Lesson video

Hello, my name's Mrs. Rawbone, and I am going to be your RE teacher today.

I'd like to welcome you to this lesson on the interaction between religious belief and political belief during the Renaissance and Enlightenment.

Our learning outcome today is to explain how Enlightenment thinking challenged Middle Ages views, and we're gonna focus on empiricism, deism, and the separation of Church and state.

We have three keywords that are going to come up a lot in today's lesson, and they are deism, empiricism, and superstition.

Deism is the belief in a creator God who does not intervene in the universe after creating it.

Empiricism is the philosophical theory that knowledge comes from sensory experience and from observation.

And a superstition is a belief based on fear or misunderstanding of the unknown which goes beyond what is logical.

Our lesson today will form two parts.

We will be looking at Renaissance and Enlightenment thinking, and then we'll be looking at changing religious views.

So let's get started thinking about Renaissance and Enlightenment thinking.

Philosophers are academics and thinkers who study ultimate questions about existence, knowledge and ethics, and reality, using logic to explore these topics.

Whether you have a religious or a non-religious worldview, you can use philosophy as a tool to understand the arguments that others use to support their views.

In this lesson, we are going to reflect on how the philosophical approach of empiricism influenced religious and political belief in the Renaissance and Enlightenment.

So let's think about the Middle Ages.

Europe was overwhelmingly Christian.

The Catholic Church influenced education, science, law, the arts, pretty much every area of life.

The Church endorsed geocentrism, which placed the Earth at the universe's centre, and this was because it reflected the importance of humanity.

So it fitted with also a God-centered worldview.

Superstition shaped everyday life.

People would've been very naturally superstitious.

The supernatural was seen as influencing fate and influencing the world that people were experiencing.

So, in the Middle Ages, most people in Europe were Christian, and the Church had great power.

During the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, while most people remained Christian, there was definitely a shift towards challenging old beliefs and understanding the world differently, and this was supported by empiricist ideas about gaining knowledge through the senses.

So we have a geocentric worldview with the world as the centre of everything because it's God's creation, moving towards a more heliocentric worldview with the sun at the centre.

And this was an understanding that gradually developed, a scientific understanding that gradually developed starting in the Renaissance and kind of being confirmed in the Enlightenment.

And it really reflects this new knowledge about science, really reflects a kind of change generally in attitude that also happened.

Superstition was a key feature of the worldview of the Middle Ages, and the word comes from Latin.

It has two parts, it has super and it has stition.

So super comes from a Latin word, super, which means above or over.

And stition comes from the verb stare in Latin, which means to stand.

So superstition is literally something which stands over or above and basically refers to beliefs that go beyond what is reasonable or logical.

So over or beyond what is reasonable.

Sofia is explaining how superstition formed part of the worldview of the Middle Ages.

She says, "In the Middle Ages, "natural events like comets and plagues "were seen as signs of God's will "or punishments for sin.

"Witchcraft and magic were feared "as real powers that could harm crops, "livestocks, and even people's souls.

"Saints and relics were believed to have miraculous powers, "with people praying to them for cures and for blessings." So when she comments on comets and plagues seen as signs of God's will, this reflects the superstition that natural phenomena weren't random events, but they were divine messages.

When she talks about powers harming crops and livestock and even people's very souls, it shows how widespread the fear of the supernatural was, that it could harm every aspect of life.

And when Sofia talks about people praying to saints or their relics for cures and blessings, we can see that this belief was making people turn to objects or to figures rather than to medical or rational solutions to get the help and protection that they may have needed.

So let's check your understanding.

Think about the statement, is it true or false? And I'd also like you to think about why.

In the Middle Ages, natural events like comets and plagues were often interpreted as random occurrences.

So take some time, decide on your answer, and think about the reason for your answer.

Pause the video if you need to, and then come back to check.

Well done if you put false.

So that's exactly the opposite of how they were interpreted.

So let's have a think about why.

Well, the reason is that people in the Middle Ages were superstitious, and they often saw these kinds of events, like comets and plagues, as signs or messages from God rather than as random occurrences.

Andeep and Izzy are discussing how the Renaissance and the Enlightenment brought about a change in the collective worldview.

So not just personal views, but in the general view that a lot of people would've been very much influenced by.

Andeep says, "For many people today, "it's not difficult to question religion, "but back in the Middle Ages, "the Church controlled everything, "including law, education, and even science." Izzy says, "Well, yes, "it was the Renaissance and the Enlightenment "that really changed the way people thought." Andeep replies, "The Renaissance was about "rediscovering ancient Greek and Roman ideas, "which must have helped people realise "there were other ways to understand the world." Izzy responds, "Yes, and the Enlightenment "took this even further.

"Many philosophers used empiricism "to argue that reason and observation," so what you could see and experience, "should guide how we understand the world." Andeep responds, "So it was a real shift in thinking "when people started to realise "that they didn't have to accept what they were told?" And Izzy replies, "Yes, that's why understanding "what life was like before "helps us to appreciate the huge jump "in how people saw the world." So how do you think people today would react if accepted truths were challenged by new ways of thinking, which is exactly what happened during the Renaissance and the Enlightenment? Take a little bit of time, talk to somebody nearby if you can, or talk to me.

Pause and come back when you are ready to continue with the lesson.

So here we can see a photograph of a bust of Aristotle.

Before the Enlightenment, much of what people believed they could know came from the teachings of the Church.

During the Enlightenment, thinkers like David Hume, who lived in the 18th century, developed a different understanding of how we gain knowledge, which is known as empiricism.

Empiricism is the idea that we learn through our senses, through what we see, hear, touch, or experience directly.

And it's actually based on the work of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle who lived in the fourth century BCE.

Empiricism was supported by the Scientific Revolution, which is when inventions like the telescope allowed people to gather direct evidence through observation.

And here we have a famous painting of the scientist, Galileo, who was known for using technical instruments to make observations and form conclusions about the world and the wider universe.

So in this painting, we can see an image of books.

Galileo read widely, and he explored ideas from the ancient philosophers, there were scientists as well, and from some more recent thinkers.

So he didn't just rely on Church teachings.

And we can also see here the globe.

Galileo was famous for using the telescope to study the planets and stars, challenging the old ideas about the Earth being the centre of the universe.

So let's check your understanding.

What are the missing words in this sentence? Empiricism is the belief that.

Comes from the.

So think back over what we've done, take your time, pause if you need to, and then come back when you are ready to check your answer.

So let's see how you did.

Well done if you put that it's the belief that knowledge comes from the senses.

So we know things by observing the world around us, and we use the senses in order to observe the world.

Enlightenment thinkers used empiricism to directly challenge some of the previous superstitious views.

Sofia says, "In the Middle Ages, "natural events like comets and plagues "were seen as signs of God's will "and/or punishments for sin." So Enlightenment thinkers argued that these kinds of events could be explained by science rather than by the supernatural.

So they weren't signs of God's will or punishments for sin.

She also says, "Witchcraft and magic were feared "as real powers that could harm crops, livestock, "and even people's souls." While Enlightenment thinkers argued that there was no evidence to support the belief that magic could harm people or the natural world.

She said, "Saints and relics were believed "to have miraculous powers, "with people praying to them for cures and blessings." While Enlightenment thinkers argued that miracles were often based on superstition rather than on reason or scientific proof.

So as well as being influenced by empiricism, Enlightenment thinking was also affected by changes in the arts and by religious reforms. So all of these influences came together.

Artists like Leonardo da Vinci focused on realistic human forms and classical themes rather than just religious ones.

Writers such as Dante and Erasmus explored human experience.

So they didn't just write about religion.

And Renaissance humanists emphasised education and the potential of humans.

Religious reformers like Martin Luther focused on a more personal faith instead of a faith led and guided completely by the Church.

So let's practise what you have been learning today in this lesson.

I'd like you to write a paragraph explaining three ways in which Renaissance and Enlightenment thinking was different from the thinking of the Middle Ages.

You can use some or all of these points to help you.

The Church, geocentric, which means Earth-centered, superstition, empiricism, the senses, and heliocentric or sun-centered.

So take your time, make sure that you explain within your paragraph three ways that the thinking was changed and became different from the thinking of the Middle Ages.

Pause the video and come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

So let's see what you could have written.

You could have said: "During the Renaissance and Enlightenment, "ideas changed from the Middle Ages.

"The Church had less control over people's beliefs, "and instead of thinking "that the Earth was the centre of the universe, geocentric, "people learned that the sun "was at the centre, heliocentric.

"Superstitions, like believing comets were signs from God, "became less important.

"Thinkers started focusing on reason, science, "and using the senses, empiricism, to explore the world.

"This shift led to new discoveries and ideas, "challenging old beliefs from the Middle Ages." So well done if you talked about how the Church had less control, that's really important, and therefore things like superstitions changed and people started to use the senses, so what they could see, hear, smell, taste, touch, to make conclusions about the world.

So let's move on to the second part of our lesson.

Now that we've thought about Renaissance and Enlightenment thinking, let's move on to think about how religious views were changing, particularly in the area of political belief.

So religion changed significantly during the Renaissance and Enlightenment.

While it was possible to reject God, most people chose to retain their faith and adapt their beliefs.

So they may have stayed Christian, but, for many of them, their version of Christianity changed somewhat.

Now, one example of this was deism.

So deism is a word with two roots.

De in Latin means God, deus, and -ism is a suffix, which usually means belief system.

So this is a belief system about God.

It literally means belief in God.

But during the Enlightenment, it's used to describe the belief in a creator God who does not intervene, so does not kind of take part in the world after He has created it.

And it is usually used differently from theism where the the comes from the Greek word, theos.

And theism often talks about God who's very involved in the world.

So deism is quite a different version of thinking about God.

Deists themselves often used analogies like a watch or a clock to illustrate their views.

They believed that the universe operated by natural laws, and they'd seen this through observation, through science.

And God acted as a creator who set the world in motion.

This is like a clock, which has a designer, but once the person has designed it, it runs on its own.

It doesn't need constant intervention and watching from its designer.

So this allows them to reconcile their belief in God with a very kind of rational, empirical worldview, which was based on the fact that there are laws of nature that you can see, and the universe almost seems to run on its own accord.

So let's check your understanding on deism.

Why did deists compare the world to a watch? Is it A, to show that the world works randomly? B, to show that God created the world but let it run by itself? C, to show the world needs constant intervention? Or D, to show the world didn't need a creator? So take your time to think about your answer, pause the video, and then when you are ready, come back and we'll check to see if you got it right.

Well done if you put B.

It was to show this idea that God might have created the world but then let it run on its own, just like someone makes a watch and then the watch works without their help or intervention.

Jun's class have been discussing how the Renaissance and Enlightenment changed religious thought in Europe.

So whilst it was possible to reject God, and there were people that did, but it wasn't particularly popular yet, most chose to retain their faith and to adapt their beliefs to align with some of the new ways of thinking.

Jun says, "Religious reformers like Martin Luther "believed in Christ "but rejected the Church's corrupt practises." So let's have a think about this on a scale.

We've got the God-centered worldview of the Middle Ages and a human-centered worldview.

Where would you put this view on the scale and why? Is it completely God-centered or is it more kind of human-centered? Have a think, turn and talk to somebody nearby if you can, or you can talk to me.

Pause and come back when you are ready to move on.

Jun also says that, "Scientists like Isaac Newton "thought that science helps us understand God's creation." So he remained a believer in God.

Where would you place his view on that scale and why? Is he completely God-centered or is he moving towards a human-centered worldview? Have a talk with somebody nearby if you can, or pause and talk to me, and come back when you're ready to move on.

Jun says that, "Deists like Voltaire "argued that God created the universe "but does not interfere with it." So think about the deist worldview.

Where would you put that on the scale? Is it more human-centered, so is it going to go over towards the right, or is it more God-centered? Talk to somebody nearby if you can, pause the video, and come back when you're ready to move on.

Jun explains that, "Sceptics like David Hume "questioned religious claims, "especially those focused "on the supernatural like miracles." Where would you place that kind of view on the scale? Is it more human-centered or is it more God-centered? Have a talk with somebody nearby, pause the video, and come back when you are ready to move on.

So let's think about how religious views changed in relation to politics from how they used to be in the Middle Ages.

So Thomas Aquinas was a philosopher and theologian, and he wrote about every area of life, including about politics.

Aquinas believed that religion should be more important than politics in creating a good society.

He thought the Church should help guide rulers to make laws that follow God's natural law.

So for Aquinas, during the Middle Ages, while politics and religion should work together, the Church should have the most power in guiding people how to live good lives.

Let's look a little bit more closely at his view.

So, for him, religion should be more important than politics when we are talking about creating a good society.

This contrasted with Renaissance and Enlightenment thinkers on politics and religion.

Hobbes argued that a strong sovereign would bring about social order, and Rousseau was focused on elected officials who would enact the people's will.

So actually the people in charge were a lot more important to Renaissance and Enlightenment thinking than they were in Middle Ages thinking.

So religion had less authority, and its role in politics was changing.

Aquinas talked about the Church helping guide the rulers to make laws that followed God's natural law, but, instead, Hobbes and Rousseau argued that political laws should not be based on religion.

Instead, they promoted using reason and creating something they called social contracts which would guide lawmaking.

So let's check your understanding on this.

How did Enlightenment thinkers like Hobbes and Rousseau view the role of religion in politics? Did they think, A, that religion should be entirely separate from politics? B, that religion could play a role in maintaining social order but not directly control the state? C, that the state should follow religious teachings completely? Or D, that religion should have no role in society at all? So take your time to think about the best answer.

Pause and come back when you're ready to check.

Well done if you said that religion, although it had a role in maintaining the social order, it wasn't directly in control.

So this was the big difference in the shift in thinking in terms of politics.

So for your first task in Task B, I'd like you to draw a diagram of a watch or clock and label it to show how deists used this analogy to explain their beliefs.

So there's a simple diagram.

I'd like to include a brief explanation of how the clock represents deism.

You need to think about covering God's role in creating and setting the world in motion.

And I'd also like you to show how this was different from the worldview of the Middle Ages.

So take some time to do this carefully and to think about what you know about deism, which really reflects a shift in religious views.

Pause the video, and come back when you are ready to have a look at what you might have done.

So you could have said that the clock is the universe, that the moving hands represent the natural processes that control the world, and your explanation might have said that the clock represents the universe which was created by God but then allowed to run on its own, like a clockmaker making a clock that runs on a battery.

The clock's hands move automatically just as the world operates according to natural laws without God needing to intervene.

This is different from the Middle Ages worldview, where people believed that God was directly involved in everyday life and events like natural disasters or even personal struggles.

So well done if you've got across that the clock is the universe and that all its movements represent the idea that the universe runs its course without intervention from God.

And if you also said how this was a change from the Middle Ages where God was more directly involved, excellent work.

So for Part 2 of our task, Alex is trying to answer our unit question, "Religion and politics in the Enlightenment: "how were they aligned?" His answer is inaccurate.

And I would like you to list three things that he's got wrong and explain why they are wrong.

Alex says, "Enlightenment thinkers "believed religion and politics should be closely linked, "with the government enforcing religious laws "and the Church guiding political decisions.

"They thought rulers should follow religious teachings "and not question the Church's authority." So take your time, look carefully at what he's written, look out for three errors, and then, remember, you're going to explain why those are mistakes.

Pause the video, take as long as you need to, and then come back when you're ready to have a look at what you might have written.

So let's have a look at what you could have said.

Firstly, Enlightenment thinkers like Rousseau and Locke wanted to keep religion and politics separate, not closely linked.

So they didn't think the government should enforce religious laws.

That was Alex's first mistake.

Secondly, Enlightenment thinkers believed the Church shouldn't control politics.

They wanted decisions based on reason and not on religious teachings.

And, thirdly, Enlightenment thinkers didn't think rulers should follow religious teachings for making laws.

Instead, they should focus on reason and the idea of a social contract.

So well done if you spotted those three errors and if you managed to explain what was wrong in terms of what Alex said.

In today's lesson, we've learnt a lot about the interaction between religious, philosophical, and political belief.

During the Renaissance and Enlightenment, some of the beliefs of the Middle Ages were questioned.

Religious superstitions were challenged by Enlightenment thinkers.

Changes in the arts and religious reform influenced Enlightenment thinking.

Empiricist ideas about gaining knowledge through the senses supported a different way of understanding the world.

Although most people remained religious, religion changed significantly.

For example, deists believed that God created the world but does not intervene in it.

And there was a move towards separating politics and religion, although many political philosophers felt religion still had a role to play.

So well done on your lesson today and for working with me through all of these ideas.

Thank you for doing that.