Overstepping Theological BoundariesEssay Preview: Overstepping Theological BoundariesReport this essayOverstepping Theological BoundariesWilliam Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe were prominent writers during the Renaissance- a time of change, a period of flourishing artistic and scientific advancements, and an era ensuring the rebirth of European culture. It witnessed major developments and modifications to the European lifestyle, with traditions and social values often being challenged. A prime example, during the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Churchs beliefs on purgatory and papal infallibility were questioned. An examination of the works of renaissance literature shows other moments in society to break away from theologically set boundaries. Macbeth and Doctor Faustus are classic texts that show evident tension involving traditional concepts of evil, sinning, and the beliefs associated with the Christian God and Church.
As discussed last week, some of the most important changes in history to us and to society in general have taken shape as a result of the Enlightenment. Among the more controversial are the following shifts in the religious life: Islam replaced Christianity with Islamic observance, the introduction of religious education, and the new emphasis on ritual instead of traditional education. As well as the evolution of social norms, these transitions have impacted social and political relationships. While these may not have been the most significant changes, there has been, and continues to be a large effort to improve the lives of working class people, and this push into a more democratic, secular world. These changes in our social and political order have involved the work of leading scholars, economists, social scientists, creative thinkers, and philosophers. They have also affected the way we feel and think about our own lives and the ways we choose to live them. The work of leading scholars at the intersection of religious and political life of the times is now being made part of what we call the Working Class Movement.
The Working Class Movement aims to:
Promote freedom and opportunity.
We believe in fighting injustices, fighting for civil society ideals, and for social justice.
We believe that if we don’t fight for equality, we won’t succeed.
We believe we are part of the solution to all social problems, whether it is inequality, poverty, or lack of equity.
And so we strive to help those living in poverty, to reduce poverty, improve education, and lead a life of economic opportunity.
And so we try to help those in need, help them with their needs, encourage them to take on more responsibilities and to build a better life.
In just eight years this work has become a model for other cities of the future, especially if it’s one that addresses what is taking place across the globe.
In some cities of the future, we’ll work to ensure that people of all backgrounds can be able to succeed and have a good life, even among those that have traditionally been under-represented.
In some cities, however, we’re going to work to create opportunities for all, not just those which could have been gained through having a better standard of living.
Finally, I’m excited to announce tonight that we’re introducing a brand new book coming out of the University of Michigan: The Work of the Working Class, by former U of M doctoral student Steven A. Sorensen. You can get the full chapter and full synopsis under our upcoming New York Times Bestseller series, “Working Class, Politics and Technology: The Critical Theory of Working Class Labor.
Steve Sorensen has been a professor at the University of Michigan since 1994. He founded and edited the Working Class Press in 1996 with the goal of publishing five books a year—one per year—while continuing to be a major contributor to the publishing of popular works by leading thinkers on such topics as American industrial politics and globalization. He holds a bachelor of arts in political science from the University of Minnesota and a master of civil society from The University of Chicago. Prior to founding the Michigan Work of the Working Class, Sorensen was Director of the Institute for Political Studies at the George Mason University, an associate professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and a visiting professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He holds a bachelor of science in political science from Harvard University and a master of civil society from MIT. In 1994, he headed the faculty of the Michigan Institute of Politics, where
In Macbeth, the characters begin to believe in a witches prophecy and they credit evil with power believed to be reserved to God. For example, Banquo questions a theological doctrine which states that only “true prophecy, the real knowledge of things to come was a power reserved to God alone” . When the first part of the witches prophecy becomes a reality, Banquo asks, “What can the devil speak true” . Because it was believed that only God has real knowledge of the future, how is it that these “instruments of darkness” tell these truths? Although Banquo acknowledges these tensions he does not completely believe in them. He explains that these “truths” are put in place in order to “win us to our harm in deepest consequence” . The three witches prophesize that Banqous children will becomes royalty, but because he did not fully believe that the manifestation of evil can bring forth pure truth, he does not yield to evil.
In contrast, Macbeth does yield to evil and that is why he falls in the play. This form of evil stems from three witches which prophesize that Macbeth will become king. In England at that time, prophesies given by witches were believed to have been generated directly from the devil – a manifestation of evil. These concepts are challenged in the play because Macbeth carries out actions to ensure that the prophecy from evil becomes true. Macbeth is not a wicked man by nature, but pressure from Lady Macbeth and other characters hasten his actions to commit murder. Most importantly, without the prophecy from the witches, it is doubtful that he would have carried out the murder.
Macbeth believes that these evil sources could embody truths and he begins to struggle with his faith in God throughout the play. For example, on the return from murdering the king, some men were saying: “God Bless us! and Amen” , but Macbeth had an “Amen” stuck in his throat. He wanted to praise the Lord, but was not successful because his action, murder, transgresses the social and theological boundary that murder is a sin. His struggle between good and evil is also evident when he offers his regrets about the murder he committed. He says:
Had I but lived an hour before this chance,I had lived a blessed time; for, form this instant,There is nothing serious in mortality;All is but toys: renown, and grace is dead;The wine of life is drawn. And the mere leesIs left this vault to brag of.Macbeth is contemplating the morality associated with his action. His words come forth in a regretful and depressive state because his “grace is dead”- a reference to salvation under Christian doctrine. He has lost the ability to gain redemption and to seek forgiveness from his Lord, Jesus Christ. The transient world and the material possessions associated with his goal to become king will not fulfill his desires because he has lost something valuable in return for something that is not. His regret and outward struggle that he has with his conscience indicates that he stepped out of the boundary of a theologically set moral code.
The plays imagery also suggests that a boundary is crossed. The Old Man and Ross reflect over the many signs in nature that they believe are a direct result of the murder. Ross says, “Thou seest the heavens, as troubled with mans act…that darkness does the face of earth entomb/ When living light should kiss it?”(II.iv.5-9). In this instance, there is no light on the earth, a symbol of evil and corruption. Also, Ross mentions that Duncans horses have “turned wild in nature, broke their stalls, flung out,/ Contending gainst obedience as they would/ Make war with mankind” . The horses unnatural action serves as an indication of a broken boundary.
The boundaries of evil and corruption are crossed in Doctor Faustus. In the play, there is tension between committing sins and evil without repentance and that is essential for the forgiveness of sins under Christianity. For example, in John 1:8, it says, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all our sins” . Faustus does not seek repentance for the evil and sins he committed, he says, “When I behold the heavens, then I repent” . His lack of desire to repent unless he has power equivocal to God indicates that there was a struggle during the renaissance with people seeking forgiveness from God for the sins they committed.
The intention of Faustus to violate divine order is also presented in the beginning of the play. He is interested in having power inside Gods jurisdiction just as he would consider repentance if he owned the heavens. For example, he implies that he would only be interested in the field of medicine if his power “Couldst thou make men live eternally/ Or, being dead raise them to life again,/ Then this profession were to be esteemed. The power of immortality is exclusive to God and only through God can one bring the dead back to life. Here, Faustus displays interest in the field of medicine only if it can fulfill his desire to seek power beyond the dimensions