The Origin of Protestantism in Europe - Assignment Example

RUNNING HEAD: ANSWER THE QUESTIONS Answer the Questions Q: What were the beliefs of Luther, Zwingli and Calvin? A: Luther, Zwingli, Calvin were Augustinian, that is, they were the preachers of Augustine, in the complete failure of any human being to save themselves by good works and coming to faith. Luther made a more stress on this than Calvin. In one of his works he stressed that all the people were slaves to sin, and they were free to choose sin unless God acted to change their hearts. This was narrated in his book “The Bondage of the Will” Calvin and the rest would have agreed with this. They believed that salvation was completely reliant on Gods Grace, an entirely unjust errand he courteously chose to show to people who did not deserve it at all. According to them, all people are rebellious and deserve only Gods just punishment, so its up to God’s will to choose anyone, not because anyone deserves it for something but because its God’s unjust will to show his mercy as it was his kind choice. Calvin and Luther stressed that the center of the Christian faith was. "Justification by faith alone" (and related to that salvation by grace alone, not at all by works) was at the CENTER of the Christian faith, and this is the central teaching of the religion which needs to be recovered and is to b taught to everyone. They believed that people preserved more liberty to assist with Gods grace, that the possessions of the plummet did not influence the human determination Q: Thirty Years War from Ch.13, discussing why it took place? Who was on each of the sides (what countries, important personalities); important battles; and the peace that ended it? Why do you think that this was the last important of the religious wars? A: The Thirty Years War is one of the great clashes of early modern European history. it consisted of a series of declared and undeclared wars which wrath through the years 1618-1648 throughout central Europe. During the war the opponents were, on the one side, the house of Austria: the Habsburg Holy Roman Emperors Ferdinand and Ferdinand together with their Spanish cousin Philip. The Habsburgs were opposed by various international opponents of House of Austria, during the long time of the Thirty Years War: the Danish, Dutch and, above all, France and Sweden. The Thirty Years War was a German civil war, in addition to the international scope. It was also; somehow, religious war among Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists. The series of conflicts, military and political, which make up the Thirty Years War, are highly complex. The main cause for this war was the inner crumble of the empire from 1555, as proved by the flaws of the majestic power, by the disgusting deficiency of patriotism evident by the lands of the empire, and by the paralysis of the imperial authority and its agencies among the Protestant estates of Southwestern Germany, which had been in a state of restlessness since 1555. As a result the whole of Germany was in a in a state of discontent. Another important cause was the religious groupings which, after moving back for a short time, grew more powerfully early in the seventeenth century. One of the causes of the war was that the countries which were forming the Austrian provinces belonged to the empire. And the Empire, due to the geographical position of these countries, became involved in the current dealings in Eastern Europe. The famous battles were the battle of Breitenfeltd and Lutzen. In the last few years of War, the parties were actively consulting at Osnabrück and Münster in Westphalia. On 24 October, 1648 the Peace of Westphalia was signed, ending the Thirty Years War. Inside the German piece of the Empire, personal work out of unusual religion was allowed and the parts of government were turned religiously neutral. So it prevails that it was the last important of religious wars. Q: What is the doctrine of "predestination"? Whose idea was it? Does it offer any incentive to do good works? A: There is the two concepts pf predestination. The first is predestination on the basis of knowledge before hand. Predestination is the everlasting choice of God, happening from his kindness, by which he makes a chronological arrangement of Salvation giving every person the possibility to receive unending Salvation. The second is the faith that God is sovereign and settles on everything that will happen apart from of the spirit of human beings and that what God concludes no man can change. There are two points here, single predestination and double predestination: Single predestination means that those who will come to heaven are chose in advance by GOD. Double predestination means it has been concluded before that who will be in heaven and who will be in hell. Augustine was the first person to build up a methodical teaching of predestination. The obligation he felt to protect the unmerited, random nature of elegance escorted him to build up the doctrine of predestination. Predestination withdraws the significance of actions. Thus, according to Predestination even if someone wants to apologize, he cannot, because he can’t until God changes him. This means that this doctrine does not compels or urge to anyone for good deeds. Q: How did the Catholic Church respond to the reform movements? Discuss the results of the Council of Trent. What were the goals and techniques of the Jesuits? A: the Catholic movement started about 1592, which pursued the Council of Trent. Some of the princes and a few Catholic theologians took part in it. On the contrary, the second movement carried out, with the masses of clergy and laity and was clear by a passionate courage of confidence and an ardent requirement for the increase of Catholicism. The optimistic enthusiasm among the Protestants was perhaps not so huge, still their adherent mood was uniformly aggressive and their pugnacious was also not less then anyone. Soon after the beginning of war, it became patent that communal and financial causes made Germany an encouraging soil for its growth. Financial existence that had been grown greatly, from the second half of the sixteenth century was now ceased. As a result there was a large number who were pleased to have the chance of sustaining themselves as salaried military and of inspiring themselves by pillage. This dissatisfaction, mutual with the simplicity with which crowds were prepared, assisted in extending the war Q: Consider the relationships between the surplus of food, due to agricultural advancements, and the rise of cities, specialized skills, and trade. How did advancements in transportation facilitate this process? A: There is a direct relationship in the surplus food, due to agricultural advancements and the rise of cities, specialized skills, and trade. The advancements in agriculture have led to access food production, the rise in the specialized skills are advantageous in producing ore variety of food in much better way. The raise in cities id due to the raise in population, this has increased the demand for food. This is adequately done by the agricultural advancements. Advancements in transportation has facilitated this process a lot, as the food is not bound for only one area but can be easily transported to others. Thus the surplus food doesn’t get wasted and utilized in a better way. Q: The traditional medieval order of clergy, nobility, and peasantry may seen comprehensive and stable, but was medieval society so neatly divided? How were these three orders experienced differently by men and women? And where did townspeople and Jews fit into this tripartite scheme? A: medieval foundations divided their society into three orders: those who pray those who fight those who work Those Who Pray .They held a special place within the Church. Only a priest could manage the sacraments, was focused to particular Church law and was normally excused from lay law, and added his special position through a unique ritual. All this was done to put them separate from society and make this order secular. All this served to set priests apart from society and make them a separate order. There was a big range of social standing. Every day was divided into segments of work and prayer. The work was to look after the gardens, overseeing the business, and different housekeeping work Those Who Fight The nobility influenced all aspects of medieval politics, economics, religion, and culture. Those who fight were the knights of the middle Ages. A man who was a member of the nobility was free in his person and in his possessions. The only bound for him was his concern with military compulsion towards his lord. He had definite privileges and errands as a member of the nobility, he could lift flocks and rule them in the meadow, he held his own courts of justice, and he could create his own money.  He was the noble of all those people who lived on his land. Those Who Work Else then the priests and knights was everybody else. They were the labors. It does not refer to work only this mean to labor i.e.; effort, employment. The word does not mean merely to work, it means to labor. Vast majority of European men and women were peasants. They were the land of their Lords. Peasants made up the great bulk of the population of Europe. This group was the townsmen. Q: Religion in the late medieval period was varied and strong. New movements and new expressions of religious belief erupted from all levels of society, initiated by both men and women. Describe some of them. What did they have in common? A: much evidence has been proving the vitality of religious life among the English laity on the eve of reformation. They went to their churches regularly. The men and women had a high commitment to their religions. The religious changes that ten occurred were really pressing as they could ever. Christians and Britains had been shaping their religious lives. Men and omen were ready to lend material in variety of any religious institution. The proofs of religious activity could be found from processions to the church buildings. Q: In what ways did the reform movements differ from the various religious movements of the late medieval period? Why was Protestantism such a serious break with the past? A: In the tenth century, a religious renewal, also known as the medieval reformation, began and reached in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries with its full power. The first extensive demonstration of the revitalization was the rehabilitated Benedictine order of monks at Cluny, in 910. A powerful impulse for the reform of the feudalized church emitted from the actual monastery in Burgundy. The Cluniac program began as a lobby group for simple restructuring, but in time it inclined the implementation of secretarial celibacy and the elimination of simony, the purchase and sale of church offices. The final aim of the Cluniac reformers was to free the whole church from lay control and give it over to papal power. Around three hundred Cluniac houses were freed from lay control.    in the late eleventh century, the medieval reformation expanded force giving another signal of frugal reorganization brought on by the disappointment of the Cluniac reform to end all the mistreatments linked with the monastic life. Harshly abstinent Carthusians and the very popular Cistercians were among the new orders.   Protestantism is the religion of all non-Catholic Western Christians. It refers to the principles specifically taught by Martin Luther, a German monk and reformer who more or less initiated the Reformation. That is why Protestantism was considered to be such a serious break of that time as Luthers Theses, posted on the door of a German cathedral glowed a big division in the Catholic Church and developed a sign of non-Catholic divisions founded on the principle that commonplace Christians were capable to acknowledge their belief without holding fast the sayings of popes. Q: What was the investiture controversy? A: The Investiture Controversy was about the ritual by which a man became a bishop or an archbishop. During the investiture, the elected bishop or archbishop was given a signet ring which showed that he is the authority to act legally for his area. A dispute began about the lay investiture of bishops and abbots with an authority fight between papacy and the Holy Roman Empire during the late 11th and early 12th centuries. Such high ecclesiastical dignity held land and often worked out material as well as priestly functions; for this reason, lay supreme lords had an understandable interest in their selection and recurrently endowed (formally presented) them with the signs of their different offices. Q: How did monarchs create and strengthen unity in their kingdoms? (Please just talk about England and France) A: With the use of gunpowder and armies in wars, the knight became obsolete, thus allowing for an end to feudalism. As a result two states developed under the power of monarchs, but England used some of the monarch’s power, while France was under the full control of authority of monarch. The king became the middle ruler accountable for hoisting income for these positioning armies. This created a greater dependence on a joining power such as a king instead of the decentralized Feudalistic system that used to take place.. As a result, a new government body comprising of legislative body of the people next below to nobility finally increased contribution in the government as a form of the gentry to protect themselves from being overtaxed by the king. Q: What did theologians believe about the relationship between faith and logic? Discuss the opinions of Anselm, Abelard, and Hildegard of Bingen. A: Abelard was a rationalist; he believed in a direct relationship between faith and logic. He used to believe only with the reason. The thing that could provide a logic or reason to him could be believable for him. Anselm proofs for faith are the examples of wrongly applied logic. Hildegard was of the belief that Faith is a commitment to a form of inspired belief; it differs from the reason only in the nature of the subject. Q: What factors led to the First Crusade? A: The First Crusade was a major event in the history of medieval Europe. Some of the different factors that led to this may be described as: 1. Europe was already in a growing age and it had been grown during the year, its capacity for war and conquest looking after raiders from all direction. Most importantly from the point of view of the crusades, the Italian city conditions had urbanized fleets of fighting boats that had held control of the Mediterranean. They had reconquered Sicily and southern Italy from the Muslims, and there was a common intelligence that, like the Vikings and Magyars, the force of the Muslims was exhausted and that the way eastward lay open. 2. Investiture Controversy, which was led by reorganization of religious spirit, had been escorted by an augment in popular theology. Religion was no longer accepted by people, passively. Many of them wanted to contribute vigorously and to do something positive in honor of their god. 3. The nobility found themselves at comparative peace, they were importance they had enjoyed at they time they stood between Europe and its attackers. Their numbers were growing. They needed more land for their children and for this purpose they started fighting with each other over the land that was available to them. 4. The rulers were effective to overturn the devolution that had been the trait of the feudal age. Many other who were looking towards them for safety and leadership, along with wanted to decrease the rights enjoyed by the nobility and move that power to the central governments of the kingdoms 5. After the split of church, in1054, into eastern and western organizations, the popes wanted to restore its position. They get involved in the Investiture Controversy and were looking for associates 6. The middle classes were now conscious of the proceeds of the eastern business, and were penetrating for some way to go around the middlemen of the eastern territory and to do business in a straight line with the Muslims. They knew that they could become rich by doing this. Q: In the High Middle Ages, the papacy was extremely powerful and influential. Describe the ideology and institutional structure that supported it. What specific steps did the church take to increase its power and magnify the distinction between church and laity? A:   The power of the church did not only depend upon an arranged, consistent doctrine but also upon the most highly planned managerial scheme in the West. At the head was the pope, or bishop of Rome. Curioa was the assistant to him. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the papal council or court, established a complicated organizational system. Court and clerical problems were handled by the papal Chancery, monetary stuff by the Camera, and punitive inquiries by the Penitentiary. Special representatives called legates, whose powers were greater then local churchmen, accepted the popes orders throughout Europe. The church was in front of worldly circumstances in raising a scheme of courts and a body of law. Church or standard law was founded on the Scriptures, the writings of the church Fathers, and the declaration of church councils and popes. The church issued its administrator body of standard law, in the twelfth century, which guided the church courts in umpiring lying under oath, profanity, sorcery, usury and dissent.   Q: Compare the development of central governments in France and England during this period. In both countries, monarchs succeeded in strengthening their control of the country. In what ways were the two countries following similar paths? How did their goals and methods differ? A: after an end to the feudal system in Euriope, there was a rise in a new state system in Europe. This system consisted a structure that has an approximate king some form of government structure that depends on different factor and therefore varied accordingly. Factors such as religion, local structure, and the strength of the nobility were very important in describing the power of a king. In England, religion had a smaller amount force on politics and the normal people and the envoy body is controlled by nobility, therefore in England, the king had to countenance a burly resistance to his authority. Whereas, France had a very weak delegate body and its nobility was also divided by religion, the king was enjoying much more power and authority. With the use of gunpowder and armies in wars, the knight became obsolete, thus allowing for an end to feudalism. As a result two states developed under the power of monarchs, but England used some of the monarch’s power, while France was under the full control of authority of monarch. The king became the middle ruler accountable for hoisting income for these positioning armies. This created a greater dependence on a joining power such as a king instead of the decentralized Feudalistic system that used to take place. As a result, a new government body comprising of legislative body of the people next below to nobility finally increased contribution in the government as a form of the gentry to protect themselves from being overtaxed by the king. The result was the state system seen in the late middle ages in Europe, as a result of the fight for power between the monarch and the gentry. Q: Compare the religious settlement in Germany with that of England. In what way can we describe English Protestantism as more political than religious? How was Queen Elizabeth able to resolve the English religious question? A: After the thirty year of wars, the religious situation in England became worst as there were many groups entered into the region who according to their own beliefs were trying to spoil the older beliefs of the region. Elizabeth felt this change and she quickly needed a religious settlement for Tudor England. Soon after the turmoil of religion that she experienced during her rule and came under her consideration. This came in 1559 and is known as the Religious Settlement in England. The moderate people of Germany had now moved toward the Lutheran position, and in time went over completely to Lutheranism thus Bucer brought almost all of Protestant southern Germany back to the Lutheran fold. He tried to fetch the Swiss cities to accept the Concord, but failed. It was left to Calvin, to reach an agreement with the Swiss. In 1540 and 1541, a series of meetings took place in Germany in which the two sides attempted to reach a settlement Protestant and Catholic rulers in Europe who were keeping a very close eye on the religious situation in England. We can say that these English protestant were more political then religious as they were more concerned about their political success and to make a great mass of their own belief. Elizabeth was a queen with a lot of ability and potential. And her intelligence and ability was as good as she could compare to any man. Therefore, when Elizabeth publicized that there had to be a religious settlement for her people, there were no nonconformists among her advisors. Elizabeth simply could not agree to the idea that religious chaos was apparently the standard for England, though this had been so in the previous thirty years, and she worked hard for a settlement that all would take on plank.   Read More