What Is More to Blame (Looking Back)

[GloryofGreece]

Was the Reformation and the breakdown of the power of the Church ultimately more responsible for the world we live in today, or was the French Revolution even more impactful by pushing forth the destruction of organized religion and establishing leftist ideology overall?

[Speaker to Animals]

Was the Reformation and the breakdown of the power of the Church ultimately more responsible for the world we live in today, or was the French Revolution even more impactful by pushing forth the destruction of organized religion and establishing leftist ideology overall?

Yes.

The Enlightenment and now thge disentigration of the West are the logical consequences of the Reformation.

[GloryofGreece]

Was the Reformation and the breakdown of the power of the Church ultimately more responsible for the world we live in today, or was the French Revolution even more impactful by pushing forth the destruction of organized religion and establishing leftist ideology overall?

Yes.

The Enlightenment and now thge disentigration of the West are the logical consequences of the Reformation.

So do you think it was almost inevitable to have something like the Enlightenment after the Reformation and breakup of the Catholic Church? Could there have been a real reform and no Enlightenment?

[Fife]

Was the Reformation and the breakdown of the power of the Church ultimately more responsible for the world we live in today, or was the French Revolution even more impactful by pushing forth the destruction of organized religion and establishing leftist ideology overall?

Too soon to tell.

[TheReal_ND]

Was the Reformation and the breakdown of the power of the Church ultimately more responsible for the world we live in today, or was the French Revolution even more impactful by pushing forth the destruction of organized religion and establishing leftist ideology overall?

Too soon to tell.

[Speaker to Animals]

Was the Reformation and the breakdown of the power of the Church ultimately more responsible for the world we live in today, or was the French Revolution even more impactful by pushing forth the destruction of organized religion and establishing leftist ideology overall?

Yes.

The Enlightenment and now thge disentigration of the West are the logical consequences of the Reformation.

So do you think it was almost inevitable to have something like the Enlightenment after the Reformation and breakup of the Catholic Church? Could there have been a real reform and no Enlightenment?

There was a real reformation. It was called the Counter-Reformation.

You have to look at it from my perspective to understand where I am coming from. I don't look at the Reformation based on the propaganda and packaging we have been sold centuries later. Same with the Enlightenment. It's not about religion either. It's about the state.

The Enlightenment in particular had some good ideas, but there were a LOT of really bad ones in there and it resulted in the kinds of nationalistic wars that set the stage for our civilization to cut it's own jugular in WW1-WW2.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I'd argue that the millenia of Catholic Church rule held humanity back by centuries. Blaming the Reformation for lifting the lid on our progress doesn't really make sense.

[GloryofGreece]

Yes.

The Enlightenment and now thge disentigration of the West are the logical consequences of the Reformation.

So do you think it was almost inevitable to have something like the Enlightenment after the Reformation and breakup of the Catholic Church? Could there have been a real reform and no Enlightenment?

There was a real reformation. It was called the Counter-Reformation.

You have to look at it from my perspective to understand where I am coming from. I don't look at the Reformation based on the propaganda and packaging we have been sold centuries later. Same with the Enlightenment. It's not about religion either. It's about the state.

The Enlightenment in particular had some good ideas, but there were a LOT of really bad ones in there and it resulted in the kinds of nationalistic wars that set the stage for our civilization to cut it's own jugular in WW1-WW2.

I think the Enlightenment certainly had a lot of interesting and good ideas but of course there were dangerous ideas as well. But how did the Rights of Man, Locke, Kant etc. lead to nationalism per say?

[Speaker to Animals]

So do you think it was almost inevitable to have something like the Enlightenment after the Reformation and breakup of the Catholic Church? Could there have been a real reform and no Enlightenment?

There was a real reformation. It was called the Counter-Reformation.

You have to look at it from my perspective to understand where I am coming from. I don't look at the Reformation based on the propaganda and packaging we have been sold centuries later. Same with the Enlightenment. It's not about religion either. It's about the state.

The Enlightenment in particular had some good ideas, but there were a LOT of really bad ones in there and it resulted in the kinds of nationalistic wars that set the stage for our civilization to cut it's own jugular in WW1-WW2.

I think the Enlightenment certainly had a lot of interesting and good ideas but of course there were dangerous ideas as well. But how did the Rights of Man, Locke, Kant etc. lead to nationalism per say?

Because western civilization was an organic balance of powers and responsibilities, based on subsidiarity and localized rule. Most of what the average liberal thinks of as the government's role was the role of what today we'd call NGOs. Those NGOs were sitting on a lot of property therein: university campuses, hospitals, monestaries, libraries, and all the land holdings bequeathed to the Church by the aristocracy over the centuries. The Reformation put ALL the power of society into the hands of the kings, which is why so many kings suddenly "realized" they were Protestant and promptly seized Church properties and started burning people who didn't go along with the program.

The Reformation was about the consolidation of power into the hands of kings.

The Enlightenment was the next logical progression in which the kings themselves were dethroned and the mob began to take control of these new nation states that were emerging.

The Enlightenment was not really about reason and liberty at all. Those things were developing just fine on their own across Europe and we'd still be a rational, scientifically-minded people had it never happened. The Enlightenment was about the rise of nation states controlled by demagogues. What they sell as freedom becomes compulsion and the liberty of the people becomes street executions of the former leaders.

One of the greatest chemists was a man named Antoine Lavoisier. The Jacobins executed him for being too cozy with the aristocracy and the former tax collectors. People complained at the verdict that it was crazy and he was one of the greatest scientific minds of the day. The judge replied: The Republic has no need of scientists or chemists; the course of justice cannot be delayed.

I cannot possibly think of a better summary of what I think of the Enlightenment than what that judge stated.

[GloryofGreece]

There was a real reformation. It was called the Counter-Reformation.

You have to look at it from my perspective to understand where I am coming from. I don't look at the Reformation based on the propaganda and packaging we have been sold centuries later. Same with the Enlightenment. It's not about religion either. It's about the state.

The Enlightenment in particular had some good ideas, but there were a LOT of really bad ones in there and it resulted in the kinds of nationalistic wars that set the stage for our civilization to cut it's own jugular in WW1-WW2.

I think the Enlightenment certainly had a lot of interesting and good ideas but of course there were dangerous ideas as well. But how did the Rights of Man, Locke, Kant etc. lead to nationalism per say?

Because western civilization was an organic balance of powers and responsibilities, based on subsidiarity and localized rule. Most of what the average liberal thinks of as the government's role was the role of what today we'd call NGOs. Those NGOs were sitting on a lot of property therein: university campuses, hospitals, monestaries, libraries, and all the land holdings bequeathed to the Church by the aristocracy over the centuries. The Reformation put ALL the power of society into the hands of the kings, which is why so many kings suddenly "realized" they were Protestant and promptly seized Church properties and started burning people who didn't go along with the program.

The Reformation was about the consolidation of power into the hands of kings.

The Enlightenment was the next logical progression in which the kings themselves were dethroned and the mob began to take control of these new nation states that were emerging.

The Enlightenment was not really about reason and liberty at all. Those things were developing just fine on their own across Europe and we'd still be a rational, scientifically-minded people had it never happened. The Enlightenment was about the rise of nation states controlled by demagogues. What they sell as freedom becomes compulsion and the liberty of the people becomes street executions of the former leaders.

One of the greatest chemists was a man named Antoine Lavoisier. The Jacobins executed him for being too cozy with the aristocracy and the former tax collectors. People complained at the verdict that it was crazy and he was one of the greatest scientific minds of the day. The judge replied: The Republic has no need of scientists or chemists; the course of justice cannot be delayed.

I cannot possibly think of a better summery of what I think of the Enlightenment than what that judge stated.

Seems like everything that came into fruitition during the Russian Revolution was already developed in France in the late 1700s. Like these dandys
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repr%C3%A ... en_mission pretty much a more flamboyant political commissar.

Makes me wonder when a real "counter reformation" will be if ever.