There have been a few good translations of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's last publications. They were published 1752-1764 and are Letters to Beaumont and Letters Written from the Mountain. Rousseau had some succinct sketches of the reformation history. Interestingly the reformers were then regarded as humanists. It is not too surprising that he knew Calvinism and the history having been born in Geneva.
A 2001 book (there is also a 2013 work in print) has a good, plain English translation. One may of course view the original 1764 text on line at the Princeton library among other sources.
Examples of Rousseau's thought from the book page 154-157 (following) illustrate the continuing relevance of Rousseau's summary of the ideas of Protestant reformers, and their concept of independence and self-reliance for interpreting the scriptures rather than an ecclesiastical or government authority. Compulsory state monopoly on spiritual or even political reasoning can be a problem in authoritarian and theocratic governments including socialism and communism.
Jean-Jacques ROUSSEAU author, Letter to Beaumont, Letters Written from the Mountain, and Related Writings, C. Kelly and E.G. Grace editors. 2001
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/reviews/letter-to-beaumont-letters-written-from-the-mountain-and-related-writings-jean-jacques-rousseau/1101165266?ean=9781611682854
"When the Reformers separated from the Roman Church they accused it of error; and in order to correct that error at its source, they gave to Scripture a different meaning than the one the Church gave it. They were asked by what authority they thus deviated from the accepted doctrine? They said that it was by their own authority, by that of their reason. They said that since the meaning of Bible was intelligible and clear to all men in what concerned salvation, each was a competent judge of doctrine and could interpret the Bible, which was its rule, in accordance with his individual mind; that all would agree this way about the essential things, and that those upon which they could not agree were not at all essential.
Thus the individual mind is established as the sole interpreter of Scripture; thus the authority of the Church is rejected; thus each is put under his own jurisdiction for doctrine. Such are the two fundamental points of the Reform: to acknowledge the Bible as rule of one’s belief, and not to admit any other interpreter of the meaning of the Bible than oneself. Combined, these two points form the principle on which the Reformed Christians separated from the Roman Church, and they could not do not any less without falling into contradiction; for what interpretive authority could they have reserved for themselves, after having rejected that of the body of the Church?
But, it will be said, how could the Protestants have been able to unite based on such a principle? Wanting each to have his manner of thinking, how did they constitute a body against the Catholic Church? They had to do it: they united in this, that all acknowledged each of them as competent judge for himself. They tolerated and they ought to tolerate all interpretation except one, namely that which removes liberty of interpretation. Now that single interpretation which they rejected was that of the Catholics. Thus they had to proscribe in concert Rome alone, which equally proscribed all of them. The very diversity of their manners of thinking about all the rest was the common bond that united them. It was so many small States leagued against a great Power, and the general confederation of which removed nothing from the independence of each.
The Protestant Religion is tolerant by principle; it is tolerant essentially; it is as much so as it is possible to be, since the only dogma it does not tolerate is that of intolerance. That is the insurmountable barrier that separates us from the Catholics and unites the other communions among themselves. Each one indeed views the others as being in error. But none views or ought to view that error as an obstacle to salvation."
A 2001 book (there is also a 2013 work in print) has a good, plain English translation. One may of course view the original 1764 text on line at the Princeton library among other sources.
Examples of Rousseau's thought from the book page 154-157 (following) illustrate the continuing relevance of Rousseau's summary of the ideas of Protestant reformers, and their concept of independence and self-reliance for interpreting the scriptures rather than an ecclesiastical or government authority. Compulsory state monopoly on spiritual or even political reasoning can be a problem in authoritarian and theocratic governments including socialism and communism.
Jean-Jacques ROUSSEAU author, Letter to Beaumont, Letters Written from the Mountain, and Related Writings, C. Kelly and E.G. Grace editors. 2001
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/reviews/letter-to-beaumont-letters-written-from-the-mountain-and-related-writings-jean-jacques-rousseau/1101165266?ean=9781611682854
"When the Reformers separated from the Roman Church they accused it of error; and in order to correct that error at its source, they gave to Scripture a different meaning than the one the Church gave it. They were asked by what authority they thus deviated from the accepted doctrine? They said that it was by their own authority, by that of their reason. They said that since the meaning of Bible was intelligible and clear to all men in what concerned salvation, each was a competent judge of doctrine and could interpret the Bible, which was its rule, in accordance with his individual mind; that all would agree this way about the essential things, and that those upon which they could not agree were not at all essential.
Thus the individual mind is established as the sole interpreter of Scripture; thus the authority of the Church is rejected; thus each is put under his own jurisdiction for doctrine. Such are the two fundamental points of the Reform: to acknowledge the Bible as rule of one’s belief, and not to admit any other interpreter of the meaning of the Bible than oneself. Combined, these two points form the principle on which the Reformed Christians separated from the Roman Church, and they could not do not any less without falling into contradiction; for what interpretive authority could they have reserved for themselves, after having rejected that of the body of the Church?
But, it will be said, how could the Protestants have been able to unite based on such a principle? Wanting each to have his manner of thinking, how did they constitute a body against the Catholic Church? They had to do it: they united in this, that all acknowledged each of them as competent judge for himself. They tolerated and they ought to tolerate all interpretation except one, namely that which removes liberty of interpretation. Now that single interpretation which they rejected was that of the Catholics. Thus they had to proscribe in concert Rome alone, which equally proscribed all of them. The very diversity of their manners of thinking about all the rest was the common bond that united them. It was so many small States leagued against a great Power, and the general confederation of which removed nothing from the independence of each.
The Protestant Religion is tolerant by principle; it is tolerant essentially; it is as much so as it is possible to be, since the only dogma it does not tolerate is that of intolerance. That is the insurmountable barrier that separates us from the Catholics and unites the other communions among themselves. Each one indeed views the others as being in error. But none views or ought to view that error as an obstacle to salvation."
No comments:
Post a Comment