“The different accidents of life are not so changeable as the feelings of human nature.”
- Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Humans have a natural inclination to want to change things - whether or not we actually can. Often this can lead to disappointment and failure, but there are times throughout history where this persistence has led to a large global impact.In 1517 the stage was set for one of these moments. Tensions between the church and religious scholars were coming to a head around Europe, and all it took was one man to be a catalyst for religious reform. Martin Luther and other newfound Protestants sought relief from the structure and confines of the Catholic church, and this growing movement led to immense growth and change for all religious parties. We see this in the “Consilium de Emendanda Ecclesia” - a report created by a church commission to recommend internal reform. It reflects a sense of helplessness towards the unknown, saying:
“These are the abuses, most blessed Father, which for the present, according to the limitations of our talents, we thought should be compiled, and which seemed to us ought to be corrected. [. . .] We certainly, if we have not done justice to the magnitude of the task which is far beyond our powers, have nevertheless satisfied our consciences”.
Throughout all these periods we see the same patterns emerge - human feeling and nature may seem to change, but as Shelley observed the “accidents of life” seem to repeat themselves in larger events. Today we find ourselves in a similar time of rejection and counterculture. We celebrate reform, embrace change, and reject the status quo, but nevertheless we must be cautious. Frankenstein created a monster seeking to differentiate himself, but in our single-minded pursuit of individualism and expression may we also be creating monsters we might regret?
Daniel Brock, Cole Erickson, Jillian Peterson
(Note: the above illustration comes from the 1831 edition of Frankenstein by Mary Shelley; used here via public domain)
This causes me a lot of thought. Is all change and protest good? Of course not. Just because protestant reformers and the American revolutionaries did the right thing by going against the crowd, doesn't mean that we should always support a change in status quo. Thanks for the post!
ReplyDeleteI really like this because even though individualism is important and there are certain aspects of it that are critical for the way that America works, I do believe that in some situations people have taken it to the extreme to the point of potentially losing the sense of community. I also really love the connection with Frankenstein, very clever.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very thought provoking blog post. I believe that many things in the world have good and bad sides. It's difficult to create any change without some negative results. I think that the power of protest for change is important but that we should use it wisely.
ReplyDeleteThere is so many times where I find this to be true: people sometimes simply reject the status quo for the sake of being different or for their own self-interest. We do not often see today people choosing to be moral for the truth's sake. Choosing to follow a moral code is not binding, it is enabling. Grateful for the Reformers who had such an individual attitude towards moral choices.
ReplyDeleteI really liked your question! "In our single-minded pursuit of individualism and expression may we also be creating monsters we might regret?" You gave great examples (Frankenstein, the bloodshed following the Protestant Reformation). Other examples I can think of include pollution from industrialization, unhealthy perfectionist mindsets from test-centered school systems, and WWII from the unrest in Germany following the settlement after WWI. What are some things we can do as individuals and as a society to better avoid creating monsters in the future?
ReplyDeleteYour comment on reform being a pattern of history really spoke to me. We are in a really unique time right now, but it also shows signs of times we've seen before. As you say, "'accidents of life' seem to repeat themselves in larger events," I wonder just how much we've actually learned from those past accidents of life, and whether we as a culture are doing any better this time around.
ReplyDeleteThat was a really new perspective of the protestant reformation for me. I think history is so often framed in a black and white context for us that we don't get to see the other angles. One pattern we see today this reminded me of is "lower prices." paying less for a product might help me, but what monsters does that create?
ReplyDeleteI think that the human impulse to change comes from a fundamental optimism: a sense that the world Should Be Fair, a desire to make it Fair. it wars with the just-as-human impulse for complacency. we want the world to be fair, but we also like it when things continue as we're used to. often it takes someone brave enough to point out that Life Isn't Fair--and We Should Fix That. that cannot coexist with the desire to retain the status quo, and no, it's not comfortable, and yes, sometimes we don't understand all the consequences. however... the world Isn't Fair. and i don't think we can ever stop humans from trying to change that.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it's important to consider the consequences. Murphy's law applies to, well, pretty much everything, you know? However, like you point out in your example, it's hard to say the Reformation was a bad thing although it did result in bloodshed at times. As Emma mentioned, social change tends to pit the human desire for fairness against the human distaste for change-- and frequently, the human distaste for change comes from those in positions of power. For example, think of the Civil Rights movement. That was some very big social change, and people got hurt protesting, but no one can argue it was a bad change. I just think it's something to consider.
ReplyDelete