On the Role of Christianity in the Political Philosophy of Francis Bacon- Tmothy Paterson.

8/10/2019 On the Role of Christianity in the Political Philosophy of Francis Bacon- Tmothy Paterson.

1/25


2/25

On

theRole of

Christianity

in

thePolitical

Philosophy

f

Francis

Bacon*

Timothy

. Paterson

St. John's

ollege

The im

of

Bacon's

political hilosophy,xpressed

ost

learly

n

his

New

Atlantis,

s

to

make

place

in

society or

a

science

hatwill

ro-

duce

power or

man.

This

roposal

or

a

power-generating

cience

necessarilyoses

the

uestion:

ow

is

the

ower

hus reated

o

be

directed

nd

controlled?

acon

s

generally

nderstood

o have

aid

thatChristianityould ean importantartof any olution othis

problem.

his

rticle, owever,

uestions

hat

nterpretation.

he

author

rgues

nstead hat

acon was

ndifferent

nd evenhostile

o

Christianity

nd that

he did

not

regard

t as

a

decisive

nswer

o

the

moral nd

political

uestions

aised

y

his

cience.

Timothy

.

Paterson

olds

Ph.D.

from

Yale

University,

as

been

lecturert

Boston

College,

Postdoctoral

esearch ellow t

Dal-

housie

University,

nd is

presently

tutor

t St.

John's

College

n

Annapolis,MD.

As

one

of

thefirst

ttempts

o

argue

he

egitimacy

f a

science

which

would

ncrease

uman

ower,

acon's

political

hilosophy

ecessarily

posed,

however

ndirectly,

he

question

f how

such

power

was to

be

controlled.

acon

ought

to

establish

nd

extend

he

ower

nddomin-

ion

of

the

human

ace

tself

ver

he

niverse"

4:114).'

Yethe

knew hat

*The author

wishes to

thank the

Izaak

Walton

Killam

Memorial Fund for

Advanced

Studies for

support

n

the

research nd

writing

f this

rticle.

'Unless

otherwise

pecified,

ll

references

o

Bacon's

writings

re to J.

Spedding,

R.L.

Ellis,

and

D.

D.

Heath,

eds.,

The

Works

f

FrancisBacon

(London:

Longmans

nd

Co.,

1857-1870).

Parenthetical

eferencesn

the

text are to

volume

and

page

number

lone;

references

n

thesenotes to

Works

followed

by

volume and

page

number.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Wed, 28 May 2014 09:50:48 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/25

420

Christianity

n

Francis

acon

thehuman acewas

divided

n

manyways,

tsfactions

ore

oncernedo

dominateachother han ounitenany ollectiveominationf non-

humannature

4:372-373).

Bacon

foresaw,

or

example,

he

dangers

posedby

cientific

ilitaryechnology

n

uch divided

orld,

ndthose

dangers

ere

nly

hemost ramatic

anifestation

f

power's bility

o

increase

he

practical

onsequences

f

foolish,

elfish,

r evil

mpulses.2

Bacon

replies

o

doubts bout

he

wisdom

f

technologicalrogress

n

Aphorism

29

of thefirst

ook

of

TheNew

Organon, passage

whose

importance

or

understanding

is ntentions

s

generally

ecognized.

e

raises he

hypotheticalbjection

hat

ugmenting

uman

ower hrough

sciencerisks he "debasement f arts and sciences o purposes f

wickedness"

4:115).

Yet he

urges

hat

no one be moved"

by

ny

uch

objection,

ince

t

might

e

madewith

qual

validitygainst

many

ther

"earthly oods"

whichwe nevertheless

eek.On

reflection,

his

ppears

to be

a

strange

eply.

t

solves

he

problem

nly

n

the sense

hat t

generalizes

t,

nd

by mplication

oncedes

hat hefears

nderlying

he

original bjection

re not unreasonable.

acon

at this

point

urns

o

rhetoricnd counter-assertion:

Only

et the

human

ace recover

hat

right

ver

nature hich

elongs

o

t

by

divine

equest,

nd et

power

e

givent;the xercisehereof illbegovernedysound eason ndtrue

religion"

4:115).

These

references

o a human

ower

ver

nature

llegedly

ased

on a

"divine

bequest"

and

guided

n

part

by

"true

religion"

ndicate

he

problem

wish o consider

ere.

acon

proposes

woultimate

ources

f

the

control

nd

guidance

f scientific

ower,

one secular

"sound

reason"),

the

other

eligious.

We

who

live

with

he

consequences

f

Baconian

mastery

f

nature,

ne of

which

s the

disappearance

f

any

hope

that"true

religion"

ould

serve

s

its

guide,

re

primarily

n-

terestedn how soundreason"mightlay hat ole, nd ooktoBacon

in

the

hope

of

understanding

is

hought

n

this

spect

f the

problem.

Any

such

inquiry,

owever,

nevitably

ncounters

he

question

of

Bacon's

real

attitude

oward

hristianity,

or

f the

roots f

Baconian

science

were

undamentally

eligious,

hen

twould

hardly

e

surprising

if

religious

nthusiasm

ad ed

Bacon to

give

nsufficient

eight

o

the

morally

roblematic

spects

f

future

cientific

ower.

Again,

t

might

be

argued

hat

whatever

acon's

personal

ttitude

oward

hristianity

may

have

been,

t eems

lear

hat n

speaking

f the ontrol

f

cientific

20On

he

sociallyproblematic

haracter

f

Baconian

science,

nd the

problem

posed

by

scientific

eaponry

n

particular,

ee Works

:163;

4:99,

228;

6:341-345,

03-405,

19-423,

444-452,

734-735,

740-743,

751-752,

756-757;

7:17-36.



4/25

Timothy

.

Paterson

421

power

by

"true

religion"

e meant

hat ome

version

f

Christianity

would emainrbecome decisiveuide f cience.f, smost ecentn-

terpretations

f

Bacon assert

r

assume,

Christianity

as

at once

the

foundation

nd

themoral

horizon

f his

thought,

hen heeffort

o

recover is

understanding

f

the

purely

ecular actors hich

might

on-

trol cientific

echnology

ust

ecessarily

ppearmisguidedr,

at

best,

ofminor

nterest.he

examinationfthe

ole f

Christianity

n

Bacon's

political

hilosophy

s the

necessary

reliminary

o

posing

he

question

of

most

nteresto

us: Did

Baconian

mastery

f

nature nclude

t

its

outset

ny

coherent

nderstanding

f the

secular

actors

which

might

guide he pplicationfthepower obegeneratedyscience?

In

what

follows,

have

carried ut this

preparatory

nd in

a

sense

largely

egative

nquiry.

y

ntentions to

question

he

prevailing

iew

which

mphasizes

o

strongly

he

religious

actorn

Bacon's

thought.3

Belief n

the

ssentially

hristian

nspiration

nd

ntentionf

Baconian

science

s,

in

my

opinion,

he

ingle

reatest

ontemporary

bstacle

o

understanding

acon's real

thought

bout he

moral nd

political

on-

trol

of

scientific

ower,

and

hence to

understanding

is

political

philosophy

s a

whole.

Bacon ays fMachiavellihat eput ertainriticismsfChristianity

"almost

in

plain

terms"

6:403,

emphasis

dded).

My

argument

assumes

hat

acon

too

conveyed

ome

f

his

houghts

bout

eligion

n

an

indirectr

guarded

manner.

hree

onsiderations

ustify

he

pplica-

tion f

this

eservedly

ontroversial

ethod

f

nterpretation

o

Bacon.

First,

he

open

expression

f

unorthodox

iews

n

religion

ould

have

exposed

im

o

serious

anger;

s

Spedding oints

ut,

Bacon's

England

was "a

world

n

which

he

publication

f

a

false

pinion

was

held o

be

an

offence

nd

forbidden

nder

enalties."4

For

an

ambitious

ut

m-

pecuniousmanandpassionate eformer,howished o be heardon

many

ubjects

n

addition

o

religion,

he

imits f

what

ould

be

said

'Although

the

interpretation

f

Bacon

as

an

anti-Christian

riter s at

least as old

as

Diderot

and

DeMaistre,

the

only

recent

ull-length

tudy

which akes

this

view s

the ate

Howard

White's

Peace

Among

the

Willows: The

Political

Philosophyof

Francis

Bacon

(The

Hague:

Martinus

Nijhoff,

968).

But

White

ssumes

thatBacon's

antireligious

nten-

tion

s so

obvious as

not

to

require ny

extended

emonstration.

any

modern

nterpreta-

tions f

Bacon's

religious

iews

onsciously

r

unconsciouslyepeat

he

onclusions

rrived

atbyKunoFischern themid-nineteenth

entury:

acon

was a

sincere f

perhaps

omewhat

tepid

Christian

whose

fideism

nwittinglypened

a

path

o the

ubsequent

ecularization f

Christian

elief.

ee

Kuno

Fischer,

rancis

Bacon

of

Verulam:

Realistic

hilosophy

nd Its

Age

(London:

Longman,

Brown,

Green,

Longmans,

and

Roberts,

1857),

290-347.

4James

pedding,

d.,

The

Letters

nd the

Life

of

Francis

Bacon

(London:

Longmans,

Green,

Reader,

and

Dyer,

1868),

Vol.

4,

p.

345.



5/25

422

Christianity

n

Francis acon

were

ven

narrowerhan

he

egal

nes.

As he

acknowledged

n

a

private

letter,aconwas concernedo avoidpublishinghingsharsh o credit

and

opinion,

r nconvenientor he

person

f the

writer."'

Second,

Bacon

makes

many

eferences

o

an

"acroamatic r

enig-

matical

method"

f

writing

hich eeks

by

obscurity

f

delivery

o ex-

clude

he

vulgar

rom

he

ecrets f

knowledge"

4:450).

Moreover,

e

endorses

oing

o:

"The discretion

nciently

bserved

. .

of

publishing

in

a

manner

hereby

t

shallnotbe

to the

apacity

or aste

f

all,

but

shall

s

it were

ingle

nd

adopt

his

reader,

s not o be

laid

aside,

both

for

he

voiding

fabuse

nthe

xcluded,

nd

the

trengthening

f ffec-

tion n theadmitted" 3:248).6

Finally,

acon believed

hat

xcessively

pen

challenges

o the

most

fundamental

r

ruling

rejudices

f

society

ere

nwise

nd undesirable

in themselves:

it

were

good

. . . that

men

in

their

nnovations

would

follow

he

xample

f time

tself;

which

ndeed

nnovateth

reatly,

ut

quietly,

nd

by

degrees

carce

o be

perceived"

6:433).

Politics

nd

religion,

nd

hence

public

order,

est

on

opinion

nd

authority,

ot

proofs

nd

demonstrations

3:302;

:89).

According

o

Bacon,

ne

ought

to

use

thenew

science

when

dealing

with

nature,

ut

the

accepted

r

establishedciencesi.e.,those ftheChristianristotelians)ndealing

with

he

opulace;

every

man f

uperior

nderstanding

ncontact

ith

inferiors

ears

mask."'

Above

ll,

when

onsidering

hatBacon

was

and

was

not

willing

o

say

openly

bout

Christianity,

e must

emember

that

e

sought

o end

religious

ontroversy,

ot ontribute

o t

by

dding

to

the

ectarian

itches'

rew

n

open

ttack

n

Christianity

tself.8

The

foregoing

remises

ranted

r

provisionally

olerated,

will

rgue

that

acon's

real

ttitude

oward

hristianity

as

a

blend

f

scepticism,

hostility,

nd

ndifference,

nd

that e

expected

decisive iminution

f

thendependentoliticalole freligionsa resultf cientificrogress.

'Ibid.,

141.

For

otherreferences

o

the

problem

of

communicating

ossibly

offensive

ideas

without

ndangering

neself,

ee

Works

3:255,

363;

4:42,

53,

371;

6:377-378,

456,

701-702.

See

also

Benjamin

Farrington's

aluable translations

f

several arly

Latin

works

which

Bacon

left

unpublished:

Benjamin

Farrington,

d. and trans.,

The Philosophy

of

Francis

Bacon

(Chicago:

University

f

Chicago

Press,

1966),

pp. 62,

77-78.

'See

Works

:311;

5:31;

6:387-389,

403-404,

29-431,

695-699,

701-702.

Even

Spedding,

no

friend

f

the

esoteric

hypothesis

s he understood

t,

felt

ompelled

by

the

undeniable

textual vidence fBacon's esotericismo attempt refutationf it; see Works1:107-113

and

the

passages

from

acon's

writings

iscussed

here.

pedding's

refutation

ails

because

it focuses

oo

much

on

the claim

thatBacon

possessed

a

secret

eaching

which

he

entirely

refrained

rom

xpressing

n

writing,

ven

ndirectly.

7Farrington,

08.

sFischer,

07-308.



6/25


7/25

424

Christianity

n

Francis acon

references

o the

Christian

eligion:

The

end

of our

foundation

s

the

knowledgefcauses, nd secretmotionsfthings;nd the nlargingf

the

bounds

of

human

mpire,

o the

effecting

f

all

things ossible"

(3:156).

To take nother

xample

rom

he

ame

book,

wearetold

t one

point

that

nationwhich

ong

ago

launched

n

unprovoked

ttack

gainst

Bensalem

as

subsequently

estroyedy great

lood,

nd this

lood s

at first

escribed

s

a

punishment

f

"proud enterprises"

y

"divine

revenge"

3:142).

But

n the ame

paragraph

e learn

hat

perhaps

s

many

s one

hundred

ears

assed

between

he

ttempted

onquest

nd

thefloodwhichllegedly unishedt, nd that loods renaturalo the

country

n

question

ecause

f ts

great

ivers

nd

high

mountains.

he

priest

who

began

by speaking

f

"divine

evenge"

nds

his

account

y

calling

heflood

this

main ccident

f time"

3:143);

a

speech

which

begins y

asserting

divine

overnance

f nature

which

unishes

n-

justice

etween

ations,

nds

by

mplying

hathuman

xistence

s at

the

mercy

f natural

orces

hat

perate

ithout

eference

o

our

humility

r

pride,

ustice

r

injustice.

Bacon's

remarks

n

religion

ometimes

re

not

merely

quivocal

ut

comeverylose obeing elf-contradictory.heopeningentencefthe

essay

Of

Atheism"

eclares

hatBacon

would

rather

elieve

ll

the

fables

n the

Legend,

nd

the

Talmud,

nd

theAlcoran

han

hat

his

universal

rame

s

without

mind"

6:413).

But he

pening

entence

f

the

following,

nd

clearly

elated,

ssay

Of

Superstition"

oth

choes

the

entence

ust

quoted

nd

questions

tsbasic

principle:

It were

etter

to have

no

opinion

t all

of God

than

uch n

opinion

s is

unworthy

f

him"

6:415).

The

principle

f

the

first

entence

s that

unworthy

r

superstitious

elief

s

preferable

o

disbelief.

he

principle

f the

econd

sentencesthat efrainingrom eliefwhichssurelykind fdisbelief)

is

preferable

o

unworthy

r

superstitious

elief.II

s

for he

fundamen-

tal

principle

hat

the

proposition

this

universal

rame

s without

mind"

s

incredible,

acon

flatly

ontradicts

t in otherworks:

the

school

of

Democritus,

hich

went

further

nto

nature

han he

rest"

(4:58)

"did

not

uppose

mind r

reason

n

the rame

f

things"3:358).

One

final

xample

s

perhaps

he

most

ignificant

fall

for

my

opic.

In

The

Advancement

f

Learning,

acon

denies

that there

an

be

anything

rreligious

nthe ffort

o

understandature,

ut

xplicitly

on-

cedes he mpietyfany ttempto attainmoral nd ethical nowledge

0'The

tension

s

noted

by

J.W.

Weinberger,

Science

and Rule

n Bacon's Utopia:

An

In-

troduction

o

the

Reading

of the

New

Atlantis,"

American

Political

Science

Review,

Vol.

70

(1976):

880.



8/25

Timothy

. Paterson

425

independent

f revelation:

It was

the

proudknowledge

f

good

and

evil,with n intentn man ogive awuntohimself,nd todepend o

more

pon

God's

commandments,

hich

asthe

orm

f he

emptation

[ofAdam]"

3:265)."

Such

n"intent"

s

necessarilyresent

n

any

f-

fort o discover

purely

ational

thics,

ince

according

o

Bacon)

reason is

unable to demonstrate

he

truth

f

Christian

morality

(3:478-479).

utThe

New

Organon4:79, 112)clearly

tateshat

new

"ethics,

nd

politics"

will

e

produced

y

Baconian

cience;

t eems

hat

the

proud

knowledge

f

good

and evil"

will

e

sought, espite

he

d-

mitted

mpiety

f

doing

o.

Does

this ot

rgue

an intent

nman

o

give

lawuntohimself,ndtodepend omore ponGod'scommandments"?

II.

Bacon's

Use

ofthe

Bible

Bacon's

characteristic

anner

f

employing

iblical

exts or

hetorical

purposes

uggests

certainnner

istance rom

hristianity.

here s

a

revealing

esemblance

etween

is

sophistical

se of

the

Bibleto

lend

authority

o

hisown

houghts

nd

his

mannerf

treating

lassical

myths

in

Of

the

Wisdom

f

the

Ancients.

n

that

work,

Bacon

claims

hat

Greek ndRomanmythsreallegoricalresentationsfa lost ncient

science,

ow

recovered

hrough

is

nterpretive

ecoding,

nd

uses

this

claim o

present

is own

views n

an

attractive

nd

somewhat

isguised

form.'2

His use

of

he

Biblewas

often

o

ess

onsciously

nsincere.t

ap-

pears hat,

n

both

ases,

he

sought

o

present

is

own

deas

n

ways

on-

sonant

with

he

prejudices

f

his

ntended

udience.

t

will

be

objected

that

misuse

f

the

Bible

was

not

unknown

o

Christendom,

nd that

"In an earlyworkwhichhe left npublished, acon was evenmore mphatic: hedesire

to

possess

knowledge

f

good

and

evil

"ever

riseth

pon

an

appetite

o

elect

and

not to

obey,

and so

containeth

n

it

a

manifest

efection"

from

God's will

Works,

3:227,

em-

phases

added).

The

theological

difficulty

hich

resultsfor

any

Baconian

"ethics

and

politics"

is

noted

by

Lisa

Jardine,

rancis

Bacon:

Discovery

and

the Art

of

Discourse

(Cambridge:

Cambridge

University

ress,

1974),

pp.

150-151.

"The

irony

r

insincerity

f

the

nterpretive

tance

Bacon

adopts

n

Wisdom

f

theAn-

cients

s

clear

from

tatements

e

made

both

before

nd

after

writing

t,

to

the

effect

hat

the

claim

to

be

recovering

long-hidden

ancient

wisdom"

was

an

"imposture"

designed

to

lend

credit

nd

authority

o

new

ideas;

see

Farrington,

6-87,

120-121;

Works,

:108.

Paolo

Rossi's

theory

hat

Bacon

was

entirely

incere,

but

kept

changing

his

mind

about

whether r notsuch"ancientwisdom" really xisted, nvolves o many

hanges

ofmind

over

o

manyyears

s

to

be

quite

mplausible.

ee

Paolo

Rossi,

Francis

Bacon:

From

Magic

to

Science

(Chicago:

University

f

Chicago

Press,

1968),

pp.

81-96.

The

resemblance

between

Bacon's

attitude

o

biblical

and

classical

myths

s

noted

by

Moody

E.

Prior,

"Bacon's

Man

of

Science,"

in

Brian

Vickers,

ed.,

Essential

Articles

or

the

Study

of

Francis

Bacon

(Hamden:

Archon

Books,

1968),

pp.

150-151.



9/25

426

Christianity

n Francis

acon

there re

indisputably

incere

hristians ho also turn

cripture

o

strangend idiosyncraticurposes.Whilegrantinghatmy rgument

here

s

suggestive

nd

not

probative,

would bserve

hat uch incere

believers

ntirely

ackdetachment

rom heir wn

misinterpretations

nd

do

not,

s

a

rule,

ndicate

more r less

openly

hat

hey

now

hey

re

misusing

heBible.

Bacon does

do

this,

nd

to a

degree

which

uggests

that

his

scripturalophistry

ould

hardly

avebeen

nadvertent.

TheAdvancement

f

Learning,

or

xample,

resents

lleged

iblical

testimonies

o God's

high

regard

or

human

earning.

he work

p-

pointed

o Adam

by

God

could

havebeen

no other han

work

f con-

templation"; dam'smain ctivityntheGarden f Edenwas"experi-

ment"

3:296).

But a

subsequent

hapter

irectly

ontradicts

hese

n-

herently

mplausible

laims:

And so

we see Enoch

the

seventh

rom

Adam,

whowas

the

irst

ontemplative,

nd

walked

with

God, yet

did

also

endow

the

church

with

prophecy.

.

But

for

ontemplation

hich

should

be

finished

n

itself,

without

asting

eams

upon

society,

s-

suredly

ivinity

noweth

t

not"

(3:422;

emphases

dded).

Again,

The

Advancement

f

Learning

ssures

s that

he

Book

of

Job

s

"pregnant

and

swelling

ithnatural

hilosophy"

3:298),

but

The

New

Organon

cites he ttempto recover aturalhilosophyromheBookofJob s

an

example

f

"the

corruption

f

philosophy

y

uperstition"

4:65-66).

The

divine

onors

ccorded

uman

nowledge

re

allegedly

hown

y

the

fact

hat

he

Biblerecords

he

names

f the nventors

f music

nd

metal-working

3:297).

Bacon

does

not

mention

hat

he

very

ext

he

cites,

Genesis

:17-24,

lso

says

hat

oth

hese

menwere irect

escen-

dants

of

Cain;

he turns

what

n

fact eem

to

be

biblical

eservations

about

echnological

rogress

ntodivine

raise

f such

progress.

acon

concedes

hat

God

laid

upon

mankind

he confusion

f

tongues,

"wherebyhe pen radend ntercoursef earningndknowledgeas

chiefly

mbarred"

3:297),

an

act which

eems

o reflect

ostility

o

human

earning

ather

han

pproval

f

it. But

he omitsmention

hat

this

was

done

because

he

inguistic

nity

f mankind

ad made

possible

a

great

feat

of

technology,

he

building

f

the Tower

of

Babel,

and

because

God

was

displeased

hat

nothing

ould

be restrained

rom

mankind

hich

t

might

magine

o

do."'

Two

ater tatements

y

Bacon

illuminate

he ssues

nvolved

ere.

irst,

n the atin

version

f The

Ad-

vancement

f

Learning,

acon

calls

grammar

an antidote

gainst

he

curse fthe onfusionftongues,"ndgoesontosay hatmost fthe

arts

nd

sciences

imilarly

attle

gainst

ivinely-imposed

imitations.

"Genesis

11:6.



10/25

Timothy

.

Paterson

427

Similarly,

n the

NewAtlantis

heultimate

urpose

fscientific

esearch

is said to be "theeffectingf all thingsossible" 3:156).

Themost

trikingxample

fBacon's

willingness

o

employ

iblical

r

religious

hetoric

n the

service

f secularntentions

s his claim

hat

sciencewill

recovermankind's

divine

bequest"

or restore

o

some

unspecified

ut

significant

egree

hat condition

f

dominion

ver

nature

njoyedby

Adam

prior

o the Fall.

This

attempt

o

present

Baconian

mastery

f

nature

s a

preparation

or

the

millenium

r

recovery

f

Paradise as

received fair mount

f

scholarly

ttention

n

recent

ears,

nd has

been cited

s decisive

roof

f

the

profoundly

Christian oots of Bacon's

thought.14

There is no doubt that

millenarianismas an

important

lement f the

religious

ife

of

early

seventeenth

entury

ngland,

nd

that acondoes

from

ime

o time

ay

things

hich

esemble

hat

he

millenariansere

saying."'

ut

do

such

remarks

rove

that

Bacon

was an

exponent

f

"Protestant-Puritan

eschatology,"

ne

whose aithed him

o nvest

cientificnd

technical

progress

with

profound eligious ignificance?

r are

they

better

understood

s

a kind f

religious

hetoric

onsciously

esigned

o

chan-

nel

nto

cience he

piritual

nergies

roused

y

millenarian

opes?

TheNewAtlantiss thedecisive est ase fordetermininghether

Bacon's

millenarian

hetoric

as

a

sincere

xpression

f

his

own

beliefs

or

merely

n

attempt

o

enlist

he

upport

f

those

enuinely

nfluenced

by

millenarian

deas.

The

book

surely

oes

contain

millenarian

hemes

"4Works,

:129,

135,

136,

217,

222;

4:7, 115,

248,

440-441.

On

"the

recovery

f

Paradise" as a

Baconian

theme,

ee Hans

Blumenberg,

he

Legitimacy f

the

Modern

Age

(Cambridge:

Massachusetts

nstitute f

Technology

ress,

1983),

pp.

232, 386;

J.

C.

Davis,

Utopia

and the

deal

Society

Cambridge:

Cambridge

University

ress,

1981),

p.

125;

Far-

rington, 2; WilliamLeiss, TheDomination

of

Nature

Boston:

Beacon

Press,

1974),

pp.

48-57;

Prior,

15-152;

Rossi,

130-131;

Charles

Webster,

The

Great

nstauration:

cience,

Medicine,

and

Reform,

626-1660

London:

Gerald

Duckworth nd

Co.,

Ltd.,

1975),

pp.

22-24,

26,

505-506,

nd

the

ame

uthor's

rom

aracelsus o

Newton:

Magic

nd

the

Making of

Modern

Science

Cambridge:

Cambridge

University

ress,

1982),

pp.

48-49;

Frances

A.

Yates,

The

Rosicrucian

Enlightenment

London:

Paladin

Press,

1975),

pp.

156-157.

"On

millenarianism

n

early

eventeenth

entury

ngland,

see

Bryan

W.

Ball,

A

Great

Expectation:

schatological

hought

n

English

rotestantism

o

1660

Leiden:

.J.

Brill,

1975);

Bernard

app,

The

Fifth

Monarchy

en:

A

Study

n

Seventeenth

entury

nglish

Millenarianism

London:

Faber,

1972);

Paul

Christianson,Reformers

nd

Babylon:

English pocalypticisionsrom heReformationotheCivilWar

Toronto:

niversity

of

Toronto

Press,

1978);

Katherine

R.

Firth,

The

Apocalyptic

Tradition n

Reformation

Britain,

1530-1645

Oxford:

Oxford

University

ress,

1979);

William

M.

Lamont,

Godly

Rule:

Politics

and

Religion,

1603-1660

London:

Macmillan,

1969);

Peter

Toon

(ed.),

Puritans,

he

Millenium,

nd

the

uture

f

srael:

uritan

schatology,

600 o

1660

Cam-

bridge

nd

London:

James

Clarke

and

Co.,

1970).



11/25

428

Christianity

n

Francis

acon

and

anguage.

ensalems

repeatedly

escribed

n

terms hich

uggest

t

to bea kind fearthlyaradise;t scalled a picturefour alvationn

heaven,"

"this

happy

and

holy

ground,"

nd "a

land of

angels"

(3:136).

The

amazing

owers

wielded

y

Salomon'sHouse

suggest

hat

science as

n

considerable easure estored ankindo ts

prelapsarian

condition

f

rule

ver

nature.

Moreover,

he

ccount

iven

f hemarital

institutionhich

acon was bold

enough

o

call

"the

Adam nd

Eve's

pools,"

where

men

nd

women

outinely

ook

upon

each

other aked

without

hame

r

sin,

clearly

ntends o

suggest

hat cientific

rogress

has also

restoredhat nnocencef

good

ndevilwhich

as

corrupted

r

lost n theFall 3:154).Finally,he haracterfJoabin, Jewishmer-

chant

ympathetic

o

Christianity

hom henarrator

ikens t

one

point

to the

prophet

lijah,

seems o

be a referenceo

the

key

millenarian

theme hat

he rrival f

the

Kingdom

f God on

earth

willbe heralded

by

he

ppearance

f

Elijah

and

the

onversion

f

the

Jews

o Christian-

ity

3:151-154).16

For

the careful

eader,

owever,

acon

provides

ndicationsf

his

own

distance

rom uch

hopes.

The

overwhelming

mphasis

which

Bacon

places

on

human

ffort

ather

handivine

ntervention

s

the

primarygencywhichs to "recover aradise"distinguishesimdeci-

sively

rom

hevast

majority

f Protestant

illenarians.

oreover,

ne

wonders

ow

many

rotestant

illenarians

ould

have

been

willing

o

accept

he

mplication

hat

he

only

millenial

ingdom

hich

mankind

can

help

to establish

n

earth

s one

which

wes

ts existence

nd

its

distinctive

haracter

o

a

certain

ind f science

nd

technology

ather

than

o

prayer,

epentance,

reaching,

tudy

f

the

Bible,

ndmoral

nd

ecclesiastical

eform.

As for

the

implied

claim that

science

and

technology

an

restore

ost

nnocence

s

well s

lost

power,

we note

hat

Joabin's ame ecallshat f oneofthemost iolentndruthless enn

the

Bible

Joab),

nd

that

he

mplied

moral

paradise

ristles

ith

d-

60On

he

anticipated

onversion

f the

Jews s

a

millenarian heme,

ee Ball,

107-108,

149-150;

Capp,

28-29;

Christianson,

07,

210-212,

214;

Davis,

113-114,

142,

146;

Firth,

160-162,

00-201,

212;

WilfridR.

Prest,

The Artof Law

and theLaw

of God: Sir

Henry

Finch,

1558-1625,"

n D.

Pennington

ndK. Thomas

eds.),

Puritans

nd

Revolutionaries

(Oxford:

Oxford

University

ress,

1978),

pp.

95,

108-109;

Toon,

passim;

Frances

A.

Yates,

The Occult

Philosophy

n the

Elizabethan

Age (London:

Routledge

nd

Kegan

Paul,

1979),

pp.

174-175.For the roleofElias/Elijah in particular ee Ball, 107; Firth, , 196,

202;

Marion

Leathers

Daniels

Kuntz,

"Introduction"

o Bodin's

Colloquium

of

the

Seven

(Princeton:

Princeton

University

ress,

1975),

xi-lxii;

Gershom

G. Scholem,

On the

Kab-

balah

and

Its

Symbolism

New

York:

Schocken

Books, 1965), p.

20;

Keith

Thomas,

Religion

and

the Decline

of Magic

(New

York:

Penguin

Books,

1978), pp.

157,

160;

Webster,

Great

nstauration,

0.



12/25


13/25

430

Christianity

n

Francis

acon

alchemy

nd

magic

re

feigned

o

havedone

n

fable

4:85-86).2o

n

an

apparentfforto redirectntellectualnergiesrommagic o science,

Bacon

proposed

hat ne

might

egard

cientific

echnology

s

a kind f

"natural

nd

legitimate

agic,"

natural nd

legitimate

n

the ense

f

eschewing

ny

laim o

operate

with

upernaturalorces,

magical

n the

sense hat

t

would

pply

the

knowledge

fhidden orms

o

the

roduc-

tion f wonderful

perations"

4:366-367).

Bacon

of

course

knew

hat

Christianityccepted

he

endsof

magic

only

reluctantly

nd with

profound

uspicion,

while

remaining

m-

placably

ostile

o

any

direct r

implied

laim hat

magic

ould com-

mand r coerce upernaturalorces.2 e took are o remain ithinhe

bounds

f

orthodoxyyrejectingny

laim hat hewonders orked

y

science ould

be

produced y

other han

natural

means;

nature an

be

commanded

nly y

being beyed."

From he

point

fview fthe

pres-

ent

nquiry,

acon's

doption

f

this

airly

ommon

efense f

"natural

magic"

s

less

nteresting

hanthe further

nd rather nconventional

argumenty

whichhe

proposed

o

distinguish legitimate

nd

pious

"magic,"

hat

s,

scientific

echnology,

rom n

mpious

nd

llegitimate

variety.

Baconargues hatmagic ntheusualsenseof the term s impious

because

t ssures s

that

wecan ttain

by

a few

asy

nd lothfulbser-

vances"

those

hings

hich

God has

ordained

must e

"bought

t

the

price

f

labor"

3:381).

Such

magic

defies

thatfirst

dictwhichGod

gave

unto

man,

n

the weat

f

your

ace

you

hall

at

your

read."

But

there an

be little oubt

hatBaconian

cience

lso seeks o resist

r

reverse

his divine

dict,

as Bacon

all but

openly

dmits

when he

describes

he rts

nd sciences

s

efforts

y

mankind

o "arm

and de-

fend"

tself

gainst

divine

curses";

n thiscontext

acon

explicitly

states hat he rts remeans ywhichmankindefendstselfgainst

"the first

eneral

urse

f

thebarrenness

f

the

earth,

nd

of

eating

bread

n the weat

f

[one's]

face"

4:440-441).

inceBaconian

cience

indisputably

eeks

he

imitless

xpansion

f

the

productive

rts,

acon's

real

argument

herefore

eems

o

be that he

only

"price

of

labor"

mankind

must

pay

is

the

effort

eeded

to

develop

a new

power-

generating

atural

cience,

hich an

nturn ree uman

eings

rom

he

20The antasticharacterfBacon's ims mergesuite learlyrom eflectionnthe

specific

magico-alchemical

romises

isted

n this

passage,

nd on

ust

what

going

far

beyond

hese

n fact"

would

nvolve.

21'n

theChristian

ttitudeowards

agic

ee,

n

addition

o thework yKeith

homas

already

ited,

D.P.

Walker,

piritual

nd Demonic

Magic

from

icino

to

Campanella

(Notre

ame:

University

f

Notre

ame

Press,

975).



14/25

Timothy

.

Paterson

431

divine dict r

curse.22"

he

degree

owhich

uch reedom

rom

abor

an

ever ecompletes left nspecified,ndthe mplications that his sa

question

which

an

only

e

resolved

ypractice.

acon

urely

pecifies

no restrictionsn "therelief

fman's

state"

whichmankind

tself

must

respect

r

enforce n thebasis

of

revelation,

s isso often

he ase

with

Bacon,

n

alleged

imitation

n human

rojectsmposed y

God

turns

out on

closer

nspection

o

be

indistinguishable

rom

hose

imits

m-

posedby

what

he

awsof nature

make

t

objectivelympossible

o

ac-

complish.

t

would

herefore

eem

hat

ccording

o the

pecific

riterion

by

which

acon himself

roposes

o

distinguish

etween

ious

nd

m-

pious"magic,"his cience s self-consciouslympious.23

A

second

nd more

pecific

ndor

goal

of

Baconian

cience

trongly

suggests

acon's

distance rom

heChristian

radition.

y

any

reason-

able

understanding

f that

radition,

he

spiration

o secureiteral

m-

mortality

or

mankind

y

human fforts

as

to

be

regarded

s

grossly

r-

religious.

et,

fantastic

s

it

might

eem,

there

s

abundant

extual

evidence

hat

Bacon

hoped

that

bodily

mmortalityight

e

possible

through

cientific

edicine

ome ime n

the

distant

uture.

n

an

early

work,

acon

described

he

rue r

proper

ndof

science s "a

discovery

ofall operationsndpossibilitiesfoperationsrommmortalityif t

were

possible)

o

the

meanest

mechanical

ractice"

3:222).

We

learn

from

Wisdom

f

the

Ancients hat

"natural

philosophy

roposes

o

itself,

s its

noblest

work f

all,

nothing

ess

than

he

restitution

nd

renovation

f

things

orruptible,

nd

what

s ndeed he

ame

hing

n

a

lower

egree)

he

onservationf

bodies n

the

tate n

which

hey

re,

and

the

etardation

f

dissolutionnd

putrefaction"

6:721).

The

scien-

tists

f

Salomon's

Housedevote

n

extraordinary

mount

f

ttention

o

the

reservation

f

health

ndthe

rolongation

f

ife;

hey

ave

gone

o

far s toachieveheresuscitationfsomebodieswhichseemdead n

appearance"

(3:159).24

22An

arly

npublished

ffort

o

argue

long

hese

ines

roduced

his

notable

iece

f

scriptural

ophistry:

hen

he

ible

ays

hat

man

must

arn

his

read

by

he

weat f

his

brow,"

t

means hat

bread

hould

e

won

primarily

y

mental

s

opposed

o

physical

labor,

nd

hence

mandates

he

evelopment

f

science

hich

an

master

ature

Works,

3:223).

23D.P.

Walker

otes

he

ather

nusual

haracter

f

Bacon's

rgument.

e

conjectures

that

acon

rejected

agic

rimarily

ecause

magic

makes

xperiments

nnecessary,

nd

Bacon ikeddoing ndplanningxperiments"Walker, 02).He doesnotconsiderhe

possibility

hat

Bacon's

distinction

ay

have

mbodied

covert

ntireligious

ntention.

Descartes

eems o

have

grasped

acon's

mplication

ere:

ne of

the

easons

we

should

make

urselves

the

masters

nd

possessors

f

nature"

s

that

o

we

may

enjoy

without

labor

he

fruits

f

the

arth"

Discourse

n

Method,

art

ix,

toward

he

beginning).

4'For

ther

eferences

o

the

ossibility

f

ndefinitely

rolonging

uman

ife,

ee

Works,

3:157,

158,

159,

160,

167;

4:85,

383-385,

390-391,

418;

6:721,

749,

761.



15/25

432

Christianity

n

Francis

acon

It

might

f course e

objected

hat desire

o

achieve

he ndefinite

prolongationf humanife shardlyhe ame hings anaspirationo

literal

mmortality.

he distinction

s undeniable

n

principle,

ut hree

considerations

ead

me

to

question

ts

ignificance

n this ontext.

irst,

if

cientific

edicine

an

prolong

uman

ife,

nd

f

he cience

n which

suchmedicine

s

to be

based

will

tself e

capable

f nfiniter ndefinite

progress

n

the

mastery

f

nature,

hen

urely

mmortality

ppears

s

an

extreme

imit

ossibility

hich

ogically

esults

rom he

uxtaposition

f

two

prior

hopes

which re

ndisputably

art

f Baconian

cience.

ec-

ond,

Bacondoes

not

peak

f

ny

imits

o this

engthening

fhuman

ife

which cience hould nprinciple espect; ere s elsewhere,heonly

significant

uestion

orBacon

s

the

bjective

ossibility

r

mpossibility

of the

goal,

not ts

piety

r

mpiety"immortality,

f

t

were

ossible").

Third,

while

n

his

unpublished

ork

acon

"to

speak

plainly

ndclear-

ly"

says

that

the

supreme

oal

of

science

s

"immortality"3:222),

phrasing

his

oal

n themore

modest

nd

plausible

erms

ound

n

the

published

orks

as

urely

prudential

ecessity;

twas

hardly

n

objec-

tive

hat

ould

have

been

penly

cknowledged.

iven

he

gross

mpiety

of

any

such

aspiration,

acon's

hinted

ndorsements

f

it are

in

fact

ratherold.

The

generally

cknowledged

nd

openly

sserted

oal

of

Bacon's

science

s

the

mastery

fnature

or

he elief

fman's

state.

ut

xactly

why

oes

mankind

eed o

master

ature?

What

s tabout

man's

state

that ries

ut

for

elief?

he

effort

o

answer

hese

uestions

uggests

he

profound

ension

etween

acon's

conception

f

the

humanituation

n

nature

nd

the

biblical

onception

s

understood

y

hevast

majority

f

Bacon's

Christian

ontemporaries.

have

lluded

o

perhaps

he

ingle

most

triking

llustration

f

this

ension,

he ccount

fthe

destruction

ofAtlantisn theNewAtlantis. s the ontextfthat ccountmakes

clear,

hefate

uffered

y

Atlantis

s

ntended

o stand

or hefate

f

all

nations

which

o

not

possess

he

power

vernature

which

Bensalem

derives

rom

ts cience.

eflection

n thedetails

f Bacon's

version

f

the

Atlantis

yth

nd

comparison

f

theBaconian

withhe latonic

er-

sion

reveal

Bacon's

apparent

cceptance

f

a

cosmology

n

which

mankind

s

subjected

o

periodic

estructions

y

nature

hich,

ot

be-

ingguided

y

any

kind

f

ntentions

r

purposes,

annot

venbe

called

indifferent

o

the

fate

f

human

eings

r

to themoral ifferences

e-

tweenhem. orBacon,naturessomethingull f"panicterrors"or

man

nd

"reverenced

oo

much";

for

he

good

of

mankind

t must

e

conquered

y

science.

acon's

anguage

when

he

speaks

fthis

ask

s

consistent

and

quite

revealing:

nature

must

be "made

captive,"

"bound,"

"racked," "conquered,"

"enslaved

and

led before

us

in



16/25

Timothy

. Paterson

433

chains,"

ndeven

put

to

death.""2

It is of coursedifficulto reconcilehisconceptionf nature s

something

loseto a foeof

mankind

ith hat ffered

y

the

Christian

tradition

n

Bacon's ime.

According

o that

radition,

ature

s

the

work

of a benevolentreator ho continues

o

employ

iscreation

s an

in-

strument

or hemoral nd

religious

nstruction

nd

chastisement

f

a

sinfulmankind.26

he

Flood,

to take he

most bvious

xample

nd

the

onewhich

most esembleshosewhich

acondiscussesnthe

New

A

tlan-

tis,

was

understood o be

a divine

response

o

profound

uman

wickedness,

ot "main

ccident

ftime."

Was t

really ossible

or

n

orthodoxhristianfthe arly eventeenthenturyoendorsehe dea

that he nature

whichGod has created

epeatedly

ecimates

mankind

without

ny

referenceo human

onduct?

ivenBacon's

conception

f

thehuman

ituation

n

nature,

nehas to

wonder

hethercertain

rim

mockery

f orthodox

elief s not

conveyed

y

his

seemingly

rthodox

declarationhat

cripture

evealsGod's

will

whilenature

eveals

his

power,

whereof he

atters a

key

nto he

former"

3:301).

f n

fact

there

xists an

indissolubleond" between

information

oncerning

[God's]

will"

and

"meditation

oncerning

is

power"

(4:89),

then

Bacon's covert uggestion ould seem to be thatto theextent ne

regards

he

natural

rder s

shapedby

divine

ntentions,

s

orthodox

Christianityoes,

reflectionn

the

way

hat rder

ffects uman

eings

suggests

hat

ny

uch

will

must

e

ill-disposed

owards

man.

IV.

Bacon's

Social

Psychology

f

Belief

nd

Unbelief

Many

f the

pecific

eforms

hich acon

proposed

id n

fact

help

o

weaken

hristianity

s

a

political

orce. he

strict

eparation

f

reason

and revelation,hefreeingfnaturalcience romhesupervisionf

religious

uthorities,

he

development

f

extensive

eligiousoleration,

the

pplication

f

science o

the

production

f

prosperity,

ealth,

nd

security,

he

popularization

f

the new

"non-teleological"

cience

f

nature-while

o

single

lement

f this

program

ecessarily

eflects

hostility

o

Christianity,

n

combination

hese

hanges

ramatically

ar-

rowed

he

public

tatus

nd

relevance

f

faith.

More

o the

pointhere,

Bacon's

few

ut

ignificant

tatements

bout

he

xperiential

onditions

tending

o

strengthen

r

weaken

eligious

elief

uggest

hathe

foresaw

and ntendedhese onsequences.

"

Works

:47;

6:710-713,

726,

744.

Cf.

Essay

58,

Works

:512-514.

26See

Paul H.

Kocher,

Science and

Religion

n

Elizabethan

England

San

Marino: The

Huntington

ibrary,

953), pp.

93-94,

117,218,

263-266,

278;

Thomas,

91-92,

96-97,

101,

105-107.



17/25

434

Christianity

n

Francis

acon

According

o

Bacon,

"learned imes" re one of the

principal

auses

of thespread f atheism6:414).The inverseelationshiplso holds:

religion

hrivesn

gnorance

f

natural auses

n

this

world,

nd n

turn

fosters

t

4:76,

78,

87-88).

Yet,

as

the

very

itle f hisfirst

major

work

suggests,

acon

undeniablyromoted

learned

imes";

he

argues

hat

themodern

ge

will

become he

hird

reat

ge

of

earning,urpassing

the

ccomplishments

fboth

Greece nd

Rome

note

he

mission f

the

ChristianMiddle

Ages

from his

honor

roll)

(4:90-102).

t

might

reasonably

e

objected

hat

n

the

New

A

tlantis

he

dvance

f

cience

s

combined

ith certain

eparation

f science

rom

ociety,

nd

that

he

bookreflectsn ambitiono combine theadvancementflearning"

among

minority

ith

n

avoidance

f "learned

imes"

n

the

ense f

general

ransformation

f

public

ttitudes

hrough

opularized

cience.

Salomon's

House,

for

xample,

withholdsertain

iscoveries

ot

only

from

he

public

ut

ven rom the

tate"

3:165),

nd t

east ne cien-

tist

resents

imself

o

the

itizenry

n

a

quasi-religious

uise

3:155;

cf.

4:390).

The

major

popular

eremony

escribed,

heFeast

of

the

Family

(3:147-151),

uggests

hat

he utlook

f

the

rdinary

itizen

s

very

ittle

affected

y any

awareness

f

the

theoreticalubstance

f

the

new

science,hough rofoundlyffectedythepracticalesults hichhat

science

chieves.

But

these

pparent

opes

re

in such

tension

with he

fundamental

character

f Baconian

cience

hat

one

wonders

ow

seriously

acon

entertained

hem.

A science

which

ndertakes

o

change

he

onditions

of

everyday

ife

will ind

tdifficult

o

maintain

tsdistance

rom

ociety,

let alone

any

air

of

remoteness,

ystery,

nd

consecration

o

higher

things.

Works"

would

eem

o

require

arge

numbers

f

technicians

and

trainers

f

technicians,

ndhence

o

promote

n

understanding

f

sciencewhichsintermediateetweenhenonscientificonsciousnessf

the

ordinary

erson

nd

the

understanding

ossessed

y

the

genuine

scientists.

aconian

cience

herefore

ecessarily

mplies

n

"enlighten-

ment"

which

nvolves

many

ersons

n that

little

r

superficial

nowl-

edge

of

philosophy"

hich, ccording

o

Bacon, may

ncline

he

mind

of

man

o atheism"

3:267).

n

addition

o

ts

hirty-six

ctive

cientists,

Salomon's

House

contains

"great

number"

f

assistants,

ttendants,

and

apprentices

f

all

kinds,

oth

men nd women

3:165).

Moreover,

Bacon

is

hopelessly

mbiguous

n

the

key question

f

exactly

what

percentagefmankindanbeexpectedounderstandhenew cience."2

The

clearest

onclusion

o be

drawn

rom

is

contradictory

emarks

n

this

ubject

s

that

his

willbe

resolved

y

practice,

ndthe ffect

f

any

27Compare,

for

example,

Works

:42,

113

with

4:62-63,

109

and

6:756-757.



18/25

Timothy

.

Paterson

435

such

uggestion

s to remove

ll

predetermined

imits

n the

effort

o

disseminatecience.

Bacon's ocial

psychology

f

belief nd

unbelief

onsistently

escribes

religion

s

strengthened

y

the

things

hich

henew

cience

will

over-

come,

and

weakened

y

the conditions

hich

hat cience

will

bring

about.

"Learned times"

particularly

end

to

promote

theism

when

joined

"with

peace

and

prosperity"6:414).

The

age

of

Augustus

Caesar,

for

xample,

s

said to

havebeen ne of the

great ges

of

earn-

ing,

"civil

time"

which had the

art

of

government

n the

greatest

perfection";

t

was

also a

time inclined o atheism"

3:274; 6:416).

"Troublesand adversities o more bow men'sminds o religion"

(6:414),

while

barbarous

imes,

specially

oined

with

alamities

nd

disasters"

ncline

men o

"superstition"

6:416,

514).

One of the

fun-

damental

ources

f

the

power

f

"superstition"

s

thatnatures

full

f

"panic

terrors"

or

human

beings 6:712).

But the

New

Atlantis

describes

political

egime

whichhas

endured or

nineteen

enturies

(3:144)

nd

which

ossesses

science

bleto

predict

nd

prevent

atural

disasters

3:166).

Bacon

claimed hat f all

existing

hilosophies

ncient

tomism

f-

fered hedeepest nderstandingfnature4:58).As Baconknew ull

well,

a

critique

f

religion

as

intimately

ssociatedwith

his

chool

(6:384).

Ancient

tomism

xplained

ature ithout

eferenceo

anygod

or

gods,

ggressively

enied

he

mmortality

f the

oul,

and

offered

psychological

ccount

f the

sources f

conventional

eligious

elief

which

by

manifest

mplication

enied

such beliefs

any

cognitive

significance.

ccording

o this

ccount,

eligion

s

strengthened,

t east

within

ertain

imits,

y

fear,

nxiety,

nd

ignorance

f the

causes

of

things,

specially

wesome

r

terrible

hings.

ne of

the

most

mportant

rootsofreligions nature'sncompleteupport orhuman lansand

hopes;

poverty,

ardship,

nd

weakness

n

the

face f

nature

trengthen

it,

while

rosperity,

nowledge

f

causes,

nd the

bility

o

predict

nd

control

ature

eaken

t.

Only

he

ational

nderstanding

f

nature an

dispel

he

errors

hich

he

human

magination

mposes

n

tself

hrough

the

religious

elusion.28

As

I

have

already

uggested,

acon's

understanding

f

the

religious

impulse

s

very

lose

o

this

ccount.He

hints t

an

association

etween

the

progress

f

the

arts

and

the

growth

f

religious

hypocrisy"

(6:750-751).Religions intimatelyssociatedwithgratitudeorgood

2'Lucretius,

n

the

Nature

f

Things,

ook

One,

ines

2-79.

ee also

J.H.

Nichols, r.,

Epicurean

olitical

hilosophy:

he

"De

Rerum

Natura"

of

Lucretius

Ithaca:

Cornell

Universityress,

976),

p.

101-178.



19/25


20/25

Timothy

.

Paterson

437

following

ines.

First,

ocialconditions

ending

o

promote

theism

r

religiousndifferenceightwellbe established ithoutuch ttitudes

becoming

eneral

reven

ery

ommon.

econd,

he

NewAtlantis

eems

to

depict

land

n

which

hristianity

ontinues

o

play

major

public

role.

Granted hat

Bacon'sown ttitude

o

Christianityight

ave

been

sceptical

r

hostile,

an such

iews ave

ny

majorpolitical ignificance

if

they

re confined o

a

fairly

mall

minority?

ight ersonal

ndif-

ferenceo

faith othave

been ombined

ith

n

entirely

incere

xpecta-

tion hat ome

kind f

diffuse hristianentimentn

a

majority

f

the

population

would

continue o

provide

he

moral framework

ithin

whichcientificowerwould eapplied o the olution fpracticalro-

blems? o answer

hese

lausible

bjections,

e

must xamine he

ela-

tion

between

eligion, olitical

ower,

nd

science s

portrayed

n

the

New

Atlantis.

The

Christian

one f the

book

s

undeniable.ts

rhetorical

ppeal

o

the

Christian

eader

uplicates

n

important

eaturef

the

tory

t

tells

of

a

successful

ttempt

y

Bensalem o convert

group

f

European

Christians

o

Bensalem's

way

of

life,

not east

by

means

f

Christian

rhetoric. ut

while

he

public

hetoric

f

Bensalem

as a

definitehris-

tian lavor,loserxaminationndicateshat ensalem'ss a dilutednd

syncretistic

hristianity

hich

s

little

more

han

glossupon

a

more

fundamental

eneration

f science

nd

scientists,

he

family,

he

nation,

peace,

prosperity,

ongevity,

nd

security.

he

major

emi-public

itual

or

ceremony

escribed

s

more

agan

han

Christian;

acon's

narrator

calls t

"a

ceremony

n

which

ature

does]

much

reside"

3:151).

Ben-

salem's

eligion

eems

o be

an

example

f what

Bacon

called

natural

piety,"

ased

on such

entiments

s

patriotism

nd

respect

or

arents,

thinly

isguised

y

the

supernatural

r

unnatural

iety

f

traditional

Christianity.lthoughheexactpublic tatus f ChristianitynBen-

salem

s

ambiguous

it

is

not

clear,

for

xample,

whether

here

s

an

established

hurch),

acon

was

of

course

ot

unqualifiedly

ostile

o

the

Christian

hurchess

social

nd

political

nstitutions,

articularly

n

the

short

erm."

He

wished

o see

Christianity

adically

eformed

o make t

less

nclined

oward

ectarian

onflict

nd

meddling

ith

atural

cience,

and

he

believed

hat

f

such

reform

ould

be

effected,

n

established

church

might

e

socially

seful. t

the

ame

ime,

e

was

not t

all

sure

that

hristianity

ouldbe so

reformed.he

mbiguity

fthe

NewA

tlan-

"

Works

:302,

6:381-384.

See

also

Fulton

H.

Anderson,

rancis

Bacon: His

Career

nd

His

Thought

Los

Angeles:

University

f

Southern

California

Press,

1962),

pp. 71-98;

White,

63-75.



21/25

438

Christianity

n

Francis

acon

tis about

the

exact

public

tatus f

Christianity

robably

eflects

his

uncertainty.

But thecharacterf

popular

eligion

n

Bensalem

s notthe

decisive

considerationor he

problem

f the

directionf

scientific

ower.

The

crucial

oint

egarding

he

relation

f

religion

o

science

ppears

n

the

account f themanner

n

which

heChristian

eligion

rrived

n

Ben-

salem nd won

acceptance

here

3:137-139).

acon

depicts

situation

which everseshe

ctual ituation

n

early

modern

urope:

ratherhan

science

aving

o make

place

for tself

n

an

already

hristian

ociety,

Christianity

rrives

n

Bensalem everal undred

ears

fter aconian

science asbeenfirmlystablishedhere. he mplicationsf this em-

poral equence

re

powerfully

einforced

y

he

details f

Christianity's

reception:

he

igns

nd wonders

hich

rove

hedivine

rigins

f the

Gospel

are

accepted

s

genuine

miracles

nly

after

hey

have been

authenticated

s such

y

memberfSalomon'sHouse

3:137).

That

s,

science ontrols

he ntroductionnd

reception

f new

eligious

deas;

n

Bensalem,

rom

he

beginning,

cience s

apparently

he

ervant

ut n

fact

he

master f

religion.32

As

I

have

ndicated

n

several

laces,

Christianity

eems o

play

very

minor ole n the elf-understandingf Bensalem'scientists,nd this s

the crucial

ointregarding

he

future ole

of

religion

n

directing

he

power

o

be

generated

y

Baconian

cience.

he

New

Atlantis

nques-

tionably

ints t

a dramatic

xpansion

f

the

political

ole

of

scientists;

in

my pinion,

he

book

depicts defacto

rule

y

cientistss

openly

s

Bacon

dared.

Bensalem's

cientists ake n

unprecedented

nd

openly

acknowledged

ontribution

o the

health,

ecurity,

nd

prosperity

f all

citizens.

They

control

he introduction

nd

interpretation

f

new

religious

deas.

They

wield

amazing

nd

almost

divine

powers

ver

nature,nd as a result reregardedythepeoplewith quasi-religious

reverence

3:155).

They ossess

wesome

militaryechnology

3:163)

nd

are

in

a

position

o

withhold hatever

echnological

ecrets

hey

wish

from

the tate"

3:165).

Their rue

olitical

osition

s ndicated

y

he

fact

hat

hework

nds

with scientist

n effect

epealing

ne of

the

kingdom's

ost undamental

aws,

pparently

n

hisown

nitiative.

or

nineteenenturies

law established

y King

Solamona

has

mandated

that

the sland's

existence

e

kept

ecret

rom

he rest

of the

world

(3:144-145),

ut

he ather

f

Salomon's

House

gives

he

narrator

leave

topublishthe ccount fSalomon'sHouse]for hegoodof other a-

tions"

3:166).

Scientific

udgments

s to what

he

ood

of

humanity

e-

"3See

Weinberger,

75;

White,

157-160.



22/25

Timothy

. Paterson

439

quires

an secure

he

epeal

feven

hemost asic

aws.The

New

Atlan-

tis ntimateshat heminoritynwhichhe eligiouscepticismfBacon

himself

s most o be

expected

s

also the

group

which

lays

he

most

significant

ole in the

application

f scientific

ower

nd indeed

n

political

ife

generally.

VI. The

Machiavellian

haracterfBaconian

cience

The

specifically

aconianmotive

nderlying

ostility

o

Christianityp-

pears

most

clearly

when we consider acon's

dependence

n,

and

modificationf, he houghtfMachiavelli. acon'sdebt oMachiavelli

in

ethics

nd

politics

was

openly

cknowledged

3:430),

and

has been

discussed

many

imes."

The

Machiavellianootsof Baconian

natural

science

re esswell

known.

ame

s the

highest

uman

ood

thus

ar

Machiavelli),

ut

fame

s bestwon

through

nnovations

n

science

nd

technology,

hich

unlikepolitical

nd

military

xploits)

enefit

ll

mankind,

ot

ust

he

itizensf

one

countrythe

Baconian

modification

of

Machiavelli)

4:113).

The

greatestmpire

s not

hat f one man

over

his

own

ountry

r

of hisown

ountry

ver ther

ountries,

ut he

ule

o

Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	fabiola-gonzalez
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

On the Role of Christianity in the Political Philosophy of Francis Bacon- Tmothy Paterson.

Documents