Machievelli Biography Essay

Machiavelli lived during the Renaissance era of the Medieval quantifys. In this meter period many concepts and ideas were being reborn, including the Christian faith. He lived during a time period in which the great deal of the time thought of the Black kindle as a symptom of judgment upon the sinningfulness of the land. These same good deal began to scourge themselves in order to express their sorrow and therefore get through Gods judgment laid upon them. Although Machiavelli lived long after the go along of the Roman Empire, he lived in an Italy that had evolved into a war-torn battleground in the midst of the city state dynasties. There were conflicts amid the French and Spanish for the incorporate of land. Machiavelli lived in a time of growing political powers and a Christian community that was adapting and changing according to the claims of the Reformers. Machiavelli had a goal he sought-after(a) to create a dichotomy between ethical Christianity and the Ethical dem ands of political rule.The 15th and 16th century world focused on theologically reforming the Church. Many reformers of the time and before Machiavellis life, including the 14th century reformer John Wycliffe, wrote on how the papacy of the Church had grown far also powerful. During Machiavellis life St. Francis was t severallying the commoners about Jesus, and the commoners began relating to Christ. The Church was not all effected by the reformers and the teachings of St. Francis, but it was also effected by itself it was smart itself. The church fought against the reformers, condemning them as heretics the church was threatened by the speech of reform. Machiavelli lived among the Christians and like many of the reformers he was fitking a reform between the Church and the State. Essentially, Machiavelli writes to prove that being a moral pattern and a person are two separate ideas, in the case of essential circumstances and, like Luther, there are two kingdoms independent of each other.Machiavelli probably wouldve been considered a judge tank of his time and he believed that a ruler, or anyone may prevalently state that they are Christians yet register no real conviction. In the eleventh chapter of The Prince Machiavelli argued that Ecclesiastical principalities were to be in demand(p) because the people who inhabited them were governed by their own phantasmal laws. Machiavelli viewed these laws as tools, tools to keep open unruly citizens within the principalities alternatively than to enforce outside rules. Machiavelli idealizes an idea completely different from the church, that politics is virtuallything that deals with facts and not abstracts, that it is a challenge to the notion of some(prenominal) Pope Gregory VII and Pope Innocent IIIs worshipful Right to rule.3 Machiavelli realized that the divine right to rule opening is nothing but a religious idea that does not bleed with the present state of man. Machiavelli also understood th at human corruption and sin is an unending problem that rulers remove to deal with.Machiavelli continues by suggesting that being a moral leader does not mean that one is a near(a) leader as wide leadership leads to order, stability, and public good. He claimed that when order, stability, and public good are threatened a ruler groundworknot risk constricting their actions by piety or virtue. Machiavelli believed that morals stood in the way of success, that rulers need to key how to not be good, and be willing to kill. While the religious leaders saw Machiavelli as non-Christian and destructive, Machiavelli states that leaders need to administer required evils in efforts to maintain order and stability within their rule, that humans can be predicted through reason. The Church saw his political agenda as lacking in Christian ethics however, his political reform lines up with Christian thinkers and with Christian ethics of generosity, compassion, and even the golden rule as we see in Saint Augustines and St. Benedicts writings.An initial consideration of Machiavellis thoughts on generosity, we notice that he believes it is good to be considered a generous person, but that it is dangerous to do so. Although sounding distant to Christianity, Machiavellis reasoning lies in the Christian idea of doing the most good for as many people as possible. Machiavelli argues that being generous requires that the ruler imposes new ways of revenue collection and therefore make his subjects hatred him and lead to a guarantee that no one will think well of him.1 Machiavelli makes a similar case for compassion, in that it is better to be seen as cruel then it is to be viewed as loving, if necessary. He asserts that as the head of an army a ruler needs to be active to be thought cruel. The same Christian idea can be used to explain his argument as before.In the words of sensory faculty Treks Spock, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the hardly a(prenominal)er. Machiavelli states that its more compassionate to impose harshness on a few rather than make use of compassion and risk chaos to demand place.2 If we look back to St. Augustines The City of God 4 we learn that rulers and people are dominated by their own selfish lecherousness for power, whereas in the City of God, which Luther also makes notions of in his Doctrine of The Two Kingdoms, people serve one another in charity.Under this assumption we see that men do not serve out of charity, but rather serve in a situation of do unto others as you would admit done to yourself. Perhaps Machiavelli agreed with this view of Christianity. Machiavellis ruler never commits an act that they would not have done to themselves. I think the Machiavellian ruler loves their neighbor as much as themselves. Machiavelli sees the political cranial orbit as a place for necessary evil. He believes, out of love, that some evil must take place in order to arrive at the most people.Machiavelli saw the wor ld he lived in as a two kingdom place, like Luther and St. Augustine did. He viewed human history for what it was, not what it could be he saw people as evil and sick. Machiavellis picture of human history took into account the human equation, that we are foul and therefore predictable, which he believes will lead to a better judgment of the future.