Aspects of Post-Kievan Rus

Posted on by

I believe that a lot can be learned about the society of Rus through the interpretation of legal documents such as the Novgorod Judicial Charter. As we already know the Russian Orthodox Church has played a vital role in Russian history since its introduction to the area, and this is a perfect example of the influence it had. By far the most frequently repeated phrase in this legal document is “kissing the cross”. This term referred to the act of kissing the cross as a symbol of a litigants promise to tell the truth during a court case. While this is similar to our modern system of swearing on the Bible, it would mean drastically more to an ancient society which revolved around religion.

This document also shows the considerable power that the Church itself wielded at the time. Like in previous legal codes, the Novgorod Charter states that a portion of fines leveed on criminals would be sent to the archbishop as well as his lieutenant and the steward. This meant that the Church more than likely commanded vast wealth at this point and would have owned large amounts of property coming from criminals who were unable to pay their fines.

Another aspect of this document that I found incredibly interesting was the equality that was commanded by the document. The first rule stated is that “everyone is to be judged equally, whether boyar, [a man of] middling means, or a poor man [lit., a young man]. While we cannot always tell how often these rules were enforced, this shows a clear attempt to give all freemen a legal equality that would not have been seen in other parts of the world at this point in time. However, it should be noted that while this court system seemed to be set up fairly, it revolved around witness testimony, something that has historically been a problem. Not only does your memory change over time, it would not be difficult to bribe or intimidate somebody to say that you were right in your argument.

Stearns on Education

Posted on by

Education is a major theme dispersed throughout Stearns full length book, Childhood in World History. Though mentioned sporadically through different sections of his book, I think what Stearns is trying to get at with education boils down to three main chronological themes. Firstly, how religion sparked the rise of importance of education. Secondly, the idea that children are the future led to the shift of children moving from the workplace into the classroom. Thirdly, stemming from the previous two revelations, a newfound obligation was born for parents to promote academic achievement and thus provide a solid, well-rounded education for their children.

Religion and Education

In Stearns chapter regarding childhood in the classical civilizations, he brings up how religion, Confucianism in specific, began to place an emphasis on education. At the time education was accessible largely by the upper class rather than the lower class, though in some special cases certain talented boys or girls may have received training from “an upper-class sponsor.” Regardless of class, Confucianism made it “clear that moral as well as academic instruction was essential.”

World religions began to push for a more formal religious education. This religious “surge,” as Stearns calls it, was unprecedented. The result was “a redefinition of what education was about” and “an impulse to spread elements of education more widely that had been the case in the classical centuries.” World religions attempted to bridge the gap between children and their spirituality while simultaneously promoting literacy and the importance of education.

From the Workplace to the Classroom

Stearns identifies three fundamental changes that have contributed to what we now know as modern childhood. His first and most essential change “involves the conversion of childhood from work to schooling.” In earlier western societies that were more agriculturally centered, the child was looked at to work and help provide for his or her family. Children receiving an education began to gain increasing value. A proper and well-rounded education was deemed necessary in order to be a positive contributor to society. Children were no longer children; they were future adults. They were viewed as the future. “The child is the object of state upbringing.” The amount of children attending school all across the globe skyrocketed. Not only were children going to school, but they were going to school longer, through high school and even college. “This was a real conversion: childhood now meant schooling, above all.”

A Parent’s Obligation

As the role of education changed and gained increasing prominence, the natural responsibilities of being a parent changed as well. Education evolved from being a luxury enjoyed by the upper-class to a universally acknowledged necessity. Slowly but surely, “growing numbers of middle- and even lower-middle-class parents began to send children to at least a year or two of secondary school.” In the West, the education of females became more common due to the notion that, “in a modern society, mothers must be educated in order to raise their children properly.” As children began to be looked at as the keys to the future rather than simple emotionless objects, education became a fundamental and essential part of life.

 

 

The Widow’s Prize

Posted on by

This reading focused on how the Mongol Invasion greatly influenced Rus’ politics and culture. As a result of this influence, The First Treaty of Novgorod was created. This treaty created more communication between the princes of the various provinces. This created a stronger alliance between the provinces; however the treaty seemed to be directed more to the citizens then the government. This is evident based on the new laws that were created by the treaty. Another significant part of the reading was Dmitrii Donskoi’s last will and testament. What was truly significant about this will was the recognition he gave to his wife. She was given a significant amount of power for a woman of that era. She was in charge of distributing the land between the sons. The rest of the will described what son would get what bit of land, and even included any future sons.

This was a very interesting reading, what made so remarkable was the last will and testament of Dmitrii, was his devout understanding of God. “And if, because of my sins, God takes away one of my sons…(Reinterpreting Russian History, pg 89)”. The strength of his faith and the fact that he would blame himself rather than God for the potential death of a son gives Dmitrii a much more martyred appearance. It is even more interesting to note that his wife gained distributing control of his property and possessions. Women during the Middle Ages, especially in Western Europe, had very little privileges and had a lot of social restrictions. Dmitrii seemed to think far more into the future than most ‘civilized’ Western Europeans at the time; he even had written in his will that his children should obey their mother.

I have two major questions on this reading. 1) How did the Orthodox Church feel about this Last Will and Testament? And 2) Was this the way most widows were treated, and if not was this simply because she was a part of the nobility?

Religion in a Revolutionary Context

Posted on by

Religion remained the primary justification of the French Revolution by the citizens of the third estate. Robespierre, the leader of Public Safety, pushed both ideologies of Supreme “Reason” and “Being” in order to provide a more understandable means to motivate revolutionaries. The state religion at the time revolved around a Deist philosophy, the notion that there is no divine intervention and God is a clockmaker who merely wound up the springs of nature and set them into motion. Logically, because God cannot interrupt the flow of the human course, but simultaneously promoted particular virtues that the monarchy did not reflect, it became justified that it was their right to overthrow the atheistic monarch to perpetuate God’s will. Religious sentiments such as these are extremely powerful. When man and woman can be convinced that their violence is justified and the result will bring them higher fortunes, it is very difficult to stop them.

La Marseillaise, the French National Anthem composed during the French Revolution, contained very violent language that no one could find religiously justifiable without it’s context. Phrases such as “Their impure blood should water our fields”, paired with adjectives like “vengeful”, actually caused it to be banned by Napoleon and Louis XVIII due to its revolutionary implications. These documents reveal that revolutionary culture during the French Revolution was fueled by violence while simultaneously being justified in religious contexts.

What is Enlightenment?

Posted on by

Being called enlightened alludes to the belief that someone is more knowledgeable about a topic than the majority of the community. This process is brought about when one begins to think for himself, therefore looking beyond how society sees things in order to create new thoughts and assumptions about how something is and what it might be/become. Immanuel Kant, the great German philosopher, defined Enlightenment as “man’s release from his self-incurred tutelage”. In this statement he expresses Enlightenment as thinking outside of the box in order to broaden ones mind and break away from the societal norms that they had been learning under since their birth. We understand that the process of enlightenment is necessary to progress in the global environment; I contend that Enlightenment has been an ongoing process that has been in motion since the dawn of man. How else (besides lucky discoveries) did people invent things without thinking “how can I make this tool better?”, and, at the root of it, isn’t that question the base of Enlightenment? Therefore, I believe, at its most basic point Enlightenment is the drive for a society to break out of its shell in search for methods that make the population’s lives easier by discovering new and improved tools and processes of getting things done.

What is Enlightenment?

Posted on by

Enlightenment is the abandonment of tutelage; the active seeking out of knowledge, freedom of thought, and the answers to earthly, religious, and spiritual queries. It is a process, not a state of being; to be truly and fully enlightened is a state of being that is unattainable. Enlightenment is particularly important in the presence of monarchs and despots who may restrict certain freedoms of their subjects. It is essential that the subjects of a monarchy question and argue in favor of freedom of thought, and not blindly obey in the face of an unjust and unenlightened tyrant. Kant argues that many people are unable or unwilling to seek enlightenment due to their self-incurred tutelage. He says that “a man may postpone enlightenment in what he ought to know, but to renounce it for posterity is to injure and trample on the rights of mankind.”