Dante-His religious beliefs:

[HollyinNNV]

My students are reading Inferno. They've been blogging this week and one of the questions that keeps coming up is if Dante's really a Christian/Catholic. Here's what they are struggling over:

 

E's Question:

 

Dante seems to believe in both the Catholic doctrine and the Greek gods. Is he Catholic and only tying in Greek gods because he admired Virgil so much, or does he actually believe in Greek mythology? His underworld is the Greek underworld, with random bits of Biblical truth and Catholic doctrine tossed in. What's all that about?

 

Then one of the students attempts to answer and its a pretty good answer for an 8th grader:

 

 

 

I agree, it is confusing. earlier this week I asked whether anyone knew if Dante was proclaimed a Christian or not. However, even if he truly did believe in 12th century Catholicism or not, I know that he's got some other idols whether he really worshiped them or not. Virgil, being the main one, and I think he's got to get his priorities straight. Although I like the book, I don't like Dante himself, or as a person. It seems like he would be disturbing to meet.

I see in the books that he really not only worshiped Virgil or considered him more *holy* than others or some strange ideal like that, but his love for his Teacher seems to come indirectly from the book of the Aeneid! I was Yahoo answers for this topic and several people also said that they thought that the relationship changed throughout the Inferno, going from an exalted standpoint to a beloved-father standpoint.One person said Virgil represented the perfect voice of reason. Interesting. I guess we will just have to keep reading. = D

 

 

So-does anyone have some perspective on what a Catholic of the Middle Ages might have believed about the Greek gods & goddesses? I'm not really sure what to think. I'm tempted to say that because this is a poem, one has to take much of it as creative license. However, I am concerned that this "common sense" approach is the common sense of 2008 and not the Middle Ages.

 

Thanks for any input.

Holly

[cajun.classical]

Holly,

 

I would highly recommend Peter Leithart's guide to the Divine Comedy.

[Cedarmom]

They talked a little about this on the Teaching Company lecture (I highly recomend it)Dante admired Virgil, and his piety , putting country over self. Dante viewed Virgil as pre-Christ. Dante felt his writing were building on Virgil's , urging people to live a noble life, but Dante added that we need to have the light of Christ.

[bwasko]

First, you can rule out the idea that Dante "believes in" the Greek gods.

 

Dante's vision of hell in the Inferno is not intended to be literal. He wrote poetry, not theology. The poem is allegorical on several levels. That means he uses people, places, and things more for their representational value than for what they are in themselves. In other words, Cerberus and the Minotaur, etc. aren't real. They are a device used to communicate something about the nature of hell.

 

Remember, this is a poem in the classical tradition. It's essentially an epic poem, which requires certain conventions, including references to mythology. He uses these references to create an overtly Christian story. Just like Milton and Spenser and even like C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein.

 

The Divine Comedy is the story of Redemption--a journey through hell, purgatory (Catholic, remember), and finally heaven. Dante borrows from the classic tradition and uses their characters and devices and uses them for a God-honoring purpose.

[Nan in Mass]

Can't one admire people who were born before Christ, especially if their values are ones that seem admirable to Christians? And he put all those classical people, albeit somewhat reluctantly in some cases, somewhere other than heaven, after all. It seemed very catholic and Christian to me. But maybe I'm missing something?

-Nan

[Michelle in MO]

Can't one admire people who were born before Christ, especially if their values are ones that seem admirable to Christians? And he put all those classical people, albeit somewhat reluctantly in some cases, somewhere other than heaven, after all. It seemed very catholic and Christian to me. But maybe I'm missing something?

-Nan

 

Here's Omnibus II's take on it (from a Reformed viewpoint, since it's published by VP):

 

"Virgil represents the best of human wisdom, philosophy and, of course, poetry. So in other words, to read allegorically, when we see VIrgil literally guiding Dante by the hand, we ought to think of how human wisdom, philosophy and poetry guide Dante--and as we put ourselves in Dante's shoes, we see how "Virgil" may guide us. We should think of Virgil as a representation of common grace, the grace which is available to Christians and non-Christians alike."

 

Agreeing with cajun here: Peter Leithart's book "Ascent to Love" is listed as one of the sources VP relies on.

 

My girls and I did enjoy reading Inferno, although my girls think Dante put far too many of his personal enemies in hell.

 

HTH!

[Nan in Mass]

... enemies in hell - yes, human but not very Christian of him LOL... I forgot about the poet aspect. I think we just thought it natural that Dante would admire such a good poet as Virgil. But we're not exactly coming at this from where others are.

[Cedarmom]

Can't one admire people who were born before Christ, especially if their values are ones that seem admirable to Christians? And he put all those classical people, albeit somewhat reluctantly in some cases, somewhere other than heaven, after all. It seemed very catholic and Christian to me. But maybe I'm missing something?

-Nan

 

Yes, I think that was how Dante felt.

[Michelle in MO]

... enemies in hell - yes, human but not very Christian of him LOL... I forgot about the poet aspect. I think we just thought it natural that Dante would admire such a good poet as Virgil. But we're not exactly coming at this from where others are.

 

I can't remember exactly, but I think Omnibus brings out the political aspect of some of this (i.e., Dante's enemies), plus Dorothy Sayers' translation is excellent: the notes are fantastic, and I think she also gives quite a bit of background explanation into the rifts and factions in the political society of Dante's time. I think somewhere in our reading I did find some notes to the effect that Dante did not cast all of his enemies into hell. Whew!

[Laura K (NC)]

nt

[TeacherZee]

 

BBCs In Our Time is doing a show on Dantes Inferno next Thursday. They are available on Podcasts if you are interested.

[SheWhoWaits]

When studying the literature of C.S. Lewis (Literature of C.S. Lewis course from Modern Scholar http://www.recordedbooks.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=scholar.show_course&course_id=49

highly recommended. They also have one on Dante by the same professor. Maybe you'd like that one.) we learned that the medievals believed (at least some of them did) that the ancient gods were real and good, but subordinate to the one true God. Somehow. I'm not sure how that worked.

[HollyinNNV]

Thanks to everyone who responded to my post. We had a very successful class today at co-op. We spent time talking about the different categories Dante uses in the poem:

People Dante knew (girlfriend, politicians and the time)

Historical People (Aristotle, Virgil)

Historical Religious People (Paul, Jesus)

Dante's religious imagination (idea of what hell was like, Satan)

Mythological figures (famous lovers)

Imaginative Figures (guardians)

 

 

I'm sure I've missed some categories here. But, we remarked on how it was a kitchen sink approach-he used everything he knew!

 

I also pointed out that Dante certainly categorized in his mind (like we did on the board) his religious beliefs and faith. Just because he used different categories in the book does not mean that he confused things in his mind. That's why we call this literature, right?

 

We also talked about the inherent danger in this type of approach. I said, imagine if I wrote a book about heaven and included Harry Potter, Hannah Montana,George Washington, Medusa, Jesus and myself? (students eyes got very wide!) And I had these diverse characters talk to each other and I described heaven as I imagined it in my imagination? That could be very controversial! Could it not? Then I actually talked a short bit about the controversy surrounding The Shack on this website. We talked about how a modern day Inferno might go over..........

 

It was a fun discussion. The majority of the students (about 9 of 11) really like Inferno-much better than Aeneid actually. I think it appeals to the innate teenager enjoyment of creepiness. Nan-it is like the undead!

 

Anyways-thanks to you all! I felt so much better after reading your responses.

 

Holly

[Nan in Mass]

LOL - Really, truely undead!

[Michelle in MO]

We also talked about the inherent danger in this type of approach. I said, imagine if I wrote a book about heaven and included Harry Potter, Hannah Montana,George Washington, Medusa, Jesus and myself? (students eyes got very wide!) And I had these diverse characters talk to each other and I described heaven as I imagined it in my imagination? That could be very controversial! Could it not? Then I actually talked a short bit about the controversy surrounding The Shack on this website. We talked about how a modern day Inferno might go over.

 

That is a very good comparison! I never thought about that---Omnibus didn't have that angle on things, either. Sounds like it was a great discussion!

[Janet in Toronto]

BBCs In Our Time is doing a show on Dantes Inferno next Thursday. They are available on Podcasts if you are interested.

 

...great show!

[Guest wallybally]

Holly's question seems to assume that Dante believed that the Classicism of Greek and Roman mythology and Christianity are somehow in conflict. I don't think most thinkers, the Scholastics in particular, of this era made this assumption. Rather, they understood Christianity as the fuller meaning, a more thorough understanding, the fruition of Classical thinking. In this sense Christianity is not in conflict with Classicism but continuous with it. [A similar parallel may be drawn with Aeneid and the Homeric epics. That trajectory did not end with Odysseus's return to Ithaca, but with Aeneas founding of Rome.] Also when we consider that Greek and Roman mythology were not religions in the sense that we think of Christianity, with its narrative and unvarying orthodoxy [consider how many variations on a single theme are in Gk mythology!], this "conflict" vanishes. There are no competing orthodoxies or teleologies between classicism and Christianity because classical mythology has none.

[Candid]

Another excellent book to use is: http://www.amazon.com/The-Discarded-Image-Introduction-Renaissance/dp/0521477352/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1333403287&sr=8-1

 

Tapestry used to use it in Year Two, but I think it's been pulled because it was at a pretty high level, so more for you than for students.

 

It's very important to understand that Dante's worldview was nothing like ours. If they can begin to get this then they can move onto a much harder concept: the Biblical world view is nothing like ours to get full meaning out of the Bible we must begin to understand and appreciate that world view which is not individualistic, psychological, scientific, (all things that are part of our culture) etc.

[asta]

Personally, I think Dante is way over the head of an 8th grader.

 

I don't care how many works they've read - the concepts involved require a certain amount of maturation of the brain synapses that simply hasn't occurred at 12 or 13.

 

And I think the fact that these students believed Dante was worshiping Virgil as an idol shows this.

 

JMO

 

 

a

[RobinL in Canada]

Personally, I think Dante is way over the head of an 8th grader.

 

I don't care how many works they've read - the concepts involved require a certain amount of maturation of the brain synapses that simply hasn't occurred at 12 or 13.

 

And I think the fact that these students believed Dante was worshiping Virgil as an idol shows this.

 

JMO

 

 

a

 

:iagree: I would hesitate to expose young teens to challenging, mature literary and philosophical works before their minds are mature enough to deal with them and before they have had enough experience (both life-experience and reading experience) to bring to such texts. I have no problem with exposing younger children to story versions of the classics which focus on the plots and characters, but a study of ideas is quite a bit more abstract and often a premature study can leave a student either confused or convinced that he has grasped material and ideas when that grasp may be very limited or incomplete. I would be cautious with the study of historical texts with young people who may not yet be able to understand that hisorical worldviews can differ radically from our own. Some, of course, may be ready sooner than others, but based on years of teaching homeschooled students, I'd say that most are not.

[Charles Wallace]

Thanks to everyone who responded to my post. We had a very successful class today at co-op. We spent time talking about the different categories Dante uses in the poem:

People Dante knew (girlfriend, politicians and the time)

Historical People (Aristotle, Virgil)

Historical Religious People (Paul, Jesus)

Dante's religious imagination (idea of what hell was like, Satan)

Mythological figures (famous lovers)

Imaginative Figures (guardians)

 

 

I'm sure I've missed some categories here. But, we remarked on how it was a kitchen sink approach-he used everything he knew!

 

I also pointed out that Dante certainly categorized in his mind (like we did on the board) his religious beliefs and faith. Just because he used different categories in the book does not mean that he confused things in his mind. That's why we call this literature, right?

 

We also talked about the inherent danger in this type of approach. I said, imagine if I wrote a book about heaven and included Harry Potter, Hannah Montana,George Washington, Medusa, Jesus and myself? (students eyes got very wide!) And I had these diverse characters talk to each other and I described heaven as I imagined it in my imagination? That could be very controversial! Could it not? Then I actually talked a short bit about the controversy surrounding The Shack on this website. We talked about how a modern day Inferno might go over..........

\

 

There is one!!http://www.amazon.com/Dantes-Divine-Comedy-Boxed-Set/dp/0811856577/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1333737720&sr=8-1

 

I love this version, I admit, and for people who are totally freaked by Dante and find him scary and intimidating (and possibly boring), this is a fabulous place to begin.

 

That said, any Dante purist who reads this will have a brainsplosion. Really, you folks who argue about whether the Mark Musa or the Dorothy Sayers was the best translation, and how to render terza rima in English, and Dante's influence on Eliot and the Modernists...just walk away. Now. Fast.

 

Okay, you other readers who argue more over who's the weirdest-looking guy in LMFAO or whether Kayne will still be relevant in five years...click the link. Go on.

 

In all seriousness, this is NOT a literal translation. It is an adaptation. The authors were very much influenced by the Gustave Dore drawings of the Inferno, but infuse both the illustrations and the text with a modern sensibility. Paolo and Francesca still fly in the middle of the great whirlwind of illicit lovers...but so do Bill and Monica. The great killers of Dante's time still wade through a river of blood...along with Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler.

 

The language and illustrations are not always appropriate, particularly the language, so I would definitely advise pre-screening, but what I would say is this: Just as the language in this Commedia is casual and everyday, so too was Dante's Italian dialect. (A work of "serious literature," after all, should have been written in Latin!)

 

Ultimately, I think that for many readers, the experience of reading this version probably comes closest to the experience shared by Dante's original readers. These folks populating the Inferno weren't just Dante's friends and enemies, but well-known members of the Ghibbeline and Guelph factions, high-ranking clergy, and (if memory serves), more than one Pope. They would have been just as memorable and real to Dante's readers as Clinton, Bush I, Bush II, Cheney, Monica Lewinsky, Charles Manson, Dionne Warwick, and a host of other public figures are to us. There's a shorthand there that we can access instantaneously without needing a footnote to explain it -- and Dante's audience experienced his text the same way.

 

In short, it is by no means a perfect work or a perfect translation -- but it is, I think, a fascinating version to read. Good luck.

[Charles Wallace]

Holly's question seems to assume that Dante believed that the Classicism of Greek and Roman mythology and Christianity are somehow in conflict. I don't think most thinkers, the Scholastics in particular, of this era made this assumption. Rather, they understood Christianity as the fuller meaning, a more thorough understanding, the fruition of Classical thinking. In this sense Christianity is not in conflict with Classicism but continuous with it. [A similar parallel may be drawn with Aeneid and the Homeric epics. That trajectory did not end with Odysseus's return to Ithaca, but with Aeneas founding of Rome.] Also when we consider that Greek and Roman mythology were not religions in the sense that we think of Christianity, with its narrative and unvarying orthodoxy [consider how many variations on a single theme are in Gk mythology!], this "conflict" vanishes. There are no competing orthodoxies or teleologies between classicism and Christianity because classical mythology has none.

 

Oh, thank you -- you said this so much more succinctly than I could. I appreciate this answer.

 

I would also like to piggyback on your answer, especially the last sentence. One element that's hard for modern Christians, Jews, or Muslims (or even those who do not practice those faiths but were raised in the modern era) to really "get" at a deep level is this:

Classical worship was not about your internal moral layout.

 

In short, it wasn't about your belief in a particular ethical or moral creed so much as it was about giving respect to the gods in the form of prayers and sacrifice. Sin wasn't necessarily about unorthodoxy. It was more about straight-on obedience v. disobedience.

 

The difference, as you can imagine, is huge. If I want my child to do something, I try to appeal to her reason and beliefs because I want her to be motivated from within. In short, I think like a modern monotheist.

 

If all I wanted was her obedience, her feelings or belief about it would be essentially irrelevant. Then, I'd be thinking more like an ancient.

 

That's why the Romans could easily and painlessly adopt worship of Cybele or Isis into their worship without a moral qualm. It's all about obeying the Gods -- whoever they are!

 

Hope that helps.

[Charles Wallace]

Personally, I think Dante is way over the head of an 8th grader.

 

I don't care how many works they've read - the concepts involved require a certain amount of maturation of the brain synapses that simply hasn't occurred at 12 or 13.

 

And I think the fact that these students believed Dante was worshiping Virgil as an idol shows this.

 

JMO

 

 

a

 

I honestly think that it's more useful to judge by the individual child. More specifically, I think that we can take away different messages and meanings at different ages, but this fact does not make initial readings superficial.